An overview of decision table literature 1982-1995.

This report gives an overview of the literature on decision tables over the past 15 years. As much as possible, for each reference, an author supplied abstract, a number of keywords and a classification are provided. In some cases own comments are added. The purpose of these comments is to show where, how and why decision tables are used. The literature is classified according to application area, theoretical versus practical character, year of publication, country or origin (not necessarily country of publication) and the language of the document. After a description of the scope of the interview, classification results and the classification by topic are presented. The main body of the paper is the ordered list of publications with abstract, classification and comments.

Discrimination nets, production systems and semantic networks: Elements of a unified framework

A number of formalisms have been used in cognitive science to account for cognition in general and learning in particular. While this variety denotes a healthy state of theoretical development, it somewhat hampers communication between researchers championing different approaches and makes comparison between theories difficult. In addition, it has the consequence that researchers tend to study cognitive phenomena best suited to their favorite formalism. It is therefore desirable to propose frameworks which span traditional formalisms. In this paper, we pursue two goals: first, to show how three (symbolic) formalisms widely used in theorizing about and in simulating human cognition—discrimination nets, semantic networks and production systems—may be used in a single, conceptually unified framework; and second to show how this framework can be used to develop a comprehensive theory of learning. Within this theory, learning is construed as (a) developing perceptual and conceptual discrimination nets, (b) adding semantic links, and (c) creating productions. We start by giving a brief description of each of these formalisms; we then describe a theoretical framework that incorporates the three formalisms, and show how these may coexist. Throughout this description, examples from chess, a highly studied field of expertise and a classical object of study in cognitive science, will be provided. These examples will illustrate how the framework can be worked out into a more detailed cognitive theory. Finally, we draw some theoretical consequences of the framework proposed here

Memory-Based Lexical Acquisition and Processing

Current approaches to computational lexicology in language technology are knowledge-based (competence-oriented) and try to abstract away from specific formalisms, domains, and applications. This results in severe complexity, acquisition and reusability bottlenecks. As an alternative, we propose a particular performance-oriented approach to Natural Language Processing based on automatic memory-based learning of linguistic (lexical) tasks. The consequences of the approach for computational lexicology are discussed, and the application of the approach on a number of lexical acquisition and disambiguation tasks in phonology, morphology and syntax is described.Comment: 18 page

Logics for Unranked Trees: An Overview

Labeled unranked trees are used as a model of XML documents, and logical languages for them have been studied actively over the past several years. Such logics have different purposes: some are better suited for extracting data, some for expressing navigational properties, and some make it easy to relate complex properties of trees to the existence of tree automata for those properties. Furthermore, logics differ significantly in their model-checking properties, their automata models, and their behavior on ordered and unordered trees. In this paper we present a survey of logics for unranked trees

A Framework for Combining Defeasible Argumentation with Labeled Deduction

In the last years, there has been an increasing demand of a variety of logical systems, prompted mostly by applications of logic in AI and other related areas. Labeled Deductive Systems (LDS) were developed as a flexible methodology to formalize such a kind of complex logical systems. Defeasible argumentation has proven to be a successful approach to formalizing commonsense reasoning, encompassing many other alternative formalisms for defeasible reasoning. Argument-based frameworks share some common notions (such as the concept of argument, defeater, etc.) along with a number of particular features which make it difficult to compare them with each other from a logical viewpoint. This paper introduces LDSar, a LDS for defeasible argumentation in which many important issues concerning defeasible argumentation are captured within a unified logical framework. We also discuss some logical properties and extensions that emerge from the proposed framework.Comment: 15 pages, presented at CMSRA Workshop 2003. Buenos Aires, Argentin