From a linguistic perspective, it is quantification which makes all the diffence between “having no dollars” and “having a lot of dollars”. And it is the meaning of the quantifier “most” which eventually decides if “Most Americans voted Kerry” or “Most Americans voted Bush” (as it stands). Natural language(NL)quantifierslike“all”,“almostall”,“many”etc. serveanimp- tant purpose because they permit us to speak about properties of collections, as opposed to describing specific individuals only; in technical terms, quantifiers are a ‘second-order’ construct. Thus the quantifying statement “Most Americans voted Bush” asserts that the set of voters of George W. Bush comprises the majority of Americans, while “Bush sneezes”only tells us something about a specific individual. By describing collections rather than individuals, quantifiers extend the expressive power of natural languages far beyond that of propositional logic and make them a universal communication medium. Hence language heavily depends on quantifying constructions. These often involve fuzzy concepts like “tall”, and they frequently refer to fuzzy quantities in agreement like “about ten”, “almost all”, “many” etc. In order to exploit this expressive power and make fuzzy quantification available to technical applications, a number of proposals have been made how to model fuzzy quantifiers in the framework of fuzzy set theory. These approaches usually reduce fuzzy quantification to a comparison of scalar or fuzzy cardinalities [197, 132].
1128693006
Fuzzy Quantifiers: A Computational Theory
From a linguistic perspective, it is quantification which makes all the diffence between “having no dollars” and “having a lot of dollars”. And it is the meaning of the quantifier “most” which eventually decides if “Most Americans voted Kerry” or “Most Americans voted Bush” (as it stands). Natural language(NL)quantifierslike“all”,“almostall”,“many”etc. serveanimp- tant purpose because they permit us to speak about properties of collections, as opposed to describing specific individuals only; in technical terms, quantifiers are a ‘second-order’ construct. Thus the quantifying statement “Most Americans voted Bush” asserts that the set of voters of George W. Bush comprises the majority of Americans, while “Bush sneezes”only tells us something about a specific individual. By describing collections rather than individuals, quantifiers extend the expressive power of natural languages far beyond that of propositional logic and make them a universal communication medium. Hence language heavily depends on quantifying constructions. These often involve fuzzy concepts like “tall”, and they frequently refer to fuzzy quantities in agreement like “about ten”, “almost all”, “many” etc. In order to exploit this expressive power and make fuzzy quantification available to technical applications, a number of proposals have been made how to model fuzzy quantifiers in the framework of fuzzy set theory. These approaches usually reduce fuzzy quantification to a comparison of scalar or fuzzy cardinalities [197, 132].
169.99
In Stock
5
1

Fuzzy Quantifiers: A Computational Theory
460
Fuzzy Quantifiers: A Computational Theory
460Paperback(Softcover reprint of hardcover 1st ed. 2006)
$169.99
169.99
In Stock
Product Details
ISBN-13: | 9783642067433 |
---|---|
Publisher: | Springer Berlin Heidelberg |
Publication date: | 11/23/2010 |
Series: | Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing , #193 |
Edition description: | Softcover reprint of hardcover 1st ed. 2006 |
Pages: | 460 |
Product dimensions: | 6.00(w) x 9.00(h) x 1.10(d) |
About the Author
From the B&N Reads Blog