IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/spr/annopr/v216y2014i1p163-18910.1007-s10479-013-1352-1.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Rough set theory: a novel approach for extraction of robust decision rules based on incremental attributes

Author

Listed:
  • Chun-Che Huang
  • Tzu-Liang Tseng
  • Fuhua Jiang
  • Yu-Neng Fan
  • Chih-Hua Hsu

Abstract

Rough set theory is a new data mining approach to manage vagueness. It is capable to discover important facts hidden in the data. Literature indicate the current rough set based approaches can’t guarantee that classification of a decision table is credible and it is not able to generate robust decision rules when new attributes are incrementally added in. In this study, an incremental attribute oriented rule-extraction algorithm is proposed to solve this deficiency commonly observed in the literature related to decision rule induction. The proposed approach considers incremental attributes based on the alternative rule extraction algorithm (AREA), which was presented for discovering preference-based rules according to the reducts with the maximum of strength index (SI), specifically the case that the desired reducts are not necessarily unique since several reducts could include the same value of SI. Using the AREA, an alternative rule can be defined as the rule which holds identical preference to the original decision rule and may be more attractive to a decision-maker than the original one. Through implementing the proposed approach, it can be effectively operating with new attributes to be added in the database/information systems. It is not required to re-compute the updated data set similar to the first step at the initial stage. The proposed algorithm also excludes these repetitive rules during the solution search stage since most of the rule induction approaches generate the repetitive rules. The proposed approach is capable to efficiently and effectively generate the complete, robust and non-repetitive decision rules. The rules derived from the data set provide an indication of how to effectively study this problem in further investigations. Copyright Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Suggested Citation

  • Chun-Che Huang & Tzu-Liang Tseng & Fuhua Jiang & Yu-Neng Fan & Chih-Hua Hsu, 2014. "Rough set theory: a novel approach for extraction of robust decision rules based on incremental attributes," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 216(1), pages 163-189, May.
    • Handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:216:y:2014:i:1:p:163-189:10.1007/s10479-013-1352-1
    DOI: 10.1007/s10479-013-1352-1
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1007/s10479-013-1352-1
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1007/s10479-013-1352-1?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Greco, Salvatore & Matarazzo, Benedetto & Slowinski, Roman, 2001. "Rough sets theory for multicriteria decision analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 129(1), pages 1-47, February.
    2. (Bill) Tseng, Tzu-Liang & Huang, Chun-Che, 2007. "Rough set-based approach to feature selection in customer relationship management," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 35(4), pages 365-383, August.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Wen-Min Lu & Qian Long Kweh & Chung-Wei Wang, 2021. "Integration and application of rough sets and data envelopment analysis for assessments of the investment trusts industry," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 296(1), pages 163-194, January.

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.
    1. Salvatore Greco & Benedetto Matarazzo & Roman Slowinski & Stelios Zanakis, 2011. "Global investing risk: a case study of knowledge assessment via rough sets," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 185(1), pages 105-138, May.
    2. Eduardo Fernández & José Rui Figueira & Jorge Navarro, 2023. "A theoretical look at ordinal classification methods based on comparing actions with limiting boundaries between adjacent classes," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 819-843, June.
    3. Doumpos, M. & Marinakis, Y. & Marinaki, M. & Zopounidis, C., 2009. "An evolutionary approach to construction of outranking models for multicriteria classification: The case of the ELECTRE TRI method," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 199(2), pages 496-505, December.
    4. Bouyssou, Denis & Marchant, Thierry, 2007. "An axiomatic approach to noncompensatory sorting methods in MCDM, II: More than two categories," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 178(1), pages 246-276, April.
    5. Fernandez, Eduardo & Navarro, Jorge & Bernal, Sergio, 2010. "Handling multicriteria preferences in cluster analysis," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 202(3), pages 819-827, May.
    6. Pawel Lezanski & Maria Pilacinska, 2018. "The dominance-based rough set approach to cylindrical plunge grinding process diagnosis," Journal of Intelligent Manufacturing, Springer, vol. 29(5), pages 989-1004, June.
    7. Choudhary, Devendra & Shankar, Ravi, 2012. "An STEEP-fuzzy AHP-TOPSIS framework for evaluation and selection of thermal power plant location: A case study from India," Energy, Elsevier, vol. 42(1), pages 510-521.
    8. García Cáceres, Rafael Guillermo & Aráoz Durand, Julián Arturo & Gómez, Fernando Palacios, 2009. "Integral analysis method - IAM," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 192(3), pages 891-903, February.
    9. Azam, Nouman & Zhang, Yan & Yao, JingTao, 2017. "Evaluation functions and decision conditions of three-way decisions with game-theoretic rough sets," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 261(2), pages 704-714.
    10. Kadziński, Miłosz & Wójcik, Michał & Ciomek, Krzysztof, 2022. "Review and experimental comparison of ranking and choice procedures for constructing a univocal recommendation in a preference disaggregation setting," Omega, Elsevier, vol. 113(C).
    11. Hu, Qiwei & Chakhar, Salem & Siraj, Sajid & Labib, Ashraf, 2017. "Spare parts classification in industrial manufacturing using the dominance-based rough set approach," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 262(3), pages 1136-1163.
    12. Leung, Yee & Fischer, Manfred M. & Wu, Wei-Zhi & Mi, Ju-Sheng, 2008. "A rough set approach for the discovery of classification rules in interval-valued information systems," MPRA Paper 77767, University Library of Munich, Germany.
    13. Deparis, Stéphane & Mousseau, Vincent & Öztürk, Meltem & Huron, Caroline, 2015. "The effect of bi-criteria conflict on matching-elicited preferences," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 242(3), pages 951-959.
    14. Pegdwendé Minoungou & Vincent Mousseau & Wassila Ouerdane & Paolo Scotton, 2023. "A MIP-based approach to learn MR-Sort models with single-peaked preferences," Annals of Operations Research, Springer, vol. 325(2), pages 795-817, June.
    15. Salvatore Barbagallo & Simona Consoli & Nello Pappalardo & Salvatore Greco & Santo Zimbone, 2006. "Discovering Reservoir Operating Rules by a Rough Set Approach," Water Resources Management: An International Journal, Published for the European Water Resources Association (EWRA), Springer;European Water Resources Association (EWRA), vol. 20(1), pages 19-36, February.
    16. Oppio, Alessandra & Dell’Ovo, Marta & Torrieri, Francesca & Miebs, Grzegorz & Kadziński, Miłosz, 2020. "Understanding the drivers of Urban Development Agreements with the rough set approach and robust decision rules," Land Use Policy, Elsevier, vol. 96(C).
    17. Alessandro Scuderi & Luisa Sturiale & Giuseppe Timpanaro & Agata Matarazzo & Silvia Zingale & Paolo Guarnaccia, 2022. "A Model to Support Sustainable Resource Management in the “Etna River Valleys” Biosphere Reserve: The Dominance-Based Rough Set Approach," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 14(9), pages 1-19, April.
    18. Zopounidis, Constantin & Doumpos, Michael, 2002. "Multicriteria classification and sorting methods: A literature review," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 138(2), pages 229-246, April.
    19. Wu, Zhibin & Huang, Shuai & Xu, Jiuping, 2019. "Multi-stage optimization models for individual consistency and group consensus with preference relations," European Journal of Operational Research, Elsevier, vol. 275(1), pages 182-194.
    20. Jonas Damidavičius & Marija Burinskienė & Jurgita Antuchevičienė, 2020. "Assessing Sustainable Mobility Measures Applying Multicriteria Decision Making Methods," Sustainability, MDPI, vol. 12(15), pages 1-15, July.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:spr:annopr:v:216:y:2014:i:1:p:163-189:10.1007/s10479-013-1352-1. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Sonal Shukla or Springer Nature Abstracting and Indexing (email available below). General contact details of provider: http://www.springer.com .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.