We describe a method for incrementally constructing belief networks. We have developed a networkconstruction language similar to a forward-chaining language using data dependencies, but with additional features for specifying distributions. Using this language, we can define parameterized classes of probabilistic models. These parameterized models make it possible to apply probabilistic reasoning to problems for which it is impractical to have a single large, static model.

We propose an abductive diagnosis theory that integrates probabilistic, causal and taxonomic knowledge. Probabilistic knowledge allows us to select the most likely explanation; causal knowledge allows us to make reasonable independence assumptions; taxonomic knowledge allows causation to be modeled at different levels of detail, and allows observations be described in different levels of precision. Unlike most other approaches where a causal explanation is a hypothesis that one or more causative events occurred, we define an explanation of a set of observations to be an occurrence of a chain of causation events. These causation events constitute a scenario where all the observations are true. We show that the probabilities of the scenarios can be computed from the conditional probabilities of the causation events. Abductive reasoning is inherently complex even if only modest expressive power is allowed. However, our abduction algorithm is exponential only in the number of observations to be explained, and is polynomial in the size of the knowledge base. This contrasts with many other abduction procedures that are exponential in the size of the knowledge base.

An experiment replicated and extended recent findings on psychologically realistic ways of modeling propagation of uncertainty in rule based reasoning. Within a single production rule, the antecedent evidence can be summarized by taking the maximum of disjunctively connected antecedents and the minimum of conjunctively connected antecedents. The maximum certainty factor attached to each of the rule's conclusions can be sealed down by multiplication with this summarized antecedent certainty. Heckerman's modified certainty factor technique can be used to combine certainties for common conclusions across production rules.

ABSTRACT The issue of confidence factors in Knowledge Based Systems has become increasingly important and Dempster-Shafer (DS) theory has become increasingly popular as a basis for these factors. This paper discusses the need for an empirical interpretation of any theory of confidence factors applied to Knowledge Based Systems and describes an empirical interpretation of DS theory suggesting that the theory-has been seriously misinterpreted. For the essentially syntactic DS theory, the empirical model developed is based on the semantics of sample spaces. This model is used to show that, if belief functions are based on reasonably accurate sampling or observation of a sample space, then the beliefs and upper probabilities as computed according to OS theory cannot be interpreted as frequency ratios. Since a number of proposed applications of OS theory use belief functions in situations with statistically derived evidence and seem to appeal to statistical intuition to provide an interpretation of the results, it is likely that OS theory has often been misapplied. CONFIDENCE FACTORS, EMPIRICISM AND THE DEMPSTER-SHAFER THEORY OF EVIDENCE The issue of confidence factors in Knowledge Based Systems has become increasingly important and Dempster-Shafer (DS) theory has become increasingly popular as a basis for these factors.

Expert systems applications that involve uncertain inference can be represented by a multidimensional contingency table. These tables offer a general approach to inferring with uncertain evidence, because they can embody any form of association between any number of pieces of evidence and conclusions. (Simpler models may be required, however, if the number of pieces of evidence bearing on a conclusion is large.) This paper presents a method of using these tables to make uncertain inferences without assumptions of conditional independence among pieces of evidence or heuristic combining rules. As evidence is accumulated, new joint probabilities are calculated so as to maintain any dependencies among the pieces of evidence that are found in the contingency table. The new conditional probability of the conclusion is then calculated directly from these new joint probabilities and the conditional probabilities in the contingency table.

This paper describes a machine induction program (WITT) that attempts to model human categorization. Properties of categories to which human subjects are sensitive includes best or prototypical members, relative contrasts between putative categories, and polymorphy (neither necessary or sufficient features). This approach represents an alternative to usual Artificial Intelligence approaches to generalization and conceptual clustering which tend to focus on necessary and sufficient feature rules, equivalence classes, and simple search and match schemes. WITT is shown to be more consistent with human categorization while potentially including results produced by more traditional clustering schemes. Applications of this approach in the domains of expert systems and information retrieval are also discussed.

General problems in analyzing information in a probabilistic database are considered. The practical difficulties (and occasional advantages) of storing uncertain data, of using it conventional forward- or backward-chaining inference engines, and of working with a probabilistic version of resolution are discussed. The background for this paper is the incorporation of uncertain reasoning facilities in MRS, a general-purpose expert system building tool.

The management of uncertainty in expert systems has usually been left to ad hoc representations and rules of combinations lacking either a sound theory or clear semantics. The objective of this paper is to establish a theoretical basis for defining the syntax and semantics of a small subset of calculi of uncertainty operating on a given term set of linguistic statements of likelihood. Each calculus is defined by specifying a negation, a conjunction and a disjunction operator. Families of Triangular norms and conorms constitute the most general representations of conjunction and disjunction operators. These families provide us with a formalism for defining an infinite number of different calculi of uncertainty. The term set will define the uncertainty granularity, i.e. the finest level of distinction among different quantifications of uncertainty. This granularity will limit the ability to differentiate between two similar operators. Therefore, only a small finite subset of the infinite number of calculi will produce notably different results. This result is illustrated by two experiments where nine and eleven different calculi of uncertainty are used with three term sets containing five, nine, and thirteen elements, respectively. Finally, the use of context dependent rule set is proposed to select the most appropriate calculus for any given situation. Such a rule set will be relatively small since it must only describe the selection policies for a small number of calculi (resulting from the analyzed trade-off between complexity and precision).

This paper examines the quantities used by MYCIN to reason with uncertainty, called certainty factors. It is shown that the original definition of certainty factors is inconsistent with the functions used in MYCIN to combine the quantities. This inconsistency is used to argue for a redefinition of certainty factors in terms of the intuitively appealing desiderata associated with the combining functions. It is shown that this redefinition accommodates an unlimited number of probabilistic interpretations. These interpretations are shown to be monotonic transformations of the likelihood ratio p(EIH)/p(El H). The construction of these interpretations provides insight into the assumptions implicit in the certainty factor model. In particular, it is shown that if uncertainty is to be propagated through an inference network in accordance with the desiderata, evidence must be conditionally independent given the hypothesis and its negation and the inference network must have a tree structure. It is emphasized that assumptions implicit in the model are rarely true in practical applications. Methods for relaxing the assumptions are suggested.

On Implementing Usual Values Ronald R. Yager Machine Intelligence Institute Iona College New Rochelle, N. Y. 10801 Abstract In many cases commonsense knowledge consists of knowledge of what is usual. In this paper we develop a system for reasoning with usual information. This system is based upon the fact that these pieces of commonsense information involve both a probabilistic aspect and a granular aspect. We implement this system with the aid of possibility-probability granules. Introduction An ability to handle commonsense reasoning is a crucial need in the development of the artificial intelligence [1].