Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #10183. 	[Title] Concept Learning and Heuristic Classification in Weak-Theory Domains 1 [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #54550. 	[Title] Analysis and Empirical Studies of Derivational Analogy [Abstract] Derivational analogy is a technique for reusing problem solving experience to improve problem solving performance. This research addresses an issue common to all problem solvers that use derivational analogy: overcoming the mismatches between past experiences and new problems that impede reuse. First, this research describes the variety of mismatches that can arise and proposes a new approach to derivational analogy that uses appropriate adaptation strategies for each. Second, it compares this approach with seven others in a common domain. This empirical study shows that derivational analogy is almost always more efficient than problem solving from scratch, but the amount it contributes depends on its ability to overcome mismatches Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #3095. 	[Title] Constructive Similarity Assessment: Using Stored Cases to Define New Situations [Abstract] A fundamental issue in case-based reasoning is similarity assessment: determining similarities and differences between new and retrieved cases. Many methods have been developed for comparing input case descriptions to the cases already in memory. However, the success of such methods depends on the input case description being sufficiently complete to reflect the important features of the new situation, which is not assured. In case-based explanation of anomalous events during story understanding, the anomaly arises because the current situation is incompletely understood; consequently, similarity assessment based on matches between known current features and old cases is likely to fail because of gaps in the current case's description. Our solution to the problem of gaps in a new case's description is an approach that we call constructive similarity assessment. Constructive similarity assessment treats similarity assessment not as a simple comparison between fixed new and old cases, but as a process for deciding which types of features should be investigated in the new situation and, if the features are borne out by other knowledge, added to the description of the current case. Constructive similarity assessment does not merely compare new cases to old: using prior cases as its guide, it dynamically carves augmented descriptions of new cases out of memory. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1110947. 	[Title] Lazy Induction Triggered by CBR [Abstract] In recent years, case-based reasoning has been demonstrated to be highly useful for problem solving in complex domains. Also, mixed paradigm approaches emerged for combining CBR and induction techniques aiming at verifying the knowledge and/or building an efficient case memory. However, in complex domains induction over the whole problem space is often not possible or too time consuming. In this paper, an approach is presented which (owing to a close interaction with the CBR part) attempts to induce rules only for a particular context, i.e. for a problem just being solved by a CBR-oriented system. These rules may then be used for indexing purposes or similarity assessment in order to support the CBR process in the future. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #212777. 	[Title] Inductive Learning of Characteristic Concept Descriptions from Small Sets of Classified Examples [Abstract] This paper presents a novel idea to the problem of learning concept descriptions from examples. Whereas most existing approaches rely on a large number of classified examples, the approach presented in the paper is aimed at being applicable when only a few examples are classified as positive (and negative) instances of a concept. The approach tries to take advantage of the information which can be induced from descriptions of unclassified objects using a conceptual clustering algorithm. The system Cola is described and results of applying Cola in two real-world domains are presented. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #385067. 	[Title] CBR for Document Retrieval: The FAllQ Project [Abstract] This paper reports about a project on document retrieval in an industrial setting. The objective is to provide a tool that helps finding documents related to a given query, such as answers in Frequently Asked Questions databases. A CBR approach has been used to develop a running prototypical system which is currently under practical evaluation. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #10796. 	[Title] An Improved Algorithm for Incremental Induction of Decision Trees [Abstract] Technical Report 94-07 February 7, 1994 (updated April 25, 1994) This paper will appear in Proceedings of the Eleventh International Conference on Machine Learning. Abstract This paper presents an algorithm for incremental induction of decision trees that is able to handle both numeric and symbolic variables. In order to handle numeric variables, a new tree revision operator called `slewing' is introduced. Finally, a non-incremental method is given for finding a decision tree based on a direct metric of a candidate tree. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1108267. 	[Title] Cooperative Bayesian and Case-Based Reasoning for Solving Multiagent Planning Tasks [Abstract] We describe an integrated problem solving architecture named INBANCA in which Bayesian networks and case-based reasoning (CBR) work cooperatively on multiagent planning tasks. This includes two-team dynamic tasks, and this paper concentrates on simulated soccer as an example. Bayesian networks are used to characterize action selection whereas a case-based approach is used to determine how to implement actions. This paper has two contributions. First, we survey integrations of case-based and Bayesian approaches from the perspective of a popular CBR task decomposition framework, thus explaining what types of integrations have been attempted. This allows us to explain the unique aspects of our proposed integration. Second, we demonstrate how Bayesian nets can be used to provide environmental context, and thus feature selection information, for the case-based reasoner. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #10798. 	[Title] Learning physical descriptions from functional definitions, examples, Learning from examples: The effect of different conceptual [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #252715. 	[Title] EMERALD: An Integrated System of Machine Learning and Discovery Programs to Support AI Education and [Abstract] With the rapid expansion of machine learning methods and applications, there is a strong need for computer-based interactive tools that support education in this area. The EMERALD system was developed to provide hands-on experience and an interactive demonstration of several machine learning and discovery capabilities for students in AI and cognitive science, and for AI professionals. The current version of EMERALD integrates five programs that exhibit different types of machine learning and discovery: learning rules from examples, determining structural descriptions of object classes, inventing conceptual clusterings of entities, predicting sequences of objects, and discovering equations characterizing collections of quantitative and qualitative data. EMERALD extensively uses color graphic capabilities, voice synthesis, and a natural language representation of the knowledge acquired by the learning programs. Each program is presented as a "learning robot," which has its own "personality," expressed by its icon, its voice, the comments it generates during the learning process, and the results of learning presented as natural language text and/or voice output. Users learn about the capabilities of each "robot" both by being challenged to perform some learning tasks themselves, and by creating their own similar tasks to challenge the "robot." EMERALD is an extension of ILLIAN, an initial, much smaller version that toured eight major US Museums of Science, and was seen by over half a million visitors. EMERALD's architecture allows it to incorporate new programs and new capabilities. The system runs on SUN workstations, and is available to universities and educational institutions. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #3243. 	[Title] A System for Induction of Oblique Decision Trees [Abstract] This article describes a new system for induction of oblique decision trees. This system, OC1, combines deterministic hill-climbing with two forms of randomization to find a good oblique split (in the form of a hyperplane) at each node of a decision tree. Oblique decision tree methods are tuned especially for domains in which the attributes are numeric, although they can be adapted to symbolic or mixed symbolic/numeric attributes. We present extensive empirical studies, using both real and artificial data, that analyze OC1's ability to construct oblique trees that are smaller and more accurate than their axis-parallel counterparts. We also examine the benefits of randomization for the construction of oblique decision trees. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #434. 	[Title] Learning Analytically and Inductively [Abstract] Learning is a fundamental component of intelligence, and a key consideration in designing cognitive architectures such as Soar [ Laird et al., 1986 ] . This chapter considers the question of what constitutes an appropriate general-purpose learning mechanism. We are interested in mechanisms that might explain and reproduce the rich variety of learning capabilities of humans, ranging from learning perceptual-motor skills such as how to ride a bicycle, to learning highly cognitive tasks such as how to play chess. Research on learning in fields such as cognitive science, artificial intelligence, neurobiology, and statistics has led to the identification of two distinct classes of learning methods: inductive and analytic. Inductive methods, such as neural network Backpropagation, learn general laws by finding statistical correlations and regularities among a large set of training examples. In contrast, analytical methods, such as Explanation-Based Learning, acquire general laws from many fewer training examples. They rely instead on prior knowledge to analyze individual training examples in detail, then use this analysis to distinguish relevant example features from the irrelevant. The question considered in this chapter is how to best combine inductive and analytical learning in an architecture that seeks to cover the range of learning exhibited by intelligent systems such as humans. We present a specific learning mechanism, Explanation Based Neural Network learning (EBNN), that blends these two types of learning, and present experimental results demonstrating its ability to learn control strategies for a mobile robot using Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #2354. 	[Title] A Statistical Approach to Solving the EBL Utility Problem [Abstract] Many "learning from experience" systems use information extracted from problem solving experiences to modify a performance element PE, forming a new element PE 0 that can solve these and similar problems more efficiently. However, as transformations that improve performance on one set of problems can degrade performance on other sets, the new PE 0 is not always better than the original PE; this depends on the distribution of problems. We therefore seek the performance element whose expected performance, over this distribution, is optimal. Unfortunately, the actual distribution, which is needed to determine which element is optimal, is usually not known. Moreover, the task of finding the optimal element, even knowing the distribution, is intractable for most interesting spaces of elements. This paper presents a method, palo, that side-steps these problems by using a set of samples to estimate the unknown distribution, and by using a set of transformations to hill-climb to a local optimum. This process is based on a mathematically rigorous form of utility analysis: in particular, it uses statistical techniques to determine whether the result of a proposed transformation will be better than the original system. We also present an efficient way of implementing this learning system in the context of a general class of performance elements, and include empirical evidence that this approach can work effectively. fl Much of this work was performed at the University of Toronto, where it was supported by the Institute for Robotics and Intelligent Systems and by an operating grant from the National Science and Engineering Research Council of Canada. We also gratefully acknowledge receiving many helpful comments from William Cohen, Dave Mitchell, Dale Schuurmans and the anonymous referees. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #86840. 	[Title] Learning Active Classifiers [Abstract] Many classification algorithms are "passive", in that they assign a class-label to each instance based only on the description given, even if that description is incomplete. In contrast, an active classifier can | at some cost | obtain the values of missing attributes, before deciding upon a class label. The expected utility of using an active classifier depends on both the cost required to obtain the additional attribute values and the penalty incurred if it outputs the wrong classification. This paper considers the problem of learning near-optimal active classifiers, using a variant of the probably-approximately-correct (PAC) model. After defining the framework | which is perhaps the main contribution of this paper | we describe a situation where this task can be achieved efficiently, but then show that the task is often intractable. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #28473. 	[Title] Adaptive Load Balancing: A Study in Multi-Agent Learning [Abstract] We study the process of multi-agent reinforcement learning in the context of load balancing in a distributed system, without use of either central coordination or explicit communication. We first define a precise framework in which to study adaptive load balancing, important features of which are its stochastic nature and the purely local information available to individual agents. Given this framework, we show illuminating results on the interplay between basic adaptive behavior parameters and their effect on system efficiency. We then investigate the properties of adaptive load balancing in heterogeneous populations, and address the issue of exploration vs. exploitation in that context. Finally, we show that naive use of communication may not improve, and might even harm system efficiency. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #127033. 	[Title] LEARNING ROBOT BEHAVIORS USING GENETIC ALGORITHMS [Abstract] Genetic Algorithms are used to learn navigation and collision avoidance behaviors for robots. The learning is performed under simulation, and the resulting behaviors are then used to control the The approach to learning behaviors for robots described here reflects a particular methodology for learning via a simulation model. The motivation is that making mistakes on real systems may be costly or dangerous. In addition, time constraints might limit the number of experiences during learning in the real world, while in many cases, the simulation model can be made to run faster than real time. Since learning may require experimenting with behaviors that might occasionally produce unacceptable results if applied to the real world, or might require too much time in the real environment, we assume that hypothetical behaviors will be evaluated in a simulation model (the off-line system). As illustrated in Figure 1, the current best behavior can be placed in the real, on-line system, while learning continues in the off-line system [1]. The learning algorithm was designed to learn useful behaviors from simulations of limited fidelity. The expectation is that behaviors learned in these simulations will be useful in real-world environments. Previous studies have illustrated that knowledge learned under simulation is robust and might be applicable to the real world if the simulation is more general (i.e. has more noise, more varied conditions, etc.) than the real world environment [2]. Where this is not possible, it is important to identify the differences between the simulation and the world and note the effect upon the learning process. The research reported here continues to examine this hypothesis. The next section very briefly explains the learning algorithm (and gives pointers to where more extensive documentation can be found). After that, the actual robot is described. Then we describe the simulation of the robot. The task _______________ actual robot. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #18619. 	[Title] Heterogeneous Uncertainty Sampling for Supervised Learning [Abstract] Uncertainty sampling methods iteratively request class labels for training instances whose classes are uncertain despite the previous labeled instances. These methods can greatly reduce the number of instances that an expert need label. One problem with this approach is that the classifier best suited for an application may be too expensive to train or use during the selection of instances. We test the use of one classifier (a highly efficient probabilistic one) to select examples for training another (the C4.5 rule induction program). Despite being chosen by this heterogeneous approach, the uncertainty samples yielded classifiers with lower error rates than random samples ten times larger. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #20924. 	[Title] Massively Parallel Case-Based Reasoning with Probabilistic Similarity Metrics [Abstract] We propose a probabilistic case-space metric for the case matching and case adaptation tasks. Central to our approach is a probability propagation algorithm adopted from Bayesian reasoning systems, which allows our case-based reasoning system to perform theoretically sound probabilistic reasoning. The same probability propagation mechanism actually offers a uniform solution to both the case matching and case adaptation problems. We also show how the algorithm can be implemented as a connectionist network, where efficient massively parallel case retrieval is an inherent property of the system. We argue that using this kind of an approach, the difficult problem of case indexing can be completely avoided. Pp. 144-154 in Topics in Case-Based Reasoning, edited by Stefan Wess, Klaus-Dieter Althoff and Michael M. Richter. Volume 837, Lecture Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #259772. 	[Title] Reasoning with Portions of Precedents [Abstract] This paper argues that the task of matching in case-based reasoning can often be improved by comparing new cases to portions of precedents. An example is presented that illustrates how combining portions of multiple precedents can permit new cases to be resolved that would be indeterminate if new cases could only be compared to entire precedents. A system that uses of portions of precedents for legal analysis in the domain of Texas worker's compensation law, GREBE, is described, and examples of GREBE's analysis that combine reasoning steps from multiple precedents are presented. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #10174. 	[Title] Knowing What Doesn't Matter: Exploiting Omitted Superfluous Data [Abstract] Most inductive inference algorithms (i.e., "learners") work most effectively when their training data contain completely specified labeled samples. In many diagnostic tasks, however, the data will include the values of only some of the attributes; we model this as a blocking process that hides the values of those attributes from the learner. While blockers that remove the values of critical attributes can handicap a learner, this paper instead focuses on blockers that remove only superfluous attribute values, i.e., values that are not needed to classify an instance, given the values of the other unblocked attributes. We first motivate and formalize this model of "superfluous-value blocking," and then demonstrate that these omissions can be useful, by showing that certain classes that seem hard to learn in the general PAC model | viz., decision trees | are trivial to learn in this setting, and can even be learned in a manner that is very robust to classification noise. We also discuss how this model can be extended to deal with (1) theory revision (i.e., modifying an existing decision tree); (2) "complex" attributes (which correspond to combinations of other atomic attributes); (3) blockers that occasionally include superfluous values or exclude re quired values; and (4) other hypothesis classes (e.g., DNF formulae). Declaration: This paper has not already been accepted by and is not currently under review for a journal or another conference, nor will it be submitted for such during IJCAI's review period. fl This is an extended version of a paper that appeared in working notes of the 1994 AAAI Fall Symposium on "Relevance", New Orleans, November 1994. y Authors listed alphabetically. We gratefully acknowledge receiving helpful comments from Dale Schuurmans and George Drastal. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #10430. 	[Title] Rules and Precedents as Complementary Warrants Complementarity of Rules and Precedents for Classification In a [Abstract] This paper describes a model of the complementarity of rules and precedents in the classification task. Under this model, precedents assist rule-based reasoning by operationalizing abstract rule antecedents. Conversely, rules assist case-based reasoning through case elaboration, the process of inferring case facts in order to increase the similarity between cases, and term reformulation, the process of replacing a term whose precedents only weakly match a case with terms whose precedents strongly match the case. Fully exploiting this complementarity requires a control strategy characterized by impartiality, the absence of arbitrary ordering restrictions on the use of rules and precedents. An impartial control strategy was implemented in GREBE in the domain of Texas worker's compensation law. In a preliminary evaluation, GREBE's performance was found to be as good or slightly better than the performance of law students on the same task. A case is classified as belonging to a particular category by relating its description to the criteria for category membership. The justifications, or warrants [Toulmin, 1958], that can relate a case to a category, can vary widely in the generality of their antecedents. For example, consider warrants for classifying a case into the legal category "negligence." A rule, such as "An action is negligent if the actor fails to use reasonable care and the failure is the proximate cause of an injury," has very general antecedent terms (e.g., "breach of reasonable care"). Conversely, a precedent, such as "Dr. Jones was negligent because he failed to count sponges during surgery and as a result left a sponge in Smith," has very specific antecedent terms (e.g., "failure to count sponges"). Both types of warrants have been used by classification systems to relate cases to categories. Classification systems have used precedents to help match the antecedents of rules with cases. Completing this match is difficult when the terms in the antecedent are open-textured, i.e., when there is significant uncertainty whether they match specific facts [Gardner, 1984, McCarty and Sridharan, 1982]. This problem results from the "generality gap" separating abstract terms from specific facts [Porter et al., 1990]. Precedents of an open-textured term, i.e., past cases to which the term applied, can be used to bridge this gap. Unlike rule antecedents, the antecedents of precedents are at the same level of generality as cases, so no generality gap exists between precedents and new