In this paper, we apply the concept of double-framed soft set (briefly DFS-set) to non-associative and non-commutative structure called Abel Grassmann’s groupoid (briefly AG-groupoid). We define double-framed soft quasi-ideals (briefly DFS quasi-ideal) of AG-groupoids and discuss their properties in left regular AG-groupoids. We also characterize left regular AG-groupoids in terms of DFS quasi-ideals. Application of DFS sets in decision making situation is provided.
In many real world problems, there frequently occur situations where uncertainty is involved. For example, if we consider the set of tall people of a particular area, then we are unable to clearly decide whether a particular person belongs to this set or not. To deal with such qualitative variables, Zadeh [45] introduced the concept of fuzzy set in 1965. Vagueness or the representation of imperfect knowledge had troubled the minds of many philosophers, logicians and mathematicians for a long time and recently it became a crucial issue for computer scientists, particularly in the area of artificial intelligence. To resolve this issue, Zadeh’s fuzzy set theory proved to be useful. To deal with uncertainities in different situations, several theories have been introduced from time to time (see for example [3, 40]). But there are inherent difficulties associated with each of the proposed theories. Molodtsov [29] pointed out that all these techniques lack in the parameterization tool and hence conceptualized a framework known as soft set in 1999 and showed that a fuzzy set can be regarded as a soft set. Since then, the theory of soft set attracted many researchers and a number of articles published in recent years by reputable publishing platforms stands as witness to the fact that the soft set theory has gained a niche for itself in dealing with complex topics. For example, the soft set theory is applied in the field of optimization by Kovkov in [27], to decision making problems [5], data analysis [46], forecasting [42] etc. Soft set theory has also been applied to different algebraic structures. We refer the reader to the papers [1, 28]. Some applications in decision making methods can be found in [33–37] and [47–59].
A left almost semigroup -semigroup) is a groupoid whose elements satisfy the following left invertive law (ab) c = (cb) a for all . This concept was first given by Kazim and Naseeruddin in 1972 [19]. Several others authors that have contributed on left almost semigroups, can be found in references (cf. [6, 13] etc.). Stevanovic and Protic [38] called this structure an Abel-Grassmann groupoid (or simply AG-groupoid), which is the primary name under which this structure in known nowadays. There are many important applications of AG-groupoids in the theory of flocks [32]. For more study of AG-groupoids, the reader is invited to read [8–10, 44].
Recently, Jun et al. extended the notions of intersectional and union soft sets into double-framed soft sets defining the double-framed soft subalgebra of a BCK/BCI-algebra and studied the related properties in [14]. Jun et al. also defined the concept of a double-framed soft ideal (briefly, DFS ideal) of a BCK/BCI-algebra and gave many valuable results. Khan et. al. [21] applied the idea of double framed soft sets to left almost semigroups.
The present paper is a continuation of the theory developed by Khan et al. in [18, 21]. The paper is divided into six sections. In Section 2, basic concepts in AG-groupoids are given. In Section 3, the concept of soft set and double-framed soft set and its operations are reviewed. In Section 4, we define double-framed soft quasi-ideals and discuss some properties of these ideals. In Section 5, we discuss properties of double-framed soft quasi-ideals in left regular AG-groupoids and characterize left regular AG-groupoids in terms of these ideals. Finally, in Section 6, we have presented an application of double-framed fuzzy soft expert-sets(briefly, DFFSE-sets) in a decision making problem by using the agree and disagree scores.
Preliminaries
A groupoid (S, ·) is called an AG-groupoid if it satisfies the left invertive law, that is, (ab) c = (cb) a for all a, b, c ∈ S
Every AG-groupoid S satisfies the medial law [19], that is, (ab) (cd) = (ac) (bd) for all a, b, c, d ∈ S .
It is a useful non-associative and non-commutative algebraic structure, midway between a groupoid and a commutative semigroup. It is important to mention here that if an AG-groupoid contains identity or even right identity, then it becomes a commutative monoid. An AG-groupoid may or may not contains left identity. If there exists left identity in an AG-groupoid, then it is unique [30]. Every AG-groupoid S with left identity satisfies the paramedial law [30], that is, (ab) (cd) = (db) (ca) for all a, b, c, d ∈ S .
In an AG-groupoid S with left identity, using the paramedial law, it is easy to prove that
Moreover, in an AG-groupoid S with left identity, we have
Throughout this paper, S will represent an AG-groupoid unless otherwise stated. For non-empty subsets A and B of S we denote by AB : = {ab|a ∈ A and b ∈ B} . If A = {a} then we write aB instead of {a} B .
A nonempty subset A of an AG-groupoid S is called sub AG-groupoid of S if A2 ⊆ A.
A nonempty subset A of an AG-groupoid S is called left (resp. right) ideal of S if SA ⊆ A (resp. AS ⊆ A). If A is both a left and a right ideal of S, then it is called a two-sided ideal or simply an ideal of S.
A non-empty subset A of an AG-groupoid S is called generalized bi-ideal of S if (AS) A ⊆ A .
A non-empty subset A of an AG-groupoid S is called a bi-ideal of S if:
(i) A is a sub AG-groupoid of S,
(ii) A is a generalized bi-ideal of S.
A non-empty subset A of an AG-groupoid S is called interior ideal of S if (SA) S ⊆ A .
A non-empty subset A of an AG-groupoid S is called quasi-ideal of S if QS ∩ SQ ⊆ Q .
In an AG-groupoid with left identity e, the left ideal, bi-ideal and quasi-ideal of S generated by a are given by L [a] = a ∪ Sa, B [a] = a ∪ a2 ∪ (aS) a and Q [a] = a ∪ (Sa ∩ aS) respectively. A subset A of an AG-groupoid S is called semiprime if for all a ∈ S, whenever a2 ∈ A, then a ∈ A.
Lemma 2.1.In an AG-groupoid S, every one-sided ideal is quasi-ideal.
Proof. Straightforward.□
Lemma 2.2. ([31]) Let (S, ·) be an AG-groupoid with left identity and a ∈ S. Then the followings hold:
(i) Sa is a left ideal of S .
(ii) aS is a left ideal of S.
(iv) a2S, Sa2 and (Sa2) S are ideals of S.
(v) Sa ∪ aS is an ideal of S.
(vi) a ∪ Sa ∪ aS is an ideal of S .
(vii) a2 ∪ Sa2 and a2 ∪ a2S are ideals of S .
Corollary 2.3.In an AG-groupoid S with left identity, for all a ∈ S, Sa, aS, a2S, Sa2, (Sa2) S are quasi-ideals of S.
Lemma 2.4. ([31]). If an AG-groupoid S contains left identity e, then S = S2 and S = eS = Se .
Lemma 2.5. ([31]) If S is an AG-groupoid with left identity e, then (xy) 2 = x2y2 = y2x2 for all x, y ∈ S.
Lemma 2.6. ([7]) If an AG-groupoid S contains left identity e, then Sa2 = a2S = (Sa2) S for all a ∈ S .
Soft set (basic operations)
In [2], Atagun and Sezgin introduced some new operations on soft set theory and defined soft sets in the following way:
Let U be an initial universe, E a set of parameters, P (U) the power set of U and A ⊆ E. Then soft set fA over U is a function defined by:
fA : E ⟶ P (U) such that fA (x) =∅ if x ∉ A.
Here fA is called an approximate function. A soft set over U can be represented by the set of ordered pairs
It is clear that a soft set is a parameterized family of subsets of U. The set of all soft sets over U is denoted by S (U) .
Definition 3.1. Let fA, fB ∈ S (U) . Then fA is a soft subset of fB, denoted by if fA (x) ⊆ fB (x) for all x ∈ E. Two soft sets fA, fB are said to be equal soft sets if and and is denoted by
Definition 3.2. Let fA, fB ∈ S (U). Then the union of fA and fB, denoted by , is defined by where fA∪B (x) = fA (x) ∪ fB (x) , for all x ∈ E.
Definition 3.3. Let fA, fB ∈ S (U). Then the intersection of fA and fB, denoted by , is defined by where fA∩B (x) = fA (x) ∩ fB (x) , for all x ∈ E.
Definition 3.4. Let fA, fB ∈ S (U) . Then the soft product of fA and fB, denoted by is defined by
Throughout this paper, let E = S, where S is an AG-groupoid and A, B, C, ⋯ are sub AG-groupoids, unless otherwise stated.
Definition 3.5. [14] A double-framed soft pair 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 is called a double-framed soft set of S over U (briefly, DFS-set of A), where α and β are mappings from A to P (U).
The set of all DFS-sets of S over U will be denoted by DFS (U) .
For a DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 of A and two subsets γ and δ of U, the γ-inclusive set and the δ-exclusive set of 〈 (α, β) ; A〉, denoted by iA (α ; γ) and eA (β ; δ), respectively, are defined as follows:
and
respectively. The set
is called a double framed soft including set [14] of 〈 (α, β) ; A 〉 . It is clear that DFA (α, β) (γ,δ) : = iA (α ; γ) ∩ eA (β ; δ) .
Let 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 and 〈 (f, g) ; B〉 be two double-framed soft sets of S over U. Then the int-uni soft product is denoted by 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 ◇ 〈 (f, g) ; B 〉 and is defined as a double framed soft set defined to be a double-framed soft set over U, in which and are soft mappings from S to P (U), given as follows:
One can easily see that the operation “◇”is well-defined.
Let 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 and 〈 (f, g) ; B〉 be two double-framed soft sets of S over a common universe U. Then 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 is called a double-framed soft subset (briefly, DFS subset) of 〈 (f, g) ; B〉, denoted by 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 ⊑ 〈 (f, g) ; B 〉, if
(i) A ⊆ B,
(ii) (∀ e ∈ A)
Two DFS-sets 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 and 〈 (f, g) ; B〉 are DFS equal if 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 ⊑ 〈 (f, g) ; B 〉 and 〈 (f, g) ; B〉 ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; A 〉 denoted by
For any two DFS sets 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 and 〈 (f, g) ; A〉 of S over U, the DFS int-uni set [14] of 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 and 〈 (f, g) ; A 〉 , is defined to be a DFS set where and are mappings given by and .
It is denoted by .
For a non-empty subset A of S, the DFS set is called the double framed characteristic soft set where
and
We have the following lemmas.
Lemma 3.6. (cf. [21]) If S is an AG-groupoid, then the set (DFS (U) , ◇) is an AG-groupoid.
Lemma 3.7. (cf. [21]) If S is an AG-Groupoid, then the medial law holds in DFS (U).
That is, for 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 , 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 , 〈 (h, k) ; S〉 and 〈 (p, q) ; S 〉 ∈ DFS (U), we have and
Lemma 3.8. (cf. [21]) If S is an AG-groupoid with left identity, then the paramedial law holds in DFS (U) .
That is, for all 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 , 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 , 〈 (h, k) ; S〉 and 〈 (p, q) ; S 〉 ∈ DFS (U) ,
and .
Lemma 3.9. (cf. [21]) IfS is an AG-groupoid with left identity then for all 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 , 〈 (h, k) ; S〉 and 〈 (p, q) ; S 〉 ∈ DFS (U) ,
and
Lemma 3.10.Let 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 , 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 , 〈 (h, k) ; S 〉 and 〈 (p, q) ; S 〉 ∈ DFS (U). Then,
i) 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ◇ (〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 ⊓ 〈 (h, k) ; S 〉) = (〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ◇ 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉) ⊓ (〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ◇ 〈 (h, k) ; S 〉) .
ii) If 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 ⊑ 〈 (h, k) ; S 〉, then 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ◇ 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ◇ 〈 (h, k) ; S 〉 .
iii) If 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 ⊑ 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 and 〈 (h, k) ; S〉 ⊑ 〈 (p, q) ; S 〉, then 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ◇ 〈 (h, k) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 ◇ 〈 (p, q) ; S 〉 .
Proof. Straightforward.□
Lemma 3.11.LetA and B be two non empty subsets of an AG-groupoid S. Then the following properties hold:
i) If A ⊆ B then XA ⊑ XB .
ii) XA ⊓ XB = XA∩B .
iii) XA ◇ XB = XAB .
Proof. Straightforward.□ The following definitions are available in [24].
Let S be an AG-groupoid and 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 be a DFS-set of S over U. Then:
(i) A DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 is called a double-framed soft AG-groupoid (briefly, DFS AG-groupoid) of S over U if α (xy) ⊇ α (x) ∩ α (y) and β (xy) ⊆ β (x) ∪ β (y) for all x, y ∈ A.
(ii) A DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 is called a double-framed soft left (resp. right) ideal (briefly, DFS left (resp. right)) ideal of S over U if α (ab) ⊇ α (b) (resp . α (ab) ⊇ α (a)) and β (ab) ⊆ β (b) (resp . β (ab) ⊆ β (a)) for all a, b ∈ A.
A DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 of A over U is called a double-framed soft two sided ideal (briefly, DFS two-sided ideal) of S over U if it is both a DFS left and a DFS right ideal of A over U.
(iii) A DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 is called a double-framed soft semiprime if α (a) ⊇ α (a2) and β (a) ⊆ β (a2) for all a ∈ A . (iv) A DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 of A over U is called a double-framed soft generalized bi-ideal (briefly, DFS generalized bi-ideal) of S over U if α ((xa) y) ⊇ α (x) ∩ α (y) and β ((xa) y) ⊆ β (x) ∪ β (y) for all a, x, y ∈ A. (v) A DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 is called a double-framed soft bi-ideal (briefly, DFS bi-ideal) of S over U if it satisfies:
(a) α (xy) ⊇ α (x) ∩ α (y) and β (xy) ⊆ β (x) ∪ β (y) for all x, y ∈ A.
(b) α ((xa) y) ⊇ α (x) ∩ α (y) and β ((xa) y) ⊆ β (x) ∪ β (y) for all a, x, y ∈ A.
(vi) 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 is called a double-framed soft interior ideal (briefly, DFS interior ideal) of S over U if α ((xa) y) ⊇ α (a) and β ((xa) y) ⊆ β (a) for all a, x, y ∈ A.
Proposition 3.12. (see [21]) A DFS set 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of an AG-groupoid S over U is DFS left (resp. right) ideal of S if and only if XS◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 (resp. 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 ◇ XS ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉).
Proposition 3.13. (see [21]) A DFS set 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of an AG-groupoid S over U is DFS bi-ideal if and only if 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 and (〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ◇ XS) ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉.
Proposition 3.14. (see [24]) A DFS set 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of an AG-groupoid S over U is DFS interior ideal if and only if (XS ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉) ◇ XS ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 .
Proposition 3.15. (see [24]) If an AG-groupoid S contains left identity, then XS ◇ XS = XS .
Proposition 3.16. (see [21]) IfS is an AG-groupoid and A is a non-empty subset of S, then
(i) A is a left (resp. right) ideal of S if and only if the DFS-set is a DFS left (resp. right) ideal of S over U.
(ii) A is an interior ideal of S if and only if the DFS-set is a DFS interior ideal of S over U.
(iii) A is a bi-ideal of S if and only if the DFS-set is a DFS bi-ideal ideal of S over U.
(iv) A is semiprime subset of S if and only if the DFS-set is a DFS semiprime subset of S over U.
(v) A is interior ideal of S if and only if the DFS-set is DFS interior ideal of S over U .
Double-framed soft quasi-ideals
In this section, we define double-framed soft quasi-ideals (briefly, DFS quasi-ideals) of AG-groupoids and discuss its properties in AG-groupoids and left regular AG-groupoids.
Definition 4.1. A DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 of A over U is called DFS quasi-ideal if
That is, and
Example 4.2. Consider the set S = {e, a, b, c} with the following multiplication table:
·
e
a
b
c
e
e
a
b
c
a
c
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
b
c
a
b
b
b
Define DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S over a universe U in which α : S → P (U) and β : S → P (U) are given as follows
and
where η1, η2, η3, η4 are subsets of U such that η1 ⊆ η2 ⊆ η4 ⊆ η3 and ρ1, ρ2, ρ3, ρ4 are subsets of U such that ρ1 ⊇ ρ2 ⊇ ρ4 ⊇ ρ3 .
Then calculations show that 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is DFS quasi-ideal of S over U .
Theorem 4.3.Let 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 and 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 be DFS right ideals and DFS left ideal of an AG-groupoid S respectively. Then 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 ⊓ 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 is a DFS quasi-ideal of S.
Proof. Since
and
hence 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 ⊓ 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 is DFS quasi-ideal of S.□
Theorem 4.4.Every DFS quasi-ideal 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of an AG-groupoid S is a DFS AG-groupoid of S.
Proof. Let 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 be a DFS quasi-ideal of AG-groupoid S. Now 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ◇ XS and 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ XS ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 which means that
and
Thus and and hence 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉. Thus 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is DFS AG-groupoid.□
Theorem 4.5.In an AG-groupoid S, every idempotent DFS quasi-ideal is DFS bi-ideal of S .
Proof. Let 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 be any idempotent DFS quasi-ideal of AG-groupoid S. This means that . That is, and Since 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is DFS quasi-ideal, then by Theorem 4.4, 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is DFS AG-groupoid. Now using left invertive law and medial law, we have
and
Now and
Hence and . Thus (〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ◇ XS) ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 and so 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is DFS bi-ideal of S.□
Theorem 4.6.Every DFS left (resp. right) ideal of an AG-groupoid is DFS quasi-ideal.
Proof. Straightforward.□ The converse of this theorem is not true in general.
Example 4.7. Consider the set S = {a, b, c, d, e} with the following multiplication table
·
a
b
c
d
f
a
d
a
a
b
d
b
a
a
a
a
a
c
a
a
a
a
a
d
a
a
a
b
a
f
d
a
a
a
d
Define DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S over a universe U in which α : S → P (U) and β : S → P (U) are given as follows
and
where η, η2, η3, η4 are subsets of U such that η4 ⊆ η3 ⊆ η and η3 ⊆ η and ρ1, ρ2, ρ3, ρ4 are subsets of U such that ρ4 ⊇ ρ2 ⊇ ρ and ρ ⊇ ρ3 . Then 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is DFS quasi-ideal of S over U .
Now α (b) = α (ad) nsupseteqα (a) and/or β (b) = β (ad) ⊈ β (a) which shows that 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is not DFS right ideal of S. Also α (d) = α (aa) ⊈ α (a) and/or β (d) = β (aa) nsupseteqβ (a) which shows that 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is not DFS left ideal of S .
Theorem 4.8.Intersection of two DFS quasi-ideals of an AG-groupoid is a DFS quasi-ideal.
Proof. It follows from Lemma 3.10 and Definition 4.1.□
Theorem 4.9.For a DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of an AG-groupoid S, the following statements are equivalent:
(i) 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is a DFS quasi-ideal of S .
(ii) The non-empty γ-inclusive set and δ-exclusive set of 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 are quasi-ideals of S for any subsets γ and δ of U.
Proof. (i)⇒(ii) Suppose that 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is DFS quasi-ideal of S. Let γ and δ be subsets of U such that iS (α ; γ) ¬ = ∅ ¬ = eS (β ; δ). Let a ∈ iS (α ; γ) S ∩ SiS (α ; γ). Then a ∈ iS (α ; γ) S and a ∈ SiS (α ; γ). Thus there exist p, q ∈ iS (α ; γ) and x, y ∈ S such that a = px ∈ iS (α ; γ) S and a = yq ∈ SiS (α ; γ) .
Now
and
Since 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is DFS quasi-ideal of S, then using its definition along with (4) and (5), we get Thus a ∈ iS (α ; γ) which shows that iS (α ; γ) is quasi-ideal of S . Now let b ∈ eS (β ; δ) S ∩ SeS (β ; δ), so there exist k, l ∈ eS (β ; δ) and c, d ∈ S such that b = kc ∈ eS (β ; δ) S and b = dl ∈ SeS (β ; δ) . Now
and
Since 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is DFS quasi-ideal of S, then using its definition along with (6) and (7), we get Thus b ∈ eS (β ; δ) which shows that eS (β ; δ) is quasi-ideal of S .
