Danny -- At 01:41 PM 11/25/2005 +0100, you wrote: >PS. What would be very useful to have would be some kind of >explanation (/proof) mechanism available with the results - so when >"population US" is solved by a "Semantic Web search and reasoning >engine", producing a single anwer: 278058881, you can tell it's what >you intended, and not the population of "us", the subscribers to >semantic-web@w3.org... There has been extensive research on the generation of explanations in the expert system community. A couple of starting points for those that which to dig deeper: KNIGHT: Lester, J. C. & Porter, B. W. (1997) Developing and empirically evaluating robust explanation generators: the KNIGHT experiments. Computational Linguistics. 23(1), 65-101. TEXPLAN: Maybury, M. T. (1992) Communicative acts for explanation generation. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 37( 2), 135-172 and Maybury, M. T. (1998) Planning multimedia explanations using communicative acts. In Mark T. Maybury and Wolfgang Wahlster (Eds.) Readings in Intelligent User Interfaces. San Francisco, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., 99-109. TRI: Domingue, J. (1988) TRI: The transparent rule interpreter. Research and Development in Expert Systems V. Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 126-138. A nice overview can be found in the dissertation Mechanisms for Answering "Why not" Querstion in Rule- and Object-based systems http://cis2.stvincent.edu/martincc/disstrttn2.doc (only availlable as .doc) cu valentin zacharias http://vzach.blogspot.com/Received on Saturday, 26 November 2005 19:51:39 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:44:49 GMT