Risk-informed decision-making in the presence of epistemic uncertainty

An important issue in risk analysis is the distinction between epistemic and aleatory uncertainties. In this paper, the use of distinct representation formats for aleatory and epistemic uncertainties is advocated, the latter being modelled by sets of possible values. Modern uncertainty theories based on convex sets of probabilities are known to be instrumental for hybrid representations where aleatory and epistemic components of uncertainty remain distinct. Simple uncertainty representation techniques based on fuzzy intervals and p-boxes are used in practice. This paper outlines a risk analysis methodology from elicitation of knowledge about parameters to decision. It proposes an elicitation methodology where the chosen representation format depends on the nature and the amount of available information. Uncertainty propagation methods then blend Monte Carlo simulation and interval analysis techniques. Nevertheless, results provided by these techniques, often in terms of probability intervals, may be too complex to interpret for a decision-maker and we, therefore, propose to compute a unique indicator of the likelihood of risk, called confidence index. It explicitly accounts for the decisionmaker’s attitude in the face of ambiguity. This step takes place at the end of the risk analysis process, when no further collection of evidence is possible that might reduce the ambiguity due to epistemic uncertainty. This last feature stands in contrast with the Bayesian methodology, where epistemic uncertainties on input parameters are modelled by single subjective probabilities at the beginning of the risk analysis process.

On the Complexity of Strong and Epistemic Credal Networks

Credal networks are graph-based statistical models whose parameters take values on a set, instead of being sharply specified as in traditional statistical models (e.g., Bayesian networks). The result of inferences with such models depends on the irrelevance/independence concept adopted. In this paper, we study the computational complexity of inferences under the concepts of epistemic irrelevance and strong independence. We strengthen complexity results by showing that inferences with strong independence are NP-hard even in credal trees with ternary variables, which indicates that tractable algorithms, including the existing one for epistemic trees, cannot be used for strong independence. We prove that the polynomial time of inferences in credal trees under epistemic irrelevance is not likely to extend to more general models, because the problem becomes NP-hard even in simple polytrees. These results draw a definite line between networks with efficient inferences and those where inferences are hard, and close several open questions regarding the computational complexity of such models.

Computing lower and upper expectations under epistemic independence

This paper investigates the computation of lower/upper expectations that must cohere with a collection of probabilistic assessments and a collection of judgements of epistemic independence. New algorithms, based on multilinear programming, are presented, both for independence among events and among random variables. Separation properties of graphical models are also investigated.

A Syntactic Approach to Revising Epistemic States with Uncertain Inputs

Revising its beliefs when receiving new information is an important ability of any intelligent system. However, in realistic settings the new input is not always certain. A compelling way of dealing with uncertain input in an agent-based setting is to treat it as unreliable input, which may strengthen or weaken the beliefs of the agent. Recent work focused on the postulates associated with this form of belief change and on finding semantical operators that satisfy these postulates. In this paper we propose a new syntactic approach for this form of belief change and show that it agrees with the semantical definition. This makes it feasible to develop complex agent systems capable of efficiently dealing with unreliable input in a semantically meaningful way. Additionally, we show that imposing restrictions on the input and the beliefs that are entailed allows us to devise a tractable approach suitable for resource-bounded agents or agents where reactiveness is of paramount importance.

A belief revision framework for revising epistemic states with partial epistemic states

Belief revision performs belief change on an agent’s beliefs when new evidence (either of the form of a propositional formula or of the form of a total pre-order on a set of interpretations) is received. Jeffrey’s rule is commonly used for revising probabilistic epistemic states when new information is probabilistically uncertain. In this paper, we propose a general epistemic revision framework where new evidence is of the form of a partial epistemic state. Our framework extends Jeffrey’s rule with uncertain inputs and covers well-known existing frameworks such as ordinal conditional function (OCF) or possibility theory. We then define a set of postulates that such revision operators shall satisfy and establish representation theorems to characterize those postulates. We show that these postulates reveal common characteristics of various existing revision strategies and are satisfied by OCF conditionalization, Jeffrey’s rule of conditioning and possibility conditionalization. Furthermore, when reducing to the belief revision situation, our postulates can induce Darwiche and Pearl’s postulates C1 and C2.

Placing political economy: organising opposition to free trade before the abolition of the Corn Laws

The unfurling of global capitalism – and its attendant effects – has long been fertile intellectual terrain for geographers. But whilst studies of the processes and mechanisms of globalisation undoubtedly assume a talismanic importance in the discipline, geographers, with few exceptions, have left examinations of early economic liberalism to historians. One such critically important episode in the evolution of the liberal economic project was the repeal of the so-called 'Corn Laws' in 1846. Whilst the precise impact of the Manchester-based Anti-Corn Law League (ACLL) continues to be a matter of conjecture, Eric Sheppard has asserted that their particular take on political economy managed to assume a 'truth-like status' and worldwide universality. But the ACLL's campaign represents only one, albeit decisive, stage in the long intellectual and practical struggle between 'protectionists' and the disciples of free trade. Studies of the non-'Manchester' components have tended to focus squarely upon national politics. This paper examines a pivotal attempt in 1838 by Lord Melbourne's Government to experiment with the effective elimination of import duties on fresh fruit. Unlike most agricultural commodities, table fruit was produced in a tightly defined area, thus allowing the Government's experiment to play out, in theory, without national political fallout. Whilst the Government's clandestine actions left little time for a concerted opposition to develop, Kentish fruit growers soon organised. A formidable lobby was forged that drew wide local support yet also evolved beyond the original 'epistemic community'. Whilst the coalition failed in their efforts to reintroduce protective duties, their actions allow us to see how protectionist ideologies and policies were vivified through practices at many different spatial scales and to better understand the complex spatiality of protectionist takes on political economy. Their campaign also changed – at least in the short term – the course of British mercantile policy.

A framework for managing uncertain inputs: An axiomization of rewarding

The success postulate in belief revision ensures that new evidence (input) is always trusted. However, admitting uncertain input has been questioned by many researchers. Darwiche and Pearl argued that strengths of evidence should be introduced to determine the outcome of belief change, and provided a preliminary definition towards this thought. In this paper, we start with Darwiche and Pearl’s idea aiming to develop a framework that can capture the influence of the strengths of inputs with some rational assumptions. To achieve this, we first define epistemic states to represent beliefs attached with strength, and then present a set of postulates to describe the change process on epistemic states that is determined by the strengths of input and establish representation theorems to characterize these postulates. As a result, we obtain a unique rewarding operator which is proved to be a merging operator that is in line with many other works. We also investigate existing postulates on belief merging and compare them with our postulates. In addition, we show that from an epistemic state, a corresponding ordinal conditional function by Spohn can be derived and the result of combining two epistemic states is thus reduced to the result of combining two corresponding ordinal conditional functions proposed by Laverny and Lang. Furthermore, when reduced to the belief revision situation, we prove that our results induce all the Darwiche and Pearl’s postulates as well as the Recalcitrance postulate and the Independence postulate.

Reflexivity, Scientificity and the Sociology of Religion: Pierre Bourdieu in Debate

This paper explores the relevance of Pierre Bourdieu’s ‘epistemic reflexivity’ for the sociology of religion, in particular by examining his neglected address to the French Association for the Sociology of Religion in 1982. Whilst sociologists of religion have addressed some issues of reflexivity in their practice, less attention has been paid to the crucial scientific requirement, highlighted by Bourdieu, to break from the ‘illusio’ of that field and thus avoid alignments with positions taken by religious actors themselves. As a result, many sociologists inevitably participate in religious contestations and stakes, whether or not they affirm or deny their own religious identification with those they study. Although Bourdieu’s address was a response to a particular national and historical form of the sociology of religion, we argue that it retains much significance today and may lead to fruitful debate within the discipline.

Reducing Uncertainty in Aeroelastic Flutter Boundaries Using Experimental Data

Flutter prediction as currently practiced is usually deterministic, with a single structural model used to represent an aircraft. By using interval analysis to take into account structural variability, recent work has demonstrated that small changes in the structure can lead to very large changes in the altitude at which
utter occurs (Marques, Badcock, et al., J. Aircraft, 2010). In this follow-up work we examine the same phenomenon using probabilistic collocation (PC), an uncertainty quantification technique which can eficiently propagate multivariate stochastic input through a simulation code,
in this case an eigenvalue-based fluid-structure stability code. The resulting analysis predicts the consequences of an uncertain structure on incidence of
utter in probabilistic terms { information that could be useful in planning
flight-tests and assessing the risk of structural failure. The uncertainty in
utter altitude is confirmed to be substantial. Assuming that the structural uncertainty represents a epistemic uncertainty regarding the
structure, it may be reduced with the availability of additional information { for example aeroelastic response data from a flight-test. Such data is used to update the structural uncertainty using Bayes' theorem. The consequent
utter uncertainty is significantly reduced across the entire Mach number range.