(ii)⇒(i) Suppose the non-empty γ-inclusive set and δ-exclusive set of 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 are quasi-ideals of S for any subsets γ and δ of U. Let x ∈ S . If x is not product of elements of S, then the result is proved. Suppose that there exist a, b ∈ S such that x = ab and let us consider a subset of U as γ = α (a) ∩ α (b), δ = β (a) ∪ β (b) . Since γ = α (a) ∩ α (b), then a, b ∈ iS (α ; γ) . Thus x = ab∈ SiS (α ; γ) ∩ iS (α ; γ) S ⊆ iS (α ; γ), since iS (α ; γ) is quasi-ideal of S. Hence α (a) ∩ α (b) = γ ⊆ α (x). Also, as δ = β (a) ∪ β (b), then a, b ∈ eS (β ; δ) and thus x = ab ∈ SeS (β ; δ) ∩ eS (β ; δ) S ⊆ eS (β ; δ), since eS (β ; δ) is quasi-ideal of S. Hence β (a) ∪ β (b) = δ ⊇ β (x) .
Now
and
Hence 〈 (α, β) ; A〉 ◇ XS ⊓ XS ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; A 〉 ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; A 〉 which implies 〈 (α, β ; S)〉 is DFS quasi-ideal of S.□
Theorem 4.10.LetA be a non-empty subset of an AG-groupoid S. Then A is an quasi-ideal of S if and only if the DFS-set is a DFS quasi-ideal of S over U.
Proof. Assume that A is quasi-ideal of S. We have is DFS characteristic function of A. Let x ∈ S.
If x ∉ A, then x ∉ SA ∩ AS. It means that x ∉ SA or x ∉ AS or x ∉ SA as well as AS. In this case, χA (x) =∅ and Now if x ∉ AS, then and Thus and
Similarly, if x ∉ SA or x ∉ AS as well as SA, then we have and
If x ∈ A, then x ∈ AS ∩ SA or x ∉ AS ∩ SA .
Case (i) If x ∈ SA ∩ AS, then x ∈ SA as well as x ∈ AS. Thus χA (x) = U, . Hence and , , Therefore
Case (ii) If x ∉ SA ∩ AS, then x ∉ SA or x ∉ AS.
If x ∉ SA, then and so Similarly, when x ∉ AS then Similarly, the other case also yields the same result. Hence is a DFS quasi-ideal of S over U.
Conversely, assume that is a DFS quasi-ideal of S over U. Let x ∈ AS ∩ SA. Then Hence χA (x) = U and so x ∈ A . Also , hence and thus x ∈ A. Therefore A is quasi-ideal of S.□
Left regular AG-groupoids
An element a of an AG-groupoid S is left regular if there exists x ∈ S such that a = xa2 . An AG-groupoid S is called left regular if every element of S is left regular.
Example 5.1. Let us consider the set S = {0, 1, 2, 3, 4} with the following multiplication table
·
0
1
2
3
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
0
1
1
1
1
2
0
1
3
4
2
3
0
1
2
3
4
4
0
1
4
2
3
Obviously S is an AG-groupoid and it is non-associative as well as non-commutative.
Note that 0 = 1 ·02, 1 = 2 ·12, 2 = 4 ·22, 3 = 3 ·32, 4 = 2 ·42, which shows that S is left regular.
Lemma 5.2.In a left regular AG-groupoidS with left identity, for every DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S over U, the followings hold:
(i) 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ◇ XS .
(ii) 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 ⊑ XS ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉.
Proof. (i) Let S be an AG-groupoid with left identity say e and 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 be a DFS-set of S over U and a ∈ S . Since S is left regular, then there exists x ∈ S such that a = xa2 = x (aa) = a (xa) .
We have ,
and .
Thus and . Hence 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ◇ XS .
(ii) Let S be an AG-groupoid with left identity say e and 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 be a DFS-set of S over U and a ∈ S . Since S is left regular, then there exists x ∈ S such that a = xa2 = x (aa) = (ex) (aa) = (ea) (xa) = a (xa) = (xa2) (xa) = (ax) (a2x) = (ax) ((aa) x)) = (ax) ((xa) a) = (xa) ((ax) a) = (a (ax)) (ax) = ((ax) (ax)) a = ((ax) 2) a = ta where t = (ax) 2.
We have ,
and
Thus and . Hence 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ XS ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 .□
Corollary 5.3.In a left regular AG-groupoid S with left identity, for every DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S over U, we have 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ◇ XS ⊓ XS ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉.
As a consequence of Lemma 4.3 and Definition 4.1, we have the following theorem.
Theorem 5.4.In a left regular AG-groupoidS with left identity, the following conditions are equivalent:
(i) 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is DFS quasi-ideal of S over U .
(ii)
Proof. (i)⇒(ii) It follows from Definition 4.1 and Corollary 4.3.
(ii)⇒(i) It is obvious.□
Theorem 5.5.In a left regular AG-groupoidS with left identity, the followings are equivalent:
(i) DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S over U is a DFS right ideal.
(ii) DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S over U is a DFS left ideal.
(iii) DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S over U is a DFS bi-ideal.
(iv) DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S over U is a DFS generalized bi-ideal.
(v) DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S over U is a DFS interior ideal.
(vi) DFS-set 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S over U is a DFS quasi-ideal.
(vii) and .
Proof. (i)⇒(vii) Let S be a left regular AG-groupoid with left identity say e and 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 be a DFS right ideal of S over U . Then by Proposition 3.11, 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 ◇ XS ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 and by Lemma 5.2 (i), 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ◇ XS .. Thus . Also by Lemma 5.2 (ii), 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ XS ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 .
Now and . Thus XS◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 and hence
(vii)⇒(vi) It is obvious.
(vi)⇒(v) Let S be a left regular AG-groupoid with left identity say e and 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 be a DFS quasi-ideal of S. Let a, x, y ∈ S. Since S is left regular, then for a ∈ S, there exists t ∈ S such that a = ta2. Now (xa) y = (xa) (ey) = (ye) (ax) = a ((ye) x) .
Also (xa) y = (x (ta2)) y = ((ex) (ta2)) y = ((a2t) (xe)) y = (x ((a2t) e)) y = (x ((et) a2)) y = (x (ta2)) y = (x (t (aa))) y = (x (a (ta))) y = (a (x (ta))) y = (y (x (ta))) a.
Now
and .
Since and , then α ((xa) y) ⊇ α (a) .
Also and . Since and , then β ((xa) y) ⊆ β (a) .
Hence 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is DFS interior ideal of S.
(v)⇒(iv) Let S be a left regular AG-groupoid with left identity say e and 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 be a DFS interior ideal of S. Let a, x, y ∈ S. Since S is left regular, then there exist u, v, w ∈ S such that a = ua2, x = vx2, y = wy2.
Now (xa) y = ((vx2) a) y = ((v (xx)) a) y = ((x (vx)) a) y = ((a (vx)) x) y = (tx) y where t = a (vx) and (xa) y = (xa) (wy2) = (xa) (w (yy)) = (xa) (y (wy)) = (xy) (a (wy)) = (xy) p where p = a (wy) .
(iv)⇒(iii) Let S be a left regular AG-groupoid with left identity say e and 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 be a DFS generalized bi-ideal of S. Let a, b ∈ S. Since S is left regular, then there exist u, m ∈ S such that a = ua2 and b = mb2 .
Now ab = (ua2) b = ((eu) (aa)) b = ((ea) (ua)) b = (b (ua)) a = (b (ua)) (ua2) = (b (ua)) (u (aa)) = (bu) ((ua) (aa)) = ((aa) u) ((ua) b) = ((ua) a) k where k = (ua) b, and ab = a (mb2) = a (m (bb)) = a (b (mb)) = b (a (mb)) = (mb2) (a (mb)) = (m (bb)) (m (ab)) = (b (mb)) (m (ab)) = ((ab) m) ((mb) b)) = (mb) (((ab) m) b) = (mb) p where p = (ab) m) b .
(iii)⇒(ii) Let S be a left regular AG-groupoid with left identity say e and 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 be a DFS bi-ideal of S and a, b ∈ S. Since S is left regular, then there exists y ∈ S such that b = yb2 .
Now ab = a (yb2) = a ((ey) (bb)) = a ((bb) (ye)) = a ((bb) t) = (bb) (at) = ((at) b) b = ((at) (yb2)) b = ((at) ((ey) (bb))) b = ((at) ((bb) (ye))) b = ((at) ((bb) t)) b = ((at) ((tb) b)) b = ((a (tb)) (tb)) b = ((bt) ((tb) a)) b = ((tb) ((bt) a)) b = ((a (bt)) (bt)) b = (b ((a (bt)) t)) b = (bp) b where p = (a (bt)) t) .
Thus α (ab) = α ((bp) b) ⊇ α (b) ∩ α (b) = α (b) and β (ab) = β ((bp) b) ⊆ β (b) ∪ β (b) = β (b) . Hence 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is DFS left ideal of S.
(ii)⇒(i) Let S be a left regular AG-groupoid with left identity say e and 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 be a DFS left ideal of S and a, b ∈ S. Since S is left regular, then there exists z ∈ S such that a = za2 .
Now ab = (xa2) b = (x (aa)) b = (a (xa)) b = (b (xa)) a .
Thus α (ab) = α ((b (xa)) a) ⊇ α (a) and β (ab) = β ((b (xa)) a) ⊆ β (a). Hence 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is DFS right ideal of S.□
Lemma 5.6. (cf. [8]) If S is an AG-groupoid with left identity, then Sa, Sa2, Sa ∩ aS are quasi-ideals of S for all a ∈ S .
Theorem 5.7.IfS is an AG-groupoid with left identity e, then the following statements are equivalent:
(i) S is left regular.
(ii) Every DFS quasi-ideal is idempotent.
Proof. (i)⇒(ii) Assume that S is left regular. Let 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 be a DFS quasi-ideal of S. By Theorem 5.5, 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 is a DFS ideal of S .
Now and , so Also and , so Thus 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 ◇ 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 .
Now let a ∈ S. Since S is left regular, then there exists x ∈ S such that a = xa2 .
We have a = x ((xa2) 2) = x ((xa2) (xa2)) = (xa2) (x (xa2)) = (x (aa)) (x (xa2)) = (a (xa)) (x (xa2)) = (ax) ((xa) (xa2)) = (xa) ((ax) (xa2)).
Now Thus
Also, Thus and so 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 ◇ 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 .
Hence which shows that 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 is idempotent.
(ii)⇒(i) Suppose every DFS quasi-ideal is idempotent. Let a ∈ S. Since Sa is a quasi-ideal, then XSa is DFS quasi-ideal and by hypothesis, X(Sa)(Sa) = XSa2 = XSa ◇ XSa = XSa . Hence XSa = XSa2 . Since a ∈ Sa = Sa2, then S is left regular.□
Theorem 5.8.In an AG-groupoidS with left identity, the following statements are equivalent:
(i) S is left regular.
(ii) Every DFS quasi-ideal of semiprime.
Proof. (i)⇒(ii) Assume that S is left regular. Let 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 be a DFS quasi-ideal of S. By Theorem 5.5, 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 is a DFS ideal of S . Now let a ∈ S. Since S is left regular, then there exists x ∈ S such that a = xa2 . We have a = x ((xa2) 2) = x ((xa2) (xa2)) = (xa2) (x (xa2)) .
Now f (a) = f ((xa2) (x (xa2))) ⊇ f (xa2) ⊇ f (a2) and g (a) = g ((xa2) (x (xa2))) ⊆ g (xa2) ⊆ g (a2). Hence 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 is DFS semiprime.
(ii)⇒(i) Assume every DFS quasi-ideal is DFS semiprime. Let a ∈ S . Since Sa2 is quasi-ideal, then XSa2 is DFS quasi-ideal and by hypothesis, it is DFS semiprime.
Now a2 ∈ Sa2, so U = χSa2 (a2) ⊆ χSa2 (a) . Hence a ∈ Sa2 showing that S is left regular. Similarly the χSa2 part of XSa2 gives S is left regular.□
Theorem 5.9.In an AG-groupoid with left identity, the following statements are equivalent:
(i) S is left regular.
(ii) L ∩ Q ⊆ LQ for any left ideal L and any quasi-ideal Q of S .
(iii) 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 ⊓ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 for any DFS left ideal 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 and DFS quasi-ideal 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S.
Proof. (i)⇒(iii) Assume S is left regular. Let 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 be a DFS left ideal and 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 be a DFS quasi-ideal of S. By Theorem 5.5, 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 becomes DFS ideal. Let a ∈ S. Since S is left regular, then there exists x ∈ S such that a = xa2 .
Then a = x ((xa2) 2) = x ((xa2) (xa2)) = (xa2) (x (xa2)) = (x (aa)) (x (xa2)) = (a (xa)) (x (xa2)) = (ax) ((xa) (xa2)) = (xa) ((ax) (xa2)) .
Now
Thus
Also,
Thus
Hence 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 ⊓ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 for any DFS left ideal 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 and DFS quasi-ideal 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S.
(iii)⇒(ii) Suppose 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 ⊓ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 for any DFS left ideal 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 and DFS quasi-ideal 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S. Let L is a left ideal of S and Q be a quasi-ideal of S. Then XL is DFS left ideal and XQ is DFS quasi-ideal of S. By hypothesis, XL ⊓ XQ = XL∩Q ⊑ XL ◇ XQ = XLQ . Hence L ∩ Q ⊆ LQ .
(ii)⇒(i) Assume L ∩ Q ⊆ LQ, for any left ideal L and quasi-ideal Q . Let a ∈ S . Since S has left identity, then Sa is left ideal as well as quasi-ideal. Hence a ∈ Sa ∩ Sa ⊆ (Sa) (Sa) = (SS) (aa) = Sa2 . Thus S is left regular.□ The following theorems can be proved easily and hence their proof is omitted.
Theorem 5.10.In a left regular AG-groupoid, the following statements are equivalent:
(i) S is left regular.
(ii) Q ∩ L ⊆ QL for any quasi-ideal Q and any left ideal L of S .
(iii) 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 ⊓ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 for any DFS quasi-ideal 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 and DFS left ideal 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S.
Theorem 5.11.In a left regular AG-groupoid, the following statements are equivalent:
(i) S is left regular.
(ii) Q ∩ B = QB for any quasi-ideal Q and bi-ideal B of S .
(iii) for any DFS quasi-ideals 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 and DFS bi-ideal 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S.
Proof. (i)⇒(iii) Assume S is left regular with left identity e. Let 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 is a DFS quasi-ideal and 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 is DFS bi-ideal of S. By Theorem 5.5, 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 and 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 becomes DFS ideals of S. Let a ∈ S. Since S is left regular, then there exists x ∈ S such that a = xa2 .
We have a = x ((xa2) 2) = x ((xa2) (xa2)) = (xa2) (x (xa2)) = (x (aa)) (x (xa2)) = (a (xa)) (x (xa2)) = (ax) ((xa) (xa2)) = (xa) ((ax) (xa2)) .
Now and
Hence 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 ⊓ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 .
Now and
Hence 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 ◇ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 ⊑ 〈 (f, g) ; S 〉 ⊓ 〈 (α, β) ; S 〉 and so for any DFS quasi-ideals 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 and DFS bi-ideal 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S.
(iii)⇒(ii) Assume for any DFS quasi-ideals 〈 (f, g) ; S〉 and DFS bi-ideal 〈 (α, β) ; S〉 of S. Let Q be a quasi-ideal and B a bi-ideal. Then XQ is DFS quasi-ideal and XB is a DFS bi-ideal of S and by hypothesis, Hence Q ∩ B = QB .
(ii)⇒(i) Assume Q ∩ B = QB for any quasi-ideal Q and bi-ideal B of S . Let a ∈ S. Then we have a ∈ Q [a] ∩ B [a] = Q [a] B [a] = (a ∪ (Sa ∩ aS)) (a ∪ a2 ∪ (aS) a)
⊆Sa (a ∪ a2 ∪ (aS) a) = (Sa) a ∪ (Sa) a2 ∪ (Sa) ((aS) a) ⊆ (Sa) (ea) ∪ Sa2 ∪ (aS) ((Sa) a) = (aa) (eS) ∪ Sa2 ∪ S ((Sa) (ea))
= (aa) (SS) ∪ Sa2 ∪ S ((aa) (eS)) = (SS) (aa) ∪ Sa2 ∪ S ((aa) S) = Sa2 ∪ Sa2 ∪ a2S = Sa2 ∪ Sa2 = Sa2. Hence S is left regular.□
Application of double-framed fuzzy soft expert sets in decision
making
As stated earlier in the definition of soft set, parameter set is actually the set of properties of the elements in the universal set. There are many real life situations, where the parameters are multi-valued. For example, if the universal set contains cars and a parameter is say colour. Colour is multi-valued parameter because colour may mean that car contains blue, red, green, black, white colours. Similarly if a universal set contains dresses then a parameter may be size. Size means small, medium, large, extra large. There are many instances like these where the parameters are not single-valued.
Moreover, it may be noted that the parameters in certain cases are such that decision makers are interested in the degree of satisfaction of a property p and degree of satisfaction of the property notp or degree of satisfaction of some counter property of p. In these cases intuitionistic fuzzy soft sets and bipolar fuzzy soft sets are useful. In our research, parameters are two-valued and the two values of the parameters may not be opposite of each other. For example, consider a set of newspapers and a parameter is quality of the news. Quality is a multi-valued variable which mean true news, unbiased news, updated news etc. The three values of the parameters are not counter properties of each other. In such cases multi-framed soft set (extension of DFS-set) may play a vital role in decision making. Our current paper is dealing with cases where parameters are two valued. For example, in this case a parameter may be coverage, which means international coverage and national coverage.
In this paper, we develop a decision making scheme where the parameters are two-valued. A concrete example, where two-valued parameters are taken, is explained here. If the universal set is containing books on “Calculus & Analytic Geometry” then the parameters may be calculus contents and geometry contents. Here the parameter, calculus contents, is intended to be two-valued. i.e. Calculus contents means single variable calculus and several-variable calculus. Other parameter, geometry contents of the book mean 2-dimensional geometry and 3-dimensional geometry. In situations, as exemplified, the concept of DFS-sets may play a vital role in decision making. Recently, in [18, 20], we have presented some applications of DFS-sets and DFS expert sets in decision making. In continuation to our previous work, we present another decision making scheme based on double-framed fuzzy soft expert set (briefly, DFFSE-set) in the following. The reader is suggested to read the papers [22, 53–57] on different recently kinds of soft and fuzzy soft applied on decision making.
From now on, since the parameters are intended to be two-valued, we shall consider write a parameters ei as a pair .
Definition 6.1. Let U = {u1, u2, . . . , un} be a universe, E = {e1, e2, . . . , em} a set of parameters and X = {x1, x2, . . . , xt} a set of experts (agents). Let O = {0 =disagree, 1 =agree} be a set of opinions, Z = E × X × O and A ⊆ Z . An object of the form is called a DFFSE-set over U, where and are mappings from A to FP (U) (set of all fuzzy subsets of U).
The tabular representation of a DFFSE-sets has the form
Example 6.2. Assume that a company wants to subscribe a newspaper from a set U = {n1 . n2, n3, n4, n5} of available newspapers. The company considers the set of parameters, A = {e1, e2, e3} = {coverage, print, quality} . The parameters involved here are two-valued. e1 stands for coverage which includes national news and international news, e2 stands for print which includes coloured print and online print, e3 stands for quality which includes unbaised news and true news. A set of experts X = {p, q} have been appointed to give there expert opinion. The following DFFSE-set is established.
Definition 6.3. Let be a DFFSE-set over U where A ⊆ Z . The agree-DFFSE-set of is denoted by and is defined to be a set of the form
Similarly the disagree DFFSE-set of is denoted by and is defined as
Example 6.4. Consider Example 6.
The agree DFFSE-set is given below.
The disagree DFFSE-set is given as,
Definition 6.5. Let be a DFFSE-set over U where A ⊆ Z . For (t1, t2) ∈ [0, 1] × [0, 1], the (t1, t2)-level cut of the agree-DFFSE-set is denoted by and is defined as
and the (t1, t2)-level cut of the disagree-DFFSE-set is denoted by and is defined as
Clearly, and are elements of U × U .
In this definition, t1, t2 ∈ [0, 1] are thresholds on the membership values. In real-life decision making problems based on DFFSE-sets, usually these thresholds are chosen by decision makers in advance.
