Fuzzy logic: Misconceptions and clarifications (Q1604676): Difference between revisions

Since the beginning of fuzzy set theory and fuzzy logic (Zadeh, 1965), mathematicians, logicians and other scientists dispute about the soundness and even the right of existence of fuzzy concepts. Clearly, there are many weak ``fuzzy'' papers, as a simple consequence and tax for the success and applicability of fuzzy sets and fuzzy logic. On the other hand, there are several (and this number increases remarkably) deep and theoretically well-founded papers and books supporting the fact that fuzzy logic is a well-established domain of mathematics and many-valued logic. The present paper belongs to the series of papers advocating the soundness and rationality of fuzzy logic, considering several ``attacks'' against fuzzy logic and showing their irrelevance. Among the 8 discussed ``misconceptions'', recall the third one due to \textit{C. Elkan} [IEEE Expert 9, No. 4, 3-8 (1994; Zbl 1009.03517)], which has forced researchers in fuzzy logic to build solid backgrounds of their theories. It is a pity that the author has not mentioned the successful answers to Elkan's challenge leading to such valuable monographs as those of \textit{P. Hájek} [Metamathematics of fuzzy logic. Dordrecht: Kluwer (1998; Zbl 0937.03030)], \textit{V. Novák}, \textit{I. Perfilieva} and \textit{J. Mockor} [Mathematical principles of fuzzy logic. Dordrecht: Kluwer (1999; Zbl 0940.03028)] or \textit{S. Gottwald} [A treatise of many-valued logics. Baldock: Research Studies Press (2001; Zbl 1048.03002)]. A large part of this paper is devoted to the truth interval fuzzy logic introduced by \textit{J. R. Kenevan} and \textit{R. E. Neapolitan} [``A model theoretic approach to propositional fuzzy logic using Beth tableau'', in: L. A. Zadeh and J. Kacprzyk (eds.), Fuzzy logic for the management of uncertainty. New York: Wiley, 141-157 (1992)] and further developed, e.g., by \textit{H. T. Nguyen} and \textit{E. A. Walker} [A first course in fuzzy logic. Boca Raton: CRC Press (1997; Zbl 0856.03019)] or by the author [Fuzzy Sets Syst. 113, 161-183 (2000; Zbl 0953.03029)]. Several considered ``misconceptions'' are then discussed in the framework of this type of fuzzy logic. Note that there are several types of fuzzy logics not mentioned by the author (e.g., residuated fuzzy logic). Nevertheless, all these well-founded fuzzy logics support the author's final claim: fuzzy logic is suitable for dealing with empirical data.