Publications

Results 26–31 of 31

Search results

Jump to search filters

Uncertainty Quantification for Machine Learning

Stracuzzi, David J.; Chen, Maximillian G.; Darling, Michael C.; Peterson, Matthew G.; Vollmer, Charlie

In this paper, we assert the importance of uncertainty quantification for machine learning and sketch an initial research agenda. We define uncertainty in the context of machine learning, identify its sources, and motivate the importance and impact of its quantification. We then illustrate these issues with an image analysis example. The paper concludes by identifying several specific research issues and by discussing the potential long-term implications of uncertainty quantification for data analytics in general.

More Details

A dynamic Bayesian network for diagnosing nuclear power plant accidents

Proceedings of the 29th International Florida Artificial Intelligence Research Society Conference, FLAIRS 2016

Jones, Thomas B.; Darling, Michael C.; Groth, Katrina M.; Denman, Matthew R.; Luger, George F.

When a severe nuclear power plant accident occurs, plant operators rely on Severe Accident Management Guidelines (SAMGs). However, current SAMGs are limited in scope and depth. The plant operators must work to mitigate the accident with limited experience and guidance for the situation. The SMART (Safely Managing Accidental Reactor Transients) procedures framework aims to fill the need for detailed guidance by creating a comprehensive probabilistic model, using a Dynamic Bayesian Network, to aid in the diagnosis of the reactor's state. In this paper, we explore the viability of the proposed SMART proceedures approach by building a prototype Bayesian network that allows tor the diagnosis of two types of accidents based on a comprehensive data set. We use Kullback-Leibler (K-L) divergence to gauge the relative importance of each of the plant's parameters. We compare accuracy and F-score measures across four different Bayesian networks: a baseline network that ignores observation variables, a network that ignores data from the observation variable with the highest K-L score, a network that ignores data from the variable with the lowest K-L score, and finally a network that includes all observation variable data. We conclude with an interpretation of these results for SMART procedures.

More Details
Results 26–31 of 31
Results 26–31 of 31