Abstract:Evidential reasoning in expert systems has often used ad-hoc uncertainty calculi. Although it is generally accepted that probability theory provides a firm theoretical foundation, researchers have found some problems with its use as a workable uncertainty calculus. Among these problems are representation of ignorance, consistency of probabilistic judgements, and adjustment of a priori judgements with experience. The application of metaprobability theory to evidential reasoning is a new approach to solving these problems. Metaprobability theory can be viewed as a way to provide soft or hard constraints on beliefs in much the same manner as the Dempster-Shafer theory provides constraints on probability masses on subsets of the state space. Thus, we use the Dempster-Shafer theory, an alternative theory of evidential reasoning to illuminate metaprobability theory as a theory of evidential reasoning. The goal of this paper is to compare how metaprobability theory and Dempster-Shafer theory handle the adjustment of beliefs with evidence with respect to a particular thought experiment. Sections 2 and 3 give brief descriptions of the metaprobability and Dempster-Shafer theories. Metaprobability theory deals with higher order probabilities applied to evidential reasoning. Dempster-Shafer theory is a generalization of probability theory which has evolved from a theory of upper and lower probabilities. Section 4 describes a thought experiment and the metaprobability and DempsterShafer analysis of the experiment. The thought experiment focuses on forming beliefs about a population with 6 types of members {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6}. A type is uniquely defined by the values of three features: A, B, C. That is, if the three features of one member of the population were known then its type could be ascertained. Each of the three features has two possible values, (e.g. A can be either "a0" or "al"). Beliefs are formed from evidence accrued from two sensors: sensor A, and sensor B. Each sensor senses the corresponding defining feature. Sensor A reports that half of its observations are "a0" and half the observations are 'al'. Sensor B reports that half of its observations are ``b0,' and half are "bl". Based on these two pieces of evidence, what should be the beliefs on the distribution of types in the population? Note that the third feature is not observed by any sensor.

Error Function Attack of chaos synchronization based encryption schemes

Conditional Evidence Theory and Its Application in Knowledge Discovery

A Modified Belief Entropy in Dempster-Shafer Framework

Confidence Factors, Empiricism and the Dempster-Shafer Theory of Evidence

D numbers theory: a generalization of Dempster-Shafer evidence theory

A new reason analysis of conflict evidence

Using Dempster-Shafer Theory Of Evidence For Situation Inference

An Improved Approach for Generation of a Basic Probability Assignment in the Evidence Theory Based on Gaussian Distribution

Inferring Evidence from Nested Sampling Data via Information Field Theory

Metaprobability and Dempster-Shafer in Evidential Reasoning

Modified Evidence Combination Method Based on Pignistic Probability Distance and Uncertainty Degree

Research on dependent evidence combination based on principal component analysis

Transformation of basic probability assignments to probabilities based on a new entropy measure

Generalization of Dempster-Shafer theory: A complex belief function

Reasoning with fuzzy and uncertain evidence using epistemic random fuzzy sets: general framework and practical models

Evidence as Opinions of Experts

Towards a Normative Theory of Scientific Evidence

Generalized Jeffrey'S Rule of Conditioning and Evidence Combining Rule for A Priori Probabilistic Knowledge in Conditional Evidence Theory

Using evidence to make decisions

Evidential Confirmation as Transformed Probability

Estimating probability terms for the background presence of glass when considering activity in forensic casework