Several results on set-valued possibilistic distributions

Ivan Kramosil; Milan Daniel

Kybernetika (2015)

  • Volume: 51, Issue: 3, page 391-407
  • ISSN: 0023-5954

Abstract

top
When proposing and processing uncertainty decision-making algorithms of various kinds and purposes, we more and more often meet probability distributions ascribing non-numerical uncertainty degrees to random events. The reason is that we have to process systems of uncertainties for which the classical conditions like σ -additivity or linear ordering of values are too restrictive to define sufficiently closely the nature of uncertainty we would like to specify and process. In cases of non-numerical uncertainty degrees, at least the following two criteria may be considered. The first criterion should be systems with rather complicated, but sophisticated and nontrivially formally analyzable uncertainty degrees, e. g., uncertainties supported by some algebras or partially ordered structures. Contrarily, we may consider easier relations, which are non-numerical but interpretable on the intuitive level. Well-known examples of such structures are set-valued possibilistic measures. Some specific interesting results in this direction are introduced and analyzed in this contribution.

How to cite

top

Kramosil, Ivan, and Daniel, Milan. "Several results on set-valued possibilistic distributions." Kybernetika 51.3 (2015): 391-407. <http://eudml.org/doc/271568>.

@article{Kramosil2015,
abstract = {When proposing and processing uncertainty decision-making algorithms of various kinds and purposes, we more and more often meet probability distributions ascribing non-numerical uncertainty degrees to random events. The reason is that we have to process systems of uncertainties for which the classical conditions like $\sigma $-additivity or linear ordering of values are too restrictive to define sufficiently closely the nature of uncertainty we would like to specify and process. In cases of non-numerical uncertainty degrees, at least the following two criteria may be considered. The first criterion should be systems with rather complicated, but sophisticated and nontrivially formally analyzable uncertainty degrees, e. g., uncertainties supported by some algebras or partially ordered structures. Contrarily, we may consider easier relations, which are non-numerical but interpretable on the intuitive level. Well-known examples of such structures are set-valued possibilistic measures. Some specific interesting results in this direction are introduced and analyzed in this contribution.},
author = {Kramosil, Ivan, Daniel, Milan},
journal = {Kybernetika},
keywords = {probability measures; possibility measures; non-numerical uncertainty degrees; set-valued uncertainty degrees; possibilistic uncertainty functions; set-valued entropy functions; probability measures; possibility measures; non-numerical uncertainty degrees; set-valued uncertainty degrees; possibilistic uncertainty functions; set-valued entropy functions},
language = {eng},
number = {3},
pages = {391-407},
publisher = {Institute of Information Theory and Automation AS CR},
title = {Several results on set-valued possibilistic distributions},
url = {http://eudml.org/doc/271568},
volume = {51},
year = {2015},
}

TY - JOUR
AU - Kramosil, Ivan
AU - Daniel, Milan
TI - Several results on set-valued possibilistic distributions
JO - Kybernetika
PY - 2015
PB - Institute of Information Theory and Automation AS CR
VL - 51
IS - 3
SP - 391
EP - 407
AB - When proposing and processing uncertainty decision-making algorithms of various kinds and purposes, we more and more often meet probability distributions ascribing non-numerical uncertainty degrees to random events. The reason is that we have to process systems of uncertainties for which the classical conditions like $\sigma $-additivity or linear ordering of values are too restrictive to define sufficiently closely the nature of uncertainty we would like to specify and process. In cases of non-numerical uncertainty degrees, at least the following two criteria may be considered. The first criterion should be systems with rather complicated, but sophisticated and nontrivially formally analyzable uncertainty degrees, e. g., uncertainties supported by some algebras or partially ordered structures. Contrarily, we may consider easier relations, which are non-numerical but interpretable on the intuitive level. Well-known examples of such structures are set-valued possibilistic measures. Some specific interesting results in this direction are introduced and analyzed in this contribution.
LA - eng
KW - probability measures; possibility measures; non-numerical uncertainty degrees; set-valued uncertainty degrees; possibilistic uncertainty functions; set-valued entropy functions; probability measures; possibility measures; non-numerical uncertainty degrees; set-valued uncertainty degrees; possibilistic uncertainty functions; set-valued entropy functions
UR - http://eudml.org/doc/271568
ER -

References

top
  1. Birkhoff, G., Lattice Theory. Third edition., Providence, Rhode Island 1967. MR0227053
  2. DeCooman, G., 10.1080/03081079708945160, Int. J. General Systems 25 (1997), 291-323, 325-351, 353-371. MR1449009DOI10.1080/03081079708945160
  3. Faure, R., Heurgon, E., Structures Ordonnées et Algèbres de Boole., Gauthier-Villars, Paris 1971. Zbl0219.06001MR0277440
  4. Fine, T. L., Theories of Probability. An Examination of Foundations., Academic Press, New York - London 1973. Zbl0275.60006MR0433529
  5. Goguen, J. A., 10.1016/0022-247x(67)90189-8, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 18 (1967), 145-174. MR0224391DOI10.1016/0022-247x(67)90189-8
  6. Halmos, P. R., Measure Theory., D. van Nostrand, New York 1950. Zbl0283.28001MR0033869
  7. Kramosil, I., 10.1142/s0218488506003935, Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness and Knowledge-Based Systems 14 (2006), 175-197. Zbl1086.28009MR2224969DOI10.1142/s0218488506003935
  8. Kramosil, I., Daniel, M., 10.1007/978-3-642-22152-1_58, In: Proc. Symbolic and Quantitative Approaches to Reasoning with Uncertainty, ECSQARU 2011 (W. Liu, ed.), LNCS (LNAI) 6717, Springer-Verlag Berlin - Heidelberg 2011, pp. 688-699. MR2831217DOI10.1007/978-3-642-22152-1_58
  9. Kramosil, I., Daniel, M., Possibilistic distributions processed by probabilistic algorithms., Kybernetika, submitted for publication. 
  10. Shannon, C. E., 10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb00917.x, The Bell Systems Technical Journal 27 (1948), 379-423, 623-656. Zbl0126.35701MR0026286DOI10.1002/j.1538-7305.1948.tb00917.x
  11. Sikorski, R., Boolean Algebras. Second edition., Springer, Berlin 1964. MR0177920
  12. Zadeh, L. A., 10.1016/s0019-9958(65)90241-x, Inform. Control 8 (1965), 338-353. Zbl0942.00007MR0219427DOI10.1016/s0019-9958(65)90241-x
  13. Zadeh, L. A., 10.1016/0022-247x(68)90078-4, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 23 (1968), 421-427. Zbl0174.49002MR0230569DOI10.1016/0022-247x(68)90078-4
  14. Zadeh, L. A., 10.1016/0165-0114(78)90029-5, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 1 (1978), 3-28. Zbl0377.04002MR0480045DOI10.1016/0165-0114(78)90029-5

NotesEmbed ?

top

You must be logged in to post comments.

To embed these notes on your page include the following JavaScript code on your page where you want the notes to appear.

Only the controls for the widget will be shown in your chosen language. Notes will be shown in their authored language.

Tells the widget how many notes to show per page. You can cycle through additional notes using the next and previous controls.

    
                

Note: Best practice suggests putting the JavaScript code just before the closing </body> tag.