Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1955. 	[Title] In Machine Learning: A Multistrategy Approach, Vol. IV  Macro and Micro Perspectives of Multistrategy Learning [Abstract] Machine learning techniques are perceived to have a great potential as means for the acquisition of knowledge; nevertheless, their use in complex engineering domains is still rare. Most machine learning techniques have been studied in the context of knowledge acquisition for well defined tasks, such as classification. Learning for these tasks can be handled by relatively simple algorithms. Complex domains present difficulties that can be approached by combining the strengths of several complementing learning techniques, and overcoming their weaknesses by providing alternative learning strategies. This study presents two perspectives, the macro and the micro, for viewing the issue of multistrategy learning. The macro perspective deals with the decomposition of an overall complex learning task into relatively well-defined learning tasks, and the micro perspective deals with designing multistrategy learning techniques for supporting the acquisition of knowledge for each task. The two perspectives are discussed in the context of Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1125386. 	[Title] 21 Using n 2 classifier in constructive induction [Abstract] In this paper, we propose a multi-classification approach for constructive induction. The idea of an improvement of classification accuracy is based on iterative modification of input data space. This process is independently repeated for each pair of n classes. Finally, it gives (n 2 n)/2 input data subspaces of attributes dedicated for optimal discrimination of appropriate pairs of classes. We use genetic algorithms as a constructive induction engine. A final classification is obtained by a weighted majority voting rule, according to n 2 - classifier approach. The computational experiment was performed on medical data set. The obtained results point out the advantage of using a multi-classification model (n 2 classifier) in constructive induction in relation to the analogous single-classifier approach. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #101143. 	[Title] Issues in Goal-Driven Explanation [Abstract] When a reasoner explains surprising events for its internal use, a key motivation for explaining is to perform learning that will facilitate the achievement of its goals. Human explainers use a range of strategies to build explanations, including both internal reasoning and external information search, and goal-based considerations have a profound effect on their choices of when and how to pursue explanations. However, standard AI models of explanation rely on goal-neutral use of a single fixed strategy|generally backwards chaining|to build their explanations. This paper argues that explanation should be modeled as a goal-driven learning process for gathering and transforming information, and discusses the issues involved in developing an active multi-strategy process for goal-driven explanation. 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 #1817. 	[Title] Hybrid Learning Using Genetic Algorithms and Decision Trees for Pattern Classification [Abstract] This paper introduces a hybrid learning methodology that integrates genetic algorithms (GAs) and decision tree learning (ID3) in order to evolve optimal subsets of discriminatory features for robust pattern classification. A GA is used to search the space of all possible subsets of a large set of candidate discrimination features. For a given feature subset, ID3 is invoked to produce a decision tree. The classification performance of the decision tree on unseen data is used as a measure of fitness for the given feature set, which, in turn, is used by the GA to evolve better feature sets. This GA-ID3 process iterates until a feature subset is found with satisfactory classification performance. Experimental results are presented which illustrate the feasibility of our approach on difficult problems involving recognizing visual concepts in satellite and facial image data. The results also show improved classification performance and reduced description complexity when compared against standard methods for feature selection. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #3101. 	[Title] Acquiring Case Adaptation Knowledge: A Hybrid Approach [Abstract] The ability of case-based reasoning (CBR) systems to apply cases to novel situations depends on their case adaptation knowledge. However, endowing CBR systems with adequate adaptation knowledge has proven to be a very difficult task. This paper describes a hybrid method for performing case adaptation, using a combination of rule-based and case-based reasoning. It shows how this approach provides a framework for acquiring flexible adaptation knowledge from experiences with autonomous adaptation and suggests its potential as a basis for acquisition of adaptation knowledge from interactive user guidance. It also presents initial experimental results examining the benefits of the approach and comparing the relative contributions of case learning and adaptation learning to reasoning performance. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #3231. 	[Title] Irrelevant Features and the Subset Selection Problem [Abstract] We address the problem of finding a subset of features that allows a supervised induction algorithm to induce small high-accuracy concepts. We examine notions of relevance and irrelevance, and show that the definitions used in the machine learning literature do not adequately partition the features into useful categories of relevance. We present definitions for irrelevance and for two degrees of relevance. These definitions improve our understanding of the behavior of previous subset selection algorithms, and help define the subset of features that should be sought. The features selected should depend not only on the features and the target concept, but also on the induction algorithm. We describe a method for feature subset selection using cross-validation that is applicable to any induction algorithm, and discuss experiments conducted with ID3 and C4.5 on artificial and real datasets. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #35. 	