Skip to main content
Log in

Visual analogy: Viewing analogical retrieval and mapping as constraint satisfaction problems

  • Published:
Applied Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The core issue of analogical reasoning is the transfer of relational knowledge from a source case to a target problem. Visual analogical reasoning pertains to problems containing only visual knowledge. Holyoak and Thagard proposed that the retrieval and mapping tasks of analogy in general can be productively viewed as constraint satisfaction problems, and provided connectionist implementations of their proposal. In this paper, we reexamine the retrieval and mapping tasks of analogy in the context of diagrammatic cases, representing the spatial structure of source and target diagrams as semantic networks in which the nodes represent spatial elements and the links represent spatial relations. We use a method of constraint satisfaction with backtracking for the retrieval and mapping tasks, with subgraph isomorphism over a particular domain language as the similarity measure. Results in the domain of 2D line drawings suggest that at least for this domain the above method is quite promising.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Subscribe and save

Springer+ Basic
$34.99 /Month
  • Get 10 units per month
  • Download Article/Chapter or eBook
  • 1 Unit = 1 Article or 1 Chapter
  • Cancel anytime
Subscribe now

Buy Now

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Explore related subjects

Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.

References

  1. Thagard P, Holyoak KJ, Nelson G, Gochfeld D (1990) Analog retrieval by constrain satisfaction. Artificial Intelligence 46:259–310

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Holyoak KJ, Thagard P (1989) Analogical mapping by constraint satisfaction. Cogn Sci 13(3):295–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Bayardo Jr., RJ, Schrag R (1997) Using CSP look-back techniques to solve real-world SAT instances. In: Proc. AAAI-97. AAAI Press, Providence, Rhode Island, pp 203–208

    Google Scholar 

  4. Davies J, Goel AK (2001) Visual analogy in problem solving. In: Proc. IJCAI-01. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Seattle, WA, pp 377–382

    Google Scholar 

  5. Davies J, Goel AK (2003) Representation issues in visual analogy. In: Proc. 25th Annual Conf. Cognitive Science Society. Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Boston, MA

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kolodner J (1993) Case-based reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, San Mateo, CA

    Google Scholar 

  7. Forbus KD, Gentner D, Law K (1995) MAC/FAC: A model of similarity-based retrieval. Cogn Sci 19(2):141–205

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Gick ML, Holyoak KJ (1980) Analogical problem solving. Cognitive Psychology 12:306–355

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Evans TG (1968) A heuristic program to solve geometric analogy problems. In: Minsky Marvin (eds) Semantic Information processing. MIT Press, Cambridge, MA

    Google Scholar 

  10. Ferguson RW (2000) Modeling orientation effects in symmetry detection: The role of visual structure. In: Gleitman L. R., Josh Ar. K. (eds) Proc. 22nd Annual Conf. Cognitive Science Society, Lawrence Erlbaum Associates, Philadelphia, PA

    Google Scholar 

  11. Ferguson RW, Forbus KD (1998) Telling juxtapositions: Using repetition and alignable difference in diagram understanding. In: Holyoak K, Gentner D, and Kokinov B (eds) Advances in analogy Research, New Bulgarian University, Sofia, Bulgaria, pp 109–117

    Google Scholar 

  12. Falkenhainer B, Forbus KD, Gentner D (1990) The structure-mapping engine: Algorithm and examples. Artificial Intelligence 41:1–63

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Pearce M, Goel AK, Kolodner JL, Zimring C, Sentosa L, Billington R (1992) Case-based design support: A case study in architectural design. IEEE Expert: Intell Syst & their Applis 7(5):14–20

    Google Scholar 

  14. Barber J, Jacobson M, Penberthy L, Simpson R, Bhatta S, Goel A, Pearce M, Shankar M, Stroulia E (1992) Integrating artificial intelligence and multimedia technologies for interface design advising. NCR J Res Dev 6(1):75–85

    Google Scholar 

  15. Gross MD, E Yi-Luen Do (1995) Diagram query and image retrieval in design. In: Proc. 2nd Int’l Conf. on Image Processing, IEEE Computer Society Press, Crystal City, VA

    Google Scholar 

  16. Gebhardt F, Voss A, Gräther W, Schmidt-Belz B (1997) Reasoning with Complex Cases, Kluwer Series in Engineering and Computer Science. vol. 393 Kluwer Academic Publishers,Boston

    Google Scholar 

  17. Börner K, Eberhard P, Tammer E-C, Coulon C-H (1996) Structural similarity and adaptation. In: Smith I, Faltings B (eds) Advances in Cased-Based Reasoning: Proc. 3rd European Workshop on Cased-Based Reasoning, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Lausanne, Switzerland, Springer-Verlag, vol 1168, pp 58–75

