P. Krause, J. Fox, and P. Judson. An argumentation based approach to risk assessment. IMA Journal of Mathematics Applied in Business and Industry, 5:249--263, 1994. Home/Search Document Details and Download
Summary Related Articles Check |
This paper is cited in the following contexts:
Determining Error Bounds for Hypothesis Tests in Risk.. - McBurney, Parsons (Correct)
.... study of argument [18] which has a history in Philosophy dating back at least to Aristotle [6] Argumentation theories have been applied successfully for some time in Artificial Intelligence, for example in the design of expert systems for medical diagnosis and for personal health risk assessment [15, 41], in legal expert systems [7] and in the design of systems of autonomous software agents [58] A recent review of such applications is given in [13] What would be required of a structure for formal deliberation of error bounds in the risk domain We believe there are a number of components. ....
P. Krause, J. Fox, and P. Judson. An argumentation based approach to risk assessment. IMA Journal of Mathematics Applied in Business and Industry, 5:249--263, 1994.
Risk Agoras: Using Dialectical Argumentation to Debate Risk - McBurney, Parsons (2000) (Correct)
....7 Leading these developments has been the team under John Fox at the Advanced Computation Laboratory of the Imperial Cancer Research Fund (ICRF) in London. 8 One approach adopted there has been the use of argumentation to reason about the possible risks of a substance or a course of action [9, 10, 24, 25, 34]. Using a generic model rst proposed by the philosopher Stephen Toulmin to represent an argument [49] this approach formalises concepts such as an argument s premises, its force, rebuttals, etc, and then develops an algebraic calculus for argument manipulation [11, 35] Once formalised, ....
P. Krause, J. Fox, and P. Judson. An argumentation based approach to risk assessment. IMA Journal of Mathematics Applied in Business and Industry, 5:249-263, 1994.
Truth or Consequences: Using argumentation to reason about risk - McBurney, Parsons (1999) (1 citation) (Correct)
....and dialectical argumentation An argument for a claim may be considered as a tentative proof for the claim. The philosopher Stephen Toulmin [68] proposed a generic framework for the structure of arguments which has been influential in the design of intelligent systems which use argumentation [19, 35, 75]. Our analysis, informed by Toulmin s structure, considers an argument to have the form of a proof, without necessarily its force. Suppose OE is a statement that a certain chemical is carcinogenic at a specified level of exposure. Then an argument for OE is a finite, ordered sequence of 13 ....
P. Krause, J. Fox, and P. Judson. An argumentation based approach to risk assessment. IMA Journal of Mathematics Applied in Business and Industry, 5:249--263, 1994.
Consequence Logics for Cancer Risk Counselling.. - McBurney, Parsons.. (1999) Self-citation (Fox) (Correct)
....manipulation of the likely consequences of the patient s decision choices. Argumentation formalisms have been used for some time in expert systems, especially in medical and legal domains, and the ICRF has been a pioneer in this regard [7] especially in the use of argumentation in risk assessment [14, 22]. This paper outlines our position on the use of such formalisms for breast cancer risk counselling systems by specifying at a high level the requirements the formalism will need to satisfy in this particular domain. 2 Making Medical Decisions In designing an intelligent system to assist ....
P. Krause, J. Fox, and P. Judson. An argumentation based approach to risk assessment. IMA Journal of Mathematics Applied in Business and Industry, 5:249--263, 1994.
Online articles have much greater impact More about CiteSeer.IST Add search form to your site Submit documents Feedback
CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC