An fMRI analysis of the efficacy of Euler diagrams in logical reasoning

Sato, Yuri; Masuda, Shinya; Someya, Yoshiaki; Tsujii, Takeo; Watanabe, Shigeru

doi:10.1109/vlhcc.2015.7357209

Cited by 13 publications

(9 citation statements)

References 50 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…To the best of our knowledge, there have been relatively few empirical studies of reasoning with Euler diagrams, e.g. the work of Sato and Mineshima such as [5]. These studies are concerned with the activity of proving itself, i.e., the creation of a proof, while we are interested in the task of understanding of a proof which already exists.…”

Section: Fig 1 An Euler Diagram Theoremmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…However, existing tools do not take into account the growing body of research on what the specific cognitive advantages of reasoning diagrammatically might be, and on where the source of these advantages, if they exist, might be located. This research includes neurological studies that examine brain activity of users reasoning with and without diagrams [5], and empirically-derived guidelines for producing diagrams that make good use of Gestalt principles relating to colour and form [2]. At the broadest level our research question asks is it possible to develop a systematic understanding of readability in diagrammatic proofs?…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Measuring User Comprehension of Inference Rules in Euler Diagrams

Linker

Burton

Blake

2016

Diagrammatic Representation and Inference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. Proofs created by diagrammatic theorem provers are not designed with human readers in mind. We say that one proof, P1, is more "readable" than another, P2, if users make fewer errors in understanding which inference rules were applied in P1 than in P2, and do so in a shorter time. We analysed the readability of individual rules in an empirical study which required users to identify the rules used in inferences. We found that increased clutter (redundant syntax) in the premiss diagrams affects readability, and that rule applications which require the user to combine information from several diagrams are sometimes less readable than those which focus on a single diagram. We provide an explanation based on mental models.

show abstract

Section: Fig 1 An Euler Diagram Theoremmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Measuring User Comprehension of Inference Rules in Euler Diagrams

Linker

Burton

Blake

2016

Diagrammatic Representation and Inference

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The reason for the lack of diagrammatic models arises due to expressiveness limitations that are considered inherent in diagrammatic languages [4]. However, recent research has pushed the boundaries of what can be expressed diagrammatically [8] in ways effective for humans to understand [2,7,[10][11][12].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Exploring and Conceptualising Attestation

Oliver

Howse

Shams

et al. 2019

Graph-Based Representation and Reasoning

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

When formalising the rules of trust in the remote attestation of TPM-based computer systems it is paramount that the rules are precisely understood, supporting unambiguous communication of information about system requirements between engineers. We present a diagrammatic approach to modelling rules of trust using an extended version of concept diagrams. Within the context of our proof-of-concept Network Function Virtualisation and Attestation environment, these rules allow different level of trust to be explored and, importantly, allow us to identify when a computer system should not be trusted. To ensure that the modelling approach can be applied to general systems, we include generic patterns for extending our domain model and rules of trust. Consequently, through the use of a formal, yet accessible, diagrammatic notation, domain experts can define rules of trust for their systems.

show abstract

“…Surprisingly little progress has been made, in contrast to the significant advances on the theoretical aspects of diagrammatic logics. Without a thorough understanding of how different choices of diagram impact cognition, it will not be possible to fully exploit the established cognitive advantages of diagrams over symbolic and sentential notations [16,31,32]. One of the most prominent reasons for developing diagrammatic logics is to enable people to better understand information which provides further motivation for understanding the relative cognitive benefits of competing choices of diagrams.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Presence and Absence of Individuals in Diagrammatic Logics: An Empirical Comparison

2017

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.The development of diagrammatic logics is strongly motivated by the desire to make formal reasoning accessible to broad audiences. One major research problem, for which surprisingly little progress has been made, is to understand how to choose between semantically equivalent diagrams from the perspective of human cognition. The particular focus of this paper is on choosing between diagrams that represent either the presence or absence of individuals. To understand how to best make this choice, we conducted an empirical study. We found that representing the presence of individuals supported task performance either significantly better than, or no worse than, representing the absence of individuals. The particularly striking feature of our results was that representing the absence of individuals in a way that makes the diagram highly cluttered is detrimental to human cognition. As a result, diagrams with this feature should be avoided, but diagrams using presence (irrespective of diagram clutter) or low-cluttered absence can be used to support cognition in the context of the tasks performed in our study.

show abstract

An fMRI analysis of the efficacy of Euler diagrams in logical reasoning

Cited by 13 publications

References 50 publications

Measuring User Comprehension of Inference Rules in Euler Diagrams

Measuring User Comprehension of Inference Rules in Euler Diagrams

Exploring and Conceptualising Attestation

Presence and Absence of Individuals in Diagrammatic Logics: An Empirical Comparison

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About