Paired Structures in Logical and Semiotic Models of Natural Language

Rodríguez, J. Tinguaro; Franco, Camilo A.; Montero, Javier; Lu, Jie

doi:10.1007/978-3-319-08855-6_57

Cited by 2 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 17 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Pairs of predicates that will constitute paired concepts are, for example, tall/short, fat/slim, big/small, cheap/expensive or good/bad (see e.g. [63]).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Paired structures in knowledge representation

Montero

Bustince

Franco

et al. 2016

Knowledge-Based Systems

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this position paper we propose a consistent and unifying view to all those basic knowledge representation models that are based on the existence of two somehow opposite fuzzy concepts. A number of these basic models can be found in fuzzy logic and multi-valued logic literature. Here it is claimed that it is the semantic relationship between two paired concepts what determines the emergence of different types of neutrality, namely indeterminacy, ambivalence and conflict, widely used under different frameworks (possibly under different names). It will be shown the potential relevance of paired structures, generated from two paired concepts together with their associated neutrality, all of them to be modelled as fuzzy sets. In this way, paired structures can be viewed as a standard basic model from which different models arise. This unifying view should therefore allow a deeper analysis of the relationships between several existing knowledge representation formalisms, providing a basis from which more expressive models can be later developed.Recent advances in Psychology and Neurology are providing relevant results for the development of decision making models. The human brain has specifically and successfully evolved to manage complex, uncertain, incomplete, and even apparently inconsistent information. For example, neurologists have shown that the part of the brain taking care of making up the last decision is different to the part of the brain in charge of the previous rational analysis of alternatives, being the first part associated to emotions (see, e.g., [6],[7]). A number of similar results within neurology (see, e.g.

show abstract

“…Pairs of predicates that will constitute paired concepts are, for example, tall/short, fat/slim, big/small, cheap/expensive or good/bad (see e.g. [63]).…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%