Encyclopedia of Database Systems

2018 Edition
| Editors: Ling Liu, M. Tamer Özsu

Decision Rule Mining in Rough Set Theory

  • Tsau Young LinEmail author
Reference work entry
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-8265-9_563


Classification rules; Decision rules; Rough computing; Rough set theory

Definition of the Subject

Mathematically, a relation is a subset of a Cartesian product of sets, called attribute domains. In relational databases (RDB), however, we extend the concept of sets to bags that allow more than one occurrence of their elements [1]. In RDB, the main focus is on time-varying bag relations; in rough set theory (RST), they are interested in the instances of bag relations, called information tables (IT). An information table is called a decision table (DT), if the attributes are divided into two disjoint families, called conditional and decision attributes. A tuple in such a DT is called a decision rule. A sub-relation is called a value reduct, if it consists of a minimal subset of minimal length decision rules that has the same decision power as the original decision table. Value reducts of a DT are not necessary unique. The main theorem of RST is:

Reduct Theorem: Every decision...

This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Recommended Reading

  1. 1.
    Gracia-Molina H, Ullman J, Windin J. Database systems the complete book. Upper Saddle Rive: Prentice Hall; 2002.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lee TT. Algebraic theory of relational databases. Bell Syst Tech J. 1983;62(10):3159–204.CrossRefMathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Lin TY. Rough set theory in very large databases. In: Proceedings of the Symposium in modelling analysis and Simulation. 1996. p. 936–41.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lin TY. Granular computing on binary relations I: data mining and neighborhood systems. In: Skoworn A, Polkowski L, editors. Rough sets in knowledge discovery. Heidelberg/New York: Physica-Verlag; 1998. p. 107–21.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Lin TY. Granular computing on binary relations II: rough set representations and belief functions. In: Skoworn A, Polkowski L, editors. Rough sets in knowledge discovery. Heidelberg/New York: Physica-Verlag; 1998. p. 121–40.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lin TY. Granular computing: fuzzy logic and rough sets. In: Zadeh L, Kacprzyk J, editors. Computing with words in information/intelligent systems. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag; 1999. p. 183–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Lin TY. Granular computing: practices, theories, and future directions. Encyclopedia of complexity and systems science. 2009. p. 4339–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Lin TY, Han J. High frequent value reduct in very large databases. In: Proceedings of the 11th International Conference on Rough Sets, Fuzzy Sets, Data Mining, and Granular Computing; 2007. p. 346–54.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Lin TY, Liu Y, Huang W. Unifying rough set theories via large scaled granular computing. Fundam Inform. 2013;127(1–4):413–28.MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pawlak Z. Rough sets. Theoretical aspects of reasoning about data. Dordrecht: Kluwer Academic; 1991. ISBN:0-7923-1472-7.zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tsau-Young Lin: Np-hard problem in rough set theory, Bigdata 2017 (to appear)Google Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Computer ScienceSan Jose State UniversitySan JoseUSA