On Latent Belief Structures

Based on the canonical decomposition of belief functions, Smets introduced the concept of a latent belief structure (LBS). This concept is revisited in this article. The study of the combination of LBSs allows us to propose a less committed version of Dempster's rule, resulting in a commutative, associative and idempotent rule of combination for LBSs. This latter property makes it suitable to combine non distinct bodies of evidence. A sound method based on the plausibility transformation is also given to infer decisions from LBSs. In addition, an extension of the new rule is proposed so that it may be used to optimize the combination of imperfect information with respect to the decisions inferred.

[1]  Amel Ben Yaghlane,et al.  Elicitation of Expert Opinions for Constructing Belief Functions , 2006 .

[2]  Frank Klawonn,et al.  The Dynamic of Belief in the Transferable Belief Model and Specialization-Generalization Matrices , 1992, UAI.

[3]  T. Denœux.  Conjunctive and disjunctive combination of belief functions induced by nondistinct bodies of evidence , 2008 .

[4]  Prakash P. Shenoy,et al.  On the plausibility transformation method for translating belief function models to probability models , 2006, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

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

[6]  Michael Clarke,et al.  Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning and Uncertainty , 1991, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[7]  Philippe Smets,et al.  The Transferable Belief Model for Quantified Belief Representation , 1998 .

[8]  Ivan Kramosil.  Probabilistic analysis of belief functions , 2001 .

[9]  Dov M. Gabbay,et al.  Handbook of defeasible reasoning and uncertainty management systems: volume 2: reasoning with actual and potential contradictions , 1998 .

[10]  P G rdenfors,et al.  Knowledge in flux: modeling the dynamics of epistemic states , 1988 .

[11]  Frans Voorbraak,et al.  A Computationally Efficient Approximation of Dempster-Shafer Theory , 1988, Int. J. Man Mach. Stud..

[12]  D. Dubois,et al.  A set-theoretic view of belief functions: Logical operations and approximations by fuzzy sets , 1986 .

[13]  K. Vind.  A foundation for statistics , 2003 .

[14]  Peter Gärdenfors,et al.  Knowledge in Flux: Modeling the Dynamics of Epistemic States , 2008 .

[15]  Philippe Smets,et al.  The Canonical Decomposition of a Weighted Belief , 1995, IJCAI.

[16]  Thierry Denoeux.  The cautious rule of combination for belief functions and some extensions , 2006, 2006 9th International Conference on Information Fusion.

[17]  Thierry Denoeux,et al.  Refined modeling of sensor reliability in the belief function framework using contextual discounting , 2008, Inf. Fusion.

[18]  Prakash P. Shenoy,et al.  Conditional independence in valuation-based systems , 1994, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[19]  Didier Dubois,et al.  "Not Impossible" vs. "Guaranteed Possible" in Fusion and Revision , 2001, ECSQARU.

[20]  Jürg Kohlas,et al.  Handbook of Defeasible Reasoning and Uncertainty Management Systems , 2000 .

[21]  Christophe Labreuche,et al.  Modeling Positive and Negative Pieces of Evidence in Uncertainty , 2003, ECSQARU.

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