Folia geobotanica & phytotaxonomica

, Volume 23, Issue 3, pp 239–274 | Cite as

Some fuzzy approaches to phytosociology: Ideals and instances

  • M. B. Dale
Article
First Online:
Received:

Abstract

Dale M. B. (1988): Some fuzzy approaches to phytosociology. Ideals and instances.—Folia Geobot. Phytotax., Praha, 23: 239–274.—In this paper I examine some differences between the ideals of systematic traditional phytosociology and pragmatic numerical ones, and identify a difference in their view of the role of a stand. Traditionally very few stands are regarded as typifying the Association, most stands being regarded as being composed of elements of several types. The approaches using numerical methods, by contrast, have generally regarded all stands as equally contributing to the definition of patterns. This difference is reflected in the methodologies regarded as appropriate for the two cases.

Attention is then given to eight classes of methods which relax the numerical insistence on crisp clusters in various ways, to permit the simultaneous presence of several types in a single stand. A stand may be assigned to one or to several clusters, and such assignment may be complete or partial. The methods are exemplified and their various possibilities and problems discussed.

Keywords

Ideal types Numerical clustering Crisp clusters Nondeterministic clusters Fuzzy classes Bk clusters Typicality Allocation Ordination Two-parameter Additive clusters C-means Coding Transposed division 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Literature Cited

  1. Abel D. J. etWilliams W. T. (1981): NEBALL and FINGRP: new programs for multiple nearest neighbour analysis.—Austral. Comput. J. 13: 24–26.Google Scholar
  2. Arabie P. etCarroll J. D. (1980): MAPCLUS: a mathematical programming approach to fitting the ADCLUS model.—Psychometrika 45: 211–235.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Backer E. (1978): Cluster analysis by optimal decomposition of induced fuzzy sets.—Delft. Univ. Press. pp. 235.Google Scholar
  4. Ball G. H. etHall D. J. (1967): A clustering technique for summarising multivariate data.—Behav. Sci. 12: 153–155.CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  5. Bezdek J. C. (1974): Numerical taxonomy with fuzzy sets.—J. Math. Biol. 1: 57–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bezdek J. C., Coray C., Gunderson R. etWatson J. (1983): Detection and characterization of cluster substructure 1. Linear structure: Fuzzy c-lines.—SIAM J. Appl. Math. 40: 339–357.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bowman D. M. J. S. etWilson B. A. (1986): Wetland vegetation pattern on the Adelaide River flood plain, Northern Territory, Australis.—Proc. Roy. Soc. Old. 97: 69–77.Google Scholar
  8. Bray J. R. etCurtis J. T. (1957): An ordination of the upland forest communities of southern Wisconsin.—Ecol. Monogr. 27: 325–349.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Carroll J. B. (1953): An analytic solution for approximating simple structure.—Psychometrika 18: 23–38.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Cattell R. B. etCattell A. K. S. (1955): Factor rotation for parallel proportion profiles; analytical solutions and an example.—Brit. J. Statist. Psychol. 8: 83–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Dahl E., Prestvik O. etToftaker H. (1981): En kvantifiserung av karakterartbegrepet. —Det. Kgl. Norsk vidensk. Abers. Selskab, Musei Botaniskes Ser. 1981–5: 215–233.Google Scholar
  12. Dale M. B. etAnderson D. J. (1972): Qualitative and quantitative information analysis.— J. Ecol. 60: 639–653.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Dale M.-B. etAnderson D. J. (1973): Inosculate analysis of vegetation data.—Austral. J. Bot. 21: 253–276.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Dale M. B., Ferrari C., Beatrice M. etVenanzoni R. (1986): A comparison of some methods of species selection.—Coenoses 1: 35–51.Google Scholar
  15. Dale M. B. etWebb L. J. (1975): Numerical methods for the establishment of Associations.—Vegetatio 30: 77–87.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Dale M. B. etWilliams W. T. (1978): A new method of species reduction for ecological data.—Austral J. Ecol. 3: 1–5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Diday E. etGovaert G. (1974): Classification avec distance adaptive.—C.R. Acad. Sci. Paris A, 993–995.Google Scholar
  18. Dunn, J. C. (1974): A fuzzy relative of ISODATA and its use in detecting compact well-separated clusters.—J. Cybernetics 3: 22–57.Google Scholar
  19. Flanagan P. A. (1986): An optimally data efficient isomorphism inference algorithm.—Information and Control 68: 207–222.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Gitman I. etLevine M. (1970): An algoritm, for detecting unimodal fuzzy sets and its appliation as a clustering technique.—IEEE Trans. Comput. C-19: 583–593.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Goodall D. W. (1969): A procedure for recognition of uncommon species combinations in sets of vegetation samples.—Vegetatio 18: 19–35.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Gower J. (1966): Some distance properties of latent root and vector methods used in multivariate analysis.—Biometrika 53: 325–338.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Gunderson R. W. (1982): Choosing the r-dimension for the FCV family of clustering algorithms. —BIT 22: 140–149.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Gunderson R. W. (1983): An adaptive FCV clustering algorithm.—Interntl. J. Man-Mach. Stud. 19: 97–104.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gustafson D. E. etKessel W. E. (1978): Fuzzy clustering with a fuzzy covariance matrix.—In:D. S. Fu [ed.]: IEEE Conf. Decision Contrib. pp. 761–76.Google Scholar
  26. Harman H. H. (1967): Modern Factor Analysis..—Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  27. Hill, M. O. (1973): Reciprocal averaging: an eigenvector method of ordination.—J. Ecol. 61: 237–249.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Horst P. (1965): Factor analysis of data matrices.—Holt, Rinehart et Winston, New York.Google Scholar
  29. Horst P. etSchaie K. W. (1956): The multiple group method of factor analysis and rotation to a simple structure hypothesis.—J. Exp. Ed. 24: 231–237.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Jardine N. etSibson R. (1968): The construction of hierarchic and nonhierarchic classifications. —Comput. J. 11: 177–184.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Kaiser H. F. (1958): The varimax criterion for analytic rotation in factor analysis.—Psychometrika 23: 187–200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Keller J. M., Gray M. R. etGivens J. A. Jr.: (1985): A fuzzy k-nearest neighbour algorithm. —IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cyber. SMC-15: 580–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kendall M. G. (1948): Rank correlation methods.—Griffin, London.Google Scholar
  34. Lance G. N. etWilliams W. T. (1966): A generalised sorting strategy for computer classifications. —Nature 212–218.Google Scholar
  35. Lance G. N. etWilliams W. T. (1967): Mixed-data classificatory programs. Agglomerative systems.—Aust. Comput. J. 1: 15–26.Google Scholar
  36. Lance G. N. etWilliams W. T. (1977): Attribute contributions to a classification.—Austral. Comput. J. 9: 128–129.Google Scholar
  37. Libert G. etRoubens M. (1983): New experimental results in cluster validity of fuzzy clustering algorithms.—In:J. Janssen, J.-P. Marcotorchino etJ.-M. Proth [eds.]: New trends in data analysis and applications.—Elsevier (North Holland), pp. 205–218.Google Scholar
  38. McBratney A. B. etde Gruijter J. (1987): Estimation and spatial prediction of continuous soil classes using fuzzy sets and generalized co-kriging.—Internatl. Fed. Classif. Soc. Conf. 1987, Aachen in prep.Google Scholar
  39. McBratney A. B. etMooee A. W. (1985): Application of fuzzy sets to climatic classification.— Agric. For. Meteor. 35: 165–185.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Medis R. (1980): Unified analysis of variance by ranks.—Brit. J. Statist. Psychol. 33: 84–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Michalski S. etStepp R. E. (1985): Automated construction of classifications: conceptual clustering versus numerical taxonomy.—IEEE Trans. Patt. Anal. Mach. Intel. PAMI-5: 396–410.Google Scholar
  42. Miyamoto S. etNakayama K. (1986): Similarity measures based on a fuzzy set model and application to hierarchical clustering.—IEEE Trans. Syst. Man Cyber. SMC-16: 479–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Molander P. (1986): Induction of categories: the problem of multiple equilibria.—J. Math. Psychol. 30: 42–54.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Pawlak Z. (1984): Rough classification.—Int. J. Man-Mach. Studies 20: 469–483.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Peay E. H. (1975): Nonmetric grouping: clusters and cliques.—Psychometrika 40: 297–313.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Ratkowsky D. etLance G. N. (1978): A criterion for determining the number of groups in a classification.—Austral. Comput. J. 10: 115–117.Google Scholar
  47. Roberts D. W. (1986): Ordination on the basis of fuzzy set theory.—Vegetatio 66: 123–131.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Rose M. J. (1965): Classification of a set of elements.—Comput. J. 7: 208–224.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Ross D. R. (1979): TAXON users manual, ed. P3.—CSIRO, Division Computing Research, Canberra, A. C. T.Google Scholar
  50. Selem, S. Z. etIsmail M. A. (1984): Soft clustering of multidimensional data: a semi-fuzzy aproach. —Patt. Recog. 17: 559–568.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Thurstone L. L. (1945): A multiple group method for factoring the correlation matrix.—Psychometrika 10: 73–78.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Thurstone L. L. (1947): Multiple factor analysis.—Univ. Chicago Press, Chicago.Google Scholar
  53. Wallace C. S. etBoulton D. A. (1968): An information measure for classification.—Comput. J. 11: 185–194.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Whitfield J. W. (1953): The distribution of total rank values for one particular object in m rankings of n objects.—Brit. J. Statist. Psychol. 6: 35–40.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Williams W. T. etTracey J. G. (1984): Network analysis of north Queensland rainforests.— Austral. J. Bot. 32: 109–116.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. Wong A. K. C. etLiu T. S. (1975): Typicality, diversity and feature pattern of an ensemble.— IEEE. Trans. Comput. C-24: 158–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. Yamamoto S., Ushio K., Tazawa S., Ikeda H., Tamari F. etHamada N. (1977): Partitions of a query set into minimal number of subsets having the consecutive retrieval property.— J. Statist. Planning Infer. 1: 41–51.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Academia 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. B. Dale
    • 1
  1. 1.Istituto BotanicoUniversita degli Studie di TriesteTriesteItaly

Personalised recommendations