一种改进的证据合成公式

针对Dempster公式,Yager公式和其他几种证据合成公式存在的不足,提出了一种改进的证据合成公式。该公式同时兼顾了多路冲突性和不冲突性证据,冲突性证据按加权平均合成,不冲突性证据按与运算合成并反映了相互间交叉融合的程度。改进的合成公式不仅反映了证据协调重合程度,保持了证据的聚焦趋向性,还能合成高度冲突的证据,提供的两个例子证明该合成公式具有很好的实用效果。     

D-S证据理论在数据融合中的应用及改进

对证据合成的基本原则和D-S合成公式作了分析,针对D-S算法实现过程中存在的失效问题提出了解决的方法,对该理论的不足采用了修正的合成规则,通过实例运算表明该方法能够对传感器提供的不一致证据进行组合,并使组合结果更加直观.     

基于证据可信度的D-S理论改进方法

针对当前D-S理论改进方法中可信度计算不够准确的问题,通过引入证据源可靠度,提出一种新的证据可信度计算方法。给出基于新可信度计算方法的三个改进合成公式,能够处理高度冲突的证据,并快速收敛到合理结果。通过算例对可信度计算方法的准确性和改进合成公式的有效性进行了验证。     

一种有效的证据理论合成公式

D-S证据理论是一种有用的不确定性推理方法，由于证据合成公式存在不足，影响了证据理论的应用。本文提出了一种有效的合成公式，即把支持证据冲突的概率按各个命题的平均支持程度加权进行分配。新的合成公式提高了合成结果的可靠性与合理性，即使对于高度冲突的证据，也能够取得理想的合成结果。     

证据算法改进及在并行故障诊断的应用

针对D-S证据理论合成公式处理并发故障诊断中高冲突证据时存在的不足,提出了一种改进的证据组合方法:考虑焦元属性之间及证据之间的相互关联性,利用证据的相似度给每个证据确定支持度,再采用组合公式融合.并结合某型飞机燃油系统并发故障诊断实例验证了算法的有效性.     

加权平均法解决证据理论中的失效问题

D-S证据理论是一种重要的处理不确定性问题的方法。但是,证据合成规则在处理冲突证据时产生的失效问题,影响了证据理论的应用。针对证据失效问题,国内外的各种改进方法主要分为对融合公式的改进和对融合模型的改进两个方向。本文在Murphy规则和邓勇方法的基础上提出了一种新的对证据本身进行加权平均,然后融合的方法来解决冲突问题。     

基于证据理论的多传感器加权融合改进方法

针对多传感器系统中高冲突证据合成问题,考虑到传感器同时具有固有可靠性与实时可靠性的特点,基于证据理论提出了一种新的多传感器加权融合方法;该方法通过计算证据间的相似矩阵获取证据的后验权重,并结合根据传感器固有可靠性预先分配的先验权重,得到证据体的复合权重,然后据此对原始证据进行加权平均,最后利用D-S证据组合规则合成加权平均后的证据;实例仿真表明,与D-S、Yager、Murphy等方法相比,该方法能够更好地处理高冲突证据,且收敛速度更快。     

一种改进的证据合成方法

D-S证据理论不能很好地描述证据之间的冲突, 而且证据高度冲突时合成规则会得出反直观的结果。针对这一问题, 提出了一种改进的证据合成方法。首先建立余弦相似度空间, 利用证据向量之间的夹角余弦度量证据相似性程度, 通过冲突证据检测因子对其进行分类; 然后引入冲突比例因子决定证据的修正方法, 利用相似度对其进行局部修正或全局修正; 最后将修正后的证据代入D-S公式进行合成。应用实例证明, 该方法能够判定冲突证据, 实现冲突证据和相似性证据的合成, 具有较好的稳定性、分类精度和收敛速度。     

一种新的基于证据权重的D-S改进算法

D-S(Dempster-Shafer)证据理论是一种有效的不确定性推理方法,但在组合高冲突证据时,D-S证据理论得到的结果却往往有悖常理。为了解决冲突证据的合成问题,考虑到不同的证据在合成过程中的重要程度不同,提出了一种新的基于证据权重的D-S改进算法。该方法首先引入一个度量证据体间相似度的证据距离函数,建立相应的证据距离矩阵,求出系统中各证据到证据集的平均欧式距离,然后通过信任函数来获得描述各证据重要程度的权重系数并对证据源进行修正,最后利用D-S组合规则对修正后的证据进行合成。通过算例的分析以及与其它改进算法的比较,验证了新方法的有效性和优越性。     

基于决策距离测量的D-S证据理论冲突处理方法

D-S(Dempster-Shafer)证据理论作为不确定性推理的有效工具,广泛应用于多传感器信息融合领域[1]。而D-S证据理论在证据高度冲突时,应用D-S合成规则可能得到有悖常理的结论。针对这一问题,从分析引起D-S冲突问题的原因入手,引入决策距离测量概念求取高度支持的最大传感器连接组,剔除互不支持的传感器信息,在此基础上应用D-S证据合成规则进行多传感器信息融合。实例表明,该方法能够克服D-S冲突问题,保证信息融合结果的准确度。     

基于冲突强度和非正则化的证据合成方法研究

证据推理广泛应用于不确定推理和数据融合等许多方面,但D-S合成规则对于高冲突证据的处理不是十分合理的。论文在分析D-S合成规则以及一些改进方法的基础上,提出了一种基于冲突强度和非正则化的冲突证据合成规则,并引入确定度的概念来衡量合成的效果。仿真实验结果表明,该规则比D-S合成规则有了明显的改进。     

Simplification of a fuzzy mechanism with rule combination

 In this paper, a systematic approach to reduce the complexity of a fuzzy controller with the rule combination of a fuzzy rule base is presented. The complexity of a fuzzy controller is defined to be the computation load in this work. The proposed rule combination approach can be applied to the fuzzy mechanisms with product–sum and min–max inferences. With the input membership functions indexed in sequence for each input variable, the n-dimensional fuzzy rule table is represented as vectors so that the combination of the fuzzy rule base is realizable. Then the adjacent fuzzy rules with the same output consequent are combined to have smaller size of fuzzy rule base. The fuzzy mechanism with the combined rule table is shown to have the same output with the original fuzzy mechanism (without rule combination). Thus, in many applications, the rule combination approach presented in this paper can be used to reduce the complexity of the fuzzy mechanism without degrading the performances. Moreover, the Don't Care fuzzy rules are defined and it is indicated that the number of the necessary fuzzy rules might be decreased when the Don't Care fuzzy rules are taken into consideration. Further, the properties of the simplification approach for the fuzzy rule base of the fuzzy mechanism are discussed.     

一种基于近邻思想的证据合成规则

D-S证据合成规则在遇到冲突证据时常有悖常理。针对现有规则的不足,通过理论分析和对几种常用组合规则的比较,提出一种基于近邻思想的冲突证据修正规则,综合考虑证据源的有效性和证据源间的距离,进行信息融合。实验结果表明,该规则对合理的合成方向具有较快的收敛速度,在证据源完全冲突的情况下也能适用。     

信任函数组合与局部冲突处理

在证据理论框架中,数据融合是将几个来自不同证据源的信任函数组合成一个信任函数,Dempster组合规则是人们常用的方法,但由于此规则是通过按比例放大组合后焦元的基本信任指派值而使其满足信任函数的标准定义,尽管这一标准化方法有逻辑上的解释,但还是招致诸多批评,并提出了一些修正的组合规则。Dempster组合规则尤其在较强冲突情形下其组合结果是不符合常理的,因此不同证据源的冲突处理是信息融合的主要问题。该文通过分析比较已有的主要组合规则,提出了一种处理冲突的新方法--局部冲突处理法,此方法可克服已有方法的缺点,而且组合结果更加合理。     

