Mixed-Initiative Argumentation: A Framework for Justification Management in Clinical Group Decision Support

نویسندگان

  • Chee Fon Chang
  • Aditya K. Ghose
  • Andrew Miller
چکیده

This paper identifies ways in which traditional approaches to argumentation can be modified to meet the needs of practical group decision support. A framework for outcome-driven decision rationale management is proposed that permits a novel conception of mixed-initiative argumentation. The framework is evaluated in the context of group decision support in medicine.

برای دانلود رایگان متن کامل این مقاله و بیش از 32 میلیون مقاله دیگر ابتدا ثبت نام کنید

ثبت نام

اگر عضو سایت هستید لطفا وارد حساب کاربری خود شوید

منابع مشابه

Mixed-Initiative Argumentation: Group Decision Support in Medicine

This paper identifies ways in which traditional approaches to argumentation can be modified to meet the needs of practical group decision support. Three specific modifications are proposed. Firstly, a framework for accrual-based argumentation is presented. Second, a framework for outcome-driven decision rationale management is proposed that permits a novel conception of mixed-initiative argumen...

متن کامل

Argumentation Theory for Decision Support in Health-Care: A Comparison with Machine Learning

This study investigates role of defeasible reasoning and argumentation theory for decision-support in the health-care sector. The main objective is to support clinicians with a tool for taking plausible and rational medical decisions that can be better justified and explained. The basic principles of argumentation theory are described and demonstrated in a well known health scenario: the breast...

متن کامل

A Semantic Enhanced Framework for Argumentation Based Group Decision Support

By an effective Group Decision Support System (GDSS) group members can be supported to identify the problem, form possible actions, resolve the conflict and achieve the joint goals. Throughout such a group decision making process, argumentation is widely regarded as a good means to propose the ideas, justify possible alternatives and convince others to achieve group consensus. In this paper, ar...

متن کامل

Decision Making with Assumption-Based Argumentation

In this paper, we present two different formal frameworks for representing decision making. In both frameworks, decisions have multiple attributes and meet different goals. In the second framework, decisions take into account preferences over goals. We also study a family of decision functions representing making decisions with different criteria, including decisions meeting all goals, most goa...

متن کامل

Argumentation and multi-agent decision making

This paper summarises our on going work on mixed initiative decision making which extends both classical decision theory and a symbolic theory of decision mak ing based on argumentation to a multi agent domain

متن کامل

ذخیره در منابع من


  با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید

عنوان ژورنال:

دوره   شماره 

صفحات  -

تاریخ انتشار 2009