ALL Metrics
-
Views
-
Downloads
Get PDF
Get XML
Cite
Export
Track
Research Article

Reducing the Complexity of Casual Representation in Bayesian Belief Network

[version 1; peer review: 2 not approved]
PUBLISHED 06 Dec 2021
Author details Author details
OPEN PEER REVIEW
REVIEWER STATUS

This article is included in the Research Synergy Foundation gateway.

Abstract

Background: Bayesian Belief Network (BBN) is a well-established causal framework that is widely adopted in various domains and has a proven track record of success in research and application areas. However, BBN has weaknesses in causal knowledge elicitation and representation. The representation of the joint probability distribution in the Conditional Probability Table (CPT) has increased the complexity and difficulty for the user either in comprehending the causal knowledge or using it as a front-end modelling tool.  
Methods: This study aims to propose a simplified version of the BBN ─ Bayesian causal model, which can represent the BBN intuitively and proposes an inference method based on the simplified version of BBN. The CPT in the BBN is replaced with the causal weight in the range of[-1,+1] to indicate the causal influence between the nodes. In addition, an inferential algorithm is proposed to compute and propagate the influence in the causal model. 
Results: A case study is used to validate the proposed inferential algorithm. The results show that a Bayesian causal model is able to predict and diagnose the increment and decrement as in BBN.  
Conclusions: The Bayesian causal model that serves as a simplified version of BBN has shown its advantages in modelling and representation, especially from the knowledge engineering perspective.

Keywords

Bayesian Belief Network, Causal Model, Causal representation

Introduction

Knowledge representation in a graphical model eases the knowledge organization and information understanding process. Causal frameworks such as Cognitive Map (CM),1 Fuzzy Cognitive Map (FCM),2 and Bayesian Belief Network (BBN),3 use graphical models to represent domain knowledge and have been widely adopted in various domains in the past few decades.4 BBN is a graphical model that used nodes to represent domain variables and links to represent the causal relationship among the nodes. However, the causal strengths of the causal relationship are represented in a tabular format. The complexity of the representation is increased with the growth of the size of conditional probability tables in BBN. The size of the CPT in BBN is growth in exponential proportion to the number of variables and the number of discrete states for each variable. Although high precision of inference outcome can be provided in BBN, such precision is often not needed or not necessary to the purpose of application. Moreover, elicitation of conditional probabilities from domain experts during the BBN modelling process is an unnatural and tedious job. BBN lacks intuitiveness in terms of representation and suffers from complexity problems in inference.5

This paper introduces a simplified BBN, namely the Bayesian causal model. A Bayesian causal model improves the representation of BBN by replacing the CPT with a single numeric value that is attached to the causal link. Moreover, a new inferential algorithm is proposed to propagate the influence in the Bayesian causal model. The proposed causal framework shows its advantages in modelling and representation, especially from the knowledge engineering perspective. Incremental updates in the model can be done easily because no reconstruction of the causal model is needed when a component is added/removed. To show the validity of the Bayesian causal model, a procedure to represent a Bayesian causal model as a BBN and comparison of the inference outcome in the Bayesian causal model corresponds to a specific probability in the Bayesian network are carried out in this study.

Methods

The Bayesian causal model is formally defined in this section. Figure 1 shows the representation of the causal influence between nodes in the Bayesian causal mode.

03729949-93e2-4476-ac0e-cf75ab6f39ef_figure1.gif

Figure 1. Representation of causal influence in Bayesian causal model.

Instead of CPT, causal strength between the nodes is represented as a single value in the range of [−1, +1]. −1 represents the decrease of 100% of the probability value and +1 denotes the increase of 100% of the probability value. The initial probability of each node is pre-determined as 0.5.

The propagation steps of the newly available evidence in the Bayesian causal model are as follows.

Influence Propagation steps

  • 1. Start from either one of the nodes with evidence

  • 2. Calculate the change in the evidence node

    • a. The change of evidence increase/decrease can obtain by (Probability in evidence node – 0.5)/0.5

  • 3. Propagate the evidence AGAINST the arc.

    • a. Causal weight = causal weight/no. of cause node

    • b. Influence = the change of evidence increase/decrease * (causal weight/no. of cause node)

  • 4. Continue to propagate until further propagation is impossible.

  • 5. Back to the node with completed causal influence from all effect nodes. Calculate the total influence.

    • a. Total backward influence = sum of causal influence from all effect node

  • 6. Start propagating the influence FOLLOW the arc

    • a. The influence from the cause node needs to exclude the previous backward influence from this effect node to the cause node.

    • b. Total forward influence = sum of causal influence from all cause nodes

  • 7. Once the node obtains complete backward and forward influence,

    • a. Total influence = total backward influence + total forward influence

  • 8. Back to 4.

  • 9. Stop when all nodes obtain the total causal influence.

  • 10. Calculate the posterior probability of each node

    • a. Posterior probability = total causal influence * 0.5 + initial probability.

  • 11. Start from the other node with evidence.

  • 12. Continue steps 2-9.

  • 13. Calculate the posterior probability of each node

    • a. If total causal influence is positive

      Posterior probability = total causal influence * (1 − posterior probability) + posterior probability.

    • b. If total causal influence is negative

      Posterior probability = total causal influence * posterior probability + posterior probability

The proposed inference algorithm for Bayesian causal model is implemented using C++ programming language and Code::Blocks 20.03.