Robust combination rules for evidence theory

Dempster’s rule of combination in evidence theory is a powerful tool for reasoning under uncertainty. Since Zadeh highlighted the counter-intuitive behaviour of Dempster’s rule, a plethora of alternative combination rules have been proposed. In this paper, we propose a general formulation for combination rules in evidence theory as a weighted sum of the conjunctive and disjunctive rules. Moreover, with the aim of automatically accounting for the reliability of sources of information, we propose a class of robust combination rules (RCR) in which the weights are a function of the conflict between two pieces of information. The interpretation given to the weight of conflict between two BPAs is an indicator of the relative reliability of the sources: if the conflict is low, then both sources are reliable, and if the conflict is high, then at least one source is unreliable. We show some interesting properties satisfied by the RCRs, such as positive belief reinforcement or the neutral impact of vacuous belief, and establish links with other classes of rules. The behaviour of the RCRs over non-exhaustive frames of discernment is also studied, as the RCRs implicitly perform a kind of automatic deconditioning through the simple use of the disjunctive operator. We focus our study on two special cases: (1) RCR-S, a rule with symmetric coefficients that is proved to be unique and (2) RCR-L, a rule with asymmetric coefficients based on a logarithmic function. Their behaviours are then compared to some classical combination rules proposed thus far in the literature, on a few examples, and on Monte Carlo simulations.     

A flexible rule for evidential combination in Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence

Dempster’s combination rule in Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence is widely used to combine multiple pieces of evidence. However, when the evidence is severely conflicting, the result could be counter-intuitive. Thus, many alternative combination rules have been proposed to address this issue. Nevertheless, the existing ones sometimes behave not very well. This may be because they do not hold some essential properties. To this end, this paper firstly identifies some of the important properties. Then, following the cues from these properties, we propose a novel evidential combination rule as a remediation of Dempster’s combination rule in Dempster–Shafertheory. Our new rule is based on the concept of complete conflict (we introduced in this paper), Dempster’s combination rule, and the concept of evidence weight. Moreover, we illustrate the effectiveness of our new rule by using it to successfully resolve well-known Zadeh’s counter-example, which is against Dempster’s combination rule. Finally, we confirm the advantages of our method over the existing methods through some examples.     

Simple analytic rules for model reduction and PID controller tuning

The aim of this paper is to present analytic rules for PID controller tuning that are simple and still result in good closed-loop behavior. The starting point has been the IMC-PID tuning rules that have achieved widespread industrial acceptance. The rule for the integral term has been modified to improve disturbance rejection for integrating processes. Furthermore, rather than deriving separate rules for each transfer function model, there is a just a single tuning rule for a first-order or second-order time delay model. Simple analytic rules for model reduction are presented to obtain a model in this form, including the “half rule” for obtaining the effective time delay.     

A new belief rule base knowledge representation scheme and inference methodology using the evidential reasoning rule for evidence combination

In this paper, we extend the original belief rule-base inference methodology using the evidential reasoning approach by i) introducing generalised belief rules as knowledge representation scheme, and ii) using the evidential reasoning rule for evidence combination in the rule-base inference methodology instead of the evidential reasoning approach. The result is a new rule-base inference methodology which is able to handle a combination of various types of uncertainty.Generalised belief rules are an extension of traditional rules where each consequent of a generalised belief rule is a belief distribution defined on the power set of propositions, or possible outcomes, that are assumed to be collectively exhaustive and mutually exclusive. This novel extension allows any combination of certain, uncertain, interval, partial or incomplete judgements to be represented as rule-based knowledge. It is shown that traditional IF-THEN rules, probabilistic IF-THEN rules, and interval rules are all special cases of the new generalised belief rules.The rule-base inference methodology has been updated to enable inference within generalised belief rule bases. The evidential reasoning rule for evidence combination is used for the aggregation of belief distributions of rule consequents.