Prototyping Structure of Rule Bases

Chapter
Part of the Intelligent Systems Reference Library book series (ISRL, volume 130)

Abstract

Designing a knowledge base for a RBS is a tedious task. The main issue concerns the identification of system properties on which the rules are based. This is an iterative process that needs proper support. This stage is often generally referred to as the conceptual design. The focus of the ARD+ method presented in this chapter is the initial transition from user-provided specification (often in natural language) that includes general concepts, to the rule specification that tie rules with these concepts. Moreover, the semi-automated prototyping of the structure of the knowledge bases is possible. The schemas of XTT decision tables can be obtained, along with default inference links between tables. We introduce the main intuitions behind the ARD+ method and its formalization. Then an algorithm for prototyping the structure of the XTT rule base is given. The design with ARD+ can be also used to generate a business process with rules.

References

  1. 1.
    OMG: Semantics of Business Vocabulary and Business Rules (SBVR). Technical report dtc/06-03-02, Object Management Group (2006)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Connolly, T., Begg, C., Strechan, A.: Database Systems, A Practical Approach to Design, Implementation, and Management. 2nd edn. Addison-Wesley (1999)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vanthienen, J., Wets, G.: From decision tables to expert system shells. Data Knowl. Eng. 13(3), 265–282 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Nalepa, G.J., Ligęza, A.: Conceptual modelling and automated implementation of rule-based systems. In: Software Engineering: Evolution and Emerging Technologies, vol. 130. Frontiers in Artificial Intelligence and Applications, pp. 330–340. IOS Press, Amsterdam (2005)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ligęza, A.: Logical Foundations for Rule-Based Systems. Springer, Berlin (2006)MATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Nalepa, G.J., Wojnicki, I.: Towards formalization of ARD+ conceptual design and refinement method. In: Wilson, D.C., Lane, H.C. (eds.) FLAIRS-21: Proceedings of the Twenty-First International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference, 15–17 May 2008, Coconut Grove, Florida, USA, Menlo Park, California, pp. 353–358. AAAI Press (2008)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Nalepa, G.J., Wojnicki, I.: Hierarchical rule design with HaDEs the HeKatE toolchain. In: Ganzha, M., Paprzycki, M., Pelech-Pilichowski, T. (eds.) Proceedings of the International Multiconference on Computer Science and Information Technology, vol. 3, pp. 207–214. Polish Information Processing Society (2008)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Nalepa, G.J., Wojnicki, I.: ARD+ a prototyping method for decision rules. method overview, tools, and the thermostat case study. Technical report CSLTR 01/2009, AGH University of Science and Technology, June 2009Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kluza, K., Nalepa, G.J.: Towards rule-oriented business process model generation. In: Ganzha, M., Maciaszek, L.A., Paprzycki, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the Federated Conference on Computer Science and Information Systems – FedCSIS 2013, Krakow, Poland, 8-11 September 2013, pp. 959–966. IEEE (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Nalepa, G.J.: Semantic Knowledge Engineering. A Rule-Based Approach. Wydawnictwa AGH, Kraków (2011)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kluza, K., Nalepa, G.J.: Generation of hierarchical business process models from attribute relationship diagrams. In: Advances in ICT for Business, Industry and Public Sector, pp. 57–76. Springer (2015)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    van der Aalst, W.M.P.: Process Mining - Discovery, Conformance and Enhancement of Business Processes. Springer, Berlin (2011)MATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Friedrich, F., Mendling, J., Puhlmann, F.: Process model generation from natural language text. In: Mouratidis, H., Rolland, C. (eds.) Advanced Information Systems Engineering. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol. 6741, pp. 482–496. Springer, Berlin (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Nalepa, G.J., Mach, M.A.: Conceptual modeling of business rules and processes with the XTT method. In: Tadeusiewicz, R., Ligęza, A., Szymkat, M. (eds.) CMS’07: Computer Methods and Systems 21–23 November 2007, pp. 65–70. Poland, AGH University of Science and Technology, Cracow, Oprogramowanie Naukowo-Techniczne (september, Kraków, September 2007Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nalepa, G.J., Mach, M.A.: Business rules design method for business process management. In: Ganzha, M., Paprzycki, M. (eds.) Proceedings of the International Multiconference on Computer Science and Information Technology, vol. 4, pp. 165–170. Polish Information Processing Society. IEEE Computer Society Press (2009)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Dumas, M., La Rosa, M., Mendling, J., Reijers, H.A.: Fundamentals of Business Process Management. Springer, Berlin (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Forster, F.: The idea behind business process improvement: toward a business process improvement pattern framework. BPTrends, pp. 1–13, April 2006Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Klösgen, W., Żytkow, J.M. (eds.): Handbook of Data Mining and Knowledge Discovery. Oxford University Press, New York (2002)MATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Han, J., Kamber, M.: Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques. Morgan Kaufmann Publisher (2000)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Atzmueller, M., Nalepa, G.J.: A textual subgroup mining approach for rapid ARD+ model capture. In: Lane, H.C., Guesgen, H.W. (eds.) FLAIRS-22: Proceedings of the Twenty-Second International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference, 19–21 May 2009, Sanibel Island, Florida, USA, Menlo Park, California, FLAIRS, pp. 414–415. AAAI Press (2009)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Atzmueller, M., Nalepa, G.J.: Towards rapid knowledge capture using textual subgroup mining for rule prototyping. Technical report Research Report Series no. 458, University of Würzburg, Institute of Computer (2009)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Atzmueller, M., Puppe, F.: Semi-automatic visual subgroup mining using VIKAMINE. J. Univ. Comput. Sci. 11(11), 1752–1765 (2005)Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Atzmueller, M., Puppe, F.: A knowledge-intensive approach for semi-automatic causal subgroup discovery. In: Proceedings of the Workshop on Prior Conceptual Knowledge in Machine Learning and Knowledge Discovery (PriCKL’07), at the 18th European Conference on Machine Learning (ECML’07), 11th European Conference on Principles and Practice of Knowledge Discovery in Databases (PKDD’07), pp. 1–6. University of Warsaw, Poland (2007)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.AGH University of Science and TechnologyKrakówPoland

Personalised recommendations