    Google Scholar 

  18. Hua K, Smith I, Faltings B (1993) Exploring case-based building design—CADRE. Art Intell for Engrs Design, Anal and Manuf (AI EDAM) 7(2):135–144

    Google Scholar 

  19. Maher ML, Zhang DM (1993) CADSYN: A case-based design process model. Art Intell Engrs Design, Anal Manuf (AI EDAM) 7(2):135–144

    Google Scholar 

  20. Sqalli MH, Purvis L, Freuder EC (1999) Survey of applications integrating constraint satisfaction and case-based reasoning. In: Layfield C, S B, Wren A (eds) Proc. Practical Applications of Constraint Technologies and Logic Programming (PACLP 1999), Practical Applications Company, London,UK

    Google Scholar 

  21. Levinson R, Ellis G (1992) Multi-level hierarchical retrieval. Knowl-Based Syst 5(3):233–244

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Petrakis EGM, Faloutsos C, Lin K-I (2002) An architecture for a CBR image segmentation system. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Engrs 14(5):959–987

    Google Scholar 

  23. Tombre K (1996) Structural and semantic methods in line drawing analysis: To which extent do they work? In: Perner P, Wang P S-P, Rosenfeld A (eds) Advances in Structural and Syntactical Pattern Recognition, 6th Int’l Workshop, SSPR ’96, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, Leipzig, Germany, vol 1121, pp 310–321

    Google Scholar 

  24. Perner P (1995) Case-based reasoning for image interpretation. In: Hlavac V, Sara R (eds) Computer Analysis of Images and Patterns, 6th Int’l Conf., CAIP ’95, Lecture Notes in Computer Science, Springer-Verlag, Prague, Czech Republic, vol 970, pp 532–537

    Google Scholar 

  25. Perner P (1999) An architecture for a cbr image segmentation system. In: Althoff K-D, Bergmann R, Branting LK (eds) Case-Based Reasoning Research and Development, 3rd Int’l Conf. on Case-Based Reasoning, ICCBR-99, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer-Verlag, Seeon Monastery, Germany, vol 1650, pp 525–534

    Google Scholar 

  26. Grimnes M (1996) A two-layer case-based reasoning architecture for medical image understanding. In: Smith I, Faltings B (eds) Advances in Case-Based Reasoning, 3rd European Workshop, EWCBR-96, Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, Springer-Verlag,Lausanne, Switzerland, vol 1168, pp 164–178

    Google Scholar 

  27. Grimson WEL, Huttenlocher DP (1991) On the verification of hypothesized matches in model-based recognition. IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 13(12):1201–1213

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Gupta A, Jain R (1997) Visual information retrieval. Comm ACM 40(5):69–79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Rui Y, Huang TS, Chang S-F (1999) Image retrieval: Current techniques, promising directions and open issues. J Visual Comm Image Repr 10(4):39–62

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Santini S, Jain R (1999) Similarity measures. PAMI 21(9):871–883

    Google Scholar 

  31. Veltkamp RC, Tanase M (2000) Content-based image retrieval systems: A survey. Technical Report UU-CS-2000-34, Institute of Information and Computing Sciences, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands

    Google Scholar 

  32. Egenhofer MJ (1996) Spatial-Query-by-Sketch. In: Burnett W,Citrin W (eds) IEEE Symposium on Visual Lnguages, IEEE Press, Boulder, CO, pp 60–67

    Google Scholar 

  33. Randell DA, Cui Z, Cohn AG (1992) A spatial logic based on regions and connections. In: Nebel B, Rich C, Swartout WR (eds) Proc. 3rd Int’l Conf. on Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, Cambridge, MA, pp 165–176

    Google Scholar 

  34. Prosser P (1993) Hybrid algorithms for the constraint satisfaction problem. Comp Intell 9(3):268–299

    Google Scholar 

  35. Ounis I, Pacsca M (1998) RELIEF: Combining expressiveness and rapidity into a single system. In: Proc. 21st Annual ACM SIGIR Conference, Melbourne, Australia, ACM Press, pp 266–274

    Google Scholar 

  36. Ferguson RW, Forbus KD (2000) GeoRep: A flexible tool for spatial representation of line drawings. In: Proc. AAAI-2000, Austin, Texas, AAAI Press

    Google Scholar 

  37. Papadias D, Kalnis P, Mamoulis N (1999) Hierarchical constraint satisfaction in spatial databases. In: Procedubgs. AAAI-99, Orlando, FL, AAAI Press

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Patrick W. Yaner.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Yaner, P.W., Goel, A.K. Visual analogy: Viewing analogical retrieval and mapping as constraint satisfaction problems. Appl Intell 25, 91–105 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-006-8868-x

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-006-8868-x

Keywords

Navigation