Encyclopedia of Machine Learning and Data Mining

2017 Edition
| Editors: Claude Sammut, Geoffrey I. Webb

Case-Based Reasoning

  • Susan Craw
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4899-7687-1_34

Abstract

Case-based reasoning (CBR) solves problems by retrieving similar, previously solved problems and reusing their solutions. The case base contains a set of cases, and each case holds knowledge about a problem or situation, together with its corresponding solution or action. The case base acts as a memory, remembering is achieved using similarity-based retrieval, and the retrieved solutions are reused. Newly solved problems may be retained in the case base and so the memory is able to grow as problem-solving occurs.

CBR reuses remembered experiences, where the experience need not record how the solution was reached, simply that the solution was used for the problem. The reliance on stored experiences means that CBR is particularly relevant in domains which are ill defined, not well understood, or where no underlying theory is available. CBR systems are a useful way to capture corporate memory of human expertise.

The fundamental assumption of CBR is that similar problems have similar solutions: a patient with similar symptoms will have the same diagnosis, the price of a house with similar accommodation and location will be similar, the design for a kitchen with a similar shape and size can be reused, and a journey plan is similar to an earlier trip. A related assumption is that the world is a regular place, and what holds true today will probably be true tomorrow. A further assumption relevant to memory is that situations repeat, because if they do not, there is no point remembering them!

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

Recommended Reading

  1. Aamodt A, and Plaza E (1994) Case-based reasoning: foundational issues, methodological variations, and system approaches. AI Commun 7:39–59. citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.39.1670Google Scholar
  2. Cheetham W (2005) Tenth anniversary of the plastics color formulation tool. AI Mag 26(3):51–61 www.aaai.org/Papers/Magazine/Vol26/26-03/AIMag26-03-007.pdf
  3. Craw S, Wiratunga N, Rowe RC (2006) Learning adaptation knowledge to improve case-based reasoning. Artif Intell 170(16–17):1175–1192. doi:10.1016/j.artint.2006.09.001MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Dong R, Schaal M, O’Mahony MP, McCarthy K, Smyth B (2014) Further experiments in opinionated product recommendation. In: Lamontagne L, Plaza E (eds) Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on case-based reasoning, Cork. LNAI, vol 8765. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 110–124. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-11209-1_9Google Scholar
  5. Gokër MH, Roth-Berghofer T (1999) The development and utilization of the case-based help-desk support system HOMER. Eng Appl Artif Intell 12:665–680. doi:10.1016/S0952-1976(99)00037-8CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Gundersen OE, Sørmo F, Aamodt A, Skalle P (2013) A real-time decision support system for high cost oil-well drilling operations. AAAI AI Mag 34(1): 21–31. www.aaai.org/ojs/index.php/aimagazine/article/view/2434
  7. Hammond KJ (1990) Explaining and repairing plans that fail. Artif Intell 45(1–2):173–228CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Jaidee U, Muñoz-Avila H, Aha DW (2013) Case-based goal-driven coordination of multiple learning agents. In: Delaney SJ, Ontanon S (eds) Proceedings of the 21st international conference on case-based reasoning, Saratoga Springs. LNAI, vol 7969. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 164–178. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39056-2_12Google Scholar
  9. Jalali V, Leake D (2013) Extending case adaptation with automatically-generated ensembles of adaptation rules. In: Delaney SJ, Ontanon S (eds) Proceedings of the 21st international conference on case-based reasoning, Saratoga Springs. LNAI, vol 7969. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 188–202. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-39056-2_14Google Scholar
  10. López de Mántaras R, McSherry D, Bridge D, Leake D, Smyth B, Craw S, Faltings B, Maher ML, Cox MT, Forbus K, Aamodt A, Watson I (2005) Retrieval, reuse, revision, and retention in case-based reasoning. Knowl Eng Rev 20(3):215–240. doi:10.1017/S0269888906000646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Minor M, Bergmann R, Görg S (2014) Case-based adaptation of workflows. Inf Syst 40:142–152. doi:10.1016/j.is.2012.11.011CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Ontañón S, Ram A (2011) Case-based reasoning and user-generated AI for real-time strategy games. In: Artificial intelligence for computer games. Springer, New York, pp 103–124. doi:10.1007/978-1-4419-8188-2_5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Quijano-Sánchez L, Bridge D, Díaz-Agudo B, Recio-García JA (2012) Case-based aggregation of preferences for group recommenders. In: Díaz-Agudo B, Watson I (eds) Proceedings of the 20th international conference on case-based reasoning, Lyon. LNAI, vol 7466. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 17–31. doi:10.1007/978-3-642-32986-9_25Google Scholar
  14. Richter MM (2009) The search for knowledge, contexts, and case-based reasoning. Eng Appl Artif Intell 22(1):3–9. doi:10.1016/j.engappai.2008.04.021CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Wender S, Watson I (2014) Combining case-based reasoning and reinforcement learning for unit navigation in real-time strategy game AI. In: Lamontagne L, Plaza E (eds) Proceedings of the 22nd international conference on case-based reasoning, Cork. LNAI, vol 8765. Springer, Berlin/Heidelberg, pp 511–525. doi:10.1007/978-3-319-11209-1_36Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Robert Gordon UniversityAberdeenUK