IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, VOL. 26, NO.
6, DECEMBER 2018
Dynamic Fusion of Multisource Interval-Valued
Data by Fuzzy Granulation
Yanyong Huang, Tianrui Li , Senior Member, IEEE, Chuan Luo, Hamido Fujita , Senior Member, IEEE,
and Shi-Jinn Horng
Abstract—Information fusion is capable of fusing and trans-
forming multiple data derived from different sources to provide a
unified representation for centralized knowledge mining that facil-
itates effective decision-making, classification and prediction, etc.
Multisource interval-valued data, characterizing the uncertainty
phenomena in the data in the form of intervals in different sources,
are the most common symbolic data which widely exist in many
real-world applications. This paper concentrates on efficient fusing
of multisource interval-valued data with the dynamic updating of
data sources, involving the addition of new sources and deletion
of obsolete sources. We propose a novel data fusion method based
on fuzzy information granulation, which translates multisource
interval-valued data into trapezoidal fuzzy granules. Given this ef-
fectively fusing capability, we develop incremental mechanisms and
algorithms for fusing multisource interval-valued data with a dy-
namic variation of data sources. Finally, extensive experiments are
carried out to verify the effectiveness of the proposed algorithms
when comparing to six different fusion algorithms. Experimental
results show that the proposed fusion method outperforms other
related approaches. Furthermore, the proposed incremental fusion
algorithms can reduce the computing overhead in comparison with
the static fusion algorithm when adding and deleting multiple data
sources.
Index Terms—Fuzzy granulation, incremental fusion, informa-
tion fusion, multisource interval-valued data.
Manuscript received April 26, 2017; revised October 31, 2017 and January
26, 2018; accepted April 26, 2018. Date of publication May 2, 2018; date of
current version November 29, 2018. This work is supported in part by the
National Science Foundation of China under Grant 61573292, Grant 61572406,
Grant 61602327, and Grant 61603313; in part by the Fundamental Research
Funds for the Central Universities under Grant 2682015QM02; in part by the
China Postdoctoral Science Foundation under Grant 2016M602688; and in part
by the MOST under Grant 106-2221-E-011-149-MY2 and Grant 106-3114-E-
011-008. (Corresponding author: Tianrui Li.)
Y. Huang and T. Li are with the School of Information Science and Technol-
ogy, Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 611756, China (e-mail:,yyhswjtu
@163.com; trli@swjtu.edu.cn).
C. Luo is with the College of Computer Science, Sichuan University, Chengdu
610065, China (e-mail:,cluo@scu.edu.cn).
Hamido Fujita is with the Faculty of Software and Information Science, Iwate
Prefectural University 020-0693, Iwate, Japan (e-mail:,HFujita-799@acm.org).
S.-J. Horng is with the School of Information Science and Technology,
Southwest Jiaotong University, Chengdu 611756, China, and also with the De-
partment of Computer Science and Information Engineering, National Taiwan
University of Science and Technology, Taipei 106, Taiwan (e-mail:, horngsj@
yahoo.com.tw).
This paper has supplementary downloadable material available at http://
ieeexplore.ieee.org, provided by the author.
Color versions of one or more of the figures in this paper are available online
at http://ieeexplore.ieee.org.
Digital Object Identifier 10.1109/TFUZZ.2018.2832608
1063-6706 © 2018 IEEE. Personal use is permitted, but republication/redistribution requires IEEE permission.
See http://www.ieee.org/publications standards/publications/rights/index.html for more information.
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - SELCUK UNIVERSITESI. Downloaded on November 11,2022 at 07:55:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3403
I. INTRODUCTION
ITH the rapid development of society and economy,
W the data collected from real-applications is described
with uncertainty, multisource characteristic, and dynamicity.
Interval-valued data is commonly employed to characterize
the imprecise and ambiguous phenomena, such as the change
of temperature [10], the fluctuation of stock price [38], and
the range of blood pressure [12]. Furthermore, the interval-
valued data may be obtained from multiple different locations
or sources. For example, the meteorological data from differ-
ent weather stations are collected to forecast the weather more
accurately. Considering that multisource interval-valued data
evolves over time, it is a challenge to fuse these data effectively.
Information fusion technology can combine and transform
information from multiple different sources to construct a uni-
fied representation, which is beneficial to reduce the ambiguity
and uncertainty of data and improve the quality of informa-
tion [9]. Information fusion methods have been applied to deal
with multisource data [11] and interval-valued data [8]. Xu et al.
presented an information fusion approach based on the infor-
mation entropy to fuse multisource fuzzy incomplete data [42].
Yager proposed a monotonic set measure for the fusion of multi-
source hybrid data, including different types of data [45]. By the
utilization of Dempster-Shafer evidence theory, Xu et al. pre-
sented a fault diagnosis method by fusing different diagnosis ev-
idences in the form of interval-valued data [41]. However, these
approaches could not be directly applied to fuse multisource
interval-valued data. This paper proposes a fusion method for
the multisource interval-valued data by utilizing granular com-
puting (GrC) methodology.
GrC is a useful tool for information processing, machine
learning, knowledge discovery, etc. [1], [30], [52]. There are
two basic issues in GrC, namely, the generation of informa-
tion granules and computation with granules [26], [34], [49].
Many related works of GrC have been studied in recent three
decades [28], [40], [43]. Pedrycz et al. presented an information
granulation method based on the fuzzy set theory for construct-
ing information granules in the analysis of temporal data [27].
Yao et al. proposed a hierarchical granulation structure in terms
of rough set theory and investigated the corresponding rough ap-
proximation structures [47]. Due to the simplicity of information
granules representation and the convenience of granular com-
putation, some information fusion methods via incorporating
GrC have been investigated in multisource environment. Yager
 3404
presented a fusion framework for dealing with the conflict of
different data sources by the utilization of granular method [46].
Huang et al. combined the theory of three-way decisions and for-
mal concept analysis for fusing the local granular concepts [14].
Qian et al. proposed a multigranulation fusing method based on
pessimistic rough set model [31]. Lin et al. discussed the relation
between multigranulation rough set theory and the evidence the-
ory and further proposed a granulation fusion method by com-
bining these two theories [21]. Based on internal-confidence
and external-confidence degrees, Xu et al. presented a source
selection algorithm for multisource data and fused these differ-
ent information sources by employing the method of triangular
fuzzy information granules [44]. However, these methods are
suitable for dealing with multisource single-valued data. They
could not be applied to fuse multisource interval-valued data
directly. In this paper, we present a new information fusion ap-
proach via merging multiple interval-valued data coming from
different sources to construct trapezoidal fuzzy granules. First, a
novel dominant matrix is proposed and the corresponding prop-
erties are investigated. Then, we compute and sort the row sums
of dominant matrix to determine the core of a trapezoidal fuzzy
granule. The optimal support of a fuzzy granule can be com-
puted by the derivation of two objective functions. Finally, the
uncertainty measures of fusion results based on rough set theory
are discussed.
Another motivation of our study is that the number of sources
of multisource interval-value data will continuously change as
the new sources are inserted or the obsolete sources are deleted
in the context of dynamic multisource environment. For exam-
ple, to improve the precision of weather prediction, more me-
teorological sensors are installed at different weather monitor
stations. Moreover, aged meteorological sensors or unreason-
able monitoring locations will be removed or canceled due to
their ineffectiveness. Since the variation of sources will result
in the change of fuzzy granule structures, traditional static fu-
sion methods need to recompute the whole process of informa-
tion fusion, which is too expensive or even infeasible for large
datasets. In order to reduce the cost of computing, incremental
fusion methods are developed by the incorporation of newly up-
dated data and accumulated information. Keong et al. presented
an incremental method to fuse unstructured texts when adding
a new text [6]. Kotwal et al. proposed a fusion rule with con-
sistency for incrementally evaluating the fusion performance
of hyperspectral images [17]. Lhuilier dynamically integrated
three fusion approaches for combination of GPS and Structure-
from-Motion based on bundle adjustment [19]. Sklarz et al.
suggested a road map estimation approach by fusing a newly
track curve incrementally [33]. Nonetheless, these approaches
are not suitable for fusing multisource interval-valued data based
on fuzzy granulation under the variation of sources. To improve
the fusion efficiency, this paper presents the incremental fusion
mechanisms for updating trapezoidal fuzzy granules, by uti-
lizing previously accumulated results of information granules
when adding and deleting information sources. Instead of com-
puting dominant matrix from scratch, the row sums of dominant
matrix are first updated by incorporating the prior calculating
results and the newly modified (added or discarded) data. Then,
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - SELCUK UNIVERSITESI. Downloaded on November 11,2022 at 07:55:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, VOL. 26, NO. 6, DECEMBER 2018
the core of a fuzzy granule can be obtained based on the order
of row sums. Finally, the support of a fuzzy granule is modified
in terms of the updated core and prior acquired information.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section II, some fun-
damental concepts of interval-valued information systems and
fuzzy set theory are reviewed briefly. In Section III, an infor-
mation fusion method based on fuzzy granulation is presented
for fusing multisource interval-valued data. In Section IV, two
incremental fusion mechanisms are presented with the addition
and deletion of data sources, respectively. And the correspond-
ing algorithms are developed and analyzed. Section V carries out
a series of compared experiments to verify the effectiveness of
the proposed methods. This paper ends with some conclusions
and future works in Section VI.
II. PRELIMINARIES
In this section, some basic concepts related to interval-valued
information systems (IvIS) [18] as well as fuzzy set theory [51],
[53] are briefly reviewed. For convenience, the description of
symbols used in this paper is summarized in Table A in the
supplementary material.
A. IvIS
Interval-valued data has been widely applied to character-
ize the imprecise and uncertain situations in real applications.
Interval-valued data is described in a tabular form, called IvIS.
The definition is as follows.
Definition II.1: [18] Let IvIS = {U, AT, V, f } be an IvIS,
where U is a nonempty finite set of objects, called the uni-
verse;AT is a nonempty finite set of condition attributes;
V = a∈A T Va and Va is a domain of attribute a; f : U ×
AT → V is an information function such that f (x, a) =
[f − (x, a), f + (x, a)] ∈ Va for every a ∈ AT , x ∈ U , where
f − (x, a) and f + (x, a) denote the lower and upper bounds of
interval, respectively.
In many real applications, the collection of interval-valued
data is usually available from multiple sensors with same func-
tions, which are located in different sites, e.g. measurements
of temperature and humidity in a country [32]. As such, inter-
val information grouped from different sources in the form of
IvIS is called multisource interval-valued information systems
(MIvIS), which is formulated as follows.
Definition II.2: Let M IvIS = {IvISi |IvISi = (U, ATi ,
VA T i , fi ), i = 1, 2, . . . , N } be an MIvIS, where
1) IvISi is the i-th IvIS in MIvIS;
2) U is a nonempty finite set of objects;
3) ATi is a nonempty finite set of attributes of the i-th IvISi ;
4) VA T i is the domain of the attribute set ATi in the i-th
subsystem IvISi ;
5) fi : U × ATi → Vi is an information function in the i-th
subsystem IvISi . 
Definition II.3: Let M IvDS = {M IvIS M D} be a
multisource interval-valued decision system (MIvDS), where
M IvIS is a multisource interval-valued information system
and M D = {D, VD , fD }, where D is the decision attribute set,
 HUANG et al.: DYNAMIC FUSION OF MULTISOURCE INTERVAL-VALUED DATA BY FUZZY GRANULATION
TABLE I
MULTISOURCE INTERVAL-VALUED DECISION SYSTEM
VD is the domain of D and fD : U × D → VD is an information
function.
Example  II.1: Table I shows an MIvDS, M IvDS =
{M IvIS M D}, where M IvIS = {IvISi |IvISi = (U, ATi ,
VA T i , fi ), i = 1, 2, 3}, in which meteorological data is col-
lected from three different weather stations. In each subsystem
IvISi , U = {xj |j ∈ {1, 2, · · · , 5}} denotes 5 different dis-
tricts, Ai = {temperature, relative humidity}  {a1 , a2 } and
D = {precipitation}. The precipitation is divided into 3 states,
i.e., VD = {no rain, little rain, heavy rain}  {0, 1, 2}.
B. Fuzzy Set Theory and Trapezoidal Fuzzy Numbers
Fuzzy set theory has played a key role in data mining, machine
learning, decision-making systems, and other domains [7], [13],
[15], [16], since it was initially presented by Zadeh [51]. In
fuzzy sets, a membership function is proposed to characterize
the degrees of membership of the objects associated with a
class. It is different with classical set theory, where elements
either belong to a set or not.
Let X denote a collection of objects. A fuzzy set A on X is
a set of ordered pairs: A = {< x, A(x) >}, where A(x) is the
membership function, which satisfies A(x) ∈ [0, 1], ∀x ∈ X.
F (X) is the family of fuzzy subsets of X. For any fuzzy subsets
A, B ∈ F (X), two basic operators intersection ∩ and union ∪
are defined as follows, respectively.
 and specificity [27]. Following this idea, Yu et al. designed an
(A ∩ B)(x) = A(x) ∧ B(x)
(A ∪ B)(x) = A(x) ∨ B(x)
where ∧ and ∨ stand for the minimum and maximum operations,
respectively.
As the fuzzy number represents imprecise and uncertain in-
formation, it has been employed in many fields, like medical
diagnosis, load forecasting of power, and so forth [37], [39],
[48]. In this paper, we focus on trapezoidal fuzzy numbers for
our study. A trapezoidal fuzzy number A is defined by a quadru-
ple, viz., A = (a, b, c, d), whose membership function has the
following form:
⎧ x−a
⎪ b−a , if a ≤ x < b
⎪
⎪ 
⎨ 1, if b ≤ x ≤ c
A(x) = d−x
⎪
⎪ , if c≤x<d
⎪
⎩ d−c
0, otherwise
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - SELCUK UNIVERSITESI. Downloaded on November 11,2022 at 07:55:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3405
Fig. 1. General trapezoidal fuzzy number.
Fig. 1 shows a general class of a trapezoidal fuzzy member-
ship function. [a, d] and [b, c] are defined as the support and core
of the trapezoidal fuzzy number A, respectively. b − a is called
the left width and d − c is the right width. Specially, when b = c,
it is commonly named the triangular fuzzy number.
Information granulation is a basic issue of GrC, which decom-
poses the whole data space into different granules with vicinal
or similar objects. After granulation, we can utilize these in-
formation granules for data mining, knowledge discovery and
others [23], [29], [35]. Pedrycz et al. proposed a method of in-
formation granulation based on fuzzy sets, which aims to con-
struct an information granule (a fuzzy set) with high legitimation
optimization problem to granulate crisp data for obtaining a tri-
angular fuzzy granule (a triangular fuzzy number) [50]. More
formally, given a collection of data {x1 , x2 , . . . , xn }, to con-
struct the triangular fuzzy granule with highly legitimate (viz.
embrace sufficient experimental data) and enough specificity
(namely, keep the support of a fuzzy set as compact as possi-
ble), the granulationproblem is transformed into the following
n
1 A (x i )
optimization task: i =d−a , where a and d are the left and
right endpoints of the triangular fuzzy number A, respectively.
The solution procedure can be divided into two steps: 1) sort
the given data {x1 , x2 , . . . , xn } to determine the median point
m0 and select it as the core of A; 2) the left and right endpoints
a and b can be obtainedby solving the following two opti-
A (x i ) A (x i )
mization problems: max xi < m 0
and max xi > m 0
.
a m 0 −a d d−m 0
Zhang et al. extended this method to deal with the granulation
of interval-valued data [54]. The interval-valued data can be
 3406 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, VOL. 26, NO. 6, DECEMBER 2018

granulated as a trapezoidal fuzzy granule by the following two

steps, i.e., determining the core [b, c] of a trapezoidal fuzzy num-
ber A, by sorting all interval-valued data {x1 , x2 , . . . , xn }, and
+ +
 x  x
i A (x)dx i A (x)dx Fig. 2. Conditions 2 and 5 in Eq. (1).
xi < b x− xi > c x−
max i
b−a and max i
d−c to obtain the
a d
+
support [a, d] of the trapezoidal fuzzy set A, where x−
i and xi
denote the left and right endpoints of the interval-valued data
xi , respectively.

III. INTERVAL-VALUED INFORMATION FUSION BASED ON

FUZZY GRANULATION
Information fusion is useful to reduce the uncertainty and
ambiguity of multisource data and improve the precision of
discrimination. In this section, we present an information fusion Fig. 3. Integration region of the condition 2 .
method in terms of fuzzy granulation to deal with information
from multiple interval-valued datasets for forming a unified
2 and 5 in (1), respectively. Fig. 2 shows the correspond-
fuzzy information table, in which each element is a trapezoidal
fuzzy number. ing conditions. From the perspective of probability theory,
 the interval-valued data x = [x− , x+ ] indicates that the ob-
Let M IvDS = {M IvIS M D} be an MIvDS, where
M IvIS = {IvISi |IvISi = (U, ATi , VA T i , fi ), i = 1, 2, . . . , ject can take any value in [x− , x+ ] with a uniform probabil-
N } including N subsystems IvIS. According to Pedrycz and ity [2]. Hence, D(x, y) = 0 in Fig. 2 (a) and D(x, y) = 1
Zhang’s method [27], [54], for any x ∈ U , we construct an in Fig. 2 (b), are unreasonable. From the probabilistic per-
information granule (a trapezoidal fuzzy number) A, to fuse spective, since the objects x and y derive from different IvIS
N interval-valued data {f1 (x, a), f2 (x, a), . . . , fN (x, a)} from under the same attribute, we can assume that the objects
different IvIS under the condition attribute a ∈ AT . The core x and y are independent and follow uniform distributions
and support of the optimal trapezoidal fuzzy granule A can U [x− , x+ ] and U [y − , y + ], respectively. Let the dominant de-
1
be determined by the approaches in [27], [54]. The core gree D(x, y) = (x + −x − )(y + −y − ) dxdy, where Ω = {(x, y)|x
Ω
of the information granule A is a numeric representative ≥ y}, which indicates the probability of x ≥ y. When the con-
of the data set {f1 (x, a), f2 (x, a), . . . , fN (x, a)}. It can be dition 2 is satisfied, we calculate the integration D(x, y) =
estimated by the median of these data when the data set 1 (x + −y − ) 2
(x + −x − )(y + −y − ) dxdy = 2(x + −x − )(y + −y − ) , where Ω is the
{f1 (x, a), f2 (x, a), . . . , fN (x, a)} is ordered [27]. Since there Ω
may exist an overlap between the interval-valued data, it could shadow area in Fig. 3. Other cases can be obtained in a similar
not get the order of these data directly. Hence, we first present a way. Hence, the novel definition of dominant degree reasonably
novel dominant degree to determine the order of interval-valued describes the comparisons of interval-valued data based on the
data derived from different sources and obtain the corresponding probabilistic method.
core of a trapezoidal fuzzy number. Then the support of a trape- Proposition III.1: 0 ≤ D(x, y) ≤ 1.
zoidal fuzzy number is determined via solving two optimal prob- Proposition III.2: D(x, y) + D(y, x) = 1.
lems according to the method presented by Zhang et al. [54]. The properties will be employed to incrementally compute
Definition III.1: Given two interval-valued data x = the dominant matrix in next section. 
[x− , x+ ] and y = [y − , y + ], the degree that x dominates y is Definition III.2: Given an MIvDS, M IvDS = {M IvIS
defined as follows: M D}, where M IvIS = {IvISi |IvISi = (U, ATi , VA T i , fi ),
i = 1, 2, . . . , N }. The dominant matrix with respect to
D(x, y) = the object x ∈ U under the condition attribute a ∈ ATi
⎧ is defined as DM a (x) = (Dij a
(x))N ×N , where Dij a
(x) =
⎪
⎪ 0 , x+ ≤ y − 1
⎪
⎪ D(fi (x, a), fj (x, a)).
⎪
⎪ (x + −y − ) 2
⎪
⎪ 2(x + −x − )(y + −y − ) , x− ≤ y − < x+ ≤ y + 2 The dominant matrix DM a (x) describes the domi-
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ 2x + −y + −y − nant degree among the group of interval-valued data
⎨ , x− < y − ≤ y + < x+ 3
+ −
2(x −x )
. (1) {f1 (x, a), f2 (x, a), . . . , fN (x, a)} from N different IvIS. In
⎪
⎪
+
x +x −2y − −
, y − ≤ x− ≤ x+ ≤ y + the dominant matrix DM a (x), the sum of the i-th row
⎪
⎪ + − 4 N
⎪ 2(y −y )
⎪ j =1 Dij (x) describes how much the object fi (x, a) is larger
a
⎪
⎪ + − 2
⎪
⎪ 1 − 2(x +(y−x −−x )
, y − < x− ≤ y + < x+ 5 than all other objects. Hence, the order of these interval-valued
⎪
⎪ )(y + −y − )
⎩ + − data {f1 (x, a), f2 (x, a), . . . , fN (x, a)} can be determined by
1 ,y ≤ x 6
comparing the values of the row-sums of DM a (x). Then
The dominant degree D(x, y) measures how much x is the median interval, chosen from these interval-valued data
larger than y. Notice that the definition of dominant degree {f1 (x, a), f2 (x, a), . . . , fN (x, a)} according to the correspond-
in [54], D(x, y) = 0 and D(x, y) = 1 satisfies the conditions ing order, is determined as the core (denoted as [ma (x), na (x)])

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - SELCUK UNIVERSITESI. Downloaded on November 11,2022 at 07:55:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 HUANG et al.: DYNAMIC FUSION OF MULTISOURCE INTERVAL-VALUED DATA BY FUZZY GRANULATION 3407

TABLE II different IvIS in MIvDS.

INFORMATION FUSION RESULT OF MIVDS ⎛ ⎞
0 0.9652 0.3473
⎜ ⎟
DM a 1 (x1 ) = ⎝ 0.0348 0 0.0006 ⎠ .
0.6527 0.9994 0
In the following, we name the information fusion result
of M IvDS as a trapezoidal fuzzy fusion information system
(TFFIS) and the corresponding rough approximations and un-
certain measures are introduced. 
 Definition III.3: Let T F F IS = (U, AT = A D, V = VA
VD , Tf ) be a TFFIS, where U is the universe of discourse of
M IvDS, AT is the attribute set of M IvDS, V is the domain
of the trapezoidal fuzzy number A with respect to the object x of AT , including the domain VA of the condition attribute set
under the attribute a. A and the domain VD of the decision attribute set D, and Tf :
After obtaining the core of A, the support of A can be deter- U × AT → V is an information function, such that Tf (x, a) =
mined by solving the following two optimal problems according [la (x), ma (x), na (x), ua (x)] is a trapezoidal fuzzy number for
to the method in [54]: any a ∈ A, x ∈ U .
The distance function proposed by Li et al. [20] is employed
N f k+ (x,a)∧m a (x)
A(x)dx to characterize the similar relation of the objects in T F F IS.
k =1 f k− (x,a)∧m a (x)
max Q(la (x)) =
l a (x) ma (x) − la (x)   [20] Given a TFFIS, T F F IS = (U, AT =
Definition III.4:
A D, V = VA VD , Tf ). The distance between two objects 
and xi and xj (xi , xj ∈ U ) is defined as: d(xi , xj ) = |A1 | a∈A
da (xi , xj ), where da (xi , xj ) = |la (xi ) − la (xj )| + |(ma (xi )
N f k+ (x,a)∨n a (x)
k =1 A(x)dx −la (xi ))−(ma (xj )−la (xj ))|+|(na (xi )−ma (xi ))−(na (xj )
f k− (x,a)∨n a (x)
max Q(ua (x)) = , − ma (xj ))| + |(ua (xi ) − ma (xi )) − (ua (xj ) − ma (xj ))| and
u a (x) ua (x) − na (x) |A| denotes the cardinality of A.
where la (x) and ua (x) denote the left and right endpoints of Definition III.5: The similarity degree of xi and xj is defined
the support of A, respectively. Moreover, when A(x) is a trape- as follows:
zoidal membership function, we can obtain the optimal solutions d (xi , xj )
Sim (xi , xj ) = 1 − (j ≥ i) (4)
la (x) and ua (x) by the derivation of Q(la (x)) and Q(ua (x)), MaxDi
respectively, as follows: where MaxDi = max(d(xi , xk ))(k = i + 1, i + 2, . . . , n). If
N 2 2 i ≥ j, let Sim(xi , xj ) = Sim(xj , xi ).
[(fk+ (x, a) ∧ ma (x)) −(fk− (x, a) ∧ ma (x)) ] The similarity degree Sim(xi , xj ) describes how much the
la (x) = k =1
N
k =1 [(fk+ (x, a) ∧ ma (x))−(fk− (x, a) ∧ ma (x))] object xi is similar to the object xj and it satisfies in [0,1].
− ma (x) (2) Definition III.6: Given a TFFIS, T F F IS = (U, AT =
A D, V = VA VD , Tf ) and a threshold α ∈ (0, 1], where
N 2 2
[(fk+ (x, a) ∨ na (x)) − (fk− (x, a) ∨ na (x)) ] U = {x1 , x2 , . . . , xn }. The similar relation between the ob-
ua (x) = k =1
N + − jects xi and xj is defined as Simα = {(xi , xj ) ∈ U ×
k =1 [(fk (x, a) ∨ na (x)) − (fk (x, a) ∨ na (x))] U |Sim(xi , xj ) ≥ α}.
− na (x) (3) By the utilization of the similar relation, we can further define
the lower and upper approximations in TFFIS. 
Example III.1: (Continuation of Example II.1) To fuse Definition
 III.7: Let T F F IS = (U, AT = A D, V =
multiple interval-valued data derived from three different VA VD , Tf ) be a TFFIS. ∀X ∈ U , the lower and upper
IvIS shown in Table I, according to Definition III.2, we approximations of X with regard to the similar relation Simα
first compute the dominant matrix DM a 1 (x1 ) = (Dij a1
(x))3×3 are defined as follows, respectively.
with respect to the object x1 under the attribute a1 . Then
the core [ma 1 (x1 ), na 1 (x1 )] = [22.9, 31.2] and the support R(α ) (X) = {x|[x]S im α ⊆ X} (5)
[la 1 (x1 ), ua 1 (x1 )] = [20.5, 32.7] can be obtained according to (α )
R (X) = {x|[x]S im α ∩ X = ∅} (6)
the order of the row-sums of DM a 1 (x1 ) and Equations 2 and 3,
respectively. Finally, three different interval-valued data with where [x]S im α = {y|(x, y) ∈ Sim }, α ∈ (0, 1].
α

regard to the object x1 under the attribute a1 are fused as a
trapezoidal fuzzy number [20.5, 22.9, 31.2, 32.7]. Other objects
can be calculated in a similar way. Table II shows the fusion
result according to the proposed method. It is obvious that each
attribute value is an information granule (a trapezoidal fuzzy
number) in place of the original interval-valued data from three
The approximate classified precision (denoted as AP) and
approximate classified quality (denoted as AQ) are used to mea-
sure the precision of approximation classification [24], [25]. Let
U/D = {D1 , D2 , . . . , Dr } be a classification
 of the universe
 U
in a TFFIS, T F F IS = (U, AT = A D, V = VA VD , f ).
The AP and AQ of U/D with respect to the similar relation

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - SELCUK UNIVERSITESI. Downloaded on November 11,2022 at 07:55:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3408 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, VOL. 26, NO. 6, DECEMBER 2018

trapezoidal fuzzy granule from Step 12, whose time complexity

is O(N log2 (N )); 4) computes the left and right endpoints of
a fuzzy support from Steps 13 and14, whose time complexity
is O(4N ). Hence, the total complexity of Algorithm 1 (from
Steps 2–16) is O(|U ||A|(2N 2 + N log2 (N ) + 4N )).

IV. INCREMENTAL FUSION OF MIVDS UNDER THE VARIATION

OF DATA SOURCES

The variation of data sources in MIvDS, including the addi-

tion and deletion of source numbers, will result in the change
of fuzzy granule structures in a dynamic multisource environ-
ment. In this section, we discuss the mechanisms of incremental
fusion of multisource interval-valued data under the variation
of data sources. According to the fusion methodology based on
fuzzy granulation in MIvDS, the core of a fuzzy granule can
be induced from the dominant matrix, whose computation is
time consuming. To reduce the computing overhead, an incre-
mental method is proposed to calculate the dominant matrix
instead of the reconstruction of it from scratch. Furthermore,
the incremental updating of the support of a fuzzy granule is
carried out by utilizing the accumulated information to reduce
the computing time. In the following, we introduce the methods
of incremental fusion under the addition and deletion of data
sources, respectively.

