用于构建和理解专家系统规则的决策表的实证评估

Lucinio Santos-Gomez, Michael J. Darnell
{"title":"用于构建和理解专家系统规则的决策表的实证评估","authors":"Lucinio Santos-Gomez,&nbsp;Michael J. Darnell","doi":"10.1016/1042-8143(92)90004-K","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><p>Two studies were designed to evaluate the efficiency of decision table representations for constructing and comprehending expert system rules by nonprogrammers with no experience in either knowledge engineering or expert systems. The first study compared the speed and accuracy of a decision table editor for constructing rules in a tabular representation relative to a standard text editor. Rules were constructed faster and more accurately with the decision table editor than with the text editor. The second study focused on the representational value of decision tables for comprehending expert system rules. In a verification task, subjects responded to questions of different types as accurately and rapidly as possible on the basis of the logical structure of a set of rules represented in either a decision table or textual format. The decision table showed an advantage only in situations where the diagrammatic, integral representation of the decision table expedited the perceptual and symbolic matching processes involved in the search.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100857,"journal":{"name":"Knowledge Acquisition","volume":"4 4","pages":"Pages 427-444"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1992-12-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/1042-8143(92)90004-K","citationCount":"22","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Empirical evaluation of decision tables for constructing and comprehending expert system rules\",\"authors\":\"Lucinio Santos-Gomez,&nbsp;Michael J. Darnell\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/1042-8143(92)90004-K\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><p>Two studies were designed to evaluate the efficiency of decision table representations for constructing and comprehending expert system rules by nonprogrammers with no experience in either knowledge engineering or expert systems. The first study compared the speed and accuracy of a decision table editor for constructing rules in a tabular representation relative to a standard text editor. Rules were constructed faster and more accurately with the decision table editor than with the text editor. The second study focused on the representational value of decision tables for comprehending expert system rules. In a verification task, subjects responded to questions of different types as accurately and rapidly as possible on the basis of the logical structure of a set of rules represented in either a decision table or textual format. The decision table showed an advantage only in situations where the diagrammatic, integral representation of the decision table expedited the perceptual and symbolic matching processes involved in the search.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100857,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Knowledge Acquisition\",\"volume\":\"4 4\",\"pages\":\"Pages 427-444\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1992-12-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/1042-8143(92)90004-K\",\"citationCount\":\"22\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Knowledge Acquisition\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/104281439290004K\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Knowledge Acquisition","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/104281439290004K","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 22

摘要

两项研究旨在评估决策表表示在构建和理解专家系统规则方面的效率,这些决策表表示是由没有知识工程或专家系统经验的非编程人员进行的。第一项研究比较了决策表编辑器与标准文本编辑器在表格表示中构建规则的速度和准确性。与文本编辑器相比,决策表编辑器更快、更准确地构建了规则。第二个研究的重点是决策表在理解专家系统规则方面的代表性价值。在验证任务中,受试者根据以决策表或文本格式表示的一组规则的逻辑结构,尽可能准确、快速地回答不同类型的问题。只有在决策表的图解、整体表示加快了搜索中涉及的感知和符号匹配过程的情况下,决策表才显示出优势。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Empirical evaluation of decision tables for constructing and comprehending expert system rules

Two studies were designed to evaluate the efficiency of decision table representations for constructing and comprehending expert system rules by nonprogrammers with no experience in either knowledge engineering or expert systems. The first study compared the speed and accuracy of a decision table editor for constructing rules in a tabular representation relative to a standard text editor. Rules were constructed faster and more accurately with the decision table editor than with the text editor. The second study focused on the representational value of decision tables for comprehending expert system rules. In a verification task, subjects responded to questions of different types as accurately and rapidly as possible on the basis of the logical structure of a set of rules represented in either a decision table or textual format. The decision table showed an advantage only in situations where the diagrammatic, integral representation of the decision table expedited the perceptual and symbolic matching processes involved in the search.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
The semantics of KBSSF, a language for KBS design Foundations for a methodology for medical KBS development What online machine learning can do for knowledge acquisition—a case study Apology and correction Configuring problem-solving methods: a CAKE perspective
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1