Papers › Learning by Abstraction: The Neural State Machine
Learning by Abstraction: The Neural State Machine
Drew A. Hudson, Christopher D. Manning
We introduce the Neural State Machine, seeking to bridge the gap between the neural and symbolic views of AI and integrate their complementary strengths for the task of visual reasoning. Given an image, we first predict a probabilistic graph that represents its underlying semantics and serves as a structured world model. Then, we perform sequential reasoning over the graph, iteratively traversing its nodes to answer a given question or draw a new inference. In contrast to most neural architectures that are designed to closely interact with the raw sensory data, our model operates instead in an abstract latent space, by transforming both the visual and linguistic modalities into semantic concept-based representations, thereby achieving enhanced transparency and modularity. We evaluate our model on VQA-CP and GQA, two recent VQA datasets that involve compositionality, multi-step inference and diverse reasoning skills, achieving state-of-the-art results in both cases. We provide further experiments that illustrate the model's strong generalization capacity across multiple dimensions, including novel compositions of concepts, changes in the answer distribution, and unseen linguistic structures, demonstrating the qualities and efficacy of our approach.
In Syntology Open this paper in Syntology's Atlas, the map of the papers in Syntology's graph and their citations.
For agents, Syntology's MCP tool lists every function and class Syntology harvested from this paper and whether it ran (how to connect): get_harvested_code_for_paper(arxiv_id="1907.03950")
Code
Syntology Ran 3 of 21 code samples harvested from 4 repositories linked to this paper; 18 have no recorded run. Of those that ran: 2 ran · honoured contract; 1 ran · fixture could not drive it.
By repository: official repository: 8 samples from 1 repository, 0 ran; community (archive-listed): 13 samples from 3 repositories, 3 ran. The run record, sample by sample. “Ran” means executed on a synthesized input, not that the code is correct or reproduces the paper.
Repository list and official/mentioned flags are the archive's, frozen 2025-07-28. Reachability, where shown, is from one Syntology probe window (2026-09-16 to 2026-09-18); repositories not probed show nothing. GitHub stars are not tracked.
Code Syntology ran Syntology
21 samples harvested; 3 ran; 2 honoured the contract we drafted; 18 have no recorded run. Read from Syntology's graph 2026-09-24; that is when this build read the record, not when the samples ran.
Licence: 2 of the 21 samples are pointer only, meaning Syntology does not serve that copy's text. This page shows no code text for any sample; each one links to its file in the repository.
Harvested from 4 repositories linked to this paper, official or community; each sample names its own and says which. “Ran” means the sample executed on a synthesized input. It does not mean the output is correct, and nothing here reproduces the paper's results. “Honoured” and “violated” refer to a contract Syntology drafted from the code itself; “our draft was wrong” and “fixture could not drive it” are failures of Syntology's instrument, not of the code.
Each sample ends with its code_sha256, Syntology's identity for that exact code. An agent fetches the stored sample with Syntology's MCP tool get_code(code_sha256="…") (how to connect); click an identity to copy that call.
Repository labels, per sample. official repository: The archive marks this repository official for the paper. named in the paper: The archive records that the paper mentions this repository; it is not marked official. community (archive-listed): In the archive's code links for this paper, not marked official and not recorded as mentioned in the paper. found in paper text by Syntology: Syntology found this repository in the paper's own text; whether it is the authors' implementation is not asserted. community: Not in the archive's code links for this paper; a community repository Syntology harvested. Samples from a repository marked official are listed first. Licence labels name the repository's licence as recorded at harvest. “Pointer only” means Syntology does not serve that copy's text, for one of four reasons: no licence file was found; the licence was not identified; the licence is recorded as permissive but that copy's record is not marked cleared; or the licence is outside the permissive list Syntology serves text under (MIT, Apache-2.0, BSD and similar). Some licences outside that list permit redistribution, such as WTFPL, and GPL-3.0 under its conditions; they are simply not on the list. Hover a licence label for the reason. File links open the file on GitHub at the default branch, which may have changed since the harvest.
8317ab884576997a · report
0c7aaed4c145f580 · report
d90ad06e8aff38ed · report
4834aa38d80ec5ee · report
c58f5331f6d04dc6 · report
278ebc1a30cb3ac5 · report
d229950ef10faeee · report
f9482a830c57d09c · report
616b5e82dd2a38f9 · report
fe946dd42b320c75 · report
d13c6151b26cba67 · report
8312fd020fcf129a · report
d4ecbe5474146ede · report
877a679a8e0c8e14 · report
56c215932698a004 · report
87b3b6d59b5f6cb0 · report
e7f4ccb81d678b17 · report
083c67090bc76ac3 · report
cc0eeb809adea837 · report
f1c340b23f7fad32 · report
b50957d3d7d06ece · report
Tasks
Results from the paper archive 2025-07-28
| Task | Dataset | Model | Metric | Value | Rank at snapshot | Leaderboard | Report |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Visual Question Answering (VQA) | GQA test-dev | NSM | Accuracy | 62.95 | #5 of 17 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Visual Question Answering (VQA) | GQA test-std | NSM | Accuracy | 63.17 | #2 of 7 | Archive leaderboard | report |
| Visual Question Answering (VQA) | VQA-CP | NSM | Score | 45.8 | #8 of 10 | Archive leaderboard | report |
Ranks are positions in the archive's leaderboards as they stood at the 2025-07-28 snapshot. Results published since then are not among these rows, so a rank here is not a current standing.
Report a problem or propose a change · a person checks every report against the paper or source before anything changes; decisions are listed on /corrections