SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Meandros Medical And Dental Journal / 2018 / Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 2

Comparison of Hierarchical and Non-hierarchical Fuzzy Models with Simulation and an Application on Hypertension Data Set

Aşamalı ve Aşamalı Olmayan Bulanık Modellerin Simülasyon ve Hipertansiyon Veri Seti Üzerinde Bir Uygulama ile Karşılaştırılması

Mevlüt TÜRE
Fulden CANTAŞ
İmran KURT ÖMÜRLÜ
Pages
138–146
Publication Date
2022-10-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Results: It was found that there was a significant difference between the fuzzy models (p

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the classification performances of hierarchical and non-hierarchical fuzzy models built by using different membership functions.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Materials­and­Methods:­In this study, normally distributed data sets containing different number of independent variables (p=3 and p=6) were generated.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Results: It was found that there was a significant difference between the fuzzy models (p
🔬Design:Modeling & Simulation
📍Scope:Comprehensive Sample
⚙️Variables:Domain Parameters

Abstract

Objective: The aim of this study is to compare the classification performances of hierarchical and non-hierarchical fuzzy models built by using different membership functions. Materials­and­Methods:­In this study, normally distributed data sets containing different number of independent variables (p=3 and p=6) were generated. Besides, the classification performances of hierarchical and non-hierarchical fuzzy models built by using the data set which contained body mass index, fasting blood glucose and triglyceride values of hypertensive (n=206) and control (n=113) people were compared. Results: It was found that there was a significant difference between the fuzzy models (p

Özet

Amaç: Bu çalışmanın amacı farklı üyelik fonksiyonları ile oluşturulan aşamalı ve aşamalı olmayan bulanık modellerin sınıflandırma performanslarının karşılaştırılmasıdır. Gereç ve Yöntemler: Bu çalışmada farklı sayıda (p=3 ve p=6) bağımsız değişkenler içeren normal dağılıma uygunluk gösteren veri setleri türetildi. Ayrıca hipertansif (n=206) ve kontrol (n=113) bireylerine ilişkin beden kitle indeksi, açlık kan şekeri ve trigliserid değerlerini içeren veri seti kullanılarak oluşturulan aşamalı ve aşamalı olmayan bulanık modellerin sınıflandırma performansları karşılaştırıldı. Bulgular: Bulanık modeller arasında ileri düzeyde farklılık olduğu bulundu (p

🔖

Cite This Article

TÜRE, M., CANTAŞ, F., ÖMÜRLÜ, İ. K. (2022). Comparison of Hierarchical and Non-hierarchical Fuzzy Models with Simulation and an Application on Hypertension Data Set. Meandros Medical And Dental Journal, Cilt: 19 - Sayı: 2, 138–146. https://ajindex.com/articles/579055

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (11)

  1. Buckley JJ, Eslami E. An Introduction to fuzzy logic and fuzzy sets. Springer-Verlag 2003; 285. Zadeh LA. Fuzzy Sets. Information and Control 1965; 8: 338-53. Altaş İH. Bulanık Mantık: Bulanıklılık Kavramı. Enerji ElektrikElektromekanik-3e. 1999; 62: 80-5. Licata G. Employing fuzzy logic in the diagnosis of clinical case. Health 2010; 2: 211-24.
  2. Brown M, Bossley KM, Mills DJ, Harris CJ, eds. High dimensional neurofuzzy systems: overcoming the curse of dimensionality. IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems; 1995.
  3. Raju GVS, Zhou J, Kisner RA. Hierarchical fuzzy control. International Journal of Control 1991; 54: 1201-16.
  4. Emara H, Elshafei AL. Robust robot control enhanced by a hierarchical adaptive fuzzy algorithm. Engineering Applications of Artificial Intelligence 2004; 17: 187-98.
  5. Chen Y, Peng L, Abraham A, eds. Programming hierarchical TS fuzzy systems. Proceedings of the 2006 International Symposium on Evolving Fuzzy Systems, EFS'06; 2006. Jang JSR, eds. Input selection for ANFIS learning. IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems; 1996.
  6. Sivanandam SN, Sumathi S, Deepa SN. Introduction to fuzzy logic using. MATLAB 2007; 1-430.
  7. Jang JSR, Sun CT, Mizutani E. Neuro-fuzzy and soft computing: a computational approach to learning and machine intelligence. Prentice Hall 1997; 614. Leondes CT. Fuzzy logic and expert systems applications. Academic Press 1998; 416. Czogala E, Leski J. Fuzzy and Neuro-Fuzzy Intelligent Systems. Physica Verlag, Springer Science & Business Media 2000; 194. Ross TJ. Fuzzy logic with engineering applications. Wiley 2009; 585. Canul-Reich J, Shoemaker L, Hall LO, eds. Ensembles of fuzzy classifiers. IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems; 2007.
  8. Ziasabounchi N, Askerzade I. ANFIS Based Classification Model for Heart Disease Prediction. Intenational Journal of Electrical and Computer Sciences. 2014; 14: 7-12.
  9. Joo MG, Lee JS, eds. Hierarchical fuzzy control scheme using structured Takagi-Sugeno type fuzzy inference. IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems; 1999.
  10. Toosi AN, Kahani M, Monsefi R, eds. Network intrusion detection based on Neuro-Fuzzy classification. 2006 International Conference on Computing and Informatics, ICOCI '06; 2006.
  11. Wei M, Bai B, Sung AH, Liu Q, Wang J, Cather ME. Predicting injection profiles using ANFIS. Information Sciences 2007; 177: 4445-61. Ba-Alwi F. Knowledge Acquisition Tool for Learning Membership Function and Fuzzy Classification Rules from Numerical Data. International Journal o