Towards the use of argumentation in bioinformatics: A gene expression case study

Bioinformatics

Volumn 24, Issue 13, 2008, Pages

  McLeod, Kenneth ^a   Burger, Albert ^a,b  

^a HERIOT WATT UNIVERSITY   (United Kingdom)

^b UNIVERSITY OF EDINBURGH   (United Kingdom)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ARTICLE; BIOINFORMATICS; COMMUNICATION SOFTWARE; COMPUTER INTERFACE; GENE EXPRESSION; GENETIC DATABASE; HUMAN COMPUTER INTERACTION; INFORMATION PROCESSING; INFORMATION RETRIEVAL; MOUSE; NONHUMAN; PRIORITY JOURNAL; SEARCH ENGINE;

BIOINFORMATICS; ENGINES; INTELLIGENT SYSTEMS; MOLECULAR BIOLOGY; QUERY PROCESSING; SEARCH ENGINES;

ARGUMENTATION SYSTEMS; BIOINFORMATICS RESOURCES; BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES; INCONSISTENT DATA; QUERY RESULTS; THIRD PARTIES;

GENE EXPRESSION;

EID: 46249107574     PISSN: 13674803     EISSN: 13674811     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1093/bioinformatics/btn157     Document Type: Article

References (26)

1. ASPIC. (2004) Theoretical framework for argumentation, deliverable d2.1.
2. Baldock,R. and Davidson,D. (2008) In Anatomy Ontologies for Bioinformatics: Principles and Practise. The Edinburgh Mouse Atlas. Springer, Berlin, Germany.
3. Bateman,A. (2007) Editorial. Nucleic Acids Research, 35, (Database Issue), D1-D2.
4. Bench-Capon,T. and Prakken,H. (2006) Argumentation. In Information Technology & Lawyers: Advanced technology in the legal domain, from challenges to daily routine, Springer, Bertin/Heidelberg/New York. pp. 61-80.
5. Bratko,I. (2000) PROLOG Programming for Artificial Intelligence. Addison Wesley, Harlow, UK.
6. Carbogim,D.V. et al. (2000) Argument-based applications to knowledge engineering. Knowl. Eng. Rev., 15, 119-149.
7. Chesñevar,C. et al. (2006) Towards an argument interchange format. Knowl. Eng. Rev., 21, 293-316.
8. Davidson,D. et al. (1997) The mouse atlas and graphical gene-exprcssion database. Semin. Cell Dev. Biol., 8, 509-517.
9. Dung,P.M. (1995) On the acceptability of arguments and its fundamental role in nonmonotonic reasoning, logic programming and n-person games. Artif. Intell., 77, 321-358.
10. Fox,J. (2001) Rags: A novel approach to computerized genetic risk assessment and decision support from pedigrees. Methods Inform. Med. 4.
11. Glasspool,D.W. et al. (2006) Argumentation in decision support for medical care planning for patients and clinicians. In Bickmore,T and Green,N. (eds), Proceedings of AAAI Spring Symposium Series 2006 (AAAI Technical Report SS-06-01), AAAI Press, California, USA.
12. Gordon,T.F. (1993) The pleadings game: Formalizing procedural justice. In Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Artifical Intelligence and Law, ACM Press, New York, NY, USA, pp. 10-19.
13. Gordon,T.F. and Karacapilidis,N. (1997) The zeno argumentation framework. In Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Artifical Intelligence and Law, Melbome, Australia, ACM Press, pp. 10-18.
14. Hurt,C. et al. (2003) Computerised advice on drug dosage decisions in childhood leukaemia: A method and a safety strategy. In Dojat,M., Keravnou,E. and Barahona,P. (eds), Proceedings of the 9th Conference on Artificial Intelligence in Medicine in Europe. Berlin, Germany, Springer, pp. 158-163.
15. Jefferys,B.R. et al. (2006) Capturing expert knowledge with argumentation: A case study in bioinformatics. Bioinformatics, 22, 923-933.
16. McLeod,K. and Burger,A. (2007) Using argumentation to tackle inconsistency and incompleteness in online distributed life science resources. In Aes,N.G and Isafs,P. (eds), Proceedings of IADIS International Conference Applied Computing 2007, Salamanca, Spain. IADIS Press, pp. 489-492.
17. Motro,A. and Rakov,I. (1998) Estimating the quality of databases. In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Flexible Query Answering Systems, Roskilde, Denmark, Springer, pp. 298-307.
18. Naumann,F. (1996) Quality-Driven Query Answering for Integrated Information Systems. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 2261. Springer, Berlin, Germany.
19. Pollock,J.L. (2002) Defeasible reasoning with variable degrees of justification. Artif. Intell., 1-2, 232-282.
20. Rahwan,I. and Amgoud,L. (2006) An argumentation-based approach for practical reasoning. In Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems, Hakodate, Japan, ACM Press, pp. 347-354.
21. Reed,C. and Rowe,G (2001) Araucaria: Software for puzzles in argument diagramming and XML. Technical Report, Department of Applied Computing, University of Dundee, Dundee, Scotland, UK.
22. Ringwald,M. et al. (2001) The mouse gene expression database (GXD). Nucleic Acids Res., 29, 98-101.
23. Walton,D. (1996a) Appeal to Expert Opinion: Arguments fmm Authority Penn State University Press, PA. USA.
24. Walton,D. (1996b) Argumentation Schemes for Presumptive Reasoning (Studies in Argumentation Series). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Mawah, NJ, USA.
25. Williams,M. and Williamson,J. (2006) Combining argumentation and Bayesian nets for breast cancer prognosis. J. Log. Lang. Inform., 15, 155-178.
26. Wolstencroft,K. et al. (2005) A little semantic web goes a long way in biology. In Proceedings of the 4th International Semantic Web Conference. Galway, Ireland, pp. 786-800.