Selecting and Comparing Multiple Cases to Maximise Result Quality after Adaptation in Case-Based Adaptive Scheduling

  • Steve Scott
  • Hugh Osborne
  • Ron Simpson
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 1898)

Abstract

Recent Case-Based Reasoning research has begun to refocus attention on the problem of automatic adaptation of the retrieved case to give a fuller solution to the new problem. Such work has highlighted problems with the usefulness of similarity assessment of cases where adaptation is involved. As a response to this, methods of case selection are evolving that take adaptation into account. This current work looks more closely at the relationship between selection and adaptation. It considers experimental evidence considering adaptation of multiple cases for one problem. It argues that selection of the best case after adaptation will often make more efficient use of case knowledge than any attempt to pre-select a single case for adaptation.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Bergmann, R., Wilke, W., “Towards a New Formal Model of Transformational Adaptation in Case-Based Reasoning”, in Proceedings of ECAI98, Prade (Ed.) Wiley & Sons, 1998Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Bergmann, R., Stahl, A., “Similarity Measures for Object Oriented Case Representations” in Advances in Case-Based Reasoning, Proceedings of the third European Workshop on Case-Based Reasoning, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer Verlag 1996Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Cunningham, P., Smyth, B., “On the use of CBR in Optimisation Problems such as the TSP”, in Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development, Veloso, Aamodt (eds.), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer Verlag 1995Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Hanney, K., Keane, M.T., “Ease it by Learning from Cases”, in Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer Verlag 1997Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Janetko, D., Wess, S., Melis, E., “Goal Driven Similarity Assessment”, Technical Report SR-92-05, Universität des Saarlandes, Saarbrücken, Germany, 1992Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kontkanen, P., Myllymäki, P., Silander, T., Tirri, H., “On Bayesian Case Matching”, in Advances in Case-Based Reasoning, Smyth & Cunningham (eds.), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer Verlag 1998Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Osborne, H. R., Bridge, D., “Similarity Metrics: A Formal Unification of Cardinal and Non-Cardinal Similarity Measures”, in Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer Verlag 1997Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Richter, M.M., “Classification and Learning of similarity Measures” in Proceedings der Jahrestangung der Gesellschaft für Klassifikation, Opiz, Lausen Klar (ed.) Studies in Classification, Data Analysis and Knowledge Organisation, Springer Verlag, 1992Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Smyth, B., Keane, M.T., “Adaptation Guided Retrieval: questioning the similarity assumption in reasoning”, in Artificial Intelligence, Volume 102, pp 249–293, 1998MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Scott, S. “Separating Constraint Dimensions in a Scheduling Problem to Reduce Search Space”, In Proceedings of ECAI98, Prade (Ed.) Wiley & Sons, 1998Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Scott, S., Simpson, R.M. “Case-Bases Incorporating Scheduling Constraint Dimensions: Experiences in Nurse Rostering”, In Advances in Case-Based Reasoning, Smyth & Cunningham (eds.), Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer Verlag 1998Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Scott, S., Osborne, H., Simpson, R., “Assessing Case Value in Case-Based Reasoning with Adaptation”, In Proceedings of the World Multiconference on Systems, Cybernetics and Informatics, IIS, 1999Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Scott, S., Osborne, H., Simpson, R., “The Case Selection Problem in Case-Based Reasoning-Making the best use of Case Knowledge for Adaptive Scheduling”, under consideration.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Sushil, J. L., Li, G., “Augmenting Genetic Algorithms with Memory to Solve Travelling Salesman Problems”, Proceedings of the Joint Conference on Information Sciences, Duke University, 1997Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Watson, I., “Applying Case-Based Reasoning”, Morgan Kaufmann, 1997Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dietterich, T.G., “Machine Learning: Four Current Directions” in AI Magazine. 18(4), 97–136, 1997Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • Steve Scott
    • 1
  • Hugh Osborne
    • 1
  • Ron Simpson
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Computing and MathematicsUniversity of HuddersfieldQueensgateUK

Personalised recommendations