基于改进证据距离的冲突度量研究方法
内蒙古工业大学, 机械工程学院, 内蒙古呼和浩特 010051
| 摘 要： | 在面对复杂滚动轴承提取困难中，数据的不确定性成为了一个挑战，其中证据理论作为一种重要的方法。然而，在实际应用中，传统证据理论在处理高度冲突的证据时，存在一定的局限性，尤其是在其核心组成部分——冲突管理机制方面。在多源信息融合过程中，如何准确地量化和处理证据之间的冲突，成为了提高融合效果的关键问题。针对这一问题，本研究提出了一种创新的证据冲突度量方法，旨在改进传统证据理论中处理高冲突证据的能力。本文方法从“距离”的角度出发，深入分析了这种距离度量所需满足的性质。通过对这些性质的证明，确保了所提出的冲突度量方法在理论上的合理性和适用性。更进一步，本研究通过一系列理论证明和数值计算，展示了该方法在处理完全冲突和完全不冲突的证据时的准确性。与此同时，该方法也能够有效地度量不同程度冲突的证据，展现了较高的灵活性和广泛的适用性。这一点是通过将新方法应用于经典的冲突证据案例，并与现有的其他方法进行对比分析得到的。通过对比，不仅验证了新方法在理论和实验层面的有效性，而且还揭示了其在处理高冲突证据方面的显著优势。本研究的创新之处主要体现在以下几个方面：首先，我们提出了一种新的冲突度量框架，该框架基于对证据之间“距离”的深入理解和分析；其次，通过严格的理论证明，确保了该度量方法的合理性和有效性；最后，通过与传统方法的对比分析，展示了新方法在实际应用中处理高冲突证据的有效性。 |
| 关 键 词： | 证据理论; 证据距离; 冲突度量 |
| DOI： | 10.57237/j.mse.2024.01.005 |
View:
Downloads:
收稿日期: 2024-02-02
接受日期: 2024-03-15
在线出版日期: 2024-03-18
Conflict Measurement Method Based on Improved Evidence Distance
School of Mechanical Engineering, Inner Mongolia University of Technology, Hohhot 010051, China
| Abstract: | In facing the challenge of extracting difficult data from complex rolling bearings, the uncertainty of data has become a significant issue. Among various approaches, evidence theory stands out as a crucial method. However, in practical applications, traditional evidence theory exhibits certain limitations, especially in its core component—the conflict management mechanism—when dealing with highly conflicting evidence. Accurately quantifying and managing conflicts between pieces of evidence becomes a key issue in enhancing fusion effectiveness during the process of multi-source information fusion. To address this issue, this study introduces an innovative evidence conflict measurement method aimed at improving the capability of traditional evidence theory to handle highly conflicting evidence. This method starts from the perspective of "distance" and conducts a thorough analysis of the properties required by such a distance measurement. By proving these properties, the theoretical rationality and applicability of the proposed conflict measurement method are ensured. Further, through a series of theoretical proofs and numerical calculations, this study demonstrates the accuracy of the method in dealing with completely conflicting and completely non-conflicting evidence. Simultaneously, the method can effectively measure evidence with varying degrees of conflict, showing higher flexibility and broad applicability. This is achieved by applying the new method to classic cases of conflicting evidence and comparing it with existing methods. The comparison not only verifies the effectiveness of the new method on both theoretical and experimental levels but also reveals its significant advantages in handling highly conflicting evidence. The innovation of this research is primarily reflected in the following aspects: Initially, a novel conflict measurement framework is introduced, predicated on an exhaustive analysis and understanding of the "distance" between evidences. Subsequently, the rationality and efficacy of this measurement approach are corroborated through rigorous theoretical validation. Finally, comparative analyses with conventional methodologies underscore the effectiveness of this new approach in addressing highly conflicting evidences in practical applications. |
| Keywords: | Evidence Theory; Evidence Distance; Conflict Measurement |
参考文献
| [1] | Dempster A P. Upper and lower probabilities induced by a multiple valued mapping [J]. The Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 1967, 38(2): 325-339. |
| [2] | Shafer G. A mathematical theory of evidence [M]. Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1976. |
| [3] | Zadeh L A. A simple view of the Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence and its implication for the rule of combination [J]. AI Magazine, 1986, 7(2): 85-90. |
| [4] | Smets P, Kennes R. The transferable belief model [J]. Artificial Intelligence, 1994, 66(2): 191-234. |
| [5] | Liu W R. Analyzing the degree of conflict among belief functions [J]. Artificial Intelligence, 2006, 170(11): 909-924. |
| [6] | Jousselme A L, Grenier D, Bossee E. A new distance between two bodies of evidence [J]. Information Fusion. 2012(2): 91-101. |
| [7] | 严志军, 陶洋. 基于证据距离和不确定度的冲突数据融合算法 [J]. 计算机工程与应用, 2018, 54(10): 54-58+104. |
| [8] | 彭颖, 胡增辉, 沈怀荣. 一种修正证据距离 [J]. 电子与信息学报, 2013, 35(7): 1624-1629. |
| [9] | 邓勇, 王栋, 李齐等. 一种新的证据冲突分析方法 [J]. 控制理论与应用, 2011, 28(6): 839-844. |
| [10] | 罗贺, 尹艳平, 胡笑旋等. 基于可信因子的证据源修正方法 [J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2015, 37(06): 1459-1464. |
| [11] | 宋亚飞, 王晓丹, 雷蕾等. 基于相关系数的证据冲突度量方法 [J]. 通信学报, 2014, 35(5): 95-100. |
| [12] | 蒋雯, 彭进业. 一种新的证据冲突表示方法 [J]. 系统工程与电子技术, 2010, 32(3): 562-565. |
| [13] | 孙贵东, 关欣, 衣晓等. 冲突证据的相关系数度量方法 [J]. 通信学报, 2018, 39(12): 30-39. |
| [14] | 杨建平. 证据理论及其复杂系统可靠性分析方法与应用研究 [D]. 电子科技大学, 2012. |
