4.7 Article

Data classification using evidence reasoning rule

期刊

KNOWLEDGE-BASED SYSTEMS
卷 116, 期 -, 页码 144-151

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.knosys.2016.11.001

关键词

Date classification; Dempster-Shafer evidence theory (DST); Evidential reasoning (ER) rule; Reliability and weight of evidence; Sequential linear programming (SLP)

资金

  1. NSFC [61433001, 61374123, 61573076, 61573275, 71573071, U1509203]
  2. Zhejiang Province Research Program Project of Commonweal Technology Application [201601071]
  3. University Students' Scientific and Technological Innovation Activity Plan of Zhejiang province (Xin-Miao Talent plan)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In Dempster-Shafer evidence theory (DST) based classifier design, Dempster's combination (DC) rule is commonly used as a multi-attribute classifier to combine evidence collected from different attributes. The main aim of this paper is to present a classification method using a novel combination rule i.e., the evidence reasoning (ER) rule. As an improvement of the DC rule, the newly proposed ER rule defines the reliability and weight of evidence. The former indicates the ability of attribute or its evidence to provide correct assessment for classification problem, and the latter reflects the relative importance of evidence in comparison with other evidence when they need to be combined. The ER rule-based classification procedure is expatiated from evidence acquisition and estimation of evidence reliability and weight to combination of evidence. It is a purely data-driven approach without making any assumptions about the relationships between attributes and class memberships, and the specific statistic distributions of attribute data. Experiential results on five popular benchmark databases taken from University of California Irvine (UCI) machine learning database show high classification accuracy that is competitive with other classical and mainstream classifiers. (C) 2016 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