Hostname: page-component-586b7cd67f-dlnhk Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-23T04:49:33.540Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conflict management in knowledge acquisition1

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2009

Rose Dieng
Rose Dieng
Affiliation:
ACACIA Project, INRIA, 2004 Route des Lucioles, BP 93, 06902 Sophia-Antipolis Cedex, France
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

This article presents our approach for conflict management in our knowledge acquisition tool KATEMES, aimed at tackling multiple experts. We offer a method for helping the knowledge engineer to detect expertise conflicts in the framework of the KADS knowledge acquisition method. We also propose techniques for conflict management through comparison of knowledge graphs.

Keywords

Conflict ManagementKnowledge Acquisition From Multiple ExpertsKnowledge GraphsProblem Classes
Type
Articles
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 9 , Issue 4 , September 1995 , pp. 337 - 351
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Boose, J.H. (1986). Rapid acquisition and combination of knowledge from multiple experts in the same domain. Future Compu. Syst. 1(2), 191–216.Google Scholar
Boose, J.H., & Bradshaw, J.M. (1987). Expertise transfer and complex problems: using AQUINAS as a knowledge-acquisition workbench for knowledge-based systems. Int. J. Man-Mach. Stud. 26, 3–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Boose, J.H., Bradshaw, J.M., & Schema, D.B. (1988). Recent progress in AQUINAS: A knowledge acquisition workbench. In Proc. Second Eur. Workshop on Knowl. Acqu. for KBS (EKA W'88). pp. 2.1 21.5. Sankt Augustin, GMD, Germany.Google Scholar
Breuker, J., & Van de Velde, W. (Eds.) (1994). Reusable problem solving components: The CommonKADS library for expertise modelling. lOS Press Amsterdam.Google Scholar
Breuker, J., & Wielinga, B. (1989). Models of expertise in knowledge acquisition. In Topics in Expert System Design, (Guida, and Tasso, . Eds.), Elsevier Science Publisher B.V., North-Holland.Google Scholar
Breuker, J., Wielinga, B., van Someren, M., de Hoog, R., Schreiber, G., de Greef, P., Bredeweg, B., Wielemaker, J., & Billault, J.-P. (1987). Model driven knowledge acquisition: Interpretation models. Deliverable AI, Esprit Project 1098, Memo 87.Google Scholar
Dieng, R., Corby, O., & Labidi, S. (1994a). Expertise conflicts in knowledge acquisition. In Proc. Eighth Banff KA for KBS Workshop (KAW '94), (Gaines, B., and Musen, M., Eds.), pp. 23–1–23–20. SRDG Publications, University of Calgary, Banff, Canada.Google Scholar
Dieng, R., Corby, O., & Labidi, S. (1994b). Agent-based knowledge acquisition. In A Future for Knowledge Acquisition: EKAW'94, (Steels, L., et al. , Eds.), LNAI no. 867, pp. 63–82. Springer-Verlag, Hoegaarden, Belgium.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dieng, R., Corby, O., & Lapalut, S. (1993). Acquisition of gradual knowledge. In Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems: EKAW '93, (Aussenac, N., et al. , Eds.), LNAI no. 723, pp. 407–426. Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Dieng, R., Giboin, A., Tourtier, P.-A., & Corby, O. (1992). Knowledge acquisition for explainable, multi-expert knowledge-based design systems. In Current Developments in Knowledge Acquisition: EKAW'92, (Wetter, T., et al. , Eds.), LNAI no. 599, pp. 298–317. Springer-Verlag, Berlin/Heidelberg.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Easterbrook, S.M. (1989). Distributed knowledge acquisition as a model for requirements elicitation. In Proc. of EKAW'89, Paris, 530–543.Google Scholar
Easterbrook, S. (1991). Handling conflict between domain descriptions with computer-supported negotiation. Knowledge Acquisition 3(3), 255–289.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Easterbrook, S.M., Beck, E.E., Goodlet, J.S., Plowman, L., Sharpies, M., & Wood, C.C. (1992). A survey of empirical studies of conflict in relation to CSCW. Tech. Rep., CSRP 227, University of Sussex.Google Scholar
Eggen, J., Lundteigen, A. M., & Mehus, M. (1990). Integration of knowledge from different knowledge acquisition tools. In Proc. of EKAW'90, (Wielinga, B., et al. , Eds.), pp. 123–142. IOS Press, Amsterdam, Netherlands.Google Scholar
Gaines, B.R., & Shaw, M.L.G. (1989). Comparing the conceptual systems of experts. In Proc. Ninth IJCAI, pp. 633–638. Detroit, MI.Google Scholar
Garner, B.J., & Lukose, D. (1992). Knowledge fusion. In Conceptual Structures: Theory and Implementation, (Pfeiffer, H.D., and Nagle, T.E., Eds.), LNAI no. 754, pp. 158–167. Springer-Verlag, Las Cruces, NM.Google Scholar
Jagannathan, V., & Elmaghraby, A.S. (1985). MEDKAT: Multiple expert DELPHI-based knowledge acquisition tool. In Proc. of the ACM NE Regional Conf., pp. 103–110. Boston, MA.Google Scholar
Kayaalp, M.M., & Sullins, J.R. (1994). Multifaceted ontological networks: Reorganization and representation of knowledge in natural sciences. In Proc. of KAW'94, pp. 25–1–25–19. SRDG Publications, University of Calgary, Banff, Canada.Google Scholar
Klein, M., & Lu, S. (1989). Conflict resolution in cooperative design. Al in Eng. 4, 168–180.Google Scholar
Klein, M. (1992). Detecting and resolving conflicts among cooperating human and machine-based design agents. Al in Eng. 7, 93–104.Google Scholar
Liou, Y.I., Weber, E.S., & Nunamaker, J.F. Jr (1990). A methodology for knowledge acquisition in a group decision support system environment. Knowledge Acquisition 2(2), 129–144.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
McGraw, K.L., & Seale, M.R. (1988). Knowledge elicitation with multiple experts: Considerations and techniques. Artif. Intell. Rev. 2, 31–44.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Mineau, G.W., & Allouche, M. (1995). Establishing a semantic basis: Toward the integration of vocabularies. In Proc. of KAW'95, (Gaines, B., and Musen, M., Eds.), pp. 2–1–2–16. SRDG Publications, University of Calgary, Banff, Canada.Google Scholar
Mittal, M.L., & Fenves, S.J. (1984). Knowledge acquisition for multiple experts. In IEEE Proc. Workshop on Principles of KBS, pp. 75–81. Denver, CO.Google Scholar
Murray, K.S., & Porter, B.W. (1990). Developing a tool for knowledge integration: initial results. Int. J. Man-Machine Stud. 33, 373–383.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Newell, A. (1982). The knowledge level. Artif. Intell. 18, 87–127.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schreiber, G., Wielinga, B., & Breuker, J. (1991). The KADS framework for modelling expertise. In Proc. of EKAW'91, Crieff, Scotland.Google Scholar
Shaw, M.L.G. (1988). Problems of validation in a knowledge acquisition system using multiple experts. In Proc. of EKAW'88, pp. 5.1–5.15. Sankt Augustin, GMD, Germany.Google Scholar
Shaw, M.L.G. (1989). A grid-based tool for knowledge acquisition: Validation with multiple experts. SIGART Newsletter, Knowledge Acquisition Special Issue 108, 168–169.Google Scholar
Shaw, M.L.G., & Gaines, B.R. (1987). Techniques for knowledge acquisition and transfer. Int. J. Man-Machine Stud. 27, 251–280.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, M.L.G., & Gaines, B.R. (1989). A methodology for recognizing conflict, correspondence, consensus and contrast in a knowledge acquisition system. Knowledge Acquisition 1(4), 341–363.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shaw, M.L.G., & Woodward, J.B. (1988). Validation in a knowledge support system: Construing consistency with multiple experts. Int. J. Man-Machine Stud. 29, 329–350.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Skuce, D. (1995). Conventions for reaching agreement on shared ontologies. In Proc. of KAW'95, (Gaines, B., and Musen, M., Eds.), pp. 3–1–3–19. SRDG Publications, University of Calgary, Banff, Canada.Google Scholar
Sowa, J.F. (1984). Conceptual structures: Information processing in mind and machine. Reading, Addison-Wesley.Google Scholar
Wiederhold, G. (1994). Interoperation, mediation and ontologies. In Proc. of FGCS'94 Workshop on Heterogeneous Cooperative Knowledge-Bases, pp. 33–48. Tokyo, Japan.Google Scholar
Wielinga, B., Schreiber, G., & Brenker, J. (1992). KADS: A modelling approach to knowledge engineering. Knowledge Acquisition 4, 5–53.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Wolf, W.A. (1989). Knowledge acquisition from multiple experts. SIGART Newsletter, Knowl. Acqu. Special Issue 108, 138–140.Google Scholar