Comparison of two approaches to approximated reasoning

13 years 1 months ago
Comparison of two approaches to approximated reasoning
A comparison is made of two approaches to approximate reasoning: Mamdani's interpolation method and the implication method. Both approaches are variants of Zadeh's compositional rule of inference. It is shown that the approaches are not equivalent. A correspondence between the approaches is established via the inverse of the implied fuzzy relation. The interpolation method has the lowest time-complexity, provided the minimum operator is chosen as t-norm. Otherwise, the time-complexity of both methods is the same. It is more efficient to first compile a set of fuzzy rules into a fuzzy relation, instead of aggregating inference results for each fuzzy rule separately.
Pim van den Broek
Added 31 Oct 2010
Updated 31 Oct 2010
Type Conference
Year 2003
Authors Pim van den Broek
Comments (0)