# Subjective logic

﻿
Subjective logic

Subjective logic is a type of probabilistic logic that explicitly takes uncertainty and belief ownership into account. In general, subjective logic is suitable for modeling and analysing situations involving uncertainty and incomplete knowledgeA. Jøsang. Artificial Reasoning with Subjective Logic. "Proceedings of the Second Australian Workshop on Commonsense Reasoning", Perth 1997. [http://www.unik.no/people/josang/papers/Jos1997-AWCR.pdf PDF] ] A. Jøsang. A Logic for Uncertain Probabilities. "International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems." 9(3), pp.279-311, June 2001. [http://www.unik.no/people/josang/papers/Jos2001-IJUFKS.pdf PDF] ] . For example, it can be used for modeling trust networks and for analysing Bayesian networks.

Arguments in subjective logic are subjective opinions about propositions. A binomial opinion applies to a single proposition, and can be represented as a Beta distribution. A multinomial opinion applies to a collection of propositions, and can be represented as a Dirichlet distribution. Through the correspondence between opinions and Beta/Dirichlet distributions, subjective logic provides an algebra for these functions. Opinions are also related to the belief functions of Dempster-Shafer belief theory.

A fundamental aspect of the human condition is that nobody can ever determine with absolute certainty whether a proposition about the world is true or false. In addition, whenever the truth of a proposition is expressed, it is always done by an individual, and it can never be considered to represent a general and objective belief. These philosophical ideas are directly reflected in the mathematical formalism of subjective logic.

Subjective opinions

Subjective opinions express subjective beliefs about the truth of propositions with degrees of uncertainty, and can indicate subjective belief ownership whenever required. An opinion is usually denoted as $omega^\left\{A\right\}_\left\{x\right\}$ where $A,!$ is the subject, also called the belief owner, and $x,!$ is the proposition to which the opinion applies. An alternative notation is $omega\left(A:x\right),!$. The proposition $x,!$ is assumed to belong to a frame of discernment (also called state space) e.g. denoted as $X,!$, but the frame is usually not included in the opinion notation. The propositions of a frame are normally assumed to be exhaustive and mutually disjoint, and subjects are assumed to have a common semantic interpretation of propositions. The subject, the proposition and its frame are attributes of an opinion. Indication of subjective belief ownership is normally omitted whenever irrelevant.

Binomial opinions

Let $x,!$ be a proposition. A binomial opinion about the truth of a $x,!$ is the ordered quadruple $omega_\left\{x\right\} = \left(b,d,u,a\right),!$ where:

x}=omega^{A}_{x};overline{circledcirc}; (omega^{A}_{x|y},omega^{A}_{x|overline{y,a_{y}),!
Modus Tollens
-
Transitivity / discountingA. Jøsang, S. Pope, and S. Marsh. Exploring Different Types of Trust Propagation. "Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Trust Management (iTrust'06)", 2006.]
$omega^\left\{A:B\right\}_\left\{x\right\}=omega^\left\{A\right\}_\left\{B\right\}otimesomega^\left\{B\right\}_\left\{x\right\},!$
n.a.
-
Cumulative fusion / consensusA. Jøsang. The Consensus Operator for Combining Beliefs. "Artificial Intelligence Journal", 142(1-2), Oct. 2002, p.157-170]
$omega^\left\{Adiamond B\right\}_\left\{x\right\}=omega^\left\{A\right\}_\left\{x\right\}oplus omega^\left\{B\right\}_\left\{x\right\},!$
n.a.
-
Averaging fusion
$omega^\left\{Aunderline\left\{diamond\right\} B\right\}_\left\{x\right\}=omega^\left\{A\right\}_\left\{x\right\};underline\left\{oplus\right\}; omega^\left\{B\right\}_\left\{x\right\},!$
n.a.

Apart from the computations on the opinion values themselves, subjective logic operators also affect the attributes, i.e. the subjects, the propositions, as well as the frames containing the propositions. In general, the attributes of the derived opinion are functions of the argument attributes, following the principle illustrated below. For example, the derived proposition is typically obtained using the propositional logic operator corresponding to the subjective logic operator.

The functions for deriving attributes depend on the operator. Some operators, such as cumulative and averaging fusion, only affect the subject attribute, not the proposition which then is equal to that of the arguments. Fusion for example assumes that two separate argument subjects are fused into one. Other operators, such as multiplication, only affect the proposition and its frame, not the subject which then is equal to that of the arguments. Multiplication for example assumes that the derived proposition is the conjunction of the argument propositions, and that the derived frame is composed as the Cartesian product of the two argument frames. The transitivity operator is the only operator where both the subject and the proposition attributes are affected, more specifically by making the derived subject equal to the subject of the first argument opinion, and the derived proposition and frame equal to the proposition and frame of the second argument opinion.

It is impractical to explicitly express complex subject combinations and propositional logic expressions as attributes of derived opinions. Instead, the trust origin subject and a compact substitute propositional logic term can be used.

Subject combinations can be expressed in a compact or expanded form. For example, the transitive trust path from $A,!$ via $B,!$ to $C,!$ can be expressed as $A:B:C,!$ in compact form, or as $\left[A,B\right] : \left[B,C\right] ,!$ in expanded form. The expanded form is the most general, and corresponds directly with the way subjective logic expressions are formed with operators.

Properties

In case the argument opinions are equivalent to binary logic TRUE or FALSE, the result of any subjective logic operator is always equal to that of the corresponding propositional/binary logic operator. Similarly, when the argument opinions are equivalent to traditional probabilities, the result of any subjective logic operator is always equal to that of the corresponding probability operator (when it exists).

In case the argument opinions contain degrees of uncertainty, the operators involving multiplication and division will produce derived opinions that always have correct expectation value but possibly with approximate variance when seen as Beta/Dirichlet probability distributions.All other operators produce opinions where the expectation value and the variance are always equal to the analytically correct values.

Different composite propositions that traditionally are equivalent in propositional logic do not necessarily have equal opinions. For example $omega_\left\{xland \left(ylor z\right)\right\} eq omega_\left\{\left(x land y\right)lor \left(xland z\right)\right\},!$ in general although the distributivity of conjunction over disjunction, expressed as $xland \left(ylor z\right) Leftrightarrow \left(x land y\right)lor \left(xland z\right),!$, holds in binary propositional logic. This is no surprise as the corresponding probability operators are also non-distributive. However, multiplication is distributive over addition, as expressed by $omega_\left\{xland \left(ycup z\right)\right\} = omega_\left\{\left(x land y\right)cup \left(xland z\right)\right\},!$. De Morgan's laws are also satisfied as e.g. expressed by $omega_\left\{overline\left\{xland y = omega_\left\{overline\left\{x\right\} lor overline\left\{y,!$.

Subjective logic allows extremely efficient computation of mathematically complex models. This is possible by approximating the analytically correct functions whenever needed. While it is relatively simple to analytically multiply two Beta distributions in the form of a joint distribution, anything more complex than that quickly becomes intractable. When combining two Beta distributions with some operator/connective, the analytical result is not always a Beta distribution and can involve hypergeometric series. In such cases, subjective logic always approximates the result as an opinion that is equivalent to a Beta distribution.

Applications

Subjective logic is applicable when the situation to be analysed is characterised by considerable uncertainty and incomplete knowledge. In this way, subjective logic becomes a probabilistic logic for uncertain probabilities. The advantage is that uncertainty is carried through the analysis and is made explicit in the results so that it is possible to distinguish between certain and uncertain conclusions.

Trust networks and Bayesian networks are typical applications of subjective logic.

Trust networks

Trust networks can be modelled with a combination of the transitivity and fusion operators. Let $\left[A,B\right] ,!$ express the trust edge from $A,!$ to $B,!$. A simple trust network can for example be expressed as $\left( \left[A,B\right] : \left[B,D\right] \right)diamond\left( \left[A,C\right] : \left[C,D\right] \right),!$ as illustrated in the figure below.

