Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., & Gentner, D. (1989). The Structure-Mapping Engine. Artificial Intelligence, 41, 1-63.  Home/Search   Document Not in Database   Summary   Related Articles   Check

....However, they provide no computational support for valalirg novel uses. 5.2 Gentner et al. Gentner s structure mapping techniques (Gentner, 1983; Gentnet t al. 1987) are applicable mostly to explicit analogies such as An electric battery is like a reservoir. Her approach, imple mented by Falkenhainer and Forbus (1986), maps the structure of the source of the metaphor to the structure of the target by creating match hypothe ses between relational representations of the base and target using a set of match construction rules. But the central example of a match construction 226 rule seems to require that ....

B. Falkenhainer, K.D. Forbus, and D. Gen- tnet. The structure-mapping engine. In AAAI-86: Proceedings of the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pages 272-277.

....as it similarly seeks to use a theory (the base) to provide extra knowledge about some domain (the target) by establishing and using a mapping be tween the two. However, work on analogy has mainly focussed on identifying what the appropriate mappings between the base and target should be [Falkenhainer et al. 1986], a task which we have not addressed and which could be beneficial for us to ex plore further. In addition, an alternative way of applying our patterns would be to transform a domain specific problem into the vocabulary of a pattern (and solve it there, and transform the solution back) rather ....

....solved there, and the answer transformed back to the electrical circuit. This alternative approach is similar to (one form of) solution by analogy, in which the pattern (e.g. the distribution network) takes the role of the base, and the domain facts (e.g. the electrical circuit) the target [Falkenhainer et al. 1986]. It is also similar to the use of delegation in object oriented programming (the tar get delegates the problem to the base, which solves it and passes the solution back [Gamma et al. 1995, p20] This variant approach for using patterns would allow some run time flexibility, but would be more ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., and Genther, D. (1986). The structure- mapping engine. In AAAI-86, pages 272-277.

....we must have some kind of correspondence between elements, i.e. there must be a map ping between concepts of one domain onto the other. There are already several interesting works around this theme, such as Tony Veale s Sapper framework [V eale, 1997]or Falkenheiner s Structure Mapping Engine [Brian Falkenhainer and Gentner, 1989],sowewon t explain this subject in much detail. We must refer, however, that our mapping function is essentially inspired in Sapper, a model for metaphor interpretation that, given two concept networks (e.g. composer and general) and a metaphor that connects them (e.g. A composer is a general ) ....

....mapping would then be: BC####### #####Dd####### ####### BC #####Dd#### BC### Dd### BC#########Dd## ## BC######Dd###### BC####Dd#### ### BC########Dd########### This is similar to Sapper s triangulation rule. We redirect the reader to [V eale, 1997] Veale and Keane, 1997] and [Brian Falkenhainer and Gentner, 1989] for a more detailed explanation of structure mapping algorithms. The Blending projection is the main generating function of a new Blend. It applies the mapping function to concepts on both domains, projecting each concept, rule or domain instance to its new existence in the Blend. De#nition 11 ....

Kenneth Forbus Brian Falkenhainer and Dedre Gentner. The structuremapping engine. Arti#cial Intelligence, 41:1--63, 1989.

....is purely one of transforming a theory, as the theory s symbols (consumer etc. are independent of and have no relationship to the symbols in the target KB (e.g. we could just have easily named the theory symbols s1 s2 s3 s4) 2. 2 Specifying Morphisms: Mapping by Name Following the terminology of [Falkenhainer et al. 1986], we refer to the source theory as the base, and the KB to import it as the target. The mapping of symbols from the base theory to the target KB is called a signature morphism (or, below, we sometimes write just morphism) For example: AXIOM ( pattern ) If a CONSUMER is connected to a ....

Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., and Gentner, D. (1986). The structure-mapping engine. In AAAI-86, pages 272--277. 8

....heterogeneous then the system help by using index based retrieval techniques from Case Based Reasoning (Kolodner, 1993) For more diverse templates with rich structure and different types of template elements, a more powerful mechanism would be needed. Use of the Structure Mapping Engine (SME) (Falkenhainer, Forbus Gentner, 1986) (Falkenhainer, Forbus Gentner, 1989) might be appropriate. Characteristics of the task, user, objects and object relationships would be given as the problem , and, after some pre filtering of stored templates based on a limited number of primary features, SME could be used to provide an ....

B. Falkenhainer, K. D. Forbus & D. Gentner. The structure-mapping engine. Proceedings of the American Association for Artificial Intelligence, 1986, pp. 272-277.

....reflecting the changing environment. 7.2.2. Mapping The foremost problem with mapping, how to overcome the combinatorial explosion which will take place in case of an exhaustive comparison between all possible correspondences, is solved in various ways by various researchers. Gentner (1983) Falkenhainer et al. 1986) in their structure mapping theory (SMT) restrict possible element correspondences only to identical relations (attributes are discarded, objects are put in correspondence after the best mapping is found) and use a purely syntactic criterion for preference the systematicity principle: it is the ....

....solutions proposed so far: 1) Holland et al. 1986) Holyoak Thagard (1988) do this on the basis of the representation it is assumed that the way of representing the source situation reflects the most relevant information. Unfortunately, this is not always the case. 2) Gentner (1983) Falkenhainer (1986) consider attributes and isolated relations as irrelevant. It seems doubtful that relevance can be expressed in such syntactic criteria. 3) Kedar Cabelli (1988) elaborates the representation in a way that selects only relevant attributes and adds an explanation network to the representation. This ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Falkenhainer B., Forbus K., Gentner D. (1986). The Structure Mapping Engine. AAAI-86, Los Altos, CA: Morgan-Kaufman.

....representations. It should also become clear that, if hand made representations had not been used, all of these programs would have failed. I will briefly consider a number of well known programs that span the last fifteen years: BACON (Langley, 1979; Langley et al. 1987) SME (Gentner, 1983; Falkenhainer, Forbus, Gentner, 1989), ACME (Holyoak Thagard, 1989) SIAM (Goldstone Medin, 1994) and, most recently, a similarity program developed by Chater Hahn (1996) BACON This program, the original version of which was developed by Langley (1979) purports to discover laws of physics, such as Ohm s Law, Coulomb s Law, ....

....that are essential to a successful search for the solution. On the other hand, had BACON been given all of Kepler s knowledge and beliefs about the solar system, combinatorial explosion would almost certainly have prevented it from deriving anything at all. SME This program (Gentner, 1983; Falkenhainer et al. 1989) is an analogy making program that discovers mappings between two situations (called the base situation and the target situation) based on their underlying syntactic structure. It maps objects and relations between objects in the base situation to their counterparts in the target situation and ....

Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K., Gentner, D. (1989). The structure-mapping engine. Artificial Intelligence 41(1): 1-63.

....object to a target object, path mapping maps each object and relation at most once, thus running in time linear to the total number of objects and relations. Path mappings greedy approach to analogical mapping is quite different from early models of mapping that take a more global approach (e.g. Falkenhainer, Forbus, Gentner, 1989; Holyoak Thagard, 1989) and more reminiscent of recent models that take a more local or incremental approach (e.g. Forbus, Ferguson, Gentner, 1994; Keane Brayshaw, 1988) The rationale for these efficient approaches arises from the fact that any attempt to exhaustively Salvucci Anderson, ....

....Zerdia is attacked by the country of Gagrach but eventually befriends Gagrach by sharing its computers. The two stories are fairly complex and require a representation with a number of objects and relations. We created a model of the Karla the Hawk stories using a representation based on that of Falkenhainer, Forbus, Gentner (1989). This representation includes four objects, 18 relations, and 36 roles for each story analog. The model runs through the four objects and maps each object to a corresponding target object. Because mapping takes time linear to the number of objects and relations, the model produces the mappings ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., & Gentner, D. (1989). Structure-mapping engine. Artificial Intelligence, 41, 1-63.

....we apply the plan to the target and propose to correct its failures by an abductive recovery mechanism inspired from abductive recovery from failed proofs. 1 Introduction The analogy scheme we shall use in this paper is quite a classical one (Winston, 1982; Gentner, 1983; Chouraqui, 1985; Falkenhainer, Forbus, and Gentner, 1986; Carbonell, 1983, 1986; Kedar Cabelli, 1988; Kodratoff, 1988) It can be described as follows. Let us suppose that we dispose of a piece of information, the base, that can be put into the form of a doublet (A, B) in which it is known that B depends on A. This dependency will often be causal, and ....

Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., Gentner, D. "The Structure-Mapping Engine, Report N UIUCDCS-R-861275, DCS, Univ. of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, May 1986. See also Proc. AAAI-86.

....Bongard problems are so hard in the first place, and why progress has been so slow in this arena. Related analyses in the AI literature are, for instance, the incisive view presented in [28] of the much hyped project CYC [18] or the critical look provided in [3] of the structure mapping engine [5]. Some of the issues discussed here have been previously brought by [12,14] On the side of philosophy, alternatives to metaphysical realism which discard the idea of a metaphysically external object have been proposed in [15,16,24,29] 4.1 Objects as a fruit of cognition We should now put ....

