Just a follow up. There appears to be a freely available online edition of an updated version of Toulmin's book at
http://johnnywalters.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/3/5/13358288/toulmin-the-uses-of-argument_1.pdf bobj On Friday, 4 December 2020 at 10:07:49 UTC+11 Bob Jansen wrote: > Tones, > > good to get your feedback. > > There is no database that I am aware of implementing Toulmin's model. > However, I have been thinking about several applications for some time now. > One is clinical guidelines for major diseases, like melanoma. These > documents are thick and heavy but most of it is background info for > emerging clinicians and interested public, in educational mode. Then there > are the actual guidelines, written like 'rules' with pointers to the > evidence. One thought I had was for a member of the public to enter > relevant details about their condition and the application to advise what > to do or not to do. The background info can also be used to explain the > reasoning behind the advice. So, the 'rules' are the statements, and the > background advice are the warrant, backing, etc. > > Also, thinking overnight, it seems now obvious that statements themselves > may be classified according to type. So in the above case, the 'rules' > equate to the Toulmin model statements but important sentences from the > rest of the material could be considered 'assertions', as in this paper > Management > of Wool Dark Fibre Risk Knowledge Using Hypertext > <https://www.researchgate.net/publication/267195462_Management_of_Wool_Dark_Fibre_Risk_Knowledge_Using_Hypertext?_sg=A5fl9dNa9YY2z8Et2p0aDF_2C5ZOTAFev6uH-O3cy4O6UzQfbbzobHAWVr5MwMaU_AazckxbAd2oKmchK64riQO1V7VdLoErCrvaJWEp.Y8-Lc0anQISAomUWnPaN67V_maR1G1MDTQPPjhYwkuoFZq3mwXJaUCFpsLGTkbpG2LeazI40yECaO284uYHexg>. > > This project trialled those of 'assertions' as simple statements extracted > from the research papers but forming a navigation structure into the > content of those papers. Assertions can be considered analogous to outline > statements, as per Word's outliner. BTW, this smallish application might be > a useful starting point for further investigations of the use of Toulmin's > model. I did start authoring my research papers from an outline model and > proved, to me at least, that the assertions were a very useful structure > for subsequent paper access. > > As for expert system maintenance, have a look at Ripple Down Rules (PDF > <http://turtlelane.com.au/Papers/TR-FD-89-01.pdf> and PDF > <http://turtlelane.com.au/Papers/AI88.pdf>). This is a mechanism Paul > Compton and I (but mainly Paul) devised many years ago now to overcome the > brittleness of KBS without major re-engineering. An additional rule was > merely added into the rule base to cover the particular case wherein the > KBS failed this time. Paul has extended the RDR approach much further and > there any many papers describing its use and enhancements. Your description > reminded me of this approach. This approach to maintenance also hinges on > the availability of a cornerstone case database, a database of conditions > that caused a rule to be created. This is useful for running against the > KBS at any time to prove its accuracy. > > As for more info on Toulmin, the obvious place is his book, The Uses of > Argument. I picked up a copy many ywars ago from a second hand book seller. > Not sure if a copy can be bought online. Otherwise, do a google images > search for toulmin model and see some of the examples that come through > that. > > Charlie, just a query. How does this approach sit with your ideas? > > bobj > On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 17:35:50 UTC+11 TW Tones wrote: > >> Bob, >> >> Very interesting. I can see plenty of ways to implement and automate the >> data model but need to digest the the meaning of each element and how to >> support discovery. Are there any examples or databases using this method we >> could get an example of? >> >> I have a few ex-CSIRO's staff in my friend and acquaintance circles. >> Retirement of people with broad and deep knowledge is a creative and >> productive opportunity, so often neglected. >> >> I imagine there may be information found in various domains that could be >> used to pre-populate such a database. >> >> I have considered in depth expert systems learning, particularly in >> complex technical support areas, when the act of solving problems. builds a >> repository of knowledge and uses analytics and actual use to strengthen the >> expert system. I imagine this solution could be similar. The idea is to use >> the information so far and add when a gap is found, but with the gaps >> filled in a reusable way and when the answer/element exists promote the >> path taken to find an answer/mpodel according to its effectiveness. In >> effect providing conditional multi-dimensional decision trees, that respond >> to future interactions. >> >> Only once a larger dataset exists can we start to derive new methods and >> mechanisms with less effort. >> >> Regards >> Tones >> >> >> On Thursday, 3 December 2020 at 16:00:47 UTC+11 [email protected] wrote: >> >>> Colleagues, >>> >>> all this thinking started by Charlie's initial posting, has led me to >>> begin building a simple TW utilising the Toulmin Argument Model for >>> representing links and associations between TW tiddlers. This is something >>> I have been planning to do for some time, now that I am 'retired' I have >>> the time. >>> >>> My reasoning is that a completed statement represents the context in >>> which the link between Ground and Claim can be made. This then also >>> supports many different reasons for creating an association between a set >>> of Grounds and Claims each one providing a single instance of context in >>> which the association is deemed valid. >>> >>> My thoughts so far: >>> A statement can be considered like an IF...THEN statement but more >>> complicated due to the additional elements, Warrant, Backing, Rebuttal and >>> Qualifier. The IF part represents the Ground and the THEN part the Claim. >>> >>> The Qualifier could be a percentage value or some other statement of >>> possibility/plausibility. >>> >>> Not all elements need to be utilised in any statement, only those that >>> make sense for that particular statement. >>> >>> Elements can be re-used between statements >>> >>> Statements can be collected together into a domain of thought or >>> applicability. Thus a single TW could cater for many domains. >>> >>> Each element is represented by its own tiddler and all tiddlers for a >>> statement are linked together to form the completed statement. Links are >>> stored as Field values in the statement tiddler and also in a Statement >>> field of each element tiddler as the links are essentially many-to-many in >>> ER terms. >>> >>> Quandries: >>> >>> How to handle content elements not text? Images, audio, video, etc... >>> >>> How to produce an 'active' instance of the domain, ie. an instance that >>> functions follow some reasoning mechanism (ie. forward chaining...) >>> >>> Shared TW: >>> >>> http://turtlelane.com.au/Development/ToulminModel/toulmin.html >>> >>> Happy to have your input/thoughts/etc. >>> >>> bobj >>> >>> On Wednesday, 2 December 2020 at 15:30:11 UTC+11 Charlie Veniot wrote: >>> >>>> Like misery, hyperactive-firing-on-all-cylinders synapses love company >>>> ... >>>> >>>> Although right here in this group is fine by me, I'm interested >>>> wherever discussion happens. >>>> >>>> On Tuesday, December 1, 2020 at 11:30:48 PM UTC-4 [email protected] >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Charlie, Tones, TiddlyTweeter >>>>> >>>>> first off, I hold you personally responsible for firing up my dormant >>>>> synapses. Thanks for that, you have provided renewed impetus for me to >>>>> continue pondering these issues, which I essentially ceased to do in any >>>>> meaningful way since I left my research position at CSIRO (the Federal >>>>> Government's research body in Australia). A dormant area of my brain has >>>>> reawakened :-) This will also require me to unbox my library so suitable >>>>> books can be re-queried (all my books are in storage as we have been >>>>> living >>>>> most of the time in South Korea for the past decade. Corona has left us >>>>> 'stranded' in Sydney). >>>>> >>>>> I will respond to the recent postings but, like Tones, need to think >>>>> things through a bit more rather than provide a rambling nonsense of >>>>> ideas >>>>> and thoughts. >>>>> >>>>> One thought though. Maybe it is time to take discussion outside of >>>>> this group. Not that I want to disenfranchise anybody but the discussion >>>>> has wider ramifications/application than Tiddlywiki. It also can be >>>>> applied >>>>> to Mediawiki and even Bill Atkinson's original Hypercard and its >>>>> offshoots. >>>>> Also, this discussion can then take advantage to TW's linking facility, >>>>> etc. Just a thought. >>>>> >>>>> Ciao for now. >>>>> >>>>> bobj >>>>> On Wednesday, 2 December 2020 at 14:19:52 UTC+11 Bob Jansen wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> TiddlyTweeter wrote: >>>>>> "Very good case example (http://cultconv.com/ [footnote---on mobile >>>>>> its too minuscule!])." >>>>>> >>>>>> yes, I know of the sizing issue on mobile devices. Not sure how to >>>>>> handle that other than a redesign which I am loathe to do given usage >>>>>> stats >>>>>> (~8,000 per month over last calendar year). The basic design is for >>>>>> multiple synchronous channels of information, in this case four >>>>>> (video/audio, transcript, table of contents and images with captions). >>>>>> Altogether too much for a small screen. Plus on iPhone, the video takes >>>>>> over the whole screen anyway. >>>>>> >>>>>> bobj >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tuesday, 1 December 2020 at 03:50:57 UTC+11 TiddlyTweeter wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> Ciao bobj >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Very good case example (http://cultconv.com/ [footnote---on mobile >>>>>>> its too minuscule!]). >>>>>>> >>>>>>> BTW, I really took to your last point ... >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Throughout all of my research career, the issue that continually >>>>>>>> crops up is context. I think this is the crucial component to keep >>>>>>>> things >>>>>>>> understandable. Yet no agreed understanding of context exists yet we >>>>>>>> all >>>>>>>> use it ... >>>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Right. In terms of information design issues there is no algorithm >>>>>>> for accurately deriving either "scope of meaning" or "scope of >>>>>>> inference >>>>>>> (context implying)". Though it is pretty clear on net that within >>>>>>> "fields >>>>>>> of interest" context is ALWAYS playing an implicit role in successful >>>>>>> sites. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I thought the site you gave access to excellent. *Very honed to >>>>>>> purpose*. It is an unusual (uplifting) thing seeing such a >>>>>>> "schematization" work so well. >>>>>>> I think that is the point. You have to "sniff/tease" out context and >>>>>>> back generate (derive) schema from that first-felt understanding that >>>>>>> isn't >>>>>>> otherwise derivable. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Best wishes >>>>>>> TT >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "TiddlyWiki" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/tiddlywiki/08024bf8-3632-459c-bb29-ec121a9a6609n%40googlegroups.com.