Results

An example of a sprinkler is used to demonstrate and validate the inference method in the Bayesian causal model. Table 1 illustrates the description of nodes in the causal model. There are a total of five nodes and five links in the causal model. The Bayesian causal model of sprinkler example is constructed as shown in Figure 2. Then, the Bayesian causal model is encoded into a BBN as shown in Figure 3. To validate the inference algorithm in Bayesian causal model, reasoning processes are performed in the Bayesian causal model and the BBN that are constructed earlier. The probabilities of any two nodes in the causal models are increased to 1 to observe the changes of probability in other nodes. The reasoning outcomes of both casual models are then recorded and compared as shown in Table 2.

Table 1. Definition of the causal nodes.

NodeDescription
SSPRINKLER
RRAIN
GWETNESS OF MY GARDEN
NWETNESS OF MY NEIGHBOUR’S GARDEN
PHEALTH OF MY PLANTS
03729949-93e2-4476-ac0e-cf75ab6f39ef_figure2.gif

Figure 2. Bayesian causal model of a sprinkler.

03729949-93e2-4476-ac0e-cf75ab6f39ef_figure3.gif

Figure 3. BBN of a sprinkler.

Table 2. Comparison results of BBN with Bayesian causal model.

RNSGP
BBN11+++
BCM11+++
RNSGP
BBN1+1++
BCM1+1++
RNSGP
BBN1++1+
BCM1++1+
RNSGP
BBN1+++1
BCM1+++1
RNSGP
BBN+11++
BCM+11++
RNSGP
BBN+1+1+
BCM+1+1+
RNSGP
BBN++++1
BCM++++1
RNSGP
BBN++11+
BCM++11+
RNSGP
BBN++1+1
BCM++1+1
RNSGP
BBN+++11
BCM+++11

According to the inference results shown in Table 2, the Bayesian causal model has shown its ability to predict and diagnose as in BBN because the reasoning outcome of both causal models are not differed too much.

Conclusions

In this paper, a new causal model ─ the Bayesian causal model is introduced and defined. The causal strength in the Bayesian causal model is represented by a numeric value from −1 to +1. Whereas the value in each node is interpreted as probabilities. The semantics of the variables and influences are defined in this study. Moreover, the computation of the propagated influence from a node to another one in the causal model is proposed. The Bayesian causal model has provided an intuitive and simple graphical representation of causal knowledge. The representation of the causal strength with a single value in the Bayesian causal model has overcome the complexity of representation in BBN. Moreover, the construction of a Bayesian causal model from domain experts is less laborious and the user could easily understand the causal knowledge from the Bayesian causal model.

Data availibility

All data underlying the results are available as part of the article and no additional source data are required.

Competing interests

No competing interests were disclosed.

Grant information

The author(s) declared that no grants were involved in supporting this work.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 06 Dec 2021
Comment
Author details Author details
Competing interests
Grant information
Copyright
Download
 
Export To
metrics
Views Downloads
F1000Research - -
PubMed Central
Data from PMC are received and updated monthly.
- -
Citations
CITE
how to cite this article
Wee YY, Tan SC and Wee K. Reducing the Complexity of Casual Representation in Bayesian Belief Network [version 1; peer review: 2 not approved]. F1000Research 2021, 10:1243 (https://doi.org/10.12688/f1000research.73480.1)
NOTE: If applicable, it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
track
receive updates on this article
Track an article to receive email alerts on any updates to this article.

Open Peer Review

Current Reviewer Status: ?
Key to Reviewer Statuses VIEW
ApprovedThe paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approvedFundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Version 1
VERSION 1
PUBLISHED 06 Dec 2021
Views
5
Cite
Reviewer Report 23 Jan 2023
Marek J. Druzdzel, Bialystok University of Technology, Białystok, Poland 
Not Approved
VIEWS 5
The paper proposes a simplification of the Bayesian networks formalism which, according to the authors, makes it easier to construct Bayesian networks/causal graphs and makes them easier to understand.

The authors seem to be unaware of the ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Druzdzel MJ. Reviewer Report For: Reducing the Complexity of Casual Representation in Bayesian Belief Network [version 1; peer review: 2 not approved]. F1000Research 2021, 10:1243 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.77134.r157866)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.
Views
45
Cite
Reviewer Report 18 May 2022
Bukhoree Sahoh, School of Informatics, Walailak University, Nakhon Si Thammarat, Thailand 
Not Approved
VIEWS 45
In this article, the authors propose a Bayesian causal model based on Bayesian Belief Network and claim it provides an intuitive and simple graphical representation of causal knowledge. The authors concluded that the representation of the causal strength with a ... Continue reading
CITE
CITE
HOW TO CITE THIS REPORT
Sahoh B. Reviewer Report For: Reducing the Complexity of Casual Representation in Bayesian Belief Network [version 1; peer review: 2 not approved]. F1000Research 2021, 10:1243 (https://doi.org/10.5256/f1000research.77134.r136326)
NOTE: it is important to ensure the information in square brackets after the title is included in all citations of this article.

Comments on this article Comments (0)

Version 1
VERSION 1 PUBLISHED 06 Dec 2021
Comment
Alongside their report, reviewers assign a status to the article:
Approved - the paper is scientifically sound in its current form and only minor, if any, improvements are suggested
Approved with reservations - A number of small changes, sometimes more significant revisions are required to address specific details and improve the papers academic merit.
Not approved - fundamental flaws in the paper seriously undermine the findings and conclusions
Sign In
If you've forgotten your password, please enter your email address below and we'll send you instructions on how to reset your password.

The email address should be the one you originally registered with F1000.

Email address not valid, please try again

You registered with F1000 via Google, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Google account password, please click here.

You registered with F1000 via Facebook, so we cannot reset your password.

To sign in, please click here.

If you still need help with your Facebook account password, please click here.

Code not correct, please try again
Email us for further assistance.
Server error, please try again.