Two types of diagrammatic inference systems: Natural deduction style and resolution style

11Citations
Citations of this article
2Readers
Mendeley users who have this article in their library.
Get full text

Abstract

Since the 1990s, reasoning with Venn and Euler diagrams has been studied from mathematical and logical viewpoints. The standard approach to a formalization is a "region-based" approach, where a diagram is defined as a set of regions. An alternative is a "relation-based" approach, where a diagram is defined in terms of topological relations (inclusion and exclusion) between circles and points. We compare these two approaches from a proof-theoretical point of view. In general, diagrams correspond to formulas in symbolic logic, and diagram manipulations correspond to applications of inference rules in a certain logical system. From this perspective, we demonstrate the following correspondences. On the one hand, a diagram construed as a set of regions corresponds to a disjunctive normal form formula and the inference system based on such diagrams corresponds to a resolution calculus. On the other hand, a diagram construed as a set of topological relations corresponds to an implicational formula and the inference system based on such diagrams corresponds to a natural deduction system. Based on these correspondences, we discuss advantages and disadvantages of each framework. © 2010 Springer-Verlag.

Cite

CITATION STYLE

APA

Mineshima, K., Okada, M., & Takemura, R. (2010). Two types of diagrammatic inference systems: Natural deduction style and resolution style. In Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics) (Vol. 6170 LNAI, pp. 99–114). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-14600-8_12

Register to see more suggestions

Mendeley helps you to discover research relevant for your work.

Already have an account?

Save time finding and organizing research with Mendeley

Sign up for free