A Theory of Modeling Semantic Uncertainty in Label Representation

Conference paper
Part of the Lecture Notes in Computer Science book series (LNCS, volume 9978)


A new theory of modeling the uncertainty associated with vague concepts is introduced. We consider the problem of quantifying an agents uncertainty concerning which labels are appropriate to describe a given observation. This can be regarded as a simplified model of natural language communication. Semantic meaning conveyed by high-level knowledge representation is often inherently uncertain. Such uncertainty is referred to semantic uncertainty and dominated by fuzzy modeling. In this framework, from an epistemic point of view, labels are precise and uncertainty comes from the undecidable boundary between labels in agents conceptual space. In this framework the boundary is regarded as a random variable and it can be modeled by a probability distribution. We also propose a functional calculus to measure how appropriate of using a certain label to describe an observation. In this way, a vague concept can be represented by a distribution on the labels. The new theory is verified by applying it to the vague category game.


Label differentiation Boundary distribution Linguistic label Label image Category game 



This work is partially supported by the Natural Science Foundation of China under grant Nos. 61305047 and 61401012.


  1. 1.
    Carruthers, P.: Language, Thought and Consciousness: An Essay in Philosophical Psychology. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (1996)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Lawry, J., Tang, Y.: Uncertainty modelling for vague concepts: a prototype theory approach. Artif. Intell. 173(18), 1539–1558 (2009)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Qin, Z., Tang, Y.: Uncertainty Modeling for Data Mining: A Label Semantics Approach. Springer, Heidelberg (2014)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Jaynes, E.T.: Probability Theory: The Logic of Science. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2003)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    de Finetti, B.: Sul significanto soggettivo della probabilita. Fundam. Math. 17, 298–329 (1931)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Lawry, J., Tang, Y.: Probability, fuzziness and borderline cases. Int. J. Approximate Reasoning 55, 1164–1184 (2014)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 8, 338–353 (1965)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Baldwin, J.F., Martin, T.P., Pilsworth, B.W.: Fril-Fuzzy and Evidential Reasoning in Artificial Intelligence. Wiley, New York (1995)Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Klir, G., Yuan, B.: Fuzzy Sets and Fuzzy Logic. Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River (1995)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy logic = computing with words. IEEE Trans. Fuzzy Syst. 4(2), 103–111 (1996)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zadeh, L.A.: Toward a generalized theory of uncertainty. Inf. Sci. 172(1–2), 1–40 (2005)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zadeh, L.A.: Computing with Words: Principal Concepts and Ideas. Springer, Heidelberg (2012)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Thint, M., Beg, S., Qin, Z.: PNL-enhanced restricted domain question answering system. In: Proceedings of IEEE-FUZZ (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Lawry, J.: A framework for linguistic modelling. Artif. Intell. 155, 1–39 (2004)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhao, H., Qin, Z.: Clustering data and vague concepts using prototype theory interpreted label semantics. In: Huynh, V.-N., Inuiguchi, M., Denoeux, T. (eds.) IUKM 2015. LNCS (LNAI), vol. 9376, pp. 236–246. Springer, Heidelberg (2015). doi: 10.1007/978-3-319-25135-6_23 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Lawry, J.: Appropriateness measures: an uncertainty model for vague concepts. Synthese 161, 255–269 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Lawry, J.: Modeling and Reasoning with Vague Concepts. Springer, New York (2006)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Williamson, T.: Vagueness. Routledge, London (1994)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Bohm, D., Park, D.: Wholeness and the implicate order. Am. J. Phys. 49, 796–797 (1981)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Fine, K.: Vagueness, truth and logic. Synthese 30(3), 265–300 (1975)CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Steels, L., Belpaeme, T.: Coordinating perceptually grounded categories through language: a case study for colour. Behav. Brain Sci. 28(4), 469–488 (2005)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer International Publishing AG 2016

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Intelligent Computing and Machine Learning Lab, School of ASEEBeihang UniversityBeijingChina
  2. 2.School of Biological Science and Medical EngineeringBeihang UniversityBeijingChina
  3. 3.École Centrale de PékinBeihang UniversityBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations