A Probabilistic Analysis of the Sacco and Vanzetti Evidence

Kadane, Joseph B.; Schum, David A.

doi:10.1002/9781118150580

Cited by 54 publications

(73 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…The fact that the Bayesian framework has, by now, seen considerable application in real world contexts would seem to address that concern. To name just some particularly pertinent examples, Kadane and Schum (1996) provide a (heroic) reconstruction of the entire body of evidence in the famous Sacco and Vanzetti trial in Bayesian terms. Moreover, the Bayesian Belief Networks they construct allow them also to evaluate what would change under alternative assignments of probabilities, and thus to determine how sensitive conclusions are to the exact numbers assumed ('sensitivity analysis').…”

Section: Dialectical Validity (Dv) a Statement Meets This Standard Ifmentioning

confidence: 99%

A normative framework for argument quality: argumentation schemes with a Bayesian foundation

Hahn

Hornikx

2015

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

In this paper, it is argued that the most fruitful approach to developing normative models of argument quality is one that combines the argumentation scheme approach with Bayesian argumentation. Three sample argumentation schemes from the literature are discussed: the argument from sign, the argument from expert opinion, and the appeal to popular opinion. Limitations of the scheme-based treatment of these argument forms are identified and it is shown how a Bayesian perspective may help to overcome these. At the same time, the contributions of the standard scheme-based approach are highlighted, and it is argued that only a combination of the insights of different traditions will yield a complete normative theory of argument quality.

show abstract

Section: Dialectical Validity (Dv) a Statement Meets This Standard Ifmentioning

confidence: 99%

A normative framework for argument quality: argumentation schemes with a Bayesian foundation

Hahn

Hornikx

2015

Synthese

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In this approach, the conflicts among data values coming from different systems is handled by measuring the credibility of every user model statement. Indeed, moving from the theory of evidence (Kadane and Schum 1996), the system which retrieves the user model data from a provider computes the credibility of both the data and of the provider of the data. Credibility is assessed by exploiting a description of the context of the provider system as well as a description of every piece of user model data.…”

Section: Merging the Collected Datamentioning

confidence: 99%

User model interoperability: a survey

Carmagnola

Cena

Gena

2011

User Model User-Adap Inter

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Nowadays a large number of user-adaptive systems has been developed. Commonly, the effort to build user models is repeated across applications and domains, due to the lack of interoperability and synchronization among user-adaptive systems. There is a strong need for the next generation of user models to be interoperable, i.e. to be able to exchange user model portions and to use the information that has been exchanged to enrich the user experience. This paper presents an overview of the wellestablished literature dealing with user model interoperability, discussing the most representative work which has provided valuable solutions to face interoperability issues. Based on a detailed decomposition and a deep analysis of the selected work, we have isolated a set of dimensions characterizing the user model interoperability process along which the work has been classified. Starting from this analysis, the paper presents some open issues and possible future deployments in the area.

show abstract

“…Graphical probability models for the combination of evidence have, in the general context of fact analysis, been studied in [32]. An application to a famous criminal case has been provided in [33]. With the exception of [6], studies on the combination of scientific evidence in forensic science are much rarer.…”

Section: Beyond Evaluation Of Single Items Of Evidencementioning

confidence: 99%

“…Roughly speaking, in a range of fire evaluation the firearm specialist may examine the distribution pattern of www.elsevier.com/locate/forsciint Forensic Science International 163 (2006) [18][19][20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28][29][30][31][32][33] certain gunshot residues in the area of the entrance hole. It is thought that for a given weapon and ammunition, there is a dependence between the distribution of GSR and the distance from which the firearm was discharged [1].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%