Abductive reasoning

About: Abductive reasoning is a research topic. Over the lifetime, 1917 publications have been published within this topic receiving 44645 citations. The topic is also known as: abduction & abductive inference.

Using Abduction to Evolve Inconsistent Requirements Specification

Abstract: Requirements specifications are often inconsistent. Inconsistencies may arise because multiple conflicting requirements are embodied in these specifications, or because the specifications themselves are in a transient stage of evolutionary development. In this paper we argue that such inconsistencies, rather than being undesirable, are actually useful drivers for changing the requirements specifications in which they arise. We present a formal technique to reason about inconsistency handling changes. Our technique is an adaptation of logical abduction - adapted to generate changes that address some specification inconsistencies, while leaving others. We represent our specifications in quasi-classical (QC) logic - an adaptation of classical logic that allows continued reasoning in the presence of inconsistency. The paper develops a sound algorithm for automating our abductive reasoning technique and presents illustrative examples drawn from a library system case study.

Quantum-like non-separability of concept combinations, emergent associates and abduction

Abstract: Consider the concept combination ‘pet human’. In word association experiments, human subjects produce the associate ‘slave’ in relation to this combination. The striking aspect of this associate is that it is not produced as an associate of ‘pet’, or ‘human’ in isolation. In other words, the associate ‘slave’ seems to be emergent. Such emergent associations sometimes have a creative character and cognitive science is largely silent about how we produce them. Departing from a dimensional model of human conceptual space, this article will explore concept combinations, and will argue that emergent associations are a result of abductive reasoning within conceptual space, that is, below the symbolic level of cognition. A tensor-based approach is used to model concept combinations allowing such combinations to be formalized as interacting quantum systems. Free association norm data is used to motivate the underlying basis of the conceptual space. It is shown by analogy how some concept combinations may behave like quantum-entangled (non-separable) particles. Two methods of analysis were presented for empirically validating the presence of non-separable concept combinations in human cognition. One method is based on quantum theory and another based on comparing a joint (true theoretic) probability distribution with another distribution based on a separability assumption using a chi-square goodness-of-fit test. Although these methods were inconclusive in relation to an empirical study of bi-ambiguous concept combinations, avenues for further refinement of these methods are identified.

Four Problems of Abduction: A Brief History

Abstract: Debates concerning the character, scope, and warrant of abductive inference have been active since Peirce first proposed that there was a third form of inference, distinct from induction and deduction. Abductive reasoning has been dubbed weak, incoherent, and even nonexistent. Part, at least, of the problem of articulating a clear sense of abductive inference is due to difficulty in interpreting Peirce. Part of the fault must lie with his critics, however. While this article will argue that Peirce indeed left a number of puzzles for interpreters, it will also contend that interpreters should be careful to distinguish discussion of the formal and strictly epistemic question of whether and how abduction is a sound form of inference from discussions of the practical goals of abduction, as Peirce understood them. This article will trace a history of critics and defenders of Peirce’s notion of abduction and discuss how Peirce both fueled the confusion and in fact anticipated and responded to several recurring ...

Hybrid case-based reasoning

Abstract: This paper reviews a number of hybrid Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) systems. These systems are hybrid because the CBR components cooperate with one or more “co-reasoners” which employ a different type of reasoning strategy (e.g. qualitative simulation, constraint satisfaction, etc.). In this paper, we propose that CBR is in fact an inherently hybrid process. We review a number of systems and identify three classes of architecture which have been used for hybrid systems. We believe that to successfully exploit a co-reasoner within a CBR system it is necessary to analyse where, when, why and how the information provided by the co-reasoner will be used. We propose the KADS methodology as a suitable way of performing such an analysis and illustrate its use by example. We conclude by considering the control issues associated with the construction of hybrid CBR systems. We review the requirements of such systems and consider how well the two existing cooperation architectures match those requirements.

Abductive concept learning

Abstract: We investigate how abduction and induction can be integrated into a common learning framework. In particular, we consider an extension of Inductive Logic Programming (ILP) for the case in which both the background and the target theories are abductive logic programs and where an abductive notion of entailment is used as the basic coverage relation for learning. This extended learning framework has been called Abductive Concept Learning (ACL). In this framework, it is possible to learn with incomplete background information about the training examples by exploiting the hypothetical reasoning of abduction. We also study how the ACL framework can be used as a basis for multiple predicate learning. An algorithm for ACL is developed by suitably extending the top-down ILP method: the deductive proof procedure of Logic Programming is replaced by an abductive proof procedure for Abductive Logic Programming. This algorithm also incorporates a phase for learning integrity constraints by suitably employing a system that learns from interpretations like ICL. The framework of ACL thus integrates the two ILP settings of explanatory (predictive) learning and confirmatory (descriptive) learning. The above algorithm has been implemented into a system also called ACL Several experiments have been performed that show the effectiveness of the ACL framework in learning from incomplete data and its appropriate use for multiple predicate learning.