1 / 26

A Role of Dialogue Strategy in Multiattribute Classification Performance

A Role of Dialogue Strategy in Multiattribute Classification Performance. Eugenia Furems Institute for System Analysis of Russian Academy of Sciences fem@mail.ru. A Role of Dialogue Strategy in Multiattribute Classification Performance Outline.

tejano
Download Presentation

A Role of Dialogue Strategy in Multiattribute Classification Performance

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. A Role of Dialogue Strategy in Multiattribute Classification Performance Eugenia Furems Institute for System Analysisof Russian Academy of Sciences fem@mail.ru MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  2. A Role of Dialogue Strategy in Multiattribute Classification PerformanceOutline Verbal Decision Analysis (VAR) – principles & methods Knowledge-based multiattribute classification Cognitive difficulties & their avoidance VDA-based method for Nominal-Ordinal Classification(NORCLASS) Advantages and Disadvantages of NORCLASS Modification of NORCLASS dialogue and its effectiveness Conclusion MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  3. Verbal Decision Analysis – Principles • Human (DM’s, expert’s) judgements (in verbal or, in other words, qualitative form) - the primary source of information for decision making problems solving • Processing such information without any quantitative conversion, so that any resulting conclusion is both transparent and well-explainable to the DM/expert. MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  4. Verbal Decision Analysis - Methods Problems MulticriteriaChoice Problem Classification problem Preference-based multicriteriaclassification Knowledge-based multiattribute classification ZAPROS UniComBos ORCLASS, DIFCLASS, CLARA NORCLASS STEPCLASS MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  5. Knowledge-based Multiattribute Classification Assigning the given objects, described with the values upon multiple attributes, to the classes* (from their pre-defined set) according to the expert knowledge. * Class - a set of objects in respect of which the expert makes the same (classification, diagnostic, etc.) decision. MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  6. Cognitive Problems & Their Avoidance “An Expert knows more than he/she is able to say” Although an expert would be able to list some classification rules directly, most certainly these rules would be applicable to the typical objects only. So, the set of such rules would be incomplete both in regard of the domain coverage,and in relation to his/her knowledge. Cause: an expert does notformulatethe rules in his/her daily activity, but he/sheappliesthem while analyzing the real-world objects. Way out:Simulating objects to be classified and presenting them to the expert for analysis and classification. MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  7. Prerequisites for VDA-based Multiattribute Classification Methods • Completeness of the expert-specified rules, that allow to classify each object from the set of all hypothetically possible objects in the given application domain described by the values of the expert-specified attributes. • Consistency of rules: Any number of rules may be specified for an object; however, all of these rules have to assign it to the same class • Avoidance of exhaustive search while the expert’s classification rules eliciting. MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  8. VDA-based method NORCLASS NORCLASS is designed for NOminal-ORdinal CLASSification, where classes correspond to non-orderable decisions, but the expert is able to order the values of each and every attribute according to their inherence in (typicality to) each such class independently of the values of other attributes.: _________________________________________________________________________________ Larichev O, Moshkovich H, Furems E et al (1991) Knowledge Acquisition for the Construction of the Full and Contradiction Free Knowledge Bases. Iec ProGAMMA, Groningen, The Netherlands. MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  9. Example MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  10. Formal Statement of Multiattribute Classification Problem in NORCLASS MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  11. Ordering by Inherence MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  12. Rules in NORCLASS • If the expert assigns an object ai to the class Cl, any object aj, such that (aj, ai)  Rl, belongs to Cl as well. • If, according to the expert judgement, an object ai, does not belong the class Cl, any object aj, such that (ai, aj)  Rl, does not belong to Cl as well. Violation of the rules above means the expert’s error and has to be corrected once it has been revealed. MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  13. C1 C2 NORCLASS Rules’ Effects a1 1,1,1,1 a23 1,1,1,1 a11 a20 a17 a4 a24 1,1,1,2 1,1,2,1 a7 1,2,1,1 2,1,1,1 1,1,1,2 1,1,2,1 1,2,1,1 2,1,1,1 a2 a13 a22 a5 a21 a19 a8 a3 a8 a18 a14 a5 a10 a16 a12 a14 1,1,1,3 1,1,2,2 1,2,1,2 1,2,2,1 2,1,1,2 2,1,2,1 2,2,1,1 1,1,1,3 1,1,2,2 1,2,1,2 1,2,2,1 2,1,1,2 2,1,2,1 2,2,1,1 a19 a6 a22 a16 a9 a6 a2 a11 a9 a15 a17 a20 a15 a10 2,1,1,3 2,1,2,2 2,2,1,2 2,2,2,1 1,1,2,3 1,2,1,3 1,2,2,2 2,1,1,3 2,1,2,2 2,2,1,2 2,2,2,1 1,1,2,3 1,2,1,3 1,2,2,2 a18 a4 a3 a7 a12 a21 a23 a13 1,2,2,3 2,1,2,3 2,2,1,3 2,2,2,2 1,2,2,3 2,1,2,3 2,2,1,3 2,2,2,2 a24 2,2,2,3 2,2,2,3 a1 MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  14. Advantages and Disadvantagesof NORCLASS MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  15. Modifications for NORCLASS Effectiveness Improvement • Restatement a problem to include the formal phase of its structuring*. • Changing the dialogue strategy in order to: • make it more flexible and, thus, less cognitively onerous for en expert; • reduce further a number of questions to be asked to an expert in a view of his/her classification rules eliciting; • provide for additional possibilities for rules’ consistency control. ----------------------- *Eugenia M. Furems. Domain Structuring For Knowledge-Based Multiattribute Classification (A Verbal Decision Analysis Approach) (2010) TOP, Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, DOI10.1007/s11750-009-0133-0 MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  16. Reformulation a problem Multiattribute classification problem is stated as two interrelated sub-problems: It is given: Some Application Domain each object of which may belong to one or more classes It is required: To define the Structure of the Application Domain, i.e., To assign each aiA (A=K1xK2x … x KM) to a class/classes from C on the basis of the expert’s knowledge so that the resulting classification is both complete (up to the expert’s knowledge) and consistent. MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  17. Explicit Structuring(Pre-defined Classes C1, C2, C3) ATTRIBUTES Values of Q1 for C1 apart form C1 Q1 k11 k12 Other classes k12 isadmissible for Q2 C3 Other classes k11 isadmissible for apart from C1 apart from k11,k1,3 C2 C3 Other values of Q1 for C3 k14 Other values of Q1 for C2 apart from C3 apart from k11 Other classes k14 isadmissible for k13 apart from C2 C1 C4 Other classes k13 isadmissible for C3 MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  18. Structuring by Examples Example for C1 Other classesk11 is admissible for A is a valueof Q1 (k11=A) If <A> & <B>, then C1 C2 C3 B is a valueof Q2 (k21=B) Example for C2 Other valuesfor C2 If <D> & <E>, then C2 k13 D is a value of Q2(k22=D) E is a value of Q3 (k31=E) Other classes k31is admissible for C1 C3 MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  19. Classification Rules Elicitation ai=(x1,x2,x3,x4), xmKm System: Expert System Expert System Q3? x2x3 Q4? x2x3x4 x2 Expert: C1 Rule: If ‘any value’ of Q1, and x2 upon Q2, and x3 upon Q3 , and x4 upon Q4, than C1 Extension the Rule according to Dominance Inherence: If ‘any value’ of Q1, and any k2i, such that (k2i, x2) R12, and any k3j, such