Fuzzy subalgebra: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Giangiacomo Gerla
imported>Giangiacomo Gerla
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
In fuzzy logic given a first order language we can interpret it by a ''[[formal fuzzy logic |fuzzy interpretation]]'', i.e. a pair (D,I) such that D is a nonempty set and I, the ''interpretation function'' is a map associating any n-ary functor with an n-ary operation and any constant with an element of D (as in the classical case). Moreover, it associate any n-ary predicate name with a suitable n-ary fuzzy relation in D. The fuzzy subalgebras are particular fuzzy interpretations of a first order language for algebraic structures with a monadic predicate symbol S. The intended meaning of S(x) is that x is an element of the subalgebra. More precisely, a ''fuzzy subalgebra'', is a model of a theory containing, for any ''n''-ary operation name h, the axiom
In fuzzy logic given a first order language and a valuation structure ''V'', we can interpret it by a ''[[formal fuzzy logic |fuzzy interpretation]]'', i.e. a pair (D,I) such that D is a nonempty set and I, the ''interpretation function'' is a map associating any n-ary functor with an n-ary operation and any constant with an element of D (as in the classical case). Moreover, I associates any n-ary predicate name with a suitable n-ary fuzzy relation in D. The fuzzy subalgebras are particular fuzzy interpretations of a first order language for algebraic structures with a monadic predicate symbol S. The intended meaning of S(x) is that x is an element of the subalgebra. More precisely, a ''fuzzy subalgebra'', is a model of a theory containing, for any ''n''-ary operation name h, the axiom
   
   


Line 16: Line 16:
ii)    s('''c''') = 1.
ii)    s('''c''') = 1.


A largely studied class of fuzzy subalgebras is the one in which the operation <math>\odot</math> coincides with the minimum. In such a case it is immediate to prove the following proposition.
In a largely studied class of valuation structures the product <math>\odot</math> coincides with the joint operation. In such a case it is immediate to prove the following proposition.


'''Proposition.''' A fuzzy subset s of an algebraic structure defines a fuzzy subalgebra if and only if for every λ in [0,1], the closed cut {x <math>\in</math> D : s(x)≥ λ} of s is a subalgebra.  
'''Proposition.''' A fuzzy subset s of an algebraic structure defines a fuzzy subalgebra if and only if for every λ in [0,1], the closed cut {x <math>\in</math> D : s(x)≥ λ} of s is a subalgebra.  
Line 25: Line 25:
where '''u''' is the neutral element in A. Given a group G, a ''fuzzy subgroup'' of G is a fuzzy submonoid s of G such that  
where '''u''' is the neutral element in A. Given a group G, a ''fuzzy subgroup'' of G is a fuzzy submonoid s of G such that  
     3)    s(x) ≤ s(x<sup>-1</sup>).
     3)    s(x) ≤ s(x<sup>-1</sup>).
It is possible to prove that the notion of fuzzy subgroup is strictly related with the notions of ''fuzzy equivalence''. In fact, assume that S is a set, G a group of transformations in S and (G,s) a fuzzy subgroup of G. Then, by setting  
The notions of fuzzy submonoid and fuzzy subgroup are strictly related with the notions of '' fuzzy order'' and ''fuzzy equivalence'', respectively.
 
'''Proposition'''. Assume that S is a nonempty set, G a group of transformations in S and (G,s) a fuzzy submonoid (subgroup) of G. Then, by setting  


   e(x,y) = Sup{s(h) : h is an element in G such that h(x) = y}  
   e(x,y) = Sup{s(h) : h is an element in G such that h(x) = y}  


we obtain a fuzzy equivalence. Conversely, let e be a fuzzy equivalence in S and, for every transformation h of S, set
we obtain a fuzzy order (a fuzzy equivalence). Conversely, let e be a fuzzy order (equivalence) in S and define s by setting, for every transformation h of S,


   s(h)= Inf{e(x,h(x)): x<math>\in</math>S}.  
   s(h)= Inf{e(x,h(x)): x<math>\in</math>S}.  


Then s defines a fuzzy subgroup of transformation in S.  In a similar way we can relate the fuzzy submonoids with the fuzzy orders.
Then s defines a fuzzy submonoid (fuzzy subgroup) of transformation in S.   


== Bibliography ==
== Bibliography ==

Revision as of 04:12, 28 October 2007

In fuzzy logic given a first order language and a valuation structure V, we can interpret it by a fuzzy interpretation, i.e. a pair (D,I) such that D is a nonempty set and I, the interpretation function is a map associating any n-ary functor with an n-ary operation and any constant with an element of D (as in the classical case). Moreover, I associates any n-ary predicate name with a suitable n-ary fuzzy relation in D. The fuzzy subalgebras are particular fuzzy interpretations of a first order language for algebraic structures with a monadic predicate symbol S. The intended meaning of S(x) is that x is an element of the subalgebra. More precisely, a fuzzy subalgebra, is a model of a theory containing, for any n-ary operation name h, the axiom


A1 ∀x1..., ∀xn(S(x1)∧.....∧ S(xn) → S(h(x1,...,xn))

and, for any constant c, the axiom

A2 S(c).

A1 expresses the closure of S with respect to the operation h, A2 expresses the fact that c is an element in S. As an example, assume that the valuation structure is defined in [0,1] and denote by the operation in [0,1] used to interpret the conjunction. Then it is easy to see that a fuzzy subalgebra of an algebraic structure whose domain is D is defined by a fuzzy subset s : D → [0,1] of D such that, for every d1,...,dn in D, if h is the interpretation of the n-ary operation symbol h, then

i) s(d1)s(dn)≤ s(h(d1,...,dn))

Moreover, if c is the interpretation of a constant c

ii) s(c) = 1.

In a largely studied class of valuation structures the product coincides with the joint operation. In such a case it is immediate to prove the following proposition.

Proposition. A fuzzy subset s of an algebraic structure defines a fuzzy subalgebra if and only if for every λ in [0,1], the closed cut {x D : s(x)≥ λ} of s is a subalgebra.

The fuzzy subgroups and the fuzzy submonoids are particularly interesting classes of fuzzy subalgebras. In such a case a fuzzy subset s of a monoid (M,•,u) is a fuzzy submonoid if and only if

    1)     s(u) =1
    2)     s(x)s(y) ≤ s(x•y)

where u is the neutral element in A. Given a group G, a fuzzy subgroup of G is a fuzzy submonoid s of G such that

    3)     s(x) ≤ s(x-1).

The notions of fuzzy submonoid and fuzzy subgroup are strictly related with the notions of fuzzy order and fuzzy equivalence, respectively.

Proposition. Assume that S is a nonempty set, G a group of transformations in S and (G,s) a fuzzy submonoid (subgroup) of G. Then, by setting

 e(x,y) = Sup{s(h) : h is an element in G such that h(x) = y} 

we obtain a fuzzy order (a fuzzy equivalence). Conversely, let e be a fuzzy order (equivalence) in S and define s by setting, for every transformation h of S,

 s(h)= Inf{e(x,h(x)): xS}. 

Then s defines a fuzzy submonoid (fuzzy subgroup) of transformation in S.

Bibliography

  • Klir, G. and Bo Yuan, Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic (1995) ISBN 978-0-13-101171-7
  • Zimmermann H., Fuzzy Set Theory and its Applications (2001), ISBN 978-0-7923-7435-0.
  • Chakraborty H. and Das S., On fuzzy equivalence 1, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 11 (1983), 185-193.
  • Demirci M., Recasens J., Fuzzy groups, fuzzy functions and fuzzy equivalence relations, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 144 (2004), 441-458.
  • Di Nola A., Gerla G., Lattice valued algebras, Stochastica, 11 (1987), 137-150.
  • Hájek P., Metamathematics of fuzzy logic. Kluwer 1998.
  • Klir G. , UTE H. St.Clair and Bo Yuan Fuzzy Set Theory Foundations and Applications,1997.
  • Gerla G., Fuzzy submonoids, fuzzy preorders and quasi-metrics, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 157 (2006) 2356-2370.
  • Mordeson J., Kiran R. Bhutani and Azriel Rosenfeld. Fuzzy Group Theory, Springer Series: Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, Vol. 182, 2005.
  • Rosenfeld A., Fuzzy groups, J. Math. Anal. Appl., 35 (1971), 512-517.
  • Zadeh L.A., Fuzzy Sets, ‘’Information and Control’’, 8 (1965) 338­353.
  • Zadeh L.A., Similarity relations and fuzzy ordering, Inform. Sci. 3 (1971) 177–200.