FuZZy Sets and Systems 8 (1982) 253-283

North-Holland Publishing Company

253

C O M P A R I S O N OF F U Z Z Y R E A S O N I N G M E T H O D S *
Masaharu MIZUMOTO
Information Science Center, Osaka Electro-Communication University, Neyagawa, Osaka 572,
Japan
Hans-Jfirgen ZIMMERMANN
Lehrstuhl fiir Unternehmensforschung, RWTH Aachen, IV. Germany
Received March 1981
Revised June 1981
L.A. Zadeh, E.H. Mamdani, and M. Mizumoto et al. have proposed methods for fuzzy
reasoning in which the antecedent involves a fuzzy conditional proposition 'If x is A then y is
B,' with A and B being fuzzy concepts. Mizumoto et al. have investigated the properties of
their methods in the case of 'generalized modus ponens'.
This paper deals with the properties of their methods in the case of 'generalized modus
tollens', and investigates the other new fuzzy reasoning methods obtained by introducing the
implication rules of many valued logic s)~tems. Finally, the properties of syllogism and
contrapositive are investigated under each fuzzy reasoning method.
Keywords: Fuzzy reasoning, Fuzzy conditional inference, Generalized modus ponens,
Generalized modus tollens, Syllogism, Contrapositive.

1. Introduction
In o u r d a i l y life w e o f t e n m a k e i n f e r e n c e s w h o s e a n t e c e d e n t s a n d c o n s e q u e n c e s
contain fuzzy c o n c e p t s . S u c h an i n f e r e n c e can n o t b e m a d e a d e q u a t e l y b y t h e
methods w h i c h a r e b a s e d e i t h e r o n classical two v a l u e d logic o r o n m a n y v a l u e d
logic. In o r d e r to m a k e such an i n f e r e n c e , Z a d e h [1] s u g g e s t e d an i n f e r e n c e r u l e
called ' c o m p o s i t i o n a l r u l e of i n f e r e n c e ' . U s i n g this i n f e r e n c e rule, he, M a m d a n i
[2] and M i z u m o t o et al. [ 3 - 6 ] s u g g e s t e d s e v e r a l m e t h o d s for fuzzy r e a s o n i n g in
which t h e a n t e c e d e n t c o n t a i n s a c o n d i t i o n a l p r o p o s i t i o n with fuzzy c o n c e p t s :
Antl:
A n t 2:

IfxisAthenyisB
xisA'

Cons':

y is B '

(1)

* This work was attained with the assistance of the Alexander yon Humboldt Foundation.
0165-0114/82/0000-0000/$02.75

1982 N o r t h - H o l l a n d

254

M. Mizumoto, H.-J. Zimmennann

where A, A ' , B, B' are fuzzy concepts. An example of the fuzzy reasoning is the
following.
Ant 1:
Ant 2:

If a tomato is red then the tomato is ripe

This tomato is very red

Cons:

This tomato is very ripe

(2)

In [4-6] we have pointed out that for the type of fuzzy reasoning in (1) called
'generalized modus ponens', the consequences inferred by Zadeh's and Mamdani's methods are not always reasonable and suggested several new methods R~,
Rg, R~, Rsg, Rg, and Rgg which coincide with our intuition with respect to several
criteria.
As continuation of our studies, this paper investigates the properties of their
fuzzy reasoning methods in the case of 'generalized modus tollens'. Moreover, by
introducing the implication rules of many valued logic systems [7-9], we discuss
the newly obtained fuzzy reasoning methods in the cases of generalized modus
ponens and generalized modus tollens. Finally, we discuss the properties of
syllogism and contrapositive under each fuzzy reasoning method.

2. Fuzzy reasoning methods

We shall first consider the following form of inference in which a fuzzy
conditional proposition is contained.
Ant 1:
Ant 2:

IfxisA
xisA'

Cons:

y is B'

then y i s B
(3)

where x and y are the names of objects, and A, A', B and B' are fuzzy Concepts
represented by fuzzy sets in universes of discourse U, U, V and V, respectively.
This form of inference may be viewed as a generalized mod,s ponens which
reduces to modus ponens when A ' = A and B ' = B .
Moreover, the following form of inference is also possible which also contains a
fuzzy conditional proposition.
Ant 1:
Ant 2:

IfxisA
yisB'

Cons:

x is A '

then y i s B

This inference can be considered as a generalized

modus tollens when B' = not B and A' = ,ot A.
The Ant 1 of the form "If x is A then y is B "
certain relationship between A and B. From this
were proposed for this form of fuzzy conditional
is B'.

(4)

modus tollens which reduces to

in (3) and (4) may represent a
point of view, several methods
proposition: 'If x is A then )

Comparisono[[uzzy reasoningmethods

255

Let A and B be fuzzy sets in U and V, respectively, which are represented as

A=~txa(u)/u,

B=~ttu(v)/v

(5)

and let x, U, f-I, --1 and 9 be cartesian product, union, intersection, complement and bounded-sum for fuzzy sets, respectively. Then the following fuzzy
relations in U x V can be derived from the fuzzy conditional proposition "If x is
A then y is B " in Ant 1 of (3) and (4). The fuzzy relations R,,, and R, were
proposed by Zadeh [1], Rc by Mamdani [2], and R~, Rg, R,g, Ugg, Rg~ and R~s are
by Mizumoto et al. [3-6].
R,, = ( A x B) U (-hA x V)
[

(I~A(tt)AtXI3(V))V(I--I.tA(tt))/(tt, V).

(6)

"O xV

R,~ = (-hA x V ) ~ ( U x B )
[

1^(1-txa(u)+t.tu(v))/(u , v).

(7)

9i o x V

Rr = A x B

= ~u ~,,,(u)^ uB(v)l(u, v).

(8)

Rs=AxV=), UxB
S

= Iu [m,(u) ~ u. (v)]/Cu.v).

(9)

where

m,(u)V m,(v)= {lo

~A(u)<~u.(v),
~A(u) > u.(v).

Rg=AxVOU
g

= Iu [~(.) ~

(10)

u.(vl]l(u, v),

where

~(u) 7u.(v)=

IxA(u) ~<gu (v),

~.(v)

U~(U)>U.(V).

R~g = ( A x V O U x B ) N ( T A
s

x V ~ Ux--1 B)
g

= Io [~A(u) 9 uB(v)]^[1- ~A(u)~ 1-uB(v)]/(., v).

(11)

Rgg=(A V ~ U x B ) N ( " n A x V ~ U x ~ B )
g

= Iu [~A (u) -* Uu ( v ) ] ^ [ 1 - UA(u) g-->1 - gu (v)]/(u, v).

(12)

M. Mizumoto, H.-I. Zimmennann

256

R~, = ( A x V ~ U x B ) N ( - 1 A x V O U x ~ B )
g

= L

[~A(u) g-~ p.D(V)]A[1--/ZA(U)--~, 1--I.tB(V)]I(u, V).

(13)

R~ = ( A x V ~S U x B ) f q ( ' - n A x V ~$ U x ~ B )

[/.&~Cu)--)/..tBCv)]A[I--/.tA(U)T) 1-/.tB(v)]/(u, v).

= Iu

(14)

Note that the implications a -~ b and a --~

g b are the implication rules in 'Standard
sequence' Ss and 'GSdelian sequence' G~, respectively [7]. Ra is based on the
implication rule in Lukasiewicz's logic L~.
In addition to the above fuzzy relations (6)-(14), it is also possible to define new
fuzzy relations for the proposition "If x is A then y is B" by introducing the
implication rules of many valued logic systems [7-9]. These implication rules and
the implication rules used in (6), (7), (9) and (10) are discussed in detail in [7-9].
In the following we shall discuss some new fuzzy relations.

Rb=(~AxV)U(UxB)
= [

au xv

(1--/XA(U))V~t~(V)/(U, V).

(15]

Ra=A215
Iu

[p.A(u) a-~ ~n(v)]/(u, v),

(16

where
1

~A(U)<~ttB(V),

oA(.----) ~A(.)> ,B(o).

RA = A x V ~

UxB
A

(17

J~x,,,[~A(u) .---,~B(v)]/Cu, v),

where
/"tA(I'l) ~ ~B(I)) = [/"J"A(") ~ /IB('0)]A [1 - - l-tB(I))"~' 1 - P,A(u)]
"

m,(0

1 A ~ A

l-,~,(u)

ViA(u) 1-/zB(v)

,1

R,=AxV~,

p.A(u)>O,

1 - - / . t B (U) > O,

IZA(U)----O or 1--m](v)=O.

UxB

= L~x [~A(u) ~ ~(O]/(u, v),

(1~

Comparison of fl~zzy reasoning methods

257

where
/XA(U) .--->/~B(V) = 1 -- ~A (U) +/~A (U)~ZB(V).

R,z=AX V ~ U x B

-u[ [wA(u)y. ~. (v)]/(u, v),

(19)

where
tLa (U) -~ tLB(V) = (/XA(U) ^/XB (V)) V (1 -- tLA(U) A 1 -- tLB(V))
V (tLB(V) ^ 1 --/xa (u))
= (1 - txa (u) v lab (v)) ^ (txa ( u ) v 1 - - / x a ( u ) )

^ (gB (v) v 1 -- ~B (v)).

R r n = A x V ~[] U x B

= so[ [t~,(u)-j t~ (v)]/(u, v),

(20)

where
{~
OA(U)-~ ~B(V)=

~ A ( u ) < l or /ZB(V)=I,
/~A(U)= i, OB(V)<I

Fig. 1 shows the graphs of the 15 fuzzy relations obtained in (6)-(20). In each
graph the symbols P'A and bib are used instead of /ZA(U) and tie(v) for simplicity.
Each left figure with parameter btB will be found to be useful to discuss the
generalized modus" ponens in (3), and each right figure with parameter P-A is
useful to analyze the generalized modus tollens in (4).
In the generalized modus ponens of (3), the consequence B' in Cons can be
deduced from Ant 1 and Ant 2 using the max-rain composition %' [1] of the fuzzy
set A' and the fuzzy relation obtained in (6)-(20). For example, we can have
B~ = A' o Rm

= A ' o [(A x B ) U (-hA x V)].

(21)

The membership function of the fuzzy set BL in V is given as

/xwCv) = V {/~A.(u) A [(/xa (u) ^ gB (v)) v (1 - / x a (u))]}.

(22)

In the same way, we have

B" = A ' o Ra = A ' o [(--nA x V ) O ( U x B)],

(23)

B c' - A ' o Rc

(24)

=A'

o (A x B),

B'=A'oR~ = A ' o [ A x V ~ UxB],

(25)

Similarly, in the generalized modus tollens of (4), the consequence A ' in Cons
can be deduced using the composition 'o' of the relation and the fuzzy set B'.

M. l~fizumoto, H.-J. Zimmermann

258

pB =
1

~A =

PA =

.1

\,.."

.8
.7
.6
.5

95

"---.6
---,5

.4
3
.2

.8

99

~A

.2

.3

"---~~ B
!

Fig. l(i). R,,: (t~AA~s)V(1--t.tA).

~B =
1
.9

8
7
6
5
.4
.3
.2

PA =
0

.2
.3
.4
.5
.6

.l
i

~' P B

Fig. l(ii). Ra: 1 A ( l - - l t A + ~ ).

PB =
1

///

//

~A =
1

.7
.6

.5

//

.4
.3

.1
/

PA

,/

//

.6

.5
.4
.3

,/

//

Fig. l(iii). R~ : ~A "P-n-

.7

laB

.2
.1
I

259

Comparison sf [uzzy reasoning methods

i l l
I

I
I

I I I

lug;=
, ~, ~
iF~',- !, ','
'

r!

I I

BATM

!i ;', ;', i',

,,

; :

.,I . / l~'
..1.
e91

.i 4~.5:.6:.7:.~,.9

!i i i ! , ,I ; I! :

I ', '; . ', , ~.

'I
Il , ! l
I ,
I ,
I i

I
!
!
I

i~
,
'
i

:'!
i
i
i

'I. ', ;

!; l',' ,. l', ,
, ! ; ' '
i ! ', ! '
i ! ', ! i

~I

I I I

'
;
i
',

! i' i

'

"~- PA

~" P B

Fig. l(iv). Rs: ~,~ ~ / ~ s (see (9)).

PB =
I

.?

.3

!
I

I
I

.+.5 .# :v.8 ._9

:~-9

'

' ;

I
I
i

~A=.~

.7

.6

' "'*5

.4

!
!

'.3

.2
.I

O
!

PA

l'

, "-'~PB

,
1

Fig. l(v). Rg:/z A -~ P-B (see (10)).

PI='I'2
9

.3 .4.

--~ p B = . l
o.2
o.3
o.4
o.5
o.6

~.7
o.8
i

' PA

.6

7 .8 9 1

I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I

Fig. l(vi). R~: (p-,,, ~ ga)A(1--p.A g--*1 --P'B)"

PB

260

M. I~fizumoto, H.-J. Zimmennann

9B =
.1 --?
~-.9
|. . . . . . . . .
-~B =
.2 , - - F - - - ?
I
I
,o , ', .7
.3
i
I
i
, , , o
~ :' :' : . 6
.4
i
f
i
!
!
.5 -- I I i i ~
o'
,5
"'7-'", , .
4' ~ : ''
.4

FI

1I
--,

.6,,I:

7 "-i---,
'
' ~'
, ,
"'T--~
.9
"

"--"-'~

.@

,.!

'

laA,.,

.i',.2,.

.3
.2

,
I

Fig. l(vii). Rgg: (~a ~ ~s)A(1 --ItA -~ 1--~B ).

l,

9B = . 9 o-,7

.6 ~

AI

I
I
I

I
I
I

I
I
l

I
l
I

:
I

I
I

I
I

i, /

, iII" 2 'i'5 '/,

4 ' / = 6~7,.8,.9
i , ,
,"

.5 o

.4 o
.3Q

I
I
I / lIl
I-"
[

~A

I-~

I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I

I
I
I
I
I

l
I
l
I
I

I
I

!
i

' '

I
I

lo

I
I~
I
/
I
I

l
I

' ' V''

'

~Y

' ~"' ~' ,

~-~B
1

Fig. l(viii). Rg~: (~A ~ ~B)A(1--I~A ~ l--I~S).

I
I

I
I

I
l

I
I
I
I
r

I
I
I

I
I
I
9I,.2,.3'=.4~ 5 I.6..7,.8,.
9,1

=
I
~A .i'.2

I
I
I
I

l
.31.4

!
!
!

l
I
!
!
I
1

~A

Fig. l(ix). R,,: (;xA ~ gn)^(1 - i t a 7 1 - ~ a ) .

~> laB

Comparison o[ [uzzy reasoning methods

~B =

1
~
.8
.7

\\

.6
.5

.4
o2
.1

I~A=
0
.1
.2
.3
.4
.5
.6
.7

261

.8

.9

Fig. l(x). Rb: (1--~A)v~ m

p~=.1.2.3 .4.5 .6 .7 .8.9 1

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

Fig. l(xi). Rzx: ~a ~ gn(see (16)).

=.l .2.3 .4.5 .6 .7 .8.9

pA =.l .2 .3.4 .5.6.7 .8.9

0
Fig. l(xii). R j : / x a ~ gs (see (17)).

262

M. Afizumoto, H.-J. Zimmennann

=

.8

.2

.5
94

.2

", ~PA

.8

kk~ "I
1

Fig. l(xiii). R,: 1 - ta,~,+taA~s-

laA~
.I, .9
.2, .8
93, .7
94, .6
.5

.8

oPA,=1

/.---~

._e...i, .9

.2

~llll.

2 , . 8

.7
.6
.5

~ .%. . . . . . . .
%-

a3

~"

.4, .6
.5

95
o6 . . . . . . . .

.is

-S S

e 7 ......

sS

PA

"~-- 9
"~

"" lab

Fig. l(xiv). R,~: taA ~" tan (see (19)).

}XB=l

laA~ 1

laA=I

laB< i

~'PA

0
Fig. l(xv). Rm: taA El" tan (see (20)).

lab

Comparison of fuzzy reasoning methods

263

Namely,
A mt - R,,, o B

= [(A x B) U (-hA x V)] o B'

(26)

9l V {[(p.A(u)/x p.n(V))V(1 - p.,~(u))]^ I~,,,(o)}lu,

Ju
u

Ao - R. o B ' = [ ( ~ A x V ) ~ ( U x B)] o B',

(27)

A'c = Rc o B' = (A x.B) o B',

(28)

A~= R~ o B ' = [ A x V ~ U x B]o B',

(29)

--

3. Comparison of fuzzy reasoning methods

In this section we shall make comparisons between the fuzzy reasoning methods
obtained above by applying the 15 fuzzy relations (6)-(20) to the generalized
modus ponens (3) and the generalized modus tollens (4).
In the generalized modus ponens, we shall show what the consequences B ' ,
B', B" . . . . will be when using the max-rain composition (as in (21)-(25)) of the
fuzzy set A ' and the fuzzy relation, where the fuzzy set A ' is
A ' = A = i , p..,,(u)/u,
A ' = very A =

A 2= II

(30)

P'A(it)2[ll'

(31)

A ' = more or less A = A ~ = Iu P'A (u)~

(32)

A ' = not A = --hA = Iu 1 -/~,~ (u)/u,

(33)

which are typical examples of A'.

Similarly, in the generalized modus toilens we shall show what the consequences A ' , A~, A" . . . . . will be when using the composition (as in (26)-(29)) of
the relation and the fuzzy set B', where B' is
B ' = not B = ~ B = fv 1 - t t ~ ( v ) / v ,

(34)

B ' = not very B = ~ B 2= ~ 1 -ttB(v)2/v,

(35)

B ' = not more or less B = ~ B ~ = ( 1 - p n ( v ) ~

A.

(36)

264

I~L Mizumoto, H.-J. Zimmermann

(37)

B ' = B = i , I.tB ( v ) / v .

The consequences inferred by all the fuzzy reasoning methods are summarized
in Table 1 (The case of generalized modus ponens) and Table 2 (The case of
generalized modus tollens), in which #B and /xA stand for p.B(v) and /xa(u),
respectively. These results are also depicted in Fig. 2 in order to make their
comparison more transparent. Each left figure shows the results inferred by R,,,
Re, Rs, Rg, R~g, Rgg, Rg,, R~,, Rb and Re, and each right figure shows the results
by R,, Ra, R , and R.. The figure of Rm is omitted because of its simplicity.
In Table 1 the inference results by the method R,t at A ' = A , very A and mor~
or less A can be more precisely rewritten as follows.

3-,,/5
__

"/~B A 2 J /1B"=

~
2 - Ixa

(= 0 . 3 8 1 9 . . . ) ,

3-'~
~B ~> 2
/x~ 3

~LI213A I x / 5 - 4/-tB-1] 2 /
L" 2-~--~B) J = ~ [ x / 5 " - 4 t x B - 1 ]

/.tB <~bo,

P,B ~> bo,

Table 1. Inference results by each method (case of generalizedmodus ponens)

9A

very A

more or less A

not A

R~

0.5v~

3-,./5
~ - ~ v/.tB

,,,/5-1
"~----V ~tn

Ra
R~

l+gB
2
~tB

3+2~tB-~
2
~B

"J'5~/aa r- 1
.2
/xB

0.5 ^ ttb

Rg
R~
Rag
Ra~
R.

IxB
~
/.tB
~B
~n

x/~a

0.5 vl-t~

~
~
~
~
qc5-1
TVl-tB

1- ~
1 -/.t B
1 -/x~
1 - ~tn

Rb

~tn
~
/.t~
t'tB
~
3-x/5
Tv~B

R,

"~~

R,

1
2-#a

R,~

0.5vg~

Rn

[ . ~ -

112

B tt2B/3^L 2(1-g~) J

+5qz.a- 1 1
tt~/3"~//a'~21xa2

[V.n - 1 + x/(1 -/.XB)2 + 412 x/5 -- 4/Zn -1

2(1-1xa)
2 vg~

gBv (1-ga)^

~-BV(1--g.B)

Comparison of f u z z y reasoning methods

where

3~

265

31

bo = 1 - ~/~+--]-~--- ~/~

(38)

~83 =0.3177...

/.tht3 A ~//x~-- 2/tn + 5 +/.tB -- 1

t-tB ~<b~,

{/'t h/3

4tLZ--2I~B +5 + ~B-- 1
2

/is I> b~,

where
311 + 3 , , / ~
bo = ~ - 3

t-

(39)

] - 0.4301 . . .

Table 2. Inference results by each method (case of generalized modus tollens)

not B

not very B

Rra

0.5 v ( 1 - IX'*)

(1 - IX'*)V

3-4~
2 V(1-IXA)

Ra

I IXA
2

I - 2/.ta + +~-+'~a
1
2

3-~/I +4/-ta
2

0.5 ^ IX'*

~ 2

,g-1

3-4g

Rc

not more or less B

(_~ ^IX"*)

^IX'*

2 "^IX'*

~A

R~

0.5 v ( 1 - IXA)

~ 2 - 1 v (1 - IX~")

3 24~"v (1 --"/-~-~A)

R,g

1--ix'*

1 -IX~

1 - "/-~a

0.5vixA

R,~

0.5v(1- IXA)

"J-5~-1v ( 1 - IX~)

3 ~'f5v (1 -,]~A)

0.5vixA

R,,

0.5 v (1- IXA)

"/'5~-1v(1 - p.~)

3 2"/5v (1 -,f-~A)

IXA

R,~

1-ix A

1 -ix~

1 --'~A

IXA

Rb

0.5 v ( 1 - IX'*)

n/5-1v(1-ix'*)
2

---v(I-IXA)
2

1.J]--~p.~ - 1
2ix~

2+IXa - - J - ~ + 4ix'*

Rzx
RA
R,

1
1 + V-A

^ 14"i---ix'* see (40)

1 + IX'*

1
1+

IX'*

Ix'*(IXA+ 2 - ~ )
2

3-4~

see (42)

2t~A+ 1 -~/1 +4IX~

2IXA

R.

0.5v(1- IXA)

(I--~A)V Ixa^

T '

IXAv(l - IXA)

R~

{; IXA<I
IXA= 1

{10 IXA<I
IXA= 1

{~ IX'*<I
Ix,, = 1

M. M i z u m o t o , H.-J. Z i m m e n n a n n

266

FB,

PB'

95

Rm,Rb,Re

.5

Re,Rn,Rg,Rsg,
, s,Rss

O
0

I P3
1 " 0

.5

~B

~/~ .5

Fig. 2(a). A t A ' = A .

laB,
RcBREt
REg,
Rgs

Rs,RsE,Rss

95

IFB~

P~

.5,

bo-O. 3177..of(3B)

Fig. 2(b). At A ' = very A ( = A2).

laB,

PB'
1
Rs,Rg,Rsg,
REg,RES.Rss

.5

R/RI

.5

Put

.I5

w P3
1 "

~5

b&-0.4301..o~'(~9)

Fig. 2(c). At A ' = more or less A ( = A ~

laB
I

Comparison o[ [uzzy reasoning methods

I~B'
I
\ Rm
i ,Ra,Rs,Rg,Rb,RA~RA,R~//

~A'

/i

267

Ra ,Rs,Rg,Rb,RA,RA~R~
\,\
"\

... __a_~
95

/'/

"NN'I~"~rt

Rm

RctRgs,RsI
0

.5

Fig. 2(d). At

Ilal,

95

A'=notA

(= ~ A ) ; (e) at

B'=B.

Rs,Rsg,Rss

95 "

~,
eS

Rm,Rg,Rgg,
Rgs,Rb,RI

.5

RC

\
\

ills

FA~
0

.5

9 t

.; ~

not B (= ~B).

Fig. 2(f). At B ' =

ii ~A'
Rs,Rsg,Rss

~~~. ~,~,~
.5

"9

95

. / ~ - - R;

\
i
t

//, //'/

95

Fig. 2(g). At B =

ao-0.5549..o1"(41)

not very B

( = -"IB2).

PA

268

M. Mizumoto, H.-J. Zimmennann

,5
""

95

.5

a&-.6920..ot(43)

Fig. 2(h). At B'= not more or less B(= "nB~

Moreover, in Table 2 the results inferred by the method RA at B'=
and not more or less B are given as follows.

not very

A t B ' = not very B by R,~:

x/1 +4/x~- 1
2~

1-4co
^

1-

[ ~ - !
/
21x2
I -

IXA~ao,
(40

4 cos

where

2[
/0'+4~r'~l
ao=g 1 + 4~ c o s ~ - - - ~ ) j = 0.5549...

(41
with

0' = c o s _,/v~
~-~].

A t B ' = not more or less B by R A :

2 + txa - x//x2
] + 4/~'~A [1
2 -- ?

- 2x/6(1 - 3p'0 c~

2 + CA - ~lx~ + 4/xa

[1 -- ~/3-- 2~/6(1 --~/xa)c~

P~A ~ a ; ,

(4:

p.A ~ a~,

Comparison o[ fl+zzy reasoning metl+ods

269

where
q~= c o s _ l (
I

ao =

3x/6(1-/,a)),8

2q~-i cos(]q/) - 3
= 0.6920...
3

,
-,[
3-v/'~"~
with q~ =cos ~ - - - - ~ , ] .

(43)

Using Fig. 1 we shall show how to obtain the results of Tables 1 and 2.
However, we shall discuss only the case of Rb (15) at A ' = very A and B ' = not
very B because of limitations of space. The methods of obtaining the consequences for R,~, R . . . . . . R,g and Rgg of (6)-(12) in the case of generalized modus
ponens are found in 1-4-6]. The other consequences can be obtained in the same
way as in the case of Rb, though we must solve a cubic equation, particularly in
the case of R~, in (17).
(i) The case of Rb at A ' = very A
The consequence B;, which is inferred by taking the composition of A ' and Rb
as in (21)-(25), is given by
B b' --A '

oRb = A ' o [ ( ' q A x V ) U ( U x B ) ] .

Then the membership function of B/, at A ' = very A (31) is

txB~,(v) = Vt t {g,X (u) z A [(1 -- txa (U)) v/-tB (v)3.
This expression becomes the following by omitting '(u)' and '(v)' for simplicity:
/.~B~' = V {p,,~ A [(1 -- #.,) v ttB ]}.

(44)

tl

For example, if ttB = 0.2, the expression in (44)

g,~/x [(1 - p,a)v gz]

(45)

is indicated by the broken line , _ _ _ 2 in Fig. 3(a) whose figure comes from the
left figure of Fig. l(x). The value of ttn, at ttB = 0.2 becomes (3-x/5)/2 by taking
the maximum of this line (i.e. (45)) by virtue of (44). Thus, in general, we can
have
/XBb,=---~

at gB

3-2

(=0.3819...).

On the other hand, when ttn= 0.7 (I> (3-x/5)/2), (45) is shown by the dotted line
' - ' - " and then the value ttBr (the maximum value of this line) is 0.7 when
tts= 0.7. Thus, in general

P'Bb' = /'tB

at gB I > - -

270

M. Mizumoto, H.-J. Zimmennann

1

lab='7

Fig. 3. T h e w a y of o b t a i n i n g B[, and A[,: (a) ~s~ a t / x A . = Ix2; (b) P-Af, at gs' = 1 - Ix2.

Therefore, we obtain

3-~

g"' =

3-x/5
2
'
3 -',/5
P.s ~ - ~ ,

/-ts

which leads to

3-4"5
/aBe'=

.vp.s.

The same method is applicable to A "= A , more or less A , and not A .

(ii) The case of Rb at B ' = not very B
The consequence A~, which is obtained by taking the composition of Rb and B'
as in (26)-(29), is given by
A'b= Rb o B' = [(TAx V ) U ( U

B'.

The membership function of A~, at B ' = not very B (35) is

/x&, = V {(1 - P-A) V P-B] A (1 -- p2)}
t~

(46)

by omitting '(u)' and '(v)'. The expression in (46)

[(1 -/~A) v taB]A (1 --/X2)

(471

at /xa = 0 . 2 ( ~ ( x / 5 - - 1 ) / 2 = 0 . 6 1 8 0 . . . ) is shown by the line '

' in Fig. 3(b
which comes from the right figure of Fig. l(x). The maximum value of this lin~
becomes 0.8 ( = 1-0.2). W h e n / x a = 0.7 ( ~ (x/5- 1)/2), (47) is indicated by the lin~
' - . - . ' and its maximum value is (x/5-1)/2. Thus we have in general

I 1 -/x a
--

/xA 4 .

,/g-1
2

~.LAI~ T

Comparison o[ [uzzy reasoning methods

271

Namely,
~"~b' =

x/-5-1 v (1 _ ~A).
2

The same way is applicable to B ' = not B, not more or less B, and B.
Example. Using Tables 1 and 2 and Fig. 2, we shall present a simple example of
fuzzy reasoning in Fig. 4. Fig. 4(a) shows fuzzy sets A and B, and Fig. 4(b)
includes fuzzy sets 'not A ' , 'not very A ' , . . . . ' u n k n o w n ' in order to compare with
the inference results of Fig. 4(c)-(j).
In the forms of fuzzy conditional inferences (3) and (4), it seems according to
our intuitions that the relations between A ' in Ant 2 and B' in Cons of the
generalized modus ponens (3) ought to be satisfied as shown in Table 3. Similarly,
the relations between B' in Ant 2 and A ' in Cons of the generalized modus
tollens (4) ought to be satisfied as in Table 4.
Relation I in Table 3 corresponds to the modus ponens. Relation I1-2 has a
consequence different from that of Relation II-1, but if there is not a strong causal
relation between " x is A " and " y is B " in the proposition "If x is A then y is
B", the satisfaction of Relation II-2 will be permitted. Relation IV-1 asserts that
when x is not A , any information about y is not conveyed from Ant 1. T h e
satisfaction of Relation IV-2 is demanded when the fuzzy proposition "If x is A
then y is B " means tacitly the proposition "If x is A then y is B else y is not B " .
Although this relation may not be accepted in ordinary logic, in our daily life we
often encounter the situation in which this relation can hold. Relation V corresponds to modus tollens. Relation VIII is discussed as in the case of Relation IV.
In Table 5, the satisfaction (0) or failure (x) of each criterion in Tables 3 and 4
under each fuzzy reasoning method is indicated by using the consequence results
of Tables 1 and 2.
Under these criteria it is found that Rm and Ra are neither very suitable for the
fuzzy conditional inference in the case of generalized modus tollens nor in the
case of generalized modus ponens. Rc is not bad. R~, Rg, R~g. . . . . R~ are
satisfactory. Rb . . . . . Rrn are not very good.

PA
1 j PB

o
1

Fig. 4(a). Fuzzysets A and B.

M. Mizumoto, H.-J. Zimmennann

272

unknown

unknown

not very A - - ~ ~

/ F//~-~ess
/ / not more
A or
I

Fig. 4(b). not A , not very A , not more or less A , not B, very B, more or less B, and unknown.

~B'

iL~aB,
//~BS.Bw
./~B~g,B~s,B~s

.5

Fig. 4(c). Inference results at A ' = A.

1

laB ,

.5

3~

.5

~'~'B~B~'~2,~gs
3

Fig. 4(d). Inference results at A ' = very A.

qaB ,

lab,
//

\.\ B~g,B~s,Bw

//o-\\

.5

Fig. 4(e). Inference results at A ' = more or less A .

273

Comparison of [ u z z y reasoning methods

PB'

Bfi, Bfi,Bfi,B~,Bb,BA ,B~ ,B~,

~A'

Aft~A~,A~AD FAA TA" rA~

~A.~Afi
/ *--_
A~ "~/~
i J

.5

.5
',~," ~Bw

z \ B2s /

',.

,~ s , A w
0

Fig. 4(0. Inference results at A ' = not A ; (g) at B' = B.

i PA'

A~,A~.A~g,
A~s,AD,A~
.5

_~

~A'

A,Aw

Aft" ~ A / ~ , A ~

.S
.5
/

O
1

9r

Fig. 4(h). Inference results at B' = not B.

~A'

A~,A~g,A~s ~ . ~ - -

AV

~A'

~-l
o

.5

/~"~

"'

9 ~----- AA

.4.fi,Aii

95

sJ

/
Afg,Afs/
A

",,Aft

st

~.

~I

U,

Fig. 4(i). Inference results at B ' = not very B.

VA'

}~A'

.5

A~,A~g,A~s

.5
3-E

/~-~ AA
A~,Aw
1

N%A~..

s#

~J

I
2
Fig. 4(j). Inference results at B' = not more or less B.

I~L M i z u m o t o ,

274
Table

3. R e l a t i o n s

H.-J. Zinnnermann

between Ant 2 and Cons under

g e n e r a l i z e d m o d u s p o n e n s in (3)
x is A ' ( A n t 2)

y is B ' ( C o n s )

Relation I
(modus ponens)
R e l a t i o n II-1
R e l a t i o n 1I-2
Relation III-1
R e l a t i o n 1II-2
Relation IV-I
Relation IV-2

x is A

y is B

x
x
x
x
x
x

y
y
y
y
y
y

Table

between Ant 2 and Cons under

g e n e r a l i z e d m o d u s t o l l e n s in (4)

4. R e l a t i o n s

Relation V
(modus tollens)
Relation VI
Relation VII
Relation VIII-1
Relation VIII-2

is
is
is
is
is
is

very A
very A
m o r e o r less A
m o r e o r less A
not A
not A

is
is
is
is
is
is

1 for the

Ant

very B

B
m o r e o r less B

B
unknown
not B

Ant

1 for the

y is B ' ( A n t 2)

x is A ' ( C o n s )

yisnotB

x is n o t A

y
y
y
y

not very B

x is n o t v e r y A

n o t m o r e o r less B

x is n o t m o r e o r l e s s A

B
B

x is u n k n o w n
x is A

is
is
is
is

T a b l e 5. S a t i s f a c t i o n o f e a c h R e l a t i o n in T a b l e s 3 a n d 4 u n d e r e a c h m e t h o d
Ant 2

Cons

Rm Ro l~

R,

R,

R,, R** R,, R.. Rb Rz~ RA R .

R.~ 5m

~'eryA
veryA

rery/3
B

x
x

x
x

x
0

0
x

x
0

0
x

x
0

x
0

0
x

x
x

x
x

x
x

x
x

x
x

x
x

more or

more or

less A

less B

Relation III-2

nlore or

Relation IV-1
Relation IV-2

less A
not A
not A

unknown
not B

0
x

0
x

0
x

0
x

x
0

x
0

0
x

0
x

0
x

0
x

0
x

not B

not A

Relation I
(modus ponens)
Relation It-1
Relation I1-2
Relation III-1

Relation V
(modus tollens)
Relation VI
Relation Vll
Relation VIII-I
Relation VIII-2

not very B not very A

not nmre not more
or less B
B

or l e s s A
unknown

Comparisonof fuzzy reasoningmethods

275

4. Syllogism and contrapositive under each fuzzy reasoning method

In this section we shall investigate two interesting concepts of 'syllogism' and
'contrapositive' under each fuzzy reasoning method obtained in Section 2.
Let P~, P2 and P3 be fuzzy conditional propositions such as
P~:
Pa:
P3:

If x is A then y is B,
If y is B then z is C,
If x is A then z is C,

where A, B and C are fuzzy sets in U, V and W, respectively. If the proposition

P3 is deduced from the propositions P~ and P2, i.e. the following holds:
PI:
P2:

I f x i s A then y i s B
If y is B then z is C

P3:

IfxisA

(48)

then z is C

then it is said that the syllogism holds.

Let R(A, B), R(B, C) and R(A, C) be fuzzy relations in U x V, V x W and
U x IV, respectively, which are obtained from the propositions P~, P2 and P3,
respectively. If the following equality holds, the syllogism holds:

R(A, B) o R(B, C) = R(A, C).

(49)

That is to say,
PI:
P2:

If x is A then y is B ~ R ( A , B )
If y is B then z is C
--~ R(B, C)

P3:

I f x is A then z is C ~-- R ( A , B ) oR(B,C)

(50)

where 'o' is the max-min composition of R(A, B) and R(B, C), and the membership function of R(A, B) o R(B, C) is given by
P-a(a.m~

W)= VI) [P-R(A.m(U, V)^ ttn~B.C~(V, W)].

(51)

Now we shall obtain R(A, B)o R(B, C) under each fuzzy reasoning method and
then show whether the syllogism holds or not.
We shall begin with the method R~. The fuzzy relations Ra(A, B) and R,(B, C)
are obtained from propositions P~ and P2 by using (7):

R,,(A, B) = ("hA x V ) ~ ( U x B),

R . ( 8 , C) = ( ~ B W ) @ ( V C).

Thus, the composition of R,~(A, B) and R,~(B, C) will be

R,~(A, B) o Ra(B, C)= [ ( ~ A V ) ~ ( U B)] o [(-riB W ) ~ ( V C)]

M. Mizumoto, ti.-1. Zimmerlnann

276

and its membership function becomes as follows.

tzRo(A,~)o~n.C)('I, W)
= V {[1 ^ (1 - Ix^ (u) + ~D (v))] A [ 1 ^ (1 -- ft, (V) + ~c(W)]}
D

= VI) {(i) ^ (ii)}.

(52)

The function (i), i.e. 1 ^ ( 1 - txA(u)+ ~ ( v ) ) , can be depicted by using the parameter t-L^(U) as in Fig. 5(a) and the function (ii), 1 ^ ( 1 - ~t,(v)+ ~c(W)), is shown by
using the parameter t.tc(w) as in Fig. 5(b). These figures base on Fig. l(ii). From
these figures, the function (i)^(ii) in (52) with both parameters p.A(u)= a and
txc(w) = c will be shown by the broken line ' . . . . ' in Fig. 5(c) and its maximum
value (by virtue of (52)) is 0.5 + (1 - a + c)/2. On the other hand, if the parameter
txA(u) is taken to be a' as in Fig. 5(c), the maximum value of its line ' - . - . '
becomes 1. Therefore, in general, for any parameters a and c, the maximum value
of (i)A(ii) is shown to be 1 ^ ( 0 . 5 + ( 1 - a + c ) 1 2 ) .
Therefore, the membership
function /~R,(A,B~.Ro(~.c(U,W) of (52) becomes:
/xR,~A.B)~

W) = 1 ^ (0.5 + (1 --/XA(U)+ tZc (W))12).

~6(~)=

Vc (w)=

.i
.2
.3
.4
.5
.6
.7
,8

.9

liA(u)=a'

1~c(W)=C
~A(u)=a

, ]~B(v)
1

Fig. 5. The way of obtaining (52); (a) 1 , ' , ( 1 - p . A ( l l ) + p s ( v ) ) ; (b) l ^ ( 1 - p n ( v ) + / X c ( W ) ) ;

(1 - / x A (u) + ~ s (v)) ^ (1 - ~B (v) + ~c(W)).

(c) l~

Comparisono[fuzzy reasoningmethods

277

From this result, we can have

R,~(A, B) o R,(B, C)
[
1A(0.5 +(1--#A(U)+I.tC(W))/2)/(U , W)
JU 'W

1A(1--1"tA(It)q-I'gc(W))/(ll'
iV)).

7~ Ra(A, C ) ( = Iu

(53)

Hence, we can conclude that the fuzzy reasoning method R. does not satisfy the
syllogism.
Similarly, we can obtain R ( A , B ) o R ( B , C ) under other fuzzy reasoning
methods and we shall list them in the following.

R,,,(A, B) o R.,(B, C)

[JtJ

xW

0-5 V (/-tA(/~)A/-tC(W))V (1 -wA(u))/(u,w)

7sRm(A, C) (= IUxw(~A(li)AI-tc(W))V(1--~A(lt))/(II,W)).

(54)

Re(A, B) o Rc(B, C) = ~uxw /~A(U) ^ ttc(W)/(U, W)

= R~(A, C).

R~(A, B) o R~(B, C) = [

(55)

p,A(U)~ t-tc(W)/(U, W)

a l l x ~,V

= R, (A, C).

Rg(A, B)o Rg(B, C)= Iu

ltA(u) ~ tZc(W)/(u' w)

= Rg(A, C).
R,g(A, B) o R,~(B, C)
Ju

(56)

(57)

[g,,,,(u) -~ ~c(W)]^ [1- ~A(u) ~ 1 - p,c(W)]/(u, W )

= R,g(A, C).

(58)

Rgg(A, B) o Rgg(B, C)
=[
Ju

[tzA(u) g-->tXc(W)]^[1- t-t~,(u) g-~ 1 - t-tcCw)]/(u, w)

= Rgg(A, C).

(59)

Rg,(A, B) o Rg~(B, C)

=[
Ju

[txA(u)g-->~c(W)]^[1-txA(u)~ 1 - tlc(W)]/(u, w)

= Rg, (A, C).

(60)

hi. l~lizumoto,H.-J.Zimmennann

278

R~(A, B) oR~(B, C)
I~

[~A(u) ~ gc(W)]^[1 - ~A(u) ~ 1 - gc(w)]/(u, w)

= n~, (A, C).

Rb(A,

(61)

B) o Rb(B, C)

0.5 v ( 1 - ~ . ( u ) ) v

t~c(w)/(u, w)

a t / x ~,v

Rb(A, C ) ( =

IUxW(1--bCA(ll))Vi.tc(W)/(II,W)).

(62)

RA(A, B) o R,,(B, C)

=[

[ ~ ( " ) 7 ~,~(w)]/(., w)

a t / ~,v

,Ra,A. C ) ( = Iu

[~A(U'a--'~"c(W)]/(U'W))'

(63)

where

~ ( . ) <- uc(w),
v.n ( . ) > t~c(W),

m~ (u) <~~c(W),

~A(u) -~ t~c(W)= tXc(W)

l~--~

~ (")> ~c(W).

RA(A, B) o R.(B, C)

[m~(u) ~ ~tc(w)]/(., w)
(64)

where

~A (u) ~ txc(w) =

~A(u)~(w)

/zA (u) > 0, 1 -

..

txc(w) > I

IzA(u) = 0 or 1 - / x c ( w ) = 0

^~--~-~^l-t~(w)

m~(u)>0, 1 - t ~ c ( w ) > O ,
IxA(U) = 0 or 1 --

gc(W) = O.

Comparisonof fuzzy reasoningmetl,ods

R,(A,

279

B) o R,(B, C)

: Iu

1-.~(w)+v-..(,0~*c(W)/(.,

~ 1 - gc(W)+ p.a(u )

~ R.(A, C ) ( = Iu

w)

1--P"x(u)+P'a(U)l'tcCw)l(u' w))"

(65)

R#(A, B) o R#(B, C)
= Iux w (0"5 v 1 - bta(u) v/Xc(W)) A (P'a (U) V 1 -- P'a (U))
A

(1 - ~c(W) v I~c(w))l(',, w)

-~R#(A, C)

(=

Iux,v (1-p.A(U)VP.c(W))A(p.A(Z,)V1--p-a(U))
\

a (1 - ~c(w) v

RB(A, B) o R[a(B, C) = I
Ju

Uc(w))l(t,, w)).

(66)

[~a (u) "-~ lZc(w)]l(u, w)

= RE](A, C ) ,

(67)

where
IzA(u)~+~tc(W)=/l[0

fza(z')< or f x c ( w ) = l ,
P.A(U) = 1, g c ( V ) < 1.

Using these results the satisfaction or failure of the syllogism under each method
is listed in Table 6. The membership functions of R(A, B)o R(B, C) whose
method does not satisfy the syllogism are depicted in Fig. 6 using a parameter P.c
in order to make comparisons between R(A, B)o R(B, C) and R(A, C), where
the membership function of R(A, C) is obtained by replacing P-B with P-c in Fig. 1
(left figure).
Finally, we shall investigate the contrapositive of a fuzzy conditional proposition under each method.
For a fuzzy conditional proposition P~:
PI:

I f x i s A then y is B

and its contrapositive proposition P2:

not B then x is not A,

we can obtain fuzzy relations R(A,B) in U V from PI and R(TB, TA) in
VxU from P2 using each method, where A; B are fuzzy sets in U, V,.
P2:

If y is

respectively. If the contrapositive holds, the following identity is satisfied.

Table 6. Satisfaction of syllogism and contrapositive

Syllogism
Contraposifive

R., R~ R c R,

R,

R** Rg. R~, R~, R b Rz~ R

R,

R~, R D

x
x

0
x

0
x

x
0

x
0

x
0

0
x

0
0

0
x

0
x

0
0

x
0

x
x

0
x

M. Mizumoto, H.-J. Zimmennann

280

pC =

l
.9

~0 =

i
.8

.8
.7
.6

.6
.4
.2

~.5

b
I

Fig. 6(a). R,,(A, B) o Rm(B, C); (b) R,~(A, B) o R,,(B, C).

PC=
I
.9
.8
.7
.6
- ~_. 5

c
I

> PA

Fig. 6(c). Rb(A, B) o Rb(B, C); (d) R,x(A, B) o Rr,(B, C).

PI = 9 1

.5

.9

P C 1=

.9
.5
f

40

e
!

Fig. 6(e). R,,(A, B) o RA(B, C); (f) R.( A, B) o R,(B, C).

Cotnparlson o[ [uzzy reasoning methods

281

~C=

pc =
o, 1
.1, .9
.2, .8
93, .7
.4, .6
.5

g
!

o
Fig. 6(g). Roe(A,B) *R~,(B,C).

R("IB,

(68)

-qA) = / ~ ( A , B)

where /~(A, B) denotes the converse of R(A,

For example, for the method Ra, we have

R.('nB, hA)=

B).

1 ^ [ 1 - (1 - lis (v)) + (1 -

tta(u))]/(v, u)

1 ^ (1 - ttA (u) + Ix. (v))/(v, u)

= i~o(A, B).
Therefore, the contrapositive holds under the method R,.
For the method Rr,,

R,,('-aB, --aA)
=[

av x U

[(1- t~(v))^(1 - t~,,(u))]v[1 - ( 1 - t~.(v))]l(o, u)

-~:.t~m(A, J~) (=

~xU(~I'A(12)
AI"I'B('D))V(1--~LA(L())](I)'[()~"

Hence, R,~ does not satisfy the contrapositive.

In the same way, we can see if the contrapositive holds or not under other
methods (See Table 6).

5. Conclusion

We have investigated the inference results in the cases of generalized modus

ponens and generalized modus toilens under the fuzzy reasoning methods which

282

M. Mizumoto, H.-J. Zimmennanu

were proposed before and which are newly obtained by introducing the implica.
tion rules of m a n y valued logics. Moreover, the syllogism and contrapositive are
discussed under each method. From these results we can conclude that the
methods R,, and R a a r e not suitable for the fuzzy reasoning, since they do not
satisfy the criteria which are quite reasonable demands. Rc is not a bad method
and R~, R~ . . . . . R~, are suitable methods. The new methods Rb, R a . . . . . R E
which are based on the implication rules of m a n y valued logic systems are not
good.
We have discussed the compositional rule of inference which uses the max-min
composition. The possibility of using new compositions other than max-rain
composition is given in [10, 11].
The formalization of inference methods for the more complicated form ot
inference such as
I f x i s A then y is B else y is C
x isA'
y isD
If x is A t then y is Bt else
If x is A 2 then y is B 2 else
If x is A . then y is B .
x is A'
y isB'
would be the future subjects of investigation.

Acknowledgment
The authors acknowledge the invaluable help of Mr. U. Thole and the m e m b e r
of fuzzy research group at R W T H Aachen. T h e y are also grateful to Prof. K
T a n a k a (Osaka Univ.) and Mr. S. Fukami (N'VF) for their valuable advices durin~
the process of this study.

References
[1] L.A. Zadeh, Calculus of fuzzy restriction, in: L.A. Zadeh et al., Eds, Fuzzy Sets and Thei
Applications to Cognitive and Decision Processes (Academic Press, New York, 1975) 1-39.
[2] E.tt. Mamdani, Application of fuzzy logic to approximate reasoning using linguistic system!
IEEE Trans. Comput. 26 (1977) 1182-1191.
[3] M. Mizumoto, S. Fukami and K. Tanaka, Fuzzy conditional inference and fuzzy inference wit
fuzzy quantifiers, in: Proc. of 6th Int. Conf. on Artificial Intelligence (Tokyo, Aug. 20-23, 197c.
589-591.
[4] M. Mizumoto, S. Fukami and K. Tanaka, Some methods of fuzzy reasoning, in: M.M. Gupta c
al., Eds., Advances in Fuzzy Set Theory and Applications (North-Holland, Amsterdam, 197c.
117-136.

Comparison o[ [uzzy reasoning methods

283

[5] M. Mizumoto, S. Fukami and K. Tanaka, Several methods for fuzzy conditional inference, in:
Proc. of IEEE Conf. on Decision & Control (Florida, Dec. 12-14, 1979) 777-782.
[6] S. Ftrkami, M. Mizumoto and K. Tanaka, Some considerations on fuzzy conditional inferences,
Fuzzy Sets and S~tems 4 (1980) 243-273.
i7] N. Rescher, Many Valued Logic (McGraw-Hill, New York, 1969).
[8] W. Bandler and L. Kohout, Fuzzy power sets and fuzzy implication operators, Fuzzy Sets and
S~tems 4 (1980) 13-30.
[9] R. Willmott, Two fuzzier implication operators in the theory of fuzzy power sets, Fuzzy Sets and
Systems 4 (1980) 31-37.
[I0] M. Mizumoto, Note on the arithmetic rule by Zadeh for fuzzy conditional inference, Cybernetics
and Systems 12 (1981) 247-306.
[11] M. Mizumoto, Fuzzy inferences using max-,x composition in the compositional rule of inference,
in: M.M. Gupta et al., Eds., Fuzzy Information and Decision Processes (North-Holland),
submitted.