Talk:Fuzzy control: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
imported>Pat Palmer (adding info to checklist) |
imported>Giangiacomo Gerla m (Talk:Fuzzy logic moved to Talk:Fuzzy control) |
||
(8 intermediate revisions by 6 users not shown) | |||
Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
{{ | {{subpages}} | ||
}} | |||
__TOC__ | |||
== Which workgroup? == | |||
Which primary workgroup does this best belong in? [[User:Stephen Ewen|Stephen Ewen]] 02:02, 28 June 2007 (CDT) | |||
:I would say computers. The primary application of these ideas is neuro-fuzzy modeling (e.g., pattern recognition, decision making and planning, robotics, theoretical approaches to cognitive science, etc.) Fuzzy logic has not been terribly popular in the broader scientific community because it suffers from various theoretical difficulties, but others do not see these as insurmountable. It's biggest application probably comes in the areas of modeling and simulation. [[User:Greg Woodhouse|Greg Woodhouse]] 11:28, 28 June 2007 (CDT) | |||
::This should go into the "Broken Optics", "Textiles", and "Electronics" workgroups. But seriously, I think Mathematics should be the primary workgroup. If we didn't have computers, Mathematicians would still be frustrated over ambiguous data sets.--[[User:Robert W King|Robert W King]] 11:30, 28 June 2007 (CDT) |
Latest revision as of 15:36, 15 November 2008
Which workgroup?
Which primary workgroup does this best belong in? Stephen Ewen 02:02, 28 June 2007 (CDT)
- I would say computers. The primary application of these ideas is neuro-fuzzy modeling (e.g., pattern recognition, decision making and planning, robotics, theoretical approaches to cognitive science, etc.) Fuzzy logic has not been terribly popular in the broader scientific community because it suffers from various theoretical difficulties, but others do not see these as insurmountable. It's biggest application probably comes in the areas of modeling and simulation. Greg Woodhouse 11:28, 28 June 2007 (CDT)
- This should go into the "Broken Optics", "Textiles", and "Electronics" workgroups. But seriously, I think Mathematics should be the primary workgroup. If we didn't have computers, Mathematicians would still be frustrated over ambiguous data sets.--Robert W King 11:30, 28 June 2007 (CDT)