Chapter 3

Informal Introduction to
Similarity-Based and
Case-Based Reasoning
Stand 20.12.00

Recommended References
This lecture is not intended to provide a complete
introduction into case based reasoning. It will rather deal
only with those aspects which are used in applications to
e-c. For additional readings we recommend:
A. Aamodt, E. Plaza: Case-Based Reasoning: Foundational
Issues, Methodological Variations, and System Approaches. AI
Communications 7(1) (1994), S.39-59.
M. Lenz, B. Bartsch-Sprl, H.-D. Burkhard, S. Wess (eds.): CaseBased Reasoning Technology. Springer Lecture Notes in AI 1400,
1998.
R. Bergmann, S. Breen, M. Gker, M. Manago, S. Wess:
Developing Industrial Case-Based Reasoning Application - The
INRECA- Methodology. Springer Lecture Notes in AI 1612, 1999.

-2-

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Case-Based Reasoning (CBR)

Case-based reasoning (CBR) is a certain technique which
was based on analogical reasoning.
The main intention is to reuse previous experiences for
actual problems.
The difficulty arises when the actual situation is not
identical to the previous one: There is an inexactness
involved.
Its main aspect is that CBR-techniques allow inexact
(approximate) reasoning in a controlled manner.
Here we will shortly describe its main features.
Major applications have been fault diagnosis and help
desk systems.
-3-

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Similarity Based Reasoning

The central notion in CBR is the concept of similarity.
The methods in CBR have been extended in a way which
allows applications to other problems rather than reusing
previous experiences:
in electronic commerce e.g. to product selection.

This is due to an abstract formulation of the similarity

concept.
In particular, the main algorithms of CBR can still be
applied to these new situations.
We will first describe the original technique informally and
then proceed to the extensions.

-4-

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

What is CBR?

Case-based reasoning is [...] reasoning by remembering.

Leake, 1996

A case-based reasoner solves new problems by adapting solutions

that were used to solve old problems.
Riesbeck & Schank, 1989

Case-based reasoning is a recent approach to problem solving and

learning [...]
Aamodt & Plaza, 1994

Case-based reasoning is both [...] the ways people use cases to

solve problems and the ways we can make machines use them.
Kolodner, 1993

-5-

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

History of CBR in USA

Roger Schank, Yale University: Cognitive Science

1977: Scripts for knowledge representation (Schank, Abelson)
1983: Dynamic Memory Theory, Memory Organization Packets
CYRUS: First implemented CBR-System (Kolodner)
1983-1988: Other Systems, e.g., JUDGE, SWALE, CHEF

Bruce Porter, Austin Texas: Concept Learning

1986-89: System PROTOS (Exemplar-based concept representation)

Edwina Rissland, U. of Massachusetts: Cases in Law (since 1983)

1990-92: Systems HYPO (Ashley) and CABARET (Skalak)

Jaime Carbonell & Manuela Veloso, Carnegie Mellon U.: Analogy

since 1990 Prodigy/Analogy: Case-based Planning using analogy
Interest in CBR is increasing in USA (new research groups),
since 1988 several DARPA and AAAI Workshops

-6-

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

History of CBR in Europe

Michael M. Richter, U. Kaiserslautern, Germany: CBR for Expert Systems

1988-1991 Systems MOLTKE and PATDEX (technical diagnosis)
since 1991 Case-Based Planning: Systems Caplan/CbC, PARIS
since 1992 European Projects INRECA, INRECA-II, WEBSELL

Ramon Mantaras, Enric Plaza, IIIA Blanes, Spain: CBR and ML

1990 Case-Based Learning for medical diagnosis

Agnar Aamodt, U. Trondheim, Norway: CBR and Knowledge Acquisition

1991 System CREEK: Integration of Cases and general knowledge

Mark Keane, Trinity College, Dublin: Cognitive Science

since 1988 Theory of analogical reasoning

Since 1991 Increasing interest in Europe (several new research groups)

1991 First German CBR Workshop (AKCBR, GWCBR)
1993 First European CBR Workshop (EWCBR)
1995 First International CBR Conference (ICCBR)

-7-

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Extensions to E-Commerce
The extensions to applications in electronic commerce have
been developed in various research projects like

WEBSELL (Esprit project, No. 27068 ):

tec:inno GmbH, Germany (prime contractor)
Interactive Multimedia Systems, IMS, Ireland
IWT Magazin Verlags GmbH, Germany
Adwired GmbH, Switzerland
Trinity College Dublin, Ireland
University of Kaiserslautern, Germany
READEE (Rhineland-Palatinate):
tec;inno GmbH, Germany
Engineering Office Conradi & Partner
University of Kaiserslautern, Germany

-8-

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Example Applications (Overview)

Commercial applications are, e.g.:
Accommodation search in the Mritz region:
http://www.mueritz.de/
Search for Operational Amplifiers (Analog Devices):
http://imsgrp.com/analog/psearch.htm
Support for networking products (3Com):
http://knowledgebase.3com.com/
Travel Agency - Last Minute Trips (Check Out Touristik):
http://www.reiseboerse.com/

-9-

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Case-Based Reasoning (CBR)

Basic Ideas:
Store previous experience (case)
Solve new Problems by selecting and reusing cases
Store new experience again

Replaces 0-1-logic by approximation

Is a well-founded technology:

Mathematically
Algorithmically
With respect to software technology
Supported by experiments and applications
Business success

- 10 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

What is a Case ?
A case has two parts:
Description of a problem or a set of problems
(generalized case)
Description of the solution of this problem
(formally or informally)
Possibly additions like explanations, comments on the quality
of the solution etc.
Cases represent experiences :
They record how a problem was solved in the past

- 11 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Different Case Representations

Free text: textual CBR (tecInnos CBR answers,
ServiceSoft, Serviceware, Inferences casepoint 1st step)

Lists of questions and answers: conversational

CBR (Halley enterprise, Inferences casepoint 2nd step).
No common case structure.
Database like representation: structural CBR
(tecInnos CBR Works and orenge, Acknosofts KATE,
CaseBank, Isofts Recall, CSIs Remind)

- 12 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Structured Case Representation

Many different case representations are used (see chapters 4 and
5):
Depend on requirements of domain and task
Structure of already available case data

Flat feature-value list

Simple case structure is sometimes sufficient for problem solving
Easy to store and retrieve in a CBR system

Object-oriented representations
Case: collection of objects (instances of classes)
Required for complex and structured objects

For special tasks:

Graph representations: case = set of nodes and arcs
Plans: case = (partially) ordered set of actions
Predicate logic: case = set of atomic formulas

- 13 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

How to Use a Case

Problem
of the case

Problem

Solution ?
Solution
adaptation

Solution
of the case

In general, there is no guarantee for getting good solutions

because the case may be too far away from the problem. Therefore
the problem arises how to define when a case is close enough.
- 14 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

How to Use a Case-Base

A case base is a data base of cases
If a new problem arises one will use a case from the
case base in order to solve the problem
If we have many cases then the chance is higher to
find one with a suitable solution
Because the given problem is usually not exactly in the
base one wants to retrieve a case which solved a
problem which is similar enough to be useful
Hence, the notion of similarity is central to CBR
The concept of similarity based retrieval is compared
with data base retrieval

- 15 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Knowledge Container of CBR

In order to solve problems one needs knowledge.
Where is it located: In knowledge containers.
Similarity
measure

Vocabulay

Solution
transformation

Case
base
Storage

Compilation
Data
Information
Knowledge

Cases have not

to be understood in
order to be stored

A task of knowledge management is the

maintenance of the containers.
- 16 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Typical Problems Handled with CBR:

Classification and Diagnosis
A class is a certain subset of some universe and a
classification assigns to each element one or more
classes to which it belongs.
In fault diagnosis the classification is only the first
step:
Observations

diagnosis

classification

repair

Domain rules

Diagnosis occurs frequently in After Sales Support,

see chapter 12
- 17 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

A Simple Example (I) Overview

Typical Scenario: Call Center
Technical Diagnosis of Car Faults:
symptoms are observed (e.g., engine doesnt start) and
values are measured (e.g., battery voltage = 6.3V)
goal: Find the cause for the failure (e.g., battery empty) and
a repair strategy (e.g., charge battery)

Case-Based Diagnosis:
a case describes a diagnostic situation and contains:
description of the symptoms
description of the failure and the cause
description of a repair strategy
store a collection of cases in a case base
find case similar to current problem and reuse repair strategy
- 18 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

A Simple Example (II)

What does a Case Look Like?

