4.7 Article

Partial classification in the belief function framework

期刊

KNOWLEDGE-BASED SYSTEMS
卷 214, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.knosys.2021.106742

关键词

Dempster-Shafer theory; Evidence theory; Supervised classification; Decision-making; Set-valued classification; OWA operator

资金

  1. China Scholarship Council
  2. Shandong Provincial Natural Science Foundation, China [ZR2018PF009]
  3. Labex MS2T - French Government through the program Investments for the future'' by the National Agency for Research, France [ANR-11-IDEX-0004-02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Partial or set-valued classification assigns instances to sets of classes to reduce misclassification while providing useful information. By extending the utility matrix using an Ordered Weighted Average operator, decision makers' attitude towards imprecision can be modeled. Experiments show the superiority of partial classification compared to single-class assignment and classification with rejection.
Partial, or set-valued classification assigns instances to sets of classes, making it possible to reduce the probability of misclassification while still providing useful information. This paper reviews approaches to partial classification based on the Dempster-Shafer theory of belief functions. To define the utility of set-valued predictions, we propose to extend the utility matrix using an Ordered Weighted Average operator, allowing us to model the decision maker's attitude towards imprecision using a single parameter. Various decision criteria are analyzed comprehensively. In particular, two main strategies are distinguished: partial classification based on complete preorders among partial assignments, and partial preorders among complete assignments. Experiments with UCI and simulated Gaussian data sets show the superiority of partial classification in terms of average utility, as compared to single-class assignment and classification with rejection. (C) 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据