Soft Computing

, Volume 22, Issue 8, pp 2463–2469 | Cite as

Multiple attribute similarity hypermatching

  • Ronald Yager
  • Fred PetryEmail author
  • Paul Elmore


An approach to objects or events similarity is based on the similarity of the data values of the specific attributes. Similarity is refined by considering importance weights for attributes and also the issues of unusual attribute values where the concept of importance amplification is used to provide soft matching of objects or events We then introduce extensions to hypermatching where certain combinations of attributes are relevant. This is approached by modeling how to represent commonly occurring attribute data values whose co-occurrence is uncommon. Certainly not all attribute combinations are typically of the same interest. What can be expected is that for a particular context or application, some subset of the attributes is being focused upon. As an application, we illustrate the importance of considering combinations of attribute values in assessing evidence in geospatial profiling.


Attribute importance Combination of attributes Amplification Soft matching Similarity 



Elmore and Petry were supported in part by the Naval Research Laboratory’s Base Program, Program Element No. 0602435 N. Ronald Yager has been in part supported by ONR Grant Award Number N00014-13-1-0626.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

Authors Yager, Elmore and Petry declare they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical approval

This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.


  1. Anderson D, Ros M, Keller J, Cuellar M, Popescu M, Delgado M, Vila A (2012) Similarity measure for anomaly detection and comparing human behaviors. Int J Intell Syst 27:733–756CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Boyd D, Crawford K (2012) Critical questions for big data. Inf Commun Soc 15(5):662–679CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Brown A, Smith A, Elmhurst O (2002) The combined use of pollen and soil analyses in a search and subsequent murder investigation. J Forensic Sci 47:614–618Google Scholar
  4. Buckles B, Petry F (1982) A fuzzy representation for relational data bases. Fuzzy Sets Syst 7(3):213–226CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. Bustince H (2000) Indicator of inclusion grade for interval-valued fuzzy sets: application to approximate reasoning based on interval-valued fuzzy sets. Int J Approx Reason 23(3):137–209MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Bustince H, Mohedano V, Barrenechea E, Pagola M (2006) Definition and construction of fuzzy DI-subsethood measures. Inf Sci 176(21):3190–3231MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. Bustince H, Barrenechea E, Pagola M (2008) Relationship between restricted dissimilarity functions, restricted equivalence functions and normal EN-functions: Image thresholding invariant. Pattern Recognit Lett 29(4):525–536CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Canter D, Youngs D (2008) Principles of geographical offender profiling. Ashgate Publishing, FarnhamGoogle Scholar
  9. Castillo E (1988) Extreme value theory in engineering. Academic Press, San Diego, CAGoogle Scholar
  10. Chen S (2010) Multimedia databases and data management: a survey. Int J Multimed Data Eng Manag 1(1):4–15CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Coles S (2001) An introduction to statistical modeling of extreme values. Springer, LondonCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. Deza M, Deza E (2014) Encyclopedia of distances, 3rd edn. Springer, HeidlebergzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Elmasri R, Navathe S (2010) Fundamentals of database systems, 6th edn. Addison-Wesley, BostonzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  14. Kantardzic M (2011) Data mining: concepts, models, methods and algorithms. IEEE Press, PiscatawayCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Lindgren G, Rootzen H (1987) Extreme values: theory and technical applications. Scand J Stat 14:241–279MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Michael K, Miller KB (2013) Big data: new opportunities and new challenges. IEEE Comput 46(6):22–24CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Novak S (2011) Extreme values methods with applications to finance. Chapman and Hall, LondonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Nwosu K, Thurasiingham B, Berra B (2011) Multi-media database systems: design and implementation. Kluwer, NorwellGoogle Scholar
  19. Pye K (2007) Geological and soil evidence: forensic applications. CRC Press, Boca RatonCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Rossmo K (2000) Geographical profiling. CRC Press, Boca RatonGoogle Scholar
  21. Santini S, Jain R (1999) Similarity measures. IEEE Trans Pattern Anal Mach Intell 21(9):871–883CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Shafer G (1976) A mathematical theory of evidence. Princeton University Press, PrincetonzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. Temkin L (1994) A continuum argument for intransitivity. Philos Public Aff 25(3):175–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Tung A, Zhang R, Koudas N, Ooi B (2006) Similarity search: a matching based approach. In: Proceedings of very large database conference, pp 631–642Google Scholar
  25. Tversky A (1969) Intransitivity of preferences. Psychol Rev 76(1):31–48CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Tversky A, Kranz D (1982) Similarity, separability and the triangle inequality. Psychol Rev 89:123–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Witten I, Frank E, Hall M (2011) Data mining: practical machine learning tools and techniques, 3rd edn. Morgan Kaufmann, San FranciscoGoogle Scholar
  28. Yager R, Petry F (2014) Hyper matching: similarity matching with extreme values. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 22(4):949–957CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Zadeh L (1971) Similarity relations and fuzzy orderings. Inf Sci 3:177–200MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  30. Zadeh L (1978) Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility. Fuzzy Sets Syst 1:3–28MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. Zezula P, Amato G, Dohnal V, Batko M (2006) Similarity search: the metric space approach. Springer, New YorkzbMATHGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany (outside the usa) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Machine Intelligence InstituteIona CollegeNew RochelleUSA
  2. 2.Geospatial Science and Technology Branch, Bldg. 1005 Naval Research LaboratoryStennis Space CenterHancock CountyUSA

Personalised recommendations