Bayesian networks for enterprise risk assessment

According to different typologies of activity and priority, risks can assume diverse meanings and it can be assessed in different ways. In general risk is measured in terms of a probability combination of an event (frequency) and its consequence (impact). To estimate the frequency and the impact (severity) historical data or expert opinions (either qualitative or quantitative data) are used. Moreover qualitative data must be converted in numerical values to be used in the model. In the case of enterprise risk assessment the considered risks are, for instance, strategic, operational, legal and of image, which many times are difficult to be quantified. So in most cases only expert data, gathered by scorecard approaches, are available for risk analysis. The Bayesian Network is a useful tool to integrate different information and in particular to study the risk's joint distribution by using data collected from experts. In this paper we want to show a possible approach for building a Bayesian networks in the particular case in which only prior probabilities of node states and marginal correlations between nodes are available, and when the variables have only two states

Modeling crime scenarios in a Bayesian Network

Legal cases involve reasoning with evidence and with the development of a software support tool in mind, a formal foundation for evidential reasoning is required. Three approaches to evidential reasoning have been prominent in the literature: argumentation, narrative and probabilistic reasoning. In this paper a combination of the latter two is proposed. In recent research on Bayesian networks applied to legal cases, a number of legal idioms have been developed as recurring structures in legal Bayesian networks. A Bayesian network quantifies how various variables in a case interact. In the narrative approach, scenarios provide a context for the evidence in a case. A method that integrates the quantitative, numerical techniques of Bayesian networks with the qualitative, holistic approach of scenarios is lacking. In this paper, a method is proposed for modeling several scenarios in a single Bayesian network. The method is tested by doing a case study. Two new idioms are introduced: the scenario idiom and the merged scenarios idiom. The resulting network is meant to assist a judge or jury, helping to maintain a good overview of the interactions between relevant variables in a case and preventing tunnel vision by comparing various scenarios

Consensus and meta-analysis regulatory networks for combining multiple microarray gene expression datasets

Microarray data is a key source of experimental data for modelling gene regulatory interactions from expression levels. With the rapid increase of publicly available microarray data comes the opportunity to produce regulatory network models based on multiple datasets. Such models are potentially more robust with greater confidence, and place less reliance on a single dataset. However, combining datasets directly can be difficult as experiments are often conducted on different microarray platforms, and in different laboratories leading to inherent biases in the data that are not always removed through pre-processing such as normalisation. In this paper we compare two frameworks for combining microarray datasets to model regulatory networks: pre- and post-learning aggregation. In pre-learning approaches, such as using simple scale-normalisation prior to the concatenation of datasets, a model is learnt from a combined dataset, whilst in post-learning aggregation individual models are learnt from each dataset and the models are combined. We present two novel approaches for post-learning aggregation, each based on aggregating high-level features of Bayesian network models that have been generated from different microarray expression datasets. Meta-analysis Bayesian networks are based on combining statistical confidences attached to network edges whilst Consensus Bayesian networks identify consistent network features across all datasets. We apply both approaches to multiple datasets from synthetic and real (Escherichia coli and yeast) networks and demonstrate that both methods can improve on networks learnt from a single dataset or an aggregated dataset formed using a standard scale-normalisation