A case describes one particular diagnostic situation

A case records several features and their specific values
occurred in that situation
A case is not a ( general) rule !!
Feature

C
A
S
E
1

Value

Problem (Symptoms)
Problem: Front light doesnt work
Car: VW Golf IV, 1.6 l
Year: 1998
Battery voltage: 13,6 V
State of lights: OK
State of light switch: OK
Solution
Diagnosis: Front light fuse defect
Repair: Replace front light fuse
- 19 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

A Simple Example (III)

A Case Base With Two Cases

Each case
describes one
particular situation
All cases are
independent of
each other

C
A
S
E
1

C
A
S
E
2

Problem (Symptoms)

Problem: Front light doesnt work

Car: VW Golf III, 1.6 l

Year: 1996

Battery voltage: 13,6 V

State of lights: OK

State of light switch: OK

Solution

Diagnosis: Front light fuse defect

Repair: Replace front light fuse

Problem (Symptoms)

Problem: Front light doesnt work

Car: Audi A4

Year: 1997

Battery voltage: 12,9 V

State of lights: surface damaged

State of light switch: OK

Solution

Diagnosis: Bulb defect

Repair: Replace front light

- 20 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

A Simple Example (IV)

Solving a New Diagnostic Problem

A new problem has to be solved

We make several observations in the current situation
Observations define a new problem
Not all feature values have to be known
Note: The new problem is a case without solution part
Feature

Value

Problem (Symptom):
Problem: Break light doesnt work
Car: Audi 80
Year: 1989
Battery voltage: 12.6 V
State of light: OK

- 21 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

A Simple Example (V)

Compare the New Problem with Each Case
and Select the Most Similar Case :
New
NewProblem
Problem

Similar?
Similar?

C
A
S
E
x

When are two cases similar?

How to rank the cases according to their similarity?
Similarity is the most important concept in CBR !!

We can assess similarity based on the similarity of each feature

Similarity of each feature depends on the feature value.
BUT: Importance of different features may be different
- 22 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

A Simple Example (VI)

Similarity Computation
Not similar

Very similar

Assignment of similarities for features values.

Express degree of similarity by a real number between 0 and 1

Examples:
Feature: Problem

Front light doesnt work

0.8

Break light doesnt work

Front light doesnt work

0.4

Engine doesnt start

12.6 V

0.9

Feature: Battery voltage

(similarity depends on the difference)

13.6 V

0.1
6.7 V
12.6 V
Different features have different importance (weights)!
High importance: Problem, Battery voltage, State of light, ...
Low importance: Car, Year, ...

- 23 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

A Simple Example (VII)

Compare Similarity and Case 1
Problem (Symptom)
Problem: Break light doesnt work
Car: Audi 80
Year: 1989
Battery voltage: 12.6 V
State of lights: OK

Very important feature: weight = 6

Less important feature: weight = 1

0.8
0.4
0.6
0.9
1.0

Problem (Symptoms)
Problem: Front light doesnt work
Car: VW Golf III, 1.6 l
Year: 1996
Battery voltage: 13.6 V
State of lights: OK
State of light switch: OK
Solution
Diagnosis: Front light fuse defect
Repair: Replace front light fuse

Similarity computation by weighted average

similarity(new,case 1) = 1/20 * [ 6*0.8 + 1*0.4 + 1*0.6 + 6*0.9 + 6* 1.0 ] = 0.86

- 24 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

A Simple Example (VIII)

Compare Similarity and Case 2
Problem (Symptom)
Problem: Break light doesnt work
Car: Audi 80
Year: 1989
Battery voltage: 12.6 V
State of lights: OK

Very important feature: weight = 6

Less important feature: weight = 1

0.8
0.8
0.4
0.95
0

Problem (Symptoms)
Problem: Front light doesnt work
Car: Audi A4
Year: 1997
Battery voltage: 12.9 V
State of lights: surface damaged
State of light switch: OK
Solution
Diagnosis: Front light fuse defect
Repair: Replace front light fuse

Similarity computation by weighted average

similarity(new,case 2) = 1/20 * [ 6*0.8 + 1*0.8 + 1*0.4 + 6*0.95 + 6*0 ] = 0.585
Case 1 is more similar: due to feature State of lights

- 25 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

A Simple Example (IX)

Reuse the Solution of Case 1
C
A
S
E
1

Problem (Symptoms):
Problem: Front light doesnt work
...
Solution:
Diagnosis: Front light fuse defect
Repair: Replace front light fuse

Problem (Symptom):
Problem: Break light doesnt work
Car: Audi 80
Year: 1989
Battery voltage: 12,6 V
State of light: OK

Adapt Solution:
How do differences in the
problem affect the solution?

