1 / 11

Information Fusion

Information Fusion. Yu Cai. Research Paper. Johan Schubert, “Clustering belief functions based on attracting and conflicting meta level evidence”, July 2002. Schubert Paper.

latoya
Download Presentation

Information Fusion

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript


  1. Information Fusion Yu Cai

  2. Research Paper • Johan Schubert, “Clustering belief functions based on attracting and conflicting meta level evidence”, July 2002

  3. Schubert Paper • Clustering belief functions based on attracting and conflicting meta level evidence to separating the belief functions into subsets that should be handled independently. • Why: • For example, in intelligence analysis we may have conflicts (meta level evidence) between two different intelligence reports about sighted objects. • sort belief functions regarding different events. (In the example, considering the presence of a dog…)

  4. Schubert Paper • Define the attracting and conflicting meta level evidence • Assign vaules to all such pieces of evidence • Combine all attracting metalevel evidence, and all conflicting metalevel evidence within each cluster • Yield belief and do partition • Compare information content

  5. Schubert Paper

  6. Dempster-Shafer Theory • The Dempster-Shafer theory, also known as the theory of belief functions, is a generalization of the Bayesian theory of subjective probability. • The Dempster-Shafer theory owes its name to work by A. P. Dempster (1968) and Glenn Shafer (1976). The theory came to the attention of AI researchers in the early 1980s. • Belief functions have been proposed for modeling someone's degrees of belief. They provide alternatives to the models based on probability functions. 

  7. Dempster-Shafer Theory • The Dempster-Shafer theory is based on two ideas: • the idea of obtaining degrees of belief for one question from subjective probabilities for a related question, • Dempster's rule for combining such degrees of belief when they are based on independent items of evidence. • Example: We obtain degrees of belief for one question (Did a limb fall on my car?) from probabilities for another question (Is the witness reliable?).

  8. Example: subjective probabilities • My subjective probability • my friend Betty is reliable is 0.9, • she is unreliable is 0.1. • Suppose she tells me a limb fell on my car. • This statement, which must true if she is reliable, is not necessarily false if she is unreliable. • So her testimony alone justifies a 0.9 degree of belief that a limb fell on my car, • but only a zero degree of belief (not a 0.1 degree of belief) that no limb fell on my car. • This zero merely means that Betty's testimony gives me no reason to believe that no limb fell on my car. • The 0.9 and the zero together constitute a belief function.

  9. Example: Dempster's rule • Suppose I have 0.9 probability for the reliability of Sally, and suppose she said, independently of Betty, that a limb fell on my car. • the probability that both are reliable is 0.9x0.9 = 0.81, • the probability that neither is reliable is 0.1x0.1 = 0.01, • and the probability that at least one is reliable is 1 - 0.01 = 0.99. • Since they both said that a limb fell on my car, at least of them being reliable implies that a limb did fall on my car, and hence I may assign this event a degree of belief of 0.99.

  10. Example: Dempster's rule • Suppose, on the other hand, that Betty and Sally contradict each other—Betty says that a limb fell on my car, and Sally says no limb fell on my car. • In this case, they cannot both be right and hence cannot both be reliable—only one is reliable, or neither is reliable. • The prior probabilities that only Betty is reliable, only Sally is reliable, and that neither is reliable are 0.09 (0.9*0.1), 0.09, and 0.01, respectively,

  11. Example • In summary, we obtain degrees of belief for one question (Did a limb fall on my car?) from probabilities for another question (Is the witness reliable?). • Implementing the Dempster-Shafer theory in a specific problem generally involves solving two related problems. • First, we must sort the uncertainties in the problem into a priori independent items of evidence. • Second, we must carry out Dempster's rule computationally.

More Related