Skip to main content
Log in

A framework for controlling model-based diagnosis systems with multiple actions

  • Published:
Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In recent years reasoning about structure and function of physical systems for the purpose of diagnosis has seen a dramatic increase in activities. New exciting results concerning modelling issues, diagnostic inference patterns and inferential power have emerged. A state of the art diagnosis agent now has a considerable toolset at hand. A main obstacle for building large diagnosis systems, however, remains. How can we controlwhen to usewhich inference pattern or representation? We argue that the actions available to a diagnosis agent can be understood in terms of change ofworking hypotheses. The control problem then becomes a belief revision problem: when to adopt or drop beliefs. Our approach proceeds in two steps. First, we adopt the principle of informational economy from Gärdenfors, Knowledge in Flux (MIT Press, 1988) as kind of a law of inertia for diagnostic processes, that helps us identify candidates for revised belief states. In a second step we employ specificdiagnostic knowledge to actually choose the next belief state. We demonstrate the use of our concepts on an example in the domain of ballast tank systems as e.g. used in offshore plants.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. B. Ayeb, P. Marquis and M. Rusinowitch, A new diagnosis approach by deduction and abduction,Proc. Int. Workshop on Expert Systems in Engineering, Springer LNAI 462.

  2. C. Böttcher, Die Verwendung multipler Modelle in der modellbasierten Diagnose (in German), University of Karlsruhe (1991).

  3. L. Console and P. Torasso, Integrating models of the correct behaviour into abductive reasoning,Proc. ECAI '90 (Pitman Publ.).

  4. J. de Kleer and B. Williams, Diagnosing multiple faults, Artificial Intelligence (1987).

  5. J. de Kleer and B. Williams, Diagnosis with behavioural modes,Proc. IJCAI-89 (Morgan Kaufmann, 1989).

  6. J. de Kleer, A. Mackworth and R. Reiter, Characterizing diagnoses,Proc. AAAI 90 (MIT Press, 1990).

  7. J. de Kleer, Focusing on probable diagnoses,Proc. AAAI 91 (MIT Press, 1991).

  8. J. Doyle, Rational belief revision,Working Notes 3rd Int. Workshop on Non-monotonic Reasoning, South Lake Tahoe, 1990.

  9. J. Doyle, Rational belief revision,Proc. KR '91 (Morgan Kaufmann, 1991).

  10. O. Dressler, An extended basic ATMS,Proc. 2nd Int. NMR Workshop, LNAI 346 (Springer, 1988).

  11. O. Dressler, Problem solving with the NM-ATMS,Proc. ECAI 90 (Pitman, 1990).

  12. O. Dressler and A. Farquhar, Putting the problem solver back in the driver's seat: Contextual control of the ATMS, in: Martins and Reinfrank (eds.),Truth Maintenance Systems, Springer LNAI 515 (1990).

  13. O. Dressler and P. Struss, Back to defaults: Characterizing and computing diagnoses as coherent assumption sets,proc. ECAI 92 (Wiley, 1992); corrected version in: Working Notes DX-92,Int. Workshop on Principles of Diagnoses, Seattle, 1992.

  14. O. Dressler, C. Böttcher, M. Montag and A. Brinkop, Qualitative and quantitative models in a model-based diagnosis system for ballast tank systems,Proc. Tooldiag '93, Toulouse, 1993.

  15. G. Friedrich, G. Gottlob and W. Nejdl, Formalizing the Repair Process,Proc. ECAI 92 (Wiley, 1992).

  16. G. Friedrich, G. Gottlob and W. Nejdl, Physical impossibility instead of fault models,Proc. AAAI 90 (MIT Press).

  17. G. Friedrich and F. Lackinger, Diagnosing temporal misbehavior,Proc. IJCAI 90 (Morgan Kaufmann, 1991).

  18. A. Fuhrmann, Theory contraction through base contraction, J. Philos. Logic 20 (1991) 175–203.

    Google Scholar 

  19. P. Gärdenfors,Knowledge in Flux (MIT Press, 1988).

  20. W. Hamscher, Modeling digital circuits for troubleshooting, Artificial Intelligence 51 (1991) 1–3.

    Google Scholar 

  21. D. Makinson, On the status of the postulate of recovery in the logic of theory change. J. Philos. Logic 16 (1987) 383–394.

    Google Scholar 

  22. B. Nebel, A knowledge level analysis of belief revision,Proc. KR '89 (Morgan Kaufmann, 1989).

  23. B. Nebel, Belief revision and default reasoning: syntax-based approaches,Proc. KR '91 (Morgan Kaufmann, 1991).

  24. W. Nejdl, Belief revision, diagnosis and repair,Proc. GI-Congress Knowledge-based Systems (Springer, 1991).

  25. D. Poole, Normality and faults in logic-based diagnosis,Proc. IJCAI 89.

  26. O. Raiman, The alibi principle,Proc. Diagnosis Workshop, Paris 1989, IBM Report.

  27. O. Raiman, J. de Kleer, V. Saraswat and M. Shirley, Characterizing non-intermittent faults,Proc. AAAI 91 (MIT Press, 1991).

  28. M. Reinfrank, O. Dressler and G. Brewka, On the relation between truth maintenance and auto-epistemic logic,Proc. IJCAI 89 (Morgan Kaufmann, 1989).

  29. R. Reiter, A logic for default reasoning, Artificial Intelligence (1980).

  30. R. Reiter, A theory of diagnosis from first principles, Artificial Intelligence (1987).

  31. W. Rodi and S. Pimentel, A non-monotonic assumption-based TMS using stable bases,Proc. KR '91 (Morgan Kaufmann, 1991).

  32. P. Struss and O. Dressler, “Physical negation” — Integrating fault models into the general diagnostic engine,proc. IJCAI '89 (Morgan Kaufmann, 1989).

  33. P. Struss, Diagnosis as a process,Working Notes of the Int. Workshop on Model-based Diagnosis, Paris, 1989; revised version in:Readings in Model-based Diagnosis (Morgan Kaufmann, 1992).

  34. P. Struss, What's in SD? Towards a theory of modelling for diagnosis, in:Readings in Model-based Diagnosis (Morgan Kaufmann, 1992).

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Böttcher, C., Dressler, O. A framework for controlling model-based diagnosis systems with multiple actions. Ann Math Artif Intell 11, 241–261 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01530744

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF01530744

Keywords

Navigation