New Solution:

Diagnosis: Break light fuse defect

Repair: Replace break light fuse

- 26 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

A Simple Example (X)

Store the New Experience
If diagnosis is correct:
Store new case in the memory.

C
A
S
E
3

Problem (Symptoms):
Problem: Break light doesnt work
Car: Audi 80
Year: 1989
Battery voltage: 12.6 V
State of lights: OK
State of light switch: OK
Solution:
Diagnosis: break light fuse defect
Repair: replace break light fuse
- 27 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Customer Classification
In e-c another classification problem arises: To define
classes of customers with the same behavior and
treat the customers according to their class:
Observations
about the
customer

Customer
class

Customer
treatment
Domain
knowledge

Inexact
classification

This will be discussed in chapter 10.

- 28 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

The Classical CBR R4-Cycle

This cycle shows the main

activities in CBR

[from: Aamodt & Plaza, 1994]

Retrieve:

Problem

New
Case

Re
tai
n
Learned
Case

Confirmed
Solution

Case
Base

Reuse:

New
Retrieved Case
Case

Knowledge

Re
vis
e

Tested/
Repaired
Case

Re
t r ie
ve

Determine most similar case(s).

Re
us
e
Solved
Case

Solve the new problem re-using

information and knowledge in the
retrieved case(s).

Revise:
Evaluate the applicability of the
proposed solution in the real-world.

Retain:
Suggested
Solution

Update case base with new learned

case for future problem solving.

- 29 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Retrieve: Modeling Similarity

The similarity based retrieval realizes an inexact match
which is still useful:
Useful solutions from a case base
Useful products from a product base

Different approaches depending on case representation

Similarity measures (see chapter 6):
Are functions to compare two cases
sim: Case x Case [0..1]
Local similarity measure: similarity on feature level
Global similarity measure: similarity on case or object level

For special tasks (see chapters 5 and 6):

(Sub-)Graph isomorphism for graph representations
Logical inferences
- 30 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Similarities (1)
Similarities are described by measures with
numerical values
They operate on
problem descriptions, demands, products ,...

Intention:
The more similar two problem descriptions C and D are,
the more useful it is two use one of the solutions also
for the other problem.
The more similar a demand and a product are the more
useful is the product for satisfying the demand.

- 31 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Similarities (2)
Given a fixed problem (demand) C
A similarity measure introduces a partial ordering (to be
more or less similar to C) on
the set of problems and therefore also on the case base
the set of products and therefore on the the product base.

The basic intention means that more similar also

means more useful with respect to the solutions
Therefore the similarity measure controls the utility
when inexact solutions are employed or the desired
product is not exactly as desired available.

- 32 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Similarities (3)
An important consequence of the intention is that
similarity is strongly related to utility
Utility is provided by the customer and should reflect
his interests and needs
Similarity is secondary because it is used to find
solutions for the customer.
Similarity is therefore not an absolute notion like truth
but a problem dependent notion.

- 33 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Similarities (4)
The similarity measure is the central element to
navigate through the space of possible solutions or
possible products.
Instead of presenting the exact solution similarity is a
concept to approximates it.
Even when the exact or optimal solution is not
available or too difficult to achieve one comes still up
with at least a suggestion for the solution.

- 34 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

A Typical Similarity Measure

Given two problem descriptions C1, C2

p attributes y1, ..., yp used for the representation
p

SIM(C1,C2) j sim j(C1,C2)

j 1

simj : similarity for attribute yj (local measure)

wj : describes the relevance of attribute j for the problem

- 35 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Retrieval: Finding The Nearest Neighbor

For a new problem C the nearest neighbor in the case
base is the case (D,L) for which problem D has the
greatest similarity to C.
Its solution L is intended to be most useful and is then
the best solution the case base can offer (or best
available product).
Classical databases use always total similarity
(i.e. equality).
The access to data in databases is in similarity based
systems replaced by the search for the nearest
neighbor. It can be regarded as an optimization
process.

This requires more effort but can be much more useful.

- 36 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Thresholds and Rough Sets

The nearest neighbor (in the given case base) is not always
sufficient for providing an acceptable solution.
On the other hand, a case which is not the nearest neighbor may
be sufficient enough.
For this purpose one can introduce two thresholds and , 0 <
< < 1 with the intention
If sim(newproblem, caseproblem) < then the case is not accepted;
If sim(newproblem, caseproblem) > then the case is accepted.

This partitions this case base (for the actual problem into three
parts (so-called rough sets): accepted cases, unaccepted cases
and an uncertainty set.
The same works for product bases.

