战争设计工程中专家研讨的组织与共识达成方法研究
|
摘要
战争设计工程是一种对未来战争复杂系统进行分析与设计的工程化方法。战争设计工程的基本思路是综合集成各领域专家的智慧,采用定性与定量相结合的方法,对未来信息化战争的干预策略进行设计,为未来可能发生的战争提出装备与战法建设的决策建议。专家群体研讨是战争设计工程的重要组成部分,是实现专家群体智慧集成的重要方式。战争设计问题的解决主要采用专家集体研讨的方式,发挥人的创造性对干预策略进行设计。专家群体研讨贯穿了战争设计工程整个流程,从战争设计问题与目标的确定,到干预策略的设计等各个阶段都需要专家群体的协作研讨。因此,专家群体研讨是战争设计工程理论与方法研究的一个重要内容。
国内外学者对专家群体研讨展开了许多研究,但是某些方面的问题还需进行深入研究,例如如何设计研讨过程、专家群体如何在研讨中达成共识等。本文在相关研究成果的基础上,针对战争设计工程专家群体研讨的实际需求,结合战争设计的工程化特点,对战争设计工程专家群体研讨的组织与共识达成方法以及研讨信息的组织与分析展开研究。本文的研究不仅丰富了战争设计工程的基础理论,而且使得战争设计专家群体研讨更具操作性,有助于提高研讨的质量和效率,对于推动战争设计工程理论和方法的发展具有重要理论意义和实际价值。本文的主要贡献与创新如下:
首先,分析了战争设计工程专家群体研讨的概念和基本要素。在介绍战争设计工程基础理论的基础上,阐述了战争设计工程专家群体研讨的概念,给出了战争设计工程专家群体研讨的整体框架,论述了战争设计工程中专家群体研讨的基本要素,包括研讨主体、研讨对象、研讨的组织等,分析了系统工程师在战争设计工程专家群体研讨中的协助任务。
其次,提出了基于ThinkLet的战争设计规范研讨过程设计方法,并给出了面向战争设计工程专家研讨的ThinkLet。基于ThinkLet的研讨过程设计方法利用ThinkLet的概念将群体研讨交互方式、研讨行为规范和主持人的协助任务进行规范描述,将其作为规范研讨过程的基本构建模块。该方法是一种自上而下的模块化设计方法,首先根据研讨目标设计研讨活动序列,然后确定完成每个研讨活动的群体协作模式,最后根据协作模式选择合适的ThinkLet。ThinkLet序列构成了规范研讨过程。设计适合战争设计工程专家群体研讨的ThinkLet是该方法的基础。为此,分析了研讨过程中不良群体思维及其应对措施和群体研讨的有效互动形式,并结合战争设计工程专家群体研讨的特殊需求,给出了面向战争设计工程专家群体研讨的ThinkLet。在此基础上,利用提出的方法设计了战争设计工程中问题约束研讨和干预策略研讨的规范研讨过程。
第三,研究了基于语义关系的研讨信息组织模型及其分析技术。阐述了基于语义关系的研讨信息组织的基本思路、主要作用、应用方式和适用范围。基于语义关系的研讨信息组织模型是根据发言间的语义关系将研讨发言进行组织,其关键在于研讨发言的分类以及发言间语义关系的分析与定义。本文在分析研讨对话发言分类相关理论的基础上,结合战争设计工程中专家研讨发言的行为特征,定义了研讨发言类型和发言间的语义关系,给出了研讨信息组织模型的基本结构及其数学表示。本文提出的研讨信息组织模型是由提问发言节点、陈述发言节点和论证发言节点构成的研讨网络。在此基础上,研究了基于语义关系的研讨信息的分析与评价技术,包括关注程度评价、研讨充分程度评价、发言意见归类分析和研讨共识度评价。
第四,提出了基于辩论的共识达成方法。针对战争设计工程中专家群体共识达成的特点,提出了基于辩论的共识达成方法。基于辩论的共识达成方法是面向过程的方法,方法的基本步骤包括:1)意见分歧点的识别,2)引导专家群体针对意见分歧点展开辩论,3)确定分歧的观点、主张或意见是否被群体所接受,4)判断群体是否达成共识。针对方法的第二步和第三步,研究了群体辩论的形式描述模型,提出了一种扩展双极辩论框架,给出了可接受论证集的确定方法和判定分歧观点是否被群体接受的基本规则。
第五,案例研究。以获取制空权的战争设计为例,展示本文所给出的战争设计工程专家群体研讨的组织与共识达成方法以及研讨信息组织模型在战争设计工程中的具体应用。
War Design Engineering (WDE) is an engineering-method for analyzing anddesigning the future war complex system. The basic idea of WDE is to design thestrategies for future information war by integrating the wisdom of domain experts andutilizing combination quantitative and qualitative method, in order to propose thedevelopment advce of equipment and tactics for the war that be likely to happen in thefuture. Expert group discussion is the importance part of WDE, and is the importantorganizational form of expert wisdom synthesis. It is used to take up the expert groupdiscussiontosolvethewardesignproblemandtoinspireexpertscreativitytodesignthestrategies. The expert group discussion fills up the whole flow of WDE. Each stage oftheprocessofWDE,fromthestageofspecificationofwardesignquestionsandobjectstothedesignofstrategies ofequipment and tactics,needs the collaborational discussionof domain experts. So, the expert group discussion is an important research content ofthetheoriesandmethodsofWDE.
The scholars have done many researches about the expert group discussion. Butsome aspects of it need deep research, such as how to design the discussion process,how the expert group to reach consensus in the disucussion and etc. On the basis ofrelative research fruits, and aiming at the demand of expert discussion in WDE, andwiththeengineeringcharacteristicofwardesign, theorginazationmethodofdiscussion,the consensus reaching method and the structureing and analyisis of discussioninformation were researched in this paper. To research the above issues ont only enrichthe fundamental theory of WDE, but also enable the organizer or facilitator to organizeand manipulate discussion more easily. And it benefits the improvement of discussionquality and efficiency. The research has the theory signification and realistic value forpomotingthedevelopmentoftheoryandmethodofWDE.
Themaincontributionandinnovationofthispaperareasfollows:
Firstly, the concept and basic elements of expert group discussion in WDE wereanalyzed.OnthebasisofintroductionofthebasictheoryofWDE,theconceptofexpertgroupdiscussioninWDEwas addressed, andthe frameworkof expert groupdiscussionin WDE was given. After that, the fundamental elements of expert group discussion inWDE were addressed, including the subject of discussion, the object of discussion andtheorginizatoinofdiscussion,etc.ThefacilitationtasksofsystemengineerintheexpertgroupdiscussioninWDEwereanalyzed.
Secondly, the formal discussion process design method for WDE based onThinkLet was proposed, and the ThinkLets for the expert group discussion in WDEwere given. The proposed method utilizes the concept of ThinkLet to formally discribethe goup discussion interaction form, discussion behavior criterion and the facilitation task of facilitator as the basic construction block of formal discussion process. Theformal discussion process design method based on ThinkLet is a block-based designmethod from up to bottom which at first to design the sequence of discussion actionaccording to discussion object, and then to determine the group collaboration mode foreach discussion action and select proper ThinkLet according to the collaboration mode.The sequence of ThinkLets make up of the formal discussion process. The basis of thismethod is to design the proper ThinkLets for expert group discussion in WDE. For thispurpose, the think mode emerging in the group discussion and the effect interactivemodel of multi-realm expert were analyzed. On this basis, and with the specialrequirement of expert group discussion in WDE, the ThinkLets for expert gourpdiscussion in WDE were given. By using the proposed method and ThinkLets, theformal process of the discussion of war design question and the discussion of strategiesofequipmentandtacticsweredesigned.
Thirdly, the discussion information structuring model based on semantics relationand its analysis technique were researched. The basic theory issues of discussioninformation structuring mode based on semantics relation were addressed, includingbasic idea, main function and application scope. The discussion information structuringmodel based on semantics relation structures the discussion utterances based on thesematic relation between the utterances. On the basis of analyzingthe relative theoryofdialog utterance classification and the characteristic of speak action in the discussion ofWDE, the utterance types and semantics relations between them were defined in thispaper. And upon this work, the basic structure and mathematical representation ofdiscussion information structuring model were given. The discussion informationstructuring model proposed in this paper is a discussion network consisting of questionnode, statement node and argument node. On this basis, the analysis and evaluationtechniqueofdiscussioninformationbasedonsemanticsrelationisresearched,includingthe evaluation of focus degree, the evaluation of discussion enough degree, the analysisofopnionclassificationandtheevaluationofconsensusdegree.
Fourthly, the consensus reaching method based on argumentation was proposed,according to the characteristic of group consensus reaching in WDE. The consensusreaching method based on argumentation is a process-oriented method, which consistsof four steps, that is: 1) recongnization of opnion difference; 2) guid expert group toargue the opnion difference; 3) determine whether the view, claim or opnion acceptedby the expert groups; 4) judge whether the expert group reaching consensus. Aiming atthe step two and three, the formalization model group argumentation was researched,and a extened bipolar argumentation framework was proposed. The determinationmethod of accepted argument set was given. On this basis, the basic rule to determinetheopnionwhetheracceptedbygroupwasgiven.
Fifthly, a case was studied. The case of obtaining the air control right is analyzed todemonstrate heapp lication of the organization and theconsensusrea chingme thodinWDE and discussion in for mationstructuring model for WDE porposed in thepaper.
国内外学者对专家群体研讨展开了许多研究,但是某些方面的问题还需进行深入研究,例如如何设计研讨过程、专家群体如何在研讨中达成共识等。本文在相关研究成果的基础上,针对战争设计工程专家群体研讨的实际需求,结合战争设计的工程化特点,对战争设计工程专家群体研讨的组织与共识达成方法以及研讨信息的组织与分析展开研究。本文的研究不仅丰富了战争设计工程的基础理论,而且使得战争设计专家群体研讨更具操作性,有助于提高研讨的质量和效率,对于推动战争设计工程理论和方法的发展具有重要理论意义和实际价值。本文的主要贡献与创新如下:
首先,分析了战争设计工程专家群体研讨的概念和基本要素。在介绍战争设计工程基础理论的基础上,阐述了战争设计工程专家群体研讨的概念,给出了战争设计工程专家群体研讨的整体框架,论述了战争设计工程中专家群体研讨的基本要素,包括研讨主体、研讨对象、研讨的组织等,分析了系统工程师在战争设计工程专家群体研讨中的协助任务。
其次,提出了基于ThinkLet的战争设计规范研讨过程设计方法,并给出了面向战争设计工程专家研讨的ThinkLet。基于ThinkLet的研讨过程设计方法利用ThinkLet的概念将群体研讨交互方式、研讨行为规范和主持人的协助任务进行规范描述,将其作为规范研讨过程的基本构建模块。该方法是一种自上而下的模块化设计方法,首先根据研讨目标设计研讨活动序列,然后确定完成每个研讨活动的群体协作模式,最后根据协作模式选择合适的ThinkLet。ThinkLet序列构成了规范研讨过程。设计适合战争设计工程专家群体研讨的ThinkLet是该方法的基础。为此,分析了研讨过程中不良群体思维及其应对措施和群体研讨的有效互动形式,并结合战争设计工程专家群体研讨的特殊需求,给出了面向战争设计工程专家群体研讨的ThinkLet。在此基础上,利用提出的方法设计了战争设计工程中问题约束研讨和干预策略研讨的规范研讨过程。
第三,研究了基于语义关系的研讨信息组织模型及其分析技术。阐述了基于语义关系的研讨信息组织的基本思路、主要作用、应用方式和适用范围。基于语义关系的研讨信息组织模型是根据发言间的语义关系将研讨发言进行组织,其关键在于研讨发言的分类以及发言间语义关系的分析与定义。本文在分析研讨对话发言分类相关理论的基础上,结合战争设计工程中专家研讨发言的行为特征,定义了研讨发言类型和发言间的语义关系,给出了研讨信息组织模型的基本结构及其数学表示。本文提出的研讨信息组织模型是由提问发言节点、陈述发言节点和论证发言节点构成的研讨网络。在此基础上,研究了基于语义关系的研讨信息的分析与评价技术,包括关注程度评价、研讨充分程度评价、发言意见归类分析和研讨共识度评价。
第四,提出了基于辩论的共识达成方法。针对战争设计工程中专家群体共识达成的特点,提出了基于辩论的共识达成方法。基于辩论的共识达成方法是面向过程的方法,方法的基本步骤包括:1)意见分歧点的识别,2)引导专家群体针对意见分歧点展开辩论,3)确定分歧的观点、主张或意见是否被群体所接受,4)判断群体是否达成共识。针对方法的第二步和第三步,研究了群体辩论的形式描述模型,提出了一种扩展双极辩论框架,给出了可接受论证集的确定方法和判定分歧观点是否被群体接受的基本规则。
第五,案例研究。以获取制空权的战争设计为例,展示本文所给出的战争设计工程专家群体研讨的组织与共识达成方法以及研讨信息组织模型在战争设计工程中的具体应用。
War Design Engineering (WDE) is an engineering-method for analyzing anddesigning the future war complex system. The basic idea of WDE is to design thestrategies for future information war by integrating the wisdom of domain experts andutilizing combination quantitative and qualitative method, in order to propose thedevelopment advce of equipment and tactics for the war that be likely to happen in thefuture. Expert group discussion is the importance part of WDE, and is the importantorganizational form of expert wisdom synthesis. It is used to take up the expert groupdiscussiontosolvethewardesignproblemandtoinspireexpertscreativitytodesignthestrategies. The expert group discussion fills up the whole flow of WDE. Each stage oftheprocessofWDE,fromthestageofspecificationofwardesignquestionsandobjectstothedesignofstrategies ofequipment and tactics,needs the collaborational discussionof domain experts. So, the expert group discussion is an important research content ofthetheoriesandmethodsofWDE.
