Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Knowledge-based system for three-way decision-making under uncertainty

  • Regular Paper
  • Published:
Knowledge and Information Systems Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Knowledge-based systems developed based on Dempster–Shafer theory and prospect theory enhances decision-making under uncertainty. But at times, the traditional two-way decision approach may not be able to suggest a suitable decision confidently. This work proposes a three-way decision support system which divides the alternatives into three disjoint sets. Nonparametric Gaussian kernel and mid-range values are used to compute basic probabilities and reference points, respectively. The difference between basic probabilities and reference points is considered for assigning gain–loss values based on the value function from prospect theory. Ten publicly available benchmark data sets are considered, and the effectiveness of the proposed system is affirmed by comparing its performance with traditional machine learning models and other relevant decision-making systems in the literature. A case study related to evaluation of candidates is included, and it is also compared with other reference point estimation methods. From the results, it can be inferred that considering mid-range values as reference generates a preference order that is intuitive and compliable.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Aristoteles A, Adhianto K, Rico Andrian R (2019) Comparative analysis of cow disease diagnosis expert system using Bayesian network and dempster-shafer method. Int J Adv Comput Sci Appl 10(4):227–235

    Google Scholar 

  2. Leema N, Khanna Nehemiah H, Kannan A, Jabez Christopher J (2016) Computer aided diagnosis system for clinical decision making: experimentation using pima indian diabetes dataset. Asian J Inf Technol 15(17):3217–3231

    Google Scholar 

  3. Kavya R, Christopher J (2022) Interpretable systems based on evidential prospect theory for decision-making. Applied Intelligence 1–26

  4. Han L, Rajasekar A, Li S (2022) An evidence-based credit evaluation ensemble framework for online retail smes. Knowledge and Information Systems 1–21

  5. Yao Y (2010) Three-way decisions with probabilistic rough sets. Inf Sci 180(3):341–353

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  6. Wang J, Ma X, Xu Z, Zhan J (2021) Three-way multi-attribute decision making under hesitant fuzzy environments. Inf Sci 552:328–351

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  7. Jaynes ET, Kempthorne O (1976) Confidence intervals vs bayesian intervals. In: Foundations of Probability Theory, Statistical Inference, and Statistical Theories of Science. Springer, pp 175–257

  8. Dempster AP (2008) Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping. In: Classic Works of the Dempster-Shafer Theory of Belief Functions. Springer, pp 57–72

  9. Shafer G (1976) A mathematical theory of evidence, vol 42. Princeton University Press, Princeton

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  10. Davoudabadi R, Mousavi SM, Mohagheghi V (2020) A new last aggregation method of multi-attributes group decision making based on concepts of todim, waspas and topsis under interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy uncertainty. Knowl Inf Syst 62(4):1371–1391

    Google Scholar 

  11. Deng X, Jiang W (2019) D number theory based game-theoretic framework in adversarial decision making under a fuzzy environment. Int J Approx Reason 106:194–213

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  12. Li Y, Chen J, Feng L (2012) Dealing with uncertainty: a survey of theories and practices. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 25(11):2463–2482

    Google Scholar 

  13. Zhang J, Deng Y (2017) A method to determine basic probability assignment in the open world and its application in data fusion and classification. Appl Intell 46(4):934–951

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  14. Zhang W, Deng Y (2019) Combining conflicting evidence using the dematel method. Soft Comput 23(17):8207–8216

    Google Scholar 

  15. Abbasnejad ME, Ramachandram D, Mandava R (2012) A survey of the state of the art in learning the kernels. Knowl Inf Syst 31(2):193–221

    Google Scholar 

  16. Kahneman D, Tversky A (2013) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. In: Handbook of the Fundamentals of Financial Decision Making: Part I. World Scientific, pp 99–127

  17. Xiao F (2019) A multiple-criteria decision-making method based on d numbers and belief entropy. Int J Fuzzy Syst 21(4):1144–1153

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  18. Kahneman D, Tversky A (1979) Prospect theory: an analysis of decision under risk. Econometrica 47(2):363–391

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  19. Li X, Chen X (2014) Extension of the topsis method based on prospect theory and trapezoidal intuitionistic fuzzy numbers for group decision making. J Syst Sci Syst Eng 23(2):231–247

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  20. Liu P, Jin F, Zhang X, Su Y, Wang M (2011) Research on the multi-attribute decision-making under risk with interval probability based on prospect theory and the uncertain linguistic variables. Knowl-Based Syst 24(4):554–561

    Google Scholar 

  21. Liu D, Yao Y, Li T (2011) Three-way investment decisions with decision-theoretic rough sets. Int J Comput Intell Syst 4(1):66–74

    Google Scholar 

  22. Wang L, Zhang Z-X, Wang Y-M (2015) A prospect theory-based interval dynamic reference point method for emergency decision making. Expert Syst Appl 42(23):9379–9388

    Google Scholar 

  23. Tversky A, Kahneman D (1992) Advances in prospect theory: cumulative representation of uncertainty. J Risk Uncertain 5(4):297–323

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  24. Liu S, Liu X, Qin J (2017) Three-way group decisions based on prospect theory. J Oper Res Soc 1–11

  25. Yao Y (2011) The superiority of three-way decisions in probabilistic rough set models. Inf Sci 181(6):1080–1096

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  26. Qin B, Xiao F (2018) A non-parametric method to determine basic probability assignment based on kernel density estimation. IEEE Access 6:73509–73519

    Google Scholar 

  27. Zheng H, Tang Y (2020) A novel failure mode and effects analysis model using triangular distribution-based basic probability assignment in the evidence theory. IEEE Access 8:66813–66827

    Google Scholar 

  28. Jing M, Tang Y (2021) A new base basic probability assignment approach for conflict data fusion in the evidence theory. Appl Intell 51(2):1056–1068

    Google Scholar 

  29. Fan Y, Ma T, Xiao F (2021) An improved approach to generate generalized basic probability assignment based on fuzzy sets in the open world and its application in multi-source information fusion. Appl Intell 51(6):3718–3735

    Google Scholar 

  30. Fang R, Liao H, Yang J-B, Xu D-L (2021) Generalised probabilistic linguistic evidential reasoning approach for multi-criteria decision-making under uncertainty. J Oper Res Soc 72(1):130–144

    Google Scholar 

  31. Gu J, Zheng Y, Tian X, Xu Z (2021) A decision-making framework based on prospect theory with probabilistic linguistic term sets. J Oper Res Soc 72(4):879–888

    Google Scholar 

  32. Fang R, Liao H (2021) A prospect theory-based evidential reasoning approach for multi-expert multi-criteria decision-making with uncertainty considering the psychological cognition of experts. Int J Fuzzy Syst 23(2):584–598

    Google Scholar 

  33. Wang T, Li H, Hu W, Zhang L (2021) A prospect theory-based three-way conflict analysis approach for agent evaluation. In: 2021 IEEE 24th international conference on computer supported cooperative work in design (CSCWD). IEEE, pp 575–580

  34. Lang G, Luo J, Yao Y (2020) Three-way conflict analysis: a unification of models based on rough sets and formal concept analysis. Knowl-Based Syst 194:105556

    Google Scholar 

  35. Zhang L, Li H, Zhou X, Huang B (2020) Sequential three-way decision based on multi-granular autoencoder features. Inf Sci 507:630–643

    Google Scholar 

  36. Goswami MP, Mitra M, Sen D (2022) Expanding and confusing space of alternatives: a case for lexicographic preferences. J Math Psychol 107:102651

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  37. Yao Y (2022) Symbols-meaning-value (smv) space as a basis for a conceptual model of data science. Int J Approx Reason 144:113–128

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  38. Yuan K, Xu W, Li W, Ding W (2022) An incremental learning mechanism for object classification based on progressive fuzzy three-way concept. Inf Sci 584:127–147

    Google Scholar 

  39. Guo D, Jiang C, Wu P (2022) Three-way decision based on confidence level change in rough set. Int J Approx Reason 143:57–77

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  40. Guo D, Jiang C, Sheng R, Liu S (2022) A novel outcome evaluation model of three-way decision: a change viewpoint. Inf Sci 607:1089–1110

    Google Scholar 

  41. Hu M (2023) Modeling relationships in three-way conflict analysis with subsethood measures. Knowl-Based Syst 260:110131

    Google Scholar 

  42. Xu W, Guo D, Qian Y, Ding W (2022) Two-way concept-cognitive learning method: a fuzzy-based progressive learning. IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems

  43. Yang X, Loua MA, Wu M, Huang L, Gao Q (2023) Multi-granularity stock prediction with sequential three-way decisions. Inf Sci 621:524–544

    Google Scholar 

  44. Pang Q, Wang H, Xu Z (2016) Probabilistic linguistic term sets in multi-attribute group decision making. Inf Sci 369:128–143

    Google Scholar 

  45. Werner KM, Zank H (2019) A revealed reference point for prospect theory. Econ Theory 67(4):731–773

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  46. Zeng X, Martinez TR (2000) Distribution-balanced stratified cross-validation for accuracy estimation. J Exp Theor Artif Intell 12(1):1–12

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  47. Tsai C-F, Hu Y-H (2022) Empirical comparison of supervised learning techniques for missing value imputation. Knowl Inf Syst 64(4):1047–1075

    Google Scholar 

  48. Christopher J (2019) The science of rule-based classifiers. In: 2019 9th international conference on cloud computing, data science & engineering (Confluence). IEEE, pp 299–303

  49. Zhang Z-X, Wang L, Wang Y-M (2018) An emergency decision making method based on prospect theory for different emergency situations. Int J Disaster Risk Sci 9(3):407–420

    Google Scholar 

  50. Denoeux T (2008) A k-nearest neighbor classification rule based on dempster-shafer theory. In: Classic Works of the Dempster-Shafer Theory of Belief Functions vol 1. Springer, pp 737–760

  51. Xu P, Deng Y, Su X, Mahadevan S (2013) A new method to determine basic probability assignment from training data. Knowl-Based Syst 46:69–80

    Google Scholar 

  52. Xu P, Davoine F, Zha H, Denoeux T (2016) Evidential calibration of binary svm classifiers. Int J Approx Reason 72:55–70

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  53. Liu Y-T, Pal NR, Marathe AR, Lin C-T (2017) Weighted fuzzy dempster-shafer framework for multimodal information integration. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 26(1):338–352

    Google Scholar 

  54. Xu P, Su X, Mahadevan S, Li C, Deng Y (2014) A non-parametric method to determine basic probability assignment for classification problems. Appl Intell 41(3):681–693

    Google Scholar 

  55. Song X, Qin B, Xiao F (2021) Fr-kde: a hybrid fuzzy rule-based information fusion method with its application in biomedical classification. Int J Fuzzy Syst 23(2):392–404

    Google Scholar 

  56. Peñafiel S, Baloian N, Sanson H, Pino JA (2020) Applying dempster-shafer theory for developing a flexible, accurate and interpretable classifier. Expert Syst Appl 148:113262

    Google Scholar 

  57. Zhu C, Qin B, Xiao F, Cao Z, Pandey HM (2021) A fuzzy preference-based dempster-shafer evidence theory for decision fusion. Inf Sci 570:306–322

    MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  58. Ranjbar M, Effati S (2022) A new approach for fuzzy classification by a multiple-attribute decision-making model. Soft Comput 26(9):4249–4260

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Funding

None.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Computer Science and Information Systems, BITS Pilani, Secunderabad, Telangana, 500068, India

    Kavya Ramisetty, Jabez Christopher & Subhrakanta Panda

  2. Department of Electrical and Electronics Engineering, BITS Pilani, Secunderabad, Telangana, 500068, India

    Akshat Singh

Authors
  1. Kavya Ramisetty
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Akshat Singh
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jabez Christopher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Subhrakanta Panda
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Contributions

K designed the knowledge-based system framework, performed analysis on tools and data, and wrote the paper. A developed the system and maintained the code deliverables. J suggested the methodology, provided the knowledge that is required for developing the system and understanding the mathematical foundations, and reviewed the paper. S suggested the statistical tests, provided insightful suggestions on system framework, and reviewed the paper.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Jabez Christopher.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no known competing financial interests or personal relationships that could have appeared to influence the work reported in this paper. The authors state that they have no conflicts of interest to disclose.

Ethical approval

Not applicable.

Informed consent

Not applicable.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Ramisetty, K., Singh, A., Christopher, J. et al. Knowledge-based system for three-way decision-making under uncertainty. Knowl Inf Syst 65, 3807–3838 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-023-01882-x

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-023-01882-x

Keywords

Search

Navigation