Fundamentals of a Fuzzy-Logic-Based Generalized Theory of Stability
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Stability is one of the fundamental concepts of complex dynamical systems including physical, economical, socioeconomical, and technical systems. In classical terms, the notion of stability inherently associates with any dynamical system and determines whether a system under consideration reaches equilibrium after being exposed to disturbances. Predominantly, this concept comes with a binary (Boolean) quantification (viz., we either quantify that systems are stable or not stable). While in some cases, this definition is well justifiable, with the growing complexity and diversity of systems one could seriously question the Boolean nature of the definition and its underlying semantics. This becomes predominantly visible in human-oriented quantification of stability in which we commonly encounter statements quantifying stability through some linguistic terms such as, e.g., absolutely unstable, highly unstable, ..., absolutely stable, and alike. To formulate human-oriented definitions of stability, we may resort ourselves to the use of a so-called Precisiated Natural Language, which comes as a subset of natural language and one of whose functions is redefining existing concepts, such as stability, optimality, and alike. Being prompted by the discrepancy of the definition of stability and the Boolean character of the concept itself, in this paper, we introduce and develop a Generalized Theory of Stability (GTS) for analysis of complex dynamical systems described by fuzzy differential equations. Different human-centric definitions of stability of dynamical systems are introduced. We also discuss and contrast several fundamental concepts of fuzzy stability, namely, fuzzy stability of systems, binary stability of fuzzy system, and binary stability of systems by showing that all of them arise as special cases of the proposed GTS. The introduced definitions offer an important ability to quantify the concept of stability using some continuous quantification (that is through the use of degrees of stability). In this manner, we radically depart from the previous binary character of the definition. We establish some criteria concerning generalized stability for a wide class of continuous dynamical systems. Next, we present a series of illustrative examples which demonstrate the essence of the concept, and at the same time, stress that the existing Boolean techniques are not capable of capturing the essence of linguistic stability. We also apply the obtained results to investigate the stability of an economical system and show its usefulness in the design of nonlinear fuzzy control systems given some predefined degree of stability.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.004 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".