BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

GraphFollow connections around a paper, topic or saved view.

Workspaces

HomePick up where your research flow left off.InboxHandle requests, replies and notifications from one place.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.PartnersSee external organizations active around the same topics.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Researcher profile

Lilith Mattei

Lilith Mattei contributes to research discovery and scholarly infrastructure.

ResearcherAffiliation not importedOpen to collaborate
Artificial Intelligence

Trust snapshot

Quick read

Trust 13 - UnverifiedVerification L1Unclaimed author
2works
0followers
1topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Decide how to stay connected

Follow researcher0

Identity and collaboration

How to connect with this researcher

Claiming links this public author record to a researcher profile and unlocks direct collaboration workflows.

Log in to claim

Direct collaboration

Open a focused conversation when the fit is right

Claim this author entity first to unlock direct invitations.

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this graph slice

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

Published work

2 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

Belief Revision in Sentential Decision Diagrams

Belief revision is the task of modifying a knowledge base when new information becomes available, while also respecting a number of desirable properties. Classical belief revision schemes have been already specialised to \emph{binary decision diagrams} (BDDs), the classical formalism to compactly represent propositional knowledge. These results also apply to \emph{ordered} BDDs (OBDDs), a special class of BDDs, designed to guarantee canonicity. Yet, those revisions cannot be applied to \emph{sentential decision diagrams} (SDDs), a typically more compact but still canonical class of Boolean circuits, which generalizes OBDDs, while not being a subclass of BDDs. Here we fill this gap by deriving a general revision algorithm for SDDs based on a syntactic characterisation of Dalal revision. A specialised procedure for DNFs is also presented. Preliminary experiments performed with randomly generated knowledge bases show the advantages of directly perform revision within SDD formalism.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2020arXiv

Tractable Inference in Credal Sentential Decision Diagrams

Probabilistic sentential decision diagrams are logic circuits where the inputs of disjunctive gates are annotated by probability values. They allow for a compact representation of joint probability mass functions defined over sets of Boolean variables, that are also consistent with the logical constraints defined by the circuit. The probabilities in such a model are usually learned from a set of observations. This leads to overconfident and prior-dependent inferences when data are scarce, unreliable or conflicting. In this work, we develop the credal sentential decision diagrams, a generalisation of their probabilistic counterpart that allows for replacing the local probabilities with (so-called credal) sets of mass functions. These models induce a joint credal set over the set of Boolean variables, that sharply assigns probability zero to states inconsistent with the logical constraints. Three inference algorithms are derived for these models, these allow to compute: (i) the lower and upper probabilities of an observation for an arbitrary number of variables; (ii) the lower and upper conditional probabilities for the state of a single variable given an observation; (iii) whether or not all the probabilistic sentential decision diagrams compatible with the credal specification have the same most probable explanation of a given set of variables given an observation of the other variables. These inferences are tractable, as all the three algorithms, based on bottom-up traversal with local linear programming tasks on the disjunctive gates, can be solved in polynomial time with respect to the circuit size. For a first empirical validation, we consider a simple application based on noisy seven-segment display images. The credal models are observed to properly distinguish between easy and hard-to-detect instances and outperform other generative models not able to cope with logical constraints.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access