Skip to main content
Log in

New method for measuring the degree of conflict among general basic probability assignments

  • Research Paper
  • Published:
Science China Information Sciences Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

There is doubt about Dempster’s rule of combination because of counter-intuitive results when dealing with conflict information in intelligent reasoning. Therefore, many modified combination rules have been presented in the literature on multi-source information fusion and reasoning with uncertainty. However, the issue of identifying conflict among evidence has been ignored. A new parameter measuring conflict evidence called the conflict distance parameter is defined to determine whether there are conflicts in evidence based on the analysis of existing conflict parameters. At the same time, a decisive rule, which a reasonable conflict measure function should satisfy, is put forward. Finally, an analysis of two typical counter-intuitive situations is given, showing that the new parameter can not only satisfy the decisive rule, but can also attain the same effect as a two-dimensional measure when deciding whether to use the Dempster’s rule of combination, and can exceed its effect when deciding whether to use Dezert-Smarandache theory.

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

Access this article

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

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. He Y, Wang G H, Guan X. Information Fusion Theory with Applications. Beijing: Publishing House of Electronics Industry, 2010

    Google Scholar 

  2. Shafer G. A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton: Princeton University, 1976

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  3. Zadeh A L. Review of books: A mathematical theory of evidence. AI Mag, 1984, 5: 81–83

    Google Scholar 

  4. Yager R R. Using approximate reasoning to represent default knowledge. Artif Intell, 1987, 31: 99–112

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  5. Yager R R. General approach to the fusion of imprecise information. Int J Intell Syst, 1997, 12: 1–29

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  6. Smets P. The combination of evidence in the transferable belief model. IEEE Trans Patten Anal Mach Intell, 1990, 12: 447–458

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Smets P. Analyzing the combination of conflicting belief functions. Technical Report, IRIDIA, Universite Libra de Bruxelles, 2004

  8. Dubois D, Prade H. Consonant approximation of Dempster-Shafer theory. Int J Approx Reason, 1990, 4: 419–449

    Article  MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  9. Lefvre E, Colot O, Vannoorenberghe P, et al. A genenic framework for resolving the conflict in the combination belief structures. In: Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Information Fusion. 2000, (l): 11–18

  10. Murphy C. Combining belief functions when evidence conflicts. Decision Support Syst, 2000, 29: 1–9

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Deng Y, Shi W K, Zhu Z F. Efficient combination approach of conflict evidence. J Infrared Millim Waves. 2004, 23: 27–32

    Google Scholar 

  12. Guan X, Yi X, Sun X M, et al. Efficient fusion approach for conflicting evidence. J Tsinghua Univ (Sci & Tech), 2009, 49: 138–141

    Google Scholar 

  13. Liu W R. Analyzing the degree of conflict among belief functions. Artif Intell, 2006, 5: 909–924

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Wang D, Jiang W, Luo R, et al. Method of measure the conflict between evidences based on the OWA operator. In: The 1st National Conference on Information Fusion, Yantai, China, 2009. 21–27

  15. Smarandache F. A Unifying Field in Logics: Neutrosophic Logic, Neutrosophy, Neutrosophic Set, Probability, and Statistics. Rehoboth: American Research Press, 2000. http://www.gallup.unm.edu/~smarandache/neutrosophy.htm

    Google Scholar 

  16. Dezert J, Smarandache F. Advances and Applications of DSmT for Information Fusion. Rehoboth: American Research Press, 2004

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  17. Jousselme A, Grenier D, Bosse E. A new distance between two bodies of evidence. Inf Fusion, 2001, 2: 91–101

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Martin A, Jousselme A, Osswald C. Conflict measure for the discounting operation on belief functions. In: The 11th International Conference on Information Fusion. Cologne, 2008. 1–8

  19. Hu L F, He Y, Guan X, et al. Measuring conflict functions in the generalized power space. Chinese J Aeronaut, 2010 (Revision)

  20. Yang F B, Wang X X. Combination Method of Conflictive Evidences in D-S Evidence Theory. Beijing: National Defense Industry Press, 2010

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to LiFang Hu.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

He, Y., Hu, L., Guan, X. et al. New method for measuring the degree of conflict among general basic probability assignments. Sci. China Inf. Sci. 55, 312–321 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-011-4346-0

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11432-011-4346-0

Keywords

Navigation