4.7 Article

Feature selection and approximate reasoning of large-scale set-valued decision tables based on α-dominance-based quantitative rough sets

Journal

INFORMATION SCIENCES
Volume 378, Issue -, Pages 328-347

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ins.2016.06.028

Keywords

Set-valued decision tables; alpha-dominance relation; Quantitative rough sets; Feature selection; Approximate reasoning; Disjunctive; Conjunctive

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61005042]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Shaanxi Province [2014JQ8348]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Set-valued data are a common type of data for characterizing uncertain and missing information. Traditional dominance-based rough sets can not efficiently deal with large-scale set-valued decision tables and usually neglect the disjunctive semantics of sets. In this paper, we propose a general framework of feature selection and approximate reasoning for large-scale set-valued information tables by integrating quantitative rough sets and dominance-based rough sets. Firstly, we define two new partial orders for set-valued data via the conjunctive and disjunctive semantics of a set. Secondly, based on a-disjunctive dominance relation and a-conjunctive dominance relation defined by the inclusion measure, we present a-dominance-based quantitative rough set models for these two types of set-valued decision tables. Furthermore, we study the issue of feature selection in set valued decision tables by employing a-dominance-based quantitative rough set models and discuss the relationships between the relative reductions and discernibility matrices. We also present approximate reasoning models based on a-dominance-based quantitative rough sets. Finally, the application of the approach is illustrated by some real-world data sets. (C) 2016 Elsevier Inc. 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