CLARK: Closed-loop Learning for Adaptive Reasoning over Knowledge Graphs

Machine Learning models are widely used for automating classification tasks by extracting statistical patterns from data. However, their performance deteriorates if the data distribution changes, making them ill-suited to handle uncertain and evolving information. Moreover, they provide limited support for integrating prior knowledge. To address these limitations, we present CLARK (Closed-loop Learning for Adaptive Reasoning over Knowledge Graphs), a framework that integrates knowledge graphs, symbolic rule mining, and probabilistic reasoning under the Logic Programs with Markov Logic Networks (LP$^{\text{MLN}}$) formalism. Starting from CACTUS-derived KGs, CLARK translates graph structure into an LP$^{\text{MLN}}$ program and iteratively enriches it with candidate rules proposed by symbolic learners. These rules are calibrated through probabilistic weight learning, enabling reasoning under uncertainty and refinement of the underlying graph structure. We evaluate CLARK on two medical datasets, analysing both rule quality and downstream classification performance. Results demonstrate that CLARK leads to improved classification performance and more generalisable inference. Overall, CLARK provides a principled approach to constructing adaptive, interpretable, knowledge-driven models for classification.

Grounding Investor Views: Neural Predicates in the Black-Litterman Model

Portfolio construction under the Black-Litterman model requires investors to specify views on asset returns alongside explicit uncertainty estimates -- a process that remains largely subjective and difficult to scale. We propose a formal approach in which neural predicates serve as a structured, probabilistic mechanism for view generation. In our formulation, structured financial analysis data is processed through a compositional hierarchy of neural predicates whose outputs -- probability distributions over market stances -- are mapped to the pick matrix $\mathbf{P}$, the view return vector $\mathbf{q}$, and the view uncertainty matrix $\boldsymbolΩ$ of the Black-Litterman model. View confidence is derived from predicate output distributions, providing a data-driven alternative to subjective uncertainty elicitation. The resulting approach is interpretable, in the sense that any portfolio weight can be traced back through the predicate's logical chain to the underlying data, and fully differentiable, enabling end-to-end learning.

ForecastBench-Sim: A Simulated-World Forecasting Benchmark

Forecasting benchmarks for general-purpose AI systems usually inherit the constraints of the real world: outcomes resolve slowly, tail events are rare, and counterfactual questions are difficult to score. We introduce ForecastBench-Sim, a simulated-world forecasting benchmark built on game rollouts from Freeciv, a turn-based strategy game modelled on the Civilization series. Forecasters receive a fixed world report (a structured snapshot of the current game state) and answer questions about hidden future states; the benchmark then continues the simulation and scores forecasts. Because the world is simulated, the same setup can generate continuous or binary forecasting questions at arbitrary time horizons, paired intervention worlds for conditional or causal questions, and resolved examples of rare or disruptive outcomes. We describe the benchmark pipeline, question families, scoring protocol, and release artifacts, and report validation slices from model evaluations and an anonymized human pilot. ForecastBench-Sim is intended to complement real-world forecasting benchmarks by providing controlled, immediately resolvable tasks for studying probabilistic reasoning under dynamic world states.

How reliable are LLMs when it comes to playing dice?

We investigate the probabilistic reasoning capabilities of large language models through a controlled benchmarking study on discrete probability problems. We constructed two datasets, respectively a set of standard exercises and a set of counterintuitive exercises, designed to trigger heuristic reasoning, and evaluated 8 state-of-the-art models, each tested with and without Chain-of-Thought prompting. Models achieve an average accuracy of 0.96 on standard problems but only 0.59 on counterintuitive ones. We further provide empirical evidence of token bias: performance drops by over 20% when canonical formulations are replaced by disguised variants. Embedding misleading suggestions in the prompt reduces performance by up to 34%, with no model proving immune. Taken together, the reported findings suggest that current LLMs are not yet genuine probabilistic reasoners, despite their success in advanced mathematical problems.