基于贝叶斯网络的硬件产品设计缺陷评估

为了预测硬件产品设计研发过程中的设计缺陷,提出利用贝叶斯网络构建产品设计缺陷评估模型。通过故障树建立评估模型的贝叶斯网络结构,利用证据推理方法确定评估模型的概率。研究案例表明,该方法可分析缺陷因素对设计缺陷的影响关系,实现对产品设计缺陷的定量预测,研究结果与实际情况对比具有较好的符合性。     

A method of learning implication networks from empirical data:algorithm and Monte-Carlo simulation-based validation

The paper describes an algorithmic means for inducing implication networks from empirical data samples. The induced network enables efficient inferences about the values of network nodes if certain observations are made. This implication induction method is approximate in nature as probabilistic network requirements are relaxed in the construction of dependence relationships based on statistical testing. In order to examine the effectiveness and validity of the induction method, several Monte Carlo simulations were conducted, where theoretical Bayesian networks were used to generate empirical data samples-some of which were used to induce implication relations, whereas others were used to verify the results of evidential reasoning with the induced networks. The values in the implication networks were predicted by applying a modified version of the Dempster-Shafer belief updating scheme. The results of predictions were, furthermore, compared to the ones generated by Pearl's (1986) stochastic simulation method, a probabilistic reasoning method that operates directly on the theoretical Bayesian networks. The comparisons consistently show that the results of predictions based on the induced networks would be comparable to those generated by Pearl's method, when reasoning in a variety of uncertain knowledge domains-those that were simulated using the presumed theoretical probabilistic networks of different topologies     

Evidential reasoning for object recognition

The authors present a framework to guide development of evidential reasoning in object recognition systems. Principles of evidential reasoning processes for open-world object recognition are proposed and applied to build evidential reasoning capabilities. The principles summarize research and findings by the authors up through the mid-1990s, including seminal results in object-centered computer vision, figure-ground discrimination, and the application of hierarchical Bayesian inference, Bayesian networks, and decision graphs to evidential reasoning for object recognition.     

On the combination of logical and probabilistic models for?information analysis

Formal logical tools are able to provide some amount of reasoning support for information analysis, but are unable to represent uncertainty. Bayesian network tools represent probabilistic and causal information, but in the worst case scale as poorly as some formal logical systems and require specialized expertise to use effectively. We describe a framework for systems that incorporate the advantages of both Bayesian and logical systems. We define a formalism for the conversion of automatically generated natural deduction proof trees into Bayesian networks. We then demonstrate that the merging of such networks with domain-specific causal models forms a consistent Bayesian network with correct values for the formulas derived in the proof. In particular, we show that hard evidential updates in which the premises of a proof are found to be true force the conclusions of the proof to be true with probability one, regardless of any dependencies and prior probability values assumed for the causal model. We provide several examples that demonstrate the generality of the natural deduction system by using inference schemes not supportable directly in Horn clause logic. We compare our approach to other ones, including some that use non-standard logics.     

MULTIPLY SECTIONED BAYESIAN NETWORKS AND JUNCTION FORESTS FOR LARGE KNOWLEDGE-BASED SYSTEMS

Bayesian networks provide a natural, concise knowledge representation method for building knowledge-based systems under uncertainty. We consider domains representable by general but sparse networks and characterized by incremental evidence where the probabilistic knowledge can be captured once and used for multiple cases. Current Bayesian net representations do not consider structure in the domain and lump all variables into a homogeneous network. In practice, one often directs attention to only part of the network within a period of time; i.e., there is "localization" of queries and evidence. In such case, propagating evidence through a homogeneous network is inefficient since the entire network has to be updated each time. This paper derives reasonable constraints, which can often be easily satisfied, that enable a natural {localization preserving) partition of a domain and its representation by separate Bayesian subnets. The subnets are transformed into a set of permanent junction trees such that evidential reasoning takes place at only one of them at a time; and marginal probabilities obtained are identical to those that would be obtained from the homogeneous network. We show how to swap in a new junction tree, and absorb previously acquired evidence. Although the overall system can be large, computational requirements are governed by the size of one junction tree.     

Explanation of Bayesian networks and influence diagrams in Elvira.

Bayesian networks (BNs) and influence diagrams (IDs) are probabilistic graphical models that are widely used for building diagnosis- and decision-support expert systems. Explanation of both the model and the reasoning is important for debugging these models, alleviating users' reluctance to accept their advice, and using them as tutoring systems. This paper describes some explanation options for BNs and IDs that have been implemented in Elvira and how they have been used for building medical models and teaching probabilistic reasoning to pre- and postgraduate students.     

Explaining the impact of source behaviour in evidential reasoning

Explanation abilities are required for data-driven models, where the high number of parameters may render its internal reasoning opaque to users. Despite the natural transparency brought by the graphical model structure of Bayesian networks, decisions trees or valuation networks, additional explanation abilities are still required due to both the complexity of the problem as well as the consequences of the decision to be taken. Threat assessment is an example of such a complex problem in which several sources with partially unknown behaviour provide information on distinct but related frames of discernment. In this paper, we propose a solution as an evidential network with explanation abilities to detect and investigate threat to maritime infrastructure. We propose a post-hoc explanation approach to an already transparent by design threat assessment model, combining feature relevance and natural language explanations with some visual support. To this end, we extend the sensitivity analysis method of generation of explanations for evidential reasoning to a multi-source model where sources can have several and disparate behaviours. Natural language explanations are generated on the basis of a series of sensitivity measures quantifying the impact of both direct reports and source models. We conclude on challenges to be addressed in future work.     

Subjective logic and arguing with evidence

This paper introduces a subjective logic based argumentation framework primarily targeted at evidential reasoning. The framework explicitly caters for argument schemes, accrual of arguments, and burden of proof; these concepts appear in many types of argument, and are particularly useful in dialogues revolving around evidential reasoning. The concept of a sensor is also useful in this domain, representing a source of evidence, and is incorporated in our framework. We show how the framework copes with a number of problems that existing frameworks have difficulty dealing with, and how it can be situated within a simple dialogue game. Finally, we examine reasoning machinery that enables an agent to decide what argument to advance with the goal of maximising its utility at the end of a dialogue.     

Building Bayesian networks for legal evidence with narratives: a case study evaluation

In a criminal trial, evidence is used to draw conclusions about what happened concerning a supposed crime. Traditionally, the three main approaches to modeling reasoning with evidence are argumentative, narrative and probabilistic approaches. Integrating these three approaches could arguably enhance the communication between an expert and a judge or jury. In previous work, techniques were proposed to represent narratives in a Bayesian network and to use narratives as a basis for systematizing the construction of a Bayesian network for a legal case. In this paper, these techniques are combined to form a design method for constructing a Bayesian network based on narratives. This design method is evaluated by means of an extensive case study concerning the notorious Dutch case of the Anjum murders.     

一种改进的贝叶斯网弧定向算法研究

贝叶斯网络是用来表示变量集合概率分布的图形模式,它提供了一种方便地表示概率信息的方法,它可以表示因果关系,但并不局限于因果关系。贝叶斯网对不确定性问题有很强的推理能力,近几年来受到众多研究者的重视。贝叶斯网络中弧的定向是指在已经有了变量之间的依赖关系图的条件下确定变量之间的边的方向的过程。介绍了一种改进了贝叶斯网弧定向的方法,该方法结合了目前多种定向方法的优点,实验证明该算法优于已存在的弧定向方法。     

A new uncertainty measure for belief networks with applications tooptimal evidential inferencing

We are concerned with the problem of measuring the uncertainty in a broad class of belief networks, as encountered in evidential reasoning applications. In our discussion, we give an explicit account of the networks concerned, and call them the Dempster-Shafer (D-S) belief networks. We examine the essence and the requirement of such an uncertainty measure based on well-defined discrete event dynamical systems concepts. Furthermore, we extend the notion of entropy for the D-S belief networks in order to obtain an improved optimal dynamical observer. The significance and generality of the proposed dynamical observer of measuring uncertainty for the D-S belief networks lie in that it can serve as a performance estimator as well as a feedback for improving both the efficiency and the quality of the D-S belief network-based evidential inferencing. We demonstrate, with Monte Carlo simulation, the implementation and the effectiveness of the proposed dynamical observer in solving the problem of evidential inferencing with optimal evidence node selection     

基于推理信息量的BN参数学习变量离散化方法

提出推理信息量的概念,将其作为贝叶斯网络连续变量离散化评价标准。在连续变量离散化的过程中,采用遗传算法寻求最优解,设计个体编码方式、交叉算子和变异算子,将推理信息量作为衡量个体适应度的标准。实例分析证明,通过该方法对变量进行离散化后学习得到的贝叶斯网络在推理时能得到更大的推理信息量。     

Data‐driven model for river flood forecasting based on a Bayesian network approach

Uncertainty analysis of hydrological models often requires a large number of model runs, which can be time consuming and computationally intensive. In order to reduce the number of runs required for uncertainty prediction, Bayesian networks (BNs) are used to graphically represent conditional probability dependence between the set of variables characterizing a flood event. Bayesian networks (BNs) are relevant due to their capacity to handle uncertainty, combine statistical data and expertise and introduce evidences in real‐time flood forecasting. In the present study, a runoff–runoff model is considered. The discharge at a gauging station located is estimated at the outlet of a basin catchment based on discharge measurements at the gauging stations upstream. The BN model shows good performances in estimating the discharges at the basin outlet. Another application of the BN model is to be used as a reverse method. Knowing discharges values at the outlet of the basin, we can propagate back these values through the model to estimate discharges at upstream stations. This turns out to be a practical method to fill the missing data in streamflow records which are critical to the sustainable management of water and the development of hydrological models.     

On modelling non-probabilistic uncertainty in the likelihood ratio approach to evidential reasoning

When the likelihood ratio approach is employed for evidential reasoning in law, it is often necessary to employ subjective probabilities, which are probabilities derived from the opinions and judgement of a human (expert). At least three concerns arise from the use of subjective probabilities in legal applications. Firstly, human beliefs concerning probabilities can be vague, ambiguous and inaccurate. Secondly, the impact of this vagueness, ambiguity and inaccuracy on the outcome of a probabilistic analysis is not necessarily fully understood. Thirdly, the provenance of subjective probabilities and the associated potential sources of vagueness, ambiguity and inaccuracy tend to be poorly understood, making it difficult for the outcome of probabilistic reasoning to be explained and validated, which is crucial in legal applications. The former two concerns have been addressed by a wide body of research in AI. The latter, however, has received little attention. This paper presents a novel approach to employ argumentation to reason about probability distributions in probabilistic models. It introduces a range of argumentation schemes and corresponding sets of critical questions for the construction and validation of argument models that define sets of probability distributions. By means of an extended example, the paper demonstrates how the approach, argumentation schemes and critical questions can be employed for the development of models and their validation in legal applications of the likelihood ratio approach to evidential reasoning.     

A target identification comparison of Bayesian and Dempster-Shafermultisensor fusion

This paper demonstrates how Bayesian and evidential reasoning can address the same target identification problem involving multiple levels of abstraction, such as identification based on type, class, and nature. In the process of demonstrating target identification with these two reasoning methods, we compare their convergence time to a long run asymptote for a broad range of aircraft identification scenarios that include missing reports and misassociated reports. Our results show that probability theory can accommodate all of these issues that are present in dealing with uncertainty and that the probabilistic results converge to a solution much faster than those of evidence theory     

Towards explaining the cognitive efficacy of Euler diagrams in syllogistic reasoning: A relational perspective

Although diagrams have been widely used as methods for introducing students to elementary logical reasoning, it is still open to debate in cognitive psychology whether logic diagrams can aid untrained people to successfully conduct deductive reasoning. In our previous work, some empirical evidence was provided for the effectiveness of Euler diagrams in the process of solving categorical syllogisms. In this paper, we discuss the question of why Euler diagrams have such inferential efficacy in the light of a logical and proof-theoretical analysis of categorical syllogisms and diagrammatic reasoning. As a step towards an explanatory theory of reasoning with Euler diagrams, we argue that the effectiveness of Euler diagrams in supporting syllogistic reasoning derives from the fact that they are effective ways of representing and reasoning about relational structures that are implicit in categorical sentences. A special attention is paid to how Euler diagrams can facilitate the task of checking the invalidity of an inference, a task that is known to be particularly difficult for untrained reasoners. The distinctive features of our conception of diagrammatic reasoning are made clear by comparing it with the model-theoretic conception of ordinary reasoning developed in the mental model theory.     

一种基于区间规则的条件证据网络推理决策方法

针对证据网络推理方法无法对区间规则进行表示和推理的问题, 提出一种基于区间规则的条件证据网络推理决策方法. 该方法针对模糊规则的条件概率或信度为不确定区间的情况, 可同时表达不确定性和模糊性; 并将区间不确定规则转化为区间条件信度函数作为证据网络的结点参数, 通过条件推理和证据融合得到条件证据网络中各结点幂集空间中焦元的随机分布作为决策依据. 最后, 通过空中目标态势评估实例, 验证了所提出方法的有效性.

     

A new belief rule base knowledge representation scheme and inference methodology using the evidential reasoning rule for evidence combination

In this paper, we extend the original belief rule-base inference methodology using the evidential reasoning approach by i) introducing generalised belief rules as knowledge representation scheme, and ii) using the evidential reasoning rule for evidence combination in the rule-base inference methodology instead of the evidential reasoning approach. The result is a new rule-base inference methodology which is able to handle a combination of various types of uncertainty.Generalised belief rules are an extension of traditional rules where each consequent of a generalised belief rule is a belief distribution defined on the power set of propositions, or possible outcomes, that are assumed to be collectively exhaustive and mutually exclusive. This novel extension allows any combination of certain, uncertain, interval, partial or incomplete judgements to be represented as rule-based knowledge. It is shown that traditional IF-THEN rules, probabilistic IF-THEN rules, and interval rules are all special cases of the new generalised belief rules.The rule-base inference methodology has been updated to enable inference within generalised belief rule bases. The evidential reasoning rule for evidence combination is used for the aggregation of belief distributions of rule consequents.     

How do argumentation diagrams compare when student pairs use them as a means for debate or as a tool for representing debate?

The objective of the research presented here was to study the influence of two types of instruction for using an argumentation diagram during pedagogical debates over the Internet. In particular, we studied how using an argumentation diagram as a medium of debate compared to using an argumentation diagram as a way of representing a debate. Two groups of students produced an individual argument diagram, then debated in pairs in one of the two conditions, and finally revised their individual diagrams in light of their debate. We developed an original analysis method (ADAM) to evaluate the differences between the argumentation diagrams constructed collaboratively during the interactions that constituted the experimental conditions, as well as those constructed individually before and after debate. The results suggest a complementary relationship between the usage of argumentation diagrams in the framework of conceptual learning. First, students who were instructed to use the argumentation diagram to represent their debate were less inclined to take a position in relation to the same graphical element while collaborating. On the other hand, students who were instructed to use the argumentation diagram alongside a chat expressed more personal opinions while collaborating. Second, the instructions given to the participants regarding the use of the argumentation diagram during the collaborative phase (either for debate or for representing a chat debate) have a significant impact on the post-individual graphs. In the individual graphs revised after the collaborative phase, participants who used the graph to represent their debate added more examples, consequences and causes. It follows that a specific usage for an argumentation diagram can be chosen and instructions given based on pedagogical objectives for a given learning situation.