Bayesian belief networks can be used to represent and to reason about complex systems with uncertain, incomplete and conflicting information. Belief networks are graphs encoding and quantifying probabilistic dependence and conditional independence among variables. One type of reasoning of interest in diagnosis is called abductive inference (determination of the global most probable system description given the values of any partial subset of variables). In some cases, abductive inference can be performed with exact algorithms using distributed network computations but it is an NP-hard problem and complexity increases drastically with the presence of undirected cycles, number of discrete states per variable, and number of variables in the network. This paper describes an approximate method based on genetic algorithms to perform abductive inference in large, multiply connected networks for which complexity is a concern when using most exact methods and for which systematic search methods are not feasible. The theoretical adequacy of the method is discussed and preliminary experimental results are presented.

This paper discusses how conflicts (as used by the consistency-based diagnosis community) can be adapted to be used in a search-based algorithm for computing prior and posterior probabilities in discrete Bayesian Networks. This is an "anytime" algorithm, that at any stage can estimate the probabilities and give an error bound. Whereas the most popular Bayesian net algorithms exploit the structure of the network for efficiency, we exploit probability distributions for efficiency; this algorithm is most suited to the case with extreme probabilities. This paper presents a solution to the inefficiencies found in naive algorithms, and shows how the tools of the consistency-based diagnosis community (namely conflicts) can be used effectively to improve the efficiency. Empirical results with networks having tens of thousands of nodes are presented.

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.

Given a belief network with evidence, the task of finding the I most probable explanations (MPE) in the belief network is that of identifying and ordering the I most probable instantiations of the non-evidence nodes of the belief network. Although many approaches have been proposed for solving this problem, most work only for restricted topologies (i.e., singly connected belief networks). In this paper, we will present a new approach for finding I MPEs in an arbitrary belief network. First, we will present an algorithm for finding the MPE in a belief network. Then, we will present a linear time algorithm for finding the next MPE after finding the first MPE. And finally, we will discuss the problem of finding the MPE for a subset of variables of a belief network, and show that the problem can be efficiently solved by this approach.

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.

Intercausal reasoning is a common inference pattern involving probabilistic dependence of causes of an observed common effect. The sign of this dependence is captured by a qualitative property called product synergy. The current definition of product synergy is insufficient for intercausal reasoning where there are additional uninstantiated causes of the common effect. We propose a new definition of product synergy and prove its adequacy for intercausal reasoning with direct and indirect evidence for the common effect. The new definition is based on a new property matrix half positive semi-definiteness, a weakened form of matrix positive semi-definiteness.

We describe a method for time-critical decision making involving sequential tasks and stochastic processes. The method employs several iterative refinement routines for solving different aspects of the decision making problem. This paper concentrates on the meta-level control problem of deliberation scheduling, allocating computational resources to these routines. We provide different models corresponding to optimization problems that capture the different circumstances and computational strategies for decision making under time constraints. We consider precursor models in which all decision making is performed prior to execution and recurrent models in which decision making is performed in parallel with execution, accounting for the states observed during execution and anticipating future states. We describe algorithms for precursor and recurrent models and provide the results of our empirical investigations to date.

Propositional representation services such as truth maintenance systems offer powerful support for incremental, interleaved, problem-model construction and evaluation. Probabilistic inference systems, in contrast, have lagged behind in supporting this incrementality typically demanded by problem solvers. The problem, we argue, is that the basic task of probabilistic inference is typically formulated at too large a grain-size. We show how a system built around a smaller grain-size inference task can have the desired incrementality and serve as the basis for a low-level (propositional) probabilistic representation service.

In recent years the belief network has been used increasingly to model systems in Al that must perform uncertain inference. The development of efficient algorithms for probabilistic inference in belief networks has been a focus of much research in AI. Efficient algorithms for certain classes of belief networks have been developed, but the problem of reporting the uncertainty in inferred probabilities has received little attention. A system should not only be capable of reporting the values of inferred probabilities and/or the favorable choices of a decision; it should report the range of possible error in the inferred probabilities and/or choices. Two methods have been developed and implemented for determining the variance in inferred probabilities in belief networks. These methods, the Approximate Propagation Method and the Monte Carlo Integration Method are discussed and compared in this paper.

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.