Papers
Topics
Authors
Recent
Detailed Answer
Quick Answer
Concise responses based on abstracts only
Detailed Answer
Well-researched responses based on abstracts and relevant paper content.
Custom Instructions Pro
Preferences or requirements that you'd like Emergent Mind to consider when generating responses
Gemini 2.5 Flash
Gemini 2.5 Flash 63 tok/s
Gemini 2.5 Pro 49 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 Medium 14 tok/s Pro
GPT-5 High 19 tok/s Pro
GPT-4o 100 tok/s Pro
Kimi K2 174 tok/s Pro
GPT OSS 120B 472 tok/s Pro
Claude Sonnet 4 37 tok/s Pro
2000 character limit reached

Exploring the Combination Rules of D Numbers From a Perspective of Conflict Redistribution (1703.04862v1)

Published 15 Mar 2017 in cs.AI

Abstract: Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence is widely applied to uncertainty modelling and knowledge reasoning because of its advantages in dealing with uncertain information. But some conditions or requirements, such as exclusiveness hypothesis and completeness constraint, limit the development and application of that theory to a large extend. To overcome the shortcomings and enhance its capability of representing the uncertainty, a novel model, called D numbers, has been proposed recently. However, many key issues, for example how to implement the combination of D numbers, remain unsolved. In the paper, we have explored the combination of D Numbers from a perspective of conflict redistribution, and proposed two combination rules being suitable for different situations for the fusion of two D numbers. The proposed combination rules can reduce to the classical Dempster's rule in Dempster-Shafer theory under a certain conditions. Numerical examples and discussion about the proposed rules are also given in the paper.

Citations (15)
List To Do Tasks Checklist Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Collections

Sign up for free to add this paper to one or more collections.

Summary

We haven't generated a summary for this paper yet.

Dice Question Streamline Icon: https://streamlinehq.com

Follow-Up Questions

We haven't generated follow-up questions for this paper yet.

Authors (2)