Mental models: towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness
Mental models: towards a cognitive science of language, inference, and consciousness
Temporal reasoning based on semi-intervals
Artificial Intelligence
Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals
Communications of the ACM
Spatial Cognition and Computation
Reasoning about Binary Topological Relations
SSD '91 Proceedings of the Second International Symposium on Advances in Spatial Databases
Qualitative Spatial Representation and Reasoning Techniques
KI '97 Proceedings of the 21st Annual German Conference on Artificial Intelligence: Advances in Artificial Intelligence
Computing Transivity Tables: A Challenge For Automated Theorem Provers
CADE-11 Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Automated Deduction: Automated Deduction
fMRI Evidence for a Three-Stage Model of Deductive Reasoning
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
The Ngongotaha river UDPS experiment: low-cost underwater dynamic stereo photogrammetry
Proceedings of the 27th Conference on Image and Vision Computing New Zealand
Multi-cultural Aspects of Spatial Knowledge
GeoS '09 Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on GeoSpatial Semantics
The endpoint hypothesis: a topological-cognitive assessment of geographic scale movement patterns
COSIT'09 Proceedings of the 9th international conference on Spatial information theory
RCC8 is polynomial on networks of bounded treewidth
IJCAI'11 Proceedings of the Twenty-Second international joint conference on Artificial Intelligence - Volume Volume Two
| Hi-index | 0.00 |
How do we reason about topological relations? Do people with different cultural backgrounds differ in how they reason about such relations? We conducted two topological reasoning experiments, one in Germany and one in Mongolia to analyze such questions. Topological relations such as "A overlaps B", "B lies within C" were presented to the participants as premises and they had to find a conclusion that was consistent with the premises ("What is the relation between A and C?"). The problem description allowed multiple possible "conclusions". Our results, however, indicate that the participants had strong preferences: They consistently preferred one of the possible conclusions and neglected other conclusions, although they were also consistent with the premises. The preferred and neglected conclusions were quite similar in Germany and Mongolia.