
This study presents a Fuzzy Multiple Objective Linear Programming Problem (FMOLPP) method to solve the Linear Programming Problem (LPP). Initially Multiple Objective Linear Programming Problem (MOLPP) is solved using Chandra Sen's approach along with various types of mean approaches. Furthermore, FMOLPP is solved using Chandra Sen's approach and various categories of fuzzy mean techniques. The simplex form is used to solve the LPP, where the three-tuple symmetric triangular fuzzy number with the constraints of the fuzzy objective function is considered. We have presented a comparative study of optimum values of MOLPP with optimum values of FMOLPP, to show the significance of our proposed method.
Citation: M Junaid Basha, S Nandhini. A fuzzy based solution to multiple objective LPP[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(4): 7714-7730. doi: 10.3934/math.2023387
[1] | Xueyong Wang, Gang Wang, Ping Yang . Novel Pareto Z-eigenvalue inclusion intervals for tensor eigenvalue complementarity problems and its applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(11): 30214-30229. doi: 10.3934/math.20241459 |
[2] | Panpan Liu, Hongbin Lv . An algorithm for calculating spectral radius of s-index weakly positive tensors. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(1): 205-217. doi: 10.3934/math.2024012 |
[3] | Yajun Xie, Changfeng Ma . The hybird methods of projection-splitting for solving tensor split feasibility problem. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 20597-20611. doi: 10.3934/math.20231050 |
[4] | Haroun Doud Soliman Adam, Khalid Ibrahim Adam, Sayed Saber, Ghulam Farid . Existence theorems for the dbar equation and Sobolev estimates on q-convex domains. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(12): 31141-31157. doi: 10.3934/math.20231594 |
[5] | Tinglan Yao . An optimal Z-eigenvalue inclusion interval for a sixth-order tensor and its an application. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(1): 967-985. doi: 10.3934/math.2022058 |
[6] | Rashad Ismail, Saira Hameed, Uzma Ahmad, Khadija Majeed, Muhammad Javaid . Unbalanced signed graphs with eigenvalue properties. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 24751-24763. doi: 10.3934/math.20231262 |
[7] | Qin Zhong . Some new inequalities for nonnegative matrices involving Schur product. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(12): 29667-29680. doi: 10.3934/math.20231518 |
[8] | Yuanqiang Chen, Jihui Zheng, Jing An . A Legendre spectral method based on a hybrid format and its error estimation for fourth-order eigenvalue problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(3): 7570-7588. doi: 10.3934/math.2024367 |
[9] | Ridho Alfarisi, Liliek Susilowati, Dafik . Local multiset dimension of comb product of tree graphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(4): 8349-8364. doi: 10.3934/math.2023421 |
[10] | Paul Bracken . Applications of the lichnerowicz Laplacian to stress energy tensors. AIMS Mathematics, 2017, 2(3): 545-556. doi: 10.3934/Math.2017.2.545 |
This study presents a Fuzzy Multiple Objective Linear Programming Problem (FMOLPP) method to solve the Linear Programming Problem (LPP). Initially Multiple Objective Linear Programming Problem (MOLPP) is solved using Chandra Sen's approach along with various types of mean approaches. Furthermore, FMOLPP is solved using Chandra Sen's approach and various categories of fuzzy mean techniques. The simplex form is used to solve the LPP, where the three-tuple symmetric triangular fuzzy number with the constraints of the fuzzy objective function is considered. We have presented a comparative study of optimum values of MOLPP with optimum values of FMOLPP, to show the significance of our proposed method.
Let m and n be two positive integers with m≥2 and n≥2, [n]={1,2,…,n}, R be the set of all real numbers, Rn be the set of all n-dimensional real vectors. Let x=(x1,x2,…,xm)∈Rm and y=(y1,y2,…,yn)∈Rn. If a fourth-order tensor A=(aijkl)∈R[m]×[n]×[m]×[n] satisfies the properties
aijkl=akjil=ailkj=aklij,i,k∈[m],j,l∈[n], |
then we call A a partially symmetric tensor.
It is well know that the tensor of the elastic modulus of elastic materials is just partially symmetrical [11]. And the components of a fourth-order partially symmetric tensor A can be regarded as the coefficients of the following biquadratic homogeneous polynomial optimization problem [6,19]:
maxf(x,y)≡Axyxy≡∑i,k∈[m]∑j,l∈[n]aijklxiyjxkyl,s.t.x⊤x=1,y⊤y=1. | (1.1) |
The optimization problem plays a great role in the analysis of nonlinear elastic materials and the entanglement problem in quantum physics [5,6,8,9,26]. To solve the problem, we would establish a new version based on the following definition:
Definition 1.1. [11,20,21] Let A=(aijkl)∈R[m]×[n]×[m]×[n] be a partially symmetric tensor. If there are λ∈R, x∈Rm∖{0} and y∈Rn∖{0} such that
A⋅yxy=λx,Axyx⋅=λy,x⊤x=1,y⊤y=1, | (1.2) |
where
(A⋅yxy)i=∑k∈[m]∑j,l∈[n]aijklyjxkyl,(Axyx⋅)l=∑i,k∈[m]∑j∈[n]aijklxiyjxk, |
then we call λ an M-eigenvalue of A, x and y the left and right M-eigenvectors associated with λ, respectively. Let σ(A) be the set of all M-eigenvalues of A and λmax(A) be the largest M-eigenvalue of A, i.e.,
λmax(A)=max{|λ|:λ∈σ(A)}. |
In 2009, Wang, Qi and Zhang [24] pointed out that Problem (1.1) is equivalently transformed into calculating the largest M-eigenvalue of a fourth-order partially symmetric tensor. Based on this, Wang et al. [24] presented an algorithm (WQZ-algorithm) to find the largest M-eigenvalue of a fourth-order partially symmetric tensor.
WQZ-algorithm [24,Algorithm 4.1]:
Initial step: Input A=(aijkl)∈R[m]×[n]×[m]×[n] and unfold it into a matrix A=(Ast)∈R[mn]×[mn] by mapping Ast=aijkl with s=n(i−1)+j,t=n(k−1)+l.
Substep 1: Take
τ=∑1≤s≤t≤mn|Ast|, | (1.3) |
and set
¯A=τI+A, | (1.4) |
where I=(δijkl)∈R[m]×[n]×[m]×[n] with δijkl=1 if i=k and j=l, otherwise, δijkl=0. Then unfold ¯A=(¯aijkl)∈R[m]×[n]×[m]×[n] into a matrix ¯A=(¯Ast)∈R[mn]×[mn].
Substep 2: Compute the unit eigenvector w=(wi)mni=1∈Rmn of matrix ¯A associated with its largest eigenvalue, and fold vector w into the matrix W=(Wij)∈R[m]×[n] in the following way:
Wij=wk, |
set i=⌈k/n⌉,j=(k−1)modn+1,∀k=1,2,⋯,mn.
Substep 3: Compute the singular vectors u1 and v1 corresponding to the largest singular value σ1 of the matrix W. Specifically, the singular value decomposition of W is
W=UTΣV=r∑i=1σiuivTi, |
where σ1≥σ2≥⋯≥σr and r is the rank of W.
Substep 4: Take x0=u1,y0=v1, and let k=0.
Iterative step: Execute the following procedures alternatively until certain convergence criterion is satisfied and output x∗,y∗:
¯xk+1=¯A⋅ykxkyk,xk+1=¯xk+1||¯xk+1||,¯yk+1=¯Axk+1ykxk+1⋅,yk+1=¯yk+1||¯yk+1||,k=k+1. |
Final step: Output the largest M-eigenvalue of the tensor A:
λmax(A)=f(x∗,y∗)−τ, |
where
f(x∗,y∗)=∑i,k∈[m]∑j,l∈[n]¯aijklx∗iy∗jx∗ky∗l, |
and the associated M-eigenvectors: x∗,y∗.
The M-eigenvalues of tensors have a close relationship with the strong ellipticity condition in elasticity theory, which guarantees the existence of the solution to the fundamental boundary value problems of elastostatics [3,5,16]. However, when the dimensions m and n of tensors are large, it is not easy to calculate all M-eigenvalues. Thus, the problem of M-eigenvalue localization have attracted the attention of many researchers and many M-eigenvalue localization sets are given; see [2,4,13,14,15,17,18,23,27].
For this, Wang, Li and Che [23] presented the following M-eigenvalue localization set for a partially symmetric tensor:
Theorem 1.1. [23,Theorem 2.2] Let A=(aijkl)∈R[m]×[n]×[m]×[n] be a partially symmetric tensor. Then
σ(A)⊆H(A)=⋃i∈[m]⋂k∈[m],k≠iHi,k(A), |
where
Hi,k(A)=[ˆHi,k(A)∪(¯Hi,k(A)∩Γi(A))],ˆHi,k(A)={z∈C:|z|≤Ri(A)−Rki(A),|z|≤Rkk(A)},¯Hi,k(A)={z∈C:(|z|−(Ri(A)−Rki(A)))(|z|−Rkk(A))≤Rki(A)(Rk(A)−Rkk(A))},Ri(A)=∑k∈[m]∑j,l∈[n]|aijkl|,Rki(A)=∑j,l∈[n]|aijkl|. |
From the set H(A) in Theorem 1.1, we can obtain an upper bound of the largest M-eigenvalue λmax(A), which can be taken as an parameter τ in WQZ-algorithm. From Example 2 in [15], it can be seen that the smaller the upper bound of λmax(A), the faster WQZ-algorithm converges. In view of this, this paper intends to provide a smaller upper bound based on a new inclusion set and take this new upper bound as a parameter τ to make WQZ-algorithm converges to λmax(A) faster.
