4.7 Article

Mixed data-driven sequential three-way decision via fusion

期刊

KNOWLEDGE-BASED SYSTEMS
卷 237, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.knosys.2021.107728

关键词

Three-way decision; Sequential three-way decision; Mixed data; subjective-objective; Dynamic fusion

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [61773324, 61876157, 61976182]
  2. Humanity and Social Science Youth Foundation of Ministry of Education of China [20YJC630191]
  3. Fintech Innovation Center of Southwestern University of Finance and Economics, China
  4. Financial Intelligence & Financial Engineering Key Laboratory of Sichuan Province, China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this paper, a novel framework of sequential three-way decision for the fusion of mixed data from the subjective and objective dynamic perspectives is explored. The proposed models achieve lower decision cost and acceptable accuracy, as demonstrated by comparative experiments.
In the context of granular computing, sequential three-way decision is a useful tool to triadic thinking, triadic computing and triadic processing from coarser to finer under multilevel and multiview granularity space. In this paper, we mainly explore a novel framework of sequential three-way decision for the fusion of mixed data from the subjective and objective dynamic perspectives. The former focuses on the decision maker's dynamic behavior without considering the time-evolving data, and the latter emphasizes on dealing with dynamic mixed data over time by multi-stage decision-making. We firstly utilize four T-norm operators and kernel-based similarity relations to integrate different types of dynamic data. Then the subjective and objective models of sequential three-way decision are investigated based on decision thresholds, attribute importance and cost reduction. Finally, the comparative experiments are reported to verify that our proposed models can achieve the lower decision cost and the acceptable accuracy. (c) 2021 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据