Dempster-Shafer TheoryArtificial Intelligence
Version 1.0
Drop me a mail: [email protected] me on web: http://rushdishams.googlepages.com
Your group: http://groups.google.com/group/csebatchesofrushdi
RS, CSE@KUET 2
Two gambleswe bet on a head turning up when we toss a
coin that is known to be fairwe bet on the outcome of a fight between the
world's greatest boxer and the world's greatest wrestler.
RS, CSE@KUET 3
Why DSTIf we have absolutely no information about
the coin, in probability theory, we will assume that it would be 50% head and
50% tail we know the coin is fair, so we know for a
fact that it would be 50% head and 50% tail.
Therefore, in the two different scenarios, we arrive at the same conclusion.
How we present total ignorance in probability theory becomes a problem.
RS, CSE@KUET 4
Why DSTIn Dempster–Shafer Theory,
for the ignorance scenario, the belief of Head and the belief of Tail would be 0.
For the fair coin scenario, the belief of Head would be 0.5, the belief of Tail
would also be 0.5.
RS, CSE@KUET 5
Formalism
RS, CSE@KUET 6
Formalism
RS, CSE@KUET 7
Formalism
RS, CSE@KUET 8
Effects of conflict (Low Conflict)Suppose that one doctor believes a patient
has either a brain tumor — with a probability of
0.99 or meningitis — with a probability of only 0.01.
A second doctor also believes the patient has a brain tumor — with a probability of 0.99and believes the patient suffers from
concussion — with a probability of only 0.01. If we calculate m (brain tumor) with
Dempster’s rule, we obtain m(brain tumor)=Bel (brain tumor)=1
RS, CSE@KUET 9
Effects of conflict (High Conflict)Suppose that one doctor believes
a patient has either meningitis with a probability of 0.99
or a brain tumor with a probability of only 0.01. A second doctor believes
the patient suffers from concussion with a probability of 0.99
and also believes the patient has a brain tumor with a probability of only 0.01.
If we calculate m (brain tumor) with Dempster’s rule, we obtain m(brain tumor)=Bel (brain tumor)=1
RS, CSE@KUET 10
Belief and PlausibilityShafer's framework allows for belief about
propositions to be represented as intervals, bounded by two values, belief (or support) and plausibility:
belief ≤ plausibility.
RS, CSE@KUET 11
Belief and PlausibilitySuppose we have a belief of 0.5 and a
plausibility of 0.8 for a proposition, say “the cat in the box is dead.” This means that we have evidence that allows us to state strongly that the proposition is true with a confidence of 0.5. However, the evidence contrary to that hypothesis (i.e. “the cat is alive”) only has a confidence of 0.2. The remaining mass of 0.3 (the gap between the 0.5 supporting evidence on the one hand, and the 0.2 contrary evidence on the other) is “indeterminate,”
RS, CSE@KUET 12
Belief and Plausibility
RS, CSE@KUET 13
Belief and Plausibility
RS, CSE@KUET 14
Belief and Plausibility
RS, CSE@KUET 15
Belief and Plausibility
RS, CSE@KUET 16
Belief and Plausibility
RS, CSE@KUET 17
Belief and Plausibility
RS, CSE@KUET 18
Belief and Plausibility
RS, CSE@KUET 19
Belief and Plausibility
RS, CSE@KUET 20
Belief and Plausibility
RS, CSE@KUET 21
Belief and Plausibility
RS, CSE@KUET 29
ReferencesWikipedia,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Belief_functions
RS, CSE@KUET 30
Stole few slides fromMiguel Garcia Remesal,
Top Related