Artificial Intelligence: Cognitive Agents: AI, Uncertainty & Bayesian Networks

Artificial Intelligence: Cognitive Agents
AI, Uncertainty & Bayesian Networks
2015-03-10 / 03-12
Kim, Byoung-Hee
Biointelligence Laboratory
Seoul National University
http://bi.snu.ac.kr
A Bayesian network is a graphical model
for probabilistic relationships among a set of variables
© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 2

ACM Turing Award
 Nobel Prize in Computing
 2011 Winner: Judea Pearl (UCLA)
 For fundamental contributions to artificial intelligence
through the development of a calculus for probabilistic
and causal reasoning
 Invention of Bayesian networks
 Pearl's accomplishments have “redefined the term
'thinking machine’” over the past 30 years
 BN mimics “the neural activities of the human brain,
constantly exchanging messages without benefit of a
supervisor”

Notes
 Related chapters in the textbook (AIMA 3 rd ed. by Russell and Norvig)
 Ch. 13 Quantifying Uncertainty

 Ch. 14 Probabilistic Reasoning (14.1~14.2)
 Ch. 20 Learning Probabilistic Models (20.1~20.2)
 On the reference ‘A Tutorial on Learning with Bayesian

Networks by David Heckerman’
 It is very technical but covers insights and comprehensive
backgrounds on Bayesian networks
 This lecture covers the ‘Introduction’ section
 This lecture is an easier introductory tutorial

 Both contents in the textbook and Heckerman’s tutorial is fairly
mathematical
 This lecture covers basic concepts and tools to understand
Bayesian networks

Contents
 Bayesian Networks: Introduction
 Motivating example
 Decomposing a joint distribution of variables
 d-separation
 A mini Turing test in causal conversation
 Correlation & causation
 AI & Uncertainty
 Bayesian Networks in Detail
 d-separation: revisited & details
 Probability & Bayesian
 Inference in & learning Bayesian networks
 BN as AI tools and advantages
Bayesian Networks:
Introduction
Slide from K. Mohan & J. Pearl, UAI ’12 Tutorial on Graphical Models for Causal Inference
Causality, Dependency
 From correlation to causality
 정성적 방법
 정량적 방법
 Granger causality index
 http://www.google.com/trends/
 Google의 CausalImpact
 R package for causal inference in time series
 Official posting: http://google-
opensource.blogspot.kr/2014/09/causalimpact-new-open-
source-package.html
 소개 기사(영문): https://gigaom.com/2014/09/11/google-
has-open-sourced-a-tool-for-inferring-cause-from-
correlations/

Assuming binary states for all the variables

Ex) Season: dry or rainy
Ex) Sprinkler: ON or OFF


(directed acyclic graph)















Correlation & Causation
Correlation does not imply causation
A chart that, correlates the number of a correlation between ice cream

pirates with global temperature. The consumption and crime, but
two variables are correlated, but one shows that the actual cause is
does not imply the other temperature.
Example
 Designing a Bayesian Network
 My own design of conditional probability tables
SEASON
DRY 0.6
SPRINKLER RAINY 0.4 RAIN
SEASON DRY RAINY SEASON DRY RAINY
DRY 0.8 0.1 YES 0.3 0.8
RAINY 0.2 0.9 NO 0.7 0.2

WET
SPRINKLER ON OFF
RAIN YES NO YES NO
YES 0.8 0.1 0.8 0.1
NO 0.2 0.9 0.2 0.9
SLIPPERY
WET YES NO
YES 0.8 0.1
NO 0.2 0.9

Example
 Designing a Bayesian Network
 Tool: GeNIe (https://dslpitt.org/genie/)
 GeNIe (Graphical Network Interface) is the graphical interface to SMILE,
a fully portable Bayesian inference engine in C++
 Inference based on the designed Bayesian Network
Q1
A1

AI & Uncertainty
Probability
 Probability plays a central role in modern pattern
recognition.
 The main tool to deal uncertainties
 All of the probabilistic inference and learning amount to
repeated application of the sum rule and the product rule
Random Variables: variables + probability

Artificial Intelligence (AI)
 The objective of AI is to build intelligent computers
 We want intelligent, adaptive, robust behavior
cat car
 Often hand programming not possible.
 Solution? Get the computer to program itself, by
showing it examples of the behavior we want!
 This is the learning approach to AI.
 (Traditional) AI
 Knowledge & reasoning; work with facts/assertions;
develop rules of logical inference
 Planning: work with applicability/effects of actions;
develop searches for actions which achieve goals/avert
disasters.
 Expert systems: develop by hand a set of rules for
examining inputs, updating internal states and
generating outputs

 Probabilistic AI
 emphasis on noisy measurements, approximation in hard
cases, learning, algorithmic issues.
 The power of learning

 Automatic system building
 old expert systems needed hand coding of knowledge and
of output semantics
 learning automatically constructs rules and supports all
types of queries
 Probabilistic databases
 traditional DB technology cannot answer queries about
items that were never loaded into the dataset
 UAI models are like probabilistic databases

Uncertainty and Artificial Intelligence
(UAI)
 Probabilistic methods can be used to:
 make decisions given partial information about the world
 account for noisy sensors or actuators
 explain phenomena not part of our models
 describe inherently stochastic behavior in the world

Other Names for UAI
 Machine learning (ML), data mining, applied
statistics, adaptive (stochastic) signal processing,
probabilistic planning/reasoning...
 Some differences:
 Data mining almost always uses large data sets,
statistics almost always small ones
 Data mining, planning, decision theory often have no
internal parameters to be learned
 Statistics often has no algorithm to run!
 ML/UAI algorithms are rarely online and rarely scale to
huge data (changing now).

Learning in AI
 Learning is most useful
 when the structure of the task is not well understood
 but can be characterized by a dataset with strong
statistical regularity
 Also useful in adaptive or dynamic situations when

the task (or its parameters) are constantly
changing
 Currently, these are challenging topics of machine
learning and data mining research

Probabilistic AI
 Let inputs=X, correct answers=Y, outputs of our
machine=Z
 Learning: estimation of p(X, Y)

 The central object of interest is the joint distribution
 The main difficulty is compactly representing it and
robustly learning its shape given noisy samples

Probabilistic Graphical Models (PGMs)
 Probabilistic graphical models represent large joint
distributions compactly using a set of “local”
relationships specified by a graph
 Each random variable in our model corresponds

to a graph node.

Probabilistic Graphical Models (PGMs)
 There are useful properties in using
probabilistic graphical models
 A simple way to visualize the structure of a probabilistic
model
 Insights into the properties of the model
 Complex computations (for inference and learning) can
be expressed in terms of graphical manipulations
underlying mathematical expressions

Directed graph vs. undirected graph
 Both (probabilistic) graphical models
 Specify a factorization (how to express the joint distribution)
 Define a set of conditional independence properties
Parent - child Maximal clique

Local conditional distribution Potential function
Bayesian Networks (BN) Markov Random Field (MRF)

Bayesian Networks in Detail
(DAG)

Designing a Bayesian Network Model
 TakeHeart II: Decision support system for clinical cardiovascular risk
assessment

Inference in a Bayesian Network Model
 Given an assignment of a subset of variables (evidence) in a BN,
estimate the posterior distribution over another subset of unobserved
variables of interest.
Inferences viewed as
message passing along the network

Bayesian Networks
 The joint distribution defined by a graph is given by the
product of a conditional distribution of each node
conditioned on their parent nodes.
K
p (x )   p ( x k | Pa ( x k ))
k 1
(𝑃𝑎(𝑥𝑘 ) denotes the set of parents of xk)
ex) 𝑝 𝑥1 , 𝑥2 , … , 𝑥7 =
* Without given DAG structure, usual chain rule can be applied to get
the joint distribution. But computational cost is much higher.

Bayes’ Theorem
Likelihood
p ( X | Y ) p (Y ) Prior
p (Y | X ) 
p( X )
Posterior Normalizing
constant
p( X )   p ( X | Y ) p (Y )
Y
posterior  likelihood × prior

Bayes’ Theorem
Figure from Figure 1. in (Adams, et all, 2013)

obtained from http://journal.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fpsyt.2013.00047/full

Bayesian Probabilities
-Frequentist vs. Bayesian
p (D | w ) p ( w )
p (w | D ) 
p (D ) Thomas Bayes
 Likelihood: p (D | w )
 Frequentist
 w: a fixed parameter determined by ‘estimator’
 Maximum likelihood: Error function =  log p ( D | w )
 Error bars: Obtained by the distribution of possible data sets D
 Bootstrap
 Cross-validation
 Bayesian
 a probability distribution w: the uncertainty in the parameters
 Prior knowledge
 Noninformative (uniform) prior, Laplace correction in estimating priors
 Monte Carlo methods, variational Bayes, EP
(See an article ‘WHERE Do PROBABILITIES COME FROM?’ on page 491 in the textbook (Russell and Norvig, 2010) for more discussion)

Conditional Independence
 Conditional independence simplifies both the structure of a model and
the computations
 An important feature of graphical models is that conditional

independence properties of the joint distribution can be read directly
from the graph without having to perform any analytical manipulations
 The general framework for this is called d-separation

Three example graphs – 1st case
 None of the variables are observed
Node c is tail-to-tail
 The variable c is observed
 The conditioned node ‘blocks’ the path from a to b,

causes a and b to become (conditionally) independent.

Three example graphs – 2nd case
Node c is head-to-tail
 The conditioned node ‘blocks’ the path from a to b,

causes a and b to become (conditionally) independent.

Three example graphs – 3rd case
Node c is head-to-head
 When node c is unobserved,

it ‘blocks’ the path and the variables a and b are independent.
 Conditioning on c ‘unblocks’ the path and render a and b dependent.

Three example graphs - Fuel gauge example
 B – Battery, F-fuel, G-electric fuel gauge (rather unreliable fuel gauge)
 Checking the fuel gauge
( Makes it more likely )

 Checking the battery also has the meaning?
Makes it less likely than observation of fuel gauge only.

(explaining away)

d-separation
 Tail-to-tail node or head-to-tail node
 Unless it is observed in which case it blocks a path, the
path is unblocked.
 Head-to-head node
 Blocks a path if is unobserved, but on the node, and/or
at least one of its descendants, is observed the path
becomes unblocked.
 d-separation?
 All paths are blocked.
 The joint distribution will satisfy conditional
independence w.r.t. concerned variables.
d-separation
 (a) a is dependent to b given c
 Head-to-head node e is unblocked, because a descendant c is in
the conditioning set.
 Tail-to-tail node f is unblocked
 (b) a is independent to b given f

 Head-to-head node e is blocked
 Tail-to-tail node f is blocked

d-separation
 Another example of conditional independence and d-separation: i.i.d.
(independent identically distributed) data
 Problem: finding posterior dist. for the mean of a univariate Gaussian dist.
 Every path is blocked and so the observations D={x1,…,xN} are independent
given
(independent)
(The observations are in general no longer independent!)

d-separation
 Naïve Bayes model
 Key assumption: conditioned on the class z, the distribution of the
input variables x1,…, xD are independent.
 Input {x1,…,xN} with their class labels,
then we can fit the naïve Bayes model to the training data using
maximum likelihood assuming that the data are drawn
independently from the model.

d-separation
 Markov blanket or Markov boundary
 When dealing with the conditional distribution of xi , consider the
minimal set of nodes that isolates xi from the rest of the graph.
 The set of nodes comprising parents, children, co-parents is called
the Markov blanket.
parents
Co-parents
children

Probability Distributions
 Discrete variables
 Beta, Bernoulli, binomial
 Dirichlet, multinomial
 …
beta Dirichlet
 Continuous variables
 Normal (Gaussian)
 Student-t
 …
binomial Gaussian
 Exponential family & conjugacy
 Many probability densities on x can be represented as the same form
p ( x |  )  h ( x ) g ( ) exp  u ( x )
T
 There are conjugate family of density functions having the same form of density
functions
 Beta & binomial F beta Dirichlet
 Dirichlet & multinomial
 Normal & Normal x binomial multinomial

Inference in Graphical Models
 Inference in graphical models
 Given evidences (some nodes are clamped to observed values)
 Wish to compute the posterior distributions of other nodes
 Inference algorithms in graphical structures

 Main idea: propagation of local messages
 Exact inference
 Sum-product algorithm, max-product algorithm, junction tree
A
algorithm ABD
B D BCD
 Approximate inference
C E CDE
 Loopy belief propagation + message passing schedule
 Variational methods, sampling methods (Monte Carlo methods)

Learning Parameters of
Bayesian Networks
 Parameters
 probabilities in conditional probability tables (CPTs) for all the
variables in the network SEASON RAIN
SEASON DRY RAINY
DRY ? YES ? ?
RAINY ? NO ? ?
 Learning parameters
 Assuming that the structure is fixed, i.e. designed or learned.
 We need data, i.e. observed instances
 Estimation based on relative frequencies from data + belief
 Example: coin toss. Estimation of ‘heads’ in various ways
1 The principle of indifference: head and tail are equally probable 𝑃 ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑑𝑠 = 1ൗ2
2 If we tossed a coin 10,000 times and it landed

heads 3373 times, we would estimate the
probability of heads to be about .3373
Bayesian Networks
 Learning parameters (continued)
 Estimation based on relative frequencies from data + belief
 Example: A-match soccer game between Korea and Japan. How,
do you think, is it probable that Korean would win?
 A: 0.85 (Korean), B: 0.3 (Japanese)
3  This probability is not a ratio, and it is not a relative
frequency because the game cannot be repeated many
times under the exact same conditions
 Degree of belief or subjective probability
 Usual method
 Estimate the probability distribution of a variable X
based on a relative frequency and belief concerning a
relative frequency

