Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Higher Order Vagueness in Geographical Information: Empirical Geographical Population of Type n Fuzzy Sets

  • Published:
GeoInformatica Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Fuzzy set theory has been suggested as a means for representing vague spatial phenomena, and is widely known for directly addressing some of the issues of vagueness such as the sorites paradox. Higher order vagueness is widely considered a necessary component of any theory of vagueness, but it is not so well known that it too is competently modelled by Type n Fuzzy sets. In this paper we explore the fuzzy representation of higher order vagueness with respect to spatial phenomena. Initially we relate the arguments on philosophical vagueness to Type n Fuzzy sets. As an example, we move on to an empirical generation of spatial Type 2 Fuzzy sets examining the spatial extent of mountain peaks in Scotland. We show that the Type 2 Fuzzy sets can be populated by using alternative parameterisations of a peak detection algorithm. Further ambiguities could also be explored using other parameters of this and other algorithms. We show some novel answers to interrogations of the mountain peaks of Scotland. The conclusion of this work is that higher order vagueness can be populated for Type 2 and higher fuzzy sets. It does not follow that it is always necessary to examine these higher order uncertainties, but a possible advantage in terms of the results of spatial inquiry is demonstrated.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Figure 4
Figure 5
Figure 6
Figure 7
Figure 8
Figure 9
Figure 10
Figure 11
Figure 12

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. C. Arnot, P.F. Fisher, R. Wadsworth, and J. Wellens. “Landscape metrics with ecotones: Pattern under uncertainty,” Landscape Ecology, Vol. 19:181–195, 2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. D.A. Bearhop. Munro’s Tables. Scottish Mountaineering Club: Edinburgh, Scotland, 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  3. B. Bennett. “What is a forest? On the vagueness of certain geographic concepts,” Topoi, Vol. 20:189–201, 2001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. D. Bennett (Ed.), The Munros: Hillwalker’s Guide. Volume 1. Scottish Mountaineering Club: Edinburgh, Scotland, 1999.

  5. J.C. Bezdek, R. Ehrlich, and W. Full. “2FCM: The fuzzy c-means clustering algorithm,” Computers & Geosciences, Vol. 10:191–203, 1984.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. P.A. Burrough. Principles of Geographical Information Systems for Land Resources Assessment. Oxford University Press: Oxford, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  7. M. Duckham and J. Sharp. “Uncertainty and geographic information: Computational and critical convergence,” in P.F. Fisher and D.J. Unwin (Eds.), Re-presenting GIS. Wiley: Chichester, 113–124, 2005.

    Google Scholar 

  8. I.S. Evans. An integrated system of terrain analysis and slope mapping. Final report on grant DA-ERO-591-73-G0040, University of Durham: Durham, England, 1979.

  9. K. Fine. “Vagueness, truth and logic,” Synthese, Vol. 30:265–300, 1975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. P.F. Fisher. “Reconsideration of the viewshed function in terrain modelling,” Geographical Systems, Vol. 3:33–58, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  11. P.F. Fisher. “Propagating effects of database generalization on the viewshed,” Transactions in GIS, Vol. 1:69–81, 1996.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. P.F. Fisher. “Improved modelling of elevation error with geostatistics,” GeoInformatica, Vol. 2:215–233, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. P.F. Fisher. “Sorites paradox and vague geographies,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, Vol. 113:7–18, 2000.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. P.F. Fisher, J. Wood, and T. Cheng. “Where is Helvellyn? Multiscale morphometry and the mountains of the English Lake District,” Transactions of the Institute of British Geographers, Vol. 29:106–128, 2004.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. P.F. Fisher, J. Wood, and T. Cheng. “Fuzziness and ambiguity in multi-scale analysis of landscape morphometry,” in F. Petry, V. Robinson, and M. Cobb (Eds.), Fuzzy Modeling with Spatial Information for Geographic Problems. Springer: Berlin Heidelberg New York, 209–232, 2005.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  16. S. Gale, “Inexactness fuzzy sets and the foundation of behavioral geography,” Geographical Analysis, Vol. 4:337–349, 1972.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. L. Herrington and G. Pellegrini. “An advanced shape of country classifier: Extraction of surface features from DEMs,” in Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Integrating GIS and Environmental Modelling (GIS/EM4), http://www.colorado.edu/research/cires/banff/pubpapers/205/ consulted 25 March 2005, 2002.

  18. R.I. John. “Type 2 fuzzy sets: An appraisal of theory and applications,” International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowledge-based Systems, Vol. 6:563–576, 1998.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. R. Keefe and P. Smith (Eds.), Vagueness: A Reader. MIT: Cambridge, MA, 1996.

  20. G.J. Klir and B. Yuan. Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic: Theory and Applications. Prentice Hall: Englewood Cliff, NJ, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  21. R. Kruse, J. Gebhardt, and F. Klawonn. Foundations of Fuzzy Systems. Wiley: Chichester, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  22. L. Kulik. “Spatial vagueness and second order vagueness,” Spatial Cognition and Computation, Vol. 3:157–183, 2003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Y.C. Leung. “Locational choice: A fuzzy set approach,” Geographical Bulletin, Vol. 15:28–34, 1979.

    Google Scholar 

  24. Y.C. Leung. “On the imprecision of boundaries,” Geographical Analysis, Vol. 19:125–151, 1987.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Y.C. Leung. Spatial Analysis and Planning under Imprecision. North Holland: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 1988.

