
Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is still posing detrimental effects on people. An association between contracting COVID-19 and the ABO blood group type has been determined. However, factors that determine the severity of COVID-19 are not yet fully understood. Thus, the current study aimed to investigate whether the ABO blood group type has a role in the severity of complications due to COVID-19.
Eighty-Six ICU-admitted COVID-19 patients and 80 matched-healthy controls were recruited in the study from Baish general hospital, Saudi Arabia. ABO blood grouping, complete blood count (CBC), CBC-derived inflammatory markers, coagulation profile, D-Dimer and anti-T antigen were reported.
Our data showed that patients with blood groups O and B are more protective against severe complications from COVID-19, as compared to patients with blood groups A and AB. This could be partially attributed to the presence of anti-T in blood group A individuals, compared to non-blood group A.
The current study reports an association between the ABO blood group and the susceptibility to severe complications from COVID-19, with a possible role of anti-T in driving the mechanism of the thrombotic tendency, as it was also correlated with an elevation in D-dimer levels.
Citation: Gasim Dobie, Sarah Abutalib, Wafa Sadifi, Mada Jahfali, Bayan Alghamdi, Asmaa Khormi, Taibah Alharbi, Munyah Zaqan, Zahra M Baalous, Abdulrahim R Hakami, Mohammed H Nahari, Abdullah A Mobarki, Muhammad Saboor, Mohammad S Akhter, Abdullah Hamadi, Denise E Jackson, Hassan A Hamali. The correlation between severe complications and blood group types in COVID-19 patients; with possible role of T polyagglutination in promoting thrombotic tendencies[J]. AIMS Medical Science, 2023, 10(1): 1-13. doi: 10.3934/medsci.2023001
[1] | Changlin Xu, Yaqing Wen . New measure of circular intuitionistic fuzzy sets and its application in decision making. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 24053-24074. doi: 10.3934/math.20231226 |
[2] | Dian Pratama, Binyamin Yusoff, Lazim Abdullah, Adem Kilicman . The generalized circular intuitionistic fuzzy set and its operations. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(11): 26758-26781. doi: 10.3934/math.20231370 |
[3] | Tehreem, Harish Garg, Kinza Ayaz, Walid Emam . Multi attribute decision-making algorithms using Hamacher Choquet-integral operators with complex intuitionistic fuzzy information. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 35860-35884. doi: 10.3934/math.20241700 |
[4] | Muhammad Qiyas, Neelam Khan, Muhammad Naeem, Saleem Abdullah . Intuitionistic fuzzy credibility Dombi aggregation operators and their application of railway train selection in Pakistan. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(3): 6520-6542. doi: 10.3934/math.2023329 |
[5] | Wajid Ali, Tanzeela Shaheen, Iftikhar Ul Haq, Hamza Toor, Faraz Akram, Harish Garg, Md. Zia Uddin, Mohammad Mehedi Hassan . Aczel-Alsina-based aggregation operators for intuitionistic hesitant fuzzy set environment and their application to multiple attribute decision-making process. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(8): 18021-18039. doi: 10.3934/math.2023916 |
[6] | Rana Muhammad Zulqarnain, Xiao Long Xin, Muhammad Saeed . Extension of TOPSIS method under intuitionistic fuzzy hypersoft environment based on correlation coefficient and aggregation operators to solve decision making problem. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(3): 2732-2755. doi: 10.3934/math.2021167 |
[7] | Shichao Li, Zeeshan Ali, Peide Liu . Prioritized Hamy mean operators based on Dombi t-norm and t-conorm for the complex interval-valued Atanassov-Intuitionistic fuzzy sets and their applications in strategic decision-making problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(3): 6589-6635. doi: 10.3934/math.2025302 |
[8] | Admi Nazra, Jenizon, Yudiantri Asdi, Zulvera . Generalized hesitant intuitionistic fuzzy N-soft sets-first result. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(7): 12650-12670. doi: 10.3934/math.2022700 |
[9] | Muhammad Jawad, Niat Nigar, Sarka Hoskova-Mayerova, Bijan Davvaz, Muhammad Haris Mateen . Fundamental theorems of group isomorphism under the framework of complex intuitionistic fuzzy set. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(1): 1900-1920. doi: 10.3934/math.2025088 |
[10] | Atiqe Ur Rahman, Muhammad Saeed, Hamiden Abd El-Wahed Khalifa, Walaa Abdullah Afifi . Decision making algorithmic techniques based on aggregation operations and similarity measures of possibility intuitionistic fuzzy hypersoft sets. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(3): 3866-3895. doi: 10.3934/math.2022214 |
Coronavirus disease-19 (COVID-19), caused by severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2), is still posing detrimental effects on people. An association between contracting COVID-19 and the ABO blood group type has been determined. However, factors that determine the severity of COVID-19 are not yet fully understood. Thus, the current study aimed to investigate whether the ABO blood group type has a role in the severity of complications due to COVID-19.
Eighty-Six ICU-admitted COVID-19 patients and 80 matched-healthy controls were recruited in the study from Baish general hospital, Saudi Arabia. ABO blood grouping, complete blood count (CBC), CBC-derived inflammatory markers, coagulation profile, D-Dimer and anti-T antigen were reported.
Our data showed that patients with blood groups O and B are more protective against severe complications from COVID-19, as compared to patients with blood groups A and AB. This could be partially attributed to the presence of anti-T in blood group A individuals, compared to non-blood group A.
The current study reports an association between the ABO blood group and the susceptibility to severe complications from COVID-19, with a possible role of anti-T in driving the mechanism of the thrombotic tendency, as it was also correlated with an elevation in D-dimer levels.
Fuzzy set (FS) [1] is designed to handle the problem of uncertainty. It assigns a value from 0 to 1 to an object, where higher value indicates a higher degree of membership, and vice versa. In some cases, representation requires not only the membership degree (M) but also the non-membership degree (N), with the relationship between the two being M+N=1. The development of fuzzy sets led to the concept of intuitionistic fuzzy sets (IFS) [2], introduced in 1983 as an extension of FS. Since then, IFS has been extensively studied and modified. In general, IFS characterizes each element by the degrees of membership and non-membership, with M+N≤1. Research and development on IFS can be classified into theoretical and applied development. Theoretical development includes algebraic aspects such as subring fuzzy [4], and further advancements in homomorphism intuitionistic fuzzy subrings [5,6]. Additionally, IFS properties have been expanded, including the development of operators based on t-norm and conorm and algebraic laws [7,8], as well as extensions into complex sets [9], distance metrics, similarity, and distance measures [10,11,14], among others. On the other hand, applicative development involves solving decision-making problems using IFS [12,13,15].
In 1989, the representation of IFS membership and non-membership, initially crisp values (M,N), was extended to interval values, giving rise to what is known as interval-valued IFS (IVIFS)[16]. This set is characterized by the values of M and N being in interval form, with an element in IVIFS represented as an ordered pair of membership and non-membership intervals. Research on IVIFS has delved into various aspects, including basic operations, modal operators, and algebraic laws [17,18], determination of cosine similarity measure based on weighted reduced IFS [19], accuracy and score functions [20], and IVIF-confidence intervals [21]. In application side, there has also been research in decision-making, such as [22], and its integration with the DEMATEL Method combined with Choquet integral [23].
Atanassov introduced another extension of IFS, distinct from IVIFS, known as circular IFS (CIFS). This set expands upon IFS by considering (M,N) as the center and incorporating the radius as a measure of imprecision. For (M,N) within IFS interpretation triangle (IFIT), the difference between CIFS and IVIFS lies in the form of interpretation, where IVIFS has a rectangle interpretation, and CIFS has a circle interpretation. The CIFS theory is at an early stage of development. Several studies have begun to expand on CIFS; however, most of the research focuses on applications that have previously been carried out on IFS or IVIFS, and not much theoretical research has been done on it. For example, case studies of multi-criteria decision-making (MCDM) [26,28], comparing IVIFS and CIFS for present worth analysis [32], upgrading the TOPSIS method [34], demonstrating CIF-TOPSIS with vague membership functions [27], extending the VIKOR method, design CIF-ELECTRE Ⅲ for group decision analysis [40], develop CIF-TODIM method [43], CIF-EDAS method [44], CIF-PROMETHEE method [45], upgrade CIF-AHP method [46] and integrating with others [36,37]. In terms of theoretical research, some studies have been conducted, such as some distance measures in CIFS [25,33,39], similarity and entropy measures [41], divergence measures for CIFS [35], circular q-rung orthopair fuzzy set theory [3], circular phytagorean fuzzy set [42] and generalized CIFS [38].
Several studies on CIFS, particularly theoretical ones, have often overlooked the novel characteristics of the radius domain. Aspects such as the range r∈[0,√2], the intrinsic correlation where smaller radius values enhance the clarity of the CIFS information, and the constraints posed by previously defined operators have not been adequately emphasized. Furthermore, certain limitations may have served as motivation for the development of this paper. First, the radius domain, which is in the interval [0,√2], makes the operator on the radius not belong to the t-norm or conorm category. In [24] and [25], the operations on radius are limited to min and max. Operators used in fuzzy set structures and their extensions are categorized as t-norm and conorm. It is necessary to have a radius operator that has equivalent properties to the t-norm and conorm operators. The radius operator should also be an interval extension of t-norm and conorm operators. Second, Atanassov [24] proposed basic operations such as union, intersection, algebraic sum, algebraic product, and arithmetic mean in CIFS. Generalization is possible by classifying basic operators into t-norm and conorm. There is a need for the definition of generalized operators from the previously proposed operators. Third, the proposed unary operators such as negation and modal operators in CIFS introduced by Atanassov [24] do not significantly impact radius. The CIFS negation operator produces comparable results to the IFS negation operator, indicating no significant difference between CIFS and IFS. The objectives of this paper are described based on the three problems and constraints:
(1)To develop new radius operations for CIFS with domain [0,ψ], where ψ∈[1,√2], and justify their properties as well as some special domains.
(2) To propose generalized union and intersection operators in CIFS, base them on t-norm and t-conorm categories and subsequently verify their properties.
