There currently exists a gap between the theories proposed by the probability and uncertainty and the needs of Artificial Intelligence research. These theories primarily address the needs of expert systems, using knowledge structures which must be pre-compiled and remain static in structure during runtime. Many Al systems require the ability to dynamically add and remove parts of the current knowledge structure (e.g., in order to examine what the world would be like for different causal theories). This requires more flexibility than existing uncertainty systems display. In addition, many Al researchers are only interested in using "probabilities" as a means of obtaining an ordering, rather than attempting to derive an accurate probabilistic account of a situation. This indicates the need for systems which stress ease of use and don't require extensive probability information when one cannot (or doesn't wish to) provide such information. This paper attempts to help reconcile the gap between approaches to uncertainty and the needs of many AI systems by examining the control issues which arise, independent of a particular uncertainty calculus. when one tries to satisfy these needs. Truth Maintenance Systems have been used extensively in problem solving tasks to help organize a set of facts and detect inconsistencies in the believed state of the world. These systems maintain a set of true/false propositions and their associated dependencies. However, situations often arise in which we are unsure of certain facts or in which the conclusions we can draw from available information are somewhat uncertain. The non-monotonic TMS 12] was an attempt at reasoning when all the facts are not known, but it fails to take into account degrees of belief and how available evidence can combine to strengthen a particular belief. This paper addresses the problem of probabilistic reasoning as it applies to Truth Maintenance Systems. It describes a belief Maintenance System that manages a current set of beliefs in much the same way that a TMS manages a set of true/false propositions. If the system knows that belief in fact is dependent in some way upon belief in fact2, then it automatically modifies its belief in facts when new information causes a change in belief of fact2. It models the behavior of a TMS, replacing its 3-valued logic (true, false, unknown) with an infinite valued logic, in such a way as to reduce to a standard TMS if all statements are given in absolute true/false terms. Belief Maintenance Systems can, therefore, be thought of as a generalization of Truth Maintenance Systems, whose possible reasoning tasks are a superset of those for a TMS.

In the 1940's, a physicist named Cox provided the first formal justification for the axioms of probability based on the subjective or Bayesian interpretation. He showed that if a measure of belief satisfies several fundamental properties, then the measure must be some monotonic transformation of a probability. In this paper, measures of change in belief or belief updates are examined. In the spirit of Cox, properties for a measure of change in belief are enumerated. It is shown that if a measure satisfies these properties, it must satisfy other restrictive conditions. For example, it is shown that belief updates in a probabilistic context must be equal to some monotonic transformation of a likelihood ratio. It is hoped that this formal explication of the belief update paradigm will facilitate critical discussion and useful extensions of the approach.

In this paper, we suggest marrying Dempster-Shafer (DS) theory with Knowledge Representation (KR). Born out of this marriage is the definition of "Dempster-Shafer Belief Bases", abstract data types representing uncertain knowledge that use DS theory for representing strength of belief about our knowledge, and the linguistic structures of an arbitrary KR system for representing the knowledge itself. A formal result guarantees that both the properties of the given KR system and of DS theory are preserved. The general model is exemplified by defining DS Belief Bases where First Order Logic and (an extension of) KRYPTON are used as KR systems. The implementation problem is also touched upon.

Two major difficulties in using default logics are their intractability and the problem of selecting among multiple extensions. We propose an approach to these problems based on integrating nommonotonic reasoning with plausible reasoning based on triangular norms. A previously proposed system for reasoning with uncertainty (RUM) performs uncertain monotonic inferences on an acyclic graph. We have extended RUM to allow nommonotonic inferences and cycles within nonmonotonic rules. By restricting the size and complexity of the nommonotonic cycles we can still perform efficient inferences. Uncertainty measures provide a basis for deciding among multiple defaults. Different algorithms and heuristics for finding the optimal defaults are discussed.

Unaided human decision making appears to systematically violate consistency constraints imposed by normative theories; these biases in turn appear to justify the application of formal decision-analytic models. It is argued that both claims are wrong. In particular, we will argue that the "confirmation bias" is premised on an overly narrow view of how conflicting evidence is and ought to be handled. Effective decision aiding should focus on supporting the contral processes by means of which knowledge is extended into novel situations and in which assumptions are adopted, utilized, and revised. The Non- Monotonic Probabilist represents initial work toward such an aid.

The compatibility of quantitative and qualitative representations of beliefs was studied extensively in probability theory. It is only recently that this important topic is considered in the context of belief functions. In this paper, the compatibility of various quantitative belief measures and qualitative belief structures is investigated. Four classes of belief measures considered are: the probability function, the monotonic belief function, Shafer's belief function, and Smets' generalized belief function. The analysis of their individual compatibility with different belief structures not only provides a sound b

Traditional approaches to non-monotonic reasoning fail to satisfy a number of plausible axioms for belief revision and suffer from conceptual difficulties as well. Recent work on ranked preferential models (RPMs) promises to overcome some of these difficulties. Here we show that RPMs are not adequate to handle iterated belief change. Specifically, we show that RPMs do not always allow for the reversibility of belief change. This result indicates the need for numerical strengths of belief.

The local computation technique (Shafer et al. 1987, Shafer and Shenoy 1988, Shenoy and Shafer 1986) is used for propagating belief functions in so called a Markov Tree. In this paper, we describe an efficient implementation of belief function propagation on the basis of the local computation technique. The presented method avoids all the redundant computations in the propagation process, and so makes the computational complexity decrease with respect to other existing implementations (Hsia and Shenoy 1989, Zarley et al. 1988). We also give a combined algorithm for both propagation and re-propagation which makes the re-propagation process more efficient when one or more of the prior belief functions is changed.

In general, the best explanation for a given observation makes no promises on how good it is with respect to other alternative explanations. A major deficiency of message-passing schemes for belief revision in Bayesian networks is their inability to generate alternatives beyond the second best. In this paper, we present a general approach based on linear constraint systems that naturally generates alternative explanations in an orderly and highly efficient manner. This approach is then applied to cost-based abduction problems as well as belief revision in Bayesian net works.

Data fusion allows the elaboration and the evaluation of a situation synthesized from low level informations provided by different kinds of sensors. The fusion of the collected data will result in fewer and higher level informations more easily assessed by a human operator and that will assist him effectively in his decision process. In this paper we present the suitability and the advantages of using a Possibilistic Assumption based Truth Maintenance System (n-ATMS) in a data fusion military application. We first describe the problem, the needed knowledge representation formalisms and problem solving paradigms. Then we remind the reader of the basic concepts of ATMSs, Possibilistic Logic and 11-ATMSs. Finally we detail the solution to the given data fusion problem and conclude with the results and comparison with a non-possibilistic solution.