Comparing knowledge elicitation techniques: a case study View Full Text


Ontology type: schema:ScholarlyArticle     


Article Info

DATE

1987-12

AUTHORS

R. Schweickert, A. M. Burton, N. K. Taylor, E. N. Corlett, N. R. Shadbolt, A. P. Hedgecock

ABSTRACT

Three knowledge elicitation techniques were used to extract knowledge bases from experts on lighting for industrial inspection tasks. The techniques were: I a structured interview; II ‘twenty questions’ —imputing rules from information requests; and III a card sort. The first two techniques generate protocols, and in these cases two knowledge engineers independently extracted production rules from the protocols. In the third technique rules were derived from the classification of lighting solutions. The first two techniques led to about the same number of rules, the card sort to less. There was a slightly higher percentage of agreement between the rules extracted separately by the knowledge engineers for the normal interview than for the ‘twenty questions’ technique. Disagreements between the knowledge engineers were resolved by discussion, and an expert system to select special lights for inspection tasks was implemented. Of the rules finally agreed on, the percentage which could be implemented in the expert system was less for the twenty questions technique than for the others. The agreed rules were mailed to the expert, who indicated whether she agreed, disagreed, or wanted to make a modification. This secondary stage of elicitation revealed no evident difference between the three techniques in terms of the proportion of rules validated by the expert. More... »

PAGES

245-253

Identifiers

URI

http://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/bf00142925

DOI

http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/bf00142925

DIMENSIONS

https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1011862815


Indexing Status Check whether this publication has been indexed by Scopus and Web Of Science using the SN Indexing Status Tool
Incoming Citations Browse incoming citations for this publication using opencitations.net

JSON-LD is the canonical representation for SciGraph data.

TIP: You can open this SciGraph record using an external JSON-LD service: JSON-LD Playground Google SDTT

