Matthias van der Hallen
Drawbacks of the Knowledge Base Paradigm:
Loosely connected components of domain Knowledge
(Algemeen Reglement op Elektrische Installaties)
Thesis making an application helping electricians or homeowners to configure law-abiding installations
(Algemeen Reglement op Elektrische Installaties)
Knowledge of AREI comes in separate, loosely linked parts:
(Roughly related to the different AREI chapters)
(Algemeen Reglement op Elektrische Installaties)
Passed rooms | Other circuits | Installed devices | |
---|---|---|---|
Circuit Routing | yes | yes | no* |
Power Analysis | no | no | yes |
(Algemeen Reglement op Elektrische Installaties)
An electrician would like to focus only on power analysis of a specific circuit
A solver potentially performs better when the problem is split and recombined later
Even modellers might prefer the modellin
Even modellers might prefer the modellin
In the notary application, we are zooming in from more general law to one specific dwelling.
In the lock scheduling problem, assigning ships a place within a lock is zooming in on a lock.
Create a collection or even hierarchy of interlinked (smaller) knowledge kernels within a knowledge base
Relations between the kernels through their respective vocabularies
Circuit Routing
Power Analysis
KBS
projections
A projection can 'simplify' a vocabulary w.r.t. a context: a tuple of constants.
Projecting from circuit routing to power analysis:
Inductive definitions can help perform projections
{
! t3 t4 : ProjectedPredicate(t3,t4) <- Predicate1(c1,c2,t3,t4).
Proposition <- Predicate2(c1).
! t2 : ProjectedFunction=x <- Function1(c1,t2)=x.
Constant=x <- Function2(c2)=x.
! t1 t2 : Predicate(t1,t2) <- Function3(t1,t2)=c2.
}
But we want a structured and declarative way of specifying these and more involved relations between vocabularies
Master thesis topics