Generalizing the Dempster–Shafer Theory to Fuzzy Sets

  • John Yen
Part of the Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing book series (STUDFUZZ, volume 219)


With the desire to manage imprecise and vague information in evidential reasoning, several attempts have been made to generalize the Dempster–Shafer (D–S) theory to deal with fuzzy sets. However, the important principle of the D–S theory, that the belief and plausibility functions are treated as lower and upper probabilities, is no longer preserved in these generalizations. A generalization of the D–S theory in which this principle is maintained is described. It is shown that computing the degree of belief in a hypothesis in the D–S theory can be formulated as an optimization problem. The extended belief function is thus obtained by generalizing the objective function and the constraints of the optimization problem. To combine bodies of evidence that may contain vague information, Dempster’s rule is extended by 1) combining generalized compatibility relations based on the possibility theory, and 2) normalizing combination results to account for partially conflicting evidence. Our generalization not only extends the application of the D–S theory but also illustrates a way that probability theory and fuzzy set theory can be integrated in a sound manner in order to deal with different kinds of uncertain information in intelligent systems


Membership Function Fuzzy Subset Probabilistic Constraint Belief Function Evidential Reasoning 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. J. Pearl, “On evidential reasoning in a hierarchy of hypothesis,” Artificial Intell., vol. 28, no. 1, Feb. 1986, pp. 9–16.Google Scholar
  2. S. A. Lesh, An Evidential Theory Approach to Judgment-based Decision Making, Ph.D. dissertation, Department of Forestry and Environmental Studies, Duke Univ., 1986.Google Scholar
  3. “Fuzzy control ensures a smooth ride,” Hitachi 1987, pp. 12–13.Google Scholar
  4. L. A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy sets and information granularity,” in Advances in Fuzzy Set Theory and Applications, 1979, pp. 3–18.Google Scholar
  5. M. Ishizuka, K. S. Fu, and J. T. P. Yao, “Inference procedures and uncertainty for the problem-reduction method,” Inform. Sci., vol. 28, 1982, pp. 179–206.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  6. R. Yager, “Generalized probabilities of fuzzy events from fuzzy belief structures,” Inform. Sci., vol. 28, 1982, pp. 45–62.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. H. Ogawa and K. S. Fu, “An inexact inference for damage assessment of existing structures,” International Journal of Man-Machine Studies, vol. 22, 1985, pp. 295–306.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. A. P. Dempster, “Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping,” Ann. Math. Stat., vol. 38, pp. 325–339, 1967.CrossRefMathSciNetMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. G. Shafer, Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton, N.J.: Princeton Univ. Press, 1976.MATHGoogle Scholar
  10. G. Shafer, “Belief functions and possibility measures,” tech. report working paper no. 163, University of Kansas, School of Business, 1984.Google Scholar
  11. L. A. Zadeh, “Possibility theory and soft data analysis,” in Mathematical Frontiers of the Social and Policy Sciences, L. Cobb and R. M. Thrall, Eds. Boulder, CO: Westview Press, 1981, pp. 69–129.Google Scholar
  12. L. A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, vol. 1, pp. 3–28, 1978.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. D. Dubois and H. Prade, Possibility Theory. New York: Plenum Press, 1988.MATHGoogle Scholar
  14. P. Smets, “The degree of belief in a fuzzy event,” Inform. Sci., vol. 25, pp. 1–19, 1981.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. L. A. Zadeh, “The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning-I,” Inform. Sci., vol. 8, pp. 199–249, 1975.CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. L. A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy languages and their relation to human and machine intelligence,” Proc. Int. Conf. Man Comput., S. Karger, Ed. Bordeaux, France: Basel, 1972, pp. 130–165.Google Scholar
  17. L. A. Zadeh, “Similarity relations and fuzzy orderings,” Information Sci., vol. 3, pp. 177–200, 1971.MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. D. Dubois and H. Prade, “On several representations of an uncertain body of evidence,” in Fuzzy Information and Decision Processes, M. M. Gupta and E. Sanchez, Ed. New York: North-Holland, 1982, pp. 167–181.Google Scholar
  19. L. A. Zadeh, “A simple view of the Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence and its implication for the Rule of Combination,” AI Magazine, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 85–90, Summer 1986.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  • John Yen

There are no affiliations available

Personalised recommendations