Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
A new approach to fuzzy distance measure and similarity measure between two
generalized fuzzy numbers
Debashree Guha, Debjani Chakraborty *
Department of Mathematics, IIT-Kharagpur, Kharagpur 721 302, WB, India
A R T I C L E I N F O
A B S T R A C T
Article history:
Received 6 September 2007
Received in revised form 3 December 2008
Accepted 25 June 2009
Available online 2 July 2009
In this paper a fuzzy distance measure between two generalized fuzzy numbers is developed. The metric
properties of this distance measure are also studied. The new distance measure is compared with the other
fuzzy distance measures proposed by Voxman [W. Voxman, Some remarks on distances between fuzzy
numbers, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 100 (1998) 353365] and Chakraborty and Chakraborty [C. Chakraborty,
D. Chakraborty, A theoretical development on fuzzy distance measure for fuzzy numbers, Mathematical
and Computer Modelling 43 (2006) 254261] and turned out to be more reasonable. A new similarity
measure is also developed with the help of the fuzzy distance measure. Examples are given to compare this
similarity measure with the other similarity measure previously proposed. A decision making scheme is
proposed using this similarity measure and this scheme is found to be more acceptable than the existing
methods due to the fact that it considers the degrees of condence of the experts opinion.
2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords:
Generalized fuzzy numbers
Fuzzy distance
Fuzzy similarity
Absolute value
1. Introduction
The concept of similarity is fundamentally important in almost
every scientic eld. Similarity measures between fuzzy sets have
gained importance due to the widespread applications in diverse
elds like decision making, pattern recognition, machine learning
and market prediction, etc. Similarity measure between two fuzzy
numbers is related to their commonality, in theories of the
recognition, identication, and categorization of objects, where a
common assumption is that the greater the commonality between
a pair of objects, more similar they are. Similarity and distance
measure between two fuzzy numbers are closely related concept.
So it is possible to express similarity measure and distance
measure between fuzzy numbers by a functional relationship. This
is because one of the oldest and most inuential theoretical
assumptions is that similarity measure is inversely related to
distance measure. Therefore the study about the distances
between fuzzy numbers is very much signicant. Thus the
distances between fuzzy sets and as well as fuzzy numbers have
gained more attention from researchers.
A lot of research has been done to construct the distance
measure between fuzzy sets [16]. Recently some researchers have
focused their attention to compute the distances between fuzzy
numbers [8,11,21,25,26].
In the literature, it has been seen that the distance methods
basically compute crisp distance measure for fuzzy numbers. But
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: debjani@maths.iitkgp.ernet.in (D. Chakraborty).
1568-4946/$ see front matter 2009 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.asoc.2009.06.009
Ca
8
>
< maxfAL2 a AR1 a; 0g
>
: maxfAL a AR a; 0g
1
2. Preliminaries
jAxj
0;
Ax
_ Ax;
8
>
AL a 0
< Aa ;
L
R
and
(1)
(2)
(3)
(4)
(5)
(6)
91
x<0
x0
(1)
92
41= p
sA1 ; A2 1
kU k
where U is the universe of discourse.
p
p
A1 A 2 ja1 b1 a3 b2 j ja1 a3 j
and
sA 2 a4 g 2 a3 b2 :
lp
1= p
ja2 a4 j p ja2 g 1 a4 g 2 j p
yA
8
a2 a1
>
>
w
2
> 1
<
a2 g 1 a1 b1
;
6
>
>
>
: w1
2
2w1
a
:
6
6
sA 1 ; A 2 61
4
ja1 b1 a3 b2 j ja1 a3 j
A1
BsA1 ; sA 2
A 2 a A 1 a
if
for
A2
if
hA 1 a A 2 a 1 hA 2 a A 1 a La; Ra
ja2 a4 j ja2 g 1 a4 g 2 j7
7
7
5
4
iBS ;S miny ; y
h
A1 A2
A1
A2
1 xA xA2
1
maxy ; y
A 1 a A 2 a
or
A 2 a for all a 2 0; 1 is
if a1 b1 a2 g 1 and 0 < w1 1
yA a1 a2 a2 g 1 a1 b1 w1 yA
by A 2 a AL2 a; AR2 a
if a1 b1 6 a2 g 1 and 0 < w1 1
and
xA
by A 1 a AL1 a; AR1 a
8
>
>
<1
>
>
:0
(2)
(3)
Therefore the fuzzy distance between A 1 and A 2 is dened by
A 1 ; A 2 dL ; dR ; u; s
d
aw aw
(4)
93
_R
_L
d d d d d d
(5)
From the above three options (I.a), (I.b) and (I.c), the following
eight combinations are possible:
L
_L
(i) dLa AL2 a AR1 a; d a 0; da AL3 a AR1 a
_L
_L
_L
_L
Proof. Proof of properties (i) and (ii) follows from Eqs. (4) and (2),
respectively.
