Skip to main content

Diagrams as Physical Models

  • Conference paper

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 4045))

Abstract

We discuss a variety of roles for diagrams in helping with reasoning, focusing in particular on their role as physical models of states of affairs, much like an architectural model of a building or a 3-D molecular model of a chemical compound. We discuss the concept of a physical model for a logical sentence, and the role played by the causal structure of the physical medium in making the given sentence as well as a set of implied sentences true. This role of a diagram is consistent with a widely-held intuition that diagrams exploit the fact that 2-D space is an analog of the domain of discourse. One line of research in diagrammatic reasoning is that diagrams, rather then being models, are formal representations with specialized rules of inference that generate new diagrams. We reconcile these contrasting views by relating the usefulness of diagrammatic systems as formal representations to the fact that their rewrite rules take advantage of the diagrams’ model-like character. When the physical model is prototypical, it supports the inference of certain other sentences for which it provides a model as well. We also informally discuss a proposal that diagrams and similar physical models help to explicate a certain sense of relevance in inference, an intuition that so-called Relevance Logics attempt to capture.

This paper was prepared through participation in the Advanced Decision Architectures Collaborative Technology Alliance sponsored by the U.S. Army Research Laboratory under Cooperative Agreement DAAD19-01-2-0009, and by federal flow-through by the Department of Defense under contract FA8652-03-3-0005 (as a subcontract from Wright State University and Wright Brothers Institute). I am indebted to Peter Schroeder-Heister and Gerard Allwein for significant assistance in thinking about these ideas, to Neil Tennant and Stewart Shapiro for useful discussions, and to one of the reviewers who made useful suggestions for improvement.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   39.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   54.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  • Allwein, G., Barwise, J. (eds.): Logical Reasoning with Diagrams. Oxford University Press, New York (1996)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Barwise, J., Etchemendy, J.: Hyperproof. CSLI/Cambridge University Press, Stanford/Cambridge (1994)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Chandrasekaran, B., Kurup, U., Banerjee, B., Josephson, J.R., Winkler, R.: An Architecture for Problem Solving with Diagrams. In: Blackwell, A.F., Marriott, K., Shimojima, A. (eds.) Diagrams 2004. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2980, pp. 151–165. Springer, Heidelberg (2004)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  • Chandrasekaran, B.: Diagrams as Physical Models to Assist in Reasoning. In: Magnani, L. (ed.) Model-Based Reasoning in Science and Engineering. King’s College Publications, London (to appear)

    Google Scholar 

  • Jamnik, M.: Mathematical Reasoning with Diagrams: From Intuition to Automation. CSLI Press, Stanford (2001)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Johnson-Laird, P.: Mental Models: Towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1983)

    Google Scholar 

  • Larkin, J., Simon, H.: Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cognitive Science 11, 65–99 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mares, E.: Relevance Logic. In: Zalta, E.N. (ed.) The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (forthcoming) (Spring 2006), http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/spr2006/entries/logic-relevance/

  • Lindsay, R.K.: Using Diagrams to Understand Geometry. Computational Intelligence 14, 238–272 (1998)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shin, S.: The Logical Status of Diagrams. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1994)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2006 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Chandrasekaran, B. (2006). Diagrams as Physical Models. In: Barker-Plummer, D., Cox, R., Swoboda, N. (eds) Diagrammatic Representation and Inference. Diagrams 2006. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 4045. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/11783183_28

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/11783183_28

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-35623-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-35624-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics