BZPEERPapers, people, evidence and research paths
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics, institutions and opportunities from one place.GraphSee how papers, authors, topics and evidence connect.

Research tools

HomeContinue from the papers, people and topics that matter now.CollectionsTurn saved papers into reading lists, evidence maps and shareable context.ResearchReconstruct the path that led you from search to paper to question.CollaborationMove from a paper, topic or expert request into a focused thread.PublishCreate full-text research articles with metadata, formulas and versions.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists whose work and reviews explain why they can help.CommunitiesJoin research groups organized around papers, topics and shared evidence.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations connected to real research context.

Account

Log inReturn to your saved papers, graph views and active threads.Create accountStart saving papers, building a research trail and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

Brendan del Favero

Brendan del Favero appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
Artificial Intelligence

Catalog footprint

What is connected

3works
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent papers, topics, institutions and collaborators without losing the researcher page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

3 published item(s)

preprint2013arXiv

An Experimental Comparison of Numerical and Qualitative Probabilistic Reasoning

Qualitative and infinitesimal probability schemes are consistent with the axioms of probability theory, but avoid the need for precise numerical probabilities. Using qualitative probabilities could substantially reduce the effort for knowledge engineering and improve the robustness of results. We examine experimentally how well infinitesimal probabilities (the kappa-calculus of Goldszmidt and Pearl) perform a diagnostic task - troubleshooting a car that will not start by comparison with a conventional numerical belief network. We found the infinitesimal scheme to be as good as the numerical scheme in identifying the true fault. The performance of the infinitesimal scheme worsens significantly for prior fault probabilities greater than 0.03. These results suggest that infinitesimal probability methods may be of substantial practical value for machine diagnosis with small prior fault probabilities.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Backward Simulation in Bayesian Networks

Backward simulation is an approximate inference technique for Bayesian belief networks. It differs from existing simulation methods in that it starts simulation from the known evidence and works backward (i.e., contrary to the direction of the arcs). The technique's focus on the evidence leads to improved convergence in situations where the posterior beliefs are dominated by the evidence rather than by the prior probabilities. Since this class of situations is large, the technique may make practical the application of approximate inference in Bayesian belief networks to many real-world problems.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Why Is Diagnosis Using Belief Networks Insensitive to Imprecision In Probabilities?

Recent research has found that diagnostic performance with Bayesian belief networks is often surprisingly insensitive to imprecision in the numerical probabilities. For example, the authors have recently completed an extensive study in which they applied random noise to the numerical probabilities in a set of belief networks for medical diagnosis, subsets of the CPCS network, a subset of the QMR (Quick Medical Reference) focused on liver and bile diseases. The diagnostic performance in terms of the average probabilities assigned to the actual diseases showed small sensitivity even to large amounts of noise. In this paper, we summarize the findings of this study and discuss possible explanations of this low sensitivity. One reason is that the criterion for performance is average probability of the true hypotheses, rather than average error in probability, which is insensitive to symmetric noise distributions. But, we show that even asymmetric, logodds-normal noise has modest effects. A second reason is that the gold-standard posterior probabilities are often near zero or one, and are little disturbed by noise.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access