Bayesian Networks
 Simple ‘counting’ solution (Bayesian point of view)
 Parameter estimation of a single node
 Assume local parameter independence
 For a binary variable (for example, a coin toss)
 prior: Beta distribution - Beta(a,b)
 after we have observed m heads and N-m tails posterior -
Beta(a+m,b+N-m) and 𝑃 𝑋 = ℎ𝑒𝑎𝑑 = (𝑎+𝑚)ൗ𝑁
(conjugacy of Beta and Binomial distributions)
binomial
beta

Bayesian Networks
 Simple ‘counting’ solution (Bayesian point of view)
 For a multinomial variable (for example, a dice toss)
 prior: Dirichlet distribution – Dirichlet(a1,a2, …, ad)
𝑎𝑘
 𝑃 𝑋 = 𝑘 = Τ𝑁 𝑁 = σ 𝑎𝑘
 Observing state i: Dirichlet(a1,…,ai+1,…, ad)
(conjugacy of Dirichlet and Multinomial distributions)
 For an entire network

 We simply iterate over its nodes
 In the case of incomplete data

 In real data, many of the variable values may be incorrect or missing
 Usual approximating solution is given by Gibbs sampling or EM
(expectation maximization) technique

Bayesian Networks
 Smoothing
 Another viewpoint
 Laplace smoothing or additive smoothing given observed counts for
d states of a variable 𝑋 = (𝑥1 , 𝑥2 ,…𝑥𝑑 )
𝑥𝑘 + 𝛼
𝑃 𝑋=𝑘 = 𝑖 = 1, … , 𝑑 , (𝛼 = 𝛼1 = 𝛼2 = ⋯ 𝛼𝑑 )
𝑁 + 𝛼𝑑
 From a Bayesian point of view, this corresponds to the expected

value of the posterior distribution, using a symmetric Dirichlet
distribution with parameter α as a prior.
 Additive smoothing is commonly a component of naive Bayes
classifiers.

Learning the Graph Structure
 Learning the graph structure itself from data requires
 A space of possible structures
 A measure that can be used to score each structure
 From a Bayesian viewpoint
: score for each model

 Tough points
 Marginalization over latent variables => challenging computational
problem
 Exploring the space of structures can also be problematic
 The # of different graph structures grows exponentially with the # of
nodes
 Usually we resort to heuristics
 Local score based, global score based, conditional independence test based, …

Bayesian Networks as Tools for AI
 Learning
 Extracting and encoding knowledge from data
 Knowledge is represented in Probabilistic relationship among variables
 Causal relationship
 Network of variables
 Common framework for machine learning models
 Supervised and unsupervised learning
 Knowledge Representation & Reasoning

 Bayesian networks can be constructed from prior knowledge alone
 Constructed model can be used for reasoning based on probabilistic inference methods
 Expert System
 Uncertain expert knowledge can be encoded into a Bayesian network
 DAG in a Bayesian network is hand-constructed by domain experts
 Then the conditional probabilities were assessed by the expert, learned from data, or
obtained using a combination of both techniques.
 Bayesian network-based expert systems are popular
 Planning
 In some different form, known as decision graphs or influence diagrams
 We don’t cover about this direction

Advantages of Bayesian Networks for
Data Analysis
 Ability to handle missing data
 Because the model encodes dependencies among all variables
 Learning causal relationships

 Can be used to gain understanding about a problem domain
 Can be used to predict the consequences of intervention
 Having both causal and probabilistic semantics

 It is an ideal representation for combining prior knowledge (which comes in
causal form) and data
 Efficient and principled approach for avoiding the overfitting of data

 By Bayesian statistical methods in conjunction with Bayesian networks
(summary from the abstract of D. Heckerman’s Tutorial on BN)

(Read ‘Introduction’ section for detailed explanations)
References
 K. Mohan & J. Pearl, UAI ’12 Tutorial on Graphical Models for Causal
Inference
 S. Roweis, MLSS ’05 Lecture on Probabilistic Graphical Models
 Chapter 1, Chapter 2, Chapter 8 (Graphical Models), in Pattern
Recognition and Machine Learning by C.M. Bishop, 2006.
 David Heckerman, A Tutorial on Learning with Bayesian Networks.
 R.E. Neapolitan, Learning Bayesian Networks, Pearson Prentice Hall,
2004.

