Skip to main content

Abstract

Concept lattices fulfil one of the aims of classification by providing a description by attributes of each class of objects. We introduce here two new similarity/dissimilarity measures: a similarity measure between concepts (elements) of a lattice and a dissimilarity measure between concept lattices defined on the same set of objects and attributes. Both measures are based on the overhanging relation previously introduced by the author, which are a cryptomorphism of lattices.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 129.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 169.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

Notes

  1. 1.

    Birkhoff (1967) defines two objects, especially systems of axioms or semantics for them, as cryptomorphic if they are equivalent but not obviously equivalent.

References

  • Barbut, M., & Monjardet, B. (1970). Ordres et classification: Algèbre et combinatoire (tome II). Paris: Hachette.

    Google Scholar 

  • Birkhoff, G. (1967). Lattice theory, (3rd ed.). Providence: American Mathematical Society.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Caspard, N., Leclerc, B., & Monjardet, B. (2012). Finite ordered sets: Concepts, results and uses. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Caspard, N., & Monjardet, B. (2003). The lattices of Moore families and closure operators on a finite set: A survey. Discrete Applied Mathematics, 127, 241–269.

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  • Davey, B. A., & Priestley, H. A. (2002). Introduction to lattices and order (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.

    Book  MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Domenach, F., & Leclerc, B. (2004). Closure systems, implicational systems, overhanging relations and the case of hierarchical classification. Mathematical Social Sciences, 47(3), 349–366.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ganter, B., & Wille, R. (1996). Formal concept analysis: Mathematical foundations. New York: Springer.

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  • Leacock, C., & Chodorow, M. (1998). Combining local context and wordnet similarity for word sense identification. In C. Fellbaum (Ed.), WordNet: An electronic lexical database (pp. 265–283). Cambridge: MIT.

    Google Scholar 

  • Rada, R., Mili, H., Bicknell, E., & Blettner, M. (1989). Development and application of a metric on semantic nets. IEEE Transactions SMC, 19, 17–30.

    Google Scholar 

  • Tversky, A. (1977). Features of similarity. Psychological Review, 84(4), 327–352.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Wille, R. (1982). Restructuring lattice theory: An approach based on hierarchies of concepts. In I. Rival (Ed.), Ordered sets (pp. 314–339).

    Google Scholar 

  • Wu, Z., & Palmer, M. (1994). Verb semantics and lexical selection. In Proceedings of the 32nd Annual Meeting of the Associations for Computational Linguistics (pp. 33–138).

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Florent Domenach .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2015 Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg

About this paper

Cite this paper

Domenach, F. (2015). Similarity Measures of Concept Lattices. In: Lausen, B., Krolak-Schwerdt, S., Böhmer, M. (eds) Data Science, Learning by Latent Structures, and Knowledge Discovery. Studies in Classification, Data Analysis, and Knowledge Organization. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-44983-7_8

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics