Pitt Creates New IC4CR Center to Utilize AHP in Resolving International Conflicts
نویسندگان
چکیده
منابع مشابه
Resolving Conflicts in Action Descriptions
We study resolving conflicts between an action description and a set of conditions (possibly obtained from observations), in the context of action languages. In this formal framework, the meaning of an action description can be represented by a transition diagram—a directed graph whose nodes correspond to states and whose edges correspond to transitions describing action occurrences. This allow...
متن کاملA New Approach for Resolving Conflicts in Actionable Behavioral Rules
Knowledge is considered actionable if users can take direct actions based on such knowledge to their advantage. Among the most important and distinctive actionable knowledge are actionable behavioral rules that can directly and explicitly suggest specific actions to take to influence (restrain or encourage) the behavior in the users' best interest. However, in mining such rules, it often occurs...
متن کاملResolving Conflicts in Agent Guidance
For agent technology to be accepted in real-world applications, humans must be able to customize and control agent operations. One approach for providing such controllability is to enable a human supervisor to define guidance for agents in the form of policies that establish boundaries on agent behavior. This paper considers the problem of conflicting guidance for agents, making contributions i...
متن کاملA Metadata Approach to Resolving Semantic Conflicts
Semantic reconciliation is an important step in determining logical connectivity between a data source (database) and a data receiver (application). Semantic reconciliation is used to determine if the semantics of the data provided by the source is meaningful to the receiver. In this paper we describe a rule-based approach to semantic specification and demonstrate how this specification can be ...
متن کاملOn resolving Conflicts between Arguments
Argument systems are based on the idea that one can construct arguments for propositions structured reasons justifying the belief in a proposition. Using defeasible rules, arguments need not be valid in all circumstances, therefore, it might be possible to construct an argument for a proposition as well as its negation. When arguments support conflicting propositions, one of the arguments must ...
متن کاملذخیره در منابع من
با ذخیره ی این منبع در منابع من، دسترسی به آن را برای استفاده های بعدی آسان تر کنید
ژورنال
عنوان ژورنال: International Journal of the Analytic Hierarchy Process
سال: 2019
ISSN: 1936-6744
DOI: 10.13033/ijahp.v11i1.654