The remainder of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we provide an M-eigenvalue localization set for a partially symmetric tensor A and prove that the new set is tighter than some existing M-eigenvalue localization sets. In Section 3, based on the new set, we provide an upper bound for the largest M-eigenvalue of A. As an application, in order to make the sequence generated by WQZ-algorithm converge to the largest M-eigenvalue of A faster, we replace the parameter τ in WQZ-algorithm with the upper bound. In Section 4, we conclude this article.
In this section, we provide a new M-eigenvalue localization set of a fourth-order partially symmetric tensor and prove that the new M-eigenvalue localization set is tighter than that in Theorem 1.1, i.e., Theorem 2.2 in [23]. Before that, the following conclusion in [1,25] is needed.
Lemma 2.1. Let x=(x1,x2,…,xn)⊤∈Rn and y=(y1,y2,…,yn)⊤∈Rn. Then
a) If ∥x∥2=1, then |xi||xj|≤12 for i,j∈[n], i≠j;
b) (∑i∈[n]xiyi)2≤∑i∈[n]x2i∑i∈[n]y2i.
Theorem 2.1. Let A=(aijkl)∈R[m]×[n]×[m]×[n] be a partially symmetric tensor. Then
σ(A)⊆Υ(A)=⋃i∈[m]⋂s∈[m],s≠iΥi,s(A), |
where
Υi,s(A)=[ˆΥi,s(A)∪(˜Υi,s(A)∩¯Υi,s(A))],ˆΥi,s(A)={z∈R:|z|<˜rsi(A),|z|<rss(A)},˜Υi,s(A)={z∈R:(|z|−˜rsi(A))(|z|−rss(A))≤rsi(A)˜rss(A)},¯Υi,s(A)={z∈R:|z|<˜rsi(A)+rsi(A)}, |
and
˜rst(A)=12∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|atjkl|+∑k∈[m],k≠s√∑l∈[n]a2tlkl,rst(A)=12∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|atjsl|+√∑l∈[n]a2tlsl,t∈[m]. |
Proof. Let λ be an M-eigenvalue of A, x∈Rm∖{0} and y∈Rn∖{0} be its left and right M-eigenvectors, respectively. Then x⊤x=1. Let |xt|=maxi∈[m]|xi|. Then 0<|xt|≤1. For any given s∈[m] and s≠t, by the t-th equation of (1.2), we have
λxt=∑k∈[m]∑j,l∈[n]atjklyjxkyl=∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n],j≠latjklyjxkyl+∑k∈[m],k≠s∑l∈[n]atlklylxkyl+∑j,l∈[n],j≠latjslyjxsyl+∑l∈[n]atlslylxsyl. |
Taking the modulus of the above equation and using the triangle inequality and Lemma 2.1, one has
|λ||xt|≤∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|atjkl||yj||xk||yl|+∑k∈[m],k≠s∑l∈[n]|atlkl||yl||xk||yl|+∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|atjsl||yj||xs||yl|+∑l∈[n]|atlsl||yl||xs||yl|≤12∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|atjkl||xt|+∑k∈[m],k≠s∑l∈[n]|atlkl||yl||xt|+12∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|atjsl||xs|+∑l∈[n]|atlsl||yl||xs|=12∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|atjkl||xt|+|xt|∑k∈[m],k≠s(∑l∈[n]|atlkl||yl|)+12∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|atjsl||xs|+|xs|∑l∈[n]|atlsl||yl|≤12∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|atjkl||xt|+|xt|∑k∈[m],k≠s(√∑l∈[n]|atlkl|2√∑l∈[n]|yl|2)+12∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|atjsl||xs|+|xs|√∑l∈[n]|atlsl|2√∑l∈[n]|yl|2=12∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|atjkl||xt|+|xt|∑k∈[m],k≠s√∑l∈[n]a2tlkl+12∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|atjsl||xs|+|xs|√∑l∈[n]a2tlsl=(12∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|atjkl|+∑k∈[m],k≠s√∑l∈[n]a2tlkl)|xt|+(12∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|atjsl|+√∑l∈[n]a2tlsl)|xs|=˜rst(A)|xt|+rst(A)|xs|, |
i.e.,
(|λ|−˜rst(A))|xt|≤rst(A)|xs|. | (2.1) |
By (2.1), we have (|λ|−˜rst(A))|xt|≤rst(A)|xt|, which leads to that |λ|≤˜rst(A)+rst(A), i.e., λ∈¯Υt,s(A).
If |xs|>0, then by the s-th equation of (1.2), we have
λxs=∑k∈[m]∑j,l∈[n]asjklyjxkyl=∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n],j≠lasjklyjxkyl+∑k∈[m],k≠s∑l∈[n]aslklylxkyl+∑j,l∈[n],j≠lasjslyjxsyl+∑l∈[n]aslslylxsyl. |
Taking the modulus of the above equation and using the triangle inequality and Lemma 2.1 yield
|λ||xs|≤∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|asjkl||yj||xk||yl|+∑k∈[m],k≠s∑l∈[n]|aslkl||yl||xk||yl|+∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|asjsl||yj||xs||yl|+∑l∈[n]|aslsl||yl||xs||yl|≤12∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|asjkl||xt|+∑k∈[m],k≠s∑l∈[n]|aslkl||yl||xt|+12∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|asjsl||xs|+∑l∈[n]|aslsl||yl||xs|=12∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|asjkl||xt|+|xt|∑k∈[m],k≠s(∑l∈[n]|aslkl||yl|)+12∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|asjsl||xs|+|xs|∑l∈[n]|aslsl||yl|≤12∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|asjkl||xt|+|xt|∑k∈[m],k≠s(√∑l∈[n]|aslkl|2√∑l∈[n]|yl|2)+12∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|asjsl||xs|+|xs|√∑l∈[n]|aslsl|2√∑l∈[n]|yl|2=12∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|asjkl||xt|+|xt|∑k∈[m],k≠s√∑l∈[n]a2slkl+12∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|asjsl||xs|+|xs|√∑l∈[n]a2slsl=(12∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|asjkl|+∑k∈[m],k≠s√∑l∈[n]a2slkl)|xt|+(12∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|asjsl|+√∑l∈[n]a2slsl)|xs|=˜rss(A)|xt|+rss(A)|xs|, |
i.e.,
(|λ|−rss(A))|xs|≤˜rss(A)|xt|. | (2.2) |
When |λ|≥˜rst(A) or |λ|≥rss(A), multiplying (2.1) and (2.2) and eliminating |xt||xs|>0, we have
(|λ|−˜rst(A))(|λ|−rss(A))≤rst(A)˜rss(A), | (2.3) |
which implies that
λ∈(˜Υt,s(A)∩¯Υt,s(A)). | (2.4) |
When |λ|<˜rst(A) and |λ|<rss(A), it holds that
λ∈ˆΥt,s(A). | (2.5) |
It follows from (2.4) and (2.5) that
λ∈[ˆΥt,s(A)∪(˜Υt,s(A)∩¯Υt,s(A))]=Υt,s(A). | (2.6) |
If |xs|=0 in (2.1), then |λ|≤˜rst(A). When |λ|=˜rst(A), then (2.3) holds and consequently, (2.4) holds. When |λ|<˜rst(A), if |λ|≥rss(A), then (2.3) and (2.4) hold. If |λ|<rss(A), then (2.5) holds. Hence, (2.6) holds. By the arbitrariness of s∈[m], and s≠t, we have
λ∈⋂t≠sΥt,s(A)⊆⋃t∈[m]⋂t≠sΥt,s(A), |
therefore, the assertion is proved.
Next, we give the relationship between the localization set H(A) given in Theorem 1.1 and the set Υ(A) given in Theorem 2.1.
Theorem 2.2. Let A=(aijkl)∈R[m]×[n]×[m]×[n] be a partially symmetric tensor. Then
Υ(A)⊆H(A). |
Proof. For any i,s∈[m] and i≠s, it holds that
˜rsi(A)=12∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|aijkl|+∑k∈[m],k≠s√∑l∈[n]a2ilkl≤∑k∈[m],k≠s∑j,l∈[n]|aijkl|=Ri(A)−Rsi(A); | (2.7) |
and
rsi(A)=12∑j,l∈[n],j≠l|aijsl|+√∑l∈[n]a2ilsl≤∑j,l∈[n]|aijsl|=Rsi(A). | (2.8) |
Let z∈Υ(A). By Theorem 2.1, there is an index i∈[m] such that for any s∈[m], i≠s, z∈Υi,s(A), which means that z∈ˆΥi,s(A), or z∈˜Υi,s(A) and z∈¯Υi,s(A).
Let z∈ˆΥi,s(A), i.e., |z|<˜rsi(A) and |z|<rss(A). By (2.7) and (2.8), we have |z|≤Ri(A)−Rsi(A) and |z|≤Rss(A), therefore, z∈ˆHi,s(A).
Let z∈˜Υi,s(A) and z∈¯Υi,s(A), i.e.,
(|z|−˜rsi(A))(|z|−rss(A))≤rsi(A)˜rss(A), | (2.9) |
and
|z|<˜rsi(A)+rsi(A). | (2.10) |
By (2.7), (2.8) and (2.10), one has |z|<˜rsi(A)+rsi(A)≤Ri(A), which means that z∈Γi(A). When |z|≥Ri(A)−Rsi(A) and |z|≥Rss(A), by (2.7), (2.8) and (2.9), we have
|z|−˜rsi(A)≥|z|−(Ri(A)−Rsi(A))≥0,|z|−rss(A)≥|z|−Rss(A)≥0, |
then
(|z|−(Ri(A)−Rsi(A)))(|z|−Rss(A))≤(|z|−˜rsi(A))(|z|−rss(A))≤rsi(A)˜rss(A)≤Rsi(A)(Rs(A)−Rss(A)), |
i.e.,
(|z|−(Ri(A)−Rsi(A)))(|z|−Rss(A))≤Rsi(A)(Rs(A)−Rss(A)), | (2.11) |
which means that z∈¯Hi,s(A). Thus, whether Ri(A)−Rsi(A)≤|z|≤Rss(A) or Rss(A)≤|z|≤Ri(A)−Rsi(A), (2.11) also holds. When |z|≤Ri(A)−Rsi(A) and |z|≤Rss(A), it follows that z∈ˆHi,s(A). i.e.,
z∈[ˆHi,s(A)∪(¯Hi,s(A)∩Γi(A))]=Hi,s(A). |
From the arbitrariness of s∈[m], and s≠i, we have
z∈⋂s∈[m],s≠iHi,s(A)⊆⋃i∈[m]⋂s∈[m],s≠iHi,s(A), |
i.e., z∈H(A). Therefore, Υ(A)⊆H(A).
In order to show the validity of the set Υ(A) given in Theorem 2.1, we present a running example.
Example 1. Let A=(aijkl)∈R[2]×[2]×[2]×[2] be a partially symmetric tensor with entries
a1111=1,a1112=2,a1121=2,a1212=3,a1222=5,a1211=2,a1122=4,a1221=4,a2111=2,a2112=4,a2121=3,a2122=5,a2211=4,a2212=5,a2221=5,a2222=6. |
By Theorem 1.1, we have
H(A)=⋃i∈[m]⋂k∈[m],k≠iHi,k(A)={z∈C:|z|≤29.4765}. |
By Theorem 2.1, we have
Υ(A)=⋃i∈[m]⋂s∈[m],s≠iΥi,s(A)={z∈C:|z|≤20.0035}. |
It is easy to see that Υ(A)⊆H(A) and all M-eigenvalues are in [−20.0035,20.0035]. In fact, all different M-eigenvalues of A are −1.2765, 0.0710, 0.1242, 0.2765, 0.3437 and 15.2091.
In this section, based on the set in Theorem 2.1, we provide an upper bound for the largest M-eigenvalue of a fourth-order partially symmetric tensor A. As an application, we apply the upper bound as a parameter τ to the WQZ-algorithm to make the sequence generated by the WQZ-algorithm converges to the largest M-eigenvalue of A faster.
Theorem 3.1. Let A=(aijkl)∈R[m]×[n]×[m]×[n] be a partially symmetric tensor. Then
ρ(A)≤Ω(A)=maxi∈[m]mins∈[m],i≠sΩi,s(A), |
where
Ωi,s(A)=max{min{˜rsi(A),rss(A)},min{˜rsi(A)+rsi(A),ˆΩi,s(A)}}, |
and
ˆΩi,s(A)=12{˜rsi(A)+rss(A)+√(rss(A)−˜rsi(A))2+4rsi(A)˜rss(A)}. |
Proof. By Theorem 2.1 and ρ(A)∈σ(A), it follows that there exists an index i∈[m] such that for any s∈[m] and s≠i, ρ(A)∈ˆΥi,s(A), or ρ(A)∈(˜Υi,s(A)∩¯Υi,s(A)). If ρ(A)∈ˆΥi,s(A), that is, ρ(A)<˜rsi(A) and ρ(A)<rss(A), then
ρ(A)<min{˜rsi(A),rss(A)}. | (3.1) |
If ρ(A)∈(˜Υi,s(A)∩¯Υi,s(A)), that is,
ρ(A)<˜rsi(A)+rsi(A)<min{˜rsi(A)+rsi(A)}, | (3.2) |
and
(ρ(A)−˜rsi(A))(ρ(A)−rss(A))≤rsi(A)˜rss(A). | (3.3) |
Solving Inequality (3.3), we have
ρ(A)≤ˆΩi,s(A)≤min{ˆΩi,s(A)}. | (3.4) |
Combining (3.2) and (3.4), we have
ρ(A)≤min{˜rsi(A)+rsi(A),ˆΩi,s(A)}. | (3.5) |
Hence, by (3.1) and (3.5), we have
ρ(A)≤max{min{˜rsi(A),rss(A)},min{˜rsi(A)+rsi(A),ˆΩi,s(A)}}=Ωi,s(A). |
Furthermore, by the arbitrariness of s, we have
ρ(A)≤mins∈[m],i≠sΩi,s(A). |
Since we do not know which i is appropriate to ρ(A), we can only conclude that
ρ(A)≤maxi∈[m]mins∈[m],i≠sΩi,s(A). |
This proof is complete.
Remark 3.1. In Theorem 3.1, we obtain an upper bound Ω(A) for the largest M-eigenvalue of a fourth order partially symmetric tensor A. Now, we take Ω(A) as the parameter τ in WQZ-algorithm to obtain a modified WQZ-algorithm. That is, the only difference between WQZ-algorithm and the modified WQZ-algorithm is the selection of τ, in particular, τ=∑1≤s≤t≤mn|Ast| in WQZ-algorithm and τ=Ω(A) in the modified WQZ-algorithm.
Next, we take Ω(A) and some existing upper bounds of the largest M-eigenvalue as τ in WQZ-algorithm to calculate the largest M-eigenvalue of a fourth-order partially symmetric tensor A.
Example 2. Consider the tensor A in Example 4.1 of [24], where
A(:,:,1,1)=[−0.97270.3169−0.3437−0.6332−0.78660.4257−0.3350−0.9896−0.4323], |
A(:,:,2,1)=[−0.6332−0.78660.42570.73870.6873−0.3248−0.7986−0.5988−0.9485], |
A(:,:,3,1)=[−0.3350−0.9896−0.4323−0.7986−0.5988−0.94850.58530.59210.6301], |
A(:,:,1,2)=[0.31690.6158−0.0184−0.78660.01600.0085−0.9896−0.66630.2559], |
A(:,:,2,2)=[−0.78660.01600.00850.68730.5160−0.0216−0.59880.04110.9857], |
A(:,:,3,2)=[−0.9896−0.66630.2559−0.59880.04110.98570.5921−0.2907−0.3881], |
A(:,:,1,3)=[−0.3437−0.01840.56490.42570.0085−0.1439−0.43230.25590.6162], |
A(:,:,2,3)=[0.42570.0085−0.1439−0.3248−0.0216−0.0037−0.94850.9857−0.7734], |
A(:,:,3,3)=[−0.43230.25590.6162−0.94850.9857−0.77340.6301−0.3881−0.8526]. |
By (1.3), we have τ=∑1≤s≤t≤9|Ast|=23.3503. By Corollary 1 of [17], we have
ρ(A)≤16.6014. |
By Theorem 3.5 of [23], we have
ρ(A)≤15.4102. |
By Corollary 2 of [17], we have
ρ(A)≤14.5910. |
By Corollary 1 of [15], where Sm=Sn=1, we have
ρ(A)≤13.8844. |
By Corollary 2 of [15], where Sm=Sn=1, we have
ρ(A)≤11.7253. |
By Theorem 3.1, we have
ρ(A)≤8.2342. |
From [24], it can be seen that λmax(A)=2.3227.
Taking τ=23.3503, 16.6014, 15.4102, 14.5910, 13.8844, 11.7253 and 8.2342 respectively, numerical results obtained by the WQZ-algorithm are shown in Figure 1.
Numerical results in Figure 1 shows that :
1) When we take τ=8.2342, the sequence more rapidly converges to the largest M-eigenvalue λmax(A) than taking τ=23.3503, τ=16.6014, τ=15.4102, τ=14.5910, τ=13.8844 and τ=11.7253, respectively.
2) When we take τ=23.3503, 16.6014, 15.4102, 14.5910, 13.8844, 11.7253 and 8.2342, the WQZ-algorithm can get the largest M-eigenvalue λmax(A) after finite iterations. However, under the same stopping criterion, if we take τ=23.3503, 16.6014, 15.4102, 14.5910, 13.8844 and 11.7253, it can be seen that the WQZ-algorithm needs more iterations to obtain the largest M-eigenvalue, and when τ=8.2342, WQZ-algorithm can obtain the largest M-eigenvalue λmax(A) faster.
3) The choice of the parameter τ in WQZ-algorithm has a significant impact on the convergence speed of the WQZ-algorithm. When τ is larger, the convergence speed of WQZ-algorithm is slower. When τ is smaller and τ is greater than the largest M-eigenvalue, the WQZ-algorithm converges faster. In other words, the faster the largest M-eigenvalue can be obtained.
4) The numerical result of the upper bound of the M-spectral radius obtained by Theorem 3.1 is of great help to the WQZ-algorithm. Therefore, it shows that the results we get have a certain effect.
Now, we consider a real elasticity tensor, which is derived from the study of self-anisotropic materials [10] for explanation.
In anisotropy materials, the components of the tensor of elastic moduli C=(cijkl)∈R[3]×[3]×[3]×[3] satisfy the following symmetry:
cijkl=cjikl=cijlk=cjilk,cijkl=cklij,∀1≤i,j,k,l≤3, |
which is also called an elasticity tensor. After a lot of research, we know that there are many anisotropic materials, of which crystal is one of its typical examples. We classify from the crystal homologues [22], the elasticity tensor C=(cijkl)∈R[3]×[3]×[3]×[3] of some crystals for trigonal system, such as CaCO3 and HgS also satisfy
c1112=c2212=c3323=c3331=c3312=c2331=0,c2222=c1111,c3131=c2323,c2233=c1133,c2223=−c1123,c2231=−c1131,c3112=√2c1123,c2312=−√2c1131,c1212=c1111−c1122. |
This shows that the triangular system of anisotropic materials has only 7 elasticities. In fact, CaMg(CO3)2-dolomite and CaCO3-calcite have similar crystal structures, in which the atoms along any triplet are alternated with magnesium and calcium. In [22], we can know that the elasticity tensor of CaMg(CO3)2-dolomite is as follows.
c2222=c1111=196.6,c3131=c2323=83.2,c2233=c1133=54.7,c2223=−c1123=31.7,c2231=−c1131=−25.3,c3112=44.8,c2312=−35.84,c1212=132.2,c3333=110,c1122=64.4. |
Next, we transform the elastic tensor C into a partially symmetric tensor A through the following double mapping, and the M-eigenvalue of A after transformation is the same as the M-eigenvalue of C [7,12]:
aijkl=aikjl,1≤i,j,k,l≤3. |
In order to illustrate the validity of the results we obtained, we take the above-mentioned partial symmetry tensor of the CaMg(CO3)2-dolomite elasticity tensor transformation as an example.
Example 3. Consider the tensor A2=(aijkl)∈R[3]×[3]×[3]×[3] in Example 3 of [17], where
a2222=a1111=196.6,a3311=a2233=83.2,a2323=a3232=a1313=a3131=54.7,a2223=a2232=−a1213=−a2131=−31.7,a3333=110,a1212=a2121=64.4,a1122=132.2,a2321=a1232=−a1311=−a1131=−25.3,a3112=a1321=44.8,a2132=a1223=−35.84, |
and other aijkl=0.
The data results of Example 2 show that the upper bound of the largest M-eigenvalue in Theorem 3.1 is sharper than the existing results.Here, we only calculate the upper bound of the largest M-eigenvalue of A2 by Theorem 3.1, and use it as the parameter τ in the WQZ-algorithm to calculate the largest M-eigenvalue of A2. Here, in order to distinguish different values of τ, we calculate the result by Theorem 3.1 and record it as τ2, that is, WQZ-algorithm τ=τ2.
By Theorem 3.1, we can get τ2=647.6100.
By Eq (1.3), we can get
τ=∑1≤s≤t≤9|Ast|=1998.6000. |
In the WQZ-algorithm, when we take τ=1998.6000 and 647.6100 respectively, the numerical results we get are shown in Figure 2.
As we can see in Figure 2, in the WQZ-algorithm, when we regard τ2 as τ, it makes the convergence sequence in the WQZ-algorithm converges faster than τ=∑1≤s≤t≤9|Ast|, so that the largest M-eigenvalue can be calculated faster.That is to say, in this article, the result we provide as the parameter τ in the WQZ-algorithm can speed up the convergence speed, so that the largest M-eigenvalue can be calculated quickly.
In this paper, we first in Theorem 2.1 provided an M-eigenvalue localization set Υ(A) for a fourth-order partially symmetric tensor A, and then proven that the set Υ(A) is tighter than the set H(A) in Theorem 2.2 of [23]. Secondly, based on the set Υ(A), we derived an upper bound for the M-spectral radius of A. As an application, we took the upper bound of the M-spectral radius as a parameter τ in the WQZ-algorithm to make the sequence generated by this algorithm converge to the largest M-eigenvalue of A faster. Finally, two numerical examples are given to show the effectiveness of the set Υ(A) and the upper bound Ω(A).
The author sincerely thanks the editors and anonymous reviewers for their insightful comments and constructive suggestions, which greatly improved the quality of the paper. The author also thanks Professor Jianxing Zhao (Guizhou Minzu University) for guidance. This work is supported by Science and Technology Plan Project of Guizhou Province (Grant No. QKHJC-ZK[2021]YB013).
The author declares no conflict of interest.
[1] | X. P. Yang, B. Y. Cao, Bing-Yuan, H. T. Lin, Multi-objective fully fuzzy linear programming problems with triangular fuzzy numbers, 2014 11th International Conference on Fuzzy Systems and Knowledge Discovery, 2014,171–177. |
[2] |
S. P. Wan, J. Y. Dong, Possibility linear programming with trapezoidal fuzzy numbers, Appl. Math. Model., 38 (2014), 1660–1672. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2013.09.006 doi: 10.1016/j.apm.2013.09.006
![]() |
[3] |
S. P. Wan, D. F. Li, Fuzzy mathematical programming approach to heterogeneous multi attribute decision-making with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy truth degrees, Inf. Sci., 325 (2015), 484–503. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2015.07.014 doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2015.07.014
![]() |
[4] |
S. Wan, J. Dong, Interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy mathematical programming method for hybrid multi-criteria group decision making with interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy truth degrees, Inform. Fusion, 26 (2015), 49–65. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2015.01.006 doi: 10.1016/j.inffus.2015.01.006
![]() |
[5] |
S. P. Wan, F. Wang, L. L. Lin, J. J. Dong, An intuitionistic fuzzy linear programming method for logistics outsourcing provider selection, Knowl.-Based Syst., 82 (2015), 80–94. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2015.02.027 doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2015.02.027
![]() |
[6] | G. L. Xu, S. P. Wan, J. Y. Dong, A hesitant fuzzy programming method for hybrid MADM with incomplete attribute weight information, Informatica, 27 (2016), 863–892. |
[7] |
U. Sharma, S. Aggarwal, Solving fully fuzzy multi-objective linear programming problem using nearest interval approximation of fuzzy number and interval programming, Int. J. Fuzzy Syst., 20 (2018), 488–499. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40815-017-0336-8 doi: 10.1007/s40815-017-0336-8
![]() |
[8] |
S. P. Wan, Y. L. Qin, J. Y. Dong, A hesitant fuzzy mathematical programming method for hybrid multi-criteria group decision making with hesitant fuzzy truth degrees, Knowl.-Based Syst., 138 (2017), 232–248. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2017.10.002 doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2017.10.002
![]() |
[9] |
S. P. Wan, F. Wang, G. L. Xu, J. Y. Dong, J. Tang, An intuitionistic fuzzy programming method for group decision making with interval-valued fuzzy preference relations, Fuzzy Optim. Decis. Making, 16 (2017), 269–295. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10700-016-9250-z doi: 10.1007/s10700-016-9250-z
![]() |
[10] |
S. P. Wan, Z. Jin, J. Y. Dong, Pythagorean fuzzy mathematical programming method for multi-attribute group decision making with pythagorean fuzzy truth degrees, Knowl. Inf. Syst., 55 (2018), 437–466. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10115-017-1085-6 doi: 10.1007/s10115-017-1085-6
![]() |
[11] |
J. Y. Dong, S. P. Wan, A new trapezoidal fuzzy linear programming method considering the acceptance degree of fuzzy constraints violated, Knowl.-Based Syst., 148 (2018), 100–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2018.02.030 doi: 10.1016/j.knosys.2018.02.030
![]() |
[12] |
C. Sen, Duality in solving multi-objective optimization (MOO) problems, AJOR, 9 (2019), 109–113. https://doi.org/10.4236/ajor.2019.93006 doi: 10.4236/ajor.2019.93006
![]() |
[13] | J. H. Dong, S. P. Wan, A new method for solving fuzzy multi-objective linear programming problems, IJFS, 16 (2019), 145–159. |
[14] | C. Sen, Improved averaging techniques for solving multi-objective optimization (MOO) problems, SN Appl. Sci., 2 (2020), 286. |
[15] |
S. P. Wan, G. L. Xu, J. Y. Dong, An atanassov intuitionistic fuzzy programming method for group decision making with interval-valued atanassov intuitionistic fuzzy preference relations, Appl. Soft Comput., 95 (2020), 106556. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2020.106556 doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2020.106556
![]() |
[16] |
S. P. Wan, Z. H. Chen, J. Y. Dong, Bi-objective trapezoidal fuzzy mixed integer linear program-based distribution center location decision for large-scale emergencies, Appl. Soft Comput., 110 (2021), 107757. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2021.107757 doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2021.107757
![]() |
[17] |
K. Gilda, S. Satarkar, Defuzzification: Maxima methods with improved efficiency and their performance evaluation, 2022 IEEE Delhi Section Conference, 2022, 1–6. https://doi.org/10.1109/DELCON54057.2022.9753474 doi: 10.1109/DELCON54057.2022.9753474
![]() |
[18] | E. Fathy, A. E. Hassanien, Fuzzy harmonic mean technique for solving fully fuzzy multilevel multiobjective linear programming problem, Alex. Eng. J., 61 (2022), 8189–8205. https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1110016822000230 |
[19] |
Y. Xu, W. Q. Gao, Q. R. Zeng, G. J. Wang, J. Ren, Y. X. Zhang, A feasible fuzzy-extended attributes-based access control technique, Secur. Commun. Netw., 2018 (2018), 6476315. https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/6476315 doi: 10.1155/2018/6476315
![]() |
[20] |
S. Faizi, W. Salabun, S. Ullah, T. Rashid, J. Wieckowski, A new method to support decision-making in an uncertain environment based on normalized interval-valued triangular fuzzy numbers and comet technique, Symmetry, 12 (2020), 516. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym12040516 doi: 10.3390/sym12040516
![]() |
[21] |
Z. I. Sohag, M. Asadujjaman, A proposed new average method for solving multi-objective linear programming problem using various kinds of mean techniques, Math. Lett., 4 (2018), 25–33. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.ml.20180402.11 doi: 10.11648/j.ml.20180402.11
![]() |
[22] | S. H. Nasseri, A. Ebrahimnejad, A fuzzy dual simplex method for fuzzy number linear programming problem, AFSS, 5 (2010), 81–95. |
[23] | J. J. Saade, B. H. Diab, Defuzzification methods and new techniques for fuzzy controllers, IJECE, 3 (2004), 161–174. |
[24] |
A. Chandramohan, M. V. C. Rao, M. S. Arumugam, Two new and useful defuzzification methods based on root mean square value, Soft Comput., 10 (2006), 1047–1059. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-005-0042-6 doi: 10.1007/s00500-005-0042-6
![]() |
[25] | Q. M. Liu, F. G. Shi, Stratified simplex method for solving fuzzy multi-objective linear programming problem, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst., 29 (2015), 2357–2364. |