Belief Function Theory: An Introduction: D.N. Kandekar

Prelliminary Information
Dempster Rule of Combination of Belief Functions

Other Rules of Combination of Belief Functions
Simple and Separable Support Functions
Bernoulli`s Rule of Combination
Conclusion
References
Belief Function Theory: An Introduction
D.N. Kandekar
Department of Mathematics, D.P.R. College, Adinathnagar, Ahmednagar(M.S.)
Recent Trends in Mathematics,

February 6-8, 2017,
Shri Anand College, Pathardi,
(Ahmednagar, Maharashtra, India )
D.N. Kandekar Belief Function Theory: An Introduction

Conclusion
References
1 Prelliminary Information
2 Dempster Rule of Combination of Belief Functions
3 Other Rules of Combination of Belief Functions
4 Simple and Separable Support Functions
5 Bernoulli`s Rule of Combination
6 Conclusion
7 References

Conclusion
References
Frame of Discernment :
Dictionary meaning of Frame of Discernment is frame of good
judgement insight. The word discern means recognize or nd out
or hear with diculty.
If Frame of Discernment Θ is
Θ = f1 ; 2 ; : : : ; n g
then every element of Θ is a proposition. The propositions of

interest are in one -to -one correspondence with the subsets of Θ.
The set of all propositions of interest corresponds to the set of all
subsets of Θ, denoted by 2Θ .

Conclusion
References

Conclusion
References
Denition
If Θ is frame of discernment, then a function m : 2Θ ! [0; 1] is
called basic probability assignment whenever
1
m(;) = 0.
AΘ m(A) = 1.
P
2
The quantity m(A) is called A's basic probability number and it

is a measure of the belief committed exactly to A.

Conclusion
References
Denition
The total belief committed to A is sum of m(B ), for all proper
subsets B of A.
Bel (A) = m(A): (1)
X
B A
If Θ is a frame of discernment, then a function Bel : 2Θ ! [0; 1]
is called belief function over Θ satisfying above condition (1).

Conclusion
References
Theorem
If Θ is a frame of discernment, then a function Bel : 2Θ ! [0; 1]
is belief function if and only if it satises following conditions
1
Bel (Φ) = 0.
2
Bel (Θ) = 1.
3
For every positive integer n and every collection
A1 ; A2 ; : : : ; An of subsets of Θ
Bel (A1 [ A2 [ : : : [ An ) 1)jI j+1 Bel ( Ai ): (2)

X \
(
I f1;2; ;ng i 2I

Conclusion
References
Theorem
Suppose Bel : 2 ! [0; 1] is belief function is given by basic
probability assignment m : 2Θ ! [0; 1]. Then
m(A) = 1)jA B j Bel (B ); 8A Θ: (3)

X
(
B A

Conclusion
References
Denition
A subset of a frame Θ is called a focal element of a belief
function Bel over Θ if m(A) > 0. The union of all the focal
elements of a belief function is called its core denoted by C .Note
that Bel (B ) = 1 if and only if C B . The quantity
Q (A) = m (B ) (4)
X
B Θ;AB
is called commonality number for A which measures the total
probability mass that can move freely to every point of A. A
function Q : 2Θ ! [0; 1]] is called commonality function for Bel .
Conclusion
References
Theorem
Suppose Bel is a belief function over Θ and Q is a commonality
function. Then
Bel (A) = 1)jB j Q (B ) (5)

X
(
bĀ
and
Q (A) = 1)jB j Bel (B̄ ) (6)
X
(
b A
for all A Θ.

Conclusion
References
Note that
1 Q (A) = 0 when A includes a point not in a core.
2 Commonality function is non-increasing i.e.
B A ) Q (A) Q (B ).
3 Some belief functions award zero commonality number to
subsets of their core.
e.g. Θ = fa; b; c g; m(fa; bg) = 1=3; m(fc g) = 2=3
and m(A) = 0 for all other A Θ.
C = fa; b; c g.
But subsets fa; c g; fb; c g and fa; b; c g have zero
commonality numbers.
Conclusion
References
Degree of doubt :
Dou (A) = bel (¯(A)).
The quantity
pl(A) = 1 - Dou(A)
m(B ) (7)
X
=
A\B 6=Φ
which expresses the extent to which one nds A credible or
plausible [1].
Conclusion
References
We have Bel (A) P (A) Pl (A) [2].

Sr. No. Subset of A jj m() Bel () q () Pl ()
1 ; 0 0 0 1 0
2 fag 1
1/12 1/12 8/12 8/12
3 fbg 1
1/12 1/12 8/12 8/12
4 fcg 1
1/12 1/12 8/12 8/12
5 fa, bg 2
2/12 4/12 5/12 11/12
6 fa, cg 2
2/12 4/12 5/12 11/12
7 fb, cg 2
2/12 4/12 5/12 11/12
8 fa, b, cg 3/12 1 3 3/12 12/12
Total 1 12
27/12 54/12 69/12
where p(fag) = p(fag) = p(fag) = 1=3, by uniform distribution
[3].
Conclusion
References
Denition
If Θ is frame of discernment, then a function Bel : 2Θ ! [0; 1] is
called Bayesian belief function if
1
Bel (Φ) = 0,
2
Bel (Θ) = 1,
3
Bel (a [ B ) = Bel (A) + Bel (B ) whenever A; B Θ and
A \ B = ;.
[1]

Conclusion
References
Also we have results:

1 Bel (A) + Bel (Ā) < 1.
2 P (A) + P (Ā) = 1.
3 Pl (A) + Pl (Ā) > 1.
[3]

Conclusion
References
Suppose Bel1 and Bel2 are belief functions over the same frame
Θ, with basic probability assignments m1 and m2 and focal
elements A1 ; A2 ; : : : ; Ak and B1 ; B2 ; : : : ; Bl respectively. Suppose
m1 (Ai )m2 (Bj ) < 1: (8)
X
i ;j ;Ai \Bj =;

Conclusion
References
Dempster Rule of Combination
Then the function m : 2Θ ! [0; 1] dened by m(;) = 0 and

i ;j ;Ai \Bj =A m1 (Ai )m2 (Bj )
P
m(A) = (9)
1 i ;j ;Ai \Bj =; m1 (Ai )m2 (Bj )
P
for all non-empty A Θ is a basic probability assignment. The

core of belief function given by m is equal to the intersection of
the cores of Bel1 and Bel2 .The belief function given by m is called
orthogonal sum of Bel1 and Bel2 and is denoted by Bel1 Bel2 .

Conclusion
References

Conclusion
References
In order to combine a collection Bel1 ; Bel2 ; ; Beln of belief

functions, we form the pairwise orthogonal sums as
Bel1 Bel2 ,
(Bel1 Bel2 ) Bel3 ,
((Bel1 Bel2 ) Bel3 ) Bel4 ,
continuing until all the Beli are included.

Conclusion
References
Zadeh`s Example:
Let 0 < 1 ; 2 < 1 and 1 and 2 be very tiny positive numbers
(close to zero). Let Θ = fa; b; c g with two expert`s basic belief
assignments as
m1 (fag) = 1 1 ; m1 (fbg) = 0; m1 (fc g) = 1 ,
m2 (fag) = 0; m1 (fbg) = 1 2 ; m1 (fc g) = 2 ,
By Dempster`s rule,
1 2
m(fc g) = =1
(1 1 ) 0 + 0 (1 2 ) + (1 2 )
Which is absurd(or at least counter intuitive). Note that for any
positive values less than or equal to 1, Dempster`s rule always
give same result. In this case, we use other rules for combination
of belief functions [4].
Conclusion
References
Yager admits the con icting belief is not reliable, so m(;) is

transferred to total ignorance. It is given by
m(;) = 0:For any A 6= ;; A 2 2Θ by
m(A) = m1 (X1 )m2 (X2 ); for A 6= Θ:
X
X1 ;X2 22Θ ;
X 1 \ X 2 =A
m(Θ) = m1 (Θ) m2 (Θ)
m1 (X1 )m2 (X2 ):
X
+
X ;X 2
1 2 2Θ ; X \ X =;
1 2
[5]
Conclusion
References
Dubois & Prade rule assumes that if two sources of evidences

are con icting and one of them is right but we don't know which
one is right. Thus if X1 \ X2 = ; then bba committed to the set
X1 \ X2 = ; by the conjunctive operator should be transmitted to
X1 [ X2 = A. According to this principle, DPRule is given by
m(;) = 0:For any A 6= ;; A 2 2Θ by
m(A) = m1 (X1 )m2 (X2 )
X
X1 ;X2 22Θ ;
X1 \X2 =A
m1 (X1 )m2 (X2 ):

X
+
X1 ;X2 22Θ ;
X1 \X2 =;;X1 [X2 =A
[6]
Conclusion
References
PCR5 rule transfers partial con icting mass to the elements

involved in the con ict and it is considered as the most
mathematically exact redistribution of the con icting mass to
non-empty sets following topic of the conjunctive rule, PCR 5 rule
is dened by
m(;) = 0:For any A 6= ;; A 2 2Θ by
m(A) = m1 (X1 )m2 (X2 )
X
X1 ;X2 22Θ ;
X1 \X2 =A
2 2
f mm1((AA))+mm2((XX2)) + mm2((AA))+mm1((XX2)) g:
X
+
1 2 2 2 1 2
X2 22Θ ;
X2 \A=;
[7] D.N. Kandekar Belief Function Theory: An Introduction
Conclusion
References
Simple and Separable Sopport Functions
There are some belief functions which are not support functions.
We have embedding of some belief functions as:
 simple   separable 
   
support belief
support 

support
function function
function function
  
(10)

Conclusion
References
Denition
The function S : 2Θ ! [0; 1] dened by
0 if B does not contain A


if B contains A but B 6= Θ.

S (B ) = s (11)
1 if B = Θ


Where s is degree of support for A with 0 s 1 and S (B ) is

degree of support for B Θ. The function S dened above is
called as a simple support function focused on A.

Conclusion
References
Let S be a simple support function focused on A. We can convert

S into belief function by assigning basic Probability numbers
m(A) = S (A); m(Θ) = 1 S (A) and m(B ) = 0 for all other
B Θ. i.e.
S (A) if C contains A but C 6= Θ


if C = Θ

m(C ) = 1 S (A) (12)
0 otherwise.



Conclusion
References
Figure: Bernoulli rule of Combination.

Conclusion
References
The Weight of Evidence
Suppose one body of evidence have precisely supporting eect for

set A Θ with degree s1 and the another completely separate
body of evidence have precisely supporting eect A to the degree
s2 . Then degree of supporting A by these two bodies of evidences
together is 1 (1 s1 )(1 s2 ) with m(Θ) = (1 s1 )(1 s2 ).
The relation between the weight of evidence ,w , which supports
A precisely and unambiguously and the degree of support s for A
in the corresponding simple support function is s = 1 e cw ,
where c is negative constant (immaginary taken as c = 1).

Conclusion
References
The Weight of Evidence
Notes:
1 !2 [0; 1] the weight of evidence can take any non-negative
value, including 0 and innity.
2 If weight of evidence is zero then degree of support is zero
i.e. if w = 0 then s = 0 and if weight of evidence is innity
then degree of support is one or certainty i.e. if w = 1 then
s = 1 or certianty.

Conclusion
References
Heterogeneous Evidences
Figure: Heterogeneous Evidences.

Conclusion
References
Suppose A \ B 6= ;. Let S1 be a simple support function focused

on A with S1 (A) = s1 and S2 be another simple support function
focused on B with S2 (B ) = s2 then orthogonal sum S = S1 S2
have basic probabiity numbers
m(A \ B ) = s1 s2 ; m(A) = s1 (1 s2 ); m(B ) = s2 (1 s1 ) and
m(Θ) = (1 s1 )(1 s2 ).

Conclusion
References
Therefore
0 if C does not contain A \ B


if C contains A \ B but neither A nor


s1 s2





s

if C contains A but not B
1
S (C ) =
s2 if C contains B but not A
6

1 (1 s1 )(1

s2 ) if C contains both A and B and C =



1

if C = Θ


(13)
for all C Θ.
Conclusion
References
Con icting Evidences
Figure: Con icting Evidences.

Conclusion
References
If A \ B 6= ; then the combination of evidences pointing to A and

evidences pointing to B is simple as compared to A \ B = ; i.e.
the bodies of evidence are heterogeneous as well as con icting
and eect of one body of evidence decreases the eect of other
body of evidence. While applying Dempster`s rule of combnation,
we eliminate lower-left rectangle ( see the gure of con icting
evidences ) and increase the measures of remaining rectangles by
1
multiplying factor .
1 s1 s2

Conclusion
References
The orthogonal sum S of the simple support function S1 which

is focused on A with S1 (A) = s1 and simple support function S2
which is focused on B with S2 (B ) = s2 , is given by basic
probability numbers:
0 if C = ;


 s1 (1 s2 )



if C = A

 1 s s


1 2
m(C ) = s2 (1 s1 ) (14)
if C = B
1 s1 s2



1 s1 )(1 s2 )

(

if C = Θ


1 s1 s2


is as follows:
Conclusion
References
0 if C contains neither A nor B



 s (1 s

if C contains A but not B
)
 1 2
 1 ss


S (C ) = s1(1s ss )
1 2
2 1
if C contains B but not A
s (1 s )+s (1 s 6 Θ
1 2
if C contains A and B but C =

)

1 2 2 1
1 s s



 1 2
1 if C = Θ


(15)
for all C Θ.

Conclusion
References
Notice that above orthogonal sum does not exist if and only if
s1 = s2 = 1 i.e. we cannot combine certainty of A with certainty
of B . By introducing second body of evidence, degree of support
1 s2
for A is reduced to s1 . The weights of evidence pointing
1 s1 s2
to A and B by w (A) and w (B ), respectively, use the following
relations
s1 = 1 e w (A) and s2 = 1 e w (B ) .
Solving above equations for w (A) and w (B ),we get

Conclusion
References
1 S (B )
w (A) = ln( ) (16)
1 S (A) S (B ))
and
1 S (A)
w (B ) = ln( ) (17)
1 S (A) S (B )
These weights of evidence are required to produce degrees of
support S (A) and S (B ) for two contradictory propositions A and
B.

Conclusion
References
Conclusion
In this, we have discussed words (or concepts ) usually used and

tried to express these concepts in mathematical form with
simillarity between concepts and mathematical operations.
Whenever uncertainty occurs, belief function theory is one of the
tool to handle uncertainty. Therefore it have applications in
Image Processing, Data Mining, Criminal Investigation, human
behaviour, Weather Analysis & Forecasting and signal detection
in radar etc.

Conclusion
References
References
Shafer, Glenn A., "A Mathematical Theory of Evidence,"
Princeton University Press, New Jersey, 1976.
Dempster, Arthur P., Upper and Lower Probabilities Induced by
Multivalued mapping," Annals of Mathematical Statistics, 1967,
pp. 325-339.
Bansi Lal and Sanjay Arora, "Mathematial Statistics", Satya
Prakashan, New Delhi, 1989.
Zadeh L., A Simple View of Dempster-Shafer Theory of Evidence
and it`s Application for the Rule of Combination", Berkeley
Congnitive Science Report No. 33, University of California,
Berkeley, C. A., 1985.
Conclusion
References
References
Yager R. R., On the Dempster-Shafer Framework and New

Combination Rules, in Information Sciences, vol. 41, pp. 93-138,
1987.
Dubois D; Prade H., "On Unucity of Dempster`s Rule of
Combinations", International Journal of Intelligent Systems, Vol.
1, pp 133-142, 1986.
Smarandache F., Dezart J., "Information Fusion Based on New
Proportional Con ict Redistribution Rules", Proceedings of
Fusion 2005 Conference, Philadelphia, July 26-29,2005.

Conclusion
References
???

Conclusion
References
Thank You.

Belief Function Theory: An Introduction: D.N. Kandekar

Încărcat de

Informații document

Titlu original

Drepturi de autor

Formate disponibile

Partajați acest document

Partajați sau inserați document

Opțiuni de partajare

Vi se pare util acest document?

Este necorespunzător acest conținut?

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Belief Function Theory: An Introduction: D.N. Kandekar

Încărcat de

Drepturi de autor:

Formate disponibile

Prelliminary Information

Dempster Rule of Combination of Belief Functions