Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-pjpqr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-06-26T21:32:46.040Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Conceptual geometric reasoning by the manipulation of models based on prototypes

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  27 February 2009

K.N. Brown ,
J.H. Sims Williams  and
C.A. McMahon
K.N. Brown
Affiliation:
Department of Engineering Mathematics
J.H. Sims Williams
Affiliation:
Department of Engineering Mathematics
C.A. McMahon
Affiliation:
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Bristol, Queens Building, University Walk, Bristol BS8 ITR, United Kingdom
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

The ability to understand the implications of the geometry of solid objects is an important aspect of intelligent behavior. This paper presents work designed to enable reasoning with relatively loose conceptualizations of geometry. The method operates by comparing target geometry to known geometry, and involves the manipulation of models based upon prototypes. In particular, three techniques of simplification, approximation, and transformation are discussed. Finally, an application of the method to the domain of stress concentration prediction is presented.

Keywords

FeaturesGeometric ReasoningPrototypes
Type
Articles
Information
AI EDAM , Volume 9 , Issue 5 , November 1995 , pp. 367 - 385
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 1995

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

Agin, G.J. (1981). Hierarchical representations of three-dimensional objects using verbal models. IEEE Trans. on Pattern Anal. and Machine Intell. Vol. PAMI-3, No. 2, March, 197–204.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brooks, R.A. (1975). Symbolic reasoning among 3-D models and 2-D images. In The Psychology of Computer Vision, (Winston, P.H., Ed.), pp. 285–349. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Brown, K.N. (1991). Conceptual Geometric Reasoning in Artificial Intelligence and Engineering. Ph.D. Thesis, Department of Engineering Mathematics, University of Bristol.Google Scholar
Brown, K.N., Sims Williams, J.H., Devlukia, J. & McMahon, C.A. (1990). Reasoning with geometry: Predicting stress concentration factors. Artif. Intell. Eng. 5(4), 182–188.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Brown, K.N.Sims Williams, J.H., & McMahon, C.A. (1992). Grammars of features in design. In Artificial Intelligence in Design '92 (Gero, J.S., Ed.), pp. 287–306. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht.Google Scholar
Corner, D.F., Ambler, A.P., & Popplestone, R.J. (1983). Reasoning about spatial relationships derived from A RAPT program for describing assembly by robot. Proc. 8th Int. Joint Conf. on AI, 842–844.Google Scholar
Davis, E. (1988). A logical framework for common sense predictions of solid object behavior. J. Artif. Intell. Eng. 3(3), July, 125–140.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
de Kleer, J. (1979). Multiple representations of knowledge in a mechanics problem solver. Proc. 6th Int. Joint Conf. on AI, 299–304.Google Scholar
Dixon, J.R., Libardi, E.C., Luby, S.C., Vaghul, M., & Simmons, M.K. (1987). Expert systems for mechanical design: Examples of symbolic representations of design geometries. Eng. with Comput. 2, 1–10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Ettinger, G.J. (1988). Large hierarchical object recognition using libraries of parametrized subparts. In Proc. CVPR88 (The Computer Society Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition), IEEE Computer Society Press, 32–41.Google Scholar
Gero, J.S., Maher, M.L. & Zhang, W. (1988). Chunking structural design knowledge as prototypes. In Artificial Intelligence in Engineering: Robotics and Processes, (Gero, J.S., Ed.), pp. 3–21. Elsevier, New York.Google Scholar
Henderson, M.R. (1984). Extraction of Feature Information From 3-Dimensional CAD Data, Ph.D. Thesis, Purdue University.Google Scholar
Jona, M.Y., & Kolodner, J.L. (1992). Reasoning, case-based. In Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence, 2nd ed., (Shapiro, S., Ed.), pp. 1265–1279. Wiley Interscience, New York.Google Scholar
Joscowicz, L. (1987). Shapes and function in mechanical devices. Proc. Am. Assoc. for AI Conf., pp. 611–615.Google Scholar
Joshi, S., & Chang, T.C. (1988). Graph-based heuristics for recognition of machined features from a 3D solid model. CAD 20(2), March, 58–66.Google Scholar
Kolodner, J. (1994). Case based reasoning. Morgan Kaufmann, Los Altos, California.Google Scholar
Kosslyn, S. (1980). Image and mind. Harvard University Press, Cambridge.Google Scholar
Kyprianou, L.K. (1980). Shape Classification in Computer-Aided Design. Ph.D. Thesis, Computer Laboratory, University of Cambridge.Google Scholar
Libardi, E.C., Dixon, J.R., & Simmons, M.K. (1986). Designing with Features: Design and Analysis of Extrusions as an Example, Mechanical Design Automation Laboratory technical report TR 2–86, Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of Massachusetts at Amherst.Google Scholar
Lipson, C. & Juvinall, R.C. (1963). Handbook of stress and strength. MacMillan, New York.Google Scholar
Luby, S.C., Dixon, J.R., & Simmons, M.K. (1986). Designing with features: Creating and using a features data base for evaluation of manufacturability of castings. Proc. ASME Computers in Engineering Conference, Chicago.Google Scholar
McDermott, D.V. (1980). A theory of metric spatial inference. Proc. Am. Assoc. for AI Conf., 246–248.Google Scholar
McDermott, D.V. (1987). Reasoning, spatial. In Encyclopedia of Artificial Intelligence, (Shapiro, S., Ed.), pp. 863–870. Wiley Interscience, New York.Google Scholar
Minsky, M. (1975). A framework for representing knowledge. In The Psychology of Computer Vision, (Winston, P.H., Ed.), pp. 211–277. McGraw-Hill, New York.Google Scholar
Murthy, S.S. & Addanki, S. (1987). PROMPT: An innovative design tool. Proceedings Am. Assoc. for AI Conf., 637–642.Google Scholar
Nevatia, R., & Binford, T.O. (1973). Structured descriptions of complex objects. Proc. 3rd Int. Joint Conf. on AI, 641–47.Google Scholar
Novak, G.S. (1977). Representation of knowledge in a program for solving physics problems. Proc. 5th Int. Joint Conf. on AI, 286–291.Google Scholar
Peterson, R. (1974). Stress concentration factors. Wiley-Interscience, New York.Google Scholar
Pylyshyn, Z.W. (1973). What the mind's eye tells the mind's brain. Psychol. Bull. 80, 1–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Requicha, A.A.G. (1980). Representations for rigid solids: Theory, methods and systems. Compu. Surveys. 12(4), December, 437–464.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rosen, D.W. & Peters, T.J. (1992). Topological properties that model feature-based representation conversions within concurrent engineering. Res. Eng. Des. 4(4), 147–158.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Schank, R.C. (1982). Dynamics memory. Cambridge University Press, New York.Google Scholar
Shah, J.J. (1988). Feature transformations between application specific feature spaces. Computer-Aided Eng. J., December, 247–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Shah, J.J. (1989). Philosophical development of form feature concept. Preprints: NSF Eng. Des. Res. Conf., pp. 317–332. College of Engineering, University of Massachusetts.Google Scholar
Shah, J.J. & Bhatnagar, A.S. (1989). Group technology classification from feature-based geometric models. Manufact. Rev. 2(3), September, 204–213.Google Scholar
Shah, J.J., & Rogers, M.T. (1988). Expert form feature modeling Shell. CAD. 20(9), November, 515–524.Google Scholar
Stanfill, C. (1983). The decomposition of a large domain: Reasoning about machines. Proc. Am. Assoc. for AI Conf., 387–390.Google Scholar
Stanfill, C. (1985). MACK, a program which deduces the behavior of machines from their forms. SIGART Newsletter, No. 93, July, 12–16.Google Scholar
Tezza, D. & Trucco, E. (1988). Functional reasoning for flexible robots. In Artificial Intelligence in Engineering: Robotics and Processes, (Gero, J.S., Ed.), pp. 3–19. Elsevier, New York.Google Scholar
Waltz, D.L. & Boggess, L. (1979). Visual analog representations for natural language understanding. Proc. 6th Int. Joint Conf. on AI, 926–934.Google Scholar
Winston, P.H.Binford, T.O., Katz, B., & Lowry, M. (1983). Learning physical descriptions from functional definitions, examples and precedents. Proc. Am. Assoc. for AI Conf., 433–439.Google Scholar