The scholars have done many researches about the expert group discussion. Butsome aspects of it need deep research, such as how to design the discussion process,how the expert group to reach consensus in the disucussion and etc. On the basis ofrelative research fruits, and aiming at the demand of expert discussion in WDE, andwiththeengineeringcharacteristicofwardesign, theorginazationmethodofdiscussion,the consensus reaching method and the structureing and analyisis of discussioninformation were researched in this paper. To research the above issues ont only enrichthe fundamental theory of WDE, but also enable the organizer or facilitator to organizeand manipulate discussion more easily. And it benefits the improvement of discussionquality and efficiency. The research has the theory signification and realistic value forpomotingthedevelopmentoftheoryandmethodofWDE.
Themaincontributionandinnovationofthispaperareasfollows:
Firstly, the concept and basic elements of expert group discussion in WDE wereanalyzed.OnthebasisofintroductionofthebasictheoryofWDE,theconceptofexpertgroupdiscussioninWDEwas addressed, andthe frameworkof expert groupdiscussionin WDE was given. After that, the fundamental elements of expert group discussion inWDE were addressed, including the subject of discussion, the object of discussion andtheorginizatoinofdiscussion,etc.ThefacilitationtasksofsystemengineerintheexpertgroupdiscussioninWDEwereanalyzed.
Secondly, the formal discussion process design method for WDE based onThinkLet was proposed, and the ThinkLets for the expert group discussion in WDEwere given. The proposed method utilizes the concept of ThinkLet to formally discribethe goup discussion interaction form, discussion behavior criterion and the facilitation task of facilitator as the basic construction block of formal discussion process. Theformal discussion process design method based on ThinkLet is a block-based designmethod from up to bottom which at first to design the sequence of discussion actionaccording to discussion object, and then to determine the group collaboration mode foreach discussion action and select proper ThinkLet according to the collaboration mode.The sequence of ThinkLets make up of the formal discussion process. The basis of thismethod is to design the proper ThinkLets for expert group discussion in WDE. For thispurpose, the think mode emerging in the group discussion and the effect interactivemodel of multi-realm expert were analyzed. On this basis, and with the specialrequirement of expert group discussion in WDE, the ThinkLets for expert gourpdiscussion in WDE were given. By using the proposed method and ThinkLets, theformal process of the discussion of war design question and the discussion of strategiesofequipmentandtacticsweredesigned.
Thirdly, the discussion information structuring model based on semantics relationand its analysis technique were researched. The basic theory issues of discussioninformation structuring mode based on semantics relation were addressed, includingbasic idea, main function and application scope. The discussion information structuringmodel based on semantics relation structures the discussion utterances based on thesematic relation between the utterances. On the basis of analyzingthe relative theoryofdialog utterance classification and the characteristic of speak action in the discussion ofWDE, the utterance types and semantics relations between them were defined in thispaper. And upon this work, the basic structure and mathematical representation ofdiscussion information structuring model were given. The discussion informationstructuring model proposed in this paper is a discussion network consisting of questionnode, statement node and argument node. On this basis, the analysis and evaluationtechniqueofdiscussioninformationbasedonsemanticsrelationisresearched,includingthe evaluation of focus degree, the evaluation of discussion enough degree, the analysisofopnionclassificationandtheevaluationofconsensusdegree.
Fourthly, the consensus reaching method based on argumentation was proposed,according to the characteristic of group consensus reaching in WDE. The consensusreaching method based on argumentation is a process-oriented method, which consistsof four steps, that is: 1) recongnization of opnion difference; 2) guid expert group toargue the opnion difference; 3) determine whether the view, claim or opnion acceptedby the expert groups; 4) judge whether the expert group reaching consensus. Aiming atthe step two and three, the formalization model group argumentation was researched,and a extened bipolar argumentation framework was proposed. The determinationmethod of accepted argument set was given. On this basis, the basic rule to determinetheopnionwhetheracceptedbygroupwasgiven.
Fifthly, a case was studied. The case of obtaining the air control right is analyzed todemonstrate heapp lication of the organization and theconsensusrea chingme thodinWDE and discussion in for mationstructuring model for WDE porposed in thepaper.
引文
[1] Alberts D S, Czerwinski T J. Complexity,Global Politics, and National Security[R]DTICDocument,1997.http://handle.dtic.mil/100.2/ADA460550.pdf.
[2] Palmore J I. Warfare Analysis and Complexity Mini-Symposium [R] MilitaryOperationsResearchSociety,1999.
[3] 269次香山科学会议组委会. 269次香山科学会议综述[EB/OL].http://159.226.97.16/ReadBrief.aspx?ItemID=383, 2005-11-20/2011-09-15.2005.
[4]赵存如,李宁,王维.战争复杂性与军事系统工程——军事系统工程专业委员会第十六届学术年会研讨成果综述[J].军事运筹与系统工程, 2006,20(4):70-73.
[5] Durham S E. Chaos Theory for the Practical Military Mind [EB/OL].http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.33.3486&rep=rep1&type=pdf,2011-08-15/2011-09-15.
[6] Beckerman L P. The Nonlinear Dynamics of War [EB/OL].http://belisarius.com/modern_business_strategy/beckerman/non_linear.htm,2011-09-15.1999.
[7]牛庆银.非线性动力系统在综合军事实力中的应用[D].北京:装备兵工程学院,2002.
[8]张金春,李彪,刘景权.自组织理论在军事系统中的应用[J].系统工程与电子技术,2002,24(5):11-13.
[9]马龙,柳少军.组织决策过程及其涌现性研究[J].系统仿真学报, 2003,15(12):1687-1690.
[10] Darbyshire P, Abbass H. A Prototype Design for Studying Emergent BattleField Behavior through Multi-Agent Simulation [C].// The FourthJapan-Australia Joint Workshop on Intelligent and Evolutionary Systems.Hayama-machi,Japan,2000.
[11] Yaneer B-Y. Complexity of Military Conflict: Multi-scale Complex SystemsAnalysis of Littoral Warfare [EB/OL].http://necsi.edu/projects/yaneer/SSG_NECSI_3_Litt.pdf,2011-09-15.2003.
[12] Ilachinski A. Irreducible Semi-Autonomous Adaptive Combat (ISAAC): AnArtificial-Life Approach to Land Warfare [J]. Military Operations Research,1997(5):29-46.
[13] Ilachinski A. Enhanced ISAAC Neural Simulation Toolkit (Einstein): AnArtificial-Life Laboratory for Exploring Self-organized Emergence in LandCombat [EB/OL]. http://www.cna.org/isaac/einstein_users_guide_beta.pdf,2011-09-15.
[14] Bajaj C, Chaturvedi A R, Mehta S R. The SEAS Environment [R] Institute forDefenseAnalysis,1998.
[15] Dean R J. Warfare Analysis Laboratory 2000 [J]. Johns Horkings APLTechnicalDigest,2000,21(2):231-237.
[16]司光亚,胡晓峰.战略决策模拟环境中XOD综合集成机制的研究与实现[J].小型微型计算机系统,2002,23(2):243-246.
[17]胡晓峰,司光亚,吴琳,黄谦.SDS2000:一个定性定量结合的战略决策综合集成研讨与模拟环境[J].系统仿真学报,2000,12(6):595-599.
[18]常显奇,李元左,刘曙云,姜振东,李祥,齐小刚.空间军事系统综合集成研讨厅内容体系的研究与建设[J].系统工程理论与实践, 2001, 21(6):86-90.
[19]王斌,常显奇,李元左.空间军事系统综合集成研讨厅体系概念研究[J].装备指挥技术学院学报,2003,14(1):1-4.
[20]赵晓哲,郭锐.军事系统研究的综合集成方法[J].系统工程理论与实践,2004,23(10):127-131.
[21]沙基昌.复杂巨系统与战争设计工程[C].//军事运筹学会2005会议论文集“一体化联合作战与军事运筹研究”,2005:3-11.
[22]胡晓峰.战争复杂性与信息化战争模拟[J].系统仿真学报, 2006, 18(12):3572-3580.
[23]沙基昌,毛赤龙,陈超.战争设计工程[M].北京:科学出版社,2009.
[24]沙基昌,毛赤龙,吴永波,陈超.战争设计工程技术研究[J].系统工程理论与实践,2005,25(6):66-70.
[25]陈超.战争设计工程中群体专家智慧集成研究[D].长沙:国防科学技术大学博士学位论文,2007.
[26]李耀东.综合集成研讨厅设计与实现中的若干问题研究[D].北京:中国科学院自动化研究所,2003.
[27]黄丽宁,张朋柱.任务导向的群体决策研讨环节探讨[J].山西高等学校社会科学学报,2004,16(2):46-48.
[28]黄丽宁,张鹏翥.网络环境下开放式群体决策的研讨过程[J].西安工程科技学院学报,2003,17(3):265-268.
[29] Zhang P, Sun J, Chen H. Frame-based Argumentation for Group Decision TaskGeneration and Identification [J]. Decision Support Systems, 2005, 39(4):643-659.
[30]邓辉,孙景乐,张朋柱,李树荣.决策任务结构化的群体研讨过程和模式[J].系统管理学报,2008,17(5):572-576.
[31] Kavadias S, Sommer S C. The Effects of Problem Structure and Team Diversityon Brainstorming Effectiveness [J]. Management Science, 2009, 55(2):1899-1913.
[32] Linstone H A, Turoff M. The Delphi Method Techniques and Applications [M],2002.
[33] Delbecq A L, Van de Ven A H, Gustafson D H. Group Techniques for ProgramPlanning: A Guide to Nominal Group and Delphi Processes [M]. Glenview, IL:Scott.Foresman,1975.
[34]彼得?圣吉(著).第五项修炼:学习型组织的艺术与实务[M].郭进隆(译).上海:上海三联书店,1998.
[35] Paulus P B, Brown V R. Toward More Creative and Innovative Group IdeaGeneration: A Cognitive-Social-Motivational Perspective of Brainstorming [J].SocialandPersonalityPsychologyCompass,2007,1(1):248-265.
[36] Litchfield R C. Brainstorming Rules as Assigned Goals: Does BrainstormingReallyImproveIdeaQuantity?[J].MotivationandEmotion,2008,33(1):25-31.
[37] Rietzschel E F, Nijstad B A, Stroebe W. Productivity is not Enough: AComparison of Interactive and Nominal Brainstorming Groups on IdeaGeneration and Selection [J]. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2006,42(2):244-251.
[38] Michinov N, Primois C. Improving Productivity and Creativity in OnlineGroups through Social Comparison Process: New Evidence for AsynchronousElectronic Brainstorming [J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2005, 21(1):11-28.
[39] Paulus P B, Brown V R. Enhancing Ideational Creativity in Groups: Lessonsfrom Research on Brainstorming [A], Paulus P B and Nijstad B A (eds.). Groupcreativity: Innovation through collaboration[M]. New York: Oxford UniversityPress,2003:110-136.
[40] Diehl M, Stroebe W. Productivity Loss in Brainstorming Groups: Toward theSolutionofaRiddle[J].JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,1987,53:497-509.
[41]孙东川,朱桂龙(编著).系统工程基本教程[M].北京:科学出版社,2010:72-76.
[42] Moon T, Vencel L, Warne L, Ali I, Bopping D. Structuring, Organising andRunning Meetings to Distil the Best Advice from Subject Matter Experts [R].DSTO-CR-0326 Edinburgh South Australia: DSTO Information SciencesLaboratory2003.
[43]经理人培训项目组.人力资源工具箱[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2006.
[44] Party G. Consensus Process for Facilitated Meetings [EB/OL].http://stuact.tamu.edu/stuorgs/greens/resources/FacilitatedMeetings.html.2003.
[45] Gorman G E, Clayton P. Qualitative Research for the Information Professional:APracticalHandbook[M].London:LibraryAssociationPublishing,1997.
[46] Phillips L D. Decision conferencing [C].// CSCW: Some Fundamental Issues,IEEColloquiumon,1991:6/1-6/3.
[47]毛赤龙.装备与战法集成分析方法[D].长沙:国防科学技术大学博士学位论文,2008.
[48]戴汝为,操龙兵.综合集成研讨厅的研制[J].管理科学学报, 2002, 5(3):10-16.
[49]孙景乐,张朋柱.一种互补的研讨框架的设计与实现[J].系统工程学报,2001,16(5):360-365.
[50]吕志坚.综合集成研讨厅中的专家研讨与思维研究[D].北京:中国科学院自动化研究所,2004.
[51]崔霞.群体智慧在综合集成研讨厅体系中的涌现[J].系统仿真学报, 2003,15(1):146-153.
[52]崔霞. HWME中基于学习型组织的专家有效互动对话模型[J].管理科学学报,2004,7(2):80-87.
[53]王丹力,戴汝为.综合集成研讨厅体系中专家群体行为的规范[J].管理科学学报,2001,4(2):1-6.
[54]李耀东,崔霞,戴汝为.综合集成研讨厅的理论框架、设计与实现[J].复杂系统与复杂性科学,2004,1(1):27-32.
[55] SantanenE L. Resolving Ideation Paradoxes: SeeingApples as Oranges throughthe Clarity of ThinkLets [C].// Proceedings of the 38th Annual HawaiiInternationalConferenceonSystemSciences(HICSS'05),2005.
[56] Karacapilidis N, Papadias D. Computer Supported Argumentation andCollaborativeDecisionMaking:TheHERMESSystem[J].InformationSystems,2001,26(4):259-277.
[57] Bui T X, Bodart F, Ma P-c. ARBAS: a Formal Language to SupportArgumentation in Network-based Organizations [J]. Journal of ManagementInformationSystems,1997,14(3):223-237.
[58] Bodart F, Tung B, Melard P, Vanreusel J F. ARBAS'96: A System ForArgumentation Support And Organizational Memory [C].// Proceedings of theThirtieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1997, vol.2:524-532
[59] Nakamura S, Watanabe M, Hazeyama A, Yokoyama S, Miyadera Y. ADiscussion Model for System Design Novices [A], Lovrek I, Howlett R J andJain L C (eds.). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Knowledge-BasedIntelligent Information and Engineering Systems[M]. Berlin Heidelberg:Springer-Verlag,2008:604-615.
[60] Okamoto T, Inaba A. The Intelligent Discussion Supporting System under theDistributed Environment [A]. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, ComputerAided Learning and Instruction in Science and Engineering[M]. BerlinHeidelberg:Springer,1996:123-131.
[61] Toulmin S E. The Uses of Argument (Updated Edition) [M]. New York:CambridgeUniversityPress,2003.
[62] ConklinJ,Selvin A, Shum S B, Sierhuis M. Facilitated Hypertext for CollectiveSensemaking: 15 Years on from gIBIS [C].// Weigand H, Goldkuhl G and deMoor A (eds.). Proceedings of the 8th International Working Conference on theLanguage-Action Perspective on Communication Modelling (LAP 2003).Tilburg,TheNetherlands,2003:1-19.
[63] Janssen T, Sage A P. Group Decision Support using Toulmin ArgumentStructures [C].// IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, andCybernetics,1996,4:2704-2709
[64] ClarkP.AModel ofArgumentationand Its ApplicationinaCooperative ExpertSystem[D].Glasgow:UniversityofStrathclyde,1991.
[65] Xiong C, Pan Y, Li D. A Discussion Information-Structuring Model Based onthe Toulmin Formalism [C].// Proceedings of the 1st international conference onForensic applications and techniques in telecommunications, information, andmultimediaandworkshop.Adelaide,Australia:ICST,2008:268-273.
[66] Maleewong K, Anutariya C, Wuwongse V. A Collective Intelligence Approachto Collaborative Knowledge Creation [C].// Fourth International Conference onSemantics,KnowledgeandGrid(SKG'08)2008:64-70.
[67] Reed C, Rowe G. Translating Toulmin Diagrams: Theory Neutrality inArgumentRepresentation[J].Argumentation,2005,19:267-286.
[68] KunzW,RittelHWJ.IssuesasElementsofInformationSystems[R].Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCalifornia,1970.
[69] Conklin J, Begeman M L. glBIS: A Hypertext Tool for Exploratory PolicyDiscussion [J]. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, 1988, 6(4):303-331.
[70] Rein G L, A. E C. rIBIS: A Real-Time Group Hypertext System [J].InternationalJournalofManMachineSutdies,1991,34(3):349-368.
[71] Westcombe M, Pidd M, Mackenzie A, Warren I, Sommerville I. ProblemSolving Dialogue: Cognitive Mapping And IBIS [R] Working paper MS01/02,Management School, Lancaster University, UK.http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/computing/research/cseg/projects/wisdom/.
[72] Isenmann S, Reuter W D. IBIS-A Convincing Concept, but a Lousy Instrument[C].//Proceedings of the Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. NewYork,NY,USA,1997.163-172.
[73] Conklin J. Dialog Mapping: Reflections on an Industrial Strength Case Study[A], Kirschner P A, Buckingham Shum S J and Carr C S (eds.). VisualizingArgumentation: Software Tools for Collaborative and EducationalSense-Making[M].London:Springer,2003.
[74] Reed C, Rowe G. Araucaria: Argument Analysis, Diagramming andRepresentation[J].InternationalJournalofAITools,2004,13(4):961-979.
[75] Suthers D, Weiner A, Connelly J, Paolucci M. Belvedere: Engaging Students inCritical Discussion of Science and Public Policy Issues [C].// Proc. 7th WorldConf.onArtificialIntelligenceinEducation.Washington,DC,1995.
[76] Gordon T F, Karacapilidis N. The Zeno Argumentation Framework [C].//Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence andLaw.Melbourne,Australia:ACM,1997:10-18.
[77] Karacapilidis N, Pappis C. Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentationand Fuzzy Similarity Measures in Multiple Criteria Decision Making [J].Computers&OperationsResearch,2000,27(7-8):653-671.
[78] Gordon T F, Prakken H, Walton D. The Carneades Model of Argument andBurdenofProof[J].ArtificialIntelligence,2007,171(10-15):875-896.
[79] Pallotta V, Niekrasz J, M. Purver. Collaborative and Argumentative Models ofMeeting Discussions [C].//Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on ComputationalModelsofNaturalArgument(CMNA).Edinburgh,Scotland,2005.
[80]程少川,张朋柱.电子公共大脑设计的信息组织研究[J].西安交通大学学报(社会科学版),2001,21(1):42-47.
[81]张兴学,张朋柱.基于Web的群体决策研讨信息自主可视化模型[J].系统工程理论方法应用,2006,15(1):1-6.
[82]张兴学,张朋柱.群体决策研讨意见分布可视化研究--电子公共大脑视听室(ECBAR)的设计与实现[J].管理科学学报,2005,8(4):15-27.
[83]张兴学,黄继鸿,张朋柱.群体研讨信息智能可视化研究[J].计算机应用研究,2009,26(2):623-627.
[84]谭俊峰,张朋柱,黄丽宁.综合集成研讨厅中的研讨信息组织模型[J].系统工程理论与实践,2005,25(1):86-92,99.
[85]李德华,熊才权.一种研讨信息组织模型及其在研讨厅中的应用[J].计算机应用研究,2008,25(9):2730-2733.
[86]熊才权,李德华.一种研讨模型[J].软件学报,2009,20(8):2181-2190.
[87]刘丹.综合集成研讨厅若干关键技术研究[D]南京理工大学,2007.
[88]谭俊峰,张朋柱,程少川,孔彬.群体研讨中的共识分析和评价技术[J].系统工程理论方法应用,2005,14(1):55-61.
[89]张兴学.基于电子公共大脑(ECB)的群体研讨信息可视化及其认知激发研究[D].上海:上海交通大学,2006.
[90]蒋御柱,张朋柱,张兴学.群体研讨支持系统中的智能可视化研究[J].管理科学学报,2009,12(3):1-11.
[91]唐锡晋.两个定性综合集成支持技术[J].系统工程理论与实践, 2010, 30(9):1593-1606.
[92]王艾,李耀东.一种面向研讨环境的摘要生成方法[J].计算机科学, 2011,38(2):191-194.
[93]李嘉,张朋柱,蒋御柱.群体研讨支持系统中研讨主题的自动可视化聚类研究[J].系统管理学报,2009,18(3):325-331.
[94]顾基发.意见综合——怎样达成共识[J].系统工程学报, 2001, 16(5):340-348.
[95] Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E, Verdegay J L. A Rational Consensus Model inGroup Decision Making using Linguistic Assessments [J]. Fuzzy Sets andSystems,1997,88(1):31-49.
[96] Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E, verdegay J L. A Model of Consensus in GroupDecision Making under Linguistic Assessments [J]. Fuzzy Sets and Systems,1996,78(1):73-87.
[97] Herrera-Viedma E, Martinez L, Mata F, Chiclana F. A Consensus SupportSystem Model for Group Decision-Making Problems With MultigranularLinguisticPreferenceRelations [J].IEEETransactions onFuzzySystems, 2005,13(5):644-658.
[98] Herrera-Viedma E, Herrera F, Chiclana F. A Consensus Model for MultipersonDecisionMakingwithDifferent PreferenceStructures [J].IEEETransactions onSystems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans, 2002, 32(3):394-402.
[99] Herrera-Viedma E, Alonso S, Chiclana F, Herrera F. A Consensus Model forGroup Decision Making With Incomplete Fuzzy Preference Relations [J]. IEEETransactionsonFuzzySystems,2007,15(5):863-877.
[100] Herrera F, Martínez L, Sánchez P J. Managing Non-Homogeneous InformationinGroupDecisionMaking[J].EuropeanJournal ofOperationalResearch,2005,166(1):115-132.
[101] Mata F, Martinez L, Herrera-Viedma E. An Adaptive Consensus Support Modelfor Group Decision-Making Problems in a Multigranular Fuzzy LinguisticContext[J].FuzzySystems,IEEETransactionson,2009,17(2):279-290.
[102] Cabrerizo F J, Moreno J M, Pérez I J, Herrera-Viedma E. Analyzing ConsensusApproaches in Fuzzy Group Decision Making: Advantages and Drawbacks [J].SoftComputing,2010,14:451-463.
[103] Xu Z. An Automatic Approach to Reaching Consensus in Multiple AttributeGroup Decision Making [J]. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2009, 56(4):1369-1374.
[104] Mata F, Martinez L, Martinez J C. A Preliminary Study of the Effects ofDifferent Aggregation Operators on Consensus Processes [C].// NinthInternational Conference on Intelligent Systems Design and Applications(ISDA'09),2009:821-826.
[105] Lee H-S. Optimal Consensus of FuzzyOpinions Under Group Decision MakingEnvironment[J].FuzzySetsandSystems,2002,132(3):303-315.
[106]王丹力,戴汝为.群体一致性及其在研讨厅中的应用[J].系统工程与电子技术,2001,23(7):33-37.
[107]王丹力,戴汝为.专家群体思维收敛的研究[J].管理科学学报, 2002, 5(2):1-5.
[108]韩祥兰. SBA系统的综合集成研讨厅研究与应用[D].南京:南京理工大学博士学位论文,2005.
[109]熊才权,李德华.综合集成研讨厅共识达成模型及其实现[J].计算机集成制造系统,2008,14(10):1913-1918.
[110]熊才权,李德华,张玉.研讨厅专家意见聚类分析及其可视化[J].模式识别与人工智能,2009,22(2):282-287.
[111]熊才权,李德华,金良海.基于保护少数人意见的群体一致性分析[J].系统工程理论与实践,2008,28(10):102-107.
[112]宋武琪,顾基发.用于综合集成研讨厅的共识支持系统框架的研究[J].运筹学学报,2007,11(Suppl.):246-256.
[113]金鑫,毕义明.空间军事系统研讨厅中专家意见集成模型研究[J].指挥控制与仿真,2009,31(1):9-12.
[114]陈侠,樊治平.关于区间数决策矩阵的专家群体判断共识性研究[J].运筹与管理,2008,17(1):1-6.
[115] Eklund P, Rusinowska A, De Swart H. Consensus Reaching in Committees [J].EuropeanJournalofOperationalResearch,2007,178(1):185-193.
[116] BriggsRO,KolfschotenGL,deVreedeGJ,DeanDL.DefiningKeyConceptsforCollaborationEngineering[C].//Proceedings oftheAmericasConferenceonInformationSystems,2006.
[117]中国人民解放军总参军训部.科索沃战争研究[M].北京:解放军出版社,2000.
[118]军事科学院军事历史研究部.海湾战争全史[M].北京:解放军出版社,2000.
[119]王永明,刘小力,肖允华.伊拉克战争研究[M].北京:军事科学出版社,2003.
[120]徐根初.跨越:从机械化战争走向信息化战争[M].北京:军事科学出版社,2003:33-39.
[121]薛国安.驾驭信息化战争[M].北京:解放军出版社,2007:3,4,90-100.
[122]张蜀平,禚法宝,王祖文(编著).直面信息化战争[M].北京:国防工业出版社,2007:123-165.
[123] Brodie C B, Hayes C C. DAISY: A Decision Support Design Methodology forComplex,Experience-enteredDomains [J].IEEE Transactions onSystems, ManandCybernetics,PartA,2002,32(1):50-71.
[124]埃德加·莫兰.复杂思路:自觉的科学[M].陈一壮(译).北京:北京大学出版社,2001:1-15.
[125]史忠植(编著).认知科学[M].合肥:中国科技大学出版社,2008:392-393.
[126]赵南元.认知科学与广义进化论[M].北京:清华大学出版社,1994:69-96.
[127]埃德加·莫兰,陈一壮.论复杂性思维[J].江南大学学报(人文社会科学版),2006,5(5).
[128]汉语大词典编辑委员会.汉语大词典(第7卷) [M].上海:汉语大词典出版社,1991:1008.
[129]三民书局大辞典编纂委员会.大辞典(中) [M].台北:三民书局股份有限公司,1985:3339.
[130]李亚.人-机决策系统研究及其在综合集成研讨厅中的应用[D].长沙:国防科学技术大学博士学位论文,1999.
[131]顾基发,王浣尘,唐锡晋(等著).综合集成方法体系与系统学研究[M].北京:科学出版社,2007:315,316.
[132]谭俊峰,张朋柱,程少川,李欣苗.面向研讨过程的群体成员权重算法[J].系统工程理论方法应用,2005,14(2):97-103.
[133]刘怡君,唐锡晋.一种支持协作与知识创造的“场”[J].管理科学学报,2006,9(1):79-85.
[134]唐锡晋,刘怡君.从群体支持系统到创造力支持系统[J].系统工程理论与实践,2006,26(5):63-71.
[135] Liu Y J, Tang X J. A Visualized Argumented Tool for Knowledge Associationin Idea Generation [C].// Gu J F (ed.). Knowledge and Systems Sciences:Toward Meta-Synthetic Support for Decison Making(the proceedings of FourthInternational Symposium on Knowledge and Systems Sciences). : Gloabal-LinkPublisher,2002:19-24.
[136] Tang X J, Liu Y J. A Prototype Environment for Group Argumentatoin [C].//Wang Z T (ed.). Proceedings of 3rd International Symposium on KnowledgeandSystemsSciences.Shanghai,2002:252-256.
[137] Ballmer T, Brennenstuhl W. Speech Act Classification: A Study in the LexicalAnalysisofEnglishSpeechActivityVerbs[M].Berlin:Springer,1981.
[138] Nunamaker J F, Briggs R O, de Vreede G L. From Information Technology ToValue Creation Technology [A], Dickson G W and DeSanctis G (eds.).InformationTechnologyand theFutureEnterprise[M].NewYork: Prentice-Hall,2001.
[139] AntunesP,CostaCJ.ADescriptiveFrameworkforElectronicMeetingSystemsBased on the UML Language [R]. Lisboa, Portugal: Department of Informatics,University of Lisbon, 2002.http://www.di.fc.ul.pt/tech-reports/abstract.php?report_ref=2002-05.
[140] Adkins M, Burgoon M, Nunamaker J F. Using Group Support Systems forStrategic Planning with the United States Air Force [J]. Decision SupportSystems,2003,34(3):315-337.
[141] Dickson G W, Lee-Partridge J E, Limayem M, Desanctis G L. FacilitatingComputer-Supported Meetings: A Cumulative Analysis in A Multiple-CriteriaTaskEnvironment[J].GroupDecisionAndNegotiation,1996,5(1):51-72.
[142] SchearzR.TheSkilledFacilitator[M]Jossey-BassPublisher,1994.
[143] Fjermestad J, Hiltz S. An Assessment of Group Support Systems ExperimentalResearch: Methodology and Results [J]. Journal of Management InformationSystems,1999,15(3):117-149.
[144]张志强,张朋柱.面向复杂决策任务的综合集成决策研讨总体框架设计[J].系统工程理论与实践,2006,26(1):9-17.
[145] Dickson G W, Partridge J-E L, Robinson L H. Exploring Modes of FacilitativeSupportforGDSSTechnology[J].MISQuarterly,1993,17(2):173-194.
[146] Grise M, Gallupe R B. Information Overload Addressing the PraduetivityParadox in Face-to-Face Electronic Meetings [J]. Journal of ManagementInformationSystems,1999-2000,16(3):157-185.
[147] Fjermestad J, Hiltz S R. A Descriptive Evaluation of Group Support SystemsCase and Field Studies [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2001,17(3):115-159.
[148] Clawson V K, Bostrom R P, Anson R. The Role of the Facilitator inComputer-Supported Meetings [J]. Small Group Research, 1993, 24(4):547-565.
[149] Ackermann F. Participants' Perceptions on the Role of Facilitators Using GroupDecision Support Systems [J]. Group Decision and Negotiation, 1996, 5(1):93-112.
[150] Clawson V K, Bostrom R P. The Importance of Facilitator Role Behaviors inDIfferent Face to Face Group Support Systems Enviroments [C].// Sprague R H(ed.). Proceedings of the 28th Hawii International Conference on SystemSciences.Hawaii,1995:181-190.
[151] Clawson V K, Bostrom R P. The Role of the Facilitator in Computer-SupportedMeetings[J].SmallGroupResearch,1993,24(4):547-565.
[152] Clawson V K, Bostrom R P. Research-Driven Facilitation Training forComputer-Supported Environments [J]. Group Decision and Negotiation, 1996,5(1):7-29.
[153] Eden C. The Unfolding Nature of Group Decision Support [A], Eden C andRadford J (eds.). Tackling Strategic Problems - The Role of Group DecisionSupport[M].London;NewburyPark,Calif.:SAGEPublications,1990.
[154] de Vreede G-J, Niederman F, Paarlberg I. Towards an Instrument to MeasureParticipants'Perceptions onFacilitationinGroup Support Systems Meetings [J].GroupDecisionandNegotiation,2002,11:127-144.
[155] de Vreede G-J, Boonstra J, Niederman F. What is Effective GSS Facilitation aQualitative Inquiry into Participants' Perceptions [C].// Proceedings of the 35thHawaiiInternationalConferenceonSystemSciences,2002.
[156] Briggs R O, de Vreede G-J, JayF. Nunamaker J, TobeyD. Thinklets AchievingPredictable, Repeatable Patterns of Group Interaction with Group SupportSystems (GSS) [C].// Proceedings of the 34th Hawaii International ConferenceonSystemSciences,2001.
[157] de Vreede G-J, Kolfschoten G L, Briggs R O. ThinkLets: A CollaborationEngineering Pattern Language [J]. International Journal Computer ApplicationTechnology,2006,25(2/3):140-154.
[158] de Vreede G L. A Field Study into the Organizational Application of GroupSupport System [C].// F. N (ed.). Proceedings of the 1997 ACM SIGCPRConferenceonComputerPersonnelResearch,1997:151-159.
[159] KolfschotenGL,SantanenEL.ReconceptualizingGeneratethinkLets:theRoleof the Modifier [C].// Proceedings of the 40th Annual Hawaii InternationalConferenceonSystemSciences(HICSS2007),2007.
[160] KolfschotenG L,AppelmanJ H,Briggs R O,deVreedeGJ.RecurringPatternsof Facilitation Interventions In GSS Sessions [C].// Proceedings of the 37thAnnualHawaiiInternationalConferenceonSystemSciences(HICSS04),2004.
[161] Santanen E L, de Vreede G L, Briggs R O. Causal Relationship in CreativeProblem Solving: Comparing Facilitation Interventions for Ideation [J]. JournalofManagementInformationSystems,2004,20:167-197.
[162] Kolfschoten G L, Veen W. Tool Support for GSS Session Design [C].//Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on SystemSciences(HICSS'05),2005.
[163] de Vreede G J, Fruhling A, Chakrapani A. A Repeatable Collaboration Processfor UsabilityTesting[C].// Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii InternationalConferenceonSystemSciences(HICSS'05)2005:46-46.
[164] Kolfschoten G L, Briggs R O, de Vreede G-J, Jacobs P H M, Appelman J H. AConceptual Foundation of the Thinklet Concept for Collaboration Engineering[J].InternationalJournalofHuman-ComputerStudies,2006,64(7):611-621.
[165] Harder R J, Keeter J M, Woodcock B W, Ferguson J W, Wills F W. Insights inImplementing Collaboration Engineering [C].// Proceedings of the 38th AnnualHawaiiInternationalConferenceonSystemSciences(HICSS'05)2005.
[166] de Vreede G J, Briggs R O. Collaboration Engineering: Designing RepeatableProcesses for High-Value Collaborative Tasks [C].// Proceedings of the 38thAnnualHawaiiInternationalConferenceonSystemSciences(HICSS'05),2005.
[167] Kolfschoten G L, Briggs R O, Appelman J H, de Vreede G-J. ThinkLets asBuilding Blocks for Collaboration Processes: A Further Conceptualization [A],de Vreede G-J (ed.). Groupware: Design, Implementation, and Use, LectureNotes in Computer Science[M]. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2004:137-152.
[168] Briggs R O,VreedeG-J D,JayF.NunamakerJ.CollaborationEngineeringwithThinkLets toPursueSustainedSuccess withGroupSupport Systems [J].JournalofManagementInformationSystems,2003,19(4):31-64.
[169] Kolfschoten G L, de Vreede G-J, Briggs R O. Collaboration Engineering [A].HandbookofGroupDecisionandNegotiation,AdvancesinGroupDecisionandNegotiation[M]. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer Science+Business Media B.V.,2010:339-357.
[170] Briggs R O. On Theory-Driven Design of Collaboration Technology andProcess [C].// de Vreede G L, Guerrero L A and M. R G (eds.). Groupware:Design, Implementation and Use: 10th International Workshop, CRIWG 2004.SanCarlos,CostaRica:Springer,2004:1-16.
[171] Deokar A V, Kolfschoten G L, de Vreede G-J. Prescriptive Workflow Designfor Collaboration-intensive Processes using the Collaboration EngineeringApproach [J]. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 2008, 9(4):11-20.
[172] Knoll S W, Horton G. Changing the Perspective: Improving Generate thinkLetsfor Ideation [C].// Proceedings of 43rd Hawaii International Conference onSystemSciences(HICSS),2010:1-10.
[173] Kolfschoten G L, de Vreede G-J. The Collaboration Engineering Approach forDesigning Collaboration Processes [A], Haake J M, Ochoa S F and Cechich A(eds.). Groupware: Design, Implementation, and Use, Lecture Notes inComputerScience[M].BerlinHeidelberg:Springer-Verlag,2007:95-110.
[174] Warfield J N. TwentyLaws of Complexity: Science Applicablein Organizations[J].SystemsResearchandBehavioralScience,1999,16(1):3-40.
[175] Warfield J N. Five Schools of Thought about Complexity: Implications forDesign and Process Science [C].// Proceedings of the Second World ConferenceonIntegratedDesignandProcessTechnology,1996,2:1-6.
[176] Warfield J N, Teigen C. Groupthink, Clanthink, Spreadthink and Linkthink:Decision-making on Complex Issue in Orgnizations [R]. Fairfax, VA: InstituteforAdvancedStudyintheIntergrativeSciences,1993.
[177] Warfield J N. Spreadthink: Explaining Ineffective Groups [J]. System Research,1995,12(1):5-14.
[178] Janis I L. Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes[M].Boston:HoughtonMifflin,1982.
[179] McCauley C. The Nature of Social Influence in Groupthink: Compliance andInternalization [J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1989, 57:250-260.
[180]毕鹏程,席酉民.群体决策过程中的群体思维研究[J].管理科学学报, 2002,5(1):25-34.
[181] Bohm D. On Dialogue [M]. New York: Routledge (An Imprint of the Taylor &FrancisGroup),1996.
[182] Isaacs W. Dialogue: The Art of Thinking Together [M]. New York: Doubleday,1999.
[183]唐锡晋,刘怡君.有关社会焦点问题的群体研讨实验——定性综合集成的一种实践[J].系统工程理论与实践,2007,27(3):42-49.
[184] van der Weijden E. Structuring Argumentation in Meetings: Visualizing theArgumentStructure[D]UniversityofTwente,2005.
[185] Rienks R, Heylen D, E. van der Weijden. Argument Diagramming of MeetingConversations [C].//Multimodal Multiparty Meeting Processing, Workshop atthe7th International ConferenceonMultimodal Interfaces (ICMI),.Trento, Italy,2005.
[186] Verbree D, Rienks R, Heylen D. First Steps Towards the AutomaticConstruction of Argument-Diagrams from Real Discussions [C].// E D P and MB-C T J (eds.). Proceedings of the in 1st International Conference onComputationalModelsofArgument,2006:183-194.
[187] Hakkani-Tür D. Towards Automatic Argument Diagramming of MultiparityMeetings [C].// IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and SignalProcessing(ICASSP),2009:4753-4756.
[188] Zimmermann M, Hakkani-TürD,ShribergE,StolckeA.Text Based DialogActClassification for Multiparty Meetings [A], Renals S, Bengio S and Fiscus J(eds.). Machine Learning for Multimodal Interaction, Lecture Notes inComputerScience[M].BerlinHeidelberg:Springer-Verlag,2006:190-199.
[189]周可艳,宗成庆.对话行为信息在口语翻译中的应用[J].中文信息学报,2010,24(6):57-63.
[190] Stolcke A, Ries K, Coccaro N, Shriberg E, Bates R, Jurafsky D, Taylor P,Martin R, EssDykema C V, Meteer M. Dialogue Act Modeling for AutomaticTagging and Recognition of Conversational Speech [J]. ComputationalLinguistics,2000,26(3):1-34.
[191] Shriberg E, Bates R, Stolcke A, Taylor P, Jurafsky D, Ries K, Coccaro N,Martin R, Meteer M, Ess Dykema C V. Can Prosody Aid the AutomaticClassification of Dialog Acts in Conversational Speech [J]. Language andSpeech,1998,41(3-4):439-487.
[192]于景元,周晓纪.从定性到定量综合集成方法的实现和应用[J].系统工程理论与实践,2002,22(10):26-32.
[193] Hamalainen M, Hashim S, Suh Y. Structured Discourse for ScientificCollaboration: A Framework for Scientific Collaboration based on StructuredDiscourseAnalysis[J].JournalofOrganizationalComputing,1992,1(2):1-26.
[194] Cayrol C, Lagasquie M C. Gradual Handling Of Contradictions InArgumentationFrameworks[A],Bouchon-MeunierB,FoulloyLandYagerRR(eds.). Intelligent Systems for Information Processing: From Representation toApplications, Chapter Reasoning[M]. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier, 2003:179-190.
[195]熊才权,孙贤斌,欧阳勇.辩论的逻辑模型研究综述[J].模式识别与人工智能,2010,23(3):362-368.
[196] Reed C, Grasso F. Recent Advances in Computational Models of NaturalArgument[J].InternationalJournalofIntelligentSystems,2007,22(1):1-15.
[197] Rowe G, Reed C. Translating Wigmore Diagrams [C].//Procedings of theConference on Computational Models of Argument. Liverpool, UK, 2006.171-182.
[198] Lin F, Shoham Y. Argument Systems: A Uniform Basis for NonmonotonicReasoning [C].// Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on KnowledgeRepresentationandReasoning.SanFrancisco,USA,1989:245-255.
[199] Simari G R, Loui R P. A Mathematical Treatment of Defeasible Reasoning andItsImplementation[J].ArtificialIntelligence,1992,53(2-3):125-157.
[200] Prakken H, Sartor G. A Dialectical Model of Assessing Conflicting ArgumentsinLegalReasoning[J].ArtificialIntelligenceandLaw,1996,4(3-4):331-368.
[201] Vreeswijk G A W. Abstract Argumentation Systems [J]. Artificial Intelligence,1992,53(1-2):225-279.
[202] Dung P M. On The Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role inNonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and N-Person Games [J].ArtificialIntelligence,1995,77(2):321-357.
[203] Amgoud L, Prade H. Generation Evaluation of Different Types of Arguments inNegotiation [C].// 10th International Workshop on Non-monotonic Reasoning(NMR),2004.
[204] Amgoud L, Cayrol C, Lagasquie-Schiex M C, Livet P. On Bipolarity inArgumentation Frameworks [J]. International Journal of Intelligent Systems,2008,23:1062-1093.
[205] Amgoud L, Cayrol C. A Reasoning Model Based on the Production ofAcceptable Arguments [J]. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence,2002,34(1-3):197-215.
[206] Bench-Capon T J M. Persuasion in Practical Argument Using Value-basedArgumentationFrameworks[J].JournalofLogicandComputation,2003,13(3):429-448.
[207] Cayrol C, Lagasquie-Schiex MC.OntheAcceptabilityofArguments inBipolarArgumentation Frameworks [A], Godo L (ed.). Symbolic and QuantitativeApproaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, LNCS[M]. Berlin Heidelberg:Springer-Verlag,2005:378-389.
[208] ModgilS.AnAbstractTheoryofArgumentationthatAccommodatesDefeasibleReasoning about Preferences [C].// Mellouli K (ed.). Proceedings of the 9thEuropean Conf. on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning withUncertainty (ECSQARU), LLNAI. Hammamet, TN: Springer Verlag, 2007:648-659.
[209] Modgil S. Reasoning about Preferences in Argumentation Frameworks [J].ArtificialIntelligence,2009,173(9-10):901-934.
[210] Dunne P E, Hunter A, McBurney P, Parsons S, Wooldridge M. WeightedArgument Systems: Basic Definitions, Algorithms, and Complexity Results [J].ArtificialIntelligence,2011,175(2):457-486.
[211] Dunne P E, Hunter A, McBurney P, Wooldridge M. Inconsistency Tolerance inWeighted Argument Systems [C].// Proceedings of The 8th InternationalConference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS) 2009,Vol.2:851-858.
[212] Baroni P, Cerutti F, Giacomin M, Guida G. AFRA: Argumentation Frameworkwith Recursive Attacks [J]. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning,2011,52(1):19-37.
[213] Baroni P, Cerutti F, Giacomin M, Guida G. An Argumentation-Based Approachto Modeling Decision Support Contexts with What-If Capabilities [C].// AAAIFallSymposiumSeries-TheUsesofComputationalArgumentation,,2009:2-7.
[214] Atkinson K, Bench-Capon T, Mcburney P. PARMENIDES: FacilitatingDeliberation in Democracies [J]. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 2006, 14(4):261-275.
[2] Palmore J I. Warfare Analysis and Complexity Mini-Symposium [R] MilitaryOperationsResearchSociety,1999.
[3] 269次香山科学会议组委会. 269次香山科学会议综述[EB/OL].http://159.226.97.16/ReadBrief.aspx?ItemID=383, 2005-11-20/2011-09-15.2005.
[4]赵存如,李宁,王维.战争复杂性与军事系统工程——军事系统工程专业委员会第十六届学术年会研讨成果综述[J].军事运筹与系统工程, 2006,20(4):70-73.
[5] Durham S E. Chaos Theory for the Practical Military Mind [EB/OL].http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.33.3486&rep=rep1&type=pdf,2011-08-15/2011-09-15.
[6] Beckerman L P. The Nonlinear Dynamics of War [EB/OL].http://belisarius.com/modern_business_strategy/beckerman/non_linear.htm,2011-09-15.1999.
[7]牛庆银.非线性动力系统在综合军事实力中的应用[D].北京:装备兵工程学院,2002.
[8]张金春,李彪,刘景权.自组织理论在军事系统中的应用[J].系统工程与电子技术,2002,24(5):11-13.
[9]马龙,柳少军.组织决策过程及其涌现性研究[J].系统仿真学报, 2003,15(12):1687-1690.
[10] Darbyshire P, Abbass H. A Prototype Design for Studying Emergent BattleField Behavior through Multi-Agent Simulation [C].// The FourthJapan-Australia Joint Workshop on Intelligent and Evolutionary Systems.Hayama-machi,Japan,2000.
[11] Yaneer B-Y. Complexity of Military Conflict: Multi-scale Complex SystemsAnalysis of Littoral Warfare [EB/OL].http://necsi.edu/projects/yaneer/SSG_NECSI_3_Litt.pdf,2011-09-15.2003.
[12] Ilachinski A. Irreducible Semi-Autonomous Adaptive Combat (ISAAC): AnArtificial-Life Approach to Land Warfare [J]. Military Operations Research,1997(5):29-46.
[13] Ilachinski A. Enhanced ISAAC Neural Simulation Toolkit (Einstein): AnArtificial-Life Laboratory for Exploring Self-organized Emergence in LandCombat [EB/OL]. http://www.cna.org/isaac/einstein_users_guide_beta.pdf,2011-09-15.
[14] Bajaj C, Chaturvedi A R, Mehta S R. The SEAS Environment [R] Institute forDefenseAnalysis,1998.
[15] Dean R J. Warfare Analysis Laboratory 2000 [J]. Johns Horkings APLTechnicalDigest,2000,21(2):231-237.
[16]司光亚,胡晓峰.战略决策模拟环境中XOD综合集成机制的研究与实现[J].小型微型计算机系统,2002,23(2):243-246.
[17]胡晓峰,司光亚,吴琳,黄谦.SDS2000:一个定性定量结合的战略决策综合集成研讨与模拟环境[J].系统仿真学报,2000,12(6):595-599.
[18]常显奇,李元左,刘曙云,姜振东,李祥,齐小刚.空间军事系统综合集成研讨厅内容体系的研究与建设[J].系统工程理论与实践, 2001, 21(6):86-90.
[19]王斌,常显奇,李元左.空间军事系统综合集成研讨厅体系概念研究[J].装备指挥技术学院学报,2003,14(1):1-4.
[20]赵晓哲,郭锐.军事系统研究的综合集成方法[J].系统工程理论与实践,2004,23(10):127-131.
[21]沙基昌.复杂巨系统与战争设计工程[C].//军事运筹学会2005会议论文集“一体化联合作战与军事运筹研究”,2005:3-11.
[22]胡晓峰.战争复杂性与信息化战争模拟[J].系统仿真学报, 2006, 18(12):3572-3580.
[23]沙基昌,毛赤龙,陈超.战争设计工程[M].北京:科学出版社,2009.
[24]沙基昌,毛赤龙,吴永波,陈超.战争设计工程技术研究[J].系统工程理论与实践,2005,25(6):66-70.
[25]陈超.战争设计工程中群体专家智慧集成研究[D].长沙:国防科学技术大学博士学位论文,2007.
[26]李耀东.综合集成研讨厅设计与实现中的若干问题研究[D].北京:中国科学院自动化研究所,2003.
[27]黄丽宁,张朋柱.任务导向的群体决策研讨环节探讨[J].山西高等学校社会科学学报,2004,16(2):46-48.
[28]黄丽宁,张鹏翥.网络环境下开放式群体决策的研讨过程[J].西安工程科技学院学报,2003,17(3):265-268.
[29] Zhang P, Sun J, Chen H. Frame-based Argumentation for Group Decision TaskGeneration and Identification [J]. Decision Support Systems, 2005, 39(4):643-659.
[30]邓辉,孙景乐,张朋柱,李树荣.决策任务结构化的群体研讨过程和模式[J].系统管理学报,2008,17(5):572-576.
[31] Kavadias S, Sommer S C. The Effects of Problem Structure and Team Diversityon Brainstorming Effectiveness [J]. Management Science, 2009, 55(2):1899-1913.
[32] Linstone H A, Turoff M. The Delphi Method Techniques and Applications [M],2002.
[33] Delbecq A L, Van de Ven A H, Gustafson D H. Group Techniques for ProgramPlanning: A Guide to Nominal Group and Delphi Processes [M]. Glenview, IL:Scott.Foresman,1975.
[34]彼得?圣吉(著).第五项修炼:学习型组织的艺术与实务[M].郭进隆(译).上海:上海三联书店,1998.
[35] Paulus P B, Brown V R. Toward More Creative and Innovative Group IdeaGeneration: A Cognitive-Social-Motivational Perspective of Brainstorming [J].SocialandPersonalityPsychologyCompass,2007,1(1):248-265.
[36] Litchfield R C. Brainstorming Rules as Assigned Goals: Does BrainstormingReallyImproveIdeaQuantity?[J].MotivationandEmotion,2008,33(1):25-31.
[37] Rietzschel E F, Nijstad B A, Stroebe W. Productivity is not Enough: AComparison of Interactive and Nominal Brainstorming Groups on IdeaGeneration and Selection [J]. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 2006,42(2):244-251.
[38] Michinov N, Primois C. Improving Productivity and Creativity in OnlineGroups through Social Comparison Process: New Evidence for AsynchronousElectronic Brainstorming [J]. Computers in Human Behavior, 2005, 21(1):11-28.
[39] Paulus P B, Brown V R. Enhancing Ideational Creativity in Groups: Lessonsfrom Research on Brainstorming [A], Paulus P B and Nijstad B A (eds.). Groupcreativity: Innovation through collaboration[M]. New York: Oxford UniversityPress,2003:110-136.
[40] Diehl M, Stroebe W. Productivity Loss in Brainstorming Groups: Toward theSolutionofaRiddle[J].JournalofPersonalityandSocialPsychology,1987,53:497-509.
[41]孙东川,朱桂龙(编著).系统工程基本教程[M].北京:科学出版社,2010:72-76.
[42] Moon T, Vencel L, Warne L, Ali I, Bopping D. Structuring, Organising andRunning Meetings to Distil the Best Advice from Subject Matter Experts [R].DSTO-CR-0326 Edinburgh South Australia: DSTO Information SciencesLaboratory2003.
[43]经理人培训项目组.人力资源工具箱[M].北京:中国人民大学出版社,2006.
[44] Party G. Consensus Process for Facilitated Meetings [EB/OL].http://stuact.tamu.edu/stuorgs/greens/resources/FacilitatedMeetings.html.2003.
[45] Gorman G E, Clayton P. Qualitative Research for the Information Professional:APracticalHandbook[M].London:LibraryAssociationPublishing,1997.
[46] Phillips L D. Decision conferencing [C].// CSCW: Some Fundamental Issues,IEEColloquiumon,1991:6/1-6/3.
[47]毛赤龙.装备与战法集成分析方法[D].长沙:国防科学技术大学博士学位论文,2008.
[48]戴汝为,操龙兵.综合集成研讨厅的研制[J].管理科学学报, 2002, 5(3):10-16.
[49]孙景乐,张朋柱.一种互补的研讨框架的设计与实现[J].系统工程学报,2001,16(5):360-365.
[50]吕志坚.综合集成研讨厅中的专家研讨与思维研究[D].北京:中国科学院自动化研究所,2004.
[51]崔霞.群体智慧在综合集成研讨厅体系中的涌现[J].系统仿真学报, 2003,15(1):146-153.
[52]崔霞. HWME中基于学习型组织的专家有效互动对话模型[J].管理科学学报,2004,7(2):80-87.
[53]王丹力,戴汝为.综合集成研讨厅体系中专家群体行为的规范[J].管理科学学报,2001,4(2):1-6.
[54]李耀东,崔霞,戴汝为.综合集成研讨厅的理论框架、设计与实现[J].复杂系统与复杂性科学,2004,1(1):27-32.
[55] SantanenE L. Resolving Ideation Paradoxes: SeeingApples as Oranges throughthe Clarity of ThinkLets [C].// Proceedings of the 38th Annual HawaiiInternationalConferenceonSystemSciences(HICSS'05),2005.
[56] Karacapilidis N, Papadias D. Computer Supported Argumentation andCollaborativeDecisionMaking:TheHERMESSystem[J].InformationSystems,2001,26(4):259-277.
[57] Bui T X, Bodart F, Ma P-c. ARBAS: a Formal Language to SupportArgumentation in Network-based Organizations [J]. Journal of ManagementInformationSystems,1997,14(3):223-237.
[58] Bodart F, Tung B, Melard P, Vanreusel J F. ARBAS'96: A System ForArgumentation Support And Organizational Memory [C].// Proceedings of theThirtieth Hawaii International Conference on System Sciences, 1997, vol.2:524-532
[59] Nakamura S, Watanabe M, Hazeyama A, Yokoyama S, Miyadera Y. ADiscussion Model for System Design Novices [A], Lovrek I, Howlett R J andJain L C (eds.). Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Knowledge-BasedIntelligent Information and Engineering Systems[M]. Berlin Heidelberg:Springer-Verlag,2008:604-615.
[60] Okamoto T, Inaba A. The Intelligent Discussion Supporting System under theDistributed Environment [A]. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, ComputerAided Learning and Instruction in Science and Engineering[M]. BerlinHeidelberg:Springer,1996:123-131.
[61] Toulmin S E. The Uses of Argument (Updated Edition) [M]. New York:CambridgeUniversityPress,2003.
[62] ConklinJ,Selvin A, Shum S B, Sierhuis M. Facilitated Hypertext for CollectiveSensemaking: 15 Years on from gIBIS [C].// Weigand H, Goldkuhl G and deMoor A (eds.). Proceedings of the 8th International Working Conference on theLanguage-Action Perspective on Communication Modelling (LAP 2003).Tilburg,TheNetherlands,2003:1-19.
[63] Janssen T, Sage A P. Group Decision Support using Toulmin ArgumentStructures [C].// IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, andCybernetics,1996,4:2704-2709
[64] ClarkP.AModel ofArgumentationand Its ApplicationinaCooperative ExpertSystem[D].Glasgow:UniversityofStrathclyde,1991.
[65] Xiong C, Pan Y, Li D. A Discussion Information-Structuring Model Based onthe Toulmin Formalism [C].// Proceedings of the 1st international conference onForensic applications and techniques in telecommunications, information, andmultimediaandworkshop.Adelaide,Australia:ICST,2008:268-273.
[66] Maleewong K, Anutariya C, Wuwongse V. A Collective Intelligence Approachto Collaborative Knowledge Creation [C].// Fourth International Conference onSemantics,KnowledgeandGrid(SKG'08)2008:64-70.
[67] Reed C, Rowe G. Translating Toulmin Diagrams: Theory Neutrality inArgumentRepresentation[J].Argumentation,2005,19:267-286.
[68] KunzW,RittelHWJ.IssuesasElementsofInformationSystems[R].Berkeley,CA:UniversityofCalifornia,1970.
[69] Conklin J, Begeman M L. glBIS: A Hypertext Tool for Exploratory PolicyDiscussion [J]. ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, 1988, 6(4):303-331.
[70] Rein G L, A. E C. rIBIS: A Real-Time Group Hypertext System [J].InternationalJournalofManMachineSutdies,1991,34(3):349-368.
[71] Westcombe M, Pidd M, Mackenzie A, Warren I, Sommerville I. ProblemSolving Dialogue: Cognitive Mapping And IBIS [R] Working paper MS01/02,Management School, Lancaster University, UK.http://www.comp.lancs.ac.uk/computing/research/cseg/projects/wisdom/.
[72] Isenmann S, Reuter W D. IBIS-A Convincing Concept, but a Lousy Instrument[C].//Proceedings of the Conference on Designing Interactive Systems. NewYork,NY,USA,1997.163-172.
[73] Conklin J. Dialog Mapping: Reflections on an Industrial Strength Case Study[A], Kirschner P A, Buckingham Shum S J and Carr C S (eds.). VisualizingArgumentation: Software Tools for Collaborative and EducationalSense-Making[M].London:Springer,2003.
[74] Reed C, Rowe G. Araucaria: Argument Analysis, Diagramming andRepresentation[J].InternationalJournalofAITools,2004,13(4):961-979.
[75] Suthers D, Weiner A, Connelly J, Paolucci M. Belvedere: Engaging Students inCritical Discussion of Science and Public Policy Issues [C].// Proc. 7th WorldConf.onArtificialIntelligenceinEducation.Washington,DC,1995.
[76] Gordon T F, Karacapilidis N. The Zeno Argumentation Framework [C].//Proceedings of the 6th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence andLaw.Melbourne,Australia:ACM,1997:10-18.
[77] Karacapilidis N, Pappis C. Computer-Supported Collaborative Argumentationand Fuzzy Similarity Measures in Multiple Criteria Decision Making [J].Computers&OperationsResearch,2000,27(7-8):653-671.
[78] Gordon T F, Prakken H, Walton D. The Carneades Model of Argument andBurdenofProof[J].ArtificialIntelligence,2007,171(10-15):875-896.
[79] Pallotta V, Niekrasz J, M. Purver. Collaborative and Argumentative Models ofMeeting Discussions [C].//Proceedings of the 5th Workshop on ComputationalModelsofNaturalArgument(CMNA).Edinburgh,Scotland,2005.
[80]程少川,张朋柱.电子公共大脑设计的信息组织研究[J].西安交通大学学报(社会科学版),2001,21(1):42-47.
[81]张兴学,张朋柱.基于Web的群体决策研讨信息自主可视化模型[J].系统工程理论方法应用,2006,15(1):1-6.
[82]张兴学,张朋柱.群体决策研讨意见分布可视化研究--电子公共大脑视听室(ECBAR)的设计与实现[J].管理科学学报,2005,8(4):15-27.
[83]张兴学,黄继鸿,张朋柱.群体研讨信息智能可视化研究[J].计算机应用研究,2009,26(2):623-627.
[84]谭俊峰,张朋柱,黄丽宁.综合集成研讨厅中的研讨信息组织模型[J].系统工程理论与实践,2005,25(1):86-92,99.
[85]李德华,熊才权.一种研讨信息组织模型及其在研讨厅中的应用[J].计算机应用研究,2008,25(9):2730-2733.
[86]熊才权,李德华.一种研讨模型[J].软件学报,2009,20(8):2181-2190.
[87]刘丹.综合集成研讨厅若干关键技术研究[D]南京理工大学,2007.
[88]谭俊峰,张朋柱,程少川,孔彬.群体研讨中的共识分析和评价技术[J].系统工程理论方法应用,2005,14(1):55-61.
[89]张兴学.基于电子公共大脑(ECB)的群体研讨信息可视化及其认知激发研究[D].上海:上海交通大学,2006.
[90]蒋御柱,张朋柱,张兴学.群体研讨支持系统中的智能可视化研究[J].管理科学学报,2009,12(3):1-11.
[91]唐锡晋.两个定性综合集成支持技术[J].系统工程理论与实践, 2010, 30(9):1593-1606.
