×

A multicriteria approach for analysis of conflicts in evidence theory. (English) Zbl 1398.68555

Summary: Dempster-Shafer Theory (DST) or Evidence Theory is regarded as one of the leading theories for modeling uncertainty in imprecise situations. The main advantage of this theory arises from the possibility of combining different bodies of evidence originally developed by using Dempster’s combination rule. However, this rule leads to counter-intuitive results when the bodies of evidence conflict with each other to a high degree. Thus, different combinations of conflict management rules have been developed over the years where, regardless of the method used, what should be identified first of all is the level of conflict between the bodies of evidence. Therefore, different metrics were used to classify or quantify the conflict but no single one of these was successful because it is impracticable to represent all situations of conflict in this theory by using only one metric. Therefore, the contribution of this article is to analyze conflict within DST by using a multi-criteria analysis, for which the Multi Criteria Decision Making (MCDM) method considered was ELECTRE TRI. On modeling the problem, three classes of conflict (low, medium and high), were considered. To validate the model, a numerical analysis was conducted that included the use of a method to point up conflict so as to infer parameters.

MSC:

68T37 Reasoning under uncertainty in the context of artificial intelligence

Software:

FITradeoff
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] Aggarwal, P.; Bhatt, D.; Devabhaktuni, V.; Bhattacharya, P., Dempster-Shafer neural network algorithm for land vehicle navigation application, Inf. Sci., 253, 26-33, (2013)
[2] Baraldi, P.; Compare, M.; Zio, E., Maintenance policy performance assessment in presence of imprecision based on Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence, Inf. Sci., 245, 112-131, (2013) · Zbl 1321.90043
[3] Burger, T., Geometric views on conflicting mass functions: from distances to angles, Int. J. Approx. Reason., 70, 36-50, (2016) · Zbl 1351.68274
[4] Cabrerizo, F. J; Moreno, J. M.; Perez, I. J.; Herrera-Viedman, E., Analyzing consensus approaches in fuzzy group decision making: advantages and drawbacks, Soft Comput., 14, 5), 451-463, (2010)
[5] Chin, K. S.; Fu, C., Weighted cautious conjunctive rule for belief functions combination, Inf. Sci., 325, 20), 70-86, (2015) · Zbl 1390.68639
[6] Danielson, M.; Ekenberg, L.; Larsson, A., Distribution of expected utility in decision trees, Int. J. Approx. Reason., 46, 387-407, (2007) · Zbl 1141.91356
[7] de Almeida, A. T.; de Almeida, J. A.; Costa, A. P.C. S.; de Almeida-Filho, A. T., A new method for elicitation of criteria weights in additive models: flexible and interactive tradeoff, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 250, 179-191, (2016) · Zbl 1346.91064
[8] Deng, Y.; Wan, D.; Q. Li, Q, A new method to analyze evidence conflict, Control Theory Appl., 28, 6, 839-844, (2011)
[9] Destercke, S.; Burger, T., Toward an axiomatic definition of conflict between belief functions, IEEE Trans. Cybern., 43, 2), 585-596, (2013)
[10] Frikha, A.; Moalla, H., Analytic hierarchy process for multi-sensor data fusion based on belief function theory, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 241, 1, 133-147, (2015) · Zbl 1338.90200
[11] Frikha, A., On the use of a multi-criteria approach for reliability estimation in belief function theory, Inf. Fusion, 18, 20-32, (2014), 18, July
[12] Fu, Y.; Yang, S. L., The group consensus based evidential reasoning approach for multiple attributive group decision analysis, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 206, 3), 601-608, (2010), ISSN 0377-2217 · Zbl 1188.90126
[13] Fu., C.; Yang, W.; Jia, Y; Kirubarajan, T., A generalized evidence conflict measure, (Proceedings of the SPIE 7697 Signal Processing, Sensor Fusion, and Target Recognition XIX, (2010)), April 27
[14] Herrera-Viedma, E.; Cabrerizo, F. J.; Kacprzyk, J.; Pedrycz, W., A review of soft consensus models in a fuzzy environment, Inf. Fusion, 17, 4-13, (2014)
[15] Jousselme, A. L.; Maupin, P., Distances in evidence theory: comprehensive survey and generalizations, Int. J. Approx. Reason., 53, 2), 118-145, (2012) · Zbl 1280.68258
