Updating with incomplete observations
Gert de Cooman, Marco Zaffalon

TL;DR
This paper introduces a conservative, imprecise-probability-based updating rule for incomplete observations, addressing limitations of existing methods and applicable to Bayesian networks and decision problems.
Contribution
It proposes a new, weak-assumption updating rule using lower previsions, ensuring coherence and handling ignorance about the incompleteness mechanism.
Findings
The new rule produces lower posterior probabilities and partial decisions.
It addresses the Monty Hall paradox effectively.
Provides a linear-time exact algorithm for Bayesian network classification.
Abstract
Currently, there is renewed interest in the problem, raised by Shafer in 1985, of updating probabilities when observations are incomplete (or set-valued). This is a fundamental problem, and of particular interest for Bayesian networks. Recently, Grunwald and Halpern have shown that commonly used updating strategies fail here, except under very special assumptions. We propose a new rule for updating probabilities with incomplete observations. Our approach is deliberately conservative: we make no or weak assumptions about the so-called incompleteness mechanism that produces incomplete observations. We model our ignorance about this mechanism by a vacuous lower prevision, a tool from the theory of imprecise probabilities, and we derive a new updating rule using coherence arguments. In general, our rule produces lower posterior probabilities, as well as partially determinate decisions. This…
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
Taxonomy
TopicsBayesian Modeling and Causal Inference · Rough Sets and Fuzzy Logic · Logic, Reasoning, and Knowledge