    Google Scholar 

  26. J.M. Mendel. Uncertain Rule-based Fuzzy Logic Systems: Introduction and New Directions. Prentice-Hall: Upper Saddle River, NJ, 2001.

    Google Scholar 

  27. J.M. Mendel and R.I. John. “Type 2 fuzzy sets made simple,” IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, Vol. 10:117–127, 2002.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. M. Mizumuto and K. Tanka. “Some properties of fuzzy sets of Type 2,” Information and Control, Vol. 31:312–340, 1976.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. F. Petry, V. Robinson, and M. Cobb (Eds.), Fuzzy Modeling with Spatial Information for Geographic Problems. Springer: Berlin Heidelberg New York, 2005.

  30. J.S. Pipkin. “Fuzzy sets and spatial choice,” Annals of the Association of American Geographers, Vol. 68:196–204, 1978.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. V.B. Robinson. “Some implications of fuzzy set theory applied to geographic databases,” Computers, Environment and Urban Systems, Vol. 12:89–98, 1988.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. V.B. Robinson and A.H. Strahler. “Issues in designing geographic information systems under conditions of inexactness,” in Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium on Machine Processing of Remotely Sensed Data, pp. 198–204, Purdue University: Lafayette, 1984.

  33. V.B. Robinson and D. Thongs. “Fuzzy set theory applied to the mixed pixel problem of multispectral landcover databases,” in B. Opitz (Ed.), Geographic Information Systems in Government A. Deerpak: Hampton, 871–885, 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  34. R.M. Sainsbury. “What is a vague object?,” Analysis, Vol. 49:99–103, 1989

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. R.M. Sainsbury. “Is there higher order vagueness?,” Philosophical Quarterly, Vol. 41:167–182, 1991.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. R.M. Sainsbury. Paradoxes. 2nd edition, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 1995.

    Google Scholar 

  37. J. Seymour. “GB Waypoints: Munros,” in http://www.itatwork.freeserve.co.uk/waypoints/munros/index.htm Accessed 20 April 2003, 2003.

  38. B. Smith and D.M. Mark. “Do mountains exist? Towards an ontology of landforms,” Environment and Planning B: Environment and Design, Vol. 30:411–427, 2003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. R.A. Sorensen. “An argument for the vagueness of the ‘vague’,” Analysis, Vol. 45:134–137, 1985.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. A.C. Varzi. “Vagueness in geography,” Philosophy and Geography, Vol. 4:49–65, 2001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. A.C. Varzi. “Higher-order vagueness and the vagueness of ‘vague’,” Mind, Vol. 112:295–298, 2003.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. J. Verstraete, G. de Tré, R. de Caluwe, and A. Hallez.“ Field based method for the modelling of fuzzy spatial data,” in F. Petry, V. Robinson, and M. Cobb (Eds.), Fuzzy Modeling with Spatial Information for Geographic Problems. Springer: Berlin Heidelberg New York, 41–69, 2005.

    Chapter  Google Scholar 

  43. T. Williamson. Vagueness. Routledge: London, 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  44. T. Williamson. “On the structure of higher order vagueness,” Mind, Vol. 108:127–143, 1999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. L. Wittgenstein. Remarks on Colour. Blackwell: Oxford, 1977.

    Google Scholar 

  46. J. Wood. “Scale-based characterisation of digital elevation models,” in D. Parker (Ed.), Innovations in GIS 3. Taylor & Francis: London, 163–175, 1996.

    Google Scholar 

  47. J. Wood. “Modelling the continuity of surface form using digital elevation models,” in Proceedings of the 8th International Symposium on Spatial Data Handling, pp. 725–736, Simon Fraser University: Burnaby, British Columbia, 1998.

  48. J. Wood. LandSerf, Version 2.1, in http://www.landserf.org, 2004.

  49. C. Wright. “Is higher order vagueness coherent?,” Analysis, Vol. 52:129–139, 1992.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  50. R.R. Yager. “Fuzzy subsets of type II in decisions,” Journal of Cybernetics, Vol. 10:137–159, 1980.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. L. Zadeh. “Fuzzy sets,” Information and Control, Vol. 8:338–353, 1965.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  52. L. Zadeh. “The concept of a linguistic variable and its application to approximate reasoning—1,” Information Sciences, Vol. 8:199–249, 1975.

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgement

We would like to thank Bob John of DeMontfort University for his comments on an earlier version of this paper. The Panorama DEM was supplied by Ordnance Survey through the EDINA service.

Author information

Author notes

  1. Tao Cheng

    Present address: Department of Geomatic Engineering, University College London, Gower Street, London, WC1E 6BT, UK

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Information Science, City University, Northampton Square, London, EC1V 0HB, UK

    Peter Fisher & Jo Wood

  2. Department of Land Surveying and Geo-Informatics, The Hong Kong Polytechnic University, Hung Hom, Kowloon, Hong Kong

    Tao Cheng

Authors
  1. Peter Fisher
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Tao Cheng
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Jo Wood
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Peter Fisher.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fisher, P., Cheng, T. & Wood, J. Higher Order Vagueness in Geographical Information: Empirical Geographical Population of Type n Fuzzy Sets. Geoinformatica 11, 311–330 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10707-006-0009-5

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10707-006-0009-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation