Uncertainty reasoning in expert systems

Intelligent control is a very successful way to transform the expert's knowledge of the type 'if the velocity is big and the distance from the object is small, hit the brakes and decelerate as fast as possible' into an actual control. To apply this transformation, one must choose appropriate methods for reasoning with uncertainty, i.e., one must: (1) choose the representation for words like 'small', 'big'; (2) choose operations corresponding to 'and' and 'or'; (3) choose a method that transforms the resulting uncertain control recommendations into a precise control strategy. The wrong choice can drastically affect the quality of the resulting control, so the problem of choosing the right procedure is very important. From a mathematical viewpoint these choice problems correspond to non-linear optimization and are therefore extremely difficult. In this project, a new mathematical formalism (based on group theory) is developed that allows us to solve the problem of optimal choice and thus: (1) explain why the existing choices are really the best (in some situations); (2) explain a rather mysterious fact that fuzzy control (i.e., control based on the experts' knowledge) is often better than the control by these same experts; and (3) give choice recommendations for the cases when traditional choices do not work

Uncertainty reasoning and representation: A Comparison of several alternative approaches

Much of the research done in Artificial Intelligence involves investigating and developing methods of incorporating uncertainty reasoning and representation into expert systems. Several methods have been proposed and attempted for handling uncertainty in problem solving situations. The theories range from numerical approaches based on strict probabilistic reasoning to non-numeric approaches based on logical reasoning. This study investigates a number of these approaches including Bayesian Probability, Mycin Certainty Factors, Dempster-Shafer Theory of Evidence, Fuzzy Set Theory, Possibility Theory and non monotonic logic. Each of these theories and their underlying formalisms are explored by means of examples. The discussion concentrates on a comparison of the different approaches, noting the type of uncertainty that they best represent

Uncertainty Assessment in High-Risk Environments Using Probability, Evidence Theory and Expert Judgment Elicitation

The level of uncertainty in advanced system design is assessed by comparing the results of expert judgment elicitation to probability and evidence theory. This research shows how one type of monotone measure, namely Dempster-Shafer Theory of Evidence can expand the framework of uncertainty to provide decision makers a more robust solution space. The issues imbedded in this research are focused on how the relevant predictive uncertainty produced by similar action is measured. This methodology uses the established approach from traditional probability theory and Dempster-Shafer evidence theory to combine two classes of uncertainty, aleatory and epistemic. Probability theory provides the mathematical structure traditionally used in the representation of aleatory uncertainty. The uncertainty in analysis outcomes is represented by probability distributions and typically summarized as Complimentary Cumulative Distribution Functions (CCDFs). The main components of this research are probability of X in the probability theory compared to mx in evidence theory. Using this comparison, an epistemic model is developed to obtain the upper “CCPF - Complimentary Cumulative Plausibility Function” limits and the lower “CCBF - Complimentary Cumulative Belief Function” limits compared to the traditional probability function. A conceptual design for the Thermal Protection System (TPS) of future Crew Exploration Vehicles (CEV) is used as an initial test case. A questionnaire is tailored to elicit judgment from experts in high-risk environments. Based on description and characteristics, the answers of the questionnaire produces information, that serves as qualitative semantics used for the evidence theory functions. The computational mechanism provides a heuristic approach for the compilation and presentation of the results. A follow-up evaluation serves as validation of the findings and provides useful information in terms of consistency and adoptability to other domains. The results of this methodology provide a useful and practical approach in conceptual design to aid the decision maker in assessing the level of uncertainty of the experts. The methodology presented is well-suited for decision makers that encompass similar conceptual design instruments

An introduction to DSmT

The management and combination of uncertain, imprecise, fuzzy and even paradoxical or high conflicting sources of information has always been, and still remains today, of primal importance for the development of reliable modern information systems involving artificial reasoning. In this introduction, we present a survey of our recent theory of plausible and paradoxical reasoning, known as Dezert-Smarandache Theory (DSmT), developed for dealing with imprecise, uncertain and conflicting sources of information. We focus our presentation on the foundations of DSmT and on its most important rules of combination, rather than on browsing specific applications of DSmT available in literature. Several simple examples are given throughout this presentation to show the efficiency and the generality of this new approach

A methodology for the selection of a paradigm of reasoning under uncertainty in expert system development

The aim of this thesis is to develop a methodology for the selection of a paradigm of reasoning under uncertainty for the expert system developer. This is important since practical information on how to select a paradigm of reasoning under uncertainty is not generally available. The thesis explores the role of uncertainty in an expert system and considers the process of reasoning under uncertainty. The possible sources of uncertainty are investigated and prove to be crucial to some aspects of the methodology. A variety of Uncertainty Management Techniques (UMTs) are considered, including numeric, symbolic and hybrid methods. Considerably more information is found in the literature on numeric methods, than the latter two. Methods that have been proposed for comparing UMTs are studied and comparisons reported in the literature are summarised. Again this concentrates on numeric methods, since there is more literature available. The requirements of a methodology for the selection of a UMT are considered. A manual approach to the selection process is developed. The possibility of extending the boundaries of knowledge stored in the expert system by including meta-data to describe the handling of uncertainty in an expert system is then considered. This is followed by suggestions taken from the literature for automating the process of selection. Finally consideration is given to whether the objectives of the research have been met and recommendations are made for the next stage in researching a methodology for the selection of a paradigm of reasoning under uncertainty in expert system development

How to Treat Expert Judgment? With certainty it contains uncertainty!

PresentationTo be acceptably safe one must identify the risks one is exposed to. It is uncertain whether the threat really will materialize, but determining the size and probability of the risk is also full of uncertainty. When performing an analysis and preparing for decision making under uncertainty, quite frequently failure rate data, information on consequence severity or on a probability value, yes, even on the possibility an event can or cannot occur is lacking. In those cases, the only way to proceed is to revert to expert judgment. Even in case historical data are available, but one should like to know whether these data still hold in the current situation, an expert can be asked about their reliability. Anyhow, expert elicitation comes with an uncertainty depending on the expert’s reliability, which becomes very visible when two or more experts give different answers or even conflicting ones. This is not a new problem, and very bright minds have thought how to tackle it. But so far, however, the topic has not been given much attention in process safety and risk assessment. The paper has a review character and will present various approaches with detailed explanation and examples

The Combination of Paradoxical, Uncertain, and Imprecise Sources of Information based on DSmT and Neutro-Fuzzy Inference

The management and combination of uncertain, imprecise, fuzzy and even paradoxical or high conflicting sources of information has always been, and still remains today, of primal importance for the development of reliable modern information systems involving artificial reasoning. In this chapter, we present a survey of our recent theory of plausible and paradoxical reasoning, known as Dezert-Smarandache Theory (DSmT) in the literature, developed for dealing with imprecise, uncertain and paradoxical sources of information. We focus our presentation here rather on the foundations of DSmT, and on the two important new rules of combination, than on browsing specific applications of DSmT available in literature. Several simple examples are given throughout the presentation to show the efficiency and the generality of this new approach. The last part of this chapter concerns the presentation of the neutrosophic logic, the neutro-fuzzy inference and its connection with DSmT. Fuzzy logic and neutrosophic logic are useful tools in decision making after fusioning the information using the DSm hybrid rule of combination of masses.Comment: 20 page