cases. Precedents therefore reduce the problem of matching specific case facts with open-textured terms to the problem of matching two sets of specific facts. For example, an injured employee's entitlement to worker's compensation depends on whether he was injured during an activity "in furtherance of employment." Determining whether any particular case should be classified as a compensable injury therefore requires matching the specific facts of the case (e.g., John was injured in an automobile accident while driving to his office) to the open-textured term "activity in furtherance of employment." The gap in generality between the case description and the abstract term makes this match problematical. However, completing this match may be much easier if there are precedents of the term "activity in furtherance of employment" (e.g., Mary's injury was not compensable because it occurred while she was driving to work, which is not an activity in furtherance of employment; Bill's injury was compensable because it occurred while he was driving to a house to deliver a pizza, an activity in furtherance of employment). In this case, John's driving to his office closely matches Mary's driving to work, so Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #137790. 	[Title] ON THE SAMPLE COMPLEXITY OF FINDING GOOD SEARCH STRATEGIES 2n trials of each undetermined experiment [Abstract] A satisficing search problem consists of a set of probabilistic experiments to be performed in some order, without repetitions, until a satisfying configuration of successes and failures has been reached. The cost of performing the experiments depends on the order chosen. Earlier work has concentrated on finding optimal search strategies in special cases of this model, such as search trees and and-or graphs, when the cost function and the success probabilities for the experiments are given. In contrast, we study the complexity of "learning" an approximately optimal search strategy when some of the success probabilities are not known at the outset. Working in the fully general model, we show that if n is the number of unknown probabilities, and C is the maximum cost of performing all the experiments, then Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1154500. 	[Title]  [Abstract] Empirical Learning Results in POLLYANNA The value of empirical learning is demonstrated by results of testing the theory space search (TSS) component of POLLYANNA. Empirical data shows approximations generated from generic simplifying assumptions to have widely varying levels of accuracy and efficiency. The candidate theory space includes some theories with Pareto optimal combinations of accuracy and efficiency, as well as others that are non-optimal. Empirical learning is thus needed to separate the optimal theories from the non-optimal ones. It works as a filter on the process of generating approximations from generic simplifying assumptions. Empirical tests serve an additional purpose as well. Theory space search collects data that precisely characterizes the tradeoff between accuracy and efficiency among the candidate approximate theories. The tradeoff data can be used to select a theory that best balances the competing objectives of accuracy and efficiency in a manner appropriate to the intended performance context. The feasibility of empirical learning is also addressed by results of testing the theory space search component of POLLYANNA. In order for empirical testing to be feasible, candidate approximate theories must be operationally usable. Candidate hearts theories generated by POLLYANNA are shown to be operationally usable by experimental results from the theory space search (TSS) phase of learning. They run on a real machine producing results that can be compared with training examples. Feasibility also depends on the information and computation costs of empirical testing. Information costs result from the need to supply the system with training examples. Computation costs result from the need to execute candidate theories. Both types of costs grow with the numbers of candidate theories to be tested. Experimental results show that empirical testing in POLLYANNA is limited more by the computation costs of executing candidate theories than by the information costs of obtaining many training examples. POLLYANNA contrasts in this respect with traditional inductive learning systems. The feasibility of empirical learning depends also on the intended performance context, and on the resources available in the context of learning. Measurements from the theory space search phase indicate that TSS algorithms performing exhaustive search would not be feasible for the hearts domain, although they may be feasible for other applications. TSS algorithms that avoid exhaustive search hold considerably more promise. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6214. 	[Title] Integrated Architectures for Learning, Planning, and Reacting Based on Approximating Dynamic Programming [Abstract] This paper extends previous work with Dyna, a class of architectures for intelligent systems based on approximating dynamic programming methods. Dyna architectures integrate trial-and-error (reinforcement) learning and execution-time planning into a single process operating alternately on the world and on a learned model of the world. In this paper, I present and show results for two Dyna architectures. The Dyna-PI architecture is based on dynamic programming's policy iteration method and can be related to existing AI ideas such as evaluation functions and universal plans (reactive systems). Using a navigation task, results are shown for a simple Dyna-PI system that simultaneously learns by trial and error, learns a world model, and plans optimal routes using the evolving world model. The Dyna-Q architecture is based on Watkins's Q-learning, a new kind of reinforcement learning. Dyna-Q uses a less familiar set of data structures than does Dyna-PI, but is arguably simpler to implement and use. We show that Dyna-Q architectures are easy to adapt for use in changing environments. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #28230. 	[Title] Decision-Theoretic Case-Based Reasoning [Abstract] Technical Report MSR-TR-95-03 Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1120713. 	[Title] A Computational Model of Ratio Decidendi [Abstract] This paper proposes a model of ratio decidendi as a justification structure consisting of a series of reasoning steps, some of which relate abstract predicates to other abstract predicates and some of which relate abstract predicates to specific facts. This model satisfies an important set of characteristics of ratio decidendi identified from the jurisprudential literature. In particular, the model shows how the theory under which a case is decided controls its precedential effect. By contrast, a purely exemplar-based model of ratio decidendi fails to account for the dependency of prece-dential effect on the theory of decision. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #10186. 	[Title] Learning Default Concepts [Abstract] Classical concepts, based on necessary and sufficient defining conditions, cannot classify logically insufficient object descriptions. Many reasoning systems avoid this limitation by using "default concepts" to classify incompletely described objects. We address the task of learning such default concepts from observational data. We model the underlying performance task | classifying incomplete examples | by a probabilistic process where random test examples are passed through a "blocker" that can hide object attributes from the classifier. We then address the task of learning accurate default concepts from random training examples. We survey the learning techniques that have been proposed for this task in the machine learning and knowledge representation literatures, investigate the relative merits of each, and show that a superior learning technique can be developed from well known statistical principles. Finally, we extend Valiant's pac-learning framework to this context and obtain a number of useful learnability results. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1481. 	[Title] (1994); Case-Based Reasoning: Foundational Issues, Methodological Variations, and System Approaches. Case-Based Reasoning: Foundational Issues, Methodological [Abstract] Case-based reasoning is a recent approach to problem solving and learning that has got a lot of attention over the last few years. Originating in the US, the basic idea and underlying theories have spread to other continents, and we are now within a period of highly active research in case-based reasoning in Europe, as well. This paper gives an overview of the foundational issues related to case-based reasoning, describes some of the leading methodological approaches within the field, and exemplifies the current state through pointers to some systems. Initially, a general framework is defined, to which the subsequent descriptions and discussions will refer. The framework is influenced by recent methodologies for knowledge level descriptions of intelligent systems. 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. We also discuss the role of case-based methods as one type of reasoning and learning method within an integrated system architecture. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #47570. 	[Title] Justification Structures for Document Reuse [Abstract] Document drafting|an important problem-solving task of professionals in a wide variety of fields|typifies a design task requiring complex adaptation for case reuse. This paper proposes a framework for document reuse based on an explicit representation of the illocutionary and rhetorical structure underlying documents. Explicit representation of this structure facilitates (1) interpretation of previous documents by enabling them to "explain themselves," (2) construction of documents by enabling document drafters to issue goal-based specifications and rapidly retrieve documents with similar intentional structure, and (3) mainte nance of multi-generation documents. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #601561. 	[Title] Applying a Machine Learning Workbench: Experience with Agricultural Databases [Abstract] This paper reviews our experience with the application of machine learning techniques to agricultural databases. We have designed and implemented a machine learning workbench, WEKA, which permits rapid experimentation on a given dataset using a variety of machine learning schemes, and has several facilities for interactive investigation of the data: preprocessing attributes, evaluating and comparing the results of different schemes, and designing comparative experiments to be run offline. We discuss the partnership between agricultural scientist and machine learning researcher that our experience has shown to be vital to success. We review in some detail a particular agricultural application concerned with the culling of dairy herds. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #22875. 	[Title] Inductive Learning and Case-Based Reasoning [Abstract] This paper describes an application of an inductive learning techniques to case-based reasoning. We introduce two main forms of induction, define case-based reasoning and present a combination of both. The evaluation of the proposed system, called TA3, is carried out on a classification task, namely character recognition. We show how inductive knowledge improves knowledge representation and in turn flexibility of the system, its performance (in terms of classification accuracy) and its scalability. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #5600. 	