Virtual Evening Seminars on Topics in Artificial Intelligence - BCS-SGAI

BCS Specialist Group on Artificial Intelligence (BCS-SGAI)
Virtual Evening Seminars on Topics in Artificial Intelligence

The first three events in this year's programme of virtual evening seminars will be on March 26^th, April 9^th and May 14^th. All the virtual seminars are free of charge and open to all. No registration is necessary. 

Further details are given below.

 

(1) Wednesday March 26th 2025 from 6 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. (UK time): 

'Symbolic AI versus Neuro-Symbolic AI'

Dr George Baryannis (University of Huddersfield) on 'Knowledge-based Artificial Intelligence: Achieving Inherent Explainability in Intelligent Applications'.

Dr Mercedes Arguello Casteleiro (SGAI) on 'One Digital Health: Symbolic AI versus Neuro-Symbolic AI' and -

Dr Safaa Menad (University of Rouen, France) on 'Merging and Validating Health Ontologies'.

Website (including Zoom link): 

https://www.bcs-sgai.org/seminars/2025-03-26/

 

(2) Wednesday April 9th 2025 from 6 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. (UK time): 'Computer Vision Applications'.

There will be two talks: Dr James Haworth (University College London) on 'Progress in computer vision for scene understanding in urban analytics' and Dr Tianjin Huang (University of Exeter) on ' Benchmarking the Robustness of Remote Sensing Foundation Models'.

Website (including Zoom link): https://www.bcs-sgai.org/seminars/2025-04-09/

 

(3) Wednesday May 14th 2025 from 6 p.m. to 7:30 p.m. (UK time), as part of our Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining series. There will be two talks: Prof. Dr. Anna Fensel (Wageningen University, The Netherlands) on 'Knowledge graphs, FAIR principles and generative AI for scientific discoveries in agri-food' and Dr Anelia Kurteva (Assistant Professor of Computer Science, University of Birmingham, UK) on 'Responsible AI through responsible data management and governance enabled by knowledge graphs'

Website (including Zoom link): (link to follow)

 

To register for information about future SGAI events go to https://www.bcs-sgai.org/register/

Max Bramer, Chair BCS-SGAI

(- and my source BCS-SGAI list)

1st Seminar Series: "Violence, Memory, Networks" - Interdisciplinary Connections

Dear colleagues,

The first session of the seminar "Violence, Memory, Networks" will take place on 19th March, 2025, at 2.30 pm (GMT), exclusively online.

In this session, Caroline Elkins (Harvard University, USA) will speak about "Legalized Lawlessness: Violence and the End of the British Empire" and Max Silverman (University of Leeds, UK) will bring us a communication on "Concentrationary violence and the everyday: the Zone of Interest (Jonathan Glazer, 2023)".

Registration is free but mandatory: https://forms.gle/brgNcR6hk6dxf7gu7

Event website: https://www.uc.pt/fluc/seminarvmn/

We would be very grateful if you could publicise the event through your channels.

Looking forward to see you soon,

The organising committee.

My source: https://www.uc.pt/fluc/ief/

'Clean tools' - fit for Conceptual Engineering?

Posting previously news of a conference on 'Conceptual Engineering' I was drawn and try to follow the following series:

Conceptual Engineering Seminar | Simon Blackburn (Cambridge): TBA 

March 30 @ 3:00 pm - 5:00 pm 

ABSTRACT. — When I hit upon the term ‘conceptual engineering’ in the Introduction to my book Think, I suppose I thought of it as simply a cute way of introducing what philosophers do. I had no idea that the term had already been used, although I have subsequently learned that it was. I have therefore been surprised that books and seminars have subsequently been devoted to the idea: it is as if books and seminars were simply entitled ‘Philosophy’ rather than directed at particular problems within philosophy. In my talk I hope to go further into that and try to understand why it happened. 

Yesterday, Simon Blackburn cited Austin (1956) and the need for 'clean tools', which led me to the following source*:

"First, words are our tools, and, as a minimum, we should use clean tools: we should know what we mean and what we do not, and we must forearm ourselves against the traps that language sets us. Secondly, words are not (except in their own little corner*) facts or things: we need therefore to prise them off the world, to hold them apart from and against it, so that we can realise their inadequacies and arbitrarinesses, and can re-look at the world without blinkers. Thirdly, and more hopefully, our common stock of words embodies all the distinctions men have found worth drawing, and the connexions they have found worth marking, in the lifetimes of many generations: these surely are likely to be more numerous, more sound, since they have stood up to the long test of the survival of the fittest, and more subtle, at least in all ordinary and reasonably practical matters, than any that you or I are likely to think up in our armchairs of an afternoon - the most favoured alternative method."

*my emphasis

Simon's talk of 'clean tools' prompted me to reflect:

The assumed neutrality of Hodges' model. As noted on W2tQ previously, Hodges' model is an invitation to start with a new slate. To leave behind bias and prejudice, to assure unconditional positive regard and a non-judgmental approach and attitude.

'Engineering' is usually conducted within a dedicated physical space. Apprentices will soon be familiar with the discipline of leaving the work environment clean and prepared for the next day. They will learn that tools have their place (even on the screen). Tools themselves also need care; so don't be care-less.

If Occam's razor is a preparatory rule for conceptual hygiene, perhaps we can take this further, or at least propose an addition? There is a 'rule of forceps' (which, it might be argued, is person-centred, or clearly patient-centred?) but not only are forceps a tool, we can utilise a divider too.

In use, Hodges' model suggests and facilitates dichotomous thinking. The forceps may help grasp the the key parts - the polarities of a situation. The divider may serve to help us to weigh and measure the 'distance' of two concepts, especially if they seem to be grounded across two of the model's care (knowledge) domains.

So Hodges' model may have a role in 'conceptual engineering', variously as a dialectic divider or dialectical forceps?

Austin, J. (1956). A Plea for Excuses: The Presidential Address. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 57, new series, 1-30. Retrieved March 30, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4544570Austin, J. (1956). A Plea for Excuses: The Presidential Address. Proceedings of the Aristotelian Society, 57, new series, 1-30. Retrieved March 30, 2021, from http://www.jstor.org/stable/4544570

There is a legal case of historic interest also described in the Austin's paper.

The "Mereology of Potentiality" project - e-Seminars

The "Mereology of Potentiality" project would like to announce the following activities for Trinity Term (to attend the e-seminar, you will simply need to click on the link provided):

Online Work in Progress seminars:

• 1 May - Thomas Sattig (Tuebingen) - "The enduring present"
• 8 May – William Simpson (Cambridge) - "Empowering scientific practices: Naturalism and the problem of induction "
• 15 May – Aaron Cotnoir (St. Andrews) - "A Mereology of Powers? Three Ideas"
• 22 May - Neil Williams (Buffalo) - "Book discussion: the power metaphysic"
• 29 May - Robert Corry (Tasmania) - "TBC"
• 5 June - Travis Dumsday (Concordia) - "The structure of powers: canvassing some options"
• 12 June - Elisa Paganini (Milano) - "Powers and Ontic Vagueness"

For all our project-related events, attendance is open to all. On our website -
(https://www.power-parts.website/ ) you can find news, abstracts, or sign up to our mailing list. 

For any questions, please e-mail us at power AT philosophy.ox.ac.uk

All the best
Anna, Christopher and Andrea


My source:
phil-powers AT maillist.ox.ac.uk

c/o Assoc. Prof. Nazilla Khanlou: Connecting - Hodges' model & Women's Health

From: Nazilla Khanlou

To: peter jones

Sent: Tuesday, 28 January 2020, 23:18:15 GMT

Subject: Re: Connecting - Hodges' model & Women's Health

Hi Peter,

I hope all is well. Yesterday in the PhD level 2 Seminar course that I teach (for PhD in Nursing students) we discussed your publication and 2 by 2 template. Thank you for letting me know about your work!

