Skip to main content

A knowledge-intensive learning system for document retrieval

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Knowledge Representation and Organization in Machine Learning

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 347))

Abstract

Our learning system supports repeatable experiments in which practical problems related to document indexing and retrieval are addressed. Knowledge bases are typically critical to the document indexing and retrieval. In our experiments, one knowledge base is augmented with knowledge from another knowledge base, and at the first level this augmentation is an instance of similarity-based or analogy-based learning. But the overall system is tuned by interaction with a person so that changes in the representation of the knowledge base and in the performance and evaluation components of the learning system can lead to demonstrably improved performance. We provide evidence that small changes in structure or representation should correspond to small changes in function or meaning. Furthermore, all the components of the learning system depend in some way on detecting similarities and exploiting differences, and the move from similarity to analogy in learning exploits a second-order difference.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Joyce Backus, Sara Davidson, and Roy Rada, “Searching for Patterns in the MeSH Vocabulary,” Bulletin of the Medical Library Association, 75, 3, pp. 221–227, July 1987.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Rene R Bakker, “Knowledge Graphs: Representation and Structuring of Scientific Knowledge,” PhD Dissertation, Department of Informatics, University of Twente, Twente, Netherlands, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Albert Bethke, “Genetic Algorithms as Function Optimizers,” PhD Thesis, Dept Computer and Communication Sciences, University Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1980.

    Google Scholar 

  4. Ronald Brachman, “What IS-A Is and Isn't: An Analysis of Taxonomic Links in Semantic Networks,” Computer 16, 10, pp. 30–36, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Jaime Carbonell, “Learning by Analogy,” in Machine Learning, ed. T Mitchell, pp. 137–161, Tioga Publishing, Palo Alto, CA, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  6. A M Collins and E F Loftus, “A Spreading Activation Theory of Semantic Processing,” Psychological Review, 82, pp. 407–428, 1975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Jonathan H Connell and Michael Brady, “Generating and Generalizing Models of Visual Objects,” Artificial Intelligence, 31, pp. 159–183, 1987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Ingetraut Dahlberg, “Conceptual Compatibility of Ordering Systems,” International Classification, 10, 1, pp. 5–8, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Lindley Darden and Roy Rada, “Hypothesis Formation via Interrelations,” in Analogica, ed. Arman Prieditis, pp. 109–128, Pitman Publishing, London, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Randall Davis, “TEIRESIAS: Applications of Meta-Level Knowledge,” in Knowledge-Based Systems in Artificial Intelligence, ed. D Lenat, pp. 229–491, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Thomas Dietterich, Bob London, Kenneth Clarkson, and Geoff Dromey, “Learning and Inductive Inference,” in Handbook of Artificial Intelligence, Vol 3, ed. E Feigenbaum, pp. 323–511, William Kaufman, Inc, Los Altos, CA, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Thomas G Dietterich, “Learning at the Knowledge Level,” Machine Learning, 1, pp. 287–316, 1896.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Manfred Eigen and Peter Schuster, “Abstract Hypercycle,” Die Naturwissenschaften 65, 3, pp. 7–41, 1978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Werner Emde, “Non-Cumulative Learning in Metaxa.3,” Proceedings of the Tenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Los Altos, California, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  15. A Finkel, B Gordon, M Baker, and C Fanta, Current Medical Information and Terminology, American Medical Association, Chicago, 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Douglas H Fisher, “Knowledge Acquisition via Incremental Conceptual Clustering,” Machine Learning, 2, pp. 139–172, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Richard Forsyth and Roy Rada, Machine Learning: Expert Systems and Information Retrieval, Ellis Horwood, London, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Dedre Gentner and Cecile Toupin, “Systematicity and Surface Similarity in the Development of Analogy,” Cognitive Science, 10, pp. 277–300, 1986.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. John Holland, Adaptation in Natural and Artificial Systems, University Michigan Press, Ann Arbor, Michigan, 1975.

