From: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de   
      
   Guillaume wrote:   
      
   >> Not necessarily. You must remember that a fuzzy system is, in effect, a   
   >> parallel processing system. All the rules are essentially run in parallel   
   >> as   
   > (snip)   
   >>    if A is High and B is Low then C is Elevated;   
   >>   
   >>    if C is Elevated then D is Small;   
   >   
   > I believe that to be actually a big limitation with "ordinary" fuzzy   
   > systems. Sequential rules (as in your example) could prove very useful,   
   > in my opinion. That would allow to build systems with much higher an   
   > abstraction level. Whether it would not exhibit some nasty stability   
   > problems is an interesting project to work on.   
      
   Technically C is a dependent (evaluated) value. It is well possible to build   
   a "non-ordinary" (:-)) fuzzy system which would deal with that. However it   
   will have a more complex design. The value of C is initially unknown until   
   some of the rules it depends on get fired. An advantage of the fuzzy   
   intuitionistic approach is that "unknown" is as legal as any other value.   
   So C in fact has a value = "unknown". As some rules get fired they impose   
   constraints on C, thus making it more and more certain.   
      
   I think that if implemented properly it cannot introduce any additional   
   instability. Well, it is known that data driven parallel systems are very   
   difficult to predict as opposed to the systems designed using a   
   conventional procedural approach, but that is another story.   
      
   --   
   Regards,   
   Dmitry A. Kazakov   
   www.dmitry-kazakov.de   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)