FYI, these are the readings we discussed yesterday:

Epstein I, Khanlou N, Ermel RE, Sherk M, Simmonds KK, Balaquiao L,& Chang K-Y. (2019). Students who identify with a disability and instructors’ experiences in nursing practice: A scoping review. International Journal of Mental Health and Addiction , 1-28, Published online: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11469-019-00129-7

Hoeck, B., & Delmar, C. (2018). Theoretical development in the context of nursing—The hidden epistemology of nursing theory. Nursing Philosophy, 19(1), e12196. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/abs/10.1111/nup.12196

Jones, P. (2014). Exploring the dimensions of recovery and user experience. International Journal of Person Centered Medicine, 3(4), 305-311.
https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Peter_Jones9/publication/288182688_Exploring_the_Dimensions_of_Recovery_and_User_Experience_Background_and_Conceptual_Development/links/567efd9908ae051f9ae66e93/Exploring-the-Dimensions-of-Recovery-and-User-Experience-Background-and-Conceptual-Development.pdf

Khanlou N, Mustafa N, Vazquez LM, Davidson, & Yoshida K. (2017). Mothering children with developmental disabilities: A critical perspective on health promotion. Health Care for Women International (38)6, 613-634. Available url: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/07399332.2017.1296841

Thorne, S., Stephens, J., & Truant, T. (2016). Building qualitative study design using nursing's disciplinary epistemology. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 72(2), 451-460.

Two of the readings in the above are related to my publications (1st one I am a co-author on and the 4th one I am the first author on).

The students asked how I came to know about your work, and I indicated one of the advantages of Twitter is you connect with folks related to our field!

Thank you again,

Nazilla
---------
Nazilla Khanlou, RN, PhD
Women's Health Research Chair in Mental Health, Faculty of Health
Academic Lead, Lillian Meighen Wright Foundation Maternal Child Health Scholars Program
Associate Professor, School of Nursing
York University, HNES 3rd floor
4700 Keele Street
Toronto, ON, Canada, M3J 1P3

E-mail: nkhanlou AT yorku.ca
Twitter: https://twitter.com/YorkUOWHC

https://twitter.com/NazillaKhanlou
Website: http://nkhanlou.info.yorku.ca/

World Philosophy Day: "Why do we need evidence of mechanisms?"

December 17th 2019, 14h30-16h00

Bordeaux Pellegrin Hospital, Rheumatology Service, 12th floor

Phyllis Illari (University College London, UK)

"Why do we need evidence of mechanisms?" A PhilInBioMed seminar

Open to all

Phyllis Illari is a Senior Lecturer at University College London (Dept of Science & Technology Studies; Faculty of Maths & Physical Sciences) in the UK. She works in the philosophy of science, with particular expertise in causality, mechanisms and information.

Abstract

I will present a view of evidence of mechanisms as evidence of the activities, entities, their organization, and the phenomena they explain, using the idea of ‘minimal mechanism’ (Glennan and Illari, 2018). I will argue that this view allows us to theoretically organize an incredibly diverse array of forms of evidence and empirical practices. I will then home in on a specific way in which evidence of mechanism is crucial, arguing that it is important even for solid evidence of correlation. Any clinical study, even a well-conducted RCT, which is still one of our best methods of establishing a reliable correlation, needs decent answers to two questions: (i) what are the variables for disease, treatment and outcome? and (ii) how and when are they measured and why?

I will use the case of ‘vitamin D deficiency’ to show how important these questions are, even when they are not explicitly addressed in published results, because they are regarded as sufficiently standardised to be unimportant. Until recently, vitamin D deficiency was regarded as well-understood, reliably measurable in standardised ways, and linked to diseases such as rickets by well understood mechanisms. However, recent research has linked vitamin D deficiency to other diseases, in ways that expose the fact that different measuring techniques measure slightly different forms of Vitamin D. Those differences are now relevant.

Considering the case shows how deeply integrative our evidential pluralism needs to be, and therefore how complex our practices of reasoning about evidence are. Philosophical accounts need to be responsive to this.

For more information click here.

Best regards,

Wiebke Bretting
--
Dr. Wiebke Bretting
Project Manager ERC IDEM
ImmunoConcEpT, UMR5164
Université de Bordeaux
146 rue Léo Saignat
33076 Bordeaux
https://www.immuconcept.org/erc-idem/

My source:
Philos-L "The Liverpool List" is run by the Department of Philosophy, University of Liverpool https://www.liverpool.ac.uk/philosophy/philos-l/