[92]王艾,李耀东.一种面向研讨环境的摘要生成方法[J].计算机科学, 2011,38(2):191-194.
[93]李嘉,张朋柱,蒋御柱.群体研讨支持系统中研讨主题的自动可视化聚类研究[J].系统管理学报,2009,18(3):325-331.
[94]顾基发.意见综合——怎样达成共识[J].系统工程学报, 2001, 16(5):340-348.
[95] Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E, Verdegay J L. A Rational Consensus Model inGroup Decision Making using Linguistic Assessments [J]. Fuzzy Sets andSystems,1997,88(1):31-49.
[96] Herrera F, Herrera-Viedma E, verdegay J L. A Model of Consensus in GroupDecision Making under Linguistic Assessments [J]. Fuzzy Sets and Systems,1996,78(1):73-87.
[97] Herrera-Viedma E, Martinez L, Mata F, Chiclana F. A Consensus SupportSystem Model for Group Decision-Making Problems With MultigranularLinguisticPreferenceRelations [J].IEEETransactions onFuzzySystems, 2005,13(5):644-658.
[98] Herrera-Viedma E, Herrera F, Chiclana F. A Consensus Model for MultipersonDecisionMakingwithDifferent PreferenceStructures [J].IEEETransactions onSystems, Man and Cybernetics, Part A: Systems and Humans, 2002, 32(3):394-402.
[99] Herrera-Viedma E, Alonso S, Chiclana F, Herrera F. A Consensus Model forGroup Decision Making With Incomplete Fuzzy Preference Relations [J]. IEEETransactionsonFuzzySystems,2007,15(5):863-877.
[100] Herrera F, Martínez L, Sánchez P J. Managing Non-Homogeneous InformationinGroupDecisionMaking[J].EuropeanJournal ofOperationalResearch,2005,166(1):115-132.
[101] Mata F, Martinez L, Herrera-Viedma E. An Adaptive Consensus Support Modelfor Group Decision-Making Problems in a Multigranular Fuzzy LinguisticContext[J].FuzzySystems,IEEETransactionson,2009,17(2):279-290.
[102] Cabrerizo F J, Moreno J M, Pérez I J, Herrera-Viedma E. Analyzing ConsensusApproaches in Fuzzy Group Decision Making: Advantages and Drawbacks [J].SoftComputing,2010,14:451-463.
[103] Xu Z. An Automatic Approach to Reaching Consensus in Multiple AttributeGroup Decision Making [J]. Computers & Industrial Engineering, 2009, 56(4):1369-1374.
[104] Mata F, Martinez L, Martinez J C. A Preliminary Study of the Effects ofDifferent Aggregation Operators on Consensus Processes [C].// NinthInternational Conference on Intelligent Systems Design and Applications(ISDA'09),2009:821-826.
[105] Lee H-S. Optimal Consensus of FuzzyOpinions Under Group Decision MakingEnvironment[J].FuzzySetsandSystems,2002,132(3):303-315.
[106]王丹力,戴汝为.群体一致性及其在研讨厅中的应用[J].系统工程与电子技术,2001,23(7):33-37.
[107]王丹力,戴汝为.专家群体思维收敛的研究[J].管理科学学报, 2002, 5(2):1-5.
[108]韩祥兰. SBA系统的综合集成研讨厅研究与应用[D].南京:南京理工大学博士学位论文,2005.
[109]熊才权,李德华.综合集成研讨厅共识达成模型及其实现[J].计算机集成制造系统,2008,14(10):1913-1918.
[110]熊才权,李德华,张玉.研讨厅专家意见聚类分析及其可视化[J].模式识别与人工智能,2009,22(2):282-287.
[111]熊才权,李德华,金良海.基于保护少数人意见的群体一致性分析[J].系统工程理论与实践,2008,28(10):102-107.
[112]宋武琪,顾基发.用于综合集成研讨厅的共识支持系统框架的研究[J].运筹学学报,2007,11(Suppl.):246-256.
[113]金鑫,毕义明.空间军事系统研讨厅中专家意见集成模型研究[J].指挥控制与仿真,2009,31(1):9-12.
[114]陈侠,樊治平.关于区间数决策矩阵的专家群体判断共识性研究[J].运筹与管理,2008,17(1):1-6.
[115] Eklund P, Rusinowska A, De Swart H. Consensus Reaching in Committees [J].EuropeanJournalofOperationalResearch,2007,178(1):185-193.
[116] BriggsRO,KolfschotenGL,deVreedeGJ,DeanDL.DefiningKeyConceptsforCollaborationEngineering[C].//Proceedings oftheAmericasConferenceonInformationSystems,2006.
[117]中国人民解放军总参军训部.科索沃战争研究[M].北京:解放军出版社,2000.
[118]军事科学院军事历史研究部.海湾战争全史[M].北京:解放军出版社,2000.
[119]王永明,刘小力,肖允华.伊拉克战争研究[M].北京:军事科学出版社,2003.
[120]徐根初.跨越:从机械化战争走向信息化战争[M].北京:军事科学出版社,2003:33-39.
[121]薛国安.驾驭信息化战争[M].北京:解放军出版社,2007:3,4,90-100.
[122]张蜀平,禚法宝,王祖文(编著).直面信息化战争[M].北京:国防工业出版社,2007:123-165.
[123] Brodie C B, Hayes C C. DAISY: A Decision Support Design Methodology forComplex,Experience-enteredDomains [J].IEEE Transactions onSystems, ManandCybernetics,PartA,2002,32(1):50-71.
[124]埃德加·莫兰.复杂思路:自觉的科学[M].陈一壮(译).北京:北京大学出版社,2001:1-15.
[125]史忠植(编著).认知科学[M].合肥:中国科技大学出版社,2008:392-393.
[126]赵南元.认知科学与广义进化论[M].北京:清华大学出版社,1994:69-96.
[127]埃德加·莫兰,陈一壮.论复杂性思维[J].江南大学学报(人文社会科学版),2006,5(5).
[128]汉语大词典编辑委员会.汉语大词典(第7卷) [M].上海:汉语大词典出版社,1991:1008.
[129]三民书局大辞典编纂委员会.大辞典(中) [M].台北:三民书局股份有限公司,1985:3339.
[130]李亚.人-机决策系统研究及其在综合集成研讨厅中的应用[D].长沙:国防科学技术大学博士学位论文,1999.
[131]顾基发,王浣尘,唐锡晋(等著).综合集成方法体系与系统学研究[M].北京:科学出版社,2007:315,316.
[132]谭俊峰,张朋柱,程少川,李欣苗.面向研讨过程的群体成员权重算法[J].系统工程理论方法应用,2005,14(2):97-103.
[133]刘怡君,唐锡晋.一种支持协作与知识创造的“场”[J].管理科学学报,2006,9(1):79-85.
[134]唐锡晋,刘怡君.从群体支持系统到创造力支持系统[J].系统工程理论与实践,2006,26(5):63-71.
[135] Liu Y J, Tang X J. A Visualized Argumented Tool for Knowledge Associationin Idea Generation [C].// Gu J F (ed.). Knowledge and Systems Sciences:Toward Meta-Synthetic Support for Decison Making(the proceedings of FourthInternational Symposium on Knowledge and Systems Sciences). : Gloabal-LinkPublisher,2002:19-24.
[136] Tang X J, Liu Y J. A Prototype Environment for Group Argumentatoin [C].//Wang Z T (ed.). Proceedings of 3rd International Symposium on KnowledgeandSystemsSciences.Shanghai,2002:252-256.
[137] Ballmer T, Brennenstuhl W. Speech Act Classification: A Study in the LexicalAnalysisofEnglishSpeechActivityVerbs[M].Berlin:Springer,1981.
[138] Nunamaker J F, Briggs R O, de Vreede G L. From Information Technology ToValue Creation Technology [A], Dickson G W and DeSanctis G (eds.).InformationTechnologyand theFutureEnterprise[M].NewYork: Prentice-Hall,2001.
[139] AntunesP,CostaCJ.ADescriptiveFrameworkforElectronicMeetingSystemsBased on the UML Language [R]. Lisboa, Portugal: Department of Informatics,University of Lisbon, 2002.http://www.di.fc.ul.pt/tech-reports/abstract.php?report_ref=2002-05.
[140] Adkins M, Burgoon M, Nunamaker J F. Using Group Support Systems forStrategic Planning with the United States Air Force [J]. Decision SupportSystems,2003,34(3):315-337.
[141] Dickson G W, Lee-Partridge J E, Limayem M, Desanctis G L. FacilitatingComputer-Supported Meetings: A Cumulative Analysis in A Multiple-CriteriaTaskEnvironment[J].GroupDecisionAndNegotiation,1996,5(1):51-72.
[142] SchearzR.TheSkilledFacilitator[M]Jossey-BassPublisher,1994.
[143] Fjermestad J, Hiltz S. An Assessment of Group Support Systems ExperimentalResearch: Methodology and Results [J]. Journal of Management InformationSystems,1999,15(3):117-149.
[144]张志强,张朋柱.面向复杂决策任务的综合集成决策研讨总体框架设计[J].系统工程理论与实践,2006,26(1):9-17.
[145] Dickson G W, Partridge J-E L, Robinson L H. Exploring Modes of FacilitativeSupportforGDSSTechnology[J].MISQuarterly,1993,17(2):173-194.
[146] Grise M, Gallupe R B. Information Overload Addressing the PraduetivityParadox in Face-to-Face Electronic Meetings [J]. Journal of ManagementInformationSystems,1999-2000,16(3):157-185.
[147] Fjermestad J, Hiltz S R. A Descriptive Evaluation of Group Support SystemsCase and Field Studies [J]. Journal of Management Information Systems, 2001,17(3):115-159.
[148] Clawson V K, Bostrom R P, Anson R. The Role of the Facilitator inComputer-Supported Meetings [J]. Small Group Research, 1993, 24(4):547-565.
[149] Ackermann F. Participants' Perceptions on the Role of Facilitators Using GroupDecision Support Systems [J]. Group Decision and Negotiation, 1996, 5(1):93-112.
[150] Clawson V K, Bostrom R P. The Importance of Facilitator Role Behaviors inDIfferent Face to Face Group Support Systems Enviroments [C].// Sprague R H(ed.). Proceedings of the 28th Hawii International Conference on SystemSciences.Hawaii,1995:181-190.
[151] Clawson V K, Bostrom R P. The Role of the Facilitator in Computer-SupportedMeetings[J].SmallGroupResearch,1993,24(4):547-565.
[152] Clawson V K, Bostrom R P. Research-Driven Facilitation Training forComputer-Supported Environments [J]. Group Decision and Negotiation, 1996,5(1):7-29.
[153] Eden C. The Unfolding Nature of Group Decision Support [A], Eden C andRadford J (eds.). Tackling Strategic Problems - The Role of Group DecisionSupport[M].London;NewburyPark,Calif.:SAGEPublications,1990.
[154] de Vreede G-J, Niederman F, Paarlberg I. Towards an Instrument to MeasureParticipants'Perceptions onFacilitationinGroup Support Systems Meetings [J].GroupDecisionandNegotiation,2002,11:127-144.
[155] de Vreede G-J, Boonstra J, Niederman F. What is Effective GSS Facilitation aQualitative Inquiry into Participants' Perceptions [C].// Proceedings of the 35thHawaiiInternationalConferenceonSystemSciences,2002.
[156] Briggs R O, de Vreede G-J, JayF. Nunamaker J, TobeyD. Thinklets AchievingPredictable, Repeatable Patterns of Group Interaction with Group SupportSystems (GSS) [C].// Proceedings of the 34th Hawaii International ConferenceonSystemSciences,2001.
[157] de Vreede G-J, Kolfschoten G L, Briggs R O. ThinkLets: A CollaborationEngineering Pattern Language [J]. International Journal Computer ApplicationTechnology,2006,25(2/3):140-154.
[158] de Vreede G L. A Field Study into the Organizational Application of GroupSupport System [C].// F. N (ed.). Proceedings of the 1997 ACM SIGCPRConferenceonComputerPersonnelResearch,1997:151-159.
[159] KolfschotenGL,SantanenEL.ReconceptualizingGeneratethinkLets:theRoleof the Modifier [C].// Proceedings of the 40th Annual Hawaii InternationalConferenceonSystemSciences(HICSS2007),2007.
