Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Conversational Case-Based Reasoning

  • Published:
Applied Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Conversational case-based reasoning (CCBR) was the first widespread commercially successful form of case-based reasoning. Historically, commercial CCBR tools conducted constrained human-user dialogues and targeted customer support tasks. Due to their simple implementation of CBR technology, these tools were almost ignored by the research community (until recently), even though their use introduced many interesting applied research issues. We detail our progress on addressing three of these issues: simplifying case authoring, dialogue inferencing, and interactive planning. We describe evaluations of our approaches on these issues in the context of NaCoDAE and HICAP, our CCBR tools. In summary, we highlight important CCBR problems, evaluate approaches for solving them, and suggest alternatives to be considered for future research.

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

Access this article

Log in via an institution

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. L. Breslow and D.W. Aha, “NaCoDAE: Navy Conversational Decision Aids Environment,” Technical Report AIC-97-018, NRL, NCARAI: Washington, DC, 1997a.

    Google Scholar 

  2. D.W. Aha and L.A. Breslow, “Refining conversational case libraries,” in Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, Springer: Providence, RI, 1997, pp. 267–278.

    Google Scholar 

  3. D.W. Aha, T. Maney, and L.A. Breslow, “Supporting dialogue inferencing in conversational case-based reasoning,” in Fourth European Workshop on Case-Based Reasoning, Springer: Dublin, Ireland, 1998, pp. 262–273.

    Google Scholar 

  4. H. Muñoz-Avila, D. McFarlane, D.W. Aha, J. Ballas, L.A. Breslow, and D. Nau, “Using guidelines to constrain interactive case-based HTN planning,” in Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, Springer: Seeon, Germany, 1999, pp. 288–302.

    Google Scholar 

  5. E. Brill, “Transformation-based tagger,” V1.14. Seewww.cs.jhu. edu/»brill, 1995.

  6. D.W. Aha and L.A. Breslow, “Correcting for length biasing in conversational case scoring,” Technical Report AIC-98-007, Naval Research Laboratory, Navy Center for Applied Research in Artificial Intelligence, Washington, DC, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Inference Corporation, “CBR2: Designing CBR Express Case Bases,” unpublished manuscript, 1995. 30 Aha, Breslow and Muñoz-Avila

  8. D. Wettschereck, D.W. Aha, and T. Mohri, “A review and comparative evaluation of feature weighting methods for lazy learning algorithms,” Artificial Intelligence Review, vol. 11, pp. 273–314, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  9. J. R. Quinlan, “Induction of decision trees,” Machine Learning, vol. 1, pp. 81–106, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  10. L. Breslow and D.W. Aha, “Simplifying decision trees: A survey,” Knowledge Engineering Review, vol. 12, pp. 1–40, 1997b.

    Google Scholar 

  11. J.R. Quinlan, “Unknown attribute values in induction,” in Proceedings of the Sixth International Workshop on Machine Learning, Morgan Kaufmann: Ithaca, NY, 1989, pp. 164–168.

    Google Scholar 

  12. J. Hendler, K. Stoffel, and M. Taylor, “Advances in high performance knowledge representation,” Technical Report CS-TR-3672, University of Maryland, Department of Computer Science, College Park, MD, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  13. A.B. Siegel, “Requirements for humanitarian assistance and peace operations: Insights from seven case studies,” Technical Report CRM 94-74, Center for Naval Analyses: Arlington, VA, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  14. DoD, “Joint tactics, techniques and procedures for noncombat evacuation operations, Joint Publication Report 3-07.51, second draft, Department of Defense: Washington, DC, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  15. A.B. Siegel, “Eastern Exit: The noncombatant evacuation operation (NEO) from Mogadishu, Somalia, in January 1991,”Technical Report CRM 91-221, Center for Naval Analyses: Arlington, VA, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  16. Stahl, T. David, “Noncombatant evacuation operations in support of the National Military Strategy,” Technical Report, United States Army Command and General Staff College, School of Advanced Military Studies, Fort Leavenworth, KA, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  17. K.S. Lambert, “Noncombatant evacuation operations: Plan now or pay later,” Technical Report, Naval War College: Newport, RI, 1992.

    Google Scholar 

  18. H. Muñoz-Avila, L.A. Breslow, D.W. Aha, and D. Nau, “Description and functionality of HTE (Version 2.90),” Technical Report AIC-98-022, Washington, DC, Naval Research Laboratory, Navy Center for Applied Research in Artificial Intelligence, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  19. K. Erol, D. Nau, and J. Hendler, “HTN planning: Complexity and expressivity,” in Proceedings of the Twelfth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press: Seattle, WA, 1994, pp. 1123–1128.

    Google Scholar 

  20. G.R. Sachtleben, “Operation Sharp Edge: The Corps MEU (SOC) Program in action,” Marine Corps Gazette, vol. 11, pp. 76–86, 1991.

    Google Scholar 

  21. A. Ceranowicz, “Modular semi-automated forces,” in Proceedings of the Winter Simulation Conference of the ACM, IEEE: New York, NY, 1994, pp. 755–761.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Fikes and Nilsson, “Strips: A new approach to the application of theorem proving in problem solving,” Artificial Intelligence, vol. 2, pp. 189–208, 1971.

    Google Scholar 

  23. D. Nau, Y. Cao, A. Lotem, and H. Muñoz-Avila, “SHOP: Simple hierarchical ordered planner,” in Proceedings of the Sixteenth International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press: Stockholm, 1999, pp. 968–973.

    Google Scholar 

  24. I. Watson, “Applying Case-Based Reasoning: Techniques for Enterprise Systems,” Morgan Kaufmann: San Francisco, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  25. T. Nguyen, M. Czerwinsksi, and D. Lee, “COMPAQ Quick-Source: Providing the consumer with the power of artificial intelligence,” in Proceedings of the Fifth Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press: Washington, DC, 1993, pp. 142–150.

    Google Scholar 

  26. H. Shimazu, A. Shibata, and K. Nihei, “Case-based retrieval interface adapted to customer-initiated dialogues in help desk operations,” in Proceedings of the Twelfth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press: Seattle, WA, 1994, pp. 513–518.

    Google Scholar 

  27. H. Shimazu, A. Shibata, and K. Nihei, “Expert Guide: A conversational case-based reasoning tool for developing mentors in knowledge spaces,” Applied Intelligence, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 33–48, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  28. H. Shimazu, “Translation of tacit knowledge into explicit knowledge: Analyses of recorded conversations between customers and human agents,” in Exploring Synergies of Knowledge Management and Case-Based Reasoning: Papers from the AAAI Workshop, edited by D.W. Aha, I. Becerra-Fernandez, F. Maurer, and H. Muñoz-Avila, Technical Report WS-99-10, AAAI Press: Menlo Park, CA, 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  29. R. Burke, K. Hammond, and B. Young, “The FindMe approach to assisted browsing,” IEEE Expert, vol. 12, no. 4, pp. 32–40, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  30. R. Burke, “The Wasabi Personal Shopper: A case-based recommender system,” in Proceedings of the Sixteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press: Orlando, FL, 1999, pp. 844–849.

    Google Scholar 

  31. K. Racine and Q. Yang, “Maintaining unstructured case bases,” in Proceedings of the Second International Conference on CBR, Springer: Providence, RI, 1997, pp. 553–564.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Z. Zhang and Q. Yang, “Towards lifetime maintenance of case base indexes for continual case based reasoning,” in Proceedings of the International Conference on Artificial Intelligence: Methodology, Systems, Applications, Springer: Sozopol, Bulgaria, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  33. J.R. Trott and B. Leng, “An engineering approach for troubleshooting case bases,” in Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, Springer: Providence, RI, 1997, pp. 178–189.

    Google Scholar 

  34. C. Carrick, Q. Yang, I. Abi-Zeid, and L. Lamontagne, “Activating CBR systems through autonomous information gathering,” in Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, Springer: Seeon, Germany, 1999, pp. 74–88.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Q. Yang and J. Wu, “Enhancing the effectiveness of interactive case-based reasoning with clustering and decision forests,” Applied Intelligence, vol. 14, no. 1, pp. 49–64, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  36. D. McSherry, “Interactive case-based reasoning in sequential diagnosis,” Applied Intelligence, vol. 14, pp. 65–76, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  37. I. Abi-Zeid, Q. Yang, and L. Lamontagne, “Is CBR applicable to the coordination of search and rescue operations? A feasibility study,” in Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, Springer: Seeon, Germany, 1999, pp. 358–371.

    Google Scholar 

  38. M. Manago, K.-D. Althoff, E. Auriol, R. Traphoner, S. Wess, N. Conruyt, and F. Maurer, “Induction and reasoning from cases,” in Proceedings of the First EuropeanWorkshop on Case-Based Reasoning, Springer-Verlag: Kaiserslautern, Germany, 1993, pp. 313–318.

    Google Scholar 

  39. B. Smyth and P. Cunningham, “A comparison of incremental CBR and inductive learning,” in Working Papers of the Second European Workshop on Case-Based Reasoning, edited by M. Keane, J.P. Haton, and M. Manago, Chantilly, France, unpublished, 1994.

  40. M. Tan and J.C. Schlimmer, “Two case studies in cost-sensitive concept acquisition,” in Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press: Boston, MA, 1990, pp. 854–860.

    Google Scholar 

  41. R. Heider, E. Auriol, E. Tartarin, and M. Manago, “Improving the quality of case bases for building better decision support systems,” in Fifth German Workshop on CBR: Foundations, Systems, and Applications, edited by R. Bergmann and W. Wilke, Technical Report LSA-97-01E, University of Kaiserslautern, Department of Computer Science, 1997.

  42. H. Kitano, H. Shimazu, and A. Shibata, “Case-method: A methodology for building large-scale case-based systems,” in Proceedings of the Eleventh National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press: Washington, DC, 1993, pp. 303–308.

    Google Scholar 

  43. S. Ku and Y.-H. Suh, “An investigation of the K-tree search algorithm for efficient case representation and retrieval,” Expert Systems with Applications, vol. 11, pp. 571–581, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  44. E. Auriol, S. Wess, M. Manago, K.-D. Althoff, and R. Traphöner, “INRECA: A seamlessly integrated system based on inductive inference and case-based reasoning,” in Proceedings of the First International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, Springer: Sesimbra, Portugal, 1995, pp. 371–380.

    Google Scholar 

  45. C. Cardie, “Using decision trees to improve case-based learning,” in Proceedings of the Tenth International Conference on Machine Learning, Morgan Kaufmann: Amherst, MA, 1993, pp. 25–32.

    Google Scholar 

  46. P. Domingos, “Context-sensitive feature selection for lazy learners,” Artificial Intelligence Review, vol. 11, pp. 227–253.

  47. M. Vilain, P. Koton, and M.P. Chase, “On analytical and similarity-based classification,” in Proceedings of the Eighth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press: Boston, MA, 1990, pp. 867–874.

    Google Scholar 

  48. D. Navinchandra, K. Sycara, and S. Narasimhan, “A transformational approach to case based synthesis,” AI in Engineering Design and Manufacturing, vol. 5, 1991, pp. 31–45.

    Google Scholar 

  49. J.D. Hastings, L.K. Branting, and J.A. Lockwood, “Case adaptation using an incomplete causal model,” in Proceedings of the First International Conference on Case-Based Reasoning, Springer-Verlag: Sesimbra, Portugal, 1995, pp. 181–192.

    Google Scholar 

  50. R. Bergmann, H. Muñoz-Avila, M. Veloso, and E. Melis, “Case-based reasoning applied to planning tasks,” in CBR Technology: From Foundations to Applications, edited by M. Lenz, B. Bartsch-Spoerl, H.-D. Burkhard, and S. Wess, Springer: Berlin, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  51. S. Kambhampati, “Exploiting causal structure to control retrieval and refitting during plan reuse,” Computational Intelligence, vol. 10, pp. 213–244, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  52. R. Bergmann and W. Wilke, “Building and refining abstract planning cases by change of representation language,” Journal of AI Research, vol.3, pp. 53–118, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  53. L.K. Branting and D.W. Aha, “Stratified case-based reasoning: Reusing hierarchical problem solving episodes,” in Proceedings of the Fourteenth International Joint Conference on AI, Morgan Kaufmann: Montreal, Canada, 1995, pp. 384–390.

    Google Scholar 

  54. S.R. Kostek, “A User's Design of a Decision Support System for Noncombatant Evacuation Operations for United States Central Command,” Master's thesis, School of Engineering, Air Force Institute of Technology, Dayton, Ohio, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  55. T. Chavez and M. Henrion, “Focusing on what matters in plan evaluation: Efficiently estimating the value of information,” in Proceedings of the ARPA/Rome Laboratory Knowledge-Based Planning and Scheduling Initiative, Morgan Kaufmann: Tuscon, AR, 1994, pp. 387–399.

    Google Scholar 

  56. Y. Gil, M. Hoffman, and A. Tate, “Domain-specific criteria to direct and evaluate planning systems,” in Proceedings of the ARPA/Rome Laboratory Knowledge-Based Planning and Scheduling Initiative, Morgan Kaufmann: Tuscon, AR, 1994, pp. 433–444.

    Google Scholar 

  57. M. desJardins, A. Francis, and M. Wolverton, “Hybrid planning: An approach to integrating generative and case-based planning,” in Case-Based Reasoning Integrations: Papers from the 1998 Workshop, edited by D.W. Aha and J.J. Daniels, Technical Report WS-98-15, AAAI Press: Menlo Park, CA, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  58. A. Tate, “Mixed initiative planning in O-Plan2,” in Proceedings of the ARPA/Rome Laboratory Knowledge-Based Planning and Scheduling Initiative, Morgan Kaufmann: Tuscon, AR, 1994, pp. 512–516.

    Google Scholar 

  59. S.W. Mitchell, “A hybrid architecture for real-time mixed-initiative planning and control,” in Proceedings of the Ninth Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press: Providence, RI, 1997, pp. 1032–1037.

    Google Scholar 

  60. M.Veloso, A.M. Mulvehill, and M.T. Cox, “Rationale-supported mixed-initiative case-based planning,” in Proceedings of the Ninth Conference on Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press: Providence, RI, 1997, pp. 1072–1077.

    Google Scholar 

  61. M.A. Bienkowski and L.J. Hoebel, “Integrating AI components for a military planning application,” in Proceedings of the Fifthteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press: Madison, WI, 1998, pp. 561–566.

    Google Scholar 

  62. G. Ferguson and J.F. Allen, “TRIPS: An integrated intelligent problem-solving assistant,” in Proceedings of the Fifthteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press: Madison, WI, 1998, pp. 567–572.

    Google Scholar 

  63. M. Wolverton and M. desJardins, “Controlling communication in distributed planning using irrelevance reasoning,” in Proceedings of the Fifthteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press: Madison, WI, 1998, pp. 868–874.

    Google Scholar 

  64. M.T. Gervasio, W. Iba, and P. Langley, “Case-based seeding for an interactive crisis response assistant,” in Case-Based Reasoning Integrations: Papers from the 1998 Workshop, edited by D.W. Aha and J.J. Daniels, Technical Report WS-98-15, AAAI Press: Menlo Park, CA, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  65. P. Avesani, A. Perini, and F. Ricci, “The twofold integration of CBR in decision support systems,” in Case-Based Reasoning Integrations: Papers from the 1998 Workshop, edited by D.W. Aha and J.J. Daniels, Technical Report WS-98-15, AAAI Press: Menlo Park, CA, 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  66. D.B. Leake, A. Kinley, and D. Wilson, “Acquiring case adaptation knowledge: A hybrid approach,” in Proceedings of the Thirteenth National Conference on Artificial Intelligence, AAAI Press: Portland, OR, 1996, pp. 684–689.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Navy Center for Applied Research in Artificial Intelligence, Naval Research Laboratory, Code 5510, 4555 Overlook Ave, SW, Washington, DC, 20375-5337, USA

    David W. Aha & Leonard A. Breslow

  2. Department of Computer Science, University of Maryland, College Park, MD, 20742-3255, USA

    Héctor Muñoz-Avila

Authors
  1. David W. Aha
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Leonard A. Breslow
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Héctor Muñoz-Avila
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Aha, D.W., Breslow, L.A. & Muñoz-Avila, H. Conversational Case-Based Reasoning. Applied Intelligence 14, 9–32 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008346807097

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1008346807097

Search

Navigation