Conversion in Progress
Chapter 7
Potential Research Directions
As chapter six attests, some limited research efforts and a few "real
world" applications have sought to synergize DS and AI techniques. Considerably
more however can be done. This chapter looks in detail at what can be done
to promote further synergism, and also looks at some additional, yet more
practical ways that AI can be applied in DM.Promoting Further Synergism
Five ways in which the AI, DS, and combined disciplines can be better served
are outlined below.An understanding of commonality/extensionality should
be promoted. As it now appears, considerable duplication of research efforts
exist between the DS and AI research communities. Additionally many of
the research techniques being developed duplicate processes or produce
results already thoroughly studied or outlined in other disciplines. More
coordinated planning by the government agencies promoting this research
as well as cooperative efforts by the major professional societies should
be encouraged. This would include such efforts as joint meetings, or symposia
devoted to technique comparison.Better modeling environments should be
created and standardized. This need seems to be one expressed by a number
of technology forecasters. For example in the July-August 1988 issue of
Operations Research, the Committee On the Next Decade in Operations Research
(CONDOR) proposed 16 areas targeted for research in the 90's. Eight of
the sixteen directly addressed improved modeling environments. These suggestions
included "Incorporation of intelligent user interaction facilities into
a model", "Extension of the concept of a model to involve inference", and
"Embedding learning capabilities in models and in systems that manage models."
Fordyce et al in INTERFACES, spelled out needs in a similar manner. Their
focus was upon improving our ability to; 1) manufacture situations requiring
models based on heuristics, 2) deliver guidelines delivered from models,
3) imbed methods for choosing and formulating an appropriate model, and
4) interpret model results. A reasonable, practical way better environments
could be aided would be through the search for a Goal, Criteria & Alternatives.
Various reasoning methods could be used to first help establish a model.
Some current software packages (e.g. Decision Maker[]) use a process approach
toward eliciting & structuring the problem. However there is no formal
inherent guidance for unfolding specific problem types, such as those covered
in Chapter 2. Nor is there any method for guiding the user into discovery
of similar "real world" models, i.e. analogical reasoning. At the same
time search algorithms and heuristics could be used for the discovery,
access and organization of both internal and external data and/or knowledge
sources.A greater emphasis on the qualitative aspects of problem solving
and decision making should be encouraged. A firm definition for qualitative
remains elusive. Nonetheless we can establish a baseline which includes
the myriad of attributes or qualities surrounding an object or event, and
the non-numerical relationships among those attributes. Karl Weick at the
University of Texas has formulated 66 primary "Thinking Strategies" which
focus upon approaches toward problem solving. These strategies could be
thought of as a list of possible relationships among objects or events.
A portion of two of these strategies are presented below:
Strategies for:
Involvement Information
Manipulation
Committ Check
Defer Diagram
Hold Back Display
Leap In Organize
In the same manner, the thrust of the CYC project discussed in Chapter
4 is to include "reasonable" approaches toward understanding the relationships
among objects, events and their attributes. Other efforts generally classified
in the AI discipline are now enabling progress in this area. These include
object oriented systems and qualitative physics. A practical implementation
in the qualitative area is the use of knowledge based subject matter "front
ends" and deamons in systems. Extending the reasoning above, once recognizing
entry into a specific domain or within a certain topical area, KBSs could
be utilized to help guide the DM through the peculiarities of that area.
E.G. for a budget decision, guidance could be made available concerning
organizational policy & regulations. Or detailed information on cost
areas such as CBA, types of costs, and cost measurement would be readily
apparent. Yet another area ripe for practical implmentation is Conflict
Recognition (not resolution) in subject matter content. A capability is
needed to identify areas where events are being considered in a mutually
exclusive sense when they are in fact codependent, or perhaps inconsistent
in a rational sense. Examples:ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿³With
regard to size: ³ ³ A is greater than B ³³ B is greater
than C ³³ C is greater than A < cannot be true ³³
if 1 & 2 are true ³ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
ÚÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄ¿
³Proposal: ³ ³ ³³Lets reduce the deficit by decreasing
the tax rate ³ ³to 10 %, while increasing spending by 25%. ³ÀÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÄÙ
A growing area created for handling these type of problems in AI is called
Truth Maintenance Systems (TMS). Goals of TMSs include recognizing problems
such as these encompassing contradiction, redundancy, and circular reasoning.Consistency
measures already present in some software such as Expert Choice should
be propagated. Often the best that can be done for dealing with more qualitative
attributes of problems is to simply recognize the complexity of many objects
and situations and to plan for the unexpected within sophisticated modeling
environments. Fortunately this can be aided considerably by providing more
flexible and powerful capabilities to these environments.Practical methods
for interfacing should be implemented. Immediate improvement in creating
effective, combined DS/AI environments could be seen by creating better
transitional forms for data, objects, and their attributes, whether quantiative
or qualitative. While de facto standards of some types now exist on personal
computers, they are limited. These include standards for worksheets such
as Lotus 1-2-3's .WK1 files, for databases through dBase III+'s .DBF files,
and a common graphics format via .TIF files. Other efforts which should
be encouraged include the move towards standards in dynamic data exchange
(DDE), as well as efforts within IEEE in its AI Standards Committee. M.
Geneserath of Stanford University has created a standard for interfacing
between knowledge bases called GIK. Hopefully this standard will also bear
fruit.The idea of "Intelligent Matching" of problems and decisions to techniques
for resolution should be expanded. As discussed in Chapter 3, problem solvers
and decision makers now tend to frame problems and to solve them based
upon their experience, whether valid or not. Additionally as discussed
in Chapter 6, problem solvers also become involved in methodoliatry, solving
all problems using one approach. Intelligent matching, the use of the computer
to help select a method (or methods) and to guide the user through its
use would go a long way toward rectifying these problems with current decision
making. Intelligent matching uses attributes of a problem to suggest methods
for resolution, along with details on how these can be implemented. User's
would be "trained" in the method as they proceed through its implementation.
Andriole[] has suggested a task/user/organization 3D matrix for guiding
selection of a technique. Applegate [] has suggested defining problems
along this same general line using task/data/situation/implementation characteristics.
She has implemented a system, labeled "Method Master" in an object oriented
environment on the Apple MacIntosh. Her approach extends a decision decomposition
protocol proposed by Zachary []. Banerjee and Basu have proposed an AI
frame based structure for adding intelligence to the matching process.
And finally Juell, Nygard, and Nagesh have suggested a similar approach
using neural network technology as the basis for selection of a method.
Paper Summary and Conclusions
The early part of this paper focused upon definitions for problems,
decision making, and modeling. This was expanded using a cognitive basis
with the purpose of pointing out the limitations and biases of human decision
making. Technologies in the decision sciences and artificial intelligence
areas were then introduced with the general purpose of demonstrating which
weaknesses they supported and which biases they mitigated. The power gained
by combining many of these techniques was presented. At the same time overlap
and duplication in the thrust of the AI and DS disciplines suggest a problem
in research directions. Finally five areas where improvement in AI and
DS models can be realized was detailed. As a bottom line synergism between
DS and AI can be improved. Professional level policy adjustments and the
incorporation of AI and DS into DM through smoother transitional means
are two paths to ensure this progress.