Uncertainty Management for Rule-Based Decision Support Systems

We present an uncertainty management scheme in rule-based systems for decision making in the domain of urban infrastructure. Our aim is to help end users make informed decisions. Human reasoning is prone to a certain degree of uncertainty but domain experts frequently find it difficult to quantify this precisely, and thus prefer to use qualitative (rather than quantitative) confidence levels to support their reasoning. Secondly, there is uncertainty in data when it is not currently available (missing). In order to incorporate human-like reasoning within rule-based systems we use qualitative confidence levels chosen by domain experts in urban infrastructure. We introduce a mechanism for the representation of confidence of input facts and inference rules, and for the computation of confidence in the inferred facts. We also present a mechanism for computing inferences in the presence of missing facts, and their effect on the confidence of inferred facts

ToolSHeD™: The development and evaluation of a decision support tool for health and safety in construction design

Purpose - The purpose of this paper is to describe an innovative information and decision support tool (ToolSHeD(TM)) developed to help construction designers to integrate the management of OHS risk into the design process. The underlying structure of the prototype web-based system and the process of knowledge acquisition and modelling are described. Design/methodology/approach - The ToolSHeD(TM) research and development project involved the capture of expert reasoning regarding design impacts upon occupational health and safety (OHS) risk. This knowledge was structured using an innovative method well-suited to modelling knowledge in the context of uncertainty and discretionary decision-making. Example "argument trees" are presented, representing the reasoning used by a panel of experts to assess the risk of falling from height during roof maintenance work. The advantage of using this method for modelling OHS knowledge, compared to the use of simplistic rules, is discussed. Findings - The ToolSHeD™ prototype development and testing reveals that argument trees can represent design safety risk knowledge effectively. Practical implications - The translation of argument trees into a web-based decision support tool is described and the potential impact of this tool in providing construction designers (architects and engineers) with easy and inexpensive access to expert OHS knowledge is discussed. Originality/value - The paper describes a new computer application, currently undergoing testing in the Australian building and construction industry. Its originality lies in the fact that ToolSHeD(TM) deploys argument trees to represent expert OHS reasoning, overcoming inherent limitations in rule-based expert systems

An advanced risk analysis approach for container port safety evaluation

Risk analysis in seaports plays an increasingly important role in ensuring port operation reliability, maritime transportation safety and supply chain distribution resilience. However, the task is not straightforward given the challenges, including that port safety is affected by multiple factors related to design, installation, operation and maintenance and that traditional risk assessment methods such as quantitative risk analysis cannot sufficiently address uncertainty in failure data. This paper develops an advanced Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA) approach through incorporating Fuzzy Rule-Based Bayesian Networks (FRBN) to evaluate the criticality of the hazardous events (HEs) in a container terminal. The rational use of the Degrees of Belief (DoB) in a fuzzy rule base (FRB) facilitates the implementation of the new method in Container Terminal Risk Evaluation (CTRE) in practice. Compared to conventional FMEA methods, the new approach integrates FRB and BN in a complementary manner, in which the former provides a realistic and flexible way to describe input failure information while the latter allows easy updating of risk estimation results and facilitates real-time safety evaluation and dynamic risk-based decision support in container terminals. The proposed approach can also be tailored for wider application in other engineering and management systems, especially when instant risk ranking is required by the stakeholders to measure, predict and improve their system safety and reliability performance

A dominant set-informed interpretable fuzzy system for automated diagnosis of dementia

Dementia is an incurable neurodegenerative disease primarily affecting the older population, for which the World Health Organisation has set to promoting early diagnosis and timely management as one of the primary goals for dementia care. While a range of popular machine learning algorithms and their variants have been applied for dementia diagnosis, fuzzy systems, which have been known effective in dealing with uncertainty and offer to explicitly reason how a diagnosis can be inferred, sporadically appear in recent literature. Given the advantages of a fuzzy rule-based model, which could potentially result in a clinical decision support system that offers understandable rules and a transparent inference process to support dementia diagnosis, this paper proposes a novel fuzzy inference system by adapting the concept of dominant sets that arise from the study of graph theory. A peeling-off strategy is used to iteratively extract from the constructed edge-weighted graph a collection of dominant sets. Each dominant set is further converted into a parameterized fuzzy rule, which is finally optimized in a supervised adaptive network-based fuzzy inference framework. An illustrative example is provided that demonstrates the interpretable rules and the transparent reasoning process of reaching a decision. Further systematic experiments conducted on data from the Open Access Series of Imaging Studies (OASIS) repository, also validate its superior performance over alternative methods

Solving multiple-criteria R&D project selection problems with a data-driven evidential reasoning rule

In this paper, a likelihood based evidence acquisition approach is proposed to acquire evidence from experts'assessments as recorded in historical datasets. Then a data-driven evidential reasoning rule based model is introduced to R&D project selection process by combining multiple pieces of evidence with different weights and reliabilities. As a result, the total belief degrees and the overall performance can be generated for ranking and selecting projects. Finally, a case study on the R&D project selection for the National Science Foundation of China is conducted to show the effectiveness of the proposed model. The data-driven evidential reasoning rule based model for project evaluation and selection (1) utilizes experimental data to represent experts' assessments by using belief distributions over the set of final funding outcomes, and through this historic statistics it helps experts and applicants to understand the funding probability to a given assessment grade, (2) implies the mapping relationships between the evaluation grades and the final funding outcomes by using historical data, and (3) provides a way to make fair decisions by taking experts' reliabilities into account. In the data-driven evidential reasoning rule based model, experts play different roles in accordance with their reliabilities which are determined by their previous review track records, and the selection process is made interpretable and fairer. The newly proposed model reduces the time-consuming panel review work for both managers and experts, and significantly improves the efficiency and quality of project selection process. Although the model is demonstrated for project selection in the NSFC, it can be generalized to other funding agencies or industries.Comment: 20 pages, forthcoming in International Journal of Project Management (2019

Development and Validation of a Rule-based Time Series Complexity Scoring Technique to Support Design of Adaptive Forecasting DSS

Evidence from forecasting research gives reason to believe that understanding time series complexity can enable design of adaptive forecasting decision support systems (FDSSs) to positively support forecasting behaviors and accuracy of outcomes. Yet, such FDSS design capabilities have not been formally explored because there exists no systematic approach to identifying series complexity. This study describes the development and validation of a rule-based complexity scoring technique (CST) that generates a complexity score for time series using 12 rules that rely on 14 features of series. The rule-based schema was developed on 74 series and validated on 52 holdback series using well-accepted forecasting methods as benchmarks. A supporting experimental validation was conducted with 14 participants who generated 336 structured judgmental forecasts for sets of series classified as simple or complex by the CST. Benchmark comparisons validated the CST by confirming, as hypothesized, that forecasting accuracy was lower for series scored by the technique as complex when compared to the accuracy of those scored as simple. The study concludes with a comprehensive framework for design of FDSS that can integrate the CST to adaptively support forecasters under varied conditions of series complexity. The framework is founded on the concepts of restrictiveness and guidance and offers specific recommendations on how these elements can be built in FDSS to support complexity