Comparative study of alternative types of knowledge reduction in inconsistent systems. (English) Zbl 0969.68146

Summary: Many types of attribute reduction and decision rules have been proposed in the area of rough sets. It is required to provide their consistent classification. The task is not easy because new proposals address different issues such as: noise in data, compact representation, prediction capability. Usually, when introducing a new knowledge reduction method the authors relate it only to one basic type of knowledge reduction. The main objective of the paper was to find and prove static relationships among classical types of knowledge reduction in inconsistent decision tables in order to provide an underlying classification of knowledge reduction types. Hence, if a newly devised reduction type is a specialization of some known type then all its properties inherited from generalized types will be also known.


68T30 Knowledge representation
Full Text: DOI


[1] Rough sets: Theoretical aspects of reasoning about data. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Vol. 9; 1991. · Zbl 0758.68054
[2] Classification strategies using certain and possible rules. In: LNAI 1424, RSCTC ’98. Springer; 1998. p 37-44.
[3] On rough set based approaches to induction of decision rules. In: editors. Rough sets in knowledge discovery. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag, Vol. 1; 1998. p 500-529. · Zbl 0927.68094
[4] Searching for dynamic reducts in inconsistent decision tables. In: Proc of IPMU ’98, Paris, France. Vol. 2; 1998. p 1362-1369.
[5] Analysis of uncertain information in the framework of variable precision rough sets. In: Foundations of computing and decision sciences, Vol. 18, No. 3-4; 1993. p 381-396. · Zbl 0806.68029
[6] A new rough set approach in multicriteria and multiattribute classification. In: LNAI 1424, RSCTC ’98. Springer; 1998. p 214-221.
[7] Approximate reducts in decision tables. In: Proc of IPMU ’96, Granada, Spain, Vol. 3; 1996. p 1159-1164.
[8] Approximate reducts and association rules correspondence and complexity results. In: editors. Proc of RSFDGrC ’99, Yamaguchi, Japan. LNAI 1711; 1999. p 137-145. · Zbl 0954.68129
[9] Effective rules. In: Proc of 5th International Conference of the Decision Sciences Institute, DSI ’99, Athens, Greece. Vol. 2; 1999. p 1383-1385.
[10] A comparison of dynamic and non-dynamic rough set methods for extracting laws from decision tables. In: editors. Rough sets in knowledge discovery. Heidelberg: Physica-Verlag; 1998. p 321-365.
[11] Rough mereology and analytical mereology: New developments in rough set theory. In: editors. Proc of WOCFAI ’95. Angkor, Paris; 1995. p 343-354.
[12] Rough membership functions. In: editors. Advances in the dempster Shafer theory of evidence. New York, Chichester, Brisbane, Toronto, Singapore: John Wiley and Sons, Inc.; 1994. p 251-271.
[13] Strong rules in large databases. In: Proc of IPMU ’98. Paris, France. Vol. 2; 1998. p 1520-1527.
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.