(3) To identify and propose negation and modal operators based on the radius interval condition, and examine their relationship with the existing operators.
To accomplish these objectives, we begin with establishing fundamental definitions such as IFS, IVIFS, and CIFS, along with their basic relations and operations in Section 2. Section 3, the generalized intersection and union are introduced based on t-norm (conorm) with conditions of membership, non-membership, and radius in the interval [0,1]. Several algebraic properties have been demonstrated, such as commutative, associative, and De Morgan's laws. Furthermore, the distributive property is proved for special cases namely algebraic sum-product, and arithmetic mean types by modifying the operators on the radius. Section 4 defines the generalized radius operations on the interval [0,ψ], where ψ∈[1,√2], and provides a proof of its algebraic properties. After defining the radius operation, Section 5 introduces another form of the negation operator in CIFS, accompanied by a proof of the De Morgan's law. Finally, the integration of the negation operator with the modal "necessity" and "possibility" operators is discussed, along with an examination of their advanced properties. Conclusions and discussion of further research are given in Section 6.
In this section, the basic definitions of IFS, IVIFS, and CIFS are provided. Let X be a finite set, any x∈X, M(x) is defined as membership degree and N(x) is defined as non-membership degree of x.
Definition 2.1. [2] An Intuitionistic fuzzy set (IFS) A in X is defined as an object of the form:
A={⟨x,MA(x),NA(x)⟩∣x∈X}, |
where MA:X→[0,1] and NA:X→[0,1] and satisfies 0≤MA(x)+NA(x)≤1 for every x∈X.
Note that, in this case MA(x) and NA(x) are given as a single values in [0,1]. Further extension of this set is when the values of membership and non-membership functions are presented in unit interval [0,1]. For any x∈X, M∗(x) is interval of membership degree and N∗(x) is interval of non-membership degree for x. Let Int([0,1]) are represented as interval in [0,1].
Definition 2.2. [16] An interval-valued IFS (IVIFS) A∗ in X is defined as an object of the form:
A∗={⟨x,M∗A(x),N∗A(x)⟩∣x∈X}, |
where M∗A:X→Int([0,1]) and N∗A:X→Int([0,1]) are defined by M∗A(x)=[M∗AL(x),M∗AU(x)], N∗A(x)=[N∗AL(x),N∗AU(x)], such that 0≤M∗AU(x)+N∗AU(x)≤1 for every x∈X.
It can be observed that under the IFIT [16], the IFS forms a single point of intersection between MA(x) and NA(x) for every x∈X, while for the IVIFS, its membership and non-membership functions form a rectangular area. Atanassov [24] then introduced another extension of IFS, instead of a rectangular area as in IVIFS, a circular area is proposed, called CIFS (CIFS). Under this new set, the point of intersection between MA(x) and NA(x) in IFS can be represented by a circular area with radius r and the center as the intersection point.
Definition 2.3. [24,25] A circular IFS (CIFS) Ar in X is defined as Ar={⟨x,MA(x),NA(x);r⟩∣x∈X}, where MA:X→[0,1] and NA:X→[0,1] satisfy 0≤MA(x)+NA(x)≤1 and r∈[0,√2] is the radius of the circle around each element x∈X.
Moreover, the function HAr where HAr(x)=1−MAr(x)−NAr(x)∈[0,1] corresponds to the degree of indeterminacy (uncertainty). It is clear that if r=0, then A0 is an IFS (i.e., a single point), but for r>0, it cannot be represented by an IFS. Let L∗={(p,q)|p,q∈[0,1] and p+q≤1}, then Ar can be written in the form Ar={⟨x,Or(MA(x),NA(x))⟩|x∈X} where,
Or(MA(x),NA(x))={⟨p,q⟩|p,q∈[0,1]and√(MA(x)−p)2+(NA(x)−q)2≤r}∩L∗. |
Previously, Atanassov identified five possible forms of the circle (see Figure 1), two of which have a center inside IFIT and the other three have a center on IFIT (x3 is on the coordinate-X or Y, x4 is on the maximum limit of the coordinate-X or Y, and x5 is on (0,0)). In the following, some related properties of CIFS are provided, such as the relations, operations, and modal operators.
Definition 2.4. [24] Let Ar and Bs be CIFSs, for each x∈X, the relations between Ar and Bs are as follows:
● Ar⊂ρBs iff (r<s) and (MA(x)=MB(x) and NA(x)=NB(x)).
● Ar⊂νBs iff (r=s) and one of the following conditions is fulfilled,
– MA(x)<MB(x) and NA(x)≥NB(x),
– MA(x)≤MB(x) and NA(x)>NB(x),
– MA(x)<MB(x) and NA(x)>NB(x).
● Ar⊂Bs iff (r<s) and one of the following conditions is fulfilled,
– MA(x)<MB(x) and NA(x)≥NB(x),
– MA(x)≤MB(x) and NA(x)>NB(x),
– MA(x)<MB(x) and NA(x)>NB(x).
● Ar⊆ρBs iff (r<s) and satisfied (MA(x)=MB(x) and NA(x)=NB(x)).
●Ar⊆νBs iff (r=s) and satisfied (MA(x)≤MB(x) and NA(x)≥NB(x)).
● Ar⊆Bs iff (r≤s) and satisfied (MA(x)≤MB(x) and NA(x)≥NB(x)).
● Ar=ρBs iff (r=s).
● Ar=νBs iff (MA(x)=MB(x) and NA(x)=NB(x)).
● Ar=Bs iff (r=s) and satisfied (MA(x)=MB(x) and NA(x)=NB(x)).
Definition 2.5. [24] Let Ar,Bs are CIFSs and operation radius ∝∈{min,max}. The negation, intersection, union, algebraic product, algebraic sum, and arithmetic mean operators between Ar and Bs respectively as follows:
¬Ar={⟨x,NA(x),MA(x);r⟩|x∈X}.Ar∩∝Bs={⟨x,min(MA(x),MB(x)),max(NA(x),NB(x));∝(r,s)⟩|x∈X}.Ar∪∝Bs={⟨x,max(MA(x),MB(x)),min(NA(x),NB(x));∝(r,s)⟩|x∈X}.Ar∘∝Bs={⟨x,MA(x)⋅MB(x),NA(x)+NB(x)−NA(x)⋅NB(x);∝(r,s)⟩|x∈X}.Ar+∝Bs={⟨x,MA(x)+MB(x)−MA(x)⋅MB(x),NA(x)⋅NB(x);∝(r,s)⟩|x∈X}.Ar@∝Bs={⟨x,MA(x)+MB(x)2,NA(x)+NB(x)2;∝(r,s)⟩|x∈X}. |
Definition 2.6. [24] Let Ar be CIFS, then modal operator "necessity" and "possibility" of Ar have the form:
◻Ar={⟨x,MA(x),1−MA(x);r⟩|x∈X}={⟨x,Or(MA(x),1−MA(x))⟩|x∈X},♢Ar={⟨x,1−NA(x),NA(x);r⟩|x∈X}={⟨x,Or(1−NA(x),NA(x))⟩|x∈X}. |
The operators used in membership functions of FS has several criteria that must be fulfilled, as well as non-membership functions in IFS. Operators such as minimum, maximum, algebraic product, and algebraic sum are included in the triangular norms or conorms as the following:
Definition 2.7. [29,30] A triangular norm (briefly t-norm) is binary operation T on the unit interval [0,1] with definition T:[0,1]2→[0,1] such that for all x,y,z∈[0,1]:
(T1) T(x,y)=T(y,x),
(T2) T(x,T(y,z))=T(T(x,y),z),
(T3) T(x,y)≤T(x,z) whenever y≤z, (T4) T(x,1)=x.
Definition 2.8. [29,30] A triangular conorm (t-conorm for short) is binary operation S on the unit interval [0,1] with definition S:[0,1]2→[0,1] which satisfies for all x,y,z∈[0,1], (T1-T3) and
(S4) S(x,0)=x.
Some examples of functions under t-norm or t-conorm include:
TM(x,y)=min(x,y)TP(x,y)=xyTL(x,y)=max(x+y−1,0)TD(x,y)={0if(x,y)∈[0,1[2min(x,y)otherwiseSM(x,y)=max(x,y)SP(x,y)=x+y−xySL(x,y)=min(x+y,1)SD(x,y)={1if(x,y)∈]0,1]2max(x,y)otherwise |
The operator S is also called the dual of T and has the relation T(x,y)=1−S(1−x,1−y) while the classification on both of them is in accordance with the prevailing properties. In this paper, we focus on two operators, the operator TP is called product t-norm (algebraic product) and the operator SP is called probabilistic sum (algebraic sum). Both operators satisfy the properties of monotone, continuous, strictly, cancellation law, and archimedean. Moreover, algebraic properties on its members such as idempotent, nilpotent and zero divisor can also be shown.
Remark 1 : In Definition 2.5, the operations on M and N fall under the category of t-norm, allowing them to be extended and applied using various forms of t-norm or conorm. This differs from the radius, which operates within the domain interval [0,√2], where the operation used is not a t-norm or conorm. The operations applied to the radius are constrained to min and max. Expanding the radius from the interval [0,1] to [0,√2] presents an opportunity to extend the operations on t-norm (conorm) into new operations. To maintain generality, the following proposes the extension of the algebraic sum and product operators into the interval [0,√2].
In early research, Attanasov [24] introduced the radius domain in the interval [0,1] and the min and max operators as initial operations. In this case, the selection of min and max operators can refer to the category type of t-norm and t-conorm functions so that the operators on the radius can be projected using t-norm and t-conorm operators. Furthermore, the radius interval is expanded to [0,√2] to ecompass the entire IFIT region within the circle range [25]. This expansion causes the categories of min and max operations to no longer be seen as t-norm and t-conorm functions and has an impact on the limitations of operators other than min and max.
In this section, the operators extension algebraic product, T∗ and extension algebraic sum, S∗ are defined on the interval [0,ψ] with ψ∈[1,√2]. These operators are based on the algebraic product and algebraic sum on the t-norm and t-conorm. The T∗ and S∗ operators are expected to have similar properties and structure to the algebraic product and sum.