that (k3j,x3) R13, and any k4s, such that (k4s, x4) R14, than C1 MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  20. Before After Effect of Dialogue Strategy Modification(Class C1) a1 1,1,1,1 a1 1,1,1,1 a13 a4 a7 a4 a2 1,1,1,2 1,1,2,1 a7 1,2,1,1 2,1,1,1 1,1,1,2 1,1,2,1 1,2,1,1 2,1,1,1 a2 a13 a3 a19 a5 a19 a16 a3 a8 a8 a10 a5 a10 a16 a14 a14 1,1,1,3 1,1,2,2 1,2,1,2 1,2,2,1 2,1,1,2 2,1,2,1 2,2,1,1 1,1,1,3 1,1,2,2 1,2,1,2 1,2,2,1 2,1,1,2 2,1,2,1 2,2,1,1 a6 a6 a22 a9 a17 a20 a22 a11 a9 a15 a17 a20 a11 a15 2,1,1,3 2,1,2,2 2,2,1,2 2,2,2,1 1,1,2,3 1,2,1,3 1,2,2,2 2,1,1,3 2,1,2,2 2,2,1,2 2,2,2,1 1,1,2,3 1,2,1,3 1,2,2,2 a18 a21 a23 a18 a12 a21 a23 a12 1,2,2,3 2,1,2,3 2,2,1,3 2,2,2,2 1,2,2,3 2,1,2,3 2,2,1,3 2,2,2,2 a24 2,2,3,3 2,,2,3,3 a24 MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  21. Before After Effect of Dialogue Strategy Modification(Class C2) a23 1,1,1,1 a23 1,1,1,1 a11 a17 a20 a17 a20 a24 a24 1,1,1,2 1,1,2,1 1,2,1,1 2,1,1,1 1,1,1,2 1,1,2,1 1,2,1,1 2,1,1,1 a11 a22 a5 a21 a5 a22 a18 a18 a14 a21 a14 a8 a12 a8 a12 1,1,1,3 1,1,2,2 1,2,1,2 1,2,2,1 2,1,1,2 2,1,2,1 2,2,1,1 1,1,1,3 1,1,2,2 1,2,1,2 1,2,2,1 2,1,1,2 2,1,2,1 2,2,1,1 a19 a19 a2 a16 a9 a6 a2 a15 a16 a10 a9 a6 a15 a10 2,1,1,3 2,1,2,2 2,2,1,2 2,2,2,1 1,1,2,3 1,2,1,3 1,2,2,2 2,1,1,3 2,1,2,2 2,2,1,2 2,2,2,1 1,1,2,3 1,2,1,3 1,2,2,2 a7 a4 a3 a7 a13 a4 a3 a13 1,2,2,3 2,1,2,3 2,2,1,3 2,2,2,2 1,2,2,3 2,1,2,3 2,2,1,3 2,2,2,2 a1 2,,2,3,3 2,,2,3,3 a1 MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  22. AD Structure Adjustment • Expert has opportunity to specify a new class He/she is asked to determine admissibility of all values of the attributes from the current set Q to such class before to proceed to the next object classification. • Expert has opportunity to inquire about a new attribute He/she names it, lists all of its possible values and specifies their correspondent admissibility to the classes. The first value of the new attribute is added to the description of the object under consideration, and it is presented to the expert in addition to information she/he knows already for such object • Expert points out incompatible values in the object’s • description All objects with such incompatible values’ combinations are excluded from the set A. MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  23. Additional Consistency Control Possible contradictions: The expert specifies a rule for a class with the value(s) in left-hand part, he/she determined as inadmissible to the class at the stage of structuring The rule elicited last is inconsistent with the rules elicited previously. MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  24. Explicit Rules Inconsistency Rule 1 If any value of Q1, andx2 upon Q2, andx3 upon Q3 ,and x4 upon Q4 , then C1 If x1 upon Q1,andx2 upon Q2, andx3 upon Q3 ,and x4 upon Q4 , then C1 Contradiction Rule 2 If x1 upon Q1, and x2upon Q2 , and any valueof Q3, and x4 upon Q4 ,then C2 If x1 upon Q1, and x2 upon Q2 , and x3 upon Q3 ,and x4 upon Q4 , then C2 MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  25. Conclusions VDA-based techniques for multiattribute classification use only those operations of eliciting information from a DM/expert and such information processing so that both intermediate and resulting conclusions are traceable (well-explainable) to the expert. Proposed modification of a dialogue strategy for NORCLASS allows to make an expert’ knowledge acquisition more close to his/her routine practice, and, thus, to facilitate for him/her the rules’ eliciting procedure. In addition, proposed modification allows to eliminate disadvantages of NORCLASS (absence of preliminary structuring procedures, non-flexible dialogue, impossibility of new classes, attributes and their values specification, etc.) and to reduce further the number of objects to be presented the expert directly for his/her classification rules eliciting. MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

  26. Thank You! MCDM 2011, Jyvaskyla, Finland, June 13-17, 2011

More Related