Scribd
Upload
12 views

Chapter 8 - Expert Systems & Reasoning

Uploaded by

d4rx5wsrw5
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
12 views

Chapter 8 - Expert Systems & Reasoning

Uploaded by

d4rx5wsrw5
Copyright
© © All Rights Reserved
Available Formats
Download as PPTX, PDF, TXT or read online on Scribd
You are on page 1/ 20

Department of Computer Sciences

College of Computers & Information Technology

501481-3 Summer 2022

Artificial Intelligence
Chapter 8: Expert Systems &
Reasoning

1
Who is generally acknowledged
as an expert?
• Anyone can be considered a domain expert if he or
she has deep knowledge (of both facts and rules)
and strong practical experience in a particular
domain.
• The area of the domain may be limited. For
example, experts in life insurance marketing might
have limited understanding of a real estate
insurance policy.
• In general, an expert is a skilful person who can do
things other people cannot.
Definition of Expert Systems
• An Expert System is a computer program designed to simulate
the problem-solving behavior of a human who is an expert in a
narrow domain or discipline.
• Expert System, also called a Knowledge Based System (KBS), is
computer application programs that take the knowledge of one
or more human experts in a field and computerize it so that it is
readily available for use. A more general definition for expert
systems could be:

“An expert systems is a program that attempts to mimic human


expertise by applying inference methods to a specific body of
knowledge. This body of knowledge is called the domain.”
Main Players of Expert systems
Development Team

In general, there are five members of the expert system development


team. The success of their expert system entirely depends on how well
the members work together.
Complete
Structure
of a
Rule Based
Expert
System
Structure of a Rule-Based
Expert System
• The knowledge base contains the domain knowledge useful for
problem solving. In a rule-based expert system, the knowledge is
represented as a set of rules. Each rule specifies a relation,
recommendation, directive, strategy or heuristic and has the IF
(condition) THEN (action) structure. When the condition part of a rule
is satisfied, the rule is said to fire and the action part is executed.

• The database includes a set of facts used to match against the IF


(condition) parts of rules stored in the knowledge base.

• The inference engine carries out the reasoning whereby the expert
system reaches a solution. It links the rules given in the knowledge
base with the facts provided in the database.
Structure of a Rule-Based
Expert System
• The explanation facilities enable the user to ask the expert system how a
particular conclusion is reached and why a specific fact is needed. An
expert system must be able to explain its reasoning and justify its advice,
analysis or conclusion.

• The user interface is the means of communication between a user seeking


a solution to the problem and an expert system. The communication
should be as meaningful and friendly as possible.

• The external interface allows an expert system to work with external data
files and programs written in conventional programming languages such
as C, Pascal, FORTRAN and Basic. The developer interface usually includes
knowledge base editors, debugging aids and input/output facilities.
Production System Model

The production model is based on the idea that humans


solve problems by applying their knowledge (expressed as
production rules) to a given problem represented by
problem-specific information.
The production rules are stored in the long-term memory
and the problem-specific information or facts in the short-
term memory.
Reasoning
• In AI, logical reasoning is a mechanism necessary to follow
behavior rules as the system responds to states of the world
to solve an AI problem

• In general, there are four types of reasoning:


– deductive reasoning,
– inductive reasoning,
– abductive reasoning and
– reasoning by analogy.
Inductive Reasoning
• If the premises is false or says nothing about knowledge or
knowledge is not complete, then the case is inductive
inference.
• To understand inductive inference, consider the following
Propositions:
All animals eat, therefore all kangaroos eat

• The premises given says nothing about whether or not


Kangaroo is an animal.
• The problem is that such inference lacks mathematical
exactness of deduction.
Deductive Reasoning
• This problem does not exist in the case of
deductive inference. Deductive inference
means that if the premises are true, then the
conclusion is guaranteed also to be true:

Rachel is a programmer, and all programmers


are happy, therefore Rachel is happy
Reasoning with Certainty
Life Insurance Example
• The following rules show how the induction technique generates
general rules from specific examples:

RULE 1 if age is old


and gender is male
and smoker is no
then risk is low;
RULE 2 if age is middle
and gender is male
and smoker is yes
then risk is high;
RULE 3 if age is young
and gender is female
and smoker is no
then risk is low;
Reasoning & Uncertainty
• Reasoning for real-world problems involves
missing knowledge, inexact knowledge,
inconsistent facts or rules, and other sources of
uncertainty

• In general, sources of Uncertainty and


Inexactness in Reasoning are:
• Incorrect and Incomplete Knowledge
• Ambiguities
• Belief and Ignorance
Reasoning & Uncertainty
Sources of Uncertainty
• Data
– data missing, unreliable, ambiguous,
– representation imprecise, inconsistent, subjective,
derived from defaults.

• Expert knowledge
– inconsistency between different experts
– plausibility
• “best guess” of experts
Belief, Disbelief, and CF
• measure of belief MB(H,E)
– degree to which hypothesis H is supported by evidence
E
• measure of disbelief MD(H,E)
– degree to which doubt in hypothesis H is supported by
evidence E
• difference between belief and disbelief
CF (H,E) = MB(H,E) - MD (H,E)
denotes the belief in a hypothesis H given that some
pieces of evidence E are observed
Characteristics of Certainty Factors
Aspect Probability MB MD CF
Certainly true P(H|E) = 1 1 0 1
Certainly false P(¬H|E) = 1 0 1 -1
No evidence P(H|E) = P(H) 0 0 0

• Ranges
– measure of belief 0 ≤ MB ≤ 1
– measure of disbelief 0 ≤ MD ≤ 1
– certainty factor -1 ≤ CF ≤ +1
Combining Evidence
in a Hypothesis
– A change in evidence, or having a new
evidence, of rule premises could be
combined :
• E1 AND E2 min [CF(E1, e),CF(E2, e)]
• E1 OR E2 max[CF(E1, e),CF(E2, e)]
• NOT E -CF(E, e)
Combining Evidence
in a Hypothesis
– The change in evidence will certainty
affect the overall CF of rule hypothesis:

IF Ecombined THEN H (CFOld)

is given by:
CFNew(H, Ecombined) = CF(Ecombined) *CF(H,E)Old
Quantification of Uncertainty Terms
Example
Given the following rule:
IF Sky definitely Dark AND Wind definitely Strong
THEN it will almost certainly Rain CF=0.8

Suppose that the evidence of having wind


changed from definitely to probably (0.7).
Rewrite the new modified rule after these
changes

You might also like