Skip to main content

Part of the book series: Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing ((AINSC,volume 73))

Abstract

In Group Decision Making based on argumentation, decisions are made considering the diverse points of view of the different partakers in order to decide which course of action a group should follow. However, knowledge and belief are normally incomplete, contradictory, or error sensitive, being desirable to use formal tools to deal with the problems that arise from the use of uncertain and even not precise information. On the other hand, qualitative models and qualitative reasoning have been around in Artificial Intelligence research for some time, in particular due the growing need to offer support in decision-making processes, a problem that in this work will be addressed in terms of an extension to the logic programming language and based on an evaluation of the Quality-of-Information (QoI) that stems out from those extended logic programs or theories. We present a computational model to address the problem of decision making, in terms of a multitude of scenarios, also defined as logic programs or theories, where the more appropriate ones stand for the higher QoIs values.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Kowalski, R.: The logical way to be artificially intelligent. In: Toni, F., Torroni, O. (eds.) Proceedings of the CLIMA VI. LNCS (LNAI), pp. 1–22. Springer, Heidelberg (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  2. Sheridan, F.: A Survey of techniques for inference under uncertainty. Artificial Intelligent Review 5(1), 89 (1991)

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Ginsberg, M.L.: Readings in Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Los Altos, Califórnia, EUA. Morgan Kauffman Publishers, Inc., San Francisco (1991)

    Google Scholar 

  4. Neves, J.: A Logic Interpreter to Handle Time and Negation in Logic Data Bases. In: Proceedings of ACM 1984, The Fifth Generation Challenge, pp. 50–54 (1984)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Subrahmanian, V.: Probabilistic databases and logic programming. In: Proc. of the 17th International Conference of Logic Programming (2001)

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kakas, A., Kowalski, R., Toni, F.: The role of abduction in logic programming. Handbook of Logic in Artificial Intelligence and Logic Programming 5, 235–324 (1998)

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Hommersom, A., Lucas, P.J.F., van Bommel, P.: Checking the quality of clinical guidelines using automated reasoning tools. Theory and Practice of Logic Programming 8(5-6), 611–641 (2008)

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  8. Lima, L., Novais, P., Bulas Cruz, J.: A Process Model For Group Decision Making With Quality Evaluation. In: Omatu, S., Rocha, M.P., Bravo, J., Fernández, F., Corchado, E., Bustillo, A., Corchado, J.M. (eds.) IWANN 2009. LNCS, vol. 5518, pp. 566–573. Springer, Heidelberg (2009)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  9. Novais, P., Costa, R., Carneiro, D., Machado, J., Lima, L., Neves, J.: Group Support in Collaborative Networks Organizations for Ambient Assisted Living. In: Oya, M., Uda, R., Yasunobu, C. (eds.) Towards Sustainable Society on Ubiquitous Networks. IFIP, pp. 353–362. Springer, Heidelberg (2008)

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  10. Analide, C., Novais, P., Machado, M., Neves, J.: Quality of Knowledge in Virtual Entities. In: Encyclopedia of Communities of Practice in Information and Knowledge Management, pp. 436–442. Idea Group Inc., USA (2006)

    Google Scholar 

  11. Lu, J., Zhang, G., Ruan, D., Wu, F.: Multi-objective Group Decision Making: Methods, Software and Applications with Fuzzy Set Techniques. Electric and Computer Engineering. Imperial College Press,

    Google Scholar 

  12. Simon, H.A.: Models of Bounded Rationality: Empirically Grounded Economic Reason, vol. 3. MIT Press, Cambridge (1982)

    Google Scholar 

  13. Nappelbaum, E.: Systems logic for problem formulation and choice. In: Humphreys, P., et al. (eds.) IFIP TC8 WG8.3, Springer, Heidelberg (1997)

    Google Scholar 

  14. Jones, G., Humphreys, P.: The Decision Hedgehog: Enhancing Contextual Knowledge for Group Decision Authoring and Communication Support. In: Fifth International and Interdisciplinary Conference on Modeling and Using Context, CEUR-WS, Paris, France (2005)

    Google Scholar 

  15. Machado, J., Abelha, A., Novais, P., Neves, J., Neves, J.: Quality of service in healthcare units. Int. J. Computer Aided Engineering and Technology 2(4), 436–449 (2010)

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2010 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Novais, P., Salazar, M., Ribeiro, J., Analide, C., Neves, J. (2010). Decision Making and Quality-of-Information. In: Corchado, E., Novais, P., Analide, C., Sedano, J. (eds) Soft Computing Models in Industrial and Environmental Applications, 5th International Workshop (SOCO 2010). Advances in Intelligent and Soft Computing, vol 73. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13161-5_24

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-13161-5_24

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-642-13160-8

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-642-13161-5

  • eBook Packages: EngineeringEngineering (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics