6 views

Uploaded by Anonymous 0U9j6BLllB

Neutrosophic set (NS) developed by Smarandache introduced neutrosophic set (NS) as a more general platform which extends the concepts of the classic set and fuzzy set, intuitionistic fuzzy set and interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy set.

- Construcciones, pruebas y el significado de las constantes lógicas
- Lesson Plan Math Discrete
- Neutrosophic Parametrized Soft Set Theory and Its Decision Making
- Power Quality improvement of Unbalanced Distribution System Using Fuzzy based D-STATCOM
- geb_v3_7
- Math Induct 3
- Ds Mirrors Artificial Intelligence
- posthuman mathematics.pdf
- Clarke
- Towards a Formal Taxonomy of Hybrid Uncertainty Representations
- 4. Maths - Ijamss - A New Ranking of - Sagaya Roseline
- On Neutrosophic Submodules of a Module
- robot vision fuzzy
- VIKOR based MAGDM Strategy with Trapezoidal Neutrosophic Numbers
- MTH110 Suggested Homework
- XI class
- 16personalities Log Inenglish 0
- 35 Integration Full Part 1 of 5
- Splitting Necklace
- logic games notes

You are on page 1of 8

20, 2018 36

BCK/BCI-algebras

1 Department of Mathematics, University of Tabuk, Tabuk 71491, Saudi Arabia. e-mail: chishtygm@gmail.com

2 Postdoctoral Research Fellow, Shahid Beheshti University, Tehran, Iran. e-mail: bordbar.amirh@gmail.com

3 Mathematics & Science Department, University of New Mexico. 705 Gurley Ave., Gallup, NM 87301, USA. e-mail: fsmarandache@gmail.com

4 Department of Mathematics Education, Gyeongsang National University, Jinju 52828, Korea. e-mail: skywine@gmail.com

∗ Correspondence: Y.B. Jun (skywine@gmail.com)

Abstract: Characterizations of an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal are ∈)-neutrosophic subalgebra to be a (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal are

considered. Any ideal in a BCK/BCI-algebra will be realized as provided. Using a collection of ideals in a BCK/BCI-algebra, an

level neutrosophic ideals of some (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal. The re- (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal is established. Equivalence relations on

lation between (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal and (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic the family of all (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideals are introduced, and re-

subalgebra in a BCK-algebra is discussed. Conditions for an (∈, lated properties are investigated.

By a BCI-algebra, we mean a set X with a special element 0

Neutrosophic set (NS) developed by Smarandache [8, 9, 10] in- and a binary operation ∗ that satisfies the following conditions:

troduced neutrosophic set (NS) as a more general platform which

extends the concepts of the classic set and fuzzy set, intuitionis- (I) (∀x, y, z ∈ X) (((x ∗ y) ∗ (x ∗ z)) ∗ (z ∗ y) = 0),

tic fuzzy set and interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy set. Neutro- (II) (∀x, y ∈ X) ((x ∗ (x ∗ y)) ∗ y = 0),

sophic set theory is applied to various part which is refered to the

site (III) (∀x ∈ X) (x ∗ x = 0),

Jun et al. studied neutrosophic subalgebras/ideals in If a BCI-algebra X satisfies the following identity:

BCK/BCI-algebras based on neutrosophic points (see [1], [5]

(V) (∀x ∈ X) (0 ∗ x = 0),

and [7]).

In this paper, we characterize an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal in a then X is called a BCK-algebra. Any BCK/BCI-algebra X

BCK/BCI-algebra. We show that any ideal in a BCK/BCI- satisfies the following conditions:

algebra can be realized as level neutrosophic ideals of some

(∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal. We investigate the relation between (∀x ∈ X) (x ∗ 0 = x) , (2.1)

(∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal and (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic subalgebra

x≤y ⇒ x∗z ≤y∗z

in a BCK-algebra. We provide conditions for an (∈, ∈)- (∀x, y, z ∈ X) , (2.2)

x≤y ⇒ z∗y ≤z∗x

neutrosophic subalgebra to be a (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal. Using

(∀x, y, z ∈ X) ((x ∗ y) ∗ z = (x ∗ z) ∗ y) , (2.3)

a collection of ideals in a BCK/BCI-algebra, we establish an

(∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal. We discuss equivalence relations on (∀x, y, z ∈ X) ((x ∗ z) ∗ (y ∗ z) ≤ x ∗ y) (2.4)

the family of all (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideals, and investigate re-

where x ≤ y if and only if x ∗ y = 0. A nonempty subset S of a

lated properties.

BCK/BCI-algebra X is called a subalgebra of X if x ∗ y ∈ S

for all x, y ∈ S. A subset I of a BCK/BCI-algebra X is called

2 Preliminaries an ideal of X if it satisfies:

introduced by K. Iséki (see [2] and [3]) and was extensively in- (∀x ∈ X) (∀y ∈ I) (x ∗ y ∈ I ⇒ x ∈ I) . (2.6)

G. Muhiuddin, H. Bordbar, F. Smarandache, Y.B. Jun, Further results on (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic subalgebras and ideals

in BCK/BCI-algebras

Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 20, 2018 37

We refer the reader to the books [4, 6] for further information and

regarding BCK/BCI-algebras.

x ∗ y ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; αx ), y ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; αy )

For any family {ai | i ∈ Λ} of real numbers, we define ⇒ x ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; αx ∧ αy )

x ∗ y ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; βx ), y ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; βy )

(∀x, y ∈ X)

_

{ai | i ∈ Λ} := sup{ai | i ∈ Λ}

⇒ x ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; βx ∧ βy )

x ∗ y ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γx ), y ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γy )

and ⇒ x ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γx ∨ γy )

^ (2.9)

{ai | i ∈ Λ} := inf{ai | i ∈ Λ}.

for all αx , αy , βx , βy ∈ (0, 1] and γx , γy ∈ [0, 1).

W If Λ = {1, 2}, weVwill also use a1 ∨ a2 and a1 ∧ a2 instead of

{ai | i ∈ Λ} and {ai | i ∈ Λ}, respectively.

Let X be a non-empty set. A neutrosophic set (NS) in X (see

3 (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic subalgebras and

[9]) is a structure of the form: ideals

A∼ := {hx; AT (x), AI (x), AF (x)i | x ∈ X} We first provide characterizations of an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic

ideal.

where AT : X → [0, 1] is a truth membership function,

Theorem 3.1. Given a neutrosophic set A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) in

AI : X → [0, 1] is an indeterminate membership function, and

a BCK/BCI-algebra X, the following assertions are equiva-

AF : X → [0, 1] is a false membership function. For the sake of

lent.

simplicity, we shall use the symbol A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) for the

neutrosophic set (1) A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal of X.

A∼ := {hx; AT (x), AI (x), AF (x)i | x ∈ X}. (2) A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) satisfies the following assertions.

AT (0) ≥ AT (x),

Given a neutrosophic set A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) in a set X,

(∀x ∈ X) AI (0) ≥ AI (x), (3.1)

α, β ∈ (0, 1] and γ ∈ [0, 1), we consider the following sets:

AF (0) ≤ AF (x)

T∈ (A∼ ; α) := {x ∈ X | AT (x) ≥ α}, and

I∈ (A∼ ; β) := {x ∈ X | AI (x) ≥ β},

AT (x) ≥ AT (x ∗ y) ∧ AT (y)

F∈ (A∼ ; γ) := {x ∈ X | AF (x) ≤ γ}.

(∀x, y ∈ X) AI (x) ≥ AI (x ∗ y) ∧ AI (y) (3.2)

We say T∈ (A∼ ; α), I∈ (A∼ ; β) and F∈ (A∼ ; γ) are neutrosophic AF (x) ≤ AF (x ∗ y) ∨ AF (y)

∈-subsets.

Proof. Assume that A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (∈, ∈)-

A neutrosophic set A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) in a BCK/BCI-

neutrosophic ideal of X. Suppose there exist a, b, c ∈ X be

algebra X is called an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic subalgebra of X (see

such that AT (0) < AT (a), AI (0) < AI (b) and AF (0) >

[5]) if the following assertions are valid.

AF (c). Then a ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; AT (a)), b ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; AI (b)) and

x ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; αx ), y ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; αy )

c ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; AF (c)). But

⇒ x ∗ y ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; αx ∧ αy ),

x ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; βx ), y ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; βy )

0∈

/ T∈ (A∼ ; AT (a)) ∩ I∈ (A∼ ; AI (b)) ∩ F∈ (A∼ ; AF (c)).

(∀x, y ∈ X) (2.7)

⇒ x ∗ y ∈ I∈ (A ∼ ; βx ∧ βy ),

This is a contradiction, and thus AT (0) ≥ AT (x), AI (0) ≥

x ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γx ), y ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γy )

AI (x) and AF (0) ≤ AF (x) for all x ∈ X. Suppose that

⇒ x ∗ y ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γx ∨ γy ) AT (x) < AT (x ∗ y) ∧ AT (y), AI (a) < AI (a ∗ b) ∧ AI (b)

and AF (c) > AF (c ∗ d) ∨ AF (d) for some x, y, a, b, c, d ∈ X.

for all αx , αy , βx , βy ∈ (0, 1] and γx , γy ∈ [0, 1).

Taking α := AT (x∗y)∧AT (y), β := AI (a∗b)∧AI (b) and γ :=

A neutrosophic set A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) in a BCK/BCI- AF (c∗d)∨AF (d) imply that x∗y ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; α), y ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; α),

algebra X is called an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal of X (see [7]) a ∗ b ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; β), b ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; β), c ∗ d ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γ) and

if the following assertions are valid. d ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γ). But x ∈ / T∈ (A∼ ; α), a ∈ / I∈ (A∼ ; β) and

c∈/ F∈ (A∼ ; γ). This is impossible, and so (3.2) is valid.

x ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; αx ) ⇒ 0 ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; αx ) Conversely, suppose A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) satisfies two con-

(∀x ∈ X) x ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; βx ) ⇒ 0 ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; βx ) (2.8) ditions (3.1) and (3.2). For any x, y, z ∈ X, let α, β ∈ (0, 1]

x ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γx ) ⇒ 0 ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γx ) and γ ∈ [0, 1) be such that x ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; α), y ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; β) and

G. Muhiuddin, H. Bordbar, F. Smarandache, Y.B. Jun, Further results on (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic subalgebras and ideals in

BCK/BCI-algebras

38 Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 20, 2018

AI (0) ≥ AI (y) ≥ β and AF (0) ≤ AF (z) ≤ γ and so that

0 ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; α)∩I∈ (A∼ ; β)∩F∈ (A∼ ; γ). Let a, b, c, d, x, y ∈ X AT (x) < AT (x ∗ y) ∧ AT (y),

be such that a ∗ b ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; αa ), b ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; αb ), c ∗ d ∈ AI (a) < AI (a ∗ b) ∧ AI (b),

I∈ (A∼ ; βc ), d ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; βd ), x ∗ y ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γx ), and y ∈ AF (u) > AF (u ∗ v) ∨ AF (v)

F∈ (A∼ ; γy ) for αa , αb , βc , βd ∈ (0, 1] and γx , γy ∈ [0, 1). Us-

for some x, y, a, b, u, v ∈ X. Taking α := AT (x ∗ y) ∧ AT (y),

ing (3.2), we have

β := AI (a ∗ b) ∧ AI (b) and γ := AF (u ∗ v) ∨ AF (v) imply that

AT (a) ≥ AT (a ∗ b) ∧ AT (b) ≥ αa ∧ αb α, β ∈ (0, 1], γ ∈ [0, 1), x ∗ y ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; α), y ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; α),

AI (c) ≥ AI (c ∗ d) ∧ AI (d) ≥ βc ∧ βd a ∗ b ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; β), b ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; β), u ∗ v ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γ) and

AF (x) ≤ AF (x ∗ y) ∨ AF (y) ≤ γx ∨ γy . v ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γ). But x ∈ / T∈ (A∼ ; α), a ∈

/ I∈ (A∼ ; β) and u ∈ /

F∈ (A∼ ; γ). This is a contradiction since T∈ (A∼ ; α), I∈ (A∼ ; β)

Hence a ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; αa ∧ αb ), c ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; βc ∧ βd ) and x ∈ and F∈ (A∼ ; γ) are ideals of X. Thus

F∈ (A∼ ; γx ∨ γy ). Therefore A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (∈, ∈)-

neutrosophic ideal of X. AT (x) ≥ AT (x ∗ y) ∧ AT (y),

AI (x) ≥ AI (x ∗ y) ∧ AI (y),

Theorem 3.2. Let A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) be a neutrosophic set AF (x) ≤ AF (x ∗ y) ∨ AF (y)

in a BCK/BCI-algebra X. Then the following assertions are

equivalent. for all x, y ∈ X. Therefore A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (∈,

∈)-neutrosophic ideal of X by Theorem 3.1.

(1) A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal of X.

I∈ (A∼ ; β) and F∈ (A∼ ; γ) are ideals of X for all Proposition 3.3. Every (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal A =

∼

α, β ∈ (0, 1] and γ ∈ [0, 1). (AT , AI , AF ) of a BCK/BCI-algebra X satisfies the follow-

Proof. Let A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) be an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal ing assertions.

of X and assume that T∈ (A∼ ; α), I∈ (A∼ ; β) and F∈ (A∼ ; γ) are

AT (x) ≥ AT (y)

nonempty for α, β ∈ (0, 1] and γ ∈ [0, 1). Then there exist (∀x, y ∈ X) x ≤ y ⇒ AI (x) ≥ AI (y) , (3.3)

x, y, z ∈ X such that x ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; α), y ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; β) and z ∈

AF (x) ≤ AF (y)

F∈ (A∼ ; γ). It follows from (2.8) that

AT (x) ≥ AT (y) ∧ AT (z)

0 ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; α) ∩ I∈ (A∼ ; β) ∩ F∈ (A∼ ; γ). (∀x, y, z ∈ X) x ∗ y ≤ z ⇒ AI (x) ≥ AI (y) ∧ AI (z) .

AF (x) ≤ AF (y) ∨ AF (z)

Let x, y, a, b, u, v ∈ X be such that x ∗ y ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; α), (3.4)

y ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; α), a ∗ b ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; β), b ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; β), u ∗ v ∈

F∈ (A∼ ; γ) and v ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γ). Then Proof. Let x, y ∈ X be such that x ≤ y. Then x ∗ y = 0, and so

AT (x) ≥ AT (x ∗ y) ∧ AT (y) ≥ α ∧ α = α AT (x) ≥ AT (x ∗ y) ∧ AT (y) = AT (0) ∧ AT (y) = AT (y),

AI (a) ≥ AI (a ∗ b) ∧ AI (b) ≥ β ∧ β = β

AI (x) ≥ AI (x ∗ y) ∧ AI (y) = AI (0) ∧ AI (y) = AI (y),

AF (u) ≤ AF (u ∗ v) ∨ AF (v) ≤ γ ∨ γ = γ

AF (x) ≤ AF (x ∗ y) ∨ AF (y) = AF (0) ∨ AF (y) = AF (y)

by (3.2), and so x ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; α), a ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; β) and

u ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γ). Hence the nonempty neutrosophic ∈-subsets by Theorem 3.1. Hence (3.3) is valid. Let x, y, z ∈ X be such

T∈ (A∼ ; α), I∈ (A∼ ; β) and F∈ (A∼ ; γ) are ideals of X for all that x ∗ y ≤ z. Then (x ∗ y) ∗ z = 0, and thus

α, β ∈ (0, 1] and γ ∈ [0, 1).

AT (x) ≥ AT (x ∗ y) ∧ AT (y)

Conversely, let A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) be a neutrosophic

set in X for which T∈ (A∼ ; α), I∈ (A∼ ; β) and F∈ (A∼ ; γ) ≥ (AT ((x ∗ y) ∗ z) ∧ AT (z)) ∧ AT (y)

are nonempty and are ideals of X for all α, β ∈ (0, 1] and ≥ (AT (0) ∧ AT (z)) ∧ AT (y)

γ ∈ [0, 1). Assume that AT (0) < AT (x), AI (0) < AI (y) ≥ AT (z) ∧ AT (y),

and AF (0) > AF (z) for some x, y, z ∈ X. Then x ∈

T∈ (A∼ ; AT (x)), y ∈ I∈ (A∼ ; AI (y)) and z ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; AF (z)),

that is, T∈ (A∼ ; α), I∈ (A∼ ; β) and F∈ (A∼ ; γ) are nonempty. AI (x) ≥ AI (x ∗ y) ∧ AI (y)

But 0 ∈ / T∈ (A∼ ; AT (x)) ∩ I∈ (A∼ ; AI (y)) ∩ F∈ (A∼ ; AF (z)), ≥ (AI ((x ∗ y) ∗ z) ∧ AI (z)) ∧ AI (y)

which is a contradiction since T∈ (A∼ ; AT (x)), I∈ (A∼ ; AI (y))

≥ (AI (0) ∧ AI (z)) ∧ AI (y)

and F∈ (A∼ ; AF (z)) are ideals of X. Hence AT (0) ≥ AT (x),

AI (0) ≥ AI (x) and AF (0) ≤ AF (x) for all x ∈ X. Suppose ≥ AI (z) ∧ AI (y)

G. Muhiuddin, H. Bordbar, F. Smarandache, Y.B. Jun, Further results on (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic subalgebras and ideals

in BCK/BCI-algebras

Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 20, 2018 39

and If x ∗ y ∈ I and y ∈

/ I, then

≤ (AF ((x ∗ y) ∗ z) ∨ AF (z)) ∨ AF (y) AI (x ∗ y) = β and AI (y) = 0,

AF (x ∗ y) = γ and AF (y) = 1,

≤ (AF (0) ∨ AF (z)) ∨ AF (y)

≤ AF (z) ∨ AF (y) It follows that

AI (x) ≥ 0 = AI (x ∗ y) ∧ AI (y),

AF (x) ≤ 1 = AF (x ∗ y) ∨ AF (y).

Theorem 3.4. Any ideal of a BCK/BCI-algebra X can be re-

Similarly, if x ∗ y ∈

/ I and y ∈ I, then

alized as level neutrosophic ideals of some (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic

ideal of X. AT (x) ≥ AT (x ∗ y) ∧ AT (y),

AI (x) ≥ AI (x ∗ y) ∧ AI (y),

Proof. Let I be an ideal of a BCK/BCI-algebra X and let AF (x) ≤ AF (x ∗ y) ∨ AF (y).

A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) be a neutrosophic set in X given as fol-

lows: Therefore A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal

of X by Theorem 3.1. This completes the proof.

α if x ∈ I,

AT : X → [0, 1], x 7→

0 otherwise, Lemma 3.5 ([5]). A neutrosophic set A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) in a

β if x ∈ I, BCK/BCI-algebra X is an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic subalgebra of

AI : X → [0, 1], x 7→

0 otherwise, X if and only if it satisfies:

γ if x ∈ I,

AT (x ∗ y) ≥ AT (x) ∧ AT (y)

AF : X → [0, 1], x 7→

1 otherwise (∀x, y ∈ X) AI (x ∗ y) ≥ AI (x) ∧ AI (y) . (3.5)

AF (x ∗ y) ≤ AF (x) ∨ AF (y)

where (α, β, γ) is a fixed ordered triple in (0, 1] × (0, 1] × [0, 1).

Then T∈ (A∼ ; α) = I, I∈ (A∼ ; β) = I and F∈ (A∼ ; γ) = I. Theorem 3.6. In a BCK-algebra, every (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic

Obviously, AT (0) ≥ AT (x), AI (0) ≥ AI (x) and AF (0) ≤ ideal is an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic subalgebra.

AF (x) for all x ∈ X. Let x, y ∈ X. If x ∗ y ∈ I and y ∈ I, then

x ∈ I. Hence Proof. Let A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) be an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal

of a BCK-algebra X. Since x∗y ≤ x for all x, y ∈ X, it follows

AT (x ∗ y) = AT (y) = AT (x) = α, from Proposition 3.3 and (3.2) that

AI (x ∗ y) = AI (y) = AI (x) = β,

AT (x ∗ y) ≥ AT (x) ≥ AT (x ∗ y) ∧ AT (y) ≥ AT (x) ∧ AT (y),

AF (x ∗ y) = AF (y) = AF (x) = γ,

AI (x ∗ y) ≥ AI (x) ≥ AI (x ∗ y) ∧ AI (y) ≥ AI (x) ∧ AI (y),

and so AF (x ∗ y) ≤ AF (x) ≤ AF (x ∗ y) ∨ AF (y) ≤ AF (x) ∨ AF (y).

gebra of X by Lemma 3.5.

AI (x) ≥ AI (x ∗ y) ∧ AI (y),

AF (x) ≤ AF (x ∗ y) ∨ AF (y). The following example shows that the converse of Theorem

3.6 is not true in general.

If x ∗ y ∈

/ I and y ∈

/ I, then

Example 3.7. Consider a set X = {0, 1, 2, 3} with the binary

AT (x ∗ y) = AT (y) = 0, operation ∗ which is given in Table 1.

AI (x ∗ y) = AI (y) = 0, Then (X; ∗, 0) is a BCK-algebra (see [6]). Let A∼ = (AT , AI ,

AF ) be a neutrosophic set in X defined by Table 2

AF (x ∗ y) = AF (y) = 1.

It is routine to verify that A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (∈, ∈)-

Thus neutrosophic subalgebra of X. We know that I∈ (A∼ ; β) is an

ideal of X for all β ∈ (0, 1]. If α ∈ (0.3, 0.7], then T∈ (A∼ ; α) =

AT (x) ≥ AT (x ∗ y) ∧ AT (y), {0, 1, 3} is not an ideal of X. Also, if γ ∈ [0.2, 0.8), then

F∈ (A∼ ; γ) = {0, 1, 3} is not an ideal of X. Therefore A∼ =

AI (x) ≥ AI (x ∗ y) ∧ AI (y),

(AT , AI , AF ) is not an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal of X by The-

AF (x) ≤ AF (x ∗ y) ∨ AF (y). orem 3.2.

G. Muhiuddin, H. Bordbar, F. Smarandache, Y.B. Jun, Further results on (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic subalgebras and ideals in

BCK/BCI-algebras

40 Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 20, 2018

Table 1: Cayley table for the binary operation “∗”

_ _

∗ 0 1 2 3 α = {i ∈ ΛT | i < α} and α 6= {i ∈ ΛT | i < α}.

0 0 0 0 0

1 1 0 0 1 First case implies that

2 2 1 0 2

x ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; α) ⇔ x ∈ Di for all i < α

3 3 3 3 0 (3.9)

⇔ x ∈ ∩{Di | i < α}.

Table 2: Tabular representation of A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) the second case, we claim that T∈ (A∼ ; α) = ∪{Di | i ≥ α}.

If x ∈ ∪{Di | i ≥ α}, then x ∈ Di for some i ≥ α. Thus

X AT (x) AI (x) AF (x) AT (x) ≥ i ≥ α, and so x ∈ T∈ (A∼ ; α). If Wx ∈ / ∪{Di | i ≥ α},

0 0.7 0.9 0.2 then x ∈ / Di for all i ≥ α. Since α 6= {i ∈ ΛT | i < α},

1 0.7 0.6 0.2 there exists ε > 0 such that (α − ε, α) ∩ ΛT = ∅. Hence x ∈ / Di

2 0.3 0.6 0.8 for all i > α − ε, which means that if x ∈ Di then i ≤ α − ε.

3 0.7 0.4 0.2 Thus AT (x) ≤ α − ε < α, and so x ∈ / T∈ (A∼ ; α). Therefore

T∈ (A∼ ; α) = ∪{Di | i ≥ α} which is an ideal of X since {Dk }

forms a chain. Similarly, we can verify that I∈ (A∼ ; β) is an ideal

of X. Finally, we consider the following two cases:

We give a condition for an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic subalgebra to ^ ^

be an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal. γ = {j ∈ ΛF | γ < j} and γ 6= {j ∈ ΛF | γ < j}.

Theorem 3.8. Let A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) be a neutrosophic set

For the first case, we have

in a BCK-algebra X. If A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (∈, ∈)-

neutrosophic subalgebra of X that satisfies the condition (3.4), x ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γ) ⇔ x ∈ Dj for all j > γ

then it is an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal of X. (3.10)

⇔ x ∈ ∩{Dj | j > γ},

Proof. Taking x = y in (3.5) and using (III) induce the condition

and thus F∈ (A∼ ; γ) = ∩{Dj | j > γ} which is an ideal of X.

(3.1). Since x ∗ (x ∗ y) ≤ y for all x, y ∈ X, it follows from (3.4)

The second case implies that F∈ (A∼ ; γ) = ∪{Dj | j ≤ γ}. In

that

fact, if x ∈ ∪{Dj | j ≤ γ}, then x ∈ Dj for some j ≤ γ. Thus

AT (x) ≥ AT (x ∗ y) ∧ AT (y), AF (x) ≤ j ≤ γ, that is, x ∈ F∈ (A∼ ; γ). Hence ∪{Dj | j ≤

AI (x) ≥ AI (x ∗ y) ∧ AI (y), γ} ⊆ F∈ (A∼ ; γ). NowVif x ∈ / ∪{Dj | j ≤ γ}, then x ∈ / Dj for

AF (x) ≤ AF (x ∗ y) ∨ AF (y) all j ≤ γ. Since γ 6= {j ∈ ΛF | γ < j}, there exists ε > 0

such that (γ, γ+ε)∩ΛF is empty. Hence x ∈ / Dj for all j < γ+ε,

for all x, y ∈ X. Therefore A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (∈, and so if x ∈ Dj , then j ≥ γ + ε. Thus AF (x) ≥ γ + ε > γ, and

∈)-neutrosophic ideal of X by Theorem 3.1. hence x ∈ / F∈ (A∼ ; γ). Thus F∈ (A∼ ; γ) ⊆ ∪{Dj | j ≤ γ}, and

therefore F∈ (A∼ ; γ) = ∪{Dj | j ≤ γ} which is an ideal of X.

Theorem 3.9. Let {Dk | k ∈ ΛT ∪ ΛI ∪ ΛF } be a collection of Consequently, A = (A , A , A ) is an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic

∼ T I F

ideals of a BCK/BCI-algebra X, where ΛT , ΛI and ΛF are ideal of X by Theorem 3.2.

nonempty subsets of [0, 1], such that

A mapping f : X → Y of BCK/BCI-algebras is called

X = {Dα | α ∈ ΛT } ∪ {Dβ | β ∈ ΛI } ∪ {Dγ | γ ∈ ΛF },

a homomorphism if f (x ∗ y) = f (x) ∗ f (y) for all x, y ∈ X.

(3.6)

Note that if f : X → Y is a homomorphism of BCK/BCI-

T I F

(∀i, j ∈ Λ ∪ Λ ∪ Λ ) (i > j ⇔ Di ⊂ Dj ) . (3.7) algebras, then f (0) = 0. Given a homomorphism f : X → Y

of BCK/BCI-algebras and a neutrosophic set A∼ = (AT , AI ,

Let A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) be a neutrosophic set in X defined as A ) in Y , we define a neutrosophic set Af = (Af , Af , Af ) in

F ∼ T I F

follows: X, which is called the induced neutrosophic set, as follows:

AT : X → [0, 1], x 7→ W {α ∈ ΛT | x ∈ Dα },

W

AfT : X → [0, 1], x 7→ AT (f (x)),

AI : X → [0, 1], x 7→ V{β ∈ ΛI | x ∈ Dβ }, (3.8)

AfI : X → [0, 1], x 7→ AI (f (x)),

AF : X → [0, 1], x 7→ {γ ∈ ΛF | x ∈ Dγ }.

AfF : X → [0, 1], x 7→ AF (f (x)).

Then A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal of X.

Theorem 3.10. Let f : X → Y be a homomorphism of

Proof. Let α, β ∈ (0, 1] and γ ∈ [0, 1) be such that T∈ (A∼ ; α) 6= BCK/BCI-algebras. If A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (∈,

∅, I∈ (A∼ ; β) 6= ∅ and F∈ (A∼ ; γ) 6= ∅. We consider the follow- ∈)-neutrosophic ideal of Y , then the induced neutrosophic set

G. Muhiuddin, H. Bordbar, F. Smarandache, Y.B. Jun, Further results on (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic subalgebras and ideals

in BCK/BCI-algebras

Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 20, 2018 41

Af∼ = (AfT , AfI , AfF ) in X is an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal of X. AI (x) = AI (f (a)) = AfI (a)

≥ AfI (a ∗ b) ∧ AfI (b)

Proof. For any x ∈ X, we have

= AI (f (a ∗ b)) ∧ AI (f (b))

AfT (x) = AT (f (x)) ≤ AT (0) = AT (f (0)) = AfT (0), = AI (f (a) ∗ f (b)) ∧ AI (f (b))

AfI (x) = AI (f (x)) ≤ AI (0) = AI (f (0)) = AfI (0), = AI (x ∗ y) ∧ AI (y),

AfF (x) = AF (f (x)) ≥ AF (0) = AF (f (0)) = AfF (0).

and

Let x, y ∈ X. Then

AF (x) = AF (f (a)) = AfF (a)

AfT (x

∗ y) ∧ AfT (y)= AT (f (x ∗ y)) ∧ AT (f (y))

≤ AfF (a ∗ b) ∨ AfF (b)

= AT (f (x) ∗ f (y)) ∧ AT (f (y))

= AF (f (a ∗ b)) ∨ AF (f (b))

≤ AT (f (x)) = AfT (x), = AF (f (a) ∗ f (b)) ∨ AF (f (b))

= AF (x ∗ y) ∨ AF (y).

AfI (x ∗ y) ∧ AfI (y) = AI (f (x ∗ y)) ∧ AI (f (y))

Therefore A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal

= AI (f (x) ∗ f (y)) ∧ AI (f (y)) of Y by Theorem 3.1.

≤ AI (f (x)) = AfI (x),

Let N(∈,∈) (X) be the collection of all (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic

and ideals of X and let α, β ∈ (0, 1] and γ ∈ [0, 1). Define binary

β γ

relations Rα

T , RI and RF on N(∈,∈) (X) as follows:

AfF (x ∗ y) ∨ AfF (y) = AF (f (x ∗ y)) ∨ AF (f (y))

AT Rα

T BT ⇔ T∈ (A∼ ; α) = T∈ (B∼ ; α)

= AF (f (x) ∗ f (y)) ∨ AF (f (y)) β

AI RI BI ⇔ I∈ (A∼ ; β) = I∈ (B∼ ; β) (3.11)

≥ AF (f (x)) = AfF (x). AF RγF BF ⇔ F∈ (A∼ ; γ) = F∈ (B∼ ; γ)

Therefore Af∼ = (AfT , AfI , AfF ) is an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal for all A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) and B∼ = (BT , BI , BF ) in

of X by Theorem 3.1. N(∈,∈) (X).

β γ

Clearly Rα T , RI and RF are equivalence relations on

N(∈,∈) (X). For any A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) ∈ N(∈,∈) (X),

Theorem 3.11. Let f : X → Y be an onto homomorphism of

let [A∼ ]T (resp., [A∼ ]I and [A∼ ]F ) denote the equivalence

BCK/BCI-algebras and let A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) be a neutro-

class of A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) in N(∈,∈) (X) under Rα T (resp.,

sophic set in Y . If the induced neutrosophic set Af∼ = (AfT , AfI , β γ α β

R and R ). Denote by N (X)/R , N (X)/R I and

AfF ) in X is an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal of X, then A∼ = (AT , I F

γ

(∈,∈) T (∈,∈)

N(∈,∈) (X)/RF the collection of all equivalence classes under

AI , AF ) is an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal of Y . β γ

RαT , RI and RF , respectively, that is,

Proof. Assume that the induced neutrosophic set Af∼ = (AfT , N(∈,∈) (X)/RαT = {[A∼ ]T | A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) ∈ N(∈,∈) (X),

AfI , AfF ) in X is an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal of X. For any β

N(∈,∈) (X)/RI = {[A∼ ]I | A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) ∈ N(∈,∈) (X),

x ∈ Y , there exists a ∈ X such that f (a) = x since f is onto. N(∈,∈) (X)/RγF = {[A∼ ]F | A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) ∈ N(∈,∈) (X).

Using (3.1), we have

Now let I(X) denote the family of all ideals of X. Define

AT (x) = AT (f (a)) = AfT (a) ≤ AfT (0) = AT (f (0)) = AT (0), maps fα , gβ and hγ from N(∈,∈) (X) to I(X) ∪ {∅} by

AI (x) = AI (f (a)) = AfI (a) ≤ AfI (0) = AI (f (0)) = AI (0), fα (A∼ ) = T∈ (A∼ ; α), gβ (A∼ ) = I∈ (A∼ ; β) and

AF (x) = AF (f (a)) = AfF (a) ≥ AfF (0) = AF (f (0)) = AF (0). hγ (A∼ ) = F∈ (A∼ ; γ),

respectively, for all A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) in N(∈,∈) (X). Then

Let x, y ∈ Y . Then f (a) = x and f (b) = y for some a, b ∈ X. fα , gβ and hγ are clearly well-defined.

It follows from (3.2) that

Theorem 3.12. For any α, β ∈ (0, 1] and γ ∈ [0, 1), the maps

AT (x) = AT (f (a)) = AfT (a) fα , gβ and hγ are surjective from N(∈,∈) (X) to I(X) ∪ {∅}.

≥ AfT (a ∗ b) ∧ AfT (b) Proof. Let 0∼ := (0T , 0I , 1F ) be a neutrosophic set in X where

= AT (f (a ∗ b)) ∧ AT (f (b)) 0T , 0I and 1F are fuzzy sets in X defined by 0T (x) = 0,

0I (x) = 0 and 1F (x) = 1 for all x ∈ X. Obviously,

= AT (f (a) ∗ f (b)) ∧ AT (f (b))

0∼ := (0T , 0I , 1F ) is an (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal of X.

= AT (x ∗ y) ∧ AT (y), Also, fα (0∼ ) = T∈ (0∼ ; α) = ∅, gβ (0∼ ) = I∈ (0∼ ; β) = ∅

G. Muhiuddin, H. Bordbar, F. Smarandache, Y.B. Jun, Further results on (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic subalgebras and ideals in

BCK/BCI-algebras

42 Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 20, 2018

and hγ (0∼ ) = F∈ (0∼ ; γ) = ∅. For any ideal I of X, let Proof. Consider the (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal 0∼ := (0T , 0I ,

A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) be the (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal of X 1F ) of X which is given in the proof of Theorem 3.12. Then

in the proof of Theorem 3.4. Then fα (A∼ ) = T∈ (A∼ ; α) = I,

gβ (A∼ ) = I∈ (A∼ ; β) = I and hγ (A∼ ) = F∈ (A∼ ; γ) = I. ϕα (0∼ ) = fα (0∼ ) ∩ hα (0∼ ) = T∈ (0∼ ; α) ∩ F∈ (0∼ ; α) = ∅,

Therefore fα , gβ and hγ are surjective. ϕβ (0∼ ) = gβ (0∼ ) ∩ hβ (0∼ ) = I∈ (0∼ ; β) ∩ F∈ (0∼ ; β) = ∅.

Theorem 3.13. The quotient sets N(∈,∈) (X)/Rα T , A = (A , A , A ) of X in the proof of Theorem 3.4. Then

∼ T I F

N(∈,∈) (X)/RβI and N(∈,∈) (X)/RγF are equivalent to

I(X) ∪ {∅} for any α, β ∈ (0, 1] and γ ∈ [0, 1). ϕα (A∼ ) = fα (A∼ ) ∩ hα (A∼ )

= T∈ (A∼ ; α) ∩ F∈ (A∼ ; α) = I

Proof. Let A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) ∈ N(∈,∈) (X). For any α, β ∈

(0, 1] and γ ∈ [0, 1), define and

fα∗ : N(∈,∈) (X)/Rα

T → I(X) ∪ {∅}, [A∼ ]T 7→ fα (A∼ ), ϕβ (A∼ ) = gβ (A∼ ) ∩ hβ (A∼ )

∗ β

gβ : N(∈,∈) (X)/RI → I(X) ∪ {∅}, [A∼ ]I 7→ gβ (A∼ ),

= I∈ (A∼ ; β) ∩ F∈ (A∼ ; β) = I.

h∗γ : N(∈,∈) (X)/RγF → I(X) ∪ {∅}, [A∼ ]F 7→ hγ (A∼ ).

Therefore ϕα and ϕβ are surjective.

Assume that fα (A∼ ) = fα (B∼ ), gβ (A∼ ) = gβ (B∼ ) and

hγ (A∼ ) = hγ (B∼ ) for B∼ = (BT , BI , BF ) ∈ N(∈,∈) (X).

Then T∈ (A∼ ; α) = T∈ (B∼ ; α), I∈ (A∼ ; β) = I∈ (B∼ ; β) and

β

F∈ (A∼ ; γ) = F∈ (B∼ ; γ) which imply that AT Rα T BT , AI RI BI Theorem 3.15. For any α, β ∈ (0, 1), the quotient sets

γ

and AF RF BF . Hence [A∼ ]T = [B∼ ]T , [A∼ ]I = [B∼ ]I N(∈,∈) (X)/ϕα and N(∈,∈) (X)/ϕβ are equivalent to I(X) ∪

and [A∼ ]F = [B∼ ]F . Therefore fα∗ , gβ∗ and h∗γ are injec- {∅}.

tive. Consider the (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal 0∼ := (0T , 0I ,

1F ) of X which is given in the proof of Theorem 3.12. Then

fα∗ ([0∼ ]T ) = fα (0∼ ) = T∈ (0∼ ; α) = ∅, gβ∗ ([0∼ ]I ) = gβ (0∼ ) = Proof. Given α, β ∈ (0, 1), define two maps ϕ∗α and ϕ∗β as fol-

I∈ (0∼ ; β) = ∅, and h∗γ ([0∼ ]F ) = hγ (0∼ ) = F∈ (0∼ ; γ) = ∅. lows:

For any ideal I of X, consider the (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal

ϕ∗α : N(∈,∈) (X)/ϕα → I(X) ∪ {∅}, [A∼ ]Rα 7→ ϕα (A∼ ),

A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) of X in the proof of Theorem 3.4. Then

ϕ∗β : N(∈,∈) (X)/ϕβ → I(X) ∪ {∅}, [A∼ ]Rβ 7→ ϕβ (A∼ ).

fα∗ ([A∼ ]T ) = fα (A∼ ) = T∈ (A∼ ; α) = I, gβ∗ ([A∼ ]I ) =

gβ (A∼ ) = I∈ (A∼ ; β) = I, and h∗γ ([A∼ ]F ) = hγ (A∼ ) =

If ϕ∗α ([A∼ ]Rα ) = ϕ∗α ([B∼ ]Rα ) and ϕ∗β [A∼ ]Rβ

=

F∈ (A∼ ; γ) = I. Hence fα∗ , gβ∗ and h∗γ are surjective, and the

ϕ∗β [B∼ ]Rβ for all [A∼ ]Rα , [B∼ ]Rα ∈ N(∈,∈) (X)/ϕα and

proof is over.

[A∼ ]Rβ , [B∼ ]Rβ ∈ N(∈,∈) (X)/ϕβ , then

For any α, β ∈ [0, 1], we define another relations Rα and Rβ fα (A∼ ) ∩ hα (A∼ ) = fα (B∼ ) ∩ hα (B∼ )

on N(∈,∈) (X) as follows:

and

(A∼ , B∼ ) ∈ Rα ⇔ T∈ (A∼ ; α) ∩ F∈ (A∼ ; α)

= T∈ (B∼ ; α) ∩ F∈ (B∼ ; α), gβ (A∼ ) ∩ hβ (A∼ ) = gβ (B∼ ) ∩ hβ (B∼ ),

(3.12)

(A∼ , B∼ ) ∈ Rβ ⇔ I∈ (A∼ ; β) ∩ F∈ (A∼ ; β)

= I∈ (B∼ ; β) ∩ F∈ (B∼ ; β) that is,

N(∈,∈) (X). Then the relations Rα and Rβ are also equivalence

relations on N(∈,∈) (X). and

Theorem 3.14. Given α, β ∈ (0, 1), we define two maps I∈ (A∼ ; β) ∩ F∈ (A∼ ; β) = I∈ (B∼ ; β) ∩ F∈ (B∼ ; β).

ϕα : N(∈,∈) (X) → I(X) ∪ {∅}, Hence (A∼ , B∼ ) ∈ Rα and (A∼ , B∼ ) ∈ Rβ . It follows that

A∼ 7→ fα (A∼ ) ∩ hα (A∼ ), [A∼ ]Rα = [B∼ ]Rα and [A∼ ]Rβ = [B∼ ]Rβ . Thus ϕ∗α and ϕ∗β

(3.13) are injective. Consider the (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal 0∼ := (0T ,

ϕβ : N(∈,∈) (X) → I(X) ∪ {∅},

A∼ 7→ gβ (A∼ ) ∩ hβ (A∼ ) 0I , 1F ) of X which is given in the proof of Theorem 3.12. Then

for each A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) ∈ N(∈,∈) (X). Then ϕα and ϕβ ϕ∗α ([0∼ ]Rα ) = ϕα (0∼ ) = fα (0∼ ) ∩ hα (0∼ )

are surjective. = T∈ (0∼ ; α) ∩ F∈ (0∼ ; α) = ∅

G. Muhiuddin, H. Bordbar, F. Smarandache, Y.B. Jun, Further results on (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic subalgebras and ideals

in BCK/BCI-algebras

Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 20, 2018 43

Chang, V. (2018). Neutrosophic Association Rule Mining

ϕ∗β [0∼ ]Rβ = ϕβ (0∼ ) = gβ (0∼ ) ∩ hβ (0∼ ) Algorithm for Big Data Analysis. Symmetry, 10(4), 106.

= I∈ (0∼ ; β) ∩ F∈ (0∼ ; β) = ∅. [12] Abdel-Basset, M., & Mohamed, M. (2018). The Role of

Single Valued Neutrosophic Sets and Rough Sets in Smart

For any ideal I of X, consider the (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic ideal City: Imperfect and Incomplete Information Systems.

A∼ = (AT , AI , AF ) of X in the proof of Theorem 3.4. Then Measurement. Volume 124, August 2018, Pages 47-55

[13] Abdel-Basset, M., Gunasekaran, M., Mohamed, M., &

ϕ∗α ([A∼ ]Rα ) = ϕα (A∼ ) = fα (A∼ ) ∩ hα (A∼ ) Smarandache, F. A novel method for solving the fully

= T∈ (A∼ ; α) ∩ F∈ (A∼ ; α) = I neutrosophic linear programming problems. Neural

Computing and Applications, 1-11.

and [14] Abdel-Basset, M., Manogaran, G., Gamal, A., &

Smarandache, F. (2018). A hybrid approach of neutrosophic

ϕ∗β [A∼ ]Rβ = ϕβ (A∼ ) = gβ (A∼ ) ∩ hβ (A∼ ) sets and DEMATEL method for developing supplier selection

criteria. Design Automation for Embedded Systems, 1-22.

= I∈ (A∼ ; β) ∩ F∈ (A∼ ; β) = I.

[15] Abdel-Basset, M., Mohamed, M., & Chang, V. (2018).

Therefore ϕ∗α and ϕ∗β are surjective. This completes the proof. NMCDA: A framework for evaluating cloud computing

services. Future Generation Computer Systems, 86, 12-29.

[16] Abdel-Basset, M., Mohamed, M., Zhou, Y., & Hezam, I.

(2017). Multi-criteria group decision making based on

neutrosophic analytic hierarchy process. Journal of Intelligent

References & Fuzzy Systems, 33(6), 4055-4066.

[1] A. Borumand Saeid and Y.B. Jun, Neutrosophic subalge- [17] Abdel-Basset, M.; Mohamed, M.; Smarandache, F. An

bras of BCK/BCI-algebras based on neutrosophic points, Extension of Neutrosophic AHP–SWOT Analysis for

Strategic Planning and Decision-Making. Symmetry 2018, 10,

Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 14 (2017), no. 1, 87–97.

116.

[2] K. Iséki, On BCI-algebras, Math. Seminar Notes 8 (1980),

125–130.

[3] K. Iséki and S. Tanaka, An introduction to the theory of Received : March 26, 2018. Accepted : April 16, 2018.

BCK-algebras, Math. Japon. 23 (1978), 1–26.

[4] Y. Huang, BCI-algebra, Science Press, Beijing, 2006.

[5] Y.B. Jun, Neutrosophic subalgebras of several types

in BCK/BCI-algebras, Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 14

(2017), no. 1, 75–86.

[6] J. Meng and Y. B. Jun, BCK-algebras, Kyungmoonsa Co.

Seoul, Korea 1994.

[7] M.A. Öztürk and Y.B. Jun, Neutrosophic ideals in

BCK/BCI-algebras based on neutrosophic points, J. In-

ter. Math. Virtual Inst. 8 (2018), 1–17.

[8] F. Smarandache, Neutrosophy, Neutrosophic Prob-

ability, Set, and Logic, ProQuest Information &

Learning, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA, 105 p., 1998.

http://fs.gallup.unm.edu/eBook-neutrosophics6.pdf (last

edition online).

[9] F. Smarandache, A Unifying Field in Logics: Neutrosophic

Logic. Neutrosophy, Neutrosophic Set, Neutrosophic Prob-

ability, American Reserch Press, Rehoboth, NM, 1999.

[10] F. Smarandache, Neutrosophic set-a generalization of the

intuitionistic fuzzy set, Int. J. Pure Appl. Math. 24 (2005),

no.3, 287–297.

G. Muhiuddin, H. Bordbar, F. Smarandache, Y.B. Jun, Further results on (∈, ∈)-neutrosophic subalgebras and ideals in

BCK/BCI-algebras

- Construcciones, pruebas y el significado de las constantes lógicasUploaded byelias
- Lesson Plan Math DiscreteUploaded byakula
- Neutrosophic Parametrized Soft Set Theory and Its Decision MakingUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Power Quality improvement of Unbalanced Distribution System Using Fuzzy based D-STATCOMUploaded byIOSRjournal
- geb_v3_7Uploaded bybanabjhf
- Math Induct 3Uploaded bythonhi
- Ds Mirrors Artificial IntelligenceUploaded byamitvohra
- posthuman mathematics.pdfUploaded byEmiliano Mora
- ClarkeUploaded byCésar Manuel Ramos Saldaña
- Towards a Formal Taxonomy of Hybrid Uncertainty RepresentationsUploaded bymanuaugustine
- 4. Maths - Ijamss - A New Ranking of - Sagaya RoselineUploaded byiaset123
- On Neutrosophic Submodules of a ModuleUploaded byMia Amalia
- robot vision fuzzyUploaded byMada Sanjaya Ws
- VIKOR based MAGDM Strategy with Trapezoidal Neutrosophic NumbersUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- MTH110 Suggested HomeworkUploaded byCarolyn Wang
- XI classUploaded bypremsempire
- 16personalities Log Inenglish 0Uploaded byRajkumar
- 35 Integration Full Part 1 of 5Uploaded bySubrahmanyam Sana
- Splitting NecklaceUploaded byazharh_36
- logic games notesUploaded byTimothy Roberts
- Essay on Mathematical Understanding (Otten)Uploaded byfelipe_cruz_6
- Tower-type bounds for unavoidable patterns in wordsUploaded byMaria Clara Mendes
- 5.Balls&BagsUploaded byAnu Amruth
- codigo PIC18F2550Uploaded byLizeth Carolina Peña Molina
- F4 Maths Annual Scheme of Work_2010Uploaded byFikrah Imayu
- 120 Problem Set 1 (1)Uploaded byAnonymous zmHGWsca
- Formal ProofsUploaded byStats Helper
- Single Variabiles CalculusUploaded byunuldinei
- Demonstration TeachingUploaded byDenelyn Prodigalidad
- josé gusmão rodrigues 2011_art is not a copy of the real worldUploaded byluiz carvalho

- A New Neutrosophic Cognitive Map with Neutrosophic Sets on ConnectionsUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Neutrosophic Sets and Systems. Book series, vol. 22 / 2018Uploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Neutrosophic Sets and Systems. Book series, vol. 22 / 2018Uploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- On Single Valued Neutrosophic Signed Digraph and its applicationsUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- TOPSIS Method for MADM based on Interval Trapezoidal Neutrosophic NumberUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Single Valued Neutrosophic Hesitant Fuzzy Computational Algorithm for Multiobjective Nonlinear Optimization ProblemUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Extensions to Linguistic Summaries Indicators based on Neutrosophic TheoryUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- The Basic Notions for (over, off, under) Neutrosophic Geometric Programming ProblemsUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- A framework for selecting cloud computing services based on consensus under single valued neutrosophic numbersUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Some Neutrosophic Probability DistributionsUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- VIKOR based MAGDM Strategy with Trapezoidal Neutrosophic NumbersUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Operators on Single Valued Trapezoidal Neutrosophic Numbers and SVTN-Group Decision MakingUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Neutrosophic Sets and Systems. Book series, vol. 23 / 2018Uploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Neutrosophic Sets and Systems. Book series, vol. 23 / 2018Uploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Optimization of EOQ Model with Limited Storage Capacity by Neutrosophic Geometric ProgrammingUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Extension of Soft Set to Hypersoft Set, and then to Plithogenic Hypersoft SetUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Validation of the pedagogical strategy for the formation of the competence entrepreneurshipin high education through the use of neutrosophic logic and Iadov techniqueUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- A new approach for multi-attribute decision-making problems in bipolar neutrosophic setsUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Gaussian single-valued neutrosophic numbers and its application in multi-attribute decision makingUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Neutrosophic Soft Cubic Set in Topological SpacesUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- On Neutrosophic Crisp Topology via N-TopologyUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Sinos River basin social-environmental prospective assessment of water quality management using fuzzy cogmitive maps and neutrosophic AHP-TOPSISUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Neutrosophic Soft Normed Linear SpacesUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Positive implicative BMBJ-neutrosophic ideals in BCK-algebrasUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Algebraic Structure of Neutrosophic Duplets in Neutrosophic RingsUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- MBJ-neutrosophic structures and its applications in BCK/BCI-algebrasUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Intrusion Detection System and Neutrosophic Theory for MANETs: A Comparative StudyUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- On single-valued co-neutrosophic graphsUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Performance Evaluation of Mutual Funds Via Single Valued Neutrosophic Set (SVNS) Perspective: A Case Study in TurkeyUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Neutrosophic Shortest Path ProblemUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB

- Airline Business Februarie 2013Uploaded bySchutzstaffelDH
- stevestrongUploaded byapi-245089800
- POL 1101 Personal PaperUploaded byOsama Ghani
- NdtUploaded byarcelitas
- Non-Programmer's Tutorial for Python 2.0Uploaded bygraeme.whelan5212
- Example Sparkta_NFPA 780 SimplifiedUploaded bysales5655
- P660HW-B1A_Telefonica_User_Manual_V1.00.pdfUploaded byNostromo2015
- Tamil Nadu Survey and Boundaries Act, 1923 (Validation) Act, 1924Uploaded byLatest Laws Team
- Admin GuideUploaded byTony Visuite Thavornratana
- CTA_EB_CV_01454_D_2017SEP18_ASSUploaded byPhillipCachapero
- Patel v. Chan, Defendant Response to Motion to Intervene & Strike JudgmentUploaded byDefiantly.net
- Case 17Uploaded bymehak02
- State of Black AmericaUploaded bygleebritt21
- What Does Joint Management Body (JMB)Uploaded byRajentran A. Narayanasamy
- Pagani.docxUploaded byAzizul Anwar
- Alcatel_SD_C1_C2_UsersManual_1.pdfUploaded byPavel Vancu
- Ferryways NV v Associated British PortsUploaded bylicopodicum7670
- Resistance Welding FundamentalsUploaded byAek Jay
- Kidnapping and Abduction Are DistinctUploaded bySanjay Malhotra
- Specifications for Excavation and EarthworkUploaded byAjay Singh
- SAME: Aug 2010Uploaded bypromechmags
- WWR_500-R-16_FinalUploaded byserialamine
- StudyInAustriaUploaded byZulqarnain Butt
- Grand Boulevard Hotel v. Genuine Labor Organization.docxUploaded byAnonymous 5MiN6I78I0
- PV Electricity Cost Maps 2013.pdfUploaded bybdsrl
- Stress Management for TeachersUploaded bycikgulazim
- report on super passage .docxUploaded byLohithReddy
- Sales and Distribution Management of AmulUploaded byPravesh Dhavale
- AMS Template 2012 (2)Uploaded bySoufianeBenhamida
- Encyclopedia of Crash Dump Analysis Patterns.pdfUploaded byAnonymous rsGzBBiqk