Not enough data to create a plot.
Try a different view from the menu above.
Shortliffe, Edward H.
Letters to the Editor.
Shortliffe, Edward H., Wilson, Kirk, Brender, David, Cott, Harold Van
Letters to the Editor.
Shortliffe, Edward H., Wilson, Kirk, Brender, David, Cott, Harold Van
These debates end by a culture for accommodating of the medical AI community, I feel I up merely as arguments in which its limited knowledge representations. Those of us in intelligence is). Depending such an extent that the limits of the medical AI have been highly sensitized upon what properties of human and computer system would no longer be to common misunderstandings artificial intelligence are stressed we a representational problem? We also encounter a general lack of of the relationship. Will we need to ascribe pleasure and realistic expectations regarding the The problem is that the models of pain to our computer experts?
A Computational Model of Reasoning from the Clinical Literature
Rennels, Glenn D., Shortliffe, Edward H., Stockdale, Frank E., Miller, Perry L.
The specific motivations underlying this research include the following propositions: (1) Reasoning from experimental evidence contained in the clinical literature is central to the decisions physicians make in patient care. Furthermore, the model can help us better understand the general principles of reasoning from experimental evidence both in medicine and other domains. Roundsman is a developmental computer system that draws on structured representations of the clinical literature to critique plans for the management of primary breast cancer. Roundsman is able to produce patient-specific analyses of breast cancer-management options based on the 24 clinical studies currently encoded in its knowledge base.
Logic and Decision-Theoretic Methods for Planning under Uncertainty
Langlotz, Curtis, Shortliffe, Edward H.
Decision theory and nonmonotonic logics are formalisms that can be employed to represent and solve problems of planning under uncertainty. We analyze the usefulness of these two approaches by establishing a simple correspondence between the two formalisms. The analysis indicates that planning using nonmonotonic logic comprises two decision-theoretic concepts: probabilities (degrees of belief in planning hypotheses) and utilities (degrees of preference for planning outcomes). We present and discuss examples of the following lessons from this decision-theoretic view of nonmonotonic reasoning: (1) decision theory and nonmonotonic logics are intended to solve different components of the planning problem; (2) when considered in the context of planning under uncertainty, nonmonotonic logics do not retain the domain-independent characteristics of classical (monotonic) logic; and (3) because certain nonmonotonic programming paradigms (for example, frame-based inheritance, nonmonotonic logics) are inherently problem specific, they might be inappropriate for use in solving certain types of planning problems.
Logic and Decision-Theoretic Methods for Planning under Uncertainty
Langlotz, Curtis, Shortliffe, Edward H.
Decision theory and nonmonotonic logics are formalisms that can be employed to represent and solve problems of planning under uncertainty. We analyze the usefulness of these two approaches by establishing a simple correspondence between the two formalisms. The analysis indicates that planning using nonmonotonic logic comprises two decision-theoretic concepts: probabilities (degrees of belief in planning hypotheses) and utilities (degrees of preference for planning outcomes). We present and discuss examples of the following lessons from this decision-theoretic view of nonmonotonic reasoning: (1) decision theory and nonmonotonic logics are intended to solve different components of the planning problem; (2) when considered in the context of planning under uncertainty, nonmonotonic logics do not retain the domain-independent characteristics of classical (monotonic) logic; and (3) because certain nonmonotonic programming paradigms (for example, frame-based inheritance, nonmonotonic logics) are inherently problem specific, they might be inappropriate for use in solving certain types of planning problems. We discuss how these conclusions affect several current AI research issues.
A Computational Model of Reasoning from the Clinical Literature
Rennels, Glenn D., Shortliffe, Edward H., Stockdale, Frank E., Miller, Perry L.
This article explores the premise that a formalized representation of empirical studies can play a central role in computer- based decision support. The specific motivations underlying this research include the following propositions: (1) Reasoning from experimental evidence contained in the clinical literature is central to the decisions physicians make in patient care. (2) A computational model based on a declarative representation for published reports of clinical studies can drive a computer program that selectively tailors knowledge of the clinical literature as it is applied to a particular case. (3) The development of such a computational model is an important first step toward filling a void in computer-based decision support systems. Furthermore, the model can help us better understand the general principles of reasoning from experimental evidence both in medicine and other domains. Roundsman is a developmental computer system that draws on structured representations of the clinical literature to critique plans for the management of primary breast cancer. Roundsman is able to produce patient-specific analyses of breast cancer-management options based on the 24 clinical studies currently encoded in its knowledge base. The Roundsman system is a first step in exploring how the computer can help bring a critical analysis of the relevant literature, structured around a particular patient and treatment decision, to the physician.
Rule-Based Expert Systems: The MYCIN Experiments of the Stanford Heuristic Programming Project
Buchanan, Bruce G., Shortliffe, Edward H.
Artificial intelligence, or AI, is largely an experimental science—at least as much progress has been made by building and analyzing programs as by examining theoretical questions. MYCIN is one of several well-known programs that embody some intelligence and provide data on the extent to which intelligent behavior can be programmed. As with other AI programs, its development was slow and not always in a forward direction. But we feel we learned some useful lessons in the course of nearly a decade of work on MYCIN and related programs. In this book we share the results of many experiments performed in that time, and we try to paint a coherent picture of the work. The book is intended to be a critical analysis of several pieces of related research, performed by a large number of scientists. We believe that the whole field of AI will benefit from such attempts to take a detailed retrospective look at experiments, for in this way the scientific foundations of the field will gradually be defined. It is for all these reasons that we have prepared this analysis of the MYCIN experiments.
The complete book in a single file.
Readings in Medical Artificial Intelligence: The First Decade - Table of Contents
Clancey, William J., Shortliffe, Edward H.
A survey of early work exploring how AI can be used in medicine, with somewhat more technical expositions than in the complementary volume "Artificial Intelligence in Medicine." Each chapter is preceded by a brief introduction that outlines our view of its contribution to the field, the reason it was selected for inclusion in this volume, an overview of its content, and a discussion of how the work evolved after the article appeared and how it relates to other chapters in the book.
Interviewer/Reasoner Model: An Approach to Improving System Responsiveness in Interactive AI Systems
Gerring, Phillip E., Shortliffe, Edward H., Melle, William van
Interactive intelligent systems often suffer from a basic conflict between their computationally intensive nature and the need for responsiveness to a user. This paper introduces the Interviewer/Reasoner model, which helps to reduce this conflict. The Interviewer's primary function is to gather data while providing an acceptable response time to the user. The Reasoner does most of the symbolic computation for the system.