Figure 6 - uploaded by John Zeleznikow
Content may be subject to copyright.
Source publication
Argumentation concepts have been applied to numerous knowledge engineering endeavours in recent years. For example, a variety of logics have been developed to represent argumentation in the context of a dialectical situation such as a dialogue. In contrast to the dialectical approach, argumentation has also been used to structure knowledge. This ca...
Citations
... Furthermore, similar studies in open source software development projects used an adapted method of the general field argumentation model by Toulman [81] using codes like claim, warrant, rebuttal, etc. For knowledge engineering projects, the Toulman scheme was also used with variation because did not fulfil the projects' needs [63]. However, previous studies in collaborative knowledge engineering identified the value of argumentation in building ontologies and introduced Diligent, an argumentationbased ontology engineering methodology [51,76] using codes such as issue, elaboration, counter example, etc.. Based on the idea that during ontology building, participants exchange arguments which may support or object to certain ontology engineering decisions, the authors suggested a model for tracking arguments [69]. ...
In this work, we study disagreement in discussions around Wikidata, an online knowledge community that builds the data backend of Wikipedia. Discussions are important in collaborative work as they can increase contributor performance and encourage the emergence of shared norms and practices. While disagreements can play a productive role in discussions, they can also lead to conflicts and controversies, which impact contributor well-being and their motivation to engage. We want to understand if and when such phenomena arise in Wikidata, using a mix of quantitative and qualitative analyses to identify the types of topics people disagree about, the most common patterns of interaction, and roles people play when arguing for or against an issue. We find that decisions to create Wikidata properties are much faster than those to delete properties and that more than half of controversial discussions do not lead to consensus. Our analysis suggests that Wikidata is an inclusive community, considering different opinions when making decisions, and that conflict and vandalism are rare in discussions. At the same time, while one-fourth of the editors participating in controversial discussions contribute with legit and insightful opinions about Wikidata's emerging issues, they do not remain engaged in the discussions. We hope our findings will help Wikidata support community decision making, and improve discussion tools and practices.
... Modeline dayalı çalışmaların Fen Bilimleri (Altun, 2010;Aslan, 2010;Çiftçi, 2016;Dawson ve Venville, 2009;Demirci, 2008;Deveci, 2009;Doğru, 2016;Erduran, Simon, ve Osborne, 2004;Georgiou ve Mavrikaki, 2013;Gültepe, 2011;Jimenez-Aleixandre, Rodriguez ve Duschl, 2000;Kaya, 2009;Köroğlu, 2009;Merino-Rubilar, Jara, Leyton, Paipa ve Izquierdo, 2014;Naylor, Keogh ve Downing, 2006;Niaz, Aguilera, Maza, Liendo, 2002;Obsorne, Erduran ve Simon 2004;Öğreten, 2014;Öztürk, 2013;Sevgi, 2016;Simon, 2008;Simon, Erduran ve Osborne, 2006;Tekeli, 2009;Venville ve Dawson, 2010;Yeşiloğlu, 2007) ve Matematik alanlarında yapıldığı (Dinçer, 2011;Pedemonte ve Balacheff, 2016;Rumsey, 2012) görülmektedir. Bunların dışında Sosyal Bilgiler (Torun, 2015), İngilizce (Greenwald, 2007;Hernandez, Kaplan ve Schwartz, 2006;Lunsford, 2002;Ortiz-Seda, 1990;Qin ve Karabacak, 2010;Voss, 2005), Din (Horne, 2008), Satış-Pazarlama (Kim ve Benbasat, 2006), Edebiyat (Boynukalın, 2013;Coşkun ve Tiryaki, 2011) ve Felsefe (Hitchcock, 2005;Karbach 1987;Stranieri, Zeleznikow ve Yearwood, 2001) ...
