Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1113551. 	[Title] Modeling Ill-Structured Optimization Tasks through Cases [Abstract] CABINS is a framework of modeling an optimization task in ill-structured domains. In such domains, neither systems nor human experts possess the exact model for guiding optimization. And the user's model of optimality is subjective and situation-dependent. CABINS optimizes a solution through iterative revision using case-based reasoning. In CABINS, task structure analysis was adopted for creating an initial model of the optimization task. Generic vocabularies found in the analysis were specialized into case feature descriptions for application problems. Extensive experimentation on job shop scheduling problems has shown that CABINS can operationalize and improve the model through the accumulation of cases. 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 #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 #10435. 	[Title] Improving accuracy by combining rule-based and case-based reasoning [Abstract] An architecture is presented for combining rule-based and case-based reasoning. The architecture is intended for domains that are understood reasonably well, but still imperfectly. It uses a set of rules, which are taken to be only approximately correct, to obtain a preliminary answer for a given problem; it then draws analogies from cases to handle exceptions to the rules. Having rules together with cases not only increases the architecture's domain coverage, it also allows innovative ways of doing case-based reasoning: the same rules that are used for rule-based reasoning are also used by the case-based component to do case indexing and case adaptation. The architecture was applied to the task of name pronunciation, and, with minimal knowledge engineering, was found to perform almost at the level of the best commercial systems. Moreover, its accuracy was found to exceed what it could have achieved with rules or cases alone, thus demonstrating the accuracy improvement afforded by combining rule-based and case-based reasoning. This work may not be copied or reproduced in whole or in part for any commercial purpose. Permission to copy in whole or in part without payment of fee is granted for nonprofit educational and research purposes provided that all such whole or partial copies include the following: a notice that such copying is by permission of Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories of Cambridge, Massachusetts; an acknowledgment of the authors and individual contributions to the work; and all applicable portions of the copyright notice. Copying, reproduction, or republishing for any other purpose shall require a license with payment of fee to Mitsubishi Electric Research Laboratories. All rights reserved. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1108329. 	[Title] Using Case-Based Reasoning as a Reinforcement Learning Framework for Optimization with Changing Criteria [Abstract] Practical optimization problems such as job-shop scheduling often involve optimization criteria that change over time. Repair-based frameworks have been identified as flexible computational paradigms for difficult combinatorial optimization problems. Since the control problem of repair-based optimization is severe, Reinforcement Learning (RL) techniques can be potentially helpful. However, some of the fundamental assumptions made by traditional RL algorithms are not valid for repair-based optimization. Case-Based Reasoning (CBR) compensates for some of the limitations of traditional RL approaches. In this paper, we present a Case-Based Reasoning RL approach, implemented in the C A B I N S system, for repair-based optimization. We chose job-shop scheduling as the testbed for our approach. Our experimental results show that C A B I N S is able to effectively solve problems with changing optimization criteria which are not known to the system and only exist implicitly in a extensional manner in the case base. Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #41417. 	[Title] Case-based Acquisition of User Preferences for Solution Improvement in Ill-Structured Domains [Abstract] 1 We have developed an approach to acquire complicated user optimization criteria and use them to guide Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #1130539. 	[Title] Learning High Utility Rules by Incorporating Search Control  Guidance Committee [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #3084. 	[Title] A Comparative Utility Analysis of Case-Based Reasoning and Control-Rule Learning Systems [Abstract] The utility problem in learning systems occurs when knowledge learned in an attempt to improve a system's performance degrades performance instead. We present a methodology for the analysis of utility problems which uses computational models of problem solving systems to isolate the root causes of a utility problem, to detect the threshold conditions under which the problem will arise, and to design strategies to eliminate it. We present models of case-based reasoning and control-rule learning systems and compare their performance with respect to the swamping utility problem. Our analysis suggests that case-based reasoning systems are more resistant to the utility problem than control-rule learning systems. 1 Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #887. 	[Title] Some studies in machine learning using the game of checkers. IBM Journal, 3(3):211-229, 1959. Some [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #210871. 	[Title] Coevolving High-Level Representations [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #198653. 	[Title] Information filtering: Selection mechanisms in learning systems. Machine Learning, 10:113-151, 1993. Generalization as search. Artificial [Abstract]  Please summarise all the given information.

Above are papers related to the following paper: [Paper_ID] Paper #128383. 	[Title] Using Case-Based Reasoning to Acquire User Scheduling Preferences that Change over Time [Abstract] Production/Manufacturing scheduling typically involves the acquisition of user optimization preferences. The ill-structuredness of both the problem space and the desired objectives make practical scheduling problems difficult to formalize and costly to solve, especially when problem configurations and user optimization preferences change over time. This paper advocates an incremental revision framework for improving schedule quality and incorporating user dynamically changing preferences through Case-Based Reasoning. Our implemented system, called CABINS, records situation-dependent tradeoffs and consequences that result from schedule revision to guide schedule improvement. The preliminary experimental results show that CABINS is able to effectively capture both user static and dynamic preferences which are not known to the system and only exist implicitly in a extensional manner in the case base. Please summarise all the given information.

Paper #1113551 has the title `Modeling Ill-Structured Optimization Tasks through Cases  
` and the abstract `CABINS is a framework of modeling an optimization task in ill-structured domains. In such domains, neither systems nor human experts possess the exact model for guiding optimization. And the user's model of optimality is subjective and situation-dependent. CABINS optimizes a solution through iterative revision using case-based reasoning. In CABINS, task structure analysis was adopted for creating an initial model of the optimization task. Generic vocabularies found in the analysis were specialized into case feature descriptions for application problems. Extensive experimentation on job shop scheduling problems has shown that CABINS can operationalize and improve the model through the accumulation of cases. 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #1113551 be classified as ?
You can select one from ['Neural_Networks', 'Case_Based', 'Theory', 'Reinforcement_Learning', 'Probabilistic_Methods', 'Rule_Learning', 'Genetic_Algorithms'].


Paper #1113551 has the title `Modeling Ill-Structured Optimization Tasks through Cases  
` and the abstract `CABINS is a framework of modeling an optimization task in ill-structured domains. In such domains, neither systems nor human experts possess the exact model for guiding optimization. And the user's model of optimality is subjective and situation-dependent. CABINS optimizes a solution through iterative revision using case-based reasoning. In CABINS, task structure analysis was adopted for creating an initial model of the optimization task. Generic vocabularies found in the analysis were specialized into case feature descriptions for application problems. Extensive experimentation on job shop scheduling problems has shown that CABINS can operationalize and improve the model through the accumulation of cases. 
`.
Question: Which category should Paper #1113551 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