Currently, density-based clustering algorithms are widely applied because they can detect clusters with arbitrary shapes. However, they perform poorly in measuring global density, determining reasonable cluster centers or structures, assigning samples accurately and handling data with large density differences among clusters. To overcome their drawbacks, this paper proposes a granule fusion density-based clustering with evidential reasoning (GFDC). Both local and global densities of samples are measured by a sparse degree metric first. Then information granules are generated in high-density and low-density regions, assisting in processing clusters with significant density differences. Further, three novel granule fusion strategies are utilized to combine granules into stable cluster structures, helping to detect clusters with arbitrary shapes. Finally, by an assignment method developed from Dempster-Shafer theory, unstable samples are assigned. After using GFDC, a reasonable clustering result and some identified outliers can be obtained. The experimental results on extensive datasets demonstrate the effectiveness of GFDC.

This paper presents an efficient adaptation and application of the Dempster-Shafer theory of evidence, one that can be used effectively in a massively parallel hierarchical system for visual pattern perception. It describes the techniques used, and shows in an extended example how they serve to improve the system's performance as it applies a multiple-level set of processes.

In this paper, we present some results of evidential reasoning in understanding multispectral images of remote sensing systems. The Dempster-Shafer approach of combination of evidences is pursued to yield contextual classification results, which are compared with previous results of the Bayesian context free classification, contextual classifications of dynamic programming and stochastic relaxation approaches.

To develop an approach to utilizing continuous statistical information within the Dempster- Shafer framework, we combine methods proposed by Strat and by Shafero We first derive continuous possibility and mass functions from probability-density functions. Then we propose a rule for combining such evidence that is simpler and more efficiently computed than Dempster's rule. We discuss the relationship between Dempster's rule and our proposed rule for combining evidence over continuous frames.

Evidential reasoning in expert systems has often used ad-hoc uncertainty calculi. Although it is generally accepted that probability theory provides a firm theoretical foundation, researchers have found some problems with its use as a workable uncertainty calculus. Among these problems are representation of ignorance, consistency of probabilistic judgements, and adjustment of a priori judgements with experience. The application of metaprobability theory to evidential reasoning is a new approach to solving these problems. Metaprobability theory can be viewed as a way to provide soft or hard constraints on beliefs in much the same manner as the Dempster-Shafer theory provides constraints on probability masses on subsets of the state space. Thus, we use the Dempster-Shafer theory, an alternative theory of evidential reasoning to illuminate metaprobability theory as a theory of evidential reasoning. The goal of this paper is to compare how metaprobability theory and Dempster-Shafer theory handle the adjustment of beliefs with evidence with respect to a particular thought experiment. Sections 2 and 3 give brief descriptions of the metaprobability and Dempster-Shafer theories. Metaprobability theory deals with higher order probabilities applied to evidential reasoning. Dempster-Shafer theory is a generalization of probability theory which has evolved from a theory of upper and lower probabilities. Section 4 describes a thought experiment and the metaprobability and DempsterShafer analysis of the experiment. The thought experiment focuses on forming beliefs about a population with 6 types of members {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6}. A type is uniquely defined by the values of three features: A, B, C. That is, if the three features of one member of the population were known then its type could be ascertained. Each of the three features has two possible values, (e.g. A can be either "a0" or "al"). Beliefs are formed from evidence accrued from two sensors: sensor A, and sensor B. Each sensor senses the corresponding defining feature. Sensor A reports that half of its observations are "a0" and half the observations are 'al'. Sensor B reports that half of its observations are ``b0,' and half are "bl". Based on these two pieces of evidence, what should be the beliefs on the distribution of types in the population? Note that the third feature is not observed by any sensor.

The Dempster-Shafer theory has been extended recently for its application to expert systems. However, implementing the extended D-S reasoning model in rule-based systems greatly complicates the task of generating informative explanations. By implementing GERTIS, a prototype system for diagnosing rheumatoid arthritis, we show that two kinds of knowledge are essential for explanation generation: (l) taxonomic class relationships between hypotheses and (2) pointers to the rules that significantly contribute to belief in the hypothesis. As a result, the knowledge represented in GERTIS is richer and more complex than that of conventional rule-based systems. GERTIS not only demonstrates the feasibility of rule-based evidential-reasoning systems, but also suggests ways to generate better explanations, and to explicitly represent various useful relationships among hypotheses and rules.

This paper presents a methodology for research and development of the inferencing and knowledge representation aspects of an Expert System approach for performing reasoning under uncertainty in support of a real time vehicle guidance and navigation system. Such a system could be of major benefit for non-terrain following low altitude flight systems operating in foreign hostile environments such as might be experienced by NOE helicopter or similar mission craft. An innovative extension of the evidential reasoning methodology, termed the Sum-and-Lattice-Points Method, has been developed. The research and development effort presented in this paper consists of a formal mathematical development of the Sum-and-Lattice-Points Method, its formulation and representation in a parallel environment, prototype software development of the method within an expert system, and initial testing of the system within the confines of the vehicle guidance system.

The categorial approach to evidential reasoning can be seen as a combination of the probability kinematics approach of Richard Jeffrey (1965) and the maximum (cross-) entropy inference approach of E. T. Jaynes (1957). As a consequence of that viewpoint, it is well known that category theory provides natural definitions for logical connectives. In particular, disjunction and conjunction are modelled by general categorial constructions known as products and coproducts. In this paper, I focus mainly on Dempster-Shafer theory of belief functions for which I introduce a category I call Dempster?s category. I prove the existence of and give explicit formulas for conjunction and disjunction in the subcategory of separable belief functions. In Dempster?s category, the new defined conjunction can be seen as the most cautious conjunction of beliefs, and thus no assumption about distinctness (of the sources) of beliefs is needed as opposed to Dempster?s rule of combination, which calls for distinctness (of the sources) of beliefs.

In this paper we describe a novel method for evidential reasoning [1]. It involves modelling the process of evidential reasoning in three steps, namely, evidence structure construction, evidence accumulation, and decision making. The proposed method, called RES, is novel in that evidence strength is associated with an evidential support relationship (an argument) between a pair of statements and such strength is carried by comparison between arguments. This is in contrast to the onventional approaches, where evidence strength is represented numerically and is associated with a statement.

Stochastic sampling algorithms, while an attractive alternative to exact algorithms in very large Bayesian network models, have been observed to perform poorly in evidential reasoning with extremely unlikely evidence. To address this problem, we propose an adaptive importance sampling algorithm, AIS-BN, that shows promising convergence rates even under extreme conditions and seems to outperform the existing sampling algorithms consistently. Three sources of this performance improvement are (1) two heuristics for initialization of the importance function that are based on the theoretical properties of importance sampling in finite-dimensional integrals and the structural advantages of Bayesian networks, (2) a smooth learning method for the importance function, and (3) a dynamic weighting function for combining samples from different stages of the algorithm. We tested the performance of the AIS-BN algorithm along with two state of the art general purpose sampling algorithms, likelihood weighting (Fung and Chang, 1989; Shachter and Peot, 1989) and self-importance sampling (Shachter and Peot, 1989). We used in our tests three large real Bayesian network models available to the scientific community: the CPCS network (Pradhan et al., 1994), the PathFinder network (Heckerman, Horvitz, and Nathwani, 1990), and the ANDES network (Conati, Gertner, VanLehn, and Druzdzel, 1997), with evidence as unlikely as 10^-41. While the AIS-BN algorithm always performed better than the other two algorithms, in the majority of the test cases it achieved orders of magnitude improvement in precision of the results. Improvement in speed given a desired precision is even more dramatic, although we are unable to report numerical results here, as the other algorithms almost never achieved the precision reached even by the first few iterations of the AIS-BN algorithm.