Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Classification of incomplete data integrating neural networks and evidential reasoning

  • S.I. : Neuro, fuzzy and their Hybridization
  • Published:
Neural Computing and Applications Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

When missing data are imputed by any method, there is some uncertainty associated with the imputed value. Consequently, when such imputed data are classified, some uncertainty will be propagated to the classifier output. This leads to two issues to address. First, reducing the uncertainty in the imputed value. Second, modeling and processing of the uncertainty associated with the classifier output to arrive at a better decision. To deal with the first issue, we use a latent space representation, while for the second issue we use Dempster-Shafer evidence theory. First, we train a neural network using the data without any missing value to generate a latent space representation of the input. The complete data set is now extended by deleting every feature once. These missing values are estimated using a nearest neighbor-based scheme. The network is then refined using this extended dataset to obtain a better latent space. This mechanism is expected to reduce the effect of the missing data on the latent space representation. Using the latent space representation of the complete data, we train two classifiers, support vector machines and evidential t-nearest neighbors. To classify an input with a missing value, we make a rough estimate of the missing value using the nearest neighbor rule and generate its latent space representation for classification by the classifiers. Using each classifier output, we generate a basic probability assignment (BPA) and all BPAs are combined to get an overall BPA. Final classification is done using Pignistic probabilities computed on the overall BPA. We use three different ways to defining BPAs. To avoid some problems of Dempster’s rule of aggregation, we also use several alternative aggregations including some T-norm-based methods. Note that, T-norm has been used for combination of belief function in Pichon and Denœux (in: NAFIPS 2008: 2008 annual meeting of the North American fuzzy information processing society, pp 1–6, 2008). To demonstrate the superiority of the proposed method, we compare its performance with four state-of-the-art techniques using both artificial and real datasets.

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

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Allison PD (2001) Missing data: Sage university papers series on quantitative applications in the social sciences (07–136), Thousand Oaks, CA

  2. Choudhury SJ, Pal NR (2019) Classification of incomplete data using autoencoder and evidential reasoning. In: IFIP international conference on artificial intelligence applications and innovations. Springer, pp 167–177

  3. Choudhury SJ, Pal NR (2021) Deep and structure-preserving autoencoders for clustering data with missing information. IEEE Trans Emerg Top Comput Intell 5(4):639–650. https://doi.org/10.1109/TETCI.2019.2949264

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Choudhury SJ, Pal NR (2019) Imputation of missing data with neural networks for classification. Knowl Based Syst. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2019.07.009

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Chung D, Merat FL (1996) Neural network based sensor array signal processing. In: IEEE/SICE/RSJ international conference on multisensor fusion and integration for intelligent systems, 1996. IEEE, pp 757–764

  6. Cobb BR, Shenoy PP (2003) A comparison of methods for transforming belief function models to probability models. In: European conference on symbolic and quantitative approaches to reasoning and uncertainty. Springer, pp 255–266

  7. DENOEUX T (1995) A k-nearest neighbor classification rule based on Dempster–Shafer theory. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 25(5):804–813

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Dixon JK (1979) Pattern recognition with partly missing data. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 9(10):617–621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Dubois D, Prade H (1988) Representation and combination of uncertainty with belief functions and possibility measures. Comput Intell 4(3):244–264

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Fessant F, Midenet S (2002) Self-organising map for data imputation and correction in surveys. Neural Comput Appl 10(4):300–310

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  11. García-Laencina PJ, Sancho-Gómez JL, Figueiras-Vidal AR (2010) Pattern classification with missing data: a review. Neural Comput Appl 19(2):263–282

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Gautam C, Ravi V (2015) Counter propagation auto-associative neural network based data imputation. Inf Sci 325:288–299

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Gautam C, Ravi V (2015) Data imputation via evolutionary computation, clustering and a neural network. Neurocomputing 156:134–142

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Kalton G (1983) Compensating for missing survey data. Inst for Social Research the Univ

  15. Kofman P, Sharpe IG (2003) Using multiple imputation in the analysis of incomplete observations in finance. J Financ Econom 1(2):216–249

    Google Scholar 

  16. Krstulovic J, Miranda V, Costa AJS, Pereira J (2013) Towards an auto-associative topology state estimator. IEEE Trans Power Syst 28(3):3311–3318

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Kumar S (2004) Neural networks: a classroom approach. Tata McGraw-Hill Education, New York

    Google Scholar 

  18. Lefevre E, Colot O, Vannoorenberghe P (2002) Belief function combination and conflict management. Inf fusion 3(2):149–162

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Little RJ, Rubin DB (2014) Statistical analysis with missing data. Wiley, Hoboken

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  20. Liu Z.g, Dezert J, Pan Q, Mercier G (2011) Combination of sources of evidence with different discounting factors based on a new dissimilarity measure. Decis Support Syst 52(1):133–141

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Liu ZG, Pan Q, Mercier G, Dezert J (2015) A new incomplete pattern classification method based on evidential reasoning. IEEE Trans Cybern 45(4):635–646

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Marseguerra M, Zoia A (2005) The autoassociative neural network in signal analysis: II. Application to on-line monitoring of a simulated BWR component. Ann Nucl Energy 32(11):1207–1223

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Marwala T, Chakraverty S (2006) Fault classification in structures with incomplete measured data using autoassociative neural networks and genetic algorithm. Curr Sci 90:542–548

    Google Scholar 

  24. Miranda V, Krstulovic J, Keko H, Moreira C, Pereira J (2012) Reconstructing missing data in state estimation with autoencoders. IEEE Trans Power Syst 27(2):604–611

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Morin R, Raeside B (1981) A reappraisal of distance-weighted \( k \)-nearest neighbor classification for pattern recognition with missing data. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 3:241–243

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Narayanan S, Marks R, Vian JL, Choi J, El-Sharkawi M, Thompson BB (2002) Set constraint discovery: missing sensor data restoration using autoassociative regression machines. In: Proceedings of the 2002 international joint conference on neural networks, 2002. IJCNN’02, vol 3. IEEE, pp 2872–2877

  27. Narayanan S, Vian JL, Choi J, Marks R, El-Sharkawi M, Thompson BB (2003) Missing sensor data restoration for vibration sensors on a jet aircraft engine. In: Proceedings of the international joint conference on neural networks, 2003, vol 4. IEEE, pp 3007–3010

  28. Nowicki R (2009) Rough neuro-fuzzy structures for classification with missing data. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern Part B (Cybern) 39(6):1334–1347

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Pichon F, Denœux T (2008) T-norm and uninorm-based combination of belief functions. In: NAFIPS 2008: 2008 annual meeting of the North American fuzzy information processing society, pp 1–6

  30. Platt J et al (1999) Probabilistic outputs for support vector machines and comparisons to regularized likelihood methods. Adv Large Margin Classif 10(3):61–74

    Google Scholar 

  31. Qiao W, Gao Z, Harley RG, Venayagamoorthy GK (2008) Robust neuro-identification of nonlinear plants in electric power systems with missing sensor measurements. Eng Appl Artif Intell 21(4):604–618

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Samad T, Harp S.A (1992) Self-organization with partial data. Netw Comput Neural Syst 3(2):205–212

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Schafer JL (1997) Analysis of incomplete multivariate data. CRC Press, Cambridge

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  34. Sentz K, Ferson S et al (2002) Combination of evidence in Dempster–Shafer theory, vol 4015. Citeseer, Princeton

    Book  Google Scholar 

  35. Shafer G (1976) A mathematical theory of evidence, vol 42. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  36. Silva-Ramírez EL, Pino-Mejías R, López-Coello M (2015) Single imputation with multilayer perceptron and multiple imputation combining multilayer perceptron and k-nearest neighbours for monotone patterns. Appl Soft Comput 29:65–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Silva-Ramírez EL, Pino-Mejías R, López-Coello M, Cubiles-de-la Vega MD (2011) Missing value imputation on missing completely at random data using multilayer perceptrons. Neural Netw 24(1):121–129

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Smarandache F, Dezert J (2009) Advances and Applications of DSmT for Information Fusion Collected works. American Research Press, vol 3, p 760

  39. Smets P (1990) The combination of evidence in the transferable belief model. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 12(5):447–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Smets P (2007) Analyzing the combination of conflicting belief functions. Inf Fusion 8(4):387–412

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Thompson BB, Marks R, El-Sharkawi MA (2003) On the contractive nature of autoencoders: application to missing sensor restoration. In: Proceedings of the international joint conference on neural networks, 2003, vol 4. IEEE, pp 3011–3016

  42. Tsang I, Kwok J, Cheung P, Cristianini N (2005) Core vector machines: fast SVM training on very large data sets. J Mach Learn Res 6:363–392

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  43. Westin LK (2004) Missing data and the preprocessing perception, page 3, Umea University, ISSN-0348-0542

  44. Yager RR (1987) Quasi-associative operations in the combination of evidence. Kybernetes 16(1):37–41

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  45. Yang JB, Xu DL (2013) Evidential reasoning rule for evidence combination. Artif Intell 205:1–29

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Electronics and Communication Sciences Unit, Indian Statistical Institute, Calcutta, 700108, India

    Suvra Jyoti Choudhury & Nikhil R. Pal

Authors
  1. Suvra Jyoti Choudhury
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Nikhil R. Pal
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Suvra Jyoti Choudhury.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest regarding the publication of this paper.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

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

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Choudhury, S.J., Pal, N.R. Classification of incomplete data integrating neural networks and evidential reasoning. Neural Comput & Applic 35, 7267–7281 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-021-06267-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-021-06267-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation