Issues in ATR Theory emerge by considering three levels of the ATR problem. The term "monolithic architecture (MA)-ATR" is used for problems of standard classification theory. The MA-ATR level has seen recent unification of theories that should be aggressively applied. Modern ATR systems include standard classification theoretic subsystems (e.g., feature extraction, matching, and discrimination); however they also add modeling within a search paradigm. These "aggregate architecture (AA)-ATRs" allow more direct inclusion of application-specific prior (non-sample) knowledge. Greater theoretical support is needed for analyzing AA-ATRs at the system level and integrating the strong MA-ATR theories. The third level of the ATR problem returns to the MA-ATR problem and below. The strongest elements of the MA-ATR theories deal with the stochastic aspects of the ATR problem. Structural aspects of ATRs are an important weak link in the MA-ATR theories. Function decomposition provides an "atom" towards a structural theory. Decomposition provides robustness by constructing the MA-ATR's structure from samples, but is intractable. Standard MA-ATR design is tractable, but is brittle because of an ad hoc structure selection. The key issue in either case is to make explicit use of non-sample (typically structural) knowledge in selecting or, better yet, constructing the MA-ATR's structure.
Edmund G. ZelnioFrederick GarberLori A. WesterkampSteven W. WorrellJohn J. WesterkampMary JarrattCatherine E. DeardorfPatricia A. Ryan
Syed A. RizviDawit LakewNasser M. Nasrabadi
Arnold C. WilliamsBrandy N. Clark
William E. PiersonTimothy D. Ross