论文信息 - Comparison Between DSm and Minc Combination Rules

Comparison Between DSm and Minc Combination Rules

Both DSm and minC rules of combination endeavor to process conflicts among combined beliefs better. The nature of conflicts as well as their processing during the belief combination is sketched. An presentation of the minC combination, an alternative to Dempster’s rule of combination, follows. Working domains, structures and mechanisms of the DSm and minC combination rules are compared in the body of this chapter. Finally, some comparative examples are presented.

Milan Daniel

[1] Henri Prade,et al. Representation and combination of uncertainty with belief functions and possibility measures , 1988, Comput. Intell..

[2] R. Yager. On the dempster-shafer framework and new combination rules , 1987, Inf. Sci..

[3] Alessandro Saffiotti,et al. The Transferable Belief Model , 1991, ECSQARU.

[4] J. Dezert. Combination of paradoxical sources of information within the neutrosophic framework , 2002 .

[5] P. Vannoorenberghe,et al. Strategies for combining conflicting dogmatic beliefs , 2003, Sixth International Conference of Information Fusion, 2003. Proceedings of the.

[6] Glenn Shafer,et al. A Mathematical Theory of Evidence , 2020, A Mathematical Theory of Evidence.

[7] Philippe Smets,et al. The Combination of Evidence in the Transferable Belief Model , 1990, IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell..

[8] Philippe Smets,et al. The Transferable Belief Model , 1994, Artif. Intell..

[9] Milan Daniel. Distribution of Contradictive Belief Masses in Combination of Belief Functions , 2000 .

[10] Jean Dezert,et al. Foundations for a new theory of plausible and paradoxical reasoning , 2002 .

[11] Milan Daniel,et al. Associativity in combination of belief functions; a derivation of minC combination , 2003, Soft Comput..