[
  {
    "@context": "https://springernature.github.io/scigraph/jsonld/sgcontext.json", 
    "about": [
      {
        "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/08", 
        "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
        "name": "Information and Computing Sciences", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }, 
      {
        "id": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/0801", 
        "inDefinedTermSet": "http://purl.org/au-research/vocabulary/anzsrc-for/2008/", 
        "name": "Artificial Intelligence and Image Processing", 
        "type": "DefinedTerm"
      }
    ], 
    "author": [
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University, USA", 
          "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.169077.e", 
          "name": [
            "Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University, USA"
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "familyName": "Schweickert", 
        "givenName": "R.", 
        "type": "Person"
      }, 
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "Department of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK", 
          "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.4563.4", 
          "name": [
            "Department of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK"
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "familyName": "Burton", 
        "givenName": "A. M.", 
        "id": "sg:person.01261533174.87", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.01261533174.87"
        ], 
        "type": "Person"
      }, 
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "Department of Production Engineering and Production Management, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK", 
          "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.4563.4", 
          "name": [
            "Department of Production Engineering and Production Management, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK"
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "familyName": "Taylor", 
        "givenName": "N. K.", 
        "id": "sg:person.016325331676.88", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.016325331676.88"
        ], 
        "type": "Person"
      }, 
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "Department of Production Engineering and Production Management, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK", 
          "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.4563.4", 
          "name": [
            "Department of Production Engineering and Production Management, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK"
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "familyName": "Corlett", 
        "givenName": "E. N.", 
        "id": "sg:person.01046217545.41", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.01046217545.41"
        ], 
        "type": "Person"
      }, 
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "Department of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK", 
          "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.4563.4", 
          "name": [
            "Department of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK"
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "familyName": "Shadbolt", 
        "givenName": "N. R.", 
        "id": "sg:person.011356547667.50", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.011356547667.50"
        ], 
        "type": "Person"
      }, 
      {
        "affiliation": {
          "alternateName": "Department of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK", 
          "id": "http://www.grid.ac/institutes/grid.4563.4", 
          "name": [
            "Department of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK"
          ], 
          "type": "Organization"
        }, 
        "familyName": "Hedgecock", 
        "givenName": "A. P.", 
        "id": "sg:person.012437764243.31", 
        "sameAs": [
          "https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.012437764243.31"
        ], 
        "type": "Person"
      }
    ], 
    "datePublished": "1987-12", 
    "datePublishedReg": "1987-12-01", 
    "description": "Three knowledge elicitation techniques were used to extract knowledge bases from experts on lighting for industrial inspection tasks. The techniques were: I a structured interview; II \u2018twenty questions\u2019 \u2014imputing rules from information requests; and III a card sort. The first two techniques generate protocols, and in these cases two knowledge engineers independently extracted production rules from the protocols. In the third technique rules were derived from the classification of lighting solutions. The first two techniques led to about the same number of rules, the card sort to less. There was a slightly higher percentage of agreement between the rules extracted separately by the knowledge engineers for the normal interview than for the \u2018twenty questions\u2019 technique. Disagreements between the knowledge engineers were resolved by discussion, and an expert system to select special lights for inspection tasks was implemented. Of the rules finally agreed on, the percentage which could be implemented in the expert system was less for the twenty questions technique than for the others. The agreed rules were mailed to the expert, who indicated whether she agreed, disagreed, or wanted to make a modification. This secondary stage of elicitation revealed no evident difference between the three techniques in terms of the proportion of rules validated by the expert.", 
    "genre": "article", 
    "id": "sg:pub.10.1007/bf00142925", 
    "inLanguage": "en", 
    "isAccessibleForFree": false, 
    "isPartOf": [
      {
        "id": "sg:journal.1126843", 
        "issn": [
          "0269-2821", 
          "1573-7462"
        ], 
        "name": "Artificial Intelligence Review", 
        "publisher": "Springer Nature", 
        "type": "Periodical"
      }, 
      {
        "issueNumber": "4", 
        "type": "PublicationIssue"
      }, 
      {
        "type": "PublicationVolume", 
        "volumeNumber": "1"
      }
    ], 
    "keywords": [
      "knowledge elicitation techniques", 
      "knowledge engineers", 
      "inspection tasks", 
      "expert system", 
      "elicitation techniques", 
      "industrial inspection tasks", 
      "knowledge bases", 
      "production rules", 
      "technique rules", 
      "information requests", 
      "task", 
      "experts", 
      "rules", 
      "engineers", 
      "lighting solutions", 
      "Card Sort", 
      "case study", 
      "technique", 
      "requests", 
      "protocol", 
      "system", 
      "classification", 
      "elicitation", 
      "same number", 
      "sort", 
      "solution", 
      "number", 
      "special light", 
      "terms", 
      "questions", 
      "basis", 
      "discussion", 
      "stage", 
      "modification", 
      "interviews", 
      "structured interviews", 
      "study", 
      "secondary stage", 
      "light", 
      "disagreement", 
      "percentage", 
      "agreement", 
      "question technique", 
      "differences", 
      "high percentage", 
      "evident differences", 
      "proportion", 
      "normal interview"
    ], 
    "name": "Comparing knowledge elicitation techniques: a case study", 
    "pagination": "245-253", 
    "productId": [
      {
        "name": "dimensions_id", 
        "type": "PropertyValue", 
        "value": [
          "pub.1011862815"
        ]
      }, 
      {
        "name": "doi", 
        "type": "PropertyValue", 
        "value": [
          "10.1007/bf00142925"
        ]
      }
    ], 
    "sameAs": [
      "https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00142925", 
      "https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1011862815"
    ], 
    "sdDataset": "articles", 
    "sdDatePublished": "2022-05-20T07:18", 
    "sdLicense": "https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/", 
    "sdPublisher": {
      "name": "Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project", 
      "type": "Organization"
    }, 
    "sdSource": "s3://com-springernature-scigraph/baseset/20220519/entities/gbq_results/article/article_213.jsonl", 
    "type": "ScholarlyArticle", 
    "url": "https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00142925"
  }
]
 

Download the RDF metadata as:  json-ld nt turtle xml License info

HOW TO GET THIS DATA PROGRAMMATICALLY:

JSON-LD is a popular format for linked data which is fully compatible with JSON.

curl -H 'Accept: application/ld+json' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/bf00142925'

N-Triples is a line-based linked data format ideal for batch operations.

curl -H 'Accept: application/n-triples' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/bf00142925'

Turtle is a human-readable linked data format.

curl -H 'Accept: text/turtle' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/bf00142925'

RDF/XML is a standard XML format for linked data.

curl -H 'Accept: application/rdf+xml' 'https://scigraph.springernature.com/pub.10.1007/bf00142925'


 

This table displays all metadata directly associated to this object as RDF triples.

145 TRIPLES      21 PREDICATES      74 URIs      66 LITERALS      6 BLANK NODES

Subject Predicate Object
1 sg:pub.10.1007/bf00142925 schema:about anzsrc-for:08
2 anzsrc-for:0801
3 schema:author N0728bb1dd9c8415581375006b9e3b034
4 schema:datePublished 1987-12
5 schema:datePublishedReg 1987-12-01
6 schema:description Three knowledge elicitation techniques were used to extract knowledge bases from experts on lighting for industrial inspection tasks. The techniques were: I a structured interview; II ‘twenty questions’ —imputing rules from information requests; and III a card sort. The first two techniques generate protocols, and in these cases two knowledge engineers independently extracted production rules from the protocols. In the third technique rules were derived from the classification of lighting solutions. The first two techniques led to about the same number of rules, the card sort to less. There was a slightly higher percentage of agreement between the rules extracted separately by the knowledge engineers for the normal interview than for the ‘twenty questions’ technique. Disagreements between the knowledge engineers were resolved by discussion, and an expert system to select special lights for inspection tasks was implemented. Of the rules finally agreed on, the percentage which could be implemented in the expert system was less for the twenty questions technique than for the others. The agreed rules were mailed to the expert, who indicated whether she agreed, disagreed, or wanted to make a modification. This secondary stage of elicitation revealed no evident difference between the three techniques in terms of the proportion of rules validated by the expert.
7 schema:genre article
8 schema:inLanguage en
9 schema:isAccessibleForFree false
10 schema:isPartOf N123f39c5678c498b9ba66041d4db33da
11 Nc1842b85a0d84c6caef90d11198407ca
12 sg:journal.1126843
13 schema:keywords Card Sort
14 agreement
15 basis
16 case study
17 classification
18 differences
19 disagreement
20 discussion
21 elicitation
22 elicitation techniques
23 engineers
24 evident differences
25 expert system
26 experts
27 high percentage
28 industrial inspection tasks
29 information requests
30 inspection tasks
31 interviews
32 knowledge bases
33 knowledge elicitation techniques
34 knowledge engineers
35 light
36 lighting solutions
37 modification
38 normal interview
39 number
40 percentage
41 production rules
42 proportion
43 protocol
44 question technique
45 questions
46 requests
47 rules
48 same number
49 secondary stage
50 solution
51 sort
52 special light
53 stage
54 structured interviews
55 study
56 system
57 task
58 technique
59 technique rules
60 terms
61 schema:name Comparing knowledge elicitation techniques: a case study
62 schema:pagination 245-253
63 schema:productId N3d1b635f32714aa089bfd8be32307cb3
64 Nef54aaa0533344708a40ca3aab3a06d8
65 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/details/publication/pub.1011862815
66 https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00142925
67 schema:sdDatePublished 2022-05-20T07:18
68 schema:sdLicense https://scigraph.springernature.com/explorer/license/
69 schema:sdPublisher N1e2af3822ecc4e2283fb68c6dad579a5
70 schema:url https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00142925
71 sgo:license sg:explorer/license/
72 sgo:sdDataset articles
73 rdf:type schema:ScholarlyArticle
74 N0728bb1dd9c8415581375006b9e3b034 rdf:first N59d5736002d04942a46547fdad935084
75 rdf:rest N29f5c28907644c258425ff0fc3ca30aa
76 N123f39c5678c498b9ba66041d4db33da schema:issueNumber 4
77 rdf:type schema:PublicationIssue
78 N1e2af3822ecc4e2283fb68c6dad579a5 schema:name Springer Nature - SN SciGraph project
79 rdf:type schema:Organization
80 N29f5c28907644c258425ff0fc3ca30aa rdf:first sg:person.01261533174.87
81 rdf:rest Nf183c42160df43c785f5cc716bc4c8a4
82 N2cacccdbd70041558da59db5615d6eb7 rdf:first sg:person.012437764243.31
83 rdf:rest rdf:nil
84 N3d1b635f32714aa089bfd8be32307cb3 schema:name dimensions_id
85 schema:value pub.1011862815
86 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
87 N59d5736002d04942a46547fdad935084 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.169077.e
88 schema:familyName Schweickert
89 schema:givenName R.
90 rdf:type schema:Person
91 Nc1842b85a0d84c6caef90d11198407ca schema:volumeNumber 1
92 rdf:type schema:PublicationVolume
93 Nc75bc41c293348829e88fc1632e86fa8 rdf:first sg:person.01046217545.41
94 rdf:rest Ne0eeb79e1dee4e1abdd5928dc9da6616
95 Ne0eeb79e1dee4e1abdd5928dc9da6616 rdf:first sg:person.011356547667.50
96 rdf:rest N2cacccdbd70041558da59db5615d6eb7
97 Nef54aaa0533344708a40ca3aab3a06d8 schema:name doi
98 schema:value 10.1007/bf00142925
99 rdf:type schema:PropertyValue
100 Nf183c42160df43c785f5cc716bc4c8a4 rdf:first sg:person.016325331676.88
101 rdf:rest Nc75bc41c293348829e88fc1632e86fa8
102 anzsrc-for:08 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
103 schema:name Information and Computing Sciences
104 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
105 anzsrc-for:0801 schema:inDefinedTermSet anzsrc-for:
106 schema:name Artificial Intelligence and Image Processing
107 rdf:type schema:DefinedTerm
108 sg:journal.1126843 schema:issn 0269-2821
109 1573-7462
110 schema:name Artificial Intelligence Review
111 schema:publisher Springer Nature
112 rdf:type schema:Periodical
113 sg:person.01046217545.41 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.4563.4
114 schema:familyName Corlett
115 schema:givenName E. N.
116 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.01046217545.41
117 rdf:type schema:Person
118 sg:person.011356547667.50 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.4563.4
119 schema:familyName Shadbolt
120 schema:givenName N. R.
121 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.011356547667.50
122 rdf:type schema:Person
123 sg:person.012437764243.31 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.4563.4
124 schema:familyName Hedgecock
125 schema:givenName A. P.
126 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.012437764243.31
127 rdf:type schema:Person
128 sg:person.01261533174.87 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.4563.4
129 schema:familyName Burton
130 schema:givenName A. M.
131 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.01261533174.87
132 rdf:type schema:Person
133 sg:person.016325331676.88 schema:affiliation grid-institutes:grid.4563.4
134 schema:familyName Taylor
135 schema:givenName N. K.
136 schema:sameAs https://app.dimensions.ai/discover/publication?and_facet_researcher=ur.016325331676.88
137 rdf:type schema:Person
138 grid-institutes:grid.169077.e schema:alternateName Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University, USA
139 schema:name Department of Psychological Sciences, Purdue University, USA
140 rdf:type schema:Organization
141 grid-institutes:grid.4563.4 schema:alternateName Department of Production Engineering and Production Management, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
142 Department of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
143 schema:name Department of Production Engineering and Production Management, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
144 Department of Psychology, University of Nottingham, Nottingham, UK
145 rdf:type schema:Organization
 




Preview window. Press ESC to close (or click here)


...