Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

An approach using Dempster–Shafer evidence theory to fuse multi-source observations for dam safety estimation

  • Methodologies and Application
  • Published:
Soft Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Considering the limitations existing in the single-effect quantity analysis method of dam service behavior reasoning, the dam service behavior multi-effect quantities fusion reasoning model is built and implemented based on the study of improved methods about classic Dempster–Shafer (D–S) evidence fusion technologies. Focusing on the problems that classic D–S evidence fusion rules fail or the reasoning results are contrary to the intuition and convention due to the high-conflict evidences, the calculation methods of compatibility coefficient measurement matrices between any two basic probability assignment functions of evidences (E-BPAF) and between any two basic probability assignment functions of focal elements (FE-BPAF) are provided, respectively, based on the compatibility analysis of any two E-BPAFs and any two FE-BPAFs. The weight matrices about any two E-BPAFs and any two FE-BPAFs for initial BPAFs are defined, respectively, through compatibility coefficient matrices. Then, the comprehensive weight matrix for initial BPAFs is introduced to unify weight matrices. By analyzing and comparing some examples and existing study results, the performance test of the proposed method is conducted and the correctness and rationality are also verified. Finally, combining with an instance of a gravity arch dam project, the proposed method is utilized to fuse the multi-information from measuring points on the dam abutment, and the reasonable reasoning results are obtained about the dam service behavior.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abellán J, Masegosa A (2008) Requirements for total uncertainty measures in Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence. Int J Gen Syst 37:733–747

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Basir O, Yuan X (2007) Engine fault diagnosis based on multi-sensor information fusion using Dempster–Shafer evidence theory. Inf Fusion 8:379–386

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Compare M, Zio E (2015) Genetic algorithms in the framework of Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence for maintenance optimization problems. IEEE Trans Reliab 64:645–660

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Dempster AP (1967) Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping. Ann Math Stat 38:325–339

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Esposito C, Ficco M, Palmieri F et al (2015) Smart cloud storage service selection based on fuzzy logic, theory of evidence and game theory. IEEE Trans Comput 99:1–14

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Gruyer D, Demmel S, Magnier V et al (2016) Multi-hypotheses tracking using the Dempster–Shafer theory, application to ambiguous road context. Inf Fusion 29:40–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Haenni R (2002) Are alternatives to Dempster’s rule of combination real alternatives: comments on “About the belief function combination and the conflict management problem”—Lefevre et al. Inf Fusion 3:237–239

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • He JP, Ma CB, Shi YQ (2012) Multi-effect-quantity fusion model of high arch dam based on improved D–S evidence theory. Geomat Inf Sci Wuhan Univ 37:1397–1400

    Google Scholar 

  • Jousselme AL, Grenier D, Éloi B (2001) A new distance between two bodies of evidence. Inf Fusion 2:91–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lefevre E, Colot O, Vannoorenberghe P (2002) Belief function combination and conflict management. Inf Fusion 3:149–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Li JW, Cheng YM, Pan Q et al (2010) Combination rule of conflicting evidence based on focal element distance. Syst Eng Electron 32:2360–2362

    Google Scholar 

  • Li LL, Ma DJ, Wang CS et al (2011) New method for conflict evidence processing in D–S theory. Appl Res Comput 28:4528–4531

    Google Scholar 

  • Liu W (2006) Analyzing the degree of conflict among belief functions. Artif Int 170:909–924

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Liu HY, Zhao ZG, Liu X (2008) Combination of conflict evidences in D–S theory. J Univ Electron Sci Technol China 37:701–704

    Google Scholar 

  • Ma MM, An JY (2015) Combination of evidence with different weighting factors: a novel probabilistic-based dissimilarity measure approach. J Sens. https://doi.org/10.1155/2015/509385

  • Moosavian A, Khazaee M, Najafi G et al (2015) Spark plug fault recognition based on sensor fusion and classifier combination using Dempster–Shafer evidence theory. Appl Acoust 93:120–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murphy CK (2000) Combining belief functions when evidence conflicts. Decis Support Syst 29:1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rosli MF, Hee LM, Leong MS (2015) Integration of artificial intelligence into Dempster Shafer theory: a review on decision making in condition monitoring. Appl Mech Mater 773–774:154–157

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Schubert J (2011) Conflict management in Dempster–Shafer theory using the degree of falsity. Int J Approx Reason 52:449–460

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Sevastjanov P, Dymova L (2015) Generalised operations on hesitant fuzzy values in the framework of Dempster–Shafer theory. Inf Sci 311:39–58

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Shafer G (1976) A mathematical theory of evidence. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Song YF, Wang XD, Lei L et al (2014) Measurement of evidence conflict based on correlation coefficient. J Commun 35:95–100

    Google Scholar 

  • Song YF, Wang XD, Lei L et al (2015) Evidence combination based on the degree of credibility and falsity. J Commun 36:102–107

    Google Scholar 

  • Su HZ, Wen ZP, Sun XR et al (2015) Time-varying identification model for dam behavior considering structural reinforcement. Struct Saf 57:1–7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sun Q, Ye XQ, Gu WK (2000) A new combination rules of evidence theory. Acta Electron Sin 28:117–119

    Google Scholar 

  • Yager RR (1987) On the Dempster–Shafer framework and new combination rules. Inf Sci 41:93–137

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

This study was funded by National Natural Science Foundation of China (SN: 51579083, 51739003, 51479054, 41323001), the National Key Research and Development Program of China (SN: 2016YFC0401601), Open Foundation of State Key Laboratory of Hydrology-Water Resources and Hydraulic Engineering (SN: 20165042112, 20145027612), the Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities (SN: 2015B25414).

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. State Key Laboratory of Hydrology-Water Resources and Hydraulic Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing, 210098, China

    Huaizhi Su & Jie Ren

  2. College of Water Conservancy and Hydropower Engineering, Hohai University, Nanjing, 210098, China

    Huaizhi Su & Jie Ren

  3. Department of Computer Engineering, Nanjing Institute of Technology, Nanjing, 211167, China

    Zhiping Wen

Authors
  1. Huaizhi Su
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Jie Ren
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Zhiping Wen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Huaizhi Su.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and animal rights statement

Research do not involve human participants and/or animals.

Additional information

Communicated by V. Loia.

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Su, H., Ren, J. & Wen, Z. An approach using Dempster–Shafer evidence theory to fuse multi-source observations for dam safety estimation. Soft Comput 23, 5633–5644 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-3220-z

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-3220-z

Keywords

Search

Navigation