Characterization of t-norms for Type-2 Fuzzy Sets

Basic Information

• Paper ID: 2511.17640
• Title: Characterization of t-norms on normal convex functions
• Author: Jie Sun (Southwest Minzu University, China)
• Classification: math.GM (General Mathematics)
• Publication Date: November 2025 (arXiv v2)
• Paper Link: https://arxiv.org/abs/2511.17640

Abstract

This paper investigates the construction of triangular norms (t-norms) in the theory of type-2 fuzzy sets (T2 FS). Type-2 fuzzy sets, introduced by Zadeh in 1965, have membership degrees that are themselves type-1 fuzzy sets, enabling better modeling of uncertainty in real-world applications. In type-2 rule-based fuzzy systems (T2 RFS), the composition rules of inference are based on t-norms defined on the complete lattice (L,⊑), where L is the set of all convex normal functions from 0,1 to 0,1 and ⊑ is the convolution order. The choice of t-norm affects the performance of T2 RFS; therefore, extending the set of available t-norms for domain experts to choose from is of significant importance. This paper provides necessary and sufficient conditions for the convolution ∗△ to be a t-norm on (L,⊑), and provides a class of t-norms with extremely simple computation.

Research Background and Motivation

1. Core Problem to be Solved

The key problem addressed in this paper is: Under what conditions is the convolution ∗△ induced by two operators ∗ and △ on 0,1 a t-norm on the complete lattice (L,⊑)?

2. Importance of the Problem

• Theoretical Significance: Type-2 fuzzy set theory is an important extension of fuzzy set theory; the fuzziness of membership degrees enables better handling of uncertainty
• Practical Applications: Type-2 rule-based fuzzy systems (T2 RFS) have wide applications in industrial process control, complex system analysis, and other fields
• System Performance: The choice of t-norm directly affects the composition of inference rules, thereby affecting the overall performance of the fuzzy system
• Computational Complexity: The computational complexity of existing operators hinders practical applications of T2 RFS

3. Limitations of Existing Methods

• Hernández et al. (2014): Provided only sufficient but not necessary conditions for convolutions to be tr-norms (t-norms satisfying stricter axioms)
• Theoretical Incompleteness: Lacks complete characterization via necessary and sufficient conditions
• Computational Efficiency: Existing convolution operators have high computational complexity

4. Research Motivation

• Provide complete theoretical characterization of t-norm construction, enabling domain experts to select appropriate t-norms more flexibly
• Reduce computational complexity and promote practical applications of T2 RFS
• Deepen understanding of the convolution order ⊑ and advance research on aggregation operators

Core Contributions

1. Necessary and Sufficient Conditions Theorem: Provides necessary and sufficient conditions for the convolution ∗△ to be a t-norm on (L,⊑) (Theorems 3.6 and 4.19), completely resolving this open problem
2. Equivalence of t-norms and tr-norms: Proves that on (L,⊑), a convolution ∗△ is a t-norm if and only if it is a tr-norm (Theorem 3.6)
3. Easily Computable t-norms: Provides a class of convolution t-norms that are extremely easy to compute (Definition 4.15 and Proposition 4.21), of the form ∧△, where △ is a boundary continuous t-norm
4. New Characterization of Convolution Order: Provides new equivalent characterizations of the convolution order ⊑ (Proposition 4.11), expressed through α-cuts and strong α-cuts, making the convolution order more intuitive
5. Dual Results: Provides complete dual theory for t-conorms and tr-conorms (Theorems 5.7 and 5.8)

Detailed Methodology

Task Definition

Input: Two binary operators ∗: 0,1² → 0,1 and △: 0,1² → 0,1, where ∗ is surjective

Output: Determine whether the convolution ∗△: L² → L induced by ∗ and △ is a t-norm on (L,⊑)

Constraints:

• L is the set of all convex normal functions from 0,1 to 0,1
• ⊑ is the convolution order, defined as f ⊑ g if and only if f ∧∧ g = f
• (L,⊑,0̄,1̄) is a complete distributive lattice

Core Concepts

1. Convolution Definition (Definition 2.6)

For n-ary operators ∗ and △, the convolution ∗△: Mⁿ → M is defined as:

∗△(f₁,...,fₙ)(x) = ⋁_{∗(y₁,...,yₙ)=x} △(f₁(y₁),...,fₙ(yₙ))

For the binary case:

(f ∗△ g)(x) = ⋁_{y∗z=x} f(y)△g(z)

2. t-norm Definition (Definition 2.1)

A binary operator ∗: P² → P is a t-norm on a bounded poset (P,≤,0_P,1_P) if:

• Commutativity: x∗y = y∗x
• Associativity: (x∗y)∗z = x∗(y∗z)
• Identity element: 1_P∗x = x
• Monotonicity: y ≤ z ⟹ x∗y ≤ x∗z

3. Convex Normal Functions

• Normality: sup{f(x) | x ∈ 0,1} = 1
• Convexity: x ≤ y ≤ z ⟹ f(y) ≥ f(x) ∧ f(z)

Proof Strategy of Main Results

Necessity Analysis (Section 3)

Key Lemma 3.3: If ∗△ is a t-norm on (L,⊑), then:

• ∗△ is closed on J (singleton characteristic functions) and J2 (closed interval characteristic functions)
• ∗ is a continuous t-norm

Proof Outline:

1. Utilize the identity element property 1̄∗△x̄ = x̄
2. Prove Ā∗△B̄ = A∗B via Lemma 3.2
3. Establish isomorphism τ: 0,1 → J, x ↦ x̄
4. Conclude that ∗ is a t-norm and hence continuous via Proposition 2.4

Key Lemma 3.4: If ∗△ is a t-norm on (Lu,⊑) or (L,⊑), then △ is a t-norm

Proof Outline:

1. Construct special function family P = {p_a | a ∈ 0,1}, where

   p_a(x) = {1,  x=0
            {a,  x∈(0,1] (when a<1)
   

2. Prove that the map p: 0,1 → P is an order isomorphism
3. Apply Proposition 2.4 to reach the conclusion

Proposition 3.7: If ∗△ is a t-norm on (L,⊑), then △ is a boundary continuous t-norm

Proposition 3.11: If ∗△ is a t-norm on (L,⊑) and ∗≠∧, then △ is a left-continuous t-norm

Proof Strategy: Construct special functions f,g,h ∈ L, utilize the associativity and monotonicity, and prove a△1⁻ = a through an intricate chain of inequalities

Sufficiency Analysis (Section 4)

4.1 Closure (Proposition 4.2)

If ∗ is a continuous t-norm and △ is continuous at (1,1), then ∗△ is closed on L

Proof Outline:

1. Normality: Utilize the continuity of △ at (1,1); for any a<1, there exist b₁,c₁ such that b₁△c₁>a
2. Convexity: Key Lemma 4.1 proves that the union of convex set families satisfying the non-empty intersection condition is convex

4.2 Monotonicity (Proposition 4.13)

Introduce a new order relation ≼ on the collection I of subintervals:

A≼B ⟺ A∧B = A

Key Lemma 4.8: A≼B ⟺ ↑B⊆↑A and ↓A⊆↓B

where ↑A = ⋃{x∈A}x,1, ↓A = ⋃{x∈A}0,x

Proposition 4.11 (New Characterization of Convolution Order): For f,g ∈ L, the following are equivalent:

1. f ⊑ g
2. f^â≼g^â for all a∈(0,1)
3. f^a≼g^a for all a∈(0,1)

4.3 Associativity

Proposition 4.14: If both ∗ and △ are t-norms and △ is left-continuous, then ∗△ is associative on M

Proposition 4.17: If △ is a boundary continuous t-norm, then ∧△ is associative on L

Proof Core: Introduce the definition of f⁺ (Definition 4.15):

f⁺ = ∪{[0,a] | f is monotonically increasing on [0,a]}

Prove that (f∧△g)⁺ = f⁺∩g⁺, then discuss associativity in cases

Main Theorem (Theorem 4.19)

The convolution ∗△ is a t-norm on (L,⊑) if and only if:

1. ∗ is a continuous t-norm
2. If ∗≠∧, then △ is a left-continuous t-norm
3. If ∗=∧, then △ is a boundary continuous t-norm

Technical Innovations

1. Unified Framework: Unifies t-norms and tr-norms under a single framework, proving their equivalence (Theorem 3.6)
2. Fine-grained Continuity Classification: Distinguishes between cases ∗=∧ and ∗≠∧, with different continuity requirements for △:
   • ∗≠∧ requires left-continuity
   • ∗=∧ requires only boundary continuity
3. New Order Relation Tools: Introduces the ≼ relation and ↑, ↓ operators, providing new tools for handling the convolution order
4. Constructive Proof: Employs clever construction of special functions (such as the p_a family and specific f,g,h) to extract operator properties
5. Simplified Computation: Proposition 4.21 provides an explicit computation formula for ∧△:

   (f∧△g)(x) = {f(x)∨g(x),     x∈f⁺∩g⁺
                {f(x),           x∈g⁺\f⁺
                {g(x),           x∈f⁺\g⁺
                {f(x)△g(x),      x∉f⁺∪g⁺
   

Experimental Setup

This is a pure theoretical mathematics paper with no experimental validation. The research methodology consists of:

1. Rigorous mathematical proofs
2. Construction of counterexamples
3. Lemma-chain derivations
4. Bidirectional proofs of necessity and sufficiency

Experimental Results

Summary of Theoretical Results

Main Theorems:

• Theorem 3.6: t-norm ⟺ tr-norm (on L)
• Theorem 4.19: Necessary and sufficient conditions theorem
• Theorem 5.7: Dual t-conorm necessary and sufficient conditions
• Theorem 5.8: t-conorm ⟺ tr-conorm

Key Propositions:

• Proposition 4.11: Three equivalent characterizations of the convolution order
• Proposition 4.21: Simplified computation formula for ∧△

Verification of Theoretical Contributions

1. Completeness: Bidirectional proofs of necessary and sufficient conditions ensure theoretical completeness
2. Generality: Results apply to all combinations of ∗ and △ satisfying the conditions
3. Constructiveness: Provides concrete methods for constructing t-norms

Related Work

Main Research Directions

1. Foundational T-norm Theory:
   • Schweizer & Sklar (1961): Introduction of t-norms on 0,1
   • Alsina, Frank & Schweizer (2006): Associative functions and copulas
2. T-norms on Posets:
   • Zhang (2005): Triangular norms on posets
   • Deschrijver et al. (2004): Intuitionistic fuzzy t-norms
3. Type-2 Fuzzy Set Theory:
   • Zadeh (1975): Linguistic variables and approximate reasoning
   • Walker & Walker (2005): Fuzzy truth algebras
   • Harding et al. (2008, 2010): Lattices of convex normal functions
4. Convolution Operators:
   • Zhang & Hu (2019, 2025): Distributivity of convolutions and α-cuts
   • Hu & Wang (2014, 2015): Type-2 fuzzy sets and interval-valued type-2 fuzzy sets
   • Hernández et al. (2014): T-norms for type-2 fuzzy sets (sufficient conditions)

Advantages of This Paper

1. Theoretical Completeness: Compared to Hernández et al. (2014) providing only sufficient conditions, this paper provides necessary and sufficient conditions
2. Computational Efficiency: Provides explicit formulas for ∧△, significantly reducing computational complexity
3. Theoretical Deepening:
   • Proves equivalence of t-norms and tr-norms
   • Provides new characterizations of the convolution order
   • Complete dual theory
4. Systematicity: Uniformly handles both t-norms and t-conorms

Conclusions and Discussion

Main Conclusions

1. Necessary and Sufficient Conditions: Under the assumption that ∗ is surjective, completely characterizes the conditions for ∗△ to be a t-norm on (L,⊑)
2. Equivalence Results: On (L,⊑), the concepts of t-norm and tr-norm are equivalent
3. Simplified Computation: When △ is a boundary continuous t-norm, ∧△ has a simple computation formula
4. Dual Theory: Necessary and sufficient conditions for t-conorms are obtained through duality

Limitations

1. Surjectivity Assumption: Requires ∗ to be surjective, excluding some operators (such as the Drastic t-norm in certain cases)
2. Continuity Requirements: Requires ∗ to be continuous and △ to be left-continuous or boundary continuous, limiting the scope of applicability
3. Lu Not Fully Addressed: The paper mentions future research on characterizing t-norms on (Lu,⊑) for upper semi-continuous cases, indicating incomplete resolution
4. Computational Complexity: Although ∧△ has a simplified formula, computation of general ∗△ may still be complex
5. Lack of Application Verification: Lacks application verification and performance comparison in concrete T2 RFS

