JP3986478B2 - Diagnosis support system - Google Patents

Description

The present invention is a medical diagnosis relates to the diagnosis support system for supporting the various diagnostic fault diagnosis.

  Conventionally, various diagnosis support systems that support medical diagnosis by a doctor have been proposed (see, for example, Patent Document 1).

A conventional diagnosis support system prepares in advance a database in which disease state information related to a patient's medical condition (symptom) and disease information related to a disease (disease) are associated with each other, and responds to the medical condition information when the disease state information is input. Disease information to be read from the database. For example, when the possibility of the disease D is high when the disease state A, the disease state B, and the disease state C appear, the correspondence relationship between the disease state A, B, C and the disease D is registered in the database. Thereby, when the disease state information indicating the disease state A, the disease state B, and the disease state C is input, the disease information indicating the disease D is output.
JP 2002-32476 A

  However, in a conventional diagnosis support system, a disease that appears with a high probability from a specific medical condition appears as a diagnostic result, but a disease that rarely appears from a specific medical condition does not appear as a diagnostic result. For example, if the possibility of the disease D is high when the medical condition A, the medical condition B, and the medical condition C appear, the disease D is output by inputting the medical condition A, the medical condition B, and the medical condition C. If the disease D is rare when the disease B and the disease E appear, the diagnosis result of the disease D cannot be obtained from the disease A, the disease B, and the disease E. Therefore, it is difficult to find diseases that rarely occur.

An object of the present invention is to provide a diagnosis support system that can be surely discovered without missing a rare disease .

The diagnosis support system according to the present invention is based on storage means for storing inference knowledge indicating a correspondence relationship between a symptom and a disease consisting of one or a plurality of keywords, and inference knowledge stored in the storage means, At the time of diagnosis, an inference means for generating a diagnosis result indicating a disease corresponding to a given symptom by abduction and analogy, an update means for updating knowledge for inference stored in the storage means, and a superordinate concept of a plurality of knowledge Generalizing means for obtaining knowledge, and the reasoning means determines a keyword that is missing for the generation of a diagnosis result when the diagnosis result cannot be generated based on the reasoning knowledge stored in the storage means. produced, similar in the knowledge that knowledge containing the keyword similar to a keyword lacking is stored in the storage means when they are stored in storage means keyword To generate similar knowledge by substituting with the missing keyword, ask the judge to determine whether the similar knowledge is correct for generating the diagnostic result, and the similar knowledge is correct for generating the diagnostic result stored in the storage means similar knowledge as abductive knowledge to generate a diagnosis result based on the similarity knowledge when it is judged by the judgment's and, updating means periodically or abductive knowledge stored in the storage means If it is presented irregularly to the judge and the judge determines that the abductive knowledge is correct, the abductive knowledge is given to the generalization means, or the abductive knowledge is stored in the storage means as inference knowledge. If the abductive knowledge is corrected by the judge, the corrected abductive knowledge is given to the generalizing means. The generalized knowledge is generated by expressing multiple keywords of multiple knowledge including common symptoms in the superordinate concept among the knowledge for reasoning stored in the database and the abductive knowledge given from the update means. The stored knowledge is stored in the storage means as knowledge for inference.

  Here, the symptom means a state observed in the diagnosis target. A disease means a disease or a failure in a diagnosis object.

In the diagnosis support system according to the present invention, inference knowledge indicating a correspondence relationship between a symptom and a disease including one or a plurality of keywords is stored by a storage unit. Based on the reasoning knowledge stored in the storage means, at the time of diagnosis, a diagnosis result indicating a disease corresponding to a given symptom is generated by abduction and analogy by the reasoning means. Further, the inference knowledge stored in the storage means is updated by the update means. Further, knowledge of a superordinate concept of a plurality of knowledge is obtained by the generalizing means. In particular, when a diagnosis result cannot be generated based on inference knowledge stored in the storage means, a keyword that is missing for generating a diagnosis result is generated, and a keyword that is similar to the missing keyword When knowledge including is stored in the storage means, similar knowledge is generated by replacing similar keywords in the knowledge stored in the storage means with missing keywords, and similar knowledge generates diagnostic results correct determination of whether the sought decision's similarity with the diagnostic result is generated based on the similarity knowledge when it is determined by the right and determines who to similar knowledge to produce diagnostic results knowledge to Is stored in the storage means as abductive knowledge. Furthermore, when the abductive knowledge stored in the storage means is presented to the judge periodically or irregularly by the update means, and the abductive knowledge is judged to be correct by the judge, the abductive knowledge is transferred to the generalization means. The abductive knowledge is given or stored in the storage means as inference knowledge, and when the abductive knowledge is corrected by the judge, the corrected abductive knowledge is given to the generalizing means. Furthermore, among the inference knowledge stored in the storage means and the abductive knowledge given from the update means, the generalization means can be generalized by expressing the keywords of the plurality of knowledge including common symptoms in a superordinate concept. The generated knowledge is generated, and the generalized knowledge is stored in the storage means as inference knowledge.

In this case, since knowledge for inference is generated by abduction and analogy at the time of diagnosis, the accuracy of the diagnosis result is improved as the number of diagnoses increases.

Also, the abductive knowledge stored in the storage means is presented to the judge regularly or irregularly, and the abductive knowledge determined to be correct is given to the generalization means or stored in the storage means as inference knowledge. Modified abductive knowledge is provided to the generalization means. Thereby, the accuracy of diagnosis can be improved.

  Furthermore, generalized knowledge is generated by expressing a plurality of keywords of a plurality of knowledge including common symptoms in a superordinate concept, and the generalized knowledge is stored in the storage means as inference knowledge. Thereby, at the time of diagnosis, the probability that a diagnosis result can be obtained based on the given symptoms can be improved.

  In this way, it can be surely discovered without missing a rare disease.

According to the present invention, it is possible to surely find a rare disease without missing it.

  FIG. 1 is a block diagram showing a configuration of a diagnosis support system according to an embodiment of the present invention. In the present embodiment, a medical diagnosis support system will be described as an example of a diagnosis support system.

  1 includes a medical data storage unit 1, an inductive knowledge acquisition unit 2, a key graph unit 3, a knowledge base 4, a generalization process unit 5, an inference unit 6, update processing units 7 and 8, an abductive A knowledge base 9 and a new knowledge base 10 are provided.

  The medical data storage unit 1 includes a database. The medical data storage unit 1 stores medical data such as examination data as symptom information of each patient. The inductive knowledge acquisition unit 2 is configured by an inductive learning program, and generates general knowledge from medical data stored in the medical data storage unit 1. General knowledge is represented by clauses (formulas) generated from decision trees. The decision tree represents a correspondence relationship between a plurality of medical data and disease information such as a plurality of disease names in a tree shape. With this decision tree, disease information is determined from one or more medical data.

  The knowledge base 4 consists of a database. In the knowledge base 4, general knowledge and rare knowledge are registered.

  Here, knowledge represents a correspondence relationship between medical data (symptom information) and disease information. General knowledge means knowledge with high expression frequency. On the other hand, rare knowledge means knowledge with a low expression frequency compared with general knowledge.

  General knowledge and rare knowledge are expressed by clauses (formulas) consisting of multiple terms. For example, general knowledge is represented by the clause “a, b, c → d”. Here, “a”, “b”, “c”, and “d” are terms. The clause “a, b, c → d” means that if a symptom “a”, a symptom “b”, and a symptom “c” appear, the disease is “d”. Each section includes specific keywords such as duodenal ulcer, Helicobacter pylori, and hypergastrinemia.

  An example of general knowledge is “duodenal ulcer, Helicobacter pylori → hypergastrinemia”. This means hypergastrinemia if there are duodenal ulcers and H. pylori.

  The key graph unit 3 is configured by a KeyGraph program, and finds rare knowledge and new knowledge (unknown knowledge) from the medical data stored in the medical data storage unit 1. That is, the key graph unit 3 finds rare disease information or new disease information from the medical data. The rare knowledge and new knowledge found by the key graph unit 3 are given to the new knowledge base 10.

  Here, KeyGraph is a technique for displaying the relationship between elements graphically (graphically) regardless of the appearance frequency. Therefore, according to the key graph unit 3, it is possible to discover rare knowledge with a very low expression frequency and new knowledge that has not been known so far.

  It should be noted that other methods can be used to find rare knowledge and new knowledge from the medical data stored in the medical data storage unit 1.

  The generalization process unit 5 is configured by a machine learning program, generalizes general knowledge registered in the knowledge base 4 and abductive knowledge registered in the abductive knowledge base 9 described later, and provides the knowledge base 4 as general knowledge. .

  Here, the generalization of knowledge means expressing a plurality of detailed knowledge by knowledge of a superordinate concept.

  For example, if the general knowledge is “sake (drinks) → lipid metabolism disorder”, “whiskey (drinks) → lipid metabolism disorder” and “wine (drinks) → lipid metabolism disorder”, the generalization of “alcohol ( It is possible to generate general knowledge that “drink often) → abnormal lipid metabolism”.

  The inference unit 6 includes an inference program described later. This inference unit 6 infers explanations (diagnostic results) from given symptoms by abduction and analogy using general knowledge and rare knowledge registered in the knowledge base 4 at the time of diagnosis. Output. The inference unit 6 requests confirmation from a specialist 10 such as a doctor regarding a predetermined matter. The detailed operation of the inference unit 6 will be described later.

  In the diagnosis by the inference unit 6, abductive knowledge or new knowledge may be generated as a by-product.

  Here, abductive knowledge refers to knowledge generated by interpolation when abduction is performed in the absence of knowledge. For example, it is assumed that there is general knowledge “a, b, c → d”. If a given symptom has terms “b” and “c”, term “a” is generated as abductive knowledge to explain term “d”. In this case, abductive knowledge “x, y → z” can be generated by abduction.

  The abductive knowledge base 9 consists of a database. In the abductive knowledge base 9, abductive knowledge generated by the inference unit 6 is registered.

  The update processing unit 7 confirms the abductive knowledge registered in the abductive knowledge base 9 periodically or irregularly (for example, at the time of diagnosis by the inference unit 6), after confirming by the expert 11, to the generalization process unit 5. give. In this case, the update processing unit 7 presents the abductive knowledge registered in the abductive knowledge base 9 to the expert 11, asks for a determination as to whether or not the abductive knowledge is correct, and determines that the expert 11 is correct. If so, the abductive knowledge is given to the generalization process unit 5. When the expert 11 corrects the abductive knowledge, the update processing unit 7 gives the corrected abductive knowledge to the generalization process unit 5.

  The generalization process unit 5 generalizes a plurality of abductive knowledge given by the update processing unit 7.

  For example, as abductive knowledge, “sake (5 go) → lipid metabolism abnormality”, “sake (5.5 go) → lipid metabolism abnormality”, “sake (6 go) → lipid metabolism abnormality” and “sake (8 go) If there is “→ lipid metabolism abnormality”, “sake (> 5 go) → lipid metabolism abnormality” can be generated by generalization. Further, it is possible to generate “sake (frequently drink) → lipid metabolism abnormality” by the judgment of the expert 11.

  The abductive knowledge generalized by the generalization process unit 5 is registered as general knowledge in the knowledge base 4. Further, the update processing unit 7 directly registers the abductive knowledge determined by the expert as the rare knowledge in the knowledge base 4 without generalizing the abductive knowledge.

  The new knowledge base 10 consists of a database. In the new knowledge base 10, new knowledge given by the inference unit 6 and rare knowledge or new knowledge given by the key graph unit 3 are registered.

  The update processing unit 8 provides the knowledge base 4 with the rare knowledge or new knowledge registered in the new knowledge base 10 periodically or irregularly (for example, at the time of diagnosis by the inference unit 6) after confirmation by the expert 11. . In this case, the update processing unit 8 presents the rare knowledge or new knowledge registered in the new knowledge base 10 to the expert 11, and asks the expert 11 to determine whether the rare knowledge or new knowledge is correct. When it is determined to be correct, the rare knowledge or new knowledge is given to the knowledge base 4. Further, when the expert 11 corrects the rare knowledge or new knowledge, the update processing unit 8 gives the corrected rare knowledge or new knowledge to the knowledge base 4.

  Of the new knowledge given to the knowledge base 4, new knowledge having a high expression frequency is registered in the knowledge base 4 as general knowledge, and new knowledge having a low expression frequency is registered in the knowledge base 4 as rare knowledge. In this way, the contents of the knowledge base 4 are sequentially updated regularly or irregularly.

  FIG. 2 is a block diagram showing a hardware configuration of the diagnosis support system 100 of FIG.

  The diagnosis support system 100 includes a CPU (Central Processing Unit) 501, a ROM (Read Only Memory) 502, a RAM (Random Access Memory) 503, an input device 504, a display device 505, an external storage device 506, a recording medium driving device 507, and the like. A printing device 508.

  The input device 504 includes a keyboard, a mouse, and the like, and is used to input various commands, medical data, and patient symptoms. The ROM 502 stores a system program. The recording medium driving device 507 includes a CD-ROM drive, a floppy disk drive, and the like, and reads / writes data from / to a recording medium 509 such as a CD-ROM or a floppy disk.

  A diagnostic support program is recorded on the recording medium 509. The external storage device 506 includes a hard disk device or the like, and stores a diagnosis support program and various data read from the recording medium 509 via the recording medium driving device 507. The CPU 501 executes the diagnosis support program stored in the external storage device 506 on the RAM 503.

  The diagnosis support program includes the inductive knowledge acquisition unit 2, the key graph unit 3, the generalization process unit 5, the inference unit 6, and the update processing units 7 and 8 in FIG. 1.

  The medical data storage unit 1, knowledge base 4, abductive knowledge base 9, and new knowledge base 10 in FIG. 1 are configured in the external storage device 506.

  The display device 505 includes a liquid crystal display panel, a CRT (cathode ray tube), and the like, and displays diagnostic results and the like output by the inference unit 6 of FIG. 1 using various characters and images. The printing apparatus 508 prints the diagnosis result output by the inference unit 6 in FIG.

  As the recording medium 509 for recording the diagnosis support program, various recording media such as a semiconductor memory such as a ROM and a hard disk can be used. In addition, the diagnosis support program may be downloaded to the external storage device 506 via a communication medium such as a communication line and executed on the RAM 503.

In the present embodiment, the inference unit 6 corresponds to inference means. The external storage device 506 corresponds to a storage unit. Further, the generalization process unit 5 corresponds to a generalization unit, and the update processing unit 8 corresponds to an update unit.

  FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating an example of medical data stored in the medical data storage unit 1.

  As shown in FIG. 3, the medical data storage unit 1 stores test results of a plurality of patients for each test item as medical data. In the example of FIG. 3, “age (age)”, “sex (sex)”, “goitre (thyroid)”, “tumor”, “hypoituitary (hypopituitary function)”, “psich” for each patient. (Psychological analysis) ”,“ TSH (Thyroid Stimulating Hormone) ”,“ T3 ”,“ TT4 ”,“ T4U ”,“ FTI (Free Thyroxine Index) ”and“ Diagnostics ”items are stored ing.

  In the item “sex”, “F” indicates a woman, and “M” indicates a man. In addition, “f” in the items of “goitre (thyroid goiter)”, “tumor (tumor)”, “hypoituitary (hypopituitary function)” and “psych (psychological analysis)” represents “false”, and “t” Represents “true”. Furthermore, measured values are shown for the items of “T3”, “TT4”, “T4U” and “FTI (free thyroxine index)”. In addition, a diagnosis result is shown in the item “Diagnostics”.

  FIG. 4 is a diagram showing an example of a decision tree generated from the medical data of FIG.

  In the example of FIG. 4, when the value of “TSH” is 6 or less, it is normal. Further, when the value of “TSH” is larger than 6, there are a case where the value of “FTI” is 64 or less and a case where the value of “FTI” is smaller than 64.

  When the value of “FTI” is 64 or less, it is normal if “measured“ TSH ”is“ false ”. When the measured “TSH” is “true”, if the measured “T4U” is “false”, it is “compensated hyperthyroid”. When the measured “T4U” is “true”, if “thyroid surgery” is “false”, it is “primary hyperthyroid” (primary thyroid function decline), and “thyroid surgery” (thyroid gland). If “operation” is “true”, it is normal.

  When the value of “FTI” is larger than 64, it is normal if “thyroxine” is “true”. When “thyroxine” is “false”, if the measured “TSH” is “false”, it is normal. When the measured “TSH” is “true”, it is normal if “thyroid surgery” is “true”.

  FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating an example of a clause (expression) obtained from the decision tree of FIG.

  The node (formula) on the first line in FIG. 5 indicates that the value is “normal” when the value of “TSH” is 6 or less.

  In the section (expression) on the second line, the value of “TSH” is greater than 6, the value of “FTI” is 64 or less, “TSH” is “true”, and “T4U” is “false”. For example, it represents “compensated hyperthyroid” (compensated hypothyroidism).

  The section (formula) in the third row shows that the value of “TSH” is greater than 6, the value of “FTI” is greater than 64, “T4U” is “false”, and “TSH” is “false”. Indicates normal.

  FIG. 6 is a flowchart showing the processing of the inference unit 6 in the diagnosis support program executed by the diagnosis support system 100 of FIG.

  First, the inference unit 6 receives an input of symptoms at the time of diagnosis (step S1). Next, the inference unit 6 determines whether the symptom can be explained (that is, whether it can be diagnosed) based on the general knowledge or the rare knowledge of the knowledge base 4 (step S2). In this case, the inference unit 6 first searches for general knowledge corresponding to the symptom in the knowledge base 4 and searches for rare knowledge corresponding to the symptom when there is no general knowledge corresponding to the symptom. Note that the inference unit 6 may simultaneously search for general knowledge and rare knowledge corresponding to symptoms in the knowledge base 4.

  If the symptom can be explained, the inference unit 6 generates and outputs an explanation (diagnosis result) based on the general knowledge or the rare knowledge of the knowledge base 4 (step S3).

  If the reasoning unit 6 cannot explain the symptom based on the general knowledge or the rare knowledge of the knowledge base 4, the inference unit 6 generates missing knowledge for explaining the symptom (step S <b> 4). Then, the inference unit 6 determines whether there is knowledge similar to the generated knowledge (lack of knowledge) (step S5).

  If there is no knowledge similar to the generated knowledge (lack of knowledge), the inference unit 6 presents the generated knowledge to the expert 11 (step S6), and the expert determines whether the presented knowledge is correct. 11 (step S7).

  If the presented knowledge is incorrect, the inference unit 6 asks the expert 11 for correct knowledge (step S8). The expert 11 corrects the presented knowledge and inputs correct knowledge. And the inference part 6 determines whether the correct knowledge was acquired from the expert 11 (step S9).

  When the correct knowledge is acquired from the expert 11, the inference unit 6 generates and outputs an explanation (diagnosis result) of symptoms based on the knowledge acquired from the expert 11 (step S10). The inference unit 6 registers the knowledge acquired from the expert 11 in the abductive knowledge base 9 as abductive knowledge (step S11).

  When correct knowledge cannot be acquired from the expert 11 in step S9, the inference unit 6 registers the generated knowledge (lack of knowledge) in the new knowledge base 10 as new knowledge (step S14).

  If the knowledge presented in step S7 (lack of knowledge) is correct, the inference unit 6 generates and outputs a symptom explanation (diagnosis result) based on the presented knowledge (step S10). The inference unit 6 registers the presented knowledge in the abductive knowledge base 9 (step S11).

  If there is knowledge similar to the knowledge generated in step S5 (lack of knowledge), the inference unit 6 acquires similar knowledge using a predetermined algorithm (step S12), and determines whether the acquired knowledge is correct. Judgment is requested from the expert 11 (step S13).

  If the acquired knowledge (knowledge similar to the lacked knowledge) is not correct, the process proceeds to step S8, and the expert 11 is requested for correct knowledge.

  If the acquired knowledge (knowledge similar to the missing knowledge) is correct, the inference unit 6 generates and outputs an explanation (diagnosis result) of the symptom based on the acquired knowledge (step S10). The inference unit 6 registers the acquired knowledge (knowledge similar to the lacked knowledge) in the abductive knowledge base 9 as abductive knowledge (step S11).

  In the flowchart of FIG. 6, the process of acquiring similar knowledge corresponds to analogy, and the other processes correspond to abductive.

  FIG. 7 is a flowchart showing a similar knowledge acquisition process in the process of the inference unit 6 of FIG. This similar knowledge acquisition process is constituted by a subroutine, for example.

  First, the inference unit 6 receives a clause representing knowledge (step S31). For example, the inference unit 6 receives the clause “a, b, c → d” as knowledge.

  Next, the inference unit 6 breaks the clauses into terms (step S32). For example, the inference unit 6 decomposes the clause “a, b, c → d” into the terms “a”, “b”, “c”, and “d”.

  Next, the inference unit 6 extracts keywords from the decomposed terms (step S33). For example, the inference unit 6 extracts “Peroli bacteria” as a keyword from the term “b”.

  Further, the inference unit 6 determines whether or not the extracted keyword is similar to the keyword in the existing knowledge (general knowledge or rare knowledge registered in the knowledge base 4) based on a predetermined algorithm. (Step S34).

  For example, the term “b” includes “Peroli” as a keyword, the term “b ′” registered in the knowledge base 4 includes “H. pylori” as a keyword, and the term “b” is similar to the term “b ′”. Suppose you are. Further, it is assumed that the term “d” is similar to the term “d ′” registered in the knowledge base 4.

  If there is no extracted keyword similar to the keyword in the existing knowledge, the inference unit 6 does nothing and ends the process.

  If there is a keyword similar to the keyword in the existing knowledge in the extracted keywords, the inference unit 6 searches for a clause including the similar keyword (step S35). For example, the inference unit 6 searches the knowledge base 4 for a clause including the term “b ′”, a clause including the term “d ′”, and the like.

  Then, the inference unit 6 determines whether there is a clause including a similar keyword in the existing knowledge (step S36).

  When there are a plurality of clauses containing similar keywords in the existing knowledge, a clause equivalent to the one obtained by exchanging the keywords in the given clause is output from the plurality of clauses (step S37).

  For example, if there is a clause “a, b ′ → e” and a clause “e, c → d ′” in the existing knowledge, the sections “a, b ′, c → d ′” are obtained by combining these clauses. Become. In this case, the synthesized clause “a, b ′, c → d ′” is obtained by replacing the terms “b” and “d” in the given clause “a, b, c → d” with existing clauses, respectively. This is equivalent to the replacement of the terms “b ′” and “d ′”. Therefore, “a, b ′, c → d ′” is output as similar knowledge.

  If there is no clause containing the extracted keyword in the existing knowledge, only the keyword in the given clause is replaced with the keyword in the existing knowledge and output (step S38).

  For example, if there is no clause including a similar term “b ′” in the existing knowledge, the inference unit 6 uses the term “b” in the given clause “a, b, c → d” as a similar term. Replace with “b ′” and output the clause “a, b ′, c → d”.

  A specific example of the operation of the diagnosis support system 100 of FIG. 1 will be described below with reference to FIGS.

  FIG. 8 is a diagram showing a first specific example of the operation of the diagnosis support system 100 of FIG.

  As shown in FIG. 8A, it is assumed that “duodenal ulcer, Helicobacter pylori → hypergastrinemia” is registered in the knowledge base 4 as general knowledge.

  As shown in FIG. 8B, when the given symptom is “duodenal ulcer, Helicobacter pylori, cut, fever”, the diagnosis result is “hypergastrinemia” from the general knowledge of FIG. 8A. Can be explained.

  As shown in FIG. 8C, when the given symptom is “duodenal ulcer, cut, fever” and “H. pylori” is absent, “H. pylori” is generated, and “H. pylori” It is determined whether or not “” is correct. If the presence of “H. pylori” is correct, explain that there is a risk of “hypergastrinemia” as a diagnostic result.

  As shown in FIG. 8D, when the given symptom is “duodenal ulcer, pelori fungus, cut, fever”, it is determined whether or not “Peroli bacterium” is similar to “H. pylori”. . When "Peroli" is similar to "H. pylori", similar knowledge "duodenal ulcer, Perori → hypergastrinemia" is generated. Then, it is determined whether or not the similar knowledge “duodenal ulcer, pelori bacteria → hypergastrinemia” is correct. If the similar knowledge “duodenal ulcer, Peroribacterium → hypergastrinemia” is correct, explain that there is a risk of “hypergastrinemia” as a diagnostic result. In this case, the similar knowledge “duodenal ulcer, pelori bacteria → hypergastrinemia” is registered in the abductive knowledge base 9 as abductive knowledge.

  FIG. 9 is a diagram showing a second specific example of the operation of the diagnosis support system 100 of FIG.

  Assume that general knowledge shown in FIG. 9A is registered in the knowledge base 4. When the symptoms shown in FIG. 9B are given, it can be explained that there is a suspicion of alcoholic hepatitis.

  On the other hand, as shown in FIG. 9C, when “sake (well drink)” is lacking in the given symptom, “sake (well drink)” is generated. Then, it is determined whether or not “sake (drink well)” is correct. If "sake (drink well)" is correct, explain that there is a risk of alcoholic hepatitis as a diagnostic result.

