Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
Inference Knowledge
Engine Engineer
User Expert
Working Knowledge
Memory Base
Database
Fig 1
Interaction: with software packages Perl provides very concise and flexible
mechanisms for controlling and processing the results obtained from system
commands and other external programs. CAPE programmers can also exploit the
tools for generating Perl "wrappers" for software components written in C, and
make use of Perl's ability to dynamically load compiled code at run-time.
[3]Invest is an expert system developed to help make financial decisions.
With bank officials, Invest obtains information about a customer’s wishes and
attempts to make useful and well-founded investment proposals. Significantly,
Invest covers the entire spectrum of possible investments. We expect it to help
investment experts advice customers. Another application could be in small
branches of banks where the lack of adequately trained staff has made it
impossible to provide investment advice.
[4] Focuses on detailed case study of building Code
Tutor, a Web-based intelligent tutoring system (ITS) in the
domain of radio communications. It is ontologically founded and
was built using CLIPS and Java-based expert system tools, latest
integrated graphical CASE tools for software analysis and design,
and Java servlets. In Code Tutor, Apache HTTP Server stores and
serves static HTML pages, and Apache JServ Java package
enables dynamic interpretation of user defined servlet classes
and generation of active HTML pages. XML technology is used to
generate files that Code Tutor uses to provide recommendations
to the learners.
Knowledge Knowledge
base representation
Explanation
justification
Inferencing
Fig 2
Unstructured interviews:
Many knowledge acquisition interviews session are conducted informally,
usually as a starting point. Starting information save time it helps to move quickly
to the basic structure of the domain. Usually it is followed by formal technique.
Unstructured interview provides complete or well-organized description of
cogenitive process.
Structured interview:
Structure interview is a systematic goal oriented process. It forces
organized communication between expert and knowledge engineer. It reduces
interpretation problem inherited in unstructured interview, and prevents distortion
caused by domain expert subjectivity. It is more effective and efficient techniques
of knowledge acquisition and can be applied to knowledge acquisition from
multiple experts. While this technique is used experts fill out a set of carefully
designed questions raised by knowledge engineer making use of established
domain model of business decision-making activity to capture the subjective and
qualitative aspects of decision making. Questionnaires can be particularly useful
in discovering the objects of the domain, in uncovering relationship, and in
determining uncertainties.
Observation:
Sometime it is possible to observe an expert at work. In many ways, this is
the most obvious and straightforward approach to knowledge acquisition. This
technique allows an expert to work in accustomed environment without
interruptions by the knowledge engineer and gives knowledge engineer insights
into complexities of a problem. Before implementing this method it is necessary
to decide experts performance recording technique. Recording methods may be
notes, video etc. The major limitations of
this technique is that the underlying reasoning in expert s mind is usually not
reveled in his/her actions.
Computer-adided approaches:
The purpose of computerized support for the expert is to reduce or
eliminate the potential problems. A smart knowledge acquisition tool must be able
to add knowledge to knowledge base incrementally and refine or even correct
existing knowledge. Benefits derived from using a computer aided environment
for knowledge acquisition include:
1) Electronic documentation of knowledge.
2) Knowledge extraction can be done in parallel from multiple experts.
3) Conflicts are addressed during knowledge extraction sessions.
4) Interactions among experts result in an enlarged and enriched domain of
expertise.
[8] Focuses on case base reasoning system uses the technique to match a
situation or problem description to a stored database. Here the input is given by the user
on the current situation and the output is case retrieval to the most similar match to the
database. The CBR engine first searches for case history that is similar to the given
description.
As stated case is a unique knowledge entity describing a problem and
solution. It can be represented a single database.
Here representation is:
• A problem point to one or more case.
• A case has a single solution.
• A question can influence one or more case.
Case Solution
Question
Fig 3
CBR systems vary in the way the case database is structured. The
representation can be flat, where all cases are represented at the same level, or it can be
hierarchical, expressing relationships between cases and sub-cases. The hierarchical
organization is useful when the CBR system is used for taxonomic tasks, for example, to
identify an animal based on its features. A detailed discussion of data structures is beyond
the scope of this paper, as the structure is not expected to impact the performance of a
diagnosis system.
Similarity between Cases:
It consist of following attribute:
• Reflective: A case is similar to itself.
• Symmetric: If A is similar to B, then B is also similar to A
• Transitive : If A is similar to B and B is similar to C, we cannot say that A is
similar to C, because the features defining the similarities between A and B and
between B and C are not necessarily the same.
1.3.2 Knowledge Presentation:
To calculate similarity we use:
• Numeric: sim(a,b)=|a-b| / Range
• Sumbolic: sim(a,b)= 1 if a=b 0 if a not equal to b
• Multi-valued: sim(a,b)= card(a) card(b)/ card(a b)
• Tazonomy: sim(a,b)= h(common node (a,b))/min(h(a),h(b))
Where
Card is the cardinality (size) of the set
range is the absolute value of difference between the upper and lower boundary
of the set .
h is the height (number of levels) of the taxonomy tree.
Case Indexing:
A CBR system its ability to retrieve relevant cases quickly and accurately
from its case base is its main power. It build a structure that will return the most
appropriate case(s) at high speed. Case base indexing minimizes the number of cases that
have to be evaluated at run time and is required for a large set of cases as linear searched
will yield a probability long retrieval time.
Different methods:
• Nearest neighbor:
Number of CBR system relates to nearest-neighbor method. The system
would simply prefer cases that match more features to a case that matched fewer.
The nearest-neighbor algorithm uses statistical method to determine the optimal
set of feature and the number of case that should be used calculated similarities if
the retrieval is somewhat flexible this approach works well. In Nearest-neighbor
algorithm each new case is compared with all other cases in the database. As the
case base grows nearest neighbor cannot be calculated on the fly and pre-indexing
is required.
• Induction:
Inductive approaches to indexing are useful where the retrieval goal or
case outcome is well defined. The output of the induction process is in the form of
a decision tress. Induction-based system use a decision tree for retrieval as
compared to nearest-neighbor indexing which is more associative, and induced
decision tree is hierarchical and static.
o The resultant index increases the retrieval time by only the log of the
number of cases rather than doing linearly. Retrieval time can be an
important factor when using large case bases.
• Knowledge guided:
A knowledge-guided approach uses human knowledge to the induction process by
manually identifying known case features that are considered important and useful for
case retrieval. Its the simplest approach to case classification and indexing. Cases are
reviewed for their important features and the appropriate questions are passed to query
the user about the existence or absence of features.
[9] illustrates about the a hybrid Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) and
Information Retrieval (IR) system that generates a query to the IR system by using
information derived from CBR analysis of a problem situation. Based on a CBR analysis
form a set of highly relevant cases the query is automatically formed by submitting in
text. CBR is highly intelligent but limited in its reach and IR is broadly applicable but not
able to reason in any depth. The goal in this project is to take advantage of the strengths
of both CBR and IR in order to retrieve documents that are highly relevant to a problem
case from a standard IR collection without the need for creating symbolic case
representations for documents in the collection. We address the issue of how
automatically formulate good queries based on a problem situation in order to perform
retrieval from large text.
Hybrid CBR-IR system works by first performing a standard CBR
analysis of the input problem case and then using the results of the CBR analysis to drive
text-based document retrieval. Ordinarily, INQUERY would not engage in relevance
feedback until retrieval. based on user input, had been made and a set of documents
retrieved and presented to the user. In effect, our system uses “feedback” in the form of
the RF-CKB on a null query. Our system’s use of relevance feedback, in effect, tells the
IR component that the cases found through the CBR analysis are highly relevant and that
INQUERY should retrieve more like them. Note that while the CBR analysis is done
with respect to the relatively small CKB available to the CBR component, and relevance
feedback is done with respect to the even smaller set of special cases in the RF-CKB, the
Fig 2
IR can be performed with respect to a text collection of arbitrary size. Instead of the user
initiating the retrieval by making up a query, in our approach the user begins by inputting
facts ot’ a case. In effect our system leverages its own “m-house” analysis of the problem
case to a full-blown retrieval from an outside document base.
[10] talks about the methods for case retrieval, reuse, solution testing, and
learning are summarized, and their actual realization is discussed in the light of a few
example systems that represent different CBR approaches. It is a problem solving
paradigm that in many respects is fundamentally different from other major AI
approaches. Instead of relying solely on general knowledge of a problem domain,
or making associations along generalized relationships between problem descriptors
and conclusions, CBR is able to utilize the specific knowledge of previously
experienced, concrete problem situations (cases).
Fig 5 consist of Task method decomposition of CBR. Tasks have node names in bold letters,
while methods are written in italics. The links between task nodes (plain lines) are task
decompositions, i.e part-of relations, where the direction of the relationship is
downwards. The top-level task is problem solving and learning from experience and
the method to accomplish the task is case-based reasoning.
• CBR Problem Areas:
As for AI in general, there are no universal CBR methods suitable for
every domain of application The challenge in CBR as elsewhere is to come up
with methods that are suited for problem solving and learning in particular subject
domains and for particular application environments. In line with the task model just
Fig 5
shown, core problems addressed by CBR research can be grouped into five areas. A
set of coherent solutions to these problems constitutes a CBR method:
• Knowledge representation
• Retrieval methods
• Reuse methods
• Revise methods
• Retain methods
[11] Present software architecture for CBR systems based on three
components (a task description, a domain model, and adaptors) connected by a type of
connectors called bridges. Adaptors are basic inference components that perform specific
transformations to cases.The three main elements of the ABC software architecture are (i)
a task description, (ii) a domain model, and (iii) a library of adaptors. These three
elements connected with a special kind of connector called bridge. In addition, the
problem to be solved is called input and for simplicity we will include the case base into
the domain model element. The main issue to go from a specification like ABC to an
actual implementation is deciding how is 1) the representation of components and
bridges, and 2) The control scheme. We are implementing adaptors in Noos, a
representation language designed for supporting knowledge modeling approaches to
problem solving and learning in which different CBR systems have been built. In Noos
cases are represented as feature terms, a formalism for representing structured cases in
which any subpart of a case (feature term) is also a term and thus is also a case. Inference
is provided by problem solving methods (PSMs) thast use domain knowledge to build
models (or parts of models). A problem is solved when a case-specific model is
completed, and then it is retained in the case base. Retrieval is performed by specialized
PSMs, retrieval methods, that use domain knowledge or heuristic principles to search the
case base. Concerning the control scheme, Noos inference is on demand, i.e. follows a
lazy evaluation strategy. The chain of control is thus backwards: retrieval methods
determine the features of a case that they need, thus forcing the evaluation off.
• Case Indexing:
A CBR system its ability to retrieve relevant cases quickly and accurately
from its case base is its main power. It build a structure that will return the most
appropriate case(s) at high speed. Case base indexing minimizes the number of cases that
have to be evaluated at run time and is required for a large set of cases as linear searched
will yield a probability long retrieval time.
One claim is that hybrid systems are intrinsically better. They allow for the
synergistic combination of two techniques with more strengths and less weaknesses
than either technique alone.
Although useful for many types of problem, hybrid systems provide even
more opportunity for misuse than single techniques. Although motivated by
combining the strengths of the system, the hybrid will, in the worst case, contain none
of the strengths and all of the weaknesses of the component systems. While hybrid
systems have great potential for solving some very difficult problems, they can also
be used inappropriately. As a technique becomes more complex, the opportunities for
misuse become greater, and hybrid systems are intrinsically more complex than single
techniques. Many researchers are still making gross misuse of neural networks and
fuzzy logic as single techniques, and you can expect that this will carry over into
hybrid systems as they become more and more accessible.
–
2.2. Integrating expert systems and case-based reasoning: approaches and
applications:
[12] Talks that this research involves both the development of intelligent
systems and the study of cognitive models. The main motivations for the researches
on HMs are
– Cognitive processes are not homogeneous, consequently, a large variety of
representations and modeling techniques can be used
The performance of intelligent systems can be improved by the
combination of different Artificial Intelligence (AI) techniques. Therefore,
may electively solve several real-world problems.
[12] Presents new Case Based Reasoning approach using hybrid mechanisms for
case retrieval and adaptation. Several strategies for case adaptation have been
proposed in the literature. They can be classified in three main groups (see Fig. 6):
substitutional
adaptation, transformational adaptation and generative adaptation.
Fig 6
The strategies for substitution adaptation exchange solution attribute values of the
retrieved solution by appropriate values, producing a new solution. The strategies for
transformational adaptation modify the solution structure by including or removing
components of the retrieved solution in order to satisfy the requirements of the new
problem. The strategies for generative adaptation construct a new solution from problem
data using a predefined procedure.
The architecture of the proposed CBR system contains:
– A case retrieval mechanism composed by an ANN based on the
Adaptative Resonance Theory (ART2) model;
– A case adaptation mechanism composed by one of the following ML
algorithms:
– an ANN based on the Multi Layer Perceptron (MLP) model [4];
– a symbolic learning algorithm M5 [26];
– an algorithm based on the statistical learning theory named
Support Vector Machine (SVM) [25].
• Case Retrieval and Incorporation Approach:
Case Incorporation Process: The case incorporation mechanism proposed supports the
storage of new cases at any time (fourth phase of the CBR CYCLE). The memory
organization used by this mechanism makes possible the storage of new cases without the
eliminating cases previously stored.
4 Future study
4.1. Studying the potential applications where hybrid approach can be used
Studying the potential applications of different hybrid approach which we
are going to use.