University students (n = 86) revised their beliefs about story-based relationships in the face of new, contradictory information. Prior to resolving an inconsistency, students drew a picture depicting the story information. Participants’ resolution of logical inconsistencies reflected (a) the structure of the facts at hand and (b) the relationship conveyed by the major premise (All p are q). St...

Background Medical diagnosis has been traditionally recognized as a privileged field of application for so called probabilistic induction. Consequently, the Bayesian theorem, which mathematically formalizes this form of inference, has been seen as the most adequate tool for quantifying the uncertainty surrounding the diagnosis by providing probabilities of different diagnostic hypotheses, given...

'Aristotelian logic', as it was taught from late antiquity until the 20th century, commonly included a short presentation of the argument forms modus (ponendo) ponens, modus (tollendo) tollens, modus ponendo tollens, and modus tollendo ponens. In late antiquity, arguments of these forms were generally classified as 'hypothetical syllogisms'. However, Aristotle did not discuss such arguments, no...

Simple belief-revision tasks were defined by a giving subjects a conditional premise, (p—>q), a categorical premise, (p, for a modus-ponens belief-set, or ~q, for a modus tollens belief-set), and the associated inference (q or ~p, respectively). "New" information contradicted the initial inference (~ q or p, respectively). Subjects indicated their degree of belief in the conditional premise and...

Structure of Rough Approximations Based on Molecular Lattices p. 69 Rough Approximations under Level Fuzzy Sets p. 78 Fuzzy-Rough Modus Ponens and Modus Tollens as a Basis for Approximate Reasoning p. 84 Logic and Rough Sets Rough Truth, Consequence, Consistency and Belief Revision p. 95 A Note on Ziarko's Variable Precision Rough Set Model and Nonmonotonic Reasoning p. 103 Fuzzy Reasoning Base...

Reasoners revise their beliefs in the premises when an inference they have made is contradicted. We describe the results of an experiment that shows that the belief they revise depends on the inference they have made. They revise their belief in a conditional (if A then B) when they make a modus tollens inference (from not-B to not-A) that is subsequently contradicted (A). But when they make a ...

Research in the field of human reasoning has shown repeatedly that people find it reasonably easy to detect inconsistencies. The question that still remains is how people revise their beliefs to undo these inconsistencies. We report two experiments in which subjects had to make belief revision choices on modus ponens (MP) and modus tollens (MT) sets of problems that contained conditionals with ...

In this paper, we present a paraconsistent description logic based on quasi-classical logic. Compared to the four-valued description logic, quasi-classical description logic satisfies all of the three basic inference rules (i.e., modus ponens, modus tollens and disjunctive syllogism) so that the inference ability of quasiclassical description logic is closer to that of classical logic. Quasicla...

In Semantic Web, the knowledge sources usually contain inconsistency because they are constantly changing and from different view points. As is well known, as based on the description logic, OWL is lack of the ability of tolerating inconsistent or incomplete data. Recently, the research in handling inconsistency in OWL becomes more and more important. In this paper, we present a paraconsistent ...

The past ten years have shown a great variety of approaches for formal argumentation. An interesting question is to which extent these various formalisms correspond to the different application domains. That is, does the appropriate argumentation formalism depend on the particular domain of application, or does “one size fits all”. In this paper, we study this question from the perspective of o...