Mining Inconsistent Data with Probabilistic Approximations

  • P. G. Clark
  • J. W. Grzymala-BusseEmail author
  • Z. S. Hippe
Part of the Studies in Computational Intelligence book series (SCI, volume 559)


Generalized probabilistic approximations, defined using both rough set theory and probability theory, are studied using an approximation space (U, R), where R is an arbitrary binary relation. Generalized probabilistic approximations are applicable in mining inconsistent data (data with conflicting cases) and data with missing attribute values.


Probabilistic Approximation Decision Table Approximation Space Rule Induction Indiscernibility Relation 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


  1. Clark PG, Grzymala-Busse JW (2011) Experiments on probabilistic approximations. In: Proceedings of IEEE international conference on granular computing, pp 144–149Google Scholar
  2. Clark PG, Grzymala-Busse JW (2012) Experiments using three probabilistic approximations for rule induction from incomplete data sets. In: Proceedings of European conference on data mining, pp 72–78Google Scholar
  3. Clark PG, Grzymala-Busse JW, Kuehnhausen M (2012) Local probabilistic approximations for incomplete data. In: Proceedings of 20th international symposium on methodologies for intelligent systems, pp 93–98Google Scholar
  4. Grzymala-Busse JW (2003) Rough set strategies to data with missing attribute values. In: Proceedings of 3rd international conference on data mining, pp 56–63Google Scholar
  5. Grzymala-Busse JW (2004) Data with missing attribute values: Generalization of indiscernibility relation and rule induction. Trans Rough Sets 1:78–95Google Scholar
  6. Grzymala-Busse JW (2011) Generalized parameterized approximations. In: Proceedings of 6th international conference on rough sets and knowledge technology, pp 136–145Google Scholar
  7. Grzymala-Busse JW (2013) Generalized probabilistic approximations. In: Proceedings of 6th international conference on human system interaction, pp 13–17Google Scholar
  8. Grzymala-Busse JW, Rzasa W (2010) A local version of the MLEM2 algorithm for rule induction. Fundamenta Informaticae 100:99–116zbMATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  9. Kryszkiewicz M (1995) Rough set approach to incomplete information systems. In: Proceedings of 2nd annual joint conference on information sciences, pp 194–197Google Scholar
  10. Slowinski R, Vanderpooten D (2000) A generalized definition of rough approximations based on similarity. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 12:331–336CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Stefanowski J, Tsoukias A (1999) On the extension of rough sets under incomplete information. In: Proceedings of 7th international workshop on new directions in rough sets, data mining, and granular-soft computing, pp 73–81Google Scholar
  12. Yao YY (1998) Relational interpretations of neighborhood operators and rough set approximation operators. Inf Sci 111:239–259CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Yao YY (2007) Decision-theoretic rough set models. In: Proceedings of 2nd international conference on rough sets and knowledge technology, pp 1–12Google Scholar
  14. Yao YY, Wong SKM (1992) A decision theoretic framework for approximate concepts. J Man–Mach Stud 37:793–809CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing Switzerland 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. G. Clark
    • 1
  • J. W. Grzymala-Busse
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  • Z. S. Hippe
    • 3
  1. 1.Department of Electrical Engineering and Computer ScienceUniversity of KansasLawrenceUSA
  2. 2.Institute of Computer SciencePolish Academy of SciencesWarszawaPoland
  3. 3.Department of Expert Systems and Artificial IntelligenceUniversity of Information Technology and ManagementRzeszówPoland

Personalised recommendations