Post on 16-Dec-2015
Fuzzy Logic
The restriction of classical propositional calculus to a two-valued logic has created many interesting paradoxes over the ages. For example, the barber of Seville is a classic paradox (also termed as Russell’s barber). In the small Spanish town of Seville, there is a rule that all and only those men who do not shave themselves are shaved by a barber. Who shaves the barber?
Another example comes from ancient Greece. Does the liar from Crete lie when he claims, “All Cretians are liars”? If he is telling the truth, then the statement is false. If the statement is false, he is not telling the truth.
Fuzzy Logic
Let S: the barber shaves himself
S’: he does not
S S’ and S’ S
T(S) = T(S’) = 1 – T(S)
T(S) = 1/2
But for binary logic T(S) = 1 or 0
Fuzzy propositions are assigned for fuzzy sets:
10
~
~~
A
A xPT
Fuzzy Logic
~~
1 PTPT
~~~~
~~~~
,max
:
QTPTQPT
BorAxQP
~~~~
~~~~
,min
:
QTPTQPT
BandAxQP
~~~~~~
~~
,max QTPTQPTQPT
QP
Negation
Disjunction
Conjunction
Implication [Zadeh, 1973]
Fuzzy Logic
xyxyx
YABAR
ABAR~~~~
1,max,~~~~
Example:
= medium uniqueness =
= medium market size =
Then…
4
2.0
3
1
2
6.0
5
3.0
4
8.0
3
1
2
4.0
~A
~B
Fuzzy Logic
Fuzzy Logic
When the logical conditional implication is of the compound form,
IF x is , THEN y is , ELSE y is
Then fuzzy relation is:
whose membership function can be expressed as:
~A
~B
~C
~~~~~CABAR
yxyxyx CABAR
~~~~~
1,max,
Fuzzy Logic
Rule-based format to represent fuzzy information.
Rule 1: IF x is , THEN y is , where and represent fuzzy propositions (sets)
Now suppose we introduce a new antecedent, say, and we consider the following rule
Rule 2: IF x is , THEN y is
~A
~B
~B
~A
'~A '
~B
RAB ''~~
Fuzzy Logic
Fuzzy Logic
Suppose we use A in fuzzy composition, can we get
The answer is: NO
Example:
For the problem in pg 127, let
A’ = AB’ = A’ R = A R = {0.4/1 + 0.4/2 + 1/3 + 0.8/4 + 0.4/5 + 0.4/6} ≠ B
RBB ~~
Fuzzy Tautologies, Contradictions, Equivalence, and Logical Proofs
The extension of truth operations for tautologies, contradictions, equivalence, and logical proofs is no different for fuzzy sets; the results, however, can differ considerably from those in classical logic. If the truth values for the simple propositions of a fuzzy logic compound proposition are strictly true (1) or false (0), the results follow identically those in classical logic. However, the use of partially true (or partially false) simple propositions in compound propositional statements results in new ideas termed quasi tautologies, quasi contradictions, and quasi equivalence. Moreover, the idea of a logical proof is altered because now a proof can be shown only to a “matter of degree”. Some examples of these will be useful.
Fuzzy Tautologies, Contradictions, Equivalence, and Logical Proofs
Truth table (approximate modus ponens)
A B AB (A(AB)) (A(AB))B
.3 .2 .7 .3 .7
.3 .8 .8 .3 .8 Quasi tautology
.7 .2 .3 .3 .7
.7 .8 .8 .7 .8
Truth table (approximate modus ponens)
A B AB (A(AB)) (A(AB))B
.4 .1 .6 .4 .6
.4 .9 .9 .4 .9 Quasi tautology
.6 .1 .4 .4 .6
.6 .9 .9 .6 .9
Fuzzy Tautologies, Contradictions, Equivalence, and Logical Proofs
The following form of the implication operator show different techniques for obtaining the membership function values of fuzzy relation defined on the Cartesian product space X × Y:
~R
Fuzzy Tautologies, Contradictions, Equivalence, and Logical Proofs
The following common methods are among those proposed in the literature for the composition operation , where is the input, or antecedent defined on the universe X, is the output, or consequent defined on the universe Y, and is a fuzzy relation characterizing the relationship between specific inputs (x) and specific outputs (y):
Refer fig on next slide…
~~~RAB
~A
~B
~R
Fuzzy Tautologies, Contradictions, Equivalence, and Logical Proofs
where f(.) is a logistic function (like a sigmoid or step function) that limits the value of the function within the interval [0,1]
Commonly used in Artificial Neural Networks for mapping between parallel layers of a multi-layer network.
Fuzzy Rule-based systems
Using fuzzy sets as a calculus to interpret natural language. It is vague, imprecise, ambiguous and fuzzy.
Fundamental terms atoms
Collection of atomic terms composite or set of terms
An atomic term (a linguistic variable) can be interpreted using fuzzy sets.
An atomic term in the universe of natural language, X.
Define a fuzzy set in the universe of interpretations or meanings, Y as a specific meaning of .
~A
Fuzzy Rule-based systems
~A
X Y ~~AM
Mapping of a linguistic atom to a cognitive interpretation ~A
251
2525
251
,
12
~
~~
y
yy
yyoug
yy
M
AM
Fuzzy Rule-based systems
Composite
yyNot
yyy
and
yyy
or
and
or
1:
,min
:
,max
:
Linguistic Hedges
15.0121
5.002
2
2
75.0
5
21
21
25.1
4
2
2
yy
yy
Intensify
Minus
y
y
Slightly
plus
veryVery
y
y
Very
y
y
It increases contrast.
Precedence of the Operations
1 Hedge, not
2 and
3 or
Example:
Suppose we have a universe of integers, Y = {1,2,3,4,5}. We define the following linguistic terms as a mapping onto Y:
“small” =
“large” =
5
1.
4
8.
3
6.
2
4.
1
2.
5
2.
4
4.
3
6.
2
8.
1
1
Example (contd)
Then we construct a phrase, or a composite term:
= “not very small and not very, very large”
which involves the following set-theoretic operations:
4
6.
3
64.
2
36.
4
6.
3
9.
2
1
1
1
5
96.
4
84.
3
64.
2
36.
Suppose we want to construct a linguistic variable “intensely small” (extremely small); we will make use of the equation defined before to modify “small” as follows:
Example (contd)
“Intensely small” =
5
08.0
4
32.0
3
68.0
2
92.0
1
1
5
2.02
4
4.02
3
6.0121
2
8.0121
1
1121
22
222
Rule-based Systems
IF-THEN rule based form
Canonical Rule Forms
1. Assignment statementsx = large, x y
2. Conditional statementsIf A then B,If A then B, else C
3. Unconditional statementsstopgo to 5
unconditional can beIf any conditions, then stopIf condition Ci, then restrict Ri
Decomposition of Compound Rule
Any compound rule structure can be decomposed and reduced to a number of simple canonical rules.
The most commonly used techniques
Multiple Conjunctive Antecedents
If x is and , then y is
Define
~A LAA
~
2
~ SB
~LS AAAA
~
2
~
1
~~
xxx LS AAA
~
1
~~
,,min
The rule can be rewritten.
IF THENSA
~
SB~
Multiple Disjunctive Antecedents
If x is or or … or
then y is
1
~A 2
~A LA
~
SB~
xxx
AAAA
LS AAA
LS
,,max 1
~
2
~
1
~~
IF THENSA
~
SB~
Condition Statements
1. IF THEN ( ELSE ) decomposed into:
IF THEN or IF NOT THEN
1
~A
~
1B2
~B
1
~A 1
~B 1
~A 2
~B
2. IF (THEN ) unless decomposed into:IF THEN or IF NOT THEN NOT
1
~A
~
1B 2
~A
1
~A 1
~B 2
~A 1
~B
3. IF THEN ( ELSE IF THEN ( )) decomposed into:
IF THEN or IF NOT and THEN NOT
1
~A
~
1B2
~A
1
~A 1
~B 1
~A 2
~B
~
2B2
~A
4. Nested IF-THEN rules IF THEN (IF , THEN ( )) becomes IF and THEN
Each canonical form is an implication, and we can reduce the rules to a series of relations.
1
~A 2
~A
1
~B
1
~A 2
~A 1
~B
Condition Statements
“likely” “very likely” “highly likely” “true” “fairly true” “very true” “false” “fairly false” “very false”
1
x
Xx
anything
Let be a fuzzy truth value “very true” “true” “fairly true” “fairly false” “false”
A truth qualification proposition can be expressed as:“x is is ”
orx is is =
~A
~A
5.0~
~
x
x
A
A
Aggregation of fuzzy rule
The process of obtaining the overall consequent (conclusion) from the individual consequent contributed by each rule in the rule-base is known as aggregation of rules.
Conjunctive System of Rules:
Yyyyy
yyyy
ryyy
r
,,min 1
21
Disjunctive System of Rules:
Yyyyy
yyyy
ryyy
r
,,max 1
21
Graphical Technique of Inference
If x1 is and x2 is then y is , k = 1,2,..., r
Graphical methods that emulate the inference process and make manual computations involving a few simple rules.
Case 1: inputs x1, and x2 are crisp.
Memberships1 x1 = input(i)
(x1) = (x1 – input(i)) = 0 otherwise
1 x2 = input(i)(x2) = (x2 – input(i)) = 0 otherwise
Graphical Technique of Inference
For r disjunctive rules:
A11 refers to the first fuzzy antecedent of the first rule.
A12 refers to the second fuzzy antecedent of the first rule.
rk
jinputiinputy kkk AAkB
,,2,1
,minmax2~1~~