Vision | Positivity | Foresight | Transparency | Honesty | |
e | 0.4 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.9 |
f | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 1 | 0.6 |
g | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 0.7 |
h | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.6 |
i | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
Citation: Jianwei Du, Xiaoling Sun. On the graph connectivity and the variable sum exdeg index[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(1): 607-622. doi: 10.3934/math.2021037
[1] | Anas Al-Masarwah, Abd Ghafur Ahmad . Subalgebras of type (α, β) based on m-polar fuzzy points in BCK/BCI-algebras. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(2): 1035-1049. doi: 10.3934/math.2020072 |
[2] | Ubaid Ur Rehman, Tahir Mahmood, Muhammad Naeem . Bipolar complex fuzzy semigroups. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(2): 3997-4021. doi: 10.3934/math.2023200 |
[3] | Muhammad Riaz, Maryam Saba, Muhammad Abdullah Khokhar, Muhammad Aslam . Novel concepts of m-polar spherical fuzzy sets and new correlation measures with application to pattern recognition and medical diagnosis. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(10): 11346-11379. doi: 10.3934/math.2021659 |
[4] | Anas Al-Masarwah, Abd Ghafur Ahmad . On (complete) normality of m-pF subalgebras in BCK/BCI-algebras. AIMS Mathematics, 2019, 4(3): 740-750. doi: 10.3934/math.2019.3.740 |
[5] | Muhammad Akram, Uzma Noreen, Mohammed M. Ali Al-Shamiri, Dragan Pamucar . Integrated decision-making methods based on 2-tuple linguistic m-polar fuzzy information. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(8): 14557-14594. doi: 10.3934/math.2022802 |
[6] | Muhammad Riaz, Khadija Akmal, Yahya Almalki, S. A. Alblowi . Cubic m-polar fuzzy topology with multi-criteria group decision-making. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(7): 13019-13052. doi: 10.3934/math.2022721 |
[7] | Mohammed M. Ali Al-Shamiri, Adeel Farooq, Muhammad Nabeel, Ghous Ali, Dragan Pamučar . Integrating TOPSIS and ELECTRE-Ⅰ methods with cubic m-polar fuzzy sets and its application to the diagnosis of psychiatric disorders. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 11875-11915. doi: 10.3934/math.2023601 |
[8] | Warud Nakkhasen, Teerapan Jodnok, Ronnason Chinram . Intra-regular semihypergroups characterized by Fermatean fuzzy bi-hyperideals. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 35800-35822. doi: 10.3934/math.20241698 |
[9] | Rukchart Prasertpong . Roughness of soft sets and fuzzy sets in semigroups based on set-valued picture hesitant fuzzy relations. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 2891-2928. doi: 10.3934/math.2022160 |
[10] | S. Meenakshi, G. Muhiuddin, B. Elavarasan, D. Al-Kadi . Hybrid ideals in near-subtraction semigroups. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(7): 13493-13507. doi: 10.3934/math.2022746 |
A non-empty set together with one or more binary operations is called an algebraic structure. Algebraic structures have various applications in mathematics, including physics, control engineering, topological spaces, computer science, and coding theory [1]. It was Lehmer [2] who firstly studied the concept of ternary algebraic system. Ternary semigroups are important because of their applications to modern mathematical physics, algebraic, functional, and analytical methods [3]. Theory of ternary semigroups was established by Santiago, and Bala [4]. Los [5] proved a semigroup can be embedded to ternary semigroup but every ternary semigroup cannot necessarily be reduced to a semigroup. Here, illustrating an example, {ι,−ι,0} with ternary operation of multiplication in complex numbers is ternary semigroup, but it is not a semigroup under usual binary multiplication. Also, there are various structures that are not handled by binary multiplication, so we have used the ternary operation to solve these problems. For instance consider the set of rational numbers Q is a semigroup but its subset Q− is not a subsemigroup of Q because with the binary multiplication, it is not closed. But, under the ternary product Q− is closed. Sioson defined the notions of ideals in ternary semigroups [6]. For more detail, see [7,8,9,10,11,12,13,14,15].
Theory of fuzzy set is well-known presented by Zadeh [16]. It has a variety of applications in different fields including medical diagnosis, digital communications, artificial intelligence, social, management sciences, decision-making challenges, and many more. A fuzzy set is established by a membership function whose range is the unit interval [0,1]. Theory of bipolar fuzzy set is an extension of fuzzy set which deals with the uncertain, and complex problems, both in positive, and negative aspects with membership degree range of [−1,1]. For more applications of fuzzy set and bipolar fuzzy set, see [17,18,19,20,21,22,23,24].
Chen proposed bipolar fuzzy sets and 2-polar fuzzy sets are cryptomorphic mathematical concepts. By using the idea of one-to-one correspondence, the bipolar fuzzy sets are extended to m-PF sets [25]. Sometimes, different objects have been monitored in different ways. This led to the study of m-PF set. To assign the membership degrees to several objects regarding multi-polar information, m-PF set works successfully. Here, no membership degree will be assumed as negative as m-PF set provides only positive degree of memberships of each element.
The m-PF sets are applicable when a company decides to construct an item, a country elects its political leader, or a group of mates wants to visit a country with various options. It can be used to discuss the confusions, and conflicts of communication signals in wireless communication. Thus, m-PF set can be implement in both real world problems, and mathematical theories. For example, a fuzzy set "good leader" can have different interpretations among politicians of particular area. Multi-polar information, weighted games, multi-attributes, multi-index, multi-objects, multi-valued interactions, and multi-agent are only a few examples of real world applications for m-PF set. For more and recent applications, see [25,26].
We will give an example to demonstrate it.
Let H={e,f,g,h,i} be a set of 5 candidates for the selection of appropriate political leader. We have characterized them according to five qualities in the form of 5-PFS given in Table 1. Also, the graphical representation of a 5-PFS is shown in Figure 1.
Vision | Positivity | Foresight | Transparency | Honesty | |
e | 0.4 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.9 |
f | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 1 | 0.6 |
g | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 0.7 |
h | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.6 |
i | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
Thus, we get a 5-PFS ψ:H→[0,1]5 of H such that
ψ(e)=(0.4,0.7,0.6,0.5,0.9)ψ(f)=(0.9,0.4,0.7,1,0.6)ψ(g)=(0.5,0.6,0.3,0.9,0.7)ψ(h)=(0.9,0.8,0.5,0.4,0.6)ψ(i)=(0.6,0.5,0.7,0.9,0.8). |
Here, the value 1 represents good remarks, 0.5 represents average, and 0 represents bad remarks. When we combine the technique of m-PF set to ternary semigroup, it will be more useful. Many works have been done on m-PF set. Some previous work is given below.
1) In 2019, Al-Masarwah worked on m-polar fuzzy ideals of BCK/BCI-algebras [27,28]. Al-Masarwah & Ahmad studied the m-polar (α,β)-fuzzy ideals in BCK/BCI-algebras [29] and he also worked on normality of m-PF subalgebras in BCK/BCI-algebra [30].
2) In 2020, Muhiuddin et al. introduced m-polar fuzzy q-ideals in BCI-algebras [31].
3) In 2021, Muhiuddin et al. introduced interval valued m-polar fuzzy BCK/BCI-algebras and interval-valued m-polar fuzzy positive implicative ideals in BCK-algebras [32,33].
4) In 2021, Shabir et al. studied m-polar fuzzy ideals in terms of LA-semigroups [34].
5) Later on, Bashir et al. initiated the concept of regular and intra-regular semigroups in terms of m-polar fuzzy environment [35].
In this paper, we have introduced the concept of m-PFIs in ternary semigroups, also characterized regular and intra-regular ternary semigroups by the properties of these m-PFIs.
The paper is organized as follows: In Section 2, we define the fundamental notions of m-PF sets in ternary semigroups. The main part of this paper is Section 3, in which m-PFTSSs and m-PFIs of ternary semigroups with examples are discussed. In Section 4, we have characterized regular, and intra-regular ternary semigroups with the properties of m-PFIs. A comparison of this paper to previous work is given in Section 5. In the last, we discuss the conclusions of this work and our future work.
The list of acronyms used here, is given in Table 2.
Acronyms | Representation |
m-PF | m-Polar fuzzy |
m-PFS | m-Polar fuzzy subset |
m-PFSS | m-Polar fuzzy subsemigroup |
m-PFTSS | m-Polar fuzzy ternary subsemigroup |
m-PFI | m-Polar fuzzy ideal |
m-PFLI | m-Polar fuzzy left ideal |
m-PFMI | m-Polar fuzzy middle ideal |
m-PFRI | m-Polar fuzzy right ideal |
m-PFGBI | m-Polar fuzzy generalized bi-ideal |
m-PFBI | m-Polar fuzzy bi-ideal |
m-PFQI | m-Polar fuzzy quasi-ideal |
m-PFII | m-Polar fuzzy interior ideal |
In this phase, we show some fundamentals but necessary ideas, and preliminary results based on ternary semigroups that are important in their own right. These are prerequisite for later sections. A mapping () : D×D×D→D is called a ternary operation for any non-empty set D. A non-empty set D with ternary operation ( ) is called ternary semigroup if it fulfills associative law such as ((d1d2d3)d4d5)=(d1(d2d3d4)d5)=(d1d2(d3d4d5)) for all d1,d2,d3,d4,d5∈D. Throughout this paper, D will indicate ternary semigroup, unless otherwise specified, and subsets indicate non-empty subsets. A subset H of D is called ternary subsemigroup of D if HHH⊆H. A right ideal (resp. lateral or middle ideal, and left ideal) of D is a subset H of D satisfying HDD⊆H(resp.DHD⊆H,DDH⊆H). A subset H is called an ideal if it is right ideal, lateral ideal, and left ideal [36]. A subset H of D is called generalized bi-ideal of D if HDHDH⊆H. A subset H of D is called bi-ideal of D if HHH⊆H, and HDHDH⊆H [37]. A subset H of D is called quasi-ideal of D if HDD∩DHD∩DDH⊆H and HDD∩DDHDD∩DDH⊆H [38]. A subset H of D is called an interior ideal of D if DDHDD⊆H [39]. A mapping ψ:D→[0,1]m is an m-PFS or a ([0,1]m-set) on D. The m-PFS is an m-tuple of membership degree function of D that is ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm), where ψκ:D→[0,1] is a mapping for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. The m-PF set is a generalization of BFS. Similar to the case of BFS, an m-PF set can be presented as m different fuzzy sets. Therefore, in this situation each input is characterized by an m-dimensional vector of numbers from the close interval [0,1], each presenting a confidence degree. Assume that the set κ={1,2,...,m} is the set of context. The degree of satisfaction for each element with respect to the κth context will thus be represented by an m-PF set for each κ∈N [40]. The m-PF set is an m-tuple of membership degree function of D that is ψ={ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm}, where ψκ:D→[0,1] is a mapping for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}.
The set of all m-PFSs of D is called an m-PF power set of D and presented as m(D). We define relation ≤ on m-PF power set (m(D)) as follows: ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm),ℸ=(ℸ1,ℸ2,...,ℸm),℧=(℧1,℧2,...,℧m) are m-PFSs of D,ψ≤ℸ≤℧ means that ψκ(l)≤ℸκ(l)≤℧κ(l) for all l∈D, and κ∈{1,2,...,m}. The symbols ψ∧ℸ∧℧ and ψ∨ℸ∨℧ indicates these m-PFSs of D. (ψ∧ℸ∧℧)(l)=ψ(l)∧ℸ(l)∧℧(l),(ψ∨ℸ∨℧)(l)=ψ(l)∨ℸ(l)∨℧(l) that is (ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)(l)=ψκ(l)∧ℸκ(l)∧℧κ(l) and (ψκ∨ℸκ∨℧κ)(l)=ψκ(l)∨ℸκ(l)∨℧κ(l) for all l∈D and κ∈{1,2,...,m}.
Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm),ℸ=(ℸ1,ℸ2,...,ℸm), and ℧=(℧1,℧2,...,℧m) be m-PFSs of D. The ternary product of ψ,ℸ,℧ is denoted as (ψ∘ℸ∘℧)=(ψ1∘ℸ1∘℧1,ψ2∘ℸ2∘℧2,...,ψκ∘ℸκ∘℧κ), and defined as
(ψκ∘ℸκ∘℧κ)(l)={∨l=ghi{ψκ(g)∧ℸκ(h)∧℧κ(i)},ifl=ghi;0otherwise; |
for some g,h,i∈D, and for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}.
Example 1 shows the multiplication of m-PFSs of ψ,ℸ, and ℧ of D for m=3.
Example 1. Consider a ternary semigroup D={0,d1,d2}. The multiplication of m-PFSs ψ,ℸ,℧ of D are given in Tables 3–5 for m=3.
0 | 0 | d1 | d2 |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
d1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
d2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
d1 | 0 | d1 | d2 |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
d1 | 0 | d2 | d1 |
d2 | 0 | d1 | d2 |
d2 | 0 | d1 | d2 |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
d1 | 0 | d1 | d2 |
d2 | 0 | d2 | d1 |
We define 3-PFSs ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,ψ3),ℸ=(ℸ1,ℸ2,ℸ3) and ℧=(℧1,℧2,℧3) of D as follows:
ψ(0)=(0.5,0.2,0.3),ψ(d1)=(0.6,0.3,0.8),ψ(d2)=(0,0,0); |
ℸ(0)=(0.3,0.4,0.1),ℸ(d1)=(0.4,0.1,0.2),ℸ(d2)=(0.3,0.1,0.5); |
℧(0)=(0.1,0.2,0.1),℧(d1)=(0.3,0.4,0.5),℧(d2)=(0.2,0.4,0). |
Then, we have
(ψ1∘ℸ1∘℧1)(0)=0.3,(ψ1∘ℸ1∘℧1)(d1)=0.3,(ψ1∘ℸ1∘℧1)(d2)=0.3; |
(ψ2∘ℸ2∘℧2)(0)=0.3,(ψ2∘ℸ2∘℧2)(d1)=0.1,(ψ2∘ℸ2∘℧2)(d2)=0.1; |
(ψ3∘ℸ3∘℧3)(0)=0.3,(ψ3∘ℸ3∘℧3)(d1)=0.5,(ψ3∘ℸ3∘℧3)(d2)=0.2. |
Hence, the product of ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,ψ3),ℸ=(ℸ1,ℸ2,ℸ3),℧=(℧1,℧2,℧3) is defined by: (ψ∘ℸ∘℧)(0)=(0.3,0.3,0.3),(ψ∘ℸ∘℧)(d1)=(0.3,0.1,0.5) and (ψ∘ℸ∘℧)(d2)=(0.3,0.1,0.2).
This is a significant part because in this section we have done our major contributions. In this part, the notions of m-PFTSSs, m-PFIs, m-PFGBIs, m-PFBIs, m-PFQIs and m-PFIIs of ternary semigroups are explored by using various examples and lemmas. We have proved that, every m-PFBI of D is an m-PFGBI of D but the converse does not hold. This result was previously proved for semigroup by Bashir et al. [35]. We have generalized the results of [35] for ternary semigroups. Ternary semigroup is more general than semigroup. Throughout the paper, δ is the m-PFS of D that maps every element of D on (1,1,...,1).
Definition 1. Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm) be an m-PFS of D.
1) Define ψα={l∈D|ψ(l)≥α} for all α, where α=(α1,α2,...,αm)∈(0,1]m, that is ψκ(l)≥ακ for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Then ψα is called an α-cut or a level set. This indicates ψα=⋂mκ=1(ψκ)ακ.
2) The support of ψ:D→[0,1]m is defined as a set Supp(ψ)={l∈D|ψ(l)>(0,0,...,0),m-tuple} that is ψκ(l)>0 for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}.
Definition 2. An m-PFS ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm) of D is called an m-PFTSS of D if for all g,h,i∈D, ψ(ghi)≥ψ(g)∧ψ(h)∧ψ(i) that is ψκ(ghi)≥ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i) for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}.
Definition 3. An m-PFS ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...ψm) of D is called an m-PFRI ( resp. m-PFMI, and m-PFLI ) of D if for all g,h,i∈D,ψ(ghi)≥ψ(g)( resp. ψ(ghi)≥ψ(h),ψ(ghi)≥ψ(i)) that is, ψκ(ghi)≥ψκ(g)( resp. ψκ(ghi)≥ψκ(h),ψκ(ghi)≥ψκ(i)) for all κ∈{1,2,..,m}.
1) If ψ is together m-PFRI and m-PFLI of D then ψ is called an m-PF two-sided ideal of D;
2) If ψ is together m-PFRI, m-PFMI, and m-PFLI of D then ψ is called an m-PFI of D.
The Example 2 is of 3-PFl of D.
Example 2. Consider the ternary semigroup D={0,d1,d2} given in Table 3, Table 4 and Table 5 of Example 1. We define 3-PFS ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,ψ3) of D as follows: ψ(0)=(0.9,0.9,0.6),ψ(d1)=ψ(d2)=(0.5,0.3,0.1). Clearly, ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,ψ3) is 3-PFRI, 3-PFMI and 3-PFLI of D. Hence ψ is 3-PF ideal of D.
Definition 4. Let H be a subset of D. Then the m-polar characteristic function χ:H→[0,1]m of H is defined as
χH(l)={(1,1,…,1),m-tuple ifl∈H;(0,0,…,0),m-tuple ifl∉H. |
Lemma 1. Let H,I and J be subsets of D. Then the following conditions are true:
1) χH∧χI=χH∩I;
2) χH∨χI=χH∪I;
3) χH∘χI∘χJ=χHIJ.
Proof. The proof of (1) and (2) are obvious.
(3) Let H,I and J be subsets of D.
Case 1: Let l∈HIJ. This implies that l=ghi for some g∈H,h∈I, and i∈J. Thus, χHIJ(l)=(1,1,...,1). Since g∈H,h∈I,i∈J, we have χH(g)=(1,1,...,1)=χI(h)=χJ(i). Now,
(χH∘χI∘χJ)(l)=∨l=pqr{χH(p)∧χI(q)∧χJ(r)} |
≥χH(g)∧χI(h)∧χJ(i) |
=(1,1,...,1). |
Thus, χH∘χI∘χJ=χHIJ.
Case 2: Let l∉HIJ. This implies that χHIJ(l)=(0,0,...,0). Since, l≠ghi for all g∈H,h∈I and i∈J. Thus,
(χH∘χI∘χJ)(l)=∨l=ghi{χH(g)∧χI(h)∧χJ(i)} |
=(0,0,...,0). |
Hence, χH∘χI∘χJ=χHIJ.
Lemma 2. Consider a subset H of D. Then the following assertions are true.
1) H is ternary subsemigroup of D if and only if χH is an m-PFTSS of D;
2) H is an ideal of D if and only if χH is an m-PFI of D.
Proof. (1) Consider, H is a ternary subsemigroup of D. We have to show that χH(ghi)≥χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i) for all g,h,i∈D. We observe the following eight cases:
Case 1: Let g,h,i∈H. Then χH(g)=(1,1,...,1)=χH(h)=χH(i). So, χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i)=(1,1,...,1). Since H is ternary subsemigroup of D, so ghi∈H implies that χH(ghi)=(1,1,...,1). Hence, χH(ghi)≥χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i).
Case 2: Let g,h∈H and i∉H. Then χH(g)=χH(h)=(1,1,...,1) and χH(i)=(0,0,...,0). This implies that, χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i)=(0,0,...,0). Hence, χH(ghi)≥χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i)=(0,0,...,0).
Case 3: Let g,h∉H and i∈H. Then χH(g)=χH(h)=(0,0,...,0) and χH(i)=(1,1,...,1). This implies that, χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i)=(0,0,...,0). Hence, χH(ghi)≥(0,0,...,0)=χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i).
Case 4: Let g,i∈H, and h∉H. Then χH(g)=χH(i)=(1,1,...,1), and χH(h)=(0,0,...,0). This implies that, χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i)=(0,0,...,0). Hence, χH(ghi)≥(0,0,...,0)=χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i).
Case 5: Let g,i∉H and h∈H. Then χH(g)=χH(i)=(0,0,...,0) and χH(h)=(1,1,...,1). This implies that, χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i)=(0,0,...,0). Hence, χH(ghi)≥(0,0,...,0)=χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i).
Case 6: Let h,i∈H and g∉H. Then χH(h)=χH(i)=(1,1,...,1) and χH(g)=(0,0,...,0). This implies that, χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i)=(0,0,...,0). Hence, χH(ghi)≥(0,0,...,0)=χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i).
Case 7: Let h,i∉H and g∈H. Then χH(h)=χH(i)=(0,0,...,0) and χH(g)=(1,1,...,1). This implies that, χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i)=(0,0,...,0). Hence, χH(ghi)≥(0,0,...,0)=χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i).
Case 8: Let g,h,i∉H. Then χH(g)=χH(h)=χH(i)=(0,0,...,0). This implies that, χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i)=(0,0,...,0). Hence, χH(ghi)≥χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i).
Conversely, let χH is an m-PFTSS of D. Let g,h,i∈H. Then, χH(g)=χH(h)=χH(i)=(1,1,...,1). By definition, χH(ghi)=(1,1,...,1)≥χH(g)∧χH(h)∧χH(i) we have χH(ghi)=(1,1,...,1). This implies that ghi∈H, so H is a ternary subsemigroup of D.
(2) Consider, H is a left ideal of D. We have to show that χH is an m-PFLI of D, that is χH(ghi)≥χH(i) for all g,h,i∈D. Now, we observe these two cases:
Case 1: Let i∈Handg,h∈D. Then, χH(i)=(1,1,...,1). Since H is left ideal of D, so ghi∈H implies that χH(ghi)=(1,1,...,1). Hence, χH(ghi)≥χH(i).
Case 2: Let i∉H and g,h∈D. Then χH(i)=(0,0,...,0). Clearly, χH(ghi)≥χH(i).
Conversely, let χH is an m-PFLI of D. Assume that g,h∈D and i∈H. Then, χH(i)=(1,1,...,1). By definition, χH(ghi)≥χH(i)=(1,1,...,1), we have χH(ghi)=(1,1,...,1). This implies that ghi∈H, that is H is a left ideal of D.
Similarly, we can prove for lateral ideal and right ideal of D.
Lemma 3. Consider ψ is an m-PFS of D. Then the following properties hold.
1) ψ is an m-PFTSS of D if and only if ψ∘ψ∘ψ≤ψ;
2) ψ is an m-PFLI of D if and only if δ∘δ∘ψ≤ψ;
3) ψ is an m-PFMI of D if and only if δ∘ψ∘δ≤ψ,δ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘δ≤ψ;
4) ψ is an m-PFRI of D if and only if ψ∘δ∘δ≤ψ;
5) ψ is an m-PFI of D if and only if δ∘δ∘ψ≤ψ,δ∘ψ∘δ≤ψ,ψ∘δ∘δ≤ψ, where δ is an m-PFS of D mapping every element of D on (1,1,...,1).
Proof. (1) Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm) be an m-PFTSS of D, that is ψκ(ghi)≥ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i) for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Let l∈D. If l cannot be written as l=ghi for some g,h,i∈D then (ψ∘ψ∘ψ)(l)=0. Hence, ψ∘ψ∘ψ≤ψ. But if l is expressible as l=ghi for some g,h,i∈D, then
(ψκ∘ψκ∘ψκ)(l)=∨l=ghi{ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i)} |
≤∨l=ghi{ψκ(ghi)} |
=ψκ(l)for allκ∈{1,2,...,m}. |
Hence, ψ∘ψ∘ψ≤ψ. Conversely, let ψ∘ψ∘ψ≤ψ and g,h,i∈D. Then for allκ∈{1,2,...,m}.
(ψκ)(ghi)≥(ψκ∘ψκ∘ψκ)(ghi) |
=∨ghi=bcd{ψκ(b)∧ψκ(c)∧ψκ(d)}≥ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i). |
Hence, ψ(ghi)≥ψ(g)∧ψ(h)∧ψ(i). Thus, ψ is an m-PFTSS of D.
(2) Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm) be an m-PFLI of D that is, ψκ(ghi)≥ψκ(i) for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}andg,h,i∈D. Let l∈D, if l cannot be written as l=ghi for some g,h,i∈D then (δ∘δ∘ψ)(l)=0. Hence, δ∘δ∘ψ≤ψ. But if l is expressible as l=ghi for some g,h,i∈D.
(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(l)=∨l=ghi{δκ(g)∧δκ(h)∧ψκ(i)} |
=∨l=ghi{(1,1,...,1)∧(1,1,...,1)∧ψκ(i)} |
=∨l=ghi{ψκ(i)} |
≤∨l=ghi{ψκ(ghi)} |
=ψκ(l)for allκ∈{1,2,...,m}. |
Hence, δ∘δ∘ψ≤ψ. Conversely, let δ∘δ∘ψ≤ψ and g,h,i∈D. Then,
ψκ(ghi)≥(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(ghi)=∨ghi=bcd{δκ(b)∧δκ(c)∧ψκ(d)} |
≥δκ(g)∧δκ(h)∧ψκ(i) |
={(1,1,...,1)∧(1,1,...,1)∧ψκ(i)} |
=ψκ(i)for allκ∈{1,2,...,m}. |
Hence, (ghi)≥ψ(i). Thus ψ is an m-PFLI of D.
Similarly, we can prove the parts (3),(4)and(5).
Lemma 4. The following assertions are true in D.
1) Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm),ℸ=(ℸ1,ℸ2,...,ℸm), and ℧=(℧1,℧2,...,℧m) be m-PFTSSs of D. Then ψ∧ℸ∧℧ is also an m-PFTSS of D;
2) Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm),ℸ=(ℸ1,ℸ2,...,ℸm), and ℧=(℧1,℧2,...,℧m) be m-PFIs of D. Then ψ∧ℸ∧℧ is also an m-PFI of D.
Proof. Straightforward.
Proposition 1. Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm) be an m-PFS of D. Then ψ is an m-PFTSS ( resp. m-PFI ) of D if and only if ψα={l∈D|ψ(l)≥α} is a ternary subsemigroup ( resp. ideal ) of D for all α=(α1,α2,...,αm)∈(0,1].
Proof: Let ψ be an m-PFTSS of D. Let g,h,i∈ψα. Then ψκ(g)≥ακ,ψκ(h)≥ακ and ψκ(i)≥ακ for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Since, ψ is an m-PFTSS of D, we have
ψκ(ghi)≥ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i) |
≥ακ∧ακ∧ακ=ακfor allκ∈{1,2,...,m}. |
Thus, (ghi)∈ψα. Hence, ψα is a ternary subsemigroup of D.
Conversely, let ψα is a ternary subsemigroup of D. On contrary assume that ψ is not an m-PFTSS of D. Suppose g,h,i∈D such that ψκ(ghi)<ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i) for some κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Take ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i)=ακ for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Then g,h,i∈ψα but ghi∉ψα, which is contradiction. Hence, ψκ(ghi)≥ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i). Thus ψ is an m-PFTSS of D.
Further cases can be prove on the same lines.
Definition 5. Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm) be an m-PFS of D. Then ψ is called an m-PFGBI of D if for all g,d1,h,d2,i∈D,ψ(gd1hd2i)≥ψ(g)∧ψ(h)∧ψ(i) that is ψκ(gd1hd2i)≥ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i) for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}.
Example 3. Let D={e,f,g,h,i} be a ternary semigroup and its multiplication table is defined in Table 6.
e | f | g | h | i | |
e | e | e | e | e | e |
f | e | e | h | e | f |
g | e | i | e | g | e |
h | e | f | e | h | e |
i | e | e | g | e | i |
Let ψ={ψ1,ψ2,ψ3,ψ4} be a 4-PFS of D such that ψ(e)=(0.7,0.8,0.8,0.9),ψ(f)=(0.1,0.2,0.3,0.4), ψ(g)=(0.2,0.3,0.4,0.5),ψ(h)=(0,0,0,0), ψ(i)=(0.3,0.4,0.5,0.6). Then simple calculations shows that ψ is a 4-PFGBI of D.
Lemma 5. A subset H of D is a generalized bi-ideal of D if and only if χH is an m-PFGBI of D.
Proof. The proof follows from the proof of Lemma 2.
Lemma 6. An m-PFS ψ of D is an m-PFGBI of D if and only if ψ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘ψ≤ψ, where δ is the m-PFS of D mapping every element of D on (1,1,...,1).
Proof. Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm) be an m-PFGBI of D that is, ψκ(gd1hd2i)≥ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i) for all κ∈{1,2,...,m} and g,d1,h,d2,i∈D. Let l∈D, if l cannot be written as l=ghi for some g,h,i∈D then (ψ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘ψ)(l)=(0,0,...,0). Hence, ψ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘ψ≤ψ. Suppose l is expressible as l=ghi for some g,h,i∈D. Then
((ψκ∘δκ∘ψκ)∘δκ∘ψκ)(l)=∨l=ghi{(ψκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(g)∧δκ(h)∧ψκ(i)} |
=∨l=ghi{∨g=def{ψκ(d)∧δκ(e)∧ψκ(f)}∧δκ(h)∧ψκ(i)} |
=∨l=ghi{∨g=def{ψκ(d)∧ψκ(f)}∧ψκ(i)} |
≤∨l=ghi∨g=def{ψκ((def)hi)} |
=∨l=ghi{ψκ(ghi)} |
=ψκ(l)for allκ∈{1,2,...,m}. |
Hence, (ψ∘δ∘ψ)∘δ∘ψ≤ψ. Conversely, let (ψ∘δ∘ψ)∘δ∘ψ≤ψ and g,h,i∈D. Then,
ψκ((gd1h)d2i)≥((ψκ∘δκ∘ψκ)∘δκ∘ψκ)((gd1h)d2i) |
=∨(gd1h)d2i=bcd{(ψκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(b)∧δκ(c)∧ψκ(d)}≥(ψκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(gd1h)∧δκ(d2)∧ψκ(i) |
=(ψκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(gd1h)∧(1,1,...,1)∧ψκ(i) |
=∨gd1h=lmn{ψκ(l)∧δκ(m)∧ψκ(n)}∧ψκ(i) |
=∨gd1h=lmn{ψκ(l)∧(1,1,...,1)∧ψκ(n)}∧ψκ(i) |
≥{ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)}∧ψκ(i) |
=ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i)for allκ∈{1,2,...,m}. |
Hence, ψ(gd1hd2i)≥ψ(g)∧ψ(h)∧ψ(i). Thus ψ is an m-PFGBI of D.
Proposition 2. Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,....,ψm) be an m-PFS of D. Then ψ is an m-PFGBI of D if and only if ψα={l∈D|ψ(l)≥α} is a generalized bi-ideal of D for all α=(α1,α2,...,αm)∈(0,1]m.
Proof. Suppose ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,....,ψm) is an m-PFGBI of D. Let g,h,i∈ψα and d1,d2∈D. Then, ψκ(g)≥ακ,ψκ(h)≥ακ and ψκ(i)≥ακ for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Since, ψ is an m-PFGBI of D, so
ψκ(gd1hd2i)≥ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i) |
≥ακ∧ακ∧ακ=ακfor allκ∈{1,2,...,m}. |
Thus gd1hd2i∈ψα, that is ψα is a generalized bi-ideal of D.
Conversely, let ψα is a generalized bi-ideal of D. On contrary suppose that ψ is not an m-PFGBI of D. Let g,d1,h,d2,i∈D such that ψκ(gd1hd2i)<ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i) for some κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Take ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i)=ακ for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Then g,d1,h,d2,i∈ψα but (gd1hd2i)∉ψα which is a contradiction. Thus, ψκ(gd1hd2i)≥ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i). Hence ψ is an m-PFGBI of D.
Definition 7. An m-PFTSS ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm) of D is called an m-PFBI of D if for all g,d1,h,d2,i∈D,ψ(gd1hd2i)≥ψ(g)∧ψ(h)∧ψ(i) that is ψκ(gd1hd2i)≥ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i) for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}.
Lemma 7. A subset H of D is a BI of D if and only if χH the m-polar characteristic function of H is an m-PFBI of D.
Proof. Follows from Lemmas 2 and 5.
Lemma 8. An m-PFTSS ψ of D is an m-PFBI of D if and only if ψ∘ψ∘ψ≤ψ and ψ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘ψ≤ψ.
Proof. Follows from Lemmas 3 and 6.
Proposition 3. Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,....,ψm) be an m-PFTSS of D. Then ψ is an m-PFBI of D if and only if ψα={l∈D|ψ(l)≥α} is a bi-ideal of D for all α=(α1,α2,...,αm)∈(0,1]m.
Proof. Follows from Propositions 1 and 2.
Remark 1. Every m-PFBI of D is an m-PFGBI of D.
The Example 4 proves that the converse of the Remark 1 may not be true.
Example 4. Consider D={e,f,g,h,i} is a ternary semigroup as given in Example.3 and ψ={ψ1,ψ2,ψ3,ψ4} is 4-PFGBI of D. Then simple calculations shows that ψ is not a bi-ideal of D as ψ(h)=ψ(fig)=(0,0,0,0)≱(0.1,0.2,0.3,0.4)=ψ(f)∧ψ(i)∧ψ(g).
Definition 8. An m-PFS ψ of D is called an m-PFQI of D if (ψ∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘ψ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘ψ)≤ψ,(ψ∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘ψ)≤ψ that is (ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)∧(δκ∘ψκ∘δκ)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)≤ψκ and (ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)≤ψκ for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}, where δ is fuzzy subset of D mapping every element of D on (1,1,...,1).
Example 5. Let D={e,f,g,h} be a ternary semigroup and its multiplication table is defined in Table 7.
e | f | g | h | |
e | e | e | e | e |
f | e | f | g | h |
g | e | g | e | g |
h | e | h | e | e |
Define a 5-PFS ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,ψ3,ψ4,ψ5) of D as follows: ψ(e)=ψ(g)=(0.9,0.8,0.7,0.7,0.6), ψ(f)=(0.3,0.2,0.2,0.1,0.3),ψ(h)=(0,0,0,0,0). Then simple calculations proves that ψα is a quasi-ideal of D. As the result of Proposition 4, ψ is a 5-PFQI of D.
Lemma 9. Let H be a subset of D. Then H is a quasi-ideal of D if and only if the m-polar characteristic function χH of H is an m-PFQI of D.
Proof. Let H be a quasi-ideal of D that is HDD∩DHD∩DDH⊆H,HDD∩DDHDD∩DDH⊆H. Now we have to show that, (χH∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘χH∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘χH)≤χH, (χH∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘χH∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘χH)≤χH that is ((χH∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘χH∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘χH))(l)≤χH(l) and ((χH∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘χH∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘χH))(l)≤χH(l). This implies that (χH∘δ∘δ)(l)∧(δ∘χH∘δ)(l)∧(δ∘δ∘χH)(l)≤χH(l) and (χH∘δ∘δ)(l)∧(δ∘δ∘χH∘δ∘δ)(l)∧(δ∘δ∘χH)(l)≤χH(l) for all l∈D.
We observe the following two cases:
Case 1: If l∈H then χH(l)=(1,1,...,1)≥((χH∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘χH∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘χH))(l). So, (χH∘δ∘δ)(l)∧(δ∘χH∘δ)(l)∧(δ∘δ∘χH)(l)≤χH(l). Also, ((χH∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘χH∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘χH))(l)≤χH(l). Hence, (χH∘δ∘δ)(l)∧(δ∘δ∘χH∘δ∘δ)(l)∧(δ∘δ∘χH)(l)≤χH(l).
Case 2: If l∉H then l∉HDD∩DHD∩DDH. This implies that l≠muv or l≠wnx or l≠yzo for some m,n,o∈H and u,v,w,x,y,z∈D. Thus either (χH∘δ∘δ)(l)=(0,0,...,0) or (δ∘χH∘δ)(l)=(0,0,...,0) or (δ∘δ∘χH)(l)=(0,0,...,0) that is (χH∘δ∘δ)(l)∧(δ∘χH∘δ)(l)∧(δ∘δ∘χH)(l)=(0,0,...,0)≤χH(l). Hence (χH∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘χH∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘χH)≤χH.
Also, if l∉H then l∉HDD∩DDHDD∩DDH. This implies that l≠mst or l≠uvnwx or l≠yzg for some m,n,o∈H and s,t,u,v,w,x,y,z∈D. Thus either (χH∘δ∘δ)(l)=(0,0,...,0) or (δ∘δ∘χH∘δ∘δ)(l)=(0,0,...,0) or (δ∘δ∘χH)(l)=(0,0,...,0) that is (χH∘δ∘δ)(l)∧(δ∘δ∘χH∘δ∘δ)(l)∧(δ∘δ∘χH)(l)=(0,0,...,0)≤χH(l). Hence, (χH∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘χH∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘χH)≤χH.
Conversely, let l∈HDD∩DHD∩DDH and l∈HDD∩DDHDD∩DDH.
Firstly, if l∈HDD∩DHD∩DDH then l=muv,l=wnx,l=yzo for all m,n,o∈H and u,v,w,x,y,z∈D. As χH is an m-PFQI of D. We have
χH(l)≥((χH∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘χH∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘χH))(l)=(χH∘δ∘δ)(l)∧(δ∘χH∘δ)(l)∧(δ∘δ∘χH)(l) |
={∨l=muv{χH(m)∧δ(u)∧δ(v)}}∧{∨l=wnx{δ(w)∧χH(n)∧δ(x)}}∧{∨l=yzo{δ(y)∧δ(z)∧χH(o)}} |
≥{χH(m)∧δ(u)∧δ(v)}∧{δ(w)∧χH(n)∧δ(x)}∧{δ(y)∧δ(z)∧χH(o)} |
=(1,1,...,1). |
Thus, χH(l)=(1,1,...,1). Hence, l∈H. So, HDD∩DHD∩DDH⊆H.
Now, secondly if l∈HDD∩DDHDD∩DDH then l=mst,l=uvnwx,l=yzo for all m,n,o∈H and s,t,u,v,w,x,y,z∈D. As χH is an m-PFQI of D, we have
χH(l)≥((χH∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘χH∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘χH))(l) |
=(χH∘δ∘δ)(l)∧(δ∘δ∘χH∘δ∘δ)(l)∧(δ∘δ∘χH)(l) |
={∨l=mst{χH(m)∧δ(s)∧δ(t)}}∧{∨l=uvnwx{δ(u)∧δ(v)∧χH(n)∧δ(w)∧δ(x)}} |
∧{∨l=yzo{δ(y)∧δ(z)∧χH(o)}} |
≥{χH(m)∧δ(s)∧δ(t)}∧{δ(u)∧δ(v)∧χH(n)∧δ(w)∧δ(x)}∧{δ(y)∧δ(z)∧χH(o)} |
=(1,1,...,1). |
Thus, χH(l)=(1,1,...,1). Hence, l∈H. So, HDD∩DDHDD∩DDH⊆H. This shows that H is a quasi-ideal of D.
Proposition 4. Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm) be an m-PFS of D. Then ψ is an m-PFQI of D if and only if ψα={l∈D|ψ(l)≥α} is a QI of D for all α=(α1,α2,...,αm)∈(0,1]m.
Proof. Consider ψ is an m-PFQI of D. To show that ψαDD∩DψαD∩DDψα⊆ψα and ψαDD∩DDψαDD∩DDψα⊆ψα.
Firstly, let l∈ψαDD∩DψαD∩DDψα. Then l∈ψαDD,l∈DψαD and l∈DDψα. So, l=muv,l=wnx,l=yzo for some u,v,w,x,y,z∈D and m,n,o∈(ψκ)ακ. Thus, ψκ(m)≥ακ,ψκ(n)≥ακ and ψκ(o)≥ακ for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Now,
(ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(l)=∨l=muv{ψκ(m)∧δκ(u)∧δκ(v)} |
≥ψκ(m)∧δκ(u)∧δκ(v) |
=ψκ(m)∧(1,1,...,1)∧(1,1,...,1) |
=ψκ(m) |
≥ακ. |
So, (ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(l)≥ακ for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Now,
(δκ∘ψκ∘δκ)(l)=∨l=wnx{δκ(w)∧ψκ(n)∧δκ(x)} |
≥δκ(w)∧ψκ(n)∧δκ(x) |
=(1,1,...,1)∧ψκ(n)∧(1,1,...,1) |
=ψκ(n) |
≥ακ. |
So, (δκ∘ψκ∘δκ)(l)≥ακ for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Now,
(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(l)=∨l=yzo{δκ(y)∧δκ(z)∧ψκ(o)} |
≥δκ(y)∧δκ(z)∧ψκ(o) |
=(1,1,...,1)∧(1,1,...,1)∧ψκ(o) |
=ψκ(o) |
≥ακ. |
So, (δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(l)≥ακ for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Thus,
((ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)∧(δκ∘ψκ∘δκ)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ))(l) |
=(ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(l)∧(δκ∘ψκ∘δκ)(l)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(l)≥ακ∧ακ∧ακ |
=ακfor allκ∈{1,2,...,m}. |
So, ψ(l)≥((ψ∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘ψ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘ψ))(l)≥α. This implies that l∈ψα. Hence, ψα is a quasi-ideal of D.
Now secondly, let l∈ψαDD∩DDψαDD∩DDψα. Then l∈ψαDD,l∈DDψαDD,l∈DDψα. So l=mst,l=uvnwx, l=yzo for some s,t,u,v,w,x,y,z∈D and m,n,o∈ψα. Thus, ψκ(m)≥ακ,ψκ(n)≥ακ, and ψκ(o)≥ακ for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Now,
(ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(l)=∨l=mst{ψκ(m)∧δκ(s)∧δκ(t)} |
≥ψκ(m)∧δκ(s)∧δκ(t) |
=ψκ(m)∧(1,1,...,1)∧(1,1,...,1) |
=ψκ(m) |
≥ακ. |
So, (ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(l)≥ακ for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Now,
(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(l)=∨l=uvnwx{δκ(u)∧δκ(v)∧ψκ(n)∧δκ(w)∧δκ(x)} |
≥δκ(u)∧δκ(v)∧ψκ(n)∧δκ(w)∧δκ(x) |
=ψκ(n)≥ακ. |
Thus, (δκ∘δκ∘ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(l)≥ακ for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Now,
(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(l)=∨l=yzo{δκ(y)∧δκ(z)∧ψκ(o)} |
≥{δκ(y)∧δκ(z)∧ψκ(o)} |
={(1,1,...,1)∧(1,1,...,1)∧ψκ(o)} |
=ψκ(o) |
≥ακ. |
So, (δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(l)≥ακ for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Thus,
((ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ))(l) |
=(ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(l)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(l)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(l) |
≥ακ∧ακ∧ακ |
=ακfor allκ∈{1,2,...,m}. |
So, ((ψ∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘ψ))(l)≥α. Since, ψ(l)≥((ψ∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘ψ))(l)≥α. So, l∈ψα.
Conversely, on contrary consider that ψ is not an m-PFQI of D. Let l∈D be such that ψκ(l)<(ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(l)∧(δκ∘ψκ∘δκ)(l)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(l) for some κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Choose ακ∈(0,1] such that ακ=(ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(l)∧(δκ∘ψκ∘δκ)(l)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(l) for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. This implies that l∈(ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)ακ,l∈(δκ∘ψκ∘δκ)ακ and l∈(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)ακ but l∉(ψκ)ακ for some κ. Hence, l∈(ψ∘δ∘δ)α,l∈(δ∘ψ∘δ)α and l∈(δ∘δ∘ψ)α but l∉(ψ)α, which is a contradiction. Hence, (ψ∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘ψ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘ψ)≤ψ.
Also, on contrary consider that ψ is not an m-PFQI of D. Let l∈D be such that ψκ(l)<(ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(l)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(l)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(l) for some κ∈{1,2,...,m}. Choose ακ∈(0,1] such that ακ=(ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(l)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(l)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(l) for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}. This implies that, l∈(ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)ακ,l∈(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)ακ and l∈(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)ακ but l∉(ψκ)ακ for some κ. Hence, l∈(ψ∘δ∘δ)α,l∈(δ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘δ)α and l∈(δ∘δ∘ψ)α but l∉(ψ)α, which is a contradiction. Hence, (ψ∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘ψ)≤ψ.
Lemma 10. Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm),ℸ=(ℸ1,ℸ2,...,ℸm),℧=(℧1,℧2,...,℧m) be m-PFRI, m-PFMI and m-PFLI of D respectively. Then ψ∧ℸ∧℧ is an m-PFQI of D.
Proof. Suppose ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm),ℸ=(ℸ1,ℸ2,...,ℸm),℧=(℧1,℧2,...,℧m) is m-PFRI, m-PFMI and m-PFLI of D respectively. Let l∈D, if l≠ghi for some g,h,i∈D. Then, ((ψ∧ℸ∧℧)∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘(ψ∧ℸ∧℧)∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘(ψ∧ℸ∧℧))≤ψ∧ℸ∧℧. If l=ghi for some g,h,i∈D. Then,
((ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)∘δκ∘δκ)∧(δκ∘(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)∘δκ)∧(δκ∘δκ∘(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ))(l) |
=((ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)∘δκ∘δκ)(l)∧(δκ∘(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)∘δκ)(l)∧(δκ∘δκ∘(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ))(l) |
={∨l=ghi{(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)(g)∧δκ(h)∧δκ(i)}}∧{∨l=ghi{δκ(g)∧(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)(h)∧δκ(i)}} |
∧{∨l=ghi{δκ(g)∧δκ(h)∧(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)(i)}} |
={∨l=ghi{(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)(g)}}∧{∨l=ghi{(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)(h)}}∧{∨l=ghi{(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)(i)}} |
=∨l=ghi{(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)(g)∧(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)(h)∧(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)(i)} |
=∨l=ghi{ψκ(g)∧ℸκ(g)∧℧κ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ℸκ(h)∧℧κ(h)∧ψκ(i)∧ℸκ(i)∧℧κ(i)} |
≤∨l=ghi{ψκ(g)∧ℸκ(h)∧℧κ(i)} |
≤∨l=ghi{ψκ(ghi)∧ℸκ(ghi)∧℧κ(ghi)} |
=∨l=ghi{(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)(ghi)} |
=(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)(l)forallκ∈{1,2,...,m}. |
Hence, ((ψ∧ℸ∧℧)∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘(ψ∧ℸ∧℧)∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘(ψ∧ℸ∧℧))≤(ψ∧ℸ∧℧), that is (ψ∧ℸ∧℧) is an m-PFQI of D. Similarly, ((ψ∧ℸ∧℧)∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘(ψ∧ℸ∧℧)∘δ∘δ)∧(δ∘δ∘(ψ∧ℸ∧℧))≤(ψ∧ℸ∧℧). Hence, (ψ∧ℸ∧℧) is an m-PFQI of D.
Lemma 11. Every m-PF one-sided ideal of D is an m-PFQI of D.
Proof. The proof follows from Lemma 3.
In the Example 6, it is shown that the converse of the Lemma 11 may not be true.
Example 6. Consider D={e,f,g,h} is a ternary semigroup in Example 5 and ψ is a 5-PFQI of D. Now, by calculations ψ(fhh)=ψ(h)=(0,0,0,0,0)̸≥ψ(f)=(0.3,0.2,0.3,0.1,0.3). So, ψ is not a 5-PFRI of D.
Definition 9. An m-PFTSS ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm) of D is called an m-PFII of D if for all g,h,l,i,j∈D,ψ(ghlij)≥ψ(l) that is, ψκ(ghlij)≥ψκ(l) for all κ∈{1,2,...,m}.
Lemma 12. Let H be a subset of D. Then H is an interior ideal of D if and only if m-polar characteristic function χH of H is an m-PFII of D.
Proof. Consider H is an interior ideal of D. From Lemma 2, χH is an m-PFTSS of D. Thus, we have to show that χH((ghl)ij)≥χH(l) for all g,h,l,i,j∈D. We observe these two cases:
Case 1: Let l∈H and g,h,i,j∈D. Then χH(l)=(1,1,...,1). Since, H is an interior ideal of D. So, (ghlij)∈H. Then χH(ghlij)=(1,1,...,1). Hence, χH(ghlij)≥χH(l).
Case 2: Let l∉H, and g,h,i,j∈D. Then χH(l)=(0,0,...,0). Clearly, χH(ghlij)≥χH(l). Hence, the m- polar characteristic function χH of H is an m-PFII of D.
Conversely, let χH is an m-PFII of D. Then by Lemma 2, H is a ternary subsemigroup of D. Suppose g,h,i,j∈D, and l∈H then χH(l)=(1,1,...,1). By the hypothesis, χH(ghlij)≥χH(l)=(1,1,...,1). Hence, χH(ghlij)=(1,1,...,1). This implies that (ghlij)∈H, that is H is an interior ideal of D.
Lemma 13. Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm) be an m-PFTSS of D. Then ψ is an m-PFII of D if and only if δ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘δ≤ψ.
Proof. Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm) be an m-PFII of D. We have to show that, ((δ∘δ∘ψ)∘δ∘δ)≤ψ. Let l∈D. Then,
((δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)∘δκ∘δκ)(l)=∨l=ghi{(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(g)∧δκ(h)∧δκ(i)} |
=∨l=ghi{∨g=def{δκ(d)∧δκ(e)∧ψκ(f)}} |
=∨l=ghi{∨g=def{ψκ(f)}} |
=∨l=(def)hi{ψκ(f)} |
≤∨l=(def)hi{ψκ((def)hi)} |
=ψκ(l)for allκ∈{1,2,...,m}. |
Thus, (δ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘δ)≤ψ. Conversely, let (δ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘δ)≤ψ. We only have to show that ψκ(ghlij)≥ψκ(l) for all g,h,l,i,j∈D and κ∈{1,2,...,m}.
ψκ((ghl)ij)≥((δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)∘δκ∘δκ)((ghl)ij) |
=∨(ghl)ij=bcd{(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(b)∧δκ(c)∧δκ(d)} |
≥{(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(ghl)∧δκ(i)∧δκ(j)} |
=(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(ghl) |
=∨ghl=uvw{δκ(u)∧δκ(v)∧ψκ(w)} |
≥{δκ(g)∧δκ(h)∧ψκ(l)} |
=ψκ(l)for allκ∈{1,2,...,m}. |
So, (ghlij)≥ψ(l). Hence, ψ is an m-PFII of D.
Proposition 4. Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm) be an m-PFS of D. Then ψ is an m-PFII of D if and only if ψα={l∈D|ψ(l)≥α} is an interior ideal of D for all α=(α1,α2,...,αm)∈(0,1]m.
Proof. The proof is same as the proof of Propositions 1 and 2.
In this section, various important results of regular and intra-regular ternary semigroups under the m-PFSs, m-PFIs of D are presented. Many theorems of Shabir et al. [34]. Bashir et al. [35] are examined and generalized in the form of m-PFIs of D. Regular and intra-regular ternary semigroups have been studied by several authors see [6,38,41].
Definition 10. An element l of D is called regular if there exists y,z∈D such that l=lylzl. D is regular if all elements of D are regular [6].
Theorem 1. [38] The listed below assertions are equivalent for D.
1) D is regular;
2) H∩I∩J=HIJ for all left ideal H, all lateral ideal I and all right ideal J of D;
3) H=HDHDH for all quasi ideal H of D.
Theorem 2. Every m-PFQI of D is an m-PFBI of D.
Proof. Suppose ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm) is an m-PFQI of D. Let g,h,i∈D. Then
ψκ(ghi)≥((ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)∧(δκ∘ψκ∘δκ)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ))(ghi) |
=(ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(ghi)∧(δκ∘ψκ∘δκ)(ghi)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(ghi)={∨ghi=uvm{ψκ(u)∧δκ(v)∧δκ(m)}}∧{∨ghi=wnx{δκ(w)∧ψκ(n)∧δκ(x)}} |
∧{∨ghi=yzo{δκ(y)∧δκ(z)∧ψκ(o)}} |
≥{ψκ(g)∧δκ(h)∧δκ(i)}∧{δκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧δκ(i)}∧{δκ(g)∧δκ(h)∧ψκ(i)} |
=ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i). |
So, ψ(ghi)≥ψ(g)∧ψ(h)∧ψ(i). Also,
ψκ(gd1hd2i)≥((ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ))(gd1hd2i)=(ψκ∘δκ∘Λκ)(gd1hd2i)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ∘δκ∘δκ)(gd1hd2i)∧(δκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(gd1hd2i) |
={∨gd1hd2i=mst{ψκ(m)∧δκ(s)∧δκ(t)}} |
∧{∨gd1hd2i=uvnwx{δκ(u)∧δκ(v)∧ψκ(n)∧δκ(w)∧δκ(x)}} |
∧{∨gd1hd2i=yzo{δκ(y)∧δκ(z)∧ψκ(o)}} |
≥{ψκ(g)∧δκ(d1hd2)∧δκ(i)}∧{δκ(g)∧δκ(d1)∧ψκ(h)∧δκ(d2)∧δκ(i)} |
∧{δκ(g)∧δκ(d1hd2)∧ψκ(i)} |
=ψκ(g)∧ψκ(h)∧ψκ(i). |
So, ψ(gd1hd2i)≥ψ(g)∧ψ(h)∧ψ(i). Hence, ψ is an m-PFBI of D.
Theorem 3. For D the given conditions are equivalent.
1) D is regular;
2) ψ∧ℸ∧℧=ψ∘ℸ∘℧ for all m-PFRI ψ, all m-PFMI ℸ and all m-PFLI ℧ of D.
Proof. (1)⇒(2): Suppose that ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm),ℸ=(ℸ1,ℸ2,...,ℸm),℧=(℧1,℧2,...,℧m) is m-PFRI, m-PFMI and m-PFLI of D respectively. Let l∈D, we have
(ψκ∘ℸκ∘℧κ)(l)=∨l=ghi{ψκ(g)∧ℸκ(h)∧℧κ(i)} |
≤∨l=ghi{ψκ(ghi)∧ℸκ(ghi)∧℧κ(ghi)} |
=ψκ(l)∧ℸκ(l)∧℧κ(l) |
=(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)(l). |
Hence, (ψκ∘ℸκ∘℧κ)(l)≤(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)(l)for allκ∈{1,2,...,m}. So, (ψ∘ℸ∘℧)≤(ψ∧ℸ∧℧). Since D is regular, so for all l∈D there exists y,z∈D such that l=lylzl.
(ψκ∘ℸκ∘℧κ)(l)=∨l=ghi{ψκ(g)∧ℸκ(h)∧℧κ(i)} |
≥ψκ(l)∧ℸκ(ylz)∧℧κ(l) |
≥ψκ(l)∧ℸκ(l)∧℧κ(l) |
=(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)(l)for allκ∈{1,2,...,m}. |
Thus, (ψ∘ℸ∘℧)≥(ψ∧ℸ∧℧). Therefore, (ψ∘ℸ∘℧)=(ψ∧ℸ∧℧).
(2)⇒(1): Let l∈D. Then H=lDD is a left ideal of D,I=DlD is a lateral ideal of D and J=DDl is a right ideal of D. Then by using Lemma 2, χH,χI,χJ, the m- polar characteristic function of H,I,J are m-PFLI, m-PFMI and m-PFRI of D respectively. Now, by given condition
χH∧χI∧χJ=χH∘χI∘χJχH∩I∩J=χHIJby Lemma1. |
Thus, H∩I∩J=HIJ. Hence, it follows from Theorem 1 that D is regular.
Theorem 4. For D the listed below conditions are equivalent.
1) D is regular;
2) ψ=ψ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘ψ for every m-PFGBI ψ of D;
3) ψ=ψ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘ψ for every m-PFQI ψ of D.
Proof. (1)⇒(2): Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm) be an m-PFGBI of D and l∈D. As D is regular, so there exist y,z∈D such that l=lylzl. So, we have
((ψκ∘Λκ∘ψκ)∘δκ∘ψκ)(l)=∨l=ghi{(ψκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(g)∧δκ(h)∧ψκ(i)} |
≥(ψκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(lyl)∧δκ(z)∧ψκ(l) |
=∨lyl=def{ψκ(d)∧δκ(e)∧ψκ(f)}∧ψκ(l) |
≥ψκ(l)∧δκ(y)∧ψκ(l)∧ψκ(l) |
=ψκ(l)for allκ∈{1,2,...,m}. |
Hence, ψ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘ψ≥ψ. Since, ψ is an m-PFGBI of D. So, we have
((ψκ∘δκ∘ψκ)∘δκ∘ψκ)(l)=∨l=ghi{(ψκ∘δκ∘ψκ)(g)∧δκ(h)∧ψκ(i)} |
=∨l=ghi{∨g=def{ψκ(d)∧δκ(e)∧ψκ(f)}∧δκ(h)∧ψκ(i)} |
=∨l=ghi{∨g=def{ψκ(d)∧(1,1,…,1)∧ψκ(f)}∧(1,1,...,1)∧ψκ(i) |
=∨l=ghi{∨g=def{ψκ(d)∧ψκ(f)}∧ψκ(i)} |
≤∨l=ghi{∨g=def{ψκ((def)hi)}} |
≤∨l=ghi{ψκ(ghi)} |
=ψκ(l)for allκ∈{1,2,...,m}. |
So, ψ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘ψ≤ψ. Thus ψ∘δ∘ψ∘δ∘ψ=ψ.
(2)⇒(3): It is obvious.
(3)⇒(1): Let ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm),ℸ=(ℸ1,ℸ2,...,ℸm),℧=(℧1,℧2,...,℧m) be m-PFRI, m-PFMI and m-PFLI of D respectively. Then (ψ∧ℸ∧℧) is an m-PFQI of D. Then by hypothesis,
(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)=(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)∘δκ∘(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)∘δκ∘(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ) |
≤ψκ∘δκ∘ℸκ∘δκ∘℧κ=ψκ∘ℸκ∘℧κ. |
So, ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ≤ψκ∘ℸκ∘℧κ. But, ψκ∘ℸκ∘℧κ≤ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ. This implies that ψκ∘ℸκ∘℧κ=ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ. That is ψ∘ℸ∘℧=ψ∧ℸ∧℧. Thus D is regular ternary semigroup by Theorem 3.
Definition 11. An element l of D is called intra-regular if there exists y,z∈D such that l=yl3z. D is intra-regular if all elements of D are intra-regular [41].
Theorem 5. [41] If D is an intra-regular ternary semigroup then H∩I∩J⊆HIJ for any left ideal H, lateral ideal I and right ideal J of D.
Theorem 6. D is intra-regular if and only if ψ∧ℸ∧℧≤ψ∘ℸ∘℧ for every m-PFLI ψ,everym-PFMI ℸ and every m-PFRI ℧ of D.
Proof. Suppose, ψ=(ψ1,ψ2,...,ψm),ℸ=(ℸ1,ℸ2,...,ℸm),℧=(℧1,℧2,...,℧m) is m-PFLI, m-PFMI and m-PFRI of D respectively. Let l∈D. Then, there exists y,z∈D such that l=yl3z=y(yl3z)(yl3z)(yl3z)z. Thus
(ψκ∘ℸκ∘℧κ)(l)=∨l=ghi{ψκ(g)∧ℸκ(h)∧℧κ(i)} |
≥ψκ(yyl3)∧ℸκ(zyl3zy)∧℧κ(l3zz) |
≥ψκ(l3)∧ℸκ(l3)∧℧κ(l3) |
=ψκ(lll)∧ℸκ(lll)∧℧κ(lll) |
≥ψκ(l)∧ℸκ(l)∧℧κ(l) |
=(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ)(l)for allκ∈{1,2,...,m}. |
So, (ψκ∘ℸκ∘℧κ)≥(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ). That is ψ∧ℸ∧℧≤ψ∘ℸ∘℧.
Conversely, suppose that (ψκ∘ℸκ∘℧κ)≥(ψκ∧ℸκ∧℧κ), for m-PFLI ψ,m-PFMI ℸ and m-PFRI ℧ of D. Let H,I,J are left, lateral and right ideal of D. Then by using Lemma 2, χH,χI,χJ the m- polar characteristic functions of H,I,J are m-PFLI, m-PFMI and m-PFRI of D, respectively. Now, by our supposition
χH∧χI∧χJ≤χH∘χI∘χJχH∩I∩J≤χHIJby Lemma1. |
Thus, H∩I∩J⊆HIJ. Therefore by Theorem 5, D is intra-regular.
In the current section, we will describe a connection between this paper and previous papers [34,35]. Shabir et al. [34] worked on m-PFIs and m-PFBIs for the characterizations of regular LA-semigroups. Bashir et al. generalized [34] to [35]. We have extended this work to the structure of m-PFIs of ternary semigroups, regular ternary semigroups and intra-regular ternary semigroups. Our results are more general than the results in [34,35] because associative property does not hold in LA-semigroup. For example let ψ(ghi)=g is not an LA-semigroup but it is ternary semigroup. Also, there are many structures that are not handled by binary multiplication but handled by ternary multiplication, such as Z−,R− and Q−. To get rid of this difficulty, we operate the ternary operation, and generalize all results in ternary semigroups. Hence, the technique used in this paper is more general than previous.
The definition of an m-PF set is applied to the structure of ternary semigroups in this paper. When data comes from m factors then m-PF set theory is used to deal such problems. We have converted the basic algebraic structure of [34,35] to ternary semigroup by using m-PF set. A huge number of uses and needs of ternary operation of m-PF set theory are given in this paper. Also, it is proved that every m-polar fuzzy bi-ideal of ternary semigroup is an m-polar fuzzy generalized bi-ideal of ternary semigroup but converse is not true in general shown by example. We have studied the characterization of regular and intra-regular ternary semigroups by m-PFIs.
In future, we will apply this technique for gamma semigroups and near rings. Thus, the roughness of m-PFIs of ternary semigroups, gamma semigroups and near-rings will be defined.
This project was funded by the Deanship of Scientific Research (DSR), King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, under grant No. (19-130-35-RG). The authors, therefore, gratefully acknowledge DSR technical and financial support.
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
[1] | R. Todeschini, V. Consonni, Handbook of Molecular Descriptors, Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2000. |
[2] | I. Gutman, B. Furtula (Eds.), Novel Molecular Structure Descriptors-Theory and Applications I, University of Kragujevac and Faculty of Science Kragujevac, 2010. |
[3] | I. Gutman, B. Furtula (Eds.), Novel Molecular Structure Descriptors-Theory and Applications II, University of Kragujevac and Faculty of Science Kragujevac, 2010. |
[4] |
M. Randić, On characterization of molecular branching, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 97 (1975), 6609-6615. doi: 10.1021/ja00856a001
![]() |
[5] |
I. Gutman, N. Trinajstić, Graph theory and molecular orbitals. Total π-electron energy of alternant hydrocarbons, Chem. Phys. Lett., 17 (1972), 535-538. doi: 10.1016/0009-2614(72)85099-1
![]() |
[6] | D. Vukičević, Bond additive modeling 4. QSPR and QSAR studies of the variable Adriatic indices, Croat. Chem. Acta, 84 (2011), 87-91. |
[7] | D. Vukičević, Bond additive modeling 5. mathematical properties of the variable sum exdeg index, Croat. Chem. Acta, 84 (2011), 93-101. |
[8] | D. Vukičević, Bond additive modeling. adriatic indices overview of the results, In: Novel Molecular Structure Descriptors. Theory and Applications II, University of Kragujevac and Faculty of Science Kragujevac, 2010,269-302. |
[9] | D. Vukičević, Bond additive modeling 6. randomness vs. design, MATCH Commun. Math. Comput. Chem., 65 (2011), 415-426. |
[10] |
Z. Yarahmadi, A. R. Ashrafi, The exdeg polynomial of some graph operations and applications in nanoscience, J. Comput. Theor. Nanos., 12 (2015), 46-51. doi: 10.1166/jctn.2015.3696
![]() |
[11] | A. Ghalavand, A. R. Ashrafi, Extremal graphs with respect to variable sum exdeg index via majorization, Appl. Math. Comput., 303 (2017), 19-23. |
[12] | S. Khalid, A. Ali, On the zeroth-order general Randić index, variable sum exdeg index and trees having vertices with prescribed degree, Discret. Math. Algorithms Appl., 10 (2018), 1-12. |
[13] | D. Dimitrov, A. Ali, On the extremal graphs with respect to the variable sum exdeg index, Discrete Math. Lett., 1 (2019), 42-48. |
[14] | M. Javaida, A. Ali, I. Milovanović, E. Milovanović, On the extremal cactus graphs for variable sum exdeg index with a fixed number of cycles, AKCE International Journal of Graphs and Combinatorics, 2020 (2020), 1-4. |
[15] | X. Sun, J. Du, On variable sum exdeg indices of quasi-tree graphs and unicyclic graphs, Discrete Dyn. Nat. Soc., 2020 (2020), 1-7. |
[16] | J. A. Bondy, U. S. R. Murty, Graph Theory with Applications, Elsvier Science, New York, 1976. |
[17] | Z. Du, B. Zhou, On the Estrada index of graphs with given number of cut edges, Electron. J. Linear Al., 22 (2011), 586-592. |
[18] |
K. Fang, J. Shu, On graphs with cut vertices and cut edges, Acta Math. Sin., 30 (2014), 539-546. doi: 10.1007/s10114-014-1230-z
![]() |
[19] |
H. Wang, S. Wang, B. Wei, Sharp bounds for the modified multiplicative Zagreb indices of graphs with vertex connectivity at most k, Filomat, 33 (2019), 4673-4685. doi: 10.2298/FIL1914673W
![]() |
[20] | R. Wu, H. Chen, H. Deng, On the monotonicity of topological indices and the connectivity of a graph, Appl. Math. Comput., 298 (2017), 188-200. |
[21] | J. Du, X. Sun, On the multiplicative sum Zagreb index of graphs with some given parameters, J. Math. Inequal., 2020, in press. |
[22] |
X. Li, Y. Fan, The connectivity and the Harary index of a graph, Discrete Appl. Math., 181 (2015), 167-173. doi: 10.1016/j.dam.2014.08.022
![]() |
[23] |
S. Chen, W. Liu, Extremal Zagreb indices of graphs with a given number of cut edges, Graph. Combinator., 30 (2014), 109-118. doi: 10.1007/s00373-012-1258-8
![]() |
[24] |
S. Akhter, R. Farooq, Eccentric adjacency index of graphs with a given number of cut edges, B. Malays. Math. Sci. So., 43 (2020), 2509-2522. doi: 10.1007/s40840-019-00820-x
![]() |
1. | Shahida Bashir, Mohammed M. Ali Al-Shamiri, Shahzeen Khalid, Rabia Mazhar, Regular and Intra-Regular Ternary Semirings in Terms of m-Polar Fuzzy Ideals, 2023, 15, 2073-8994, 591, 10.3390/sym15030591 | |
2. | Shahida Bashir, Talal Alharbi, Rabia Mazhar, Issra Khalid, Muneeb ul Hassan Afzal, Nauman Riaz Chaudhry, An efficient approach to study multi-polar fuzzy ideals of semirings, 2024, 14, 2045-2322, 10.1038/s41598-023-49395-5 |
Vision | Positivity | Foresight | Transparency | Honesty | |
e | 0.4 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.9 |
f | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 1 | 0.6 |
g | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 0.7 |
h | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.6 |
i | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
Acronyms | Representation |
m-PF | m-Polar fuzzy |
m-PFS | m-Polar fuzzy subset |
m-PFSS | m-Polar fuzzy subsemigroup |
m-PFTSS | m-Polar fuzzy ternary subsemigroup |
m-PFI | m-Polar fuzzy ideal |
m-PFLI | m-Polar fuzzy left ideal |
m-PFMI | m-Polar fuzzy middle ideal |
m-PFRI | m-Polar fuzzy right ideal |
m-PFGBI | m-Polar fuzzy generalized bi-ideal |
m-PFBI | m-Polar fuzzy bi-ideal |
m-PFQI | m-Polar fuzzy quasi-ideal |
m-PFII | m-Polar fuzzy interior ideal |
0 | 0 | d1 | d2 |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
d1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
d2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
d1 | 0 | d1 | d2 |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
d1 | 0 | d2 | d1 |
d2 | 0 | d1 | d2 |
d2 | 0 | d1 | d2 |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
d1 | 0 | d1 | d2 |
d2 | 0 | d2 | d1 |
e | f | g | h | i | |
e | e | e | e | e | e |
f | e | e | h | e | f |
g | e | i | e | g | e |
h | e | f | e | h | e |
i | e | e | g | e | i |
e | f | g | h | |
e | e | e | e | e |
f | e | f | g | h |
g | e | g | e | g |
h | e | h | e | e |
Vision | Positivity | Foresight | Transparency | Honesty | |
e | 0.4 | 0.7 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.9 |
f | 0.9 | 0.4 | 0.7 | 1 | 0.6 |
g | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.3 | 0.9 | 0.7 |
h | 0.9 | 0.8 | 0.5 | 0.4 | 0.6 |
i | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.7 | 0.9 | 0.8 |
Acronyms | Representation |
m-PF | m-Polar fuzzy |
m-PFS | m-Polar fuzzy subset |
m-PFSS | m-Polar fuzzy subsemigroup |
m-PFTSS | m-Polar fuzzy ternary subsemigroup |
m-PFI | m-Polar fuzzy ideal |
m-PFLI | m-Polar fuzzy left ideal |
m-PFMI | m-Polar fuzzy middle ideal |
m-PFRI | m-Polar fuzzy right ideal |
m-PFGBI | m-Polar fuzzy generalized bi-ideal |
m-PFBI | m-Polar fuzzy bi-ideal |
m-PFQI | m-Polar fuzzy quasi-ideal |
m-PFII | m-Polar fuzzy interior ideal |
0 | 0 | d1 | d2 |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
d1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
d2 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
d1 | 0 | d1 | d2 |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
d1 | 0 | d2 | d1 |
d2 | 0 | d1 | d2 |
d2 | 0 | d1 | d2 |
0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
d1 | 0 | d1 | d2 |
d2 | 0 | d2 | d1 |
e | f | g | h | i | |
e | e | e | e | e | e |
f | e | e | h | e | f |
g | e | i | e | g | e |
h | e | f | e | h | e |
i | e | e | g | e | i |
e | f | g | h | |
e | e | e | e | e |
f | e | f | g | h |
g | e | g | e | g |
h | e | h | e | e |