Advertisement

Mean Field Analysis for Continuous Time Bayesian Networks

  • Davide Cerotti
  • Daniele Codetta-Raiteri
Conference paper
Part of the Communications in Computer and Information Science book series (CCIS, volume 825)

Abstract

In this paper we investigate the use of the mean field technique to analyze Continuous Time Bayesian Networks (CTBN). They model continuous time evolving variables with exponentially distributed transitions with the values of the rates dependent on the parent variables in the graph. CTBN inference consists of computing the probability distribution of a subset of variables, conditioned by the observation of other variables’ values (evidence). The computation of exact results is often unfeasible due to the complexity of the model. For such reason, the possibility to perform the CTBN inference through the equivalent Generalized Stochastic Petri Net (GSPN) was investigated in the past. In this paper instead, we explore the use of mean field approximation and apply it to a well-known epidemic case study. The CTBN model is converted in both a GSPN and in a mean field based model. The example is then analyzed with both solutions, in order to evaluate the accuracy of the mean field approximation for the computation of the posterior probability of the CTBN given an evidence. A summary of the lessons learned during this preliminary attempt concludes the paper.

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work is original and has a financial support of the Università del Piemonte Orientale.

References

  1. 1.
    Ajmone-Marsan, M., Balbo, G., Conte, G., Donatelli, S., Franceschinis, G.: Modelling With Generalized Stochastic Petri Nets. Wiley, New York (1994)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Benaim, M., Le Boudec, J.Y.: A class of mean field interaction models for computer and communication systems. Perform. Eval. 65(11), 823–838 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Bobbio, A., Cerotti, D., Gribaudo, M., Iacono, M., Manini, D.: Markovian agent models: a dynamic population of interdependent Markovian agents. In: Al-Begain, K., Bargiela, A. (eds.) Seminal Contributions to Modelling and Simulation. SFMA, pp. 185–203. Springer, Cham (2016).  https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-33786-9_13CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bobbio, A., Gribaudo, M., Telek, M.: Analysis of large scale interacting systems by mean field method. In: 5th International Conference on the Quantitative Evaluation of SysTems (QEST2008) (2008)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bortolussi, L., Hillston, J., Latella, D., Massink, M.: Continuous approximation of collective system behaviour: a tutorial. Perform. Eval. 70(5), 317–349 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Boudec, J.Y.L., McDonald, D., Mundinger, J.: A generic mean field convergence result for systems of interacting objects. In: International Conference on the Quantitative Evaluation of Systems, pp. 3–18, September 2007Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Boyen, X., Koller, D.: Tractable inference for complex stochastic processes. In: Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 33–42 (1998)Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cho, J.W., Le Boudec, J.Y., Jang, Y.: On the validity of the fixed point equation and decoupling assumption for analyzing the 802.11 MAC protocol. Perform. Eval. Rev. 38(2), 36–38 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Codetta-Raiteri, D., Portinale, L.: A Petri net-based tool for the analysis of generalized continuous time Bayesian networks. In: Theory and Application of Multi-Formalism Modeling, pp. 118–143. IGI Global (2013)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    El-Hay, T., Friedman, N., Kupferman, R.: Gibbs sampling in factorized continuous time Markov processes. In: Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence (2008)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Fan, Y., Shelton, C.: Sampling for approximate inference in continuous time Bayesian networks. In: International Symposium on AI and Mathematics (2008)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gopalratnam, K., Kautz, H., Weld, D.S.: Extending continuous time Bayesian networks. In: Proceedings of AAAI 2005, pp. 981–986, Pittsburgh, PA (2005)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Lauritzen, S.L., Richardson, T.S.: Chain graph models and their causal interpretations. J. Roy. Stat. Soc. B 64(3), 321–348 (2002)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Murphy, K.: Dynamic Bayesian Networks: Representation, Inference and Learning. Ph.D Thesis, UC Berkley (2002)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Nodelman, U., Koller, D., Shelton, C.R.: Expectation propagation for continuous time Bayesian networks. Computing Research Repository, abs/1207.1401 (2012)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nodelman, U., Shelton, C.R., Koller, D.: Continuous time Bayesian networks. In: Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 378–387 (2002)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Nodelman, U., Shelton, C.R., Koller, D.: Expectation propagation for continuous time Bayesian networks. In: Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 431–440 (2005)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Opper, M., Saad, D., (eds.) Advanced Mean Field Methods: Theory and Practice, p. 10. MIT press, Cambridge (2002)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Portinale, L., Bobbio, A., Codetta-Raiteri, D., Montani, S.: Compiling dynamic fault trees into dynamic Bayesian nets for reliability analysis: the Radyban tool. In: Bayesian Modeling Applications Workshop, CEUR Workshop Proceedings, vol. 268, Vancouver, Canada, July 2007Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Saria, S., Nodelman, U., Koller, D.: Reasoning at the right time granularity. In: Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, pp. 421–430 (2007)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Sznitman, A.-S.: Topics in propagation of chaos. In: Hennequin, P.-L. (ed.) Ecole d’Eté de Probabilités de Saint-Flour XIX — 1989. LNM, vol. 1464, pp. 165–251. Springer, Heidelberg (1991).  https://doi.org/10.1007/BFb0085169CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.DiSIT, Computer Science InstituteUniversità Piemonte OrientaleAlessandriaItaly

Personalised recommendations