Multi-graph-Based Intent Hierarchy Generation to Determine Action Sequence

  • Hrishikesh KulkarniEmail author
Conference paper
Part of the Advances in Intelligent Systems and Computing book series (AISC, volume 828)


All actions are result of scenarios. While we analyze different information pieces and their relationships, we notice that actions drive intents and intents drive actions. These relationships among intents and actions can decode the reasoning behind action selection. In the similar way, in stories, news and even email exchanges these relationships are evident. These relationships can allow us to formulate a sequence of mails irrespective of change in subject and matter. The continuity among concepts, drift of concepts, and then reestablishing of original concepts in conversation, email exchanges, or even series of events is necessary to establish relationships among various artifacts. This paper proposes a multi-edge fuzzy graph-based adversarial concept mapping to resolve this issue. Instead of peaks, this technique tries to map different valleys in concept flow. The transition index between prominent valleys helps to decide your order of that particular leg. The paper further proposes a technique to minimize this using fuzzy graph. The fuzziness in graph represents the fuzzy relationships among concepts. The association among multiple such graphs helps to represent the overall concept flow. The dynamic concept flow represents the overall concept flow across the documents. This algorithm and representation can be very useful to represent lengthy documents with multiple references. This approach can be used to solve many real-life problems like news compilation, legal case relevance detection, and associating assorted news from the period under purview.


Multi-edge graph Fuzzy graph Adversarial concept mapping Data mining Machine learning Cognitive sciences 


  1. 1.
    Rose DE (2012) Context based learning. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Liu B, Cin C et al Mining topic specific connect and definitions on the web. Retrieved from 27 May 2017
  3. 3.
    Cutting DR, Pedersen JO, Karger DR, Turkey JW (1992) Scatter/gather: a cluster-based approach to browsing large document collections. In: ACM SIGIRGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sundaranar M et al (2013) Quantification of portrayal concepts using TF-IDF weighting. Int J Inf Sci Tech (IJIST) 3(5)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Ramos J (2003) Using TF-IDF to determine word relevance in document queries. In: Proceedings, 2003Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Craven M, DiPasquo D et al (1998) Learning to extract symbolic knowledge from world wide web. In: AAAI-98Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Fiburger N, Maurel D (2002) Textual similarity based on proper names. In: Workshop on mathematical methods in information retrieval, ACM SIGIRGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kulkarni AR, Tokekar V, Kulkarni P (2012) Identifying context of text document using naïve Bayes classification and Apriori association rule mining. In: CONSEGGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kulkarni P, Mulay P (2013) Evolve your system using incremental clustering approach. Springer J Evolving Syst 4(2):71–85CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mangasarian OL (2015) Unsupervised classification via convex absolute inequalities. Optimization 64(1):81–86Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Dong W, Zhou M (2014) Gaussian classifier-based evolutionary strategy (GCES) to solve multimodal optimization. IEEE Trans Neural Netw Learn Syst 25(6)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Li X, Epitropakis M, Deb K, Engelbrecht A (2016) Seeking multiple solutions, an updated survey on niching solution. IEEE Trans Evol Comput 99:1Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kulkarni P (2012) Reinforcement and systemic machine learning for decision making. Book, Wiley/IEEE, HobokenCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Agrawal A et al (2011) Sentiment analysis on twitter data. In: Proceedings of the workshop on language in social media. pp 30–38Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Fang X, Zhan J (2015) Sentiment analysis using product review data. J Big Data 2:5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kulkarni P (2017) Reverse hypothesis machine learning, intelligent systems reference library. Springer, New YorkCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bringsjord S, Ferrucci D (2000) Artificial intelligence and literary creativity. Lawerence Erlbaum Associates Publishers, LondonGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Jahirabadkar S, Kulkarni P (2014) Algorithm to determine ε-distance parameter in density based clustering. Expert Syst Appl 41:2939–2946CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kulkarni H (2017) Intelligent context based prediction using probabilistic intent-action ontology and tone matching algorithm. International Conference on Advances in Computing, Communications and Informatics (ICACCI)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Kulkarni AR, Tokekar V, Kulkarni P, Identifying context of text documents using Naïve Bayes classification and Apriori association rule mining. In: 2012 CSI sixth international conference on software engineering (CONSEG). pp 1–4Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cover T, Thomas J (2006) Elements of information theory. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.PVG’s College of Engineering and Technology, (SPPU)PuneIndia

Personalised recommendations