English (United Kingdom)

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/featured_content/oa?rat=en

https://curated-unify.zendy.io/wp-json/zendy-region/v1/highlighted_journal/

Zendy Open

Presents the pdf analysis as premium feature

PDF Analysis

Insights

Presents the summarisation as premium feature

Summarisation

Presents the keyphrase highlighting as premium feature

Keyphrase Highlighting

Presents the zaia usage as premium feature

ZAIA

Zendy Tools

Zendy Plus

Presents the access of premium content as premium feature

Premium Content

In this paper, we investigate the problem encountered by Dempster's combination rule in view of Dempster's original combination framework. We first show that the root of Dempster's combination rule (defined and named by Shafer) is Dempster's original idea on evidence combination. We then argue that Dempster's original idea on evidence combination is, in fact, richer than what has been formulated in the rule. We conclude that, by strictly following what Dempster has suggested, there should be no counterintuitive results when combining evidence.

Reinvestigating Dempster's Idea on Evidence Combination