Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Representational Interpretive Structure: Theory and Notation

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Diagrammatic Representation and Inference (Diagrams 2022)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 13462))

Included in the following conference series:

  • 606 Accesses

Abstract

A cognitive theory of the interpretive structure of visual representations (RIST) was proposed by Cheng (2020), which identified four classes of schemas that specify how domain concepts are encoded by graphical objects. A notation (RISN) for building RIST models as networks of these schemas was also introduced. This paper introduces common RIST/RISN network structures – idioms – that occur across varied representations. A small-scale experiment is presented in which three participants successfully modelled their own interpretation of three diverse representations using RIST/RISN and idioms.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 44.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 59.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Pronounced like “wrist” (/ˈɹɪst/) and “risen” (/ˈɹɪzən/), respectively.

  2. 2.

    Figure 3 was drawn in a web browser tool, RIS Editor (RISE), that was specifically developed for creating RISN models. The tool will be presented in a paper to follow.

  3. 3.

    A schema is a mental knowledge representation for a category defined by a set of attributes (slots) for which a particular instance of a concept is assigned values (fillers); e.g., [16].

  4. 4.

    R-symbol supersedes Token used in [4] for reasons of notational and theoretical consistency.

  5. 5.

    ‘The Round Flow of Money Income and Expenditure, 1922’: https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:The_Round_Flow_of_Money_Income_and_Expenditure,_1922.jpg.

References

  1. Bird, R., Wadler, P.: Introduction to Functional Programming. Hemel Hempstead: Prentice Hall International (UK) (1988)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Cheng, P.C.-H.: Electrifying diagrams for learning: principles for effective representational systems. Cogn. Sci. 26(6), 685–736 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0364-0213(02)00086-1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Cheng, P.C.-H.: Probably good diagrams for learning: representational epistemic re-codification of probability theory. Top. Cogn. Sci. 3(3), 475–498 (2011)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Cheng, P.C.-H.: A sketch of a theory and modelling notation for elucidating the structure of representations. In: Pietarinen, A.-V., Chapman, P., Bosveld-de Smet, L. Giardino, V., Corter, J., Linker, S. (eds.) Diagrams 2020, LNCS (LNAI), vol. 12169, pp. 93–109. Springer Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54249-8_8

  5. Cheng, P.-H., Garcia Garcia, G., Raggi, D., Stockdill, A., Jamnik, M.: Cognitive properties of representations: a framework. In: Basu, A., Stapleton, G., Linker, S., Legg, C., Manalo, E., Viana, P. (eds.) Diagrams 2021. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 12909, pp. 415–430. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86062-2_43

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  6. Gordon, M., Milner, R., Wadsworth, C.P.: Edinburgh LCF: A Mechanised Logic of Computation. LNCS. Springer, Berlin (1979). https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-09724-4

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Gurr, C.A.: On the isomorphism, or lack of it, of representations. In: Marriott, K., Meyer, B. (eds.) Visual Language Theory, pp. 293–306. Springer, New York (1998). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-1676-6_10

  8. Jamnik, M., Cheng, P.C.-H.: Endowing machines with the expert human ability to select representations: why and how. In: Muggleton, S., Chater, N. (eds.) Human-Like Machine Intelligence, pp. 355–378. Oxford University Press, Oxford (2021)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Kintsch, W.: Comprehension: A Paradigm for Cognition. Cambridge University Press, New York (1998)

    Google Scholar 

  10. Larkin, J.H., Simon, H.A.: Why a diagram is (sometimes) worth ten thousand words. Cogn. Sci. 11, 65–99 (1987)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Peebles, D.J., Cheng, P.C.-H.: Modelling the effect of task and graphical representations on response latencies in a graph-reading task. Hum. Factors 45(1), 28–45 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1518/hfes.45.1.28.27225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Pinker, S.: A theory of graph comprehension. In: Freedle, R. (ed.) Artificial Intelligence and the Future of Testing, pp. 73–126. Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale (1990)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Raggi, D., Stockdill, A., Jamnik, M., Garcia Garcia, G., Sutherland, H.E.A., Cheng, P.C.-H.: Dissecting representations. In: Pietarinen, A.-V., Chapman, P., Bosveld de Smet, L., Giardino, V., Corter, J., Linker, S. (eds.) Diagrams 2020. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 12169, pp. 144–152. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-54249-8_11

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  14. Raggi, D., Stapleton, G., Stockdill, A., Jamik, M., Garcia Garcia, G., & Cheng, P. C.-H. (2020). How to (re)represent it? In S. Pan (Ed.), 32nd International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence: IEEE

    Google Scholar 

  15. Raggi, D., Stockdill, A., Jamnik, M., Garcia Garcia, G., Sutherland, H.E.A., Cheng, P.-H.: Inspection and selection of representations. In: Kaliszyk, C., Brady, E., Kohlhase, A., Sacerdoti Coen, C. (eds.) CICM 2019. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 11617, pp. 227–242. Springer, Cham (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23250-4_16

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. Schank, R.C., Abelson, R.P.: Scripts, Plans, Goals, and Understanding: An Enquiry into Human Knowledge Structures. Erlbaum, Mahwah (1977)

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Shimojima, A.: Semantic Properties of Diagrams and Their Cognitive Potentials. CSLI Press, Stanford (2015)

    Google Scholar 

  18. Stenning, K., Oberlander, J.: A cognitive theory of graphical and linguistic reasoning: logic and implementation. Cogn. Sci. 19(1), 97–140 (1995)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Stevens, S.S.: On the theory of scales of measurement. Science 103(2684), 677–680 (1946)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Stockdill, A., Raggi, D., Jamnik, M., Garcia Garcia, G., Cheng, P.-H.: Considerations in representation selection for problem solving: a review. In: Basu, A., Stapleton, G., Linker, S., Legg, C., Manalo, E., Viana, P. (eds.) Diagrams 2021. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 12909, pp. 35–51. Springer, Cham (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-86062-2_4

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  21. Zhang, J.: A representational analysis of relational information displays. Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud. 45, 59–74 (1996)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Zhang, J.: The nature of external representations in problem solving. Cogn. Sci. 21(2), 179–217 (1997)

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by the EPSRC grants EP/R030642/1, EP/T019603/1, EP/T019034/1 and EP/R030650/1.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. University of Sussex, Brighton, UK

    Peter C.-H. Cheng, Aaron Stockdill & Grecia Garcia Garcia

  2. University of Cambridge, Cambridge, UK

    Daniel Raggi & Mateja Jamnik

Authors
  1. Peter C.-H. Cheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Aaron Stockdill
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Grecia Garcia Garcia
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Daniel Raggi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  5. Mateja Jamnik
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter C.-H. Cheng .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. CNRS, Ecole Normale Supérieure, Paris, France

    Valeria Giardino

  2. Lancaster University in Leipzig, Leipzig, Germany

    Sven Linker

  3. West Chester University, West Chester, PA, USA

    Richard Burns

  4. Universitá di Bologna, Bologna, Italy

    Francesco Bellucci

  5. Université Bourgogne Franche-Comté, Dijon, France

    Jean-Michel Boucheix

  6. Universidade Federal Fluminense, Niterói, Brazil

    Petrucio Viana

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2022 Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Cheng, P.CH., Stockdill, A., Garcia Garcia, G., Raggi, D., Jamnik, M. (2022). Representational Interpretive Structure: Theory and Notation. In: Giardino, V., Linker, S., Burns, R., Bellucci, F., Boucheix, JM., Viana, P. (eds) Diagrammatic Representation and Inference. Diagrams 2022. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 13462. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15146-0_4

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-15146-0_4

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-031-15145-3

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-031-15146-0

  • eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation