Fuzzy implications: alpha migrativity and generalised laws of importation (Q2023159)

Usually, we consider only one fuzzy extension of each logical operation, e.g., only one conjunction (``and''). In this case, the intuitively clear associativity of conjunction \((a\,\&\,b)\,\&\,c\equiv a\,\&\,(b\,\&\,c)\) translates into associativity of the fuzzy conjunction \(C(C(a,b),c)=C(a,C(b,c))\). However, the very fact that different ``and''-operations are most effective in different applications shows that it may be beneficial to use different conjunction operations \(C_i\) to combine different statements. In this case, associativity is translated into a more general requirement \(C_1(C_2(a,b),c)=C_3(a,C_4(b,c))\). Similarly, usually, the intuitively clear formula \((a\,\&\,b)\to c\equiv a\to (b\to c)\) translates into \(I(C(a,b),c)=I(a,I(b,c))\). If we take into account that there may be two different implication operations \(I_i\), then we can have more general formulas, e.g., \(I_1(C(a,b),c)=I_1(a,I_2(b,c))\) and \(I_1(C(a,b),c)=I_2(a,I_1(b,c))\). Under most general conditions on \(C\) and \(I_i\), this paper studies the relation between these three formulas: namely, it gives examples when these formulas are not equivalent and provides conditions under which they are equivalent.