On Learning Evidential Contextual Corrections from Soft Labels Using a Measure of Discrepancy Between Contour Functions

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 11940)


In this paper, a proposition is made to learn the parameters of evidential contextual correction mechanisms from a learning set composed of soft labelled data, that is data where the true class of each object is only partially known. The method consists in optimizing a measure of discrepancy between the values of the corrected contour function and the ground truth also represented by a contour function. The advantages of this method are illustrated by tests on synthetic and real data.


Belief functions Contextual corrections Learning Soft labels 



The authors would like to thank the anonymous reviewers for their helpful and constructive comments, which have helped them to improve the quality of the paper and to consider new paths for future research.

Mrs. Mutmainah’s research is supported by the overseas 5000 Doctors program of Indonesian Religious Affairs Ministry (MORA French Scholarship).


  1. 1.
    Côme, E., Oukhellou, L., Denœux, T., Aknin, P.: Learning from partially supervised data using mixture models and belief functions. Pattern Recogn. 42(3), 334–348 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Denoeux, T.: A k-nearest neighbor classification rule based on Dempster-Shafer theory. IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cybern. 25(5), 804–813 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Denœux, T.: Conjunctive and disjunctive combination of belief functions induced by nondistinct bodies of evidence. Artif. Intell. 172, 234–264 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Denœux, T.: Maximum likelihood estimation from uncertain data in the belief function framework. IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng. 25(1), 119–130 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Dubois, D., Prade, H.: A set-theoretic view of belief functions: logical operations and approximations by fuzzy sets. Int. J. Gen. Syst. 12(3), 193–226 (1986)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Dua, D., Graff, C.: UCI Machine Learning Repository. School of Information and Computer Science, University of California, Irvine (2019). Scholar
  7. 7.
    Elouedi, Z., Mellouli, K., Smets, P.: The evaluation of sensors’ reliability and their tuning for multisensor data fusion within the transferable belief model. In: Benferhat, S., Besnard, P. (eds.) ECSQARU 2001. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 2143, pp. 350–361. Springer, Heidelberg (2001). Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kanjanatarakul, O., Kuson, S., Denoeux, T.: An evidential K-nearest neighbor classifier based on contextual discounting and likelihood maximization. In: Destercke, S., Denoeux, T., Cuzzolin, F., Martin, A. (eds.) BELIEF 2018. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 11069, pp. 155–162. Springer, Cham (2018). Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kanjanatarakul, O., Kuson, S., Denœux, T.: A new evidential k-nearest neighbor rule based on contextual discounting with partially supervised learning. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 113, 287–302 (2019)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Mercier, D., Quost, B., Denœux, T.: Refined modeling of sensor reliability in the belief function framework using contextual discounting. Inf. Fusion 9(2), 246–258 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Mercier, D., Lefèvre, E., Delmotte, F.: Belief functions contextual discounting and canonical decompositions. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 53(2), 146–158 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pichon, F., Dubois, D., Denoeux, T.: Relevance and truthfulness in information correction and fusion. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 53(2), 159–175 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Pichon, F., Mercier, D., Lefèvre, E., Delmotte, F.: Proposition and learning of some belief function contextual correction mechanisms. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 72, 4–42 (2016)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Quost, B., Denoeux, T., Li, S.: Parametric classification with soft labels using the evidential EM algorithm: linear discriminant analysis versus logistic regression. Adv. Data Anal. Classif. 11(4), 659–690 (2017)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Shafer, G.: A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1976)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Smets, P.: Belief functions: the disjunctive rule of combination and the generalized Bayesian theorem. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 9(1), 1–35 (1993)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Smets, P., Kennes, R.: The transferable belief model. Artif. Intell. 66(2), 191–234 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zafallon, M., Corani, G., Mauá, D.-D.: Evaluating credal classifiers by utility-discounted predictive accuracy. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 53(8), 1282–1301 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.EA 3926 LGI2AUniv. ArtoisBéthuneFrance
  2. 2.UIN Sunan KalijagaYogyakartaIndonesia

Personalised recommendations