Exploring the complexity of natural languages: A fuzzy evaluative perspective on Greenberg universals

Antoni Brosa-Rodríguez; M. Dolores Jiménez-López; Adrià Torrens-Urrutia; Antoni Brosa-Rodríguez; M. Dolores Jiménez-López; Adrià Torrens-Urrutia

doi:10.3934/math.2024109

AIMS Mathematics

2024, Volume 9, Issue 1: 2181-2214. doi: 10.3934/math.2024109

Previous Article Next Article

Research article Special Issues

Exploring the complexity of natural languages: A fuzzy evaluative perspective on Greenberg universals

Universitat Rovira i Virgili, Research Group on Mathematical Linguistics (GRLMC), 43002, Tarragona, Spain

Received: 13 August 2023 Revised: 01 November 2023 Accepted: 19 November 2023 Published: 21 December 2023
MSC : 03B65

In this paper, we introduced a fuzzy model for calculating complexity based on universality, aiming to measure the complexity of natural languages in terms of the degree of universality exhibited in their rules. We validated the model by conducting experiments on a corpus of 143 languages obtained from Universal Dependencies 2.11. To formalize the linguistic universals proposed by Greenberg, we employed the Grew tool to convert them into a formal rule representation. This formalization enables the verification of universals within the corpus. By analyzing the corpus, we extracted the occurrences of each universal in different languages. The obtained results were used to define a fuzzy model that quantifies the degree of universality and complexity of both the Greenberg universals and the languages themselves, employing the mathematical theory of evaluative expressions from fuzzy natural logic (FNL). Our analysis revealed an inversely proportional relationship between the degree of universality and the level of complexity observed in the languages. The implications of our findings extended to various applications in the theoretical analysis and computational treatment of languages. In addition, the proposed model offered insights into the nature of language complexity, providing a valuable framework for further research and exploration.

Keywords:

Citation: Antoni Brosa-Rodríguez, M. Dolores Jiménez-López, Adrià Torrens-Urrutia. Exploring the complexity of natural languages: A fuzzy evaluative perspective on Greenberg universals[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(1): 2181-2214. doi: 10.3934/math.2024109

Related Papers:

[1]	Yayun Fu, Mengyue Shi . A conservative exponential integrators method for fractional conservative differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 19067-19082. doi: 10.3934/math.2023973
[2]	Yong-Chao Zhang . Least energy solutions to a class of nonlocal Schrödinger equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(8): 20763-20772. doi: 10.3934/math.20241009
[3]	Tingting Ma, Yuehua He . An efficient linearly-implicit energy-preserving scheme with fast solver for the fractional nonlinear wave equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(11): 26574-26589. doi: 10.3934/math.20231358
[4]	Karmina K. Ali, Resat Yilmazer . Discrete fractional solutions to the effective mass Schrödinger equation by mean of nabla operator. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(2): 894-903. doi: 10.3934/math.2020061
[5]	Erdal Bas, Ramazan Ozarslan . Theory of discrete fractional Sturm–Liouville equations and visual results. AIMS Mathematics, 2019, 4(3): 593-612. doi: 10.3934/math.2019.3.593
[6]	Dengfeng Lu, Shuwei Dai . On a class of three coupled fractional Schrödinger systems with general nonlinearities. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 17142-17153. doi: 10.3934/math.2023875
[7]	Mubashir Qayyum, Efaza Ahmad, Hijaz Ahmad, Bandar Almohsen . New solutions of time-space fractional coupled Schrödinger systems. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(11): 27033-27051. doi: 10.3934/math.20231383
[8]	Xiaojun Zhou, Yue Dai . A spectral collocation method for the coupled system of nonlinear fractional differential equations. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 5670-5689. doi: 10.3934/math.2022314
[9]	Zunyuan Hu, Can Li, Shimin Guo . Fast finite difference/Legendre spectral collocation approximations for a tempered time-fractional diffusion equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 34647-34673. doi: 10.3934/math.20241650
[10]	Xiao-Yu Li, Yu-Lan Wang, Zhi-Yuan Li . Numerical simulation for the fractional-in-space Ginzburg-Landau equation using Fourier spectral method. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(1): 2407-2418. doi: 10.3934/math.2023124

Abstract

1. Introduction

Fractional calculus is a popular subject because of having a lot of application areas of theoretical and applied sciences, like engineering, physics, biology, etc. Discrete fractional calculus is more recent area than fractional calculus and it was first defined by Diaz–Osler ^[1], Miller–Ross ^[2] and Gray–Zhang ^[3]. More recently, the theory of discrete fractional calculus have begun to develop rapidly with Goodrich–Peterson ^[4], Baleanu et al. ^[5,6], Ahrendt et al. ^[7], Atici–Eloe ^[8,9], Anastassiou ^[10], Abdeljawad et al. ^{[11,12,13,14,15,16]}, Hein et al. ^[17] and Cheng et al. ^[18], Mozyrska ^[19] and so forth ^{[20,21,22,23,24,25]}.

Fractional Sturm–Liouville differential operators have been studied by Bas et al. ^[26,27], Klimek et al.^[28], Dehghan et al. ^[29]. Besides that, Sturm–Liouville differential and difference operators were studied by ^{[30,31,32,33]}. In this study, we define DFHA operators and prove the self–adjointness of DFHA operator, some spectral properties of the operator.

More recently, Almeida et al. ^[34] have studied discrete and continuous fractional Sturm–Liouville operators, Bas–Ozarslan ^[35] have shown the self–adjointness of discrete fractional Sturm–Liouville operators and proved some spectral properties of the problem.

Sturm–Liouville equation having hydrogen atom potential is defined as follows

$\frac{d^{2}R}{dr^{2}}+\frac{a}{r}\frac{dR}{dr}-\frac{\ell \left( \ell +1\right) }{r^{2}}R+\left( E+\frac{a}{r}\right) R = 0\qquad \left( 0 \lt r \lt \infty \right) .$

In quantum mechanics, the study of the energy levels of the hydrogen atom leads to this equation. Where $R$ is the distance from the mass center to the origin, $\ell$ is a positive integer, $a$ is real number $E$ is energy constant and $r$ is the distance between the nucleus and the electron.

The hydrogen atom is a two–particle system and it composes of an electron and a proton. Interior motion of two particles around the center of mass corresponds to the movement of a single particle by a reduced mass. The distance between the proton and the electron is identified $r$ and $r$ is given by the orientation of the vector pointing from the proton to the electron. Hydrogen atom equation is defined as Schrödinger equation in spherical coordinates and in consequence of some transformations, this equation is defined as

$y^{\prime \prime }+\left( \lambda -\dfrac{l\left( l+1\right) }{x^{2}}+\dfrac{ 2}{x}-q\left( x\right) \right) y = 0.$

Spectral theory of hydrogen atom equation is studied by ^[39,40,41]. Besides that, we can observe that hydrogen atom differential equation has series solution as follows (^[39], p.268)

$\begin{eqnarray} y(x) = &a_0x^{l+1}\left\{1-\dfrac{k-l-1}{1!(2l+2)}.\dfrac{2x}{k}+\dfrac{(k-l-1)(k-l-2)}{2!(2l+2)(2l+3)}\left(\dfrac{2x}{k} \right)^2+\ldots \right.\\ &\left.+(-1)^n\dfrac{(k-l-1)(k-l-2)\ldots3.2.1}{(k-1)!(2l+2)(2l+3)\ldots(2l+n)}\left(\dfrac{2x}{k} \right)^n \right\}, k = 1, 2, \ldots \end{eqnarray}$

(1.1)

Recently, Bohner and Cuchta ^[36,37] studied some special integer order discrete functions, like Laguerre, Hermite, Bessel and especially Cuchta mentioned the difficulty in obtaining series solution of discrete special functions in his dissertation (^[38], p.100). In this regard, finding series solution of DFHA equations is an open problem and has some difficulties in the current situation. For this reason, we study to obtain solutions of DFHA eq.s in a different way with representation of solutions.

In this study, we investigate DFHA equation in Riemann–Liouville and Grü nwald–Letnikov sense. The aim of this study is to contribute to the spectral theory of DFHA operator and behaviors of eigenfunctions and also to obtain the solution of DFHA equation.

We investigate DFHA equation in three different ways;

$i)$ (nabla left and right) Riemann–Liouville (R–L)sense,

$L_{1}x\left( t\right) = \nabla _{a}^{\mu }\left( _{b}\nabla ^{\mu }x\left( t\right) \right) +\left( \dfrac{l\left( l+1\right) }{t^{2}}-\dfrac{2}{t} +q\left( t\right) \right) x\left( t\right) = \lambda x\left( t\right) , \text{ }0 \lt \mu \lt 1,$

$ii)$ (delta left and right) Grünwald–Letnikov (G–L) sense,

$L_{2}x\left( t\right) = \Delta _{-}^{\mu }\left( \Delta _{+}^{\mu }x\left( t\right) \right) +\left( \dfrac{l\left( l+1\right) }{t^{2}}-\dfrac{2}{t} +q\left( t\right) \right) x\left( t\right) = \lambda x\left( t\right) , \text{ }0 \lt \mu \lt 1,$

$iii)$ (nabla left) Riemann–Liouville (R–L)sense,

$L_{3}x\left( t\right) = \nabla _{a}^{\mu }\left( \nabla _{a}^{\mu }x\left( t\right) \right) +\left( \dfrac{l\left( l+1\right) }{t^{2}}-\dfrac{2}{t} +q\left( t\right) \right) x\left( t\right) = \lambda x\left( t\right) , \text{ }0 \lt \mu \lt 1.$

2. Preliminaries

Definition 2.1. ^[42] Falling and rising factorial functions are defined as follows respectively

$\begin{equation} t^{\underline{\alpha }} = \frac{\Gamma \left( t +1\right) }{\Gamma \left( t-\alpha +1\right) }, \end{equation}$

(2.1)

$\begin{equation} t^{\overline{\alpha}} = \frac{\Gamma \left( t+\alpha \right) }{\Gamma \left( t\right) }, \end{equation}$

(2.2)

where $\Gamma$ is the gamma function, $\alpha \in \mathbb{R}$ .

Remark 2.1. Delta and nabla operators hold the following properties

$\begin{eqnarray} \Delta t^{\underline{\alpha }} & = &\alpha t^{\underline{\alpha -1}}, \\ \nabla t^{\overline{\alpha}} & = &\alpha t^{\overline{\alpha -1}}. \end{eqnarray}$

(2.3)

Definition 2.2. ^[2,8,11] Nabla fractional sum operators are given as below,

$\left(i\right)$ The left fractional sum of order $\mu > 0$ is defined by

$\begin{equation} \nabla _{a}^{-\mu }x\left( t\right) = \frac{1}{\Gamma \left( \mu \right) } \sum\limits_{s = a+1}^{t}\left( t-\rho \left( s\right) \right) ^{\overline{\mu -1} }x\left( s\right) , \text{ }t\in \mathbb{N} _{a+1}, \end{equation}$

(2.4)

$\left(ii\right)$ The right fractional sum of order $\mu > 0$ is defined by

$\begin{equation} _{b}\nabla ^{-\mu }x\left( t\right) = \frac{1}{\Gamma \left( \mu \right) } \sum\limits_{s = t}^{b-1}\left( s-\rho \left( t\right) \right) ^{\overline{\mu -1} }x\left( s\right) , \text{ }t\in \text{ }_{b-1} \mathbb{N} , \end{equation}$

(2.5)

where $\rho \left(t\right) = t-1$ is called backward jump operators, $\mathbb{N} _{a} = \left \{ a, a+1, ...\right \},$ $_{b} \mathbb{N} = \left \{ b, b-1, ...\right \}$ .

Definition 2.3. ^[12,14] Nabla fractional difference operators are as follows,

$\left(i\right)$ The left fractional difference of order $\mu > 0$ is defined by

$\begin{equation} \nabla _{a}^{\mu }x\left( t\right) = \nabla ^{n}\nabla _{a}^{-\left( n-\mu \right) }x\left( t\right) = \frac{\nabla ^{n}}{\Gamma \left( n-\mu \right) } \sum\limits_{s = a+1}^{t}\left( t-\rho \left( s\right) \right) ^{\overline{n-\mu -1} }x\left( s\right) , \text{ }t\in \mathbb{N} _{a+1}, \end{equation}$

(2.6)

$\left(ii\right)$ The right fractional difference of order $\mu > 0$ is defined by

$\begin{equation} _{b}\nabla ^{\mu }x\left( t\right) = \left( -1\right) ^{n}\nabla ^{n}\nabla _{a}^{-\left( n-\mu \right) }x\left( t\right) = \frac{\left( -1\right) ^{n}\Delta ^{n}}{\Gamma \left( n-\mu \right) }\sum\limits_{s = t}^{b-1}\left( s-\rho \left( t\right) \right) ^{\overline{n-\mu -1}}x\left( s\right) , \text{ }t\in \text{ }_{b-1} \mathbb{N} . \end{equation}$

(2.7)

Fractional differences in $\left(2.6-2.7\right)$ are called the Riemann–Liouville (R–L) definition of the $\mu$ -th order nabla fractional difference.

Definition 2.4. ^[1,18] Fractional difference operators are given as follows

$\left(i\right)$ The delta left fractional difference of order $\mu,$ $0 < \mu \leq 1,$ is defined by

$\begin{equation} \Delta _{-}^{\mu }x\left( t\right) = \frac{1}{h^{\mu }}\sum\limits_{s = 0}^{t}\left( -1\right) ^{s}\frac{\mu \left( \mu -1\right) ...\left( \mu -s+1\right) }{s!} x\left( t-s\right) , \text{ }t = 1, ..., N. \end{equation}$

(2.8)

$\left(ii\right)$ The delta right fractional difference of order $\mu,$ $0 < \mu \leq 1,$ is defined by

$\begin{equation} \Delta _{+}^{\mu }x\left( t\right) = \frac{1}{h^{\mu }}\sum\limits_{s = 0}^{N-t}\left( -1\right) ^{s}\frac{\mu \left( \mu -1\right) ...\left( \mu -s+1\right) }{s!} x\left( t+s\right) , \text{ }t = 0, .., N-1, \end{equation}$

(2.9)

fractional differences in $\left(2.8-2.9\right)$ are called the Grünwald–Letnikov (G–L) definition of the $\mu$ -th order delta fractional difference.

Definition 2.5 ^[14] Integration by parts formula for R–L nabla fractional difference operator is defined by, $u$ is defined on $_{b} \mathbb{N}$ and $v$ is defined on $\mathbb{N} _{a}$ ,

$\begin{equation} \sum\limits_{s = a+1}^{b-1}u\left( s\right) \nabla _{a}^{\mu }v\left( s\right) = \sum\limits_{s = a+1}^{b-1}v\left( s\right) _{b}\nabla ^{\mu }u\left( s\right) . \end{equation}$

(2.10)

Definition 2.6. ^[34] Integration by parts formula for G–L delta fractional difference operator is defined by, $u$ , $v$ is defined on $\left \{ 0, 1, ..., n\right \}$ , then

$\begin{equation} \sum\limits_{s = 0}^{n}u\left( s\right) \Delta _{-}^{\mu }v\left( s\right) = \sum\limits_{s = 0}^{n}v\left( s\right) \Delta _{+}^{\mu }u\left( s\right) . \end{equation}$

(2.11)

Definition 2.7. ^[17] $f: \mathbb{N} _{a}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ , $s\in \Re,$ Laplace transform is defined as follows,

$\mathcal{L} _{a}\left \{ f\right \} \left( s\right) = \sum\limits_{k = 1}^{\infty }\left( 1-s\right) ^{k-1}f\left( a+k\right) ,$

where $\Re = \mathbb{C} \backslash \left \{ 1\right \}$ and $\Re$ is called the set of regressive (complex) functions.

Definition 2.8. ^[17] Let $f, g: \mathbb{N} _{a}\rightarrow \mathbb{R}$ , all $t\in \mathbb{N} _{a+1},$ convolution of $f$ and $g$ is defined as follows

$\left( f\ast g\right) \left( t\right) = \sum\limits_{s = a+1}^{t}f\left( t-\rho \left( s\right) +a\right) g\left( s\right) ,$

where $\rho \left(s\right)$ is the backward jump function defined in ^[42] as

$\rho \left( s\right) = s-1.$

Theorem 2.1. ^[17] $f, g: \mathbb{N} _{a}\rightarrow \mathbb{R},$ convolution theorem is expressed as follows,

$\mathcal{L} _{a}\left \{ f\ast g\right \} \left( s\right) = \mathcal{L} _{a}\left \{ f\right \} \mathcal{L} _{a}\left \{ g\right \} \left( s\right) .$

Lemma 2.1. ^[17] $f: \mathbb{N} _{a}\rightarrow \mathbb{R},$ the following property is valid,

$\mathcal{L} _{a+1}\left \{ f\right \} \left( s\right) = \frac{1}{1-s} \mathcal{L} _{a}\left \{ f\right \} \left( s\right) -\frac{1}{1-s}f\left( a+1\right) .$

Theorem 2.2. ^[17] $f: \mathbb{N} _{a}\rightarrow \mathbb{R},$ $0 < \mu < 1,$ Laplace transform of nabla fractional difference

$\mathcal{L} _{a+1}\left \{ \nabla _{a}^{\mu }f\right \} \left( s\right) = s^{\mu }\mathcal{L} _{a+1}\left \{ f\right \} \left( s\right) -\frac{ 1-s^{\mu }}{1-s}f\left( a+1\right) , \mathit{\text{}}t\in \mathbb{N} _{a+1}.$

Definition 2.9. ^[17] For $\left \vert p\right \vert < 1$ , $\alpha > 0,$ $\beta \in \mathbb{R}$ and $t\in \mathbb{N} _{a}$ , Mittag–Leffler function is defined by

$E_{p, \alpha , \beta }\left( t, a\right) = \sum\limits_{k = 0}^{\infty }p^{k}\frac{\left( t-a\right) ^{\overline{\alpha k+\beta }}}{\Gamma \left( \alpha k+\beta +1\right) }.$

Theorem 2.3. ^[17] For $\left \vert p\right \vert < 1$ , $\alpha > 0,$ $\beta \in \mathbb{R}$ , $\left \vert 1-s\right \vert < 1$ and $\left \vert s\right \vert ^{\alpha } > p$ , Laplace transform of Mittag–Leffler function is as follows,

$\mathcal{L} _{a+1}\left \{ E_{p, \alpha , \beta }\left( ., a\right) \right \} \left( s\right) = \frac{s^{\alpha -\beta -1}}{s^{\alpha }-p}.$

3. Main results

3.1. Discrete fractional hydrogen–atom equations

Let us consider equations in three different forms;

$i)$ $L_{1}$ DFHA operator $L_{1}$ is defined in (nabla left and right) R–L sense,

$\begin{equation} L_{1}x\left( t\right) = \nabla _{a}^{\mu }\left( p\left( t\right) _{b}\nabla ^{\mu }x\left( t\right) \right) +\left( \dfrac{l\left( l+1\right) }{t^{2}}- \dfrac{2}{t}+q\left( t\right) \right) x\left( t\right) = \lambda x\left( t\right) , \text{ }0 \lt \mu \lt 1, \end{equation}$

(3.1)

where $l$ is a positive integer or zero, $q\left(t\right) +\dfrac{2}{t}- \dfrac{l\left(l+1\right) }{t^{2}}$ are named potential function., $\lambda$ is the spectral parameter, $t\in \left[a+1, b-1\right],$ $x\left(t\right) \in l^{2}\left[a+1, b-1\right],$ $a > 0.$

$ii)$ $L_{2}$ DFHA operator $L_{2}$ is defined in (delta left and right) G–L sense,

$\begin{equation} L_{2}x\left( t\right) = \Delta _{-}^{\mu }\left( p\left( t\right) \Delta _{+}^{\mu }x\left( t\right) \right) +\left( \dfrac{l\left( l+1\right) }{t^{2} }-\dfrac{2}{t}+q\left( t\right) \right) x\left( t\right) = \lambda x\left( t\right) , \text{ }0 \lt \mu \lt 1, \end{equation}$

(3.2)

where $p, q, l, \lambda$ is as defined above, $t\in \left[1, n\right],$ $x\left(t\right) \in l^{2}\left[0, n\right].$

$iii)$ $L_{3}$ DFHA operator $L_{3}$ is defined in (nabla left) R–L sense,

$\begin{equation} L_{3}x\left( t\right) = \nabla _{a}^{\mu }\left( \nabla _{a}^{\mu }x\left( t\right) \right) +\left( \dfrac{l\left( l+1\right) }{t^{2}}-\dfrac{2}{t} +q\left( t\right) \right) x\left( t\right) = \lambda x\left( t\right) , \text{ }0 \lt \mu \lt 1, \end{equation}$

(3.3)

$p, q, l, \lambda$ is as defined above, $t\in \left[a+1, b-1\right],$ $a > 0.$

Theorem 3.1. DFHA operator $L_{1}$ is self–adjoint.

Proof.

