Strongly transitive fuzzy relations: A more adequate way to describe similarity

The notion of a transitive closure of a fuzzy relation is very useful for clustering in pattern recognition, for fuzzy databases, etc. It is based on translating the standard definition of transitivity and transitive closure into fuzzy terms. This definition works fine, but to some extent it does not fully capture our understanding of transitivity. The reason is that this definition is based on fuzzifying only the positive side of transitivity: if R(a,b) and R(b,c), then R(a,c); but transitivity also includes a negative side: if R(a,b) and not R(a,c), then not R(b,c). In classical logic, this negative statement follows from the standard 'positive' definition of transitivity. In fuzzy logic, this negative part of the transitivity has to be formulated as an additional demand. A strongly transitive fuzzy relation as the one that satisfies both the positive and the negative transitivity demands is defined, the existence of strongly transitive closure is proven, and the relationship between strongly transitive similarity and clustering are found

How to help intelligent systems with different uncertainty representations cooperate with each other

In order to solve a complicated problem one must use the knowledge from different domains. Therefore, if one wants to automatize the solution of these problems, one has to help the knowledge-based systems that correspond to these domains cooperate, that is, communicate facts and conclusions to each other in the process of decision making. One of the main obstacles to such cooperation is the fact that different intelligent systems use different methods of knowledge acquisition and different methods and formalisms for uncertainty representation. So an interface f is needed, 'translating' the values x, y, which represent uncertainty of the experts' knowledge in one system, into the values f(x), f(y) appropriate for another one. The problem of designing such an interface as a mathematical problem is formulated and solved. It is shown that the interface must be fractionally linear: f(x) = (ax + b)/(cx + d)

Maximum entropy approach to fuzzy control

For the same expert knowledge, if one uses different &- and V-operations in a fuzzy control methodology, one ends up with different control strategies. Each choice of these operations restricts the set of possible control strategies. Since a wrong choice can lead to a low quality control, it is reasonable to try to loose as few possibilities as possible. This idea is formalized and it is shown that it leads to the choice of min(a + b,1) for V and min(a,b) for &. This choice was tried on NASA Shuttle simulator; it leads to a maximally stable control

How far we are from the complete knowledge: Complexity of knowledge acquisition in Dempster-Shafer approach

When a knowledge base represents the experts' uncertainty, then it is reasonable to ask how far we are from the complete knowledge, that is, how many more questions do we have to ask (to these experts, to nature by means of experimenting, etc) in order to attain the complete knowledge. Of course, since we do not know what the real world is, we cannot get the precise number of questions from the very beginning: it is quite possible, for example, that we ask the right question first and thus guess the real state of the world after the first question. So we have to estimate this number and use this estimate as a natural measure of completeness for a given knowledge base. We give such estimates for Dempster-Shafer formalism. Namely, we show that this average number of questions can be obtained by solving a simple mathematical optimization problem. In principle this characteristic is not always sufficient to express the fact that sometimes we have more knowledge. For example, it has the same value if we have an event with two possible outcomes and nothing else is known, and if there is an additional knowledge that the probability of every outcome is 0.5. We'll show that from the practical viewpoint this is not a problem, because the difference between the necessary number of questions in both cases is practically negligible

How to combine probabilistic and fuzzy uncertainties in fuzzy control

Fuzzy control is a methodology that translates natural-language rules, formulated by expert controllers, into the actual control strategy that can be implemented in an automated controller. In many cases, in addition to the experts' rules, additional statistical information about the system is known. It is explained how to use this additional information in fuzzy control methodology

How far are we from the complete knowledge: complexity of knowledge acquisition in Dempster-Shafer approach

Abstract: When a knowledge base represents the experts ’ uncertainty, then it is reasonable to ask how far we are from the complete knowledge, that is, how many more questions do we have to ask (to these experts, to nature by means of experimenting, etc) in order to attain the complete knowledge. Of course, since we do not know what the real world is, we cannot get the precise number of questions from the very beginning: it is quite possible, for example, that we ask the right question first and thus guess the real state of the world after the first question. So we have to estimate this number and use this estimate as a natural measure of completeness for a given knowledge base. We give such estimates for Dempster-Shafer formalism. Namely, we show that this average number of questions can be obtained by solving a simple mathematical optimization problem. In principle this characteristic is not always sufficient to express the fact that sometimes we have more knowledge. For example, it has the same value if we have an event with two possible outcomes and nothing else is known, and if there is an additional knowledge that the probability of every outcome is 0.5. We’ll show that from the practical viewpoint this is not a problem, because the difference between the necessary number o

How to control if even experts are not sure: Robust fuzzy control

In real life, the degrees of certainty that correspond to one of the same expert can differ drastically, and fuzzy control algorithms translate these different degrees of uncertainty into different control strategies. In such situations, it is reasonable to choose a fuzzy control methodology that is the least vulnerable to this kind of uncertainty. It is shown that this 'robustness' demand leads to min and max for &- and V-operations, to 1-x for negation, and to centroid as a defuzzification procedure

Monte-Carlo methods make Dempster-Shafer formalism feasible

One of the main obstacles to the applications of Dempster-Shafer formalism is its computational complexity. If we combine m different pieces of knowledge, then in general case we have to perform up to 2(sup m) computational steps, which for large m is infeasible. For several important cases algorithms with smaller running time were proposed. We prove, however, that if we want to compute the belief bel(Q) in any given query Q, then exponential time is inevitable. It is still inevitable, if we want to compute bel(Q) with given precision epsilon. This restriction corresponds to the natural idea that since initial masses are known only approximately, there is no sense in trying to compute bel(Q) precisely. A further idea is that there is always some doubt in the whole knowledge, so there is always a probability p(sub o) that the expert's knowledge is wrong. In view of that it is sufficient to have an algorithm that gives a correct answer a probability greater than 1-p(sub o). If we use the original Dempster's combination rule, this possibility diminishes the running time, but still leaves the problem infeasible in the general case. We show that for the alternative combination rules proposed by Smets and Yager feasible methods exist. We also show how these methods can be parallelized, and what parallelization model fits this problem best