Evidential reasoning is now a leading topic in Artificial Intelligence. Evidence is represented by a variety of evidential functions. Evidential reasoning is carried out by certain kinds of fundamental operation on these functions. This paper discusses two of the basic operations on evidential functions, the discount operation and the well-known orthogonal sum operation. We show that the discount operation is not commutative with the orthogonal sum operation, and derive expressions for the two operations applied to the various evidential function.

Numerous methods for probabilistic reasoning in large, complex belief or decision networks are currently being developed. There has been little research on automating the dynamic, incremental construction of decision models. A uniform value-driven method of decision model construction is proposed for the hierarchical complete diagnosis. Hierarchical complete diagnostic reasoning is formulated as a stochastic process and modeled using influence diagrams. Given observations, this method creates decision models in order to obtain the best actions sequentially for locating and repairing a fault at minimum cost. This method construct decision models incrementally, interleaving probe actions with model construction and evaluation. The method treats meta-level and baselevel tasks uniformly. That is, the method takes a decision-theoretic look at the control of search in causal pathways and structural hierarchies.

Valuation networks have been proposed as graphical representations of valuation-based systems (VBSs). The VBS framework is able to capture many uncertainty calculi including probability theory, Dempster-Shafer's belief-function theory, Spohn's epistemic belief theory, and Zadeh's possibility theory. In this paper, we show how valuation networks encode conditional independence relations. For the probabilistic case, the class of probability models encoded by valuation networks includes undirected graph models, directed acyclic graph models, directed balloon graph models, and recursive causal graph models.

We take a utility-based approach to categorization. We construct generalizations about events and actions by considering losses associated with failing to distinguish among detailed distinctions in a decision model. The utility-based methods transform detailed states of the world into more abstract categories comprised of disjunctions of the states. We show how we can cluster distinctions into groups of distinctions at progressively higher levels of abstraction, and describe rules for decision making with the abstractions. The techniques introduce a utility-based perspective on the nature of concepts, and provide a means of simplifying decision models used in automated reasoning systems. We demonstrate the techniques by describing the capabilities and output of TUBA, a program for utility-based abstraction.

This paper describes ongoing research into planning in an uncertain environment. In particular, it introduces U-Plan, a planning system that constructs quantitatively ranked plans given an incomplete description of the state of the world. U-Plan uses a DempsterShafer interval to characterise uncertain and incomplete information about the state of the world. The planner takes as input what is known about the world, and constructs a number of possible initial states with representations at different abstraction levels. A plan is constructed for the initial state with the greatest support, and this plan is tested to see if it will work for other possible initial states. All, part, or none of the existing plans may be used in the generation of the plans for the remaining possible worlds. Planning takes place in an abstraction hierarchy where strategic decisions are made before tactical decisions. A super-plan is then constructed, based on merging the set of plans and the appropriately timed acquisition of essential knowledge, which is used to decide between plan alternatives. U-Plan usually produces a super-plan in less time than a classical planner would take to produce a set of plans, one for each possible world.

Two algorithms are presented for "compiling" influence diagrams into a set of simple decision rules. These decision rules define simple-to-execute, complete, consistent, and near-optimal decision procedures. These compilation algorithms can be used to derive decision procedures for human teams solving time constrained decision problems.

We describe the integration of logical and uncertain reasoning methods to identify the likely source and location of software problems. To date, software engineers have had few tools for identifying the sources of error in complex software packages. We describe a method for diagnosing software problems through combining logical and uncertain reasoning analyses. Our preliminary results suggest that such methods can be of value in directing the attention of software engineers to paths of an algorithm that have the highest likelihood of harboring a programming error.

In previous work we developed a method of learning Bayesian Network models from raw data. This method relies on the well known minimal description length (MDL) principle. The MDL principle is particularly well suited to this task as it allows us to tradeoff, in a principled way, the accuracy of the learned network against its practical usefulness. In this paper we present some new results that have arisen from our work. In particular, we present a new local way of computing the description length. This allows us to make significant improvements in our search algorithm. In addition, we modify our algorithm so that it can take into account partial domain information that might be provided by a domain expert. The local computation of description length also opens the door for local refinement of an existent network. The feasibility of our approach is demonstrated by experiments involving networks of a practical size.

One topic that is likely to attract an increasing amount of attention within the Knowledge-base systems research community is the coordination of information provided by multiple experts. We envision a situation in which several experts independently encode information as belief networks. A potential user must then coordinate the conclusions and recommendations of these networks to derive some sort of consensus. One approach to such a consensus is the fusion of the contributed networks into a single, consensus model prior to the consideration of any case-specific data (specific observations, test results). This approach requires two types of combination procedures, one for probabilities, and one for graphs. Since the combination of probabilities is relatively well understood, the key barriers to this approach lie in the realm of graph theory. This paper provides formal definitions of some of the operations necessary to effect the necessary graphical combinations, and provides complexity analyses of these procedures. The paper's key result is that most of these operations are NP-hard, and its primary message is that the derivation of ?good? consensus networks must be done heuristically.

To determine the value of perfect information in an influence diagram, one needs first to modify the diagram to reflect the change in information availability, and then to compute the optimal expected values of both the original diagram and the modified diagram. The value of perfect information is the difference between the two optimal expected values. This paper is about how to speed up the computation of the optimal expected value of the modified diagram by making use of the intermediate computation results obtained when computing the optimal expected value of the original diagram.