Dealing with uncertainty in fuzzy inductive reasoning methodology

Francisco Mugica; Angela Nebot; Pilar Gomez

Home/Archive/arXiv

arXiv · 1212.2501

Dealing with uncertainty in fuzzy inductive reasoning methodology

Francisco Mugica·Angela Nebot·Pilar Gomez

View original source ↗Read source document ↗Export metadata ↓

Abstract

The aim of this research is to develop a reasoning under uncertainty strategy in the context of the Fuzzy Inductive Reasoning (FIR) methodology. FIR emerged from the General Systems Problem Solving developed by G. Klir. It is a data driven methodology based on systems behavior rather than on structural knowledge. It is a very useful tool for both the modeling and the prediction of those systems for which no previous structural knowledge is available. FIR reasoning is based on pattern rules synthesized from the available data. The size of the pattern rule base can be very large making the prediction process quite difficult. In order to reduce the size of the pattern rule base, it is possible to automatically extract classical Sugeno fuzzy rules starting from the set of pattern rules. The Sugeno rule base preserves pattern rules knowledge as much as possible. In this process some information is lost but robustness is considerably increased. In the forecasting process either the pattern rule base or the Sugeno fuzzy rule base can be used. The first option is desirable when the computational resources make it possible to deal with the overall pattern rule base or when the extracted fuzzy rules are not accurate enough due to uncertainty associated to the original data. In the second option, the prediction process is done by means of the classical Sugeno inference system. If the amount of uncertainty associated to the data is small, the predictions obtained using the Sugeno fuzzy rule base will be very accurate. In this paper a mixed pattern/fuzzy rules strategy is proposed to deal with uncertainty in such a way that the best of both perspectives is used. Areas in the data space with a higher level of uncertainty are identified by means of the so-called error models. The prediction process in these areas makes use of a mixed pattern/fuzzy rules scheme, whereas areas identified with a lower level of uncertainty only use the Sugeno fuzzy rule base. The proposed strategy is applied to a real biomedical system, i.e., the central nervous system control of the cardiovascular system.

Explore related subjects

cs.AI

Keep this discovery

BibTeX RIS

Francisco Mugica, Angela Nebot, Pilar Gomez. 2012-10-19. Dealing with uncertainty in fuzzy inductive reasoning methodology. https://arxiv.org/abs/1212.2501

Cite the original work for its findings. Save a collection to share your selection of sources.

KEEP EXPLORING

Related papers

arXiv2026

Decoupling Readiness from Release for Tail-Aware Scheduling of Agentic LLM Workflows

Agentic LLM workflows consist of sequences of model turns interleaved with tool interactions, so their end-to-end completion time depends not only on inference speed but also on when ready turns are released. Most runtimes release each turn immediately upon readiness. Under contention, this eager release policy can accumulate released but unfinished work; once submitted, those turns can no longer be reordered by the workflow-level policy, increasing tail latency. We present a tail-risk-aware turn release scheduling method that jointly decides which ready turn to release next and how much released but unfinished work to maintain. The method uses a mean--Conditional Value-at-Risk (CVaR) objective to capture the evolving tail risk of unfinished workflows, incorporates online estimates of turn work when prioritizing ready turns, and adapts the released work budget to observed queue pressure. We evaluate the method using real agent execution traces from software engineering tasks across multiple LLMs and workflow arrival rates. The method performs comparably to eager release under light load and substantially reduces the P95 of workflow flow time under contention, achieving up to a \(3.50\times\) speedup.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Demystifying the Privacy-Utility Trade-off in LLM Interactions

The integration of Large Language Models into daily tasks relies on context-rich instructions, inevitably exposing sensitive user information. Current privacy-preserving methods typically employ context-agnostic static rules, causing severe utility degradation. However, the specific mechanisms governing how sanitization impacts downstream performance remain largely underexplored. To address this, we conduct a systematic analysis to deconstruct the privacy-utility trade-off, uncovering three underlying mechanisms: (1) Context-Dependent Utility, which first establishes when to sanitize by revealing that data value shifts from critical constraints to dispensable noise based on user intent; (2) Strategic Adaptation, which subsequently determines how to sanitize by dictating that the choice between removal and replacement depends on the task's reliance on factual integrity versus structural coherence; and (3) Combinatorial Interplay, which finally extends the protection scope by demonstrating that attributes form a semantic web of synergistic dependencies or antagonistic redundancies. Guided by these insights, we introduce an intent-driven local protection framework. By distilling a lightweight model Veilmind-4B to drive a dynamic extraction-sanitization-restoration pipeline, our approach reaches a low-leakage privacy point while preserving substantially higher response utility than existing privacy-oriented baselines, advancing the privacy-utility trade-off toward the Pareto frontier.

cs.AI↗

arXiv2026

Defining AI Agents: A Compendium of Criteria, Metrics, and Benchmarks

The term agent in artificial intelligence lacks a standard definition, complicating the evaluation, comparison, and reproducibility of AI agent research. We address this ambiguity through a survey organized around five dimensions of agenticness: environmental interaction, learning and adaptation, autonomy, goal-directed behavior, and temporal coherence. For each dimension, we examine how the underlying capability has been conceptualized across prior work and synthesize the metrics, benchmarks, and evaluation frameworks used to assess it. This review provides a structured account of the current landscape of agent evaluation, highlighting both established approaches and areas where evaluation remains limited or inconsistent. We additionally introduce the Agent Compendium, a public-facing digital resource that organizes and extends the evaluation methods identified through this review. Together, the survey and compendium provide a common structure for evaluating and comparing agent capabilities across AI systems, supporting more reproducible research, clearer communication, and more systematic study of artificial agents.

cs.AI↗