首页> 外文学位 >An assessment of using response latency to estimate levels of certainty associated with a production rule in expert systems.
【24h】

An assessment of using response latency to estimate levels of certainty associated with a production rule in expert systems.

机译:使用响应潜伏期来估计与专家系统中的生产规则相关的确定性级别的评估。

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例

摘要

Knowledge elicitation is a bottleneck in the expert system building procedure as it is expensive and time consuming. It involves interviewing a human expert over a period of time to discover decision rules as well as the relative measures of certainty or preferences among the expert's recommendations. Certainty Factors (CF) are associated with these rules and are used to measure the expert's degree of certainty or preference.; The research problem is directed at assessing two knowledge elicitation methods that can be used to measure an expert's CFs and the degree of inconsistency in a set of CFs, called the Certainty Ratio (CR). One method is the older or classic method where the expert self-reports the level of certainty associated with a rule. The other one is based on using response latencies (the time taken for an expert to express a preference in one recommendation over another). The Response Latency method is newer and has the advantage of being unobtrusive, less prone to conscious censure, quicker to perform, requires less effort, and possibly is less expensive to administer. If the response latency method performs at least as well as the classic, self-report method, then it can be used in place of the classic method.; To determine if there is a difference in the two methods, 21 subjects were evaluated in a paired sample design. Employing a computer-administered questionnaire, subjects expressed relative levels of confidence for a set of potential recommendations and the time for each subject to respond was recorded unobtrusively.; Using paired sample t-tests, sufficient evidence was found to reject the null hypotheses (α =.025) that the mean of the difference of the CFs was zero in the population (p .0001). Additionally, there was sufficient evidence to reject the null hypothesis (α =.05) that the mean of the difference in the CRs was zero in the population ( p .0001), accepting the alternative hypothesis that, in the population, response latency has a lower mean CR than the self-report method. Thus, there is initial support for using the response latency method in place of the self-report method of knowledge elicitation.
机译:知识获取是专家系统构建过程中的瓶颈,因为它既昂贵又耗时。它涉及在一段时间内采访人类专家,以发现决策规则以及专家建议中确定性或偏好性的相对度量。确定性因子(CF)与这些规则相关联,用于衡量专家的确定性或偏好程度。该研究问题针对评估两种知识启发方法,这些方法可用于测量专家的CF和一组CF中的不一致程度,称为确定性比(CR)。一种方法是较旧的或经典的方法,专家可以自行报告与规则相关的确定性水平。另一个则基于使用响应延迟(专家在一项建议中表示偏好而不是另一项建议所花费的时间)。响应延迟方法是一种较新的方法,具有以下优点:不引人注目,不易受到有意识的指责,执行速度更快,所需的精力更少,并且可能管理成本更低。如果响应等待时间方法的性能至少与经典的自报告方法相同,则可以使用它代替经典方法。为了确定两种方法是否存在差异,以配对样本设计评估了21名受试者。使用计算机管理的调查表,受试者表达了对一组潜在建议的相对信心水平,并且每个受试者的回答时间都记录得很清楚。使用配对样本t检验,发现有足够的证据拒绝零假设(α= .025),即人口中CF差的平均值为零( p <.0001)。此外,有足够的证据拒绝零假设(α= .05),即人口中CR差异的平均值为零( p <.0001),接受了另一种假设,在人群中,响应潜伏期的平均CR低于自我报告方法。因此,最初支持使用响应等待时间方法代替知识提示的自报告方法。

著录项

  • 作者

    Feinstein, Jerald L.;

  • 作者单位

    The George Washington University.;

  • 授予单位 The George Washington University.;
  • 学科 Business Administration Marketing.; Psychology Cognitive.; Information Science.; Artificial Intelligence.
  • 学位 Ph.D.
  • 年度 1999
  • 页码 188 p.
  • 总页数 188
  • 原文格式 PDF
  • 正文语种 eng
  • 中图分类 贸易经济;心理学;信息与知识传播;人工智能理论;
  • 关键词

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号