Markman, AB. Knowledge representation. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates; 1999.
Clement, CA, Gentner, D. Systematicity as a selection constraint in analogical mapping. Cognitive Science 1991, 15:89–132.
Gentner, D, Kurtz, K. Relations, objects, and the composition of analogies. Cognitive Science 2006, 30:609.
Spellman, BA, Holyoak, KJ. If Saddam is Hitler then who is George Bush? Analogical mapping between systems of social roles. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 1992, 62:913–933.
Gentner, D, Sagi, E. %22Does “different” imply a difference? A comparison of two tasks.%22 In: Sun, R, Miyake, N, eds. Proceedings of the Twenty‐eighth Annual Meeting of the Cognitive Science Society, 2006.
Goldstone, RL, Medin, DL, Gentner, D. Similarity involving attributes and relations: Judgments of similarity and difference are not inverses. Psychological Science 1990, 1:64–69.
Love, BC, Rouder, JN, Wisniewski, EJ. A structural account of global and local processing. Cognitive Psychology 1999, 38:291–316.
Markman, AB, Gentner, D. Structural alignment during similarity comparisons. Cognitive Psychology 1993, 25:431–467.
Gentner, D. Structure‐mapping: a theoretical framework for analogy. Cognitive Science 1983, 7:155–170.
Goldstone, RL, Medin, DL. Time course of comparison. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, %26 Cognition 1994, 20:29–50.
Cheng, PW, Holyoak, KJ. Pragmatic reasoning schemas. Cognitive Psychology 1985, 17:391–416.
Gentner, D, Medina, J. Similarity and the development of rules. Cognition 1998, 65:263–297.
Kuehne, SE, Gentner, D, Forbus, KD. %22Modeling infant learning via symbolic structural alignment.%22 In: Gleitman, L, Joshi, AK, eds. Proceedings of the Twenty‐Second Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 2000, 286–291.
Gentner, D, Rattermann, MJ, Forbus, KD. The roles of similarity in transfer: Separating retrievability from inferential soundness. Cognitive Psychology 1993, 25:524–575.
Holyoak, KJ, Koh, K. Surface and structural similarity in analogical transfer. Memory %26 Cognition 1987, 15:332–340.
Ross, BH. Distinguishing types of superficial similarities: Different effects on the access and use of earlier problems. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 1989, 15:456–468.
Gentner, D. %22The mechanisms of analogical learning.%22 In: Vosniadou, S, Ortony, A, eds. Similarity and Analogical Reasoning London: Cambridge University Press; 1989, 199–241.
Gentner, D. %22Why we’re so smart.%22 In: Gentner, D., Goldin‐Meadow, S., eds. Language in Mind: Advances in the Study of Language and Cognition. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2003, 195–236.
Gentner, D, Markman, AB. Defining structural similarity. The Journal of Cognitive Science 2006, 6:1–20.
Forbus, KD, Gentner, D, Law, K. MAC/FAC: A model of similarity‐based retrieval. Cognitive Science 1995, 19:141–205.
Gentner, D. %22Are scientific analogies metaphors?.%22 In: Miall, DS, ed. Metaphor: Problems and Perspectives. Brighton, England: Harvester Press; 1982, 106–132.
Gentner, D, Clement, C. %22Evidence for relational selectivity in the interpretation of analogy and metaphor.%22 In: Bower, GH, ed. The Psychology of Learning and Motivation, Advances in Research and Theory. New York: Academic Press; 1988, 307–358.
Spellman, BA, Holyoak, KJ. Pragmatics in analogical mapping. Cognitive Psychology 1996, 31:307–346.
Markman, AB. Constraints on analogical inference. Cognitive Science 1997, 21:373–418.
Krawczyk, DC, Holyoak, KJ, Hummel, JE. The one‐to‐one constraint in analogical mapping and inference. Cognitive Science 2005, 29:797–806.
Falkenhainer, B. Learning from physical analogies, Technical report no. UIUCDCS‐R‐88‐1479. Ph.D. thesis. Urbana‐Champaign: University of Illinois; 1988.
Larkey, LB, Love, BC. CAB: Connectionist Analogy Builder. Cognitive Science 2003, 27:781–794.
Mitchell, M. Analogy‐making as perception: A computer model. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 1993.
Hofstadter, DH. Fluid concepts and creative analogies. New York: Basic Books; 1995.
French, RM. The subtlety of similarity. Cambridge, MA: The MIT Press; 1995.
Holyoak, KJ, Thagard, PR. %22A computational model of analogical problem solving.%22 In: Vosniadou, S, Ortony, A, eds. Similarity and Analogical Reasoning. New York: Cambridge University Press; 1989, 242–266.
Ramscar, MJA, Pain, HG. Can a real distinction be made between cognitive theories of analogy and categorization?. Proceedings of the 18th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. San Diego: University of California; 1996.
Winston, PH. Learning and reasoning by analogy. Communications of the ACM 1980, 23:689–703.
Burstein, MH. A model of learning by incremental analogical reasoning and debugging. Proceedings of the National Conference on Artificial Intelligence; 1983, 45–48.
Greiner, R. %22Learning by understanding analogies.%22 In: Prieditis, A, ed. Analogica. Los Altos, CA: Kaufmann; 1988, 1–36.
Keane, MT. %22On order effects in analogical mapping: predicting human error using IAM.%22 In: Moore, JD, Lehmann, JF, eds. Proceedings of the Seventeenth Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum; 1995.
Hummel, JE, Holyoak, KJ. LISA: A computational model of analogical inference and schema induction. Psychological Review 1997.
Winston, PH. %22Learning by augmenting rules and accumulating censors.%22 In: Michalski, RS, Carbonell, JG, Mitchell, TM, eds. Machine Learning: An Artificial Intelligence Approach. Los Altos, CA: MorganKaufmann; 1986, 45–61.
Falkenhainer, B, Forbus, K, Gentner, D. The Structure‐Mapping Engine. Proceedings of AAAI‐86, Philadelphia, PA, August 1986.
Falkenhainer, B, Forbus, KD, Gentner, D. The structure‐mapping engine: Algorithm and examples. Artificial Intelligence 1989, 41:1–63.
Loewenstein, J, Gentner, D. Relational language and the development of relational mapping. Cognitive Psychology 2005, 50:315–353.
Forbus, KD, Ferguson, RW, Gentner, D. Incremental structure mapping In: Proceedings of the 16th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, 1994.
Kokinov, BN, Petrov, AA. In: %22Integrating memory and reasoning in analogy‐making: the AMBR model.%22 Gentner, D, Holyoak, KJ, Kokinov, BN, eds. The Analogical Mind: Perspectives Prom Cognitive Science. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press; 2001, 161–196.
Hahn, U, Chater, N. Richardson, LB. Similarity as transformation Cognition 2003, 87:1–32
Hodgetts, C.J. Hahn, U., Chater, N. Transformation and alignment in similarity. Cognition 2009, 113:62–79.
Markman, AB, Gentner, D. Splitting the differences: a structural alignment view of similarity. Journal of Memory and Language 1993, 32:517–535.
Thagard, P, Holyoak, KJ, Nelson, G, Gochfeld, D. Analog retrieval by constraint satisfaction. Artificial Intelligence 1990, 46:259–310.
Leech, R, Mareschal, D, Cooper, R. Analogy as relational priming: a developmental and computational perspective on the origins of a complex cognitive skill. Behavioral and Brain Sciences 2008, 31:357–414.
Gick, ML, Holyoak, KJ. Schema induction and analogical transfer. Cognitive Psychology 1983, 15:1–38.
Catrambone, R, Holyoak, KJ. Overcoming contextual limitations on problem‐solving transfer. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory and Cognition 1989, 15:1147–1156.
Loewenstein, J, Thompson, L, Gentner, D. Analogical learning in negotiation teams: Comparing cases promotes learning and transfer. Academy of Management Learning and Education 2003, 2:119–127.
Gust, H, Kuhnberger, KU, Schmid, U. metaphors and heuristic‐driven theory projection (HDTP). Theoretical Computer Science 2006, 354:98–117.
Schwering, A, Krumnack, U, Kuhnberger, KU, Gust, H. Syntactic principles of heuristic‐driven theory projection. Cognitive Systems Research 2009, 10:251–269.
Schmid, U, Gust, H, Kühnberger, K‐U, Burghardt, J. In: %22An algebraic framework for solving proportional and predictive analogies.%22 Schmalhofer, F, Young, R, Katz, G, eds. Proceedings of the European Conference on Cognitive Science (EuroCogSci 2003). Osnabrück, Germany: Lawrence Erlbaum; September 10–13, 2003, 295–300.
Schwering, A, Gust, H, Kuhnberger, K‐U, Krumnack, U. Solving geometric proportional analogies with the analogy model HDTP, Proceedings of CogSci09; 2009.
Gentner, D, Loewenstein, J, Thompson, L, Forbus, K. Reviving inert knowledge: Analogical abstraction supports relational retrieval of past events. Cognitive Science 2009, 33:1343–1382.
Kuehne, SE, Forbus, KD, Gentner, D, Quinn, B. %22SEQL: Category learning as progressive abstraction using structure mapping.%22 In: Gleitman, LR, Joshi, AK, eds., Proceedings of the Twenty‐Second Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Philadelphia, PA; 2000, 770–775.
Halstead, D, Forbus, KD. Transforming between propositions and features: bridging the gap. Proceedings of AAAI‐05. Pittsburgh, PA; 2005.
Lockwood, K, Lovett, A, Forbus, K. Automatic Classification of Containment and Support Spatial Relations in English and Dutch. In: Proceedings of Spatial Cognition; 2008.
Halstead, D, Forbus, K. Some Effects of a Reduced Relational Vocabulary on the Whodunit Problem. Proceedings of IJCAI‐2007, Hyderabad, India; 2007.
Friedman, SE, Forbus, KD. Learning naive physics models and misconceptions. Proceedings of the 31st Annual Conference of theCognitive Science Society, Amsterdam, Netherlands; 2009.
Dehghani, M, Tomai, E, Forbus, K, Iliev, R, Klenk, M. MoralDM: a computational modal of moral decision‐making. Proceedings of the 30th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society (CogSci), Washington, DC; 2008.
Lovett, A, Tomai, E, Forbus, K, Usher, J. Solving geometric analogy problems through two‐stage analogical mapping. Cognitive Science 2009.
Loewenstein, J, Thompson, L, Gentner, D. Analogical encoding facilitates knowledge transfer in negotiation. Psychonomic Bulletin %26 Review 1999, 6:586–597.
Gentner, D, Namy, L. Comparison in the development of categories. Cognitive Development 1999, 14:487–513.
Falkenhainer, B. %22A unified approach to explanation and theory formation.%22 In: Shrager, J, Langley, P, eds. Computational Models of Scientific Discovery and Theory Formation. Morgan Kaufmann Publishers; 1990, 157–196.
Salvucci, DD, Anderson, JR. Integrating analogical mapping and general problem solving: the path‐mapping theory. Cognitive Science 2001, 25:67–110
Lovett, A, Gentner, D, Forbus, K, Sagi, E. Using analogical mapping to simulate time‐course phenomena in perceptual similarity Cognitive Systems Research 2009, 10:216–228.
Krumnack, U, Gust, H, Kuhnberger, K‐U, Schwering, A. Re‐representation in a logic‐based model for analogy‐making. Proceedings of the 21st Australasian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Aukland, New Zealand; 2008.
Yan, J, Forbus, KD, Gentner, D. A theory of rerepresentation in analogical matching. Proceedings of the 25th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society; 2003.
Chi, M, Feltovich, P, Glaser, R. Categorization and representation of physics problems by experts and novices. Cognitive Science 1981, 5:121–152.
Novick, LR. Analogical transfer, problem similarity, and expertise. Journal of Experimental Psychology: Learning, Memory, and Cognition 1988, 14:510–520.
Finlayson, M, Winston, PH. Intermediate features and information‐level constraint on analogical retrieval. Proceedings of CogSci05; 2005.
Kokinov, B. %22A hybrid model of reasoning by analogy.%22 In: Holyoak, K, Barnden, J, eds. Advances in Connectionist and Neural Computation Theory. Volume 2: Analogical Connections. Norwood, NJ: Ablex; 1994, 247–320.
Forbus, K, Klenk, M, Hinrichs, T. Companion cognitive systems: Design goals and lessons learned so far. IEEE Intelligent Systems vol. 2009, 24:36–46.
Doumas, . LAA, Hummel, JE, Sandhofer, CM. A theory of the discovery and predication of relational concepts. Psychological Review 2008, 115:1–43.
Friedman, S, Taylor, J, Forbus, K. Learning naïve physics models by analogical generalization. Proceedings of the 2nd International Analogy Conference, Sofia, Bulgaria; 2009.