Comparison of Algorithms for Decision Making Problems and Preservation of α-properties of Fuzzy Relations in Aggregation Process

• Autorzy: Bentkowska U. , Balicki K.

Identyfikatory

DOI

10.14313/JAMRIS_2-2016/13

• Języki publikacji: EN

Abstrakty

EN

In the paper the problem of preservation of properties of fuzzy relations during aggregation process is considered. It means that properties of fuzzy relations R1, … , R2 on a set X are compared with properties of the aggregated fuzzy relation RF = F(R1, … , R2), where R is a function of the type F ∶ [0, 1]n → [0, 1]. There are discussed α-properties (which may be called graded properties - to some grade R) as reflexivity, irreflexivity, symmetry, asymmetry, antisymmetry, connectedness and transitivity, where α ∈ [0, 1]. Fuzzy relations with a given graded property are analyzed (there may be diverse grades of the same property) and the obtained grade of the aggregated fuzzy relation is provided. There is also discussed the „converse” problem. Namely, relation RF = F(R1, … , Rn) is assumed to have a graded property and the properties of relations R1, … , Rn are examined (possibly with some assumptions on F). Presented here considerations have possible applications in decision making algorithms. This is why interpretation of the considered graded properties and possible potential in decision making is presented.

Słowa kluczowe

EN

decision making algorithms; fuzzy relations; properties of fuzzy relations; aggregation function

• Wydawca: Łukasiewicz Industrial Research Institute for Automation and Measurements PIAP
• Czasopismo: Journal of Automation Mobile Robotics and Intelligent Systems
• Rocznik: 2016
• Tom: Vol. 10, No. 2
• Strony: 25--39
• Opis fizyczny: Bibliogr. 40 poz.

Twórcy

autor

Bentkowska U.

• University of Rzeszów, Interdisciplinary Centre for Computational Modelling, ul. Pigonia 1, 35-310 Rzeszów, Poland

autor

Balicki K.

• University of Rzeszów, Interdisciplinary Centre for Computational Modelling, ul. Pigonia 1, 35-310 Rzeszów, Poland

