Optimizing Inference in Bayesian Networks and Semiring Valuation Algebras

  • Michael Wachter
  • Rolf Haenni
  • Marc Pouly
Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 4827)


Previous work on context-specific independence in Bayesian networks is driven by a common goal, namely to represent the conditional probability tables in a most compact way. In this paper, we argue from the view point of the knowledge compilation map and conclude that the language of Ordered Binary Decision Diagrams (OBDD) is the most suitable one for representing probability tables, in addition to the language of Algebraic Decision Diagrams (ADD). We thus suggest the replacement of the current practice of using tree-based or rule-based representations. This holds not only for inference in Bayesian networks, but is more generally applicable in the generic framework of semiring valuation algebras, which can be applied to solve a variety of inference and optimization problems in different domains.


Bayesian Network Boolean Function Local Computation Fusion Algorithm Inference Problem 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Pearl, J.: Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems. Morgan Kaufmann, San Mateo (1988)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shenoy, P.P., Shafer, G.: Axioms for probability and belief-function propagation. In: Shachter, R.D., Levitt, T.S., Lemmer, J.F., Kanal, L.N. (eds.) UAI 1988. 4th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Minneapolis, USA, pp. 169–198 (1988)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Boutilier, C., Friedman, N., Goldszmidt, M., Koller, D.: Context-specific independence in Bayesian networks. In: Horvitz, E., Jensen, F. (eds.) UAI 1996. 12th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Inteligence, Portland, USA, pp. 115–123 (1996)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Smith, J.E., Holtzman, S., Matheson, J.E.: Structuring conditional relationships in influence diagrams. Operations Research 41(2), 280–297 (1993)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wong, S.K., Butz, C.: Contextual weak independence in Bayesian networks. In: Laskey, K.B., Prade, H. (eds.) UAI 1999. 15th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Stockholm, Sweden, pp. 670–679 (1999)Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Geiger, D., Heckerman, D.: Advances in probabilistic reasoning. In: UAI 1991. 6th Annual Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence, Los Angeles, USA, pp. 118–126 (1991)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Galles, D., Pearl, J.: Axioms of causal relevance. Artificial Intelligence 97(1–2), 9–43 (1997)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Cano, A., Moral, S., Salmeron, A.: Penniless propagation in join trees. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 15(11), 1027–1059 (2000)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Bellot, D., Bessière, P.: Approximate discrete probability distribution representation using a multi-resolution binary tree. In: ICTAI 2003. 15th IEEE International Conference on Tools with Artificial Intelligence, Sacramento, USA, pp. 498–503 (2003)Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Poole, D., Zhang, N.L.: Exploiting contextual independence in probabilistic inference. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 18, 263–313 (2003)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Chavira, M., Darwiche, A.: Compiling Bayesian networks using variable elimination. In: IJCAI 2007. 20th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Hyderabad, India (2007)Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bryant, R.E.: Graph-based algorithms for Boolean function manipulation. IEEE Transactions on Computers 35(8), 677–691 (1986)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Darwiche, A., Marquis, P.: A knowledge compilation map. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 17, 229–264 (2002)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Wachter, M., Haenni, R.: Propositional DAGs: a new graph-based language for representing Boolean functions. In: Doherty, P., Mylopoulos, J., Welty, C. (eds.) KR 2006. 10th International Conference on Principles of Knowledge Representation and Reasoning, pp. 277–285. AAAI Press, USA (2006)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kohlas, J.: Information Algebras: Generic Stuctures for Inference. Springer, London (2003)Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Kohlas, J., Wilson, N.: Exact and approximate local computation in semiring induced valuation algebras. Technical Report 06–06, Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg, Switzerland (2006)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kohlas, J., Shenoy, P.P.: Computation in valuation algebras. In: Gabbay, D.M., Smets, P. (eds.) Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems. Algorithms for Uncertainty and Defeasible Reasoning, vol. 5, pp. 5–39. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht (2000)Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dechter, R.: Bucket elimination: a unifying framework for reasoning. Artificial Intelligence 113(1–2), 41–85 (1999)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bahar, R.I., Frohm, E.A., Gaona, C.M., Hachtel, G.D., Macii, E., Pardo, A., Somenzi, F.: Algebraic decision diagrams and their applications. In: Lightner, M.R., Jess, J.A.G. (eds.) 4th IEEE/ACM International Conference on Computer-Aided Design, pp. 188–191. IEEE Computer Society Press, California (1993)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Shenoy, P.P., Shafer, G.: Axioms for probability and belief function propagation. In: Shafer, G., Pearl, J. (eds.) Readings in Uncertain Reasoning, pp. 575–610. Morgan Kaufmann, USA (1990)Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Wachter, M., Haenni, R.: Multi-state directed acyclic graphs. In: Kobti, Z., Wu, D. (eds.) CanAI 2007. 20th Canadian Conference on Artificial Intelligence, Montréal, Canada. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 4509, pp. 464–475 (2007)Google Scholar
  22. 22.
    Zhang, N.L., Poole, D.: Exploiting causal independence in Bayesian network inference. Journal of Artificial Intelligence Research 5, 301–328 (1996)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Shenoy, P.P.: Valuation-based systems: A framework for managing uncertainty in expert systems. In: Zadeh, L.A., Kacprzyk, J. (eds.) Fuzzy Logic for the Management of Uncertainty, pp. 83–104. John Wiley and Sons, New York (1992)Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Schneuwly, C., Pouly, M., Kohlas, J.: Local computation in covering join trees. Technical Report 04–16, Department of Informatics, University of Fribourg, Switzerland (2004)Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wegener, I.: Branching Programs and Binary Decision Diagrams – Theory and Applications. Number 56 in Monographs on Discrete Mathematics and Applications. SIAM  (2000)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  • Michael Wachter
    • 1
  • Rolf Haenni
    • 2
  • Marc Pouly
    • 3
  1. 1.University of BernSwitzerland
  2. 2.Bern University of Applied SciencesSwitzerland
  3. 3.University of FribourgSwitzerland

Personalised recommendations