Soft Computing

, Volume 21, Issue 7, pp 1833–1845 | Cite as

Modeling with linguistic entities and linguistic descriptors: a perspective of granular computing

  • Witold Pedrycz
  • Rami Al-Hmouz
  • Abdullah Saeed Balamash
  • Ali Morfeq
Methodologies and Application


In this study, we are concerned with the formation of interpretable descriptors of dependencies existing in experimental data and realized in the form of linguistic entities (information granules). We elaborate on a way of bridging numerically inclined fuzzy models (in which information granules are built on a basis of experimental data and described through numeric membership functions) and a qualitative way of system modeling (originating from symbol-based modeling). Proceeding with the principles of fuzzy modeling (especially, those residing with rule-based architectures), their numerical constructs of fuzzy sets—information granules are augmented with viable interpretation mechanisms abstracted from the detailed membership functions. In this regard, a linguistic view of the outcomes of fuzzy clustering (realized in terms of fuzzy C-means) are revisited and supplied with an interpretation at a higher level of abstraction. The buildup of the qualitative descriptors embraces two essential aspects of abstraction, namely (a) an abstraction of linguistic terms realized on the basis of membership functions (fuzzy sets) and (b) an abstraction of relationships completed on the basis of detailed functional dependencies present in the fuzzy model (say, the rules of the model). Two categories of problems are studied in detail along with their applications, namely a linguistic description of time series and a linguistic description of linearization tasks. Both of them are illustrated with a number of experimental studies.


Linguistic descriptors Granular computing Implicit and explicit information granules Symbols Time series Linguistic linearization 


  1. Acampora G, Loia V (2005) Using FML and fuzzy technology in adaptive ambient intelligence environments. Int J Comput Intell Res 1(2):171–182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bezdek JC (1981) Pattern recognition with fuzzy objective function algorithms. Plenum Press, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  3. Bolt J, Van der Gaag L, Renooij S (2005) Introducing situational signs in qualitative probabilistic networks. Int J Approx Reason 38(3):333–354MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. Celotto A, Loia V, Senatore S (2015) Fuzzy linguistic approach to quality assessment model for electricity network infrastructure. Inf Sci 304(2):1–5CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cordón O, Del Jesus MJ, Herrera F (1999) A proposal on reasoning methods in fuzzy rule-based classification systems. Int J Approx Reason 20(1):21–45CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. De Oliveira JV, Pedrycz W (2007) Advances in fuzzy clustering and its applications. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  7. Forbus K (1996) Qualitative reasoning. In: CRC Handbook of Computer Science and Engineering. CRC Press, Boca Raton, pp 715–733Google Scholar
  8. Herrera-Viedma E, Peis E (2003) Evaluating the informative quality of documents in SGML format from judgments by means of fuzzy linguistic techniques based on computing with words. Inf Process Manag 39:233–249CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  9. Hruschka ER, Campello RJGB, Freitas AA (2009) A survey of evolutionary algorithms for clustering. IEEE Trans Systems Man Cybern Part C Appl Rev 39:133–155CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Ibrahim Z, Ngom A, Tawfik A (2011) Using qualitative probability in reverse-engineering gene regulatory networks. IEEE/ACM Trans Comput Biol Bioinform 8(12):326–334CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Liu H, Brown DJ, Coghill GM (2008) Fuzzy qualitative robot kinematics. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 16(3):808–822CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Pedrycz W, Rai P (2008) Collaborative clustering with the use of Fuzzy C-means and its quantification. Fuzzy Sets Syst 159:2399–2427MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. Pedrycz W, de Oliveira JV (2008) A development of fuzzy encoding and decoding through fuzzy clustering. IEEE Trans Instrum Meas 57(4):829–837CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Shults B, Kuipers BJ (1997) Proving properties of continuous systems: qualitative simulation and temporal logic. Artif Intell 92(1):91–129MathSciNetCrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. Takagi T, Sugeno M (1985) Fuzzy identification of systems and its application to modelling and control. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern 15:116–132CrossRefMATHGoogle Scholar
  16. Zadeh LA (2005) From computing with numbers to computing with words—from manipulation of measurements to manipulation of perceptions. In: Vanderveken D (ed) Log. Thought action. Springer, Netherlands, pp 507–544Google Scholar
  17. Zhou SM, Lyons RA, Gravenor MB (2013) Constructing compact Takagi-Sugeno rule systems: identification of complex interactions in epidemiological data. PLoS One 7(12):1–14Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2015

Authors and Affiliations

  • Witold Pedrycz
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Rami Al-Hmouz
    • 2
  • Abdullah Saeed Balamash
    • 2
  • Ali Morfeq
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of AlbertaEdmontonCanada
  2. 2.Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringKing Abdulaziz UniversityJeddahSaudi Arabia
  3. 3.Systems Research Institute, Polish Academy of SciencesWarsawPoland

Personalised recommendations