$\begin{eqnarray} u\left( t\right) L_{1}v\left( t\right) &\bf{ = }&u\left( t\right) \nabla _{a}^{\mu }\left( p\left( t\right) _{b}\nabla ^{\mu }v\left( t\right) \right) +u\left( t\right) \left( \dfrac{l\left( l+1\right) }{t^{2}}-\dfrac{2 }{t}+q\left( t\right) \right) v\left( t\right) , \end{eqnarray}$

(3.4)

$\begin{eqnarray} v\left( t\right) L_{1}u\left( t\right) &\bf{ = }&v\left( t\right) \nabla _{a}^{\mu }\left( p\left( t\right) _{b}\nabla ^{\mu }u\left( t\right) \right) +v\left( t\right) \left( \dfrac{l\left( l+1\right) }{t^{2}}-\dfrac{2 }{t}+q\left( t\right) \right) u\left( t\right) . \end{eqnarray}$

(3.5)

Subtracting $\left(16-17\right)$ from each other

$u\left( t\right) L_{1}v\left( t\right) -v\left( t\right) L_{1}u\left( t\right) = u\left( t\right) \nabla _{a}^{\mu }\left( p\left( t\right) _{b}\nabla ^{\mu }v\left( t\right) \right) -v\left( t\right) \nabla _{a}^{\mu }\left( p\left( t\right) _{b}\nabla ^{\mu }u\left( t\right) \right)$

and applying definite sum operator to both side of the last equality, we have

$\begin{equation} \sum\limits_{s = a+1}^{b-1}\left( u\left( s\right) L_{1}v\left( s\right) -v\left( s\right) L_{1}u\left( s\right) \right) = \sum\limits_{s = a+1}^{b-1}u\left( s\right) \nabla _{a}^{\mu }\left( p\left( s\right) _{b}\nabla ^{\mu }v\left( s\right) \right) -\sum\limits_{s = a+1}^{b-1}v\left( s\right) \nabla _{a}^{\mu }\left( p\left( s\right) _{b}\nabla ^{\mu }u\left( s\right) \right) . \end{equation}$

(3.6)

Applying the integration by parts formula $\left(2.10\right)$ to right hand side of $\left(18\right),$ we have

$\begin{eqnarray*} \sum\limits_{s = a+1}^{b-1}\left( u\left( s\right) L_{1}v\left( s\right) -v\left( s\right) L_{1}u\left( s\right) \right) & = &\sum\limits_{s = a+1}^{b-1}p\left( s\right) _{b}\nabla ^{\mu }v\left( s\right) _{b}\nabla ^{\mu }u\left( s\right) \\ &&-\sum\limits_{s = a+1}^{b-1}p\left( s\right) _{b}\nabla ^{\mu }u\left( s\right) _{b}\nabla ^{\mu }v\left( s\right) \\ & = &0, \end{eqnarray*}$

$\left \langle L_{1}u, v\right \rangle = \left \langle u, L_{1}v\right \rangle .$

The proof completes.

Theorem 3.2. Eigenfunctions, corresponding to distinct eigenvalues, of the equation $\left(3.2\right)$ are orthogonal.

Proof. Assume that $\lambda _{\alpha }$ and $\lambda _{\beta }$ are two different eigenvalues corresponds to eigenfunctions $u\left(n\right)$ and $v\left(n\right)$ respectively for the equation $\left(3.1 \right)$ ,

$\begin{eqnarray*} \nabla _{a}^{\mu }\left( p\left( t\right) _{b}\nabla ^{\mu }u\left( t\right) \right) +\left( \dfrac{l\left( l+1\right) }{t^{2}}-\dfrac{2}{t}+q\left( t\right) \right) u\left( t\right) -\lambda _{\alpha }u\left( t\right) & = &0, \\ \nabla _{a}^{\mu }\left( p\left( t\right) _{b}\nabla ^{\mu }v\left( t\right) \right) +\left( \dfrac{l\left( l+1\right) }{t^{2}}-\dfrac{2}{t}+q\left( t\right) \right) v\left( t\right) -\lambda _{\beta }v\left( t\right) & = &0, \end{eqnarray*}$

Multiplying last two equations to $v\left(n\right)$ and $u\left(n\right)$ respectively, subtracting from each other and applying sum operator, since the self–adjointness of the operator $L_{1},$ we get

$\left( \lambda _{\alpha }-\lambda _{\beta }\right) \sum\limits_{s = a+1}^{b-1}r\left( s\right) u\left( s\right) v\left( s\right) = 0,$

since $\lambda _{\alpha }\neq \lambda _{\beta, }$

$\begin{eqnarray*} \sum\limits_{s = a+1}^{b-1}r\left( s\right) u\left( s\right) v\left( s\right) & = &0, \\ \left \langle u\left( t\right) , v\left( t\right) \right \rangle & = &0, \end{eqnarray*}$

and the proof completes.

Theorem 3.3. All eigenvalues of the equation $\left(3.1\right)$ are real.

Proof. Assume $\lambda = \alpha +i\beta,$ since the self–adjointness of the operator $L_{1},$ we have

$\begin{eqnarray*} \left \langle L_{1}u, u\right \rangle & = &\left \langle u, L_{1}u\right \rangle , \\ \left \langle \lambda u, u\right \rangle & = &\left \langle u, \lambda u\right \rangle , \end{eqnarray*}$

$\left( \lambda -\overline{\lambda }\right) \left \langle u, u\right \rangle = 0$

Since $\left \langle u, u\right \rangle _{r}\neq 0,$

$\lambda = \overline{\lambda }$

and hence $\beta = 0.$ So, the proof is completed.

Self–adjointness of $L_{2}$ DFHA operator G–L sense, reality of eigenvalues and orthogonality of eigenfunctions of the equation 3.2 can be proven in a similar way to the Theorem 3.1–3.2–3.3 by means of Definition 2.5.

3.2. Representation of solution for discrete fractional hydrogen atom equation

Theorem 3.4.

(3.7)

$\begin{equation} x\left( a+1\right) = c_{1}, \mathit{\text{}}\nabla _{a}^{\mu }x\left( a+1\right) = c_{2}, \end{equation}$

(3.8)

where $p\left(t\right) > 0,$ $r\left(t\right) > 0,$ $q\left(t\right)$ is defined and real valued, $\lambda$ is the spectral parameter $.$ The sum representation of solution of the problem $\left(3.7\right) -\left(3.8\right)$ is given as follows,

$\begin{eqnarray} x\left( t\right) & = &c_{1}\left( \left( 1+\dfrac{l\left( l+1\right) }{\left( a+1\right) ^{2}}-\dfrac{2}{a+1}+q\left( a+1\right) \right) E_{\lambda , 2\mu , \mu -1}\left( t, a\right) -\lambda E_{\lambda , 2\mu , 2\mu -1}\left( t, a\right) \right) \\ &&+c_{2}\left( E_{\lambda , 2\mu , 2\mu -1}\left( t, a\right) -E_{\lambda , 2\mu , \mu -1}\left( t, a\right) \right) \\ &&-\sum\limits_{s = a+1}^{t}E_{\lambda , 2\mu , 2\mu -1}\left( t-\rho \left( s\right) +a\right) \left( \dfrac{l\left( l+1\right) }{s^{2}}-\dfrac{2}{s}+q\left( s\right) \right) x\left( s\right) . \end{eqnarray}$

(3.9)

Proof. Taking Laplace transform of the equation $\left(3.7 \right)$ by Theorem 2.2 and take $\left(\dfrac{l\left(l+1\right) }{t^{2}}- \dfrac{2}{t}+q\left(t\right) \right) x\left(t\right) = g\left(t\right),$

$\begin{eqnarray*} \mathcal{L} _{a+1}\left \{ \nabla _{a}^{\mu }\left( \nabla _{a}^{\mu }x\right) \right \} \left( s\right) +\mathcal{L} _{a+1}\left \{ g\right \} \left( s\right) & = &\lambda \mathcal{L} _{a+1}\left \{ x\right \} \left( s\right) , \\ \begin{array}{c} = \end{array} s^{\mu }\mathcal{L} _{a+1}\left \{ \nabla _{a}^{\mu }x\right \} \left( s\right) -\frac{1-s^{\mu }}{1-s}c_{2} & = &\lambda \mathcal{L} _{a+1}\left \{ x\right \} \left( s\right) -\mathcal{L} _{a+1}\left \{ g\right \} \left( s\right) , \\ \begin{array}{c} = \end{array} s^{\mu }\left( s^{\mu }\mathcal{L} _{a+1}\left \{ x\right \} \left( s\right) -\frac{1-s^{\mu }}{1-s}c_{1}\right) -\frac{1-s^{\mu }}{1-s}c_{2} & = &\lambda \mathcal{L} _{a+1}\left \{ x\right \} \left( s\right) -\mathcal{L} _{a+1}\left \{ g\right \} \left( s\right) , \end{eqnarray*}$

$\begin{array}{c} = \end{array} \mathcal{L} _{a+1}\left \{ x\right \} \left( s\right) = \frac{1-s^{\mu }}{1-s} \frac{1}{s^{2\mu }-\lambda }\left( s^{\mu }c_{1}+c_{2}\right) -\frac{1}{ s^{2\mu }-\lambda }\mathcal{L} _{a+1}\left \{ g\right \} \left( s\right) .$

Using Lemma 2.1, we have

$\begin{equation} \mathcal{L} _{a}\left \{ x\right \} \left( s\right) = c_{1}\left( \frac{ s^{\mu }-\lambda }{s^{2\mu }-\lambda }\right) -\frac{1-s}{s^{2\mu }-\lambda } \left( \frac{1}{1-s}\mathcal{L} _{a}\left \{ g\right \} \left( s\right) - \frac{1}{1-s}g\left( a+1\right) \right) +c_{2}\left( \frac{1-s^{\mu }}{ s^{2\mu }-\lambda }\right) . \end{equation}$

(3.10)

Now, taking inverse Laplace transform of the equation $\left(3.10 \right)$ and applying convolution theorem, then we have the representation of solution of the problem $\left(3.7\right) -\left(3.8\right),$ $\left \vert \lambda \right \vert < 1$ , $\left \vert 1-s\right \vert < 1$ and $\left \vert s\right \vert ^{\alpha } > \lambda$ from Theorem 2.3., i.e.

$\begin{eqnarray*} \mathcal{L}_{a}^{-1}\left \{ \frac{s^{\mu }}{s^{2\mu }-\lambda }\right \} & = &E_{\lambda , 2\mu , \mu -1}\left( t, a\right), \\ \mathcal{L}_{a}^{-1}\left \{ \frac{1}{s^{2\mu }-\lambda }\right \} & = &E_{\lambda , 2\mu , 2\mu -1}\left( t, a\right), \end{eqnarray*}$

$\begin{equation*} \mathcal{L}_{a}^{-1}\left \{ \frac{1}{s^{2\mu }-\lambda }\mathcal{L} _{a}\left \{ q\left( s\right) x\left( s\right) \right \} \right \} = \sum\limits_{s = a+1}^{t}E_{\lambda , 2\mu , 2\mu -1}\left( t-\rho \left( s\right) +a\right) q\left( s\right) x\left( s\right) . \end{equation*}$

Consequently, we have sum representation of solution for DFHA problem 3.7–3.8

$\begin{eqnarray*} x\left( t\right) & = &c_{1}\left( \left( 1+\dfrac{l\left( l+1\right) }{\left( a+1\right) ^{2}}-\dfrac{2}{a+1}+q\left( a+1\right) \right) E_{\lambda , 2\mu , \mu -1}\left( t, a\right) -\lambda E_{\lambda , 2\mu , 2\mu -1}\left( t, a\right) \right) \\ &&+c_{2}\left( E_{\lambda , 2\mu , 2\mu -1}\left( t, a\right) -E_{\lambda , 2\mu , \mu -1}\left( t, a\right) \right) \\ &&-\sum\limits_{s = a+1}^{t}E_{\lambda , 2\mu , 2\mu -1}\left( t-\rho \left( s\right) +a\right) \left( \dfrac{l\left( l+1\right) }{s^{2}}-\dfrac{2}{s}+q\left( s\right) \right) x\left( s\right) . \end{eqnarray*}$

3.3. Applications and visual results

Presume that $c_{1} = 1, c_{2} = 0, a = 0$ in the representation of solution $\left(3.9\right)$ and hence we may observe the behaviors of solutions in following figures (Figures 1–7) and tables (Tables 1–3);

Figure 1.

$q\left(t\right) = 0, \lambda = 0.01, l = 1$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 2.

$\lambda = 0.01, \mu = 0.45, l = 1$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 3.

$q\left(t\right) = 0, \mu = 0.4, l = 1$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 4.

$q\left(t\right) = 0, l = 1, \lambda = 0.01, t = 4$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 5.

$q\left(t\right) = 0, \lambda = -0.01, l = 0.01$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 6.

$q\left(t\right) = 0, \lambda = -0.01, \mu = 0.9$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Figure 7.

$q\left(t\right) = 0, \mu = 0.9, l = 0.01$ .

DownLoad: Full-Size Img PowerPoint

Table 1.

$q\left(t\right) = 0, \lambda = 0.01, l = 1$ .

$x\left(t\right)$	$\mu =0.3$	$\mu =0.35$	$\mu =0.4$	$\mu =0.45$	$\mu =0.5$
$x\left(1\right)$	$1$	$1$	$1$	$1$	$1$
$x\left(2\right)$	$0.612$	$0.714$	$1.123$	$0.918$	$1.020$
$x\left(3\right)$	$0.700$	$0.900$	$1.515$	$1.370$	$1.641$
$x\left(5\right)$	$0.881$	$1.336$	$2.402$	$2.747$	$3.773$
$x\left(7\right)$	$1.009$	$1.740$	$3.352$	$4.566$	$7.031$
$x\left(9\right)$	$1.099$	$2.100$	$4.332$	$6.749$	$11.461$
$x\left(12\right)$	$1.190$	$2.570$	$5.745$	$10.623$	$20.450$
$x\left(15\right)$	$1.249$	$2.975$	$6.739$	$15.149$	$32.472$
$x\left(16\right)$	$1.264$	$3.098$	$7.235$	$16.793$	$37.198$
$x\left(18\right)$	$1.289$	$3.330$	$8.233$	$20.279$	$47.789$
$x\left(20\right)$	$1.309$	$3.544$	$9.229$	$24.021$	$59.967$

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Table 2.

$\lambda = 0.01, \mu = 0.45, l = 1$ .

$x\left(t\right)$	$q\left(t\right) =1$	$q\left(t\right) =t$	$q\left(t\right) =\sqrt{t}$
$x\left(1\right)$	$1$	$1$	$1$
$x\left(2\right)$	$7.37\ast 10^{-17}$	$4.41\ast 10^{-17}$	$5.77\ast 10^{-17}$
$x\left(3\right)$	$-0.131$	$-0.057$	$-0.088$
$x\left(5\right)$	$-0.123$	$-0.018$	$-0.049$
$x\left(7\right)$	$-0.080$	$-0.006$	$-0.021$
$x\left(9\right)$	$-0.050$	$-0.003$	$-0.011$
$x\left(12\right)$	$-0.028$	$-0.001$	$-0.005$
$x\left(15\right)$	$-0.017$	$-0.0008$	$-0.003$
$x\left(16\right)$	$-0.015$	$-0.0006$	$-0.0006$
$x\left(18\right)$	$-0.012$	$-0.0005$	$-0.002$
$x\left(20\right)$	$-0.010$	$-0.0003$	$-0.001$

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

Table 3.

$q\left(t\right) = 0, \mu = 0.4, l = 1$ .

$x\left(t\right)$	$\lambda =0.1$	$\lambda =0.11$	$\lambda =0.12$
$x\left(1\right)$	$1$	$1$	$1$
$x\left(2\right)$	$1$	$1.025$	$1.052$
$x\left(3\right)$	$1.668$	$1.751$	$1.841$
$x\left(5\right)$	$3.876$	$4.216$	$4.595$
$x\left(7\right)$	$7.243$	$8.107$	$9.095$
$x\left(9\right)$	$11.941$	$13.707$	$12.130$
$x\left(12\right)$	$22.045$	$26.197$	$25.237$
$x\left(15\right)$	$36.831$	$45.198$	$46.330$
$x\left(16\right)$	$43.042$	$53.369$	$55.687$
$x\left(18\right)$	$57.766$	$73.092$	$78.795$
$x\left(20\right)$	$76.055$	$98.154$	$127.306$

| Show Table

DownLoad: CSV

4. Conclusion

We have analyzed DFHA equation in Riemann–Liouville and Grü nwald–Letnikov sense. Self–adjointness of the DFHA operator is presented and also, we have proved some significant spectral properties for instance, orthogonality of distinct eigenfunctions, reality of eigenvalues. Moreover, we give sum representation of the solutions for DFHA problem and find the solutions of the problem. We have carried out simulation analysis with graphics and tables. The aim of this paper is to contribute to the theory of hydrogen atom fractional difference operator.

We observe the behaviors of solutions by changing the order of the derivative $\mu$ in and , by changing the potential function $q\left(t\right)$ in , we compare solutions under different $\lambda$ eigenvalues in , and , also we observe the solutions by changing $\mu$ with a specific eigenvalue in and by changing $l$ values in Figure 6.

We have shown the solutions by changing the order of the derivative $\mu$ in , by changing the potential function $q\left(t\right)$ and $\lambda$ eigenvalues in Table 2, Table 3.

Acknowledgment

The authors would like to thank the editor and anonymous reviewers for their careful reading of our manuscript and their many insightful comments and suggestions.

Conflict of interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

[1]	G. Deutscher, Through the language glass: Why the world looks different in other languages, New York: Metropolitan Books, 2010.
[2]	P. W. Culicover, Grammar and complexity: Language at the intersection of competence and performance, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013.
[3]	T. Givón, M. Shibatani, editors, Syntactic complexity: Diachrony, acquisition, neuro-cognition, evolution, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2009. https://doi.org/10.1075/tsl.85
[4]	G. Sampson, D. Gil, P. Trudgill, Language complexity as an evolving variable, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009.
[5]	Y. M. Oh, F. Pellegrino, Towards robust complexity indices in linguistic typology: A corpus-based assessment, Stud. Lang., 2022, 18–31. https://doi.org/10.1075/sl.22034.oh doi: 10.1075/sl.22034.oh
[6]	D. Gil, How complex are isolating languages? In: M. Miestamo, K. Sinnemäki, F. Karlsson, editors, Language Complexity: Typology, Contact, Change, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2008,109–131. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.94.08gil
[7]	S. Leufkens, Measuring redundancy: The relation between concord and complexity, Linguist. Vanguard, 9 (2023), 95–106. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2020-0143 doi: 10.1515/lingvan-2020-0143
[8]	J. E. Joseph, Why does language complexity resist measurement? Front. Commun., 6 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3389/fcomm.2021.624855 doi: 10.3389/fcomm.2021.624855
[9]	I. Korzen, Are some languages more complex than others? On text complexity and how to measure it, Globe J. Lang. Cult. Commun., 12 (2021), 18–31. https://doi.org/10.5278/ojs.globe.v12i.6665 doi: 10.5278/ojs.globe.v12i.6665
[10]	J. Nichols, Linguistic complexity: A comprehensive definition and survey, In: G. Sampson, D. Gil, P. Trudgill, editors, Language Complexity as an Evolving Variable, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009,110–125.
[11]	G. Deutscher, Overall complexity: A wild goose chase? In: G. Sampson, D. Gil, P. Trudgill, editors, Language Complexity as an Evolving Variable, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009,243–251.
[12]	Ç. Çöltekin, T. Rama, What do complexity measures measure? Correlating and validating corpus-based measures of morphological complexity, Linguist. Vanguard, 9 (2023), 27–43. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2021-0007 doi: 10.1515/lingvan-2021-0007
[13]	E. A. Moravcsik, Explaining language universals, In: J. J. Song, editor, The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, 69–89. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199281251.013.0005
[14]	J. H. Greenberg, Universals of language, Cambridge, MA: MIT Press, 1963.
[15]	G. Palloti, A simple view of linguistic complexity, Second Lang. Res., 31 (2015), 117–134. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658314536435 doi: 10.1177/0267658314536435
[16]	J. McWhorter, The world's simplest grammars are creole grammars, Linguist. Typol., 6 (2001), 125–166. https://doi.org/10.1515/lity.2001.001 doi: 10.1515/lity.2001.001
[17]	C. Bentz, X. Gutierrez-Vasques, O. Sozinova, T. Samardžić, Complexity trade-offs and equi-complexity in natural languages: A meta-analysis, Linguist. Vanguard, 9 (2023), 9–25. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2021-0054 doi: 10.1515/lingvan-2021-0054
[18]	O. Shcherbakova, V. Gast, D. Blasi, H. Skirgard, R. Gray, S. Greenhil, A quantitative global test of the complexity trade-off hypothesis: The case of nominal and verbal grammatical marking, Linguist. Vanguard, 9 (2023), 155–167. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2021-0011 doi: 10.1515/lingvan-2021-0011
[19]	R. Baechler, G. Seiler, Complexity, isolation, and variation, Berlin: De Gruyter, 2016. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110348965
[20]	B. Baerman, D. Brown, G. G. Corbett, Understanding and measuring morphological complexity, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2015. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof: oso/9780198723769.001.0001
[21]	G. Coloma, La Complejidad de los Idiomas, Berlin: Peter Lang, 2017. https://doi.org/10.3726/b10613
[22]	C. C. Jiménez, Complejidad lingüística: Orígenes y revisión crítica del concepto de lengua compleja, Berlin: Peter Lang, 2018. https://doi.org/10.3726/b14515
[23]	E. Di Domenico, Syntactic complexity from a language acquisition perspective, Newcastle upon Tyne: Cambridge Scholars Publishing, 2017.
[24]	B. Kortmann, B. Szmrecsanyi, Linguistic complexity: Second language acquisiton, indigenization, contact, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1515/9783110229226
[25]	F. L. Mantia, I. Licata, P. Perconti, Language in complexity: The emerging meaning, Berlin: Springer, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-29483-4
[26]	J. McWhorter, Linguistic simplicity and complexity: Why do languages undress? Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2012. https://doi.org/10.1515/9781934078402
[27]	F. J. Newmeyer, L. B. Preston, Measuring grammatical complexity, Oxford: Oxford Univesity Press, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1093/acprof: oso/9780199685301.001.0001
[28]	L. Ortega, Z. H. Han, Complexity theory and language development, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.48
[29]	M. Miestamo, Grammatical complexity in a cross-linguistic perspective, In: M. Miestamo, K. Sinnemäki, F. Karlsson, editors, Language Complexity: Typology, Contact, Change, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2008, 23–42. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.94.04mie
[30]	Ö. Dahl, The growth and maintenance of linguistic complexity, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2004. https://doi.org/10.1075/slcs.71
[31]	W. Kusters, Linguistic complexity: The influence of social change on verbal inflection, Utrecht: LOT, 2003.
[32]	P. Trudgill, Contact and simplification: Historical baggage and directionality in linguistic change, Linguist. Typol., 5 (2001), 371–374.
[33]	J. A. Hawkins, An efficiency theory of complexity and related phenomena, In: G. Sampson, D. Gil, P. Trudgill, editors, Language Complexity Evolving Variation, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2009,252–268.
[34]	K. Ehret, Kolmogorov complexity as a universal measure of language complexity, In: Proceedings of the First Shared Task on Measuring Language Complexity, 2018, 8–14.
[35]	A. Andrason, Language complexity: An insight from complex-system theory, Int. J. Lang. Linguist., 2 (2014), 74–89. https://doi.org/10.11648/J.IJLL.20140202.15 doi: 10.11648/J.IJLL.20140202.15
[36]	P. Blache, A computational model for linguistic complexity, In: G. Bel-Enguix, V. Dahl, M. D. Jiménez-López, editors, Biology, Computation and Linguistics, New Interdisciplinary Paradigms, Amsterdam: IOS Press, 2011,155–167. https://doi.org/10.3233/978-1-60750-762-8-155
[37]	B. Bulté, A. Housen, Defining and operationalising L2 complexity, In: A. Housen, F. Kuiken, I. Vedder, editors, Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2012, 21–46. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.32.02bul
[38]	F. Kuiken, Linguistic complexity in second language acquisition, Linguist. Vanguard, 9 (2023), 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingvan-2021-0112 doi: 10.1515/lingvan-2021-0112
[39]	M. Mohammadi, Complexity of language and SLA, J. Soc. Sci. Human. Res., 8 (2020), 13–17. https://doi.org/10.24200/jsshr.vol8iss03pp13-17 doi: 10.24200/jsshr.vol8iss03pp13-17
[40]	A. Housen, B. De Clercq, F. Kuiken, I. Vedder, Multiple approaches to complexity in second language research, Second Lang. Res., 35 (2019), 3–21. https://doi.org/10.1177/0267658318809765 doi: 10.1177/0267658318809765
[41]	A. Housen, H. Simoens, Cognitive perspectives on difficulty and complexity in L2 acquisition, Stud. Second Lang. Acq., 38 (2016), 163–175. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0272263116000176 doi: 10.1017/S0272263116000176
[42]	A. Housen, F. Kuiken, I. Vedder, Complexity, accuracy and fluency, In: A. Housen, F. Kuiken, I. Vedder, editors, Dimensions of L2 performance and proficiency: Complexity, accuracy and fluency in SLA, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2012, 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1075/lllt.32.01hou
[43]	P. Ramat, The (early) history of linguistic typology, In: J. J. Song, editor, The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, 9–24. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199281251.013.0002
[44]	C. Mauri, Obiettivi, metodi e strumenti della tipologia, In: N. Grandi, C. Mauri, editors, La tipologia linguistica: unità e diversità nelle lingue del mondo, Roma: Carocci Editore, 2022, 23–54.
[45]	H. O'Horan, Y. Berzak, I. Vulić, R. Reichart, A. Korhonen, Survey on the use of typological information in natural language processing, In: Y. Matsumoto, R. Prasad, editors, Proceedings of COLING 2016, the 26th International Conference on Computational Linguistics: Technical Papers, Osaka: COLING, 2016, 1297–1308.
[46]	E. M. Ponti, H. O'Horan, Y. Berzak, I Vulić, R. Reichart, T. Poibeau, et al., Modeling language variation and universals: A survey on typological linguistics for natural language processing, Comput. Linguist., 45 (2019), 1–156. https://doi.org/10.1162/coli_a_00357 doi: 10.1162/coli_a_00357
[47]	N. Levshina, Corpus-based typology: Applications, challenges and some solutions, Linguist. Typol., 26 (2022), 129–160. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2020-0118 doi: 10.1515/lingty-2020-0118
[48]	K. Gerdes, S. Kahane, X. Chen, Typometrics: From implicational to quantitative universals in word order typology, Glossa, 6 (2021), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.5334/gjgl.764 doi: 10.5334/gjgl.764
[49]	B. Bickel, Absolute and statistical universals, In: P. Colm Hogan, editor, The Cambridge Encyclopedia of the Language Sciences, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2010, 77–79.
[50]	J. Nivre, M. C. Marneffe, F. Ginter, J. Hajič, C. D. Manning, S. Pyysalo, et al., Universal dependencies, 2023. Available from: https://universaldependencies.org/.
[51]	S. Petrov, D. Das, R. McDonald, A universal part-of-speech tagset, In: N. Calzolari, K. Choukri, T. Declerck, M. Uğur Doğan, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, A. Moreno, J. Odijk, S. Piperidis, editors, Proceedings of the Eighth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC'12), Istanbul: European Language Resources Association, 2012, 2089–2096.
[52]	M. de Marneffe, T. Dozat, N. Silveira, K. Haverinen, F. Ginter, J. Nivre, et al., Universal Stanford dependencies: A cross-linguistic typology, In: N. Calzolari, K. Choukri, T. Declerck, H. Loftsson, B. Maegaard, J. Mariani, A. Moreno, J. Odijk, S. Piperidis, editors, Proceedings of the Ninth International Conference on Language Resources and Evaluation (LREC), Reykjavik: European Language Resources Association (ELRA), 2014, 4585–4592.
[53]	R. Futrell, R. P. Levy, E. Gibson, Dependency locality as an explanatory principle for word order, Language, 96 (2020), 371–412. https://doi.org/ 10.1353/lan.2020.0019 doi: 10.1353/lan.2020.0019
[54]	B. Guillaume, Graph matching and graph rewriting: GREW tools for corpus exploration, maintenance and conversion, In: D. Gkatzia, D. Seddah, editors, Proceedings of the 16th Conference of the European Chapter of the Association for Computational Linguistics: System Demonstrations, Association for Computational Linguistics, 2021,168–175. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/2021.eacl-demos.21
[55]	V. Novák, Mining information from time series in the form of sentences of natural language, Int. J. Approx. Reason., 78 (2016), 192–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijar.2016.07.006 doi: 10.1016/j.ijar.2016.07.006
[56]	V. Novák, The concept of linguistic variable revisited, In: M. Sugeno, J. Kacprzyk, S. Shabazova, editors, Recent Developments in Fuzzy Logic and Fuzzy Sets, Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing, Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: Springer, 2020,105–118.
[57]	V. Novák, Fuzzy logic in natural language processing, In: Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE), Naples, Italy: IEEE, 2017. https://doi.org/10.1109/FUZZ-IEEE.2017.8015405
[58]	V. Novák, Mathematical fuzzy logic: From vagueness to commonsese reasoning, In: G. Kreuzbauer, N. Gratzl, E. Hielb, editors, Retorische Wissenschaft: Rede und Argumentation in Theorie und Praxis, Wien, Austria: LIT-Verlag, 2008,191–223.
[59]	V. Novák, What is fuzzy natural logic, In: Integrated Uncertainty in Knowledge Modelling and Decision Making, V. Huynh, M. Inuiguchi, T. Denoeux, editors, Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: Springer, 2015, 15–18.
[60]	V. Novák, Fuzzy natural logic: Towards mathematical logic of human reasoning, In: R. Seising, E. Trillas, J. Kacprzyk, editors, Fuzzy Logic: Towards the Future, Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany: Springer, 2015,137–165.
[61]	V. Novák, Evaluative linguistic expressions vs. fuzzy categories? Fuzzy Set. Syst., 281 (2015), 81–87.
[62]	A. Torrens-Urrutia, V. Novák, M. D. Jiménez-López, Describing linguistic vagueness of evaluative expressions using fuzzy natural logic and linguistic constraints, Mathematics, 10 (2022), 2760. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10152760 doi: 10.3390/math10152760
[63]	A. Torrens-Urrutia, M. D. Jiménez-López, S. Campillo-Muñoz, Dealing with evaluative expressions and hate speech metaphors with Fuzzy Property Grammar Systems, Axioms, 12 (2023), 484. https://doi.org/10.3390/axioms12050484 doi: 10.3390/axioms12050484
[64]	A. Torrens-Urrutia, V. Novák, M. D. Jiménez-López, Fuzzy property grammars for gradience in natural language, Mathematics, 11 (2023), 735. https://doi.org/10.3390/math11030735 doi: 10.3390/math11030735
[65]	A. Torrens-Urrutia, M. D. Jiménez-López, A. Brosa-Rodríguez, D. Adamczyk, A fuzzy grammar for evaluating universality and complexity in natural language, Mathematics, 10 (2023), 602. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10152602 doi: 10.3390/math10152602
[66]	A. Torrens-Urrutia, M. D. Jiménez-López, A. Brosa-Rodríguez, A fuzzy approach to language universals for NLP, In: Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems (FUZZ-IEEE), Luxembourg: IEEE, 2021, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/FUZZ45933.2021.9494516
[67]	M. Daniel, Linguistic typology and the study of language, In: J. J. Song, editor, The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, 43–68. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199281251.013.0004
[68]	H. Hammarström, Counting languages in dialect continua using the criterion of mutual intelligibility, J. Quant. Linguist., 15 (2008), 34–45. https://doi.org/10.1080/09296170701794278 doi: 10.1080/09296170701794278
[69]	M. Cysouw, Using the world atlas of language structures, Lang. Typol. Univ., 61 (2009), 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1524/stuf.2008.0018 doi: 10.1524/stuf.2008.0018
[70]	D. Bakker, Language sampling, In: J. J. Song, editor, The Oxford Handbook of Linguistic Typology, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010, 1–26. https://doi.org/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780199281251.013.0007
[71]	M. Miestamo, D. Bakker, A. Arppe, Sampling for variety, Linguist. Typol., 20 (2016), 233–296. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2016-0006 doi: 10.1515/lingty-2016-0006
[72]	M. G. Naranjo, L. Becker, Statistical bias control in typology, Linguist. Typol., 26 (2022), 605–670. https://doi.org/10.1515/lingty-2021-0002 doi: 10.1515/lingty-2021-0002
[73]	A. Brosa-Rodríguez, M. D. Jiménez-López, A typometrical study of Greenberg's linguistic universal 1, In: R. Mehmood, et al., editors, Distributed Computing and Artificial Intelligence, Lecture Notes in Networks and Systems, Berlin: Springer, 741 (2023), 186–196. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-38318-2_19
[74]	K. Gerdes, S. Kahane, X. Chen, Rediscovering Greenberg's word order universals in UD, In: A. Rademaker, F. Tyers (Editors), editors, Proceedings of the Third Workshop on Universal Dependencies (UDW, SyntaxFest 2019), Paris: Association for Computational Linguistics, 2019,124–131. https://doi.org/10.18653/v1/W19-8015
[75]	K. Sinnemäki, Language universals and linguistic complexity: Three case studies in core argument marking, Unpublished PhD dissertation, Helskinki: University of Helsinki, 2011.
[76]	M. Miestamo, K. Sinnemäki, F. Karlsson, Language complexity: Typology, contact, change, Amsterdam: John Benjamins, 2008.
[77]	J. F. Newmeyer, More complicated and hence, rarer: A look at grammatical complexity and crosslinguistic rarity, In: V. S. Karimi, V. Samiian, W. K. Wilkins, editors, Phrasal and clausal architecture: Syntactic derivation and interpretation, Berlin: Mouton de Gruyter, 2007,221–242.
[78]	A. C. Harris, On the explanation of typologically unusual structures, In: J. Good, editor, Linguistic universals and language change, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2008, 54–76.
[79]	B. Edmonds, Syntactic measures of complexity, Unpublished PhD dissertation, Manchester: University of Manchester, 1999.
[80]	A. Torrens-Urrutia, M. D. Jiménez-López, A. Brosa-Rodríguez, D. Adamczyk, A fuzzy grammar for evaluating universality and complexity in natural language, Mathematics, 10 (2022), 2602. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10152602 doi: 10.3390/math10152602
[81]	R. Tomlin, Basic word order: Functional principles, London: Croom Helm, 1986.
[82]	M. Dryer, Why statistical universals are better than absolute universals, In: Papers from the 33rd Annual Meeting of the Chicago Linguistics Society, 1998, 1–23.
[83]	M. Dryer, On the order of demonstrative, numeral, adjective, and noun, Language, 94 (2018), 798–833. https://doi.org/10.1353/lan.2018.0054 doi: 10.1353/lan.2018.0054
[84]	W. Croft, Typology and universals, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2003.
[85]	M. Dryer, M. Haspelmath, The world atlas of language structures online, WALS Online (v2020.3), Data set, Zenodo, 2023. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7385533
[86]	H. S. Choi, B. Guillaume, K. Fort, Corpus-based language universals analysis using universal dependencies, ACL Anthology, 2021, 1–15.
[87]	H. S. Choi, B. Guillaume, K. Fort, Investigating dominant word order on universal dependencies with graph rewriting, Int. Conf. Recent Adv. Nat. Lang. Proc., 2021,281–290.

This article has been cited by:

1.	Erdal Bas, Funda Metin Turk, Ramazan Ozarslan, Ahu Ercan, Spectral data of conformable Sturm–Liouville direct problems, 2021, 11, 1664-2368, 10.1007/s13324-020-00428-6
2.	Tom Cuchta, Dallas Freeman, Discrete Polylogarithm Functions, 2023, 84, 1338-9750, 19, 10.2478/tmmp-2023-0012
3.	B. Shiri, Y. Guang, D. Baleanu, Inverse problems for discrete Hermite nabla difference equation, 2025, 33, 2769-0911, 10.1080/27690911.2024.2431000
4.	Muhammad Sulthan Zacky, Heru Sukamto, Lila Yuwana, Agus Purwanto, Eny Latifah, The performance of space-fractional quantum carnot engine, 2025, 100, 0031-8949, 025306, 10.1088/1402-4896/ada9de

Reader Comments

Your name:*

Email:*
© 2024 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)