DLO%SU-AI@sri-unix.UUCP (11/05/83)
From: David Lowe <DLO@SU-AI>
I have recently written a paper that might be of considerable interest
to the people on this list. It is about a new form of structuring
interactions between many users of an interactive network, based on an
explict representation of debate. Although this is not a typical AI
problem, it is related to much AI work on the representation of language
or reasoning (for example, the representation of a chain of reasoning in
expert systems). The representation I have chosen is based on the work
of the philosopher Stephen Toulmin. I am also sending a version of this
message to HUMAN-NETS, since one goal of the system is to create a
lasting, easily-accessed representation of the interactions which occur
on discussion lists such as HUMAN-NETS or AIList.
A copy of the paper can be accessed by FTP from SAIL (no login required).
The name of the file is PAPER[1,DLO]. You can also send me a message
(DLO @ SAIL) and I'll mail you a copy. If you send me your U.S. mail
address, I'll physically mail you a carefully typeset version. Let
me know if you are interested, and I'll keep you posted about future
developments. The following is an abstract:
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
THE REPRESENTATION OF DEBATE AS A BASIS
FOR INFORMATION STORAGE AND RETRIEVAL
By David Lowe
Computer Science Department
Stanford University, Stanford, CA 94305
Abstract
Interactive computer networks offer the potential for creating a body
of information on any given topic which combines the best available
contributions from a large number of users. This paper describes a
system for cooperatively structuring and evaluating information through
well-specified interactions by many users with a common database. A
working version of the system has been implemented and examples of its use
are presented. At the heart of the system is a structured representation
for debate, in which conclusions are explicitly justified or negated by
individual items of evidence. Through debates on the accuracy of
information and on aspects of the structures themselves, a large number of
users can cooperatively rank all available items of information in terms
of significance and relevance to each topic. Individual users can then
choose the depth to which they wish to examine these structures for the
purposes at hand. The function of this debate is not to arrive at
specific conclusions, but rather to collect and order the best available
evidence on each topic. By representing the basic structure of each field
of knowledge, the system would function at one level as an information
retrieval system in which documents are indexed, evaluated and ranked in
the context of each topic of inquiry. At a deeper level, the system would
encode knowledge in the structure of of the debates themselves. This use
of an interactive system for structuring information offers many further
opportunities for improving the accuracy, accessibility, currency,
conciseness, and clarity of information.