A. Incremental Fusion of MIvDS With the Addition of

Data Sources

Let M IvDS t = {M IvIS t M D} be an MIvDS at time t,
where M IvIS t ={IvISi |IvISi = (U, ATi , VA T i , fi ), i =
Simα are defined as follows, respectively. 1, 2, . . . , N }. At time t, ∀x ∈ U and a ∈ ATi , these interval-
 (α ) valued data {{f1 (x, a), f2 (x, a), . . . , fN (x, a)}} from N
D ∈U /D |R (Di )|
different IvIS are fused as [lat (x), mta (x), nta (x), uta (x)] ac-
APSimα (U/D) =  i (α )
(7)
D i ∈U /D |R (Di )| cording to the above-mentioned information fusion method in
 (α )
Section III. In what follows, the incremental mechanisms for
D i ∈U /D |R (Di )| updating the core [mta (x), nta (x)] and the support [lat (x), uta (x)]
AQSimα (U/D) = . (8)
|U | are discussed when adding data sources.
Theorem IV.1: Suppose ΔN IvIS IvISi = (U, ATi , VA T i ,
Obviously, the values of APSimα (U/D) and AQSimα (U/D) fi )}(i = N + 1, N + 2, . . . , N + ΔN ) are appended to
range in [0, 1]. And the higher APSimα (U/D) and M IvDS t at time t + 1. ∀x ∈ U and ∀a ∈ ATi , let Sumt+1 i
AQSimα (U/D) indicate the better precision and quality of ap- denote the sum of the i-th row of the dominant matrix DM a (x)
proximation classification, respectively. with respect to the attribute a in M IvDS t+1 at time t + 1.
Example III.2: (Continuation of Example III.1) It is clear Sumt+1 can be updated as follows:
that Table II is a TFFIS and U/D = {D1 , D2 , D3 }, where D1 =
i  +Δ N
1) Sumt+1 = Sumti + N j =N +1 D(fi (x, a), fj (x, a))(i = 1,
{x1 }, D2 = {x2 , x5 }, and D3 = {x3 , x4 }. Given a thresh- i
2, . . . , N );
old α = 0.6, then we have R(α ) (D1 ) = {x|[x]S im α ⊆ D1 } =  N +Δ N
(α ) 2) Sumt+1 i =N− N j =1 D(fj (x, a), fi (x, a)) + j =N +1
{x1 }, R (D1 ) = {x|[x]S im α ∩ D1 = ∅} = {x1 }, R(α ) (D2 ) D(fi (x, a),fj (x, a))(i = N + 1, N + 2,. . . ,N + ΔN ).
(α ) (α )
= {x5 }, R (D2 ) = {x2 , x4 , x5 }, R(α ) (D3 ) = {x3 }, R The proof can be found in Appendix A.
(D3 ) = {x2 , x3 , x4 }, APS im α (U/D) = 0.43 and AQS im α Corollary 1: The core [mt+1 a (x), na (x)] with regard
t+1

(U/D) = 0.6. to the object x under the attribute a at time t + 1

According to the above-mentioned notions, an algorithm (see
Algorithm 1) based on fuzzy granulation is developed to fuse
multisource interval-valued data.
Algorithm 1 is divided into four processes for computing the
trapezoidal fuzzy granules: 1) computes the dominant matrix
from Steps 4–8, whose time complexity is O(N 2 ); 2) calcu-
lates the row sum of the dominant matrix from Steps 9–11,
whose time complexity is O(N 2 ); 3) determines the core of a
can be obtained according to the median interval of
{f1 (x, a), f2 (x, a), . . . , fN +Δ N (x, a)} based on the order of
Sumt+1i (i = 1, 2, . . . , N + ΔN ).
Theorem IV.1 and Corollary 1 show an incremental method
to update the core of a fuzzy granule by utilizing the prior matrix
information, rather than recomputing the dominant matrix.
To employ the prior information to update the left and
right endpoints of the support of a fuzzy granule, we sort

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - SELCUK UNIVERSITESI. Downloaded on November 11,2022 at 07:55:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 HUANG et al.: DYNAMIC FUSION OF MULTISOURCE INTERVAL-VALUED DATA BY FUZZY GRANULATION 3409

the right and left endpoints of the interval-valued data the object x under the attribute a at time t + 1 can be updated
{f1 (x, a), f2 (x, a), . . . , fN (x, a)} from M IvDS t in an as- as follows:
cending order at time t, respectively. The corresponding sorted AROS12 + ARIS12 + ARN S12
a (x) =
ut+1 − nt+1
a (x)
+ + +
results are denoted as {f(1) (x, a), f(2) (x, a), . . . , f(N ) (x, a)} AROS11 + ARIS11 + ARN S11
− − − +
and {f(1) (x, a), f(2) (x, a), . . . , f(N ) (x, a)}, where f(i) (x, a) (11)
− where
and f(i) (x, a) denote the i-th order of the right and left end-
points of these interval-valued data, respectively. 
N
+ −
Theorem IV.2: Let K1 denote the location, which sat- AROS1p = [(f(i) (x, a))p − (f(i) (x, a))p ]
+ +
isfies f(K 1)
(x, a) < mta (x) and f(K 1 +1)
(x, a) ≥ mta (x). If i=K 3 +1

a (x) ≥ ma (x), the left endpoint la (x) of the support with

mt+1 t t+1

K3
+
respect to the object x under the attribute a at time t + 1 can be ARIS1p = [(f(i) (x, a) ∨ nt+1
a (x))
p

updated as follows: i=1

−
ALOS12 + ALIS12 + ALN S12 − (f(i) (x, a) ∨ nt+1
a (x)) ]
p
lat+1 (x) = − mt+1
a (x) (9)
ALOS11 + ALIS11 + ALN S11 and
where +Δ N
N


K1 ARN S1p = [(fi+ (x, a) ∨ nt+1
a (x))
p
+ −
ALOS1p = [(f(i) (x, a))p − (f(i) (x, a))p ], i=N +1
i=1
− (fi− (x, a) ∨ nt+1
a (x)) ](p = 1, 2).
p


N
+
ALIS1p = [(f(i) (x, a) ∧ mt+1
a (x))
p The proof can be found in Appendix A.
i=K 1 +1 Theorem IV.5: Let K4 denote the location, which satisfies
+ +
− f(K 4)
(x, a) < nta (x) and f(K 4 +1)
(x, a) ≥ nta (x). If nt+1
a (x) >
− (f(i) (x, a) ∧ mt+1
a (x)) ]
p
na (x), the right endpoint ua (x) of the support with respect to
t t+1

and the object x under the attribute a at time t + 1 can be updated

+Δ N
N as follows:
ALN S1p = [(fi+ (x, a) ∧ mt+1
a (x))
p
ARIS22 + ARN S22
i=N +1 a (x) =
ut+1 − nt+1a (x) (12)
ARIS21 + ARN S21
− (fi− (x, a) ∧ mt+1
a (x)) ]
p
where
(p = 1, 2). 
N
ARIS2p = [(f(i++ ) (x, a) ∨ nt+1
a (x))
p
The proof can be found in Appendix A. i=K 4
Theorem IV.3: Let K2 denote the location, which sat-
−
isfies f(K (x, a) < mta (x) and f(K −
(x, a) ≥ mta (x). If − (f(i−+ ) (x, a) ∨ nt+1
a (x)) ]
p
2) 2 +1)

a (x) < ma (x), the left endpoint la (x) of the support with
mt+1 t t+1
and
respect to the object x under the attribute a at time t + 1 can be +Δ N
N
updated as follows: ARN S2p = [(fi+ (x, a) ∨ nt+1
a (x))
p

ALIS22 + ALN S22 i=N +1

lat+1 (x) = − mt+1
a (x) (10)
ALIS21 + ALN S21 − (fi− (x, a) ∨ nt+1
a (x)) ](p = 1, 2).
p

where
Proof: The proof is similar to Theorem IV.4. 

K2
Remark: ALOS and AROS represent the prior information,
+
ALIS2p = [(f(i) (x, a) ∧ mt+1
a )
p
ALIS and ARIS represent the interactive information with
i=1
respect to the original data and the updated core and ALN S
−
− (f(i) (x, a) ∧ mt+1
a ) ]
p and ARN S represent the updated information.
By the utilization of the prior information, Theorems IV.2–
and IV.5 show the incremental mechanisms for updating the support
+Δ N
N of a fuzzy granule when adding data sources.
ALN S2p = [(fi+ (x, a) ∧ mt+1
a )
p
Algorithm 2 is used to describe the process of incremental
i=95N +1 fusion of multisource interval-valued data with the addition of
− (fi− (x, a) ∧ mt+1
a ) ](p = 1, 2).
p new sources.
In Algorithm 2, Steps 2–19 are divided into three parts to
Proof: It can be obtained in a similar way as Theorem IV.2. compute the trapezoidal fuzzy granules: 1) updates the row
Theorem IV.4: Let K3 denote the location, which satisfies sum of the dominant matrix from Steps 4–6, whose time
− −
f(K 3)
(x, a) < nta (x) and f(K 3 +1)
(x, a) ≥ nta (x). If nt+1
a (x) ≤ complexity is O((N + ΔN )ΔN ); 2) renews the value of
na (x), the right endpoint ua (x) of the support with respect to
t t+1
the original trapezoidal fuzzy core from Step 7, whose time

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - SELCUK UNIVERSITESI. Downloaded on November 11,2022 at 07:55:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3410 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, VOL. 26, NO. 6, DECEMBER 2018

ΔN different IvIS, the corresponding fusion result is

[lat (x), mta (x), nta (x), uta (x)] (∀x ∈ U , a ∈ ATi ). In the fol-
lowing, we discuss how to incrementally update the core
[mta (x), nta (x)] and the support [lat (x), uta (x)] when deleting
data sources.
Theorem IV.6: Suppose ΔN IvIS IvISi = (U, ATi , VA T i ,
fi )}(i = N + 1, N + 2, . . . , N + ΔN ) are removed from
M IvDS t at time t + 1. ∀x ∈ U and ∀a ∈ ATi , let Sumt+1 i
denote the sum of the i-th row of the dominant matrix DM a (x)
with respect to the attribute a in M IvDS t+1 at time t + 1.
Sumt+1 i can be updated as follows:
+Δ N
N
Sumt+1
i = Sumti + D(fi (x, a), fj (x, a))
j =N +1

(i = 1, 2, . . . , N ).

