Dominance-Based Rough Set Approach to Knowledge Discovery (I): General Perspective

This chapter is devoted to knowledge discovery from data, taking into account prior knowledge about preference semantics in patterns to be discovered. The data concern a set of objects (situations, states, examples) described by a set of attributes (properties, features, characteristics). The attributes are, in general, divided into condition and decision attributes, corresponding to input and output descriptions of an object. The set of objects is partitioned by decision attributes into decision classes. A pattern discovered from the data has a symbolic form of decision rule or decision tree. In many practical problems, some condition attributes are defined on preference ordered scales, and the decision classes are also preference ordered. The known methods of knowledge discovery unfortunately ignore this preference information, risking drawing wrong patterns. To deal with preference-ordered data, we propose to use a new approach called Dominance-based Rough Set Approach (DRSA). Given a set of objects described by at least one condition attribute with preference-ordered scale and partitioned into preference-ordered classes, the new rough set approach is able to approximate this partition by means of dominance relations. The rough approximation of this partition is a starting point for induction of “if..., then...” decision rules. The syntax of these rules is adapted to represent preference orders. The DRSA analyzes only facts present in data, and possible inconsistencies are identified. It preserves the concept of granular computing; however, the granules are dominance cones in evaluation space, and not bounded sets. It is also concordant with the paradigm of computing with words, as it exploits the ordinal, and not necessarily the cardinal, character of data. The basic DRSA and its major extensions are presented in two consecutive parts in this book. In the present part, we give a general perspective of DRSA, explaining its use in the context of multicriteria classification, choice, and ranking. Moreover, we present a variant of DRSA that handles missing values in data sets.

[1]  G. A. Miller THE PSYCHOLOGICAL REVIEW THE MAGICAL NUMBER SEVEN, PLUS OR MINUS TWO: SOME LIMITS ON OUR CAPACITY FOR PROCESSING INFORMATION 1 , 1956 .

[2]  Edward I. Altman,et al.  FINANCIAL RATIOS, DISCRIMINANT ANALYSIS AND THE PREDICTION OF CORPORATE BANKRUPTCY , 1968 .

[3]  L. Zadeh A Fuzzy-Set-Theoretic Interpretation of Linguistic Hedges , 1972 .

[4]  菅野 道夫,et al.  Theory of fuzzy integrals and its applications , 1975 .

[5]  F. Roberts Measurement Theory with Applications to Decisionmaking, Utility, and the Social Sciences: Measurement Theory , 1984 .

[6]  M. Allais,et al.  The So-Called Allais Paradox and Rational Decisions under Uncertainty , 1979 .

[7]  N. Capon Credit Scoring Systems: A Critical Analysis , 1982 .

[8]  Viewer Miscomprehension Findings are Measurement Bound , 1982 .

[9]  V. Novák Fuzzy sets and their applications , 1989 .

[10]  A. Nakamura,et al.  A logic for fuzzy data analysis , 1991 .

[11]  William M. Goldstein,et al.  Decomposable threshold models , 1991 .

[12]  Z. Pawlak Rough Sets: Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Data , 1991 .

[13]  R. Słowiński A generalization of the indiscernibility relation for rough set analysis of quantitative information , 1992 .

[14]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Putting Rough Sets and Fuzzy Sets Together , 1992, Intelligent Decision Support.

[15]  Jerzy W. Grzymala-Busse,et al.  LERS-A System for Learning from Examples Based on Rough Sets , 1992, Intelligent Decision Support.

[16]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Gradual inference rules in approximate reasoning , 1992, Inf. Sci..

[17]  Bernadette Bouchon-Meunier,et al.  Linguistic modifiers and imprecise categories , 1992, Int. J. Intell. Syst..

[18]  Roman Słowiński,et al.  Intelligent Decision Support , 1992, Theory and Decision Library.

[19]  Akira Nakamura,et al.  Applications of Fuzzy-Rough Classifications to Logics , 1992, Intelligent Decision Support.

[20]  Bernard Roy,et al.  Aide multicritère à la décision : méthodes et cas , 1993 .

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

[22]  Wojciech Ziarko,et al.  Variable Precision Rough Set Model , 1993, J. Comput. Syst. Sci..

[23]  Marc Roubens,et al.  Fuzzy Preference Modelling and Multicriteria Decision Support , 1994, Theory and Decision Library.

[24]  Jerzy W. Grzymala-Busse,et al.  Rough Sets , 1995, Commun. ACM.

[25]  M. Grabisch Fuzzy integral in multicriteria decision making , 1995 .

[26]  I. Burhan Türksen,et al.  Measurement-theoretic justification of connectives in fuzzy set theory , 1995, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[27]  Constantin Zopounidis,et al.  Application of the Rough Set Approach to Evaluation of Bankruptcy Risk , 1995 .

[28]  Heikki Mannila,et al.  Verkamo: Fast Discovery of Association Rules , 1996, KDD 1996.

[29]  Tsau Young Lin,et al.  Rough Sets and Data Mining: Analysis of Imprecise Data , 1996 .

[30]  Roman Slowinski,et al.  Rough-Set Reasoning about Uncertain Data , 1996, Fundam. Informaticae.

[31]  Heikki Mannila,et al.  Fast Discovery of Association Rules , 1996, Advances in Knowledge Discovery and Data Mining.

[32]  C. Zopounidis Operational tools in the management of financial risks , 1997 .

[33]  Yiyu Yao Combination of Rough and Fuzzy Sets Based on α-Level Sets , 1997 .

[34]  J. Kacprzyk,et al.  Incomplete Information: Rough Set Analysis , 1997 .

[35]  Sadaaki Miyamoto,et al.  Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing , 2012, Lecture Notes in Computer Science.

[36]  S. Greco,et al.  Exploitation of A rough approximation of the outranking relation in multicriteria choice and ranking , 1998 .

[37]  Roman Słowiński,et al.  A New Rough Set Approach to Evaluation of Bankruptcy Risk , 1998 .

[38]  Lech Polkowski,et al.  Rough Sets in Knowledge Discovery 2 , 1998 .

[39]  Theodor J. Stewart,et al.  Trends in Multicriteria Decision Making , 1998 .

[40]  Ivan Bratko,et al.  Machine Learning and Data Mining; Methods and Applications , 1998 .

[41]  Ewa Orlowska,et al.  Introduction: What You Always Wanted to Know about Rough Sets , 1998 .

[42]  Gianpiero Cattaneo,et al.  Fuzzy Extension of Rough Sets Theory , 1998, Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing.

[43]  C. Zopounidis,et al.  A Multicriteria Decision Aid Methodology for Sorting Decision Problems: The Case of Financial Distress , 1999 .

[44]  Peter P. Wakker,et al.  State Dependent Expected Utility for Savage's State Space , 1999, Math. Oper. Res..

[45]  Roman Słowiński,et al.  The Use of Rough Sets and Fuzzy Sets in MCDM , 1999 .

[46]  Salvatore Greco,et al.  Rough approximation of a preference relation by dominance relations , 1999, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[47]  Salvatore Greco,et al.  Handling Missing Values in Rough Set Analysis of Multi-Attribute and Multi-Criteria Decision Problems , 1999, RSFDGrC.

[48]  Jarosław Stepaniuk,et al.  Knowledge discovery by application of rough set models , 2000 .

[49]  Andrzej Skowron,et al.  Calculi of Granules Based on Rough Set Theory: Approximate Distributed Synthesis and Granular Semantics for Computing with Words , 1999, RSFDGrC.

[50]  S. Greco,et al.  Rough set based processing of inconsistent information in decision analysis , 2000 .

[51]  Salvatore Greco,et al.  Variable Consistency Model of Dominance-Based Rough Sets Approach , 2000, Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing.

[52]  Georgios I. Doukidis,et al.  Decision making : recent developments and worldwide applications , 2000 .

[53]  J. Fodor,et al.  Preferences and Decisions under Incomplete Knowledge , 2000 .

[54]  Salvatore Greco,et al.  Rough Set Processing of Vague Information Using Fuzzy Similarity Relations , 2000, Finite Versus Infinite.

[55]  Salvatore Greco,et al.  An Algorithm for Induction of Decision Rules Consistent with the Dominance Principle , 2000, Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing.

[56]  Salvatore Greco,et al.  Rough Set Approach to Decisions under Risk , 2000, Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing.

[57]  Daniel Vanderpooten,et al.  A Generalized Definition of Rough Approximations Based on Similarity , 2000, IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng..

[58]  Roman Słowiński,et al.  Dealing with Missing Data in Rough Set Analysis of Multi-Attribute and Multi-Criteria Decision Problems , 2000 .

[59]  Tsau Young Lin,et al.  Rough Set Methods and Applications , 2000 .

[60]  Roman Słowiński,et al.  Fuzzy Extension of the Rough Set Approach to Multicriteria and Multiattribute Sorting , 2000 .

[61]  Roman Słowiński,et al.  Extension Of The Rough Set Approach To Multicriteria Decision Support , 2000 .

[62]  Salvatore Greco,et al.  Rough sets theory for multicriteria decision analysis , 2001, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[63]  S. Greco,et al.  Conjoint measurement and rough set approach for multicriteria sorting problems in presence of ordinal criteria , 2001 .

[64]  Salvatore Greco,et al.  Rough sets methodology for sorting problems in presence of multiple attributes and criteria , 2002, Eur. J. Oper. Res..

[65]  Salvatore Greco,et al.  Rough Set Analysis of Preference-Ordered Data , 2002, Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing.

[66]  Roman Słowiński,et al.  Preference Representation by Means of Conjoint Measurement and Decision Rule Model , 2002 .

[67]  Salvatore Greco,et al.  Variable Consistency Monotonic Decision Trees , 2002, Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing.

[68]  Masahiro Inuiguchi,et al.  Dominance-Based Rough Set Approach Using Possibility and Necessity Measures , 2002, Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing.

[69]  S. Greco,et al.  Axiomatization of utility, outranking and decision-rule preference models for multiple-criteria classification problems under partial inconsistency with the dominance principle , 2002 .

[70]  R. Słowiński,et al.  Aiding decisions with multiple criteria: essays in honor of Bernard Roy , 2002 .

[71]  Salvatore Greco,et al.  Mining decision-rule preference model from rough approximation of preference relation , 2002, Proceedings 26th Annual International Computer Software and Applications.

[72]  Salvatore Greco,et al.  Mining Association Rules in Preference-Ordered Data , 2002, ISMIS.

[73]  S. Greco,et al.  Methodology of rough-set-based classification and sorting with hierarchical structure of attributes and criteria , 2002 .

[74]  Masahiro Inuiguchi,et al.  Possibility and necessity measure specification using modifiers for decision making under fuzziness , 2003, Fuzzy Sets Syst..

[75]  Masahiro Inuiguchi,et al.  A New Proposal for Fuzzy Rough Approximations and Gradual Decision Rule Representation , 2004, Trans. Rough Sets.

[76]  Masahiro Inuiguchi,et al.  New Fuzzy Rough Sets Based on Certainty Qualification , 2004, Rough-Neural Computing: Techniques for Computing with Words.

[77]  Shusaku Tsumoto,et al.  Foundations of Intelligent Systems, 15th International Symposium, ISMIS 2005, Saratoga Springs, NY, USA, May 25-28, 2005, Proceedings , 2005, ISMIS.