Abhava is not a method of Indian logic. It is a concept that refers to the absence of something.

Vyabhichara is the term for the logical fallacy of affirming the consequent. It occurs when the conclusion of an argument is true, but the premises do not necessarily support it.

Karya is not a type of anumana. It is a type of upamana.

Viruddha is the term for the logical fallacy of denying the antecedent. It occurs when the conclusion of an argument is false, but the premises do not necessarily contradict it.

Arthapatti is not a type of upamana. It is a method of Indian logic.

Petitio principii is the term for the logical fallacy of begging the question. It occurs when the conclusion of an argument is assumed in one of the premises.

Karya is not a type of arthapatti. It is a type of anumana.

Vyabhichara is the term for the logical fallacy of the undistributed middle term. It occurs when the middle term of a syllogism is not distributed in both premises.

Asiddha is not a type of hetvabhasa. It is a type of sadhyasama.

Ativyapti is the term for the logical fallacy of the illicit major. It occurs when the major term of a syllogism is distributed in the conclusion, but not in the major premise.

Anaikantika is not a type of sadhyasama. It is a type of hetvabhasa.

Avachchedakatva is the term for the logical fallacy of the illicit minor. It occurs when the minor term of a syllogism is distributed in the conclusion, but not in the minor premise.

Vyabhichara is not a type of asiddha. It is a type of hetvabhasa.

Viruddha is the term for the logical fallacy of the negative conclusion. It occurs when the conclusion of a syllogism is negative, but the premises are both affirmative.

Vyabhichara is not a type of satpratipaksha. It is a type of hetvabhasa.