http://adhominem.blogsome.com Argumentation: logic, theory & implementation .... and the tricky line between them Thu, 01 Nov 2007 16:27:30 +0000 http://backend.userland.com/rss092 en Just back from ICTAI ‘07. Some quick notes: Keynote A good keynote by Ian Horrocks - even though I was familiar with most of the stuff, it was good to see it so clearly presented & explained. Slides here. Ontologies are useful So, I’m biased because I do some work that ... http://adhominem.blogsome.com/2007/11/01/ictai-07/ And at last, a paper from the thesis…. Accepted by & appearing at ICTAI (Int. Conf. on Tools for AI) ‘07 in Greece at the end of October 2007. http://adhominem.blogsome.com/2007/10/03/ictai-paper/ Here is poster from a recent joint UK/ US Cancer Informatics conference (details here) which introduces the work from the thesis - very exciting! (well, for me). The poster is necessarily sketchy, but covers the idea of linking a DL ontology with an Argumentation formalism, and how one can use this ... http://adhominem.blogsome.com/2007/10/03/integrating-ontologies-argumentation-for-decision-making-in-breast-cancer/ After a very long absence…. First up: A talk, a paper and a poster then… Probabilistic DL (aka Pronto, etc.) http://adhominem.blogsome.com/2007/10/03/im-back/ After a hugely long gap, I’m going to try using this again. It has actually been very useful as a way of jotting down notes wherever I am, and then having them recorded. However, at the moment I’m desperately trying to get a paper finished, as well as a two talks, ... http://adhominem.blogsome.com/2007/05/31/an-even-longer-absence/ I’ve been thinking (for a while) about the mismatch between different ‘bits’ of logic. Take a standard example, which can be found throughout the literature on defeasible logics: Bird(x) -> Flies (x) Penguin(x) -> not Flies(x) Bird(Tweety) Penguin(Tweety) ?Flies(Tweety) The point is to highlight the deafeasible nature of the knowledge, develop arguments, etc. There are, basically, two ... http://adhominem.blogsome.com/2006/02/03/ontology-vs-inference-in-logic/ Fields: semweb Semantic Web Ontology An interesting article here , with some comments here. Obviously linked to the last post, and something that is probably bubbling up (incidentally, it’s an area that seems to have been rather ignored by the ‘academic’ community: When I checked, citeseer was down, and ArXiv (cs) ... http://adhominem.blogsome.com/2006/01/27/shirky-and-ontology-vs-folksonomies/ Just seen an article here: The Fish Wrapper » Blog Archive » Knocking down bookshelves about some of the problems with ontologies, and how folksonomies are ‘better’. One of the main gripes is that ontologies force a rigid way of looking a the world, which obviously doesn’t apply to everyone. In ... http://adhominem.blogsome.com/2006/01/25/ontologies-folksonomies-etc/ Ok, for anyone new (and interested) to help unpick my ramblings: I’m a PhD Student at UCL, in London, UK. Although I’m also a (medical) doctor. As my thesis, I’m trying to work on mixing ontologies and argumentation. This means we get a (much) richer set of possibilites for the arguments, and ... http://adhominem.blogsome.com/2006/01/25/a-basic-intro/ I had been thinking about a rule syntax of the form A -> (B -> (C -> D)) where A is some source, B is some (non-optional) condition, C is some (optional) condition and D is some outcome. This then let’s us define a meta-rule of the form Value(D) -> ... http://adhominem.blogsome.com/2006/01/25/rule-syntax/