Advertisement

Modeling and extending expertise

Introductory Papers
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 723)

Abstract

This paper surveys the state-of-the-art in knowledge acquisition for knowledge-based systems. It gives an overview of three major areas of advance in recent years: in conceptual and theoretical terms, the characterization of knowledge acquisition as a process of modeling expertise with a view to emulating and extending it; in methodological terms, the provision of detailed formal modeling methodologies supporting such processes; and, in technological terms, the development of computer-based tools for knowledge acquisition supporting such modeling methodologies. The paper also presents the state-of-the-art in the context of its relation to other fields of activity such as developments in software engineering, system-theoretic aspects of modeling in general, and the variety of technologies that have been applied in knowledge acquisition such as those of hypermedia and machine learning.

Keywords

Knowledge Acquisition Knowledge Engineering Knowledge Engineer Soft System Methodology Empirical Induction 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. [1]
    H. Akkermans, F.v. Harmelen, G. Shreiber, and B. Wielinga, “A formalisation of knowledge-level models for knowledge acquisition,” International Journal of Intelligent Systems, vol. 8, no. 2 pp. 169–208, 1993.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    J.H. Boose, “Personal construct theory and the transfer of human expertise,” in Proceedings AAAI-84. American Association for Artificial Intelligence: California. p. 27–33, 1984.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    J.H. Boose, Expertise Transfer for Expert Systems, Amsterdam: Elsevier. 1986.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    J.H. Boose, “A survey of knowledge acquisition techniques and tools,” Knowledge Acquisition, vol. 1, no. 1 pp. 39–58, 1989.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    J.H. Boose and J.M. Bradshaw, “Expertise transfer and complex problems: using AQUINAS as a knowledge acquisition workbench for knowledge-based systems,” International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. 26, pp. 3–28, 1987.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    J.H. Boose and B.R. Gaines, Knowledge Acquisition Tools for Expert Systems, London: Academic Press. 1988.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    J.M. Bradshaw, K.M. Ford, J.R. Adams-Webber, and J.H. Boose, “Beyond the repertory grid: new approaches to constructivist knowledge acquisition tool development,” International Journal of Intelligent Systems, vol. 8, no. 2 pp. 287–33, 1993.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    R. Carnap, Logical Foundations of Probability, London: Routledge & Kegan-Paul. 1950.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    J. Cendrowska, “An algorithm for inducing modular rules,” International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. 27, no. 4 pp. 349–370, 1987.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    P. Checkland, Systems Thinking, Systems Practice, Chichester, UK: Wiley. 1981.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    W.J. Clancey, “Viewing knowledge bases as qualitative models,” IEEE Expert, vol. 4, no. 2 pp. 9–23, 1989.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    B. Cohen, W.T. Harwood, and M.I. Jackson, The Specification of Complex Systems, Wokingham, UK: Addison-Wesley. 1986.Google Scholar
  13. [13]
    J.D. Couger, “Evolution of business system analysis techniques,” ACM Computing Surveys, vol. 5, no. 3 pp. 167–198, 1973.Google Scholar
  14. [14]
    J. Diederich, I. Ruhmann, and M. May, “KRITON: A knowledge acquisition tool for expert systems,” International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. 26, no. 1 pp. 29–40, 1987.Google Scholar
  15. [15]
    L. Eshelman, D. Ehret, J. McDermott, and M. Tan, “MOLE: A tenacious knowledge acquisition tool,” International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. 26, no. 1 pp. 41–54, 1987.Google Scholar
  16. [16]
    K.M. Ford, A. Cañas, J. Jones, H. Stahl, J. Novak, and J. Adams-Webber, “ICONKAT: an integrated constructivist knowledge acquisition tool,” Knowledge Acquisition, vol. 3, no. 2 pp. 215–236, 1990.Google Scholar
  17. [17]
    B.R. Gaines, “Behaviour/structure transformations under uncertainty,” International Journal Man-Machine Studies, vol. 8, no. 3 pp. 337–365, 1976.Google Scholar
  18. [18]
    B.R. Gaines, “System identification, approximation and complexity,” International Journal of General Systems, vol. 2, no. 3 pp. 241–258, 1977.Google Scholar
  19. [19]
    B.R. Gaines, “An ounce of knowledge is worth a ton of data: quantitative studies of the trade-off between expertise and data based on statistically well-founded empirical induction,” in Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Machine Learning. Morgan Kaufmann: San Mateo, California, p. 156–159, 1989.Google Scholar
  20. [20]
    B.R. Gaines, “Social and cognitive processes in knowledge acquisition,” Knowledge Acquisition, vol. 1, no. 1 pp. 251–280, 1989.Google Scholar
  21. [21]
    B.R. Gaines, “Empirical investigations of knowledge representation servers: Design issues and applications experience with KRS,” ACM SIGART Bulletin, vol. 2, no. 3 pp. 45–56, 1991.Google Scholar
  22. [22]
    B.R. Gaines, “Integrating rules in term subsumption knowledge representation servers,” in AAAI'91: Proceedings of the Ninth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence. AAAI Press/MIT Press: Menlo Park, California, p. 458–463, 1991.Google Scholar
  23. [23]
    B.R. Gaines, “The tradeoff between knowledge and data in data acquisition,” in Knowledge Discovery in Databases, G. Piatetsky-Shapiro and W. Frawley, Editor. MIT Press: Cambridge, Massachusetts, p. 491–505, 1991.Google Scholar
  24. [24]
    B.R. Gaines, M. Linster, and M.L.G. Shaw, “An integrated knowledge support system,” in Proceedings of FGCS'92: International Conference on Fifth Generation Computer Systems. ICOT: Tokyo, p. 1157–1164, 1992.Google Scholar
  25. [25]
    B.R. Gaines and M.L.G. Shaw, “New directions in the analysis and interactive elicitation of personal construct systems,” International Journal Man-Machine Studies, vol. 13, pp. 81–116, 1980.Google Scholar
  26. [26]
    B.R. Gaines and M.L.G. Shaw, “Hierarchies of distinctions as generators of system theories,” in Proceedings of the Society for General Systems Research International Conference, A.W. Smith, Editor. Society for General Systems Research: Louisville, Kentucky, p. 559–566, 1984.Google Scholar
  27. [27]
    B.R. Gaines and M.L.G. Shaw, “Integrated knowledge acquisition architectures,” Journal for Intelligent Information Systems, vol. 1, no. 1 pp. 9–34, 1992.Google Scholar
  28. [28]
    B.R. Gaines and M.L.G. Shaw, “Basing knowledge acquisition tools in personal construct psychology,” Knowledge Engineering Review, vol. 8, no. 1 pp. to appear, 1993.Google Scholar
  29. [29]
    B.R. Gaines and M.L.G. Shaw, “Eliciting knowledge and transferring it effectively to a knowledge-based systems,” IEEE Transactions on Knowledge and Data Engineering, vol. 5, no. 1 pp. 4–14, 1993.Google Scholar
  30. [30]
    B.R. Gaines, M.L.G. Shaw, and J.B. Woodward, “Modeling as a framework for knowledge acquisition methodologies and tools,” International Journal of Intelligent Systems, vol. 8, no. 2 pp. 155–168, 1993.Google Scholar
  31. [31]
    C. Garg-Janardan and G. Salvendy, “A conceptual framework for knowledge elicitation,” International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. 26, no. 4 pp. 521–531, 1987.Google Scholar
  32. [32]
    F. Gomez and C. Segami, “Knowledge acquisition from natural language for expert systems based on classification problem-solving methods,” Knowledge Acquisition, vol. 2, no. 2 pp. 107–128, 1990.Google Scholar
  33. [33]
    A.C. Graesser and L.F. Clark, Structures and Procedures of Implicit Knowledge, New Jersey: Ablex. 1985.Google Scholar
  34. [34]
    F. Hayes-Roth, D.A. Waterman, and D.B. Lenat, ed. Building Expert Systems. Addison-Wesley: Reading, Massachusetts. 1983.Google Scholar
