The Info List - Inference

--- Advertisement ---

Inferences are steps in reasoning, moving from premises to conclusions. Charles Sanders Peirce
Charles Sanders Peirce
divided inference into three kinds: deduction, induction, and abduction. Deduction is inference deriving logical conclusions from premises known or assumed to be true,[1] with the laws of valid inference being studied in logic. Induction is inference from particular premises to a universal conclusion. Abduction is inference to the best explanation. Human inference (i.e. how humans draw conclusions) is traditionally studied within the field of cognitive psychology; artificial intelligence researchers develop automated inference systems to emulate human inference. Statistical inference uses mathematics to draw conclusions in the presence of uncertainty. This generalizes deterministic reasoning, with the absence of uncertainty as a special case. Statistical inference uses quantitative or qualitative (categorical) data which may be subject to random variations.


1 Definition 2 Examples

2.1 Example for definition #1 2.2 Example for definition #2

3 Incorrect inference 4 Applications

4.1 Inference engines

4.1.1 Prolog engine

4.2 Semantic web 4.3 Bayesian statistics and probability logic 4.4 Fuzzy logic 4.5 Non-monotonic logic

5 See also 6 References 7 Further reading 8 External links

Definition[edit] The process by which a conclusion is inferred from multiple observations is called inductive reasoning. The conclusion may be correct or incorrect, or correct to within a certain degree of accuracy, or correct in certain situations. Conclusions inferred from multiple observations may be tested by additional observations. This definition is disputable (due to its lack of clarity. Ref: Oxford English dictionary: "induction ... 3. Logic
the inference of a general law from particular instances." [clarification needed]) The definition given thus applies only when the "conclusion" is general. Two possible definitions of "inference" are:

A conclusion reached on the basis of evidence and reasoning. The process of reaching such a conclusion.

Examples[edit] Example for definition #1[edit] Ancient Greek philosophers defined a number of syllogisms, correct three part inferences, that can be used as building blocks for more complex reasoning. We begin with a famous example:

All humans are mortal. All Greeks are humans. All Greeks are mortal.

The reader can check that the premises and conclusion are true, but logic is concerned with inference: does the truth of the conclusion follow from that of the premises? The validity of an inference depends on the form of the inference. That is, the word "valid" does not refer to the truth of the premises or the conclusion, but rather to the form of the inference. An inference can be valid even if the parts are false, and can be invalid even if some parts are true. But a valid form with true premises will always have a true conclusion. For example, consider the form of the following symbological track:

All meat comes from animals. All beef is meat. Therefore, all beef comes from animals.

If the premises are true, then the conclusion is necessarily true, too. Now we turn to an invalid form.

All A are B. All C are B. Therefore, all C are A.

To show that this form is invalid, we demonstrate how it can lead from true premises to a false conclusion.

All apples are fruit. (True) All bananas are fruit. (True) Therefore, all bananas are apples. (False)

A valid argument with a false premise may lead to a false conclusion, (this and the following examples do not follow the Greek syllogism):

All tall people are French. (False) John Lennon was tall. (True) Therefore, John Lennon was French. (False)

When a valid argument is used to derive a false conclusion from a false premise, the inference is valid because it follows the form of a correct inference. A valid argument can also be used to derive a true conclusion from a false premise:

All tall people are musicians. (Valid, False) John Lennon was tall. (Valid, True) Therefore, John Lennon was a musician. (Valid, True)

In this case we have one false premise and one true premise where a true conclusion has been inferred. Example for definition #2[edit] Evidence: It is the early 1950s and you are an American stationed in the Soviet Union. You read in the Moscow
newspaper that a soccer team from a small city in Siberia
starts winning game after game. The team even defeats the Moscow
team. Inference: The small city in Siberia
is not a small city anymore. The Soviets are working on their own nuclear or high-value secret weapons program. Knowns: The Soviet Union
Soviet Union
is a command economy: people and material are told where to go and what to do. The small city was remote and historically had never distinguished itself; its soccer season was typically short because of the weather. Explanation: In a command economy, people and material are moved where they are needed. Large cities might field good teams due to the greater availability of high quality players; and teams that can practice longer (weather, facilities) can reasonably be expected to be better. In addition, you put your best and brightest in places where they can do the most good—such as on high-value weapons programs. It is an anomaly for a small city to field such a good team. The anomaly (i.e. the soccer scores and great soccer team) indirectly described a condition by which the observer inferred a new meaningful pattern—that the small city was no longer small. Why would you put a large city of your best and brightest in the middle of nowhere? To hide them, of course. Incorrect inference[edit] An incorrect inference is known as a fallacy. Philosophers who study informal logic have compiled large lists of them, and cognitive psychologists have documented many biases in human reasoning that favor incorrect reasoning. Applications[edit] Inference engines[edit] Main articles: Reasoning
system, Inference engine, expert system, and business rule engine AI systems first provided automated logical inference and these were once extremely popular research topics, leading to industrial applications under the form of expert systems and later business rule engines. More recent work on automated theorem proving has had a stronger basis in formal logic. An inference system's job is to extend a knowledge base automatically. The knowledge base (KB) is a set of propositions that represent what the system knows about the world. Several techniques can be used by that system to extend KB by means of valid inferences. An additional requirement is that the conclusions the system arrives at are relevant to its task. Prolog engine[edit] Prolog (for "Programming in Logic") is a programming language based on a subset of predicate calculus. Its main job is to check whether a certain proposition can be inferred from a KB (knowledge base) using an algorithm called backward chaining. Let us return to our Socrates
syllogism. We enter into our Knowledge Base the following piece of code:

mortal(X) :- man(X). man(socrates).

( Here :- can be read as "if". Generally, if P

displaystyle to

Q (if P then Q) then in Prolog we would code Q:-P (Q if P).) This states that all men are mortal and that Socrates
is a man. Now we can ask the Prolog system about Socrates:

?- mortal(socrates).

(where ?- signifies a query: Can mortal(socrates). be deduced from the KB using the rules) gives the answer "Yes". On the other hand, asking the Prolog system the following:

?- mortal(plato).

gives the answer "No". This is because Prolog does not know anything about Plato, and hence defaults to any property about Plato
being false (the so-called closed world assumption). Finally ?- mortal(X) (Is anything mortal) would result in "Yes" (and in some implementations: "Yes": X=socrates) Prolog can be used for vastly more complicated inference tasks. See the corresponding article for further examples. Semantic web[edit] Recently automatic reasoners found in semantic web a new field of application. Being based upon description logic, knowledge expressed using one variant of OWL can be logically processed, i.e., inferences can be made upon it. Bayesian statistics and probability logic[edit] Main article: Bayesian inference Philosophers and scientists who follow the Bayesian framework for inference use the mathematical rules of probability to find this best explanation. The Bayesian view has a number of desirable features—one of them is that it embeds deductive (certain) logic as a subset (this prompts some writers to call Bayesian probability "probability logic", following E. T. Jaynes). Bayesian's identify probabilities with degrees of beliefs, with certainly true propositions having probability 1, and certainly false propositions having probability 0. To say that "it's going to rain tomorrow" has a 0.9 probability is to say that you consider the possibility of rain tomorrow as extremely likely. Through the rules of probability, the probability of a conclusion and of alternatives can be calculated. The best explanation is most often identified with the most probable (see Bayesian decision theory). A central rule of Bayesian inference
Bayesian inference
is Bayes' theorem. Fuzzy logic[edit] Main article: Fuzzy logic

This section needs expansion. You can help by adding to it. (October 2016)

Non-monotonic logic[edit] Main article: Non-monotonic logic [2] A relation of inference is monotonic if the addition of premises does not undermine previously reached conclusions; otherwise the relation is non-monotonic. Deductive inference is monotonic: if a conclusion is reached on the basis of a certain set of premises, then that conclusion still holds if more premises are added. By contrast, everyday reasoning is mostly non-monotonic because it involves risk: we jump to conclusions from deductively insufficient premises. We know when it is worth or even necessary (e.g. in medical diagnosis) to take the risk. Yet we are also aware that such inference is defeasible—that new information may undermine old conclusions. Various kinds of defeasible but remarkably successful inference have traditionally captured the attention of philosophers (theories of induction, Peirce's theory of abduction, inference to the best explanation, etc.). More recently logicians have begun to approach the phenomenon from a formal point of view. The result is a large body of theories at the interface of philosophy, logic and artificial intelligence. See also[edit]


Abductive reasoning Deductive reasoning Inductive reasoning

Entailment Epilogism Analogy Axiom


Immediate inference Inferential programming Inquiry Logic Logic
of information Logical assertion Logical graph Rule of inference List of rules of inference Theorem Transduction (machine learning)

portal Thinking portal


^ http://www.thefreedictionary.com/inference ^ Fuhrmann, André. Nonmonotonic Logic
(PDF). Archived from the original (PDF) on 9 December 2003. 

Further reading[edit]

Hacking, Ian (2011). An Introduction to Probability
and Inductive Logic. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-77501-9.  Jaynes, Edwin Thompson (2003). Probability
Theory: The Logic
of Science. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-59271-2.  McKay, David J.C. (2003). Information Theory, Inference, and Learning Algorithms. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-64298-1.  Russell, Stuart J.; Norvig, Peter (2003), Artificial Intelligence: A Modern Approach (2nd ed.), Upper Saddle River, New Jersey: Prentice Hall, ISBN 0-13-790395-2  Tijms, Henk (2004). Understanding Probability. Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0-521-70172-4. 

Inductive inference:

Carnap, Rudolf; Jeffrey, Richard C., eds. (1971). Studies in Inductive Logic
and Probability. 1. The University of California Press.  Jeffrey, Richard C., ed. (1980). Studies in Inductive Logic
and Probability. 2. The University of California Press.  Angluin, Dana (1976). An Application of the Theory of Computational Complexity to the Study of Inductive Inference (Ph.D.). University of California at Berkeley.  Angluin, Dana (1980). "Inductive Inference of Formal Languages from Positive Data" (PDF). Information and Control. 45: 117–135. doi:10.1016/s0019-9958(80)90285-5.  Angluin, Dana; Smith, Carl H. (Sep 1983). "Inductive Inference: Theory and Methods" (PDF). Computing Surveys. 15 (3): 237–269. doi:10.1145/356914.356918.  Gabbay, Dov M.; Hartmann, Stephan; Woods, John, eds. (2009). Inductive Logic. Handbook of the History of Logic. 10. Elsevier.  Goodman, Nelson (1983). Fact, Fiction, and Forecast. Harvard University Press. 

Abductive inference:

O'Rourke, P.; Josephson, J., eds. (1997). Automated abduction: Inference to the best explanation. AAAI Press.  Psillos, Stathis (2009). Gabbay, Dov M.; Hartmann, Stephan; Woods, John, eds. An Explorer upon Untrodden Ground: Peirce on Abduction (PDF). Handbook of the History of Logic. 10. Elsevier. pp. 117–152.  Ray, Oliver (Dec 2005). Hybrid Abductive Inductive Learning (Ph.D.). University of London, Imperial College. CiteSeerX . 

Psychological investigations about human reasoning:


Johnson-Laird, Philip Nicholas; Byrne, Ruth M. J. (1992). Deduction. Erlbaum.  Byrne, Ruth M. J.; Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2009). ""If" and the Problems of Conditional Reasoning" (PDF). Trends in Cognitive Science. 13 (7): 282–287. doi:10.1016/j.tics.2009.04.003.  Knauff, Markus; Fangmeier, Thomas; Ruff, Christian C.; Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2003). "Reasoning, Models, and Images: Behavioral Measures and Cortical Activity" (PDF). Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience. 15 (4): 559–573. doi:10.1162/089892903321662949. PMID 12803967.  Johnson-Laird, Philip N. (1995). Gazzaniga, M. S., ed. Mental Models, Deductive Reasoning, and the Brain (PDF). MIT Press. pp. 999–1008.  Khemlani, Sangeet; Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2008). "Illusory Inferences about Embedded Disjunctions". Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Washington/DC (PDF). pp. 2128–2133. 


McCloy, Rachel; Byrne, Ruth M. J.; Johnson-Laird, Philip N. (2009). "Understanding Cumulative Risk" (PDF). The Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology. 63: 18. doi:10.1080/17470210903024784.  Johnson-Laird, Philip N. (1994). "Mental Models and Probabilistic Thinking" (PDF). Cognition. 50: 189–209. doi:10.1016/0010-0277(94)90028-0. ,


Burns, B. D. (1996). "Meta-Analogical Transfer: Transfer Between Episodes of Analogical Reasoning". Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition. 22 (4): 1032–1048. doi:10.1037/0278-7393.22.4.1032. 


Jahn, Georg; Knauff, Markus; Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2007). "Preferred mental models in reasoning about spatial relations" (PDF). Memory & Cognition. 35 (8): 2075–2087. doi:10.3758/bf03192939.  Knauff, Markus; Johnson-Laird, P. N. (2002). "Visual imagery can impede reasoning" (PDF). Memory & Cognition. 30 (3): 363–371. doi:10.3758/bf03194937.  Waltz, James A.; Knowlton, Barbara J.; Holyoak, Keith J.; Boone, Kyle B.; Mishkin, Fred S.; de Menezes Santos, Marcia; Thomas, Carmen R.; Miller, Bruce L. (Mar 1999). "A System for Relational Reasoning
in Human Prefrontal Cortex" (PDF). Psychological Science. 10 (2): 119–125. doi:10.1111/1467-9280.00118. 


Bucciarelli, Monica; Khemlani, Sangeet; Johnson-Laird, P. N. (Feb 2008). "The Psychology of Moral Reasoning" (PDF). Judgment and Decision Making. 3 (2): 121–139. 

External links[edit]

Look up inference or infer in Wiktionary, the free dictionary.

Inference at PhilPapers Infenrece example and definition Inference at the Indiana Philosophy

v t e


Outline History


Argumentation theory Axiology Critical thinking Logic
in computer science Mathematical logic Metalogic Metamathematics Non-classical logic Philosophical logic Philosophy
of logic Set theory


Abduction Analytic and synthetic propositions Antinomy A priori and a posteriori Deduction Definition Description Induction Inference Logical form Logical consequence Logical truth Name Necessity and sufficiency Meaning Paradox Possible world Presupposition Probability Reason Reference Semantics Statement Strict implication Substitution Syntax Truth Validity



Mathematical logic Boolean algebra Set theory


Logicians Rules of inference Paradoxes Fallacies Logic

Portal Category WikiProject (talk) changes

v t e






Epistemology Logic Ethics Aesthetics


Action Art

Culture Design Music Film

Business Color Cosmos Dialogue Education Environment Futility Happiness Healthcare History Human nature Humor Feminism Language Life Literature Mathematics Mind

Pain Psychology

of psychiatry Philosophy
of perception Philosophy Religion Science

Physics Chemistry Biology Geography

Sexuality Social science

Culture Economics Justice Law Politics Society

Space and time Sport Technology

Artificial intelligence Computer science Engineering Information


Schools of thought

By era

Ancient Western

Medieval Renaissance Early modern Modern Contemporary



Agriculturalism Confucianism Legalism Logicians Mohism Chinese naturalism Neotaoism Taoism Yangism Zen


Aristotelianism Atomism Cynicism Cyrenaics Eleatics Eretrian school Epicureanism Hermeneutics Ionian

Ephesian Milesian

Megarian school Neoplatonism Peripatetic Platonism Pluralism Presocratic Pyrrhonism Pythagoreanism Neopythagoreanism Sophistic Stoicism


Samkhya Nyaya Vaisheshika Yoga Mīmāṃsā Ājīvika Ajñana Cārvāka Jain

Anekantavada Syādvāda


Śūnyatā Madhyamaka Yogacara Sautrāntika Svatantrika


Mazdakism Zoroastrianism Zurvanism



Christian philosophy Scholasticism Thomism Renaissance humanism

East Asian

Korean Confucianism Edo Neo-Confucianism Neo-Confucianism



Acintya bheda abheda Advaita Bhedabheda Dvaita Dvaitadvaita Shuddhadvaita Vishishtadvaita



Averroism Avicennism Illuminationism ʿIlm al-Kalām Sufi





Cartesianism Kantianism Neo-Kantianism Hegelianism Marxism Spinozism


Anarchism Classical Realism Liberalism Collectivism Conservatism Determinism Dualism Empiricism Existentialism Foundationalism Historicism Holism Humanism Idealism

Absolute British German Objective Subjective Transcendental

Individualism Kokugaku Materialism Modernism Monism Naturalism Natural law Nihilism New Confucianism Neo-Scholasticism Pragmatism Phenomenology Positivism Reductionism Rationalism Social contract Socialism Transcendentalism Utilitarianism



Applied ethics Analytic feminism Analytical Marxism Communitarianism Consequentialism Critical rationalism Experimental philosophy Falsificationism Foundationalism / Coherentism Generative linguistics Internalism and Externalism Logical positivism Legal positivism Normative ethics Meta-ethics Moral realism Neo-Aristotelian Quinean naturalism Ordinary language philosophy Postanalytic philosophy Quietism Rawlsian Reformed epistemology Systemics Scientism Scientific realism Scientific skepticism Contemporary utilitarianism Vienna Circle Wittgensteinian


Critical theory Deconstruction Existentialism Feminist Frankfurt School New Historicism Hermeneutics Neo-Marxism Phenomenology Postmodernism Post-structuralism Social constructionism Structuralism Western Marxism


Kyoto School Objectivism Russian cosmism more...



Formalism Institutionalism Aesthetic response


Consequentialism Deontology Virtue

Free will

Compatibilism Determinism Libertarianism


Atomism Dualism Monism Naturalism


Constructivism Empiricism Idealism Particularism Fideism Rationalism / Reasonism Skepticism Solipsism


Behaviorism Emergentism Eliminativism Epiphenomenalism Functionalism Objectivism Subjectivism


Absolutism Particularism Relativism Nihilism Skepticism Universalism


Action Event Process


Anti-realism Conceptualism Idealism Materialism Naturalism Nominalism Physicalism Realism

by region Philosophy-related lists Miscellaneous

By region

African Ethiopian Aztec Native America Eastern Chinese Egyptian Czech Indian Indonesian Iranian Japanese Korean Vietnam Pakistani Western American Australian British Danish French German Greek Italian Polish Romanian Russian Slovene Spanish Turkish


Outline Index Years Problems Schools Glossary Philosophers Movements Publications


Women in philosophy Sage (philosophy)

Portal Category Book

Authority control

GND: 43335