Re: Can you solve this interval problem using IEEE-stds 1788

[Walter Mascarenhas <walter.mascarenhas@xxxxxxxxx>]

Dear Mehran,

   For simple cases like the one you mention, the bounds

you obtain can be obtained easily using linear programming.

Would your method allow one to obtain bound which could

not be obtained via linear programming?

  The point that bothers me is not that you could get bounds

in simple contrived examples. As I said above, this can

be easily done with linear programming.

   The point is how you would turn your approach in a tool

for GENERAL USE. I still believe that you would need to do

a lot of work in order to have a software that would take

a GENERAL PROBLEM and obtain bounds to it.

   Dealing with particular cases is not, and should not be,

the purpose of a standard. 

   Until you present a software able to handle general

examples, proposed by other people, I believe you

will not convince many people about your approach.

In particular, a particular example like the one you

present if far, far, from showing the power of your approach.

 

      regards,

                walter.

   

On Sat, Nov 26, 2016 at 12:14 PM, Mehran Mazandarani <me.mazandarani@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:

Dear Walter and member of IEEE-stds1788
Thank you for your comments.
I am waiting for the result of one of my paper in which we
investigated the interval computing in the context of fuzzy sets and
showed how the approach is able to address the practical cases.
Once I receive the final result, the paper will be sent to you.
Indeed, I have another approach to deal with interval arithmetic that
I'm working on.

For the problem sent to the group, you can see the attachment
including the proposed approach for obtaining the solution.


Best wishes,

On 11/25/16, Walter Mascarenhas <walter.mascarenhas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Mehran,
>
>    I insist: unless you present a viable practical alternative
> to what is proposed in the standard your arguments will
> have little chance of being heard.
>
>    You should also keep in mind that a standard is supposed
> to be a MINIMAL set of requirements, not a compilation of
> all conceivable alternatives. The more requirements you
> make in a standard, the less likely it will ever be implemented.
>
>    In my opinion, the standard is already too complex and
> large as it is. Including new versions for the arithmetic operations
> would lead to something completely out of reach for the few souls
> who have the endurance to turn these abstractions into real software.
>
>   At least for me, practice matters a lot, and I don't see how you
> could get a simple practical solution for the problems you pose.
>
>    Of course, I may be wrong (and it would not be the first time), but
> I would like to see practical evidence that this is indeed the case.
>
>    My wife is an experimental molecular biologist and she always
> tells me: "ideas are cheap, do the experiment". Along the years
> I found little reason to disagree with her.
>
>   So, I ask you again: do the experiment and let us know the result.
>
>            walter.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 7:58 AM, Mehran Mazandarani <
> me.mazandarani@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>> Dear Walter,
>> Thank you for message.
>> I wasn't going to turn the presented software by Oliver down, and also
>> I have not written a software yet, maybe in the future. But, the key
>> point I am going to mention is that whether a researcher could handle
>> such a problem based on the IEEE-stds 1788 or not?
>> You know, software works based on algorithm and method created by
>> human. It also may think and learn based on human's algorithm and
>> methods defined for. Then, if we don't have correct method to deal
>> with problem, therefore software does not either.
>>
>> I think we should not only define the standard operators in IEEE-stds
>> 1788, but also define the "standard form".
>>
>> Warmest regards,
>>
>> On 11/25/16, Walter Mascarenhas <walter.mascarenhas@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > Mehran,
>> >
>> >    How would your software solve this problem?
>> >
>> >    Would your software have the same general
>> > purpose as Oliver's, that is, would it work in
>> > all possible cases? Would it handle
>> > nonlinear functions for instance?
>> >
>> >     Would your software work if you only had
>> > information (1) ? If it would then I would
>> > like to see it working.
>> >
>> >    What I particularly WOULD NOT  like to
>> > see is the comparison of a software
>> > that exists only on your imagination
>> > with real code, which has been
>> > tested and used by other people.
>> >
>> >    If you can provide such a software then
>> > I believe your contribution would be
>> > much appreciated by the community.
>> >
>> >   Until you provide this software your
>> > claims will be questionable.
>> >
>> >   So, write it up and let us see the result.
>> >
>> >   Oliver has done such effort and I praise
>> > him for that. If you do something similar
>> > I will praise you too.
>> >
>> >              walter
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > On Fri, Nov 25, 2016 at 5:35 AM, Mehran Mazandarani <
>> > me.mazandarani@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Dear Member of IEEE-stds 1788,
>> >> I was wondering whether one can obtain a unique solution to the
>> >> following naturally equivalent problems based on IEEE-stds 1788 or
>> >> not:
>> >>
>> >> X is unknown; u and v are interval numbers and known
>> >>
>> >> 1) X-u=v
>> >> 2)X-u-v=0;
>> >> 3)X-v=u
>> >> 4)X=u+v
>> >>
>> >> solution X=?
>> >> Please do mention based on which definition of IEEE-stds 1788 the
>> >> presented problem has a unique solution.
>> >> Thank you so much for your kind comments in advance.
>> >> Warmest regards,
>> >> Mehran
>> >> --
>> >> Mehran Mazandarani
>> >> Department of Electrical Engineering
>> >> Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
>> >> homepage:http://mehran.mazandarani.fumblog.um.ac.ir/
>> >> IEEE Member, me.mazandarani@xxxxxxxx
>> >>
>> >
>>
>>
>> --
>> Mehran Mazandarani
>> Department of Electrical Engineering
>> Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
>> homepage:http://mehran.mazandarani.fumblog.um.ac.ir/
>> IEEE Member, me.mazandarani@xxxxxxxx
>>
>


--
Mehran Mazandarani
Department of Electrical Engineering
Ferdowsi University of Mashhad, Mashhad, Iran.
homepage:http://mehran.mazandarani.fumblog.um.ac.ir/
IEEE Member, me.mazandarani@xxxxxxxx