Computational and Applied Mathematics

, Volume 37, Issue 3, pp 3283–3306 | Cite as

Medical diagnoses using three-way fuzzy concept lattice and their Euclidean distance

  • Prem Kumar SinghEmail author


Searching the closest symptoms of a particular disease in the given patient is a major concern for medical diagnoses expert. In most cases, this problem arises due to large number of incomplete, uncertain, or inconsistent information generated in medical diagnoses data set. Recently, some of the researchers tried to pay attention towards precise measurement of uncertainty and vagueness in medical data set using the properties of applied abstract algebra. In this process, researchers noticed that calculus of three-way decision space is more useful to characterize the uncertainty and vagueness in medical data set based on truth, indeterminacy, and falsity membership-values. However, searching some relevant query based on user requirement to diagnoses the disease is a major issue in three-way decision space. To encounter this problem, current paper tried to analyze the medical data set using the properties of single-valued neutrosophic graph-based concept lattice. In addition, another method is proposed to select some of the interesting three-way fuzzy concepts at user-defined granulation for their computed Euclidean distance with an illustrative example.


Formal concept analysis Fuzzy concept lattice Medical diagnoses Neutrosophic set Three-way fuzzy concept lattice 

Mathematics Subject Classification

68Txx (Artificial intelligence) 68Rxx (Discrete mathematics in relation to computer science) 06Bxx (Lattices) 



The Author sincerely thanks the anonymous reviewers for their valuable suggestions to improve the quality of this paper.


  1. Alqadah F, Bhatnagar R (2011) Similarity measures in formal concept analysis. Ann Math Artif Intell 61(3):245–256MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. Amin II, Kassim Hassanien SK, Hefny HA (2012) Formal concept analysis for mining hypermethylated genes in breast cancer tumor subtypes. Proc Twelfth ISDA 2012:764–769Google Scholar
  3. Antoni L, Krajči S, Krídlo O, Macek B, Piskova L (2014) On heterogeneous formal contexts. Fuzzy Sets Syst 234:22–33MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Aswani Kumar Ch, Srinivas S (2010a) Mining associations in health care data using formal concept analysis and singular value decomposition. J Biol Syst 18(4):787–807MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Aswani Kumar Ch, Srinivas S (2010b) Concept lattice reduction using fuzzy K-means clustering. Expert Syst Appl 37(3):2696–2704CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. Bělohlávek R, Sklenǎr V, Zackpal J (2005) Crisply generated fuzzy concepts. In: Proceedings of ICFCA 2005, LNAI 3403, pp 269–284Google Scholar
  7. Berry A, Sigayret A (2004) Representing concept lattice by a graph. Discret Appl Math 144(1–2):27–42MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. Burusco A, Fuentes-Gonzalez R (1994) The study of the L-fuzzy concept lattice. Mathew Soft Comput 1(3):209–218MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Burusco A, Fuentes-Gonzales R (2001) The study on interval-valued contexts. Fuzzy Sets Syst 121(3):439–452MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. Broumi S, Talea M, Bakali A, Smarandache F (2016a) Interval valued neutrosophic graphs. Sisom Acoust 10:69–91Google Scholar
  11. Broumi S, Talea M, Bakali A, Smarandache F (2016b) On bipolar single valued neutrosophic graphs. J New Theory 11:84–102Google Scholar
  12. Cross V, Yi W (2009) Approximation and similarity in concept lattices. In : Fuzzy information processing society, 2009. NAFIPS 2009. Annual meeting of the North American, pp 1–6. doi: 10.1109/NAFIPS.2009.5156441
  13. Deli I (2017) Interval-valued neutrosophic soft sets and its decision making. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 8(2):665–676MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dias SM, Vieira NJ (2017) A methodology for analysis of concept lattice reduction. Inf Sci 396:202–217MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Djouadi Y, Prade H (2011) Possibility-theoretic extension of derivation operators in formal concept analysis over fuzzy lattices. Fuzzy Optim Decis Mak 10:287–309MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Fan F, Hong W, Song J, Jing J, Ji S (2013) A visualization method for chinese medicine knowledge discovery based on formal concept analysis. ICIC Express Lett Part B Appl 4(3):801–808Google Scholar
  17. Formica A (2013) Similarity reasoning for the semantic web based on fuzzy concept lattices: an informal approach. Inf Syst Front 15(3):511–520Google Scholar
  18. Gambhir S, Malik SK, Kumar Y (2016) Role of soft computing approaches in healthcare domain: a mini review. J Med Syst 40(12):1–20CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Ganter B, Wille R (1999) Formal concept analysis: mathematical foundation. Springer, BerlinCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  20. Hu BQ (2016) Three-way decision spaces based on partially ordered sets and three-way decisions based on hesitant fuzzy sets. Knowl Based Syst 91:16–31CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kandasamy WBV, Ilanthenral K, Smarandache F (2015) Neutrosophic graphs: a new dimension to graph theoryGoogle Scholar
  22. Kaytoue M, Kuznetsov SO, Napoli A, Duplessis S (2011) Mining gene expression data with pattern structures in formal concept analysis. Inf Sci 181:1989–2001MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Khan S, Gani A, Wahab AWA, Singh PK (2017) Feature selection of Denial-of-Service attacks using entropy and granular computing. Arab J Sci Eng. doi: 10.1007/s1336901726348 Google Scholar
  24. Li JH, Mei CL, Lv YJ (2013) Incomplete decision contexts: approximate concept construction, rule acquisition and knowledge reduction. Int J Approx Reason 54(1):149–165MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  25. Li JH, Huanga C, Qi J, Qian J, Liu W (2017) Three-way cognitive concept learning via multi-granularity. Inf Sci 378:244–263CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Li M, Wang J (2016) Approximate concept construction with three-way decisions and attribute reduction in incomplete contexts. Knowl Based Syst 91:165–178CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Ma L, Mi JS, Xie B (2017) Multi-scaled concept lattices based on neighborhood systems. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 8(1):149–157CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Pedrycz W, Chen SM (2015) Granular computing and decision-making: interactive and iterative approaches. Springer, Germany. ISBN 978-3-319-16829-6CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Singh PK, Kumar CA (2012) A method for decomposition of fuzzy formal context. Proc Int Conf Model Optim Comput Proc Eng 38:1852–1857Google Scholar
  30. Singh PK, Kumar CA (2014) Bipolar fuzzy graph representation of concept lattice. Inf Sci 288:437–448MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. Singh PK, Gani A (2015) Fuzzy concept lattice reduction using Shannon entropy and Huffman coding. J Appl Non Class Log 25(2):101–119MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Singh PK, Kumar CA (2015) A note on computing crisp order context of a fuzzy formal context for knowledge reduction. J Inf Process Syst 11(2):184–204Google Scholar
  33. Singh PK (2016) Processing linked formal fuzzy context using non-commutative composition. Inst Integr Omics Appl Biotechnol (IIOAB) J 7(5):21–32Google Scholar
  34. Singh PK, Kumar CA, Li J (2016a) Knowledge representation using interval-valued fuzzy concept lattice. Soft Comput 20(4):1485–1502CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. Singh PK, Kumar CA, Gani A (2016b) A comprehensive survey on formal concept analysis and its research trends. Int J Appl Math Comput Sci 26(2):495–516MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. Singh PK, Kumar CA, Li J (2017) Concepts reduction in formal concept analysis with fuzzy setting using Shannon entropy. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 8(1):179–189CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Singh PK (2017a) Three-way fuzzy concept lattice representation using neutrosophic set. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 8(1):69–79CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Singh PK (2017b) Complex vague set based concept lattice. Chaos Solitons Fractal 96:145–153CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  39. Singh PK (2017c) Interval-valued neutrosophic graph representation of concept lattice and its (\(\alpha , \beta , \gamma \))-decomposition. Arab J Sci Eng 2017. doi: 10.1007/s13369-017-2718-5
  40. Pollandt S (1998) Fuzzy begriffe. Springer, BerlinzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. Qi J, Wei L, Yao Y (2014) Three-way formal concept analysis. Lecture notes in computer science 8818:732–741CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. Rice MD, Siff M (2001) Clusters, concepts, and pseudometrics. Electron Notes Theor Comput Sci 40:323–346CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  43. Rivieccio U (2008) Neutrosophic logics: prospects and problems. Fuzzy Sets Syst 159:1860–1868MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  44. Smarandache F (1999) A unifying field in logics neutrosophy: neutrosophic probability, set and logic. American Research Press, RehobothzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  45. Somu N, Raman RG, Kirthivasan K, Shankar Sriram VS (2016) Hypergraph based feature selection technique for medical diagnosis. J Med Syst 40:239. doi: 10.1007/s10916-016-0600-8 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Shivhare R, Aswani Kumar Ch (2017) Three-way conceptual approach for cognitive memory functionalities. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 8(1):21–34CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Tadrat J, Boonjing V, Pattaraintakorn P (2012) A new similarity measure in formal concept analysis for case-based reasoning. Expert Syst Appl 39(1):967–972CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Ward M, Dilworth RP (1939) Residuated lattices. Trans Am Math Soc 45:335–354MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  49. Wille R (1982) Restructuring lattice theory: an approach based on hierarchies of concepts. In: Rival I (eds): ordered sets, NATO advanced study institutes series, vol 83. Springer pp 445–470Google Scholar
  50. Wu WZ, Leung Y, Mi JS (2009) Granular computing and knowledge reduction in formal context. IEEE Trans Knowl Data Eng 21(10):1461–1474CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Yang HL (2016) New distance measure of single-valued neutrosophic sets and its application. Int J Intell Syst 31:1021–1032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Yan S, Yun L, Luan L (2009) A concept similarity method in structural and semantic levels. In: Em Information science and engineering (ISISE), pp 620–623. doi: 10.1109/ISISE.2009.133
  53. Yao YY (2004a) A comparative study of formal concept analysis and rough set theory in data analysis. In: Proceedings of 4th international conference on rough sets and current trends in computing (RSCTC) 2004, Sweden, pp 59–68Google Scholar
  54. Yao Y (2004b) Granular computing. In: Proceedings of the 4th Chinese national conference on rough sets and soft computing 2004, computer science (Ji Suan Ji Ke Xue) vol 31. Springer pp 1–5Google Scholar
  55. Yao Y (2009) Three-waY Decision: an interpretation of rules in rough set theory. In : Wen P, Li Y, Polkowski L, Yao Y, Tsumoto S, Wang G (eds) RSKT 2009. LNCS, vol 5589, pp 642–649Google Scholar
  56. Yao Y (2013) An outline of a theory of three-way decisions. In: Yao J, Yang Y, Slowinski R, Greco S, Li H, Mitra S, Polkowski L (eds) RSCTC 2012. LNCS, vol 7413. Springer pp 1–17Google Scholar
  57. Yao Y (2017) Interval sets and three-way concept analysis in incomplete contexts. Int J Mach Learn Cybern 8(1):3–20MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. Ye J (2015) Improved cosine similarity measures of simplified neutrosophic sets for medical diagnoses. Artif Intell Med 63(2015):171–177CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© SBMAC - Sociedade Brasileira de Matemática Aplicada e Computacional 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Amity Institute of Information TechnologyAmity UniversityNoidaIndia

Personalised recommendations