Epistemic graphs generalize the epistemic approach to probabilistic argumentation and tackle the uncertainties in and between arguments. A framework was proposed to generate epistemic constraints from data using a two-way generalization method in the perspective of only considering the beliefs of participants without considering the nature of relations represented in an epistemic graph. The deficiency of original framework is that it is unable to learn rules using tighter constraints, and the learnt rules might be counterintuitive. Meanwhile, when dealing with more restricted values, the filtering computational complexity will increase sharply, and the time performance would become unreasonable. This paper introduces a filtering-based approach using a multiple-way generalization step to generate a set of rational rules based on both the beliefs of each agent on different arguments and the epistemic graph corresponding to the epistemic constraints. This approach is able to generated rational rules with multiple restricted values in higher efficiency. Meanwhile, we have proposed a standard to analyze the rationality of a dataset based on the postulates of deciding rational rules. We evaluate the filtering-based approach on two suitable data bases. The empirical results show that the filtering-based approach performs well with a better efficiency comparing to the original framework, and rules generated from the improved approach are ensured to be rational.