Abstract
Uncertainty about future developments constitutes the most important and most difficult challenge for mankind. Despite this fact, uncertainty is not a part of general science. General science assumes that the future development follows cause-effect relations which can be described by mathematical functions, where the argument represents the cause and the image represents the effect. Scientific theories have exactly this form and it is widely believed that these functions represent “truth”. Of course, this is nonsense as all the scientific theories are with certainty wrong and cannot describe the real evolution correctly. The inappropriate handling of uncertainty in science has produced a strange variety of “uncertainty theories” that causes confusion and helplessness. A friend of mine has expressed his confusion by the following words:
‘Crisp sets’, ‘fuzzy sets’, ‘rough sets’, ‘grey sets’, ‘fuzzy rough sets’, ‘rough fuzzy sets’, ‘fuzzy grey sets’, ‘grey fuzzy sets’, ‘rough grey sets’, ‘grey rough sets’, and now ‘affinity sets’. My goodness! Is there anybody around who can enlighten me, i.e., help me to see a clear pattern in this set of sets, allegedly providing powerful tools to model various kinds of uncertainty?
This paper examines the role and the handling of uncertainty in quality control. How is uncertainty quantified in quality control for making decisions aiming at maintaining or improving quality of processes and products.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution.
Buying options
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Learn about institutional subscriptionsNotes
- 1.
- 2.
- 3.
“Abstract” means that the elements have no real interpretation.
- 4.
According to Hu et al. (2009)
- 5.
References
Deng, J. L. (1985). Grey systems (social economical). Beijing (in Chinese): The Publishing House of Defense Industry.
Guo, R., & Guo D. (2008). Random fuzzy variable foundation for Grey differential equation modeling. Focus. New York: Springer.
Hu, B. Q., Ip, W. C., & Wong, H. Fuzzy integral and credibility measure. In B. Cao, Z.-F. Li, & C.-Y. Zhang, (Eds.), Fuzzy information and engineering (Vol. 2, p. 254). Berlin: Springer.
Kolmogorov, A. N. (1956). Foundations of the theory of probability (N. Morrison, Trans., 2nd ed.). New York: Chelsea.
Liu, B. (2007). Uncertainty theory (2nd ed.). Berlin: Springer.
Liu, B. (2010). Uncertainty theory. Beijing: Uncertainty Theory Laboratory, Tsinghua University, http://orsc.edu.cn/liu/ut.pdf.
Liu, B., & Liu, Y.-K. (2002). Expected value of fuzzy variable and fuzzy expected value model. IEEE transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 10, 445–450.
von Collani, E. (2004). Theoretical stochastics. In E. von Collani (Ed.), Defining the science of stochastics (pp. 147–174). Lemgo: Heldermann Verlag.
Zadeh, L. (1978). Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility. Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1, 3–28.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2012 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
von Collani, E. (2012). Uncertainty and Quality Control. In: Lenz, HJ., Schmid, W., Wilrich, PT. (eds) Frontiers in Statistical Quality Control 10. Frontiers in Statistical Quality Control, vol 10. Physica, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-2846-7_27
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-7908-2846-7_27
Published:
Publisher Name: Physica, Heidelberg
Print ISBN: 978-3-7908-2845-0
Online ISBN: 978-3-7908-2846-7
eBook Packages: Mathematics and StatisticsMathematics and Statistics (R0)