An introduction to bipolar representations of information and preference

International Journal of Intelligent Systems

Volumn 23, Issue 8, 2008, Pages 866-877

  Dubois, Didier ^a   Prade, Henri ^a  

^a UNIVERSITÉ DE TOULOUSE   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIVARIATE; DECISION ANALYSIS; RULE REPRESENTATION; UNIVARIATE;

DECISION THEORY;

DECISION MAKING;

EID: 48849090539     PISSN: 08848173     EISSN: 1098111X     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/int.20297     Document Type: Conference Paper

References (37)

1. Tversky A, Kahneman D. Advances in prospect theory: Cumulative representation of uncertainty. J Risk Uncertain 1992; 5:297-323.
2. Osgood CE, Suci GJ, Tannenbaum PH. The measurement of meaning. Chicago: University of Illinois Press; 1957.
3. Cacioppo JT, Gardner WL, Berntson GG. Beyond bipolar conceptualizations and measures: The case of attitudes and evaluative space. Personality Social Psychol Rev 1997; 1:3-25.
4. Slovic P, Finucane M, Peters E, MacGregor DG. Rational actors or rational fools? implications of the affect heuristic for behavioral economics. J Socio-Econo 2002; 31:329-342.
5. Yager RR, Rybalov A. Uninorm aggregation operators. Fuzzy Sets Syst 1996; 80:111-120.
6. Dombi J. Basic concepts for a theory of evaluation: The aggregative operator. Eur J Oper Res 1982; 10:282-293.
7. Grabisch M. The Moebius transform on symmetric ordered structures and its application to capacities on finite sets. Discrete Math 2004; 28(1-3):17-34.
8. Dubois D, Kaci S, Prade H. Bipolarity in reasoning and decision: An introduction. The case of the possibility theory framework. In: Proc. of the 10th Int Conf on Information Processing and Management of Uncertainty in Knowledge-Based Systems (IPMU'04), Perugia, Italy; 2004. pp 959-966.
9. Shafer G. A mathematical theory of evidence. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press; 1976.
10. Dubois D, Prade H. Possibility theory. New York: Plenum Press; 1988.
11. Giang PH, Shenoy PP. Two axiomatic approaches to decision-making using possibility theory. Eur J Oper Res 2005; 162:450-467.
12. Atanassov K. Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Set Syst 1986; 20:87-96.
13. Belnap ND. A useful four-valued logic. In Dunn JM, Epstein G. editors. Modern uses of multiple-valued logic, Dordrecht, The Netherlands: D.Reidel; 1977. pp 8-37.
14. Ginsberg ML. Bilattices and modal operators. J. Logic Comput. 1990; 1:41-69.
15. Zhang W-R, Zhang L. Yin Yang bipolar logic and bipolar fuzzy logic. Inform Sci 2004; 165:265-287.
16. Amgoud L, Cayrol C, Lagasquie-Schiex MC, Livet P. On the bipolarity in argumentation frameworks. International Journal of Intelligent System, 2008 (this special issue).
17. Pawlak Z. Rough Sets - Theoretical aspects of reasoning about data. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer Academic Publishers; 1991.
18. Banerjee M. Rough sets and 3-valued Lukasiewicz logic. Fundam Inform 1997; 32:213-220.
19. Dubois D, Prade H, Smets P. "Not impossible" vs. "guaranteed possible" in fusion and revision. In: Benferhat S, Besnard P. editors. Proceedings of ECSQARU'01, LNAI, Vol. 2143, Berlin: Springer-Verlag; 2001. pp 522-531.
20. Dubois D, Hajek P, Prade H. Knowledge-driven versus data-driven logics. J Logic Lang. Inform 2000; 9:65-89.
21. Prade H, Serrurier M. Version space learning for possibilistic hypotheses. In: Proc 17th Europ. Conf. on Art. Intel., ECAI'06, Riva del Garda, Italy; 2006. pp 801-802.
22. de Finetti B. Theory of Probability. New York: Wiley; 1974.
23. Mamdani EH. Application of fuzzy logic to approximate reasoning using linguistic systems. IEEE Trans Comput 1997; 26:1182-1191.
24. Dubois D, Prade H, Ughetto L. A new perspective on reasoning with fuzzy rules. Int J Intell Syst 2003; 18:541-567.
25. Dubois D, Huellermeier E, Prade H. A systematic approach to the assessment of fuzzy association rules. Data Mining Knowl Discovery 2006; 13:167-192.
26. Labreuche Ch, Grabisch M. Generalized Choquet-like aggregation functions for handling bipolar scales. Eur. J Oper Res 2006; 172(3):931-955.
27. Greco S, Matarazzo B, Slowinski R. Bipolar Sugeno and Choquet integrals. In: EUROFUSE Workshop on Information Systems, Varenna; 2002. pp 191-196.
28. Grabisch M, Labreuche Ch. Bi-capacities - parts I and II. Fuzzy Sets Syst 2005; 151(2):211-260.
29. Bonnefon J-F, Dubois D, Fargier H, Leblois S. Qualitative Heuristics for Balancing the Pros and Cons, Theory and Decision, available on-line, to appear.
30. Gigerenzer G, Todd PM. and the ABC group. Simple heuristics that make us smart. New York: Oxford University Press; 1999.
31. Amgoud L, Prade H. Comparing decisions on the basis of a bipolar typology of arguments. In Hunter A, Dix J. editor Proc. 11th Workshop on Nonmonotonic Reasoning, Windermere U.K.; 2006. pp 426-432.
32. Benferhat S, Dubois D, Kaci S, Prade H. Bipolar possibility theory in preference modeling: Representation, fusion and optimal solutions. Inform Fusion 2006; 7:135-150.
33. Zadeh LA. Fuzzy sets, Information and Control 1965; 8:338-353.
34. Dubois D, Prade H. Possibility theory, probability theory and multiple-valued logics: A clarification. Annals of Mathematics and Artificial Intelligence 2001; 32:35-66.
35. Dubois D. On ignorance and contradiction considered as truth-values. Logic Journal of the IGPL 2008; 16(2):195-216.
36. de Finetti B. "La Prévision: See lois logiques, ses sources subjectives," Annales de l'Institut Henri Poincaré 1937; 7(1):1-68
37. (translation: Foresight: its Logical Laws, its Subjective Sources, in Kyburg HE and Smokier HE (eds), Studies in Subjective Probability, New York: Wiley, 1964).