![]() |
|
|||
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
|
![]() |
[an error occurred while processing this directive]
Interestingly enough, these two operations were introduced by J. Lukasiewicz in his model of three-valued and many-valued logics; while being evident extensions of the model of two-valued logic they still were somewhat conservative by retaining the excluded middle and contradiction - the two fundamental principles of two-valued logic. As far as the remaining set-theoretic properties are concerned, both commutativity and associativity of the operators defined through triangular norms hold owing to the definition itself. The set requirement of idempotency as expressed in terms of t- and s-norms states that and As the associativity holds, we get In general In other words, no matter how many identical fuzzy set are combined, the result is not affected by this number. The idempotency property, as outlined above, does not hold for all triangular norms. To the contrary, the only meaningful idempotent triangular norms are the maximum and minimum operations. It is also to be noted that by iterating t-norms one gets a decreasing sequence of values when the number of arguments involved in the pertinent computation goes up The s-norms give rise to an increasing sequence of membership values meaning that It should be observed that, in general, the distributivity property is not satisfied for triangular norms. An exception is noted when we consider the pair min and max norms to model the intersection and union, respectively. 3.10. Information-based characteristics of fuzzy setsOwing to their continuous membership functions, fuzzy sets require more prudent characterization than their Boolean counterpart. In this section we discuss the classic information-oriented measures to describe the information content of fuzzy sets. Here entropy and energy measure of fuzziness are of primordial importance. We also discuss an issue of fuzzy set specificity through which we attempt to describe its fuzziness. 3.10.1. Entropy measure of fuzzinessTo remind briefly the notion of entropy and explain its meaning, let us consider an experiment with a finite number of outcomes x1, x2, .., xn which occur with some probabilities p1, p2, , pn; obviously one has The notion of entropy, as originally introduced by Shannon and Weaver (1949), reads as To get to the very essence of this notion, let analyze three highly illustrative situations:
Here we define pilog2pi =0 if pi=0 by extending -log2x to the origin by continuity. As clearly unveiled by the above observations, entropy quantifies uncertainty that stems from a lack of predictability of the results of the experiment caused by the probabilistic nature of the experiment. This uncertainty vanishes if a single outcome occurs (with probability one) and assumes its maximal value if all the outcomes are equiprobable (occur with the same probability). Referring to the original entropy definition, we can express entropy as an expected value of the function -log2(1/pi), say The definition easily generalizes to the continuous case; here the sum is replaced by the integral with p being the probability density function, whereas X is a random variable defined in X and described by the probability density function p(x). Another useful generalization of the entropy function pertains to a so-called weighted entropy where all the weight factors are greater than zero, wi >0. Especially, assuming that the weighted entropy is expressed as a sum of squared probabilities, In what follows, we confine ourselves to a finite universe of discourse X = {x1, x2, , xn}. The notion of entropy measures of fuzziness was introduced by De Luca and Termini (1972, 1974). Further generalizations and refinements could be found in Knopfmacher (1975), Trillas and Riera (1978), Czogala et al. (1982). We start with defining a functional h: [0,1] → [0,1] with the following properties (Ebanks, 1983):
Several commonly encountered examples of the above functional include, see also Fig. 3.6,
Then the entropy of A is defined as the sum of the functionals of the membership function of A
Copyright © CRC Press LLC
![]() |
![]() |
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
![]() |
![]() |