VanLehn spends very little of his voluminous dissertation on demonstrating the coverage of his theory. Most of his effort goes into underlining its principled construction. First, he traces the performance of his model to a restricted set of sufficient principles, emphasizing that his design is transparent with respect to them. Second, he argues that these principles are necessary to the theory for empirical and explanatory adequacy by comparing them with potential competitors in what he calls competitive argumentation. In this context, it becomes essential to have well-defined processes by which modifications to the underlying principles propagate through the theory, via the kind of global constraints called entailments in REPAIR theory. VanLehn is now advocating his competitive argumentation as a general methodology for validating AI-based theories of human cognition (VanLehn et al., 1984). One of his central claims is that the contributions of a solid argumentation may well outlive the theory it was meant to support. 1, record 1, English, - competitive%20argumentation
Use this artificial intelligence prototype to translate Government of Canada content up to and including Protected B. Available to employees of selected departments and agencies only.
The Language Portal’s writing tools have a new look! Easy to consult, they give you access to a wealth
of information that will help you write better in English and French.