- 37 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Retrieve: Efficiency Issues

Efficient case retrieval is essential for large case bases and
large product spaces.
Different approaches depending
on the representation
complexity of similarity computation
size of the base

Organization of the base:

Linear lists, only for small bases
Index structures for large bases, e.g., kd-trees,
retrieval nets, discrimination nets
2-Phase retrieval: MAC-FAC strategies

How to store cases or products:

Databases: for large bases or if shared with other applications
Main memory: for small bases, not shared
See chapter 7.
- 38 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Reuse: How to Adapt the Solution

No modification of the solution: just copy. Manual/interactive
solution adaptation by the user.
Automatic solution adaptation :
Transformational Analogy: transformation of the solution
Rules or operators to adjust solution w.r.t. differences in the
problems
Knowledge required about the impact of differences
Derivational Analogy: replay of the problem solving trace
Complete generative problem solver
Knowledge required about how to solve the problem in principle
Compositional adaptation: combine several cases to a single solution
See chapter 9

- 39 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Adaptation in Electronic Commerce

The best available product may not satisfy customers
demands sufficiently well.
Customize the product if possible
Exchange, add or remove parts
Change parameters
etc.

Suggest product bundles if an individual product does

not satisfy the customers demands
Product Configuration
See chapter 9.

- 40 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Revise: Verify and Correct Solution

Revise phase: little attention in CBR research today

No revise phase
Verification of the solution by computer simulation
Verification / evaluation of the solution in the real world
For products: Technical or customer evaluation, buying decision

Criteria for revision

Correctness of the solution
Quality of the solution
Other, e.g., user preferences

- 41 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Retain: Learning from Problem Solving

What can be learned

New experience (new case)

Improved similarity assessment, importance of features
Organization/indexing of the case base to improve efficiency
Knowledge for solution adaptation
Forgetting cases, e.g., for efficiency or because out-of-date

Methods

Storing cases in the case base

Deleting cases from the case base
Explanation-based learning
Induction, e.g. of decision trees
Neural net style learning

- 42 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Advantages of CBR over other

Techniques
Reduces the knowledge acquisition effort
Requires less maintenance effort
Improves problem solving performance through
reuse
Makes use of existing data, e.g. in databases
Improves over time and adapt to changes in the
environment
High user acceptance
- 43 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Reduce Knowledge Acquisition Effort

Traditional KnowledgeBased Systems

CBR Systems

Solution

Knowledge Acquisition
Domain
Knowledge

!!

KBS

Require less general

knowledge
Most knowledge in case
base
Case knowledge is easier to
acquire (sometimes already
available)

Knowledge Base

Problem

Acquisition of general
knowledge is very difficult !!
- 44 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Less Effort Required for Maintenance

What is the impact of changes of the environment ?

Rule bases or models are difficult to maintain

Many dependencies between rules

Rules of KBS often difficult to understand for non AI experts
Effects of changes of the rule base are hard to predict
Maintenance by the domain expert impossible !!

Case bases are easier to maintain

Cases are independent from each other

Domain experts and novices understand cases quite easy
Maintenance of CBR system (partially) by adding/deleting cases
However, changes in the vocabulary container require more effort
- 45 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Expert Systems vs. CBR

Expert System

CBR System

Expert should be replaced

Should generate new
knowledge
Knowledge implicitly stored in
an expert system model

Supports the inexperienced

user in routine operations
Searching for similar cases and
adapting these if necessary
Knowledge explicitly stored in
concrete cases and similarity
measures

Hard to maintain because of

Distinctly easier to maintain
unpredictable implications by
and to update
model changes and extensions
Aimed at 100% coverage of
Works with the pareto principle
knowledge domain

- 46 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Databases vs. CBR

Database System

CBR System

simple search all or

nothing

using same database but

search for most similar cases

often too many hits

(underspecification) or no hits
at all (overspecification)

system can be told to show

only, e.g., 10 cases by
descending order

no specific domain knowledge

used for the search

considers domain knowledge

for search by using similarity
measures, e.g., spatial or
geographical relations

pure database applications

cannot be used for online
consulting

online consulting is the power

of a CBR system

- 47 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Positioning the CBR System

Stored
Solution

Knowledge,
Models

New
Case

RETRIEVE

RETAIN
Verified
Solution

Case Base
Knowledge Model

REVISE

Closed Knowledge Model

Adapted
Solution

Increasing
Knowledge Centralization

Expert Systems

Data,
Examples

REUSE

Open Database
Increasing
Example Orientation

CBR Systems

- 48 -

Similar
Case

Databases

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Search Engines / Information Retrieval vs.

