according to his/her calendar entry, the employee is supposed to be out from a meeting half an hour ago. To keep brevity of the things, we now denote the probability of a context as the probability of a context in against of a notification. So a high probability outcome will mean not to make any disruption. A gives a high probability of employee being busy but a moderate P(CL) = 0.8 denotes the employee may be eligible to receive the notification. This is a P(CS) = 0.4 perfect conflicting scenario to apply Dempster-Shafer theory. If we prefer to go with the location context, then the probability of Non-Interruption based on Location P(NIL) becomes P(NIL) = [P(CL) * P(CS’)] / [1 (P(CL) * P(CS))] – = [(0.8) * (0.6)] / [1 (0.8) * (0.4)] 0.7 – ≈ Here, is simply the complement of the probability P(CS’) P(CS). So puts a high 0.7 degrees of belief toward not interrupting. Likewise, if we CL go with the schedule context, the probability of non-interruption based on schedule becomes P(NIS) = [(0.4) * (0.2)] / [1 (0.4) * (0.8)] 0.1 – ≈ This suggests a low degree of belief toward non-interruption or a high degree of belief toward interruption. The probability that we cannot interrupt based on neither of these contexts, is P(NIO) P(NIO) = 1 (0.7 + 0.1) = 0.2 – This is inside the range of 0.1 and 0.7. So the bound Dempster-Shafer Theory puts on no-interruption scenario here is instead of traditional probability bound [0.1 0.7] of [0 1].
according to his/her calendar entry, the employee is supposed to be out from a meeting half an hour ago. To keep brevity of the things, we now denote the probability of a context as the probability of a context in against of a notification. So a high probability outcome will mean not to make any disruption. A P(CL) = 0.8 gives a high probability of employee being busy but a moderate P(CS) = 0.4 denotes the employee may be eligible to receive the notification. This is a perfect conflicting scenario to apply Dempster-Shafer theory. If we prefer to go with the location context, then the probability of Non-Interruption based on Location P(NIL) becomes P(NIL) = [P(CL) * P(CS’)] / [1 – (P(CL) * P(CS))] = [(0.8) * (0.6)] / [1 – (0.8) * (0.4)] ≈ 0.7 Here, P(CS’) is simply the complement of the probability P(CS). So CL puts a high 0.7 degrees of belief toward not interrupting. Likewise, if we go with the schedule context, the probability of non-interruption based on schedule becomes P(NIS) = [(0.4) * (0.2)] / [1 – (0.4) * (0.8)] ≈ 0.1 This suggests a low degree of belief toward non-interruption or a high degree of belief toward interruption. The probability that we cannot interrupt based on neither of these contexts, P(NIO) is P(NIO) = 1 – (0.7 + 0.1) = 0.2 This is inside the range of 0.1 and 0.7. So the bound Dempster-Shafer Theory puts on no-interruption scenario here is [0.1 0.7] instead of traditional probability bound of [0 1].
Sina%20Thesis%20V6.docx