An intuitive representation of imperfect information

  • E. Charpentier
  • J. P. Daurès
  • P. Dujols
  • F. Grémy
Reasoning Techniques Under Uncertainty
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 313)


A representation of uncertain information has been presented along with a set of algorithms for logical computing and inference. It has been shown that this representation and these algorithms have many intuitively desirable properties. This representation has explicitly been built from elementary propositions about medical reasoning; these propositions have been chosen for their usefulness and “common sense” character, since our goal is to remain as close as possible to clinical practice.

This representation is intended to be used into medical experts systems. Many problems remain to be solved before an effective implementation can be tested. Some theoretical problems are also open.

This representation seems however to be in good relation with the “real” medical practice and knowledge. Further work about this representation is hence justifiable: we plan to use it in an application to masculine sterility diagnosis and treatment.


Fuzzy Number Production Rule Imperfect Information Logical Expression Logical Connective 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. [1]
    Piero P. Bonissone and Keith S. Decker. Selecting Uncertainity Calculi and Granularity: an Experiment in Trading-off Precision and Complexity. In L.N. Kanal and J.F. Lemmer, editors, Uncertainity in Artificial Intelligence, pages 217–247, North-Holland, 1986.Google Scholar
  2. [2]
    Bruce G. Buchanan and Edward E. Shortliffe. Rule Based Expert Systems: the mycin Experiments of the Stanford Heuristic Programming Project. Addison-Wesley, 1984. Part IV.Google Scholar
  3. [3]
    Emmanuel Charpentier. Un modèle intuitif du raisonnement médical. Mémoire de D.E.A. de Biomathématiques, Université Paris VII, Octobre 1987.Google Scholar
  4. [4]
    François Chenique. Comprendre la logique moderne. Dunod, Paris, 1972.Google Scholar
  5. [5]
    Didier Dubois and Henri Prade. A Tentative Comparison of Numerical Approximate Reasoning Methodologies. In Proceedings of the 7 th European Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1986.Google Scholar
  6. [6]
    Didier Dubois and Henri Prade. Théorie des possibilités. Masson, Paris, 1985.Google Scholar
  7. [7]
    Philip N. Johnson-Laird. Mental Models. Harvard University Press, 1983.Google Scholar
  8. [8]
    Riszard S. Michalski and Patrick H. Winston. Variable Precision Logic. Artificial Intelligence, 29:121–146, 1986.Google Scholar
  9. [9]
    Gerard Soula. Aide à la décision en logique floue; application en médecine. Thèse de doctorat, Université d'Aix-Marseille II, Faculté de Médecine, 1981.Google Scholar
  10. [10]
    John F. Sowa. Conceptual Structures. Addison-Wesley, 1983.Google Scholar
  11. [11]
    Terence R. Thompson. Parallel Formulation of Evidential-Reasoning Theories. In Proceedings of the 9 th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1985.Google Scholar
  12. [12]
    Alexander Yeh. Flexible Data Fusion (& Fission). In Proceedings of the 9 th International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence, 1985.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • E. Charpentier
    • 1
  • J. P. Daurès
    • 1
  • P. Dujols
    • 1
  • F. Grémy
    • 1
  1. 1.Département de l'Information MédicaleHôpital Lapeyronie — Université Montpellier IFrance

Personalised recommendations