More Textbooks and Courses
 https://www.coursera.org/course/pgm :
Probabilistic Graphical Models by D. Koller

APPENDIX

Bayesian Networks
F
The probability distribution of F represents our belief
concerning the relative frequency with which X equals k.
 Case 1: X is a binary variable

 F: beta distribution, X: Bernoulli or binomial distribution
 Ex) F ~ Beta(a,b), then 𝑃 𝑋 = 1 = 𝑎Τ𝑁 (𝑁 = 𝑎 + 𝑏)
 Case 2: X is a multinomial variable

 F: Dirichlet distribution, X: multinomial distribution
 Ex) F ~ Dirichlet(a1,a2, …, ad), then 𝑃 𝑋 = 𝑘 = 𝑎𝑘Τ𝑁 𝑁 = σ 𝑎𝑘
 Laplace smoothing or additive smoothing given observed
frequencies 𝑋 = (𝑥1 , 𝑥2 ,…𝑥𝑑 )
𝑥𝑘 + 𝛼
𝑃 𝑋=𝑘 = 𝑖 = 1, … , 𝑑 , (𝛼 = 𝛼1 = 𝛼2 = ⋯ 𝛼𝑑 )
𝑁 + 𝛼𝑑
Graphical interpretation of
Bayes’ theorem
 Given structure: p ( x , y )  p ( x ) p ( y | x ) (a)
 We observe the value of y (b)
 Goal: infer the posterior distribution overp(x,x | y)
 Marginal distribution p ( x ) : a prior over the latent
variable x
p( y)
 We can evaluate the marginal distribution
p( y)   p ( y | x ') p ( x ')
x'
 By Bayes’ theorem we can calculate

p( y | x) p( x)
p(x | y)  (c)
p( y)
d-separation
 Directed factorization
 Filtering whether can be expressed in terms of the factorization implied by
the graph?
 If we present to the filter the set of all possible distributions p(x) over the set
of variables X, then the subset of distributions that are passed by the filter
will be denoted DF (Directed Factorization)
 Fully connected graph: The set DF will contain all possible distributions
 Fully disconnected graph: The joint distributions which factorize into the
product of the marginal distributions over the variables only.

Gaussian distribution
1  1 2
N ( x |  , )  exp    
2
( x ) 
(2 ) 
2 1/ 2 2
 2 
Multivariate Gaussian
1 1  1 1 
N (x | μ, Σ )  exp   ( x  μ ) Σ ( x  μ ) 
T
(2 )
D /2 1/ 2
|Σ|  2 

Artificial Intelligence: Cognitive Agents: AI, Uncertainty & Bayesian Networks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Artificial Intelligence: Cognitive Agents: AI, Uncertainty & Bayesian Networks

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Artificial Intelligence: Cognitive Agents: AI, Uncertainty & Bayesian Networks

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Artificial Intelligence: Cognitive Agents

AI, Uncertainty & Bayesian Networks

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 2

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 3

 Ch. 13 Quantifying Uncertainty

 On the reference ‘A Tutorial on Learning with Bayesian

 This lecture is an easier introductory tutorial

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 4

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 7

Assuming binary states for all the variables

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 8

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 9

(directed acyclic graph)

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 10

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 11

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 12

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 13

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 14

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 15

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 16

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 17

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 18

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 19

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 20

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 21

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 22

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 23

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 24

Correlation does not imply causation

A chart that, correlates the number of a correlation between ice cream

DRY 0.8 0.1 YES 0.3 0.8

RAINY 0.2 0.9 NO 0.7 0.2

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 26

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 27

Random Variables: variables + probability

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 31

 The power of learning

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 32

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 33

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 34

 Also useful in adaptive or dynamic situations when

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 35

 Learning: estimation of p(X, Y)

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 36

 Each random variable in our model corresponds

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 37

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 38

Parent - child Maximal clique

Bayesian Networks (BN) Markov Random Field (MRF)

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 39

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 41

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 42

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 43

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 44

posterior  likelihood × prior

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 45

Figure from Figure 1. in (Adams, et all, 2013)

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 46

© 2014-2015, SNU CSE Biointelligence Lab., http://bi.snu.ac.kr 47