Rating scale development: a multistage exploratory sequential design

The project chosen to showcase the application of the exploratory sequential design in second/ foreign (L2) language assessment comes from the context of rating scale development and focuses on the development of a set of scales for a suite of high-stakes L2 speaking tests. The assessment of speaking requires assigning scores to a speech sample in a systematic fashion by focusing on explicitly defined criteria which describe different levels of performance (Ginther 2013). Rating scales are the instruments used in this evaluation process, and they can be either holistic (i.e. providing a global overall assessment) or analytic (i.e. providing an independent evaluations for a number of assessment criteria, e.g. Grammar, Vocabulary, Organisation, etc.). The discussion in this chapter is framed within the context of rating scales in speaking assessment. However, it is worth noting that the principles espoused, stages employed and decisions taken during the development process have wider applicability to performance assessment in general

A knowledge-based system with learning for computer communication network design

Computer communication network design is well-known as complex and hard. For that reason, the most effective methods used to solve it are heuristic. Weaknesses of these techniques are listed and a new approach based on artificial intelligence for solving this problem is presented. This approach is particularly recommended for large packet switched communication networks, in the sense that it permits a high degree of reliability and offers a very flexible environment dealing with many relevant design parameters such as link cost, link capacity, and message delay

On the functional origins of essentialism

This essay examines the proposal that psychological essentialism results from a history of natural selection acting on human representation and inference systems. It has been argued that the features that distinguish essentialist representational systems are especially well suited for representing natural kinds. If the evolved function of essentialism is to exploit the rich inductive potential of such kinds, then it must be subserved by cognitive mechanisms that carry out at least three distinct functions: identifying these kinds in the environment, constructing essentialized representations of them, and constraining inductive inferences about kinds. Moreover, there are different kinds of kinds, ranging from nonliving substances to biological taxa to within-species kinds such as sex, and the causal processes that render these categories coherent for the purposes of inductive generalization vary. If the evolved function of essentialism is to support inductive generalization under ignorance of true causes, and if kinds of kinds vary in the implicit assumptions that support valid inductive inferences about them, then we expect different, functionally incompatible modes of essentialist thinking for different kinds. In particular, there should be differences in how biological and nonbiological substances, biological taxa, and biological and social role kinds are essentialized. The functional differences between these kinds of essentialism are discussed

Information and Entropy

What is information? Is it physical? We argue that in a Bayesian theory the notion of information must be defined in terms of its effects on the beliefs of rational agents. Information is whatever constrains rational beliefs and therefore it is the force that induces us to change our minds. This problem of updating from a prior to a posterior probability distribution is tackled through an eliminative induction process that singles out the logarithmic relative entropy as the unique tool for inference. The resulting method of Maximum relative Entropy (ME), which is designed for updating from arbitrary priors given information in the form of arbitrary constraints, includes as special cases both MaxEnt (which allows arbitrary constraints) and Bayes' rule (which allows arbitrary priors). Thus, ME unifies the two themes of these workshops -- the Maximum Entropy and the Bayesian methods -- into a single general inference scheme that allows us to handle problems that lie beyond the reach of either of the two methods separately. I conclude with a couple of simple illustrative examples.Comment: Presented at MaxEnt 2007, the 27th International Workshop on Bayesian Inference and Maximum Entropy Methods (July 8-13, 2007, Saratoga Springs, New York, USA

Alfredo Deaño and the non-accidental transition of thought

If the cultural variations concerning knowledge and research on ordinary reasoning are part of cultural history, what kind of historiographical method is needed in order to present the history of its evolution? This paper proposes to introduce the study of theories of reasoning into a historiographic perspective because we assume that the answer to the previous question does not only depend of internal controversies about how reasoning performance is explained by current theories of reasoning. [...

Technology assessment of advanced automation for space missions

Six general classes of technology requirements derived during the mission definition phase of the study were identified as having maximum importance and urgency, including autonomous world model based information systems, learning and hypothesis formation, natural language and other man-machine communication, space manufacturing, teleoperators and robot systems, and computer science and technology

Apperceptive patterning: Artefaction, extensional beliefs and cognitive scaffolding

In “Psychopower and Ordinary Madness” my ambition, as it relates to Bernard Stiegler’s recent literature, was twofold: 1) critiquing Stiegler’s work on exosomatization and artefactual posthumanism—or, more specifically, nonhumanism—to problematize approaches to media archaeology that rely upon technical exteriorization; 2) challenging how Stiegler engages with Giuseppe Longo and Francis Bailly’s conception of negative entropy. These efforts were directed by a prevalent techno-cultural qualifier: the rise of Synthetic Intelligence (including neural nets, deep learning, predictive processing and Bayesian models of cognition). This paper continues this project but first directs a critical analytic lens at the Derridean practice of the ontologization of grammatization from which Stiegler emerges while also distinguishing how metalanguages operate in relation to object-oriented environmental interaction by way of inferentialism. Stalking continental (Kapp, Simondon, Leroi-Gourhan, etc.) and analytic traditions (e.g., Carnap, Chalmers, Clark, Sutton, Novaes, etc.), we move from artefacts to AI and Predictive Processing so as to link theories related to technicity with philosophy of mind. Simultaneously drawing forth Robert Brandom’s conceptualization of the roles that commitments play in retrospectively reconstructing the social experiences that lead to our endorsement(s) of norms, we compliment this account with Reza Negarestani’s deprivatized account of intelligence while analyzing the equipollent role between language and media (both digital and analog)

Space exploration: The interstellar goal and Titan demonstration

Automated interstellar space exploration is reviewed. The Titan demonstration mission is discussed. Remote sensing and automated modeling are considered. Nuclear electric propulsion, main orbiting spacecraft, lander/rover, subsatellites, atmospheric probes, powered air vehicles, and a surface science network comprise mission component concepts. Machine, intelligence in space exploration is discussed

The problem of evaluating automated large-scale evidence aggregators

In the biomedical context, policy makers face a large amount of potentially discordant evidence from different sources. This prompts the question of how this evidence should be aggregated in the interests of best-informed policy recommendations. The starting point of our discussion is Hunter and Williams’ recent work on an automated aggregation method for medical evidence. Our negative claim is that it is far from clear what the relevant criteria for evaluating an evidence aggregator of this sort are. What is the appropriate balance between explicitly coded algorithms and implicit reasoning involved, for instance, in the packaging of input evidence? In short: What is the optimal degree of ‘automation’? On the positive side: We propose the ability to perform an adequate robustness analysis as the focal criterion, primarily because it directs efforts to what is most important, namely, the structure of the algorithm and the appropriate extent of automation. Moreover, where there are resource constraints on the aggregation process, one must also consider what balance between volume of evidence and accuracy in the treatment of individual evidence best facilitates inference. There is no prerogative to aggregate the total evidence available if this would in fact reduce overall accuracy