Elsevier

Information Sciences

Volume 178, Issue 5, 1 March 2008, Pages 1355-1371
Information Sciences

Attribute reduction based on evidence theory in incomplete decision systems

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2007.10.006Get rights and content

Abstract

Attribute reduction is a basic issue in knowledge representation and data mining. This paper deals with attribute reduction in incomplete information systems and incomplete decision systems based on Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence. The concepts of plausibility reduct and belief reduct in incomplete information systems as well as relative plausibility reduct and relative belief reduct in incomplete decision systems are introduced. It is shown that in an incomplete information system an attribute set is a belief reduct if and only if it is a classical reduct and a plausibility consistent set must be a classical consistent set. In a consistent incomplete decision system, the concepts of relative reduct, relative plausibility reduct, and relative belief reduct are all equivalent. In an inconsistent incomplete decision system, an attribute set is a relative plausibility reduct if and only if it is a relative reduct, a plausibility consistent set must be a belief consistent set, and a belief consistent set is not a plausibility consistent set in general.

Introduction

The theory of rough sets, proposed by Pawlak [39], is an extension of classical set theory for the study of intelligent systems characterized by insufficient and incomplete information. With more than twenty years development, rough set theory has been found to have very successful applications in the fields of artificial intelligence such as expert systems, machine learning, pattern recognition, decision analysis, process control, and knowledge discovery in databases.

A basic concept related to rough set is information system (attribute-value system). Most applications based on rough set theory can fall into the attribute-value representation model. According to whether or not a system is deterministic, information systems can be classified into two categories: complete and incomplete. A complete information system is a system in which the values of all the attributes are deterministic. By an incomplete information system we mean a system that the values of some of the attributes are not known, i.e., missing or partially known, an incomplete information system is also called a nondeterministic information system [38].

The basic idea of rough set theory is knowledge acquisition in the sense of unravelling a set of decision rules from an information system via an objective knowledge induction process for decision making. Various approaches using rough set theory have been proposed to induce decision rules from data sets taking the form of complete decision systems [8], [10], [20], [39], [40], [41], [42], [43], [44], [53], [56], [66], [73]. Due to the rampant existence of incomplete information systems in real life, many authors employed extensions of Pawlak’s rough set model to reason in incomplete information systems [5], [7], [9], [11], [12], [22], [23], [25], [26], [28], [30], [31], [36], [37], [38], [46], [53], [54], [57], [68]. For example, Greco et al. [7], Grzymala-Busse [9], Kryszkiewicz [22], [23], used similarity relations in incomplete information systems with missing values. By analyzing similarity classes defined by Kryszkiewicz, Leung and Li [25] introduced the concept of maximal consistent block technique for rule acquisition in incomplete information systems. To unravel certain and possible decision rules in incomplete information systems, Leung et al. [26] developed a new rough set approximations by defining a new information structure called labelled blocks. Other researchers, such as Deng et al. [6], Hong et al. [13], [14], Jensen and Shen [18], Korvin et al. [21], Liu et al. [32], Slowinski and Stefanowski [53], Wang et al. [60] and Wu et al. [63], used rough set models to handle fuzzy and quantitative data.

It is well-known that not all conditional attributes in an information system are necessary to depict the decision attribute before decision rules are generated. Knowledge reduction in the sense of reducing attributes is thus an outstanding contribution made by rough set research to data analysis [40]. It is performed in information systems by means of the notion of a reduct based on a specialization of the general notion of independence due to Marczewski [33]. Many types of attribute reduction have been proposed in complete information systems and complete decision systems [1], [2], [10], [17], [19], [20], [24], [27], [34], [35], [40], [43], [50], [51], [52], [55], [56], [58], [59], [69], [71], each of them aimed at some basic requirement. In recent years, more attention has been paid to attribute reduction in incomplete information systems, incomplete decision systems, covering information systems, and fuzzy information systems in rough set research [3], [11], [15], [16], [22], [23], [25], [26], [32], [72].

Another important method used to deal with uncertainty in information systems is the Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence. It was originated by Dempster’s concepts of lower and upper probabilities [4], and extended by Shafer [45] as a theory. The basic representational structure in this theory is a belief structure which consists of a family of subsets, called focal elements, with associated individual positive weights summing to one. The primitive numeric measures derived from the belief structure are a dual pair of belief and plausibility functions.

There are strong connections between rough set theory and Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence. It has been demonstrated that various belief structures are associated with various rough approximation spaces such that the different dual pairs of lower and upper approximation operators induced by the rough approximation spaces may be used to interpret the corresponding dual pairs of belief and plausibility functions induced by the belief structures [29], [30], [47], [48], [49], [61], [67]. The Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence may be used to analyze knowledge acquisition in information systems. For example, Zhang et al. [70] proposed the concepts of belief reduct and plausibility reduct in complete information systems without decisions. Wu et al. [64] discussed knowledge reduction in complete decision systems via the Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence. Lingras and Yao [30] employed two different generalizations of rough set models to generate plausibilistic rules with incomplete databases instead of probabilistic rules generated by a Pawlak’s rough set model with complete decision tables. Wu and Mi [62] studied knowledge reduction in incomplete information systems without decisions within evidence theory. We attempt to investigate in this paper attribute reduction in incomplete decision systems within the Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence.

In the next section, we give some basic notions related to incomplete information systems and incomplete decision systems, we also review rough set approximations in incomplete information systems. Some basic notions of evidence theory are introduced in Section 3. The concepts of belief reducts and plausibility reducts in incomplete information systems are proposed in Section 4. In Section 5, we study relative belief reducts and relative plausibility reducts in consistent and inconsistent incomplete decision systems and discuss the relationships among the new concepts of reducts and some existing ones. We then conclude the paper with a summary and outlook for further research in Section 6.

Section snippets

Incomplete information systems and rough set approximations

The notion of information systems (sometimes called data tables, information tables, attribute-value systems, knowledge representation systems etc.) provides a convenient tool for the representation of objects in terms of their attribute values.

A complete information system (CIS) S is a pair (U, AT), where U = {x1, x2,  , xn} is a nonempty finite set of objects called the universe of discourse and AT = {a1, a2,  , am} is a nonempty finite set of attributes such that a:U  Va for any a  AT, i.e., a(x)  Va, x  U

Belief structures and belief functions

The Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence, also called the “evidence theory” or the “belief function theory”, is treated as a promising method of dealing with uncertainty in intelligence systems. The basic representational structure in the Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence is a belief structure [45].

Definition 1

Let U be a nonempty finite set, a set function m:P(U)[0,1] is referred to as a basic probability assignment if it satisfies axioms (M1) and (M2):(M1)m()=0,(M2)AUm(A)=1.

The value m(A) represents

Attribute reduction in incomplete information systems

In this section, we propose the concepts of belief and plausibility reducts in IISs and compare them with the concept of classical reduct.

Definition 3

Let S = (U, AT) be an IIS, then

  • (1)

    an attribute subset A  AT is referred to as a classical consistent set of S if RA = RAT. If A  AT is a classical consistent set of S and no proper subset of A is a classical consistent set of S, then A is referred to as a classical reduct of S. Thus a classical reduct of S is a minimal subset A  AT satisfying RA = RAT.

  • (2)

    an attribute subset A

Attribute reduction in incomplete decision systems

In this section, we introduce the concepts of relative belief reduct and relative plausibility reduct in an IDS and compare them with the existing concept of relative reduct.

Let S = (U, C  {d}) be an IDS and B  C, denoteB(x)={d(y):ySB(x)},xU.B(x) is called the generalized decision of x w.r.t. B in S. S is said to be consistent if |∂C(x)| = 1 for all x  U, otherwise it is inconsistent.

Definition 4

Let S = (U, C  {d}) be an IDS and B  C. Then

  • (1)

    B is referred to as a relative consistent set of S if ∂B(x) = C(x) for all x  U

Conclusions

An incomplete information system is an attribute-value system in which some of the attribute values are non-deterministic, i.e., missing or partially known. We make an assumption in this paper that a non-deterministic value in the system is a set of possible values of the attribute for the object. Obviously such an incomplete information system can be transformed into a set-valued information system.

We have discussed in this paper attribute reduction via the Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence

Acknowledgements

The author would like to thank the anonymous referees for their valuable comments and suggestions. This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 60373078, No. 60673096 and No. 60773174).

References (73)

  • Y. Leung et al.

    Knowledge acquisition in incomplete information systems: a rough set approach

    European Journal of Operational Research

    (2006)
  • M. Liu et al.

    Reduction method based on a new fuzzy rough set in fuzzy information system and its applications to scheduling problems

    Computers and Mathematics with Applications

    (2006)
  • J.-S. Mi et al.

    Approaches to knowledge reduction based on variable precision rough sets model

    Information Sciences

    (2004)
  • E. Orlowska

    Semantics analysis of inductive reasoning

    Theoretical Computer Science

    (1986)
  • E. Orlowska et al.

    Representation of nondeterministic information

    Theoretical Computer Science

    (1984)
  • Z. Pawlak et al.

    Rudiments of rough sets

    Information Sciences

    (2007)
  • Z. Pawlak et al.

    Rough sets: some extensions

    Information Sciences

    (2007)
  • R. Slowinski et al.

    Rough classification in incomplete information systems

    Mathematical and Computer Modelling

    (1989)
  • P. Terlecki et al.

    On the relation between rough set reducts and jumping emerging patterns

    Information Sciences

    (2007)
  • X. Wang et al.

    Learning fuzzy rules from fuzzy samples based on rough set technique

    Information Sciences

    (2007)
  • W.-Z. Wu et al.

    Knowledge reduction in random information systems via Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence

    Information Sciences

    (2005)
  • Y.Y. Yao

    A decision theoretic framework for approximating concepts

    International Journal of Man–Machine Study

    (1992)
  • Y.Y. Yao et al.

    Interpretations of belief functions in the theory of rough sets

    Information Sciences

    (1998)
  • W.-X. Zhang et al.

    Incomplete information system and its optimal selections

    Computers and Mathematics with Applications

    (2004)
  • Y. Zhao et al.

    Data analysis based on discernibility and indiscernibility

    Information Sciences

    (2007)
  • W. Zhu et al.

    Reduction and axiomization of covering generalized rough sets

    Information Sciences

    (2003)
  • W. Ziarko

    Variable precision rough set model

    Journal of Computer and System Sciences

    (1993)
  • J.A. Bazan

    Comparison of dynamic and non-dynamic rough set methods for extracting laws from decision tables

  • D. Chen et al.

    A new approach to attribute reduction of consistent and inconsistent covering decision systems with covering rough sets

    Information Sciences

    (2007)
  • A.P. Dempster

    Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multivalued mapping

    Annals of Mathematical Statistics

    (1967)
  • S. Demri et al.

    Incomplete Information: Structure, Inference, Complexity

    (2002)
  • S. Greco et al.

    Handling missing values in rough set analysis of multi-attribute and multi-criteria decision problems

  • S. Greco et al.

    Rough approximation by dominance relation

    International Journal of Intelligent Systems

    (2002)
  • J. Grzymala-Busse

    A rough set approach to data with missing attribute values

  • J. Grzymala-Busse et al.

    Classification strategies using certain and possible rules

  • T.P. Hong et al.

    Knowledge acquisition from quantitative data using the rough-set theory

    Intelligent Data Analysis

    (2000)
  • Cited by (197)

    • Lattices arising from fuzzy coverings

      2023, Fuzzy Sets and Systems
    • Belief functions and rough sets: Survey and new insights

      2022, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning
    View all citing articles on Scopus
    View full text