1 / 17

Arguing about Cancer

Some Practical Issues. Arguing about Cancer. Matt Williams, ACL. What is Argumentation ?. A Formally sound, qualitative technique. Relatively new. ICRF/ CR-UK a major developer. Several different approaches. Different Approaches. Very Formal. Very Informal. Why is it good?.

holly
Download Presentation

Arguing about Cancer

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Some Practical Issues Arguing about Cancer Matt Williams, ACL

  2. What is Argumentation ? • A Formally sound, qualitative technique • Relatively new • ICRF/ CR-UK a major developer • Several different approaches

  3. Different Approaches • Very Formal • Very Informal

  4. Why is it good? • Can handle qualitative data • Explanatory power • Formally sound

  5. A Useful Picture

  6. State of the Art

  7. State of the Art

  8. State of the Art At the moment, we have handcrafted arguments Values hard coded into the arguments Too slow, too hard to update Impossible to automate Difficult to reuse

  9. State of the Art - CREDO • 65 Decision points Four TA decisions: Genetic Risk Imaging Biopsy Management Currently in phase I/II trials

  10. State of the Art - REACT Therapy planning in BRCA1/ BRCA2 carriers Arguments hard-coded in xml 40 pages of arguments Up-to-date?

  11. What do we want ? A language for arguments That is easy(ish) to author That allows an element to be a claim in one argument and a warrant in the next That allows us to author them 'en-masse' and to reuse them as we wish

  12. Separate pieces... • We have 'Knowledge' x does y x does z • We have 'Arguments' y is good, so x is a good idea z is bad, so x is a bad idea • We have 'Decisions' Lets not do x, because z is more important than y

  13. ...working together ? • 'Statements' (atomic knowledge) can be stored in a knowledge base • KB then queried, helped by a standard terminology • Arguments can be assembled from statements • Arguments need to passed around

  14. An example (1) “Kryptonite is bad for Superman” • Lois: An argument AGAINST kryptonite • Lex: An argument FOR kryptonite These are currently hard-coded

  15. An example (2) “Kryptonite is bad for Superman” • A STATEMENT • What is the desired state ? • What are our values ? • What do we PREFER • Lex: Kryptonite AGREES with my desired outcome, therefore there is an argument for it • Lois: Kryptonite CONFLICTS with my desired outcome, therefore there is an argument against it

  16. A Real Example

  17. Future work • How do we get the statements to compile into arguments ? • What can we predict about the behaviour of the network of arguments ? • How can we speed up learning ? • Does this make any difference ?

More Related