The DOI matches its Crossref record.
On the evidential reasoning algorithm for multiple attribute decision analysis under uncertainty
Abstract
In multiple attribute decision analysis (MADA), one often needs to deal with both numerical data and qualitative information with uncertainty. It is essential to properly represent and use uncertain information to conduct rational decision analysis. Based on a multilevel evaluation framework, an evidential reasoning (ER) approach has been developed for supporting such decision analysis, the kernel of which is an ER algorithm developed on the basis of the framework and the evidence combination rule of the Dempster-Shafer (D-S) theory. The approach has been applied to engineering design selection, organizational self-assessment, safety and risk assessment, and supplier assessment. In this paper, the fundamental features of the ER approach are investigated. New schemes for weight normalization and basic probability assignments are proposed. The original ER approach is further developed to enhance the process of aggregating attributes with uncertainty. Utility intervals are proposed to describe the impact of ignorance on decision analysis. Several properties of the new ER approach are explored, which lay the theoretical foundation of the ER approach. A numerical example of a motorcycle evaluation problem is examined using the ER approach. Computation steps and analysis results are provided in order to demonstrate its implementation process.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Cited by
High-resolution mapping of global surface water and its long-term changes
Pekel, J.-F., Cottam, A., Gorelick, N., & Belward, A. S. (2016) · Nature · doi:10.1038/nature20584 · Cited by 5,513
The 2017 IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems
(2016) · IEEE Computational Intelligence Magazine · doi:10.1109/mci.2016.2545826 · Cited by 308
Advanced uncertainty modelling for container port risk analysis
Alyami, H., Yang, Z., Riahi, R., Bonsall, S., & Wang, J. (2019) · Accident Analysis & Prevention · doi:10.1016/j.aap.2016.08.007 · Cited by 156
Sachan, S., Almaghrabi, F., Yang, J.-B., & Xu, D.-L. (2021) · Expert Systems with Applications · doi:10.1016/j.eswa.2021.115597 · Cited by 66
Self-citationOptimal location of PEVCSs using MAS and ER approach
Jiang, C., Jing, Z., Ji, T., & Wu, Q. (2018) · IET Generation, Transmission & Distribution · doi:10.1049/iet-gtd.2017.1907 · Cited by 24
Metadata
- Authors
- Yang, J.-B., & Xu, D.-L.
- Venue
- IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans
- Published
- 2002-05
- Volume
- 32
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 289-304
- ISSN
- 1083-4427 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2120160105
- Cited by
- 884
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 16.78
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: On the evidential reasoning algorithm for multiple attribute decision analysis under uncertainty. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1109/tsmca.2002.802746
- The paper
- Yang, J.-B., & Xu, D.-L. (2002). On the evidential reasoning algorithm for multiple attribute decision analysis under uncertainty. IEEE Transactions on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics - Part A: Systems and Humans. https://doi.org/10.1109/tsmca.2002.802746
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.