Öğrenciler için tartışma kültürünün kazandırılması, tartışmanın etkili bir iletişim aracı olarak kullanılması, tartışmayla birlikte mantıksal çıkarımlarda bulunma ve sorgulama becerisinin kazandırılması önemlilik taşımaktadır. Sosyal Bilgiler dersinde yer alan konuların nedenselliğinin açıklanmasında ve sorgulanmasında Toulmin Tartışma Modeli’nin kullanılmasıyla öğretmen ve öğrenciler üzerindeki etkilerinin neler olduğu problem durumunu oluşturmuştur. Bu çerçevede çalışmanın amacını; ilkokul dördüncü sınıflarda Sosyal Bilgiler dersi öğrenme-öğretme sürecinde Toulmin Tartışma Modeline dayalı uygulamaların nasıl yürütüldüğünün incelenmesi oluşturmuştur. Çalışmada durum çalışması türlerinden etnografik durum çalışması benimsenmiştir. Araştırmada sosyo-ekonomik düzey bakımından farklı üç ilkokulun dördüncü sınıfları çalışma grupları olarak ele alınmıştır. Veri toplama araçları olarak; öğretmen ve öğrenciler için kişisel bilgi formu, gözlem formu, uygulama öncesi- süresi ve sonrasına dayalı öğretmen görüşleri, uygulama sürecine dayalı öğrenci günlükleri kullanılmıştır, okul- öğretmen ve öğrencilere bir kod adı tayin edilmiştir. Çalışma sonuçları, üç farklı ilkokuldaki öğretmen ve öğrenci görüşleri, gözlem notlarından yola çıkılarak değerlendirilmiştir. Öğretmenler uygulama öncesinde Toulmin Tartışma Modeli ile ilgili bilgilerinin olmadığını, sınıflarında münazara, panel ve soru-cevap yöntemlerini kullandıklarını belirtmiştir. Öğretmenler, modelin sınıfları için uygulanabilir olduğunu, modeli yürütürken öğrenci kazanımı ve ön bilgilerine önem vereceklerini söylemiştir. Gökyüzü ve Yıldız İlkokulu öğrencilerinin uygulamalarda araştırma ve sorgulama sürecine aktif katıldığı, derse ilgi, motivasyon ve özgüvenlerinin yüksek düzeyde olduğu, sınıf atmosferlerinin demokratik bir yapıya sahip olduğu görülmüştür. Bulut İlkokulu’ndaki uygulamaların daha dar bir çerçevede gerçekleştiği, derslere katılım, kendini ifade etme, sorgulama sürecinin diğer okullara göre daha sınırlı bir düzeyde kaldığı gözlenmiştir. Öğretmenler modelin ilkokul düzeyindeki diğer derslerde de uygulanabileceğini, günlük yaşama aktarılabileceğini ifade etmiştir. Modelin uygulanışı ile ilgili öğretmenlere eğitim alma imkânı sunulması, modelin farklı yöntem ve gruplarla uygulanması getirilen öneriler arasındadır.
... Modeline dayalı çalışmaların Fen Bilimleri (Altun, 2010;Aslan, 2010;Çiftçi, 2016;Dawson ve Venville, 2009;Demirci, 2008;Deveci, 2009;Doğru, 2016;Erduran, Simon, ve Osborne, 2004;Georgiou ve Mavrikaki, 2013;Gültepe, 2011;Jimenez-Aleixandre, Rodriguez ve Duschl, 2000;Kaya, 2009;Köroğlu, 2009;Merino-Rubilar, Jara, Leyton, Paipa ve Izquierdo, 2014;Naylor, Keogh ve Downing, 2006;Niaz, Aguilera, Maza, Liendo, 2002;Obsorne, Erduran ve Simon 2004;Öğreten, 2014;Öztürk, 2013;Sevgi, 2016;Simon, 2008;Simon, Erduran ve Osborne, 2006;Tekeli, 2009;Venville ve Dawson, 2010;Yeşiloğlu, 2007) ve Matematik alanlarında yapıldığı (Dinçer, 2011;Pedemonte ve Balacheff, 2016;Rumsey, 2012) görülmektedir. Bunların dışında Sosyal Bilgiler (Torun, 2015), İngilizce (Greenwald, 2007;Hernandez, Kaplan ve Schwartz, 2006;Lunsford, 2002;Ortiz-Seda, 1990;Qin ve Karabacak, 2010;Voss, 2005), Din (Horne, 2008), Satış-Pazarlama (Kim ve Benbasat, 2006), Edebiyat (Boynukalın, 2013;Coşkun ve Tiryaki, 2011) ve Felsefe (Hitchcock, 2005;Karbach 1987;Stranieri, Zeleznikow ve Yearwood, 2001) ...
It is important for students to gain the culture of discussion, to use the discussion as an
effective communication tool, to make the logical inferences and questioning with the discussion.
