aiqbench analysis
This research addresses the critical challenge of reconstructing argument graphs by generating implicit premises using a neuro-symbolic pipeline that combines large language models with logical formalization. The approach aims to resolve entailment and contradiction relationships in enthymemes, bridging the gap between natural language processing and rigorous symbolic logic. For AI researchers, this represents a significant step toward more transparent and logically sound argumentation systems capable of handling incomplete information.
Identifying Implicit Premises for Logical Reconstruction of Argument Graphs
arXiv:2608.18821v1 Announce Type: cross Abstract: The logical reconstruction of argument graphs from natural language text is challenging because of the prevalence of enthymemes (i.e., arguments with implicit premises). There are natural language processing methods for identifying enthymemes in text, and there are symbolic methods based on abduction for identifying missing premises in a logical representation of enthymemes. However, there is a need for methods to generate implicit premises to logically show a known entailment or contradiction relationship between a pair of statements. To address this, we propose a neuro-symbolic pipeline that uses large language models (LLMs) to generate intermediate implicit premises that are translated into logical formulae and used with logical formulae representing explicit premises and explicit claims to show the logical relationships between them (entailment, contradiction, or neutrality). Our approach is evaluated on the Microtext Argumentative Corpus.
Abstract:The logical reconstruction of argument graphs from natural language text is challenging because of the prevalence of enthymemes (i.e., arguments with implicit premises). There are natural language processing methods for identifying enthymemes in text, and there are symbolic methods based on abduction for identifying missing premises in a logical representation of enthymemes. However, there is a need for methods to generate implicit premises to logically show a known entailment or contradiction relationship between a pair of statements. To address this, we propose a neuro-symbolic pipeline that uses large language models (LLMs) to generate intermediate implicit premises that are translated into logical formulae and used with logical formulae representing explicit premises and explicit claims to show the logical relationships between them (entailment, contradiction, or neutrality). Our approach is evaluated on the Microtext Argumentative Corpus.
Computation and Language (cs.CL); Artificial Intelligence (cs.AI)
arXiv:2608.18821 [cs.CL]
(or arXiv:2608.18821v1 [cs.CL] for this version)
https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2608.18821 Focus to learn more arXiv-issued DOI via DataCite (pending registration)
arXivLabs is a framework that allows collaborators to develop and share new arXiv features directly on our website.
Both individuals and organizations that work with arXivLabs have embraced and accepted our values of openness, community, excellence, and user data privacy. arXiv is committed to these values and only works with partners that adhere to them.
Have an idea for a project that will add value for arXiv's community? Learn more about arXivLabs.
Full text under the publisher's open licence · 231 words
Related coverage

The Entangled Dimensions of Decision Theory
LessWrong · Jul 30, 2026
Identification of Entailment and Contradiction Relations for Natural Language Argumentation: A Neurosymbolic Approach
arXiv · Oct 15, 2026
Rational Agentic Maximalist Philosophies
LessWrong · Jun 17, 2026
Making Implicit Premises Explicit in Logical Understanding of Enthymemes
arXiv · Jul 31, 2026