[Title] 4 Implementing Application Specific Routines  Genetic algorithms in search, optimization, and machine learning. Reading, MA: Addison-Wesley. [Abstract] To implement a specific application, you should only have to change the file app.c. Section 2 describes the routines in app.c in detail. If you use additional variables for your specific problem, the easiest method of making them available to other program units is to declare them in sga.h and external.h. However, take care that you do not redeclare existing variables. Two example applications files are included in the SGA-C distribution. The file app1.c performs the simple example problem included with the Pascal version; finding the maximum of x 10 , where x is an integer interpretation of a chromosome. A slightly more complex application is include in app2.c. This application illustrates two features that have been added to SGA-C. The first of these is the ithruj2int function, which converts bits i through j in a chromosome to an integer. The second new feature is the utility pointer that is associated with each population member. The example application interprets each chromosome as a set of concatenated integers in binary form. The lengths of these integer fields is determined by the user-specified value of field size, which is read in by the function app data(). The field size must be less than the smallest of the chromosome length and the length of an unsigned integer. An integer array for storing the interpreted form of each chromosome is dynamically allocated and assigned to the chromosome's utility pointer in app malloc(). The ithruj2int routine (see utility.c) is used to translate each chromosome into its associated vector. The fitness for each chromosome is simply the sum of the squares of these integers. This example application will function for any chromosome length. SGA-C is intended to be a simple program for first-time GA experimentation. It is not intended to be definitive in terms of its efficiency or the grace of its implementation. The authors are interested in the comments, criticisms, and bug reports from SGA-C users, so that the code can be refined for easier use in subsequent versions. Please email your comments to rob@galab2.mh.ua.edu, or write to TCGA: The authors gratefully acknowledge support provided by NASA under Grant NGT-50224 and support provided by the National Science Foundation under Grant CTS-8451610. We also thank Hillol Kargupta for donating his tournament selection implementation. Booker, L. B. (1982). Intelligent behavior as an adaptation to the task environment (Doctoral dissertation, Technical Report No. 243. Ann Arbor: University of Michigan, Logic of Computers Group). Dissertations Abstracts International, 43(2), 469B. (University Microfilms No. 8214966) 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 #3112. 	[Title] Supporting Combined Human and Machine Planning: An Interface for Planning by Analogical Reasoning [Abstract] Realistic and complex planning situations require a mixed-initiative planning framework in which human and automated planners interact to mutually construct a desired plan. Ideally, this joint cooperation has the potential of achieving better plans than either the human or the machine can create alone. Human planners often take a case-based approach to planning, relying on their past experience and planning by retrieving and adapting past planning cases. Planning by analogical reasoning in which generative and case-based planning are combined, as in Prodigy/Analogy, provides a suitable framework to study this mixed-initiative integration. However, having a human user engaged in this planning loop creates a variety of new research questions. The challenges we found creating a mixed-initiative planning system fall into three categories: planning paradigms differ in human and machine planning; visualization of the plan and planning process is a complex, but necessary task; and human users range across a spectrum of experience, both with respect to the planning domain and the underlying planning technology. This paper presents our approach to these three problems when designing an interface to incorporate a human into the process of planning by analogical reasoning with Prodigy/Analogy. The interface allows the user to follow both generative and case-based planning, it supports visualization of both plan and the planning rationale, and it addresses the variance in the experience of the user by allowing the user to control the presentation of information. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #263486. 	[Title] Architecture for Iterative Learning of Recursive Definitions [Abstract] In this paper we are concerned with the problem of inducing recursive Horn clauses from small sets of training examples. The method of iterative bootstrap induction is presented. In the first step, the system generates simple clauses, which can be regarded as properties of the required definition. Properties represent generalizations of the positive examples, simulating the effect of having larger number of examples. Properties are used subsequently to induce the required recursive definitions. This paper describes the method together with a series of experiments. The results support the thesis that iterative bootstrap induction is indeed an effective technique that could be of general use in ILP. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #238401. 	[Title] Classification by Pairwise Coupling [Abstract] We discuss a strategy for polychotomous classification that involves estimating class probabilities for each pair of classes, and then coupling the estimates together. The coupling model is similar to the Bradley-Terry method for paired comparisons. We study the nature of the class probability estimates that arise, and examine the performance of the procedure in real and simulated datasets. Classifiers used include linear discriminants, nearest neighbors, and the support vector machine. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1153101. 	[Title] Machine Learning and Inference [Abstract] Constructive induction divides the problem of learning an inductive hypothesis into two intertwined searches: onefor the best representation space, and twofor the best hypothesis in that space. In data-driven constructive induction (DCI), a learning system searches for a better representation space by analyzing the input examples (data). The presented data-driven constructive induction method combines an AQ-type learning algorithm with two classes of representation space improvement operators: constructors, and destructors. The implemented system, AQ17-DCI, has been experimentally applied to a GNP prediction problem using a World Bank database. The results show that decision rules learned by AQ17-DCI outperformed the rules learned in the original representation space both in predictive accuracy and rule simplicity. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #5966. 	[Title] Cost-Sensitive Classification: Empirical Evaluation of a Hybrid Genetic Decision Tree Induction Algorithm [Abstract] This paper introduces ICET, a new algorithm for costsensitive classification. ICET uses a genetic algorithm to evolve a population of biases for a decision tree induction algorithm. The fitness function of the genetic algorithm is the average cost of classification when using the decision tree, including both the costs of tests (features, measurements) and the costs of classification errors. ICET is compared here with three other algorithms for costsensitive classification EG2, CS-ID3, and IDX and also with C4.5, which classifies without regard to cost. The five algorithms are evaluated empirically on five real-world medical datasets. Three sets of experiments are performed. The first set examines the baseline performance of the five algorithms on the five datasets and establishes that ICET performs significantly better than its competitors. The second set tests the robustness of ICET under a variety of conditions and shows that ICET maintains its advantage. The third set looks at ICETs search in bias space and discovers a way to improve the search. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #110162. 	[Title] Case-Based Similarity Assessment: Estimating Adaptability from Experience [Abstract] Case-based problem-solving systems rely on similarity assessment to select stored cases whose solutions are easily adaptable to fit current problems. However, widely-used similarity assessment strategies, such as evaluation of semantic similarity, can be poor predictors of adaptability. As a result, systems may select cases that are difficult or impossible for them to adapt, even when easily adaptable cases are available in memory. This paper presents a new similarity assessment approach which couples similarity judgments directly to a case library containing the system's adaptation knowledge. It examines this approach in the context of a case-based planning system that learns both new plans and new adaptations. Empirical tests of alternative similarity assessment strategies show that this approach enables better case selection and increases the benefits accrued from learned adaptations. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #110163. 	[Title] Learning to Integrate Multiple Knowledge Sources for Case-Based Reasoning [Abstract] The case-based reasoning process depends on multiple overlapping knowledge sources, each of which provides an opportunity for learning. Exploiting these opportunities requires not only determining the learning mechanisms to use for each individual knowledge source, but also how the different learning mechanisms interact and their combined utility. This paper presents a case study examining the relative contributions and costs involved in learning processes for three different knowledge sources|cases, case adaptation knowledge, and similarity information|in a case-based planner. It demonstrates the importance of interactions between different learning processes and identifies a promising method for integrating multiple learning methods to improve case-based reasoning. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #110164. 	[Title] A Case Study of Case-Based CBR [Abstract] Case-based reasoning depends on multiple knowledge sources beyond the case library, including knowledge about case adaptation and criteria for similarity assessment. Because hand coding this knowledge accounts for a large part of the knowledge acquisition burden for developing CBR systems, it is appealing to acquire it by learning, and CBR is a promising learning method to apply. This observation suggests developing case-based CBR systems, CBR systems whose components themselves use CBR. However, despite early interest in case-based approaches to CBR, this method has received comparatively little attention. Open questions include how case-based components of a CBR system should be designed, the amount of knowledge acquisition effort they require, and their effectiveness. This paper investigates these questions through a case study of issues addressed, methods used, and results achieved by a case-based planning system that uses CBR to guide its case adaptation and similarity assessment. The paper discusses design considerations and presents empirical results that support the usefulness of case-based CBR, that point to potential problems and tradeoffs, and that directly demonstrate the overlapping roles of different CBR knowledge sources. The paper closes with general lessons about case-based CBR and areas for future research. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1111899. 	[Title] Case-Based Planning to Learn [Abstract] Learning can be viewed as a problem of planning a series of modifications to memory. We adopt this view of learning and propose the applicability of the case-based planning methodology to the task of planning to learn. We argue that relatively simple, fine-grained primitive inferential operators are needed to support flexible planning. We show that it is possible to obtain the benefits of case-based reasoning within a planning to learn framework. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1118302. 	[Title] Learning Recursion with Iterative Bootstrap Induction (Extended Abstract) [Abstract] In this paper we are concerned with the problem of inducing recursive Horn clauses from small sets of training examples. The method of iterative bootstrap induction is presented. In the first step, the system generates simple clauses, which can be regarded as properties of the required definition. Properties represent generalizations of the positive examples, simulating the effect of having larger number of examples. Properties are used subsequently to induce the required recursive definitions. This paper describes the method together with a series of experiments. The results support the thesis that iterative bootstrap induction is indeed an effective technique that could be of general use in ILP. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #27246. 	[Title] Appears in Working Notes, Integrating Multiple Learned Models for Improving and Scaling Machine Learning Algorithms [Abstract] This paper presents the Plannett system, which combines artificial neural networks to achieve expert- level accuracy on the difficult scientific task of recognizing volcanos in radar images of the surface of the planet Venus. Plannett uses ANNs that vary along two dimensions: the set of input features used to train and the number of hidden units. The ANNs are combined simply by averaging their output activations. When Plannett is used as the classification module of a three-stage image analysis system called JAR- tool, the end-to-end accuracy (sensitivity and specificity) is as good as that of a human planetary geologist on a four-image test suite. JARtool-Plannett also achieves the best algorithmic accuracy on these images to date. 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 #1110390. 	[Title] How to Get a Free Lunch: A Simple Cost Model for Machine Learning Applications [Abstract] This paper proposes a simple cost model for machine learning applications based on the notion of net present value. The model extends and unifies the models used in (Pazzani et al., 1994) and (Masand & Piatetsky-Shapiro, 1996). It attempts to answer the question "Should a given machine learning system now in the prototype stage be fielded?" The model's inputs are the system's confusion matrix, the cash flow matrix for the application, the cost per decision, the one-time cost of deploying the system, and the rate of return on investment. Like Provost and Fawcett's (1997) ROC convex hull method, the present model can be used for decision-making even when its input variables are not known exactly. Despite its simplicity, it has a number of non-trivial consequences. For example, under it the "no free lunch" theorems of learning theory no longer apply. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #83449. 	[Title] Context-Based Similarity Applied to Retrieval of Relevant Cases [Abstract] Retrieving relevant cases is a crucial component of case-based reasoning systems. The task is to use user-defined query to retrieve useful information, i.e., exact matches or partial matches which are close to query-defined request according to certain measures. The difficulty stems from the fact that it may not be easy (or it may be even impossible) to specify query requests precisely and completely resulting in a situation known as a fuzzy-querying. It is usually not a problem for small domains, but for a large repositories which store various information (multifunctional information bases or a federated databases), a request specification becomes a bottleneck. Thus, a flexible retrieval algorithm is required, allowing for imprecise query specification and for changing the viewpoint. Efficient database techniques exists for locating exact matches. Finding relevant partial matches might be a problem. This document proposes a context-based similarity as a basis for flexible retrieval. Historical bacground on research in similarity assessment is presented and is used as a motivation for formal definition of context-based similarity. We also describe a similarity-based retrieval system for multifunctinal information bases. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1153150. 	[Title] Machine Learning and Inference [Abstract] Constructive induction divides the problem of learning an inductive hypothesis into two intertwined searches: onefor the best representation space, and twofor the best hypothesis in that space. In data-driven constructive induction (DCI), a learning system searches for a better representation space by analyzing the input examples (data). The presented data-driven constructive induction method combines an AQ-type learning algorithm with two classes of representation space improvement operators: constructors, and destructors. The implemented system, AQ17-DCI, has been experimentally applied to a GNP prediction problem using a World Bank database. The results show that decision rules learned by AQ17-DCI outperformed the rules learned in the original representation space both in predictive accuracy and rule simplicity. Please summarise all the given information.

Paper #1955 has the title `In Machine Learning: A Multistrategy Approach, Vol. IV  Macro and Micro Perspectives of Multistrategy Learning  
` and the abstract `Machine learning techniques are perceived to have a great potential as means for the acquisition of knowledge; nevertheless, their use in complex engineering domains is still rare. Most machine learning techniques have been studied in the context of knowledge acquisition for well defined tasks, such as classification. Learning for these tasks can be handled by relatively simple algorithms. Complex domains present difficulties that can be approached by combining the strengths of several complementing learning techniques, and overcoming their weaknesses by providing alternative learning strategies. This study presents two perspectives, the macro and the micro, for viewing the issue of multistrategy learning. The macro perspective deals with the decomposition of an overall complex learning task into relatively well-defined learning tasks, and the micro perspective deals with designing multistrategy learning techniques for supporting the acquisition of knowledge for each task. The two perspectives are discussed in the context of 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #1955 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].


Paper #1955 has the title `In Machine Learning: A Multistrategy Approach, Vol. IV  Macro and Micro Perspectives of Multistrategy Learning  
` and the abstract `Machine learning techniques are perceived to have a great potential as means for the acquisition of knowledge; nevertheless, their use in complex engineering domains is still rare. Most machine learning techniques have been studied in the context of knowledge acquisition for well defined tasks, such as classification. Learning for these tasks can be handled by relatively simple algorithms. Complex domains present difficulties that can be approached by combining the strengths of several complementing learning techniques, and overcoming their weaknesses by providing alternative learning strategies. This study presents two perspectives, the macro and the micro, for viewing the issue of multistrategy learning. The macro perspective deals with the decomposition of an overall complex learning task into relatively well-defined learning tasks, and the micro perspective deals with designing multistrategy learning techniques for supporting the acquisition of knowledge for each task. The two perspectives are discussed in the context of 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #1955 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