The problem status of teachers and students by using the Toulmin Discussion Model in explaining
and questioning the causality of the subjects in the Social Studies course. The purpose of the study
was to examine how the practices of the Social Studies course based on the Toulmin Discussion
Model during the learning-teaching process in the fourth grade at primary school. In the study, the
ethnographic case study of the types of case studies has been adopted. In the study, four classes of
three primary schools differing in socio-economic level were considered as working groups. As
data collection tools; personal information form for teachers and students, observation form, preapplication, teacher's opinions based on application process and afterwards, student logs based on
application process were used. The results of the study were evaluated by observing notes from
teachers and students in three different primary schools. All three teachers stated that they did not
have information about Toulmin Discussion Model before the application and they used
discussion, panel and question-answer methods in their class. Teachers said that the model is
applicable for their classes and that they will attach importance to student acquisition and
preliminary knowledge when conducting the model. It has been observed that the students of
Gökyüzü and Yıldız Primary School actively participate in the research and inquiry process in
practice and that the class interest, motivation and self-esteem are at a high level and that the class
atmosphere has a democratic structure. It has been observed that the practices in Bulut Primary
School have been carried out in a narrower frame, and the participation, self-expression and
questioning period in the classes have remained at a limited level compared to other schools.
Teachers stated that the model could also be applied in other lessons at primary school level, could
be transferred to everyday life. Providing the opportunity to receive training for teachers about the
implementation of the model and the application of the model with different methods and groups
are among the recommendations.
Keywords: Toulmin discussion models, social studies lesson
... The use of an inference procedure in the way advanced here draws on an approach for representing knowledge called the Generic Actual Argument Model (GAAM) by (Yearwood and Stranieri 2005). This model has been applied to the development of numerous decision support systems in law including; Split Up, predicting the percentage split of assets a Family Court judge awards divorcees (Stranieri et al 2001), Embrace, assessing the strength of claims for refugee status (Yearwood and Stranieri 1999), GetAid, determining eligibility for legal aid in Victoria (Stranieri et al 2001) and witness selection in Scotland (Bromby and Hall, 2002). ...
... The use of an inference procedure in the way advanced here draws on an approach for representing knowledge called the Generic Actual Argument Model (GAAM) by (Yearwood and Stranieri 2005). This model has been applied to the development of numerous decision support systems in law including; Split Up, predicting the percentage split of assets a Family Court judge awards divorcees (Stranieri et al 2001), Embrace, assessing the strength of claims for refugee status (Yearwood and Stranieri 1999), GetAid, determining eligibility for legal aid in Victoria (Stranieri et al 2001) and witness selection in Scotland (Bromby and Hall, 2002). ...
... The Generic Actual Argument Model (GAAM) (Yearwood & Stranieri 2006, Stranieri, Yearwood & Zeleznikow 2002) is a structure for capturing expert reasoning. The approach is based on the argument structure proposed by Toulmin (1969). ...
... A segment of the Split-Up Family Law tree is provided in Fig 4 which Figure 4: Section of the Split-Up Argument tree. (Stranieri et al. 2002) The top of the tree is the root node, which represents the argument of division of marital assets. Under the root node are the three most important arguments in determining the division of marital assets. ...
There are many dierent approaches for settling dis- putes on-line, such as simple email systems, fixed bid systems and intelligent systems. However, to date there have been no attempts to integrate decision sup- port methods into the dispute resolution process for the purpose of supporting outcomes that are consis- tent with judicial reasoning. This paper describes how a model of judicial rea- soning can be used to assist divorcees with the reso- lution of property issues online, in a manner that is consistent with decisions a judge would make if the matter was heard in Court. The approach uses an argument based model of the discretionary nature of decisions made by judges in Australian Family Law. This is integrated with a protocol for online dispute dialogue. Predictions of the likelihood of alternates outcomes is achieved with a series of Bayesian Belief Networks.
... The hierarchy of relevant factors derives from the Generic Actual Argument model described in (Stranieri et al. 2001). This model provides a natural framework for decomposing a task during the data transformation phase. ...
... This notion of how an explanation is generated is in keeping with views on decisionmaking advocated by proponents of the school of legal realism. (Stranieri et al. 2001) make the assumption that an explanation is separate from the steps used to infer a solution and that explanation for discretionary reasoning is further removed from the reasoning steps than is the case in less discretionary domains. This is particularly important when using neural networks or other statistical KDD techniques to model reasoning in discretionary legal domains. ...