The indices 1, 2 and 3 indicate the chronological order in which the trust edges and recommendations are formed. Thus, given the set of trust edges with index 1, the origin trustor $A,!$ receives recommendations from $B,!$ and $C,!$, and is thereby able to derive trust in $D,!$. By expressing each trust edge and recommendation as an opinion $A,!$'s trust in $D,!$ can be computed as $omega^\left\{A\right\}_\left\{D\right\} = \left(omega^\left\{A\right\}_\left\{B\right\}otimes omega^\left\{B\right\}_\left\{D\right\}\right) oplus \left(omega^\left\{A\right\}_\left\{C\right\}otimes omega^\left\{C\right\}_\left\{D\right\}\right),!$. Trust networks can express the reliability of information sources for propositions, and can be used to determine subjective opinions about propositions. There can be a separate trust network leading to the opinion about each propositional term.

Bayesian Networks

In the Bayesian network below, $X,!$ and $Y,!$ are evidence frames and $Z,!$ is the conclusion frames. The frames can have arbitrary cardinality, and in the example the evidence frames are illustrated with cardinality 3. The conditional opinions express a conditional relationship between the evidence frames and the conclusion frame.

The evidence on $X,!$ and $Y,!$ produces separate derived opinions on $Z,!$ which is fused with ether the cumulative or averaging fusion operator.

References

* [http://www.unik.no/people/josang/sl/ Online demonstrations] of subjective logic.

Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.

### Look at other dictionaries:

• Logic — • A historical survey from Indian and Pre Aristotelian philosophy to the Logic of John Stuart Mill Catholic Encyclopedia. Kevin Knight. 2006. Logic     Logic      …   Catholic encyclopedia

• Logic and the philosophy of mathematics in the nineteenth century — John Stillwell INTRODUCTION In its history of over two thousand years, mathematics has seldom been disturbed by philosophical disputes. Ever since Plato, who is said to have put the slogan ‘Let no one who is not a geometer enter here’ over the… …   History of philosophy

• Hegel’s logic and philosophy of mind — Willem deVries LOGIC AND MIND IN HEGEL’S PHILOSOPHY Hegel is above all a systematic philosopher. Awe inspiring in its scope, his philosophy left no subject untouched. Logic provides the central, unifying framework as well as the general… …   History of philosophy

• Probabilistic logic — The aim of a probabilistic logic (or probability logic) is to combine the capacity of probability theory to handle uncertainty with the capacity of deductive logic to exploit structure. The result is a richer and more expressive formalism with a… …   Wikipedia

• Fuzzy logic — is a form of multi valued logic derived from fuzzy set theory to deal with reasoning that is approximate rather than precise. Just as in fuzzy set theory the set membership values can range (inclusively) between 0 and 1, in fuzzy logic the degree …   Wikipedia

• Description logic — (DL) is a family of formal knowledge representation languages. It is more expressive than propositional logic but has more efficient decision problems than first order predicate logic. DL is used in artificial intelligence for formal reasoning on …   Wikipedia

• Modal logic — is a type of formal logic that extends classical propositional and predicate logic to include operators expressing modality. Modals words that express modalities qualify a statement. For example, the statement John is happy might be qualified by… …   Wikipedia

• Epistemic modal logic — is a subfield of modal logic that is concerned with reasoning about knowledge. While epistemology has a long philosophical tradition dating back to Ancient Greece, epistemic logic is a much more recent development with applications in many fields …   Wikipedia

• Non-Aristotelian logic — The term non Aristotelian logic, sometimes shortened to null A, means any non classical system of logic which rejects one of Aristotle s premises (see term logic). Contents 1 History 2 Use in science fiction 3 See also 4 …   Wikipedia

• Narrative logic — In the broadest sense, narrative logic is any logical process of narrative analysis. Narrative logic is a tool through which the audience may create events and explanations or otherwise elucidate details not included in the narrative. It is used… …   Wikipedia