Hostname: page-component-76fb5796d-skm99 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-27T14:58:20.193Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

A transformational approach to case-based synthesis

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2009

D. Navinchandra ,
Katia P. Sycara  and
S. Narasimhan
D. Navinchandra
Affiliation:
School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, U.S.A.
Katia P. Sycara
Affiliation:
School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, U.S.A.
S. Narasimhan
Affiliation:
School of Computer Science, Carnegie Mellon University, Pittsburgh, PA 15213, U.S.A.
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

Design is not done in a vacuum. Engineers often rely on prior designs to make new design decisions instead of solving every new problem from scratch. Prior designs that represent good solutions to the tightly coupled nature of mechanical devices are used as guides. Moreover, prior failures are used to avoid repeating old mistakes. In this paper we present a computer-based approach to exploiting the knowledge embodied in prior designs. Reasoning from design cases requires the ability to use cases, or pieces of cases that realize subfunctions of the device being designed. It is, however, difficult to recognize and retrieve relevant cases or case pieces using a given design specification. Because there is no one-to-one correspondence between the desired behavior of a device and the individual component behaviors, it is often not possible to find relevant design cases by using the given overall behavioral specification as an index into case memory. We approach this problem by elaborating the given behavior specification into a description that gives rise to indices with which relevant components can be retrieved. The elaborations are carried out in a behavior-preserving manner using two transformation operators that (a) rely on physical laws if it is known which ones are relevant, or (b) hypothesize behaviors and then search the case memory for ways in which the required behaviors may be achieved. These two approaches are used opportunistically in CADET, a case-based mechanical design system.

Type
Research Article
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 5 , Issue 1 , February 1991 , pp. 31 - 45
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1991

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

DeKleer, J. and Brown, J. 1984. A qualitative physics based on confluences. Artificial Intelligence 24, 7–83.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Forbus, K. 1984. Qualitative process theory, Artificial Intelligence 24, 85–168.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Gero, J. S. 1987. Prototypes: a New Schema for Knowledge-based Design, Techical report, Architectural Computing Unit, Department of Architectural Science, Working Paper.Google Scholar
Goel, A., Chandrasekaran, B. 1989. Integrating model-based reasoning and case-based reasoning for design problem solving. Proceedings of the 1988 AAAI Design Workshop.Google Scholar
Gregory, S. A. 1988. The boundaries and internals of expert systems in engineering design. Proceedings of the Second IFIP Workshop on Intelligent CAD, pp. 7–9.Google Scholar
Hammond, K. J. 1986. CHEF: A model of case-based planning. Proceedings of AAAl-86, pp. 267–271.Google Scholar
Hicks, T. G. 1987. Machine Design Calculations Reference Guide. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar
Hix, C. F. Jr and Alley, R. P. 1958. Physical Laws and Effects. New York: John Wiley.Google Scholar
Howard, C., Wang, J., Daube, F., Rafiq, T. 1989. Applying design-dependent knowledge in structural engineering design. (AI EDAM) 3, 111–123.Google Scholar
Huhns, M. H. and Acosta, R. D. 1987. Argo: An Analogical Reasoning System for Solving Design Problems, Technical report AI/CAD-092–87, Microelectronic and Computer Technology Corporation, March.Google Scholar
Iwasaki, Y. and Simon, H. A. 1986. Causality in device behavior. Artificial Intelligence, 29, 3–32.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kolodner, J. L. 1980. Retrieval and Organizational Strategies in Conceptual Memory: A Computer Model, PhD dissertation, Yale University.Google Scholar
Kolodner, J. L. 1987. Extending problem solver capabilities through case-based inference. Proceedings of the 4th Annual International Machine Learning Workshop, Irvine, CA.Google Scholar
Kolodner, J. L., Simpson, R. L. and Sycara, K. 1985. A process model of case-based reasoning in problem solving. Proceedings of IJCAI-85, Los Angeles, pp. 284–290.Google Scholar
Kuipers, B. 1984. Commonsense reasoning about causality. Artificial Intelligence 24, 169–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kuipers, B. J. 1986. Qualitative simulation. Artificial Intelligence 29, 289–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Maher, M. L. and Zhao, F. 1987. Using experience to plan the synthesis of new designs. In Expert Systems in Computer-Aided Design, Gero, J. S., ed. Amsterdam: North-Holland.Google Scholar
Mostow, J. 1985. Toward better models of the design process. The AI Magazine, Spring, 1985, 44–57.Google Scholar
Mostow, J. and Barley, M. 1987. Automated reuse of design plans. Proceedings of the International Conference on Engineering Design, February.Google Scholar
Navinchandra, D. 1991. Exploration and Innovation in Design: Towards a Computational Model. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Navinchandra, D., Sriram, D. and Kedar-Cabelli, S. T. 1987. On the role of analogy in engineering design: an overview. In Al in Engineering, Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference, Boston, Sriram, D. and Adey, B. ed. Ashurst: Computational Mechanics Publishing.Google Scholar
Pahl, G. and Beitz, W. 1984. Engineering Design. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.Google Scholar
Riesbeck, C. K. and Schank, R. 1989. Inside Case-Based Reasoning. Palo Alto; CA: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar
Rinderle, J. R. 1982. Measures of Functional Coupling in Design. PhD dissertation, Massachusetts Institute of Technology.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Simoudis, E. and Miller, J. S. 1991. The application of CBR to helpd esk applications. Proceedings of the 1991 Case Based Reasoning Workshop. Washington: DARPA.Google Scholar
Steinberg, L. I. 1987. Design as refinement plus constraint propagation: The VEXED experience. Proceedings of the Sixth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 830–835.Google Scholar
Suh, N. P., Bell, A. C. and Gossard, D. C. 1978. On an axiomatic approach to manufacturing and manufacturing systems. Journal of Engineering for IndustryCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sycara, K. 1987 a. Finding creative solutions in adversarial impasses. Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Seattle, WA.Google Scholar
Sycara, K. 1987 b. Resolving Adversarial Conflicts: An Approach Integrating Case-Based and Analytic Methods. PhD dissertation, School of Information and Computer Science Georgia Institute of Technology.Google Scholar
Sycara, K. 1988. Patching up old plans. Proceedings of the Tenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Montreal, Canada.Google Scholar
Sycara, K. and Navinchandra, D. 1989 a. Representing and indexing design cases. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Industrial and Engineering Applications of AI and Expert Systems, Tullahoma, TN.Google Scholar
Sycara, K. and Navinchandra, D. 1989 b. Integrating case-based reasoning and qualitative reasoning in design. In Al in Design, Gero, J. ed. Ashurst: Computational Mechanics Publishing.Google Scholar
Sycara, K. D. and Navinchandra, D., 1989 c. A process model of case based design. Proceedings of the Cognitive Science Society Conference, Ann Arbor, Michigan.Google Scholar
Tong, C. 1986. Knowledge-based Circuit Design. PhD dissertation, Stanford University.Google Scholar
Ullman, D. G. and Dietterich, T. A. 1987. Mechanical design methodology: implications on future developments of computeraided design and knowledge-based systems. Engineering with Computers, 2, 21–29.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ulrich, K. T. and Seering, W. P. 1988. Function sharing in mechanical design. 7th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI-88, Minneapolis, MN, August 21–26.Google Scholar
Williams, B. 1990. Interaction-based invention: designing novel devices from first principles. Proceedings of AAAI-90, Boston, MA, pp. 349–356.Google Scholar