No abstract

No abstract

No abstract

Bayesian networks (BNs) model problems that involve uncertainty. A BN is a directed graph, whose nodes are the uncertain variables and whose edges are the causal or influential links between the variables. Associated with each node is a set of conditional probability functions that model the uncertain relationship between the node and its parents. The benefits of using BNs to model uncertain domains are well known, especially since the recent breakthroughs in algorithms and tools to implement them. However, there have been serious problems for practitioners trying to use BNs to solve realistic problems. This is because, although the tools make it possible to execute large-scale BNs efficiently, there have been no guidelines on building BNs. Specifically, practitioners face two significant barriers. The first barrier is that of specifying the graph structure such that it is a sensible model of the types of reasoning being applied. The second barrier is that of eliciting the conditional probability values. In this paper we concentrate on this first problem. Our solution is based on the notion of generally applicable “building blocks”, called idioms, which serve solution patterns. These can then in turn be combined into larger BNs, using simple combination rules and by exploiting recent ideas on modular and object oriented BNs (OOBNs). This approach, which has been implemented in a BN tool, can be applied in many problem domains. We use examples to illustrate how it has been applied to build large-scale BNs for predicting software safety. In the paper we review related research from the knowledge and software engineering literature. This provides some context to the work and supports our argument that BN knowledge engineers require the same types of processes, methods and strategies enjoyed by systems and software engineers if they are to succeed in producing timely, quality and cost-effective BN decision support solutions.

A Bayesian network (BN) is a graphical model of uncertainty that is especially well suited to legal arguments. It enables us to visualize and model dependencies between different hypotheses and pieces of evidence and to calculate the revised probability beliefs about all uncertain factors when any piece of new evidence is presented. Although BNs have been widely discussed and recently used in the context of legal arguments, there is no systematic, repeatable method for modeling legal arguments as BNs. Hence, where BNs have been used in the legal context, they are presented as completed pieces of work, with no insights into the reasoning and working that must have gone into their construction. This means the process of building BNs for legal arguments is ad hoc, with little possibility for learning and process improvement. This article directly addresses this problem by describing a method for building useful legal arguments in a consistent and repeatable way. The method complements and extends recent work by Hepler, Dawid, and Leucari (2007) on object-oriented BNs for complex legal arguments and is based on the recognition that such arguments can be built up from a small number of basic causal structures (referred to as idioms). We present a number of examples that demonstrate the practicality and usefulness of the method.