Ashley, K. D. and McLaren, B. M. (1995). Reasoning with Reasons in Case-Based Comparisons. In the Proceedings of the First International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, Sesimbra, Portugal.  Home/Search   Document Details and Download   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....of retrieval is an individual aircraft in a conflict. This problem of representing cases describing two conflicting entities has already been faced in the CBR literature, for example in two classical systems, Mediator (Simpson, 1985) and Persuader (Sycara, 1987) and more recently in Truth Teller (Ashley, 1995). In all these systems, perhaps because they describe interaction between humans, there is a vocabulary to characterise the type of conflict and this is critical in determining the solution. This is less true in ATC where the solutions depend on the arrangement of the aircraft and the context of ....

....is an individual aircraft in a conflict. This problem of representing situations involving two conflicting entities has already been faced in the CBR literature, for example in two classical systems, Mediator (Simpson, 1985) and Persuader (Sycara, 1987) and more recently in Truth Teller (Ashley, 1995). In these systems, perhaps because they describe interaction between humans, there is a vocabulary to characterise the type of conflict and this is critical in determining the solution. In the ATC domain the situation is different because the solutions depend on the arrangement of the aircraft ....

Ashley K.D., McLaren B.M. (1995). Reasoning with Reasons in Case-based Comparisons, Proceedings of the 1995 International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, Casebased Reasoning Research and Development, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, M. Veloso and A. Aamodt Eds., Springer Verlag, pp.133-144.

....be decomposable so that the basic unit of retrieval is an individual aircraft. The problem of representing cases describing two conflicting entities has already been faced in the CBR literature, for example in two classical systems, Mediator [8] and Persuader [9] and more recently in Truth Teller [10]. In all these systems, perhaps because they describe interaction between humans, there is a vocabulary to characterise the type of conflict and this is critical in determining the solution. This is less true in ATC where the solutions depend on the arrangement of the aircraft and the context of ....

Ashley K.D., McLaren B.M., Reasoning with Reasons in Case-based Comparisons, Proceedings of the 1995 International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, Case-based Reasoning Research and Development, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, M. Veloso and A. Aamodt Eds., Springer Verlag, pp.133-144, 1995.

....dimensions of a case in order to force its retrieval. However, we also follow a similar approach concerning conceptualised representation of cases at dioeerent levels. Addressing the needs of agents to integrate reasoning with cases, reasons and underlying argumentation principles, Truth Teller [4] compares pairs of cases (presenting ethical dilemmas about whether to tell the truth) and generates a comparison text contrasting the reasons in each case. Even if the program does not retrieve and select relevant precedent cases in order to analyze problematic instances (like in traditional ....

Ashley, K.D, Mc Laren, B.M.: Reasoning with Reasons in Case-Based Comparisons. In M. Veloso & A. Aamodt (eds.) Case-Based Reasoning: Research and Development, LNAI 1010, Springer-Verlag, pp. 133-144, 1995.

....basic unit of retrieval is an individual aircraft in a conflict. This problem of representing cases describing two conflicting entities has already been faced in the CBR literature in two classical systems, Mediator (Simpson, 1985) and Persuader (Sycara, 1987) and more recently in Truth Teller (Ashley, 1995). In all these systems, perhaps because they describe interaction between humans, there is a vocabulary to characterise the type of conflict and this is critical in determining the solution. This is less true in ATC where the solutions depend on the arrangement of the aircraft and the context of ....

Ashley K.D., McLaren B.M., (1995), Reasoning with Reasons in Case-Based Comparisons, Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, M. Veloso & A. Aamodt (eds), pp133-144, Springer Verlag.

No context found.

Ashley, K. D. and McLaren, B. M. (1995). Reasoning with Reasons in Case-Based Comparisons. In the Proceedings of the First International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, Sesimbra, Portugal.

No context found.

Ashley, K. D. and McLaren, B. M. 1995. Reasoning with Reasons in Case-Based Comparisons. In the Proceedings of the First International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, Sesimbra, Portugal.

No context found.

K.D.Ashley and B.M. McLaren, "Reasoning with Reasons in Case-Based Comparisons," Proc. 1st Int'l Conf. Case-Based Reasoning, Springer, 1995, pp. 133--144.

....to more abstract factors and ultimately to legal issues. BankXX (Rissland et al., 1996) searches a legal network including legal theories for information benefiting a side in a dispute. In our own earlier work on ethics, we attempted to model components of case based or casuistic ethical argument (Ashley and McLaren, 1995). Casuistry is a form of ethical reasoning in which decisions are made by comparing a problem to paradigmatic case examples of high level principles (Jonsen and Toulmin, 1988) As compared to legal reasoning, the domain of engineering ethics appears to involve a less welldefined and explicit model ....

Ashley, K. D. and McLaren, B. M. (1995). Reasoning with Reasons in Case-Based Comparisons. In the Proceedings of the First International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR-95). Pp, 133-144. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 1010. Springer Verlag. Heidelberg, Germany.

.... particular problem and case, that assessment may be tempered by the co occurrence of other factual circumstances and other applicable principles, policies or concerns, the arguer s rhetorical viewpoint and the dialectical role in which the arguer is engaged (Ashley, 1989; Ashley Rissland, 1988; Ashley McLaren, 1995). 2. The Factor Hierarchy In this paper, we present a hierarchical knowledge structure, the Factor Hierarchy, as a method for representing in part the meaning and significance of relevant surface level similarities and differences among cases in terms of more abstract concepts. The Factor ....

....CATO achieves this by using information about link strength to evaluate the support for an abstract factor in a case 1 . Note that this notion of support is nonmonotonic. The CATO program, an intelligent tutoring system designed to teach law students to make arguments with cases (Aleven Ashley, 1994; 1995; Ashley Aleven, 1992) employs the Factor Hierarchy in a number of ways. In teaching students to analyze problems, CATO teaches them to determine which factors apply to the problem and to find and compare cases which share factors with the problem. A relevant similarity is a factor shared by a ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Ashley, K.D. and McLaren, B. M. (1995) Reasoning with Reasons in Case-Based Comparisons. In Proc. First Internat. Conf. on Case-Based Reasoning (ICCBR-95) Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence 1010 Veloso, M. and Aamodt, A. (ed.) pp. 133-144. Springer: Berlin. Sesimbra, Portugal. October.

No context found.

Ashley, K. D., McLaren, B. 1995. Reasoning with reasons in case-based comparisons. Proceedings of the First International Conference on Cased-Based Reasoning (ICCBR-95) (pp. 133-144). Berlin: Springer.

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