4.5 Article

On characterization of generalized interval-valued fuzzy rough sets on two universes of discourse

Journal

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF APPROXIMATE REASONING
Volume 51, Issue 1, Pages 56-70

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/j.ijar.2009.07.002

Keywords

Interval-valued approximation operators; Interval-valued fuzzy relations; Interval-valued fuzzy logical operators; Interval-valued fuzzy rough sets; Interval-valued fuzzy sets; Rough sets

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This paper proposes a general study of (I, T)-interval-valued fuzzy rough sets on two universes of discourse integrating the rough set theory with the interval-valued fuzzy set theory by constructive and axiomatic approaches. Some primary properties of interval-valued fuzzy logical operators and the construction approaches of interval-valued fuzzy T-similarity relations are first introduced. Determined by an interval-valued fuzzy triangular norm and an interval-valued fuzzy implicator, a pair of lower and upper generalized interval-valued fuzzy rough approximation operators with respect to an arbitrary interval-valued fuzzy relation on two universes of discourse is then defined. Properties of I-lower and T-upper interval-valued fuzzy rough approximation operators are examined based on the properties of interval-valued fuzzy logical operators discussed above. Connections between interval-valued fuzzy relations and interval-valued fuzzy rough approximation operators are also established. Finally, an operator-oriented characterization of interval-valued fuzzy rough sets is proposed, that is, interval-valued fuzzy rough approximation operators are characterized by axioms. Different axiom sets of T-lower and T-upper interval-valued fuzzy set-theoretic operators guarantee the existence of different types of interval-valued fuzzy relations which produce the same operators. (C) 2009 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available