Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 2,070Rough Sets and Fuzzy LogicFuzzy and Soft Set TheoryAdvanced Algebra and Logic

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 352 of the 352 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Rudiments of rough sets

Open access
Pawlak, Zdzisław, Skowron, Andrzej·2007·Information Sciences
DOI 10.1016/j.ins.2006.06.003
Open this paper in CoChat — free accountOpen PDF

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.ins.2006.06.003

Cites

352 of 352 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Research works printed but not linked: 64

  1. 2002, vol. 2475
  2. P. Apostoli, A. Kanda, Parts of the continuum: Towards a modern ontology of sciences, Technical Reports in Philosophical Logic, vol. 96 (1). The University of Toronto, Department of Philosophy, Toronto, Canada, 1999, Revised March, 1999.
  3. M. Banerjee, M.K. Chakraborty, Rough set algebras. In: Pal et al. [194], pp. 157–184.
  4. J.G. Bazan, A comparison of dynamic and non-dynamic rough set methods for extracting laws from decision tables. In: Polkowski and Skowron [244], pp. 321–365.
  5. G. Cattaneo, Abstract approximation spaces for rough theories. In: Polkowski and Skowron [244], pp. 59–98.
  6. 2001, Computational Intelligence: An International Journal, vol. 17
  7. Doherty, 2006, vol. 202
  8. Forrest, 2002, Sets as mereological tropes, Metaphysical, 3, 5
  9. 1994, vol. 3
  10. Hu, 1995, A rough set approach to compute all maximal generalized rules, Journal of Computing and Information, 1, 1078
  11. Hu, 2004, A new rough set model based on database systems, Journal of Fundamental Informatics, 59, 135
  12. 2003, vol. 125
  13. T. Iwiński, Rough analysis of lattices, Working papers, vol. 23. University of Carlos III, Madrid, 1991.
  14. J. Järvinen, Representation of information systems and dependence spaces, and some basic algorithms. Licentiate’s thesis. Ph.D. thesis, University of Turku, Department of Mathematics, Turku, Finland, 1997.
  15. J. Komorowski, Z. Pawlak, L. Polkowski, A. Skowron, Rough sets: a tutorial. In: Pal and Skowron [195], pp. 3–98.
  16. Kostek, 1999, vol. 31
  17. Kostek, 2005, vol. 3
  18. M. Kryszkiewicz, Properties of incomplete information systems in the framework of rough sets. In: Polkowski and Skowron [244], pp. 422–450.
  19. A.O.V. Le Blanc, Lesniewski’s Computative Protothetic. Report (Ph.D. thesis), University of Manchester, Manchester, UK, 2003.
  20. 1996, Journal of the Intelligent Automation and Soft Computing, vol. 2
  21. J. Małuszyński, A. Vitória, Toward rough datalog. In: Pal et al. [194], pp. 297–332.
  22. S.H. Nguyen, H.S. Nguyen, Some efficient algorithms for rough set methods. In: Sixth International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty on Knowledge Based Systems IPMU’1996, Granada, Spain, 1996, vol. III, pp. 1451–1456.
  23. Novotný, 1991, Algebraic theory of independence in information systems, Fundamenta Informaticae, 14, 454, 10.3233/FI-1991-14404 · DOI
  24. E. Orłowska, Rough concept logic. In: Skowron [272], pp. 177–186.
  25. Orłowska, 1987, Reasoning about vague concepts, Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Mathematics, 35, 643
  26. 1997, vol. 13
  27. Pagliani, 2004, Pretopologies and dynamic spaces, Fundamenta Informaticae, 59, 221
  28. 2005, vol. 3776
  29. 2001, Rough-neuro computing, Neurocomputing, 36
  30. Z. Pawlak, Rough Relations, Reports, vol. 435. Institute of Computer Science, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw, Poland, 1981.
  31. Pawlak, 1987, Rough logic, Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Technical Sciences, 35, 253
  32. Pawlak, 1991, Decision logic, Bulletin of the EATCS, 44, 201
  33. Pawlak, 1991, vol. 9
  34. 2001, International Journal of Intelligent Systems, vol. 16
  35. 2004, vol. 3100
  36. 2005, vol. 3400
  37. 2005, vol. 3700
  38. 2004, vol. 3135
  39. 2000, vol. 56
  40. 1998, vol. 1424
  41. 1998, vol. 18
  42. 1998, vol. 19
  43. Pomykała, 1988, The stone algebra of rough sets, Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Mathematics, 36, 495
  44. Rauszer, 1985, An equivalence between theory of functional dependence and a fragment of intuitionistic logic, Bulletin of the Polish Academy of Sciences, Mathematics, 33, 571
  45. 1985, vol. 208
  46. Skowron, 2000, Rough sets in KDD – plenary talk, 1
  47. 2003, Pattern Recognition Letters, vol. 24
  48. 2003, vol. 82(4)
  49. D. Śle¸zak, Approximate reducts in decision tables. In: Sixth International Conference on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems IPMU’1996. Granada, Spain, 1996, vol. III, pp. 1159–1164.
  50. 2005, vol. 3641
  51. 2005, vol. 3642
  52. K. Słowiński, J. Stefanowski, Medical information systems – problems with analysis and way of solution. In: Pal and Skowron [195], pp. 301–315.
  53. 1992, vol. 11
  54. R. Słowiński, J. Stefanowski (Eds.). Special issue: Proceedings of the First International Workshop on Rough Sets: State of the Art and Perspectives, Kiekrz, Poznań, Poland, September 2–4 (1992). In: Foundations of Computing and Decision Sciences, vol. 18(3–4). 1993.
  55. Słowiński, 2000, Rough sets processing of inconsistent information, Control and Cybernetics, 29, 379
  56. R. Swiniarski, Rough sets and principal component analysis and their applications. data model building and classification. In: Pal and Skowron [195], pp. 275–300.
  57. 2001, vol. 2253
  58. 2004, vol. 3066
  59. 2003, vol. 2639
  60. A. Wasilewska, L. Vigneron, Rough algebras and automated deduction. In: Polkowski and Skowron [244], pp. 261–275.
  61. Y.Y. Yao, Generalized rough set models. In: Polkowski and Skowron [244], pp. 286–318.
  62. 1995, An International Journal, 11
  63. 1996, Fundamenta Informaticae, 27
  64. 2001, vol. 2005

Cited by

See all 2,070

Related

See all

Metadata

Authors
Pawlak, Z., & Skowron, A.
Affiliations
University of Warsaw (PL)
Corresponding author
Skowron, Andrzej
ORCID
Venue
Information Sciences
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-01
Volume
177
Issue
1
Pages
3-27
ISSN
0020-0255 (ISSN-L)
DOI
10.1016/j.ins.2006.06.003
OpenAlex
W2143451122
Cited by
2,070
References
352
Citations by year
2026: 28 · 2025: 49 · 2024: 61 · 2023: 65 · 2022: 67 · 2021: 89 · 2020: 92 · 2019: 102 · 2018: 108 · 2017: 85 · 2016: 120 · 2015: 125 · 2014: 139 · 2013: 129 · 2012: 182
FWCI
111.73
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Licence
www.elsevier.com/tdm/userlicense/1.0/ (tdm)
Locations
  • Information Sciences (publishedVersion)
  • Our Digital Library (Warsaw University of Technology) (submittedVersion)
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Rough Sets and Fuzzy Logic
  • Social Sciences › Decision Sciences › Management Science and Operations Research › Fuzzy and Soft Set Theory
  • Physical Sciences › Computer Science › Computational Theory and Mathematics › Advanced Algebra and Logic
Keywords
rough set theory, artificial intelligence, knowledge discovery, decision analysis, expert systems, pattern recognition, inductive reasoning, mereology

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.