Model-based diagnostics and probabilistic assumption-based reasoning

AbstractThe mathematical foundations of model-based diagnostics or diagnosis from first principles have been laid by Reiter (1987). In this paper we extend Reiter's ideas of model-based diagnostics by introducing probabilities into Reiter's framework. This is done in a mathematically sound and precise way which allows one to compute the posterior probability that a certain component is not working correctly given some observations of the system. A straightforward computation of these probabilities is not efficient and in this paper we propose a new method to solve this problem. Our method is logic-based and borrows ideas from assumption-based reasoning and ATMS. We show how it is possible to determine arguments in favor of the hypothesis that a certain group of components is not working correctly. These arguments represent the symbolic or qualitative aspect of the diagnosis process. Then they are used to derive a quantitative or numerical aspect represented by the posterior probabilities. Using two new theorems about the relation between Reiter's notion of conflict and our notion of argument, we prove that our so-called degree of support is nothing but the posterior probability that we are looking for. Furthermore, a model where each component may have more than two different operating modes is discussed and a new algorithm to compute posterior probabilities in this case is presented