Search NASA⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Kreinovich, V.

Publications and source records attributed to Kreinovich, V..

4 records
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS1993

Nonlinear rescaling of control values simplifies fuzzy control

Traditional control theory is well-developed mainly for linear control situations. In non-linear cases there is no general method of generating a good control, so we have to rely on the ability of the experts (operators) to control them. If we want to automate their control, we must acquire their knowledge and translate it into a precise control strategy. The experts' knowledge is usually represented in non-numeric terms, namely, in terms of uncertain statements of the type 'if the obstacle is straight ahead, the distance to it is small, and the velocity of the car is medium, press the brakes hard'. Fuzzy control is a methodology that translates such statements into precise formulas for control. The necessary first step of this strategy consists of assigning membership functions to all the terms that the expert uses in his rules (in our sample phrase these words are 'small', 'medium', and 'hard'). The appropriate choice of a membership function can drastically improve the quality of a fuzzy control. In the simplest cases, we can take the functions whose domains have equally spaced endpoints. Because of that, many software packages for fuzzy control are based on this choice of membership functions. This choice is not very efficient in more complicated cases. Therefore, methods have been developed that use neural networks or generic algorithms to 'tune' membership functions. But this tuning takes lots of time (for example, several thousands iterations are typical for neural networks). In some cases there are evident physical reasons why equally space domains do not work: e.g., if the control variable u is always positive (i.e., if we control temperature in a reactor), then negative values (that are generated by equal spacing) simply make no sense. In this case it sounds reasonable to choose another scale u' = f(u) to represent u, so that equal spacing will work fine for u'. In the present paper we formulate the problem of finding the best rescaling function, solve this problem, and show (on a real-life example) that after an optimal rescaling, the un-tuned fuzzy control can be as good as the best state-of-art traditional non-linear controls.

Vanlangingham, H.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Inverse problems: Fuzzy representation of uncertainty generates a regularization

In many applied problems (geophysics, medicine, and astronomy) we cannot directly measure the values x(t) of the desired physical quantity x in different moments of time, so we measure some related quantity y(t), and then we try to reconstruct the desired values x(t). This problem is often ill-posed in the sense that two essentially different functions x(t) are consistent with the same measurement results. So, in order to get a reasonable reconstruction, we must have some additional prior information about the desired function x(t). Methods that use this information to choose x(t) from the set of all possible solutions are called regularization methods. In some cases, we know the statistical characteristics both of x(t) and of the measurement errors, so we can apply statistical filtering methods (well-developed since the invention of a Wiener filter). In some situations, we know the properties of the desired process, e.g., we know that the derivative of x(t) is limited by some number delta, etc. In this case, we can apply standard regularization techniques (e.g., Tikhonov's regularization). In many cases, however, we have only uncertain knowledge about the values of x(t), about the rate with which the values of x(t) can change, and about the measurement errors. In these cases, usually one of the existing regularization methods is applied. There exist several heuristics that choose such a method. The problem with these heuristics is that they often lead to choosing different methods, and these methods lead to different functions x(t). Therefore, the results x(t) of applying these heuristic methods are often unreliable. We show that if we use fuzzy logic to describe this uncertainty, then we automatically arrive at a unique regularization method, whose parameters are uniquely determined by the experts knowledge. Although we start with the fuzzy description, but the resulting regularization turns out to be quite crisp.

Kreinovich, V.↗
NASA NTRS1992

Gaussian membership functions are most adequate in representing uncertainty in measurements

In rare situations, like fundamental physics, we perform experiments without knowing what their results will be. In the majority of real-life measurement situations, we more or less know beforehand what kind of results we will get. Of course, this is not the precise knowledge of the type 'the result will be between alpha - beta and alpha + beta,' because in this case, we would not need any measurements at all. This is usually a knowledge that is best represented in uncertain terms, like 'perhaps (or 'most likely', etc.) the measured value x is between alpha - beta and alpha + beta.' Traditional statistical methods neglect this additional knowledge and process only the measurement results. So it is desirable to be able to process this uncertain knowledge as well. A natural way to process it is by using fuzzy logic. But, there is a problem; we can use different membership functions to represent the same uncertain statements, and different functions lead to different results. What membership function do we choose? In the present paper, we show that under some reasonable assumptions, Gaussian functions mu(x) = exp(-beta(x(exp 2))) are the most adequate choice of the membership functions for representing uncertainty in measurements. This representation was efficiently used in testing jet engines to airplanes and spaceships.

Kreinovich, V.↗