A Study of Associative Evidential Reasoning

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).