Generalization of Arithmetic and Visual Fuzzy Logic-based

Representations for Nonlinear Modeling and Optimization

in Fully Fuzzy Environment
Hassen Taher Dorrah, Member, IEEE and Walaa Ibrahim Mahmoud Gabr
Dr. Walaa I. M. Gabr is with SDA Engineering (Consultants) Inc.,
Egypt, and the Egyptian Electricity Holding Company, Ministry of
Electricity and Energy, Egypt (e-mail: Walaa_gabr@yahoo.com).

Abstract-This paper is directed towards the

development of the Arithmetic and Visual Logic-based
representations for classical nonlinear systems modeling
and optimization. The concept was originally proposed by
Gabr and Dorrah [1-5] for linear system as an extension of
the notion of the normalized fuzzy matrices. In this
concept, the arithmetic fuzzy logic-based representation type
is suggested based on dual cell representation, expressed
by replacing each parameter with a pair of parentheses,
the first is the actual value and the second is the
corresponding fuzzy level, or equivalently (Value Fuzzy
Level). The visual fuzzy logic-based type is proposed based
on colored cells representation expressed by replacing each
parameter by its value and a coded corresponding to its
fuzzy level. For both cases, the theoretical foundations of
the fuzzy logic algebra, different properties and
implementation rules are further elaborated in this paper
for various cases of operations.

Recently, Gabr and Dorrah presented the new concept

of both Arithmetic and Visual fuzzy logic-based
representations [1-5]. The concept is based on
representing all parameters during the modeling and
optimization procedure by two elements (Value, Fuzzy
Level). The approach was then applied to many classes
of linear system modeling and optimization of
operational engineering systems as a generalization of
the notion of fuzzy matrices. This has included solving
linear, multi-objective and quadratic programming
optimization problems.
In order to circumvent the shortcomings, the concept
of fuzzy matrices [6-9] was normalized to the real
situation using the extended range of
a ij [ 1,1], i, j , and then separates its operation
after normalization (scaling) from the original problem
values. This means that each problem parameter is
expressed into two components: the original
deterministic component and the relative fuzziness
component normalized or scaled to satisfy the above
boundaries. This will require that the effect values of
the fuzzy component are less than the main original
deterministic problem. The original problem solution
follows in its computations the normal procedure, and
the other fuzziness component will be subject to a
special fuzzy algebra operation procedure.

The suggested approach is generalized to classical

nonlinear modeling and optimization problems that are
normally solved by either the Lagrangean Function
Method or the Jacobian Technique. The two methods were
then modified by incorporating the suggested fuzzy logicbased representations assuming the fuzziness of all the
optimization
formulation
parameters.
Using
a
representative nonlinear optimization numerical example,
the proposed fuzzy logic-based formulation is applied.
Both the Lagrangean Function Method and the Jacobian
Technique fuzzy logic-based formulations gave identical
results for all the solution parameters and their
corresponding fuzzy levels. These results demonstrate the
consistency and robustness of the developed approach for
incorporation with classical nonlinear optimization
problems. Finally, it is shown that the presented concept
provides a unified theory for various linear and nonlinear
systems in fully fuzzy environments.

Gabr and Dorrah [1-5] approach is pragmatic as it

requires only specifying heuristically the fuzzy logic
levels of the parameters and coefficients, which can be
relatively evaluated in real life. These levels are then
transferred at the end of solution to actual uncertainties.
Other approaches require specifying accurately these
uncertainties prior to problem solving, which is not
handy in most circumstances. With the fuzzy logicbased representations, forward and backward fuzzy
levels tracking during optimization solution are also
suggested [3,5]. This can help the decision maker and
the system analyst to manually trace back the sources of
high fussiness causing risk. They can then interfere by
adjusting input parameters fuzziness through their
understanding of the overall process.

I. INTRODUCTION

F
UZZY matrices have been applied by many researchers
to solve some real life applications. Nevertheless, the
application of fuzzy matrices to real life problem is still
very limited. In fact, the notion of fuzzy matrices has
unlimited capabilities that have not yet explored in real
applications. Most of the system data are normally
expressed in the form of matrices of various types that
make this notion of fuzzy matrices most pertinent to
their manipulation. Therefore, there has been a real need
to scrutinize the operation of these fuzzy matrices and
search for other physically profound operational
techniques.

In this paper further developments of Gabr and

Dorrah approach [1-5] are presented for classical
nonlinear modeling and optimization, as a
generalization of previously suggested methodology.

Manuscript received July 1, 2009.

Dr. H. T. Dorrah is with the Department of Electrical Engineering,
Cairo University, Egypt (e-mail: dorrahht@aol.com).

II. ALGEBRA OF ARITHMETIC FUZZY LOGIC-BASED

REPRESENTATION

The newly suggested Fuzzy Logic-based Arithmetic

Representation approach developed by Gabr and Dorrah
[1-5] is based on representing each parameter X by two
components, X o is the deterministic equivalence, and
X f is the fuzzy equivalence representing a small
uncertainty or value tolerance in the parameter
term X f is modeled by the formula: X f
where

X . The
f r x X o

X+Y

Z o X o Yo , and

Subtraction

X-Y

Square roots

Squaring

Other
Polynomials

Y= X

1/2

is an integer value
Y=X2

<1.

In general, the fuzzy level could be extended from

level p to m where p and m are integers. If
the levels are selected from p to m , the value of
the relative fuzziness f r is restricted such as p. f r <

n
x
m

The proposed Arithmetic Fuzzy Logic-based

representation follows the following rules for

(3)

X ( X o , x ) , Y (Yo , y )

The algebra of fuzzy logic arithmetic representation

was developed for the basic cases of multiplication,
division, addition, and subtraction, for both scalar and
matrix operations and also for function of the fuzzybased parameters [1-5]. A summary of the main fuzzylogic based algebraic operations are presented in Table 1.

Let

and Z ( Z o , z ) .

denotes the fuzzy level of expression

.
a) Associative Laws:

X .Y .Z ( X .Y ).Z

TABLE 1

SUMMARY OF MOST COMMON FUZZY LOGIC-BASED

ARITHMETIC ALGEBAIC OERATIONS.

X .(Y .Z )
.
x y z

Resulting Values and Fuzzy

Levels from Original
Operation

XY ( X oYo , x y )

X.Y

12

III. PROPERTIES OF ARITHMETIC FUZZY LOGIC-BASED

REPRESENTATION

(2)

Symbolic
Representation
of Operation

X o Yo

For the sake of uncertainty analysis and for each

fuzzy level, it is assumed as an example that the
parameter variation can be quantitatively modeled by a
Gaussian probability function of zero mean and
standard deviation . In general, assumption of
normality can be substantiated by applying the Central
Limit theorem, which states that the addition of
independent several probabilistic parameters will result
in an overall normal distribution.

and

Name of
Operation of
Basic
Variables
Multiplication

Y= Xn/m

x X o yYo

Y ( X o , y ) and
y x 2
Y ( X o2 , y ) and
y 2x
Y ( X on m , y ) and
y

1 and m. f r < 1 (preferably will be << 1). This will

guarantee not changing the sign of the parameters
during the solution, and that all the scaled or normalized
fuzzy components satisfy the conditions of the
normalized fuzzy matrices boundary [-1, +1]. This is
not a real restriction as the whole fuzzy process is
mainly based on intuitive approximations and heuristic
evaluations.
Similarly, we have for any other two general
parameters Y and Z the following representations:

Z (Zo , ) .
z

X o Yo

Z o X o Yo , and

indicating the corresponding fuzzy level of X . The

~
scaled or normalized fuzzy term is X f x . x , such

Y (Yo , y )

x X o yYo

.
4

where the first term in the pair is the equivalent

X Y ( X o Yo , x y )

(1)

deterministic component, and

Resulting Values and Fuzzy

Levels from Original
Operation

X/Y

is the corresponding

X ( X o , x )

Ser.

Addition

Symbolic
Representation
of Operation

fuzzy level. For the sake of simplicity f r is omitted in

the representation and the parameter X is expressed
by the following pair:

~
X

Ser.

f r is the relative unit fuzziness (usually a

certain small percentage), and

that

Name of
Operation of
Basic
Variables
Division

and

X Y Z ( X Y ) Z

(4)

 X (Y Z )
0

b) Commutative Laws:

X .Y .Z X .Z .Y

During the calculation steps, a parallel process takes

place by encoding these colors, performing
corresponding fuzzy logic operation algebra, and then
the result is coded to the corresponding color of the cell.
These color coding/encoding processes are additional
steps to be incorporated with the solutions procedure.
This is a substitute of having an additional cell for fuzzy
level representation.

(6)

Y .Z . X .

and

X Y Z X Z Y
Y Z X

(7)

The scale shown in Table 2 is defined with wide range

of six positive colors and six negative colors permitting
handling a wide range of fuzziness.

c) Distributive Laws:

X .(Y Z ) X .Y X .Z

(8)

TABLE 2

EXAMPLE OF SELECTED POSITIVE AND NEGATIVE

CODED COLORS FUZZY LOGIC-BASED SCALE.

.
d) Compliments Laws:

Excel
Color
Index

Corresp
onding
Fuzzy
Level

Violent
(Lavender)

(255,0,255)

+6

The same above rules apply for division and

subtraction.

Blue

(0,102,204)

+5

e) Other Implementation Rules:

Green

(51,153,102)

50

+4

Violent
(Lavender
Light)

(204,153,255)

39

+3

Blue Light

(153,204,255)

37

+2

Green Light

(204,255,204)

35

+1

White

(255,255,255)

(255,255,204)

19

-1

(255,153,0)

45

-2

(255,153,204)

38

-3

Ser.

W X

(9)

When applying the Arithmetic Fuzzy Logic-based

representation laws, it must be observed during
implementations the following sequence:
i)
ii)
iii)
iv)

First apply the arithmetic representation algebra to

the multiplication/division operations.
Second apply the algebra to the
additions/subtraction operations.
Inner brackets are applied first then followed by
the succeeding brackets, ending by the most outer
bracket.
Rules (i) and (ii) are sequentially applied when
moving from one inner proceeding to outer
brackets.

Color

Color Code

RBG Color
Index

Let W X 1 then

Yellow
Light
Orange
Light

8
9

It can be seen that the operation sequence of the

above implementation rules are similar to that of
traditional arithmetic operation. This will permit easy
operation of parallel operation of the corresponding
fuzzy level by the conventional arithmetic calculations.

10

Red Light

11

Yellow

(255,255,0)

27

-4

12

Orange

(255,102,0)

46

-5

13

Red

(255,0,0)

-6

Type

In the scale, each color is used twice; the first in its light
form indicating low fuzziness and the second is in its
normal form indicating high fuzziness. The scale
demonstrates smooth gradation when increasing
fuzziness in both positive and negative direction.

Positive Colors

X Y Z

(5)

Negative Colors

x X 0 yY0 z Z 0

logic level and transfer them to their equivalent color.

Example of these coded colors is shown in Table 2.

V. NONLINEAR OPTIMIZATION USING LAGRANGEAN

FUNCTION METHOD

IV. BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF VISUAL FUZZY LOGIC-BASED

REPRESENTATION

A. Method Formulation and Optimization Solution

In the arithmetic representation of fuzzy logic levels,

each parameter was replaced by two cells form (Value,
Fuzzy Level), thus doubling the size of the solution.
Alternatively, the same original solution cells are used,
and the color of the cell is selected as its equivalent
fuzzy logic level [1-5]. This requires having a coding
process which will take the input values of the fuzzy

Consider the general classical nonlinear optimization

formulation, expressed as [10]:
Minimize Z f ( X )
subject to

g( X ) 0
3

(10)

(11)

0
T
P

where X ( x1 , x2 ,..., xn ) and

g ( g 1 , g 2 ,...g m ) T . The functions f ( X ) and

gi ( X ) , i=1, 2, ,m are twice continuously

(17)

where is an unknown parameter. Consider the

determinant ; then each of the real (n-m) roots
of the polynomial 0 must be

differentiable. Define

L ( X , ) f ( X ) g ( X ) .

Q I

(12)

i)

Negative if X 0 is a maximum point.

such that the function L designates the Lagrangean

function of the problem and the parameters are the
Lagrange multipliers.

ii)

The equations

Let us consider the following numerical example [10]:

L
L
0,
0

Positive if X 0 is a minimum point.

B. Solving Numerical Example in Deterministic
Environment
2
2
2
Minimize f ( X ) c1 x1 c 2 x 2 c3 x 3

(13)

subject to

provide the necessary conditions for determining

stationary points of f ( X ) subject to g ( X ) 0 .
The sufficiency conditions for the Lagrangean method
will be stated as follows [10]. Define

0
T
P

g 1 ( X ) a11 x1 a12 x 2 a13 x3 b1 0

g 2 ( X ) a 21 x1 a 22 x 2 a 23 x3 b2 0 .

(14)

1 ( a11 x1 a12 x2 a13 x3 b1 )

2 (a 21 x1 a 22 x 2 a 23 x3 b2 )

(15)

The selected deterministic values of input parameters

are shown in Table 3.

m n

TABLE 3

2 L( X , )
Q
xi x j

The matrix

for all i and j.

PARAMETERS VALUES OF NUMERICAL EXAMPLE AND

THEIR CORRESPONDING FUZZY LEVELS.

(16)

n n

H B is the bordered Hessian matrix.

Parameter

Given the stationary point ( X 0 , 0 ) for the

c1
c2

Lagrangean function L( X , ) and the bordered

Hessian matrix H B evaluated at ( X 0 , 0 ) , then
X 0 is

ii)

(21)

L( X , ) c1 x12 c2 x22 c3 x32

.

(20)

Accordingly, the Lagrangean function of the problem as

defined in (12) can be expressed as

( m n ) ( m n )

and

i)

(19)

and

where

g1 ( X )

P

(X )
gm

(18)

c3

A maximum point if, starting with the principal

major determinant of order (2m+1), the last (n-m)
principal minor determinants of H B form an
alternating sign pattern starting with (-1)m-1 .
A minimum point if, starting with the principal
minor determinant of order (2m+1), the last (n-m)
principal minor determinants of H B have the
sign (-1)m.

(Value, Fuzzy
Level)

(1,1 )
(1,-1)
(1,-2)

a11
a12

(1,-1)

a13

(3,2)

(1,1)

Parameter

(Value, Fuzzy
Level)

a 21
a 22

(5,-1)

a 23

(1,-2)

b1
b2

(2,1)

(2,-1)

(5,-1)

Applying the numerical deterministic values of Table

1 to the example, the corresponding Lagrangean
function can be expressed as:

L( X , ) x12 x22 x32 1 ( x1 x2 3x3 2)

2 (5 x1 2 x2 x3 5)

(22)

These conditions are sufficient, but not necessary, for

identifying an extreme point. This means that a
stationary point may be an extreme point without
satisfying these conditions.

This yields the following necessary conditions:

Other conditions exist that are both necessary and

sufficient for identifying extreme points. However, the
procedure may be computationally intractable. Define
the following matrix at the stationary point ( X 0 , 0 ) :

L
2 x1 1 52 0
x1

(23)

L
2 x2 1 22 0
x2

(24)

L
2 x3 31 2 0
x3

( 2,1)

(0,0)

(25)

L
( x1 x2 3x3 2) 0
1
L
(5 x1 2 x 2 x 3 5) 0 .
2

(0,0)

(26)

(1 , 2 ) = (0.0870, 0.3043).

H a11

a12

a13
B

0
1

a13

a 23

a11

a12

a 21

a 22

a 21
a 22

2c1
0

0
2c 2

a 23

2c3

( 2,1)

(0,0)

( 1,1)

(0,0)

( 2,2)

( 3,2)

(1,1)

(3,2)

(0,0)

(1,2)

(0,0)

(5,1) ( 2,1)
(0,0)

(0,0)
(0,0)

( 2,1)

(5,1)

(28)

To show that the given point is a minimum, consider

( 1,1)

The solution to these simultaneous equations yields

and

(0,0)

(1,1)

(27)

X 0 ( x1 , x2 , x3 ) = (0.8043, 0.3478, 0.2826)

(0,0)

or in visual representation where the color of each cell

in (31) denotes the corresponding fuzzy level using the
color coding described in Table 1.

(29)

-1

-5

-1

-2

x1
x2
x3

-3

-1

0
0

2
5

The fuzzy logic-based solution is expressed as:

Because n=3 and m=2, n-m=1, and we need to check

the determinant of H B only, which must have the sign

The equivalent Hesbian matrix of (28) can be

rewritten for the fuzzy logic-based case as:

of (-1)2 for the stationary point X 0 to be a minimum.

(0,0)

(0,0)
B
H
(1,1)

(1,1)

(3,2)

Because det

1
5
2
0
0

1
2
0
2
0

(31)

1
2

1
0 .

0
0
5
2
1

( 5,1)

( 2,1)
( (30)
1,2) .

(0,0)

(0,0)

x (0.8043,0), x (0.3478,1), x (0.2826,0),

1
2
3
(0.0870,5) and (0.03043,2). (32)
1
2

H B =460>0, X 0 is a minimum point.

C. Solving Numerical Example in Fully Fuzzy

Environment
It is assumed now for the above numerical example
that all parameters are operating in a fully fuzzy
environment with corresponding fuzzy values as shown
in Table 3. All parameters values are the same as given
in Table 2, but differ in their associated fuzzy level.

(0,0)
(0,0)
(5,1)
(2,1)
(1,2)

(1,1)
(5,1)
(2,1)
(0,0)
(0,0)

(1,1)
(3,2)

(2,1) (1,2)
(0,0) (33)
(0,0)

(2,1) (0,0)

(0,0) ( 2,2)

or in visual form as

In this case, each parameter in the nonlinear

modeling formulation is represented by two elements,
the value and corresponding fuzzy level. The
optimization solution given in 5.1 is then repeated under
the new representation with the calculations made using
the algebra of Arithmetic Fuzzy Logic-based
Representation and its associated rules of Section 2.
Accordingly the corresponding results of this case (23)(27) can be expressed in the arithmetic fuzzy level
representation form as:

HB

(34)

The det H B = 460>0 with fuzzy level=2. The

objective function f (x ) = 0.8478 with fuzzy level=1.
All fuzzy levels can then be transferred to equivalent
uncertainty by assuming the value of relative fuzziness
f r for as described in Section II.
VI. NONLINEAR OPTIMIZATION USING JACOBIAN
TECHNIQUE
5

x1

x2
x3

A. Method Formulation and Optimization Solution

where 0 f is the constrained gradient vector of f

In this section, we present first a brief summary of

the Jacobian Method [10] as an alternate method to be
extended for the case where are parameters are
expressed in a fully fuzzy environment.

with respect to Z. Thus 0 f (Y , Z ) must be null at

the stationary points.
The sufficiency conditions are similar to that in
Section V. The Hessian matrix will correspond to the
independent vector Z, and the elements of the Hessian
matrix must be the constrained second derivatives. To
show how this is obtained, let

For the nonlinear optimization problem described in

(19), define

X (Y , Z )

(35)

0 f z f WC .

such that

Y ( y1 , y2 ,..., ym ),

(46)

It thus follows that the ith row of the (constrained)

Hessian matrix is 0 f zi . Notice that W is a
function of Y and Y is a function of Z. Thus, the partial
derivative of 0 f with respect to zi is based on the
following chain rule:

(36)

Z ( z1 , z 2 ,..., z n m ) .
The vectors Y and Z are called the dependent and
independent variables, respectively. Rewriting the
gradient vectors of f and g in terms of Y and Z ,
we get

f (Y , Z ) ( y f , z f )

(37)

wi
wi yi

.
zi
yi zi

g (Y , Z ) ( y g , z g )
Define

(38)

B. Solving Numerical Example in Deterministic

Environment

y g1

J yg

g
y m

(39)

The numerical example described in (18) to (20) with

its input parameters values given in Table 1 is now
solved using the Jacobian Method. To determine the
constrained extreme points, let [10]:

Y ( x1 , x2 ) and Z x3

z g1

C z g

g
z m

(48)

thus
(40)

f f
( 2c1 x1 ,2c 2 x 2 ) ,
Y f
,
x1 x 2
f
Z f
2c 3 x 3
x 3

where J m n denotes the Jacobian matrix and

Cm n m the control matrix. The Jacobian J is

assumed nonsingular. This is always possible because
the given m equations are independent by definition.
The components of the vector Y must thus be selected
such that the matrix J is nonsingular.

a
J 11
a 21

The original set of equations in f ( X ) and X

may be written as:

J 1

f (Y , Z ) y fY z fZ

such as

(41)

a12
,
a 22

a d 1 a12 d 1
a13

22 1
,
1
a

a
d
a
d
23

21
11

(49)

(50)

= Det J a11 a 22 a12 a 21 .

Hence, it follows from (45) that

and

JY CZ .

(42)

0 f

-1

Because J is nonsingular, its inverse J exists. Hence,

Y J 1CZ .

f (Y , Z ) ( z f y fJ 1C )Z .

1
a13
a12 d (51)

1
a11 d a 23

2c2 d 1 ( a21a13 a11a23 ) x2 2c3 x3

(44)

From this equation, the constrained derivative with

respect to the independent vector Z is given by

0 f (Y , Z )
0 f y fJ 1C
0Z

0 f
0 x3

a 22 d 1
2c 3 x 3 ( 2c1 x1 ,2c 2 x 2 )
1
a 21 d
2c1d 1 ( a22 a13 a12 a23 ) x1

(43)

Substituting for Y in (41) for f ( X ) gives f as

a function of Z ,that is,

0 f

(47)

The equations for determining the stationary points are

thus given as
(45)

0 f 0

g1 ( X ) 0
6

(52)

g2 ( X ) 0

Representation and its associated algebra and rules.

Accordingly the results of the fuzzy represented of (50)
can be summarized as:

or

a11
a
21

a12
a 22

a13
a 23

x1 0

x 2 b1 .
x b
3 2

10

,1
3
(1,1)

(5,1)

(53)

28

,1
31

(1,1)
( 2,1)

such as

2c1d ( a22 a13 a12 a23 ),

1

( 2,2) x
(0,0)
1

(3,2) . x2 ((57)
2,1)

(5,1)
(1,2) x3

or in the visual form

2c2 d 1 ( a21a13 a11a23 ) and 2c3

For this numerical example

10
28
,
and 2 .
3
3

10
3

The solution is

(0.8043,0.3478,0.2826).

The identity of

(54)

is checked using the sufficiency

condition. Given x3 is the independent variable, it

J 1 C

3
14

3

f 0 x32

x2

x3

(58)

(59)

460
0 has an equivalent
9
fuzzy level of -1. The objective function f (x )
2
2
The term 0 f 0 x3

(55)

=0.8478 with fuzzy level=1. Similarly, such fuzziness

can be transferred into uncertainty after introducing the
relative fuzziness f r for as described in Section II.
The numerical example implementation is carried out
using the spreadsheet (Excel) model with built-in
macros programmed by Visual Basic Applications.
Both the Lagrangean Function Method and the
Jacobian Technique gave identical results for all the
parameters solutions and their corresponding fuzzy
levels. The only difference was for the fuzzy levels of
the sufficiency conditions given by the Hesbian Matrix
2
0
f 0 x32
and the derivative
as they
HB
indicate different formulas. These fuzzy levels can be
transferred to equivalent uncertainty by incorporating
the value of relative fuzziness f r (preferably be <<
1) of the problem.

(56)

Substitution of (56) into (55) gives the result

2
0

x1

and x3 (0.2826,0).

From the Jacobian method, we have

x1 (0.8043,0), x 2 (0.3478,0)

2
0

dx1

dx 3
dx 2

dx 3

28
3

This gives the final solution

follows from 0 f that

dx
dx
f
1 2
2
0 x3
dx3
dx3
dx1

dx3

dx2
dx
3

460
0 . Hence X 0 is the minimum
9

point.
C. Solving Numerical Example in Fully Fuzzy
Environment

In order to analyze more the proposed fuzzy logic

based formulation, six different scenarios of the same
numerical example were designed as shown in Table 3.
The results of solving the scenarios using both the
Lagrangean Function Method and the Jacobian
Technique are shown in the same table. These results
demonstrate the consistency and robustness of the
developed approach for incorporation with classical
nonlinear optimization problems.

It is assumed now for the above numerical example

that all parameters are operating in a fully fuzzy
environment as shown in Table 2. All parameters values
are the same as given in Table 1, but differ in their
associated fuzzy level.
Similarly, each parameter in the nonlinear modeling
formulation is represented by two elements, the value
and corresponding fuzzy level. The optimization
solution given in Section VI is then repeated under the
new representation with the calculations made using the
algebra of Arithmetic Fuzzy Logic-based

TABLE 4

RESULTS OF VARIOUS SCENARIOS OF DIFFERENT INPUT

FUZZY LEVEL OF NUMERICAL EXAMPLE.

Parameter

Value
I

II

III

IV

VI

c1
c2

-3

-2

-1

-1

-2

-3

c3

-3

-2

-3

-4

a11
a12

-1

-2

-3

-3

-2

-1

a13

-4

-1

-1

-4

a 21
a 22

-1

-2

-3

-1

-2

-3

a 23

-1

-2

-3

b1
b2
x1
x2

-1

-2

-1

-1

-2

-3

0.8043

-1

-1

0.3478

-5

-3

-2

0.2826

-1

-2

0.0870

-4

-3

-3

-2

0.3043

-6

-2

0.8478

-2

-1

-1

460

-1

-1

51.11

-3

-6

-7

x3

1
2
f (X )
H
2
0
f

0 x32

modeling and optimization problems that can be solved

by either the Lagrangean Function method or the
Jacobian Technique. Both the Lagrangean Function
Method and the Jacobian Technique fuzzy logic based
formulations gave identical solution results of a selected
numerical example for all the parameters and their
corresponding fuzzy levels. These results demonstrate
the consistency and robustness of the developed
approach for incorporation with classical nonlinear
optimization problems.

Corresponding Fuzzy Level of

Different Scenarios

It is recommended that the developed fuzzy logicbased arithmetic and visual representations be
generalized as a unified theory to be incorporated with
modeling and global optimization of both linear and
nonlinear systems [10-12]. This unified theory will be
based on forming parallel operational algorithm for the
calculation of solution fuzziness to go with the
conventional arithmetic modeling and optimization
computations. Finally, efforts should also commence in
extending the developed fuzzy logic-based formulation
to additional mathematical formulas (such as integration
and differentiation) and to dynamical systems.
REFERENCES
[1]

[2]

The results indicated that the sufficiency condition of

the Jacobian Technique is more susceptible to variations
of input parameters fuzziness than the Lagrangean
Function Approach.

[3]

In order to manage the fuzziness at the output

solution, the formulation systems can be mathematically
solved using appropriate techniques with fuzzy level
tracking. This tracking operated at each step of
parameters calculation by determining its corresponding
fuzzy logic level using the developed fuzzy logic
algebra. In this case, it is easy to locate the sources of
input parameters with high fuzziness effect on the
solution [3,5].
VII. CONCLUSIONS
The new fuzzy logic arithmetic and visual
representations proposed by Gabr and Dorrah [1-5] is
further developed in this paper for classical nonlinear
modeling and optimizations. The development included
elaborating its associated arithmetic algebra, properties
and implementation rules, as a generalization of the
notion of the normalized fuzzy matrices. The approach
is a pragmatic tool for manipulating quantitative and
qualitative fuzziness in the modeling and optimization.
For this purpose integer fuzzy intervals are assumed
forming a special scale that can map both positive and
negative fuzziness in the parameters. Both equal and
non-equal fuzzy interval spans can be handled by this
developed approach.

[4]

[5]

[6]

[7]

[8]

[9]

The proposed fuzzy logic-based arithmetic and visual

representations and the normalized fuzzy matrices were
generalized in this paper to the classical nonlinear

[10]

Walaa Ibrahim Gabr and Hassen Taher Dorrah, New Fuzzy

Logic-based Arithmetic and Visual Representations for
Systems Modeling and Optimization IEEE International
Conference on Robotics and Biomimetics, February 22-25,
2009, Bangkok, Thailand, Paper No. TuA4.1. pp 715-722.
Walaa Ibrahim Gabr and Hassen Taher Dorrah,
Development of Fuzzy Logic-based Arithmetic and Visual
Representations for Systems Modeling and Optimization of
Interconnected Networks, IEEE International Conference
on Robotics and Biomimetics, February 22-25, 2009,
Bangkok, Thailand, Paper No TuA4.2, pp 723-730.
Hassen Taher Dorrah and Walaa Ibrahim Gabr, "MultiObjective Linear Optimization Using Fuzzy Logic-based
Arithmetic and Visual Representations with Forward and
Backward Tracking , IEEE International Conference on
Robotics and Biomimetics, February 22-25, 2009, Bangkok,
Thailand, Paper No. TuA4.3, pp 731-738.
Hassen Taher Dorrah and Walaa Ibrahim Gabr,
Development of Fuzzy Logic-based Arithmetic and Visual
Representations for Solving Quadratic Programming in
Fully Fuzzy Environment IEEE International Conference
on Information and Automation, Zhuhai, China, 22-25 June,
2009, Session M1-2-Control Applications 1.
Walaa Ibrahim Mahmoud Gabr, Development of New
Fuzzy Logic-based Arithmetic and Visual Representations
and Tracking for Systems Modeling and Optimization, Ph.
D. Dissertation, Department of Electrical Power and
Machines Engineering (Automatic Control), Faculty of
Engineering, Cairo University, Giza, Egypt, November
2008.
W. B. Vasantha Kandasamy and Florentin Smarandache,
Fuzzy Interval Matrices, Neutrosophic Interval Matrices and
Their Applications, URL: http://www.gallup.unm.edu/
~smarandache / NIM.pdf, HEXIS, Phoenix, Arizona, 2006.
W. B. Vasantha Kandasamy, Florentin Smarandache, and K.
Amal, Super Fuzzy Matrices and Super Fuzzy Models for
Social Scientists,
URL: http://www.gallup.unm.edu/
~smarandache/ SuperFuzzy Matrices. pdf, Infollarnquest
(ILQ), Ann Arbor, USA, 2008.
W. B. Vasantha Kandasamy, Florentin Smarandache, and K.
Ilanthenral, Elementary Fuzzy Matrix Theory and Fuzzy
Models for Social Scientists. Automation, Los Angeles,
USA, 2007.
W. B. Vasantha Kandasamy, Smarandache, Florentin, and
Ilanthenral, K., Introduction to Bimatrices, URL: http://
www.gallup.unm.edu/~smarandache/Bimatrices.pdf,, Hexis,
Phoenix, Arizona, USA, 2005.
Hamdy Taha, Operations Research: An Introduction.
Pearsons Educational International, Upper Saddle River, NJ,

USA, 2003.
[11]
[12]

Thomas Weise, Global Optimization Algorithms Theory

and Application, http://www.it-weise.de/projects/book.pdf,
January 2008.
Panos M Pardalos, and H. Edwin Romeijn (Editors),
Handbook of Global Optimization, Volume 2, University of
Florida, Gainesville, Kluwer Academic Publisher, Boston,
URL: http://www.optimization-online.org/DB_FILE/ 2002/
03/456.pdf, 2002.