Inference via belief qualified if — Then rules based on compatibility relations and possibility theory

  • Janusz Kacprzyk
  • Mario Fedrizzi
Fuzzy Mathematics
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 313)


We discuss first the representation of IF A THEN B rules in which the primary and secondary variables, A and B, take on values in some sets of values (single values as special cases). We propose the use of compatibility relations. We assume that with each rule a degree of belief as to its validity is associated. Second, we discuss inference in the sense that knowing a possibility distribution on the values of A, and a compatibility relation representing IF A THEN B, with its degree of belief, we seek an induced possibility distribution on the values of B.


knowledge representation production rule IF — THEN rule belief qualification inference possibility theory 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. Dubois D. and H. Prade (1980) Fuzzy Sets and Systems: Theory and Applications. Academic Press, New York.Google Scholar
  2. Dubois D. and H. Prade (1982) On several representations of an uncertain body of evidence. In M.M. Gupta and E. Sanchez (Eds.): "Fuzzy Information and Decision Processes". North — Holland, Amsterdam, pp. 167–182.Google Scholar
  3. Dubois D. and H. Prade (1985) Evidence measures based on fuzzy information. Automatica 21, 547–562.Google Scholar
  4. Kacprzyk J. (1987) Compatibility relations for the representation of associations between variables in knowledge based systems. Tech. Rep. ZPZC 148-47/87, Systems Research Institute, Polish Academy of Sciences, Warsaw.Google Scholar
  5. Kacprzyk J. and R.R. Yager (1984) Linguistic quantifiers and belief qualification in fuzzy multicriteria and multistage decision making. Control and Cybernetics 13, 155–173.Google Scholar
  6. Shafer G. (1976) A Mathematical Theory of Evidence. Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ, USA.Google Scholar
  7. Yager R.R. (1982) Generalized probabilities of fuzzy events from fuzzy belief structures. Information Sciences 28, 45–62.Google Scholar
  8. Yager R.R. (1986a) Non — monotonic compatibility relations in the theory of evidence. Tech. Rep. MII — 615, Machine Intelligence Institute, Iona College, New Rochelle, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  9. Yager R.R. (1986b) On the associations between variables in expert systems including default relations. Tech. Rep. MII — 616, Machine Intelligence Institute, Iona College, New Rochelle, NY, USA.Google Scholar
  10. Yager R.R. (1988) Uncertain associational relations: compatibility and transitive relations in reasoning. In J. Kacprzyk and M. Fedrizzi (Eds.) "Combining Fuzzy Imprecision with Probabilistic Uncertainty in Decision Making", Springer, Berlin — New York — Tokyo (forthcoming).Google Scholar
  11. Zadeh L.A. (1978) Fuzzy sets as a basis for a theory of possibility. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 1, 3–28.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • Janusz Kacprzyk
    • 1
  • Mario Fedrizzi
    • 2
  1. 1.Systems Research InstitutePolish Academy of SciencesWarsawPoland
  2. 2.Institute of InformaticsUniversity of TrentoTrentoItaly

Personalised recommendations