Properties of fuzzy relations and aggregation process in decision making

Document Type: Research Paper

Author

Interdisciplinary Centre for Computational Modelling, University of Rzeszow, Al. Rejtana 16C, 35-959 Rzeszow, Poland

Abstract

In this contribution connections between input fuzzy relations R1, . . . ,Rn on a set X and the output fuzzy relation
RF = F(R1, . . . ,Rn) are studied. F is a function of the form F : [0, 1]n → [0, 1] and RF is called an aggregated fuzzy
relation. In the literature the problem of preservation, by a function F, diverse types of properties of fuzzy relations
R1, . . . ,Rn is examined. Here, it is considered the converse approach. Namely, fuzzy relation RF = F(R1, . . . ,Rn) is
assumed to have a given property and then it is checked if fuzzy relations R1, . . . ,Rn have this property. Moreover, a
discussion on the mentioned two approaches is provided. The properties, which are examined in this paper, depend on
their notions on binary operations B : [0, 1]2 → [0, 1]. By incorporating operation B these properties are generalized
versions of known properties of fuzzy relations.

Keywords


[1] W. Bandler, L. J. Kohout, Semantics of implication operators and fuzzy relational products, International Journal
Man-Machine Studies, 12 (1980), 89{116.
[2] B. Bassan, F. Spizzichino, Dependence and multivariate aging: the role of level sets of the survival function, In: System
and Bayesian Reliability, Series of Quality Reliability Engineering Statistics, vol. 5. World Scientifi c Publishers,
River Edge, New Jork, 2001, pp. 229{242.
[3] G. Beliakov, H. Bustince, T. Calvo, A practical guide to averaging functions, Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing,
Springer International Publishing, Switzerland, 2016.
[4] G. Beliakov, A. Pradera, T. Calvo, Aggregation Functions: A Guide for Practitioners, Springer, Berlin, 2007.
[5] U. Bentkowska, B-properties of fuzzy relations in aggregation process - the "converse problem", In: G. Acampora et
al. (Eds.), Proc. of FUZZ IEEE 2017, 9{12 July, Naples, 2017, pp.1{6.
[6] U. Bentkowska, K. Balicki, Comparison of algorithms for decision making problems and preservation of alpha-
properties of fuzzy relations in aggregation process, Journal of Automation, Mobile Robotics and Intelligent Systems,
10(2) (2016), 25{39.
[7] U. Bentkowska, J. Drewniak, Aggregations of MN-convex functions on complete lattices, In: M. Baczynski et al.
(Eds.), Proc. 8th Internat. Summer School on Aggregation Operators (AGOP 2015). Katowice (Poland), 2015, pp.
55{60.
[8] U. Bentkowska, A. Krol, Aggregation of fuzzy α-C-equivalences, In: J.M. Alonso, et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of the
International Joint Conference IFSA-EUSFLAT 2015. Atlantis Press, 2015, pp. 1310{1317.
[9] U. Bentkowska, A. Krol, Preservation of fuzzy relation properties based on fuzzy conjunctions and disjunctions
during aggregation process, Fuzzy Sets Syst., 291 (2016), 98{113.
[10] J. C. Bezdek, J. D. Harris, Fuzzy partitions and relations: an axiomatic basis for clustering, Fuzzy Sets and
Systems, 1 (1978), 111{127.
[11] P. S. Bullen, Handbook of Means and Their Inequalities, vol. 560, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, The
Netherlands, 2003.
[12] H. Bustince, J. Fernandez, R. Mesiar, J. Montero, R. Orduna, Overlap functions, Nonlinear Analysis, Theory, 72
(2010), 1488{1499.
[13] H. Bustince, M. Pagola, R. Mesiar, E. Hullermeier and F. Herrera, Grouping, overlap functions and generalized
bi-entropic functions for fuzzy modeling of pairwise comparison, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 20(3) (2012),
405{415.
[14] T. Calvo, A. Kolesarova, M. Komornkova, R. Mesiar, Aggregation operators: Properties, classes and construction
methods, In: T. Calvo et al. (Eds.), Aggregation Operators. Physica-Verlag, Heildelberg, 2002, pp. 3{104.
[15] B. De Baets, S. Janssens, H. De Meyer, Meta-theorems on inequalities for scalar fuzzy set cardinalities, Fuzzy Set
and Systems, 157 (2006), 1463{1476.
[16] S. Daz, B. De Baets, S. Montes, Additive decomposition of fuzzy pre-orders, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 158 (2007),
830{842.
[17] S. Daz, B. De Baets, S. Montes, General results on the decomposition of transitive fuzzy relations, Fuzzy Optimization
and Decision Making, 9 (2010), 1{29.

[18] S. Daz, B. De Baets, S. Montes, Transitivity and Negative Transitivity in the Fuzzy Setting, In: B. De Baets et al.
(Eds.), Proc. Eurofuse 2011, AISC 107. Springer-Verlag, Berlin Heidelberg, 2011, pp. 91{100.
[19] S. Daz, S. Montes, B. De Baets, Transitive decomposition of fuzzy preference relations: the case of nilpotent
minimum, Kybernetika, 40 (2004), 71{88.
[20] J. Drewniak, Fuzzy relation calculus, Silesian University, Katowice, 1989.
[21] J. Drewniak, P. Drygas, U. Dudziak, Domination between multiplace operations, In: O. Hryniewicz et al. (Eds.),
Issues in Soft Computing, Decisions and Operations Research. EXIT, Warszawa, 2005, pp. 149{160.
[22] J. Drewniak, A. Krol, A survey of weak connectives and the preservation of their properties by aggregations, Fuzzy
Set and Systems, 161(2010), 202{215.
[23] D. Dubois, H. Prade, On the use of aggregation operations in information fusion processes, Fuzzy Sets and Systems,
142 (2004), 143{161.
[24] U. Dudziak, B. Pekala, Intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations, In: S. Galichet et al. (Eds.), Proceedings of
EUSFLAT 2011 AND LFA 2011, Advances in Intelligent Systems Research, 2011, pp. 529{536.
[25] J. Fodor, M. Roubens, Fuzzy preference modelling and multicriteria decision support, Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1994.
[26] M. Grabisch, E. Pap, R. Mesiar, J. L. Marichal, Aggregation Functions, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
2009.
[27] E. Hullermeier, K. Brinker, Learning valued preference structures for solving classi fication problems, Fuzzy Sets
and Systems, 159 (2008), 2337{2352.
[28] E. Hullermeier, S. Vanderlooy, Combining predictions in pairwise classi fication: an optimal adaptive voting strategy
and its relation to weighted voting, Pattern Recognition, 43(1) (2010), 128{142.
[29] E. P. Klement, R. Mesiar, E. Pap, Triangular norms, Kluwer Acad. Publ., Dordrecht, 2000.
[30] S. A. Orlovsky, Decision-making with a fuzzy preference relation, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 1(3) (1978), 155{167.
[31] B. Pekala, Operations on interval matrices, In: M. Kryszkiewicz et al. (Eds.), Rough Sets and Intelligent Systems
Paradigms, Lecture Notes on in Artifi cial Intelligence 4585, 2007, pp. 613{621.
[32] B. Pekala, Properties of Interval-Valued Fuzzy Relations, Atanassov's Operators and Decomposable Operations, In:
E. Hullermeir et al. (Eds.), Information Processing and Management of Uncertianty in Knowledge-Based Systems:
Theory and Methods, Communications in Computer and Information Science 80, 2010, pp. 647{655.
[33] V. Peneva, I. Popchev, Properties of the aggregation operators related with fuzzy relations, Fuzzy Sets and Systems,
139(3) (2003), 615{633.
[34] A. Pradera, G.Beliakov, H.Bustince and B. De Baets, A review of the relationships between implication, negation
and aggregation functions from the point of view of material implication, Information Sciences, 329 (2016), 357{380.
[35] S. Saminger, R. Mesiar, U. Bodenhofer, Domination of aggregation operators and preservation of transitivity,
International Journal Uncertain., Fuzziness, Knowl.-Based Syst., 10(Suppl.) (2002), 11{35.
[36] S. Saminger-Platz, R. Mesiar, D. Dubois, Aggregation operators and commuting, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy
Systems, 15(6) (2007), 1032{1045.
[37] B. Schweizer, A. Sklar, Probabilistic metric spaces, North Holland, New York, 1983.
[38] F. Suarez Garcia, P. Gil Alvarez, Two families of fuzzy integrals, Fuzzy Set and Systems, 18 (1986), 67{81.
[39] L. A. Zadeh, Fuzzy sets, Information and Control, 8 (1965), 338{353.
[40] L. A. Zadeh, Similarity relations and fuzzy orderings, Information Sciences, 3(1971), 177{200.
[41] H. J. Zimmermann, P. Zysno, Decisions and evaluations by hierarchical aggregation of information, Fuzzy Sets and
Systems, 10 (1983), 243{260.