[comp.archives] [comp.ai.shells] Re: Dempster-Shafer theory

almond@alta.stat.washington.edu (Russell Almond) (10/10/90)

Archive-name: belief/03-Oct-90
Original-posting-by: almond@alta.stat.washington.edu (Russell Almond)
Original-subject: Re: Dempster-Shafer theory
Archive-site: hustat.harvard.edu [128.103.28.101]
Reposted-by: emv@math.lsa.umich.edu (Edward Vielmetti)

On shells available using Dempster-Shafer theory:

I am the developer of a package of Common Lisp functions for
implementing the belief function (Dempster-Shafer) theory.  The
program is called BELIEF and it operates in both the belief function
and ordinary (Bayesian) probability modes (in the latter case it
implements the Lauritzen and Spiegelhalter algorithm (JRSS, Series B,
1988).  It is available via anonymous ftp from hustat.harvard.edu.  It
is still currently in a test state (as a matter of fact, I have
corrected some bugs which I have not yet posted), but it works fairly
well.  The operator end of the user interface is very primitive (I'm a
statistician, not a computer scientist), but the tools available for
specifying knowledge bases are well designed.

A TeX version of the operator's manual can be gotten from the same
source.  It can also be optained from Harvard University, Departement
of Statistics (Technical Report S-128).  A detailed description of the
algorithms involved is in my disseration (Tech. Report S-130).  As I
am interested in pursing this research and having people use the
program, I will offer support over the Network.


On the applicability of the theory of belief functions:

All of the "problems" I've seen with applications of the theory of
belief functions has come down to the following scenario.  An expert
system builder, usually without formal training in statistics, tries
to apply the theory without making formal assumptions in the model.
The informal assumptions he makes are incorrect, and the result is a
paradox.  

This has always been a problem in statistics, and usually the first
few weeks of any statistics course involves describing the pitfalls
that careless assumptions produce.  A statistician knows that she will
need to carefully justify each assumption she makes (especially
independence assumptions).  The situation is no different in the more
general belief function theory.

Unfortunately, sloppy thinking leads to sloppy answers.  This is true
if the model you are using is first order logic, probability, belief
function, fuzzy logic or the human brain.  In order to get a good
expert system using belief functions, one must apply the same model
critisism/refinement procedures that one would apply to any other
knowledge base.  Work is only starting on those ideas for Bayesian and
belief function approaches.

I would be happy to discuss specific examples.

---------------------

	Russell Almond
	Dept. of Statistics, GN-22
	U. of Washington
	Seattle, WA  98195
	(206) 543-4302
	almond@stat.washington.edu