Better Understanding, Understanding Better

• URL: http://arxiv.org/abs/2606.31892v1
• Date: Tue, 30 Jun 2026 16:02:13 GMT
• Title: Better Understanding, Understanding Better
• Abstract summary: A recurring theme in philosophical literature is that, unlike knowledge, understanding comes in degrees.<n>We introduce a comparative logic of understanding with level-indexed understanding modalities.<n>We show that each fixed finite-level fragment is decidable.
• Score: 1.4568425367156232
• License: http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
• Abstract: "Any fool can know; the point is to understand." A well-known remark often attributed to Einstein captures a widely shared intuition: understanding is more than merely knowing. Yet epistemic logic has paid relatively little attention to understanding, despite its central role in contemporary epistemology, philosophy of science, and recent debates about AI. A recurring theme in the philosophical literature is that, unlike knowledge, understanding comes in degrees: one may understand something more or less well, and one's understanding may be better than another's. We introduce a comparative epistemic logic of understanding with level-indexed understanding modalities and a comparative connective for saying that one agent understands why a proposition better than another agent does. Semantically, we enrich multi-agent epistemic models with agent-indexed graded explanation structures and a justification-style term algebra. This yields a unified framework for representing minimal, ordinary, more demanding, and ideal understanding, together with comparisons between agents with respect to the same formula at issue. We distinguish a finitary bounded-level calculus from an infinitary full-language companion system. We establish soundness and strong completeness, and show that each fixed finite-level fragment is decidable.

Related papers

• Cognitive Mismatch in Multimodal Large Language Models for Discrete Symbol Understanding [96.81411333150213]
  This paper introduces a benchmark to evaluate how top-tier MLLMs navigate discrete semantic spaces.<n>Our investigation uncovers a counterintuitive phenomenon: models often fail at basic symbol recognition yet succeed in complex reasoning tasks.<n>This work offers a roadmap for developing more rigorous, human-aligned intelligent systems.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2026-03-19T04:08:20Z)
• Complexity of Faceted Explanations in Propositional Abduction [6.674752821781092]
  Abductive reasoning is a popular non-monotonic paradigm that aims to explain observed symptoms and manifestations.<n>In propositional abduction, we focus on specifying knowledge by a propositional formula.<n>We consider reasoning between decisions and counting, allowing us to understand explanations better.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2025-07-20T13:50:26Z)
• A Complexity-Based Theory of Compositionality [53.025566128892066]
  In AI, compositional representations can enable a powerful form of out-of-distribution generalization.<n>Here, we propose a definition, which we call representational compositionality, that accounts for and extends our intuitions about compositionality.<n>We show how it unifies disparate intuitions from across the literature in both AI and cognitive science.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2024-10-18T18:37:27Z)
• Forms of Understanding for XAI-Explanations [3.2908604499330423]
  Explainability has become an important topic in computer science and artificial intelligence, leading to a subfield called Explainable Artificial Intelligence (XAI)<n>What it means to 'understand' is still not clearly defined, and the concept itself is rarely the subject of scientific investigation.<n>This conceptual article aims to present a model of forms of understanding for XAI-explanations and beyond.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-11-15T08:06:51Z)
• Modeling Hierarchical Reasoning Chains by Linking Discourse Units and Key Phrases for Reading Comprehension [80.99865844249106]
  We propose a holistic graph network (HGN) which deals with context at both discourse level and word level, as the basis for logical reasoning. Specifically, node-level and type-level relations, which can be interpreted as bridges in the reasoning process, are modeled by a hierarchical interaction mechanism.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-06-21T07:34:27Z)
• How Do Transformers Learn Topic Structure: Towards a Mechanistic Understanding [56.222097640468306]
  We provide mechanistic understanding of how transformers learn "semantic structure" We show, through a combination of mathematical analysis and experiments on Wikipedia data, that the embedding layer and the self-attention layer encode the topical structure.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2023-03-07T21:42:17Z)
• An Enactivist-Inspired Mathematical Model of Cognition [5.8010446129208155]
  We formulate five basic tenets of enactivist cognitive science that we have carefully identified in the relevant literature. We then develop a mathematical framework to talk about cognitive systems which complies with these enactivist tenets.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2022-06-10T13:03:47Z)
• Compositional Processing Emerges in Neural Networks Solving Math Problems [100.80518350845668]
  Recent progress in artificial neural networks has shown that when large models are trained on enough linguistic data, grammatical structure emerges in their representations. We extend this work to the domain of mathematical reasoning, where it is possible to formulate precise hypotheses about how meanings should be composed. Our work shows that neural networks are not only able to infer something about the structured relationships implicit in their training data, but can also deploy this knowledge to guide the composition of individual meanings into composite wholes.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-05-19T07:24:42Z)
• HALMA: Humanlike Abstraction Learning Meets Affordance in Rapid Problem Solving [104.79156980475686]
  Humans learn compositional and causal abstraction, ie, knowledge, in response to the structure of naturalistic tasks. We argue there shall be three levels of generalization in how an agent represents its knowledge: perceptual, conceptual, and algorithmic. This benchmark is centered around a novel task domain, HALMA, for visual concept development and rapid problem-solving.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2021-02-22T20:37:01Z)
• Understanding understanding: a renormalization group inspired model of (artificial) intelligence [0.0]
  This paper is about the meaning of understanding in scientific and in artificial intelligent systems. We give a mathematical definition of the understanding, where, contrary to the common wisdom, we define the probability space on the input set. We show, how scientific understanding fits into this framework, and demonstrate, what is the difference between a scientific task and pattern recognition.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-10-26T11:11:46Z)
• The Relativity of Induction [0.0]
  We show that Occam's razor and parsimony principles are insufficient to ground learning. We derive and demonstrate a set of relativistic principles that yield clearer insight into the nature and dynamics of learning.
  arXiv  Detail & Related papers  (2020-09-22T15:17:26Z)

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.