Combining belief functions when evidence conflicts
By Catherine K. Murphy. Decision Support Systems, 2000
1,024 citations recorded by the source corpus.
Subfields: Artificial Intelligence, Management Science and Operations Research
View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/415f737126be3337675fea042bff979a3e5748b2
How researchers see this paper
The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.
In Artificial Intelligence
- Jianbo Yang
- Dongling Xu
- Kwai-Sang Chin
- Malcolm John Beynon
- Fuyuan Xiao
- Yingming Wang
- Yan Zhao
- Yiyu Yao
In Management Science and Operations Research
- Dongling Xu
- Jianbo Yang
- Kwai-Sang Chin
- Yingming Wang
- Malcolm John Beynon
- Elias Z. Tragos
- Alexandros G. Fragkiadakis
- Fuyuan Xiao
Citations in the corpus
- The evidential reasoning approach for MADA under both probabilistic and fuzzy uncertainties (2006, background): “S theory and the combination rule can lead to irrational conclusions in the aggregation of multiple pieces of evidence in conflict (Murphy, 2000).”
- Multi-sensor data fusion based on the belief divergence measure of evidences and the belief entropy (2019, methodology): “’s weighted average approach [80] overcame the weakness of Murphy’s method [79] to some extent.”
- Evidential reasoning rule for evidence combination (2013, background): “This lack of definition has led to a counter-intuitive problem when the rule is used to combine evidence in high (or near complete) conflict [46,23,16,32].”
- A Survey on Security Threats and Detection Techniques in Cognitive Radio Networks (2013, background): “However, DempsterShafer is criticized to have low performance, if there are high decision conflicts among the users (see [94]).”
- Advances and Applications of DSmT for Information Fusion (2004, neutral): “These combination rules are the most of time compared following the properties of the operator such as associativity, commutativity, linearity, anonymity and on special and simple cases of experts responses [1, 22, 24].”
- The Role of the DS/AHP in Identifying Inter-Group Alliances and Majority Rule Within Group Decision Making (2006, background): “The larger this measure, the more conflict in the sources of evidence, and subsequently the less sense there is in their combination (Hegarat-Mascle et al. 1997; Murphy 2000).”
- Analyzing the degree of conflict among belief functions (2006, neutral): “E-mail address: w.liu@qub.ac.uk (W. Liu).”