Proof: It can be obtained by the same method as employed

in Theorem IV.1.
Corollary 2: The core [ mt+1 a ( x ), na ( x ) ] with regard to
t+1

the object x under the attribute a at time t + 1 can be up-

dated in terms of the median interval of {f1 (x, a), f2 (x, a), . . . ,
fN (x, a)} based on the order of Sumt+1 i (i = 1, 2, . . . , N ).
Instead of updating the whole dominant matrix, Theorem IV.6
and Corollary 2 show an incremental approach to update the core
by means of the prior matrix information.
Similar to the scenario of updating the support of a
fuzzy granule when adding data sources, we sort the
right and left endpoints of the original interval-valued data
{f1 (x, a), f2 (x, a), . . . , fN +Δ N (x, a)} in an ascending or-
der at time t, respectively. And the corresponding sorted
+ + +
results are {f(1) (x, a), f(2) (x, a), . . . , f(N +Δ N ) (x, a)} and
− − −
{f(1) (x, a), f(2) (x, a), . . . , f(N +Δ N ) (x, a)}.
Theorem IV.7: Let Q1 denote the location, which sat-
− −
isfies f(Q 1)
(x, a) < mta (x) and f(Q 1 +1)
(x, a) ≥ mta (x). If
a (x) < ma (x), the left endpoint la (x) of the support with
mt+1 t t+1
complexity is O((N + ΔN )log2 (N + ΔN )); 3) updates the
left and right endpoints of the original fuzzy support from respect to the object x under the attribute a at time t + 1 can be
Steps 8–17, whose time complexity is determined by the values updated as follows:
of K1 , K2 , K3 , and K4 . Thus, the worst case of the total DLIS22
complexity of Algorithm 2 is O(|U ||A|((N + ΔN )ΔN + lat+1 (x) = − mt+1
a (x) (13)
DLIS21
(N + ΔN )log2 (N + ΔN ) + 4(N + ΔN ))) when K1 = 0
or K2 = N and K3 = N or K4 = ΔN . In the best-case where
scenario, it becomes O(|U ||A|((N + ΔN )ΔN + (N + 
+
DLIS2p = (f(i) (x, a) ∧ mt+1
a (x))
p
ΔN )log2 (N + ΔN ) + 4ΔN )) when K1 = N or K2 = 0
i∈L I n dex 1
and K3 = 0 or K4 = N . Obviously, the time complexity of
−
incremental fusion algorithm (Algorithm 2) is better than − (f(i) (x, a) ∧ mt+1
a (x) )(p = 1, 2), LIndex1
p

that of the static algorithm (Algorithm 1) when adding data

sources. = {{(1), (2), . . . , (Q1 )}

− {N + 1, N + 2, . . . , N + ΔN }}.
B. Incremental Fusion of MIvDS With the Deletion
of Data Sources The proof can be found in Appendix B.

Let M IvDS t = {M IvIS t M D} be an MIvDS at time Theorem IV.8: Let Q2 denote the location, which sat-
+ +
t, where M IvIS t = {IvISi |IvISi = (U, ATi , VA T i , fi ), i = isfies f(Q 2)
(x, a) < mta (x) and f(Q 2 +1)
(x, a) ≥ mta (x). If
1, 2, . . . , N, N + 1, . . . , N + ΔN }. For these interval- ma (x) ≥ ma (x), the left endpoint la (x) of the support with
t+1 t t+1

valued data {f1 (x, a), f2 (x, a), . . . , fN +Δ N (x, a)} from N + respect to the object x under the attribute a at time t + 1 can be

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - SELCUK UNIVERSITESI. Downloaded on November 11,2022 at 07:55:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 HUANG et al.: DYNAMIC FUSION OF MULTISOURCE INTERVAL-VALUED DATA BY FUZZY GRANULATION 3411

updated as follows: where


DLOS12 + DLIS12 − DLN S12 DROS1p = +
(f(i) −
(x, a))p − (f(i) (x, a))p ,
lat+1 (x) = − mt+1
a (x)
DLOS11 + DLIS11 − DLN S11 i≤Q 4
(14) 
+
where DRIS1p = (f(i) (x, a) ∨ nt+1
a (x))
p

 i∈R I n dex 2
+ −
DLOS1p = (f(i) (x, a))p − (f(i) (x, a))p , −
i≤Q 2
− (f(i) (x, a) ∨ nt+1
a (x))
p

 and
+
DLIS1p = (f(i) (x, a) ∧ mt+1
a (x))
p

+
i∈L I n dex 2 DRN S1p = (f(i) (x, a))p
−
− (f(i) (x, a) ∧ mt+1
a (x))
p i∈R I n dex 3
−
− (f(i) (x, a))p (p = 1, 2).
and
 Moreover,
+ −
DLN S1p = (f(i) (x, a))p − (f(i) (x, a))p (p = 1, 2).
i∈L I n dex 3 RIndex2 = {{(1), (2), . . . , (Q4 )}
Moreover, − {N + 1, N + 2, . . . , N + ΔN }}

LIndex2 = {{(Q2 + 1), (Q2 + 2), . . . , (N + ΔN )}

− {N + 1, N + 2, . . . , N + ΔN }} and

and RIndex3 = {{(Q4 + 1), (Q4 + 2), . . . , (N + ΔN )}

LIndex3 = {{(1), (2), . . . , (Q2 )}∩ ∩ {N + 1, N + 2, . . . , N + ΔN }}.

{N + 1, N + 2, . . . , N + ΔN }}. Proof: It can easily be obtained by the similar way in

Theorem IV.9. 
Proof: It can be obtained in a similar way as Theorem IV.7. Remark: DLOS and DROS represent the prior information,
Theorem IV.9: Let Q3 denote the location, which satisfies DLIS and DRIS represent the interactive information with
+ +
f(Q 3)
(x, a) < nta (x) and f(Q 3 +1)
(x, a) ≥ nta (x). If nt+1
a (x) > respect to the original data and the updated core and DLN S
na (x), the right endpoint ua (x) of the support with respect to
t t+1
and DRN S represent the updated information.
the object x under the attribute a at time t + 1 can be updated Theorems IV.7–IV.10 display the incremental approaches to
as follows: update the support of a fuzzy granule when deleting data sources.
DRIS22 Algorithm 3 shows how to incrementally update trape-
a (x) =
ut+1 − nt+1
a (x) (15) zoidal fuzzy granules in MIvDS when obsolete sources are
DRIS21
removed.
where Algorithm 3 is divided into three parts for updating the trape-
 zoidal fuzzy granules from Steps 2–19:
+ −
DRIS2p = (f(i) (x, a) ∨ nt+1
a (x)) − (f(i) (x, a)
p
1) computes the row sum of the dominant matrix from
i∈R I n dex 1 Steps 4–6, whose time complexity is O(N ΔN );
∨ nt+1 2) updates the value of the original trapezoidal fuzzy core
a (x)) (p = 1, 2), RIndex1 = {{(Q3 + 1),
p
from Step 7, whose time complexity is O(N log2 N );
(Q3 + 2), . . . , (N + ΔN )} − {N + 1, N + 2, 3) renews the left and right endpoints of the original fuzzy
support from Steps 8–17, whose time complexity is
. . . , N + ΔN }}. determined by the values of |LIndex1 |, |LIndex2 |,
|LIndex3 |, |RIndex1 |, |RIndex2 |, and |RIndex3 |.
The proof can be found in Appendix B.
In the worst-case scenario, the time complexity of
Theorem IV.10: Let Q4 denote the location, which satisfies
− − Algorithm 3 is O(|U ||A|(N ΔN + N log2 N + 4(N + ΔN )))
f(Q (x, a) < nta (x) and f(Q (x, a) ≥ nta (x). If nt+1
a (x) ≤
4) 4 +1) when |LIndex2 | = N , |LIndex3 | = ΔN , |RIndex2 | = N
na (x), the right endpoint ua (x) of the support with respect to
t t+1
and |RIndex3 | = ΔN . The best case of the total complex-
the object x under the attribute a at time t + 1 can be updated ity of Algorithm 3 is O(|U ||A|(N ΔN + N log2 N )) when
as follows: |LIndex1 | = 0 and |RIndex1 | = 0. It is clear that the time
DROS12 + DRIS12 − DRN S12 complexity of incremental fusion algorithm (Algorithm 3) is
a (x) =
ut+1 − nt+1
a (x) better than that of the static algorithm (Algorithm 1) when delet-
DROS11 + DRIS11 − DRN S11
(16) ing data sources.

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - SELCUK UNIVERSITESI. Downloaded on November 11,2022 at 07:55:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3412
TABLE III
DESCRIPTION OF DATA SETS
V. EXPERIMENTAL ANALYSIS
In this section, comparative experiments based on nine data
sets from the UCI Repository of Machine Learning are car-
ried out to demonstrate the effectiveness and efficiency of the
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - SELCUK UNIVERSITESI. Downloaded on November 11,2022 at 07:55:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, VOL. 26, NO. 6, DECEMBER 2018
proposed methods. The detailed information of these data sets
is summarized in Table III.
All concerned experiments are performed with MATLAB
2012a on a personal computer with Intel Core i5-4200U CPU
1.60GHZ, 4.0 GB of memory.
Since multisource interval-valued datasets are not available in
any public databases, we construct a synthetic MIvDS according
to the following steps:  
1) Let S = (U, AT D, V  = VA T VD , g  ) denote an
original real-valued decision system. Generate an IvIS
IvIS = (U, AT, VA T , g) according to the method pre-
sented by Leung et al. [18]. ∀x ∈ U , ∀a ∈ AT , g − (x, a)
= g  (x, a) − 2σa , g + (x, a) = g  (x, a) + 2σa , where σa
denotes the standard deviation of the attribute a in the
same decision class.
2) Draw a random number r from a normal distribution
N (0, 0.1). Let each ATi = AT (i = 1, 2, . . . , N ). If r >
0, f − (x, a) = g − (x, a)(1 − r) and f + (x, a) = g + (x, a)
(1 + r); otherwise f − (x, a) = g − (x, a)(1 + r) and
f + (x, a) = g + (x, a)(1 − r). Let M D = {D, VD , gD 
},
where D and VD are the decision attribute set and
the corresponding decision domain from the original

decision system, respectively. Moreover, gD is the in-
formation function with respect to the decision at-
tribute D. Then we obtain an MIvDS, M IvDS =
{M IvIS M D}, where M IvIS = {IvISi |IvISi =
(U, ATi , VA T i , fi )}(i = 1, 2, . . . , N ).
A. Effectiveness Analysis
In this section, we compare the proposed fusion method based
on fuzzy granulation (abbreviated as FgF for convenience) with
other six related fusion methods  to verify the effectiveness.
Let M IvDS = {M IvIS M D} be an MIvDS, where
M IvIS = {IvISi |IvISi = (U, ATi , VA T i , fi ), i = 1, 2, . . . ,
N } and ATi  A. In this section, we fix N = 20. Assume
min and max denote the minimum and maximum operations,
respectively. And mean indicates the averaging operation.
∀x ∈ U , ∀a ∈ A, then other six fusion approaches refer to: 1)
maximum fusion method (abbreviated as MaxF): MaxF− a (x) =
+
min{f1− (x, a), f2− (x, a),. . . ,fN− (x, a)}, MaxF+a (x) = max{f 1
+ +
(x, a),f2 (x, a),. . . ,fN (x,a)}, where MaxFa (x) and MaxF+
−
a
(x) denote the left and right endpoints of a maximum fusion
 HUANG et al.: DYNAMIC FUSION OF MULTISOURCE INTERVAL-VALUED DATA BY FUZZY GRANULATION 3413

TABLE IV
AP AND AQ OF DIFFERENT FUSION APPROACHES IN THE WINE DATASET

TABLE V
MEANS AND STANDARD DEVIATIONS OF CLASSIFICATION ACCURACY FOR DIFFERENT FUSION METHODS

result, respectively; 2) minimum fusion method (abbreviated as with respect to the comparisons of AP and AQ between dif-
MinF): MinF− − − −
a (x) = max{f1 (x, a), f2 (x, a), . . . , fN (x, a)}, ferent fusion methods can be found in supplementary materials
+ + + +
MinFa (x) = min{f1 (x, a), f2 (x, a), . . . , fN (x, a)} where (Tables B– I). According to the experimental results, the pro-
MinF− +
a (x) and MinFa (x) denote the left and right endpoints posed fusion method based on fuzzy granulation outperforms
of a minimum fusion result, respectively; 3) mean fusion all the other fusion approaches in most situations under the
method (abbreviated as MeanF): MeanF− a (x) = mean{f1
−
variation of α.
+
(x, a), f2− (x, a),. . . ,fN− (x, a)}, MeanF+
a (x) = mean{f 1 (x, a), K-nearest neighbor classifier is employed to verify the fusion
f2+ (x, a), . . . , fN+ (x, a)}, where MeanF− a (x) and MeanFa (x)
+
effectiveness. Table V shows the average accurate classification
denote the left and right endpoints of a mean fusion result, rate and standard deviation by tenfolds cross validation. Further-
respectively; 4) single mean fusion method (abbreviated more, two-sample t-test [36] using MATLAB [22] is conducted
f 1− (x,a)+f 1+ (x,a) f 2− (x,a)+f 2+ (x,a) to check whether the proposed fusion method (FgF) is signifi-
as SMF): SMFa (x) = mean{ 2 , 2 ,
f − (x,a)+f + (x,a) cantly better than other six fusion approaches. Given a signifi-
..., N 2
N
}, where SMFa (x) denotes a single mean cance level of 5%, let the null hypothesis be H0 : μF g F = μO F
fusion result; 5) maximal source fusion method (abbreviated and the alternative hypothesis be Ha : μF g F > μO F , where
as MSF): choose the i-th IvISi as the fusion result according μF g F and μO F denote the means of classification accuracy w.r.t.
to the maximum evaluation indexes; 6) the fusion method the fusion method FgF and other fusion methods, respectively.
proposed by Zhang et al. [54] (abbreviated as ZF). AP, AQ and In the supplementary material, Table J displays the detailed P-
the accurate classification rate are employed to measure the values of the comparison results between FgF and other fusion
fusion effectiveness in this section. methods. According to the t-test results, FgF is statistically bet-
Table IV illustrates the AP and AQ of different fusion ap- ter than other fusion methods w.r.t. classification accuracy on all
proaches in the multisource interval-valued dataset Wine when datasets with the exception of the data sets Wine and BCW. The
the similarity degree parameter α changes from 0.50 to 0.95 in classification accuracies of FgF on the Wine and BCW data sets
an interval of 0.05. The bold values in Table IV indicate the best are statistically better than most of the other fusion approaches,
AP and AQ among seven fusion approaches when changing the excepting MeanF, MaxF and MSF. The bold values in Table V
parameter α. Due to the limited space, other datasets’ results

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - SELCUK UNIVERSITESI. Downloaded on November 11,2022 at 07:55:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3414
TABLE VI
SOURCE NUMBERS OF DIFFERENT MULTISOURCE INTERVAL-VALUED DATASETS
Fig. 4. Running times of Algorithm 1 (Static) and Algorithm 2 (Incremental) when inserting different ratios of sources. (a) Wine, (b) Ecoli, (c) Climate,
(d) BCW, (e) Diabetic, (f) Image, (g) Wall, (h) Occ, (i) Default.
describe the best classification accuracy with a statistically sig-
nificant difference between different fusion methods. In the first
and fourth rows of Table V, these bold values with superscript
∗ correspond to the best classification accuracy and there are no
significant differences among them.
Hence, compared with other six fusion approaches, these ex-
perimental results show that the proposed fusion method based
on fuzzy granulation is a more reasonable choice for the fusion
of multisource interval-valued data.
B. Efficiency Analysis
In this section, we compare the running time between the
static fusion algorithm (Algorithm 1) and the incremental fu-
sion algorithms (Algorithms 2 and 3) with the variation of data
sources on nine datasets shown in Table III.
To demonstrate the efficiency of the proposed incremental fu-
sion algorithms, we generate nine multisource interval-valued
datasets and the corresponding number of sources is increased
by 2 times from 100 to 25600. Table VI illustrates the detailed
information of data sources. In order to analyze the computa-
tional efficiency under the addition and deletion of data sources,
respectively, we choose 50% data sources from the whole dataset
as the basic dataset and the source number is increased by 10%
from the remaining dataset when adding data sources. The whole
dataset is considered as the basic dataset and the source number
is decreased by 10% from the original dataset when deleting
data sources.
Due to the limited space, the detailed running times and
the incremental speedup ratio with respect to static and incre-
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - SELCUK UNIVERSITESI. Downloaded on November 11,2022 at 07:55:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, VOL. 26, NO. 6, DECEMBER 2018
mental algorithms are appended to supplementary materials.
Tables K and L in the supplementary materials show the com-
putation times between static and incremental algorithms when
inserting and deleting different ratios of sources, respectively.
Table M (in the supplementary materials) describes the incre-
mental speedup ratio when inserting and deleting different ratios
of data sources. It shows that the incremental fusion algorithm
(Algorithm 2) yields 1.47–56.99× speedup over the static fusion
algorithm (Algorithm 1) when adding data sources. Similarly,
the incremental fusion algorithm (Algorithm 3) achieves 1.13–
587.63 × over the static fusion algorithm (Algorithm 1) when
deleting data sources.
Figs. 4 and 5 show the more detailed change trend of com-
pared algorithms with the increase and decrease of the number
of sources, respectively. In each sub-figures (a)– (i) of Figs. 4
and 5, the x-coordinate pertains to the variation of ratios and
the y-coordinate pertains to the running time of static and in-
cremental algorithms. Although, there are some fluctuations of
the running time under the variation of source numbers, the
computational efficiency of incremental fusion algorithms are
better than that of the static fusion algorithm. Obviously, it is
coherent with the analysis of time complexity in Section IV.
Furthermore, we employ the Wilcoxon signed-rank test to de-
termine whether the performance difference between the static
and incremental algorithms are indeed statistically significant.
With 5% significance level, the P-values of the observed results
in Figs. 4 and 5 are 3.835e − 4 and 5.825e − 16, respectively.
Both of them are less than 0.05. Hence, the performances of pro-
posed incremental fusion algorithms (Algorithms 2 and 3) are
 HUANG et al.: DYNAMIC FUSION OF MULTISOURCE INTERVAL-VALUED DATA BY FUZZY GRANULATION 3415

Fig. 5. Running times of Algorithm 1 (Static) and Algorithm 3 (Incremental) when deleting different ratios of sources. (a) Wine, b) Ecoli, (c) Climate, (d) BCW,
(e) Diabetic, (f) Image, (g) Wall, (h) Occ, (i) Default.