[16] Jousselme, A. L.; Grenier, D.; Bosseé, E., A new distance between two bodies of evidence, Inf. Fusion, 2, 2), 91-101, (2001)
[17] Lin, T. C., Switching-based filter based on Dempster’s combination rule for image processing, Inf. Sci., 180, 4892-4908, (2010), (24, 15)
[18] Liu, W., Analyzing the degree of conflict among belief functions, Artif. Intell., 170, 909-924, (2006) · Zbl 1131.68539
[19] Ma, M.; An, J., Combination of evidence with different weighting factors: a novel probabilistic-based dissimilarity measure approach, J. Sens., 2015, (2015), Article ID 509385, 9 pages
[20] Mata, F.; Perez, L. G.; Zhou, S.-M.; Chiclana, F., Type-1 OWA methodology to consensus reaching processes in multi-granular linguistic contexts, Knowl. Based Syst., 58, 11-22, (2014)
[21] Mousseau, V.; Slowinski, R., Inferring an ELECTRE-TRI model from assignment examples, J. Glob. Optim., 12, 2, 157-174, (1998) · Zbl 0904.90093
[22] Parreiras, R. O.; Ekel, P. Ya.; Martini, J. S.C.; Palhares, R. M., A flexible consensus scheme for multicriteria group decision making, Inf. Sci., 180, 1075-1089, (2010)
[23] Parreiras, R. O.; Ekel, P. Ya; Morais, D. C., Fuzzy set based consensus schemes for multicriteria group decision making applied to strategic planning, Group Decis. Negot., 21, 153-183, (2012)
[24] Parreiras, R.; Ekel, P.; Bernardes, R., A dynamic consensus scheme based on nonreciprocal fuzzy preference relation modeling, Inf. Sci., 211, 1-17, (2012)
[25] Pichon, F.; Destercke, S.; Burger, T., A consistency-specificity trade-off to select source behavior in information fusion, IEEE Trans. Cybern., 45, 4), 598-609, (2015), April
[26] Qu, S.; Cheng, Y.; Pan, Q.; K, Conflict-redistribution dsmt and new methods dealing with conflict among evidences, Control Decis., 24, 12, 1856-1859, (2009)
[27] Roy, B.; Vincke, Ph., Relational systems of preferences with one or more pseudo-criteria: some new concepts and results, Manag. Sci., 30, 11, 1245-1254, (1984) · Zbl 0555.90002
[28] Schubert, J., Conflict management in Dempster-Shafer theory using the degree of falsity, Int. J. Approx. Reason., 52, 3, 449-460, (2011)
[29] Sevastjanov, P.; Dymova, L., Generalized operations on hesitant fuzzy values in the framework of Dempster-Shafer theory, Inf. Sci., 311, 1), 39-58, (2015) · Zbl 1390.68677
[30] Shafer, G., A mathematical theory of evidence, (1976), Princeton University Press Princeton, NJ · Zbl 0359.62002
[31] Smets, P., Analyzing the combination of conflicting belief functions, Inf. Fusion, 8, 4, 387-412, (2007), Oct.ISSN 1566-2535
[32] Tessem, B., Approximations for efficient computation in the theory of evidence, Artif. Intell., 61, 315-329, (1993)
[33] Wei, Y., Aide multicritère à la decision dans le cadre de la problématique du tri: concepts, methods and applications, (1992), Université Paris Dauphine (in French) Paris, France, Doctorate thesis
[34] Wen-hao, B.; Na, Z.; Ling-hui, Q.; Tao, G., The method of measuring conflict evidence based on the modified probability distribution function and similarity measure, (Proceedings of the 32nd Chinese Control Conference (CCC),, 4698-4702, (2013)), 26-28
[35] Wu, J.; Chiclana, F., Multiplicative consistency of intuitionistic reciprocal preference relations and its application to missing values estimation and consensus building, Knowl. Based Syst., 71, 187-200, (2014)
[36] P. Yang, J.; Huang, H. Z.; Liu, Y.; Li, Y. F., Quantification classification algorithm of multiple sources of evidence, Int. J. Inf. Technol. Decis. Mak., 14, 5), 1017-1034, (2015)
[37] Yang, J. P.; H. Z., Huanga; Miao, Q.; Suna, R., A novel information fusion method based on Dempster-Shafer evidence theory for conflict resolution, Intell. Data Anal., 15, 399-411, (2011)
[38] W. Yu, ELECTRE TRI: Aspects méthodologiques et manuel d’utilisation. Document du LAMSADE No. 74, Université Paris-Dauphine, 1992.
[39] Yu, C.; Yang, J.; Yang, D.; Ma, X.; Min, H., An improved conflicting evidence combination approach based on a new supporting probability distance, Expert Syst. Appl., 42, 12, 5139-5149, (2015), 15 July
[40] Zadeh, L. A., Review of books: a mathematical theory of evidence, AI Mag., 5, 3, 81-83, (1984)
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.