Example 6.6. Reconsider Example 6, and setting t1 = 0.5, t2 = 0.5we have,
and
To represent the (t1, t2)-level cut of the agree-DFFSE-set , we form a table which has entries of the form (aij, bij) where aij, bij ∈ {0, 1} and the components are defined as
Similarly the tabular representation of the (t1, t2)-level cut of the disagree-DFFSE-set , the entries are of the form (mij, nij) where mij, nij ∈ {0, 1} and the components are defined as
Consider Example 6, the tabular representation of the (0.5, 0.5)-level cut of the agree-DFFSE-set
and the tabular representation of the level (0.5, 0.5)-level cut of the disagree-DFFSE-set
Score values of an object
The agree scores and of an object ui ∈ U are calculated from the tabular representation of the (t1, t2)-level cut of the agree-DFFSE-set by the formulas given below,
Similarly the disagree scores and of an object ui ∈ U are calculated from the tabular representation of the (t1, t2)-level cut of the disagree-DFFSE-set by the formulas given below,
Decision making algorithm based on DFFSE-sets
Here a decision making algorithm is propsed based on DFFSE-sets The following steps may be followed by the decision makers for the best possible decision.
Algorithm
1. Input the DFFSE-set
2. Find the agree-DFFSE-set and disagree-DFFSE-set of the given DFFSE-set .
3. Set the pair of thresholds (t1, t2) ∈ [0, 1] × [0, 1] and find the (t1, t2)-level cut of the agree-DFFSE-set and the (t1, t2)-level cut of the disagree-DFFSE-set.
4. Present the (t1, t2)-level cut of the agree-DFFSE-set and the (t1, t2)-level cut of the disagree-DFFSE-set in tabular form.
5. Compute the agree scores and the disagree scores of each element ui ∈ U.
6. Find the values Si = Ai - Di for each ui .
7. If Sk = max Si then uk is the best possible decision. If there are two or more values of k then any uk may be choosen as the best optimal solution.
Let us apply the algorithm to Example 6. From Tables 1 and 2, the agree scores Ai and disagree scores Di in the following tables.
Table1
U
e1
e2
e3
n1
(1, 1)
(1, 1)
(0, 0)
n2
(1, 1)
(1, 1)
(1, 1)
n3
(0, 1)
(1, 0)
(0, 0)
n4
(1, 1)
(0, 0)
(0, 1)
n5
(1, 1)
(1, 1)
(1, 1)
Table2
U
e1
e2
e3
n1
(0, 0)
(0, 1)
(1, 1)
n2
(0, 0)
(0, 0)
(0, 0)
n3
(1, 1)
(1, 1)
(1, 1)
n4
(0, 0)
(1, 1)
(0, 0)
n5
(0, 0)
(0, 0)
(0, 0)
Agree scores of each ui
U
e1
e2
e3
Ai(1)
Ai(2)
Ai
n1
(1,1)
(1,1)
(0,0)
2
2
4
n2
(1,1)
(1,1)
(1,1)
3
3
6
n3
(0,1)
(1,0)
(0,0)
1
1
2
n4
(1,1)
(0,0)
(0,1)
1
2
3
n5
(1,1)
(1,1)
(1,1)
3
3
6
Disagree scores of each ui
U
e1
e2
e3
Di(1)
Di(2)
Di
n1
(0,0)
(0,1)
(1,1)
1
2
3
n2
(0,0)
(0,0)
(0,0)
0
0
0
n3
(1,1)
(1,1)
(1,1)
3
3
6
n4
(0,0)
(1,1)
(0,0)
1
1
2
n5
(0,0)
(0,0)
(0,0)
0
0
0
The scores for each ui ∈ U are calculated by using Step 6 of the proposed algoritm, and the scores are S1 = 4 -3 = 1, S2 = 6 -0 = 6, S3 = 2 -6 = -4, S4 = 3 -2 = 1, S5 = 6 -0 .
Hence n2 and n5 are the best newspapers and the company may subscribe any one of these.
Conclusion
In this paper, DFS-quasi ideals have been defined alongwith some examples and some properties of them were discussed in AG-groupoids. Moreover, application of double-framed fuzzy soft expert- sets(briefly, DFFSE-sets) in a decision making problem was presented and a decision making algorithm was proposed based on DFFSE-sets. In our future work, we intend to extend the results of this paper introducing (M, N) DFS-quasi ideals of AG-groupoids. Moreover, the development of multi-framed soft sets and their applications to decision making problems will be our next research project. In [22, 53–57] multi-attribute decision making schemes are designed. Our proposed multi-framed soft sets will play useful role in multi-attribute decision making problems.
Acknowledgements. The authors are highly grateful to the referees for their valuable comments and suggestions which were helpful in improving this paper, and to the Assoc. Editor of the journal for editing and communicating the paper.
References
1.
AcarU., KoyuncuF. and TanayB., Soft sets and soft rings, Comput Math Appl59(11) (2010), 3458–3463.
2.
AtagunA.O. and SezginA., Soft substructures of rings, fields and modules, Comput Math Appl61(3) (2011), 592–601.
3.
AtanossovK.T., Intuitionistic fuzzy sets, Fuzzy Sets and Systems20(1) (1986), 87–96.
4.
CagmanN. and EnginogluS., FP-soft set theory and its applications, Ann Fuzzy Math Inform2(2) (2011), 219–226.
5.
CagmanN. and EnginogluS., Soft matrix theory and its decision making, Comput Math Appl59 (2010), 3308–3314.
6.
ChoJ.R., Pusan, JezekJ. and KepkaT., Paramedial groupoids, Czechoslovak Math J49(2) (1999), 277–290.
7.
DavvazB., KhanM., AnisS. and HaqS., Generalized fuzzy quasi-ideals of an intra-regular abel-grassmann’s groupoid, J Appl Math (2012), 16. Art. ID 627075.
8.
DudekW.A., KhanM. and KhanN., Characterizations of intra-regular Abel-Grassmann’s groupoids, J Intell Fuzzy Systems27(6) (2014), 2915–2925.
9.
DudekW.A. and GigonR.S., Congruences on completely inverse AG**-groupoids, Quasigroups Related Systems20(2) (2012), 203–209.
10.
DudekW.A. and GigonR.S., Completely inverse AG**-groupoids, Semigroup Forum87(1) (2013), 201–229.
11.
FengF., JunY.B. and ZhaoX., Soft semirings, Comput Math Appl56(10) (2008), 2621–2628.
12.
GauW.L. and BuehrerD.J., Vague sets, IEEE Transactions of Systems, Man and Cybernetics23(2) (1993), 610–614.
13.
HolgateP., Groupoids satisfying a simple invertive law, Math Student61 (1992), 101–106.
14.
JunY.B. and AhnS.S., Double-framed soft sets with applications in BCK/BCI-algebras, J Appl Math (2012), 15. Art. ID178159.
15.
JunY.B., Soft BCK/BCI-algebras, Comput Math Appl56(5) (2008), 1408–1413.
16.
KhanW., ChenG. and HilaK., Sandwich sets and congruences in completely inverse AG** groupoids, Ital J Pure Appl Math39 (2018), 822–838.
17.
KhanW., YousafzaiF. and HilaK., Congruences and decompositions of AG**-groupoids, Miskolc Math Notes19(2) (2018), 931–944.
18.
IzharM., KhanA. and HilaK., Double-framed soft generalized bi-ideals of intra-regular AG-groupoids, J Intell Fuzzy Systems35(4) (2018), 4701–4715.
19.
KazimM.A. and NaseeruddinM., On almost semigroups, Aligarh Bull Math2 (1972), 1–7.
20.
IzharM., KhanA. and MahmoodT., (M, N)-Double framed soft ideals of Abel Grassmann’s groupoids, J Intell Fuzzy Systems35(6) (2018), 6313–6327.
JiangH., ZhanJ. and ChenD., Covering based variable precision (I,T)-fuzzy rough sets with applications to multi-attribute decision-making, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems. doi: 10.1109/TFUZZ.2018.2883023.
23.
KhanA., JunY.B. and MehmoodT., Generalized fuzzy interior ideals in Abel Grassmann’s groupoids, Int J Math Math Sci (2010), 14. Art. Art. ID838392.
24.
KhanA., IzharM. and SezginA., Characterization of Abel Grassmann’s groupoids by the properties of their doubleframed soft ideals, Int J Anal Appl15(1) (2017), 62–74.
25.
KhanM., SmarandacheF. and AnisS., Theory of Abel Grassmann’s Groupoids, ISBN 978-1-59973-347-0, The Educational Publisher, Inc., Columbus, 2015.
26.
KhanM., SmarandacheF. and AzizT., Fuzzy Abel Grassmann’s Groupoids, ISBN 978-1-59973-340-1, The Educational Publisher, Inc., Columbus, 2015.
27.
KovkovD.V., KolbanovV.M. and MolodtsovD.A., Soft sets theory based optimization, J Comput Syst Sci Int46(6) (2007), 872–880.
28.
MajiP.K., BiswasR. and RoyA.R., Soft set theory, Comput Math Appl45 (2003), 555–562.
29.
MolodtsovD., Soft set theory-first results. Global optimization, control, and games, III, Comput Math Appl37(4-5) (1999), 19–31.
30.
MushtaqQ. and YusufS.M., On LA-semigroups, The Alig Bull Math8 (1978), 65–70.
31.
MushtaqQ. and KhanM., Topological structures on LA-semigroups, Bull Malays Math Sci Soc36(4) (2013), 901–906.
32.
NaseeruddinM., PhD Thesis, The Aligarh Muslim University India, Some studies on almost semigroups and flocks, 1970.
33.
PengX.D. and YangY., Algorithms for interval-valued fuzzy soft sets in stochastic multi-criteria decision making based on regret theory and prospect theory with combined weight, Appl Soft Comput54 (2017), 415–430.
34.
PengX.D. and GargH., Algorithms for interval-valued fuzzy soft sets in emergency decision making based on WDBA and CODAS with new information measure, Computers and Industrial Engineering119 (2018), 439–452.
35.
PengX.D. and LiuC., Algorithms for neutrosophic soft decision making based on EDAS, new similarity measure and level soft set, J Intell Fuzzy Systems32(1) (2017), 955–968.
36.
PengX.D. and DaiJ.G., Hesitant fuzzy soft decision making methods based on WASPAS, MABAC and COPRAS with combined weights, J Intell Fuzzy Systems33(2) (2017), 1313–1325.
37.
PengX.D. and DaiJ.G., A bibliometric analysis of neutrosophic set: Two decades review from 1998-2017, Artif Intell Rev. doi: 10.1007/s10462-018-9652-0.
38.
ProtićP.V. and StevanovićN., On Abel-Grassmann’s groupoids, Proceedings of the Mathematical Conference in Priśtina 1994, Univ Priśtina, Priśtina, 1995, pp. 31–38.
39.
ProtićP.V. and StevanovićN., AG-test and some general properties of Abel-Grassmann’s groupoids, Pure Math Appl6(4) (1995), 371–383.
40.
PawlakZ., Rough sets: Theoretical aspects of Reasoning about Data, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1991.
41.
StevanovićN. and ProtićP.V., Composition of abel-grassmann’s 3-bands, Novi Sad, J Math34(2) (2004), 175–182.
42.
XiaoZ., GongK. and ZouY., A combined forecasting approach based on fuzzy soft sets, J Comput Appl Math228(1) (2009), 326–333.
43.
YousafzaiF., KhanA., AmjadV. and ZebA., On fuzzy fully regular AG-groupoids, J Intell Fuzzy Systems26(6) (2014), 2973–2982.
44.
YousafzaiF., AliA., HaqS.H. and HilaK., Non-associative semigroups in terms of semilattices via soft ideals, J Intell Fuzzy Syst35 (2018), 4837–4847.
45.
ZadehL.A., Fuzzy sets, Information and Control8 (1965), 338–353.
46.
ZouY. and XiaoZ., Data analysis approaches of soft sets under incomplete information, Knowledge-Based Systems21(8) (2008), 941–945.
47.
ZhanJ., LiuQ. and HerawanT., A novel soft rough set: Soft rough hemirings and its multicriteria group decision making, Appl Soft Comput54 (2017), 393–402.
48.
ZhanJ., AliM.I. and MehmoodN., On a novel uncertain soft set model: Z-soft fuzzy rough set model and corresponding decision making methods, Appl Soft Comput56 (2017), 446–457.
49.
ZhanJ. and XuW., Two types of coverings based multigranulation rough fuzzy sets and applications to decision making, Artif Intell Rev (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-018-9649-8.
ZhanJ. and AlcantudJ.C.R., A novel type of soft rough covering and its application to multicriteria group decision making, Artif Intell Rev (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-018-9617-3.
52.
ZhanJ. and AlcantudJ.C.R., A survey of parameter reduction of soft sets and corresponding algorithms, Artif Intell Rev (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-017-9592-0.
53.
ZhanJ., SunB. and AlcantudJ.C.R., Covering based multigranulation (I, T)-fuzzy rough set models and applications in multi-attribute group decision-making, Information Sciences476 (2019), 290–318.
54.
ZhangL., ZhanJ. and XuZ.X., Covering-based generalized IF rough sets with applications to multi-attribute decisionmaking, Information Sciences478 (2019), 275–302.
55.
ZhangK., ZhanJ., WuW.Z. and AlcantudJ.C.R., Fuzzy β-covering based (I, T)-fuzzy rough set models and applications to multi-attribute decision-making, Computers and Industrial Engineering128 (2019), 605–621.
56.
ZhanJ. and AlcantudJ.C.R., A novel type of soft rough covering and its application to multicriteria group decision making, Artif Intell Rev (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-018-9617-3.
57.
ZhanJ. and AlcantudJ.C.R., A survey of parameter reduction of soft sets and corresponding algorithms, Artif Intell Rev (2018). doi: 10.1007/s10462-017-9592-0.
58.
ZhangL. and ZhanJ., Fuzzy soft β-covering based fuzzy rough sets and corresponding decision-making applications, Int J Mach Learn & Cyber (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-018-0828-3.
59.
ZhangL. and ZhanJ., Novel classes of fuzzy soft β- coverings-based fuzzy rough sets with applications to multicriteria fuzzy group decision making, Soft Comput (2018). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-3470-9.