CogSketch: Sketch understanding for cognitive science research and for education

Topics in Cognitive Science

Volumn 3, Issue 4, 2011, Pages 648-666

  Forbus, Kenneth ^a   Usher, Jeffrey ^a   Lovett, Andrew ^a   Lockwood, Kate ^a   Wetzel, Jon ^a  

^a NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Analogy; Cognitive simulation; Qualitative reasoning; Sketch understanding; Spatial cognition; Spatial reasoning; Visual reasoning

Indexed keywords

AUDIOVISUAL AID; COMPREHENSION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONCEPT FORMATION; DEPTH PERCEPTION; DEVICES; HUMAN; PATTERN RECOGNITION; PHYSIOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL MODEL; PSYCHOLOGY; STANDARDS;

AUDIOVISUAL AIDS; COGNITIVE SCIENCE; COMPREHENSION; COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONCEPT FORMATION; HUMANS; MODELS, PSYCHOLOGICAL; PATTERN RECOGNITION, VISUAL; SPACE PERCEPTION;

EID: 80053903109     PISSN: 17568757     EISSN: 17568765     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1111/j.1756-8765.2011.01149.x     Document Type: Article

References (61)

1. Adler, A., & Davis, R. (2004). Speech and sketching for multimodal design. Proceedings of the 9th International Conference on Intelligent User Interfaces, Island of Madeira, Portugal.
2. Aleven, V., Sewall, J., McLaren, B. M., & Koedinger, K. R. (2006). Rapid authoring of intelligent tutors for real-world and experimental use. In Kinshuk, R. Koper, P. Kommers, P. Kirschner, D. G. Sampson, & W. Didderen (Eds.), Proceedings of the 6th IEEE International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies (ICALT 2006) (pp. 847-851). Los Alamitos, CA: IEEE Computer Society.
3. Alvarado, C., Oltmans, M., & Davis, R. (2002). A framework for multi-domain sketch recognition. Proceedings of AAAI Spring Symposium on Sketch Understanding, Palo Alto, CA.
4. Barker, K., Blythe, J., Borchardt, G., Chaudhri, V., Clark, P., Cohen, P., Fitzgerald, J., Forbus, K., Gil, Y., Katz, B., Kim, J., King, G., Mishra, S., Morrison, C., Murray, K., Otstott, C., Porter, B., Schrag, R., Uribe, T., Usher, J., & Yeh, P. (2003). A knowledge acquisition tool for course of action analysis. Proceedings of the Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, Acapulco, Mexico.
5. Blair, K., Schwartz, D., Biswas, G., & Leelawong, K. (2007). Pedagogical agents for learning by teaching: Teachable agents. Education Technology, 47, 56-61.
6. Bohan, A., & O'Donoghue, D. (2000). LUDI: A model for geometric analogies using attribute matching. Proceedings of the 11th Artificial Intelligence and Cognitive Science Conference (AICS-2000), Galway, Ireland.
7. Bradley, E. (1995). Autonomous exploration and control of chaotic systems. Cybernetics and Systems, 26, 299-319.
8. Carpenter, P. A., Just, M. A., & Shell, P. (1990). What one intelligence test measures: A theoretical account of the processing in the Raven Progressive Matrices test. Psychological Review, 97(3), 404-431.
9. Cheng, P. C.-H., & Rojas-Anaya, H. (2008). Measuring mathematic formula writing competence: An application of graphical protocol analysis. In B. C. Love, K. McRae, & V. M. Sloutsky (Eds.), Proceedings of the Thirtieth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (pp. 869-874). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
10. Chi, M., Feltovich, P., & Glaser, R. (1981). Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science, 5, 121-152.
11. Cohn, A. (1996) Calculi for qualitative spatial reasoning. In J. Calmet, J. A. Campbell, & J. Pfalzgraph (Eds.), Artificial Intelligence and Symbolic Mathematical Computation, LNCS 1138 (pp. 124-143). New York: Springer Verlag.
12. Corbett, A. T., & Anderson, J. R. (2001). Locus of feedback control in computer-based tutoring: Impact on learning rate, achievement and attitudes. Proceedings of ACM CHI'2001 Conference on Human Factors in Computing Systems, Seattle, WA, 245-252.
13. Coventry, K. R., Prat-Sala, M., & Richards, L. V. (2001). The interplay between geometry and function in the comprehension of 'over', 'under', 'above', and 'below'. Journal of Memory and Language, 44, 376-398.
14. Dehaene, S., Izard, V., Pica, P., & Spelke, E. (2006). Core knowledge of geometry in an Amazonian Indigene Group. Science, 311, 381-384.
15. Edwards, G., & Moulin, B. (1998). Toward the simulation of spatial mental images using the Voronoi model. In P. Olivier & K. P. Gapp (Eds.), Representation and processing of spatial expressions (pp. 163-184). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA Press.
16. Evans, T. (1968). A program for the solution of geometric-analogy intelligence test questions. In M. Minsky (Ed.), Semantic information processing (pp. 271-353). Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
17. Falkenhainer, B., Forbus, K., & Gentner, D. (1989). The Structure-Mapping Engine: Algorithm and examples. Artificial Intelligence, 41, 1-63.
18. Feist, M. I., & Gentner, D. (1998). On plates, bowls, and dishes: Factors in the use of English 'in' and 'on'. Proceedings of the 20th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Madison, WI.
19. Ferguson, R., Aminoff, A., & Gentner, D. (1996). Modeling qualitative differences in symmetry judgments. Proceedings of CogSci96, La Jolla, CA.
20. Forbus, K. (1983). Qualitative reasoning about space and motion. In D. Gentner & A. Stevens (Eds.), Mental models (pp. 53-74). Hillsdale, NJ: LEA associates, Inc.
21. Forbus, K. (2007). Qualitative modeling. In F. Harmelen, V. Lifschitz, & B. Porter (Eds.), Handbook of knowledge representation (pp. 361-394). New York: Elsevier.
22. Forbus, K., & de Kleer, J. (1993). Building problem solvers. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
23. Forbus, K., Ferguson, R., & Usher, J. (2001) Towards a computational model of sketching. Proceedings of Intelligent User Interfaces, Santa Fe, NM, pp. 77-83.
24. Forbus, K., Gentner, D., & Law, K. (1995). MAC/FAC: A model of Similarity-based Retrieval. Cognitive Science, 19(2), 141-205.
25. Forbus, K., Mostek, T., & Ferguson, R. (2002) An analogy ontology for integrating analogical processing and first-principles reasoning. Proceedings of IAAI-02, Edmonton, AB.
26. Forbus, K., Nielsen, P., & Faltings, B. (1991). Qualitative spatial reasoning: The CLOCK Project. Artificial Intelligence 51(1-3), 417-471.
27. Forbus, K., & Oblinger, D. (1990). Making SME greedy and pragmatic. Proceedings of the 12th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Cambridge, MA.
28. Forbus, K., Usher, J., & Chapman, V. (2003). Sketching for military courses of action diagrams. Proceedings of IUI'03, Miami, FL.
29. Forbus, K., Usher, J., & Tomai, E. (2005). Analogical learning of visual/conceptual relationships in sketches. Proceedings of AAAI-05, Pittsburgh, PA.
30. Gentner, D. (1983). Structure-mapping: A theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science, 7, 155-170.
31. Gentner, D., & Bowerman, M. (2009). Why some spatial semantic categories are harder to learn than others: The Typological Prevalence hypothesis. In J. Guo, E. Lieven, S. Ervin-Tripp, N. Budwig, S. Özçaliskan, & K. Nakamura (Eds.), Crosslinguistic approaches to the psychology of language: Research in the tradition of Dan Isaac Slobin (pp. 465-480). New York: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
32. Gross, M. D., & Do, E. (1996). Demonstrating the electronic cocktail napkin: A paper-like interface for early design. ACM Conference on Human Factors (CHI '96), 5-6.
33. Halstead, D., & Forbus, K. (2005). Transforming between propositions and features: Bridging the gap. Proceedings of AAA-05, Pittsburgh, PA.
34. Hoffman, D. D., & Richards, W. (1984). Parts of recognition. Cognition, 18, 65-96.
35. Huang, X., & Zhao, F. (2000). Relation based aggregation: Finding objects in largespatial datasets. Intelligent Data Analysis, 4, 129-147.
36. Huttenlocher, J., Hedges, L. V., & Duncan, S. (1991). Categories and particulars: Prototype effects in estimating location. Psychological Review, 98(3), 352-376.
37. Jee, B., Gentner, D., Forbus, K., Sageman, B., & Uttal, D. (2009). Drawing on experience: Use of sketching to evaluate knowledge of spatial scientific concepts. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Amsterdam, The Netherlands.
38. Joscowicz, L., & Sacks, E. (1991). Computational kinematics. Artificial Intelligence, 51, 381-416.
39. Kim, H. (1993). Qualitative reasoning about fluids and mechanics, Ph.D. dissertation and ILS Technical Report, Northwestern University.
40. Klenk, M., Forbus, K., Tomai, E., Kim, H., & Kyckelhahn, B. (2005). Solving everyday physical reasoning problems by analogy using sketches. Proceedings of 20th National Conference on Artificial Intelligence (AAAI-05), Pittsburgh, PA.
41. Kosslyn, S. M., Chabris, C. F., Marsolek, C. M., & Koenig, O. (1992). Categorical versus coordinate spatial representations: Computational analyses and computer simulations. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Human Perception and Performance, 18, 562-577.
42. Kuehne, S., Forbus, K., Gentner, D., & Quinn, B. (2000). SEQL: Category learning as progressive abstraction using structure mapping. Proceedings of the 22nd Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Philadelphia, PA.
43. Landay, J. A., Hong, J., Klemmer, S., Lin, J., & Newman, M. (2002). Informal PUIs: No recognition required. Proceedings of AAAI Spring Symposium on Sketch Understanding, Palo Alto, CA.
44. Lee, W., De Silva, R., Peterson, E. J., Calfee, R. C., & Stahovich, T. F. (2007). Newton's Pen - A pen-based tutoring system for statics. Proceedings of the Eurographics Workshop on Sketch-Based Interfaces and Modeling, Riverside, CA.
45. Lockwood, K., Lovett, A., & Forbus, K. (2008). Automatic classification of containment and support spatial relations in English and Dutch. Proceedings of Spatial Cognition, Frieburg, Germany.
46. Lovett, A., Forbus, K., & Usher, J. (2007). Analogy with qualitative spatial representations can simulate solving Raven's Progressive Matrices. Proceedings of the 29th Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, Nashville, TN.
47. Lovett, A., Gentner, D., Forbus, K., & Sagi, E. (2009a). Using analogical mapping to simulate time-course phenomena in perceptual similarity. Cognitive Systems Research, 10, 216-228.
48. Lovett, A., Lockwood, K., & Forbus, K. (2008). Modeling cross-cultural performance on the visual oddity task. Proceedings of Spatial Cognition 2008, Freiburg, Germany.
49. Lovett, A., Tomai, E., Forbus, K., & Usher, J. (2009b). Solving geometric analogy problems through two-stage analogical mapping. Cognitive Science, 33(7), 1192-1231.
50. Nielsen, P. E. (1988). A qualitative approach to rigid body mechanics. (Tech. Rep. No. UIUCDCS-R-88-1469; UILU-ENG-88-1775). Urbana, IL: University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, Department of Computer Science.
51. Pittman, J., Smith, I., Cohen, P., Oviatt, S., & Yang, T. (1996). Quickset: A multimodal interface for military simulations. Proceedings of the Sixth Conference on Computer-Generated Forces and Behavioral Representation, Orlando, FL, 217-224.
52. Rasch, R., Kott, A., & Forbus, K. (2002). AI on the battlefield: An experimental exploration. Proceedings of the 14th Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, Edmonton, AB.
53. Raven, J., Raven, J. C., & Court, J. H. (1998). Manual for Raven's Progressive Matrices and Vocabulary Scales: Section 1. General Overview. Oxford, England: Oxford Psychologists Press.
54. Regier, T. (1996). Thehuman semantic potential: Spatial language and constrained connectionism. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.
55. Saund, E., Mahoney, J., Fleet, D., Larner, D., & Lank, E. (2002). Perceptualoganization as a foundation for intelligent sketch editing. Proceedings of AAAI Spring Symposium on Sketch Understanding, Palo Alto, CA, 118-125.
56. Schwering, A., Krumnack, U., Kuehneberger, K., & Gust, H. (2007). Using gestalt principles to compute analogies of geometric figures. Proceedings of the 29th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Nashville, TN.
57. Shepard, R. N., & Cooper, L. A. (1982). Mental images and their transformations. Cambridge: MIT Press.
58. Stahovich, T., Davis, R., & Shrobe, H. (2000). Qualitative rigid-body mechanics. Artificial Intelligence 119(1-2), 19-60.
59. Wetzel, J., & Forbus, K. (2009). Automated critique of sketched mechanisms. Proceedings of the 21st Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, Pasadena, CA.
60. Yin, J., Forbus, K. D., Usher, J., Sageman, B., & Jee, B. (2010) Sketch Worksheets: A Sketch-based Educational Software System. Proceedings of the 22nd Innovative Applications of Artificial Intelligence Conference, Atlanta.
61. Yip, K. (1991). KAM: A System for Intelligently Guiding Numerical Experimentation by Computer. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.