Proof of property (iii) is given here:
Let A 1 , A 2 and A 3 are three generalized fuzzy numbers with their
a cut representation A i a ALi a; ARi a for i=1, 2, 3 for a 2 0; w,
0 < w 1.
Depending on the relative positions of the means of A 1 ; A 2 and
A 3 , three situations arise.
Situation (I):
When mean of A 1 mean of A 2 mean of A 3
AL1 w AR1 w AL2 w AR2 w AL3 w AR3 w
;
2
2
2
_L
Now, from the above eight combinations, (vii) and (viii) are not
possible.
As from (vii), it can be seen that
A 1 and A 2 are disjoint.
A 2 and A 3 are disjoint.
A 1 and A 3 intersect.
A 1 and A 2 intersect.
A 2 and A 3 are disjoint.
A 1 and A 3 intersect.
AL2 a AR1 a da
AR3 a AL1 a da
AR2 a AL2 a da
0
0
0
Z w
Z w
Z w
AR2 a AR1 a da
AR3 a AL1 a da
AL2 a AL2 a da
0
0
0
Z w
Z w
AL3 a AR1 a da
AR3 a AL1 a da
0
_L
_R
d d
Proved
_L
A 2 ; A 3 d
A 1 ; A 3
A 1 ; A 2 d
d
L
_L
(vi) dLa 0; d a 0; da 0
94
L
_L
(ii) dLa 0; d a AL3 a AR2 a; da AL3 a AR1 a
R
L
R
L
d d d d
Z w
Z w
Z w
AR2 a AL1 a da
AL3 a AR2 a da
AR3 a AL2 a da
0
0
0
Z w
Z w
Z w
AL3 a AL2 a da
AR3 a AL1 a da
AR2 a AR2 a da
0
0
0
Z w
Z w
AL3 a AR1 a da
AR3 a AL1 a da
0
_L
_R
d d
Proved
L
_L
L
L
R
(iii) da 0; d a 0; da ZA3 a A1 a
Z w
w
R
L
R
L
d d d d
AR2 a AL1 a da
AR3 a AL2 a da
0
0
Z w
Z w
AR2 a AL2 a da
AR3 a AL1 a da
Z0 w
Z0 w
AL3 a AR1 a da
AR3 a AL1 a da
0
_L
_R
d d
Proved
L
_L
L
L
R
(iv) da A2 a A1 a;Zd aw 0; da 0
Z w
Z w
R
L
R
L
AL2 a AR1 a da
AR2 a AL1 a da
AR3 a AL2 a da
d d d d
0
0
0
Z w
Z w
Z w
AL2 a AR1 a da
AR3 a AL1 a da
AR2 a AL2 a da
0
0
Z0 w
AR3 a AL1 a da
0
_L
_R
d d
proved
L
_L
L
L
R
L
R
L
R
(v) da A2 a A1 a;Zd a A3 a A2 a; da ZA3 a A1 a
w
w
R
L
R
L
d d d d
AL2 a AR1 a da
AL3 a AR2 a da
0
0
Z w
Z w
AR2 a AL1 a da
AR3 a AL2 a da
Z0 w
Z0 w
Z w
AL2 a AR1 a da
AL3 a AR2 a da
AR3 a AL1 a da
0
Z0 w
Z0 w
AL3 a AR1 a da
AR3 a AL1 a da
0
_L
_R
d d
proved
_L
L
(vi) da 0; d a 0; da Z0
Z w
w
R
L
R
L
d d d d
AR2 a AL1 a da
AR3 a AL2 a da
0
0
Z w
AR3 a AL1 a da
0
_L
_R
d d
proved
AL1 wAR
w
1
2
AL3 wAR
w
3
2
AL2 wAR
w
2
2
(III)
AL2 wAR
w
2
2
AL1 wAR
w
1
2
AL3 wAR
w
3
2
(7)
Ambd pro posed
if
1
0
(8)
Now, for our proposed distance measure (in Section 3.1), the
following two situations can arise:
(I) L(a) 0 and (II) L(a) 0 R(a) (with the help of Eq. (3),
we can write the above two)
In case of situation (I), for both h = 0 and 1, from the denition of
ambiguity it is very clear that Ambd pro posed Ambdchakraborty .
For situation (II), two different cases arise depending on the
value of h. The proof of (7) for two different cases is given
separately as follows:
(II.a) For h = 1;
The a cut of the proposed distance measure (from Eqs. (2) and
(3)) can be written as follows:
dLa 0
Therefore
Ambd pro posed
if
Ambd pro posed
if
0
AR1
sa AR1 a AL2 a
sa
0
AR1
AR2
AL1
AL2
jAL1
a
a
a <
(9)
(10)
Now, Eq. (8) is compared with the Eqs. (9) and (10) respectively
as follows:
(i) From Eqs. (8) and (9), we can write
Z 1
Z 1
sa AR1 a AL2 a da <
sa AR1 a AL2 a AR2 a
0
AL1
a da
AR2
AL1
AL2 a da
(as dRa AR1 a AL2 a is positive).
Therefore Ambd pro posed < Ambdchakraborty .
(II.b) For h = 0;
From the denition proposed in Section 3, the a cut of the
proposed distance measure (from Eqs. (2) and (3)) can be written
as follows:
dLa 0;
0
jAL2
sa AR2 a AL1 a da
0
jAL2
(11)
sa AR1 a AL2 a da
(12)
Now, Eq. (8) is compared with the Eqs. (11) and (12)
respectively as follows:
(i) From Eqs. (8) and (11), we can write
Z 1
Z 1
saAR2 a AL1 a da <
saAR2 a AL1 a AR1 a
0
AL2 a da
(as L(a) 0, therefore AR1 a AL2 a is positive).
Therefore Ambd pro posed < Ambdchakraborty .
(ii) From Eqs. (8) and (12), we can write
Z 1
Z 1
saAR1 a AL2 a da <
saAR1 a AL2 a AR2 a
0
AL1 a da
a da
a AR2 aj
and
95
Ambdchakraborty Ambdvoxman :
Now, we can
Ambdvoxman .
say
that
96
A;
A 2 1
for 0 d
(13)
(14)
Z w
u dLaw max
dLa da; 0 ; and s
0
Z w
R
da da dRaw where w minw1 ; w2
0
1
dRaw
dL
s
u
; 1 R aw ; R
; R
;
daw s daw s daw s
aw s
dR
w minw1 ; w2
(16)
97
(1) From Fig. 1 it is clear that set 2 and set 3 are different sets of
generalized fuzzy number, but the method proposed by Lee
[17] and Chen [4] give the same similarity (from Table 1).
(2) In set 4 two different fuzzy numbers are given, but the methods
of Lee [17] and Chen [4], give the value of the similarity
measure as 1.
(3) From Fig. 1 and Table 1, we have seen that Lees [17] method
cannot calculate the similarity measure of the fuzzy numbers
given in set 5 and for the fuzzy numbers given in set 6, Lees[17]
method calculates the degree of similarity as 0.
(4) From Fig. 1 it is clear that set 7 and set 8 are different sets of
generalized fuzzy number, but Chen [4] gives the same
similarity (from Table 1).
(5) In set 9 and set 10, different sets of fuzzy numbers are given,
but by the method of Chen [4] and Chen and Chen [7] same
similarity measure is obtained.
(6) From Fig. 1, we can see that set 11 and set 12 are different sets
of generalized fuzzy numbers. However, from Table 1, we can
see that if we apply the methods proposed by Chen [4] and
Chen and Chen [7], set 11 and set 12 get the same degree of
similarity.
Now from Fig. 1 and Table 1 it is clear that in all the above cases
the proposed similarity measure calculates the similarity between
two fuzzy numbers and overcome the drawbacks of the existing
methods.
5. Fuzzy decision making technique based on the proposed
similarity measure of generalized fuzzy number (when
condence level of the expert is considered)
4.2. Properties
The above distance based fuzzy similarity measure given in
Eq. (16) satises the following properties:
(i)
(ii)
(iii)
A 1 ; A 2 2 0; 1
S
A 2 ; A 1
A 1 ; A 2 S
S
A 1 ; A 3 minfS
A 1 ; A 2 ; S
A 2 ; A 3 g
If A 1 A 2 A 3 ; then S
Table 1
Here a comparison of the proposed similarity measure with the existing similarity measure through the above sets of 12 examples are given.
Set
Set
Set
Set
Set
Set
Set
Set
Set
Set
Set
Set
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
12
0.9167
0.5
0.5
1
#
0
0.5
0.6667
0.4167
0.75
0.5
0.375
0.975
0.7
0.7
1
1
0.9
0.9
0.9
0.65
0.65
0.5
0.5
0.8357
0.42
0.49
0.8
1
0.9
0.54
0.81
0.106
0.106
0.25
0.25
Note. # means that the similarity measure cannot calculate the degree of similarity between two generalized fuzzy numbers. The results that are not satisfactory are given in
bold and italic.
98
Table 2
Linguistic variables for the ratings of alternatives.
Very poor (VP)
Poor (P)
Medium poor (MP)
Fair (F)
Medium good (MG)
Good (G)
Very good (VG)
(0; 0, 1; 1.0)
(1; 1, 2; 1.0)
(3; 2, 2; 1.0)
(5; 2, 2; 1.0)
(7; 2, 2; 1.0)
(9; 2, 1; 1.0)
(10; 1, 0; 1.0)
xi : fi j
for each j 1; 2; . . . ; n
(17)
R j Pm
i1 xi i1
and the condence level of expert regarding R j is w j
min1im wi j [7].
Now based on the similarity measure (given in Eq. (16) of
Section 4.1) a ranking process to determine the best
alternative, has been given in the steps below:
Step 2 Use the proposed similarity measure to evaluate the degree
of similarity between the over all fuzzy scores R j of the j th
alternative and the terms given in Table 2. The more value of
the similarity measure indicates more matching.
Step 3 Let us suppose, R 1 and R 2 be the aggregated fuzzy scores of
the alternative a1 and a2, respectively. Now, the ordering is
done as follows:
First, label a1 and a2 with the terms given in Table 2 where
the similarity value (as given by 16) are maximum.
If the labels are different, then the ordering is either
a1 > a2 or a1 < a2 according to the labeled given in Table 2.
If a1 and a2 both are labeled with the same term, say T,
then
(i) a1 > a2 for sR 1 ; T > sR 2 ; T
(ii) a1 > a2 for sR 1 ; T < sR 2 ; T
If s R 1 ; T s R 2 ; T , then for ranking the alternatives
give attention to the condence level of the experts overall
opinion about an alternative and the ranking is as follows:
(i) a1 > a2 for w1 > w2 .
(ii) a1 > a2 for w1 < w2 .
Step 4 Here it is clear that the similarity measure gives a generalized
triangular fuzzy number. While comparing two fuzzy
similarity measures i.e. two generalized triangular fuzzy
numbers, it is not possible to conclude as such that one is
Now, using Eq. (16), the degree of similarity between each term
of Table 2 and R 1 and R 2 is evaluated as shown in Tables 4 and 5,
respectively.
From Table 4, applying step 4, we can see that the similarity
between the over all fuzzy score R 1 and medium good has the
largest value. Therefore, the generalized triangular fuzzy number
Table 3
The ratings of candidates given by the expert under all attributes.
Criteria
Candidates
Experts response
C1
a1
a2
MG
G
C2
a1
a2
G
VG
C3
a1
a2
F
VG
Table 4
The degree of similarity between R 1 and each linguistic term given in
Table 2.
Linguistic term (say Ti)
Degree of similarity sR 1 ; T i
Degree of similarity s R 2 ; T i
99
[3] S.H. Chen, Operations on fuzzy numbers with function principal, Tamkang Journal
of Management Sciences 6 (1) (1985) 1325.
[4] S.M. Chen, New methods for subjective mental workload assessment and fuzzy
risk analysis, Cybernetics and Systems 27 (1996) 449472.
[5] S.H. Chen, Ranking generalized fuzzy numbers with graded mean integration, in:
Proceedings of the 8th International Fuzzy Systems Association World Congress,
vol. 2, 1999, pp. 899902.
[6] C.T. Chen, Extensions of the TOPSIS for group decision-making under fuzzy
environment, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 114 (2000) 19.
[7] S.J. Chen, S.M. Chen, Fuzzy risk analysis based on similarity measures of generalized fuzzy numbers, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems 11 (2003) 4556.
[8] C.H. Cheng, A new approach for ranking fuzzy numbers by distance method, Fuzzy
Sets and Systems 95 (1998) 307317.
[9] M. Delgado, A. Vila, W. Voxman, On a canonical representation of fuzzy numbers,
Fuzzy Sets and Systems 93 (1998) 125135.
[10] M. Delgado, A. Vila, W. Voxman, On a canonical representation of fuzzy numbers,
Applications Systems 94 (1998) 205216.
[11] P. Diamond, Fuzzy least squares, Information Sciences 46 (1988) 141157.
[12] D. Dubois, H. Prade, Fuzzy Sets and Systems: Theory and Applications, Academic
Press, 1980.
[13] L. Fachao, S. Lianqing, Y. Xiangdong, Q. Jiqing, The absolute value of fuzzy number
and its basic properties, The Journal of Fuzzy Mathematics 9 (2001) 4350.
[14] J. Fan, W. Xie, Some notes on similarity measure and proximity measure, Fuzzy
Sets and Systems 101 (1999) 403412.
[15] C.H. Hsieh, S.H. Chen, Similarity of generalized fuzzy numbers with graded mean
integration representation, in: Proceedings of the 8th International Fuzzy Systems Association World Congress, vol. 2, Taipai, Taiwan, Republic of China,
(1999), pp. 551555.
[16] J. Kacprzyk, Multistage Fuzzy Control, Wiley, Chichester, 1997.
[17] H.S. Lee, An optimal aggregation method for fuzzy opinions of group decision,
Proceedings of IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics 3
(1999) 314319.
[18] D.F. Li, C.T. Cheng, New similarity measures of intuitionistic fuzzy sets and application to pattern recognitions, Pattern Recognition Letters 23 (2002) 221225.
[19] Z.Z. Liang, P.F. Shi, Similarity measures on intuitionistic fuzzy numbers, Pattern
Recognition Letters 24 (2003) 26872693.
[20] W. Pedrycz, Fuzzy sets in pattern recognition: accomplishments and challenges,
Fuzzy Sets and Systems 90 (1997) 171176.
[21] L. Tran, L. Duckstein, Comparison of fuzzy numbers using a fuzzy distance
measure, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 130 (3) (2002) 331341.
[22] W. Voxman, some remarks on distances between fuzzy numbers, Fuzzy Sets and
Systems 100 (1998) 353365.
[23] Y.M. Wang, J.B. Yang, D.L. Xu, K.S. Chin, On the centroids of fuzzy numbers, Fuzzy
Sets and Systems 157 (2006) 919926.
[24] S.H. Wei, S.M. Chen, A new approach for fuzzy risk analysis based on similarity
measures of generalized fuzzy numbers, Expert Systems with Applications 36
(2009) 589598.
[25] R. Xu, C. Li, Multidimensional least-squares tting with a fuzzy model, Fuzzy Sets
and Systems 119 (2001) 215223.
[26] M.S. Yang, C.H. Ko, On cluster-wise fuzzy regression analysis, IEEE Transactions on
Systems, Man and Cybernetics Part B 27 (1997) 113.
[27] D. Yong, S. Wenkang, D. Feng, L. Qi, A new similarity measure of generalized fuzzy
numbers and its application to pattern recognition, Pattern Recognition Letters 25
(2004) 875883.