Ambiguity in information systems: rows, columns, and the Ellsberg paradox

被引:0
作者
Wolski, Marcin [1 ]
Gomolinska, Anna [2 ]
机构
[1] Marie Curie Sklodowska Univ, Dept Log & Cognit Sci, Pl Marii Curie Sklodowskiej 4, PL-20031 Lublin, Poland
[2] Univ Bialystok, Fac Comp Sci, Ul Konstantego Ciolkowskiego 1M, PL-15245 Bialystok, Poland
关键词
Ellsberg paradox; Uncertainty; Ambiguity; Information system; Rough set theory; Galois connections; Adjunctions; Nearness relation; UNCERTAINTY;
D O I
10.1007/s10115-024-02334-w
中图分类号
TP18 [人工智能理论];
学科分类号
081104 ; 0812 ; 0835 ; 1405 ;
摘要
The present paper investigates information systems stemming from rough set theory against the backdrop of the Ellsberg Paradox. In the early 1960s, D. Ellsberg introduced and discussed a type of informational uncertainty/ambiguity that could not be adequately modelled by the concept of measurable risk. Twenty years later, Z. Pawlak developed rough set theory-a mathematical framework aimed at modelling and managing different types of informational uncertainty that may be found in data analysis (including various forms of imprecision, vagueness, or indecision). However, as in economics in the 1960s, by uncertainty it has commonly been meant, in default of any other alternative interpretation, a sort of measurable risk. In the present study, we would like to fill this research gap and examine D. Ellsberg's distinction between measurable risk and unmeasurable ambiguity in the context of various forms of information systems related to rough set theory. It turns out that this distinction brings an interesting reformulation of rough sets and reveals hidden facets of this theory. Specifically, we investigate two versions of ambiguity that can be derived from the Ellsberg paradox and relate them to the row and column oriented representations of information systems.
引用
收藏
页码:5247 / 5270
页数:24
相关论文
共 31 条
  • [1] Empson W., Seven Types of Ambiguity, (1949)
  • [2] Grzymala-Busse J.W., A rough set approach to incomplete data, Rough Sets and Knowledge Technology. Lecture Notes in Computer Science, 9436, pp. 3-14, (2015)
  • [3] Ziarko W., Variable precision rough set model, J Comput Syst Sci, 46, 1, pp. 39-59, (1993)
  • [4] Yao Y., An outline of a theory of three-way decisions, Rough Sets and Current Trends in Computing, pp. 1-17, (2012)
  • [5] Ellsberg D., Risk, ambiguity, and the savage axioms, Q J Econ, 75, pp. 643-669, (1961)
  • [6] Slowinski R., Stefanowski J., Handling various types of uncertainty in the rough set approach, Proceedings of the International Workshop on Rough Sets and Knowledge Discovery, pp. 366-376, (1993)
  • [7] Greco S., Matarazzo B., Slowinski R., Distinguishing vagueness from ambiguity in rough set approximations, Int J Uncertain Fuzziness Knowledge-Based Syst, 26, pp. 89-125, (2018)
  • [8] Pawlak Z., Vagueness and uncertainty: a rough set perspective, Comput Intell, (1995)
  • [9] Hsu M., Bhatt M., Adolphs R., Tranel D., Camerer C., Neural systems responding to degrees of uncertainty in human decision-making, Science (New York, N.Y.), 310, pp. 1680-1683, (2006)
  • [10] Pawlak Z., Rough Sets: Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Data. Theory and Decision Library D: System Theory, Knowledge Engineering and Problem Solving, vol. 9, (1991)