How many diagnoses do we need?

Roni Stern, Meir Kalech, Shelly Rogov, Alexander Feldman

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

15 Scopus citations

Abstract

A known limitation of many diagnosis algorithms is that the number of diagnoses they return can be very large. This is both time consuming and not very helpful from the perspective of a human operator: presenting hundreds of diagnoses to a human operator (charged with repairing the system) is meaningless. In various settings, including decision support for a human operator and automated troubleshooting processes, it is sufficient to be able to answer a basic diagnostic question: is a given component faulty? We propose a way to aggregate an arbitrarily large set of diagnoses to return an estimate of the likelihood of a given component to be faulty. The resulting mapping of components to their likelihood of being faulty is called the system's health state. We propose two metrics for evaluating the accuracy of a health state and show that an accurate health state can be found without finding all diagnoses. An empirical study explores the question of how many diagnoses are needed to obtain an accurate enough health state, and an online stopping criteria is proposed.

Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)26-45
Number of pages20
JournalArtificial Intelligence
Volume248
DOIs
StatePublished - 1 Jul 2017
Externally publishedYes

Bibliographical note

Publisher Copyright:
© 2017 Elsevier B.V.

Keywords

  • Artificial intelligence
  • Model-based diagnosis

Fingerprint

Dive into the research topics of 'How many diagnoses do we need?'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.

Cite this