Detecting the knowledge boundary with prudence analysis
- Authors: Dazeley, Richard , Kang, Byeongho
- Date: 2008
- Type: Text , Conference paper
- Relation: Paper presented at 21st Australasian Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Auckland, New Zealand : 1st-5th December 2008 p. 482-488
- Full Text: false
- Description: Prudence analysis (PA) is a relatively new, practical and highly innovative approach to solving the problem of brittleness in knowledge based systems (KBS). PA is essentially an online validation approach, where as each situation or case is presented to the KBS for inferencing the result is simultaneously validated. This paper introduces a new approach to PA that analyses the structure of knowledge rather than the comparing cases with archived situations. This new approach is positively compared against earlier systems for PA, strongly indicating the viability of the approach.
- Description: 2003006511
An expert system methodology for SMEs and NPOs
- Authors: Dazeley, Richard
- Date: 2008
- Type: Text , Conference paper
- Relation: Paper presented at 11th Australian Conference on Knowledge Management and Intelligent Decision Support, ACKMIDS 2008, Ballarat, Victoria : 8th-10th December 2008
- Full Text:
- Description: Traditionally Expert Systems (ES) require a full analysis of the business problem by a Knowledge Engineer (KE) to develop a solution. This inherently makes ES technology very expensive and beyond the affordability of the majority of Small and Medium sized Enterprises (SMEs) and Non-Profit Organisations (NPOs). Therefore, SMEs and NPOs tend to only have access to off-the-shelf solutions to generic problems, which rarely meet the full extent of an organisation’s requirements. One existing methodological stream of research, Ripple-Down Rules (RDR) goes some of the way to being suitable to SMEs and NPOs as it removes the need for a knowledge engineer. This group of methodologies provide an environment where a company can develop large knowledge based systems themselves, specifically tailored to the company’s individual situation. These methods, however, require constant supervision by the expert during development, which is still a significant burden on the organisation. This paper discusses an extension to an RDR method, known as Rated MCRDR (RM) and a feature called prudence analysis. This enhanced methodology to ES development is particularly well suited to the development of ES in restricted environments such as SMEs and NPOs.
- Description: 2003006507
Online knowledge validation with prudence analysis in a document management application
- Authors: Dazeley, Richard , Park, Sung Sik , Kang, Byeongho
- Date: 2011
- Type: Text , Journal article
- Relation: Expert Systems with Applications Vol. , no. (2011), p.
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: Prudence analysis (PA) is a relatively new, practical and highly innovative approach to solving the problem of brittleness in knowledge based system (KBS) development. PA is essentially an online validation approach where as each situation or case is presented to the KBS for inferencing the result is simultaneously validated. Therefore, instead of the system simply providing a conclusion, it also provides a warning when the validation fails. Previous studies have shown that a modification to multiple classification ripple-down rules (MCRDR) referred to as rated MCRDR (RM) has been able to achieve strong and flexible results in simulated domains with artificial data sets. This paper presents a study into the effectiveness of RM in an eHealth document monitoring and classification domain using human expertise. Additionally, this paper also investigates what affect PA has when the KBS developer relied entirely on the warnings for maintenance. Results indicate that the system is surprisingly robust even when warning accuracy is allowed to drop quite low. This study of a previously little touched area provides a strong indication of the potential for future knowledge based system development. © 2011 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
The viability of prudence analysis
- Authors: Dazeley, Richard , Kang, Byeongho
- Date: 2008
- Type: Text , Conference paper
- Relation: Paper presented at Pacific Rim Knowledge Acquisition Workshop 2008, PKAW-08, Hanoi, Vietnam : 15th-16th December 2008
- Full Text:
- Description: Prudence analysis (PA) is a relatively new, practical and highly innovative approach to solving the problem of brittleness. PA is essentially an incremental validation approach, where each situation or case is presented to the KBS for inferencing and the result is subsequently validated. Therefore, instead of the system simply providing a conclusion, it also provides a warning when the validation fails. This allows the user to check the solution and correct any potential deficiencies found in the knowledge base. There have been a small number of potentially viable approaches to PA published that show a high degree of accuracy in identifying errors. However, none of these are perfect, very rarely a case is classified incorrectly and not identified by the PA system. The work in PA thus far, has focussed on reducing the frequency of these missed warnings, however there has been no studies on the affect of these on the final knowledge base’s performance. This paper will investigate how these errors in a knowledge base affect its ability to correctly classify cases. The results in this study strongly indicate that the missed errors have a significantly smaller influence on the inferencing results than would be expected, which strongly support the viability of PA.
- Description: 2003006508
Rapid anomaly detection using integrated prudence analysis (IPA)
- Authors: Maruatona, Omaru , Vamplew, Peter , Dazeley, Richard , Watters, Paul
- Date: 2018
- Type: Text , Conference proceedings
- Relation: PAKDD 2018.Trends and Applications in Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining. p. 137-141
- Full Text: false
- Reviewed:
- Description: Integrated Prudence Analysis has been proposed as a method to maximize the accuracy of rule based systems. The paper presents evaluation results of the three Prudence methods on public datasets which demonstrate that combining attribute-based and structural Prudence produces a net improvement in Prudence Accuracy.