主管：中国科学院
主办：中国优选法统筹法与经济数学研究会
　　　中国科学院科技战略咨询研究院
中国管理科学

中国管理科学 ›› 2010, Vol. 18 ›› Issue (4): 152-157.

• 论文 • 上一篇    下一篇

一种基于一致性证据冲突的证据合成方法

梁昌勇1, 叶春森1,2, 张恩桥1   

  1. 1. 合肥工业大学管理学院, 安徽合肥230009;
    2. 安徽大学管理学院, 安徽合肥230039
  • 收稿日期:2009-09-03 修回日期:2010-07-13 出版日期:2010-08-30 发布日期:2010-08-30
  • 作者简介:梁昌勇(1965- ),男(汉族),安徽肥西人,合肥工业大学管理学院教授,博士生导师,研究方向:不确定性决策、智能计算.
  • 基金资助:

    国家自然科学基金资助项目(70771037;70871034)

A New Method of Combination Rules of Evidences Based on Concordance Evidences Conflict

LIANG Chang-yong1, YE Chun-sen1,2, ZHANG En-qiao1   

  1. 1. School of Management, Hefei University of Technology, Hefei 230009, China;
    2. School of Management, Anhuiu University, Hefei 230039, China
  • Received:2009-09-03 Revised:2010-07-13 Online:2010-08-30 Published:2010-08-30

PDF (PC)

1602

被引次数

12

摘要： 针对Dempster-shafer证据合成结果与直觉决策认识之间的不一致性,提出一种新的证据合成规则。从决策的具体背景入手,描述Dempster-shafer证据合成公式产生悖论的两种情况,利用证据冲突的定义分析产生悖论的原因,提出基于一致性证据冲突的证据合成公式。该公式能减低决策中"一票否决制"和"众口烁金"等模式中决策信息放大或缩小而造成的误差。实例分析和实验结果表明,新的合成公式比较符合直观和常理,并较好地解决了上述冲突证据的合成问题。

关键词: 证据理论, 证据冲突, 决策模式, 合成悖论

Abstract: Aiming to the problem of conflict from intuition decision making and the combination result of dempste-rshafer,a new combination rule was proposed in this paper based on the classes of evidence conflicts. The two types of absurdity were firstly presented according to demand of decision-making in real world,which are "one-vote-down system" and "public clamor can confound right and wrong". Some errors were analyzed,which is caused by the irrational definition of evidence conflicts in view of information streng thened or lessened1 Finally,two numerical examples and experiments were applied toil lustrate the validity of the proposed method.

Key words: evidence theory, evidence conflict, decision-making pattern, absurdity of combination

中图分类号: