4.7 Article

Three-way conflict analysis: A unification of models based on rough sets and formal concept analysis

Journal

KNOWLEDGE-BASED SYSTEMS
Volume 194, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.knosys.2020.105556

Keywords

Conflict analysis; Formal concept analysis; Rough sets; Three-valued situation table; Three-way decision

Funding

  1. China Scholarship Council [201808430120]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61603063]
  3. Hunan Provincial Natural Science Foundation, PR China [2018JJ3518, 2018JJ2027]
  4. Hunan Provincial Education Department Foundation, PR China [19B027]
  5. Scientific Research Fund of Hunan Provincial Key Laboratory of Mathematical Modelling and Analysis in Engineering, PR China [2018MMAEZD10]
  6. NSERC, Canada

Ask authors/readers for more resources

The Pawlak model of conflict analysis uses three-valued ratings (i.e., positive, neutral, and negative) of a set of agents on a set of issues. Several extensions to the Pawlak model, namely, rough sets based qualitative and quantitative models, formal concept analysis based quantitative models, and three-way conflict analysis models, have been proposed in recent years. The main objective of this paper is to propose a more general model that unifies these existing models in an evaluation-based framework of three-way decision. The proposed model uses a pair of evaluations, one for support and the other for opposition, for trisecting the set of agents. By considering qualitative and quantitative evaluations, we derive a qualitative model and a quantitative model of three-way conflict analysis, respectively. The corresponding two models built based on rough sets and the corresponding two models built based on formal concept analysis are special cases. A unification of existing models provides insights into a common structure in formulating three-way conflict analysis with different choices of evaluations. We illustrate an application of the three-way conflict analysis model in making development plans for Gansu Province in China. (C) 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available