Human Conditional Reasoning in Answer Set Programming

Chiaki Sakama
11/8/2023
cs.AIcs.LO

No confident code implementation found for this paper. 1 possible match can be shown below.

Abstract

Given a conditional sentence "P=>Q" (if P then Q) and respective facts, four different types of inferences are observed in human reasoning. Affirming the antecedent (AA) (or modus ponens) reasons Q from P; affirming the consequent (AC) reasons P from Q; denying the antecedent (DA) reasons -Q from -P; and denying the consequent (DC) (or modus tollens) reasons -P from -Q. Among them, AA and DC are logically valid, while AC and DA are logically invalid and often called logical fallacies. Nevertheless, humans often perform AC or DA as pragmatic inference in daily life. In this paper, we realize AC, DA and DC inferences in answer set programming. Eight different types of completion are introduced and their semantics are given by answer sets. We investigate formal properties and characterize human reasoning tasks in cognitive psychology. Those completions are also applied to commonsense reasoning in AI.

View on arXivView PDF

Code Implementations

No confident code match yet

We couldn't find an author-owned or strongly-evidenced community implementation for this paper. 1 weaker match is hidden by default — verify before relying on them.

No code implementations found yet.

Know of an implementation? Let us know in the comments below!

Similar Papers

Cite this paper

@article{sakama2023human,
  title  = {Human Conditional Reasoning in Answer Set Programming},
  author = {Chiaki Sakama},
  year   = {2023},
  eprint = {2311.04412},
  archivePrefix = {arXiv},
  url    = {http://arxiv.org/abs/2311.04412v2}
}

Add a badge to your README

Shows whether official code is linked for this paper.

Code of Paper badge
[![Code of Paper](https://codeofpaper.com/badge/2311.04412.svg)](https://codeofpaper.com/paper/2311.04412)

Discussion