Interval-valued representability of qualitative data: The continuous case

International Journal of Uncertainty, Fuzziness and Knowldege-Based Systems

Volumn 15, Issue 3, 2007, Pages 299-319

  Bosi, Gianni ^a   Campión, Maria Jesús ^b   Candeal, Juan Carlos ^c   Induráin, Esteban ^b  

^a UNIVERSITY OF TRIESTE   (Italy)

^b PUBLIC UNIVERSITY OF NAVARRE   (Spain)

^c UNIVERSITY OF ZARAGOZA   (Spain)

Author keywords

Continuous representations of orderings; Data processing; Fuzzy numbers; Interval orders; Intransitivity; Preference modelling

Indexed keywords

COMPUTER SIMULATION; CONFORMAL MAPPING; DATABASE SYSTEMS; FUNCTION EVALUATION; FUZZY SETS; TOPOLOGY;

INTERVAL ORDERS; INTRANSITIVITY; REAL NUMBERS;

DATA PROCESSING;

EID: 34250836012     PISSN: 02184885     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1142/S0218488507004698     Document Type: Article

References (56)

1. G. Birkhoff, Lattice Theory (American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1967).
2. J. C. Candeal-Haro and E. Induráin-Eraso, Utility functions on partially ordered topological groups, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 115(3) (1992) 765-767.
3. J. C. Candeal, E. Induráin and E. Olóriz, Weak extensive measurement without translation-invariance axioms, J. Math. Psych. 42(1) (1998) 48-62.
4. D. S. Bridges and G. B. Mehta, Representations of Preference Orderings (Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1995).
5. P. C. Fishburn, Preference structures and their numerical representations, Theoret. Comput. Sci. 217 (1999) 359-383.
6. G. Gierz, K. H. Hofmann, K. Keimel, J. D. Lawson, M. Mislove and D. S. Scott, Continuous Lattices and Domains (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2003).
7. L. Nachbin, Topology and Order (Van Nostrand Reinhold, New York, 1965).
8. D. W. Katzner, Static Demand Theory (Macmillan, London, 1970).
9. E. H. Lieb and J. Yngvason, A guide to entropy and the second law of thermodynamics, Notices Amer. Math. Soc. 5 (1975) 195-204.
10. J. L. B. Cooper, The foundations of Thermodynamics, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 210 (1967) 375-389.
11. J. C. Candeal, J. R. De Miguel, E. Induráin and G. B. Mehta, Representations of ordered semigroups and the physical concept of Entropy, Appl. Gen. Topol. 5(1) (2004) 1-23.
12. H. J. Skala, Non-Archimedean Utility Theory (D. Reidel, Dordrecht, 1974).
13. B. Girotto and S. Holzer, On the axiomatic treatment of the Φ-mean, Journal of the Italian Statistical Society 4(3) (1995) 299-336.
14. J. Pfanzagl, Theory of Measurement (Physica-Verlag Würzburg, Wien, 1968).
15. D. Krantz, D. R. Luce, P. Suppes, and A. Tversky, Foundations of Measurement (Academic Press, New York, 1971).
16. F. S. Roberts, On nontransitive indifference, J. Math. Psych. 7 (1970) 243-258.
17. G. M. Reed, A. W. Roscoe and R. F. Wachter, Topology and Category Theory in Computer Science (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1991).
18. J. C. Candeal, J.R. De Miguel and E. Induráin, Existence of additive and continuous utility functions on ordered semigroups, Journal of Economics - Zeitschrift für Nationalökonomie Suppl. 8 (1998) 53-68.
19. J. C. Candeal, E. Induráin and E. Olóriz, Existence of additive utility on positive semigroups: An elementary proof, Ann. Oper. Res. 80 (1998) 269-279.
20. J. C. Candeal, J. R. De Miguel and E. Induráin, Expected utility from additive utility on semigroups, Theory and Decision 53(1) (2002) 87-94.
21. G. B. Mehta, Preference and utility, in Handbook of Utility Theory, eds. S. Barberà, P. Hammond and C. Seidl, (Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1998), pp. 1-47.
22. G. Herden and G. B. Mehta, The Debreu Gap Lemma and some generalizations, J. Math. Econom. 40(7) (2004) 747-769.
23. A. F. Beardon, J. C. Candeal, G. Herden, E. Induráin and G. B. Mehta, The non-existence of a utility function and the structure of non-representable preference relations, J. Math. Econom. 37 (2002) 17-38.
24. M. J. Campión, J. C. Candeal and E. Induráin, Representability of binary relations through fuzzy numbers, Fuzzy Sets and Systems 157 (2006) 1-19.
25. A. Kaufmann and M. M. Gupta, Introduction to Fuzzy Arithmetic, Theory and Applications (Van Nostrand Reinhold Company, New York, 1985).
26. R. E. Moore, Methods and Applications of Interval Analysis, SIAM Studies in Applied Mathematics 2 (1979).
27. E. R. Hansen, Global Optimization using Interval Analysis (Marcel Dekker, New York, 1992).
28. V. Kreinovich, Interval methods in knowledge representation (abstracts of recent papers), Internat. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowledge-Based Systems 4(5) (1996) 467-490.
29. G. Bosi and R. Isler, Representing preferences with nontransitive indifference by a single real-valued function, J. Math. Econom. 24 (1995) 621-631.
30. P. C. Fishburn, Intransitive indifference with unequal indifference intervals, J. Math. Psych. 7 (1970) 144-149.
31. P. C. Fishburn, Intransitive indifference in preference theory: a survey, Oper. Res. 18(2) (1970) 207-228.
32. P. C. Fishburn, Interval representations for interval orders and semiorders, J. Math. Psych. 10 (1973) 91-105.
33. P. C. Fishburn, Interval Orders and Interval Graphs (Wiley, New York, 1985).
34. A. Tversky, Intransitivity of preferences, Psychological Review 76(1) (1969) 31-48.
35. W. T. Trotter, New perspectives on interval orders and interval graphs, in Surveys in Combinatorics, 1997 (London), London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser. 241 (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge UK, 1997), pp. 237-286.
36. Chung-Yee Lee, Lei Lei and M. Pinedo, Current trends in deterministic scheduling, Ann. Oper. Res. 70 (1997) 1-41.
37. M. Pinedo, Planning and Scheduling in Manufacturing and Services (Springer-Verlag, New York, 2005).
38. N. Wiener, Contribution to the theory of relative position, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Society 17 (1914) 441-449.
39. P. C. Fishburn, Nontransitive preferences in decision theory, Journal of Risk and Uncertainty 4 (1991) 113-134.
40. B. G. Mirkin, Descriptions of some relations on the set of real-line intervals, J. Math. Psych. 9 (1972) 243-252.
41. B. G. Mirkin, Group Choice (Winston, Washington DC, 1979).
42. J. P. Doignon, A. Ducamp and J. C. Falmagne, On realizable biorders and the biorder dimension of a relation, J. Math. Psych. 28 (1984) 73-109.
43. E. Olóriz, J. C. Candeal and E. Induráin, Representability of interval orders, J. Econom. Theory 78(1) (1998) 219-227.
44. G. Bosi, J. C. Candeal, E. Induráin, E. Olóriz and M. Zudaire, Numerical representations of interval orders, Order 18 (2001) 171-190.
45. D. S. Bridges, Numerical representation of interval orders on a topological space, J. Econom. Theory 38 (1986) 160-166.
46. A. Chateauneuf, Continuous representation of a preference relation on a connected topological space, J. Math. Econom. 16 (1987) 139-146.
47. G. Bosi, Continuous representations of interval orders based on induced preorders, Rivista di Matematica per le Scienze Economiche e Sociali, Anno XVIII, Fascicolo I (1995) 75-82.
48. J. C. Candeal, E. Induráin and M. Zudaire, Continuous representability of interval orders, Appl. Gen. Topol. 5(2) (2004) 213-230.
49. G. Debreu, Representation of a preference ordering by a numerical function, in Decision processes, eds. R. Thrall, C. Coombs and R. Davies (John Wiley, New York, 1954), pp. 159-165.
50. G. Debreu, Continuity properties of Paretian utility, Internat. Econom. Rev. 5 (1964) 285-293.
51. P. C. Fishburn, Utility Theory for Decision-Making (Wiley, New York, 1970).
52. B. Monjardet, Axiomatiques et propriétés des quasi-ordres, Math. Sci. Hum. Math. Soc. Sci. 63 (1978) 51-82.
53. D. S. Bridges, Representing interval orders by a single real-valued function, J. Econom. Theory 36 (1985) 149-155.
54. D. Dubois and H. Prade, Operations on fuzzy numbers, Internat. J. Systems Sci. 9(6) (1978) 613-626.
55. V. Novák, Fuzzy Sets and Their Applications (Adam Hilger, Bristol and Philadelphia, 1989).
56. G. Bosi, J. C. Candeal and E. Induráin, Continuous representability of interval orders and biorders, J. Math. Psych. (2007, to appear), available on-line 21 December 2006, doi:10.1016/j.jmp.2006.10.005.