Search
  • All Journals
Advanced Search
Search articles by Title, Author, Keywords, DOI
7.7CiteScore
2.0Impact Factor
Advanced Search
MAP  >  The Knowledge Engineering Review
2016 Volume 31
Article Contents
Next Previous
RESEARCH ARTICLE   Open Access    

Data fusion and abductive inference for metaphor resolution: a bridging discussion

  • Department of Mathematics, Computer Science and Physics

More Information
  • Abstract: Since the 1980s, metaphor has been recognized as a pervasively diffused phenomenon in communication, absolutely not restricted to rhetoric and linguistic phenomena, involving structured concepts, relations, and matching ‘rules’. Metaphor resolution, that is metaphor understanding, as well as metaphor creation, has become an issue in automated processing and understanding of natural language as well as of mixed visual communication. It can be showed as a process of structure finding and mapping procedure between conceptual denotation–connotation structures necessary for interpretation. Creative abduction is then showed to be the pattern inference required to work out structure-mappings in corresponding nodes as present in metaphors. In this paper, we review some key issues (definitions, typologies, theoretical problems) involving the concept of ‘metaphor’ and survey some definitions and concepts emerging in contemporary debate on abductive inference. Finally, we argue that metaphor understanding process can be recognized as a fusion tractable problem, allowing the exploitation of frameworks and algorithms of such domain.
  • 加载中
  • Aliseda A. 2006. Abductive Reasoning. Logical Investigations into Discovery and Explanation (Synthese Library), Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Aristotle 1995. Poetics. William Heinemann Ltd.

    Google Scholar

    Barnden J. A. 2008. Metaphor and artificial intelligence: why they matter to each other. In The Cambridge Handbook of Metaphor and Thought, Gibbs, R. W., Jr. (ed.). Cambridge University Press, 311–338.

    Google Scholar

    Barnden J. A. & Lee M. G. 1999. An implemented context system that combines belief reasoning, metaphor-based reasoning and uncertainty handling. In Proceedings of the Second International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Modeling and Using Context, CONTEXT ‘99, 28–41. Springer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar

    Barsalou L. W. 1999. Perceptual symbol systems. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 22(4), 577–660.

    Google Scholar

    Bharathan V. & Josephson J. R. 2006. An abductive framework for level one information fusion. In Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Information Fusion, 1–7.

    Google Scholar

    Burch R. W. 2000. Semeiotic data fusion. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Information Fusion, 2, 67–73.

    Google Scholar

    Cameron L. & Deignan A. 2006. The emergence of metaphor in discourse. Applied Linguistics 27(4), 671–690.

    Google Scholar

    Evans V. 2009. How Words Mean: Lexical Concepts, Cognitive Models and Meaning Construction. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar

    Fass D. 1997. Processing Metaphor and Metonymy. Ablex.

    Google Scholar

    Ferrin G., Snidaro L., Canazza S. & Foresti G. 2008. Soft data issues in fusion of video surveillance. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Information Fusion, 1882–1889.

    Google Scholar

    Ferrin G., Snidaro L. & Foresti G. 2009. Structuring relations for fusion in intelligence. In Proceedings of the 12th International Conference on Information Fusion, 1621–1626.

    Google Scholar

    Ferrin G., Snidaro L. & Foresti G. L. 2011. Contexts, co-texts and situations in fusion domain. In Proceedings of the 14th International Conference on Information Fusion, 1–6. IEEE.

    Google Scholar

    Ferrin G., Snidaro L. & Foresti G. L. 2015. Artifact ‘metaphors’: gaining capability using ‘wrong’ tools. In Proceedings of the 18th International Conference on Information Fusion, 1176–1181.

    Google Scholar

    Feyerabend P. K. 1999. Conquest of Abundance: A Tale of Abstraction Versus the Richness of Being. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar

    Flach P. A. & Kakas A. C. (eds) 2000. Abduction and Induction: Essays on their Relation and Integration. Kluwer Academic Publishers.

    Google Scholar

    Forceville C. 1994. Pictorial metaphor in advertisements. Metaphor and Symbolic Activity 9(1), 1–29.

    Google Scholar

    Forceville C. 1996. Pictorial Metaphor in Advertising. Routledge (Taylor and Francis).

    Google Scholar

    Forceville C. 2000. Compasses, beauty queens and other PCs: pictorial metaphors in computer advertisements. Hermes, Journal of Linguistics 24, 31–55.

    Google Scholar

    Forceville C. 2002. The identification of target and source in pictorial metaphors. Journal of Pragmatics 34(1), 1–14.

    Google Scholar

    Forceville C. 2005. A course in pictorial and multimodal metaphor, Semiotics Institute. http://semioticon.com/sio/courses/pictorial-multimodal-metaphor.

    Google Scholar

    Gabbay D. M. & Woods J. 2005. A Practical Logic of Cognitive Systems, Volume 2: The Reach of Abduction: Insight and Trial. Elsevier Science Inc.

    Google Scholar

    Gargett A. & Barnden J. 2015. Gen-Meta: generating metaphors by combining AI and corpus-based modeling. Web Intelligence 13, 103–114.

    Google Scholar

    Gentner D. 1983. Structure-mapping: a theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science 7(2), 155–170.

    Google Scholar

    Gentner D. 1988. Metaphor as structure mapping: the relational shift. Child Development 59, 47–59.

    Google Scholar

    Hanson N. R. 1958. Patterns of Discovery. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar

    Harman G. H. 1965. The inference to the best explanation. The Philosophical Review 74(1), 88–95.

    Google Scholar

    Hintikka J. 1998. What is abduction? The fundamental problem of contemporary epistemology. Transactions of the Charles Sanders Peirce Society 34, 503–533.

    Google Scholar

    Hobbes T. 1651. Leviathan, or, the Matter, Forme and Power of a Common Wealth Ecclesiasticall and Civil. Andrew Crooke.

    Google Scholar

    Hobbs J. R., Stickel M. & Martin P. 1993. Interpretation as abduction. Artificial Intelligence 63, 69–142.

    Google Scholar

    Holyoak K. J. & Thagard P. 1995. Mental Leaps: Analogy in Creative Thought. MIT Press.

    Google Scholar

    Hume D. 2007. A treatise of human nature. Norton, D.F. & Norton, M.J. (eds). Clarendon Press.

    Google Scholar

    Josephson J. R. 2008. Abductive inferencing for integrating information from human and robotic sources. In Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Information Fusion, 109–114.

    Google Scholar

    Kadmon N. 2001. Formal Pragmatics: Semantics, Pragmatics, Presupposition, and Focus. Blackwell Publishers.

    Google Scholar

    Kemp C. & Tenenbaum J. B. B. 2008. The discovery of structural form. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America 105(31), 10687–10692.

    Google Scholar

    Kövecses Z. 2002. Metaphor: A Practical Introduction. Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar

    Lakoff G. & Johnson M. 1980. Metaphors We Live By. University of Chicago Press.

    Google Scholar

    Liggins M. E., Hall D. L. & Llinas J. (eds) 2008. Handbook of Multisensor data fusion: theory and practice, The electrical engineering & applied signal processing series, second edn. CRC Press.

    Google Scholar

    Llinas J., Bowman C., Rogova G., Steinberg A., Waltz E. & White F. 2004. Revisiting the JDL data fusion model II. In Proceedings of the 7th International Conference on Information Fusion, 1218–1230.

    Google Scholar

    Magnani L. 2001. Abduction, Reason and Science. Processes of Discovery and Explanation. Kluwer Academic Plenum Publishers.

    Google Scholar

    Magnani L. 2009. Abductive Cognition—The Epistemological and Eco-Cognitive Dimensions of Hypothetical Reasoning, Cognitive Systems Monographs 3. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Magnani L. 2013. Is abduction ignorance-preserving? Conventions, models and fictions in science. Logic Journal of the IGPL 21(6), 882–914.

    Google Scholar

    Magnani L. 2015. The eco-cognitive model of abduction. Journal of Applied Logic 13(3), 285–315.

    Google Scholar

    Martin J. H. 1990. A Computational Model of Metaphor Interpretation. Academic Press Professional, Inc.

    Google Scholar

    Martin J. H. 2000. Representing UNIX domain metaphors. Artificial Intelligence Review 14, 377–401.

    Google Scholar

    McAllister J. W. 2013. Reasoning with visual metaphors. Knowledge Engineering Review 28(3), 367–379.

    Google Scholar

    Möller R. & Neumann B. 2008. Ontology-based reasoning techniques for multimedia interpretation and retrieval. In Semantic Multimedia and Ontologies: Theory and Applications, Kompatsiaris Y. & Hobson P. (eds). Springer, 55–98.

    Google Scholar

    Narayanan S. 1999. Moving right along: a computational model of metaphoric reasoning about events. In Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 121–128. AAAI Press.

    Google Scholar

    Niiniluoto I. 1999. Defending abduction. Philosophy of Science 66, 436–451.

    Google Scholar

    Peirce C. S. 1931. Collected Papers of Charles Sanders Peirce. Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar

    Peirce C. S. 1982–. Writings of Charles S. Peirce: A Chronological edition 1. Indiana University Press.

