Abstract
When an actor is selecting an action in order to fulfill its intents, in a given context, the actor’s knowledge and beliefs about the specific context will impact the possibility to achieve a desired outcome. The context is often affected by unobserved, or unmeasured, factors, which can impact the result of the desired outcome.
The context specific knowledge and beliefs an actor has about a domain, together with the possibilities to evaluate and learn which actions shall be taken, are packaged into a context frame. Our intention with this study is to evaluate an implementation of such a context frame. The context frame concept is meant to support actors to fulfill their intents in a given knowledge domain, by enforcing the needed, and available, actions which cause effects on the outcomes. We have built our implementation of the context frame on the OODA-loop, Pask’s conversation theory, and structural causal models, by using a Bayesian approach, and probabilistic programming.
The research approach is based on evaluation research. We evaluated our implementation with the help of a proof of concept. During the proof of concept we used data sets containing decisions about treatment and survival analysis regarding cancer patients, information obtained during focus group interviews, and questionnaire data.
The proof of concept used to evaluate our implementation of a context frame was regarded as successful and the concept of context frames deemed as useful.
Our division of a context frame in three parts, supported by four different types of analysis functions, made it easier to create a solution which supports evaluation and learning.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
Anthony, K.D.: Introduction to causal modeling, bayesian theory and major Bayesian modeling tools for the intelligence analyst. Eur. J. Oper. Res. 1–31 (2006)
Consoli, A., Tweedale, J., Jain, L.: Aligning cognitive models using AC3M. In: Proceedings - 1st International Conference on Emerging Trends in Engineering and Technology, ICETET 2008, pp. 882–886 (2008)
Crown, W.H.: Real-world evidence, causal inference, and machine learning. Value Health 22(5), 587–592 (2019)
Davidson-Pilon, C.: Bayesian Methods for Hackers, 1st edn. Addison Wesley Data & Analytics Series (2016)
Hayduk, L.A., et al.: Pearl’s d-separation: one more step into causal thinking. Struct. Equ. Model. 10(2), 289–311 (2003)
Hernan, M.A., Robins, J.M.: Causal Inference: What if. CRC Press (2020)
Kline, R.B.: Principles and Practice of Structural Equation Modeling, 4th edn. The Guilford Press (2016)
Kochenderfer, M.: Decision Making Under Uncertainty. MIT Press (2015)
Liu, B.: Lifelong machine learning: a paradigm for continuous learning. Front. Comput. Sci. 11(3), 359–361 (2017)
Mccauley-bell, P., Freeman, R.: Quantification of belief and knowledge systems in information warfare. In: Proceedings of the 5th IEEE international conference on Fuzzy Systems, vol. 3, pp. 1579–1585 (1996)
McElreath, R.: Statistical Rethinking. CRC Press (2016)
McElreath, R.: Rethinking package (2017). https://github.com/rmcelreath/rethinking. Accessed 09 Dec 2020
Pask, G.: Conversation Theory. Elsevier, The Netherlands (1976)
Pearl, J.: Causality, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press (2009)
Pearl, J., Glymour, M., Jewell, N.P.: Causal Inference in Statistics, 1st edn. Wiley, Hoboken (2016)
Richards, C.: Boyd’s OODA loop. In: Proceedings of Lean Software and Systems Conference 2011, 127–136 (2011)
Robson, C.: Real World Research: A Resource for Users of Social Research Methods in Applied Settings, 3rd edn. Wiley, Chichester (2011)
Silvander, J.: Understanding human generated decision data. In: Shishkov, B. (ed.) BMSD 2020. Understanding Human Generated Decision Data, vol. 391, pp. 362–374. Springer, Cham (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-52306-0_26
Silvander, J., Angelin, L.: Introducing intents to the OODA loop. In: Knowledge-Based and Intelligent Information & Engineering Systems, pp. 878–883 (2019). Procedia Computer Science
Silvander, J., Wilson, M., Wnuk, K., Svahnberg, M.: Supporting continuous changes to business intents. Int. J. Softw. Eng. Knowl. Eng. 27(8), 1167–1198 (2017)
Silvander, J., Wnuk, K., Svahnberg, M.: Systematic literature review on intent-driven systems. IET Softw. 14(4), 345–357 (2020)
Simmons, E.: Requirements triage: what can we learn from a “medical approach? IEEE Softw. 21(4), 86–88 (2004)
Textor, J., van der Zander, B., Gilthorpe, M.S., Liśkiewicz, M., Ellison, G.T.: Robust causal inference using directed acyclic graphs: the R package ‘dagitty’. Int. J. Epidemiol. 45(6), 1887–1894 (2016)
Vaughan, D.: Analytic Skills for AI & Data Science. O’Reilly Media Inc (2020)
Wikipedia: C-reactive protein (2018). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/C-reactive_protein. Accessed 01 Apr 2021
Wikipedia: Johari window (2020). https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Johari_window. Accessed 30 Nov 2020
Yao, L., Chu, Z., Li, S., Li, Y., Gao, J., Zhang, A.: A survey on causal inference. arXiv 1(1), 1–38 (2020)
Zrake, J., MacFadyen, A., McEnery, J.E., Racusin, J.L., Gehrels, N.: Numerical simulations of driven supersonic relativistic MHD turbulence. Ann. Rev. Sociol. 22, 102–105 (2011)
Acknowledgement
To Anna for her patience, endurance, and thoughts, when forcing us to explain our ideas to her, and ourselves, in an understandable way.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 Springer Nature Switzerland AG
About this paper
Cite this paper
Silvander, J. (2021). On Context Frames and Their Implementations. In: Shishkov, B. (eds) Business Modeling and Software Design. BMSD 2021. Lecture Notes in Business Information Processing, vol 422. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79976-2_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-79976-2_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-030-79975-5
Online ISBN: 978-3-030-79976-2
eBook Packages: Computer ScienceComputer Science (R0)