  35. [35]
    W.P. Jones, “Bringing corporate knowledge into focus with CAMEO,” Knowledge Acquisition, vol. 2, no. 3 pp. 207–239, 1990.Google Scholar
  36. [36]
    G.A. Kelly, The Psychology of Personal Constructs, New York: Norton. 1955.Google Scholar
  37. [37]
    G. Klinker, J. Bentolila, S. Genetet, M. Grimes, and J. McDermott, “KNACK—report-driven knowledge acquisition,” International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. 26, no. 1 pp. 65–79, 1987.Google Scholar
  38. [38]
    G.J. Klir, “Identification of generative structures in empirical data,” International Journal of General Systems, vol. 3, pp. 89–104, 1976.Google Scholar
  39. [39]
    G.J. Klir, Architecture of Systems Problem Solving, New York: Plenum Press. 1985.Google Scholar
  40. [40]
    P. Maes and D. Nardi, ed. Meta-Level Architectures and Reflection. North-Holland: Amsterdam. 1988.Google Scholar
  41. [41]
    S. Marcus, “Taking backtracking with a grain of SALT,” International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. 26, no. 4 pp. 393–398, 1987.Google Scholar
  42. [42]
    R.S. Michalski and R.L. Chilausky, “Knowledge acquisition by encoding expert rules versus computer induction from examples—A case study involving soyabean pathology,” International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. 12, pp. 63–87, 1980.Google Scholar
  43. [43]
    K. Morik, ed. Knowledge Representation and Organization in Machine Learning. Vol. LNCS-347. Springer: Berlin. 1989.Google Scholar
  44. [44]
    E. Motta, M. Eisenstadt, K. Pitman, and M. West, “Support for knowledge acquisition in the knowledge engineer's assistant (KEATS),” Expert Systems, vol. 5, no. 1 pp. 6–28, 1988.Google Scholar
  45. [45]
    J.R. Quinlan, “Simplifying decision trees,” International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. 27, no. 3 pp. 221–234, 1987.Google Scholar
  46. [46]
    A. Quinton, “Knowledge and belief,” in The Encyclopedia of Philosophy: Volume 4, P. Edwards, Editor. Macmillan: New York. p. 345–352, 1967.Google Scholar
  47. [47]
    J.A. Rantanen, “Hypermedia in knowledge acquisition and specification of user interface for KBS: an approach and a case study,” Knowledge Acquisition, vol. 2, no. 3 pp. 259–278, 1990.Google Scholar
  48. [48]
    D.D. Runes, Dictionary of Philosophy, London: Peter Owen. 1972.Google Scholar
  49. [49]
    A.T. Schreiber, B.J. Wielinga, and J.A. Breuker, ed. KADS: A Pprincipled Approach to Knowledge-based System Development. Academic Press: London. 1993.Google Scholar
  50. [50]
    M.L.G. Shaw and B.R. Gaines, “A computer aid to knowledge engineering,” in Proceedings of British Computer Society Conference on Expert Systems. British Computer Society: Cambridge, p. 263–271, 1983.Google Scholar
  51. [51]
    M.L.G. Shaw and B.R. Gaines, “Eliciting the real problem,” in Adequate Modeling of Systems, H. Wedde, Editor. Springer: Berlin, p. 100–111, 1983.Google Scholar
  52. [52]
    M.L.G. Shaw and B.R. Gaines, “KITTEN: Knowledge initiation and transfer tools for experts and novices,” International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. 27, no. 3 pp. 251–280, 1987.Google Scholar
  53. [53]
    M.L.G. Shaw and B.R. Gaines, “A methodology for recognizing conflict, correspondence, consensus and contrast in a knowledge acquisition system,” Knowledge Acquisition, vol. 1, no. 4 pp. 341–363, 1989.Google Scholar
  54. [54]
    M.L.G. Shaw and B.R. Gaines, “Personal construct psychology foundations for knowledge acquisition and representation,” in Proceedings of EKAW-93: Seventh European Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems, p. this volume, 1993.Google Scholar
  55. [55]
    B. Wilson, Systems: Concepts, Methodologies, and Applications, Chichester, UK: Wiley. 1984.Google Scholar
  56. [56]
    B. Woodward, “Knowledge engineering at the front-end: defining the domain,” Knowledge Acquisition, vol. 2, no. 1 pp. 73–94, 1990.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Knowledge Science InstituteUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations