Applied Mathematics, 2013, 4, 1512-1519
Published Online November 2013 (http://www.scirp.org/journal/am)
http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/am.2013.411204
Open Access AM
Attribute Reduction in Interval and Set-Valued Decision
Information Systems
Hong Wang1, Hong-Bo Yue1, Xi-E Chen2
1College of Mathematics and Computer Science, Shan’xi Normal University, Linfen, China
2Shanxi Coal Mining Adminstrators College, Taiyuan, China
Email: whdw218@163.com
Received September 6, 2013; revised October 6, 2013; accepted October 13, 2013
Copyright © 2013 Hong Wang et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License,
which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
ABSTRACT
In many practical situation, some of the attribute values for an object may be interval and set-valued. This paper intro-
duces the interval and set-valued information systems and decision systems. According to the semantic relation of at-
tribute values, interval and set-valued information systems can be classified into two categories: disjunctive (Type 1)
and conjunctive (Type 2) systems. In this pape r, we mainly focus on semantic interpretatio n of Type 1. Then, we define
a new fuzzy preference relation and construct a fuzzy rough set model for interval and set-v alued information systems.
Moreover, based on the new fuzzy preference relation, the concepts of the significance measure of condition attributes
and the relative significance measure of condition attributes are given in interval and set-valued decision information
systems by the introduction of fuzzy positive region and the depend ency degree. And on this b asis, a heuristic algorithm
for calculating fuzzy positive region reduction in interval and set-valued decision information systems is given. Finally,
we give an illustrative example to substantiate the theoretical arguments. The results will help us to gain much more
insights into the meaning of fuzzy rough set theory. Furthermore, it has provided a n ew perspective to study the attrib-
ute reduction problem in decision systems.
Keywords: Interval and Set-Valued Information Systems; Fuzzy Preference Relation; Interval and Set-Valued Decision
Information Systems; Fuzzy Positive Region; Dependency Degree; Significance Measure
1. Introduction
Rough set theory, introduced by Pawlak in 1982, is a
useful mathematic approach for dealing with uncertain,
imprecise and incomplete information [1]. It has attracted
much attention from researchers.
In Pawlak’s original rough set theory, partition or
equivalence (indiscernibility) relatio n is an important and
primitive concept. But partition or equiva lence relation is
still restrictive for many applications. It is unsuitable for
handing incomplete information systems or incomplete
decision systems. To address this issue, several interest-
ing and meaningful extensions to equivalence relation
have been proposed in the past, such as tolerance rela-
tions [2-5], dominance relations [6] and others [7-19].
Particularly, in 1990, Dubois and Prade combined fuzzy
sets with rough sets in a fruitful way by defining rough
fuzzy sets and fuzzy rough sets.
Fuzzy rough sets were first proposed by Dubois and
Prade to extend crisp rough set models [20,21]. Fuzzy
rough sets encapsulate the related but distinct concepts of
vagueness and indiscernibility, both of which occur as a
result of knowledge uncertainty. Fuzzy rough set models
have been a popular topic in recent years. In this paper,
we introduce the interval and set-valued information sys-
tems and decision systems. Interval and set-valued in-
formation systems are important type of data tables, and
generalized models of set-valued information systems
and interval-valued information systems. Several authors
have studied about interval and set-valued information
systems. Lin et al. [6] introduced interval and set-valued
information systems and presented a dominance-based
rough set model for the interval and set-valued informa-
tion systems. However, interval and set-valued informa-
tion systems have not been investigated under the frame-
work of fuzzy rough set model. The main objective of
this paper is to introduce a fuzzy rough set model for
interval and set-valued information systems by defining a
fuzzy preference relation for interval and set-valued in-
formation systems.
H. WANG ET AL. 1513
In rough set theory, an important concept is attribute
reduction [2,13,14,16-18,22,23], which can be consid-
ered as a kind of specific feature selection. In other
words, based on rough set theory, one can select useful
features from a given data set. Recently, more attention
has been focused on the area of attribute reduction and
many scholars have studied attribute reduction based on
fuzzy rough sets [2,16-18,22,23]. Dai et al. [2] proposed
a fuzzy rough set model for set-valued data and investi-
gated the attribute reduction in set-valued information
systems based on discernibility matrices and functions.
Yao et al. [16] proposed an attribute reduction approach
based on generalized fuzzy evidence theory in fuzzy de-
cision system. Shen et al. [17] studied an attribute reduc-
tion method based on fuzzy rough sets. Hu et al. [18]
also proposed an attribute reduction approach by using
information entropy as a tool to measure the significance
of attributes. Rajen B. Bhatt and M. Gopal [22] put for-
ward the concept of fuzzy rough sets on compact com-
putational domain based on the properties of fuzzy t-
norm and t-conorm operators and build improved feature
selection algorithm. Zhao et al. [23] revisited attribute
reductions based on fuzzy rough sets, and then presented
and proved some theorems which describe the impacts of
fuzzy approximation operators on attribute reduction.
However, attribute reduction based on fuzzy rough set in
interval and set-valued decision information systems has
not been reported. In this paper, a fuzzy preference rela-
tion is defined and the upper and lower approximations
of decision classes based on the fuzzy preference relation
are given. Moreover, the definition of the significance
measure of condition attributes and the relative signifi-
cance measure of condition attributes are given in inter-
val and set-valued decision information systems by the
introduction of fuzzy positive reg ion and the dependency
degree. And on this basis, a heuristic algorithm for cal-
culating fuzzy positive region reduction in interval and
set-valued decision information systems is given.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In
Section 2, we give a brief introduction to interval and
set-valued information systems and fuzzy preference rel a-
tion. In Section 3, we propose a fuzzy rough set model
for interval and set-valued information systems by defin-
ing a new fuzzy preference relation. In Section 4, fuzzy
positive region reduction in interval and set-valued deci-
sion information systems is introduced into interval and
set-valued decision information systems. To substantiate
the theoretical arguments, an illustrative example is given
in Section 5. In Section 6, we conclude this paper.
2. Preliminaries
2.1. Interval and Set-Valued Information
Systems
As a result of limitation of subjective and objective con-
ditions and the interference of random factors, people
often get an approximation of the data in data acquisition
of the data in data acquisition. In an information system,
it may occur that some of the attribute values for an ob-
ject are similar, we often make it difficult to determine
the similar values. Therefore, sometimes there are some
object’s attribute values in information systems can not
be determined, but we can know the range, which leads
to the interval and set-valued information systems.
Definition 2.1.1. [6] Let and Q are ordinary sets,
if the range of variable takes set as the lower
limit, set as the upper limit, then the variable is
called interval and set-valu ed variable.
P
R P
Q R
Definition 2.1.2. [6] An information system is a quad-
ruple
,,,SUAVf, wher e the univ erse is a non-
empty finite set of objects, U
A
is a non-empty finite set
of attributes, V is the union of attribute domains
a
aA
VV

a
V, is the set of all possible values for
attribute and is an interval and set-valued vari-
able, a
:a
V
f
UA V
is a function that assigns particular
values from attribute domains to objects, then the infor-
mation system is called an interval and set-valued infor-
mation system.
The semantics of interval and set-valued information
systems have been studied by different approaches, whi c h ,
actually, fall into two types [6]:
Type 1:
x
U
, aA
, the value of attribe a
for objt ut
ec
is denote

d by

a
a
f
x
f
x
V
, where
a
f
x
,
a
f
x
are the finite sets, and satisfy condition:


min max
aa
f
xfx






min max
a
a
fx
aa
fx
f
xV fx

 ,
i.e. the minimum of set

a
f
x
at least equal to the
minimum of set
a
f
x
, at most equal to the maximum
of set
a
f
x
. The value of attribute for object
a
is interpreted disjunctively. For example, if denotes
the environmental risk assessment index of enterprise
a
investment, then can be interpreted as:

 

2,3
1
a
a
fx
fx
VV
the lowest grade of the environmental risk assessment
index is 1, the highest gr ade may be 2 or 3.
Type 2:
x
U
, aA
, the value of attribute a
for object
is denoted by


a
a
f
x
f
x
V
, where
,
aa
fxfx

are the finite sets, and satisfy conditions:




a
a
fx
a
fx
fx Vfx

a
i.e. the minimu m of se t


a
a
f
x
f
x
V
at least contains
a
fx
, at most equal to
a
fx
. The
value of attribute afor object
is interpreted conjuc-
tively. For example, if adenotes the oral expression
Open Access AM
H. WANG ET AL.
Open Access AM
1514
1
2
ij
r
indicates that there is no difference between
ability, then can be inter-

 
English,French,German
English
a
a
fx
fx
VV
preted as:
can speak English, but may also speak
French and German. Therefore, the value of i
x
and
j
x
.
1
ij
indicates that i
x
is absolutely preferred to xj.
r

may be {English}, {English, French },
{English, German} or {English, French, German}.
English,French,German
English
V
In this paper, we mainly focus on semantic interpreta-
tion of Type 1.
2.2. Fuzzy Preference Relation
Definition 2.2.1. [7-12] A fuzzy preference relation
on a set of U is a fuzzy set on the product set
, which is characterized by a membership function:
R
UU
:U
nn

,xx
0,1RU
rR
. If the cardinality of is finite, the
preference relation can also be conveniently represented
by a matrix , where
U


ij nn
MRr
ijij,
0,1 r
ij
r. is interpreted as the pref-
ij
erence degree of the i
x
over
j
x
.
1
2
ij
r indicates that i
x
is preferred to
j
x
.
In this case, the preference matrix

M
R
is usually
assumed to be an additive reciprocal. i.e. 1
ij ji
rr
,
,1,,ij n.
Definition 2.2.2. [14] is called weak reflexive, if R

1
,2
ii
Rxx
i
x
U .
3. Fuzzy Rough Set Model for Interval and
Set-Valued Information Systems
Definition 3.1. Let be an interval
and set-valued information system, , a fuzzy
relation can be defined as:
,,,SUAVf
aA
R



























,
minmin maxmax
min minmax maxmin minmax max
aij
kak aiakai
kak aiakaikak ajakaj
Rxx
xfxfx fxfx
x fxfxfxfxx fxfxfxfx
 
 
 
 
For a set of attributes , a fuzzy relation BA
B
R
is
defined as:

,,inf
B
ij aij
aB
Rxx xx
R

.
Obviously, there are some important properties of the
fuzzy relation defined above:
1)

1
,2
aii
Rxx
, we know that is weak reflexive;
a
R
2) , we know that is
additive reciprocal.

,,
aija ji
RxxRxx

1
a
R
Hence, is a fuzzy preference relation.
R
Definition 3.2. Let be an interval
and set-valued information system, is a fuzzy pref-
erence relation on ,
,,,SUAVfR
i
U
x
U B
i
, , a fuzzy pref-
erence class Bi
R
of A

xP
x
U
induced by the rela-
tion can be d efined as:
R

12
12
B
ii i
i
Rn
rr r
Px n
x
xx

( can also be

Bi
R
Px
regarded as the fuzzy information granule), where
,
ijB i j
rRxx

Bi
R
Px
. Here, “+” means the unions of elements.
is a fuzzy set, and the fuzzy cardinal number of

Bi
R
Px
is defined as:

1
B
n
ii
Rj
Px r
j
.
For a finite set
X
, j
x
X , we have 1
ij
r
, then
the cardinality of is also finite and

i
x
B
R
P

Bi
R
Definition 3.3. Give a fuzzy preference relation
on .
Px U. R
U
0,1
 , the cuts
is a crisp relation,
where
 

1,
,0,
ij
ij
ij
Rxx
Rxx Rxx
Theorem 3.1. Let
,,,SUAVfR
,
ij
b e an interval and
set-valued information system, is a fuzzy preference
relation on U,
x
xU
,BC
,
ij
, , if ,
then i.e. ABC
C
R
B
R
x
xU
, if , then BC
x,,x
CijBij
RxxR

.
Proof. It easy to prove according to Definition 3.1.
4. Fuzzy Positive Region Reduct in Interval
and Set-Valued Decision Information
Systems
In this section, we investigate fuzzy positive region re-
duct with respect to the fuzzy preference relation in in-
terval and set-valued decision information systems.
Definition 4.1. Given an information system
,, ,,SUAfdg, where the universe
12
,,,
n
Uxx x is a non-empty finite set of objects,
12
,,,
m
A
aa a
d
:fU
:
is a non-empty finite set of condition
attributes, is a non-empty finite set of decision at-
tributes, is a function that assigns particular
values from condition attribute domains to objects,
A
g
Ud is a function that assigns particular values
from decision attribute domains to objects, then the in-
H. WANG ET AL. 1515
formation system is called an interval and set-valued
decision information system.
Definition 4.2. Let be an interval
and set-valued decision information system, is a fuzzy
preference relation on ,
,,,,SUAfdg
U
R

12
,,Ud DD,Dr,
k
DUd, , then define two fuzzy operators as
follows: 1kr


inf 1,
jk
Ak iAij
xD
RD xRxx





sup ,
jk
Ak iAij
xD
RD xRxx


Ak i
RD x
and

Ak i
RD x
are called fuzzy lower
approximation operator and upper approximation oper ator
of decision class with respect to , respectively.
k
Theorem 4.1. Let be an interval
and set-valued decision information system, ,
then the following properties hold:
D R
,dg
,, ,SUAf
,BCA
1) , we have
CB
 
Ck Bk
RD RD

,
 
B
kC
RD RD

k
.
2)
 
B
CkBkCk
RDRDRD

,
  
B
CkBk Ck
RDRDRD

.
Proof. Since , according to Theorem 3.1, we
know CB

,

,
B
ij ij
Rx xx


x
C
x R
1,Rx
. Therefore,

1,
Cij Bij
Rxx






inf 1,
inf 1,
jk
jk
Ck iCij
xD
B
ijB ki
xD
RD xRxx
RxxRD x

 







sup ,
sup ,
jk
jk
Bk iBij
xD
CijCki
xD
RD xRxx
RxxRD x



Therefore, the equation
Ck Bk
RD RD

and
 
B
kCk
RD RD

is proved.
2) Since , then according to 1),
,BCBBC C
we have
  
,
B
CkBkBCkCk
RDRDRDRD


,
Therefore, the equation

B
CkBkCk
RDRDRD

is proved, and the equation
  
B
CkBkCk
RDRDRD

can be proved in a s i mi -
lar way.
Definition 4.3. Let be an interval
and set-valued decision information system and,
decision class
,,,,SUAfdg
BA

12
,,,
r
DD DUd, k
d
DUd
B
. Then
the fuzzy positive region of with respect to is
denoted by , the membership function is de-
fined by
B
POS d

 
sup
k
Bi Bkii
DUd
POS d xRDxxU

With res p ec t to , according to Theorem 4.1, we
have BA
B
kAk
RD
, he
RD
nce,

BA
POS dPOS d.
Definition 4.4. Let
,, ,,UAfdg be an interval
and senformati
S
t-valued decisio and n ion system
aB A
. If

dPOS d

n Otherwi
in spensable. If each attr
B
Ba
POS , then the at-
tribute a is dispesable.in Bse, the attribute
is indibute of B is a
pe
B
e
i
indispensable, then B is called independent. All indis-
nsablattributes of
A
is called the core of intval
and set-valued informtion system, which is denoted by
er
a
Core S.
Definition 4.5. Let
,,,,SUAfdg be an interval
and set-valued decisio and n information system
on reduct of SBA
,
B is a fuzzy positive regi if
1)
BA
POS dPOS d,
2)


,OSd POSd B
Ba
aBP .
Fuzzy mi
positive region reduct in interval and set-valued
decision information systems is the nimal attribute
subset that keeps positive region invariant, and it is easy
to prove that for any fuzzy positive region reduct B of
S, we have
Core SB.
Generally speak, information system S may ave h
many reducts, all the reducts of Red(S).
AS is denoted by
ccording to the definition of core, it is easy to get the
following theorem:
Theorem 4.2. Let
,,,,SUAfdg be an interval
and set-valued decisio, then we have n information system
re SRedS, the intersection
of all reducts of S. t
Co i.e.

Core S is
Definition 4.6. Le
,S g be an interval
and set-valued deisi,, ,UAfd
n information system
gree of d to B
co and
Th BA.
en the dependency de is defined by
 

i
Bi
xU
POS dx
dxU
Bi
U

01
Bd
,Obviously, and with respect t
we have o BA,
BA
dd

.
4.7. Let Definition
,, ,,UAfdg be an il
and set-vaSnterva
lued decision If information system.
1
Ad
,
th em.
en S is called a constem; otherwise,
it is referred to as an inconsistent decision syst
Theorem 4.3. Let
sistent decision sy
,,,,SUAfdg be an interval
and set-valued decision information system and BA,
then B is a fuzzy poct of S if and
only if
1)
sitive region redu
BA
dd
,
2)


,BBa
aB dd

 .
of. The necessity of obvious, we prove the suf-
ficiency in the following:
Pro
If
BA
POS dPOS d, according to Theorem 4.1
and Definition 4.3, i
x
U
, such that
O
pen Access AM
H. WANG ET AL.
1516




B
i i
S, then

A
POd xPOS dx
BA
dd

,
which contradicts

d
. On th
pensable,


Ba
POSdPO


BBad
, which
cts



Bdd

. Ther efore B is a fuzzy
lete the
proof of Theore
Definition 4.8. Let
,,,,SUAfdg be an interval
and set-valued decision
B
d
aB, such that a is dis

B
Sd ,
contradi Ba
positive region reduct of S
m 4.3.
inform
me
A
. Hence,
ation sy
asure of
e other hand, I
then we have
d
we comp
stem and BA
in
f
,
aB, the significance B is defined
as:

a

,,Siga B ddd




g be an interval
m, then the core
 
,, 0SigaA d

,g be an interval
, BA,
m
B
on information
gnificance

,,,,SUAfdg.
B
Theorem 4.4. Let SU
and set-valued decision inform
att s
or
Proof.
 

AAa
a Sd


Definition 4.9. Let SU
andset-valued decision inform
ative signi
a
Si
Give an interval and set-va
system

,,,,SUAfdg
measure a
lculation method o
ecision information sys
Ba
,,fd
ation syste
,fd
ation system
cance
lued decisi
, according to the si
m
,,A

d
,,A
fi
te
ribute of S satisfie
 

:,,0CeSaASigaA d 
Core
AB, then the relaeasure of attri-
bute a to B is defined as


 
,
B
B
ga ddd


nd the relative significance measure, we can
get a caf fuzzy positive region reduct.
The specific steps are written as follows:
Algorithm. Fuzzy positive reduct in interval and set-
valued decision information systems.
Input: An interval and set-valued decision information
system

,,,,SUAfdg.
Output: Fuzzy positive reduct of interval and set-
valued d
Step 1. Compute the dependency degree
A
,d,
is a zzy positive
need to go to Step 3.
d
,
Step 2. aA, compute
,Siga A
 

:,,0reSaASigaAd , If Co
A
C

r
region reduct of S. Otherwise,
Step 3. Let
B,

 
ore Sdd, then Co fu
CoreS respect to condition
attribute subset

e S
we
with
A
B, cycle the following steps:
1) aAB lative significance measure

,
B
Siga d. , compute re
hoose a


,max ,
aAB
Sig adSig ad

2) C0AB, such that
0BB
and make
0
BB a
positive regio
.
5.trative Exam
al and set-valued
ntaining information abo ut
3) If
 
BA
dd

, then
reduct of S. Otherwise, returnB is fuzzy n
to 1).
Illusple
an intervExample. Table 1 depicts
decision information system co
risk investment of a company, where
12345
,,,,U xxxxx denotes five companies,
12345
,,,,
A
aaaaa = {market risk,
ronmental risk, product risk
he decision attribute.
By Definition 3.1, we can kn ow.
technology risk,
, finan-operational risk, envi
cial risk}, and d is t

1
12122

272
57
51551
72782
12122
27 25 7
33313
58528
51551
72782
a
MR













2
13113
28228
51551
82882
13113
28228
13113
28228
51551
82882
a
MR















3
12222
27 3 57
51551
72682
11111
36246
33313
58 428
51551
72682
a
MR














Table 1. An interval and set-valued decision information
system.
U a a a a a a d
1 2 345 6
1


4
3
V


5
4
V


4
3
V


4
3
V


3
2
V


5
4
V1
2
x

2
1
V


2
1
V


2,3
1
V


2,3
1
V

3
2
V


2,3
1
V2
3
x


4
3
V


5
4
V


5
3,4
V


4
3
V


4,5
3
V


5
4
V1
4
x


3
2
V


5
4
V


3
2
V


3,4
2
V


3
2
V


4,5
3
V2
5
x

2
1
V


2
1
V


2,3
1
V


2
1
V


3
2
V



3
1, 2
V2
O
pen Access AM
H. WANG ET AL. 1517

4
12122
27257
51551
72782
12122
27257
33313
58528
51551
72782
a
MR















5
11511
22622
11511
22622
11111
66266
11511
22622
11511
22622
a
MR















6
12121
27 2 5 3
515 55
72789
12121
27 2 5 3
33313
58527
24241
39372
a
MR














According to Definition 3.1
We have
 
,inf,
Aij aij
aA
Rxx Rxx

,

12122
27257
11511
22822
11111
66266
13113
28228
14511
2982 2
A
MR















Then

169
35
A
R
Px
,

221
8
A
R
Px
,

37
6
A
R
Px
,
.
puter the depeency degree

49
4
A
R
Px
1) Comnd
113
,Dxx,

2245
,,Dxxx
According Definition 4.2,e have to w
,

5185
72
A
R
Px

11 3
A
RD x5

21A
RDx
1
2

12 2
A
RD x1

22A
RDx
3
8


13 5
6
A
RDx


231
2
A
RD x

14 1
2
A
RDx

241
2
A
RD x


15 1
2
A
RDx


253
8
A
RD x
According to Definition 4 we have .6,

13 15 1144
55262275
Ad






1
131511
552622
Aa d


44
75


2
131511 44
55 2 6 2275
Aa d






3
131511 44
552622 75
Aa d






4
131511 44
55 2 6 2275
Aa d






5
13 3 3 13743
558427 1400
Aa d






6
131511 44
55 2 6 2275
Aa d




(Accordin g t o Definition 4.7, since

13 151144 1
55262275
Ad




, so this decision
information system is an inconsistent decision system.)
2) Compute
Core S (the significance measure of
each attribute)
According to Definition 4.8, we have
1,, 0SigaAd

2,,0SigaAd
3,,0aA dSig

4,,0SigaAd

547

6,,0SigaA d
,, 0
84
SigaA d
Therefore,
5
Core Sa,

 
17
30 A
Core Sdd

 .
3) Compute the relative significance measure
O
pen Access AM
H. WANG ET AL.
1518
Let , according to Definition 4.9,
we have


5
BCoreS a


 
1
1,
B
Sig a44 171
75 3050
B
Ba
ddd




 
2
217 17
i,
B
Ba
ga d
0
30 30
B
Sd d



 
3
344 171
,75 3050
BB
Ba
Siga ddd




 
4
444 171
,75 3050
BB
Ba
Siga ddd




 
5
544 171
,753050
BB
Ba
Siga ddd




 
6
644 171
,753050
BB
Ba
Siga ddd



 
15
,
13151144
55 2 6 2275A
aa d






d

35
,
13151144
55262275 A
aa d




d

 
45
,
13 15 1144
55262275 A
aa d




d

 
56
,
13151144
55262275 A
aa d




d
Hence,, ,

15
,aa

35
,aa
45
,aa
s in interval
and are
the fuzzy reduct
ued decision information system. We can conclude t
product risk is the core influencing factor and market risk,
operational risk, environmental risk and financial ris
thnt influencing facrs.
formation systems has
attracted the attention of many scholars.
introduce a fuzzy rough set model f
heoretical Aspects of Reason-
[2] J. H. Dai and H. W. Tian, “Fuzzy Rough Set Model For-
set-Valued Dat, Vol. 229, 2013,
pp. 54-68. http ss.2013.03.005

56
,aa
and set-val-
positive region hat
k are
e importato
6. Conclusions
It is well known that attribute reduction is a basic issue in
rough set theory. Recently, the attribute reduction based
on fuzzy rough set in decision in
In this paper, we or
interval and set-valued information systems by defining a
fuzzy preference relation. The concepts of the signifi-
cance measure of condition attributes and the relative
significance measure of condition attributes are given in
interval and set-valued decision information systems by
the introduction of fuzzy positive region and the de-
pendency degree. And on this basis, a heuristic algorithm
for calculating fuzzy positive region reduction in interval
and set-valued decision information systems is given.
The results will help us to gain much more insights
into the meaning of fuzzy rough set theory. Further more,
it has provided a new perspective to study the attribute
reduction problem in decision systems.
7. Acknowledgements
This work is supported by the Natural Science Founda-
tion of Shanxi Province in China (No. 2008011012).
REFERENCES
[1] Z. Pawlak, “Rough Sets: T
ing about Data,” Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht,
1991.
a,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems
://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.f
[3] Y. H. Qian, J. Y. Liang, W. Z. Wu and C. Y. Dang, “In-
formation Granularity in Fuzzy Binary Grc Model,” IEEE
Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, Vol. 19, No. 2, 2011, pp.
253-264. http://dx.doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2010.2095461
[4] Z. Q. Meng and Z. Z. Shi, “Extended Rough Set-Based
Attribute Reduction in Inconsistent Incomplete Decision
Systems,” Information Sciences, Vol. 204, 2012, pp. 44-
69. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2012.04.004
[5] T. Q. Deng, C. D. Yang and X. F. Wang, “A Reduct De-
rived from Feature Selection,” Pattern Recognition Let-
ters, Vol. 33, No. 12, 2012, pp. 1638-1646.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2012.03.028
[6] Y. J. Lin, J. J. Li and S. X. Wu, “Rough Set Theory in
Interval and Set-Valued Information Systems,” Control
and Decision, Vol. 26, No. 11, 2011, pp. 1611-1615.
[7] R. C. Berredo, P. Y. Ekel and R. M. Palhares, “Fuzzy
Preference Relations in Models of Decision Making,”
Nonlinear Analysis, Vol . 63, N o . 5 - 7 , 2 0 0 5, p p . e 7 3 5 -e741.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.na.2005.02.093
[8] E. Herrera-Viedma, F. Herrera, F. Chiclana and M. Luque,
“Some Issues on Consistency of Fuzzy Preference Rela-
tions,” European Journal of Operational Researcher, Vol.
154, No. 1, 2004, pp. 98-109.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(02)00725-7
[9] Q. H. Hu, D. R. Yu and M. Z. Guo, “Fuzzy Preference
Based Rough Sets,” Information Sciences, Vol. 180, No.
10, 2010, pp. 2003-2022.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2010.01.015
[10] Y. M. Wang and Z, P. Fan, “Fuzzy Preference Relations
Aggregation and Weight Determination,” Computers &
Industrial Engineering, Vol. 53, No. 1, 2007, pp. 163-
172. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cie.2007.05.001
[11] L. L. Lee, “Gr oup Decisi on Making with Inc o mplet e Fuzzy
Preference Relations Based on the Additive Consistency
and the Other Consistency Origi nal,” Experts Systems wi th
Applications, Vol. 39, No. 14, 2012, pp. 11666-11676.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.eswa.2012.04.043
[12] B. Zhu, “Studies on Consistency Measure of Hesitant
Fuzzy Preference Relations,” Procedia Computer Science,
Vol. 17, 2013, pp. 457-464.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2013.05.059
[13] Y. H. Qian and J. Y. Liang, “Positive Approximation: A
Accelerator for Attribute Reduction in Rough Set The-
n
ory,” Artificial Intelligence, Vol. 174, No. 9-10, 2010, pp.
597-618. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.artint.2010.04.018
O
pen Access AM
H. WANG ET AL.
Open Access AM
1519
ghua Publishing Company
[14] W. X. Zhang and G. F. Qiu, “Uncertain Decision Making
Based on Rough Sets,” Qin
Beijing, 2005, pp. 133-144. ,
[15] D. R. Yu, Q. H. Hu and C. X. Wu, “Uncertainty Measures
for Fuzzy Relations and Their Applications,” Applied Soft
Computing, Vol. 7, No. 3, 2007, pp. 1135-1143.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2006.10.004
[16] Y. Q. Yao and J. S. Mi, “Attribute Reduction Based on
Generalized Fuzzy Evidence Theory in Fuzzy Decision
Systems,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 170, No. 1, 2011,
pp. 64-75. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.fss.2011.01.008
[17] R. Jensen and Q. Shen, “Fuzzy-Rough Attributes Reduc-
tion with Application to Web Categorization,” F
and Systems, Vol. 141, No. 3, 2004, pp. 469-4uzzy Sets
85.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(03)00021-6
[18] Q. H. Hu, D. R. Yu and Z. X. Xie, “Information-Pre-
serving Hybrid Data Reduction Based on Fuzzy Rough
Techniques,” Pattern Recognition Letters, Vol. 27, No. 5,
2006, pp. 414-423.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2005.09.004
[19] B. Q. Hu and Y. X. Xian, “Level Characteristics of Rough
Fuzzy Sets and Fuzz
Mathematics, Vol. 20, No. 1, 2006, pp.108-114
y Rough Sets,” Fuzzy Systems and
.
[20] D. Dubois and H. Prade, “Rough Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy
Rough Sets,” International Journal of General Systems,
Vol. 17, No. 2-3, 1990, pp. 191-209.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03081079008935107
[21] D. Dubois and H. Prade, “Putting Rough Sets and Fuzzy
Sets Together,” Intelligent Decision
1992, pp. 203-232. Support, Vol. 11,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-015-7975-9_14
[22] R. B. Bhatt and M. Gopal, “On Fuzzy-Rough Sets Ap-
proach to Feature Sele
Vol. 26, No. 7, 2005, pp. 965-975.
ction,” Pattern Recognition Letters,
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2004.09.044
[23] S. Y. Zhao, “On Fuzzy Approximation Operators in At-
tribute Reduction with Fuzzy Rou
Sciences, Vol. 178, No. 16, 2008, pp. 3163-317
gh Sets,” Information
6.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2008.03.022