Spatial problem solving for diagrammatic reasoning

Diagrammatic reasoning (DR) is pervasive in human problem solving as a powerful adjunct to symbolic reasoning based on language-like representations. However, Artificial Intelligence is overwhelmingly based on symbolic representations, with proportionately scant attention to diagrams. This dissertation is a contribution to building artificial agents that can create and use diagrams as part of their problem solving. The work is in a framework in which DR is modeled as a process in which subtasks are solved, as appropriate, either by inference from symbolic representations or by information perceived from a diagram, and subtasks may also act on the diagram, i.e., create or modify objects in the diagram. The perceptions and actions are in fact domain- and task-specific 2D spatial problems defined in terms of properties and relations involving diagrammatic objects. Most DR systems built so far are task-specific, and their developers as a rule have hand-crafted the required perceptions and actions. Our goal is the development of a general, i.e., domain- and task-independent, capability that takes specifications of perceptions and actions and automatically executes them. Thus, the purpose of this dissertation is to investigate: (1) A language for a human problem solver to communicate a wide variety of 2D spatial problems relevant to DR, and (2) A general domain-independent framework of underlying representations and reasoning strategies suitable for efficiently solving spatial problems without human intervention. This dissertation will present a high-level language that is extensible, human-usable, and expressive enough to describe a wide variety of spatial problems in terms of constraints. The constraints are specified in first-order logic over the real domain using a vocabulary of objects, properties, relations and actions. Two general and independent strategies—constraint satisfaction and spatial search—are developed for automatically solving the spatial problems specified in that language. Several ideas about how to make these strategies computationally efficient are proposed and illustrated by examples. A traditional AI problem solver is augmented with this spatial problem solver for reasoning with diagrams in different domains for real-world applications. The utility of the framework is judged by the expressiveness of the language, and generality and efficiency of the two strategies.

[1]  Kincho H. Law,et al.  Qualitative Structural Analysis Using Diagrammatic Reasoning , 1995, IJCAI.

[2]  Volker Weispfenning,et al.  The Complexity of Linear Problems in Fields , 1988, Journal of symbolic computation.

[3]  M. Jamnik Mathematical reasoning with diagrams : from intuition to automation , 2001 .

[4]  Herbert A. Simon,et al.  Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth 10, 000 word , 1987 .

[5]  James H. Davenport,et al.  Real Quantifier Elimination is Doubly Exponential , 1988, J. Symb. Comput..

[6]  R. Storn,et al.  Differential Evolution - A simple and efficient adaptive scheme for global optimization over continuous spaces , 2004 .

[7]  Volker Weispfenning,et al.  Semilinear Motion Planning in REDLOG , 2001, Applicable Algebra in Engineering, Communication and Computing.

[8]  Stefan Ratschan,et al.  Efficient solving of quantified inequality constraints over the real numbers , 2002, TOCL.

[9]  Ivan E. Sutherland,et al.  Sketchpad: a man-machine graphical communication system , 1899, AFIPS '63 (Spring).

[10]  N. Hari Narayanan,et al.  Diagrammatic Reasoning: Cognitive and Computational Perspectives , 1995 .

[11]  N. Hari Narayanan,et al.  Reasoning Visually about Spatial Interactions , 1991, IJCAI.

[12]  Thomas Sturm,et al.  Real Quantifier Elimination in Practice , 1997, Algorithmic Algebra and Number Theory.

[13]  Jon Barwise,et al.  Logical reasoning with diagrams , 1996 .

[14]  Thomas Sturm,et al.  Weak quantifier elimination for the full linear theory of the integers , 2007, Applicable Algebra in Engineering, Communication and Computing.

[15]  Hubie Chen The Computational Complexity of Quantified Constraint Satisfaction , 2004 .

[16]  Alfred V. Aho,et al.  The Design and Analysis of Computer Algorithms , 1974 .

[17]  Dave Barker-Plummer,et al.  A computational architecture for heterogeneous reasoning , 2007, J. Exp. Theor. Artif. Intell..

[18]  Robert K. Lindsay,et al.  Using Diagrams to Understand Geometry , 1998, Comput. Intell..

[19]  Kenneth D. Forbus,et al.  GeoRep: A Flexible Tool for Spatial Representation of Line Drawings , 2000, AAAI/IAAI.

[20]  Allen Newell,et al.  SOAR: An Architecture for General Intelligence , 1987, Artif. Intell..

[21]  Rüdiger Loos,et al.  Applying Linear Quantifier Elimination , 1993, Comput. J..

[22]  A. Newell Unified Theories of Cognition , 1990 .

[23]  Steven Pinker,et al.  A theory of graph comprehension. , 1990 .

[24]  Barbara Tversky,et al.  Some Ways that Maps and Diagrams Communicate , 2000, Spatial Cognition.

[25]  Bonny Banerjee,et al.  Perceptual and Action Routines in Diagrammatic Reasoning for Entity-Reidentification , 2004 .

[26]  George E. Collins,et al.  Partial Cylindrical Algebraic Decomposition for Quantifier Elimination , 1991, J. Symb. Comput..

[27]  B. Chandrasekaran,et al.  A Diagrammatic Reasoning Architecture: Design, Implementation and Experiments , 2005, AAAI Spring Symposium: Reasoning with Mental and External Diagrams: Computational Modeling and Spatial Assistance.

[28]  Jon Barwise,et al.  A Computational Architecture for Heterogeneous Reasoning , 1998 .

[29]  Bonny Banerjee,et al.  DIAGRAMMATIC REASONING IN SUPPORT OF SITUATION UNDERSTANDING AND PLANNING , 2002 .

[30]  B. Chandrasekaran,et al.  An Architecture for Problem Solving with Diagrams , 2004, Diagrams.

[31]  A. Tarski A Decision Method for Elementary Algebra and Geometry , 2023 .

[32]  John A. Nelder,et al.  A Simplex Method for Function Minimization , 1965, Comput. J..

[33]  Thomas Sturm,et al.  Computational Geometry Problems in REDLOG , 1996, Automated Deduction in Geometry.

[34]  Kenneth D. Forbus,et al.  Telling juxtapositions: Using repetition and alignable difference in diagram understanding , 1998 .

[35]  Susan Bell Trickett,et al.  Toward a Comprehensive Model of Graph Comprehension: Making the Case for Spatial Cognition , 2006, Diagrams.

[36]  Jean-Pierre Jouannaud,et al.  Rewrite Systems , 1991, Handbook of Theoretical Computer Science, Volume B: Formal Models and Sematics.

[37]  S. Basu,et al.  Algorithms in real algebraic geometry , 2003 .

[38]  John R. Anderson,et al.  Rules of the Mind , 1993 .

[39]  Bernard Chazelle Triangulating a simple polygon in linear time , 1991, Discret. Comput. Geom..

[40]  Yusuf Pisan A Visual Routines Based Model of Graph Understanding , 2003 .

[41]  Paul S. Rosenbloom,et al.  Universal Subgoaling and Chunking , 1986 .