Conflict analysis and information systems: A rough set approach

Lecture Notes in Computer Science (including subseries Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence and Lecture Notes in Bioinformatics)

Volumn 4062 LNAI, Issue , 2006, Pages 233-240

  Skowron, Andrzej ^a   Ramanna, Sheela ^b   Peters, James F ^c  

^a UNIVERSITY OF WARSAW   (Poland)

^b UNIVERSITY OF WINNIPEG   (Canada)

^c UNIVERSITY OF MANITOBA   (Canada)

Author keywords

Conflict; Conflict graph; Conflict resolution; Negotiation; Requirements engineering; Rough sets

Indexed keywords

ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE; COMPUTER SCIENCE; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; PROBLEM SOLVING; REQUIREMENTS ENGINEERING; UNCERTAIN SYSTEMS;

CONFLICT; CONFLICT GRAPH; CONFLICT RESOLUTION; NEGOTIATION;

ROUGH SET THEORY;

EID: 33746666540     PISSN: 03029743     EISSN: 16113349     Source Type: Book Series    
DOI: 10.1007/11795131_34     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (21)

1. Boehm, B., Grnbacher, P., Kepler, J.: Developing Groupware for Requirements Negotiation: Lessons Learned, IEEE Software, May/June (2001) 46-55.
2. Casti, J.L: Alternative Realities - Mathematical Models of Nature and Man, John Wiley and Sons (1989).
3. Cohene, T., Easterbrook, S.: Contextual risk analysis for interview design, Proc. 13th IEEE Int. Requirements Eng. Conference (RE'05), Paris (2005) 1-10.
4. Coombs, C.H., Avrunin, G.S.: The Structure of Conflict, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates (1988).
5. Curtis,B., Krasner, H., Iscoe, N.: A field study of the software design process for large systems, Communications of the ACM 31(11) (1988) 1268-1287.
6. Deja, R., Skowron, A.: On Some Conflict Models and Conflict Resolutions, Romanian Journal of Information Science and Technology 5(1-2) (2002) 69-82.
7. Easterbrook, S.: Handling Conflict between Domain Descriptions with Computer-Supported Negotiation, Knowledge Acquisition 3 (1991) 255-289.
8. Leffingwell, D. Widrig, D.: Managing Software Requirements, Addision-Wesley (2003).
9. Li, Z., Ruhe, G.: Uncertainty handling in Tabular-Based Requirements Using Rough Sets, LNAI 3642. Springer, Berlin (2005) 678-687.
10. Maeda, Y., Senoo, K., Tanaka, H.: Interval density function in conflict analysis, LNAI 1711, Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1999) 382-389.
11. Nakamura, A.: Conflict logic with degrees. In: S. K. Pal, A. Skowron (Eds.), Rough Fuzzy Hybridization: A New Trend in Decision-Making, Springer-Verlag (1999) 136-150.
12. Pawlak, Z.: On Conflicts, Int. J. of Man-Machine Studies 21 (1984) 127-134.
13. Pawlak, Z.: Rough Sets - Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Data, Kluwer Academic Publishers (1991).
14. Pawlak, Z.: An inquiry into anatomy of conflicts, Journal of Information Sciences, 109 (1998) 65-78.
15. Pawlak, Z., Skowron, A.: Rough Sets and Conflict Analysis. E-Service Intelligence, Series on Computational Intelligence, Springer. Berlin (2006) [to appear].
16. Peters, J.F., Ramanna, S.: Approximation Space for Software Models. In: J.F. Peters, A. Skowron (Eds.), Transactions on Rough Sets I: Journal Subline, LNCS 3100, Springer, Berlin (2004)338-354.
17. Peters, J.F., Ramanna, S.: Towards a software change classification system: A rough set approach. Software Quality Journal 11 (2003) 121-147.
18. Lai, G., Li, C., Sycara, K., Giampapa, J.: Literature review on multi-attribute negotiations, Technical Report CMU-RI-TR-04-66 (2004) 1-35.
19. Kowalski, R.: A logic-based approach to conflict resolution (2003) 1-28 [manuscript].
20. Kraus, S.: Strategic Negotiations in Multiagent Environments,The MIT Press (2001).
21. WINWIN Homepage at http://sunset.usc.edu/research/WINWIN