Cluster Computing

, Volume 22, Supplement 3, pp 6589–6598 | Cite as

Strong conflicting evidences fusion based on belief interval distance measurement

  • Jie LiEmail author
  • Wei Wang
  • Xiaoli Gao
  • Liang Zhou


To suppress the counterintuitive results which are caused by the combination of strong conflicting bodies of evidence, we proposed a modified evidence combination. First of all, we found out that the belief interval on the evidence theory had shown the disadvantages of uncertainty of the evidence expression. And based on the differences of belief interval of all the elements in the identification frame between two bodies of evidence, we constructed a new distance measure to represent the conflict between bodies, and theoretically proved its rationality. Secondly, based on the measured distance result, we calculated the weight of multiple bodies of evidence participating in the fusion. And finally, the integration of conflicting evidence was resolved through fusion of the weighted average evidence. Numerical experiments show that when the conflict is weak, the new method is as same as the other existing advanced calculations, or similar with them. And when the conflict is strong, it can overcome the interference of strong conflicting evidences effectively and conform the results of intuitive cognition. Besides, its convergence speed is much faster.


DS evidence theory Strong conflicting Belief interval Distance measure 


  1. 1.
    Dempster, A.P.: Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multiplicated mapping. Ann. Math. Stat. 38(2), 325–339 (1967)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Shafer, G.: A mathematical theory of evidence. Princeton University Press, New Jersey (1976)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Zadeh, L.A.: Review of Shafer’s a mathematical theory of evidence. AI Mag. 5(3), 81–83 (1984)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Zadeh, L.A.: A simple view of the Dempster–Shafer theory of evidence and its implication for the rule of combination. AI Mag. 2(7), 85–90 (1986)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Smarandache, F., Dezert, J.: Applications and advances of DSmT for information fusion. American Research Press, Rehoboth (2009)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lefevre, E., Colot, O., Vannoorenberghe, P.: Belief functions combination and conflict management. Inf. Fusion 3(2), 149–162 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lefevre, E., Elouedi, Z.: How to preserve the conflict as an alarm in the combination of belief function. Decis. Support Syst. 56, 326–333 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Smets, P.: Data fusion in the transferable belief model. In: Proceedings of of the 3rd International Conference on Information Fusion. Sunny vale, CA, USA: ISIF, pp. 21–33 (2000)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Murphy, C.K.: Combining belief functions when evidence conflicts. Decis. Support Syst. 29(1), 1–9 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Yager, R.R.: Comparing approximate reasoning and probabilistic reasoning using the Dempster–Shafer framework. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 50(5), 812–821 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yager, R.R., Alajlan, N.: Dempster–Shafer belief structures for decision making under uncertainty. Knowl. Based Syst. 80, 58–66 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Jousselme, A.L., Grenier, D., Bosse, E.: A new distance between two bodies of evidence. Inf. Fusion 2(2), 91–101 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Tessem, B.: Approximations for efficient computation in the theory of evidence. Artif. Intell. 61, 315–329 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Xu, Z., Luo, X., Mei, L., Hu, C.: Measuring the semantic discrimination capability of association relations. Concurr. Comput. 26(2), 380–395 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Yu, C., Yang, J.H., Yang, D.B., et al.: An improved conflicting evidence combination approach based on a new supporting probability distance. Expert Syst. Appl. 42(12), 5139–5149 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Han, D., Dezert, J., Yang Y.: New distance measures of evidence based on belief intervals. In: International Conference on Belief Functions, pp. 432–441 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Jousselme, A., Maupin, P.: Distances in evidence theory: comprehensive survey and generalizations. Int. J. Approx. Reason. 53(2), 118–145 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Liu, Z.-G., Pan, Q., Dezert, J.: Evidential classifier for imprecise data based on belief functions. Knowl. Based Syst. 52, 246–257 (2013)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Chebbah, M., Martin, A., Yaghlane, B.B.: Combining partially independent belief function. Decis. Support Syst. 73, 37–46 (2015)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Yager, R.R.: Fuzzy relations between Dempster-Shafer belief structures. Knowl.-Based Syst. 105, 60–67 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Irpino, A., Verde, R.: Dynamic clustering of interval data using a Wasserstein-based distance. Pattern Recognit. Lett. 29(11), 1648–1658 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Tran, L., Duckstein, L.: Comparison of fuzzy numbers using a fuzzy distance measure. Fuzzy 130(3), 331–341 (2002)MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Yang, Y., Han, D.Q.: A new distance-based total uncertainty measure in the theory of belief functions. Knowl.-Based Syst. 94, 114–123 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Smets, P.: The transferable belief model. Artif. Intell. 66(2), 191–234 (1994)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.National Key Laboratory of Science and Technology on CommunicationsUniversity of Electronic Science and Technology of ChinaChengduChina
  2. 2.Sichuan Jiuzhou Electronic Group Co. Ltd.MianyangChina

Personalised recommendations