Probability and desirability of future developments – Results of a large-scale Argumentative Delphi in support of Horizon Europe preparation
This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only...
Ausführliche Beschreibung
Gespeichert in:
| Autor*in: |
Cuhls, Kerstin [verfasserIn] |
|---|
| Format: |
E-Artikel |
|---|---|
| Sprache: |
Englisch |
| Erschienen: |
2022transfer abstract |
|---|
| Schlagwörter: |
|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
Enthalten in: Latent subspace modeling of sequential data under the maximum entropy discrimination framework - Chatzis, Sotirios P. ELSEVIER, 2018, the journal of policy, planning and futures studies, Amsterdam [u.a.] |
|---|---|
| Übergeordnetes Werk: |
volume:138 ; year:2022 ; pages:0 |
| Links: |
|---|
| DOI / URN: |
10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918 |
|---|
| Katalog-ID: |
ELV057347751 |
|---|
| LEADER | 01000caa a22002652 4500 | ||
|---|---|---|---|
| 001 | ELV057347751 | ||
| 003 | DE-627 | ||
| 005 | 20230626044931.0 | ||
| 007 | cr uuu---uuuuu | ||
| 008 | 220808s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c | ||
| 024 | 7 | |a 10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918 |2 doi | |
| 028 | 5 | 2 | |a /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001821.pica |
| 035 | |a (DE-627)ELV057347751 | ||
| 035 | |a (ELSEVIER)S0016-3287(22)00019-2 | ||
| 040 | |a DE-627 |b ger |c DE-627 |e rakwb | ||
| 041 | |a eng | ||
| 082 | 0 | 4 | |a 610 |q VZ |
| 084 | |a 54.72 |2 bkl | ||
| 100 | 1 | |a Cuhls, Kerstin |e verfasserin |4 aut | |
| 245 | 1 | 0 | |a Probability and desirability of future developments – Results of a large-scale Argumentative Delphi in support of Horizon Europe preparation |
| 264 | 1 | |c 2022transfer abstract | |
| 336 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zzz |2 rdacontent | ||
| 337 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b z |2 rdamedia | ||
| 338 | |a nicht spezifiziert |b zu |2 rdacarrier | ||
| 520 | |a This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization. | ||
| 520 | |a This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization. | ||
| 650 | 7 | |a Argumentative Delphi |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Probability |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Preparation of FP9 |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Identifying priorities |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Horizon Scanning |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Desirability |2 Elsevier | |
| 650 | 7 | |a Foresight |2 Elsevier | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Dragomir, Bianca |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Gheorghiu, Radu |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Rosa, Aaron |4 oth | |
| 700 | 1 | |a Curaj, Adrian |4 oth | |
| 773 | 0 | 8 | |i Enthalten in |n Elsevier Science |a Chatzis, Sotirios P. ELSEVIER |t Latent subspace modeling of sequential data under the maximum entropy discrimination framework |d 2018 |d the journal of policy, planning and futures studies |g Amsterdam [u.a.] |w (DE-627)ELV000310468 |
| 773 | 1 | 8 | |g volume:138 |g year:2022 |g pages:0 |
| 856 | 4 | 0 | |u https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918 |3 Volltext |
| 912 | |a GBV_USEFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a GBV_ELV | ||
| 912 | |a SYSFLAG_U | ||
| 912 | |a SSG-OLC-PHA | ||
| 936 | b | k | |a 54.72 |j Künstliche Intelligenz |q VZ |
| 951 | |a AR | ||
| 952 | |d 138 |j 2022 |h 0 | ||
| author_variant |
k c kc |
|---|---|
| matchkey_str |
cuhlskerstindragomirbiancagheorghiuradur:2022----:rbbltadeiaiiyfuueeeomnseutoaagsaeruettvdlhisp |
| hierarchy_sort_str |
2022transfer abstract |
| bklnumber |
54.72 |
| publishDate |
2022 |
| allfields |
10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001821.pica (DE-627)ELV057347751 (ELSEVIER)S0016-3287(22)00019-2 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 54.72 bkl Cuhls, Kerstin verfasserin aut Probability and desirability of future developments – Results of a large-scale Argumentative Delphi in support of Horizon Europe preparation 2022transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization. This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization. Argumentative Delphi Elsevier Probability Elsevier Preparation of FP9 Elsevier Identifying priorities Elsevier Horizon Scanning Elsevier Desirability Elsevier Foresight Elsevier Dragomir, Bianca oth Gheorghiu, Radu oth Rosa, Aaron oth Curaj, Adrian oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Chatzis, Sotirios P. ELSEVIER Latent subspace modeling of sequential data under the maximum entropy discrimination framework 2018 the journal of policy, planning and futures studies Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV000310468 volume:138 year:2022 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA 54.72 Künstliche Intelligenz VZ AR 138 2022 0 |
| spelling |
10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001821.pica (DE-627)ELV057347751 (ELSEVIER)S0016-3287(22)00019-2 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 54.72 bkl Cuhls, Kerstin verfasserin aut Probability and desirability of future developments – Results of a large-scale Argumentative Delphi in support of Horizon Europe preparation 2022transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization. This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization. Argumentative Delphi Elsevier Probability Elsevier Preparation of FP9 Elsevier Identifying priorities Elsevier Horizon Scanning Elsevier Desirability Elsevier Foresight Elsevier Dragomir, Bianca oth Gheorghiu, Radu oth Rosa, Aaron oth Curaj, Adrian oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Chatzis, Sotirios P. ELSEVIER Latent subspace modeling of sequential data under the maximum entropy discrimination framework 2018 the journal of policy, planning and futures studies Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV000310468 volume:138 year:2022 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA 54.72 Künstliche Intelligenz VZ AR 138 2022 0 |
| allfields_unstemmed |
10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001821.pica (DE-627)ELV057347751 (ELSEVIER)S0016-3287(22)00019-2 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 54.72 bkl Cuhls, Kerstin verfasserin aut Probability and desirability of future developments – Results of a large-scale Argumentative Delphi in support of Horizon Europe preparation 2022transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization. This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization. Argumentative Delphi Elsevier Probability Elsevier Preparation of FP9 Elsevier Identifying priorities Elsevier Horizon Scanning Elsevier Desirability Elsevier Foresight Elsevier Dragomir, Bianca oth Gheorghiu, Radu oth Rosa, Aaron oth Curaj, Adrian oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Chatzis, Sotirios P. ELSEVIER Latent subspace modeling of sequential data under the maximum entropy discrimination framework 2018 the journal of policy, planning and futures studies Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV000310468 volume:138 year:2022 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA 54.72 Künstliche Intelligenz VZ AR 138 2022 0 |
| allfieldsGer |
10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001821.pica (DE-627)ELV057347751 (ELSEVIER)S0016-3287(22)00019-2 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 54.72 bkl Cuhls, Kerstin verfasserin aut Probability and desirability of future developments – Results of a large-scale Argumentative Delphi in support of Horizon Europe preparation 2022transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization. This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization. Argumentative Delphi Elsevier Probability Elsevier Preparation of FP9 Elsevier Identifying priorities Elsevier Horizon Scanning Elsevier Desirability Elsevier Foresight Elsevier Dragomir, Bianca oth Gheorghiu, Radu oth Rosa, Aaron oth Curaj, Adrian oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Chatzis, Sotirios P. ELSEVIER Latent subspace modeling of sequential data under the maximum entropy discrimination framework 2018 the journal of policy, planning and futures studies Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV000310468 volume:138 year:2022 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA 54.72 Künstliche Intelligenz VZ AR 138 2022 0 |
| allfieldsSound |
10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918 doi /cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001821.pica (DE-627)ELV057347751 (ELSEVIER)S0016-3287(22)00019-2 DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng 610 VZ 54.72 bkl Cuhls, Kerstin verfasserin aut Probability and desirability of future developments – Results of a large-scale Argumentative Delphi in support of Horizon Europe preparation 2022transfer abstract nicht spezifiziert zzz rdacontent nicht spezifiziert z rdamedia nicht spezifiziert zu rdacarrier This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization. This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization. Argumentative Delphi Elsevier Probability Elsevier Preparation of FP9 Elsevier Identifying priorities Elsevier Horizon Scanning Elsevier Desirability Elsevier Foresight Elsevier Dragomir, Bianca oth Gheorghiu, Radu oth Rosa, Aaron oth Curaj, Adrian oth Enthalten in Elsevier Science Chatzis, Sotirios P. ELSEVIER Latent subspace modeling of sequential data under the maximum entropy discrimination framework 2018 the journal of policy, planning and futures studies Amsterdam [u.a.] (DE-627)ELV000310468 volume:138 year:2022 pages:0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918 Volltext GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA 54.72 Künstliche Intelligenz VZ AR 138 2022 0 |
| language |
English |
| source |
Enthalten in Latent subspace modeling of sequential data under the maximum entropy discrimination framework Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:138 year:2022 pages:0 |
| sourceStr |
Enthalten in Latent subspace modeling of sequential data under the maximum entropy discrimination framework Amsterdam [u.a.] volume:138 year:2022 pages:0 |
| format_phy_str_mv |
Article |
| bklname |
Künstliche Intelligenz |
| institution |
findex.gbv.de |
| topic_facet |
Argumentative Delphi Probability Preparation of FP9 Identifying priorities Horizon Scanning Desirability Foresight |
| dewey-raw |
610 |
| isfreeaccess_bool |
false |
| container_title |
Latent subspace modeling of sequential data under the maximum entropy discrimination framework |
| authorswithroles_txt_mv |
Cuhls, Kerstin @@aut@@ Dragomir, Bianca @@oth@@ Gheorghiu, Radu @@oth@@ Rosa, Aaron @@oth@@ Curaj, Adrian @@oth@@ |
| publishDateDaySort_date |
2022-01-01T00:00:00Z |
| hierarchy_top_id |
ELV000310468 |
| dewey-sort |
3610 |
| id |
ELV057347751 |
| language_de |
englisch |
| fullrecord |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV057347751</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230626044931.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">220808s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">/cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001821.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV057347751</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0016-3287(22)00019-2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">54.72</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Cuhls, Kerstin</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Probability and desirability of future developments – Results of a large-scale Argumentative Delphi in support of Horizon Europe preparation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2022transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Argumentative Delphi</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Probability</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Preparation of FP9</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Identifying priorities</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Horizon Scanning</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Desirability</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Foresight</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Dragomir, Bianca</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gheorghiu, Radu</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rosa, Aaron</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Curaj, Adrian</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier Science</subfield><subfield code="a">Chatzis, Sotirios P. ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Latent subspace modeling of sequential data under the maximum entropy discrimination framework</subfield><subfield code="d">2018</subfield><subfield code="d">the journal of policy, planning and futures studies</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV000310468</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:138</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2022</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">54.72</subfield><subfield code="j">Künstliche Intelligenz</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">138</subfield><subfield code="j">2022</subfield><subfield code="h">0</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| author |
Cuhls, Kerstin |
| spellingShingle |
Cuhls, Kerstin ddc 610 bkl 54.72 Elsevier Argumentative Delphi Elsevier Probability Elsevier Preparation of FP9 Elsevier Identifying priorities Elsevier Horizon Scanning Elsevier Desirability Elsevier Foresight Probability and desirability of future developments – Results of a large-scale Argumentative Delphi in support of Horizon Europe preparation |
| authorStr |
Cuhls, Kerstin |
| ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv |
@@773@@(DE-627)ELV000310468 |
| format |
electronic Article |
| dewey-ones |
610 - Medicine & health |
| delete_txt_mv |
keep |
| author_role |
aut |
| collection |
elsevier |
| remote_str |
true |
| illustrated |
Not Illustrated |
| topic_title |
610 VZ 54.72 bkl Probability and desirability of future developments – Results of a large-scale Argumentative Delphi in support of Horizon Europe preparation Argumentative Delphi Elsevier Probability Elsevier Preparation of FP9 Elsevier Identifying priorities Elsevier Horizon Scanning Elsevier Desirability Elsevier Foresight Elsevier |
| topic |
ddc 610 bkl 54.72 Elsevier Argumentative Delphi Elsevier Probability Elsevier Preparation of FP9 Elsevier Identifying priorities Elsevier Horizon Scanning Elsevier Desirability Elsevier Foresight |
| topic_unstemmed |
ddc 610 bkl 54.72 Elsevier Argumentative Delphi Elsevier Probability Elsevier Preparation of FP9 Elsevier Identifying priorities Elsevier Horizon Scanning Elsevier Desirability Elsevier Foresight |
| topic_browse |
ddc 610 bkl 54.72 Elsevier Argumentative Delphi Elsevier Probability Elsevier Preparation of FP9 Elsevier Identifying priorities Elsevier Horizon Scanning Elsevier Desirability Elsevier Foresight |
| format_facet |
Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource |
| format_main_str_mv |
Text Zeitschrift/Artikel |
| carriertype_str_mv |
zu |
| author2_variant |
b d bd r g rg a r ar a c ac |
| hierarchy_parent_title |
Latent subspace modeling of sequential data under the maximum entropy discrimination framework |
| hierarchy_parent_id |
ELV000310468 |
| dewey-tens |
610 - Medicine & health |
| hierarchy_top_title |
Latent subspace modeling of sequential data under the maximum entropy discrimination framework |
| isfreeaccess_txt |
false |
| familylinks_str_mv |
(DE-627)ELV000310468 |
| title |
Probability and desirability of future developments – Results of a large-scale Argumentative Delphi in support of Horizon Europe preparation |
| ctrlnum |
(DE-627)ELV057347751 (ELSEVIER)S0016-3287(22)00019-2 |
| title_full |
Probability and desirability of future developments – Results of a large-scale Argumentative Delphi in support of Horizon Europe preparation |
| author_sort |
Cuhls, Kerstin |
| journal |
Latent subspace modeling of sequential data under the maximum entropy discrimination framework |
| journalStr |
Latent subspace modeling of sequential data under the maximum entropy discrimination framework |
| lang_code |
eng |
| isOA_bool |
false |
| dewey-hundreds |
600 - Technology |
| recordtype |
marc |
| publishDateSort |
2022 |
| contenttype_str_mv |
zzz |
| container_start_page |
0 |
| author_browse |
Cuhls, Kerstin |
| container_volume |
138 |
| class |
610 VZ 54.72 bkl |
| format_se |
Elektronische Aufsätze |
| author-letter |
Cuhls, Kerstin |
| doi_str_mv |
10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918 |
| dewey-full |
610 |
| title_sort |
probability and desirability of future developments – results of a large-scale argumentative delphi in support of horizon europe preparation |
| title_auth |
Probability and desirability of future developments – Results of a large-scale Argumentative Delphi in support of Horizon Europe preparation |
| abstract |
This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization. |
| abstractGer |
This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization. |
| abstract_unstemmed |
This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization. |
| collection_details |
GBV_USEFLAG_U GBV_ELV SYSFLAG_U SSG-OLC-PHA |
| title_short |
Probability and desirability of future developments – Results of a large-scale Argumentative Delphi in support of Horizon Europe preparation |
| url |
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918 |
| remote_bool |
true |
| author2 |
Dragomir, Bianca Gheorghiu, Radu Rosa, Aaron Curaj, Adrian |
| author2Str |
Dragomir, Bianca Gheorghiu, Radu Rosa, Aaron Curaj, Adrian |
| ppnlink |
ELV000310468 |
| mediatype_str_mv |
z |
| isOA_txt |
false |
| hochschulschrift_bool |
false |
| author2_role |
oth oth oth oth |
| doi_str |
10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918 |
| up_date |
2024-07-06T22:58:20.456Z |
| _version_ |
1803872318739447808 |
| fullrecord_marcxml |
<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">ELV057347751</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230626044931.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">220808s2022 xx |||||o 00| ||eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="028" ind1="5" ind2="2"><subfield code="a">/cbs_pica/cbs_olc/import_discovery/elsevier/einzuspielen/GBV00000000001821.pica</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)ELV057347751</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(ELSEVIER)S0016-3287(22)00019-2</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="082" ind1="0" ind2="4"><subfield code="a">610</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="084" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">54.72</subfield><subfield code="2">bkl</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Cuhls, Kerstin</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Probability and desirability of future developments – Results of a large-scale Argumentative Delphi in support of Horizon Europe preparation</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2022transfer abstract</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zzz</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">z</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">nicht spezifiziert</subfield><subfield code="b">zu</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">This contribution explores the use of a Foresight tool, namely the Dynamic Argumentative Delphi (DAD) survey, in informing policy-making during the design phase of a new Framework Programme in research, technology, development and innovation (RTDI). The Dynamic Argumentative Delphi enables not only quantitative assessments for future statements, but also supports these estimates with qualitative arguments that are visible to fellow contributors; and ranked in real-time according to the frequency of their selection. Using project “BOHEMIA – Beyond the Horizon” project as an example for a procedure bringing in issues under uncertainty into a policy-making process, we undergo a structural analysis of the content generated (the results of the Delphi survey), exploring the quantitative and qualitative results obtained. More specifically, analysing the argumentation generated by respondents, this paper investigates to what extent the perceived feasibility of statements is consistent with the estimated time of realization and whether the perceived desirability of the statements creates a bias in the estimated time of realization. We observe that participants’ argumentation is consistently correlated with the quantitative estimations, where more extended debates on some statements reflect a real dispersion of opinions. Moreover, expressed feasibility is correlated with average time of realization. One rather surprising, but encouraging finding, is the absence of a consistent desirability bias, i.e. more votes for arguments that deem the statement desirable are not correlated with a shorter estimated time of realization.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Argumentative Delphi</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Probability</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Preparation of FP9</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Identifying priorities</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Horizon Scanning</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Desirability</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="650" ind1=" " ind2="7"><subfield code="a">Foresight</subfield><subfield code="2">Elsevier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Dragomir, Bianca</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Gheorghiu, Radu</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rosa, Aaron</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="1" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Curaj, Adrian</subfield><subfield code="4">oth</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">Enthalten in</subfield><subfield code="n">Elsevier Science</subfield><subfield code="a">Chatzis, Sotirios P. ELSEVIER</subfield><subfield code="t">Latent subspace modeling of sequential data under the maximum entropy discrimination framework</subfield><subfield code="d">2018</subfield><subfield code="d">the journal of policy, planning and futures studies</subfield><subfield code="g">Amsterdam [u.a.]</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)ELV000310468</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:138</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2022</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:0</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1016/j.futures.2022.102918</subfield><subfield code="3">Volltext</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ELV</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_U</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SSG-OLC-PHA</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="936" ind1="b" ind2="k"><subfield code="a">54.72</subfield><subfield code="j">Künstliche Intelligenz</subfield><subfield code="q">VZ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">138</subfield><subfield code="j">2022</subfield><subfield code="h">0</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
|
| score |
7.4003525 |