Structure, behavior, and function of complex systems: The structure, behavior, and function modeling language

Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing: AIEDAM

Volumn 23, Issue 1, 2009, Pages 23-35

  Goel, Ashok K ^a   Rugaber, Spencer ^a   Vattam, Swaroop ^a  

^a Georgia Institute of Technology   (United States)

Author keywords

Behavior; Function; Ontology; Structure; Teleology

Indexed keywords

AUTOMATED DESIGN; BEHAVIOR; COMPLEX SYSTEMS; COMPUTER PROGRAM; ENGINEERED SYSTEMS; ENGINEERING DESIGN; ENGINEERING SYSTEMS; EXPRESSIVE POWER; FUNCTION MODELING; FUNCTIONAL REPRESENTATION; INTERACTIVE MODELS; PROGRAMMING LANGUAGE; STRUCTURE; TELEOLOGY;

COMPUTER SIMULATION LANGUAGES; LARGE SCALE SYSTEMS; LINGUISTICS; MODELS; ONTOLOGY; PROBLEM ORIENTED LANGUAGES; PROBLEM SOLVING;

MATHEMATICAL MODELS;

EID: 68349157177     PISSN: 08900604     EISSN: 14691760     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1017/S0890060409000080     Document Type: Article

References (46)

1. Anthony, L., Regli, W., John, J., & Lombeyda, S. (2001). An approach to capturing structure, behavior and function of artifacts in CAD. Journal of Computing and Information Science in Engineering 1(2), 186-192.
2. Bhatta, S., & Goel, A. (1994). Model-based discovery of physical principles from design experiences. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 8(2), 113-123.
3. Bhatta, S., & Goel, A. (1997). Learning generic mechanisms for innovative design adaptation. Journal of Learning Sciences 6(4), 367-396.
4. Buckley, B. (2000). Interactive multimedia and model-based learning in science education. International Journal of Science Education 22, 895-935.
5. Bunge, M. (1977). Treatise on Basic Philosophy. Volume 3: Ontology I: The Furniture of the World. Berlin: Springer.
6. Bylander, T. (1991). A theory of consolidation for reasoning about devices. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 35, 467-489.
7. Chakrabarti, A., & Bligh, T. (1996). Approach to functional synthesis of mechanical design concepts: theory, applications, and emerging research issues. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 10(4), 313-331.
8. Chandrasekaran, B. (1994). Functional representation: a brief historical perspective. Applied Artificial Intelligence 8(2), 173-197.
9. Chandrasekaran, B., Goel, A., & Iwasaki, Y. (1993). Functional representation as a basis for design rationale. IEEE Computer 26(1), 48-56.
10. Chandrasekaran, B., & Josephson, J. (2000). Function in device representation. Engineering with Computers 16, 162-177.
11. Clement, J. (1989). Learning via model construction and criticism: protocol evidence on sources on creativity in science. In Handbook of Creativity: Assessment, Theory and Research (Glover, J.A., Ronning, R.R., & Reynolds, C.R., Eds.), pp. 341-381. New York: Plenum.
12. Clement, J. (2000). Model-based learning as a key research area in science education. International Journal of Science Education 22, 1041-1053.
13. Erden, M., Komoto, H., van Beek, T., D'Amelio, V., Echavarria, E., & Tomi-yama, T. (2008). A review of function modeling: approaches and applications. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 22(2), 147-169.
14. Gero, J. (1990). Design prototypes: a knowledge representation schema for design. AI Magazine 11(4), 26-36.
15. Gero, J.S., Tham, K.W., & Lee, H.S. (1992). Behavior: a link between function and structure in design. In Intelligent Computer Aided Design (Brown, D.C., Waldron, M.B., & Yoshikawa, H., Eds.), pp. 193-225. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
16. Goel,A.(1992). Representationofdesign functionsinexperience-based design. In Intelligent Computer Aided Design (Brown, D.C., Waldron, M.B., & Yoshikawa, H., Eds.), pp. 283-308. Amsterdam: North-Holland.
17. Goel, A., & Bhatta, S. (2004). Design patterns: a unit of analogical transfer in creative design. Advanced Engineering Informatics 18(2), 85-94.
18. Goel, A., Bhatta, S., & Stroulia, E. (1997). Kritik: an early case-based design system. In Issues and Applications of Case-Based Reasoning in Design (Maher, M., & Pu, P., Eds.), pp. 87-132. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
19. Goel, A., & Chandrasekaran, B. (1989). Functional representation of designs and redesign problem solving. Proc. 11th Int. Joint Conf. Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-89), pp. 1388-1394. Los Altos, CA: Morgan Kaufmann.
20. Goel, A., & Chandrasekaran, B. (1992). Case-based design: a task analysis. In Artificial Intelligence Approaches to Engineering Design. Volume II: Innovative Design (Tong, C., & Sriram, D., Eds.), pp. 165-184. San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
21. Goel, A., Gomez, A., Grue, N., Murdock, W., Recker, M., & Govindaraj, T. (1996). Towards design learning environments - explaining how devices work. Proc. Int. Conf. Intelligent Tutoring Systems, Montreal.
22. Goel, A., & Murdock, J. (1996). Meta-cases: explaining case-based reasoning. In Advances in Case-Based Reasoning. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence (Smith, I., & Faltings, B., Eds.), Vol. 1168. Berlin: Springer-Verlag.
23. Griffith, T., Nersessian, N., & Goel, A. (2000). Function-follows- form transformations in scientific problem solving. Proc. 22nd Annual Conf. Cognitive Science Society, pp. 196-210. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
24. Hmelo, C., Holton, D., & Kolodner, J. (2000). Designing to learn about complex systems. Journal of the Learning Sciences 9(3), 247-298.
25. Hmelo-Silver, C., Jordan, R., Liu, L., Gray, S., Demeter, M., Rugaber, S., Vattam, S., & Goel, A. (2008). Focusing on function: thinking below the surface of complex natural systems. Science Scope 27-35.
26. Hmelo-Silver, C., & Pfeffer, M. (2004). Comparing expert and novice understanding of a complex systems from the perspectives of structures, behaviors and functions. Cognitive Science 28, 127-138.
27. International Organization for Standardization and International Electro-technical Commission. (1996). Information Technology-Syntactic Metalanguage-Extended BNF, 1st ed. ISO Rep. 1996-l 2-l 5, ISO/IEC 14977: 1996(E). Accessed at http://standards.iso.org/ittf/PubliclyAvailableStandards/ s026153-ISO-IEC-14977-1996(E).zip
28. Kitamura, Y., Kashiwase, M., Fuse, M., & Mizoguchi, R. (2004). Deployment of an ontological framework of functional design knowledge. Advanced Engineering Informatics 18(2), 115-127.
29. Nosek, J., & Roth, I. (1990). A comparison of formal knowledge representation schemes as communication tools: predicate logic vs. semantic network. International Journal of Man-Machine Studies 33, 227-239.
30. Novak, J., & Gowin, D. (1984). Learning How to Learn. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
31. Prabhakar, S., & Goel, A. (1998). Functional modeling for enabling adaptive design of devices for new environments. Artificial Intelligence in Engineering 12, 417-444.
32. Rasmussen, J. (1985). The role of hierarchical knowledge representation in decision making and system management. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 15, 234-243.
33. Rasmussen, J., Pejterson, A., & Goodstein, L. (1994). Cognitive Systems Engineering. New York: Wiley.
34. Sasajima, M., Kitamura, Y., Ikeda, M., & Mizoguchi, R. (1995). FBRL: a function and behavior representation language. Proc. IJCAI-95, pp. 1830-1836.
35. Sembugamoorthy, V., & Chandrasekaran, B. (1986). Functional representation of devices and compilation of diagnostic problem-solving systems. In Experience, Memory, and Reasoning (Kolodner, J.L., & Riesbeck, C.K., Eds.), pp. 47-73. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
36. Simon, H. (1996). Sciences of the Artificial, 3rd ed. Boston: MIT Press.
37. Stone, R., & Wood, K. (2000). Development of a functional basis for design. Journal of Mechanical Design 122(4), 359-370.
38. Szykman, S., Racz, J., Bochenek, C., & Sriram, R. (2000). A web-based system for design artifact modeling. Design Studies 21(2), 145-164.
39. Szykman, S., Sriram, R., Bochenek, C., Racz, J., & Senfaute, J. (2000). Design repositories: engineering design's new knowledge base. IEEE Intelligent Systems 15(3), 48-55.
40. Umeda, Y., Takeda, H., Tomiyama, T., & Yoshikawa, H. (1990). Function, behavior, and structure. Proc. AIENG '90 Applications of AI in Engineering (pp. 177-193). Southerton/Berlin: Computational Mechanics Publications/Springer-Verlag.
41. Umeda, Y., Ishii, M., Yoshioka, M., Shimomura, Y., & Tomiyama, T. (1996). Supporting conceptual design based on the function-behavior- state modeler. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 10, 275-288.
42. Umeda, Y., & Tomiyama, T. (1997). Functional reasoning in design. IEEE Expert 12(2), 42-48.
43. Vattam, S., Helms, M., & Goel, A. (2008). Compound analogical design: interaction between problem decomposition and analogical transfer in biologically inspired design. Proc. Third Int. Conf. Design Computing and Cognition (Gero, J., & Goel, A., Eds.), pp. 377-396. Berlin: Springer.
44. Wilensky, U. (1999). NetLogo Itself: 1999. Evanston, IL: Northwestern University, Center for Connected Learning and Computer-Based Modeling. Accessed at http://ccl.northwestern.edu/netlogo/.
45. Yaner, P., & Goel, A. (2007). Understanding drawings by compositional analogy. Proc. 20th Int. Joint Conf. Artificial Intelligence (IJCAI-07), pp. 1131-1137, Hyderabad, India.
46. Yaner, P., & Goel, A. (2008). Analogical recognition of shape and structure in design drawings. Artificial Intelligence for Engineering Design, Analysis and Manufacturing 22(2), 117-128.