RobustLR: Evaluating Robustness to Logical Perturbation in Deductive Reasoning
Transformers have been shown to be able to perform deductive reasoning on a
logical rulebase containing rules and statements written in English natural
language. While the progress is promising, it is currently unclear if these
models indeed perform logical reasoning by understanding the underlying logical
semantics in the language. To this end, we propose RobustLR, a suite of
evaluation datasets that evaluate the robustness of these models to minimal
logical edits in rulebases and some standard logical equivalence conditions. In
our experiments with RoBERTa and T5, we find that the models trained in prior
works do not perform consistently on the different perturbations in RobustLR,
thus showing that the models are not robust to the proposed logical
perturbations. Further, we find that the models find it especially hard to
learn logical negation and disjunction operators. Overall, using our evaluation
sets, we demonstrate some shortcomings of the deductive reasoning-based
language models, which can eventually help towards designing better models for
logical reasoning over natural language.