A., Rjumohan
(2017):
*Fuzzy Set Theory: A Primer.*

Preview |
PDF
MPRA_paper_101875.pdf Download (269kB) | Preview |

## Abstract

In the Classical Logic, the ‘Law of the Excluded Middle’ states that out of two contradictory propositions (where one proposition is the negation of the other) one must be true, and the other false, or that every proposition must either be true or false: it will not be possible to be and not to be the same thing; these truth values with a sharp demarcation may be represented by ‘1’ for ‘true’ and ‘0’ for ‘false’ and form the basis of the traditional set theory. Thus it cannot consider cases of vagueness. However, there are many concepts and predicates that are surrounded by vagueness or uncertainty. For example, consider the predicates such as ‘tall’ and ‘nice’, adverbs such as ‘quickly’ and even quantifiers such as ‘many’, all of which can be vague. So are the predicates ‘developed’ and ‘poor’, or the concepts of ‘development’ and ‘poverty’. A well-known account of vagueness comes in terms of ‘degree theory’ that drops classical Logic. The degree theory proposes a gradual transition between ‘perfect falsity’ to ‘perfect truth’, so that there are more than two truth values, that is, an infinite number of truth values along a spectrum between perfect truth and perfect falsity. Thus truth comes in degrees. Fuzzy set logic, developed by the American mathematician Lotfi Aliasker Zadeh, seeks to quantify the degree of truth in borderline cases. Thus perfect truth may be represented by ‘1’ and perfect falsity by ‘0’, with borderline cases having a truth value anywhere between 0 and 1. The present paper provides an introduction to fuzzy set theory.

Item Type: | MPRA Paper |
---|---|

Original Title: | Fuzzy Set Theory: A Primer |

Language: | English |

Keywords: | Vagueness, Concepts, Classical set theory, Fuzzy set logic, membership function |

Subjects: | C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C0 - General C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C1 - Econometric and Statistical Methods and Methodology: General C - Mathematical and Quantitative Methods > C6 - Mathematical Methods ; Programming Models ; Mathematical and Simulation Modeling > C65 - Miscellaneous Mathematical Tools |

Item ID: | 101875 |

Depositing User: | Vijayamohanan Pillai N |

Date Deposited: | 19 Jul 2020 01:55 |

Last Modified: | 19 Jul 2020 01:55 |

References: | Baliamoune, Mina N. (2004) “On the Measurement of Human Well-Being: Fuzzy Set Theory and Sen’s Capability Approach”. WIDER Working Paper 16/2004 , UNU-WIDER February. Baliamoune, Mina N. (2000). “Economics of Summitry: An Empirical Assessment of the Economic Effects of Summits”. Empirica 27: 295-314. Basu K (1987) “Axioms for a fuzzy measure of inequality”. Mathematical Social Science 14:275-288. Betti, G., Cheli B. and Cambini R. (2004), “A statistical model for the dynamics between two fuzzy states: theory and an application to poverty analysis”, Metron, 62, pp. 391-411. Betti, G., Cheli, B., Lemmi, A. and Verma, V. (2005), “On the construction of fuzzy measures for the analysis of poverty and social exclusion”, paper presented to the International Conference to Honour Two Eminent Social Scientist: C. GINI and M.O. LORENZ, University of Siena, 23-26 May 2005. Betti G., and Verma V. (1999) “Measuring the degree of poverty in a dynamic and comparative context: a multi-dimensional approach using fuzzy set theory”, Proceedings, ICCS-VI, Vol. 11, pp. 289-301, Lahore, Pakistan. Betti G., and Verma V. (2002) “Non-monetary or Lifestyle Deprivation”, in Eurostat (2002) European Social Statistics: Income, Poverty and Social Exclusion: 2nd Report. Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, pp. 76-92. Betti, G. and Verma V. (2004), “A methodology for the study of multidimensional and longitudinal aspects of poverty and deprivation”, Working Paper 49, Università di Siena, Dipartimento di Metodi Quantitativi. Blaszczak-Przybycinska I. (1992) Multidimensional statistical analysis of poverty in Poland, Poverty measurement for economies in transition. Polish Statistical Association and Central Statistical Office, Warsaw, pp. 307-327. Cerioli A, and Zani, S (1990) “A fuzzy approach to the measurement of poverty”. In: Dagum C, and Zenga M (eds) Income and Wealth Distribution, Inequality and Poverty. Springer Verlag, Berlin, pp 272-284. Cheli B. (1995) “Totally Fuzzy and Relative Measures in Dynamics Context”, Metron, 53 (3/4), pp. 83-205. Cheli B, and Lemmi A (1995) “A ‘Totally’ Fuzzy and Relative Approach to the Multidimensional Analysis of Poverty”. Economic Notes 24:115-134. Cheli B., and Betti G. (1999), “Fuzzy Analysis of Poverty Dynamics on an Italian Pseudo Panel, 1985-1994”, Metron, 57, 1-2, pp. 83-103. Chiappero-Martinetti E (1994) “A new approach to the evaluation of well-being and poverty by fuzzy set theory”. Giornale Degli Economisti e Annali di Economia 53:367-388. Chiappero-Martinetti E (1996) “Standard of living evaluation based on Sen's approach: some methodological considerations”. Notizie di Politeia 12:37-53. Chiappero-Martinetti E (2000) “A multi-dimensional assessment of well-being based on Sen's functioning theory”. Rivista Intemazionale di Scienze Sociali 108:207-231. Chiapperio-Martinetti E (2005) “Complexity and vagueness in the capability approach: strengths or weaknesses?” In: Comim F, Qizilbash M, Alkire S (eds) The capability approach: concepts, applications and measures. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Clark, D.A., and Qizilbash, M. (2002), “Core Poverty and Extreme Vulnerability in South Africa”, Presented to the IARIW Conference, Stockholm. Cornelissen, A.M.G.; Van Den Berg, J.; Koops, W.J.; Grossman, M. and Udo, H.M.J. (2000) Assessment of Sustainable Development: A Novel Approach Using Fuzzy Set Theory. Erasmus Research Institute of Management Report Series -2000-23-LIS, April 2000. Dagum C. and Costa M. (2004) “Analysis and Measurement of Poverty. Univariate and Multivariate Approaches and Their Policy Implications. A Case Study: Italy”; in Dagum C. and Ferrari G. (eds.), Household Behaviour, Equivalence Scales, Welfare and Poverty. Heidelberg, Physica-Verlag, pp. 221-272. Dagum C., Gambassi R. and Lemmi A. (1992) New approaches to the measurement of poverty; Poverty measurement for economies in transition. Polish Statistical Association and Central Statistical Office, Warsaw, pp. 201-225. Dreze, Jean and Sen, Amartya (1995) India’s Economic Development and Social Opportunity. Oxford: Clarendon Press. p. 78. Filippone A., Cheli B., and D’Agostino A. (2001), “Addressing the Interpretation and the Aggregation Problems in Totally Fuzzy and Relative Poverty Measures”, ISER Working Papers, n. 2001-22, Institute for Social and Economic Research - University of Essex, Colchester, UK. Keefe, R. and Smith, P. (1996) Vagueness: a reader. MIT press, Cambridge Mass. Klasen, S. (1997), “Poverty, inequality and deprivation in South Africa: an analysis of the 1993 ALDRU Survey”, Social Indicators Research 41, pp. 51-97. Klasen, S. (2000), “Measuring poverty and deprivation in South Africa”, Review of Income and Wealth 46(1), pp. 33-58. Lelli, Sara (2001) “Factor Analysis vs. Fuzzy Sets theory: Assessing the influence of Different Techniques on Sen's Functioning Approach”. Presented at the conference on ‘Justice and poverty: Examining Sen's Capability Approach’. St. Edmund's College, Cambridge, June. Also as Discussion Paper Series DPS 01.21, Center for Economic Studies, Catholic University of Leuven, Belgium, November. Mussard, S and Pi-Alperin, M.N. (2005), “Multidimensional Decomposition of Poverty: A Fuzzy Set Approach”, paper presented to the International Conference to Honour Two Eminent Social Scientist: C. GINI and M.O. LORENZ, University of Siena, 23-26 May 2005. Pannuzi N. and Quaranta A.G. (1995), “Measuring poverty: a study case in an Italian industrial city”, in Dagum C. and Lemmi A. (eds.) Income Distribution, Social Welfare, Inequality and Poverty, Volume 6 of Slottje D.J. (ed) Research on Economic Inequality, JAI Press Inc., London, pp. 323-336. Qizilbash M (2002) “A Note on the Measurement of Poverty and Vulnerability in the South African Context”. Journal of International Development 14:757-772. Qizilbash M (2003) “Vague language and precise measurement: the case of poverty”. Journal of Economic Methodology 10:41-58. Sen AK (1973) On economic inequality. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Sen AK (1981) Poverty and famines: an essay on entitlement and deprivation. Clarendon Press, Oxford. Sen AK (1989) “Economic methodology: heterogeneity and relevance”. Social Research 56:299-330. Sen AK (1992) Inequality reexamined. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Sen AK (1999) Development as freedom. Oxford University Press, Oxford. Zadeh LA (1965) “Fuzzy sets”. Information and Control. Vol. 8:338-353. Zadeh LA (1975) “Fuzzy logic and approximate reasoning”. Syntheses Vol. 30:407-440. Zhenga, Buhong and Zheng, Charles (2015) “Fuzzy ranking of human development: A proposal”. Mathematical Social Sciences, 78, 2015, 39 – 47. Verma V., and Betti G. (2002) “Longitudinal measures of income poverty and life-style deprivation”, Working Paper 50, Università degli Studi di Padova, Dipartimento di Scienze di Statistiche. Von Furstenberg, George M. and Joseph P. Daniels (1991). “Policy Undertakings by the Seven Summit Countries: Ascertaining the Degree of Compliance”. Carnegie-Rochester Conference Series on Public Policy, 35: 267-308. |

URI: | https://mpra.ub.uni-muenchen.de/id/eprint/101875 |