Fuzzy Logic = Computing with Words
As its name suggests, computing with words, CW, is a methodology in which words are used in place of numbers for computing and reasoning. The point of this note is that fuzzy logic plays a pivotal role in CW and vice-versa. Thus, as an approximation, fuzzy logic may be equated to CW.
There are two major imperatives for computing with words. First, computing with words is a necessity when the available information is too imprecise to justify the use of numbers. And second, when there is a tolerance for imprecision which can be exploited to achieve tractability, robustness, low solution cost and better rapport with reality. Exploitation of the tolerance for imprecision is an issue of central importance in CW.
In CW, a words is viewed as a label of a granule, that is, a fuzzy set of points drawn together by similarity, with the fuzzy set playing the role of a fuzzy constraint on a variable. The premises are assumed to be expressed as propositions in a natural language. For purposes of computation, the propositions are expressed as canonical forms which serve to place in evidence the fuzzy constraints that are implicit in the premises. Then, the rules of inference in fuzzy logic are employed to propagate the constraints from premises to conclusions.
At this juncture, the techniques of computing with words underlie -- in one way or another -- almost all applications of fuzzy logic. In coming years, computing with words is likely to evolve into a basic methodology in its own right with wide-ranging ramifications on both basic and applied levels.
KeywordsNatural Language Fuzzy Logic Canonical Form Constraint Satisfaction Problem Fuzzy Relation
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References and Related Publications
- Bosch, P. (1978), “Vagueness, Ambiguity and All the Rest,” in Sprachstruktur, Individuum und Gesselschaft, eds. M. Van de Velde and W. Vandeweghe, Tubingen: Niemeyer.Google Scholar
- Bowen, J., Lai, R., and Bahler D. (1992), “Fuzzy Semantics and Fuzzy Constraint Networks”, Proc. of the 1st IEEE Conf. on Fuzzy Systems, San Francisco, pp. 1009–1016.Google Scholar
- Bowen, J., Lai, R., and Bahler D. (1992), “Lexical Imprecision in Fuzzy Constraint Networks”, Proc. of the National Conf. on Artificial Intelligence, pp. 616–620.Google Scholar
- Cresswell, M.J. (1973), Logic and Languages, London: Methuen.Google Scholar
- Dubois, D., Fargier, H., and Prade H. (1994), “Propagation and Satisfaction of Flexible Constraints”, in Fuzzy Sets, Neural Networks, and Soft Computing, eds. R.R. Yager, L.A. Zadeh, New York: Von Nostrand Reinhold, pp. 166–187.Google Scholar
- Dubois, D., Fargier, H., and Prade H. “Possibility Theory in Constraint Satisfaction Problems: Handling Priority, Preference and Uncertainty”, to appear in Applied Intelligence Journal.Google Scholar
- Dubois, D., Fargier, H., and Prade H. (1993), “The Calculus of Fuzzy Restrictions as a Basis for Flexible Constraint Satisfaction,” Proc. of the 2nd IEEE Int. Conf. on Fuzzy Systems, San Francisco, pp. 1131–1136.Google Scholar
- Freuder, E.C. and Snow P. (1990), “Improved Relaxation and Search Methods for Approximate Constraint Satisfaction with a Maximin Criterion”, Proc. of the 8th Biennial Conf. on the Canadian Society for Computational Studies of Intelligence, Ontario, pp. 227–230.Google Scholar
- Katai, O., Matsubara, S., Masuichi, H., Ida, M., et. al. (1992), “Synergetic Computation for Constraint Satisfaction Problems Involving Continuous and Fuzzy Variables by Using Occam,” in Transputer/Occam, Proc. of the 4th Transputer/Occam Int. Conf., eds. S. Noguchi and H. Umeo, Amsterdam: IOS Press, pp. 146–160.Google Scholar
- Lodwick, W.A. (1990), “Analysis of Structure in Fuzzy Linear Programs,” Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 38(1), pp. 15–26.Google Scholar
- Mamdani, E.H. and Gaines, B.R. (1981), Eds., Fuzzy Reasoning and its Applications, London.Google Scholar
- Mares, M. (1994), Computation Over Fuzzy Quantities,Boca Raton: CRC Press. Novak, V (1991), “Fuzzy Logic, Fuzzy Sets, and Natural Languages,” Int. J. of General Systems 20(1),pp. 83–97.Google Scholar
- Oshan, M.S., Saad, O.M., and Hassan, A.G. (1995), “On the Solution of Fuzzy Multiobjective Integer Linear Programming Problems with a Parametric Study,” Advances in Modelling & Analysis A, 24 (2), pp. 49–64.Google Scholar
- Partee, B. (1976), Montague Grammar, New York: Academic Press.Google Scholar
- Qi G. and Friedrich, G. (1992), “Extending Constraint Satisfaction Problem Solving in Structural Design,” in Industrial and Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence and Expert Systems, 5th Int. Cont., IEA/AIE-92, eds. F. Belli and F.J. Radermacher, Berlin: Springer-Verlag, pp. 341–350.Google Scholar
- Sakawa, M., Sawada, K., and Inuiguchi, M. (1995), “A Fuzzy Satisficing Method for Large-Scale Linear Programming Problems with Block Angular Structure,” European Journal of Operational Research, 81(2), pp. 399–409.Google Scholar
- Tong S.C., (1994), “Interval Number and Fuzzy Number Linear Programming,” Advances in Modelling & Analysis A, 20(2), pp. 51–56.Google Scholar
- Zadeh, L.A. (1973), “Outline of a New Approach to the Analysis of Complex System and Decision Processes,” IEEE Trans. on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, SMC-3, pp.28–44.Google Scholar
- Zadeh, L.A. (1974), “On the Analysis of Large Scale Systems,” Systems Approaches and Environment Problems, ed. H. Gottinger, Gottingen: Vandenhoeck and Ruprecht, pp. 23–37.Google Scholar
- Zadeh, L.A. (1975), “Calculus of Fuzzy Restrictions,” in Fuzzy Sets and Their Applications to Cognitive and Decision Processes, eds. L.A. Zadeh, K.S. Fu, M. Shimura, New York: Academic Press, pp. 1–39.Google Scholar
- Zadeh, L.A. (1979), “Fuzzy Sets and Information Granularity,” in Advances in Fuzzy Set Theory and Applications, eds. M. Gupta, R.Ragade and R. Yager, Amsterdam: North-Holland, pp. 3–18.Google Scholar
- Zadeh, L.A. (1979), “A Theory of Approximate Reasoning,” Machine Intelligence 9, eds. J. Hayes, D. Michie, and L. I. Mikulich, New York: Halstead Press, pp. 149–194.Google Scholar
- Zadeh, L.A. (1981), “Test-Score Semantics for Natural Languages and Meaning Representation via PRUF,” Empirical Semantics,ed. B. Rieger, W. Germany: Brockmeyer, pp. 281–349. Also Technical Report Memorandum 246,AI Center, SRI International, Menlo Park, CA.Google Scholar
- Zadeh, L.A. (1986), “Outline of a Computational Approach to Meaning and Knowledge Representation Based on a Concept of a Generalized Assignment Statement,” Proc. of the Int. Seminar on Artificial Intelligence and Man-Machine Systems, eds. M. Thoma and A. Wyner, Heidelberg: Springer-Verlag, pp. 198–211.Google Scholar