Page 232 - Data Science Algorithms in a Week
P. 232

216     Abdulrahman Albar, Ahmad Elshennawy, Mohammed Basingab et al.

                       linguistic terms that are associated with the fuzzy classes. There are a total of 360 rule
                       assessments in this table, which represents the assessment of 36 rules by ten experts. It is
                       apparent that 31 of the 36 evaluated rules were evaluated using two or fewer linguistic
                       terms,  and  the  remaining  rules  were  evaluated  with  no  more  than  three  terms.  Five
                       assessed rules reached full consensus, with an agreement rate of 100%; FLS3-09, FLS3-
                       20,  FLS3-24,  FLS3-26,  and  FLS3-31.  It  is  also  observed  that  twelve  assessed  rules
                       received a consensus rate between 80% and 90%, while eighteen rules reached the range
                       of 60% to 70%. Finally, one rule, FLS3-02, achieved a minimum consensus rate of 50%.
                       The  average  consensus  rate  for  this  subsystem  is  76%,  which  when  compared  to  the
                       average  rate  of  79%  for  subsystem  I,  is  relatively  close,  even  though  subsystem  III
                       featured more inputs. When compared to subsystem II’s average consensus rate of 84%,
                       76% is still satisfactory, although subsystem III contained more assessment classes. The
                       frequency of linguistic class use in assessing rules was the highest in the “high” class
                       with 124 uses, followed by “medium” with 105 uses, while the least used classes were
                       “low” and “very high”, with 66 and 65 uses, respectively.

                                Table 9: Results of expert evaluation for subsystem III’s fuzzy rules.


























                          The final list of fuzzy rules for subsystem III is provided in Appendix C, which will
                       be stored in the fuzzy rule base to build the fuzzy knowledge base.
                          The results for subsystem IV’s rule assessments are provided in Table 10, which is
                       the  most  significant  subsystem  in  the  fuzzy  system.  In  this  subsystem,  ten  experts
                       evaluated  80  rules  against  five  assessment  levels,  with  each  rule  consisting  of  a
                       combination of three AND conditions. As each rule is designed with three combinations
                       for  the  antecedent,  to  be  assessed  at  five  levels,  this  subsystem  presents  the  highest
                       complexity for expert assessment.
   227   228   229   230   231   232   233   234   235   236   237