Eg, KGs (RDF, PGs, ...) are logical, but in automated construction, are not semantic in the sense of the ground domain of NLP, and in manual construction, tiny ontology. Conversely, fancy powerful logics like modal ones are even less semantic in NLP domains. Code is more expressive, but brings its own issues.
LLMs generate responses based on statistical probabilities derived from their training data. They do not inherently understand or store an "absolute source of truth." Thus, any KG bootstrapped from an LLM might inherit not only the model's insights but also its inaccuracies and biases (hallucinations). You need to understand that these hallucinations are not errors of logic but they are artifacts of the model's training on vast, diverse datasets and reflect the statistical patterns in that data.
Maybe you could build retrieval model but not generative model.
I don't have answer to that. I felt there would be lesser KG representations which would fit a logical world, than what fits into the current vast vector spaces of network's weight and biases. But that's just a idea. This whole thing stems from this internal intuition that language is secondary to my thought process and internally I feel I can just play around concepts without language - what kind of Large X models will meet that kind of capability I don't know!