[Title] Evaluating the Effectiveness of Derivation Replay in Partial-order vs State-space Planning [Abstract] Case-based planning involves storing individual instances of problem-solving episodes and using them to tackle new planning problems. This paper is concerned with derivation replay, which is the main component of a form of case-based planning called derivational analogy (DA). Prior to this study, implementations of derivation replay have been based within state-space planning. We are motivated by the acknowledged superiority of partial-order (PO) planners in plan generation. Here we demonstrate that plan-space planning also has an advantage in replay. We will argue that the decoupling of planning (derivation) order and the execution order of plan steps, provided by partial-order planners, enables them to exploit the guidance of previous cases in a more efficient and straightforward fashion. We validate our hypothesis through a focused empirical comparison. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #20193. 	[Title] The Structure-Mapping Engine: Algorithm and Examples [Abstract] This paper describes the Structure-Mapping Engine (SME), a program for studying analogical processing. SME has been built to explore Gentner's Structure-mapping theory of analogy, and provides a "tool kit" for constructing matching algorithms consistent with this theory. Its flexibility enhances cognitive simulation studies by simplifying experimentation. Furthermore, SME is very efficient, making it a useful component in machine learning systems as well. We review the Structure-mapping theory and describe the design of the engine. We analyze the complexity of the algorithm, and demonstrate that most of the steps are polynomial, typically bounded by O (N 2 ). Next we demonstrate some examples of its operation taken from our cognitive simulation studies and work in machine learning. Finally, we compare SME to other analogy programs and discuss several areas for future work. This paper appeared in Artificial Intelligence, 41, 1989, pp 1-63. For more information, please contact forbus@ils.nwu.edu Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1114336. 	[Title] Four Challenges for a Computational Model of Legal Precedent [Abstract] Identifying the open research issues in a field is a necessary step for progress in that field. This paper describes four open research problems in computational models of precedent-based legal reasoning: relating case representation to precedent use; modeling the selection and construction of both arguments based on pairwise case comparison and multiple-precedent arguments; modeling the process whereby purposes, policies, and principles are used in case similarity assessment; and extending the applicability of precedents to tasks other than classification. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #97892. 	[Title] Correcting Imperfect Domain Theories: A Knowledge-Level Analysis [Abstract] Explanation-Based Learning [Mitchell et al., 1986; DeJong and Mooney, 1986] has shown promise as a powerful analytical learning technique. However, EBL is severely hampered by the requirement of a complete and correct domain theory for successful learning to occur. Clearly, in non-trivial domains, developing such a domain theory is a nearly impossible task. Therefore, much research has been devoted to understanding how an imperfect domain theory can be corrected and extended during system performance. In this paper, we present a characterization of this problem, and use it to analyze past research in the area. Past characterizations of the problem (e.g, [Mitchell et al., 1986; Rajamoney and DeJong, 1987]) have viewed the types of performance errors caused by a faulty domain theory as primary. In contrast, we focus primarily on the types of knowledge deficiencies present in the theory, and from these derive the types of performance errors that can result. Correcting the theory can be viewed as a search through the space of possible domain theories, with a variety of knowledge sources that can be used to guide the search. We examine the types of knowledge used by a variety of past systems for this purpose. The hope is that this analysis will indicate the need for a "universal weak method" of domain theory correction, in which different sources of knowledge for theory correction can be freely and flexibly combined. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6378. 	[Title] Learning to coordinate without sharing information [Abstract] Researchers in the field of Distributed Artificial Intelligence (DAI) have been developing efficient mechanisms to coordinate the activities of multiple autonomous agents. The need for coordination arises because agents have to share resources and expertise required to achieve their goals. Previous work in the area includes using sophisticated information exchange protocols, investigating heuristics for negotiation, and developing formal models of possibilities of conflict and cooperation among agent interests. In order to handle the changing requirements of continuous and dynamic environments, we propose learning as a means to provide additional possibilities for effective coordination. We use reinforcement learning techniques on a block pushing problem to show that agents can learn complimentary policies to follow a desired path without any knowledge about each other. We theoretically analyze and experimentally verify the effects of learning rate on system convergence, and demonstrate benefits of using learned coordination knowledge on similar problems. Reinforcement learning based coordination can be achieved in both cooperative and non-cooperative domains, and in domains with noisy communication channels and other stochastic characteristics that present a formidable challenge to using other coordination schemes. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #6385. 	[Title] Multi-Agent Reinforcement Learning: Independent vs. Cooperative Agents [Abstract] Intelligent human agents exist in a cooperative social environment that facilitates learning. They learn not only by trial-and-error, but also through cooperation by sharing instantaneous information, episodic experience, and learned knowledge. The key investigations of this paper are, "Given the same number of reinforcement learning agents, will cooperative agents outperform independent agents who do not communicate during learning?" and "What is the price for such cooperation?" Using independent agents as a benchmark, cooperative agents are studied in following ways: (1) sharing sensation, (2) sharing episodes, and (3) sharing learned policies. This paper shows that (a) additional sensation from another agent is beneficial if it can be used efficiently, (b) sharing learned policies or episodes among agents speeds up learning at the cost of communication, and (c) for joint tasks, agents engaging in partnership can significantly outperform independent agents although they may learn slowly in the beginning. These tradeoffs are not just limited to multi-agent reinforcement learning. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1129208. 	[Title] Figure 3: Average model size accepted from a ran-dom prefix-closed samples of various size, and [Abstract] that is based on Angluin's L fl algorithm. The algorithm maintains a model consistent with its past examples. When a new counterexample arrives it tries to extend the model in a minimal fashion. We conducted a set of experiments where random automata that represent different strategies were generated, and the algorithm tried to learn them based on prefix-closed samples of their behavior. The algorithm managed to learn very compact models that agree with the samples. The size of the sample had a small effect on the size of the model. The experimental results suggest that for random prefix-closed samples the algorithm behaves well. However, following Angluin's result on the difficulty of learning almost uniform complete samples [ An-gluin, 1978 ] , it is obvious that our algorithm does not solve the complexity issue of inferring a DFA from a general prefix-closed sample. We are currently looking for classes of prefix-closed samples in which US-L* behaves well. [ Carmel and Markovitch, 1994 ] D. Carmel and S. Markovitch. The M* algorithm: Incorporating opponent models into adversary search. Technical Report CIS report 9402, Technion, March 1994. [ Carmel and Markovitch, 1995 ] D. Carmel and S. Markovitch. Unsupervised learning of finite automata: A practical approach. Technical Report CIS report 9504, Technion, March 1995. [ Shoham and Tennenholtz, 1994 ] Y. Shoham and M. Tennenholtz. Co-Learning and the evolution of social activity. Technical Report STAN-CS-TR-94-1511, Stanford Univrsity, Department of Computer Science, 1994. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1122425. 	[Title] Reinforcement Learning with Imitation in Heterogeneous Multi-Agent Systems [Abstract] The application of decision making and learning algorithms to multi-agent systems presents many interestingresearch challenges and opportunities. Among these is the ability for agents to learn how to act by observing or imitating other agents. We describe an algorithm, the IQ-algorithm, that integrates imitation with Q-learning. Roughly, a Q-learner uses the observations it has made of an expert agent to bias its exploration in promising directions. This algorithm goes beyond previous work in this direction by relaxing the oft-made assumptions that the learner (observer) and the expert (observed agent) share the same objectives and abilities. Our preliminary experiments demonstrate significant transfer between agents using the IQ-model and in many cases reductions in training time. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #74749. 	[Title] Probably Approximately Optimal Derivation Strategies [Abstract] An inference graph can have many "derivation strategies", each a particular ordering of the steps involved in reducing a given query to a sequence of database retrievals. An "optimal strategy" for a given distribution of queries is a complete strategy whose "expected cost" is minimal, where the expected cost depends on the conditional probabilities that each requested retrieval succeeds, given that a member of this class of queries is posed. This paper describes the PAO algorithm that first uses a set of training examples to approximate these probability values, and then uses these estimates to produce a "probably approximately optimal" strategy | i.e., given any *; ffi &gt; 0, PAO produces a strategy whose cost is within * of the cost of the optimal strategy, with probability greater than 1 ffi. This paper also shows how to obtain these strategies in time polynomial in 1=*, 1=ffi and the size of the inference graph, for many important classes of graphs, including all and-or trees. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #8703. 	[Title] Theory Refinement Combining Analytical and Empirical Methods [Abstract] This article describes a comprehensive approach to automatic theory revision. Given an imperfect theory, the approach combines explanation attempts for incorrectly classified examples in order to identify the failing portions of the theory. For each theory fault, correlated subsets of the examples are used to inductively generate a correction. Because the corrections are focused, they tend to preserve the structure of the original theory. Because the system starts with an approximate domain theory, in general fewer training examples are required to attain a given level of performance (classification accuracy) compared to a purely empirical system. The approach applies to classification systems employing a propositional Horn-clause theory. The system has been tested in a variety of application domains, and results are presented for problems in the domains of molecular biology and plant disease diagnosis. Please summarise all the given information.

Paper #10183 has the title `Concept Learning and Heuristic Classification in Weak-Theory Domains 1  
` and the abstract `nan`.
Question: Which category should Paper #10183 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].


Paper #10183 has the title `Concept Learning and Heuristic Classification in Weak-Theory Domains 1  
` and the abstract `nan`.
Question: Which category should Paper #10183 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