The Role of Classification Trees and Expert Knowledge in Building Bayesian Networks: A Case Study in Medicine

2014 ◽  
Vol 43 (4) ◽  
pp. 839-850
Author(s):  
L. Stracqualursi ◽  
P. Agati
2019 ◽  
Vol 11 (18) ◽  
pp. 5021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Zhaobo Chen ◽  
Gangzhu Qiao ◽  
Jianchao Zeng

Unsafe behaviours, such as violations of rules and procedures, are commonly identified as important causal factors in coal mine accidents. Meanwhile, a recurring conclusion of accident investigations is that worker states, such as mental fatigue, illness, physiological fatigue, etc., are important contributory factors to unsafe behaviour. In this article, we seek to provide a quantitative analysis on the relationship between the worker state and unsafe behaviours in coal mine accidents, based on a case study drawn from Chinese practice. Using Bayesian networks (BN), a graphical structure of the network was designed with the help of three experts from a coal mine safety bureau. In particular, we propose a verbal versus numerical fuzzy probability assessment method to elicit the conditional probability of the Bayesian network. The junction tree algorithm is further employed to accomplish this analysis. According to the BN established by expert knowledge, the results show that when the worker is in a poor state, the most vulnerable unsafe behaviour is violation, followed by decision-making error. Furthermore, insufficient experience may be the most significant contributory factor to unsafe behaviour, and poor fitness for duty may be the principal state that causes unsafe behaviours.


2021 ◽  
pp. 1-16
Author(s):  
Eugénia C. Heldt ◽  
Lisa Herzog

Abstract Recent discussions of accountability in contexts of expert knowledge raise questions about the limits of transparency. Against this background, we discuss the nexus between expert knowledge and meaningful accountability – that is, context-sensitive accountability based on a genuine understanding of a situation. We argue that the concentration of expertise in certain institutions makes it difficult to hold those institutions accountable. In particular, three components challenge meaningful accountability: specialization, inaccessibility and potential biases or conflict of interest. We emphasize the role of ‘epistemic communities’ and their impact on the tension between expert knowledge and independence. Drawing on the deliberative systems literature, we discuss how expert knowledge might be communicated to outsiders to enable meaningful accountability. To illustrate our argument, we draw on the European Central Bank, a case study in which states have chosen a delegation design characterized by a high degree of independence and trust in expert knowledge, to the detriment of accountability. We sketch possible avenues for creating the conditions for meaningful accountability even in the case of institutions with highly concentrated expertise.


2021 ◽  
pp. 097152312098732
Author(s):  
Huma Siddiqi

Pakistan is a fragile democracy repeatedly facing problems in the design and implementation of police reforms. The scholarship on public policy highlights the role of non-state actors like NGOs in improving policies, especially through policy transfer and diffusion. In 2002, Pakistan designed a police reform, PO 2002, through collaborative methods, and implemented it nationwide for a short time. Using process tracing within case study and interviews with key informants, this article evaluates the role of domestic NGOs in the design, implementation and change of PO 2002, with special focus on policy transfer and policy diffusion. The evidence collected showed that in 2000, the nascent NGOs lacked expert knowledge to make any contribution to policy transfer. Later, their absence from the implementation phase and faulty methods blinded them from unveiling the critical policy lessons and impeded their ability to play any credible role in future policy diffusion.


2018 ◽  
Vol 18 (2) ◽  
pp. 237-259
Author(s):  
Esin Özdemir

This article discusses the relationship between the expert knowledge and the prospects of politicizing and democratizing urban planning. The term ‘experts’ refers mainly to urban planners, yet also includes architects, engineers and lawyers, who are specialized in planning. The article begins with a review of the critical literature on communicative planning, agonistic pluralism, agonistic planning and discussions on what needs to be done in planning focusing on the role of the expert knowledge. It argues that expert knowledge can gain different and multi-dimensional roles in urban planning processes, leading not necessarily to techno-management, yet contributing in their inclusiveness and conflict sensitivity. Encompassing both technical support and objective intermediation for local communities, it can both be utilized to build an agonistic space and help the communities better utilize the existing communicative/collaborative channels to voice their disagreements. By this way, it contributes in the politicization and democratization of planning processes. With this argument, the article also aims to challenge the strict distinction between ‘the politics’ and ‘the political’ as well as the related communicative–agonistic divide. The argument is supported by evidence from a case study on two informally built residential neighbourhoods in Istanbul, where there has been an active citizen opposition and involvement in a planning process.


1987 ◽  
Author(s):  
William A. Worrall ◽  
Ann W. Stockman

2019 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Robert M. Anderson ◽  
Amy M. Lambert

The island marble butterfly (Euchloe ausonides insulanus), thought to be extinct throughout the 20th century until re-discovered on a single remote island in Puget Sound in 1998, has become the focus of a concerted protection effort to prevent its extinction. However, efforts to “restore” island marble habitat conflict with efforts to “restore” the prairie ecosystem where it lives, because of the butterfly’s use of a non-native “weedy” host plant. Through a case study of the island marble project, we examine the practice of ecological restoration as the enactment of particular norms that define which species are understood to belong in the place being restored. We contextualize this case study within ongoing debates over the value of “native” species, indicative of deep-seated uncertainties and anxieties about the role of human intervention to alter or manage landscapes and ecosystems, in the time commonly described as the “Anthropocene.” We interpret the question of “what plants and animals belong in a particular place?” as not a question of scientific truth, but a value-laden construct of environmental management in practice, and we argue for deeper reflexivity on the part of environmental scientists and managers about the social values that inform ecological restoration.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document