A proposed validation framework for expert elicited Bayesian Networks

The popularity of Bayesian Network modelling of complex domains using expert elicitation has raised questions of how one might validate such a model given that no objective dataset exists for the model. Past attempts at delineating a set of tests for establishing confidence in an entirely expert-elicited model have focused on single types of validity stemming from individual sources of uncertainty within the model. This paper seeks to extend the frameworks proposed by earlier researchers by drawing upon other disciplines where measuring latent variables is also an issue. We demonstrate that even in cases where no data exist at all there is a broad range of validity tests that can be used to establish confidence in the validity of a Bayesian Belief Network.

Combining elicited expert knowledge into Bayesian priors

Information that is elicited from experts can be treated as `data', so can be analysed using a Bayesian statistical model, to formulate a prior model. Typically methods for encoding a single expert's knowledge have been parametric, constrained by the extent of an expert's knowledge and energy regarding a target parameter. Interestingly these methods have often been deterministic, in that all elicited information is treated at `face value', without error. Here we sought a parametric and statistical approach for encoding assessments from multiple experts. Our recent work proposed and demonstrated the use of a flexible hierarchical model for this purpose. In contrast to previous mathematical approaches like linear or geometric pooling, our new approach accounts for several sources of variation: elicitation error, encoding error and expert diversity. Of interest are the practical, mathematical and philosophical interpretations of this form of hierarchical pooling (which is both statistical and parametric), and how it fits within the subjective Bayesian paradigm. Case studies from a bioassay and project management (on PhDs) are used to illustrate the approach.

Comparison of three expert elicitation methods for logistic regression on predicting the presence of the threatened brush-tailed rock-wallaby petrogale penicillata

Numerous expert elicitation methods have been suggested for generalised linear models (GLMs). This paper compares three relatively new approaches to eliciting expert knowledge in a form suitable for Bayesian logistic regression. These methods were trialled on two experts in order to model the habitat suitability of the threatened Australian brush-tailed rock-wallaby (Petrogale penicillata). The first elicitation approach is a geographically assisted indirect predictive method with a geographic information system (GIS) interface. The second approach is a predictive indirect method which uses an interactive graphical tool. The third method uses a questionnaire to elicit expert knowledge directly about the impact of a habitat variable on the response. Two variables (slope and aspect) are used to examine prior and posterior distributions of the three methods. The results indicate that there are some similarities and dissimilarities between the expert informed priors of the two experts formulated from the different approaches. The choice of elicitation method depends on the statistical knowledge of the expert, their mapping skills, time constraints, accessibility to experts and funding available. This trial reveals that expert knowledge can be important when modelling rare event data, such as threatened species, because experts can provide additional information that may not be represented in the dataset. However care must be taken with the way in which this information is elicited and formulated.

Combining expert opinions in prior elicitation

A method of eliciting prior distributions for Bayesian models using expert knowledge is proposed. Elicitation is a widely studied problem, from a psychological perspective as well as from a statistical perspective. Here, we are interested in combining opinions from more than one expert using an explicitly model-based approach so that we may account for various sources of variation affecting elicited expert opinions. We use a hierarchical model to achieve this. We apply this approach to two problems. The first problem involves a food risk assessment problem involving modelling dose-response for Listeria monocytogenes contamination of mice. The second concerns the time taken by PhD students to submit their thesis in a particular school.

Elicitator : a user-friendly, interactive tool to support scenario-based elicitation of expert knowledge

Expert elicitation is the process of determining what expert knowledge is relevant to support a quantitative analysis and then eliciting this information in a form that supports analysis or decision-making. The credibility of the overall analysis, therefore, relies on the credibility of the elicited knowledge. This, in turn, is determined by the rigor of the design and execution of the elicitation methodology, as well as by its clear communication to ensure transparency and repeatability. It is difficult to establish rigor when the elicitation methods are not documented, as often occurs in ecological research. In this chapter, we describe software that can be combined with a well-structured elicitation process to improve the rigor of expert elicitation and documentation of the results

Embedding human expert cognition and real-time trajectory planning in autonomous UAS

This thesis presents a new approach to compute and optimize feasible three dimensional (3D) flight trajectories using aspects of Human Decision Making (HDM) strategies, for fixed wing Unmanned Aircraft (UA) operating in low altitude environments in the presence of real time planning deadlines. The underlying trajectory generation strategy involves the application of Manoeuvre Automaton (MA) theory to create sets of candidate flight manoeuvres which implicitly incorporate platform dynamic constraints. Feasible trajectories are formed through the concatenation of predefined flight manoeuvres in an optimized manner. During typical UAS operations, multiple objectives may exist, therefore the use of multi-objective optimization can potentially allow for convergence to a solution which better reflects overall mission requirements and HDM preferences. A GUI interface was developed to allow for knowledge capture from a human expert during simulated mission scenarios. The expert decision data captured is converted into value functions and corresponding criteria weightings using UTilite Additive (UTA) theory. The inclusion of preferences elicited from HDM decision data within an Automated Decision System (ADS) allows for the generation of trajectories which more closely represent the candidate HDM’s decision strategies. A novel Computationally Adaptive Trajectory Decision optimization System (CATDS) has been developed and implemented in simulation to dynamically manage, calculate and schedule system execution parameters to ensure that the trajectory solution search can generate a feasible solution, if one exists, within a given length of time. The inclusion of the CATDS potentially increases overall mission efficiency and may allow for the implementation of the system on different UAS platforms with varying onboard computational capabilities. These approaches have been demonstrated in simulation using a fixed wing UAS operating in low altitude environments with obstacles present.

Eliciting Expert Knowledge in Conservation Science

Expert knowledge is used widely in the science and practice of conservation because of the complexity of problems, relative lack of data, and the imminent nature of many conservation decisions. Expert knowledge is substantive information on a particular topic that is not widely known by others. An expert is someone who holds this knowledge and who is often deferred to in its interpretation. We refer to predictions by experts of what may happen in a particular context as expert judgments. In general, an expert-elicitation approach consists of five steps: deciding how information will be used, determining what to elicit, designing the elicitation process, performing the elicitation, and translating the elicited information into quantitative statements that can be used in a model or directly to make decisions. This last step is known as encoding. Some of the considerations in eliciting expert knowledge include determining how to work with multiple experts and how to combine multiple judgments, minimizing bias in the elicited information, and verifying the accuracy of expert information. We highlight structured elicitation techniques that, if adopted, will improve the accuracy and information content of expert judgment and ensure uncertainty is captured accurately. We suggest four aspects of an expert elicitation exercise be examined to determine its comprehensiveness and effectiveness: study design and context, elicitation design, elicitation method, and elicitation output. Just as the reliability of empirical data depends on the rigor with which it was acquired so too does that of expert knowledge.

Embedding human expert cognition into autonomous UAS trajectory planning

This paper presents a new approach for the inclusion of human expert cognition into autonomous trajectory planning for unmanned aerial systems (UASs) operating in low-altitude environments. During typical UAS operations, multiple objectives may exist; therefore, the use of multicriteria decision aid techniques can potentially allow for convergence to trajectory solutions which better reflect overall mission requirements. In that context, additive multiattribute value theory has been applied to optimize trajectories with respect to multiple objectives. A graphical user interface was developed to allow for knowledge capture from a human decision maker (HDM) through simulated decision scenarios. The expert decision data gathered are converted into value functions and corresponding criteria weightings using utility additive theory. The inclusion of preferences elicited from HDM data within an automated decision system allows for the generation of trajectories which more closely represent the candidate HDM decision preferences. This approach has been demonstrated in this paper through simulation using a fixed-wing UAS operating in low-altitude environments.

How useful is expert opinion for predicting the distribution of a species within and beyond the region of expertise? A case study using brush-tailed rock-wallabiesPetrogale penicillata

1. Species' distribution modelling relies on adequate data sets to build reliable statistical models with high predictive ability. However, the money spent collecting empirical data might be better spent on management. A less expensive source of species' distribution information is expert opinion. This study evaluates expert knowledge and its source. In particular, we determine whether models built on expert knowledge apply over multiple regions or only within the region where the knowledge was derived. 2. The case study focuses on the distribution of the brush-tailed rock-wallaby Petrogale penicillata in eastern Australia. We brought together from two biogeographically different regions substantial and well-designed field data and knowledge from nine experts. We used a novel elicitation tool within a geographical information system to systematically collect expert opinions. The tool utilized an indirect approach to elicitation, asking experts simpler questions about observable rather than abstract quantities, with measures in place to identify uncertainty and offer feedback. Bayesian analysis was used to combine field data and expert knowledge in each region to determine: (i) how expert opinion affected models based on field data and (ii) how similar expert-informed models were within regions and across regions. 3. The elicitation tool effectively captured the experts' opinions and their uncertainties. Experts were comfortable with the map-based elicitation approach used, especially with graphical feedback. Experts tended to predict lower values of species occurrence compared with field data. 4. Across experts, consensus on effect sizes occurred for several habitat variables. Expert opinion generally influenced predictions from field data. However, south-east Queensland and north-east New South Wales experts had different opinions on the influence of elevation and geology, with these differences attributable to geological differences between these regions. 5. Synthesis and applications. When formulated as priors in Bayesian analysis, expert opinion is useful for modifying or strengthening patterns exhibited by empirical data sets that are limited in size or scope. Nevertheless, the ability of an expert to extrapolate beyond their region of knowledge may be poor. Hence there is significant merit in obtaining information from local experts when compiling species' distribution models across several regions.

Elicitator : an expert elicitation tool for regression in ecology

Expert elicitation is the process of retrieving and quantifying expert knowledge in a particular domain. Such information is of particular value when the empirical data is expensive, limited, or unreliable. This paper describes a new software tool, called Elicitator, which assists in quantifying expert knowledge in a form suitable for use as a prior model in Bayesian regression. Potential environmental domains for applying this elicitation tool include habitat modeling, assessing detectability or eradication, ecological condition assessments, risk analysis, and quantifying inputs to complex models of ecological processes. The tool has been developed to be user-friendly, extensible, and facilitate consistent and repeatable elicitation of expert knowledge across these various domains. We demonstrate its application to elicitation for logistic regression in a geographically based ecological context. The underlying statistical methodology is also novel, utilizing an indirect elicitation approach to target expert knowledge on a case-by-case basis. For several elicitation sites (or cases), experts are asked simply to quantify their estimated ecological response (e.g. probability of presence), and its range of plausible values, after inspecting (habitat) covariates via GIS.

Expert performance in sport and the dynamics of talent development

Research on expertise, talent identification and development has tended to be mono-disciplinary, typically adopting adopting neurogenetic deterministic or environmentalist positions, with an over-riding focus on operational issues. In this paper the validity of dualist positions on sport expertise is evaluated. It is argued that, to advance understanding of expertise and talent development, a shift towards a multi-disciplinary and integrative science focus is necessary, along with the development of a comprehensive multi-disciplinary theoretical rationale. Here we elucidate dynamical systems theory as a multi-disciplinary theoretical rationale for capturing how multiple interacting constraints can shape the development of expert performers. This approach suggests that talent development programmes should eschew the notion of common optimal performance models, emphasise the individual nature of pathways to expertise, and identify the range of interacting constraints that impinge on performance potential of individual athletes, rather than evaluating current performance on physical tests referenced to group norms.