Future Directions

1. Characterization on Lu: Investigate necessary and sufficient conditions for t-norms on the set (Lu,⊑) of normal, convex, upper semi-continuous functions
2. Relaxing Continuity: Explore whether continuity requirements on ∗ and △ can be relaxed
3. Computational Optimization: Further optimize computation algorithms for general convolutions
4. Application Research: Test performance of different t-norms in concrete T2 RFS
5. Other Operators: Investigate characterizations of other aggregation operators such as uninorms and copulas on (L,⊑)

In-Depth Evaluation

Strengths

1. Theoretical Rigor:
   • Complete proofs with rigorous logic
   • Bidirectional proofs of necessity and sufficiency
   • Clear hierarchical organization of lemmas and theorems
2. Completeness of Problem Resolution:
   • Completely resolves the open problem left by Hernández et al.
   • Provides necessary and sufficient conditions rather than only sufficient conditions
   • Covers both t-norms and t-conorms
3. Technical Innovation:
   • Introduces ≼ relation and ↑, ↓ operators, providing new analytical tools
   • The definition of f⁺ cleverly characterizes monotonicity regions of functions
   • Constructive proofs demonstrate sophisticated techniques
4. Practical Value:
   • The explicit formula in Proposition 4.21 significantly reduces computational complexity
   • Corollary 4.20 provides easily verifiable sufficient conditions
   • Provides theoretical guidance for T2 RFS designers
5. Writing Quality:
   • Clear structure, progressing layer by layer from preliminaries to main results
   • Consistent use of definitions and notation
   • Clear explanation of key proof strategies

Weaknesses

1. Readability:
   • High threshold for non-specialist readers
   • Some proofs (e.g., Proposition 3.11) are technically demanding with insufficient intuitive explanation
   • Lacks diagrams to aid understanding
2. Restrictiveness of Assumptions:
   • Surjectivity assumption excludes some important operators
   • Continuity requirements may be too strong
   • Does not discuss necessity of assumptions
3. Insufficient Application Orientation:
   • Lacks case analysis of concrete application scenarios
   • No comparison with existing T2 RFS implementations
   • No quantitative analysis of computational complexity
4. Incompleteness:
   • Problems on Lu left for future work
   • Does not address n-ary convolutions (n>2)
   • No extension to non-normal or non-convex functions
5. Lack of Experimental Verification:
   • As a pure theoretical paper, lacks numerical experiments or application verification
   • No code implementation provided

Impact

1. Theoretical Contribution:
   • Completely resolves an important open problem
   • Provides new analytical tools for fuzzy set theory
   • Likely to become a classic reference in the field
2. Practical Value:
   • Provides theoretical foundation for T2 RFS design
   • Simplified computation formulas facilitate practical applications
   • Expands the range of available t-norms
3. Reproducibility:
   • All theorems have complete proofs
   • Results can be independently verified
   • Construction methods are explicit
4. Follow-up Research:
   • Points direction for research on Lu
   • Can be generalized to other posets
   • Inspires research on aggregation operators

Applicable Scenarios

1. Theoretical Research:
   • Fuzzy logic theory research
   • Lattice theory and order theory
   • Aggregation operator theory
2. System Design:
   • Type-2 fuzzy inference system design
   • Uncertainty reasoning systems
   • Decision support systems
3. Application Fields:
   • Industrial process control (e.g., Mamdani controllers)
   • Complex system analysis
   • Pattern recognition and classification
   • Information fusion
4. Teaching:
   • Advanced courses on fuzzy set theory
   • Mathematical logic courses
   • Lattice theory courses

Key References

1. Zadeh (1965, 1975): Foundational work on fuzzy sets and type-2 fuzzy sets
2. Schweizer & Sklar (2011): Classic monograph on t-norms
3. Harding, Walker & Walker (2008, 2010): Important properties of lattices of convex normal functions
4. Hernández et al. (2014): Prior work directly improved by this paper
5. Zhang & Hu (2025): Recent results on α-cuts
6. Alsina, Frank & Schweizer (2006): Theory of associative functions

Overall Assessment: This is a high-quality theoretical mathematics paper that completely resolves an important open problem in type-2 fuzzy set theory. The theory is rigorous, proofs are complete, and it possesses significant theoretical value and potential practical value. The main shortcoming is the lack of application verification and intuitive explanation, but this is acceptable for a theoretical paper. It is recommended that follow-up work verify the results in concrete application scenarios and explore further relaxation of the assumption conditions.