Cognitive Argumentation and the Suppression Task
- URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2002.10149v1
- Date: Mon, 24 Feb 2020 10:30:39 GMT
- Title: Cognitive Argumentation and the Suppression Task
- Authors: Emmanuelle-Anna Dietz Saldanha, Antonis Kakas
- Abstract summary: This paper addresses the challenge of modeling human reasoning, within a new framework called Cognitive Argumentation.
The framework relies on cognitive principles, based on empirical and theoretical work in Cognitive Science, to adapt a general and abstract framework of computational argumentation from AI.
We argue that Cognitive Argumentation provides a coherent and cognitively adequate model for human conditional reasoning.
- Score: 1.027974860479791
- License: http://arxiv.org/licenses/nonexclusive-distrib/1.0/
- Abstract: This paper addresses the challenge of modeling human reasoning, within a new
framework called Cognitive Argumentation. This framework rests on the
assumption that human logical reasoning is inherently a process of dialectic
argumentation and aims to develop a cognitive model for human reasoning that is
computational and implementable. To give logical reasoning a human cognitive
form the framework relies on cognitive principles, based on empirical and
theoretical work in Cognitive Science, to suitably adapt a general and abstract
framework of computational argumentation from AI. The approach of Cognitive
Argumentation is evaluated with respect to Byrne's suppression task, where the
aim is not only to capture the suppression effect between different groups of
people but also to account for the variation of reasoning within each group.
Two main cognitive principles are particularly important to capture human
conditional reasoning that explain the participants' responses: (i) the
interpretation of a condition within a conditional as sufficient and/or
necessary and (ii) the mode of reasoning either as predictive or explanatory.
We argue that Cognitive Argumentation provides a coherent and cognitively
adequate model for human conditional reasoning that allows a natural
distinction between definite and plausible conclusions, exhibiting the
important characteristics of context-sensitive and defeasible reasoning.
Related papers
- Conceptual and Unbiased Reasoning in Language Models [98.90677711523645]
We propose a novel conceptualization framework that forces models to perform conceptual reasoning on abstract questions.
We show that existing large language models fall short on conceptual reasoning, dropping 9% to 28% on various benchmarks.
We then discuss how models can improve since high-level abstract reasoning is key to unbiased and generalizable decision-making.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2024-03-30T00:53:53Z) - From Heuristic to Analytic: Cognitively Motivated Strategies for
Coherent Physical Commonsense Reasoning [66.98861219674039]
Heuristic-Analytic Reasoning (HAR) strategies drastically improve the coherence of rationalizations for model decisions.
Our findings suggest that human-like reasoning strategies can effectively improve the coherence and reliability of PLM reasoning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-24T19:46:04Z) - A Unifying Framework for Learning Argumentation Semantics [50.69905074548764]
We present a novel framework, which uses an Inductive Logic Programming approach to learn the acceptability semantics for several abstract and structured argumentation frameworks in an interpretable way.
Our framework outperforms existing argumentation solvers, thus opening up new future research directions in the area of formal argumentation and human-machine dialogues.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2023-10-18T20:18:05Z) - Disentangling Reasoning Capabilities from Language Models with
Compositional Reasoning Transformers [72.04044221898059]
ReasonFormer is a unified reasoning framework for mirroring the modular and compositional reasoning process of humans.
The representation module (automatic thinking) and reasoning modules (controlled thinking) are disentangled to capture different levels of cognition.
The unified reasoning framework solves multiple tasks with a single model,and is trained and inferred in an end-to-end manner.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-10-20T13:39:55Z) - Towards Unifying Perceptual Reasoning and Logical Reasoning [0.6853165736531939]
Recent study of logic presents a view of logical reasoning as Bayesian inference.
We show that the model unifies the two essential processes common in perceptual and logical systems.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-06-27T10:32:47Z) - A Quantitative Symbolic Approach to Individual Human Reasoning [0.0]
We take findings from the literature and show how these, formalized as cognitive principles within a logical framework, can establish a quantitative notion of reasoning.
We employ techniques from non-monotonic reasoning and computer science, namely, a solving paradigm called answer set programming (ASP)
Finally, we can fruitfully use plausibility reasoning in ASP to test the effects of an existing experiment and explain different majority responses.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-05-10T16:43:47Z) - Scientific Explanation and Natural Language: A Unified
Epistemological-Linguistic Perspective for Explainable AI [2.7920304852537536]
This paper focuses on the scientific domain, aiming to bridge the gap between theory and practice on the notion of a scientific explanation.
Through a mixture of quantitative and qualitative methodologies, the presented study allows deriving the following main conclusions.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-05-03T22:31:42Z) - Causal Inference Principles for Reasoning about Commonsense Causality [93.19149325083968]
Commonsense causality reasoning aims at identifying plausible causes and effects in natural language descriptions that are deemed reasonable by an average person.
Existing work usually relies on deep language models wholeheartedly, and is potentially susceptible to confounding co-occurrences.
Motivated by classical causal principles, we articulate the central question of CCR and draw parallels between human subjects in observational studies and natural languages.
We propose a novel framework, ROCK, to Reason O(A)bout Commonsense K(C)ausality, which utilizes temporal signals as incidental supervision.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2022-01-31T06:12:39Z) - A Qualitative Theory of Cognitive Attitudes and their Change [8.417971913040066]
We show that it allows us to express a variety of relevant concepts for qualitative decision theory.
We also present two extensions of the logic, one by the notion of choice and the other by dynamic operators for belief change and desire change.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2021-02-16T10:28:49Z) - Logical Neural Networks [51.46602187496816]
We propose a novel framework seamlessly providing key properties of both neural nets (learning) and symbolic logic (knowledge and reasoning)
Every neuron has a meaning as a component of a formula in a weighted real-valued logic, yielding a highly intepretable disentangled representation.
Inference is omni rather than focused on predefined target variables, and corresponds to logical reasoning.
arXiv Detail & Related papers (2020-06-23T16:55:45Z)
This list is automatically generated from the titles and abstracts of the papers in this site.
This site does not guarantee the quality of this site (including all information) and is not responsible for any consequences.