Skip to main content

Helping a CBR Program Know What It Knows

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Computer Science ((LNAI,volume 2080))

Abstract

Case-based reasoning systems need to know the limitations of their expertise. Having found the known source cases most relevant to a target problem, they must assess whether those cases are similar enough to the problem to warrant venturing advice. In experimenting with SIROCCO, a twostage case-based retrieval program that uses structural mapping to analyze and provide advice on engineering ethics cases, we concluded that it would sometimes be better for the program to admit that it lacks the knowledge to suggest relevant codes and past source cases. We identified and encoded three strategic metarules to help it decide. The metarules leverage incrementally deeper knowledge about SIROCCO’s matching algorithm to help the program “know what it knows.” Experiments demonstrate that the metarules can improve the program’s overall advice-giving performance.

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

Buying options

Chapter
USD   29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD   84.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD   109.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Learn about institutional subscriptions

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. James F. Allen. Maintaining Knowledge about Temporal Intervals. In the Communications of the ACM 26(11), 832–843.

    Google Scholar 

  2. K. D. Ashley. Modeling Legal Argument: Reasoning with Cases and Hypotheticals. Cambridge: MIT Press.

    Google Scholar 

  3. L. K. Branting. Building Explanations from Rules and Structured Cases. Int’l Journal of Man-Machine Studies, 34 (6): 797–837.

    Google Scholar 

  4. R. Davis. Expert Systems: Where Are We? And Where Do We Go From Here? AI Magazine 3, no. 2:3–22.

    Google Scholar 

  5. R. Davis and B. Buchanan. “Meta-Level Knowledge,” chapter 28 in B. Buchanan and E. Shortliffe (ed.)Rule-Based Expert Systems, pp. 507–530. Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  6. K. D. Forbus, D. Gentner, and K. Law. MAC/FAC: A Model of Similarity-based Retrieval. Cognitive Science 19, 141–205, Norwood, NJ: Ablex Publ.

    Google Scholar 

  7. C. E. Harris, M. S. Pritchard, and M. J. R abins. Engineering Ethics: Concepts and Cases. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth, 2nd edition.

    Google Scholar 

  8. J. A. G. M. Koomen. The TIMELOGIC Temporal Reasoning System. Tech. Report 231, Computer Science Dept., University of Rochester, NY.

    Google Scholar 

  9. D. Lenat, R. Davis, J. Doyle, M. Genesereth, I. Goldstein, and H. Schrobe. “Reasoning about Reasoning,” chapter 7 in F. Hayes-Roth, et al. ed. Building Expert Systems, pp. 219–239. Addison-Wesley: Reading, MA.

    Google Scholar 

  10. D. D. Lewis, R. E. Schapire, J. P. Callan, and R. Papka. Training Algorithms for Linear Text Classifiers. In: Proceedings of the 19th International ACM-SIGIR Conf. on Res. and Dev. in Information Retrieval. Zurich.

    Google Scholar 

  11. B. M. McLaren. Assessing the Relevance of Cases and Principles Using Operationalization Techniques. Ph.D. Dissertation, University of Pittsburgh, PA.

    Google Scholar 

  12. B. M. McLaren and K. D. Ashley. Case Representation, Acquisition, and Retrieval in SIROCCO. In: Proc. of the 3rd International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, 248–262.

    Google Scholar 

  13. B. M. McLaren and K. D. Ashley. Assessing Relevance With Extensionally Defined Principles and Cases. In: Proc. of the 17th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 316–322.

    Google Scholar 

  14. E. L. Rissland, D. B. Skalak, and M. T. Friedman. BankXX: Supporting Legal Arguments through Heuristic Retrieval. AI and Law Volume 4. Kluwer.

    Google Scholar 

  15. B. Smyth and M. T. Keane. Remembering to Forget: A Competence Preserving Deletion Policy for Case-Based Reasoning Systems. In: Proc. of the 14th International Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 377–382.

    Google Scholar 

  16. B. Smyth and E. McKenna. Building Compact Competent Case-Bases. In: Proc. of the 3rd International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, 329–342.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2001 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

McLaren, B.M., Ashley, K.D. (2001). Helping a CBR Program Know What It Knows. In: Aha, D.W., Watson, I. (eds) Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development. ICCBR 2001. Lecture Notes in Computer Science(), vol 2080. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44593-5_27

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/3-540-44593-5_27

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-540-42358-4

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-540-44593-7

  • eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive

Publish with us

Policies and ethics