CBR (I)

Search Engine

CBR as an alternative for traditional information

retrieval systems:
intelligent search in unstructured documents
possible
Especially: Internet or Intranet
Someone searching will be lead to the
solution/relevant information step by step by selective
questions

CBR
- 49 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Search Engines / Information Retrieval vs.

CBR (II)
Properties
Search Engines

CBR Systems

index the Internet

specific for one application

search for Web sites is possible

search for problem solutions

possible

search is processed by
keywords

search processed by features

no specific know-how present

specific know-how about the

domain used, even necessary

- 50 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

When to Use CBR?

... users have to be supported and advised
... cases can easily be identified and created,
products are simple to describe
... easy maintenance of the case based is desired
... no 100% coverage of the domain is required
... Similarity based retrieval is acceptable fast

CBR technology can be

understood as the fusion of
these concepts whereby the
advantages of knowledgebased systems are linked to
existing data.

- 51 -

Database

Expert
System

CBR

Information
Retrieval

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

The R4-Cycle for Electronic Commerce

The sales process
in the CBR-view
Retrieve:

Initial
demands

Re
t r ie
ve

Re
fin

User
demands

Product
Base

Evaluation

Reuse:
User

Retrieved
demands
product

Knowledge

Re
vis
e

Tested
product

Determine most similar product(s).

Modified
product

Re
us
e

Adapt/configurate the product using

information and knowledge

Revise:
Evaluate the product in the real world.

Refine:
Learn from customer behavior

Offer

- 52 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Use of CBR Concepts in E-C (1)

In a sales context the customer has a demand to be
satisfied. The realization of the demand can be in
achieved basically two ways:
1) Use the CBR approach: Store cases of the form (demand,
product) in a case base and search for a similar demand in the
base if a new demand arises.
2) Try to associate directly a product to a demand without storing
cases.

In the sales context several classification tasks occur

(e.g. classification of customers). Again, there are the two
approaches as above.
When searching a suitable supplier also similarities can
be applied

- 53 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Use of CBR Concepts in E-C (2)

The classical CBR approach:
nearest neighbor search
demand
(customer)

demand from case

(customer from case)

stored

product ?
(class ?)

reuse

- 54 -

product from case

(class from case)

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Use of CBR Concepts in E-C (3)

The extended approach:
demand
(customer)
nearest neighbor search
Requires:
Notion of similarity
between
demand and product
(customer and class)

product from product base

(customer class)

- 55 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Use of CBR Concepts in E-C (4)

The retrieval algorithms developed in CBR can still be
applied.
The special situations may, however, require modifications
or variations of such algorithms.
The solution transformation will play an important role
because selected products often do not satisfy customer
demands without modification.
As a new requirement we will encounter configuration:
There may be only parts of products available in the
product base and for the demanded product one needs a
design from the parts.

- 56 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Use of CBR Concepts in E-C (5)

Problems with the extended approach:
The terminology used in the descriptions of demand and
product (customer and customer class) is often quite
different.
Therefore similarity measures are more difficult to define.
This will be discussed in chapters 9 and 10.

Advantages of the new approach:

There is no case base necessary (which is often not
available);
The basic techniques (e.g. similarity based retrieval, inexact
classification) can still be applied.
The similarity based approach is often superior to standard
information and data based retrieval techniques.

- 57 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Advantages of Using Similarity in E-C

Similarity based retrieval provides always an answer
(e.g. an offered product).
Answers can also be provided for incompletely stated
queries.
Change of user preferences can be reflected by
changed similarity measures.
The number of retrieved answers can be controlled
by selecting the m nearest neighbors.
Answers can be improved using adaptation.

- 58 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern

Summary

CBR is a technique for solving problems based on experience

CBR problem solving involves four phases:

Retrieve,

Reuse,

Revise,

Retain

CBR systems store knowledge in four containers:

Vocabulary, Case Base,
Similarity Concept, Solution Adaptation

Large variety of techniques for:

representing the knowledge, in particular, the cases
realizing the different phases

CBR has several advantages over traditional KBS

The basic techniques of CBR have been extended to the needs of

E-Commerce.

- 59 -

(c) 2000 Dr. Ralph Bergmann and Prof. Dr. Michael M. Richter, Universitt Kaiserslautern