Resultado de búsqueda
6 de feb. de 2012 · 33.6k 6 81 140. 1. As I understand it, the Wang and Klir book basically indicates that fuzzy measures don't use the term "fuzzy" in the same way when talks about fuzzy sets or fuzzy logic, including Sugeno's integral. That's what I recall Wang and Klir writing, and Klir is definitely a strong advocate of fuzzy theory.
25 de feb. de 2016 · Fuzzy logic and probability theory are two independent sources of indeterminacy in judging if an element x ∈ A x ∈ A is in a set. If x x is precisely known and A A is clearly defined, then x ∈ A x ∈ A is either true or false, following the "law of excluded middle". This is how classical logic works.
12 de ene. de 2020 · Well this is even more complicated. You can use two classical definitions of XOR, which are equal in crisp logic, but not necessarily in fuzzy logic: AxorS B = (A ∧ ¬B) ∨ (¬A ∧ B) A xor S. . B = (A ∧ ¬ B) ∨ (¬ A ∧ B) i.e. "one but not the other" which is usually marked with S subscript, since it has S-norm (or) at the top ...
2 de abr. de 2015 · I was reading the book Fuzzy Logic by Timothy. J .Ross I don't understand how this defuzzification result was obtained. This is the example in the book: The centroid method equation is : I don't understand how the equations for $\mu_B(Z)$ was obtained. That is I don't understand for example, how from 3.6-4 it was integrated as $(z-3.0)\over 2$
29 de abr. de 2017 · I am trying to implement a fuzzy logic system, but am having serious issues finding the centroid for the defuzzification process. This is what my output sets look like: My reference source gives this to me as an example:
22 de may. de 2012 · Mamdani type fuzzy inference gives an output that is a fuzzy set. Sugeno-type inference gives an output that is either constant or a linear (weighted) mathematical expression. e.g Mamdani: If A is X1, and B is X2, then C is X3. (X1, X2, X3 are fuzzy sets). Sugeno: If A is X1 and B is X2 then C = ax1 + bx2 + c (linear expression) (a,b,and c are ...
18 de abr. de 2016 · There are two common forms of composition operation in Fuzzy Theory: Let R be a relation that relates elements from universe X to universe Y, and let S be a relation that relates elements from universe Y to universe Z. Relation R and S are as follows. R = y1 y2 x1 x2 x3 [0.1 0.3 0.4 0.2 0.8 0.6] S = z1 z2 z3 y1 y2 [0.1 0.3 0.2 0.6 0.4 0.5]
Let H H be a complete Heyting algebra. The main result is that the category of H H -valued fuzzy sets Fuz(H) Fuz (H) defined by Eytan is a topos if and only if H H is a Boolean algebra. Apparently, the problem is that H H -valued fuzzy sets are insufficiently ‘fuzzified’ (Pitt's word!) to be well-behaved enough to form a topos.
13 de feb. de 2020 · Fuzzy and Boolean Logics are equally expressive and one is nothing more than syntactic sugar for the other. I'm honestly trying to get convinced otherwise. Here's my argument: In Boolean logic, $...
13 de oct. de 2017 · If no, please give an alternative f(x) f (x) that also has these properties. Background: In fuzzy logic, truth and falsehood are a matter of degree, which can be between 0 0 and 1 1. This question asks about whether the definition of the fuzzy "not" operation is unique in order to preserve certain properties of the classical logic. real-analysis.
