skip to main content
10.1145/3322640.3326716acmconferencesArticle/Chapter ViewAbstractPublication PagesicailConference Proceedingsconference-collections
research-article

Explainable Bayesian Network Query Results via Natural Language Generation Systems

Published: 17 June 2019 Publication History

Abstract

Bayesian networks (BNs) are an important modelling technique used to support certain types of decision making in law and forensics. Their value lies in their ability to infer the rational implications of probabilistic knowledge and beliefs, a task that human decision makers struggle with. However, their use is controversial. One of the main obstacles to the more widespread use of BNs is the difficulty to acquire good explanations of the results obtained with BNs. While useful techniques exist to visualise, verbalise or abstract BNs and the inner workings of belief propagation algorithms, these techniques provide generic, one-size-fits-all explanations, that have, thus far, failed to stem the criticism of lack of explainable BN results. Building on the qualified support graph method introduced in earlier work, this paper outlines how a natural language generation system can be constructed to explain Bayesian inference. This constitutes a novel approach to BN explanation that has the potential to produce more focussed and compelling explanations of Bayesian inference as the narratives such a system produces can be tailored to address specific communicative goals and, by extension, the needs of the user.

References

[1]
C. Aitken and F. Taroni. 2004. Statistics and the Evaluation of Evidence for Forensic Scientists (2nd edition ed.). Wiley.
[2]
C. Aitken, F. Taroni, and P. Garbolino. 2003. A graphical model for the evaluation of cross-transfer evidence in DNA profiles. Theoretical Population Biology 63 (2003), 179--190.
[3]
S. Andersen, K. Olesen, F. Verner Jensen, and F. Jensen. 1989. HUGIN - A Shell for Building Bayesian Belief Universes for Expert Systems. Proceedings of the Eleventh International Joint Conference on Artificial Intelligence 2, 1080--1085.
[4]
J. Bateman and M. Zock. 2005. Natural language generation. In The Oxford Handbook of Computational Linguistics, R. Mitkov (Ed.). Oxford University Press, 284--305.
[5]
A. Biedermann, F. Taroni, O. Delemont, C. Semadeni, and A. Davison. 2005. The evaluation of evidence in the forensic investigation of fire incidents. Part II. Practical examples of the use of Bayesian networks. Forensic Science International 147 (2005), 59--69.
[6]
A. Bies, M. Ferguson, K. Katz, M. Macintyre, R.and Contributors, V. Tredinnick, G. Kim, M. Ann Marcinkiewicz, and B. Schasberger. 1995. Bracketing Guidelines For Treebank II Style Penn Treebank Project. (04 1995).
[7]
R. Cook, I. Evett, G. Jackson, P. Jones, and J. Lambert. 1998. A Model for Case Assessment and Interpretation. Science and Justice 38, 6 (1998), 151--156.
[8]
G. Davis. 2003. Bayesian reconstruction of traffic accidents. Law, Probability and Risk 2 (2003), 69--89.
[9]
N. Fenton and M. Neil. 2013. Risk Assessment and Decision Analysis with Bayesian Networks. CRC Press.
[10]
S. Gittelson, A. Biedermann, S. Bozza, and F. Taroni. 2013. Modeling the forensic two-trace problem with Bayesian networks. Artificial Intelligence and Law 21, 2 (2013), 221--252.
[11]
J. Halpern. 2003. Reasoning about uncertainty. MIT Press.
[12]
R. Hughes. 2017. Using a Bayesian Network to Predict L5/S1 Spinal Compression Force from Posture, Hand Load, Anthropometry, and Disc Injury Status. Applied Bionics and Biomechanics 2017 (2017), 2014961.
[13]
J. Keppens. 2016. Explaining Bayesian Belief Revision for Legal Applications. In Proceedings of the 29th International Conference on Legal Knowledge and Information Systems. 63--72.
[14]
C. Lacave and F. Díez. 2002. A review of explanation methods for Bayesian networks. Knowledge Engineering Review 17, 2 (2002), 107--127.
[15]
W. Mann and S. Thompson. 1988. Rhetorical structure theory: towards a functional theory of text organisation. Interdisciplinary Journal for the Study of Discourse 8 (1988), 243--281. Issue 3.
[16]
K. McKeown. 1985. Discourse strategies for generating natural-language text. Artificial Intelligence 27 (1985), 1--41.
[17]
J. Mortera, A. Dawid, and S. Lauritzen. 2003. Probabilistic expert systems for DNA mixture profiling. Theoretical Population Biology 63 (2003), 191--205.
[18]
S. Parsons. 1995. Refining Reasoning in Qualitative Probabilistic Networks. In Proceedings of the 11th Conference on Uncertainty in Artificial Intelligence. 427--434.
[19]
J. Pearl. 1988. Probabilistic Reasoning in Intelligent Systems: Networks of Plausible Inference (second edition ed.). Morgan-Kaufmann.
[20]
R. Perera and P. Nand. 2017. Recent advances in natural language generation: a survey and classification of the empirical literature. Computing and Informatics 36 (2017), 1--32.
[21]
S. Renooij, S. Parsons, and P. Pardieck. 2003. Using Kappas as Indicators of Strength in Qualitative Probabilistic Networks. In Proceedings of the Seventh European Conference on Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty. 87--99.
[22]
S. Timmer, J-J. Meyer, H. Prakken, S. Renooij, and B. Verheij. 2017. A two-phase method for extracting explanatory arguments from Bayesian networks. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 80 (2017), 475--494.
[23]
M. Wellman. 1990. Fundamental concepts of qualitative probabilistic networks. Artificial Intelligence 44 (1990), 257--303.
[24]
M. Wellman and M. Henrion. 1993. Explaining "explaining away". IEEE Transactions on Pattern Analysis and Machine Intelligence 15 (1993), 287--291.
[25]
C. Witteman and S. Renooij. 2003. Evaluation of a verbal-numerical scale. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 33 (2003), 117--131.

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)Reusability of Bayesian Networks case studies: a surveyApplied Intelligence10.1007/s10489-025-06289-555:6Online publication date: 7-Feb-2025
  • (2024)Optimally Traversing Explainability in Bayesian Networks via the Graphical LassoArtificial Intelligence Research10.1007/978-3-031-78255-8_2(21-37)Online publication date: 26-Nov-2024
  • (2023)Modeling COVID-19 disease processes by remote elicitation of causal Bayesian networks from medical expertsBMC Medical Research Methodology10.1186/s12874-023-01856-123:1Online publication date: 29-Mar-2023
  • Show More Cited By

Recommendations

Comments

Information & Contributors

Information

Published In

cover image ACM Conferences
ICAIL '19: Proceedings of the Seventeenth International Conference on Artificial Intelligence and Law
June 2019
312 pages
ISBN:9781450367547
DOI:10.1145/3322640
Permission to make digital or hard copies of all or part of this work for personal or classroom use is granted without fee provided that copies are not made or distributed for profit or commercial advantage and that copies bear this notice and the full citation on the first page. Copyrights for components of this work owned by others than the author(s) must be honored. Abstracting with credit is permitted. To copy otherwise, or republish, to post on servers or to redistribute to lists, requires prior specific permission and/or a fee. Request permissions from [email protected].

Sponsors

In-Cooperation

  • Univ. of Montreal: University of Montreal
  • AAAI
  • IAAIL: Intl Asso for Artifical Intel & Law

Publisher

Association for Computing Machinery

New York, NY, United States

Publication History

Published: 17 June 2019

Permissions

Request permissions for this article.

Check for updates

Qualifiers

  • Research-article
  • Research
  • Refereed limited

Conference

ICAIL '19
Sponsor:

Acceptance Rates

Overall Acceptance Rate 69 of 169 submissions, 41%

Contributors

Other Metrics

Bibliometrics & Citations

Bibliometrics

Article Metrics

  • Downloads (Last 12 months)18
  • Downloads (Last 6 weeks)0
Reflects downloads up to 08 Mar 2025

Other Metrics

Citations

Cited By

View all
  • (2025)Reusability of Bayesian Networks case studies: a surveyApplied Intelligence10.1007/s10489-025-06289-555:6Online publication date: 7-Feb-2025
  • (2024)Optimally Traversing Explainability in Bayesian Networks via the Graphical LassoArtificial Intelligence Research10.1007/978-3-031-78255-8_2(21-37)Online publication date: 26-Nov-2024
  • (2023)Modeling COVID-19 disease processes by remote elicitation of causal Bayesian networks from medical expertsBMC Medical Research Methodology10.1186/s12874-023-01856-123:1Online publication date: 29-Mar-2023
  • (2022)The Study of Artificial Intelligence as LawLaw and Artificial Intelligence10.1007/978-94-6265-523-2_24(477-502)Online publication date: 6-Jul-2022
  • (2021)Exploration of Cross-Modal Text Generation Methods in Smart JusticeScientific Programming10.1155/2021/32259332021Online publication date: 1-Jan-2021
  • (2021)Introduce structural equation modelling to machine learning problems for building an explainable and persuasive modelSICE Journal of Control, Measurement, and System Integration10.1080/18824889.2021.1894040(1-13)Online publication date: 19-Mar-2021
  • (2021)Explaining the impact of source behaviour in evidential reasoningInformation Fusion10.1016/j.inffus.2021.11.007Online publication date: Nov-2021
  • (2020)Artificial intelligence as lawArtificial Intelligence and Law10.1007/s10506-020-09266-0Online publication date: 14-May-2020
  • (2020)A Taxonomy of Explainable Bayesian NetworksArtificial Intelligence Research10.1007/978-3-030-66151-9_14(220-235)Online publication date: 21-Dec-2020

View Options

Login options

View options

PDF

View or Download as a PDF file.

PDF

eReader

View online with eReader.

eReader

Figures

Tables

Media

Share

Share

Share this Publication link

Share on social media