Abstract
Due to having the explicit evidential reasoning (ER) aggregation function, the analytical ER algorithm has been extensively applied to decision problems under uncertainty. However, there are some different opinions to the validity of the analytical ER algorithm. In this paper, a new method is proposed for proving the equivalence between the recursive and analytical ER algorithms, in such a way that is different from and, it is believed, more rigorous than that of Wang et al (2006). The new method is based directly on Dempster-Shafer’s combination rule and mathematics induction principle. It allows to consider simultaneously the combination and normalization of evidence. In addition, the iterative relationship of the normalization factors between two algorithms is derived. The paper further demonstrates the validity of the analytical ER algorithm theoretically and clarifies the relationship between the recursive and analytical ER algorithms.
Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a callDisclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.