statistically better than that of the static algorithm (Algorithm 1)
when inserting and deleting data sources in MIvDS.
VI. CONCLUSION
Multisource interval-valued data are common in many
practical applications. How to effectively fuse multisource
interval-valued data is a challenge in a dynamic multisource
environment. In this paper, we presented a novel fusion method
via the utilization of fuzzy granulation to transform multiple
interval-valued data into a trapezoidal fuzzy granule. A new
dominant matrix was constructed to compute the core of a
trapezoidal fuzzy granule and the corresponding support was
obtained by maximizing two objective functions. Furthermore,
considering that the variation of data sources would incur the
changes of fuzzy granule structures in MIvDS, an incremental
fusion approach was proposed by utilizing the accumulated
granules information to improve the computing efficiency.
We investigated the incremental fusion mechanisms and
developed the corresponding incremental fusion algorithms
when adding and deleting data sources. Experimental results on
several UCI datasets demonstrated the proposed fusion method
outperformed most of other six fusion approaches in terms of
AP, AQ, and classification accuracy. Moreover, we constructed
nine MIvDS containing source numbers from 100–25600
to verify the efficiency of incremental fusion algorithms in
comparison with the static fusion algorithm. The comparative
results showed that the proposed incremental fusion algorithms
can effectively improve the computation performance when
adding and deleting multiple data sources. In this paper, we
focused on the scenario that each IvIS had the same attributes
in MIvDS. However, in real-world applications, there may
exist different attributes in each source. In the future, we
will extend the proposed method to deal with this situation.
Furthermore, in this paper, the multisource interval-valued data
include the label information. However, we always encounter
the interval-valued data without labels in many situations.
The clustering problem of interval-valued data has been
intensively investigated [3]–[5]. Our another future work will
investigate the fusion technologies of multisource unlabeled
interval-valued data to improve the effectiveness of clustering.
APPENDIX A
PROOFS OF THEOREMS IV.1, IV.2, AND IV.4
In this appendix, we give the proofs of incremental fusion
mechanisms, viz., Theorems IV.1, IV.2, and IV.4, under the
addition of data sources.
Proof of Theorem IV.1: While ΔN interval-valued data
from different IvIS are inserted into the M IvDS t at
time t + 1, ∀x ∈ U , and ∀a ∈ ATi , the dominant ma-
trix DM a (x) = (Dij a
(x))(N +Δ N )×(N +Δ N ) , where Dija
(x) =
D(fi (x, a), fj (x, a))(i, j ∈ {1, 2, . . . , N + ΔN }). Evidently,
the first N rows and N columns of DM a (x) are the entries of
original dominant matrix according to Definition III.2. Hence,
+Δ N
N
Sumt+1
i = Sumti + D(fi (x, a), fj (x, a))
j =N +1
(i = 1, 2, . . . , N ).
In terms of Proposition III.2,
D(fi (x, a), fj (x, a)) = 1 − D(fj (x, a), fi (x, a))
(i ∈ {N + 1, N + 2, . . . , N + ΔN },
j ∈ {1, 2, . . . , N + ΔN }).

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - SELCUK UNIVERSITESI. Downloaded on November 11,2022 at 07:55:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 3416 IEEE TRANSACTIONS ON FUZZY SYSTEMS, VOL. 26, NO. 6, DECEMBER 2018

Thus, N +Δ N + 2 −
Clearly, i=1 [(fi (x, a) ∧ mt+1
a (x)) −(fi (x, a)∧ma
t+1
2
+Δ N
N 
N (x)) ] = ALOS12 + ALIS12 + ALN S12 . The denominator
Sumt+1
i = D(fi (x, a), fj (x, a)) = D(fi (x, a), of the first term of lat+1 (x) can be obtained in a similar way.
j =1 j =1 Therefore, we have
+Δ N
N
fj (x, a)) + D(fi (x, a), fj (x, a)) ALOS12 + ALIS12 + ALN S12
lat+1 (x) = − mt+1
a (x).
j =N +1 ALOS11 + ALIS11 + ALN S11


N +Δ N
N Proof of Theorem IV.4: In terms of Equation (3),
= (1 − D(fj (x, a), fi (x, a))) +
j =1 j =N +1
a (x) =
ut+1

N N +Δ N 2 2
D(fi (x, a), fj (x, a)) = N − D(fj (x, a), [(fi+ (x, a) ∨ nt+1 −
a (x)) − (fi (x, a) ∨ na (x)) ]
t+1
i=1
N +Δ N
j =1 i=1 [(fi+ (x, a) ∨ nt+1 −
a (x)) − (fi (x, a) ∨ na (x))]
t+1

+Δ N
N
− nt+1
a (x)
fi (x, a)) + D(fi (x, a),fj (x, a))
j =N +1
while ΔN interval-valued data are appended to M IvDS t at
(i = N + 1, N + 2, . . . , N + ΔN ). a (x) can be
time t + 1. The numerator of the first term of ut+1
partitioned into two items, namely,
Proof of Theorem IV.2: According to Equation (2), we have
lat+1 (x) = +Δ N
N  
2 2
(fi+ (x, a) ∨ nt+1 −
a (x)) − (fi (x, a) ∨ na (x))
t+1
N +Δ N 2 2
[(fi+ (x, a) ∧ mt+1 −
a (x)) − (fi (x, a) ∧ ma (x)) ]
t+1 i=1
i=1
N +Δ N
i=1 [(fi+ (x, a) ∧ mt+1 −
a (x)) − (fi (x, a) ∧ ma (x))]
t+1 N 
 2 2

= (fi+ (x, a) ∨ nt+1 −
a (x)) − (fi (x, a) ∨ na (x))
t+1
− mt+1
a (x). i=1

The numerator of lat+1 (x) can be divided into the sum of two +Δ N
N 
2
parts, viz., + (fi+ (x, a) ∨ nt+1
a (x))
i=N +1
+Δ N
N   
2 2
(fi+ (x, a) ∧ mt+1 (x)) − (f −
(x, a) ∧ m t+1
(x)) − (fi− (x, a) ∨ nt+1
2
a (x))
a i a .
i=1
N 
  −
2 2 Since f(i) (x, a) ≥ nta (x)(i ∈ {K3 + 1, K3 + 2, . . . , N }) and
= (fi+ (x, a) ∧ mt+1 −
a (x)) − (fi (x, a) ∧ ma (x))
t+1
− −
i=1 nta (x) ≥ nt+1
a (x), then f(i) (x, a) ∨ na (x) = f(i) (x, a).
t+1

− + +
+Δ N
N  Because f(i) (x, a) ≤ f(i) (x, a), then f(i) (x, a) ∨ nt+1a (x) =
2 N +Δ N +
+ (fi+ (x, a) ∧ mt+1
a (x))
+
f(i) (x, a). Thus, the first term of i=1 [(fi (x, a)
i=N +1 2 − 2
 ∨ nt+1
a (x)) − (fi (x, a) ∨ na (x)) ] can be divided into the
t+1
2
− (fi− (x, a) ∧ mt+1
a (x)) . sum of two parts, viz.,

+
Since f(i) (x, a) < mta (x)(i ∈ {1, 2, . . . , K1 }) and mt+1
a (x) ≥ 
N
+
+ + − [(f(i) (x, a))2 − (f(i)
−
(x, a))2 ]
ma (x), then f(i) (x, a) ∧ ma (x) = f(i) (x, a). Because f(i)
t t+1
i=K 3 +1
+ − −
(x, a) ≤ f(i) (x, a), then f(i) (x, a) ∧ mt+1 a (x) = f(i) (x, a).
Hence, 
K3
+ 2 − 2
+ [(f(i) (x, a) ∨ nt+1
a (x)) − (f(i) (x, a) ∨ na (x)) ].
t+1
N 
 
2 2 i=1
(fi+ (x, a) ∧ mt+1 −
a (x)) − (fi (x, a) ∧ ma (x))
t+1

a (x) can
Similarly, the denominator of the first term of ut+1
i=1
K1  
 be obtained in a similar way. Then, we have ut+1 a (x) =
+
= (f(i) (x, a))2 − (f(i)
−
(x, a))2 A R O S 1 2 +A R I S 1 2 +A R N S 1 2
A R O S 1 1 +A R I S 1 1 +A R N S 1 1 − nt+1
a (x).
i=1


N  APPENDIX B
+ 2
+ (f(i) (x, a) ∧ mt+1
a (x)) PROOFS OF THEOREMS IV.7 AND IV.9
i=K 1 +1
− 2
 Due to the limited space, the proofs of Theorems IV.7 and
− (f(i) (x, a) ∧mt+1
a (x)) . IV.9 can be found in supplementary materials.

Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - SELCUK UNIVERSITESI. Downloaded on November 11,2022 at 07:55:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
 HUANG et al.: DYNAMIC FUSION OF MULTISOURCE INTERVAL-VALUED DATA BY FUZZY GRANULATION
REFERENCES
[1] A. Bargiela and W. Pedrycz, “Toward a theory of granular computing
for human-centered information processing,” IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst.,
vol. 16, no. 2, pp. 320–330, Apr. 2008.
[2] L. Billard and E. Diday, “From the statistics of data to the statistics of
knowledge: Symbolic data analysis,” J. Amer. Stat. Assoc., vol. 98, no. 462,
pp. 470–487, 2003.
[3] F. A. T. de Carvalho, “Fuzzy c-means clustering methods for sym-
bolic interval data,” Pattern Recognit. Lett., vol. 28, no. 4, pp. 423–437,
2007.
[4] F. A. T. de Carvalho and Y. Lechevallier, “Dynamic clustering of
interval-valued data based on adaptive quadratic distances,” IEEE Trans.
Syst., Man, Cybern. A, Syst., Humans, vol. 39, no. 6, pp. 1295–1306,
Nov. 2009.
[5] F. A. T. de Carvalho and C. P. Tenório, “Fuzzy K-means clustering al-
gorithms for interval-valued data based on adaptive quadratic distances,”
Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 161, no. 23, pp. 2978–2999, 2010.
[6] H. K. Chan, Z. X. Hu, and L. H. Beng, “Fusion of simplified entity
networks from unstructured text,” in Proc. 14th Int. Conf. Inf. Fusion,
2011, pp. 1–7.
[7] D. Dubois, “The role of fuzzy sets in decision sciences: Old techniques
and new directions,” Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 184, no. 1, pp. 3–28, 2011.
[8] D. Dubois, “On the use of aggregation operations in information fusion
processes,”Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 142, no. 1, pp. 143–161, 2004.
[9] D. Dubois, W. R. Liu, and J. B. Ma, “The basic principles of uncertain
information fusion,” Inf. Fusion, vol. 32, pp. 12–39, 2016.
[10] P. Durso and J. M. Leski, “Fuzzy c-ordered medoids clustering for interval-
valued data,” Pattern Recognit., vol. 58, pp. 49–67, 2016.
[11] R. Gravina, P. Alinia, H. Ghasemzadeh, and G. Fortino, “Multi-sensor
fusion in body sensor networks: State-of-the-art and research challenges,”
Inf. Fusion, vol. 35, pp. 68–80, 2017.
[12] D. Guru, B. B. Kiranagi, and P. Nagabhushan, “Multivalued type proxim-
ity measure and concept of mutual similarity value useful for clustering
symbolic patterns,” Pattern Recognit. Lett., vol. 25, no. 10, pp. 1203–1213,
2004.
[13] T. P. Hong, K. Y. Lin, and S. L. Wang, “Fuzzy data mining for interesting
generalized association rules,” Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 138, no. 2, pp. 255–
269, 2003.
[14] C. C. Huang, J. H. Li, C. L. Mei, and W. Z. Wu, “Three-way concept
learning based on cognitive operators: An information fusion viewpoint,”
Int. J. Approx. Reason., vol. 83, pp. 218–242, 2017.
[15] E. Hullermeier, “Fuzzy sets in machine learning and data mining,” Appl.
Soft Comput., vol. 11, no. 2, pp. 1493–1505, 2011.
[16] C. Kahraman, B. öztayşi, and S. Ç. Onar, “A comprehensive literature
review of 50 years of fuzzy set theory,” Int. J. Comput. Intell. Syst., vol. 9,
pp. 3–24, 2016.
[17] K. Kotwal and S. Chaudhuri, “A novel approach to quantitative evaluation
of hyperspectral image fusion techniques,” Inf. Fusion, vol. 14, no. 1,
pp. 5–18, 2013.
[18] Y. Leung, M. M. Fischer, W. Z. Wu, and J. S. Mi, “A rough set approach
for the discovery of classification rules in interval-valued information
systems,” Int. J. Approx. Reason., vol. 47, no. 2, pp. 233–246, 2008.
[19] M. Lhuillier, “Incremental fusion of structure-from-motion and GPS using
constrained bundle adjustments,” IEEE Trans. Pattern Anal. Mach. Intell.,
vol. 34, no. 12, pp. 2489–2495, Dec. 2012.
[20] J. H. Li, W. Y. Zeng, J. J. Xie, and Q. Yin, “A new fuzzy regression
model based on least absolute deviation,” Eng. Appl. Artif. Intell., vol. 52,
pp. 54–64, 2016.
[21] G. P. Lin, J. Y. Liang, and Y. H. Qian, “An information fusion approach
by combining multigranulation rough sets and evidence theory,” Inf. Sci.,
vol. 314, pp. 184–199, 2015.
[22] W. L. Martinez and A. R. Martinez, Computational Statistics Handbook
With MATLAB. Boca Raton, FL, USA: CRC Press, 2002.
[23] S. Mitra, S. K. Pal, and P. Mitra, “Data mining in soft computing frame-
work: A survey,” IEEE Trans. Neural Netw., vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 3–14,
Jan. 2002.
[24] Z. Pawlak, Rough Sets: Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning About Data.
Norwell, MA, USA: Kluwer, 1991.
[25] Z. Pawlak and A. Skowron, “Rudiments of rough sets,” Inf. Sci., vol. 177,
no. 1, pp. 3–27, 2007.
[26] W. Pedrycz, Granular Computing : An Introduction. Heidelberg,
Germany: Physica-Verlag HD, 2000, pp. 309–328.
[27] W. Pedrycz and A. Gacek, “Temporal granulation and its application to
signal analysis,” Inf. Sci., vol. 143 no. 1, pp. 47–71, 2002.
Authorized licensed use limited to: ULAKBIM UASL - SELCUK UNIVERSITESI. Downloaded on November 11,2022 at 07:55:14 UTC from IEEE Xplore. Restrictions apply.
3417
[28] W. Pedrycz and P. Rai, “Collaborative clustering with the use of fuzzy c-
means and its quantification,” Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 159, no, 18, pp. 2399–
2427, 2008.
[29] W. Pedrycz and M. L. Song, “Analytic hierarchy process (AHP) in group
decision making and its optimization with an allocation of informa-
tion granularity,” IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 19, no. 3, pp. 527–539,
Jun. 2011.
[30] W. Pedrycz and S. M. Chen, “Granular computing and decision-making,”
New York, NY, USA: Springer, 2015.
[31] Y. H. Qian, S. Y. Li, J. Y. Liang, Z. Z. Shi, and F. Wang, “Pessimistic
rough set based decisions: A multigranulation fusion strategy,” Inf. Sci.,
vol. 264, pp. 196–210, 2014.
[32] S. Rehman and M. Mohandes, “Artificial neural network estimation of
global solar radiation using air temperature and relative humidity,” Energy
Policy, vol. 36, no. 2, pp. 571–576, 2008.
[33] S. E. Sklarz, A. Novoselsky, and M. Dorfan, “Incremental fusion of GMTI
tracks for road map estimation,” in Proc. 11th Int. Conf. Inf. Fusion, 2008,
pp. 1–7.
[34] A. Skowron and J. Stepaniuk, “Information granules: Towards foundations
of granular computing,” Int. J. Intell. Syst., vol. 16, no. 1, pp. 57–85, 2001.
[35] A. Skowron and P. Synak, “Reasoning in information maps,” Fundam.
Inform., vol. 59, no. 2, pp. 241–259, 2003.
[36] G. W. Snedecor and W. G. Cochran, Statistical Methods, 8th ed. Ames,
IA, USA: Iowa State Univ. Press, 1989.
[37] K. B. Song, Y. S. Baek, D. H. Hong, and G. Jang, “Short-term load
forecasting for the holidays using fuzzy linear regression method,” IEEE
Trans. Power Syst., vol. 20, no. 1, pp. 96–101, Feb. 2005.
[38] F. de A. T. de Carvalho, P. Bertrand, and E. C. Simões, “Batch SOM
algorithms for interval-valued data with automatic weighting of the vari-
ables,”Neurocomputing, vol. 182, pp. 66–81, 2016.
[39] J. Q. Wang, J. T. Wu, J. Wang, H. Y. Zhang, and X. H. Chen, “Multi-criteria
decision-making methods based on the Hausdorff distance of hesitant
fuzzy linguistic numbers,” Soft Comput., vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 1621–1633,
2016.
[40] W. Z. Wu, Y. Leung, and J. S. Mi, “Granular computing and knowledge
reduction in formal contexts,” IEEE Trans. Knowl. Data Eng., vol. 21,
no. 10, pp. 1461–1474, Oct. 2009.
[41] X. B. Xu, Z. Zhang, D. L. Xu, and Y. W. Chen, “Interval-valued evidence
updating with reliability and sensitivity analysis for fault diagnosis,” Int.
J. Comput. Intell. Syst., vol. 9, no. 3, pp. 396–415, 2016.
[42] W. H. Xu and W. T. Li, “Information fusion based on information entropy
in fuzzy multi-source incomplete information system,” Int. J. Fuzzy Syst.,
vol. 19, no. 4, pp. 1200–1216, 2017.
[43] W. H. Xu and W. T. Li, “Granular computing approach to two-way learning
based on formal concept analysis in fuzzy datasets,” IEEE Trans. Cybern.,
vol. 46, no. 2, pp. 366–379, Feb. 2016.
[44] W. H. Xu and J. H. Yu, “A novel approach to information fusion in multi-
source datasets: A granular computing viewpoint,” Inf. Sci., vol. 378,
pp. 410–423, 2016.
[45] R. R. Yager, “Set measure directed multi-Source information fusion,”
IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst., vol. 19, no. 6, pp. 1031–1039, Dec. 2011.
[46] R. R. Yager, “A framework for multi-source data fusion,” Inf. Sci., vol. 163,
no. 13, pp. 175–200, 2004.
[47] Y. Y. Yao, “Information granulation and rough set approximation,” Int. J.
Intell. Syst., vol. 16, pp. 87–104, 2001.
[48] J. F. Yao and J. S. Yao, “Fuzzy decision making for medical diagnosis
based on fuzzy number and compositional rule of inference,” Fuzzy Sets
Syst., vol. 120, no. 2, pp. 351–366, 2001.
[49] Y. Y. Yao, “Granular computing: Basic issues and possible solutions,” in
Proc. 5th Joint Conf. Inf. Sci., 2002, pp. 186–189.
[50] F. S. Yu and W. Pedrycz, “The design of fuzzy information granules: Trade-
offs between specificity and experimental evidence,” Appl. Soft Comput.,
vol. 9, no. 1, pp. 264–273, 2011.
[51] L. A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy sets,” Inf. Control, vol. 8, no. 3, pp. 338–353, 1965.
[52] L. A. Zadeh, “Fuzzy logic = computing with words,” IEEE Trans. Fuzzy
Syst., vol. 4, no. 2, pp. 103–111, May 1996.
[53] L. A. Zadeh, “Toward a theory of fuzzy information granulation and its
centrality in human reasoning and fuzzy logic,” Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 90,
no. 2, pp. 111–127, 1997.
[54] M. X. Zhang, K. Q. Dong, and F. S. Yu, “Fuzzy granulation of interval
numbers,” in Proc. 8th Int. Conf. Fuzzy Syst. Knowl. Discovery, 2011,
pp. 372–376.
Authors’ photographs and biographies not available at the time of publication.