In addition, "sake (drinking well)," If you are not satisfied, "Sake (drink well)" and look similar to have that knowledge. If “Nara Tsuke (frequently eaten)” is similar to “Sake (frequently drinks)”, similar knowledge “Nara Tsuke (frequently eaten), high serum IgA → balloon-like changes in hepatocytes” is generated. Then, it is determined whether or not the similar knowledge “Narasuke (eating well), high serum IgA → balloon-like change in hepatocytes” is correct. If the similar knowledge “Naratsuki (eating well), high serum IgA → balloon-like change in hepatocytes” is correct, the diagnosis result is “there is a risk of alcoholic hepatitis”. In this case, the similar knowledge “Naratsuki (eating well), high serum IgA → balloon-like change in hepatocytes” is registered in the abductive knowledge base 9 as abductive knowledge.

  As described above, according to the diagnosis support system according to the present embodiment, not only a diagnosis result having a high expression frequency but also a diagnosis result having a low expression frequency can be obtained. Therefore, rare diseases or illnesses can be discovered without missing.

  In addition, since the knowledge base 4 is sequentially updated with new knowledge and rare knowledge, the diagnostic accuracy improves with time.

  In the above embodiment, the case where the diagnosis support system, diagnosis support method, and diagnosis support program according to the present invention are applied to medical diagnosis has been described. However, the diagnosis support system, diagnosis support method, and diagnosis support program of the present invention are It can also be applied to failure diagnosis of automobiles and the like. In that case, instead of the medical data storage unit 1, a failure data storage unit that stores failure data as symptom information is used.

  The present invention can be used for medical diagnosis support, failure diagnosis support for automobiles, and the like.

It is a block diagram which shows the structure of the diagnosis assistance system which concerns on one embodiment of this invention. It is a block diagram which shows the hardware constitutions of the diagnostic assistance system of FIG. It is a figure which shows an example of the medical data stored in a medical data storage part. It is a figure which shows an example of the decision tree produced | generated from the medical data of FIG. FIG. 5 is a diagram illustrating an example of a clause (expression) obtained from the decision tree of FIG. 4. It is a flowchart which shows the process of the inference part in the diagnostic assistance program performed with the diagnostic assistance system of FIG. It is a flowchart which shows the similar knowledge acquisition process in the process of the reasoning part of FIG. It is a figure which shows the 1st specific example of operation | movement of the diagnosis assistance system of FIG. It is a figure which shows the 2nd specific example of operation | movement of the diagnosis assistance system of FIG.

Explanation of symbols

DESCRIPTION OF SYMBOLS 1 Medical data storage part 2 Inductive knowledge acquisition part 3 Key graph part 4 Knowledge base 5 Generalization process part 6 Reasoning part 7, 8 Update processing part 9 Abductive knowledge base 10 New knowledge base 11 Expert 50 Diagnosis support system 100 Diagnosis Support system 501 CPU
502 ROM
503 RAM
504 Input device 505 Display device 506 External storage device 507 Recording medium drive device 508 Printing device 509 Recording medium

Claims (1)

Storage means for storing knowledge for inference indicating a correspondence relationship between a symptom and a disease composed of one or a plurality of keywords ;
An inference means for generating a diagnosis result indicating a disease corresponding to a given symptom by abduction and analogy based on the inference knowledge stored in the storage means;
Updating means for updating inference knowledge stored in the storage means ;
Generalization means for obtaining knowledge of superordinate concepts of a plurality of knowledge ,
The inference means generates a missing keyword for generating a diagnosis result when the diagnosis result cannot be generated based on the inference knowledge stored in the storage means, and the lacking When knowledge including a keyword similar to a keyword is stored in the storage means, similar knowledge is generated by replacing the similar keyword in the knowledge stored in the storage means with the missing keyword the calculated similarity knowledge of correct or not to generate a diagnostic result determined in decision person, based on the similarity knowledge when the similarity knowledge is judged by the judgment's right in order to produce diagnostic results Generating the diagnosis result and storing the similar knowledge as abductive knowledge in the storage means ,
The updating means presents the abductive knowledge stored in the storage means to the judge regularly or irregularly, and when the abductive knowledge is judged to be correct by the judge, Or the abductive knowledge thereof is stored in the storage means as the reasoning knowledge, and the abductive knowledge corrected when the abductive knowledge is corrected by the judge is stored in the generalizing means. Give,
The generalizing means expresses a plurality of keywords of a plurality of knowledge including common symptoms among the knowledge for reasoning stored in the storage means and the abductive knowledge given from the updating means, by a superordinate concept, A diagnostic support system characterized by generating generalized knowledge and storing the generalized knowledge as the inference knowledge in the storage means.

Images