{[ promptMessage ]}

Bookmark it

{[ promptMessage ]}

chapter13

# chapter13 - Uncertainty Chapter 13 Chapter 13 1 Outline...

This preview shows pages 1–8. Sign up to view the full content.

Uncertainty Chapter 13 Chapter 13 1

This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document
Outline Uncertainty Probability Syntax and Semantics Inference Independence and Bayes’ Rule Chapter 13 2
Uncertainty Let action A t = leave for airport t minutes before flight Will A t get me there on time? Problems: 1) partial observability (road state, other drivers’ plans, etc.) 2) noisy sensors (KCBS tra ffi c reports) 3) uncertainty in action outcomes (flat tire, etc.) 4) immense complexity of modelling and predicting tra ffi c Hence a purely logical approach either 1) risks falsehood: “ A 25 will get me there on time” or 2) leads to conclusions that are too weak for decision making: A 25 will get me there on time if there’s no accident on the bridge and it doesn’t rain and my tires remain intact etc etc.” ( A 1440 might reasonably be said to get me there on time but I’d have to stay overnight in the airport . . . ) Chapter 13 3

This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document
Methods for handling uncertainty Default or nonmonotonic logic: Assume my car does not have a flat tire Assume A 25 works unless contradicted by evidence Issues: What assumptions are reasonable? How to handle contradiction? Rules with fudge factors : A 25 0 . 3 AtAirportOnTime Sprinkler 0 . 99 WetGrass WetGrass 0 . 7 Rain Issues: Problems with combination, e.g., Sprinkler causes Rain ?? Probability Given the available evidence, A 25 will get me there on time with probability 0 . 04 Mahaviracarya (9th C.), Cardamo (1565) theory of gambling ( Fuzzy logic handles degree of truth NOT uncertainty e.g., WetGrass is true to degree 0 . 2 ) Chapter 13 4
Probability Probabilistic assertions summarize e ff ects of laziness : failure to enumerate exceptions, qualifications, etc. ignorance : lack of relevant facts, initial conditions, etc. Subjective or Bayesian probability: Probabilities relate propositions to one’s own state of knowledge e.g., P ( A 25 | no reported accidents ) = 0 . 06 These are not claims of a “probabilistic tendency” in the current situation (but might be learned from past experience of similar situations) Probabilities of propositions change with new evidence: e.g., P ( A 25 | no reported accidents , 5 a.m. ) = 0 . 15 (Analogous to logical entailment status KB | = α , not truth.) Chapter 13 5

This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document
Making decisions under uncertainty Suppose I believe the following: P ( A 25 gets me there on time | . . . ) = 0 . 04 P ( A 90 gets me there on time | . . . ) = 0 . 70 P ( A 120 gets me there on time | . . . ) = 0 . 95 P ( A 1440 gets me there on time | . . . ) = 0 . 9999 Which action to choose? Depends on my preferences for missing flight vs. airport cuisine, etc. Utility theory is used to represent and infer preferences Decision theory = utility theory + probability theory Chapter 13 6
Probability basics Begin with a set Ω —the sample space e.g., 6 possible rolls of a die. ω Ω is a sample point / possible world / atomic event A probability space or probability model is a sample space with an assignment P ( ω ) for every ω Ω s.t. 0

This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

View Full Document
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.

{[ snackBarMessage ]}