A review of Sisyphus 91 &amp; 92: Models of problem-solving knowledge

Linster, Marc

doi:10.1007/3-540-57253-8_53

Cited by 13 publications

(15 citation statements)

References 15 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…For years, people across the globe devoted all their working hours to explicating the Delphic utterances of Siggi the Wizard, and wondering what would happen if Monika X took up smoking. The "nal set of papers were collected in this journal (Linster, 1994).…”

Section: Sisyphus I and Iimentioning

confidence: 99%

The experimental evaluation of knowledge acquisition techniques and methods: history, problems and new directions

Shadbolt¹,

O’Hara²,

Crow³

1999

International Journal of Human-Computer Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The special problems of experimentally evaluating knowledge acquisition and knowledge engineering tools, techniques and methods are outlined, and illustrated in detail with reference to two series of studies. The "rst is a series of experiments undertaken at Nottingham University under the aegis of the UK Alvey initiative and the ESPRIT project ACKnowledge. The second is the series of Sisyphus benchmark studies. A suggested programme of experimental evaluation is outlined which is informed by the problems with using Sisyphus for evaluation.

show abstract

Section: Sisyphus I and Iimentioning

confidence: 99%

The experimental evaluation of knowledge acquisition techniques and methods: history, problems and new directions

Shadbolt¹,

O’Hara²,

Crow³

1999

International Journal of Human-Computer Studies

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…To design an instrument with which modelling frameworks can be compared: (a) existing comparisons of languages and frameworks were studied and analysed (Treur & Wetter, 1993;Harmelen, Lopez de Mántaras, Malec & Treur, 1993;Fensel & Harmelen, 1994;Linster, 1991Linster, , 1994Fensel, 1995;Schreiber & Birmingham, 1996); (b) a number of frameworks and languages were analysed on the basis of available literature (including Mazza, Fairclough, Melton, de Pablo, Scheffer, and Stevens, 1994;Sage & Palmer, 1990;Revise, 1996) and, in some cases on the basis of handson experience; and (c) research groups (from the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, Universiteit van Amsterdam, University of Karlsruhe, Stanford University, Open University and Université de Paris-Sud) evaluated the instrument and the specific results for their modelling framework.…”

Section: An Instrument To Compare Modelling Frameworkmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Problem-oriented comparison (comparison based on the application of an approach to one given problem) to both languages (Treur & Wetter, 1993;Harmelen, Lopez de Mántaras, Malec & Treur, 1993) and modelling frameworks (Linster, 1991(Linster, , 1994Fensel, 1995;Schreiber & Birmingham, 1996) as a joint activity, has increased understanding of different modelling frameworks. An advantage of problem-oriented comparison is that a well-described problem in which specific aspects of a problem are highlighted provides a concrete basis for comparison.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

An instrument for a purpose driven comparison of modelling frameworks

Brazier

Wijngaards

1997

Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling and Management

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract.During the past decade a number of modelling frameworks for knowledge based systems have been developed. In this paper an approach to the comparison of modelling frameworks is proposed, based on the aims and purposes behind the frameworks. A purpose oriented comparison of the frameworks DESIRE, CommonKADS, PROTÉGÉ-II, MIKE, VITAL and KARL provides insight in their differences and similarities.

show abstract

“…An early attempt to survey and classify most approaches in knowledge acquisition was given by [Boo88]. Methodologically close in spirit to this work are [KLV90], [NPB+91], [Lin93], and [FeH94]. [KLV90] survey four approaches to model-based knowledge acquisition and extract three common hypotheses which are now common places in knowledge acquisition.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…[KLV90] survey four approaches to model-based knowledge acquisition and extract three common hypotheses which are now common places in knowledge acquisition. [NPB+91] tries to give a complete classification on knowledge acquisition and [Lin93] focuses on solutions of the Sisyphus-I problem. [FeH94] discuss and compare eight formal knowledge specification languages.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A comparison of two approaches to model-based knowledge acquisition

Fensel¹,

Poeck

1994

Lecture Notes in Computer Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Abstract. This paper discusses and compares two different approaches to model-based knowledge acquisition. That is, we regard the Model-based and Incremental Knowledge Engineering (MIKE) approach and the Configurable Role-limiting Method approach (CRLM). MIKE is based on the distinction of different phases in the software development process. It uses the formal and operational knowledge specification language KARL allowing a precise and unique description of a model of expertise which is the outcome of the analysis phase. CRLM is based on the rolelimiting method approach. Role limiting shells are implementations of strong problem-solving methods and substantially simplify knowledge acquisition through guidance by predefined models of problem-solving and by sophisticated graphical user interfaces. The main disadvantages, namely inflexibility and brittleness, are to some degree overcome by the CRLM where the shell's problem-solving methods are split into smaller parts, which can then be reconfigured allowing the integration of new methods or other method combinations. Although these two approaches are often discussed as contradictory, we, however, experienced that both approaches complete each other very well. As an outcome of our comparison, we outline topics of future research for both approaches.

show abstract

A review of Sisyphus 91 & 92: Models of problem-solving knowledge

Cited by 13 publications

References 15 publications

The experimental evaluation of knowledge acquisition techniques and methods: history, problems and new directions

The experimental evaluation of knowledge acquisition techniques and methods: history, problems and new directions

An instrument for a purpose driven comparison of modelling frameworks

A comparison of two approaches to model-based knowledge acquisition

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About