On the Value of Synthetic Judgments. Revision.

Abstract

Decision-support technologies are founded on the paradigm that direct judgments are less reliable and less valid than synthetic inferences produced from more fragmentary judgments. Moreover, certain types of fragments are normally assumed to be more valid than others. In particular, judgments about the likelihood of a certain state of affairs given a particular set of data (diagnostic inferences) are routinely fabricated from judgments about the likelihood of that data given various states of affairs (causal inferences), and not vice versa. This study was designed to test the benefits of causal synthesis schemes by comparing the validity of causal and diagnostic judgments against ground-truth standards.

Open PDF

Document Details

Document Type
Technical Report
Publication Date
Dec 01, 1980
Accession Number
ADA094407

Entities

People

  • Judea Pearl
  • Michael B Burns

Organizations

  • University of California, Los Angeles

Tags

Communities of Interest

  • Biomedical

DTIC Thesaurus Topics

  • Air Force
  • Applied Psychology
  • Artificial Intelligence
  • Behavioral Sciences
  • Causal Reasoning
  • Engineering
  • Human Factors Engineering
  • Information Processing
  • Information Systems
  • Military Research
  • Operations Research
  • Plastic Explosives
  • Psychology
  • Reasoning
  • Students
  • Systems Engineering
  • Systems Science

Fields of Study

  • Psychology

Readers

  • Brain and Cognitive Science; Experimental Psychology; Cognitive Neuroscience
  • Computer Vision.
  • Systems Analysis and Design

Technology Areas

  • AI & ML
  • AI & ML - Bayesian Inference