On Quality Measures for Case Base Maintenance

  • Thomas Reinartz
  • Ioannis Iglezakis
  • Thomas Roth-Berghofer
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1898)


Case base maintenance is one of the most important issues for current research in Case-Based Reasoning (CBR). In this paper, we outline two novel steps as part of the maintenance phase of the CBR process. The review step covers assessment and monitoring of the knowledge containers whereas the restore step actually modifies the contents of the containers according to recommendations resulting from the review step. Here, we focus our attention on the review step for the case base. For this purpose, we define several quality measures based on different case and case base properties that describe specific characteristics of the case base such as correctness, consistency, uniqueness, minimality, and incoherence. These measures allow an initial implementation of the review step for the case base container. We conclude the paper with an outline of future work to extend these aspects of maintenance in CBR.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Agnar Aamodt and Enric Plaza. Case-based reasoning: Foundational issues, methodological variations, and system approaches. AI Communications, 7(1):39–59, 1994.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    David W. Aha and Leonard A. Breslow. Refining conversational case libraries. In Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, pages 267–278, 1997.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mehmet Göker and Thomas Roth-Berghofer. The development and utilization of the case-based help-desk support system HOMER. Special Issue of the International Journal “Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence”, 12(6), 1999.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    David B. Leake and David C. Wilson. Categorizing case-base maintenance: Dimensions and directions. In Proceedings of EWCBR-98, Advances in Case-Based Reasoning. Springer-Verlag, 1998.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    David B. Leake and David C. Wilson. When experience is wrong: Examining CBR for changing tasks and environments. In Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, 1999.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kirsti Racine and Qiang Yang. On the consistency management of large case bases: the case for validation. In Proceedings of the AAAI-96 Workshop on Knowledge Base Validation, American Association for Artificial Intelligence (AAAI), 1996.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kirsti Racine and Qiang Yang. Maintaining unstructured case bases. In Proceedings of the 1997 International Conference on Case Based Reasoning, pages 553–564, 1997.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Michael M. Richter. The knowledge contained in similarity measures. Invited Talk at the International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, 1995.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Barry Smyth and Mark T. Keane. Remembering to forget: A competence-preserving deletion policy for case-based reasoning systems. In Proceedings of the 14th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 377–382, 1995.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Barry Smyth and Elizabeth McKenna. A portrait of case competence: Modelling the competence of case-based reasoning systems. In Proceedings of the 4th European Workshop on Case-Based Reasoning., pages 208–220, 1998.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Jun Zhu and Qiang Yang. Remembering to add: Competence-preserving case addition policies for case base maintenance. In Proceedings of the International Joint Conference in Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI), 1999.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Thomas Reinartz
    • 1
  • Ioannis Iglezakis
    • 1
  • Thomas Roth-Berghofer
    • 2
  1. 1.DaimlerChrysler AG, Research & TechnologyUlmGermany
  2. 2.tec:inno GmbHKaiserslauternGermany

Personalised recommendations