Re: [okmds-convene] Definition of Decision Support

["Phil Murray" <pcmurray2000@xxxxxxxxx>]

Ken --

 

Excellent way to start the discussion. I agree with everything you propose, but -- especially given the Project's broad goals ("The need to effectively administer 'knowledge space' to yield meaningful connections that are scalable and sustainable is a strategic challenge of all institutions, whether that knowledge resides primarily within, outside, or across an institution's span of control.") -- I would add some perspective and points of emphasis. My comments are interspersed, below.

On Jan 1, 2008 12:16 AM, Ken Baclawski <kenb@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

 

KB> Welcome to the New Year!  I propose that the first "resolution" for the OKMDS community this year should be to examine the definition of decision support.
>
> It is easy enough to define "decision support system" to be a computer-based information system that supports decision making activities.  However, this says very little, since so many activities are related to decisions in some way.  As a result, decision support is a very broad concept, and there are many different kinds of system that are considered to be decision support systems. This may partly be due to the fact that decision making is a process.  A particular decision support system will usually be designed for and have an impact on only a few parts of the decision making process.  The decision making process has at least the following parts:
>
> 1. Acquire relevant background knowledge.  This could include other decisions.

 

I would emphasize the *discovery* aspects of knowledge acquisition.

 

And the "knowledge" discovered should be expressed in a way that is ...

 

-- Easily understood -- in a variety of contexts -- by a broad cross-section of participants.

 

-- Retrieved and managed predictably and easily by applications.

 

-- Encapsulated in such a way that the decisions (or, perhaps more broadly, the "assertions") can be referenced easily. (Also relevant to your point #2.)

 

>
> 2. Identify the alternatives from which a choice must be made.

 

Given the potentially very large set of assertions that could be contributed in an open community, we need to address the negative in a positive way -- that is, we need explicit ways to quickly evaluate any assertion as irrelevant. Separating the wheat from the chaff effectively is especially important when making important decisions.

 

>
> 3. Determine the criteria that should be used to distinguish the alternatives from one another (typically in the form of a value or utility for each alternative).
>
> 4. Select the best alternative.
>
Here's where the ambitious goals of the OKMDS community present a challenge, which you also address in points #1 and #2 of "managing the process," below.

 

Decision support (whether in the model of military situational awareness or in making decisions that reflect enterprise business strategy) typically involves a limited set of alternatives and a relatively small number of vetted participants. The "collaborative environment" of the OKMDS needs scalable methods and tools for evaluating assertions.

 

One of the first things we need is to have participants in this community help identify the strategies and technologies that most effectively enable distributed evaluation of a *large* set of alternatives. Of course, I'm not talking about a popularity contest. This isn't "American Idol." (Give yourself 5 culture points if you *don't* understand the reference.) Or Digg.

 

If John Sowa, Leo Obrst, Pat Hayes, or Ken Baclawski submits an evaluation of an assertion, that evaluation should be worth more than, well, mine. Is this where we get into some form of Social Network Analysis?

 

> Both knowledge management and ontologies can play a role in each of these parts.  They can also play a role in managing the process, such as:
>
> 1. Manage the process workflow in structured decision making processes.
>
> 2. Provide a collaboration environment for decision making.
>
> 3. Manage the documents associated with the process.

 

But, as noted above, not just the documents ... or multimedia. We also need to manage the decisions themselves.

 

>
> I suggest that this framework could be the starting point for a more in-depth discussion of decision support.
>
> Kenneth Baclawski
> College of Computer and Information Science Northeastern University

Thanks,

 

Phil Murray

Founding Member

The Center for Semantic Excellence http://www.semanticexcellence.org

 

_________________________________________________________________
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/okmds-convene/  
Subscribe: mailto:okmds-convene-join@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Config/Unsubscribe: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/okmds-convene/  
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/work/OKMDS/
http://ontolog.cim3.net/cgi-bin/wiki.pl?OKMDS 
To Post: mailto:okmds-convene@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx    (01)