Qualitative knowledge to support reasoning about cases

  • Robert J. Aarts
  • Juho Rousu
Scientific Papers Integrated Approaches
First Online:
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1266)

Abstract

Our recipe planner for bioprocesses, Sophist, uses a semi-qualitative model to reason about cases. The model represents qualitative knowledge about the possible effects of differences between cases and about the possible causes of observed problems. Hence, the model is a crucial resource of adaptation knowledge. The model representation has been developed specifically to support CBR tasks. The essential notion in this representation is that of an influence. Representation of domain knowledge in an influence graph and a mapping of case-features onto nodes of such a graph, enable a variety of interesting reasoning tasks. Examples of such task illustrate how qualitative reasoning and case-based reasoning support each other in complex planning tasks.

Keywords

qualitative reasoning planning domain knowledge 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Aamodt, A. (1994). Explanation-driven case-based reasoning, In S. Wess, K. Althoff, M. Richter (Eds.): Topics in Case-based reasoning. Springer Verlag, pp. 274–288.Google Scholar
  2. Aarts, R.J. & Rousu, J. (1996). Towards CBR for bioprocess planning. In Smith I., Faltings, B., (Eds.): Proceedings of EWCBR-96, Lausanne, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 1186: 16–27.Google Scholar
  3. Ashley, K.D. & Aleven, V. (1996). How different is different? Arguing About the Significance of Similarities and Differences. In Smith I., Faltings, B., (Eds.): Proceedings of EWCBR-96, Lausanne, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 1186: 1–15.Google Scholar
  4. Bhatta, S., Goel, A. & Prabhakar, S. (1994). Innovation in Analogical Design: A Model-Based Approach. Proc. of the Third International Conference on AI in Design, Aug. 1994, Lausanne, Switzerland.Google Scholar
  5. DeJong, G. F. (1994). Learning to plan in continuous domains. Artificial Intelligence 65: 71–141.Google Scholar
  6. Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K.D. & Gentner, D. (1989). The Structure-Mapping Engine: Algorithm and Examples. Artificial Intelligence 41: 1–63.Google Scholar
  7. Forbus. K.D. (1984). Qualitative Process Theory. Artificial Intelligence 24: 85–168.Google Scholar
  8. Hammond, K. (1990). Explaining and Repairing Plans That Fail. Artificial Intelligence, 45:173–228.Google Scholar
  9. Hanney, K. & Keane, M.T. (1996). Learning Adaptation Rules from a Case-Base. In Smith I., Faltings, B., (Eds). Proceedings of EWCBR-96, Lausanne, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 1186: 179–192.Google Scholar
  10. Hastings, J.D., Branting, L.K. & Lockwood, J.A. (1995), Case Adaplalion Using an Incomplete Causal Model. In: Veloso, M. & Aamodl, A. (Eds.): Proceedings ICCBR-95, Sesimbra, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 1010: 181–192.Google Scholar
  11. Leake, D.B., Kinley, A. & Wilson, D. Learning to Improve Case Adaptation by Introspective Reasoning and CBR. In: Veloso, M. & Aamodt, A. (Eds.): Proceedings ICCBR-95, Sesimbra, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 1010: 229–240.Google Scholar
  12. Kamp, G. (1996). Using Description Logics for Knowledge Intensive Case-Based Reasoning. In Smith I., Faltings, B., (Eds). Proceedings of EWCBR-96, Lausanne, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 1186: 204–218Google Scholar
  13. Koton, P. (1989). Using experience in learning and problem solving. Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Laboratory of Computer Science (Ph.D. diss., October 1988), MIT/LCS/TR-441.Google Scholar
  14. Nayak P. & Joskowicz, L. (1996). Efficient compositional modeling for generating causal explanations. Artificial Intelligence 83: 193–227.Google Scholar
  15. Richter, M. (1995). The similarity Issue in CBR: The knowledge contained in similarity measures, Invited talk at ICCBR-95, Sesimbra.Google Scholar
  16. Say, A.C.C. & Kuru, S. (1996). Qualitative system identification: deriving structure from behavior. Artificial Intelligence 83: 75–141.Google Scholar
  17. Schank, R.C. & Leake, D.B. (1989). Creativity and Learning in a Case-Based Explainer. Artificial Intelligence 40: 353–385.Google Scholar
  18. Sycara, K., Guttal, R., Koning, J., Narasimhan, S. & Navinchandra, D. (1992) CADET: a Case-based Synthesis Tool for Engineering Design, Intl. J. Expert Systems, 4:2.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • Robert J. Aarts
    • 1
  • Juho Rousu
    • 1
  1. 1.VTT Biotechnology and Food ResearchVTTFinland

Personalised recommendations