74:
53:
22:
174:, as opposed to just saying that all possible combinations of outcomes should be considered within that theory. It looks as if most of the publications reaached via the "external links" involve someone called Smets and I am not clear that the 2 references I added to the article are by independent sources. So just how "notable" is this topic? It doesn't seem to stir much interest from editors.
241:
I added a few inline-citation for the paragraphs I added or changed. For the two remaining paragraphs (Zadehs example and open world assumption) I'am not exactly sure about the source publications. It might be Smets and Kennes, 1994 as well. I would suggest removing the maintenance template "lack of
208:
I introduced a new structure and added a few facts, links and references, hopefully improving the readability of the article. Despite that, the quality of the article explaining the DST, which is the basis for this article, should be improved. Then it would be much easier to add more content here. I
141:
I have just created this introductory article on a research topic that, I think, is very promising. I read a few papers on the
Transferable Belief Model and it seems to me a valid alternative, for some cases, to the broadly known
193:
This article seems to be written exclusively for people that already have extensive understanding of the subject and terminology. It could use an introduction that better explains what it is to the layman.
124:
209:
also think a separate article that comprehensively introduces Zadeh’s example would be helpful in order to describe the DST and their numerous elaborations, e.g. TBM and
Subjective logic.
283:
114:
156:
I rewrote the article to reflect the fundamental historical reason why P.Smets developped the TBM. Think the DST article needs improvement too. HDMinh
288:
278:
90:
81:
58:
258:
225:
33:
21:
171:
150:
157:
39:
254:
221:
73:
52:
246:
213:
89:
on
Knowledge. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
250:
217:
179:
143:
199:
262:
229:
203:
183:
160:
272:
175:
195:
170:
Does anyone know enough about this to say that this is actually distinct from the
86:
15:
85:, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
8:
19:
47:
242:inline citations". What do you think?
49:
7:
79:This article is within the scope of
38:It is of interest to the following
284:Low-importance Statistics articles
14:
99:Knowledge:WikiProject Statistics
72:
51:
20:
289:WikiProject Statistics articles
279:Start-Class Statistics articles
119:This article has been rated as
102:Template:WikiProject Statistics
184:14:39, 27 September 2010 (UTC)
1:
161:14:52, 18 December 2006 (UTC)
93:and see a list of open tasks.
204:19:46, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
305:
118:
67:
46:
263:15:36, 26 May 2016 (UTC)
237:Lack of inline citations
230:16:35, 19 May 2016 (UTC)
172:Dempster-Shafer theory
166:Question of notability
151:Dempster-Shafer theory
82:WikiProject Statistics
28:This article is rated
105:Statistics articles
144:Probability Theory
34:content assessment
266:
249:comment added by
233:
216:comment added by
146:and to the often
139:
138:
135:
134:
131:
130:
296:
265:
243:
232:
210:
125:importance scale
107:
106:
103:
100:
97:
76:
69:
68:
63:
55:
48:
31:
25:
24:
16:
304:
303:
299:
298:
297:
295:
294:
293:
269:
268:
244:
239:
211:
191:
168:
104:
101:
98:
95:
94:
61:
32:on Knowledge's
29:
12:
11:
5:
302:
300:
292:
291:
286:
281:
271:
270:
238:
235:
190:
189:Not very clear
187:
167:
164:
158:193.51.120.172
137:
136:
133:
132:
129:
128:
121:Low-importance
117:
111:
110:
108:
91:the discussion
77:
65:
64:
62:Low‑importance
56:
44:
43:
37:
26:
13:
10:
9:
6:
4:
3:
2:
301:
290:
287:
285:
282:
280:
277:
276:
274:
267:
264:
260:
256:
252:
248:
236:
234:
231:
227:
223:
219:
215:
206:
205:
201:
197:
188:
186:
185:
181:
177:
173:
165:
163:
162:
159:
154:
152:
149:
148:overestimated
145:
126:
122:
116:
113:
112:
109:
92:
88:
84:
83:
78:
75:
71:
70:
66:
60:
57:
54:
50:
45:
41:
35:
27:
23:
18:
17:
245:— Preceding
240:
212:— Preceding
207:
192:
169:
155:
147:
140:
120:
80:
40:WikiProjects
30:Start-class
273:Categories
96:Statistics
87:statistics
59:Statistics
259:contribs
247:unsigned
226:contribs
214:unsigned
176:Melcombe
196:Andacar
123:on the
251:Mcgree
218:Mcgree
36:scale.
255:talk
222:talk
200:talk
180:talk
115:Low
275::
261:)
257:•
228:)
224:•
202:)
182:)
153:.
253:(
220:(
198:(
178:(
127:.
42::
Text is available under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License. Additional terms may apply.
