IUKM 2011: Integrated Uncertainty in Knowledge Modelling and Decision Making pp 7-15 | Cite as
Introduction to the ER Rule for Evidence Combination
Conference paper
Abstract
The Evidential Reasoning (ER) approach has been developed to support multiple criteria decision making (MCDM) under uncertainty. It is built upon Dempster’s rule for evidence combination and uses belief functions for dealing with probabilistic uncertainty and ignorance. In this introductory paper, following a brief introduction to Dempster’s rule and the ER approach, we report the discovery of a new generic ER rule for evidence combination [16]. We first introduce the concepts and equations of a new extended belief function and then examine the detailed combination equations of the new ER rule. A numerical example is provided to illustrate the new ER rule.
Keywords
Evidential reasoning Belief function Evidence combination Dempster’s rule Multiple criteria decision makingPreview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
- 1.Beynon, M.: DS/AHP method: A mathematical analysis, including an understanding of uncertainty. European Journal of Operational Research 140(1), 148–164 (2002)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 2.Dempster, A.P.: Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multi-valued mapping. Annals of Mathematical Statistics 38, 325–339 (1967)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 3.Denoeux, T., Zouhal, L.M.: Handling possibilistic labels in pattern classification using evidential reasoning. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 122(3), 409–424 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 4.Haenni, R.: Shedding new light on zadeh’s criticism of Dempster’s rule of combination. In: The 7th International Conference on Information Fusion (FUSION) (2005)Google Scholar
- 5.McClean, S., Scotney, B.: Using evidence theory for knowledge discovery and extraction in distributed databases. International Journal of Intelligent Systems 12, 763–776 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 6.Murphy, C.K.: Combining belief functions when evidence conflicts. Decision Support Systems 29, 1–9 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 7.Shafer, G.: A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton University Press, Princeton (1976)MATHGoogle Scholar
- 8.Wang, Y.M., Yang, J.B., Xu, D.L.: The evidential reasoning approach for multiple attribute decision analysis using interval belief degrees. European Journal of Operational Research 175(1), 35–66 (2006)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 9.Xu, D.L., Yang, J.B., Wang, Y.M.: The ER approach for multi-attribute decision analysis under interval uncertainties. European Journal of Operational Research 174(3), 1914–1943 (2006)CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 10.Yager, R.R.: Decision making using minimization of regret. International Journal of Approximate Reasoning 36, 109–128 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 11.Yang, J.B., Singh, M.G.: An evidential reasoning approach for multiple attribute decision making with uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 24(1), 1–18 (1994)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 12.Yang, J.B.: Rule and utility based evidential reasoning approach for multiattribute decision analysis under uncertainties. European Journal of Operational Research 131, 31–61 (2001)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 13.Yang, J.B., Xu, D.L.: On the evidential reasoning algorithm for multiattribute decision analysis under uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics Part A: Systems and Humans 32(3), 289–304 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 14.Yang, J.B., Wang, Y.M., Xu, D.L.: The Evidential reasoning approach for MADA under both probabilistic and fuzzy uncertainties. European Journal of Operational Research 171(1), 309–343 (2006)MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
- 15.Yang, J.B., Xu, D.L., Xie, X.L., Maddulapalli, A.K.: Multicriteria evidential reasoning decision modelling and analysis - prioritising voices of customer. Journal of the Operational Research Society 62, 1638–1654 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
- 16.Yang, J.B., Xu, D.L.: The evidential reasoning rule for evidence combination. Artificial Intelligence (submitted to, 2011)Google Scholar
Copyright information
© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2011