Liu, Smith 2
1. P(PropCost | Age = Adolescent, Antilock = False, Mileage = FiftyThou,MakeModel = SportsCar)
of the car in question is that of a sports car then,based on the network as illustrated in Figure 1 of the handout, weexpect that the driver would be less risk averse, the driver would havemore money, the car would be of higher value. All of these thingsshould cause the cost of insurance to “go up,” relative to our previousquery which did not involve any evidence about the MakeModel of thecar. An increase in the
domain sense means that theprobability distribution should be shifted towards the higher costelements of the domain (e.g.
might have a higher probabilitythan
).Indeed, this is what happens. As can be seen below,
is about four thousand dollars greater in this case relative to that from Section 1.3.
<[PropCost] = [HundredThou]> = 0.17179333672003955<[PropCost] = [Million]> = 0.03093877334365239<[PropCost] = [TenThou]> = 0.34593039737969233<[PropCost] = [Thousand]> = 0.45133749255661565(f = 52028.74)
2. P(PropCost | Age = Adolescent, Antilock = False, Mileage = FiftyThou,GoodStudent = True)
In this case, counter-intuitive as it may seem, if the driver is a
, then the overall cost of insurance goes up. Thisfollows from the network as shown in Figure 1 of the project handout,i.e.
is only connected to the network through twoparents: Age and
. Since Age is an evidence variable,
is the only node affected by the augmentation of
to the evidence. More specifically, if the adolescentdriver is a good student, they are likely to have more money, and thusdrive fancier cars, be less risk averse, et cetera.This result is manifested in the results after variable elimination giventhe proper evidence. More specifically,
is a little less than four thousand dollars greater in this case relative to that from Section 1.3.
<[PropCost] = [HundredThou]> = 0.1837467917616061<[PropCost] = [Million]> = 0.029748793596801583<[PropCost] = [TenThou]> = 0.32771416728772235<[PropCost] = [Thousand]> = 0.4587902473538701(f = 51859.40)