|
|
səhifə | 3/3 | tarix | 11.09.2023 | ölçüsü | 74,5 Kb. | | #142603 |
| Lec11- ExpertSystems
- Forward chaining allows you to conclude anything
- Forward chaining is expensive
- Backward chaining requires known goals.
- Premises of backward chaining directs which facts (tests) are needed.
- Rule trace provides explanation.
- This will yield an intuitive degree of belief in system conclusion.
- To each fact, assign a confidence or degree of belief. A number between 0 and 1.
- To each rule, assign a rule confidence: also a number between 0 and 1.
- Confidence of premise of a rule =
- Confidence in conclusion of a rule =
- (confidence in rule premise)*(confidence in rule)
- Confidence in conclusion from several rules: r1,r2,..rm with confidences c1,c2,..cm =
- c1 @ c2 @... cm
- Where x @ y is 1- (1-x)*(1-y).
And now with confidences - Facts:
- F1: Ungee gives milk: .9
- F2: Ungee eats meat: .8
- F3: Ungee has hoofs: .7
- Rules:
- R1: If X gives milk, then it is a mammal: .6
- R2: If X is a mammal and eats meat, then carnivore: .5
- R3: If X has hoofs, then X is carnivore: .4
- R1 with F1: Ungee is mammal. (F4)
- Confidence F4: C(F4) = .9*.6 = .54
- R2 using F2 and F4 yields: Ungee is carnivore (F5).
- C(F5) from R2 = min(.54, .8)*.5 = .27
- R3 using F3 conclude F5 from R3
- C(F5) from R3 = .7*.4 = .28
- C(F5) from R3 and R2 = .27 @ .28 = 1 –(1-.28)*(1-.27) = .48
- People forget to say the obvious
- Rules difficult to acquire (years)
- People don’t have stable or correct estimates of “confidence”
- Data insufficient to yield good estimate of true probabilities.
- But Feigenbaum: In the knowledge lies the power.
- Calculus/confidences not that important
AI Winter - Expert Systems found useful
- hundreds of successful systems
- Consultants and hype ->
- Hundreds of unsucessful systems
- Remember:
- Now on to Probability based approach
Dostları ilə paylaş: |
|
|