An expert system on design of liquid-retaining structures with blackboard architecture

The design of liquid-retaining structures involves many decisions to be made by the designer based on rules of thumb, heuristics, judgement, codes of practice and previous experience. Structural design problems are often ill structured and there is a need to develop programming environments that can incorporate engineering judgement along with algorithmic tools. Recent developments in artificial intelligence have made it possible to develop an expert system that can provide expert advice to the user in the selection of design criteria and design parameters. This paper introduces the development of an expert system in the design of liquid-retaining structures using blackboard architecture. An expert system shell, Visual Rule Studio, is employed to facilitate the development of this prototype system. It is a coupled system combining symbolic processing with traditional numerical processing. The expert system developed is based on British Standards Code of Practice BS8007. Explanations are made to assist inexperienced designers or civil engineering students to learn how to design liquid-retaining structures effectively and sustainably in their design practices. The use of this expert system in disseminating heuristic knowledge and experience to practitioners and engineering students is discussed.

A knowledge-based system for liquid retaining structure design with blackboard architecture

Owing to the high degree of vulnerability of liquid retaining structures to corrosion problems, there are stringent requirements in its design against cracking. In this paper, a prototype knowledge-based system is developed and implemented for the design of liquid retaining structures based on the blackboard architecture. A commercially available expert system shell VISUAL RULE STUDIO working as an ActiveX Designer under the VISUAL BASIC programming environment is employed. Hybrid knowledge representation approach with production rules and procedural methods under object-oriented programming are used to represent the engineering heuristics and design knowledge of this domain. It is demonstrated that the blackboard architecture is capable of integrating different knowledge together in an effective manner. The system is tailored to give advice to users regarding preliminary design, loading specification and optimized configuration selection of this type of structure. An example of application is given to illustrate the capabilities of the prototype system in transferring knowledge on liquid retaining structure to novice engineers. (C) 2004 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Hybrid knowledge representation in a blackboard KBS for liquid retaining structure design

This paper highlights the importance of design expertise, for designing liquid retaining structures, including subjective judgments and professional experience. Design of liquid retaining structures has special features different from the others. Being more vulnerable to corrosion problem, they have stringent requirements against serviceability limit state of crack. It is the premise of the study to transferring expert knowledge in a computerized blackboard system. Hybrid knowledge representation schemes, including production rules, object-oriented programming, and procedural methods, are employed to express engineering heuristics and standard design knowledge during the development of the knowledge-based system (KBS) for design of liquid retaining structures. This approach renders it possible to take advantages of the characteristics of each method. The system can provide the user with advice on preliminary design, loading specification, optimized configuration selection and detailed design analysis of liquid retaining structure. It would be beneficial to the field of retaining structure design by focusing on the acquisition and organization of expert knowledge through the development of recent artificial intelligence technology. (C) 2003 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Capturing expert knowledge for threatened species assessments: a case study using NatureServe conservation status ranks

Assessments for assigning the conservation status of threatened species that are based purely on subjective judgements become problematic because assessments can be influenced by hidden assumptions, personal biases and perceptions of risks, making the assessment process difficult to repeat. This can result in inconsistent assessments and misclassifications, which can lead to a lack of confidence in species assessments. It is almost impossible to Understand an expert's logic or visualise the underlying reasoning behind the many hidden assumptions used throughout the assessment process. In this paper, we formalise the decision making process of experts, by capturing their logical ordering of information, their assumptions and reasoning, and transferring them into a set of decisions rules. We illustrate this through the process used to evaluate the conservation status of species under the NatureServe system (Master, 1991). NatureServe status assessments have been used for over two decades to set conservation priorities for threatened species throughout North America. We develop a conditional point-scoring method, to reflect the current subjective process. In two test comparisons, 77% of species' assessments using the explicit NatureServe method matched the qualitative assessments done subjectively by NatureServe staff. Of those that differed, no rank varied by more than one rank level under the two methods. In general, the explicit NatureServe method tended to be more precautionary than the subjective assessments. The rank differences that emerged from the comparisons may be due, at least in part, to the flexibility of the qualitative system, which allows different factors to be weighted on a species-by-species basis according to expert judgement. The method outlined in this study is the first documented attempt to explicitly define a transparent process for weighting and combining factors under the NatureServe system. The process of eliciting expert knowledge identifies how information is combined and highlights any inconsistent logic that may not be obvious in Subjective decisions. The method provides a repeatable, transparent, and explicit benchmark for feedback, further development, and improvement. (C) 2004 Elsevier SAS. All rights reserved.

A cognitive genetic algorithm for power distribution system planning

Power systems are large scale nonlinear systems with high complexity. Various optimization techniques and expert systems have been used in power system planning. However, there are always some factors that cannot be quantified, modeled, or even expressed by expert systems. Moreover, such planning problems are often large scale optimization problems. Although computational algorithms that are capable of handling large dimensional problems can be used, the computational costs are still very high. To solve these problems, in this paper, investigation is made to explore the efficiency and effectiveness of combining mathematic algorithms with human intelligence. It had been discovered that humans can join the decision making progresses by cognitive feedback. Based on cognitive feedback and genetic algorithm, a new algorithm called cognitive genetic algorithm is presented. This algorithm can clarify and extract human's cognition. As an important application of this cognitive genetic algorithm, a practical decision method for power distribution system planning is proposed. By using this decision method, the optimal results that satisfy human expertise can be obtained and the limitations of human experts can be minimized in the mean time.

A framework for systematically improving occupational therapy expert opinions on work capacity

Aim: To present an evidence-based framework to improve the quality of occupational therapy expert opinions on work capacity for litigation, compensation and insurance purposes. Methods: Grounded theory methodology was used to collect and analyse data from a sample of 31 participants, comprising 19 occupational therapists, 6 medical specialists and 6 lawyers. A focused semistructured interview was completed with each participant. In addition, 20 participants verified the key findings. Results: The framework is contextualised within a medicolegal system requiring increasing expertise. The framework consists of (i) broad professional development strategies and principles, and (ii) specific strategies and principles for improving opinions through reporting and assessment practices. Conclusions: The synthesis of the participants' recommendations provides systematic guidelines for improving occupational therapy expert opinion on work capacity.