Fw: CAP use case - Reasoning on Weighted Condition and Fuzzy Reasoning?

Hi, Vipul

Thanks for your "workaround" information. 

This is the email I received earlier from Samson. Great minds indeed come 
to the same place :)

Jos had implemented a similar solution.  One step further, you can have a 
triple to specify the N in the statement of (at least N out of M signs) so 
you don't have to be restricted to "at least 2" conditions. 

Helen

----- Forwarded by Helen Chen/AMPJB/AGFA on 09/27/2006 02:48 PM -----

Samson Tu <swt@stanford.edu> 
09/26/2006 06:57 PM

To
Helen Chen/AMPJB/AGFA@AGFA
cc

Subject
Re: Fw: CAP use case - Reasoning on Weighted Condition and Fuzzy 
Reasoning?








Not sure whether this is going to help:

A standard way to do counting with rule programming is to  have a bunch 
of rules of the form:

conditioni AND (count ?n) =>
    ( retract (count ?n)) && assert (count ?n + 1))

and then use a lower priority rule
  (count ?n:&(?n >= 2)) => obtain chest X-ray.

In the 80s people found that, if you need to manage "weights" and 
uncertainties in diagnosis, it's not a good idea to use rules. That's 
when Bayesian network become useful.

SAmson

helen.chen@agfa.com wrote:
> 
> I am forwarding this discussion at ACPP to the HCLS list, hope to get 
> some input on this tread.
> 
> ----- Forwarded by Helen Chen/AMPJB/AGFA on 09/26/2006 04:53 PM -----
> *Helen Chen/AMPJB/AGFA*
> 
> 09/26/2006 08:30 AM
> 
> 
> To
>                Chimezie Ogbuji
> cc
>                cebarr01@yahoo.com, aziz@boxwala.com, 
sam.brandt@siemens.com, 
> THONGSERMEIER@PARTNERS.ORG, ogbujic@bio.ri.ccf.org, 
> davide@landcglobal.com, DAN.RUSSLER@ORACLE.COM
> Subject
>                CAP use case
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Hi, Chimezie
> 
> As per our discussion last Tcon, here is the Guideline for Managing 
> Community Acquired Pneumonia (CAP). 
> 
> 
http://www.guideline.gov/summary/summary.aspx?doc_id=9398&nbr=005034&string=community+AND+acquired+AND+pneumonia 

> 
> 
> The algorithm is here :
> 
> http://www.guideline.gov/algorithm/5034/NGC-5034_1.html
> 
> Notice in the step 3, it says:
> 
> 3: "Obtain chest X-ray, especially if patient has two or more of these 
> signs:
>    Temp > 100F
>    Pulse > 100
>    Decreased breath sounds
>    Rales
>    Respiratory rate > 20
> 
> Now we are facing the new problem of modelling "two or more" facts of a 
> necessary condition for "order chest X-ray" in the knowledge base. 
>  Furthermore, doctors will likely tell you that no only they need to 
> express "at least two or more", they also want to express "fact A 
> carries more weight or more indicative to a diagnosis than fact B".  If 
> we were to model these "weighted condition", we are opening a whole can 
> of new worms, and I don't think any SW reasoners now can do reasoning on 

> this.
> 

-- 
Samson Tu                    email: swt@stanford.edu
Senior Research Scientist    web: www.stanford.edu/~swt/
Stanford Medical Informatics phone: 1-650-725-3391
Stanford University          fax: 1-650-725-7944