    Google Scholar 

  20. John Holland, Keith Holyoak, Richard Nisbett, and Paul Thagard, Induction: Processes of Inference, Learning, and Discovery, MIT Press, Cambridge, Massachusetts, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Janet Kolodner, Retrieval and Organizational Strategies in Conceptual Memory, Lawrence Erlbaum, Hillsdale, NJ, 1984.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Michael Lebowitz, “Integrated Learning: Controlling Explanation,” Cognitive Science, 10, pp. 219–240, 1986.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Michael Lebowitz, “Experiments with Incremental Concept Formation: UNIMEM,” Machine Learning, 2, pp. 103–138, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Douglas Lenat, “The Role of Heuristics in Learning by Discovery,” in Machine Learning, ed. T Mitchell, pp. 243–306, Tioga Publishing, Palo Alto, CA, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Brian Martin and Roy Rada, “Building a Relational Data Base for a Physician Document Index,” Medical Informatics, 12, 3, pp. 187–201, July–September 1987.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. R Michalski and R Stepp, “Automated Clustering of Classifications: Conceptual Clustering Versus Numerical Taxonomy,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 5, 4, pp. 396–409, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Hafedh Mili and Roy Rada, “Merging Thesauri: Principles and Evaluation,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 10, 2, pp. 204–220, 1988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. T M Mitchell, R M Keller, and S T Kedar-Cabelli, “Explanation-Based Generalization: A Unifying View,” Machine Learning, 1, 1, pp. 47–80, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Katharina Morik, “Acquiring Domain Models,” International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 26, pp. 93–104, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Judea Pearl, “On the Discovery and Generation of Certain Heuristics,” AI Magazine 4, 1, pp. 23–34, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  31. Roy Rada, Susanne Humphrey, and Craig Coccia, “A Knowledge-base for Retrieval Evaluation,” Annual Proceedings Association Computing Machinery, pp. 360–367, Oct 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Roy Rada, “Gradualness Facilitates Knowledge Refinement,” IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence, 7, 5, pp. 523–530, September 1985.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Roy Rada, Florence Lu, John Eng, and Brandon Brylawski, “Augmentation and Evaluation of a Medical Classification Structure Through Morphosemantic Analysis,” Proceedings MEDINFO '86, pp. 1096–1100, North-Holland: Amsterdam, Holland, October 26–30, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Roy Rada, Bruce Blum, Edith Calhoun, Hafedh Mili, Helmuth Orthner, and Sarah Singer, “A Vocabulary for Medical Informatics,” Computers and Biomedical Research 20, pp. 244–263, 1987.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  35. Roy Rada and Brian Martin, “Augmenting Thesauri for Information Systems,” ACM Transactions on Office Information Systems, 5, 4, pp. 378–392, 1987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. Roy Rada, “Connecting and Evaluating Thesauri,” International Classification, 14, 2, pp. 63–69, 1987.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Larry Rendell, “A General Framework for Induction and a Study of Selective Induction,” Machine Learning, 1, pp. 177–226, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Jean Sammet and Anthony Ralston, “The New (1982) Computing Reviews Classification System—Final Version,” Communications of the Association for Computing Machinery, 25, 1, pp. 13–25, January 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Herbert Simon, “Why Should Machines Learn,” in Machine Learning, ed. T Mitchell, pp. 25–38, Tioga Publishing, Palo Alto, CA, 1983.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Barry Smith and Kevin Mulligan, “Pieces of a Theory,” in Parts and Moments: Studies in Logic and Formal Ontology, ed. Barry Smith, pp. 15–109, Philosophia Verlag, Munich, Germany, 1982.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Sabine Thieme, “The Acquisition of Model-Knowledge for a Model-Driven Machine-Learning Approach,” Proceedings Knowledge Representation and Knowledge (Re-)Organization in Machine Learning, 1988. (appears in this book)

    Google Scholar 

  42. Paul E Utgoff, Machine Learning of Inductive Bias, Kluwer Publishers, Boston, Massachusetts, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  43. F Wingert, “An Indexing System for SNOMED,” Methods of Information in Medicine, 25, 1, pp. 22–30, 1986.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Katharina Morik

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 1989 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this chapter

Cite this chapter

Rada, R., Mili, H. (1989). A knowledge-intensive learning system for document retrieval. In: Morik, K. (eds) Knowledge Representation and Organization in Machine Learning. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, vol 347. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0017217

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0017217

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-50768-0

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-46081-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics