Knowledge acquisition in dynamic systems: How can logicism and situatedness go together?

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


This paper presents an investigation of knowledge acquisition in dynamic systems. The nature of dynamic systems is analyzed. A first ontology of the domain is proposed. Various distinctions are presented such as the agent perspective, the perception of temporal progression, and the notions of conseqences and expertise in dynamic systems. We use Rasmussen's model to characterize ways knowledge can be acquired in dynamic systems. Procedures are shown to be essential knowledge entities in interactions with dynamic systems. An emphasis on logicism and situatedness is presented and discussed around the situation recognition and analytical reasoning model. The knowledge block representation is introduced as a mediating representation for knowledge acquisition in dynamic systems.


Knowledge Acquisition Artificial Agent Procedural Knowledge Situational Knowledge Operational Knowledge 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Abbott, K.H., (1989), “Human-Centered Automation and AI: Ideas, Insights, and Issues From the Intelligent Cockpit Aids Research Effort”, Proceedings of the IJCAI-89 Workshop Report on Integrated Human-Machine Intelligence in Aerospace Systems, Detroit, Michigan, U.S.A., August.Google Scholar
  2. Allen, J.F. (1985). Maintaining knowledge about temporal intervals. Readings in Knowledge Representation. Brachman R.J. and Levesque H.J. (Eds), Morgan Kaufmann Publishers.Google Scholar
  3. Amalberti, R. (1988). Savoir-faire de l'opérateur: théorie et pratique. XXIVème Congrès de la SELF.Google Scholar
  4. Billings, C.E. (1991). Human-centered aircraft automation philosophy. Technical Memorandum 103885, NASA Ames Resarch Center, Moffett Field, CA.Google Scholar
  5. Boy, G.A. (1987). Operator Assistant Systems. Int. J. Man-Machine Studies, 27, pp. 541–554.Google Scholar
  6. Boy, G.A. (1989). The Block representation in knowledge acquisition for computer integrated documentation. Proceedings of the Fourth AAAI-Sponsored Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems Workshop, Banff, Canada, October 1–6.Google Scholar
  7. Boy, G.A. (1991a). Intelligent Assistant Systems. Academic Press, London, U.K.Google Scholar
  8. Boy, G.A. (1991b). Computer Integrated Documentation. NASA Technical Memorandum, NASA Ames Research Center, Moffett Field, CA.Google Scholar
  9. Boy, G.A. & Caminel, T. (1989). Situation pattern acquisition improves the control of complex dynamic systems. Third European Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems, Paris, July.Google Scholar
  10. Boy, G.A. & Delail, M. (1988). Knowledge Acquisition by Specialization-Structuring: A Space Telemanipulation Application. AAAI-88, Workshop on Integration of Knowledge Acquisition and Performance Systems, St Paul, Minnesota, USA.Google Scholar
  11. Boy, G.A., & Gruber, T. (1990). Intelligent Assistant Systems: Support for Integrated Human-Machine Systems. Proceedings of the AAAI Spring Symposium on Knowledge-Based Human Computer Communication, Stanford, March 27–29.Google Scholar
  12. Boy, G.A. & Nuss, N. (1988). Knowledge acquisition by observation: application to intelligent tutoring systems. Proceedings of the Second European Workshop on Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems, Bonn, Germany.Google Scholar
  13. Cypher, A. (1993). Watch What I Do—Programming by demonstration. The MIT Press, Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  14. Dejong, G. (1981). Generalization based on explanation. Proc. IJCAI, pp. 67–69.Google Scholar
  15. Drummond, M., (1989), “Situated Control Rules”, Proceedings of the First International Conference on Principle of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Morgan Kaufmann Pub., Toronto, May.Google Scholar
  16. Falkenhainer, B.C. (1990). A unified approach to explanation and theory formation. In J. Shrager & P, Langley (Eds.), Computational models of scientific discovery and theory formation. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo.Google Scholar
  17. Figarol, S. (1989). Airline pilot's anticipatory knowledge. Masters thesis. Universié Toulouse Le Mirail, France (In French).Google Scholar
  18. Fisher, D. (1987). Knowledge acquisition via incremental conceptual clustering. Machine Learning, 2, pp. 139–172.Google Scholar
  19. Gentner, D. (1989). Mechanisms of analogical learning. In S. Vosniadou & A. Ortony (Eds.) Similarity and analogical reasoning. Cambridge University Press, London.Google Scholar
  20. Georgeff, M.P. & Ingrand, F.F. (1989). Decision making in an embedded reasoning system. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Detroit, MI, pp. 972–978.Google Scholar
  21. Hollnagel, E. (1993). Requirements for dynamic modelling of man-machine interaction. CRI paper. Nuclear Engineering and Design. Denmark.Google Scholar
  22. Hutchins, E. (1991). How a cockpit remembers its speed. Technical report, University of California at San Diego, Distributed Cognition Laboratory.Google Scholar
  23. Korf, R.E. (1985). Learning to Solve Problems by Searching for Macro-Operators. Research Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Pitman, Boston.Google Scholar
  24. LaFrance, M. (1989). The quality of expertise: Implications of Expert-Novice differences for knowledge acquisition. SIGART Newsletter, April, pp. 8–14.Google Scholar
  25. Langley, P., Simon, H.A. & Bradshaw, G.L. (1987). Heuristics for empirical discovery. In L. Bolc (Ed.), Computational models of learning. Springer-Verlag, Berlin.Google Scholar
  26. Laurel, B. (1991). Computer as Theatre: A dramatic theory of interactive experience. Addison Wesley, Reading, Massachusetts.Google Scholar
  27. Lenat, D.B. (1977). The ubiquity of discovery. Artificial Intelligence, 9, pp. 257–285.Google Scholar
  28. Leplat, J. (1985). The elicitation of expert knowledge. NATO Workshop on Intelligent Decision Support in Process Environments, Rome, Italy. September.Google Scholar
  29. Mathé, N. (1990). Intelligent Assiatnce for Process Control: Application to Space Teleoperation. PhD Dissertation, ENSAE, Toulouse, France.Google Scholar
  30. Mathé, N. & Kedar, S. (1992). Increasingly Automated Procedure Acquisition In Dynamic Systems. Proceedings of the Knowledge Acquisition Workshop for Knowledge-Based Systems, Banff, Canada, October. Also as a NASA Technical Report FIA-92-23, June.Google Scholar
  31. McDermott, D. (1982). A temporal logic for reasoning about processes and plans. Cognitive Science, 6, pp. 101–155.Google Scholar
  32. Mitchell, T.M. (1982). Generalization as search. Artificial Intelligence, 118, pp. 203–226.Google Scholar
  33. Mizoguchi, R., Tijerino Y. & Ikeda, M. (1992). Task Ontology and its Use in a Task Analysis Interview System. Proceedings of the Second Japaneese Knowledge Acquisition for Kowledge-Based Systems Workshop, JKAW'92, Kobe, Japan.Google Scholar
  34. Quinlan, J.R. (1986). Induction of decision trees. Machine Learning, 1, 1.Google Scholar
  35. Rappaport, A. (1993). Invariants, Context and Expertise in the Knowledge Milieu. Third International Workshop on Human and Machine Cognition, Seaside, Florida, May 13–15.Google Scholar
  36. Rasmussen, J. (1983). Skills, rules, and knowledge: Signals, signs, and symbols and other distinctions in human performance models. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 13, pp. 257–266.Google Scholar
  37. Reason, J. (1986). Decision aids: prostheses or tools ? pp. 7–14 in Cognitive Engineering in Complex Worlds, eds E. Hollnagel, G. Mancini & D.D. Woods. Academic Press, London.Google Scholar
  38. Rogoff, B. (1984). Introduction: Thinking and learning in social context. In Everyday Cognition: Its Developement in Social Context, Rogoff, B. and Lave J., Harward University Press Pub., Cambridge, MA.Google Scholar
  39. Shalin, V. & Boy, G.A. (1989). Integrated Human-Machine Intelligence. IJCAI'89, Detroit, MI.Google Scholar
  40. Shalin, V., Geddes, N., Bertram, D.,Szczepkowski, & DuBois, D. (1993). Expertise in Dynamic, Physical Task Domains. Third International Workshop on Human and Machine Cognition, Seaside, Florida, May 13–15.Google Scholar
  41. Sheridan, T.B., (1984), “Supervisory Control of Remote Manipulator, Vehicles and Dynamic Processes: Experiment in Command and Display Aiding”, Advances in Man-Machine System Research, J.A.I. Press, Vol. 1, pp. 49–137.Google Scholar
  42. Suchman, L.A., (1987), “Plans and Situated Actions. The Problem of Human-Machine Communication”, Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  43. Toggnazzini, B. (1993). Principles, Techniques, and Ethics of Stage Magic and Their Potential Application to Human Interface Design. Proceedings of INTERCHI'93, ACM Press, New York, Conference held in Amsterdam, The Netherlands.Google Scholar
  44. Wielinga, B., Van de Velde, W., Schreiber, G. & Akkermans, H. (1992). The CommonKADS Framework for Knowledge Modelling. Proceedings of the Seventh Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems AAAI Workshop, Banff, Canada, October.Google Scholar
  45. Woods D.D. & Hollnagel E., (1986). Mapping cognitive demands and activities in complex problem solving worlds. Proceedings of the Knowledge Acquisition for Knowledge-Based Systems AAAI Workshop, Banff, Canada, November.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1993

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.European Institute of Cognitive Sciences and Engineering (EURISCO)Labège CedexFrance

Personalised recommendations