Idempotent conjunctive and disjunctive combination of belief functions by distance minimization

Abstract Idempotence is a desirable property when cautiousness is wanted in an information fusion process, since in this case combining identical information should not lead to the reinforcement of some hypothesis. Idempotent operators also guarantee that identical information items are not counted twice in the fusion process, a very important property in decentralized applications where the information origin cannot always be tracked (ad-hoc wireless networks are typical examples). In the theory of belief functions, a sound way to combine conjunctively multiple information items is to design a combination rule that selects the least informative element among a subset of belief functions more informative than each of the combined ones. In contrast, disjunctive rules can be retrieved by selecting the most informative element among a subset of belief functions less informative than each of the combined ones. One interest of such approaches is that they provide idempotent rules by construction. The notions of less and more informative are often formalized through partial orderings extending usual set-inclusion, yet the only two informative partial orders that provide a straightforward idempotent rule leading to a unique result are those based on the conjunctive and disjunctive weight functions. In this article, we show that other partial orders can achieve a similar goal when the problem is slightly relaxed into a distance optimization one. Building upon previous work, this paper investigates the use of distances compatible with informative partial orders to determine a unique solution to the combination problem. The obtained operators are conjunctive/disjunctive, idempotent and commutative, but lack associativity. They are, however, quasi-associative allowing sequential combinations at no extra complexity. Some experiments demonstrate interesting discrepancies as compared to existing approaches, notably with the aforementioned rules relying on weight functions.

[1]  Weiru Liu,et al.  The basic principles of uncertain information fusion. An organised review of merging rules in different representation frameworks , 2016, Inf. Fusion.

[2]  Ph. Smets,et al.  THE CONCEPT OF DISTINCT EVIDENCE , 1999 .

[3]  Didier Dubois,et al.  A definition of subjective possibility , 2008, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[4]  John Klein,et al.  Idempotent Conjunctive Combination of Belief Functions by Distance Minimization , 2016, BELIEF.

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

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

[7]  Véronique Berge-Cherfaoui,et al.  Experiments with Self-Stabilizing Distributed Data Fusion , 2016, 2016 IEEE 35th Symposium on Reliable Distributed Systems (SRDS).

[8]  Marco E. G. V. Cattaneo,et al.  Belief functions combination without the assumption of independence of the information sources , 2011, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[9]  Thomas Guyet,et al.  Expert Opinion Extraction from a Biomedical Database , 2017 .

[10]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Idempotent conjunctive combination of belief functions: Extending the minimum rule of possibility theory , 2011, Inf. Sci..

[11]  Thomas Burger Geometric Interpretations of Conflict: A Viewpoint , 2014, Belief Functions.

[12]  Éloi Bossé,et al.  A new distance between two bodies of evidence , 2001, Inf. Fusion.

[13]  John Klein,et al.  Interpreting evidential distances by connecting them to partial orders: Application to belief function approximation , 2016, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[14]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Consonant approximations of belief functions , 1990, Int. J. Approx. Reason..

[15]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Focusing vs. Belief Revision: A Fundamental Distinction When Dealing with Generic Knowledge , 1997, ECSQARU-FAPR.

[16]  Marco E. G. V. Cattaneo Combining Belief Functions Issued from Dependent Sources , 2003, ISIPTA.

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

[18]  Arthur P. Dempster,et al.  Upper and Lower Probabilities Induced by a Multivalued Mapping , 1967, Classic Works of the Dempster-Shafer Theory of Belief Functions.

[19]  Thomas Burger,et al.  How to Randomly Generate Mass Functions , 2013, Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl. Based Syst..

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

[21]  Fabio Cuzzolin Geometry of Dempster's rule of combination , 2004, IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, Part B (Cybernetics).

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

[23]  Didier Dubois,et al.  Fuzzy set connectives as combinations of belief structures , 1992, Inf. Sci..

[24]  Lotfi A. Zadeh,et al.  A Simple View of the Dempster-Shafer Theory of Evidence and Its Implication for the Rule of Combination , 1985, AI Mag..

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

[26]  Philippe Smets,et al.  Analyzing the combination of conflicting belief functions , 2007, Inf. Fusion.

[27]  Thomas Burger,et al.  Toward an Axiomatic Definition of Conflict Between Belief Functions , 2013, IEEE Transactions on Cybernetics.