关于知识推理的几种常用不精确推理模型的探讨

本文对常用几种的不精确推理模型作了初略的评述，并对这几种不精确推理模型的性能作出比较，从而得出它们的优点和缺点。     

智能PID控制器及应用

本文从模糊逻辑、神经网络、专家系统三个方面介绍几种智能PID控制器的结构及应用。     

注册会计师侵权责任刍议

注册会计师侵权责任系专家责任之一 ,其责任构成应符合一般侵权责任构成的要求。就我国目前实际情况而言 ,其赔偿责任应有所限制     

一种ANN与ES功能互补的故障诊断方法

根据人工神经网络（ＡＮＮ）和专家系统（ＥＳ）的各自特点，建立一种人工神经网络与专家系统相结合的功能互补式设备故障诊断模型。提出将设备故障分为低层故障和高层故障，用ＡＮＮ对设备低层故障进行诊断，用ＥＳ对设备高层故障进行诊断的新方法，并以ＭＫ９－５卷接机组为对象，进行了实验研究，取得了较好的效果。     

Risk Perception in the U.K. Oil and Gas Production Industry: Are Expert Loss‐Prevention Managers' Perceptions Different From Those of Members of the Public?

This article investigates potential differences in risk perception between experts (loss-prevention managers in the U.K. oil and gas production industry) and nonexperts (managers and students). Extant research on expert versus nonexpert perceptions of risk is reviewed, followed by the present study concerning risk perceptions of seven pen-picture scenarios involving the occurrence of hazardous events in the U.K. oil and gas production industry. In contrast to many of the earlier studies of expert versus nonexpert perceptions of risk, the present analysis concludes that experts did not judge the overall riskiness of the portrayed hazardous events as less risky than the nonexperts. Nevertheless, the experts believe more strongly than our nonexperts that the risks portrayed in the scenarios pose little threat to future generations, are more precisely known, and are relatively controllable. Use of multiple regression analysis to help uncover the basis of overall riskiness assessments for expert and lay respondents was inconclusive, however. Finally, little evidence was found that nonexperts were any more heterogeneous in their risk perceptions than experts. It may be that the nature of the risks assessed in the present study may account for the general lack of clear expert versus nonexpert differences in overall perceptions of the riskiness of hazardous events in the North Sea. Earlier findings of strong expert versus nonexpert differences in risk perception assessed hazards of major public concern. It is inferred that using such extreme hazards may have resulted in an exaggerated view of differences in expert versus public (nonexpert) perception of risk.     

Computer Assisted Decision Making

Summary

It is frequently argued that computerized decision support lends itself more easily to structured than to semi- or unstructured decisions. This paper discusses decision tasks of human service practitioners and surveys emerging research in decision theory and associated decision applications. It provides examples of an Information System, a Decision Support, and an Expert System, and examines under what conditions they can facilitate decision making in human services. A number of future issues and concerns are addressed, including ethical and legal questions, and computer literacy in human services education and practice.     

The Aggregation of Expert Judgment: Do Good Things Come to Those Who Weight?

Good policy making should be based on available scientific knowledge. Sometimes this knowledge is well established through research, but often scientists must simply express their judgment, and this is particularly so in risk scenarios that are characterized by high levels of uncertainty. Usually in such cases, the opinions of several experts will be sought in order to pool knowledge and reduce error, raising the question of whether individual expert judgments should be given different weights. We argue—against the commonly advocated “classical method”—that no significant benefits are likely to accrue from unequal weighting in mathematical aggregation. Our argument hinges on the difficulty of constructing reliable and valid measures of substantive expertise upon which to base weights. Practical problems associated with attempts to evaluate experts are also addressed. While our discussion focuses on one specific weighting scheme that is currently gaining in popularity for expert knowledge elicitation, our general thesis applies to externally imposed unequal weighting schemes more generally.     

试析刑事诉讼中的专家辅助人制度

在刑事诉讼过程中,专家辅助人是刑事控辩双方利益博弈,促进法庭严查案件事实,准确把握案件性质,最终形成公正合理的裁判结果的重要参与人。基于此,通过对刑事诉讼中专家辅助人制度基本概念的辨析,对当前法律就刑事诉讼中专家辅助人制度的立法规定及有关问题进行梳理,从规范刑事诉讼中专家辅助人资格选任,明确刑事诉讼中专家辅助人的权利与义务,确立刑事诉讼中专家辅助人诉讼参与程序,完善刑事诉讼中专家辅助人诉讼结果责任承担等方面提出了完善刑事诉讼中专家辅助人制度的应对之策。     

论大学学术同行评议中的利益冲突——以委托代理理论为视角

学术同行评议是一种涉及价值判断的评价活动,是对某项学术工作的水平或重要性的鉴定。从委托代理理论来看,大学学术同行评议形成了一种嵌套式的委托代理关系结构。同行评议委托代理关系中的博弈模型表明,评审管理机构与评议专家很有可能因各自私人利益产生冲突。大学学术同行评议利益冲突的产生,源于委代双方的信息不对称、激励不相容以及契约不完备。因此,增加信息成本以防范利益冲突的可能性、注重职业伦理的"软"约束力作用及建立以奖惩机制为基础的同行评议反评估制度是防范利益冲突问题的有效策略。     

A Delphi Method Expert Survey to Derive Standards for Flood Damage Data Collection

For the purpose of flood damage analyses reliable, comparable, comprehensive, consistent, and up-to-date data are an indispensable need. Like in many other countries a database with this kind of datasets does not exist in Germany. To establish it, standards have to be set for flood damage data collection. We approached this problem by questioning experts about their information needs for flood damage analysis. This survey is done by applying a Delphi survey approach. The aptitude of the Delphi approach to assess, structure, and standardize expert knowledge is evaluated in this article. In the survey a panel of 55 experts working in the field of flood damage analysis for insurances, engineering companies/consultancy, public water management, and universities and other scientific institutions helped to identify common information needs. The multi-step Delphi method proved to reduce the deviation of answers thereby enabling consensual results and also enhanced the quality by modifying group answers in the direction of experience based answers. There was also a high level of congruence in information needs between experts from different fields of employment that allowed the derivation of common standards.