Dealing with Missing Data in Rough Set Analysis of Multi-Attribute and Multi-Criteria Decision Problems

Rough sets methodology is a useful tool for analysis of decision problems concerning a set of objects described in a data table by a set of condition attributes and by a set of decision attributes. In practical applications, however, the data table is often not complete because some data are missing. To deal with this case, we propose an extension of the rough set methodology to the analysis of incomplete data tables. The adaptation concerns both the classical rough set approach based on the use of indiscernibility relations and the new rough set approach based on the use of dominance relations. While the first approach deals with the multi-attribute classification problem, the second approach deals with the multi-criteria sorting problem. In the latter, condition attributes have preference-ordered scales, and thus are called criteria, and the classes defined by the decision attributes are also preference-ordered. The adapted relations of indiscernibility or dominance between a pair of objects are considered as directional statements where a subject is compared to a referent object. We require that the referent object has no missing data The two adapted rough set approaches boil down to the original approaches when there are no missing data. The rules induced from the newly defined rough approximations defined are either exact or approximate, depending whether they are supported by consistent objects or not, and they are robust in a sense that each rule is supported by at least one object with no missing data on the condition attributes or criteria represented in the rule.

[1]  A. Skowron,et al.  Methodology and applications , 1998 .

[2]  Z. Pawlak,et al.  Rough set approach to multi-attribute decision analysis , 1994 .

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

[4]  Andrzej Skowron,et al.  From the Rough Set Theory to the Evidence Theory , 1991 .

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

[6]  B. Roy Méthodologie multicritère d'aide à la décision , 1985 .

[7]  Thorsten Kuhlmann,et al.  Intelligent decision support , 1998 .

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

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

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

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

[12]  Nicolas Danila Roy B. : Méthodologie multicritère d'aide à la décision , 1986 .

[13]  Salvatore Greco,et al.  A New Rough Set Approach to Multicriteria and Multiattribute Classification , 1998, Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing.

[14]  Janusz Zalewski,et al.  Rough sets: Theoretical aspects of reasoning about data , 1996 .

[15]  R. Słowiński Intelligent Decision Support: Handbook of Applications and Advances of the Rough Sets Theory , 1992 .

[16]  J. Kacprzyk,et al.  Advances in the Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence , 1994 .