Qualitative Bayesian Networks with Logical Constraints

  • Barbara Vantaggi
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 2711)


An important feature of Qualitative Bayesian Networks is that they describe conditional independence models. However, they are not able to handle models involving logical constraints among the given variables. The aim of this paper is to show how this theory can be extended in such a way to represent also the logical constraints in the graph through an enhanced version of Qualitative Bayesian Networks. The relative algorithm for building these graphs (which is a generalization of the well-known algorithm based on D-separation criterion) is given.

This theory is particularly fit for conditional probabilistic independence models based on the notion of cs-independence. This notion avoids the usual critical situations shown by the classic definition when logical constraints are present.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Pearl, J.: Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausible Inference. Morgan Kaufmann, San Francisco (1988)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Coletti, G., Scozzafava, R.: The Role of Coherence in Eliciting and Handling Imprecise Probabilities and its Application to Medical Diagnosis. Information Sciences 130, 41–65 (2000)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Hill, J.R.: Comment on “Graphical models”. Statistical Science 8, 258–261 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Coletti, G., Scozzafava, R.: Zero Probabilities in Stochastical Independence. In: Bouchon-Meunier, B., Yager, R.R., Zadeh, L.A. (eds.) Information, Uncertainty, Fusion, pp. 185–196. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2000) (Selected papers from IPMU 1998)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Coletti, G., Scozzafava, R.: Stochastic Independence in a Coherent Setting. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 35, 151–176 (2002)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Coletti, G., Scozzafava, R.: Probabilistic logic in a coherent setting. Trends in logic n. 15. Kluwer, Dordrecht (2002)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Vantaggi, B.: The L-separation criterion for description of cs-independence models. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 29, 291–316 (2002)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Vantaggi, B.: Graphical representation of asymmetric graphoid structures. Submitted to ISIPTA 2003, Lugano (2003)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vantaggi, B.: Conditional Independence in a Coherent Finite Setting. Annals of Mathematic and Artificial Intelligence 32, 287–314 (2001)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Geiger, D., Verma, T., Pearl, J.: Identifying Independence in Bayesian Networks. Networks 20, 507–534 (1990)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    de Finetti, B.: Sull’Impostazione Assiomatica del Calcolo delle Probabilità. Annali dell’Università di Trieste 19, 3–55 (1949);(Eng. transl.: Ch. 5 in Probability, Induction, Statistics. Wiley, London 1972)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Dawid, P.: Separoids: A mathematical framework for conditional independence and irrelevance. Annals of Mathematic and Artificial Intelligence 32, 335–372 (2001)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Krauss, P.H.: Representation of Conditional Probability Measures on Boolean Algebras. Acta Math. Acad. Sci. Hungar 19, 229–241 (1968)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Dubins, L.E.: Finitely Additive Conditional Probabilities, Conglomerability and Disintegration. Annals of Probability 3, 89–99 (1975)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Lauritzen, S.L.: Graphical Models. Clarendon Press, Oxford (1996)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2003

Authors and Affiliations

  • Barbara Vantaggi
    • 1
  1. 1.Dip. Metodi e Modelli MatematiciUniversity “La Sapienza”RomaItaly

Personalised recommendations