Information Systems Frontiers

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 653–668 | Cite as

A case-based reasoning based multi-agent cognitive map inference mechanism: An application to sales opportunity assessment



In order to propose a new cognitive map (CM) inference mechanism that does not require artificial assumptions, we developed a case-based reasoning (CBR) based mechanism called the CBRMCM (Case-Based Reasoning based Multi-agent Cognitive Map). The key idea of the CBRMCM mechanism involves converting all of the factors (nodes) that constitute the CM into intelligent agents that determine their own status by checking status changes and relationship with other agents and the results being reported to other related node agents. Furthermore, the CBRMCM is deployed when each node agent references the status of other related nodes to determine its own status value. This approach eliminates the artificial fuzzy value conversion and the numerical inference function that were required for obtaining CM inference. Using the CBRMCM mechanism, we have demonstrated that the task of analyzing a sales opportunity could be systematically and intelligently solved and thus, IS project managers can be provided with robust decision support.


Cognitive Map (CM) Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) Case-Based Reasoning based Multi-agent Cognitive Map (CBRMCM) Sales opportunity assessment cases 


  1. Aamodt, A., & Plaza, E. (1994). Case-based reasoning: foundational issues methodological variations, and system approaches. AI Communications: The European Journal on Artificial Intelligence, 7(1), 39–59.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ahn, H., & Kim, K. J. (2009). Global optimization of case-based reasoning for breast cytology diagnosis. Expert Systems with Applications, 36(1), 724–734.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Althoff, K.-D., Bergmann, R., Wess, S., Manago, M., Auriol, E., Larichev, O. I., et al. (1998). Cased-based reasoning for medical decision support tasks: the INRECA approach. Artificial Intelligence in Medicine, 12(2), 25–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Arcos, J. L., & Plaza, E. (1994). A reflective architecture for integrated memory-based learning and reasoning. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 837, 289–300.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Babu, T. R., & Murty, M. N. (2001). Comparison of genetic algorithm based prototype selection schemes. Pattern Recognition, 34(2), 523–525.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Chiu, C. (2002). A case-based customer classification approach for direct marketing. Expert Systems with Applications, 22(2), 163–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Davis, F. D. (1989). Perceived usefulness, perceived ease of use, and user acceptance of information technology. MIS Quarterly, 13(3), 319–339.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Domingos, P. (1997). Context-sensitive feature selection for lazy learners. Artificial Intelligence Review, 11(1–5), 227–253.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Glasgow, J., Kuo, T., & Davies, J. (2006). Protein structure from contact maps: a case-based reasoning approach. Information Systems Frontiers, 8(1), 29–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Göker, M. H., & Roth-Berghofer, T. (1999). The development and utilization of the case-based help-desk support system HOMER. Engineering Application of Artificial Intelligence, 12(6), 665–680.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Huang, C.-C., & Tseng, T.-L. (2004). Rough set approach to case-based reasoning application. Expert Systems with Applications, 26(3), 369–385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Huang, Y. S., Chiang, C. C., Shieh, J. W., & Grimson, E. (2002). Prototype optimization for nearest-neighbor classification. Pattern Recognition, 35(6), 1237–1245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Jeffery, K. J., & Burgess, N. (2006). A metric for the cognitive map: found at last? Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 10(1), 1–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Kardaras, D., & Karakostas, B. (1999). The use of fuzzy cognitive maps to simulate the information systems strategic planning process. Information and Software Technology, 41, 197–210.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Kumaran, D., & Maguire, E. A. (2005). The human hippocampus: cognitive maps or relational memory? The Journal of Neuroscience, 25(31), 7254–7259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Kwahk, K. Y., & Kim, Y. G. (1999). Supporting business process redesign using cognitive maps. Decision Support Systems, 25(2), 155–178.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Lee, K. C., & Kwon, S. J. (2006). The use of cognitive maps and case-based reasoning for B2B negotiation. Journal of Management Information Systems, 22(4), 337–376.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Lee, K. C., & Lee, S. (2003). A cognitive map simulation approach to adjusting the design factors of the electronic commerce web sites. Expert Systems with Applications, 24(1), 1–11.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Liao, S.-H. (2000). Case-based decision support system: architecture for simulating military command and control. European Journal of Operational Research, 123(3), 558–567.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Liao, T. W., Zhang, Z. M., & Mount, C. R. (2000). A case-based reasoning system for identifying failure mechanisms. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 13(2), 199–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Liu, Z. Q., & Satur, R. (1999). Contextual fuzzy cognitive map for decision support in geographic information systems. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 7(5), 495–507.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Lopez, B. (1993). Reactive planning through the integration of a case-based system and a rule-based system. In Sloman et al. (Eds.), Prospects for artificial intelligence (pp. 189–198). IOS Press.Google Scholar
  23. Miao, Y., & Liu, Z. Q. (2000). On causal inference in fuzzy cognitive maps. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 8(1), 107–119.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Miao, Y., Liu, Z. Q., Siew, C. K., & Miao, C. Y. (2001). Dynamical cognitive network: an extension of fuzzy cognitive map. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 7(5), 760–770.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Noh, J. B., Lee, K. C., Kim, J. K., Lee, J. K., & Kim, S. H. (2000). A case-based reasoning approach to cognitive map-driven tacit knowledge management. Expert Systems with Applications, 19(4), 249–259.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Pews, G., & Wess, S. (1993). Combining case-based and model-based approaches for diagnostic applications in technical domains. In Proc. of First European Workshop on Case-Based Reasoning. 2, pp. 325–328.Google Scholar
  27. Plaza, E., & Lopez de Mantaras, R. (1990). A case-based apprentice that learns from fuzzy examples. Methodologies for Intelligent Systems, 5, 420–427.Google Scholar
  28. Rissland, E. L., & Skalak, D. B. (1991). CABARET: rule interpretation in a hybrid architecture. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 34(6), 839–887.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Styblinski, M. A., & Meyer, B. D. (1991). Signal flow graphs vs. fuzzy cognitive maps in application to qualitative circuit analysis. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 35(2), 175–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Varma, A., & Roddy, N. (1999). ICARUS: design and development of a case-based reasoning system for locomotive diagnostics. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence, 12(6), 681–690.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Vollrath, I., Wilke, W., & Bergmann, R. (1998). Case-based reasoning support for online catalog sales. IEEE Internet Computing online, 2(4), 47–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Watson, I. (1999). Case-based reasoning is a methodology not a technology. Knowledge-Based Systems, 12(5/6), 303–308.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Wettschereck, D., Aha, D. W., & Mohri, T. (1997). A review and empirical evaluation of feature weighting methods for a class of lazy learning algorithms. Artificial Intelligence Review, 11(1–5), 273–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2011

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Consulting Group, SAP KoreaSeoulRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Railroad Management InformationDongyang UniversityGyeongbukRepublic of Korea
  3. 3.College of BusinessChosun UniversityGwangjuRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations