The AGM theory of belief revision has become an important paradigm for investigating rational belief changes. Unfortunately, researchers working in this paradigm have restricted much of their attention to rather simple representations of belief states, namely logically closed sets of propositional sentences. In our opinion, this has resulted in a too abstract categorisation of belief change operations: expansion, revision, or contraction. Occasionally, in the AGM paradigm, also probabilistic belief changes have been considered, and it is widely accepted that the probabilistic version of expansion is conditioning. However, we argue that it may be more correct to view conditioning and expansion as two essentially different kinds of belief change, and that what we call constraining is a better candidate for being considered probabilistic expansion.

This paper investigates a purely qualitative version of Savage's theory for decision making under uncertainty. Until now, most representation theorems for preference over acts rely on a numerical representation of utility and uncertainty where utility and uncertainty are commensurate. Disrupting the tradition, we relax this assumption and introduce a purely ordinal axiom requiring that the Decision Maker (DM) preference between two acts only depends on the relative position of their consequences for each state. Within this qualitative framework, we determine the only possible form of the decision rule and investigate some instances compatible with the transitivity of the strict preference. Finally we propose a mild relaxation of our ordinality axiom, leaving room for a new family of qualitative decision rules compatible with transitivity.

We present examples where the use of belief functions provided sound and elegant solutions to real life problems. These are essentially characterized by ?missing' information. The examples deal with 1) discriminant analysis using a learning set where classes are only partially known; 2) an information retrieval systems handling inter-documents relationships; 3) the combination of data from sensors competent on partially overlapping frames; 4) the determination of the number of sources in a multi-sensor environment by studying the inter-sensors contradiction. The purpose of the paper is to report on such applications where the use of belief functions provides a convenient tool to handle ?messy' data problems.

In current perception systems applied to the rebuilding of the environment for intelligent vehicles, the part reserved to object association for the tracking is increasingly significant. This allows firstly to follow the objects temporal evolution and secondly to increase the reliability of environment perception. We propose in this communication the development of a multi-objects association algorithm with ambiguity removal entering into the design of such a dynamic perception system for intelligent vehicles. This algorithm uses the belief theory and data modelling with fuzzy mathematics in order to be able to handle inaccurate as well as uncertain information due to imperfect sensors. These theories also allow the fusion of numerical as well as symbolic data. We develop in this article the problem of matching between known and perceived objects. This makes it possible to update a dynamic environment map for a vehicle. The belief theory will enable us to quantify the belief in the association of each perceived object with each known object. Conflicts can appear in the case of object appearance or disappearance, or in the case of a confused situation or bad perception. These conflicts are removed or solved using an assignment algorithm, giving a solution called the " best " and so ensuring the tracking of some objects present in our environment.

The deontic logic DUS is a Deontic Update Semantics for prescriptive obligations based on the update semantics of Veltman. In DUS the definition of logical validity of obligations is not based on static truth values but on dynamic action transitions. In this paper prescriptive defeasible obligations are formalized in update semantics and the diagnostic problem of defeasible deontic logic is discussed. Assume a defeasible obligation `normally A ought to be (done)' together withthe fact `A is not (done).' Is this an exception of the normality claim, or is it a violation of the obligation? In this paper we formalize the heuristic principle that it is a violation, unless there is a more specific overriding obligation. The underlying motivation from legal reasoning is that criminals should have as little opportunities as possible to excuse themselves by claiming that their behavior was exceptional rather than criminal.

In building Bayesian belief networks, the elicitation of all probabilities required can be a major obstacle. We learned the extent of this often-cited observation in the construction of the probabilistic part of a complex influence diagram in the field of cancer treatment. Based upon our negative experiences with existing methods, we designed a new method for probability elicitation from domain experts. The method combines various ideas, among which are the ideas of transcribing probabilities and of using a scale with both numerical and verbal anchors for marking assessments. In the construction of the probabilistic part of our influence diagram, the method proved to allow for the elicitation of many probabilities in little time.

Our hypothesis is that by equipping certain agents in a multi-agent system controlling an intelligent building with automated decision support, two important factors will be increased. The first is energy saving in the building. The second is customer value---how the people in the building experience the effects of the actions of the agents. We give evidence for the truth of this hypothesis through experimental findings related to tools for artificial decision making. A number of assumptions related to agent control, through monitoring and delegation of tasks to other kinds of agents, of rooms at a test site are relaxed. Each assumption controls at least one uncertainty that complicates considerably the procedures for selecting actions part of each such agent. We show that in realistic decision situations, room-controlling agents can make bounded rational decisions even under dynamic real-time constraints. This result can be, and has been, generalized to other domains with even harsher time constraints.

The problem of assessing the value of a candidate is viewed here as a multiple combination problem. On the one hand a candidate can be evaluated according to different criteria, and on the other hand several experts are supposed to assess the value of candidates according to each criterion. Criteria are not equally important, experts are not equally competent or reliable. Moreover levels of satisfaction of criteria, or levels of confidence are only assumed to take their values in qualitative scales which are just linearly ordered. The problem is discussed within two frameworks, the transferable belief model and the qualitative possibility theory. They respectively offer a quantitative and a qualitative setting for handling the problem, providing thus a way to compare the nature of the underlying assumptions.

Hybrid Probabilistic Programs (HPPs) are logic programs that allow the programmer to explicitly encode his knowledge of the dependencies between events being described in the program. In this paper, we classify HPPs into three classes called HPP_1,HPP_2 and HPP_r,r>= 3. For these classes, we provide three types of results for HPPs. First, we develop algorithms to compute the set of all ground consequences of an HPP. Then we provide algorithms and complexity results for the problems of entailment ("Given an HPP P and a query Q as input, is Q a logical consequence of P?") and consistency ("Given an HPP P as input, is P consistent?"). Our results provide a fine characterization of when polynomial algorithms exist for the above problems, and when these problems become intractable.

We investigate the problem of active learning on a given tree whose nodes are assigned binary labels in an adversarial way. Inspired by recent results by Guillory and Bilmes, we characterize (up to constant factors) the optimal placement of queries so to minimize the mistakes made on the non-queried nodes. Our query selection algorithm is extremely efficient, and the optimal number of mistakes on the non-queried nodes is achieved by a simple and efficient mincut classifier. Through a simple modification of the query selection algorithm we also show optimality (up to constant factors) with respect to the trade-off between number of queries and number of mistakes on non-queried nodes. By using spanning trees, our algorithms can be efficiently applied to general graphs, although the problem of finding optimal and efficient active learning algorithms for general graphs remains open. Towards this end, we provide a lower bound on the number of mistakes made on arbitrary graphs by any active learning algorithm using a number of queries which is up to a constant fraction of the graph size.