cs.AIAug 29, 2026

Formal Concept Analysis with Three Types of Negation

Authors: Zhenghua Pan

Organizations: School of Mathematics and Data Science, Jiangnan University, Wuxi 214122, China

Read PDF
Ask AI
Cite

Copy citation

DOINot available for this paper

Abstract

Classic Formal Concept Analysis (FCA) primarily focuses on the positive relationships between objects and attributes and does not have mechanisms for handling negation.To overcome this limitation, we introduce three types of negation concepts (contradictory negation, opposite negation, intermediary negation) into FCA.Based on the set SCOI and logic LCOI+PLCOI with these three types negation, we define formal context, Galois connection operators, formal concept and concept lattice with three types of negation,this leads to the proposal of a FCACOI: Formal Concept Analysis with contradictory negation, opposite negation and intermediary negation.For the reasoning in FCACOI, this paper focuses on attribute implication reasoning. Based on the logic LCOI+PLCOI and its semantics, we introduce the notion of ICOI-entailment as the semantic implication for attribute implication reasoning in FCACOI. Through ICOI-entailment, a connection is established between attribute implication reasoning in FCACOI and inference in the logic LCOI+PLCOI, it indicate that formally proven inference rules (theorems) in LCOI+PLCOI are valid in the attribute implication reasoning of FCACOI, LCOI+PLCOI provides a logical foundation for attribute implication reasoning in FCACOI. To illustrate the capability of attribute implication reasoning in FCACOI, we discuss its application in a concrete example. Moreover, we explore attribute reduction of the formal context in FCACOI, propose two research frameworks for attribute reduction from different perspectives, and compare their characteristics.We believe that, based on richer logic and semantics, FCACOI elevates FCA from a theory that describes affirmations to one that can describe affirmations and its contradiction(either this or that), opposition(extreme negation) and intermediary (transitional states between oppositions).

More in this topic

Formal Concept Analysis

Formal Concept Analysis organizes object–attribute data into concept lattices and uses their structure for reasoning and interpretation.

See all 12 papers

Explore similar work

CardsList
Sep 8, 2026

Three Types of Negation of Triple and its Elements and an Extension of Triple

In various data models, the classical triple is a typical semantic data model. However, due to the design of the triple as a simple structure for representing positive assertions, it cannot sufficiently express different forms of negation present in the triple and its elements. This paper conceptually proposes that there are three distinct forms of negation within triples and their elements: contradictory negation, opposite negation and intermediary negation. Based on the the set SCOI and the logic LCOI+PLCOI with three kinds of negation, we propose an extension of triple that can distinguish and express these three different negations in the triple and its elements, called the TCOI triple with contradictory negation, opposite negation and intermediary negation. The TCOI triple is a semantic and structural extension of the classical triple. While retaining the ability to express positive assertions, it systematically introduces the three semantic dimensions of three negations, allowing these negations to independently act on the elements of the triple and on the whole triple. This significantly enhances the triple model capability to represent and reasoning about complex negative information. This paper also explores the expressive power and reasoning of the TCOI triple, as well as the application of TCOI triple implication reasoning in counterfactuals and counterfactual reasoning. We propose a truth-value (continuous value) algorithm for TCOI triple implication reasoning and perform its calculation through an example of the counterfactuals and counterfactual reasoning.

Zhenghua Pan

School of Mathematics and Data Science, Jiangnan University, Wuxi 214122, China

Logical ReasoningKnowledge Representation
AskPDF
Aug 30, 2026

Convergence issues in Relational Concept Analysis based on AOC-posets

Formal Concept Analysis (FCA) is an approach for conceptual classification building and rule discovery from a binary table describing a set of objects by a set of attributes. Extensions have been proposed to deal with non-binary and more complex data, such as Relational Concept Analysis (RCA) for multi-relational data. RCA aims to highlight groups of objects characterized by their relationships with other groups of objects. The richer and more complex nature of the underlying data allows RCA to produce richer results than FCA, at the expense of higher computational and interpretive complexity. The most commonly used conceptual classification structure in FCA is the concept lattice. However, in many applications, concept lattice substructures, such as AOC-posets, are preferred over the full lattice, either to mitigate combinatorial blow-up or to focus on the most informative parts of the structure. Indeed, in an AOC-poset, only concepts introducing an object or an attribute are represented, which makes AOC-posets smaller and easier to compute and use than concept lattices. Although RCA was originally defined on concept lattices, it can also be instantiated on AOC-posets. RCA is iterative and its convergence is guaranteed in the lattice-based setting, but this guarantee is lost when using AOC-posets. In this paper, we investigate this loss of convergence in detail. We show why convergence is no longer guaranteed in the general case, identify conditions under which it can still be ensured, and discuss how a dataset can be transformed to recover convergence. We also propose a convergent variant of the process, which preserves the AOC-poset structure: relational attributes, once created, are never removed, which guarantees convergence at the price of attributes that may refer to concepts absent from the final structures.

Xavier Dolques, Agnès Braud, Alain Gutierrez +2

Univ. de Strasbourg, ENGEES, CNRS, ICube UMR 7357, F-67000 Strasbourg, France · LIRMM, Univ. Montpellier, CNRS, Montpellier, France

Formal Concept Analysis
AskPDF
Sep 7, 2026

Modus Tollens and Counterfactuals and Counterfactual Reasoning Based on Three Types of Negation

Modus Tollens (MT) is a classical logical inference rule, while counterfactuals are hypothetical statements that are contrary to facts, and counterfactual reasoning is a process of reasoning based on counterfactuals. Negation is an indispensable core concept in them. In this paper, based on the logical systems LCOI&PLCOI with contradictory negation, opposite negation and intermediary negation, we propose three variants of Modus Tollens corresponding to distinct negation types, namely MTC: Modus Tollens based on contradictory negation, MTO: Modus Tollens based on opposite negation, and MTI: Modus Tollens based on intermediary negation. We define the implications within MTC, MTO and MTI, provide the truth value algorithms of MTC, MTO and MTI, and discuss the reducibility of these algorithms. To incorporate these three types of negation into counterfactuals and counterfactual reasoning, we differentiate counterfactuals into two types based on whether they possess logical negation, thereby proposing three counterfactuals and counterfactuals reasoning based on different logical negations. In this paper, we further argue that the three counterfactuals reasoning based on different logical negations have the same inference form as MTC, MTO and MTI, respectively. In other words, they share the same inference structure. As a result, the truth value algorithms for MTC, MTO and MTI can be as the truth value algorithms for the three counterfactuals reasoning based on different logical negations. The algorithms indicates that if the first premise of the reasoning is true, the truth values of the reasoning conclusions are identical to the truth values of the three negative premises in the reasoning premises, respectively. This reflects the consistency and accuracy of the truth value algorithms.

Zhenghua Pan

School of Science, Institute of Mathematics and Physics, Jiangnan University, Wuxi 214122, China

Logical ReasoningCounterfactual Reasoning
AskPDF