This paper presents a simple framework for Horn clause abduction, with probabilities associated with hypotheses. It is shown how this representation can represent any probabilistic knowledge representable in a Bayesian belief network. The main contributions are in finding a relationship between logical and probabilistic notions of evidential reasoning. This can be used as a basis for a new way to implement Bayesian Networks that allows for approximations to the value of the posterior probabilities, and also points to a way that Bayesian networks can be extended beyond a propositional language.

Since exact probabilistic inference is intractable in general for large multiply connected belief nets, approximate methods are required. A promising approach is to use heuristic search among hypotheses (instantiations of the network) to find the most probable ones, as in the TopN algorithm. Search is based on the relative probabilities of hypotheses which are efficient to compute. Given upper and lower bounds on the relative probability of partial hypotheses, it is possible to obtain bounds on the absolute probabilities of hypotheses. Best-first search aimed at reducing the maximum error progressively narrows the bounds as more hypotheses are examined. Here, qualitative probabilistic analysis is employed to obtain bounds on the relative probability of partial hypotheses for the BN20 class of networks networks and a generalization replacing the noisy OR assumption by negative synergy. The approach is illustrated by application to a very large belief network, QMR-BN, which is a reformulation of the Internist-1 system for diagnosis in internal medicine.

We make a probabilistic analysis related to some inference rules which play an important role in nonmonotonic reasoning. In a coherence-based setting, we study the extensions of a probability assessment defined on $n$ conditional events to their quasi conjunction, and by exploiting duality, to their quasi disjunction. The lower and upper bounds coincide with some well known t-norms and t-conorms: minimum, product, Lukasiewicz, and Hamacher t-norms and their dual t-conorms. On this basis we obtain Quasi And and Quasi Or rules. These are rules for which any finite family of conditional events p-entails the associated quasi conjunction and quasi disjunction. We examine some cases of logical dependencies, and we study the relations among coherence, inclusion for conditional events, and p-entailment. We also consider the Or rule, where quasi conjunction and quasi disjunction of premises coincide with the conclusion. We analyze further aspects of quasi conjunction and quasi disjunction, by computing probabilistic bounds on premises from bounds on conclusions. Finally, we consider biconditional events, and we introduce the notion of an $n$-conditional event. Then we give a probabilistic interpretation for a generalized Loop rule. In an appendix we provide explicit expressions for the Hamacher t-norm and t-conorm in the unitary hypercube.

We present a generalization of the local expression language used in the Symbolic Probabilistic Inference (SPI) approach to inference in belief nets [1l, [8]. The local expression language in SPI is the language in which the dependence of a node on its antecedents is described. The original language represented the dependence as a single monolithic conditional probability distribution. The extended language provides a set of operators (*, +, and -) which can be used to specify methods for combining partial conditional distributions. As one instance of the utility of this extension, we show how this extended language can be used to capture the semantics, representational advantages, and inferential complexity advantages of the "noisy or" relationship.

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.

Surely we want solid foundations. What kind of castle can we build on sand? What is the point of devoting effort to balconies and minarets, if the foundation may be so weak as to allow the structure to collapse of its own weight? We want our foundations set on bedrock, designed to last for generations. Who would want an architect who cannot certify the soundness of the foundations of his buildings?

Irrelevance-based partial MAPs are useful constructs for domain-independent explanation using belief networks. We look at two definitions for such partial MAPs, and prove important properties that are useful in designing algorithms for computing them effectively. We make use of these properties in modifying our standard MAP best-first algorithm, so as to handle irrelevance-based partial MAPs.

This paper outlines a methodology for analyzing the representational support for knowledge-based decision-modeling in a broad domain. A relevant set of inference patterns and knowledge types are identified. By comparing the analysis results to existing representations, some insights are gained into a design approach for integrating categorical and uncertain knowledge in a context sensitive manner.

The graphoid axioms for conditional independence, originally described by Dawid [1979], are fundamental to probabilistic reasoning [Pearl, 19881. Such axioms provide a mechanism for manipulating conditional independence assertions without resorting to their numerical definition. This paper explores a representation for independence statements using multiple undirected graphs and some simple graphical transformations. The independence statements derivable in this system are equivalent to those obtainable by the graphoid axioms. Therefore, this is a purely graphical proof technique for conditional independence.

Any probabilistic model of a problem is based on assumptions which, if violated, invalidate the model. Users of probability based decision aids need to be alerted when cases arise that are not covered by the aid's model. Diagnosis of model failure is also necessary to control dynamic model construction and revision. This paper presents a set of decision theoretically motivated heuristics for diagnosing situations in which a model is likely to provide an inadequate representation of the process being modeled.