<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><xml><records><record><source-app name="Biblio" version="7.x">Drupal-Biblio</source-app><ref-type>17</ref-type><contributors><authors><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Linda Elliott</style></author><author><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Andrew Borden</style></author></authors></contributors><titles><title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Human Intuition and Decision-making Systems (II)</style></title><secondary-title><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">Information &amp; Security: An International Journal</style></secondary-title></titles><dates><year><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1999</style></year><pub-dates><date><style  face="normal" font="default" size="100%">1999</style></date></pub-dates></dates><volume><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">2</style></volume><pages><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">50-54</style></pages><language><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">eng</style></language><abstract><style face="normal" font="default" size="100%">This article discusses how a canonical design method was used to build a system to classify airborne targets according to their threat status, and to specify the appropriate response from an integrated air defense system. The paper argues that the inadequacy of human intuition is a strong reason to use canonical methods for designing decision making systems.</style></abstract></record></records></xml>