Bibliografia

• [1] Bassan B., Spizzichino F., „Dependence and multivariate aging: the role of level sets of the survival function”, In: System and Bayesian Reliability, Series of Quality Reliability Engineering Statistics, vol. 5, World Scienti􀏐ic Publishers, River Edge, New Jork, 2001, 229–242.
• [2] Beliakov G., Pradera A., Calvo T., Aggregation Functions: A Guide for Practitioners, Springer, Berlin, 2007.
• [3] Bentkowska U., Bustince H., Jurio A., Pagola M., Pȩkala B., „Decision making with an intervalvalued fuzzy preference relation and admissible orders”, Applied Soft Computing, vol. 35, 2015, 792–801.
• [4] Blin J.M., Whinston A.B., „Fuzzy sets and social choice”, J. Cybern., vol. 3, 1973, 28–36.
• [5] Bustince H., Fernandez J., Mesiar R., Montero J., Orduna R., „Overlap functions”, Nonlinear Anal.-Theor., vol. 72, 2010, 1488–1499.DOI: 10.1016/j.na.2009.08.033.
• [6] Bustince H., Fernandez J., Kolesárová A., Mesiar R., „Directional monotonicity of fusion functions”, European Journal of Operational Research, vol. 244, 2015, 300–308. DOI:10.1016/j.ejor.2015.01.018.
• [7] Calvo T., Kolesárová A., Komornı́ková M., Mesiar R., „Aggregation operators: Properties, classes and construction methods”, In: Aggregation Operators, T. Calvo et al., eds., Physica-Verlag, Heildelberg, 2007, 3–104.
• [8] Chakraborty M.K., Das M., „On fuzzy equivalence I”, Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 11, 1983, 185–193.
• [9] De Baets B., Janssens S., De Meyer H., „Metatheorems on inequalities for scalar fuzzy set cardinalities”, Fuzzy Set Syst., vol. 157, 2006, 1463–1476.
• [10] Drewniak J., Fuzzy relation calculus, Silesian University, Katowice, 1989.
• [11] Drewniak J., Drygaś P., Dudziak U., „Domination between multiplace operations”, In: Issues in Soft Computing, Decisions and Operations Research, O. Hryniewicz et al., eds., EXIT, Warszawa, 2005, 149–160.
• [12] Drewniak J., Dudziak U., „Aggregations preserving classes of fuzzy relations”, Kybernetika, vol. 41, no. 3, 2005, 265–284.
• [13] Drewniak J., Stȩpień J., „Weak properties of fuzzy relations”, Journal of Electrical Engineering, vol. 57, no. 7/s, 2006, 95–98.
• [14] Drewniak J., Dudziak U., „Preservation of properties of fuzzy relations during aggregation processes”, Kybernetika, vol. 43, no. 2, 2007, 115–132.
• [15] Drewniak J., Król A., „A survey of weak connectives and the preservation of their properties by aggregations”, Fuzzy Set Syst., vol. 161, 2010, 202–215.
• [16] Dudziak U., „Graded properties of fuzzy relations in aggregation process”, Journal of Electrical Engineering, vol. 56, no. 12/s, 2005, 56–58.
• [17] Dudziak U., „Graded transitivity and aggregation processes”, Sci. Bull. Chełm. Section of Mathematics and Computer Science, vol. 1, 2007, 31–39.
• [18] Dudziak U., „Weak and graded properties of fuzzy relations in the context of aggregation process”, Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 161, 2010, 216–233.
• [19] Fishburn P.C., „Binary choice probabilities: on the varieties of stochastic transitivity”, J. Math. Psych., vol. 10, 1973, 327–352.
• [20] Suárez Garcia F., Gil Alvarez P., „Two families of fuzzy integrals”, Fuzzy Set Syst., vol. 18, 1986, 67–81.
• [21] Garcia-Lapresta J.L., Meneses L.C., „Individualvalued preferences and their aggregation: consistency analysis in a real case”, Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 151, 2005, 269–284.
• [22] Grabisch M., Pap E., Mesiar R., Marichal J.- L., Aggregation Functions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2009.
• [23] Gottwald S., A Treatise on Many-valued Logics, Studies in Logic and Computation, vol. 9, Research Studies Press Ltd., Baldock, UK, 2001.
• [24] Hardy G.H., Littlewood J., Polya G., Inequalities, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1955.
• [25] Fodor J., Roubens M., Fuzzy preference modelling and multicriteria decision support, Kluwer Acad. Publ., Dordrecht, 1994.
• [26] Hüllermeier E., Brinker K., „Learning valued preference structures for solving classification problems”, Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 159, 2008, 2337–2352.
• [27] Hüllermeier E., Vanderlooy S., „Combining predictions in pairwise classification: an optimal adaptive voting strategy and its relation to weighted voting”, Pattern Recognition, vol. 43, no. 1, 2010, 128–142.
• [28] Klement E.P., Mesiar R., Pap E., Triangular norms, Kluwer Acad. Publ. Dordrecht., 2000.
• [29] Maes K., Saminger S., De Baets B., „Representation and construction of self-dual aggregation operators”, European Journal of Operation Research, vol. 177, 2007, 472–487.
• [30] Orlovsky S. A., „Decision-making with a fuzzy preference relation”, Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 1, no. 3, 1978, 155–167.
• [31] Peneva V., Popchev I., „Aggregation of fuzzy relations”, C. R. Acad. Bulgare Sci., vol. 51, no. 9-10, 1998, 41–44.
• [32] Peneva V., Popchev I., „Properties of the aggregation operators related with fuzzy relations”, Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 139, no. 3, 2003, 615–633.
• [33] Roubens M., Vincke P., Preference Modelling, Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1985.
• [34] Saminger S., Mesiar R., Bodenhofer U., „Domination of aggregation operators and preservation of transitivity”, Int. J. Uncertain., Fuzziness, Knowl.-Based Syst., vol. 10, Suppl., 2002, 11–35.
• [35] Schreider J.A., Równość, podobieństwo, porza̧dek, WNT, Warszawa, 1975. (in Polish)
• [36] Schweizer B., Sklar A., Probabilistic metric spaces, North Holland, New York, 1983.
• [37] Wagenknecht M., „On pseudo-transitive approximations of fuzzy relations”, Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 44, 1991, 45–55.
• [38] Zadeh L. A., „Fuzzy sets”, Inform. Control, vol. 8, 1965, 338–353.
• [39] Zadeh L. A., „Similarity relations and fuzzy orderings”, Inform. Sci., vol. 3, 1971, 177–200.
• [40] Zimmermann H. J., Zysno P., „Decisions and evaluations by hierarchical aggregation of information”, Fuzzy Sets Syst., vol. 10, 1983, 243–260.

Uwagi

PL

Opracowanie ze środków MNiSW w ramach umowy 812/P-DUN/2016 na działalność upowszechniającą naukę.