From: mailbox@dmitry-kazakov.de   
      
   Will Dwinnell wrote:   
      
   > Luko wrote:   
   > "where and why not use fuzzy?"   
   >   
   > "Dmitry A. Kazakov"  wrote:   
   > "If you know for sure that your case is deterministic or stochastic,   
   > then do not use fuzzy."   
   >   
   > Could you clarify what you mean by this?  By "case", do you mean the   
   > problem or the solution?   
      
   I intentionally used the word "case", because even if the problem itself is   
   formulated in a deterministic or stochastic way, there could be place for   
   fuzzy approach. One should also count in our knowledge about the problem   
   and the solution space.   
      
   1. The problem can be ill defined. We might know that a system is, say,   
   stochastic, but we could be unable to describe in a representative,   
   correct, unambiguous way.   
      
   2. This knowledge can be inexact to find a solution in original terms of the   
   problem.   
      
   3. The solution can be inappropriate for some reason (numerical complexity,   
   instability etc).   
      
   > And what other choices do you imagine than   
   > "deterministic or stochastic"?   
      
   As I see it, in descending order of quality: deterministic, stochastic,   
   fuzzy. So fuzzy is the last resort approach, there is nothing after it.   
      
   --   
   Regards,   
   Dmitry A. Kazakov   
   www.dmitry-kazakov.de   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)