B. Falkenhainer, K.D. Forbus, and D.Gentner, The structure mapping engine, Artificial intelligence 41 (1990) 1-63.

....the actual models built are quite impenetrable. This line of research has generated a number of quite successful models that explained the data and made some new predictions. Typically, a model of mapping is coupled with a (separate) model of retrieval. The best known examples are SME MAC FAC (Falkenhainer, Forbus, and Gentner, 1986; Forbus, Gentner, and Law, 1995) and ACME ARCS (Holyoak and Thagard, 1989; Thagard, Holyoak, Nelson, and Gochfeld, 1990) However, the experimental work soon revealed that the pattern is not that clear and straightforward. It has been demonstrated that superficial similarities do play an ....

Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K., and Gentner, D. (1986). The structure-mapping engine. Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufman.

....boundaries of patterns (this is left to the knowledge engineer) Finally, we do not address the issue of finding 9 the appropriate mappings between patterns and the domain; this again is left to the knowledge engineer. This a primary focus of research in the related field of analogical reasoning [10]. Note that patterns are not an essential prerequisite for building a knowledgebased system. In the PHaSE application, for example, we could have simply defined the PHaSE electrical circuit, implemented axioms about the behavior of electrical circuits, and answered circuit questions, all within ....

B. Falkenhainer, K. D. Forbus, and D. Gentner. The structure-mapping engine. In AAAI-86, pages 272--277, 1986.

No context found.

Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., & Gentner, D. (1989). The Structure-Mapping Engine. Artificial Intelligence, 41, 1-63.

....that candidate inferences are well defined and that stronger arguments are preferred [11] Two simulations based on structure mapping are relevant to this paper. The first, the Structure Mapping Engine (SME) 1,7,11] is a cognitive simulation of analogical matching. How SME works is described in [6,7,11]. Two characteristics are key to the work described here: SME operates in polynomial time, using a greedy merge algorithm to provide a small number of mappings that best satisfy the constraints of structure mapping. SME s results are consistent with a large and growing body of ....

....constraints. The procedural semantics of recursivematch between and seeking match between are detailed in [30] Mappings: In structure mapping, a mapping consists of three things: A structurally consistent set of correspondences, a set of candidate inferences, and a structural evaluation score [6,7,11]. How correspondences and candidate inferences are represented in this ontology is described below. The structural evaluation score is an estimate of match quality. The function structuralevaluation score denotes the score computed by SME for the mapping. The relation (mapping of mapping match) ....

[Article contains additional citation context not shown here]

Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K., and Gentner, D. (1986, August) The Structure-Mapping Engine. Proceedings of AAAI-86, Philadelphia, PA

No context found.

Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K., & Gentner, D. (1986, August) The Structure-Mapping Engine. Proceedings of AAAI-86, Philadelphia, PA

No context found.

Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., and Gentner, D. The Structure Mapping Engine. In Proceedings of AAAI-86. Philadelphia, PA, 1986.

No context found.

Falkenhainer, Brian, Forbus, Kenneth D., & Dedre Gentner. 1989. The Structure-Mapping Engine. Artificial Intelligence, 41, pp 1-63.

No context found.

Falkenhainer, B, K. D. Forbus, & D. Gentner. (1989). The >Structure-Mapping Engine.>Artificial Intelligence, 41, pp 1-63.

No context found.

Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K. D., and D. Gentner. (1989). The Structure-Mapping Engine. Artificial Intelligence, 41, pp 1-63.

No context found.

B. Falkenhainer, K. D. Forbus, and D. Gentner. Structure-Mapping Engine. Artificial Intelligence, 41, pages 1-63, 1989.

No context found.

Falkenhainer, B, K. D. Forbus, & D. Gentner. (1989). Structure-Mapping Engine. Artificial Intelligence, 41, pp 1-63.

No context found.

Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K., and Gentner, D. (1986). The structure-mapping engine. Proceedings of the Fifth Annual Conference on Artificial Intelligence. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufman.

No context found.

Fallkenhainer, B., Forbus, K.D. and Gentner, D. (1986). The structure-mapping engine. Proceedings of the Fifth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, August, 1986.

No context found.

Fallkenhainer, B., Forbus, K.D. and Gentner, D. (1986). The structure-mapping engine. University of Illinois Technical Report No. UIUCDS-R86-1275.

No context found.

Fallkenhainer, B., Forbus, K.D. and Gentner, D. (1986). The structure-mapping engine.

First 50 documents

Online articles have much greater impact   More about CiteSeer.IST   Add search form to your site   Submit documents   Feedback  

CiteSeer.IST - Copyright Penn State and NEC