D-S Theory for Argument Confidence Assessment
نویسندگان
چکیده
Structured arguments are commonly used to communicate to stakeholders that safety, security or other attributes of a system are achieved. Due to the growing complexity of systems, more uncertainties appear and the confidence in arguments tends to be less justifiable by reviewing. In this paper, we propose a quantitative method to assess the confidence in structured arguments, like safety cases. We adopt the Goal Structuring Notation (GSN) to model the safety case and propose to add annotations to identify uncertainties in this model. Three inference types of arguments are proposed according to their impact on confidence. Definition and quantification assessment of confidence are based on the belief function theory. The proposed approach is illustrated with several GSN examples.
منابع مشابه
Using D-s Evidence Theory to Evaluation of Confidence in Safety Case
A safety case provides an explicit means for justifying the safety of a system through a reasoned argument and supporting evidence. However, the acceptance of a safety case requires the assessors to be confident, thus, there is some uncertainty of confidence in the safety case, and it becomes a key factor how to process the uncertainty in evaluating confidence in safety case. D-S evidence theor...
متن کاملAn Effective Numerical Technique for Solving Second Order Linear Two-Point Boundary Value Problems with Deviating Argument
Based on reproducing kernel theory, an effective numerical technique is proposed for solving second order linear two-point boundary value problems with deviating argument. In this method, reproducing kernels with Chebyshev polynomial form are used (C-RKM). The convergence and an error estimation of the method are discussed. The efficiency and the accuracy of the method is demonstrated on some n...
متن کاملParadox and Relativism
Since the time of Plato, relativism has been attacked as a self-refuting theory. Today, there are two basic kinds of argument that are used to show that global relativism is logically incoherent: first, a direct descendent of the argument Plato uses against Protagoras, called the peritrope; and, second, a more recent argument that relativism leads to an infinite regress. Although some relativis...
متن کاملDynamic Assessment: From Underlying Constructs to Implications for Language Teaching
Testing as a general trait of social life has received a great deal of attention by many language teachers and scholars. Throughout history, people have been tested to prove their abilities and experiences or to confirm their capacities. Many authorities have said that assessment and instruction should be integrated as a single and inseparable activity which seeks to understand development by a...
متن کاملThe Effect of Dynamic Assessment of Toulmin Model through Teacher- and Collective-Scaffolding on Argument Structure and Argumentative Writing Achievement of Iranian EFL Learners
Considering the paramount importance of writing logical arguments for college students, this study investigated the effect of dynamic assessment (DA) of Toulmin model through teacher- and collective-scaffolding on argument structure and overall quality of argumentative essays of Iranian EFL university learners. In so doing, 45 male and female Iranian EFL learners taking part in the study were r...
متن کامل