Interpreting, Representing and Integrating Scientific Knowledge from Interdisciplinary Projects

Mary A. Meyer, Ray C. Paton

DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.12775/ths.2002.036

Abstract


We describe a coherent, eclectic approach to interpreting, representing, and integrating knowledge from different scientific disciplines or communities of practice. The approach, called ECLECTIC, draws from a complementary blend of ethnological methods, the hermeneutic analysis of domains, and ecology. Our description focuses on the conceptual bases of this approach, its value, and uses, particularly in handling the methodological considerations in the overlapping phases of interpretation, representation, and integration. We give examples from our use of the approach and describe how it handles difficult methodological issues: (1) knowing what questions to initially ask of members of science communities, (2) identifying their states of knowledge, (3) determining the analyst’s role, (4) determining how the knowledge may be self elicited by the members themselves, (5) verifying that the interpretation and representation of the knowledge is meaningful to the members, and (6) integrating differing representations from the communities.

Keywords


scientific knowledge; electic approach; ethnology; ecological hermeneutics; interpretation; representation; integration

Full Text:

PDF

References


Bench-Capon, T. J. M., S. Lynch, and R. C. Paton. (1996). “Principled Development of Knowledge Based Systems—the Importance of Domain History,” Proceedings of the Seventh International Workshop on Database and Expert Systems Applications, IEEE Press, Los Alamitos, 56-61.

Briggs, C. L. (1986). Learning How to Ask: A Sociolinguistic Appraisal of the Role of the Interview in Social Science Research, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Bollen, J. (1998). “A Connectionist System to Restructure Hypertext Networks into Valid User Models,” New Review of Hypermedia 4(1), Sydney.

Ericsson, K. A., and H. A. Simon. (1984). Protocol Analysis: Verbal Reports as Data. Cambridge: MIT Press.

Harre, R. (1986). Varieties of Realism: a Rationale for the Natural Sciences. Oxford: Blackwell.

Harre, R. (1990). “Exploring the Human Umwelt,” in Harre and His Critics, edited by R. Bhaskar. Oxford: Blackwell, 297-364.

Herbert, W. (2000). “Rudolf Llinas: A Grand Unification Theory of the Brain,” U.S. News and World Report, January 3/January 10, 2000, p. 68.

Jones, D. M., and R. C. Paton. (1997). “Acquisition of Conceptual Structure in Scientific Theories,” in Knowledge Acquisition, Modeling and Management, Lecture Notes in AI1319. Edited by E. Plaza and R. Benjamins. Berlin: Springer, 145-158.

Jones, D. M., and R. C. Paton. (1998). “Some Problems in the Formal Representation of Hierarchical Knowledge,” Proc. International Conference on Formal Ontology in Information Systems—FOIS’98, IOS Press series Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications.

Kerscher, W. J., J. M. Booker, T. R. Bement, and M. A. Meyer, “Characterizing Reliability During a Product Development Program,” European Safety and Reliability (ESREL) 2000, Edinburgh, Scotland, May 15-17, 2000.

Kwasnik, B. H. (1990). “An Analysis by Means of Naturalistic Analysis of Two Complex Behaviors,” in Proceedings of AAAI Workshop on Complex Systems, Ethnometho- dology and Interaction Analysis, Boston, MA, July 1990, pp. 123-135.

Levins, S. (1984). “The Strategy of Model Building in Population Biology,” in Conceptual Issues in Evolutionary Biology, edited by E. Sober, Cambridge: Harvard University Press, pp. 18-27.

Lund, C. A., and R. C. Paton. (1998). “A Visual Metaphor for Psychoanalytic Training and Supervision,” in Visual Representations and Interpretations, edited by R. C. Paton and I. Neilson (1999). London: Springer.

Meyer, M. A., J. M. Booker, R. A. Smith, and T. R. Bement, “Enhanced Reliability Update,” Weapon Insider 6:1, January/February, 1999, Los Alames National Laboratory document, Los Alamos, New Mexico, 87545.

Meyer, M. A., “How to Apply the Anthropological Method of Participant Obser. anon to Knowledge Acquisition for Expert Systems,” Los Alamos National Labo tat: r. ten: r LA-UR-91-1876, IEEE Systems, Man and Cybernetics 22, no. 5:983-991, Sentmben October 1992.

Meyer, M. A., and J. M. Booker. (1991). Eliciting and Analyzing Expert Judgment A Prateett. Guide, Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems series 5 Ltnatn Academic Press. Reprinted in 2001 by American Statistical Society. SLAM Senes.

Meyer, M. A., and R. C. Paton. (1992). “Towards an Analysis and Class, near no :: Approaches to Knowledge Acquisition from Examination of Textaa Miocoat ' Knowledge Acquisition 4, 347-369.

Meyer, M. A., K. B. Butterfield, W. S. Murray, R. E Smith, and J. M. Booker. (2000). “Guidelines for Eliciting Expert Judgment as Probabilities or Fuzzy Logic,” Los Alamos National Laboratory report LA-UR-00-218, to be published in Fuzzy Logic and Probability Applications, American Statistical Society, SIAM Series.

Miller, A. I. (1996). Insights of Genius, Imagery and Creativity in Science and Art. New York: Copernicus.

Nielsen, J. (1993). Usability Engineering. San Diego: Academic Press.

Paton, R. C. (1997). “Glue, Verb and Text Metaphors in Biology,” Acta Biotheoretica 45, 1, 1-15.

Paton, R. C. (2000). “Systemic Metaphors and Integrative Biology,” to be published in Theoria et Historia Scientiarum.

Paton, R. C., M. J. R. Shave, T. J. M. Bench-Capon, and H. S. Nwana. (1993). “Domain Characterisation in Context,” in Brezillon, P„ Proceedings of IJCAI Workshop on Context, France.

Paton, R. C., S. Lynch, D. Jones, H. S. Nwana, T. J. M. Bench-Capon, and M. J. R. Shave. (1994). “Domain Characterisation for Knowledge Based Systems,” Proceedings of A.I. 94—Fourteenth International Avignon Conference 1, 41-54.

Paton, R. C. and Meyer, M. A. (2000). “Toolbox—Method and Enabling Theory for Representing the Structure and Functionality of Knowledge,” Los Alamos National Laboratory report LA-UR-00-1002, Los Alamos, New Mexico 87545.

Pinto, S. H., A. Gomez-Perez, and J. P. Martins. (1999). “Some Issues on Ontology Integration,” Proceedings of the IJCAI-99 Workshop on Ontologies and Problem- Solving Methods (KRR5) Stockholm, Sweden, August 2, 1999, pp. 7-1 to7-12.

“PREDICT—A New Approach to Product Development,” 1999 R&D 100 joint entry by Los Alamos National Laboratory and Delphi Automotive Systems. M. A.

Meyer, J. M. Booker, T. R. Bement, and W. Kerscher III. Also in R&D Magazine 41, p. 161, September 1999.

Ricoeur, P. (1981). Hermeneutics and the Human Sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Quinn, N., and D. Holland. (1991). “Culture and Cognition” in Cultural Models in Language and Thought. Edited by D. Holland and N. Quinn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

Schleiermacher, F. D. E. (1977). Hermeneutics. The Handwritten Manuscripts. Edited by H. Kimmerle. Missoula: Scholars Press.

Soskice, J. M. (1985). Metaphor and Religious Language, Clarendon Press, Oxford. Spradling, J. P, ed. (1972). Culture and Cognition: Rules, Maps, and Plans. San Francisco: Chandler.

Spradling, J. P. (1979). The Ethnographic Interview. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

Thiselton, A. C. (1995). Interpreting God and the Postmodern Self. Edinburgh: T & T Clark.

Uexkiill, J. (1909). Umwelt und Innenwelt der Here, Springer: Berlin.

Wenger, E. (1999). Communities of Practice: Learning, Meaning and Identity. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.


Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.





ISSN 2392-1196 (online)

Partnerzy platformy czasopism