Title : Introducing quantitative aspects for (basic) argumentation about ontology alignment.
| Presenter | Antoine Isaac |
| Abstract | Combining the output of several alignment tools is a crucial problem for ontology alignment technology. Extending on work that proposed preference-aware argumentation frameworks to deal with this problem, we have run a number of experiments with data from the National Libary of the Netherlands. We have especially investigated ways to consider quantitative aspects of aligner's outputs, either intrinsic (confidence levels) or extrinsic (consensus among mappers). I will introduce the approach we have turned to, present some results, and point at issues that arise when implementing the basics of an argumentation framework, for instance regarding the criteria to define whether an argument attacks another. |
Title : Agent-based and Population-based Simulation: A Comparative Case Study for Epidemics
| Presenter | Syed Waqar Jaffry |
| Abstract | This paper reports a comparative evaluation of population-based simulation in comparison to agent-based simulation for different numbers of agents. Population-based simulation, such as for example in the classical approaches to predator-prey modeling and modeling of epidemics, has computational advantages over agent-based modeling with large numbers of agents. Therefore the latter approaches can be considered useful only when the results are expected to deviate from the results of population-based simulation, and are considered more realistic. However, there is sometimes also a silent assumption that for larger numbers of agents, agent-based simulations approximate population-based simulations, which would indicate that agent-based simulation just can be replaced by population-based simulation. The work evaluates this assumption by a detailed comparative case study in epidemics. |
| Slides | Click on that link to get the slides |