Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #940. 	[Title] Decision Models: A Theory of Volitional Explanation [Abstract] This paper presents a theory of motivational analysis, the construction of volitional explanations to describe the planning behavior of agents. We discuss both the content of such explanations, as well as the process by which an understander builds the explanations. Explanations are constructed from decision models, which describe the planning process that an agent goes through when considering whether to perform an action. Decision models are represented as explanation patterns, which are standard patterns of causality based on previous experiences of the understander. We discuss the nature of explanation patterns, their use in representing decision models, and the process by which they are retrieved, used and evaluated. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1152896. 	[Title] Abstract [Abstract] Self-selection of input examples on the basis of performance failure is a powerful bias for learning systems. The definition of what constitutes a learning bias, however, has been typically restricted to bias provided by the input language, hypothesis language, and preference criteria between competing concept hypotheses. But if bias is taken in the broader context as any basis that provides a preference for one concept change over another, then the paradigm of failure-driven processing indeed provides a bias. Bias is exhibited by the selection of examples from an input stream that are examples of failure; successful performance is filtered out. We show that the degrees of freedom are less in failure-driven learning than in success-driven learning and that learning is facilitated because of this constraint. We also broaden the definition of failure, provide a novel taxonomy of failure causes, and illustrate the interaction of both in a multistrategy learning system called Meta-AQUA. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #310530. 	[Title] Integrating Creativity and Reading: A Functional Approach [Abstract] Reading has been studied for decades by a variety of cognitive disciplines, yet no theories exist which sufficiently describe and explain how people accomplish the complete task of reading real-world texts. In particular, a type of knowledge intensive reading known as creative reading has been largely ignored by the past research. We argue that creative reading is an aspect of practically all reading experiences; as a result, any theory which overlooks this will be insufficient. We have built on results from psychology, artificial intelligence, and education in order to produce a functional theory of the complete reading process. The overall framework describes the set of tasks necessary for reading to be performed. Within this framework, we have developed a theory of creative reading. The theory is implemented in the ISAAC (Integrated Story Analysis And Creativity) system, a reading system which reads science fiction stories. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #207395. 	[Title] A Functional Theory of Creative Reading [Abstract] Reading is an area of human cognition which has been studied for decades by psychologists, education researchers, and artificial intelligence researchers. Yet, there still does not exist a theory which accurately describes the complete process. We believe that these past attempts fell short due to an incomplete understanding of the overall task of reading; namely, the complete set of mental tasks a reasoner must perform to read and the mechanisms that carry out these tasks. We present a functional theory of the reading process and argue that it represents a coverage of the task. The theory combines experimental results from psychology, artificial intelligence, education, and linguistics, along with the insights we have gained from our own research. This greater understanding of the mental tasks necessary for reading will enable new natural language understanding systems to be more flexible and more capable than earlier ones. Furthermore, we argue that creativity is a necessary component of the reading process and must be considered in any theory or system attempting to describe it. We present a functional theory of creative reading and a novel knowledge organization scheme that supports the creativity mechanisms. The reading theory is currently being implemented in the ISAAC (Integrated Story Analysis And Creativity) system, a computer system which reads science fiction stories. fl This paper is part of the Georgia Institute of Technology, College of Computing, Technical Report series. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1956. 	[Title] INFERENTIAL THEORY OF LEARNING: Developing Foundations for Multistrategy Learning [Abstract] The development of multistrategy learning systems should be based on a clear understanding of the roles and the applicability conditions of different learning strategies. To this end, this chapter introduces the Inferential Theory of Learning that provides a conceptual framework for explaining logical capabilities of learning strategies, i.e., their competence. Viewing learning as a process of modifying the learners knowledge by exploring the learners experience, the theory postulates that any such process can be described as a search in a knowledge space, triggered by the learners experience and guided by learning goals. The search operators are instantiations of knowledge transmutations, which are generic patterns of knowledge change. Transmutations may employ any basic type of inferencededuction, induction or analogy. Several fundamental knowledge transmutations are described in a novel and general way, such as generalization, abstraction, explanation and similization, and their counterparts, specialization, concretion, prediction and dissimilization, respectively. Generalization enlarges the reference set of a description (the set of entities that are being described). Abstraction reduces the amount of the detail about the reference set. Explanation generates premises that explain (or imply) the given properties of the reference set. Similization transfers knowledge from one reference set to a similar reference set. Using concepts of the theory, a multistrategy task-adaptive learning (MTL) methodology is outlined, and illustrated b y an example. MTL dynamically adapts strategies to the learning task, defined by the input information, learners background knowledge, and the learning goal. It aims at synergistically integrating a whole range of inferential learning strategies, such as empirical generalization, constructive induction, deductive generalization, explanation, prediction, abstraction, and similization. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #936. 	[Title] The Use of Explicit Goals for Knowledge to Guide Inference and Learning [Abstract] Combinatorial explosion of inferences has always been a central problem in artificial intelligence. Although the inferences that can be drawn from a reasoner's knowledge and from available inputs is very large (potentially infinite), the inferential resources available to any reasoning system are limited. With limited inferential capacity and very many potential inferences, reasoners must somehow control the process of inference. Not all inferences are equally useful to a given reasoning system. Any reasoning system that has goals (or any form of a utility function) and acts based on its beliefs indirectly assigns utility to its beliefs. Given limits on the process of inference, and variation in the utility of inferences, it is clear that a reasoner ought to draw the inferences that will be most valuable to it. This paper presents an approach to this problem that makes the utility of a (potential) belief an explicit part of the inference process. The method is to generate explicit desires for knowledge. The question of focus of attention is thereby transformed into two related problems: How can explicit desires for knowledge be used to control inference and facilitate resource-constrained goal pursuit in general? and, Where do these desires for knowledge come from? We present a theory of knowledge goals, or desires for knowledge, and their use in the processes of understanding and learning. The theory is illustrated using two case studies, a natural language understanding program that learns by reading novel or unusual newspaper stories, and a differential diagnosis program that improves its accuracy with experience. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #28265. 	[Title] Using Introspective Reasoning to Select Learning Strategies [Abstract] In order to learn effectively, a system must not only possess knowledge about the world and be able to improve that knowledge, but it also must introspectively reason about how it performs a given task and what particular pieces of knowledge it needs to improve its performance at the current task. Introspection requires a declaratflive representation of the reasoning performed by the system during the performance task. This paper presents a taxonomy of possible reasoning failures that can occur during this task, their declarative representations, and their associations with particular learning strategies. We propose a theory of Meta-XPs, which are explanation structures that help the system identify failure types and choose appropriate learning strategies in order to avoid similar mistakes in the future. A program called Meta-AQUA embodies the theory and processes examples in the domain of drug smuggling. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #91853. 	[Title] GIT-CC-92/60 A Model-Based Approach to Analogical Reasoning and Learning in Design [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #941. 	[Title] Incremental Learning of Explanation Patterns and their Indices [Abstract] This paper describes how a reasoner can improve its understanding of an incompletely understood domain through the application of what it already knows to novel problems in that domain. Recent work in AI has dealt with the issue of using past explanations stored in the reasoner's memory to understand novel situations. However, this process assumes that past explanations are well understood and provide good "lessons" to be used for future situations. This assumption is usually false when one is learning about a novel domain, since situations encountered previously in this domain might not have been understood completely. Instead, it is reasonable to assume that the reasoner would have gaps in its knowledge base. By reasoning about a new situation, the reasoner should be able to fill in these gaps as new information came in, reorganize its explanations in memory, and gradually evolve a better understanding of its domain. We present a story understanding program that retrieves past explanations from situations already in memory, and uses them to build explanations to understand novel stories about terrorism. In doing so, the system refines its understanding of the domain by filling in gaps in these explanations, by elaborating the explanations, or by learning new indices for the explanations. This is a type of incremental learning since the system improves its explanatory knowledge of the domain in an incremental fashion rather than by learning new XPs as a whole. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #943. 	[Title] Indexing, Elaboration and Refinement: Incremental Learning of Explanatory Cases [Abstract] This article describes how a reasoner can improve its understanding of an incompletely understood domain through the application of what it already knows to novel problems in that domain. Case-based reasoning is the process of using past experiences stored in the reasoner's memory to understand novel situations or solve novel problems. However, this process assumes that past experiences are well understood and provide good "lessons" to be used for future situations. This assumption is usually false when one is learning about a novel domain, since situations encountered previously in this domain might not have been understood completely. Furthermore, the reasoner may not even have a case that adequately deals with the new situation, or may not be able to access the case using existing indices. We present a theory of incremental learning based on the revision of previously existing case knowledge in response to experiences in such situations. The theory has been implemented in a case-based story understanding program that can (a) learn a new case in situations where no case already exists, (b) learn how to index the case in memory, and (c) incrementally refine its understanding of the case by using it to reason about new situations, thus evolving a better understanding of its domain through experience. This research complements work in case-based reasoning by providing mechanisms by which a case library can be automatically built for use by a case-based reasoning program. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #3828. 	[Title] A theory of questions and question asking [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #20180. 	[Title] Learning Indices for Schema Selection [Abstract] In addition to learning new knowledge, a system must be able to learn when the knowledge is likely to be applicable. An index is a piece of information which, when identified in a given situation, triggers the relevant piece of knowledge (or schema) in the system's memory. We discuss the issue of how indices may be learned automatically in the context of a story understanding task, and present a program that can learn new indices for existing explanatory schemas. We discuss two methods using which the system can identify the relevant schema even if the input does not directly match an existing index, and learn a new index to allow it to retrieve this schema more efficiently in the future. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #129558. 	[Title] A Goal-Based Approach to Intelligent Information Retrieval [Abstract] Intelligent information retrieval (IIR) requires inference. The number of inferences that can be drawn by even a simple reasoner is very large, and the inferential resources available to any practical computer system are limited. This problem is one long faced by AI researchers. In this paper, we present a method used by two recent machine learning programs for control of inference that is relevant to the design of IIR systems. The key feature of the approach is the use of explicit representations of desired knowledge, which we call knowledge goals. Our theory addresses the representation of knowledge goals, methods for generating and transforming these goals, and heuristics for selecting among potential inferences in order to feasibly satisfy such goals. In this view, IIR becomes a kind of planning: decisions about what to infer, how to infer and when to infer are based on representations of desired knowledge, as well as internal representations of the system's inferential abilities and current state. The theory is illustrated using two case studies, a natural language understanding program that learns by reading novel newspaper stories, and a differential diagnosis program that improves its accuracy with experience. We conclude by making several suggestions on how this machine learning framework can be integrated with existing information retrieval methods. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1152436. 	[Title] Abstract [Abstract] Given an arbitrary learning situation, it is difficult to determine the most appropriate learning strategy. The goal of this research is to provide a general representation and processing framework for introspective reasoning for strategy selection. The learning framework for an introspective system is to perform some reasoning task. As it does, the system also records a trace of the reasoning itself, along with the results of such reasoning. If a reasoning failure occurs, the system retrieves and applies an introspective explanation of the failure in order to understand the error and repair the knowledge base. A knowledge structure called a Meta-Explanation Pattern is used to both explain how conclusions are derived and why such conclusions fail. If reasoning is represented in an explicit, declarative manner, the system can examine its own reasoning, analyze its reasoning failures, identify what it needs to learn, and select appropriate learning strategies in order to learn the required knowledge without overreli ance on the programmer. Please summarise all the given information.

Paper #940 has the title `Decision Models: A Theory of Volitional Explanation  
` and the abstract `This paper presents a theory of motivational analysis, the construction of volitional explanations to describe the planning behavior of agents. We discuss both the content of such explanations, as well as the process by which an understander builds the explanations. Explanations are constructed from decision models, which describe the planning process that an agent goes through when considering whether to perform an action. Decision models are represented as explanation patterns, which are standard patterns of causality based on previous experiences of the understander. We discuss the nature of explanation patterns, their use in representing decision models, and the process by which they are retrieved, used and evaluated.
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #940 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].


Paper #940 has the title `Decision Models: A Theory of Volitional Explanation  
` and the abstract `This paper presents a theory of motivational analysis, the construction of volitional explanations to describe the planning behavior of agents. We discuss both the content of such explanations, as well as the process by which an understander builds the explanations. Explanations are constructed from decision models, which describe the planning process that an agent goes through when considering whether to perform an action. Decision models are represented as explanation patterns, which are standard patterns of causality based on previous experiences of the understander. We discuss the nature of explanation patterns, their use in representing decision models, and the process by which they are retrieved, used and evaluated.
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #940 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].

This paper should be classified into: Case_Based