Explaining control strategies in problem solving

By B. Chandrasekaran, M. Tanner, J. Josephson. 1989

Subfields: Cognitive Science & Psychology

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Cognitive Science & Psychology

1. Tim Miller
2. Piers Douglas Lionel Howe
3. David Madigan
4. Liz Sonenberg

Citations in the corpus

• Explanation in Human-AI Systems: A Literature Meta-Review, Synopsis of Key Ideas and Publications, and Bibliography for Explainable AI (2019, neutral): “(Buchanan and Shortliffe, 1984a, 1984b; Chandrasekaran and Swartout, 1991; Chandrasekaran, Tanner, and Josephson, 1989; Clancey, 1983, 1984a, 1986a, 1992, 1993; Druzdzel, 1990; Druzdzel and Henrion, 1990; Ford et al., 1992; Gautier and Gruber, 1993; Goguen et al., 1983; Greer, Falk, Greer, and…”
• Explainable AI: Beware of Inmates Running the Asylum Or: How I Learnt to Stop Worrying and Love the Social and Behavioural Sciences (2017, background): “The term “explainable AI” has regained traction again recently, after being considered important in the 80s and 90s in expert systems particularly; see [Chandrasekaran et al. , 1989], [Swartout and Moore, 1993], and [Buchanan and Shortliffe, 1984].”
• Explanation in Artificial Intelligence: Insights from the Social Sciences (2017, neutral): “[23], [167], and Buchanan and Shortliffe [14].”
• A systematic review and taxonomy of explanations in decision support and recommender systems (2017, background): “A number of explanation taxonomies of different granularity levels has been proposed in the literature in the past (Ye and Johnson 1995; Chandrasekaran et al. 1989; Gregor and Benbasat 1999; Lacave and Díez 2002, 2004; Nakatsu 2006; Papadimitriou et al. 2012; Vig et al. 2009; Blanco et al. 2012; Fri”
• Explanation in Case-Based Reasoning–Perspectives and Goals (2005, background): “These explanations could be divided into four types (Swartout and Smoliar, 1987; Chandrasekaran et al., 1989; Gregor and Benbasat, 1999): – Reasoning Trace: Producing an explanation from the trace of the reasoning process used by the system to find the solution.”
• Reconstructive Expert System Explanation (1992, background): “Three core ideas have emerged from this work [2]:”
• Explainable Artificial Intelligence: Objectives, Stakeholders, and Future Research Opportunities (2020, background): “…was derived), type III, control or strategic (which explain the system’s control behavior and problem-solving strategy), and type IV, terminological (which supply definitional or terminological information) (Gregor & Benbasat, 1999, based on Chandrasekaran et al., 1989; Swartout & Smoliar, 1987).”
• A review of explanation methods for Bayesian networks (2002, background): “Other systems try to offer a simple but comprehensible report about the domain and the reasoning (Carolis et al ., 1996; Chandrasekaran et al ., 1989; Horvitz et al ., 1986; Langlotz et al ., 1988; Reggia & Perricone, 1985; Strat, 1987; Swartout, 1983; Wick & Slagle, 1989, Wick & Thompson, 1992).”
• Infusing domain knowledge in AI-based "black box" models for better explainability with application in bankruptcy prediction (2019, background): “Research in Explainable Artificial Intelligence is an emerging field, seeing a resurgence after three decades of slowed progress since the work of Chandrasekaran et al. [29], Swartout et al. [70], and Buchanan et al. [69].”
• Explanation and Argumentation Capabilities:Towards the Creation of More Persuasive Agents (2002, methodology): “Knowledge for explanation Reasoning systems can provide three types of explanation that are trace explanations, strategic explanations and deep explanations (Chandrasekaran et al. 1989; Southwick 1991).”
• A Grounded Interaction Protocol for Explainable Artificial Intelligence (2019, background): “Explaining decisions of intelligent systems has been a topic of interest since the era of expert systems, e.g. [8, 18].”
• Graphical Explanation in Belief Networks (1997, background): “Early tests of rule-based expert system models indicated the critical need for detailed explanations in that setting (Buchanan and Shortliffe, 1984; Barr and Feigenbaum, 1982; Coyne, 1990; Chandrasakaran, et al., 1989 ).”