Decision explanation

Bell, D., Gray, T., Haggett, C. (2005). The Socitil Gap in wind farm siting decisions Explanations and policy responses. Environmental Politics, 14(A), 460-477. 

Eor each role on each case, the player is asked to complete a pre-decision analysis and a decision explanation, and to select the approaches used when making the decision. The pre-decision analysis is an initial impression of a role s ethical problem and what decision this particular role might take (see top-left screen on Fig. 12.4). The player is asked to discuss the different possible decisions that the role he is playing can make and enter all of the possible options as well as the implications of each possible decision. 

The decision explanation is a justification of the decision the role made, based upon the options provided by the software (see top-right screen on Fig. 12.4). SIMULATE presents two ethical decisions based upon the role and the case provided. The player is asked to choose one of them and explain the factors he has considered to make that decision. 

In addition, text data from SIMULATE, in particular, the pre-decision and decision explanations, the ethical decision made, and the ethical approaches selected for each role and case from every player were recorded. These two sets of data, text data from SIMULATE and pre- and post-surveys are used to measure the impact of SIMULATE and the ethics course on learning and attitudes. 

The application of information in Figure 6.19 requires some explanation. The decision as to which calculation method to choose should be based upon the phase of the vessel s contents, its boiling point at ambient pressure T its critical temperature Tf, and its actual temperature T. For the purpose of selecting a calculation method, three different phases can be distinguished liquid, vapor or nonideal gas, and ideal gas. Should more than be performed separately for each phase, and the... 

These situations are treated as completely new applications which should include an explanation of the decision to develop the enantiomer or racemate. Data on the existing racemate or enantiomer may be included where appropriate with bridging studies as necessary. 

Formally no explanations have been given for these decisions. However, it is widely believed that the Veba process could not compete economically with the S VZ and blast furnace processes. 

It also provides an explanation log listing the reasons for the decisions made. 

The explanation for this is that with increasing solvent power intermolecular repulsion becomes decisive. Enhancement of the polymer concentration leads therefore to coil shrinkage [64], whereas in the limiting case of a 0-solvent no concentration-induced shrinkage is to be expected. Raising c further leads to a critical concentration, c, at which the coils begin to overlap and interpenetrate. 

Once a crystal structure has been determined, the information is communicated in the form of an atomic coordinates file. In addition to a list of the atomic positions, the coordinates file contains other information that deserves an explanation and requires attention by the user. Some of the terms included in an atomic coordinates file are explained briefly. It is hoped that the information will provide the reader with insights to evaluate the quality of the structure, distinguish between its well-defined and flexible regions, and make sensible decisions in structural analysis. 

When required, provide justification for, and an explanation of, its decisions and advice. 

All decisions must be recorded, as well as an explanation of the decision, to provide background information if changes are needed in the future. Also, all monitoring activities must be documented, so that it is clear who has done what and when. The documentation is used to demonstrate compliance in relation to certification, and in case of problems it is used to try to find out if a problem was due to human error or a technical failure. 

As is evident from Fig. 5, random FeS2—p occupies a central position among the structure types in question. This suggests that a relatively simple semi-quantitative explanation for the cause of the different modes of orienting the pairs, and the consequent implications for e.g. axial ratios, should be within reach. However, the understanding process must proceed through a number of steps this involves inter alia that decisions have to be taken on some of the following questions ... 

The isomerism existing between the pairs of nucleotides was attributed to the different locations of the phosphoryl residues in the carbohydrate part of the parent nucleoside,49 63 since, for instance, the isomeric adenylic acids are both hydrolyzed by acids to adenine, and by alkalis or kidney phosphatase to adenosine. Neither is identical with adenosine 5-phosphate since they are not deaminated by adenylic-acid deaminase,68 60 and are both more labile to acids than is muscle adenylic acid. An alternative explanation of the isomerism was put forward by Doherty.61 He was able, by a process of transglycosidation, to convert adenylic acids a" and 6 to benzyl D-riboside phosphates which were then hydrogenated to optically inactive ribitol phosphates. He concluded from this that both isomers are 3-phosphates and that the isomerism is due to different configurations at the anomeric position. This evidence is, however, open to the same criticism detailed above in connection with the work of Levene and coworkers. Further work has amply justified the original conclusion regarding the nature of the isomerism, since it has been found that, in all four cases, a and 6 isomers give rise to the same nucleoside on enzymic hydrolysis.62 62 63 It was therefore evident that the isomeric nucleotides are 2- and 3-phosphates, since they are demonstrably different from the known 5-phosphates. The decision as to which of the pair is the 2- and which the 3-phosphate proved to be a difficult one. The problem is complicated by the fact that the a and b" nucleotides are readily interconvertible.64,64... 

The commercial committee acted on his report in September 1937. They decided that only those of unquestioned loyalty to the Party would be sent abroad. Ilgner gave an odd explanation of this decision ... 

If the relationships between the previous employer, who owns trade secrets, the departing employee, and his new employer degenerate to the position that court action appears imminent, that action may well be taken in a state court or a federal court applying state law, and a jury may make the decision. A jury sometimes gives specific answers to specific interrogatories but usually delivers a verdict on the evidence without explanation. It is difficult, therefore, to predict what a jury will hold. It is also difficult to reason from the verdict in one case to another. 

It would be preferable, of course, if individually and collectively, scientists were more forthcoming with explanations and justifications of their choices of values. But it is difficult to advance strong arguments against their choices if research is practiced only as the asymptotic pursuit of "pure truth" and if the choices are not misrepresented as objective and scientific. However, as it is funded and practiced currently, scientifc research deals almost exclusively with societally important study systems and therefore has practical as well as "purely scientific" objectives. Thus, it is proper to require that decision rules be adequately explained and justified in their societal context and even to look with a jaundiced eye at misrepresentations of value choices as "objective" or "scientific" for whatever reason and in any research context. 

However, society likes to have decisions made in a black and white manner and to know whether something is there or not. This situation suggests that the analytical error should drop to zero. While this result is the goal of all analytical work, it is simply not realistic. Our basic need, then, is to simplify error determinations and explanations and to educate the public both for the reasons and for the interpretations of error. The goal of this volume is to further the use of mathematical and statistical tools—the field of chemometrics—for chemical and, specifically, trace chemical analyses of pesticides and environmental contaminants. 

When explanation is requested at intermediate points in a session. Just the reasoning for the current decision tree is presented. By asking for elaboration, the user can inspect the reasoning underlying the current rule. Elaboration of the corona decision above would yield descriptions of the lines of reasoning which determined the premises that the oil temperature was moderate, that the concentration of H2 was medium, etc. Elaboration may be repeated until the user is satisfied or until all the steps have been examined. 

---