Definition 3.1. Let ψ∈[1,√2] and T∗,S∗:[0,ψ]2→[0,ψ] where for a,b∈[0,ψ] can be defined as T∗(a,b)=abψ and S∗(a,b)=a+b−abψ.
Next, we will show the properties related to the t-norm axioms of the operator in Definition 2.4.
Theorem 3.1. Let ψ∈[1,√2] and for a,b∈[0,ψ], T∗(a,b)=abψ and S∗(a,b)=a+b−abψ. The operations T∗ and S∗ satisfy the following properties:
(ⅰ) T∗ and S∗ are commutative.
(ⅱ) T∗ and S∗ are associative.
(ⅲ) T∗ and S∗ are monotonic.
(ⅳ) The neutral element in T∗ is ψ and the neutral element in S∗ is 0.
(ⅴ) T∗(a,b)=ψ−S∗(ψ−a,ψ−b) and S∗(a,b)=ψ−T∗(ψ−a,ψ−b).
Proof. Let ψ∈[1,√2] and a,b∈[0,ψ] such that,
(ⅰ) T∗(a,b)=abψ=baψ=T∗(b,a) and S∗(a,b)=a+b−abψ=b+a−baψ=S∗(b,a). So it is proven that T∗ and S∗ are commutative.
(ⅱ) Let c∈[0,ψ], then
T∗(a,T∗(b,c))=T∗(a,bcψ)=abcψψ=abψcψ=T∗(abψ,c)=T∗(T∗(a,b),c) and
S∗(a,T∗(b,c))=S∗(a,b+c−bcψ)
=a+(b+c−bcψ)−a(b+c−bcψ)ψ
=a+b+c−bcψ−abψ−acψ+abcψ2
=a+b−abψ+c−(a+b−abψ)cψ
=S∗(a+b−abψ,c)
=S∗(S∗(a,b),c).
Hence, it is proved that T∗ and S∗ are associative.
(ⅲ) Let c∈[0,ψ] where b≤c, then T∗(a,b)=abψ≤acψ=T∗(a,c) and S∗(a,b)=a+b−abψ≤a+c−acψ=S∗(a,c). So T∗ and S∗ have monotonic.
(ⅳ) Suppose the neutral element in T∗ is e′∈[0,ψ], then T∗(a,e′)=T∗(e′,a)=a. It means ae′ψ=a and obtained e′=ψ. Similarly, suppose the neutral element in S∗ is e″, then S∗(a,e″)=S∗(e″,a)=a and we get e″=0.
(ⅴ) It can be shown that ψ−S∗(ψ−a,ψ−b)=T∗(a,b) and also ψ−T∗(ψ−a,ψ−b)=S∗(a,b).
ψ−S∗(ψ−a,ψ−b)=ψ−([ψ−a]+[ψ−b]−[ψ−a][ψ−b]ψ)
=ψ−(ψ−a+ψ−b−ψ+a+b−abψ)
=abψ=T∗(a,b)
ψ−T∗(ψ−a,ψ−b)=ψ−([ψ−a][ψ−b]ψ)
=ψ−(ψ−a−b+abψ)
=a+b−abψ=S∗(a,b).
If ψ=1, the domain interval [0,1] is obtained so that T∗(a,b)=ab/1=ab=Tp (product t-norm) and S∗(a,b)=a+b−ab1=a+b−ab=Sp (probabilistic sum t-conorm). Moreover, if ψ=√2, the domain interval is [0,√2] such that T∗(a,b)=ab√2 and S∗(a,b)=a+b−ab√2. It can be seen that the variable ψ is an index of expansion that occurs in the domain interval from 1 to √2. This raises the question whether the properties and characters that apply Tp also apply to T∗ and Sp also apply to S∗. The properties and characters in question are monotone, continuous, strict, cancellation law and archimedean.
Remark 2. The combination of monotonicity and commutativity leads to the non-decreasing property of T∗. If a≤b and c≤d, then we get T∗(a,c)≤T∗(a,d)=T∗(d,a)≤T∗(d,b)=T∗(b,d). The same effect occurs for S∗, such that S∗(a,c)≤S∗(b,d).
Theorem 3.2. Given T∗ and S∗ in Definition 3.1, both operations satisfy the properties:
(ⅰ) T∗ and S∗ are continuous for every (a,b)∈[0,ψ]2 with ψ∈[1,√2].
(ⅱ) T∗ and S∗ are strictly monotone.
(ⅲ) T∗ and S∗ satisfy cancellation law.
(ⅳ) T∗ and S∗ are archimedean.
Proof. The proof will be done on the operator T∗ (The same assumption is used for S∗).
(ⅰ) It will be proved that for every (a,b)∈[0,ψ]2 with ψ∈[1,√2] and ϵ>0, there exists δϵ>0 such that for every (a,b)∈[0,ψ]2 with √(x−a)2+(y−b)2<δϵ holds |xyψ−abψ|<ϵ. Let ψ∈[1,√2],(a,b)∈[0,ψ]2 and ϵ>0. Note that for every (x,y)∈[0,ψ]2 holds 0<a,y<ψ, then
|xyψ−abψ|=1ψ|xy−ab|
=1ψ√(xy−ab)2
=1ψ√(xy−ay+ay−ab)2
=1ψ√(x−a)2y2+2ay(x−a)(y−b)+a2(y−b)2
<1ψ√(x−a)2ψ2+2ψ(x−a)(y−b)+ψ2(y−b)2
=√(x−a)2+2(x−a)(x−b)+(y−b)2
=√((x−a)+(y−b))2
=|(x−a)+(y−b)|
≤|x−a|+|y−b|
=√(x−a)2+√(y−b)2
≤√(x−a)2+(y−b)2+√(x−a)2+(y−b)2
=2√(x−a)2+(y−b)2.
By taking δϵ=12ϵ, then for every (x,y)∈[0,ψ]2 with √(x−a)2+(y−b)2<δϵ satisfied |xyψ−abψ|<2√(x−a)2+(y−b)2<2δϵ=2(12ϵ)=ϵ.
(ⅱ) Let ψ∈[1,√2] and a,b,c∈[0,ψ] with b<c. By using the monotonicity property in Theorem 3.1, it is obtained that T∗(a,b)<T∗(a,c) and also S∗(a,b)<S∗(a,c). Thus T∗ and S∗ are strictly monotone.
(ⅲ) It will be proved that for every a,b,c∈[0,ψ] with ψ∈[1,√2], if T∗(a,b)=T∗(a,c) then a=0 or b=c. Let ψ∈[1,√2] and a,b,c∈[0,ψ] that satisfy T∗(a,b)=T∗(a,c). Hence a(b−c)ψ=0, Otherwise a=0 or b=c. Analogously using S∗ operator, if S∗(a,b)=S∗(a,c) then,
(b−c)−a(b−c)ψ=0(b−c)(1−aψ)=0. |
The result is b=c or a=ψ.
(ⅳ) We will prove for every (a,b)∈]0,ψ[2 with ψ∈[1,√2], there exist n∈N such that a(n)T∗<b. Let ψ∈[0,√2], (a,b)∈]0,ψ[2 then
a(n)T∗=T∗(a,T∗(a,...(T∗(a,a))))⏟n times=anψn−1. |
Using contradiction, if anψn−1−b≥0 then
anψn−1−b=ψ(aψ)n−b≥b(aψ)n−b=b((aψ)n−1)≥0. |
Since 0<a<ψ, then (aψ)n−1<0 and also b≠0 such that equation b((aψ)n−1)≥0 is false. So it is proved that there exist a(n)T∗<b. Similarly with the operator S∗ then,
a(n)S∗=T∗(a,T∗(a,...(T∗(a,a))))⏟n times=ψ−ψ(1−aψ)n. |
Analogously, by using contradiction, if it holds that ψ−ψ(1−aψ)n−b≥0 then,
ψ−ψ(1−aψ)n−b≥b−ψ(1−aψ)n−b=−ψ(1−aψ)n≥0. |
Considering 0<a<ψ, it follows (1−aψ)n≥0 such that −ψ(1−aψ)n≥0 is false and it is proved for a(n)S∗<b.
Theorem 3.3. Let T∗ and S∗ operator, ψ∈[1,√2] and a∈[0,ψ] then applies:
(ⅰ) Element 0 and ψ are idempotent element in T∗ and S∗.
(ⅱ) The operator T∗ and S∗ have no nilpotent elements and zero divisor.
Proof. Let ψ∈[1,√2],
(ⅰ) Element a∈[0,ψ] is called idempotent of T∗(or S∗) iff T∗(a,a)=a (or S∗(a,a)=a). Start with T∗(a,a)=a such that it is obtained,
T∗(a,a)=aa2ψ=aa−a2ψ=0a(ψ−a)ψ=0. |
This leads to a=0 or a=ψ. Now for operator S∗(a,a)=a we get,
S∗(a,a)=02a−a2ψ=aa−a2ψ=0a(ψ−a)ψ=0. |
This also means that a=0 or a=ψ. Therefore, 0 and ψ for ψ∈[1,√2] are idempotent elements for both T∗ and S∗.
(ⅱ) Element a∈]0,ψ[ is called nilpotent of T∗ (or S∗) iff there exist some n∈N such that a(n)T∗=0 (or a(n)S∗=0). Starting with operator T∗ we have a(n)T∗=anψn−1=0 such that a=0 is obtained. Similarly for operator S∗, we have
anS∗=ψ−ψ(1−aψ)n=0ψ(1−aψ)n=ψ(1−aψ)n=1. |
The above equation holds if only a=ψ is obtained for n odd or even. Since a∈]0,ψ[, both operators T∗ and S∗ have no nilpotent element. Furthermore, element a∈]0,ψ[ is called zero divisor of T∗ (or S∗) iff there exist some b∈]0,ψ[ such that T∗(a,b)=0 (or S∗(a,b)=0). Analogously with nilpotent, we have only a=0 or a=ψ that satisfies T∗(a,b)=0 and S∗(a,b)=0, so the operators T∗ and S∗ also have no zero divisor.
At the end of this section, we will show the relation between T∗ and Tp from the algebraic side using the concept of semigroup. Given interval sets I=[0,1] and I∗=[0,ψ] with ψ∈[1,√2], and also operator Tp:I2→I and operator T∗:[I∗]2→I∗ defined respectively:
Tp(a,b)=ab(∀a,b∈I),T∗(a,b)=a∗b∗ψ(∀a,b∈I∗). |
It can be shown that (I,Tp) and (I∗,T∗) are both commutative semigroups with neutral elements.
Theorem 3.4. Semigroup (I,Tp) isomorphic to (I∗,T∗) is denoted (I,Tp)≅(I∗,T∗).
Proof. It will be shown that there exists a bijective function ξ:I→I∗ such that for all a,b∈I,
ξ(Tp(a,b))=T∗(ξ(a),ξ(b)). | (3.1) |
Define the function ξ:I→I∗ by ξ(a)=aψ for ψ∈[1,√2]. This implies that for all a,b∈I holds,
ξ(Tp(a,b))=ξ(ab)=abψ=aψ.bψψ=T∗(ξ(a),ξ(b)). |
Furthermore, the function ξ is injective because ∀a,b∈I if ξ(a)=ξ(b) then a=b holds. Moreover, the function ξ is also surjective, because for any a∗∈I∗ there exist a=a∗ψ∈I such that ξ(a)=aψ=(a∗ψ)ψ=a∗ for any ψ∈[1,√2]. Since the function ξ is injective, surjective and satisfies Eq (3.1), then (I,Tp)≅(I∗,T∗).
Similarly, the operators Sp:I2→I and S∗:[I∗]→I∗ are defined respectively:
Sp(a,b)=a+b−ab(∀a,b∈I),S∗(a,b)=a+b−a∗b∗ψ(∀a,b∈I∗). |
Theorem 3.5. Semigroup (I,Sp) isomorphic to (I∗,S∗) is denoted (I,Sp)≅(I∗,S∗).
Proof. Straightforward.
With the existence of operators T∗ and S∗ that have the same structure, character, and properties as Tp and Sp, they can be used as alternative operators of radius instead of the previously defined min and max. Henceforth, in the case of CIFS using the value ψ=√2, the operator T∗ is called radius algebraic product (RAP) and is denoted ⊗, while the operator S∗ is called radius algebraic sum (RAS) and is denoted ⊕.
This section begins by defining the generalized operators for CIFS based on t-norm (conorm). These generalizations include the membership (M), non-membership (N), with the range [0,1] and radius, r with the range [0,√2]. Due to the difference in interval domains, this generalization process is applied to M and N which belong to the t-norm (conorm) category [29,30]. While the radius uses min,max, RAP, and RAS. We focus on algebraic product and algebraic sum for alternative operations on the radius and studying their related properties. Moreover, the arithmetic mean can also be applied to directly affect the radius or be consistent with the operations MA(x) and NA(x). The first step is to define the generalization of intersection and union in CIFS using t-norm (conorm).
Definition 4.1. Let Ar,Bs are CIFSs in X with r,s∈[0,1]. The generalized intersection (˜∩) and generalized union (˜∪) of CIFSs can be presented as follows:
(Ar)˜∩T,S,∝(Bs)={⟨x,T(MA(x),MB(x)),S(NA(x),NB(x));∝(r,s)|x∈X⟩},(Ar)˜∪S,T,∝(Bs)={⟨x,S(MA(x),MB(x)),T(NA(x),NB(x));∝(r,s)|x∈X⟩}, |
where T denotes t-norm and S denotes t-conorm, while ∝∈{min,max,⊗,⊕}.
It is clear that the Definition 4.1 will be defined for radius r,s∈[0,√2]. It can be seen that generalized intersection (Ar)˜∩T,S,∝(Bs) is a CIFS in X if T(MA(x),MB(x))+S(NA(x),NB(x))≤1. Since Ar and Bs are CIFSs, obtained NA(x)≤1−MA(x) and NB(x)≤1−MB(x). Then, S(NA(x),NB(x))≤S(1−MA(x),1−MB(x)), which is equivalent to S∗(MA(x),MB(x))=1−S(1−MA(x),1−MB(x))≤1−S(NA(x),NB(x)), where the equality holds if A and B are fuzzy sets. So, if T(MA(x),MB(x))≤S∗(MA(x),MB(x)), then (Ar)˜∩T,S,∝(Bs) is a CIFS in X. Analogously, generalized union (Ar)˜∪S,T,∝(Bs) is a CIFS when S(MA(x),MB(x))≤T∗(MA(x),MB(x)), where T∗(MA(x),MB(x))=1−T(1−MA(x),1−MB(x)). Thus, (Ar)˜∪S,T,∝(Bs) is a CIFS in X, the so called t-conorm (or dual t-norm T).
The properties of these operators are also a generalization of the basic properties of CIFS. The properties like commutative, associative and De'Morgan law can be derived from the generalized intersection and union in CIFS. However, for distributive properties of generalized union and intersection do not always apply, therefore it is necessary to focus on the type of t-norm (conorm) to be used. For example, if the t-norm used is min then, T(MA(x),MB(x))=min(MA(x),MB(x)) and S(NA(x),NB(x))=max(NA(x),NB(x)) so for each x∈X can be written:
(Ar)˜∩min,max,min(Bs)={⟨x,min(MA(x),MB(x)),max(NA(x),NB(x));min(r,s)⟩}=Ar∩minBs,(Ar)˜∩min,max,max(Bs)={⟨x,min(MA(x),MB(x)),max(NA(x),NB(x));max(r,s)⟩}=Ar∩maxBs. |
The same thing happened for generalized union (t-conorm). This time, if the t-norm used is an algebraic product, then the t-conorm used is an algebraic sum, and the generalized intersection and union becomes:
(Ar)˜∩∘,+,⊗(Bs)={⟨x,MA(x).MB(x),NA(x)+NB(x)−NA(x).NB(x);r.s⟩}=Ar∘⊗Bs,
(Ar)˜∩∘,+,⊕(Bs)={⟨x,MA(x).MB(x),NA(x)+NB(x)−NA(x).NB(x);r+s−r.s⟩}=Ar∘⊕Bs,
(Ar)˜∪+,∘,⊗(Bs)={⟨x,MA(x)+MB(x)−MA(x).MB(x),NA(x).NB(x);r.s⟩}=Ar+⊗Bs,
(Ar)˜∪+,∘,⊕(Bs)={⟨x,MA(x)+MB(x)−MA(x).MB(x),NA(x).NB(x);r+s−r.s⟩}=Ar+⊕Bs.
In the previous researchers [24], the operations used on the radius are only min and max. From Definition 2.5 instead of using min and max as radius operations in CIFS, it can be generalized to other t-norm (conorm) operators. We focus on the algebraic sum and product for radius operations. In addition to the algebraic product and sum form, the definition of the mean arithmetic operator will also be applied to the radius. Therefore, the definition ∝ in this paper includes min,max,⊗,⊕, and @. Thus, Definition 2.5 can be expanded to:
Definition 4.2. Let Ar,Bs are CIFS in X, radius operations ∝∈{min,max,⊕,⊗,@}, and r,s∈[0,√2].
The algebraic product, algebraic sum and arithmetic mean operator of CIFSs can be presented as follows:
Ar∘∝Bs={⟨x,MA(x).MB(x),NA(x)+NB(x)−NA(x).NB(x);∝(r,s)⟩|x∈X},Ar+∝Bs={⟨x,MA(x)+MB(x)−MA(x).MB(x),NA(x).NB(x);∝(r,s)⟩|x∈X},Ar@∝Bs={⟨x,MA(x)+MB(x)2,NA(x)+NB(x)2;∝(r,s)⟩|x∈X}. |
The following example will show the difference between the min,max,⊗,⊕ and @ on radius part.
Example 1: Let Ar and Bs are CIFS which are defined as follows:
Ar={⟨x,0.52,0.10;0.3⟩,⟨y,0.24,0.65;0.3⟩,⟨z,0.40,0.57;0.3⟩},Bs={⟨x,0.32,0.68;1.2⟩,⟨y,0.73,0.11;1.2⟩,⟨z,0.63,0.20;1.2⟩}. |
Using the algebraic product as the operator for membership and non-membership, compare the radius values for each operation ∝. If ∝=min, then,
Ar∘minBs={⟨x,0.17,0.71;0.3⟩,⟨y,0.18,0.69;0.3⟩,⟨z,0.25,0.66;0.3⟩}, |
and if ∝=max, the another result will be,
Ar∘maxBs={⟨x,0.17,0.71;1.2⟩,⟨y,0.18,0.69;1.2⟩,⟨z,0.25,0.66;1.2⟩}. |
A significant difference occurs in the radius while the membership and non-membership values are the same. So for Ar∘⊗Bs has a radius value of 0.254, Ar∘⊕Bs obtains a radius value of 1.245 and Ar∘@Bs obtains a radius value of 0.75. The next thing is to know the relation of each operation radius.
Theorem 4.1. Let Ar and Bs are CIFS, ϕ∈{∩,∪,+,∘,@} and r,s∈[0,1] the following equation holds,
Arϕ⊗Bs⊆ρArϕminBs⊆ρArϕ@Bs⊆ρArϕmaxBs⊆ρArϕ⊕Bs. |
Proof. The proof of this theorem is focused on the radius value. Since the relation ⊆ρ is in Definition 2.4, if Ar⊆ρBs then r≤s applies to radius. Furthermore, using the operating properties of the t-norm and conorm obtained for each r,s∈[0,1],
rs√2≤min{r,s}≤r+s2≤max{r,s}≤r+s−rs√2. |
So it is proved for the theorem.
Theorem 4.2. Let Ar and Bs are CIFS, ϕ ∈{∩,∪,+,∘,@},∝∈{⊗,⊕,@} and r,s∈[0,√2], then the following statements are true:
(ⅰ) (ArϕminBs)∩∝(ArϕmaxBs)=Ar∩∝Bs.
(ⅱ) (ArϕminBs)∪∝(ArϕmaxBs)=Ar∪∝Bs.
(ⅲ) (ArϕminBs)@∝(ArϕmaxBs)=Ar@∝Bs.
Proof. In proving points (ⅰ), (ⅱ), and (ⅲ) using a similar method. Since for let Ar,Bs are CIFS (i.e. point 1),
(ArϕminBs)∩∝(ArϕmaxBs)
={⟨x,ϕ(MA(x),MB(x)),ϕ(NA(x),NB(x));min(r,s)⟩}∩∝{⟨x,ϕ(MA(x),MB(x)),
ϕ(NA(x),NB(x));max(r,s)⟩}
={⟨x,ϕ(MA(x),MB(x)),ϕ(NA(x),NB(x));∝(min(r,s),max(r,s))⟩}.
If ∝=⊕, then ∝(min(r,s),max(r,s))=min(r,s)+max(r,s)−[min(r,s)⋅max(r,s)]√2=r+s−rs√2. The same is true if ∝=⊗ and @ are selected. A similar proof was also made for ϕ=∩,∪,∘,@ and for points 2 and 3.
Because the algebraic product and sum are a type of t-norm (conorm), it is proven that they are commutative, associative and De'Morgan law. However, further investigation is needed for the arithmetic mean operator combined with the algebraic product or sum,
Theorem 4.3. (Commutative Law) Let Ar and Bs are CIFSs, ∝∈{⊗,⊕,@} and r,s∈[0,√2] then satisfied:
Ar+@Bs=Bs+@Ar,Ar∘@Bs=Bs∘@Ar, and Ar@∝Bs=Bs@∝Ar, |
Proof. Let say Ar+@Bs=Ct, then radius part is t=r+s2=s+r2 and the equation Ct=Bs+@Ar is proven. Next for Ar@⊗Bs obtained,
Ar@⊗Bs={⟨x,MA(x)+MB(x)2,NA(x)+NB(x)2;rs√2⟩}={⟨x,MB(x)+MA(x)2,NB(x)+NA(x)2;sr√2⟩}=Bs@⊗Ar. |
It can be seen that operator @⊗ is also commutative, so it is also proven for Ar@⊕Bs and Ar@@Bs.
Remark 3. Using the fact that for any r,s,t∈[0,1] holds r+s2+t≠r+s+t2 then the arithmetic mean is not associative. This means that for every ϕ∈{∩,∪,+,∘} and ∝∈{min,max,⊗,⊕} applies,
Arϕ@(Bsϕ@Ct)≠(Arϕ@Bs)ϕ@CtandAr@∝(Bs@∝Ct)≠(Ar@∝Bs)@∝Ct. |
operators, we will show some properties that apply to RAP, RAS, and arithmetic mean on the radius operator.
Theorem 4.4. Let r,s,t∈[0,√2], then the relations between operators ⊗,⊕ and @ satisfied,
(ⅰ) ⊗(r,⊗(s,t))≥⊗(⊗(r,s),⊗(r,t)).
(ⅱ) ⊕(r,⊕(s,t))≤⊕(⊕(r,s),⊕(r,t)).
(ⅲ) ⊗(r,⊕(s,t))≤⊕(⊗(r,s),⊗(r,t)).
(ⅳ) ⊕(r,⊗(s,t))≥⊗(⊕(r,s),⊕(r,t)).
(ⅴ) ⊗(r,@(s,t))=@(⊗(r,s),⊗(r,t)).
(ⅵ) ⊕(r,@(s,t))=@(⊕(r,s),⊕(r,t)).
(ⅶ) @(r,⊕(s,t))≤⊕(@(r,s),@(r,t)).
(ⅷ) @(r,⊗(s,t))≥⊗(@(r,s),@(r,t)).
(ⅸ) @(r,@(s,t))=@(@(r,s),@(r,t)).
Proof. Let r,s,t∈[0,√2] real number. To prove that the left side is smaller or equal to the right side, the difference between the left and right sides is negative and vice versa.
(ⅰ) From left side, ⊗(r,⊗(s,t))=⊗(r,st√2)=rst√2√2=rst2, and from right side we have, ⊗(⊗(r,s),⊗(r,t))=⊗(rs√2,rt√2)=r2st2√2. Then the difference between the two is,
[rst2]−[r2st2√2]=√2rst−r2st2√2=rst(√2−r)2√2≥0.
It means that ⊗(r,⊗(s,t))≥⊗(⊗(r,s),⊗(r,t)).
(ⅱ) The value of the left side is, ⊕(r,⊕(s,t))=⊕(r,s+t−st√2)
=r+(s+t−st√2)−r(s+t−st√2)√2
=r+s+t−rs√2−rt√2−st√2+rst2,
while from the right side, ⊕(⊕(r,s),⊕(r,t))=⊗(r+s−rs√2,r+t−rt√2)
=(r+s−rs√2)+(r+t−rt√2)−(r+s−rs√2)(r+t−rt√2)√2
=r+s−rs√2+r+t−rs√2+r2√2+rt√2−r2t2+rs√2+st√2−rst2−r2s2−rst2+r2st2√2.
The difference between the two is,
[r+s+t−st√2−rs√2−rt√2+rst2]−[r+s−rs√2+r+t−rs√2+r2√2+rt√2−r2t2+rs√2+st√2−rst2−r2s2−rst2+r2st2√2]
=3rst2−r−r2√2−2rt√2+r2t2−2st√2+r2s2−r2st2√2
=3√2rst−2√2r−2√2r2−4rt+√2r2t−4st+√2r2s−r2st2√2
=3√2rst−r2st−2√2r−2r2+√2r2(s+t)−4t(r+s)2√2.
Since, s+t−st√2≤√2 and r+s−rs√2≤√2 then,
≤3√2rst−r2st−2√2r−2r2+√2r2(√2−st√2)−4t(r+s)
=3√2rst−2r2st−2√2r−4t(r+s)
≤3√2rst−2r2st−2√2r−4t(√2+rs√2)
=√2rst−2r2st−2√2r−4√2t
=−2r2st+√2r(st−2)−4√2t≤0.
So it is proven that ⊕(r,⊕(s,t))≤⊕(⊕(r,s),⊕(r,t)).
(ⅲ) Analogously to the previous, for the left side value is obtained,
⊗(r,⊕(s,t))=⊗(r,s+t−st√2)=r(s+t−st√2)√2=rs√2+rt√2−rst2,
while the right side is obtained,
⊕(⊗(r,s),⊗(r,t))=⊕(rs√2,rt√2)=rs√2+rt√2=(rs√2)(rt√2)√2=rs√2+rt√2−r2st2√2.
The difference is,
[rs√2+rt√2−rst2]−[rs√2+rt√2−r2st2√2]=r2st−√2rst2√2=rst(r−√2)2√2≤0.
So it is clear that ⊗(r,⊕(s,t))≤⊕(⊗(r,s),⊗(r,t)).
(ⅳ) Similarly, from left side we have,
⊕(r,⊗(s,t))=⊕(r,st√2)=r+st√2−rst√2√2=r+st√2−rst2,
from right side,
⊗(⊕(r,s),⊕(r,t))=⊗(r+s−rs√2,r+t−rt√2)
=(r+s−rs√2)(r+t−rt√2)√2
=r2√2+rt√2−r2t2+rs√2+st√2−rst2−r2s2−rst2+r2st2√2.
So the difference between left and right sides is,
[r+st√2−rst2]−[r2√2+rt√2−r2t2+rs√2+st√2−rst2−r2s2−rst2+r2st2√2]
=r−r2√2−rt√2+r2t2−rs√2+r2s2+rst2−r2st2√2
=r(√2−r)((2−st)−√2(s+t))2√2.
It is clear that r≥0,√2−r≥0, then for (2−st)−√2(s+t) will be investigated as follows,
(2−st)−√2(s+t)=2−st−√2s−√2t
=√2(√2−st√2−s−t)
=√2(√2−(s+t−st√2)).
Because s+t−st√2≤√2 for s,t∈[0,√2], then obtained that information (2−st)−√2(s+t)≥0. So it is proven that r(√2−r)((2−st)−√2(s+t))2√2≥0.
(ⅴ) To prove the similarity of left and right sides is as follows: r(s+t2)√2=r(s+t)2√2=rs√2+rt√22=@(⊗(r,s),⊗(r,t)).
(ⅵ) Likewise with point (ⅴ), it is obtained,
⊕(r,@(s,t))=⊕(r,s+t2)=r+s+t2−r(s+t2)√2=(r+s−rs√2)+(r+t−rt√2)2=@(⊕(r,s),⊕(r,t)),
(ⅶ) The left side value is,
@(r,⊕(s,t))=r+(s+t−st√2)2=r+s+t−st√22=2√2r+2√2s+2√2t−2st4√2,
while its right side is obtained,
⊕(@(r,s),@(r,t))=(r+s2)+(r+t2)−(r+s2)(r+t2)√2
=2r+s+t2−(r2+rt+rs+st4√2)
=4√2r+2√2s+2√2t−r2−rt−rs−st4√2.
So the difference between left side and right side is,
[2√2r+2√2s+2√2t−2st4√2]−[4√2r+2√2s+2√2t−r2−rt−rs−st4√2]
=−st−2√2r+r2+rt+rs4√2
=r(r+s+t−2√2)−st4√2.
Remember that s+t−st√2≤√2
≤r(r+√2+st√2−2√2)−st4√2
≤(r−√2)(r+st√2)4√2≤0.
It is obtained that @(r,⊕(s,t))≤⊕(@(r,s),@(r,t)).
(ⅷ) From left side,
@(r,⊗(s,t))=r+st√22=√2r+st2√2.
From right side,
⊗(@(r,s),@(r,t))=(r+s2)(r+t2)√2=r2+rt+rs+st4√2.
Then the difference is,
[√2r+st2√2]−[r2+rt+rs+st4√2]
=2√2r+st−r2−rt−rs4√2
=r(√2−r)+√2r+st−rt−rs4√2.
Remember that s+t−st√2≤√2 and st≥st√2,
≥r(√2−r)+√2r+(s+t−√2)−rt−rs4√2
≥r(√2−r)+(1−r)(s+t−√2)4√2≥0.
It is obtained that the value of the left side is greather than equal to the right side for radius, so @(r,⊗(s,t))≥⊗(@(r,s),@(r,t)).
(ⅸ) The same as point (ⅴ) is obtained,
@(r,@(s,t))=@(r,s+t2)=r+s+t22=r+s2+r+t22=@(@(r,s),@(r,t)).
Thus, it is proven for the distributive relation between the operators ⊗,⊕ and @.
The distributive properties of CIFS have been shown in previous research [24], but the radius operations are only limited to min and max. Furthermore, the distributive properties in algebraic addition, product, and arithmetic mean in CIFS will be shown along with additional operators on radius.
Theorem 4.5. (Distributive Law) Let Ar,Bs and Ct are CIFSs, ϕ∈{+,∘,@} and r,s,t∈[0,√2] then,
(ⅰ) Ar∘⊗(Bs+⊕Ct)⊂(Ar∘⊗Bs)+⊕(Ar∘⊗Ct).
(ⅱ) Ar∘⊗(Bs@⊕Ct)⊂ρ(Ar∘⊗Bs)@⊕(Ar∘⊗Ct).
(ⅲ) Ar∘⊗(Bs@⊗Ct)⊂ρ(Ar∘⊗Bs)@⊗(Ar∘⊗Ct).
(ⅳ) Ar∘⊕(Bs+⊕Ct)⊂ρ(Ar∘⊕Bs)+⊕(Ar∘⊕Ct).
(ⅴ) Ar∘⊕(Bs@⊕Ct)⊂ρ(Ar∘⊕Bs)@⊕(Ar∘⊕Ct).
(ⅵ) Ar∘⊕(Bs@⊗Ct)⊃ρ(Ar∘⊕Bs)@⊗(Ar∘⊕Ct).
(ⅶ) Ar∘@(Bs@⊗Ct)=ν(Ar∘@Bs)@⊗(Ar∘@Ct).
(ⅷ) Ar∘@(Bs@⊕Ct)=ν(Ar∘@Bs)@⊕(Ar∘@Ct).
(ⅸ) Ar∘ϕ(Bs+@Ct)⊂ν(Ar∘ϕBs)+@(Ar∘ϕCt).
(ⅹ) Ar∘ϕ(Bs@@Ct)=(Ar∘ϕBs)@@(Ar∘ϕCt).
(xi) Ar+⊗(Bs∘⊗Ct)⊃(Ar+⊗Bs)∘⊗(Ar+⊗Ct).
(xii) Ar+⊗(Bs@⊕Ct)⊂ρ(Ar+⊗Bs)@⊕(Ar+⊗Ct).
(xiii) Ar+⊗(Bs@⊗Ct)⊃ρ(Ar+⊗Bs)@⊗(Ar+⊗Ct).
(xiv) Ar+⊕(Bs∘⊗Ct)⊃(Ar+⊕Bs)∘⊗(Ar+⊕Ct).
(xv) Ar+⊕(Bs∘⊗Ct)⊃(Ar+⊕Bs)∘⊗(Ar+⊕Ct).
(xvi) Ar+⊕(Bs@⊕Ct)⊂ρ(Ar+⊕Bs)@⊕(Ar+⊕Ct).
(xvii) Ar+⊕(Bs@⊗Ct)⊃ρ(Ar+⊕Bs)@⊗(Ar+⊕Ct).
(xviii) Ar+@(Bs@⊗Ct)=ν(Ar+@Bs)@⊗(Ar+@Ct).
(xix) Ar+@(Bs@⊕Ct)=ν(Ar+@Bs)@⊕(Ar+@Ct).
(xx) Ar+ψ(Bs@@Ct)=(Ar+ψBs)@@(Ar+ψCt).
(xxi) Ar+ψ(Bs∘@Ct)⊃ν(Ar+ψBs)∘@(Ar+ψCt).
(xxii) Ar@⊗(Bs+⊕Ct)⊂(Ar@⊗Bs)+⊕(Ar@⊗Ct).
(xxiii) Ar@⊗(Bs∘⊗Ct)⊃(Ar@⊗Bs)∘⊗(Ar@⊗Ct).
(xxiv) Ar@⊕(Bs+⊕Ct)⊂(Ar@⊕Bs)+⊕(Ar@⊕Ct).
(xxv) Ar@⊕(Bs∘⊗Ct)⊃(Ar@⊕Bs)∘⊗(Ar@⊕Ct).
(xxvi) Ar@ψ(Bs+@Ct)⊂ν(Ar@ψBs)+@(Ar@ψCt).
(xxvii) Ar@ψ(Bs∘@Ct)⊂ν(Ar@ψBs)∘@(Ar@ψCt).
Proof. The proof of this theorem can be demonstrated by utilizing Theorem in Atanassov [24] and Theorem 4.4.
Remark 4. The proof that has been carried out in Theorems 4.3 and 4.5 can also be applied to IFS (r=0). If the radius is 0, then just ignore the radius relation in the relation operator. As an example of the distributive property points 2 and 7, if r=s=t=0 then Ar∘⊗(Bs@⊕Ct)⊂(Ar∘⊗Bs)@⊕(Ar∘⊗Ct) and Ar∘@(Bs@⊗Ct)=(Ar∘@Bs)@⊗(Ar∘@Ct).
In the original paper [24], Atanssov defined the negation operators on CIFS as redefined from IFS which only affects M and N, but not radius. Next, we will define a type negation operator based on the radius condition.
Definition 5.1. Let Ar is CIFS and r∈[0,√2] then, modified negation operator based on radius are the following:
¬2(Ar)={⟨x,MAr(x),NAr(x);√2−r⟩|x∈X},¬3(Ar)={⟨x,NAr(x),MAr(x);√2−r⟩|x∈X}. |
It is clear that the negation operator defined earlier in [24] is type-1 negation i.e. ¬1(Ar)={⟨x,NAr(x),MAr(x);r⟩}. The type-2 and type-3 negation operators satisfy the complement axioms, boundary conditions, monotonic descent, continuity, and involution properties. These changes are based on operations on the radius giving rise to some properties that apply to the definition.
Theorem 5.1. The following equalities are valid for CIFSs Ar,
(ⅰ) ¬1(¬1(Ar))=Ar likewise for ¬2 and ¬3.
(ⅱ) ¬1(¬2(Ar))=¬3(Ar).
(ⅲ) ¬2(¬1(Ar))=¬3(Ar).
(ⅳ) Ar⊆ρ¬2(Ar)⇔r≤√22.
(ⅴ) Ar⊇ρ¬2(Ar)⇔r≥√22.
Proof. For points (ⅰ) until (ⅲ), it is clearly proven by Definition 5.1. For the rest, it is sufficient to prove if r≤√2−r then r≤√22 and vice versa.
Theorem 5.2. (De'Morgan Law) The following equalities are valid for CIFSs Ar and Bs for ϕ∈{∩,∪,+,∘,@} and ∝∈{max,min,⊕,⊗,@},
(ⅰ) ¬1(Ar@∝Bs)=¬1(Ar)@∝¬1(Bs).
(ⅱ) ¬2(Arϕ@Bs)=¬2(Ar)ϕ@¬2(Bs).
(ⅲ) ¬1[¬1(Arϕ∝Bs)]=Arϕ∝Bs.
(ⅳ) ¬2[¬1(Ar∩max/minBs)]=¬3(Ar)∪min/max¬3(Bs).
(ⅴ) ¬2[¬1(Ar∪max/minBs)]=¬3(Ar)∩min/max¬3(Bs).
(ⅵ) ¬2[¬1(Ar+max/minBs)]=¬3(Ar)∘min/max¬3(Bs).
(ⅶ) ¬2[¬1(Ar∘max/minBs)]=¬3(Ar)+min/max¬3(Bs).
(ⅷ) ¬2[¬1(Ar@max/minBs)]=¬3(Ar)@min/max¬3(Bs).
(ⅸ) ¬2[¬1(Ar@@Bs)]=¬3(Ar)@@¬3(Bs)
Proof. It is clearly proven by Definitions 2.5 and 5.1.
Next will be defined another modal operators "necessity" and "possibility". The previously defined modal operators [24] only affect membership or non-membership functions, not radius. This is the reason why the modal operators "necessity" and "possibility" also affect the radius (denoted ◻2 and ♢2) as follows:
Definition 5.2. Let Ar is CIFS, then modified modal operator based form radius are the following:
◻2Ar={⟨x,MA(x),1−MA(x);√2−r⟩|x∈X},♢2Ar={⟨x,1−NA(x),NA(x);√2−r⟩|x∈X}. |
Similar to the negation operator, the modal operators "necessity" and "possibility" [24] are symbolized by ◻1 and ♢1. Some properties derived from these modal operators are presented in next the theorem:
Theorem 5.3. The following equalities are valid for CIFS Ar,
(ⅰ) ◻1Ar⊆νAr.
(ⅱ) Ar⊆ν♢1Ar.
(ⅲ) ♢1(◻1Ar)=◻1Ar.
(ⅳ) ◻1(♢1Ar)=♢1Ar.
(ⅴ) ◻1(◻1...(◻1(◻1Ar)))=◻1Ar.
(ⅵ) ♢1(♢1...(♢1(♢1Ar)))=♢1Ar.
(ⅶ) r≥√22⇔◻2Ar⊆Ar and r<√22⇔◻2Ar⊃Ar.
(ⅷ) r≤√22⇔Ar⊆♢2Ar and r<√22⇔Ar⊃♢2Ar.
(ⅸ) ♢2(◻2Ar)=◻1Ar.
(ⅹ) ◻2(♢2Ar¬)¬=♢1Ar.
(xi) ◻2(◻2Ar¬)¬=◻1Ar.
(xii) ♢2(♢2Ar)=♢1Ar.
(xiii) ◻2(◻2(◻2Ar))=◻2Ar.
(xiv) ♢2(♢2(♢2Ar))=♢2Ar.
(xv) ◻2(◻2...(◻2Ar))⏟n factor ={◻1Ar, for n even number,◻2Ar, for n odd number.
(xvi) ♢2(♢2...(♢2Ar))⏟n factor ={♢1Ar, for n even number,♢2Ar, for n odd number.
Proof. This proof will be carried out at each point,
(ⅰ) It is clear that the difference between ◻1Ar and Ar lies in the value of N◻1Ar≤NAr, so it holds ◻1Ar⊆ρAr.
(ⅱ) Same with point (ⅰ), the difference is in the value M♢1Ar≥MAr so it happens Ar⊆ρ♢1Ar.
(ⅲ) It is clear by Definition 5.2,
♢1(◻1Ar)=♢1{⟨x,MA(x),1−MA(x),r⟩}={⟨x,1−(1−MA(x)),1−MA(x),r⟩}={⟨x,MA(x),1−MA(x),r⟩}=◻1Ar. |
(ⅳ) Same with point (ⅲ),
◻1(♢1Ar)=◻{⟨x,1−NA(x),NA(x),r⟩}={⟨x,1−NA(x),1−(1−NA(x)),r⟩}={⟨x,1−NA(x),NA(x),r⟩}=♢1Ar. |
(ⅴ) Let start for n=1, it's clear. For n=2,3,4,... it will be,
◻1(◻1Ar)=◻1{⟨x,MAr(x),1−MAr(x),r⟩}={⟨x,MAr(x),1−MAr(x),r⟩}=◻1Ar, |
recursively get,
◻1(◻1...(◻1(◻1Ar)))=◻1(◻1...(◻1Ar))=...=(◻1(◻1Ar))=◻1Ar. |
(ⅵ) Same with point (ⅴ) and get,
♢1(♢1...(♢1(♢1Ar)))=♢1(♢1...(♢1Ar))=...=(♢1(♢1Ar))=♢1Ar. |
(ⅶ) From left side, if r≥√22 then value in ◻2Ar is √2−r≤√22 and the value in Ar≥√22. In addition, membership and non-membership grades are obtained ◻2Ar=⟨x,MAr(x),1−MAr(x);√2−r⟩. The fact that NAr(x)=1−MAr−HAr, then NAr≤1−MAr(x) so proved that ◻2Ar⊆Ar. From right side, if ◻2Ar⊆Ar then, √22≤r. Same method for ◻2Ar⊃Ar iff r<√22.
(ⅷ) From left side, if r≤√22 then value in ♢2Ar is √2−r≥√22 and the value in Ar≤√22. In addition, membership and non-membership grades are obtained ♢2Ar=⟨x,1−NAr(x),NAr(x);√2−r⟩. The fact that MAr(x)=1−NAr−HAr, then MAr≤1−NAr(x) so proved that Ar⊆♢2Ar. From right side, if Ar⊆♢2Ar then r≤√22 same method for Ar⊃♢2Ar iff r>√22.
(ⅸ) Using the modified two negation combination on the modal operator according to Definition 5.2,
♢2(◻2Ar)=♢2{⟨x,MA(x),1−MA(x),√2−r⟩}={⟨x,1−(1−MA(x)),1−MA(x),√2−(√2−r)⟩}={⟨x,MA(x),1−MA(x),r⟩}=◻1Ar. |
(ⅹ) Same using combination from Definition 5.2,
◻2(♢2Ar)=♢2{⟨x,1−NA(x),NA(x),√2−r⟩}={⟨x,1−NA(x),1−(1−NA(x)),√2−(√2−r)⟩}={⟨x,1−NA(x),NA(x),r⟩}=♢1Ar. |
(xi) Equivalent with the previous,
◻2(◻2Ar)=◻2(⟨x,MA(x),1−MA(x);√2−r⟩)=⟨x,MA(x),1−MA(x);√2−(√2−r)⟩=◻1Ar. |
(xii) Equivalent with the previous,
♢2(♢2Ar)=♢2(⟨x,1−NA(x),NA(x);√2−r⟩)=⟨x,1−NA(x),NA(x);√2−(√2−r)⟩=♢1Ar. |
(xiii) From point (xi),
◻2(◻2(◻2Ar))=◻2(◻2Ar)=◻2(⟨x,MA(x),1−MA;r⟩)=(⟨x,MA(x),1−MA;√2−r⟩)=◻2Ar. |
(xiv) From point (xii),
♢2(♢2(♢2Ar)))=♢2(♢2Ar)=♢2(⟨x,1−NA(x),NA;r⟩)=(⟨x,1−NA(x),NA;√2−r⟩)=♢2Ar. |
(xv) From points (xi) and (xiii), it's clear to proved that,
◻2(◻2...(◻2Ar))⏟nfactor={◻1Ar , for n even number,◻2Ar , for n odd number. |
(xvi) From points (xii) and (xiv), it's clear to proved that,
♢2(♢2...(♢2Ar))⏟nfactor={♢1Ar , for n even number,♢2Ar , for n odd number. |
Remark 5. Similarly with Remark 4, we can also apply the negation operators to IFS. Let A0={⟨x,MAr(x),NAr(x);0⟩|x∈X} and A√2={⟨x,MAr(x),NAr(x);√2⟩|x∈X} then,
¬1(Ar)=¬A,foranyIFSA,¬2(Ar)=A√2,and¬3(Ar)=¬1(A√2). |
Likewise for modal operators, so it is obtained
◻1Ar=◻A;◻2Ar=A√2,and♢1Ar=♢A;♢2Ar=A√2. |
Analogously for Theorems 5.1 and 5.3 just ignore the radius relation in the relation operator.
This research builds on Atanassov's work on theoretical CIFS, focusing on defining alternative operations for radius beyond minimum and maximum functions. These operations, namely Radius Algebraic Product (RAP) and Radius Algebraic Sum (RAS), leverage the properties of t-norm and t-conorm. Additionally, we introduce the arithmetic mean operator as a radius operator, distinct from traditional t-norm or t-conorm categories. These three operators share structural and characteristic similarities with algebraic product t-norm and probabilistic t-conorm, including algebraic properties, idempotence, nilpotence, and zero divisor elements.
Following their definition, we integrate these operations with those defined by Atanassov, extending them to generalize intersection and union based on t-norm (conorm). We explore various properties, from commutativity to associativity and distributivity, to assess the consistency of these operations. Furthermore, we propose alternative negation and modal operators beyond those defined by Atanassov, and examine related theorems.
This work contributes to the literature on CIFS theory, providing valuable tools for researchers. However, it also suggests avenues for further exploration, particularly in the realm of decision-making processes. Future research should delve into the multiplicative characteristics of CIFS operators, which serve as the foundation for developing aggregation operators such as Weighted Averaging (WA), Ordered WA (OWA), Weighted Geometric (WG), or Ordered WG (OWG). Flexibility in radius selection is crucial for decision-making agility. Moreover, the introduction of additional radius operators prompts innovation in MCDM methods such as TOPSIS, AHP, ELECTRE, DEMATEL, etc.
The authors declare that they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
This work was supported by Universiti Malaysia Terengganu under the Inter-Disciplinary Impact Driven Research Grant (ID2RG) 2023, Vot. 55516.
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
[1] |
Garg S, Kim L, Whitaker M, et al. (2020) Hospitalization rates and characteristics of patients hospitalized with laboratory-confirmed Coronavirus Disease 2019—COVID-NET, 14 States, March 1–30, 2020. MMWR Morb Mortal Wkly Rep 69: 458-464. https://doi.org/10.15585/mmwr.mm6915e3 ![]() |
[2] |
Nguyen NT, Chinn J, De Ferrante M, et al. (2021) Male gender is a predictor of higher mortality in hospitalized adults with COVID-19. PLoS One 16: e0254066. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0254066 ![]() |
[3] |
Jin JM, Bai P, He W, et al. (2020) Gender differences in patients with COVID-19: focus on severity and mortality. Front Public Health 8: 152. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpubh.2020.00152 ![]() |
[4] |
Wiersinga WJ, Rhodes A, Cheng AC, et al. (2020) Pathophysiology, transmission, diagnosis, and treatment of Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19): A review. JAMA 324: 782-793. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.2020.12839 ![]() |
[5] | Muñiz-Diaz E, Llopis J, Parra R, et al. (2021) Relationship between the ABO blood group and COVID-19 susceptibility, severity and mortality in two cohorts of patients. Blood Transfus 19: 54-63. https://doi.org/10.2450/2020.0256-20 |
[6] |
Wu BB, Gu DZ, Yu JN, et al. (2020) Association between ABO blood groups and COVID-19 infection, severity and demise: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Infect Genet Evol 84: 104485. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.meegid.2020.104485 ![]() |
[7] |
Dentali F, Sironi AP, Ageno W, et al. (2012) Non-O blood type is the commonest genetic risk factor for VTE: results from a meta-analysis of the literature. Semin Thromb Hemost 38: 535-548. https://doi.org/10.1055/s-0032-1315758 ![]() |
[8] |
Sun W, Wen CP, Lin J, et al. (2015) ABO blood types and cancer risk—a cohort study of 339,432 subjects in Taiwan. Cancer Epidemiol 39: 150-156. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.canep.2014.12.006 ![]() |
[9] | Weqaya Saudi Center for Disease Prevention and Control, Minsitry of HealthCOVID-19 Cornoavirus disease guidelines (2020). Available from: https://www.moh.gov.sa/Ministry/MediaCenter/Publications/Documents/Coronavirus-Disease-2019-Guidelines-v1.2.pdf |
[10] |
Mobarki AA, Dobie G, Saboor M, et al. (2021) MPR and NLR as prognostic markers in ICU-admitted patients with COVID-19 in Jazan, Saudi Arabia. Infect Drug Resist 14: 4859-4864. https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S342259 ![]() |
[11] |
Hamali HA, Saboor M, Dobie G, et al. (2022) Procoagulant microvesicles in COVID-19 patients: possible modulators of inflammation and prothrombotic tendency. Infect Drug Resist 15: 2359-2368. https://doi.org/10.2147/IDR.S355395 ![]() |
[12] |
Liu J, Li S, Liu J, et al. (2020) Longitudinal characteristics of lymphocyte responses and cytokine profiles in the peripheral blood of SARS-CoV-2 infected patients. EbioMedicine 55: 102763. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ebiom.2020.102763 ![]() |
[13] |
Nurlu N, Ozturk OO, Cat A, et al. (2021) Could some laboratory parameters predict mortality in COVID-19?. Clin Lab 67. https://doi.org/10.7754/Clin.Lab.2021.201231 ![]() |
[14] |
Huang G, Kovalic AJ, Graber CJ (2020) Prognostic value of leukocytosis and lymphopenia for Coronavirus disease severity. Emerg Infect Dis 26: 1839-1841. https://doi.org/10.3201/eid2608.201160 ![]() |
[15] |
Sinha P, Matthay MA, Calfee CS (2020) Is a “Cytokine Storm” relevant to COVID-19?. JAMA Intern Med 180: 1152-1154. https://doi.org/10.1001/jamainternmed.2020.3313 ![]() |
[16] | Zaghloul A, Aljoaid AM, Balkhi DS, et al. (2019) Frequency of ABO blood groups in the Makkah city and their association with diseases. IAJPS 6: 551-557. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.2532774 |
[17] |
Alabdulmonem W, Shariq A, Alqossayir F, et al. (2020) Sero-prevalence ABO and Rh blood groups and their associated transfusion-transmissible infections among blood donors in the central region of Saudi Arabia. J Infect Public Health 13: 299-305. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jiph.2019.12.004 ![]() |
[18] |
Saboor M, Zehra A, Hamali HA, et al. (2020) Prevalence of A2 and A2B subgroups and anti-A1 antibody in blood donors in Jazan, Saudi Arabia. Int J Gen Med 13: 787-790. https://doi.org/10.2147/IJGM.S272698 ![]() |
[19] |
Zhao J, Yang Y, Huang H, et al. (2021) Relationship between the ABO blood group and the Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) susceptibility. Clin Infect Dis 73: 328-331. https://doi.org/10.1093/cid/ciaa1150 ![]() |
[20] |
Zietz M, Zucker J, Tatonetti NP (2020) Associations between blood type and COVID-19 infection, intubation, and death. Nat Commun 11: 5761. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-020-19623-x ![]() |
[21] |
Li J, Wang X, Chen J, et al. (2020) Association between ABO blood groups and risk of SARS-CoV-2 pneumonia. Br J Haematol 190: 24-27. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjh.16797 ![]() |
[22] | Cheng Y, Cheng G, Chui CH, et al. (2005) ABO blood group and susceptibility to severe acute respiratory syndrome. JAMA 293: 1450-1451. https://doi.org/10.1001/jama.293.12.1450-c |
[23] |
Samra S, Habeb M, Nafae R (2021) ABO groups can play a role in susceptibility and severity of COVID-19. Egypt J Bronchol 15: 9. https://doi.org/10.1186/s43168-020-00051-w ![]() |
[24] |
Fan Q, Zhang W, Li B, et al. (2020) Association between ABO blood group system and COVID-19 susceptibility in Wuhan. Front Cell Infect Microbiol 10: 404. https://doi.org/10.3389/fcimb.2020.00404 ![]() |
[25] |
Guillon P, Clément M, Sébille V, et al. (2008) Inhibition of the interaction between the SARS-CoV spike protein and its cellular receptor by anti-histo-blood group antibodies. Glycobiology 18: 1085-1093. https://doi.org/10.1093/glycob/cwn093 ![]() |
[26] |
Lu R, Zhao X, Li J, et al. (2020) Genomic characterisation and epidemiology of 2019 novel coronavirus: implications for virus origins and receptor binding. Lancet 395: 565-574. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(20)30251-8 ![]() |
[27] |
Zhou P, Yang XL, Wang XG, et al. (2020) A pneumonia outbreak associated with a new coronavirus of probable bat origin. Nature 579: 270-273. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41586-020-2012-7 ![]() |
[28] |
Hoiland RL, Fergusson NA, Mitra AR, et al. (2020) The association of ABO blood group with indices of disease severity and multiorgan dysfunction in COVID-19. Blood Adv 4: 4981-4989. https://doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2020002623 ![]() |
[29] |
Kibler M, Dietrich L, Kanso M, et al. (2020) Risk and severity of COVID-19 and ABO blood group in transcatheter aortic valve patients. J Clin Med 9: 3769. https://doi.org/10.3390/jcm9113769 ![]() |
[30] |
Wang DS, Chen DL, Ren C, et al. (2012) ABO blood group, hepatitis B viral infection and risk of pancreatic cancer. Int J Cancer 131: 461-468. https://doi.org/10.1002/ijc.26376 ![]() |
[31] |
Rowe JA, Handel IG, Thera MA, et al. (2007) Blood group O protects against severe plasmodium falciparum malaria through the mechanism of reduced rosetting. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 104: 17471-17476. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0705390104 ![]() |
[32] | Coronaviridae Study Group of the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses.The species severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus: classifying 2019-nCoV and naming it SARS-CoV-2. Nat Microbiol (2020) 5: 536-544. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41564-020-0695-z |
[33] |
Ritchie G, Harvey DJ, Feldmann F, et al. (2010) Identification of N-linked carbohydrates from severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS) spike glycoprotein. Virology 399: 257-269. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.virol.2009.12.020 ![]() |
[34] |
Silva-Filho JC, de Melo CGF, de Oliveira JL (2020) The influence of ABO blood groups on COVID-19 susceptibility and severity: A molecular hypothesis based on carbohydrate-carbohydrate interactions. Med Hypotheses 144: 110155. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mehy.2020.110155 ![]() |
[35] |
Law JLM, Logan M, Joyce MA, et al. (2021) SARS-COV-2 recombinant Receptor-Binding-Domain (RBD) induces neutralizing antibodies against variant strains of SARS-CoV-2 and SARS-CoV-1. Vaccine 39: 5769-5779. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vaccine.2021.08.081 ![]() |
[36] |
Wu SC, Arthur CM, Wang J, et al. (2021) The SARS-CoV-2 receptor-binding domain preferentially recognizes blood group A. Blood Adv 5: 1305-1309. https://doi.org/10.1182/bloodadvances.2020003259 ![]() |
[37] |
Boukhari R, Breiman A, Jazat J, et al. (2022) ABO blood group incompatibility protects against SARS-CoV-2 transmission. Front Microbiol 12: 799519. https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2021.799519 ![]() |
[38] |
Deleers M, Breiman A, Daubie V, et al. (2021) Covid-19 and blood groups: ABO antibody levels may also matter. Int J Infect Dis 104: 242-249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijid.2020.12.025 ![]() |
[39] |
Breiman A, Ruvën-Clouet N, Le Pendu J (2020) Harnessing the natural anti-glycan immune response to limit the transmission of enveloped viruses such as SARS-CoV-2. PLoS Pathog 16: e1008556. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.ppat.1008556 ![]() |
[40] |
Matzhold EM, Berghold A, Bemelmans MKB, et al. (2021) Lewis and ABO histo-blood types and the secretor status of patients hospitalized with COVID-19 implicate a role for ABO antibodies in susceptibility to infection with SARS-CoV-2. Transfusion 61: 2736-2745. https://doi.org/10.1111/trf.16567 ![]() |
[41] |
Arend P (2021) Why blood group A individuals are at risk whereas blood group O individuals are protected from SARS-CoV-2 (COVID-19) infection: A hypothesis regarding how the virus invades the human body via ABO(H) blood group-determining carbohydrates. Immunobiology 226: 152027. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.imbio.2020.152027 ![]() |
[42] |
Hoffmann M, Kleine-Weber H, Schroeder S, et al. (2020) SARS-CoV-2 cell entry depends on ACE2 and TMPRSS2 and is blocked by a clinically proven protease inhibitor. Cell 181: 271-280.e8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cell.2020.02.052 ![]() |
[43] |
Tang N, Li D, Wang X, Sun Z (2020) Abnormal coagulation parameters are associated with poor prognosis in patients with novel coronavirus pneumonia. J Thromb Haemost 18: 844-847. https://doi.org/10.1111/jth.14768 ![]() |
[44] |
Araya S, Mamo MA, Tsegay YG, et al. (2021) Blood coagulation parameter abnormalities in hospitalized patients with confirmed COVID-19 in Ethiopia. PLoS One 16: e0252939. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0252939 ![]() |
[45] |
Yao Y, Cao J, Wang Q, et al. (2020) D-dimer as a biomarker for disease severity and mortality in COVID-19 patients: A case control study. J Intensive Care 8: 49. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40560-020-00466-z ![]() |
[46] |
Yu HH, Qin C, Chen M, et al. (2020) D-dimer level is associated with the severity of COVID-19. Thromb Res 195: 219-225. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.thromres.2020.07.047 ![]() |
[47] |
Roseff SD (2017) Cryptantigens: time to uncover the real significance of T-activation. Transfusion 57: 2553-2557. https://doi.org/10.1111/trf.14366 ![]() |
[48] |
Boas FE, Forman L, Beutler E (1998) Phosphatidylserine exposure and red cell viability in red cell aging and in hemolytic anemia. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A 95: 3077-3081. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.95.6.3077 ![]() |
[49] |
Yang Y, Koo S, Lin CS, et al. (2010) Specific binding of red blood cells to endothelial cells is regulated by nonadsorbing macromolecules. J Biol Chem 285: 40489-40495. https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M110.116608 ![]() |
[50] |
Whelihan MF, Mooberry MJ, Zachary V, et al. (2013) The contribution of red blood cells to thrombin generation in sickle cell disease: meizothrombin generation on sickled red blood cells. J Thromb Haemost 11: 2187-2189. https://doi.org/10.1111/jth.12423 ![]() |
[51] |
Mackman N (2018) The red blood cell death receptor and thrombosis. J Clin Invest 128: 3747-3749. https://doi.org/10.1172/JCI122881 ![]() |
[52] |
Danckwardt S, Hentze MW, Kulozik AE (2013) Pathologies at the nexus of blood coagulation and inflammation: thrombin in hemostasis, cancer, and beyond. J Mol Med 91: 1257-1271. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00109-013-1074-5 ![]() |
1. | Ting-Yu Chen, Enhanced Multi-Attribute Ideal-Real comparative analysis with the circular intuitionistic fuzzy framework: Application to hybrid cloud services, 2025, 65, 14740346, 103184, 10.1016/j.aei.2025.103184 |