Not enough data to create a plot.
Try a different view from the menu above.
Shortliffe, E.H.
Computer-based medical consultations: MYCIN
Shortliffe, E.H.
A Model of Inexact Reasoning in Medicine
Shortliffe, E.H. | Buchanan, B.G.
Reprinted in Readings in Uncertain Reasoning, G. Shafer and J. Pearl, eds., pp. 259-273, San Mateo, CA: Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Inc., 1990.See also: Stanford Center for Biomedical Informatics Research (BMIR).… quantifying confirmation and then manipulating the numbers as though they were probabilities quickly leads to apparent inconsistencies or paradoxes. Carl Hempel presented an early analysis of confirmation (Hempel, 1965), pointing out as we have that C[h,e] is a very different concept from P(hle ). His famous Paradox of the Ravens was presented early in his discussion of the logic of confirmation. Let hl be the statement that "all ravens are black" and h2 the statement that "all nonblack things are nonravens." Clearly hi is logically equivalent to h,2. If one were to draw an analogy with conditional probability, it might at first seem valid, therefore, to assert that C[hl,e] = C[h2,e] for all e. However, it appears counterintuitive to state that the observation of a green vase supports hi, even though the observation does seem to support h,2. C[h,e] is therefore different from P(hle) for it seems somehow wrong that an observation of a vase could logically support an assertion about ravens. Another characteristic of a quantitative approach to confirmation that distinguishes the concept from probability was well-recognized by Carnap (1950) and discussed by Barker (1957) and Harrd (1970). They note it is counterintuitive to suggest that the confirmation of the negation of a hypothesis is equal to one minus the confirmation of the hypothesis, i.e., C[h,e] is not 1 - C[-qh,e]. The streptococcal decision rule asserted that a gram-positive coccus growing in chains is a Streptococcus with a measure of support specified as 7 out of 10. This translates to C[h,e]=0.7 where h is "the organism is a Streptococcus" and e is the information that "the organism is a gram-positive coccus growing in chains." As discussed above, an expert does not necessarily believe that C[mh,e] = 0.3. The evidence is said to be supportive of the contention that the organism is a Streptococcus and can therefore hardly also support the contention that the organism is not a Streptococcus. Ch.13 of Mycin Book; revised from Math. Biosci. 23:351-379
An artificial intelligence program to advise physicians regarding antimicrobial therapy
Shortliffe, E.H. | Axline, S.G. | Buchanan, B.G. | Merigan, T.C. | Cohen, S.N.
The first Mycin publication. An antimicrobial therapy consultation system has been developed which utilizes a flexible representation of knowledge. The novel design facilitates interactive advice-giving sessions with physicians. An ability to display reasons for making decisions at the request of the user permits the program to serve a tutorial as well as consultative role. The feasibility of the judgmental rule approach which the program uses has been demonstrated with a limited knowledge base of approximately 100 rules. Its ultimate success as a clinically useful tool depends upon acquisition of additional rules and thus upon co-operation of infectious disease experts willing to improve the program's knowledge base. The techniques for acquisition, representation, and utilization of knowledge, plus considerations of natural language processing, draw upon and contribute to current Artificial Intelligence research. Comput. Biomed. Res. 6:544-560.