The comparisons of uncertainty calculi from the last two Uncertainty Workshops have all used theoretical probabilistic accuracy as the sole metric. While mathematical correctness is important, there are other factors which should be considered when developing reasoning systems. These other factors include, among other things, the error in uncertainty measures obtainable for the problem and the effect of this error on the performance of the resulting system. There are some domains in which many of the interesting conditional probabilities can be objectively estimated. For example, census data allows various characterizations of individuals with a reasonable degree of confidence.

ABSTRACI' An evidential reasoning mechanism based on the Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence is introduced. Its performance in real-world image analysis is compared with other mechanisms based on the Bayesian formalism and a simple weight combination method.

This paper discusses the semantics and proof theory of Nilsson's probabilistic logic, outlining both the benefits of its well-defined model theory and the drawbacks of its proof theory. Within Nilsson's semantic framework, we derive a set of inference rules which are provably sound. The resulting proof system, in contrast to Nilsson's approach, has the important feature of convergence - that is, the inference process proceeds by computing increasingly narrow probability intervals which converge from above and below on the smallest entailed probability interval. Thus the procedure can be stopped at any time to yield partial information concerning the smallest entailed interval.

In an earlier paper, a new theory of measurefree "conditional" objects was presented. In this paper, emphasis is placed upon the motivation of the theory. The central part of this motivation is established through an example involving a knowledge-based system. In order to evaluate combination of evidence for this system, using observed data, auxiliary at tribute and diagnosis variables, and inference rules connecting them, one must first choose an appropriate algebraic logic description pair (ALDP): a formal language or syntax followed by a compatible logic or semantic evaluation (or model). Three common choices- for this highly non-unique choice - are briefly discussed, the logics being Classical Logic, Fuzzy Logic, and Probability Logic. In all three,the key operator representing implication for the inference rules is interpreted as the often-used disjunction of a negation (b => a) = (b'v a), for any events a,b. However, another reasonable interpretation of the implication operator is through the familiar form of probabilistic conditioning. But, it can be shown - quite surprisingly - that the ALDP corresponding to Probability Logic cannot be used as a rigorous basis for this interpretation! To fill this gap, a new ALDP is constructed consisting of "conditional objects", extending ordinary Probability Logic, and compatible with the desired conditional probability interpretation of inference rules. It is shown also that this choice of ALDP leads to feasible computations for the combination of evidence evaluation in the example. In addition, a number of basic properties of conditional objects and the resulting Conditional Probability Logic are given, including a characterization property and a developed calculus of relations.

More precisely, given an evaluation of certain evidences, an evidential reasoning scheme generates an evaluation of certain hypotheses. When the evaluation of the evidences Is a binary one, that Is, we either have an evidence or do not have that evidence, the scheme acts as a set function for each hypothesis: a value as an evaluation of the hypothesis Is assigned to each subset of evidences. When the evaluation of hypotheses is also a binary one, the scheme can be represented by a collection of boolean "If-then" rules. Various approaches may be used to mak e this collection more compact. Intermediate concepts, default rules, and other Inventions I Ik e the "choice components" in SEEK2 are among these approaches. The problem becomes more compl lcated when the evaluation of hypotheses uses values from a I inearly ordered set (Integers, real numbers, or I lngulstlc quantifiers) or a partially ordered set (Intervals or property hierarchies). It becomes even more complex when hypotheses are related to each other (Shafer's theory Is an example when hypotheses are subsets of a set), or when the evaluation of evidences are not binary (systems where hypotheses can serve as evidences to other hypothese are examp I es).

This paper describes a heuristic Bayesian method for computing probability distributions from experimental data, based upon the normal distribution form of the influence diagram. An example illustrates its use in medical technology assessment. This approach facilitates the integration of results from different studies, and permits a medical expert to make proper assessments without considerable statistical training. There has been extensive research on the construction and manipulation of expert systems using probabilities as a measure for uncertainty. These systems are capable of recognizing considerable dependence and of learning from unreliable observations.

Poly-trees are singly connected causal networks in which variables may arise from multiple causes. This paper develops a method of recovering ply-trees from empirically measured probability distributions of pairs of variables. The method guarantees that, if the measured distributions are generated by a causal process structured as a ply-tree then the topological structure of such tree can be recovered precisely and, in addition, the causal directionality of the branches can be determined up to the maximum extent possible. The method also pinpoints the minimum (if any) external semantics required to determine the causal relationships among the variables considered.

An inductive logic can be formulated in which the elements are not propositions or probability distributions, but information systems. The logic is complete for information systems with binary hypotheses, i.e., it applies to all such systems. It is not complete for information systems with more than two hypotheses, but applies to a subset of such systems. The logic is inductive in that conclusions are more informative than premises. Inferences using the formalism have a strong justification in terms of the expected value of the derived information system.

Decision tree induction systems are being used for knowledge acquisition in noisy domains. This paper develops a subjective Bayesian interpretation of the task tackled by these systems and the heuristic methods they use. It is argued that decision tree systems implicitly incorporate a prior belief that the simpler (in terms of decision tree complexity) of two hypotheses be preferred, all else being equal, and that they perform a greedy search of the space of decision rules to find one in which there is strong posterior belief. A number of improvements to these systems are then suggested.

However, the theory has not been implemented for reasoning in expert systems due to.its difficulty dealing with uncertain rules. More recently, several extenstions to the theory has been proposed to overcome this difficulty [Yen, 1986a] [Liu, 1986]. Based on Yen's extended DS theory, we have implemented a prototype expert system, named GERTIS (General Evidential Reasoning Tool for Intelligent Systems), that diagnoses rheumatoid arthritis. We chose unspecified polyarthritis as the area of our medical consultation system because the diagnoses form a disease hierarchy, which fits Dempster-Shafer based reasoning best. GERTIS uses the knowledge base of OADIAG-2, a medical expert system developed by Peter Adlassnig [Adlassnig, 1985a,b]. Through the use of OADIAG-2's knowledge base, relevant evidence and rules have been already identified for the area of arthritis. In order to suit the needs of our model, however, the rules of OADIAG-2 were modified and reorganized.