<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:creator>Ruggieri, Andrea</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Stranieri, Francesco</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Stella, Fabio</dc:creator>
  <dc:creator>Scutari, Marco</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2020</dc:date>
  <dc:description xmlns:ns0="xml" ns0:lang="en">Incomplete data are a common feature in many domains, from clinical trials to industrial applications. Bayesian networks (BNs) are  often used in these domains because of their graphical and causal interpretations. BN parameter learning from incomplete data is  usually implemented with the Expectation-Maximisation algorithm (EM), which computes the relevant sufficient statistics (“soft EM”)  using belief propagation. Similarly, the Structural Expectation-Maximisation algorithm (Structural EM) learns the network structure of  the BN from those sufficient statistics using algorithms designed for complete data. However, practical implementations of parameter  and structure learning often impute missing data (“hard EM”) to compute sufficient statistics instead of using belief propagation, for  both ease of implementation and computational speed. In this paper, we investigate the question: what is the impact of using  imputation instead of belief propagation on the quality of the resulting BNs? From a simulation study using synthetic data and  reference BNs, we find that it is possible to recommend one approach over the other in several scenarios based on the  characteristics of the data. We then use this information to build a simple decision tree to guide practitioners in choosing the EM  algorithm best suited to their problem.</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>https://susi.usi.ch/global/documents/319404</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>https://n2t.net/ark:/12658/srd1319404</dc:identifier>
  <dc:identifier>https://susi.usi.ch/documents/319404/files/Scutari_a_2020.pdf</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>eng</dc:language>
  <dc:relation>info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/doi/10.3390/a13120329</dc:relation>
  <dc:relation>info:eu-repo/semantics/altIdentifier/ark/12658/srd1319404</dc:relation>
  <dc:rights>info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess</dc:rights>
  <dc:rights>CC BY</dc:rights>
  <dc:source>Algorithms. - MDPI. - 2020, vol. 13, no. 12, p. 17</dc:source>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns1="xml" ns1:lang="en">Bayesian networks</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns2="xml" ns2:lang="en">Incomplete data</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns3="xml" ns3:lang="en">Expectation-Maximisation</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns4="xml" ns4:lang="en">Parameter learning</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject xmlns:ns5="xml" ns5:lang="en">Structure learning</dc:subject>
  <dc:subject>info:eu-repo/classification/udc/004</dc:subject>
  <dc:title xmlns:ns6="xml" ns6:lang="en">Hard and soft EM in bayesian network learning from incomplete data</dc:title>
  <dc:type>http://purl.org/coar/resource_type/c_6501</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>
