Accessible Reasoning with Diagrams: From Cognition to Automation

High-tech systems are ubiquitous and often safety and security critical: reasoning about their correctness is paramount. Thus, precise modelling and formal reasoning are necessary in order to convey knowledge unambiguously and accurately. Whilst mathematical modelling adds great rigour, it is opaque to many stakeholders which leads to errors in data handling, delays in product release, for example. This is a major motivation for the development of diagrammatic approaches to formalisation and reasoning about models of knowledge. In this paper, we present an interactive theorem prover, called iCon, for a highly expressive diagrammatic logic that is capable of modelling OWL 2 ontologies and, thus, has practical relevance. Significantly, this work is the first to design diagrammatic inference rules using insights into what humans find accessible. Specifically, we conducted an experiment about relative cognitive benefits of primitive (small step) and derived (big step) inferences, and use the results to guide the implementation of inference rules in iCon.

[1]  Bernhard Beckert,et al.  A Usability Evaluation of Interactive Theorem Provers Using Focus Groups , 2014, SEFM Workshops.

[2]  Peter Rodgers,et al.  Wellformedness Properties in Euler Diagrams: Which Should Be Used? , 2012, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[3]  Atsushi Shimojima,et al.  Semantic Properties of Diagrams and Their Cognitive Potentials , 2015 .

[4]  Gem Stapleton,et al.  Drawing Euler Diagrams with Circles: The Theory of Piercings , 2011, IEEE Transactions on Visualization and Computer Graphics.

[5]  Gem Stapleton,et al.  Speedith: A Reasoner for Spider Diagrams , 2015, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[6]  Gem Stapleton,et al.  Visualizing OWL 2 using diagrams , 2017, 2017 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages and Human-Centric Computing (VL/HCC).

[7]  Ulrich Kortenkamp.  USING AUTOMATIC THEOREM PROVING TO IMPROVE THE USABILITY OF GEOMETRY SOFTWARE , 2004 .

[8]  Josef Urban,et al.  History of Interactive Theorem Proving , 2014, Computational Logic.

[9]  Gem Stapleton,et al.  Corresponding Regions in Euler Diagrams , 2002, Diagrams.

[10]  Peter Chapman,et al.  Antipattern Comprehension: An Empirical Evaluation , 2016, FOIS.

[11]  Kazuhiro Ueda,et al.  Strategy Analysis of Non-consequence Inference with Euler Diagrams , 2018, J. Log. Lang. Inf..

[12]  Lawrence C. Paulson,et al.  Isabelle - A Generic Theorem Prover (with a contribution by T. Nipkow) , 1994, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[13]  Richard Power,et al.  Measuring the Understandability of Deduction Rules for OWL , 2012, WoDOOM@EKAW.

[14]  Gem Stapleton,et al.  Reasoning with Concept Diagrams About Antipatterns in Ontologies , 2017, CICM.

[15]  Sven Linker,et al.  Tactical Diagrammatic Reasoning , 2016, UITP.

[16]  Mateja Jamnik.  Mathematical Reasoning with Diagrams , 2001 .

[17]  Stuart Kent,et al.  Formalizing spider diagrams , 1999, Proceedings 1999 IEEE Symposium on Visual Languages.

[18]  Franz Baader.  Description Logics , 2009, Reasoning Web.

[19]  Andrew Blake,et al.  Measuring User Comprehension of Inference Rules in Euler Diagrams , 2016, Diagrams.

[20]  Koji Mineshima,et al.  How Diagrams Can Support Syllogistic Reasoning: An Experimental Study , 2015, Journal of Logic, Language and Information.