Inducing rules for selecting retaining wall systems

Yau, N J; Yang, J B and Hsieh, T Y (1999) Inducing rules for selecting retaining wall systems. Construction Management and Economics, 17(1), pp. 91-98. ISSN 01446193

Abstract

Rule induction is a paradigm of machine learning that governs how knowledge is acquired from experience. This paradigm not only classifies existing data into logical sets, but also expresses them by 'if-then' rules. Rule induction can be applied to the experience-oriented construction industry. A typical example would be to select an appropriate retaining wall system at the project planning stage, in which engineers normally employ certain empirical laws or select from the types for which they have relevant expertise in making appropriate selections. This work presents a novel rule induction approach, capable of inducing from 254 retaining wall cases in engineering design reports into 181 rules, thereby allowing for an appropriate retaining wall system to be selected. A system referred to herein as RULES is also constructed with an illustrative example provided as well. Test results of the system demonstrate that the rule induction approach can effectively resolve retaining wall selection problems at the project planning stage. The approach proposed herein is highly promising for resolving experience-oriented problems in the construction industry.

Item Type: Article
Uncontrolled Keywords: artificial intelligence; knowledge discovery; retaining wall selection; rule induction
Index terms: retaining wall, machine learning, project planning, engineer, paradigm, engineering design, construction industry, artificial intelligence
Subjects: artificial intelligence, profession, control systems, industry analysis, structural engineering, education and knowledge transfer, design process
Topics: Digital Applications, Roles and Professions, Project Management, Research Practice, Engineering Principles
Descriptive scope: 3 PCT

N.B. Descriptive scope is a count of how many of the five facets of empirical research are indicated by the words used in title, abstract and keywords. It is not intended as a judgement on the research; merely a count of the kind of word we would expect to indicate Phenomenon, Concepts, Theoretical framing, Empirical techniques, Analytical techniques. If all five are present, then a code of “5 PCTEA” will indicate this. If you feel the coding for this record is questionable, we welcome discussion around the terms we matched or the way we categorized them. The facet you would expect may not be coded, or a facet may be coded inappropriately. This can also bear on a larger question, of which facets should be treated as defining in construction management research. Please get in touch, and we will look at it. More details here