Skip to main content
Log in

Fuzzy risk analysis using similarity measure of interval-valued fuzzy numbers and its application in poultry farming

  • Published:
Applied Intelligence Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Similarity measure plays an important role in the decision-making process under an uncertain environment where parameters involved are linguistics terms. Mostly, similarity measure is discussed on generalized fuzzy numbers. However, a few efforts have been made to study this measure on interval-valued fuzzy numbers. Sometimes, methods involving interval-valued fuzzy numbers depict limitations and drawbacks. Moreover, some of the methods are just confined to interval-valued fuzzy numbers. Hence, these methods fail when similarity has to be determined between crisp-valued fuzzy numbers and interval-valued fuzzy numbers. Hence, a new method of similarity measure has been developed based on the concepts of geometric distance, heights and the radius of gyration of the interval-valued fuzzy numbers. Although the method is being discussed on interval-valued fuzzy numbers, yet it is not just confined to such numbers. This method can be applied efficiently to generalized fuzzy numbers too. The method seems to out-perform in many situations and overcome the drawbacks and limitations of existing methods. A few sets of fuzzy numbers are considered for a comparative study and draw out the out-performance of the proposed method. A real-life problem of risk analysis in poultry farming has been discussed using the proposed similarity measure.

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

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6
Fig. 7
Fig. 8
Fig. 9
Fig. 10

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Chen SM (1996) New methods for subjective mental workload assessment and fuzzy risk analysis. Cybern Syst 27(5):449–472

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Kangari R, Riggs LS (1989) Construction risk assessment by linguistics. IEEE Trans Eng Manag 36 (1989):126–131

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Schmucke KJ (1984) Fuzzy sets: natural language computations, and risk analysis. Computer Science Press, Incorporated

  4. Chen SJ, Chen SM (2003) Fuzzy risk analysis based on similarity measures of generalized fuzzy numbers. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 11:45–56

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Chen SJ, Chen SM (2007) Fuzzy risk analysis based on the ranking of generalized trapezoidal fuzzy numbers. Appl Intell 26(1):1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Chen SJ, Chen SM (2008) Fuzzy risk analysis based on measures of similarity between interval-valued fuzzy numbers. Comput Math Appl 55(8):1670–1685

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  7. Chen SJ, Chen SM (2004) A new similarity measure between interval-valued fuzzy numbers. In: Proceedings of the joint 2nd international conference of soft computing and intelligent systems and 5th international symposium on advanced intelligent systems, Yokohama, Japan

  8. Chen SM, Chen JH (2009) Fuzzy risk analysis based on similarity measures between interval-valued fuzzy numbers and interval-valued fuzzy number arithmetic operators. Expert Syst Appl 36(3):6309–6317

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chen SJ, Chen SM (2007) Fuzzy risk analysis based on the ranking of generalized trapezoidal fuzzy numbers. Appl Intell 26(1):1–11

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Wei SH, Chen SM (2009) A new approach for fuzzy risk analysis based on similarity measures of generalized fuzzy numbers. Expert Syst Appl 36(1):589–598

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Chen SJ (2007) A novel similarity measure for interval-valued fuzzy numbers based on geometric-mean averaging operator. In: Proceedings of the BAI 2007 international conference on business and information, Tokyo, Japan

  12. Chen SJ (2011) Measure of similarity between interval-valued fuzzy numbers for fuzzy recommendation process based on quadratic-mean operator. Expert Syst Appl 38(3):2386–2394

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Patra K, Mondal SK (2015) Fuzzy risk analysis using area and height based similarity measure on generalized trapezoidal fuzzy numbers and its application. Appl Soft Comput 28:276–284

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Sen S, Patra K, Mondal SK (2016) Fuzzy risk analysis in familial breast cancer using a similarity measure of interval-valued fuzzy numbers. Pacific Sci Rev A: Natural Sci Eng 18(3):203–221

    Google Scholar 

  15. Chen SM, Munif A, Chen GS, Liu HC, Kuo BC (2012) Fuzzy risk analysis based on ranking generalized fuzzy numbers with different left heights and right heights. Expert Syst Appl 39(7):6320–6334

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Tang TC, Chi LC (2005) Predicting multilateral trade credit risks: comparisons of logit and fuzzy logic models using ROC curve analysis. Expert Syst Appl 28(3):547–556

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Wang YM, Elhag TM (2006) Fuzzy TOPSIS method based on alpha level sets with an application to bridge risk assessment. Expert Syst Appl 31(2):309–319

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Chen SJ, Chen SM (2001) A new method to measure the similarity between fuzzy numbers. In: the 10th IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, vol 3, pp 1123–1126

  19. Zhu LS, Xu RN (2012) Fuzzy risks analysis based on similarity measures of generalized fuzzy numbers. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, Berlin, pp 569–587

    Google Scholar 

  20. Zhang WR (1986) Knowledge representation using linguistic fuzzy relations. University of South Carolina, Columbia

    Google Scholar 

  21. Chen SM, Chen JH (2009) Fuzzy risk analysis based on ranking generalized fuzzy numbers with different heights and different spreads. Expert Syst Appl 36(3):6833–6842. Part 2

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Chen SM, Sanguansat K (2011) Analyzing fuzzy risk based on similarity measures between interval-valued fuzzy numbers. Expert Syst Appl 38(7):8612–8621

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Hsieh CH, Chen SM (1999) Similarity of generalized fuzzy numbers with graded mean integration representation, In: Proceedings of the 8th international fuzzy systems association world congress, Taipei, Taiwan, 2, pp 551–555

  24. Lee HS (2002) Optimal consensus of fuzzy opinions under group decision making environment. Fuzzy Sets Syst 132(3):303–315

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Yong D, Wenkang S, Feng D, Qi L (2004) A new similarity measure of generalized fuzzy numbers and its application to pattern recognition. Pattern Recogn Lett 25(8):875–883

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Xu Z, Shang S, Qian W, Shu W (2010) A method for fuzzy risk analysis based on the new similarity of trapezoidal fuzzy numbers. Expert Syst Appl 37(3):1920–1927

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Hejazi S, Doostparast A, Hosseini S (2011) An improved fuzzy risk analysis based on a new similarity measures of generalized fuzzy numbers. Expert Syst Appl 38(8):9179–9185

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Khorshidi HA, Nikfalazar S (2017) An improved similarity measure for generalized fuzzy numbers and its application to fuzzy risk analysis. Appl Soft Comput 52:478–486

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Chou CC (2014) A new similarity measure of fuzzy numbers. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26:287–294

    MathSciNet  MATH  Google Scholar 

  30. Li J, Zeng W (2017) Fuzzy risk analysis based on the similarity measure of generalized trapezoidal fuzzy numbers. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 32(3):1673–1683

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Farhadinia B (2014) An efficient similarity measure for intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Soft Comput 18(1):85–94

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  32. Dengfeng L, Chuntian C (2002) New similarity measures of intuitionistic fuzzy sets and application to pattern recognitions. Pattern Recogn Lett 23:221–225

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Liang Z, Shi P (2003) Similarity measures on intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Pattern Recogn Lett 24(15):2687–2693

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. Gorzaczany MB (1987) A method of inference in approximate reasoning based on interval-valued fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 21(1):1–17

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  35. Guijun W, Xiaoping L (1998) The applications of interval-valued fuzzy numbers and interval-distribution numbers. Fuzzy Sets Syst 98(3):331–335

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  36. Guijun W, Xiaoping L (1999) Correlation and information energy of interval-valued fuzzy numbers. Fuzzy Sets Syst 103(1):169– 175

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  37. Hong D H, Lee S (2002) Some algebraic properties and a distance measure for interval-valued fuzzy numbers. Inf Sci 148(1-4): 1–10

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Wu D, Mendel J M (2009) A comparative study of ranking methods, similarity measures and uncertainty measures for interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Inf Sci 179(8):1169–1192

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  39. Zhao T, Xiao J, Li Y, Deng X (2014) A new approach to similarity and inclusion measures between general type-2 fuzzy sets. Soft Comput 18(4):809–823

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Wei SH, Chen SM (2009) Fuzzy risk analysis based on interval-valued fuzzy numbers. Expert Syst Appl 36(2):2285–2299. Part 1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. Basu S (2005) Classical sets and non-classical sets: An overview. Resonance 10(8):38–48

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Chutia R, Chutia B (2017) A new method of ranking parametric form of fuzzy numbers using value and ambiguity. Appl Soft Comput 52:1154–1168

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Chen SH (1985) Ranking fuzzy numbers with maximizing set and minimizing set. Fuzzy Sets Syst 17(2):113–129

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  44. Chen SM, Wang CY (2013) Fuzzy decision making systems based on interval type-2 fuzzy sets. Inf Sci 242 (1):1–21

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  45. Chen SM (1997) Fuzzy system reliability analysis based on vague set theory, In: 1997 IEEE International Conference on Systems, Man, and Cybernetics. Computational Cybernetics and Simulation, 2, pp 1650–1655

  46. Chutia R (2017) Ranking of fuzzy numbers by using value and angle in the epsilon-deviation degree method. Appl Soft Comput 60:706–721

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. Chutia R, Gogoi MK (2018) Fuzzy risk analysis in poultry farming using a new similarity measure on generalized fuzzy numbers. Comput Ind Eng 115:543–558

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Rituparna Chutia.

Appendix

Appendix

Consider a GFN A=(a1,a2,a3,a4; ω1,ω2) with membership function as given in Eq. 4. The graphical representations of the GFN A is shown in Fig. 11 depending on the heights ω1 and ω2. The ROG point of the GFN A is denoted as \(({r_{x}^{A}},{r_{y}^{A}})\) whose value can be obtained by using the Eqs. 13 and 14 in Definition 2.11. To evaluate the moment of inertia, the GFN A is divided into regions R1,R2,R3 and R4. Hence, the moment of inertia of the areas R1,R2,R3 and R4 about the x and y axis can be calculated, according to Eqs. 11 and 12 in Definition 2.10, as

$$\begin{array}{@{}rcl@{}} (I_{x})_{R_{1}}&=&\int\limits_{R_{1}}y^{2}dR_{1}\\ &=&\int\limits_{0}^{\omega_{1}}y^{2}\left\{a_{2}-a_{1}-\frac{y(a_{2}-a_{1})}{\omega_{1}} \right\}dy\\ &=&\frac{(a_{2}-a_{1}){\omega_{1}^{3}}}{12}. \end{array} $$
$$\begin{array}{@{}rcl@{}} (I_{y})_{R_{1}}&=&\int\limits_{R_{1}}x^{2}dR_{1}\\ &=&\int\limits_{a_{1}}^{{a_{2}}}x^{2}\frac{\omega_{1}(x-a_{1})}{a_{2}-a_{1}}dx\\ &=&\frac{\omega_{1}}{12}\left( 3{a_{2}^{3}}-{a_{1}^{3}}-{a_{1}^{2}}a_{2}-a_{1}{a_{2}^{2}}\right). \end{array} $$
$$(I_{x})_{R_{2}}= \left\{\begin{array}{lll} \frac{(a_{3}-a_{2}){\omega_{1}^{3}}}{3}, &\text{if } \omega_{1} \leq \omega_{2};\\ \frac{(a_{3}-a_{2}){\omega_{2}^{3}}}{3}, &\text{if } \omega_{1} \geq \omega_{2}. \end{array}\right. $$
$$(I_{x})_{R_{3}}= \left\{\begin{array}{lll} \frac{(a_{3}-a_{2})}{12}\left( {\omega_{2}^{3}}-3{\omega_{1}^{3}}+{\omega_{1}^{2}}\omega_{2}+\omega_{1}{\omega_{2}^{2}} \right), &\text{ if } \omega_{1} \leq \omega_{2};\\ \frac{(a_{3}-a_{2})}{12}\left( {\omega_{1}^{3}}-3{\omega_{2}^{3}}+{\omega_{1}^{2}}\omega_{2}+\omega_{1}{\omega_{2}^{2}} \right), &\text{if } \omega_{1} \geq \omega_{2}. \end{array}\right. $$
$$(I_{x})_{R_{4}}=\frac{(a_{4}-a_{3}){\omega_{2}^{3}}}{12}. $$
$$(I_{y})_{(R_{2}+R_{3})}\,=\,\frac{\omega_{1}}{3}\left( {a_{3}^{3}}\!-{a_{2}^{3}}\right)+\frac{(\omega_{2}\,-\,\omega_{1})}{12}\left( 3{a_{3}^{3}}\,-\,{a_{2}^{3}}\!-{\!a_{3}^{2}}a_{2}\,-\,a_{3}{a_{2}^{2}}\right)\!. $$
$$(I_{y})_{R_{4}}=\frac{\omega_{2}}{12}\left( {a_{4}^{3}}-3{a_{3}^{3}}+{a_{3}^{2}}a_{4}+a_{3}{a_{4}^{2}}\right). $$

Hence, the ROG point of the GFN A can be obtained using the above equations as

$$\begin{array}{@{}rcl@{}} {r_{x}^{A}}&=&\sqrt{\frac{(I_{x})_{R_{1}}+(I_{x})_{R_{2}}+(I_{x})_{R_{3}}+(I_{x})_{R_{4}}}{\text{ar}(A)}}, \end{array} $$
(23)
$$\begin{array}{@{}rcl@{}} {r_{y}^{A}}&=&\sqrt{\frac{(I_{y})_{R_{1}}+(I_{y})_{(R_{2}+R_{3})}+(I_{y})_{R_{4}}}{\text{ar}(A)}}. \end{array} $$
(24)

where ar(A) is the area of the GFN A.

Fig. 11
figure 11

Graphical representation of GFN A with different left height and right height

If the GFN A is such that a1 = a2 = a3 = a4 and ω1 = ω2 = ω, then the ROG point is given by \({r_{x}^{A}}=\frac {\omega }{\sqrt {3}}\) and \(r_{y}^{A_{\omega }}=a\). For the detail derivation one may refer to Yong et al. [25].

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Chutia, R. Fuzzy risk analysis using similarity measure of interval-valued fuzzy numbers and its application in poultry farming. Appl Intell 48, 3928–3949 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-018-1178-2

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-018-1178-2

Keywords

Navigation