Knowledge engineering
technical, scientific and social aspects involved in building, maintaining and using knowledge-based system
Knowledge engineering (KE) refers to all aspects involved in knowledge-based systems.
Background
Expert systems
One of the first examples of an expert system was MYCIN, an application to perform medical diagnosis. In the MYCIN example, the domain experts were medical doctors and the knowledge represented was their expertise in diagnosis.
Expert systems were first developed in artificial intelligence laboratories as an attempt to understand complex human decision making. Based on positive results from these initial prototypes, the technology was adopted by the US business community (and later worldwide) in the 1980s. The Stanford heuristic programming project led by Edward Feigenbaum was one of the leaders in defining and developing the first expert systems.
History
In the earliest days of expert systems, there was little or no formal process for the creation of the software. Researchers just sat down with domain experts and started programming, often developing the required tools (e.g. inference engines) at the same time as the applications themselves. As expert systems moved from academic prototypes to deployed business systems it was realized that a methodology was required to bring predictability and control to the process of building the software.
This brief starts where responsible research should: with the source description of “Knowledge engineering” as technical, scientific and social aspects involved in building, maintaining and using knowledge-based system. Everything that follows is an evidence route, not borrowed authority.
Why this record matters
The subject matters to the places & architecture register because the source frames it as technical, scientific and social aspects involved in building, maintaining and using knowledge-based system. Its deeper value depends on whether names, dates, institutions and citations support that framing.
Place names and jurisdictional language are key evidence: both can reveal earlier catalogue descriptions and overlooked record series. The source revision retrieved here is dated Apr 13, 2026. The linked authority identifier is Q1540472. None of the 0 selected statements returned an explicit reference.
A single description cannot reconcile every naming convention, rebuilding phase or administrative transfer associated with a place. The lead is largely declarative, so disagreement and counter-evidence require a deliberate search beyond the opening account. Authority statements aid reconciliation but still require their own references, qualifiers and ranks to be checked.
How to read it
Treat names, boundaries and functions as historically changeable. Maps, plans, inventories and administrative records can clarify what the place meant at different dates.
- Historic place names
- Jurisdictional context
- Routes into maps and plans
Contemporary maps, plans, listed-building records, estate papers and the responsible local or national archive.
Three-step research path
- Establish the record: confirm the title “Knowledge engineering”, its source revision and the description used here.
- Expand the search: follow Knowledge engineering primary sources, Knowledge engineering archive and Knowledge research across catalogues and specialist indexes.
- Test the account: compare the strongest cited source with the responsible institution’s current record and note any disagreement.
Questions for further research
- Which source most directly establishes the central claim about “Knowledge engineering”?
- Which authority defined the place, boundary or structure at the relevant date?
- What physical evidence or contemporary plan supports the description?
Search terms from this dossier
This entry incorporates text from “Knowledge engineering” on English Wikipedia. Contributors are listed in the page history. Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 License. Selected authority identifiers and statements are retrieved from Wikidata under CC0; their references and qualifiers remain part of the verification path.