Many Artificial Intelligence systems depend on the agent's updating its beliefs about the world on the basis of experience. Experiments constitute one type of experience, so scientific methodology offers a natural environment for examining the issues attendant to using this class of evidence. This paper presents a framework which structures the process of using scientific data from research reports for the purpose of making decisions, using decision analysis as the basis for the structure and using medical research as the general scientific domain. The structure extends the basic influence diagram for updating belief in an object domain parameter of interest by expanding the parameter into four parts: those of the patient, the population, the study sample, and the effective study sample. The structure uses biases to perform the transformation of one parameter into another, so that, for instance, selection biases, in concert with the population parameter, yield the study sample parameter. The influence diagram structure provides decision theoretic justification for practices of good clinical research such as randomized assignment and blindfolding of care providers. The model covers most research designs used in medicine: case-control studies, cohort studies, and controlled clinical trials, and provides an architecture to separate clearly between statistical knowledge and domain knowledge. The proposed general model can be the basis for clinical epidemiological advisory systems, when coupled with heuristic pruning of irrelevant biases; of statistical workstations, when the computational machinery for calculation of posterior distributions is added; and of meta-analytic reviews, when multiple studies may impact on a single population parameter.

Modifiable combining functions are a synthesis of two common approaches to combining evidence. They offer many of the advantages of these approaches and avoid some disadvantages. Because they facilitate the acquisition, representation, explanation, and modification of knowledge about combinations of evidence, they are proposed as a tool for knowledge engineers who build systems that reason under uncertainty, not as a normative theory of evidence.

This paper discusses a new measure that is adaptable to certain intervalic probability frameworks, possibility theory, and belief theory. As such, it has the potential for wide use in knowledge engineering, expert systems, and related problems in the human sciences. This measure (denoted here by F) has been introduced in Smithson (1988) and is more formally discussed in Smithson (1989a)o Here, I propose to outline the conceptual basis for F and compare its properties with other measures of second-order uncertainty. I will argue that F is an indicator of nonspecificity or alternatively, of freedom, as distinguished from either ambiguity or vagueness.

One of the most important aspects of current expert systems technology is the ability to make causal inferences about the impact of new evidence. When the domain knowledge and problem knowledge are uncertain and incomplete Bayesian reasoning has proven to be an effective way of forming such inferences [3,4,8]. While several reasoning schemes have been developed based on Bayes Rule, there has been very little work examining the comparative effectiveness of these schemes in a real application. This paper describes a knowledge based system for ship classification [1], originally developed using the PROSPECTOR updating method [2], that has been reimplemented to use the inference procedure developed by Pearl and Kim [4,5]. We discuss our reasons for making this change, the implementation of the new inference engine, and the comparative performance of the two versions of the system.

We examine a probabilistic model for the diagnosis of multiple diseases. In the model, diseases and findings are represented as binary variables. Also, diseases are marginally independent, features are conditionally independent given disease instances, and diseases interact to produce findings via a noisy OR-gate. An algorithm for computing the posterior probability of each disease, given a set of observed findings, called quickscore, is presented. The time complexity of the algorithm is O(nm-2m+), where n is the number of diseases, m+ is the number of positive findings and m- is the number of negative findings. Although the time complexity of quickscore i5 exponential in the number of positive findings, the algorithm is useful in practice because the number of observed positive findings is usually far less than the number of diseases under consideration. Performance results for quickscore applied to a probabilistic version of Quick Medical Reference (QMR) are provided.

The use of numerical uncertainty representations allows better modeling of some aspects of human evidential reasoning. It also makes knowledge acquisition and system development, test, and modification more difficult. We propose that where possible, the assignment and/or refinement of rule weights should be performed automatically. We present one approach to performing this training - numerical optimization - and report on the results of some preliminary tests in training rule bases. We also show that truth maintenance can be used to make training more efficient and ask some epistemological questions raised by training rule weights.

This paper presents an approach for developing the explanation capabilities of rule-based expert systems managing imprecise and uncertain knowledge. The treatment of uncertainty takes place in the framework of possibility theory where the available information concerning the value of a logical or numerical variable is represented by a possibility distribution which restricts its more or less possible values. We first discuss different kinds of queries asking for explanations before focusing on the two following types : i) how, a particular possibility distribution is obtained (emphasizing the main reasons only) ; ii) why in a computed possibility distribution, a particular value has received a possibility degree which is so high, so low or so contrary to the expectation. The approach is based on the exploitation of equations in max-min algebra. This formalism includes the limit case of certain and precise information.

The fundamental elements of evidential reasoning problems are described, followed by a discussion of the structure of various types of problems. Bayesian inference networks and state space formalism are used as the tool for problem representation. A human-oriented decision making cycle for solving evidential reasoning problems is described and illustrated for a military situation assessment problem. The implementation of this cycle may serve as the basis for an expert system shell for evidential reasoning; i.e. a situation assessment processor.

RUM (Reasoning with Uncertainty Module), is an integrated software tool based on a KEE, a frame system implemented in an object oriented language. RUM's architecture is composed of three layers: representation, inference, and control. The representation layer is based on frame-like data structures that capture the uncertainty information used in the inference layer and the uncertainty meta-information used in the control layer. The inference layer provides a selection of five T-norm based uncertainty calculi with which to perform the intersection, detachment, union, and pooling of information. The control layer uses the meta-information to select the appropriate calculus for each context and to resolve eventual ignorance or conflict in the information. This layer also provides a context mechanism that allows the system to focus on the relevant portion of the knowledge base, and an uncertain-belief revision system that incrementally updates the certainty values of well-formed formulae (wffs) in an acyclic directed deduction graph. RUM has been tested and validated in a sequence of experiments in both naval and aerial situation assessment (SA), consisting of correlating reports and tracks, locating and classifying platforms, and identifying intents and threats. An example of naval situation assessment is illustrated. The testbed environment for developing these experiments has been provided by LOTTA, a symbolic simulator implemented in Flavors. This simulator maintains time-varying situations in a multi-player antagonistic game where players must make decisions in light of uncertain and incomplete data. RUM has been used to assist one of the LOTTA players to perform the SA task.

A major difficulty in developing and maintaining very large knowledge bases originates from the variety of forms in which knowledge is made available to the KB builder. The objective of this research is to bring together two complementary knowledge representation schemes: term subsumption languages, which represent and reason about defining characteristics of concepts, and proximate reasoning models, which deal with uncertain knowledge and data in expert systems. Previous works in this area have primarily focused on probabilistic inheritance. In this paper, we address two other important issues regarding the integration of term subsumption-based systems and approximate reasoning models. First, we outline a general architecture that specifies the interactions between the deductive reasoner of a term subsumption system and an approximate reasoner. Second, we generalize the semantics of terminological language so that terminological knowledge can be used to make plausible inferences. The architecture, combined with the generalized semantics, forms the foundation of a synergistic tight integration of term subsumption systems and approximate reasoning models.