reasoning under uncertainty

39
Reasoning Under Uncertainty Artificial Intelligence CMSC 25000 February 19, 2008

Upload: adsila

Post on 06-Jan-2016

36 views

Category:

Documents


0 download

DESCRIPTION

Artificial Intelligence CMSC 25000 February 19, 2008. Reasoning Under Uncertainty. Agenda. Motivation Reasoning with uncertainty Medical Informatics Probability and Bayes’ Rule Bayesian Networks Noisy-Or Decision Trees and Rationality Conclusions. Uncertainty. - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Artificial Intelligence

CMSC 25000

February 19, 2008

Page 2: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Agenda

• Motivation– Reasoning with uncertainty

• Medical Informatics

• Probability and Bayes’ Rule– Bayesian Networks– Noisy-Or

• Decision Trees and Rationality• Conclusions

Page 3: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Uncertainty

• Search and Planning Agents– Assume fully observable, deterministic, static

• Real World: – Probabilities capture “Ignorance & Laziness”

• Lack relevant facts, conditions

• Failure to enumerate all conditions, exceptions

– Partially observable, stochastic, extremely complex

– Can't be sure of success, agent will maximize

– Bayesian (subjective) probabilities relate to knowledge

Page 4: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Motivation

• Uncertainty in medical diagnosis– Diseases produce symptoms– In diagnosis, observed symptoms => disease ID– Uncertainties

• Symptoms may not occur• Symptoms may not be reported• Diagnostic tests not perfect

– False positive, false negative

• How do we estimate confidence?

Page 5: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Motivation II

• Uncertainty in medical decision-making– Physicians, patients must decide on treatments– Treatments may not be successful– Treatments may have unpleasant side effects

• Choosing treatments– Weigh risks of adverse outcomes

• People are BAD at reasoning intuitively about probabilities– Provide systematic analysis

Page 6: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Probability Basics

• The sample space:– A set Ω ={ω1, ω2, ω3,… ωn}

• E.g 6 possible rolls of die; • ωi is a sample point/atomic event

• Probability space/model is a sample space with an assignment P(ω) for every ω in Ω s.t. 0<= P(ω)<=1; Σ ωP(ω) = 1– E.g. P(die roll < 4)=1/6+1/6+1/6=1/2

Page 7: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Random Variables

• A random variable is a function from sample points to a range (e.g. reals, bools)

• E.g. Odd(1) = true

• P induces a probability distribution for any r.v X:– P(X=xi) = Σ{ω:X(ω)=xi}P(ω)

– E.g. P(Odd=true)=1/6+1/6+1/6=1/2

• Proposition is event (set of sample pts) s.t. proposition is true: e.g. event a= A(ω)=true

Page 8: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Why probabilities?

• Definitions imply that logically related events have related probabilities

• In AI applications, sample points are defined by set of random variables– Random vars: boolean, discrete, continuous

Page 9: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Prior Probabilities

• Prior probabilities: belief prior to evidence– E.g. P(cavity=t)=0.2; P(weather=sunny)=0.6

– Distribution gives values for all assignments

• Joint distribution on set of r.v.s gives probability on every atomic event of r.v.s– E.g. P(weather,cavity)=4x2 matrix of values

• Every question about a domain can be answered with joint b/c every event is a sum of sample pts

Page 10: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Conditional Probabilities

• Conditional (posterior) probabilities– E.g. P(cavity|toothache) = 0.8, given only that– P(cavity|toothache)=2 elt vector of 2 elt vectors

• Can add new evidence, possibly irrelevant

• P(a|b) = P(a^b)/P(b) where P(b) ≠0

• Also, P(a^b)=P(a|b)P(b)=P(b|a)P(a)– Product rule generalizes to chaining

Page 11: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Inference By Enumeration

Page 12: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Inference by Enumeration

Page 13: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Inference by Enumeration

Page 14: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Independence

Page 15: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Conditional Independence

Page 16: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Conditional Independence II

Page 17: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Probabilities Model Uncertainty

• The World - Features– Random variables– Feature values

• States of the world– Assignments of values to variables

– Exponential in # of variables– possible states

},...,,{ 21 nXXX

}...,,{ ,21 iikii xxx

n

iik

1

nik 2;2

Page 18: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Probabilities of World States

• : Joint probability of assignments– States are distinct and exhaustive

• Typically care about SUBSET of assignments– aka “Circumstance”

– Exponential in # of don’t cares

}),,,({),( 43},{ },{

2142 fXvXtXuXPfXtXPftu ftv

)( iSP

)(1

1

n

i ik

jjSP

Page 19: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

A Simpler World

• 2^n world states = Maximum entropy– Know nothing about the world

• Many variables independent– P(strep,ebola) = P(strep)P(ebola)

• Conditionally independent– Depend on same factors but not on each other– P(fever,cough|flu) = P(fever|flu)P(cough|flu)

Page 20: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Probabilistic Diagnosis

• Question:– How likely is a patient to have a disease if they have

the symptoms?

• Probabilistic Model: Bayes’ Rule• P(D|S) = P(S|D)P(D)/P(S)

– Where• P(S|D) : Probability of symptom given disease• P(D): Prior probability of having disease• P(S): Prior probability of having symptom

Page 21: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Diagnosis

• Consider Meningitis:– Disease: Meningitis: m– Symptom: Stiff neck: s– P(s|m) = 0.5– P(m) =0.0001– P(s) = 0.1– How likely is it that someone with a stiff neck

actually has meningitis?

Page 22: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Modeling (In)dependence

• Simple, graphical notation for conditional independence; compact spec of joint

• Bayesian network– Nodes = Variables– Directed acyclic graph: link ~ directly influences– Arcs = Child depends on parent(s)

• No arcs = independent (0 incoming: only a priori)• Parents of X = • For each X need

)(X))(|( XXP

Page 23: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Example I

Page 24: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Simple Bayesian Network

• MCBN1

A

B C

D E

A = only a prioriB depends on AC depends on AD depends on B,CE depends on C

Need:P(A)P(B|A)P(C|A)P(D|B,C)P(E|C)

Truth table22*22*22*2*22*2

Page 25: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Simplifying with Noisy-OR

• How many computations? – p = # parents; k = # values for variable– (k-1)k^p– Very expensive! 10 binary parents=2^10=1024

• Reduce computation by simplifying model– Treat each parent as possible independent cause– Only 11 computations

• 10 causal probabilities + “leak” probability– “Some other cause”

Page 26: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Noisy-OR Example

A B

Pn(b|a) = 1-(1-ca)(1-L)Pn(b|a) = (1-ca)(1-L)Pn(b|a) = 1-(1 -L) = L = 0.5Pn(b|a) = (1-L)

P(B|A) b b

a

a

0.6 0.4

0.5 0.5

Pn(b|a) = 1-(1-ca)(1-L)=0.6 (1-ca)(1-L)=0.4 (1-ca) =0.4/(1-L)

=0.4/0.5=0.8 ca = 0.2

Page 27: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Noisy-OR Example IIA B

C

Full model: P(c|ab)P(c|ab)P(c|ab)P(c|ab) & neg

Noisy-Or: ca, cb, LPn(c|ab) = 1-(1-ca)(1-cb)(1-L)Pn(c|ab) = 1-(1-cb)(1-L)Pn(c|ab) = 1-(1-ca)(1-L)Pn(c|ab) = 1-(1-L)

Assume:

P(a)=0.1

P(b)=0.05

Pn(c|ab)=0.3

ca= 0.5

Pn(c|b) = 0.7

= L = 0.3

Pn(c|b)=Pn(c|ab)P(a)+Pn(c|ab)P(a) 1-0.7=(1-ca)(1-cb)(1-L)0.1+(1-cb)(1-L)0.9 0.3=0.5(1-cb)0.07+(1-cb)0.7*0.9 =0.035(1-cb)+0.63(1-cb)=0.665(1-cb) 0.55=cb

Page 28: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Graph Models

• Bipartite graphs– E.g. medical reasoning– Generally, diseases cause symptom (not reverse)

d1

d2

d3

d4

s1

s2

s3

s4

s5

s6

Page 29: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Topologies

• Generally more complex– Polytree: One path between any two nodes

• General Bayes Nets– Graphs with undirected cycles

• No directed cycles - can’t be own cause

• Issue: Automatic net acquisition– Update probabilities by observing data– Learn topology: use statistical evidence of indep,

heuristic search to find most probable structure

Page 30: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Holmes Example (Pearl)

Holmes is worried that his house will be burgled. Forthe time period of interest, there is a 10^-4 a priori chanceof this happening, and Holmes has installed a burglar alarmto try to forestall this event. The alarm is 95% reliable insounding when a burglary happens, but also has a false positive rate of 1%. Holmes’ neighbor, Watson, is 90% sure to call Holmes at his office if the alarm sounds, but he is alsoa bit of a practical joker and, knowing Holmes’ concern, might (30%) call even if the alarm is silent. Holmes’ otherneighbor Mrs. Gibbons is a well-known lush and often befuddled, but Holmes believes that she is four times morelikely to call him if there is an alarm than not.

Page 31: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Holmes Example: Model

There a four binary random variables:B: whether Holmes’ house has been burgledA: whether his alarm soundedW: whether Watson calledG: whether Gibbons called

B A

W

G

Page 32: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Holmes Example: Tables

B = #t B=#f

0.0001 0.9999

A=#t A=#fB

#t#f

0.95 0.05 0.01 0.99

W=#t W=#fA

#t#f

0.90 0.10 0.30 0.70

G=#t G=#fA

#t#f

0.40 0.60 0.10 0.90

Page 33: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Decision Making

• Design model of rational decision making– Maximize expected value among alternatives

• Uncertainty from– Outcomes of actions– Choices taken

• To maximize outcome– Select maximum over choices– Weighted average value of chance outcomes

Page 34: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Gangrene Example

Medicine Amputate foot

Live 0.99 Die 0.01

850 0

Die 0.05 0

Full Recovery 0.7 1000

Worse 0.25

Medicine Amputate leg

Die 0.4 0

Live 0.6 995

Die 0.02 0

Live 0.98 700

Page 35: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Decision Tree Issues

• Problem 1: Tree size– k activities : 2^k orders

• Solution 1: Hill-climbing– Choose best apparent choice after one step

• Use entropy reduction

• Problem 2: Utility values– Difficult to estimate, Sensitivity, Duration

• Change value depending on phrasing of question

• Solution 2c: Model effect of outcome over lifetime

Page 36: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Conclusion

• Reasoning with uncertainty– Many real systems uncertain - e.g. medical

diagnosis

• Bayes’ Nets– Model (in)dependence relations in reasoning– Noisy-OR simplifies model/computation

• Assumes causes independent

• Decision Trees– Model rational decision making

• Maximize outcome: Max choice, average outcomes

Page 37: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Holmes Example (Pearl)

Holmes is worried that his house will be burgled. Forthe time period of interest, there is a 10^-4 a priori chanceof this happening, and Holmes has installed a burglar alarmto try to forestall this event. The alarm is 95% reliable insounding when a burglary happens, but also has a false positive rate of 1%. Holmes’ neighbor, Watson, is 90% sure to call Holmes at his office if the alarm sounds, but he is alsoa bit of a practical joker and, knowing Holmes’ concern, might (30%) call even if the alarm is silent. Holmes’ otherneighbor Mrs. Gibbons is a well-known lush and often befuddled, but Holmes believes that she is four times morelikely to call him if there is an alarm than not.

Page 38: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Holmes Example: Model

There a four binary random variables:B: whether Holmes’ house has been burgledA: whether his alarm soundedW: whether Watson calledG: whether Gibbons called

B A

W

G

Page 39: Reasoning Under Uncertainty

Holmes Example: Tables

B = #t B=#f

0.0001 0.9999

A=#t A=#fB

#t#f

0.95 0.05 0.01 0.99

W=#t W=#fA

#t#f

0.90 0.10 0.30 0.70

G=#t G=#fA

#t#f

0.40 0.60 0.10 0.90