Solving a Belief Network Problem with Car Starting: A Bayesian Approach

  • Thread starter Thread starter sensitive
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Network
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around solving a Bayesian network problem related to car starting, specifically calculating P(F = N|S = N). The user initially struggles with the Bayesian approach, questioning whether S depends solely on F, but later realizes that S is influenced by both F and T. They derive expressions for P(S = N|F = N) and explore how to compute P(T = Y) and P(T = N) using given probabilities. Ultimately, they seek assistance in accurately calculating these probabilities to solve the problem. The conversation highlights the complexities of Bayesian reasoning in the context of belief networks.
sensitive
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
I am having problem solving this exercise. The problem actually comes with a diagram but I do not know and I do not think i can draw it in the forum. The exercise is based on car starting(Heckerman 1995)

Since I can't draw the network diagram here but values of probability are given but first let me define all the variables

B - Battery
G - Gauge
F - Fuel
T - Turnover
S - Start
N - No
Y - Yes

P(B = N) = 0.02
p(F = N) = 0.05
P(G = N|B = Y, F = Y) = 0.04
P(G = N|B = Y, F = N) = 0.97
P(G = N|B = N, F = Y) = 0.10
P(G = N|B = N, F = N) = 0.99
P(T = N|B = Y) = 0.03
P(T = N|B = N) = 0.98
P(S = N|T = Y, F = Y) = 0.01
P(S = N|T = Y, F = N) = 0.92
P(S = N|T = N, F = Y) = 1.0
P(S = N|T = N, F = N) = 1.0

It was asked to calculate p(F = N|S = N)

Im thinking of Bayesian but I got stuck somewhere so I think it is the wrong approach since S depend on F and T NOT F alone.

Im thinking of the other approach and came up with an expression

P(F = N|S = N) = P(S = N|F = N)/P(F)
= P(S = N, B, G, T|F = N)/P(F)

But I am not sure how to compute and put the figures together.

Any input/help is appreciated. Thank you
 
Physics news on Phys.org
How do you get P(F = N|S = N) = P(S = N|F = N)/P(F) ?

P(F = N|S = N) = P(S = N & F = N)/P(S = N) and P(S = N|F = N) = P(S = N & F = N)/P(F = N) so P(S = N & F = N) = P(F = N|S = N)P(S = N) = P(S = N|F = N)P(F = N).
 
So the Bayesian approach was right. I taught I was wrong at the first place because using Bayesian ended up with the following

P(S = N|F = N) P(F = N)/ P(S = N)

but from the diagram I have and as you can see from the probabilities, S depend on both F and T and in the expression above we want to know the probability of S = N given that F = N (in other words the probability that the engine will not start given that the fuel tank was empty).
 
I am still having trouble solving P(S = N|F = N).

please help...
 
Below, I assume that the notation (A|B,C) means (A|B)|C = A|(B|C), and neither A|(B & C) nor (A|B) & C. (If anyone disagrees, please post your opinion.)

P(S = N|F = N) = P(S = N|T = Y, F = N) P(T = Y) + P(S = N|T = N, F = N) P(T = N) so you should first derive P(T = Y) and P(T = N).

You can derive P(T=N) from:
P(B = N) = 0.02
P(T = N|B = Y) = 0.03
P(T = N|B = N) = 0.98
using a formula similar to the one in the previous paragraph of this post.

Then, P(T=Y) = 1 - P(T=N).
 
Last edited:
The standard _A " operator" maps a Null Hypothesis Ho into a decision set { Do not reject:=1 and reject :=0}. In this sense ( HA)_A , makes no sense. Since H0, HA aren't exhaustive, can we find an alternative operator, _A' , so that ( H_A)_A' makes sense? Isn't Pearson Neyman related to this? Hope I'm making sense. Edit: I was motivated by a superficial similarity of the idea with double transposition of matrices M, with ## (M^{T})^{T}=M##, and just wanted to see if it made sense to talk...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 100 ·
4
Replies
100
Views
12K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 80 ·
3
Replies
80
Views
10K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K