BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Hiroyuki Kido

Hiroyuki Kido contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Artificial IntelligenceLogic in Computer ScienceMachine Learning

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 17 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
4works
0followers
3topics
2close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

4 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Towards Unifying Logical Entailment and Statistical Estimation

This paper gives a generative model of the interpretation of formal logic for data-driven logical reasoning. The key idea is to represent the interpretation as likelihood of a formula being true given a model of formal logic. Using the likelihood, Bayes' theorem gives the posterior of the model being the case given the formula. The posterior represents an inverse interpretation of formal logic that seeks models making the formula true. The likelihood and posterior cause Bayesian learning that gives the probability of the conclusion being true in the models where all the premises are true. This paper looks at statistical and logical properties of the Bayesian learning. It is shown that the generative model is a unified theory of several different types of reasoning in logic and statistics.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

A Bayesian Approach to Direct and Inverse Abstract Argumentation Problems

This paper studies a fundamental mechanism of how to detect a conflict between arguments given sentiments regarding acceptability of the arguments. We introduce a concept of the inverse problem of the abstract argumentation to tackle the problem. Given noisy sets of acceptable arguments, it aims to find attack relations explaining the sets well in terms of acceptability semantics. It is the inverse of the direct problem corresponding to the traditional problem of the abstract argumentation that focuses on finding sets of acceptable arguments in terms of the semantics given an attack relation between the arguments. We give a probabilistic model handling both of the problems in a way that is faithful to the acceptability semantics. From a theoretical point of view, we show that a solution to both the direct and inverse problems is a special case of the probabilistic inference on the model. We discuss that the model provides a natural extension of the semantics to cope with uncertain attack relations distributed probabilistically. From en empirical point of view, we argue that it reasonably predicts individuals sentiments regarding acceptability of arguments. This paper contributes to lay the foundation for making acceptability semantics data-driven and to provide a way to tackle the knowledge acquisition bottleneck.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Bayes Meets Entailment and Prediction: Commonsense Reasoning with Non-monotonicity, Paraconsistency and Predictive Accuracy

The recent success of Bayesian methods in neuroscience and artificial intelligence gives rise to the hypothesis that the brain is a Bayesian machine. Since logic and learning are both practices of the human brain, it leads to another hypothesis that there is a Bayesian interpretation underlying both logical reasoning and machine learning. In this paper, we introduce a generative model of logical consequence relations. It formalises the process of how the truth value of a sentence is probabilistically generated from the probability distribution over states of the world. We show that the generative model characterises a classical consequence relation, paraconsistent consequence relation and nonmonotonic consequence relation. In particular, the generative model gives a new consequence relation that outperforms them in reasoning with inconsistent knowledge. We also show that the generative model gives a new classification algorithm that outperforms several representative algorithms in predictive accuracy and complexity on the Kaggle Titanic dataset.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2021arXiv

Bayesian Entailment Hypothesis: How Brains Implement Monotonic and Non-monotonic Reasoning

Recent success of Bayesian methods in neuroscience and artificial intelligence gives rise to the hypothesis that the brain is a Bayesian machine. Since logic, as the laws of thought, is a product and practice of the human brain, it leads to another hypothesis that there is a Bayesian algorithm and data-structure for logical reasoning. In this paper, we give a Bayesian account of entailment and characterize its abstract inferential properties. The Bayesian entailment is shown to be a monotonic consequence relation in an extreme case. In general, it is a sort of non-monotonic consequence relation without Cautious monotony or Cut. The preferential entailment, which is a representative non-monotonic consequence relation, is shown to be maximum a posteriori entailment, which is an approximation of the Bayesian entailment. We finally discuss merits of our proposals in terms of encoding preferences on defaults, handling change and contradiction, and modeling human entailment.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access