Knowledge Acquisition and Representation for High-Performance Building Design: A Review for Defining Requirements for Developing a Design Expert System

Abstract

New functions and requirements of high performance building (HPB) being added and several regulations and certification conditions being reinforced steadily make it harder for designers to decide HPB designs alone. Although many designers wish to rely on HPB consultants for advice, not all projects can afford consultants. We expect that, in the near future, computer aids such as design expert systems can help designers by providing the role of HPB consultants. The effectiveness and success or failure of the solution offered by the expert system must be affected by the quality, systemic structure, resilience, and applicability of expert knowledge. This study aims to set the problem definition and category required for existing HPB designs, and to find the knowledge acquisition and representation methods that are the most suitable to the design expert system based on the literature review. The HPB design literature from the past 10 years revealed that the greatest features of knowledge acquisition and representation are the increasing proportion of computer-based data analytics using machine learning algorithms, whereas rules, frames, and cognitive maps that are derived from heuristics are conventional representation formalisms of traditional expert systems. Moreover, data analytics are applied to not only literally raw data from observations and measurement, but also discrete processed data as the results of simulations or composite rules in order to derive latent rule, hidden pattern, and trends. Furthermore, there is a clear trend that designers prefer the method that decision support tools propose a solution directly as optimizer does. This is due to the lack of resources and time for designers to execute performance evaluation and analysis of alternatives by themselves, even if they have sufficient experience on the HPB. However, because the risk and responsibility for the final design should be taken by designers solely, they are afraid of convenient black box decision making provided by machines. If the process of using the primary knowledge in which frame to reach the solution and how the solution is derived are transparently open to the designers, the solution made by the design expert system will be able to obtain more trust from designers. This transparent decision support process would comply with the requirement specified in a recent design study that designers prefer flexible design environments that give more creative control and freedom over design options, when compared to an automated optimization approach.

Deep Learning-Based Prognostics and Health Management Model for Pilot-Operated Cryogenic Safety Valves

“… Knowledge-based approach: Knowledge-based models rely on comparing predefined failure libraries and observed situations to provide intuitive results based on engineering experience and historical events [ 13 ]. Constructing such models is a challenging task and mostly relies on the expertise of domain experts [ 14 ]. However, recent research has been exploring the integration of knowledge-based models with other approaches through hybrid approaches to add flexibility to the modeling process, especially in complex systems.…”

Diagnosis of Maths Teaching Efficacy Beliefs Using Expert System

“…An expert knows something deeply in a field (Syahputri, Yetri, & Sari, 2022), and has experience in the field (Nurholis, Fauziah, & Natashia, 2021). Requirements needed in building an expert system based on knowledge acquisition, knowledge representation and decision support include heuristics as a source of designing knowledge, expert heuristics as a source of validation in creating designs, the structure of knowledge as a source that describes the dimension as a frame of content as a model, implementation of knowledge as a source to avoid potential and constant bias, agent-based systems and optimization, and create design alternatives (Choi & Kim, 2021).…”

Costless Expert Systems Development and Re-engineering

“…Given this situation and the fact that adopting code-based approaches such as Pyke, CLIPS, Prolog, Lisp, and other platforms for building ESs remains critical and costly, improvement is essential [8]. For instance, one reason for the interruption of some big systems (i.e., Garvan and IBM) is the high cost of maintenance and reengineering [9].…”