[160] KolfschotenG L,AppelmanJ H,Briggs R O,deVreedeGJ.RecurringPatternsof Facilitation Interventions In GSS Sessions [C].// Proceedings of the 37thAnnualHawaiiInternationalConferenceonSystemSciences(HICSS04),2004.
[161] Santanen E L, de Vreede G L, Briggs R O. Causal Relationship in CreativeProblem Solving: Comparing Facilitation Interventions for Ideation [J]. JournalofManagementInformationSystems,2004,20:167-197.
[162] Kolfschoten G L, Veen W. Tool Support for GSS Session Design [C].//Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii International Conference on SystemSciences(HICSS'05),2005.
[163] de Vreede G J, Fruhling A, Chakrapani A. A Repeatable Collaboration Processfor UsabilityTesting[C].// Proceedings of the 38th Annual Hawaii InternationalConferenceonSystemSciences(HICSS'05)2005:46-46.
[164] Kolfschoten G L, Briggs R O, de Vreede G-J, Jacobs P H M, Appelman J H. AConceptual Foundation of the Thinklet Concept for Collaboration Engineering[J].InternationalJournalofHuman-ComputerStudies,2006,64(7):611-621.
[165] Harder R J, Keeter J M, Woodcock B W, Ferguson J W, Wills F W. Insights inImplementing Collaboration Engineering [C].// Proceedings of the 38th AnnualHawaiiInternationalConferenceonSystemSciences(HICSS'05)2005.
[166] de Vreede G J, Briggs R O. Collaboration Engineering: Designing RepeatableProcesses for High-Value Collaborative Tasks [C].// Proceedings of the 38thAnnualHawaiiInternationalConferenceonSystemSciences(HICSS'05),2005.
[167] Kolfschoten G L, Briggs R O, Appelman J H, de Vreede G-J. ThinkLets asBuilding Blocks for Collaboration Processes: A Further Conceptualization [A],de Vreede G-J (ed.). Groupware: Design, Implementation, and Use, LectureNotes in Computer Science[M]. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, 2004:137-152.
[168] Briggs R O,VreedeG-J D,JayF.NunamakerJ.CollaborationEngineeringwithThinkLets toPursueSustainedSuccess withGroupSupport Systems [J].JournalofManagementInformationSystems,2003,19(4):31-64.
[169] Kolfschoten G L, de Vreede G-J, Briggs R O. Collaboration Engineering [A].HandbookofGroupDecisionandNegotiation,AdvancesinGroupDecisionandNegotiation[M]. Berlin Heidelberg: Springer Science+Business Media B.V.,2010:339-357.
[170] Briggs R O. On Theory-Driven Design of Collaboration Technology andProcess [C].// de Vreede G L, Guerrero L A and M. R G (eds.). Groupware:Design, Implementation and Use: 10th International Workshop, CRIWG 2004.SanCarlos,CostaRica:Springer,2004:1-16.
[171] Deokar A V, Kolfschoten G L, de Vreede G-J. Prescriptive Workflow Designfor Collaboration-intensive Processes using the Collaboration EngineeringApproach [J]. Global Journal of Flexible Systems Management, 2008, 9(4):11-20.
[172] Knoll S W, Horton G. Changing the Perspective: Improving Generate thinkLetsfor Ideation [C].// Proceedings of 43rd Hawaii International Conference onSystemSciences(HICSS),2010:1-10.
[173] Kolfschoten G L, de Vreede G-J. The Collaboration Engineering Approach forDesigning Collaboration Processes [A], Haake J M, Ochoa S F and Cechich A(eds.). Groupware: Design, Implementation, and Use, Lecture Notes inComputerScience[M].BerlinHeidelberg:Springer-Verlag,2007:95-110.
[174] Warfield J N. TwentyLaws of Complexity: Science Applicablein Organizations[J].SystemsResearchandBehavioralScience,1999,16(1):3-40.
[175] Warfield J N. Five Schools of Thought about Complexity: Implications forDesign and Process Science [C].// Proceedings of the Second World ConferenceonIntegratedDesignandProcessTechnology,1996,2:1-6.
[176] Warfield J N, Teigen C. Groupthink, Clanthink, Spreadthink and Linkthink:Decision-making on Complex Issue in Orgnizations [R]. Fairfax, VA: InstituteforAdvancedStudyintheIntergrativeSciences,1993.
[177] Warfield J N. Spreadthink: Explaining Ineffective Groups [J]. System Research,1995,12(1):5-14.
[178] Janis I L. Groupthink: Psychological Studies of Policy Decisions and Fiascoes[M].Boston:HoughtonMifflin,1982.
[179] McCauley C. The Nature of Social Influence in Groupthink: Compliance andInternalization [J]. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1989, 57:250-260.
[180]毕鹏程,席酉民.群体决策过程中的群体思维研究[J].管理科学学报, 2002,5(1):25-34.
[181] Bohm D. On Dialogue [M]. New York: Routledge (An Imprint of the Taylor &FrancisGroup),1996.
[182] Isaacs W. Dialogue: The Art of Thinking Together [M]. New York: Doubleday,1999.
[183]唐锡晋,刘怡君.有关社会焦点问题的群体研讨实验——定性综合集成的一种实践[J].系统工程理论与实践,2007,27(3):42-49.
[184] van der Weijden E. Structuring Argumentation in Meetings: Visualizing theArgumentStructure[D]UniversityofTwente,2005.
[185] Rienks R, Heylen D, E. van der Weijden. Argument Diagramming of MeetingConversations [C].//Multimodal Multiparty Meeting Processing, Workshop atthe7th International ConferenceonMultimodal Interfaces (ICMI),.Trento, Italy,2005.
[186] Verbree D, Rienks R, Heylen D. First Steps Towards the AutomaticConstruction of Argument-Diagrams from Real Discussions [C].// E D P and MB-C T J (eds.). Proceedings of the in 1st International Conference onComputationalModelsofArgument,2006:183-194.
[187] Hakkani-Tür D. Towards Automatic Argument Diagramming of MultiparityMeetings [C].// IEEE International Conference on Acoustics, Speech and SignalProcessing(ICASSP),2009:4753-4756.
[188] Zimmermann M, Hakkani-TürD,ShribergE,StolckeA.Text Based DialogActClassification for Multiparty Meetings [A], Renals S, Bengio S and Fiscus J(eds.). Machine Learning for Multimodal Interaction, Lecture Notes inComputerScience[M].BerlinHeidelberg:Springer-Verlag,2006:190-199.
[189]周可艳,宗成庆.对话行为信息在口语翻译中的应用[J].中文信息学报,2010,24(6):57-63.
[190] Stolcke A, Ries K, Coccaro N, Shriberg E, Bates R, Jurafsky D, Taylor P,Martin R, EssDykema C V, Meteer M. Dialogue Act Modeling for AutomaticTagging and Recognition of Conversational Speech [J]. ComputationalLinguistics,2000,26(3):1-34.
[191] Shriberg E, Bates R, Stolcke A, Taylor P, Jurafsky D, Ries K, Coccaro N,Martin R, Meteer M, Ess Dykema C V. Can Prosody Aid the AutomaticClassification of Dialog Acts in Conversational Speech [J]. Language andSpeech,1998,41(3-4):439-487.
[192]于景元,周晓纪.从定性到定量综合集成方法的实现和应用[J].系统工程理论与实践,2002,22(10):26-32.
[193] Hamalainen M, Hashim S, Suh Y. Structured Discourse for ScientificCollaboration: A Framework for Scientific Collaboration based on StructuredDiscourseAnalysis[J].JournalofOrganizationalComputing,1992,1(2):1-26.
[194] Cayrol C, Lagasquie M C. Gradual Handling Of Contradictions InArgumentationFrameworks[A],Bouchon-MeunierB,FoulloyLandYagerRR(eds.). Intelligent Systems for Information Processing: From Representation toApplications, Chapter Reasoning[M]. Amsterdam, Netherlands: Elsevier, 2003:179-190.
[195]熊才权,孙贤斌,欧阳勇.辩论的逻辑模型研究综述[J].模式识别与人工智能,2010,23(3):362-368.
[196] Reed C, Grasso F. Recent Advances in Computational Models of NaturalArgument[J].InternationalJournalofIntelligentSystems,2007,22(1):1-15.
[197] Rowe G, Reed C. Translating Wigmore Diagrams [C].//Procedings of theConference on Computational Models of Argument. Liverpool, UK, 2006.171-182.
[198] Lin F, Shoham Y. Argument Systems: A Uniform Basis for NonmonotonicReasoning [C].// Proceedings of the 1st International Conference on KnowledgeRepresentationandReasoning.SanFrancisco,USA,1989:245-255.
[199] Simari G R, Loui R P. A Mathematical Treatment of Defeasible Reasoning andItsImplementation[J].ArtificialIntelligence,1992,53(2-3):125-157.
[200] Prakken H, Sartor G. A Dialectical Model of Assessing Conflicting ArgumentsinLegalReasoning[J].ArtificialIntelligenceandLaw,1996,4(3-4):331-368.
[201] Vreeswijk G A W. Abstract Argumentation Systems [J]. Artificial Intelligence,1992,53(1-2):225-279.
[202] Dung P M. On The Acceptability of Arguments and its Fundamental Role inNonmonotonic Reasoning, Logic Programming and N-Person Games [J].ArtificialIntelligence,1995,77(2):321-357.
[203] Amgoud L, Prade H. Generation Evaluation of Different Types of Arguments inNegotiation [C].// 10th International Workshop on Non-monotonic Reasoning(NMR),2004.
[204] Amgoud L, Cayrol C, Lagasquie-Schiex M C, Livet P. On Bipolarity inArgumentation Frameworks [J]. International Journal of Intelligent Systems,2008,23:1062-1093.
[205] Amgoud L, Cayrol C. A Reasoning Model Based on the Production ofAcceptable Arguments [J]. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence,2002,34(1-3):197-215.
[206] Bench-Capon T J M. Persuasion in Practical Argument Using Value-basedArgumentationFrameworks[J].JournalofLogicandComputation,2003,13(3):429-448.
[207] Cayrol C, Lagasquie-Schiex MC.OntheAcceptabilityofArguments inBipolarArgumentation Frameworks [A], Godo L (ed.). Symbolic and QuantitativeApproaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, LNCS[M]. Berlin Heidelberg:Springer-Verlag,2005:378-389.
[208] ModgilS.AnAbstractTheoryofArgumentationthatAccommodatesDefeasibleReasoning about Preferences [C].// Mellouli K (ed.). Proceedings of the 9thEuropean Conf. on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning withUncertainty (ECSQARU), LLNAI. Hammamet, TN: Springer Verlag, 2007:648-659.
[209] Modgil S. Reasoning about Preferences in Argumentation Frameworks [J].ArtificialIntelligence,2009,173(9-10):901-934.
[210] Dunne P E, Hunter A, McBurney P, Parsons S, Wooldridge M. WeightedArgument Systems: Basic Definitions, Algorithms, and Complexity Results [J].ArtificialIntelligence,2011,175(2):457-486.
[211] Dunne P E, Hunter A, McBurney P, Wooldridge M. Inconsistency Tolerance inWeighted Argument Systems [C].// Proceedings of The 8th InternationalConference on Autonomous Agents and Multiagent Systems (AAMAS) 2009,Vol.2:851-858.
[212] Baroni P, Cerutti F, Giacomin M, Guida G. AFRA: Argumentation Frameworkwith Recursive Attacks [J]. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning,2011,52(1):19-37.
[213] Baroni P, Cerutti F, Giacomin M, Guida G. An Argumentation-Based Approachto Modeling Decision Support Contexts with What-If Capabilities [C].// AAAIFallSymposiumSeries-TheUsesofComputationalArgumentation,,2009:2-7.
[214] Atkinson K, Bench-Capon T, Mcburney P. PARMENIDES: FacilitatingDeliberation in Democracies [J]. Artificial Intelligence and Law, 2006, 14(4):261-275.
© 2004-2018 中国地质图书馆版权所有 京ICP备05064691号 京公网安备11010802017129号 地址：北京市海淀区学院路29号 邮编：100083 电话：办公室：(+86 10)66554848；文献借阅、咨询服务、科技查新：66554700 |