Rational Inference in Formal Concept Analysis

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2504.16938v1
• Date: Mon, 07 Apr 2025 20:15:20 GMT
• Title: Rational Inference in Formal Concept Analysis
• Authors: Lucas Carr, Nicholas Leisegang, Thomas Meyer, Sergei Obiedkov,
• Abstract summary: Defeasible conditionals are a form of non-monotonic inference.<n>KLM framework defines a semantics for the propositional case of defeasible conditionals.
• Score: 0.4499833362998487
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: Defeasible conditionals are a form of non-monotonic inference which enable the expression of statements like "if $\phi$ then normally $\psi$". The KLM framework defines a semantics for the propositional case of defeasible conditionals by construction of a preference ordering over possible worlds. The pattern of reasoning induced by these semantics is characterised by consequence relations satisfying certain desirable properties of non-monotonic reasoning. In FCA, implications are used to describe dependencies between attributes. However, these implications are unsuitable to reason with erroneous data or data prone to exceptions. Until recently, the topic of non-monotonic inference in FCA has remained largely uninvestigated. In this paper, we provide a construction of the KLM framework for defeasible reasoning in FCA and show that this construction remains faithful to the principle of non-monotonic inference described in the original framework. We present an additional argument that, while remaining consistent with the original ideas around non-monotonic reasoning, the defeasible reasoning we propose in FCA offers a more contextual view on inference, providing the ability for more relevant conclusions to be drawn when compared to the propositional case.

Related papers

• Non-monotonic Extensions to Formal Concept Analysis via Object Preferences [3.4873708563238277]
  We introduce a non-monotonic conditional between sets of attributes, which assumes a preference over the set of objects. We show that this conditional gives rise to a consequence relation consistent with the postulates for non-monotonicty. This notion of typical concepts is a further introduction of KLM-style typicality into Formal Concept Analysis.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-05T15:01:00Z)
• A Primer for Preferential Non-Monotonic Propositional Team Logics [0.0]
  We show that team-based propositional logics naturally give rise to cumulative non-monotonic entailment relations. Motivated by the non-classical interpretation of disjunction in team semantics, we give a precise characterization for preferential models for propositional dependence logic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-05-11T09:53:15Z)
• Mitigating Misleading Chain-of-Thought Reasoning with Selective Filtering [59.495717939664246]
  Large language models have manifested remarkable capabilities by leveraging chain-of-thought (CoT) reasoning techniques to solve intricate questions. We propose a novel approach called the selective filtering reasoner (SelF-Reasoner) that assesses the entailment relationship between the question and the candidate reasoning chain. SelF-Reasoner improves the fine-tuned T5 baseline consistently over the ScienceQA, ECQA, and LastLetter tasks.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-03-28T06:28:35Z)
• CASA: Causality-driven Argument Sufficiency Assessment [79.13496878681309]
  We propose CASA, a zero-shot causality-driven argument sufficiency assessment framework. PS measures how likely introducing the premise event would lead to the conclusion when both the premise and conclusion events are absent. Experiments on two logical fallacy detection datasets demonstrate that CASA accurately identifies insufficient arguments.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-01-10T16:21:18Z)
• Prototype-based Aleatoric Uncertainty Quantification for Cross-modal Retrieval [139.21955930418815]
  Cross-modal Retrieval methods build similarity relations between vision and language modalities by jointly learning a common representation space. However, the predictions are often unreliable due to the Aleatoric uncertainty, which is induced by low-quality data, e.g., corrupt images, fast-paced videos, and non-detailed texts. We propose a novel Prototype-based Aleatoric Uncertainty Quantification (PAU) framework to provide trustworthy predictions by quantifying the uncertainty arisen from the inherent data ambiguity.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-09-29T09:41:19Z)
• Abductive Commonsense Reasoning Exploiting Mutually Exclusive Explanations [118.0818807474809]
  Abductive reasoning aims to find plausible explanations for an event. Existing approaches for abductive reasoning in natural language processing often rely on manually generated annotations for supervision. This work proposes an approach for abductive commonsense reasoning that exploits the fact that only a subset of explanations is correct for a given context.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-05-24T01:35:10Z)
• Admissibility in Strength-based Argumentation: Complexity and Algorithms (Extended Version with Proofs) [1.5828697880068698]
  We study the adaptation of admissibility-based semantics to Strength-based Argumentation Frameworks (StrAFs) Especially, we show that the strong admissibility defined in the literature does not satisfy a desirable property, namely Dung's fundamental lemma. We propose a translation in pseudo-Boolean constraints for computing (strong and weak) extensions.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-07-05T18:42:04Z)
• Logical Satisfiability of Counterfactuals for Faithful Explanations in NLI [60.142926537264714]
  We introduce the methodology of Faithfulness-through-Counterfactuals. It generates a counterfactual hypothesis based on the logical predicates expressed in the explanation. It then evaluates if the model's prediction on the counterfactual is consistent with that expressed logic.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-05-25T03:40:59Z)
• GroupifyVAE: from Group-based Definition to VAE-based Unsupervised Representation Disentanglement [91.9003001845855]
  VAE-based unsupervised disentanglement can not be achieved without introducing other inductive bias. We address VAE-based unsupervised disentanglement by leveraging the constraints derived from the Group Theory based definition as the non-probabilistic inductive bias. We train 1800 models covering the most prominent VAE-based models on five datasets to verify the effectiveness of our method.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-20T09:49:51Z)
• Technical Report of "Deductive Joint Support for Rational Unrestricted Rebuttal" [1.3706331473063877]
  In ASPIC-style structured argumentation an argument can rebut another argument by attacking its conclusion. In restricted rebuttal, the attacked conclusion must have been arrived at with a defeasible rule. In unrestricted rebuttal, it may have been arrived at with a strict rule, as long as at least one of the antecedents of this strict rule was already defeasible.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-05-07T17:19:18Z)
• Reasoning about Typicality and Probabilities in Preferential Description Logics [0.15749416770494704]
  We describe preferential Description Logics of typicality, a nonmonotonic extension of standard Description Logics by means of a typicality operator T. This extension is based on a minimal model semantics corresponding to a notion of rational closure. We consider other strengthening of the rational closure semantics and construction to avoid the so-called blocking of property inheritance problem.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-04-20T14:50:31Z)

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.