Search
1992 Volume 7
Article Contents
RESEARCH ARTICLE   Open Access    

Qualitative frameworks for decision support: lessons from medicine

More Information
  • Abstract: Some weaknesses of current decision support technologies are discussed. Numerical methods have strong theoretical foundations but are representationally weak, and only deal with a small part of the decision process. Knowledge-based systems offer greater flexibility, but have not been accompanied by a clear decision theory. Theoretical development of symbolic decision procedures is advocated, an approach to the design of decision support systems based on first-order logic is presented, and work on this approach is reviewed. A central proposal is an extended form of inference called argumentation; reasoning qualitatively for and against decision options from generalized domain theories. Argumentation captures a natural and familiar form of reasoning, and contributes to the robustness, flexibility and intelligibility of problem solving, while having a clear theoretical basis. Argumentation was developed initially for medical applications though it may have much wider applicability.
  • 加载中
  • Andriole SJ, 1989. Handbook of Decision Support SystemsTab Books.

    Google Scholar

    Ayel M and Laurent J-P, eds., 1991. Validation, Verification and Test of KnowledgeJohn Wiley.

    Google Scholar

    Boden M, 1989. Benefits and risks of knowledge-based systems, Report of Council for Science and Society, Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar

    Buchanan BG and Smith RG, 1988. “Fundamentals of Expert Systems” Ann. Rev. Comput. Sci.323–58.

    Google Scholar

    Castles FG, Murray DJ and Potter DC, eds., 1971. “Introduction” to Decisions, Organisations and SocietyPenguin.

    Google Scholar

    Chard T, 1991. “Qualitative probability versus quantitative probability in clinical diagnosis: a study using a computer simulation” Medical Decision Making1138–41.

    Google Scholar

    Cheeseman P, 1985. “In defence of probability” In: Proceedings of 9th International Joint Conference on AIMorgan Kaufman,1002–1009.

    Google Scholar

    Clark DA, 1990. “Verbal uncertainty expressions: a. critical review of two decades of research” Current Psychology: Research and Reviews9(3) 203–235.

    Google Scholar

    Coiera E, 1992. “The qualitative representation of physical systems” The Knowledge Engineering Review7(1).

    Google Scholar

    Dawes RM, 1979. “The robust beauty of improper linear models in decision making” American Psychologist34571–582.

    Google Scholar

    de Dombal FT, 1975. “Computer assisted diagnosis of Abdominal pain” In: Rose J and Mitchell JH, eds., Advances in Medical ComputingChurchill Livingstone.

    Google Scholar

    Fox J, Barber DC and Bardhan KD, 1980. “Alternatives to Bayes: A quantitative comparison with rule-based diagnosis” Methods of Information in Medicine19(4) 210–215.

    Google Scholar

    Fox J, 1990. “Automating assistance for safety critical decisions” Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. B 327555–567.

    Google Scholar

    Fox J, 1991. “Decision theory and autonomous systems” In: Singh MG and Travé-Massuyès L, eds., Proceedings of IMACS workshop on Decision Support Systems and Qualitative ReasoningNorth Holland.

    Google Scholar

    Fox J and Clarke M, 1991. “Towards a formalisation of arguments in decision making” In: Proceedings of AAAI Spring Symposium on Argumentation and Belief AAAI.

    Google Scholar

    Fox J, Clark DA, Glowinski AJ and O'Neil M, 1990a. “Using predicate logic to integrate qualitative reasoning and classical decision theory” IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics20347–357.

    Google Scholar

    Fox J and Krause P, 1991. A formal basis for argumentation and practical reasoning, ICRF technical report.

    Google Scholar

    Fox J, Gordon C, Glowsinski AJ and O'Neil M, 1990b. “Logic engineering for knowledge engineering: the Oxford system of medicine” Artificial Intelligence in Medicine2323–339.

    Google Scholar

    Gemigniani MC, 1991. “Some legal aspects of expert systems” Expert Systems with Applications2(4) 269–284.

    Google Scholar

    Kahneman D, Slovic P and Tversky A, eds., 1982. Judgement Under Uncertainty: Heuristics and BiasesCambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar

    Keravnou E and Washbrook J, 1989. “What is a deep expert system?” The Knowledge Engineering Review4(3) 205–233.

    Google Scholar

    Kruse R and Siegel P, eds., 1991. Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to UncertaintySpringer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar

    Kulikowski CA and Weiss S, 1973. “An interactive facility for the inferential modelling of disease” Proc. Princeton Conf. on Information Sciences and Systems, 524.

    Google Scholar

    Lauritzen SL and Spiegelhalter D, 1988. “Local computations with probablities on graphical structures and their application to expert systems” J Roy. Statist. Soc B 50 (2) 157–224.

    Google Scholar

    Lindley DV, 1985. Making Decisions (2nd ed) John Wiley.

    Google Scholar

    O'Neil M and Glowinski A, 1990. “Evaluating and validating very large knowledge-based systems” Medical Information15237–251.

    Google Scholar

    Parsons S and Fox J, 1991. “Qualitative and interval algebras for robust decision making under uncertainty” In: Singh MG and Travé-Massuyès L, eds., Proceedings of IMACS workshop on Decision Support Systems and Qualitative ReasoningNorth Holland.

    Google Scholar

    Parsons S, 1991. “Qualitative methods for integrating uncertainty handling formalisms”, Technical Report, Department of Electrical Engineering, Queen Mary and Westfield College, London.

    Google Scholar

    Pearl J, 1988. Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausible Inference, Morgan Kaufmann.

    Google Scholar

    Pople HE, 1975. “DIALOG: A model of diagnostic logic for internal medicine” Proc. IJCAI-77, 814–818.

    Google Scholar

    Shanteau J, 1987. “Psychological characteristics of expert decision makers” In: Mumpower J, ed., Expert Judgement and Expert Systems vol F35, NATO ASI Series.

    Google Scholar

    Shortliffe EH, 1976. Computer-based medical consultations: MYCIN.Elsevier, New York.

    Google Scholar

    Schwartz S and Griffin T, 1986. Medical Thinking: The psychology of medical judgementSpringer-Verlag.

    Google Scholar

    Southwick RW, 1991. “Explaining reasoning: an overview of explantion in knowledge based systems” The Knowledge Engineering Review6(1) 1–20.

    Google Scholar

    Stenton SP, 1987. “Dialogue management for co-operative knowledge based systems” The Knowledge Engineering Review2(2) 99–122.

    Google Scholar

    Travé-Massuyès L, 1992. “Qualitative reasoning over time: history and current prospects” The Knowledge Engineering Review7(1).

    Google Scholar

    Wellman MP, 1990. “Fundamental concepts of qualitative probabilistic networks” Artificial Intelligence44257–303.

    Google Scholar

    Wielinga R, Schreiber AT and Breuker J, 1992. “KADS: A modelling approach to knowledge engineering” Knowledge Acquisition: Special issue on KADS (to appear).

    Google Scholar

    Wilson M, Duce D and Simpson D, 1989. “Life cycles in software and knowledge engineering: a comparative review” The Knowledge Engineering Review4(3) 189–204.

    Google Scholar

  • Cite this article

    John Fox, Paul Krause. 1992. Qualitative frameworks for decision support: lessons from medicine. The Knowledge Engineering Review. 7:6135 doi: 10.1017/S0269888900006135
    John Fox, Paul Krause. 1992. Qualitative frameworks for decision support: lessons from medicine. The Knowledge Engineering Review. 7:6135 doi: 10.1017/S0269888900006135

Article Metrics

Article views(13) PDF downloads(54)

Other Articles By Authors

RESEARCH ARTICLE   Open Access    

Qualitative frameworks for decision support: lessons from medicine

The Knowledge Engineering Review  7 Article number: 10.1017/S0269888900006135  (1992)  |  Cite this article

Abstract: Abstract: Some weaknesses of current decision support technologies are discussed. Numerical methods have strong theoretical foundations but are representationally weak, and only deal with a small part of the decision process. Knowledge-based systems offer greater flexibility, but have not been accompanied by a clear decision theory. Theoretical development of symbolic decision procedures is advocated, an approach to the design of decision support systems based on first-order logic is presented, and work on this approach is reviewed. A central proposal is an extended form of inference called argumentation; reasoning qualitatively for and against decision options from generalized domain theories. Argumentation captures a natural and familiar form of reasoning, and contributes to the robustness, flexibility and intelligibility of problem solving, while having a clear theoretical basis. Argumentation was developed initially for medical applications though it may have much wider applicability.

    • Copyright © Cambridge University Press 19921992Cambridge University Press
References (39)
  • About this article
    Cite this article
    John Fox, Paul Krause. 1992. Qualitative frameworks for decision support: lessons from medicine. The Knowledge Engineering Review. 7:6135 doi: 10.1017/S0269888900006135
    John Fox, Paul Krause. 1992. Qualitative frameworks for decision support: lessons from medicine. The Knowledge Engineering Review. 7:6135 doi: 10.1017/S0269888900006135
  • Catalog

      /

      DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
      Return
      Return