    Google Scholar

    Pragglejaz Group T. 2007. MIP: a method for identifying metaphorically used words in discourse. Metaphor and Symbol 22(1), 1–39.

    Google Scholar

    Rooth M. 1985. Association with Focus, PhD thesis, University of Massachusetts.

    Google Scholar

    Schurz G. 2008. Patterns of abduction. Synthese 164(2), 201–234.

    Google Scholar

    Semino E. 2008. Metaphor in Discourse. Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar

    Snidaro L., Garcia J. & Llinas J. 2015. Context-based information fusion: a survey and discussion. Information Fusion 25, 16–31.

    Google Scholar

    Snidaro L., Visentini I. & Foresti G. 2011. Data Fusion in Modern Surveillance (chapter 1), Studies in Computational Intelligence 336, 1–21. Springer.

    Google Scholar

    Steinberg A., Bowman C. & White F. 2004. Rethinking the JDL data fusion model. In Proceedings of NSSDF. JHUAPL.

    Google Scholar

    Tenenbaum J., Griffiths T. & Kemp C. 2006. Theory-based Bayesian models of inductive learning and reasoning. Trends in Cognitive Sciences 10(7), 309–318.

    Google Scholar

    Van der Sandt R. 1992. Presupposition projection as anaphora resolution. Journal of Semantics 9(4), 333–377.

    Google Scholar

    Veale T. 1998. ‘Just in time’ analogical mapping, an iterative-deepening approach to structure-mapping. In Proceedings of ECAI98, the Thirteenth European Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

    Google Scholar

    Veale T. 2014. A service-oriented architecture for metaphor processing. In ACL 2014, 52.

    Google Scholar

    Veale T. & Keane M. T. 1997. The competence of sub-optimal structure mapping on hard analogies. In The Proceedings of IJCAI’97, the International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

    Google Scholar

  • Cite this article

    Giovanni Ferrin, Lauro Snidaro, Gian Luca Foresti. 2016. Data fusion and abductive inference for metaphor resolution: a bridging discussion. The Knowledge Engineering Review 31(3)261−277, doi: 10.1017/S0269888916000060
    Giovanni Ferrin, Lauro Snidaro, Gian Luca Foresti. 2016. Data fusion and abductive inference for metaphor resolution: a bridging discussion. The Knowledge Engineering Review 31(3)261−277, doi: 10.1017/S0269888916000060
    shu
Download PDF

Article Metrics

Article views(21) PDF downloads(61)

Other Articles By Authors

RESEARCH ARTICLE   Open Access    

Data fusion and abductive inference for metaphor resolution: a bridging discussion

  • Department of Mathematics, Computer Science and Physics

  • Published online: 13 May 2016
The Knowledge Engineering Review  31,  2016, 31(3): 261−277  |  Cite this article

Abstract: Abstract: Since the 1980s, metaphor has been recognized as a pervasively diffused phenomenon in communication, absolutely not restricted to rhetoric and linguistic phenomena, involving structured concepts, relations, and matching ‘rules’. Metaphor resolution, that is metaphor understanding, as well as metaphor creation, has become an issue in automated processing and understanding of natural language as well as of mixed visual communication. It can be showed as a process of structure finding and mapping procedure between conceptual denotation–connotation structures necessary for interpretation. Creative abduction is then showed to be the pattern inference required to work out structure-mappings in corresponding nodes as present in metaphors. In this paper, we review some key issues (definitions, typologies, theoretical problems) involving the concept of ‘metaphor’ and survey some definitions and concepts emerging in contemporary debate on abductive inference. Finally, we argue that metaphor understanding process can be recognized as a fusion tractable problem, allowing the exploitation of frameworks and algorithms of such domain.

    HTML

    • We use the word ‘text’ in the semiotic sense of a message which can exist in any medium.

    Rights and permissions
    • © Cambridge University Press, 2016 2016Cambridge University Press
References (63)
  • About this article
    Cite this article
    Giovanni Ferrin, Lauro Snidaro, Gian Luca Foresti. 2016. Data fusion and abductive inference for metaphor resolution: a bridging discussion. The Knowledge Engineering Review 31(3)261−277, doi: 10.1017/S0269888916000060
    Giovanni Ferrin, Lauro Snidaro, Gian Luca Foresti. 2016. Data fusion and abductive inference for metaphor resolution: a bridging discussion. The Knowledge Engineering Review 31(3)261−277, doi: 10.1017/S0269888916000060
    shu

    • Catalog

      /

      DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
      Return
      Return