... (Hall et al. 2004) claim that the use of structured knowledge can help improve the performance of legal decision makers. They use the Generic Toulmin Argument Model of (Stranieri et al. 2001) to provide advice on the sentencing of criminals in the Victorian (Australian) Magistrates Court. (Borges et al. 2002) use employment contracts cases. ...
The area of Information Technology & Lawyers is a fascinating one. Both from a practical and an academic perspective the opportunities of applying Information Technology to law are tremendous. At the same time, however, lawyers are amongst the most conservative professionals, and traditional late adapters of technology. Nowadays the gap between Information Technology & Lawyers is closing more and more, in particular due to the Internet and the richness of legal sources that can be found online. This book provides material to further bridge the gap by showing people with a legal background what is possible with Information Technology now and in the near future, as well as by showing people with an IT background what opportunities exist in the domain of law. Any lawyer should read this book about the current practice of IT in the legal domain, and what is to be expected in the near future. The book is meant for both practitioners and academics, and can serve in any (post)graduate courses on computer science, law, business, etc. The editors Arno R. Lodder and Anja Oskamp are both affiliated to the Computer/Law Institute of the Vrije Universiteit Amsterdam, and before co-edited books on IT support of the Judiciary, as well as the first two editions of the Dutch handbook on IT & Lawyers.
... In this paper a dialogue game protocol is advanced that uses the GAAM to define topics for discussion and define a set of locutions for the topics. A protocol described in[13] is used to define a set of rules that govern utterance of these locutions and a set of rules to govern dialogue termination. The application domain is family law property proceedings. ...
Deliberative dialogue is a form of dialogue that involves participants advancing claims and, without power plays or posturing,
deliberating on the claims of others until a consensus decision is reached. This paper describes a deliberative support system
to facilitate and encourage participants to engage in a discussion deliberatively. A knowledge representation framework is
deployed to generate a strong domain model of reasoning structure. The structure, coupled with a deliberative dialogue protocol
results in a web based system that regulates a discussion to avoid combative, non-deliberative exchanges. The system has been
designed for online dispute resolution between husband and wife in divorce proceedings involving property.
... Future work aims to fully implement the environment and to perform empirical evaluation to identify pedagogical and/or other benefits. The approach has natural application in Online Dispute Resolution (ODR) and mediation processes and future work is planned in this direction using an argumentation representation of property proceedings in the Family Court of Australia that was originally developed for a decision support system called Split Up [4] ...
Three dimensional games are compelling and provide a fo-rum for interactivity and engagement. A dramatically dif-ferent environment from typical settings for the discussion of issues in addition the interactivity and all-engaging nature of the 3D environment is expected to facilitate deliberative attitudes. Complex reasoning if represented in a 3D envi-ronment is likely to be more compelling and interesting than the same issue represented using other means.
... Argumentation theories provide a formal account of reasoning, typically in the case of arguing for or against an assertion [8]. Arguments are linked with explanations: an argument structure provides an explanation concerning the acceptance or rejection of a proposition. ...
This position paper proposes argumentation structures for automated reasoning in context-aware systems, for design of context-aware behaviour, for generating explanations of system actions to users, and for more expressive rules for user-programming of context-aware systems.
... This can be done using a knowledge based system which after receiving the response(s) from the user for corresponding questions, decides whether to release the confidential information according to privacy law requirements. Currently, we are implementing the knowledge base that encodes privacy law and supplementary knowledge using a decision and argument tree representation described in [12]. ...
A statistical database system is a database system that contains information about individuals (companies, organisations) which enable its authorized users to retrieve aggregate statistics such as sample total, mean and count. The security problem for a statistical database is to limit the use of the database so that only statistical information is available to an authorized statistical user and no sequence of queries is sufficient to infer protected information about any individual. If, however, as a result of a statistical query, individual confidential information is obtained by a statistical user, then the database is said to be compromised. In order to prevent compromise, we use a knowledge based system approach. A statistical user can pose only statistical queries to the database. The knowledge based system will infer a query result by answering questions from the statistical user in such a way that the individual information is kept confidential. Earlier models modelled SDB compromise using two kinds of knowledge [7]. In this paper we enhance this model by including another important knowledge, namely, legal knowledge, and we describe an implementation of a knowledge base that supports the decision making for the protection of privacy in statistical databases, while taking into account not only the working and (known) supplementary knowledge but also legal knowledge.
