Two decades of Ripple Down Rules research

Ripple Down Rules (RDR) were developed in answer to the problem of maintaining medium to large rule-based knowledge systems. Traditional approaches to knowledge-based systems gave little thought to maintenance as it was expected that extensive upfront domain analysis involving a highly trained specialist, the knowledge engineer, and the time-poor domain expert would produce a complete model capturing what was in the expert’s head. The ever-changing, contextual and embrained nature of knowledge were not a part of the philosophy upon which they were based. RDR was a paradigm shift, which made knowledge acquisition and maintenance one and the same thing by incrementally acquiring knowledge as domain experts directly interacted with naturally occurring cases in their domain. Cases played an integral part of the acquisition process by motivating the capture of new knowledge, framing the context in which new knowledge would apply and ensuring that previously correctly classified cases remained so by requiring that the classification of the new case distinguish it from the system’s classification and be justified by features of the new case. RDR has moved beyond its first representation which handled single classification tasks within the domain of pathology to support multiple conclusions across a wide range of domains such as help-desk support, email classification and RoboCup and problem types including configuration, simulation, planning and natural language processing. This paper reviews the history of RDR research over the past two decades with a view to its future.

[1]  Rodrigo Martínez-Béjar,et al.  Designing Operators for Constructing Domain Knowledge Ontologies , 1997, EKAW.

[2]  Bruce C. Buchanan,et al.  Expert Systems , 1988, J. Autom. Reason..

[3]  Ghassan Beydoun,et al.  Incremental acquisition of search knowledge , 2000, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[4]  Rani Siromoney,et al.  Variations and local exceptions in inductive logic programming , 1993, Machine Intelligence 14.

[5]  Debbie Richards,et al.  The reuse of knowledge: a user-centred approach , 2000, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..

[6]  Stefan Wrobel,et al.  Automatic Representation Adjustment in an Observational Discovery System , 1988, EWSL.

[7]  Paul Compton,et al.  Teaching a computer ion chromatography from a database of published methods , 1996 .

[8]  Paul Compton,et al.  Discovery of Class Relations in Exception Structured Knowledge Bases , 2000, ICCS.

[9]  Megan Vazey Stochastic Foundations for the Case-Driven Acquisition of Classification Rules , 2006, EKAW.

[10]  W. Clancey The conceptual nature of knowledge, situations, and activity , 1997 .

[11]  R. Wille Concept lattices and conceptual knowledge systems , 1992 .

[12]  David Chapman,et al.  Penguins Can Make Cake , 1989, AI Mag..

[13]  Paul Compton,et al.  EMMA: an e-mail management assistant , 2003, IEEE/WIC International Conference on Intelligent Agent Technology, 2003. IAT 2003..

[14]  Steven A. Vere,et al.  Multilevel Counterfactuals for Generalizations of Relational Concepts and Productions , 1980, Artif. Intell..

[15]  H. Motoda,et al.  Performance evaluation of fusing two different knowledge sources in Ripple Down Rules method , 2005, Proceedings of the 2005 International Conference on Active Media Technology, 2005. (AMT 2005)..

[16]  Achim G. Hoffmann,et al.  HeurEAKA - A New Approach for Adapting GAs to the Problem Domain , 2004, PRICAI.

[17]  Brian R. Gaines,et al.  Knowledge acquisition tools based on personal construct psychology , 1993, The Knowledge Engineering Review.

[18]  Paul Compton,et al.  A Simulation Framework for Knowledge Acquisition Evaluation , 2005, ACSC.

[19]  Byeong Ho Kang,et al.  Detecting the Knowledge Frontier: An Error Predicting Knowledge Based System , 2004 .

[20]  Paul Compton,et al.  A Maintenance Approach to Case-Based Reasoning , 1994, EWCBR.

[21]  Guus Schreiber,et al.  Knowledge Engineering and Management: The CommonKADS Methodology , 1999 .

[22]  Deborah Richards,et al.  Revisiting Sisyphus I - An Incremental Approach to Resource Allocation using Ripple Down Rules , 1999 .

[23]  Mira Park,et al.  Automatic Extraction of Lung Boundaries by a Knowledge-Based Method , 2000, VIP.

[24]  Achim G. Hoffmann,et al.  Extracting Positive Attributions from Scientific Papers , 2004, Discovery Science.

[25]  Guus Schreiber,et al.  KADS : a principled approach to knowledge-based system development , 1993 .

[26]  Achim G. Hoffmann,et al.  KAFTIE: A New KA Framework for Building Sophisticated Information Extraction Systems , 2004, EKAW.

[27]  Brian R. Gaines,et al.  Induction of ripple-down rules applied to modeling large databases , 1995, Journal of Intelligent Information Systems.

[28]  Deborah Richards,et al.  Extending the SISYPHUS III Experiment from a Knowledge Engineering Task to a Requirements Engineering Task , 2007 .

[29]  Yiyu Yao,et al.  Rule+exception strategies for security information analysis , 2005, IEEE Intelligent Systems.

[30]  Paul Compton,et al.  Generalising Incremental Knowledge Acquisition , 2004 .

[31]  Akara Prayote,et al.  Detecting Anomalies and Intruders , 2006, Australian Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

[32]  Paul Compton,et al.  Towards an expert system in ion-exclusion chromatography by means of multiple classification ripple-down rules , 1998 .

[33]  Ken Satoh,et al.  Discovering Critical Cases in Case-Based Reasoning , 2000, AMAI.

[34]  Byunghoon Kang Validating Knowledge Acquisition: Multiple Classification Ripple Down Rules PhD Thesis , 1996 .

[35]  James P. Ignizio An introduction to expert systems : the development and implementation of rule-based expert systems , 1991 .

[36]  Paul Compton,et al.  Experience with Ripple-Down Rules , 2005, SGAI Conf..

[37]  Manfred K. Warmuth,et al.  Learning nested differences of intersection-closed concept classes , 2004, Machine Learning.

[38]  Allen Newell,et al.  The Knowledge Level , 1989, Artif. Intell..

[39]  Achim G. Hoffmann,et al.  Towards topic-based summarization for interactive document viewing , 2003, K-CAP '03.

[40]  Debbie Richards,et al.  A Case-Classification-Conclusion 3Cs Approach to Knowledge Acquisition: Applying a Classification Logic Wiki to the Problem Solving Process , 2006, Int. J. Knowl. Manag..

[41]  Ignizio Introduction to expert systems , 1985 .

[42]  Achim G. Hoffmann,et al.  A NEW APPROACH FOR THE INCREMENTAL DEVELOPMENT OF RETRIEVAL FUNCTIONS FOR CBR , 2006, Appl. Artif. Intell..

[43]  Debbie Richards,et al.  Training a training system , 2006, IUI '06.

[44]  Stephen Muggleton,et al.  Non-monotonic learning , 1991 .

[45]  Deborah Richards,et al.  Automatic construction of a concept hierarchy to assist web document classification , 2006 .

[46]  Byeong Ho Kang,et al.  Knowledge Acquisition Module for Conversation Agent , 2004 .

[47]  Julian Kerr Toward Generic Model-Based Object Recognition by Knowledge Acquisition and Machine Learning , 2003 .

[48]  Deborah Richards,et al.  Achieving Rapid Knowledge Acquisition in a High- Volume Call Centre , 2005 .

[49]  B. Chandrasekaran,et al.  Generic Tasks in Knowledge-Based Reasoning: High-Level Building Blocks for Expert System Design , 1986, IEEE Expert.

[50]  Achim G. Hoffmann,et al.  Simulations for Comparing Knowledge Acquisition and Machine Learning , 2001, Australian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

[51]  Takashi Washio,et al.  Case Generation Method for Constructing an RDR Knowledge Base , 2002, PRICAI.

[52]  Achim G. Hoffmann,et al.  Improved Knowledge Acquisition for High-Performance Heuristic Search , 2005, IJCAI.

[53]  G Edwards,et al.  Peirs: A pathologist‐maintained expert system for the interpretation of chemical pathology reports , 1993, Pathology.

[54]  Judy Kay,et al.  IEMS - an approach that combines handcrafted rules with learnt instance based rules , 2006, Aust. J. Intell. Inf. Process. Syst..

[55]  Heikki Mannila,et al.  Learning rules with local exceptions , 1994 .

[56]  Byeong Ho Kang,et al.  Personalized Web Document Classification using MCRDR , 2004 .

[57]  Deborah Richards,et al.  The reuse of knowledge in ripple-down rules knowledge-based systems , 1998 .

[58]  P. Compton,et al.  A philosophical basis for knowledge acquisition , 1990 .

[59]  Ghassan Beydoun,et al.  Acquisition of Search Knowledge , 1997, EKAW.

[60]  Claude Sammut,et al.  An expert system for ion chromatography developed using machine learning and knowledge in context , 1993 .

[61]  Byeong Ho Kang,et al.  Help Desk System with Intelligent Interface , 1997, Appl. Artif. Intell..

[62]  Byeong Ho Kang,et al.  A trade-off between domain knowledge and problem-solving method power , 2000 .

[63]  Kenneth M. Ford,et al.  Expertise in context: personally constructed, socially selected and reality-relevant? , 1997 .

[64]  Keith Duncan,et al.  Cognitive Engineering , 2017, Encyclopedia of GIS.

[65]  Takashi Washio,et al.  Adaptive Ripple Down Rules method based on minimum description length principle , 2004 .

[66]  Deborah Richards,et al.  Generalising Ripple-Down Rules (Short Paper) , 2000, EKAW.

[67]  Byeong Ho Kang,et al.  Multiple Classification Ripple Down Rules : Evaluation and Possibilities , 2000 .

[68]  Debbie Richards Merging individual conceptual models of requirements , 2003, Requirements Engineering.

[69]  Claude Sammut,et al.  Combining Knowledge Acquisition and Machine Learning to Control Dynamic Systems , 1997, IJCAI.

[70]  Debbie Richards,et al.  Addressing the Ontology Acquisition Bottleneck Through Reverse Ontological Engineering , 2004, Knowledge and Information Systems.

[71]  Paul Compton,et al.  Knowledge in Context: A Strategy for Expert System Maintenance , 1990, Australian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence.

[72]  Takashi Washio,et al.  Knowledge Acquisition from Both Human Expert and Data , 2001, PAKDD.

[73]  Paul Compton,et al.  Evolutionary document management and retrieval for specialized domains on the web , 2004, Int. J. Hum. Comput. Stud..