We introduce a rank measure for first-order logic and prove a "rank-preserving'" version of Gaifman's theorem. Compared to earlier "rank-preserving locality theorems'" (in particular, [Grohe, Kreutzer, Siebertz, JACM 2017]), our theorem is not only much simpler, but also yields formulas in exactly the same normal form as Gaifman's original theorem. As an application of this theorem, we give a simplified proof of the main result of [Grohe, Kreutzer, Siebertz, JACM 2017] that first-order properties of nowhere-dense structures can be decided in almost linear time.

The conventional approach to deep learning over relational databases applies neural models, such as Graph Neural Networks (GNNs), to a graph representation of the database. Recent approaches instead operate on databases directly, associating tuples with embeddings and extending query mechanisms to jointly process embeddings and relational content. Inspired by these developments, we introduce Neuro-Relational Programs (NRPs), a declarative query language for relational databases whose facts carry numeric vector embeddings. NRPs extend Datalog-style rules with operations that combine, aggregate, and transform embeddings, thereby interleaving relational reasoning and learnable neural components within a single formalism. This yields a general approach to neural computation over relational data: an NRP can be read both as a query plan with trainable components and as a neural architecture with relational structure built in. Natural syntactic fragments of NRPs recover existing architectures and query formalisms. Zero-ary NRPs correspond to non-adaptive query algorithms; monadic NRPs generalize GNN-style message passing and precisely capture Deep Homomorphism Networks, a connection that we extend to frontier-guarded NRPs over databases with row-ids. We characterize the expressive power of unrestricted NRPs with ReLU-FFN transformations by FOCQ, an extension of first-order logic with counting interpreted over real-weighted structures, yielding a precise connection with uniform TC$^0$ over ordered databases. Together, these results establish NRPs as a broad declarative framework for querying and neural computation over relational data.

In 'On Denoting' Russell proposed the most influential theory of definite descriptions, expressions of the form 'the F'. Characteristic for Russell's approach is that definite descriptions are not treated as what they appear to be on the surface, i.e. as singular terms. Instead they are eliminated by a contextual definition. Russell formalises definite descriptions in the context of complete sentences of the form 'The F is G'. This requires scope markers to distinguish, e.g., internal from external negation. It was recognised by Burge, and Kalish and Montague, however, that the essential features of Russell's approach may be formalised while respecting the syntactic category to which definite descriptions appear to belong. An alternative, favoured by Neale, follows Russell in that complete sentences 'The F is G' are formalised by a binary quantifier. The undeniable importance of the theory of definite descriptions for logic, mathematics and philosophy demands that it be formalised to meet the standards of modern proof theory. This is the topic of the present paper. We systematise, compare and extend existing approaches. After presenting its essential features, we formalise Russell's theory of definite descriptions in sequent calculus. Three approaches will be considered. The first uses a binary quantifier, whereas the remaining two employ the term-forming iota operator. The first of these employs only the iota operator, the other employs in addition the lambda operator which does duty as a scope marker. All systems satisfy the standards for modern proof theory, in particular cut elimination. The appendix reformulates these systems in natural deduction, which is more convenient for practical purposes.

Mathematical knowledge is split between bibliographic databases (e.g., MathSciNet, zbMATH Open) and formal proof libraries (e.g., Lean mathlib), preventing unified access between published results and their formalizations. We propose a relational bridge-database that aligns publication metadata with formal artifacts, providing an interoperability layer between mathematical literature and machine-verifiable proofs. We introduce a paper-level formalization score that measures how much of a publication is covered in formal systems. As a feasibility study, we show how such scores can be estimated via cross-document alignment between informal texts and Lean formalizations, enabling large-scale analysis of formalization coverage. This framework is a first step toward integrating bibliographic and formal mathematical ecosystems into scalable, machine-actionable knowledge graphs linking publications to formal proof objects.

Courcelle's celebrated theorem states that all MSO-expressible properties can be decided in linear time on graphs of bounded treewidth. Unfortunately, the hidden constant implied by this theorem is a tower of exponentials whose height increases with each quantifier alternation in the formula. More devastatingly, this cannot be improved, under standard assumptions, even if we consider the much more restricted problem of deciding FO-expressible properties on trees. In this paper we revisit this well-studied topic and identify a natural special case where the dependence of Courcelle's theorem can, in fact, be improved. Specifically, we show that all FO-expressible properties can be decided with an elementary dependence on the input formula, if the input graph has bounded pathwidth (rather than treewidth). This is a rare example of treewidth and pathwidth having different complexity behaviors. Our result is also in sharp contrast with MSO logic on graphs of bounded pathwidth, where it is known that the dependence has to be non-elementary, under standard assumptions. Our work builds upon, and generalizes, a corresponding meta-theorem by Gajarský and Hliněný for the more restricted class of graphs of bounded tree-depth.

We introduce power term polynomial algebra, a representation language for Boolean formulae designed to bridge conjunctive normal form (CNF) and algebraic normal form (ANF). The language is motivated by the tiling mismatch between these representations: direct CNF<->ANF conversion may cause exponential blowup unless formulas are decomposed into smaller fragments, typically through auxiliary variables and side constraints. In contrast, our framework addresses this mismatch within the representation itself, compactly encoding structured families of monomials while representing CNF clauses directly, thereby avoiding auxiliary variables and constraints at the abstraction level. We formalize the language through power terms and power term polynomials, define their semantics, and show that they admit algebraic operations corresponding to Boolean polynomial addition and multiplication. We prove several key properties of the language: disjunctive clauses admit compact canonical representations; power terms support local shortening and expansion rewrite rules; and products of atomic terms can be systematically rewritten within the language. Together, these results yield a symbolic calculus that enables direct manipulation of formulas without expanding them into ordinary ANF. The resulting framework provides a new intermediate representation and rewriting calculus that bridges clause-based and algebraic reasoning and suggests new directions for structure-aware CNF<->ANF conversion and hybrid reasoning methods.

Answer Set Programming (ASP) is a popular declarative reasoning and problem solving approach in symbolic AI. Its rule-based formalism makes it inherently attractive for explainable and interpretive reasoning, which is gaining importance with the surge of Explainable AI (XAI). A number of explanation approaches and tools for ASP have been developed, which often tackle specific explanatory settings and may not cover all scenarios that ASP users encounter. In this survey, we provide, guided by an XAI perspective, an overview of types of ASP explanations in connection with user questions for explanation, and describe their coverage by current theory and tools. Furthermore, we pinpoint gaps in existing ASP explanations approaches and identify research directions for future work.

Verifying whether a language model is genuinely reasoning or pattern-matching remains an open problem: learned verifiers are expensive, and output-based heuristics are brittle. We show that valid mathematical reasoning induces a measurable, training-free spectral signature in transformer attention. By treating each attention matrix as a weighted token graph, we extract four diagnostics: Fiedler value, High-Frequency Energy Ratio (HFER), spectral entropy, and smoothness, that require no learned parameters. Experiments across seven models from four architectural families yield effect sizes up to Cohen's $d = 3.30$ ($p < 10^{-116}$), enabling $85$--$96\%$ single-threshold classification accuracy. Two findings sharpen the interpretation. First, \emph{Platonic validity}: the spectral signal tracks logical coherence rather than compiler acceptance, proofs rejected for timeouts or missing imports are correctly classified as valid, a distinction confirmed by a manual audit ($\kappa = 0.82$, $n = 51$). Second, \emph{architectural determinism}: Sliding Window Attention shifts the discriminative feature from HFER to smoothness ($d = 2.09$, $p < 10^{-48}$), showing that attention design governs which spectral channel encodes reasoning quality. Causal ablation confirms the signature traces induction-head circuits. The method generalises to informal chain-of-thought ($d = 0.78$, $p < 10^{-3}$), and in proof search, HFER reranking improves Best-of-16 Pass@1 by $+4.4$--$6.6$\%, matching $98\%$ of the AUC of fully supervised probes with zero labels. Spectral graph analysis is a principled, architecture-aware primitive for reasoning verification.