• 文献检索
  • 文档翻译
  • 深度研究
  • 学术资讯
  • Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件
  • 邀请有礼
  • 套餐&价格
  • 历史记录
应用&插件
Suppr Zotero 插件Zotero 插件浏览器插件Mac 客户端Windows 客户端微信小程序
定价
高级版会员购买积分包购买API积分包
服务
文献检索文档翻译深度研究API 文档MCP 服务
关于我们
关于 Suppr公司介绍联系我们用户协议隐私条款
关注我们

Suppr 超能文献

核心技术专利:CN118964589B侵权必究
粤ICP备2023148730 号-1Suppr @ 2026

文献检索

告别复杂PubMed语法,用中文像聊天一样搜索,搜遍4000万医学文献。AI智能推荐,让科研检索更轻松。

立即免费搜索

文件翻译

保留排版,准确专业,支持PDF/Word/PPT等文件格式,支持 12+语言互译。

免费翻译文档

深度研究

AI帮你快速写综述,25分钟生成高质量综述,智能提取关键信息,辅助科研写作。

立即免费体验

扩大贝叶斯问题解决方法的应用范围。

Widening Access to Bayesian Problem Solving.

作者信息

Cruz Nicole, Desai Saoirse Connor, Dewitt Stephen, Hahn Ulrike, Lagnado David, Liefgreen Alice, Phillips Kirsty, Pilditch Toby, Tešić Marko

机构信息

Department of Psychological Sciences, Birkbeck, University of London, London, United Kingdom.

Department of Psychology, City, University of London, London, United Kingdom.

出版信息

Front Psychol. 2020 Apr 9;11:660. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00660. eCollection 2020.

DOI:10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00660
PMID:32328015
原文链接:https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC7160335/
Abstract

Bayesian reasoning and decision making is widely considered normative because it minimizes prediction error in a coherent way. However, it is often difficult to apply Bayesian principles to complex real world problems, which typically have many unknowns and interconnected variables. Bayesian network modeling techniques make it possible to model such problems and obtain precise predictions about the causal impact that changing the value of one variable may have on the values of other variables connected to it. But Bayesian modeling is itself complex, and has until now remained largely inaccessible to lay people. In a large scale lab experiment, we provide proof of principle that a Bayesian network modeling tool, adapted to provide basic training and guidance on the modeling process to beginners without requiring knowledge of the mathematical machinery working behind the scenes, significantly helps lay people find normative Bayesian solutions to complex problems, compared to generic training on probabilistic reasoning. We discuss the implications of this finding for the use of Bayesian network software tools in applied contexts such as security, medical, forensic, economic or environmental decision making.

摘要

贝叶斯推理与决策被广泛认为具有规范性,因为它以连贯的方式将预测误差最小化。然而,将贝叶斯原理应用于复杂的现实世界问题往往很困难,这些问题通常有许多未知因素和相互关联的变量。贝叶斯网络建模技术使对这类问题进行建模并获得关于改变一个变量的值可能对与其相关的其他变量的值产生的因果影响的精确预测成为可能。但贝叶斯建模本身很复杂,迄今为止,外行人在很大程度上仍然难以掌握。在一项大规模实验室实验中,我们提供了原理证明:一种贝叶斯网络建模工具,经过调整可为初学者提供关于建模过程的基础培训和指导,而无需了解背后的数学原理,与概率推理的通用培训相比,它能显著帮助外行人找到复杂问题的规范性贝叶斯解决方案。我们讨论了这一发现对于在安全、医疗、法医、经济或环境决策等应用场景中使用贝叶斯网络软件工具的意义。

相似文献

1
Widening Access to Bayesian Problem Solving.扩大贝叶斯问题解决方法的应用范围。
Front Psychol. 2020 Apr 9;11:660. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.00660. eCollection 2020.
2
BARD: A Structured Technique for Group Elicitation of Bayesian Networks to Support Analytic Reasoning.BARD:一种用于支持分析推理的贝叶斯网络的结构化群组启发式技术。
Risk Anal. 2022 Jun;42(6):1155-1178. doi: 10.1111/risa.13759. Epub 2021 Jun 19.
3
Developing Bayesian networks from a dependency-layered ontology: A proof-of-concept in radiation oncology.从依赖分层本体中开发贝叶斯网络:放射肿瘤学中的概念验证。
Med Phys. 2017 Aug;44(8):4350-4359. doi: 10.1002/mp.12340. Epub 2017 Jun 30.
4
Individuals vs. BARD: Experimental Evaluation of an Online System for Structured, Collaborative Bayesian Reasoning.个体与BARD:结构化协作贝叶斯推理在线系统的实验评估
Front Psychol. 2020 Jun 18;11:1054. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01054. eCollection 2020.
5
A Bayesian Network Decision Support Tool for Low Back Pain Using a RAND Appropriateness Procedure: Proposal and Internal Pilot Study.一种使用随机适用性程序的腰痛贝叶斯网络决策支持工具:提案与内部试点研究
JMIR Res Protoc. 2021 Jan 15;10(1):e21804. doi: 10.2196/21804.
6
Bayesian Networks in Radiology.放射学中的贝叶斯网络
Radiol Artif Intell. 2023 Sep 27;5(6):e210187. doi: 10.1148/ryai.210187. eCollection 2023 Nov.
7
Precise Network Modeling of Systems Genetics Data Using the Bayesian Network Webserver.使用贝叶斯网络网络服务器对系统遗传学数据进行精确的网络建模。
Methods Mol Biol. 2017;1488:319-335. doi: 10.1007/978-1-4939-6427-7_15.
8
Précis of bayesian rationality: The probabilistic approach to human reasoning.《贝叶斯理性:人类推理的概率方法》概要
Behav Brain Sci. 2009 Feb;32(1):69-84; discussion 85-120. doi: 10.1017/S0140525X09000284.
9
Brain health and value diversity: A new implementation field for values-based practice?大脑健康与价值多样性:基于价值实践的新实施领域?
Psychiatriki. 2024 Mar 28;35(1):13-16. doi: 10.22365/jpsych.2024.001. Epub 2024 Jan 22.
10
Bayesian Networks Improve Causal Environmental Assessments for Evidence-Based Policy.贝叶斯网络提高基于证据的政策因果环境评估。
Environ Sci Technol. 2016 Dec 20;50(24):13195-13205. doi: 10.1021/acs.est.6b03220. Epub 2016 Dec 8.

引用本文的文献

1
Utilization of non-invasive ventilation before prehospital emergency anesthesia in trauma - a cohort analysis with machine learning.创伤患者院前紧急麻醉前无创通气的应用——一项基于机器学习的队列分析
Scand J Trauma Resusc Emerg Med. 2025 Mar 3;33(1):35. doi: 10.1186/s13049-025-01350-1.
2
BARD: A Structured Technique for Group Elicitation of Bayesian Networks to Support Analytic Reasoning.BARD:一种用于支持分析推理的贝叶斯网络的结构化群组启发式技术。
Risk Anal. 2022 Jun;42(6):1155-1178. doi: 10.1111/risa.13759. Epub 2021 Jun 19.
3
Evaluation of various estimators for standardized mean difference in meta-analysis.

本文引用的文献

1
BARD: A Structured Technique for Group Elicitation of Bayesian Networks to Support Analytic Reasoning.BARD:一种用于支持分析推理的贝叶斯网络的结构化群组启发式技术。
Risk Anal. 2022 Jun;42(6):1155-1178. doi: 10.1111/risa.13759. Epub 2021 Jun 19.
2
New Paradigms in the Psychology of Reasoning.推理心理学的新范式。
Annu Rev Psychol. 2020 Jan 4;71:305-330. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010419-051132. Epub 2019 Sep 12.
3
The Zero-Sum Fallacy in Evidence Evaluation.证据评估中的零和谬误。
Meta 分析中标准化均数差的各种估计量的评价。
Stat Med. 2021 Jan 30;40(2):403-426. doi: 10.1002/sim.8781. Epub 2020 Nov 12.
4
Individuals vs. BARD: Experimental Evaluation of an Online System for Structured, Collaborative Bayesian Reasoning.个体与BARD:结构化协作贝叶斯推理在线系统的实验评估
Front Psychol. 2020 Jun 18;11:1054. doi: 10.3389/fpsyg.2020.01054. eCollection 2020.
Psychol Sci. 2019 Feb;30(2):250-260. doi: 10.1177/0956797618818484. Epub 2018 Dec 31.
4
How Communication Can Make Voters Choose Less Well.沟通如何让选民做出更差的选择。
Top Cogn Sci. 2019 Jan;11(1):194-206. doi: 10.1111/tops.12401. Epub 2018 Dec 25.
5
Formalizing Neurath's ship: Approximate algorithms for online causal learning.形式化 Neurath 船:在线因果学习的近似算法。
Psychol Rev. 2017 Apr;124(3):301-338. doi: 10.1037/rev0000061. Epub 2017 Feb 27.
6
Failures of explaining away and screening off in described versus experienced causal learning scenarios.在描述的因果学习情境与实际经历的因果学习情境中,“排除解释”和“屏蔽效应”的失效情况。
Mem Cognit. 2017 Feb;45(2):245-260. doi: 10.3758/s13421-016-0662-3.
7
Using Bayesian networks to guide the assessment of new evidence in an appeal case.使用贝叶斯网络指导上诉案件新证据的评估。
Crime Sci. 2016 May 25;5(1):9. doi: 10.1186/s40163-016-0057-6.
8
Do people reason rationally about causally related events? Markov violations, weak inferences, and failures of explaining away.人们是否能对因果相关事件进行合理推理?马尔可夫违背、弱推理以及解释消除失败。
Cogn Psychol. 2016 Jun;87:88-134. doi: 10.1016/j.cogpsych.2016.05.002. Epub 2016 Jun 1.
9
From complex questionnaire and interviewing data to intelligent Bayesian network models for medical decision support.从复杂的问卷调查和访谈数据到用于医疗决策支持的智能贝叶斯网络模型。
Artif Intell Med. 2016 Feb;67:75-93. doi: 10.1016/j.artmed.2016.01.002. Epub 2016 Jan 16.
10
Causality in thought.思维中的因果关系。
Annu Rev Psychol. 2015 Jan 3;66:223-47. doi: 10.1146/annurev-psych-010814-015135. Epub 2014 Jul 21.