Next Article in Journal
Task-Offloading Strategy Based on Performance Prediction in Vehicular Edge Computing
Next Article in Special Issue
Evaluation Method of Highway Plant Slope Based on Rough Set Theory and Analytic Hierarchy Process: A Case Study in Taihang Mountain, Hebei, China
Previous Article in Journal
Applying the UTAUT Model to Understand Factors Affecting Micro-Lecture Usage by Mathematics Teachers in China
Previous Article in Special Issue
T-Spherical Fuzzy Bonferroni Mean Operators and Their Application in Multiple Attribute Decision Making
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

An Efficient Approach to Approximate Fuzzy Ideals of Semirings Using Bipolar Techniques

1
Department of Mathematics, Quaid-e-Azam University Islamabad, Islamabad 44000, Pakistan
2
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, King Abdulaziz University, P.O. Box 80219, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia
3
Department of Mathematics, University of Gujrat, Gujrat 50700, Pakistan
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Mathematics 2022, 10(7), 1009; https://doi.org/10.3390/math10071009
Submission received: 25 February 2022 / Revised: 16 March 2022 / Accepted: 17 March 2022 / Published: 22 March 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue New Trends in Fuzzy Sets Theory and Their Extensions)

Abstract

:
The bipolar fuzzy (BF) set is an extension of the fuzzy set used to solve the uncertainty of having two poles, positive and negative. The rough set is a useful mathematical technique to handle vagueness and impreciseness. The major objective of this paper is to analyze the notion of approximation of BF ideals of semirings by combining the theories of the rough and BF sets. Then, the idea of rough approximation of BF subsemirings (ideals, bi-ideals and interior ideals) of semirings is developed. In addition, semirings are characterized by upper and lower rough approximations using BF ideals. Further, it is seen that congruence relations (CRs) and complete congruence relations (CCRs) play fundamental roles for rough approximations of bipolar fuzzy ideals. Therefore, their associated properties are investigated by means of CRs and CCRs.

1. Introduction and Motivation

The implementation of traditional fuzzy sets presented by Zadeh [1] in the field of algebraic structures has brought great success to the study of fuzzy algebra. A few mathematical researchers, such as Rosenfeld [2], Mordeson and Malik [3], Akram et al. [4], Mandal [5], Shabir and Mahmood [6] and Zhan [7], have obtained many wonderful and useful results on fuzzy sets. Nevertheless, the membership degrees of elements in conventional fuzzy sets are all limited to the interval [0,1], which leads to a great difficulty in explaining the distinction between the irrelevant elements and the opposite elements in fuzzy sets. Zhang [8] presented the theory of the bipolar fuzzy (BF) set, which has a range of [ 1 , 1 ] , to avoid this problem. Recently, keeping the results of BF sets under consideration, many researchers have been using BF sets to represent algebraic structures [9,10,11,12]. This theory provides the difference between positive and negative aspects of the same situation. In real life, we observe many bipolar concepts, good and bad effects of medicines, thickness and thinness of fluid, honesty and dishonesty. For more applications, see [13,14,15,16,17,18].
Pawlak, in 1982 [19], initiated the theory of rough sets. Based on the known attributes, a rough set contains all the information. Rough sets are characterized by means of upper and lower approximation. This theory is a useful tool in the areas of artificial intelligence, such as pattern recognition, learning algorithms, inductive reasoning, automatic classification, etc. In addition, it has many applications in measurement theory, classification theory, taxonomy, cluster analysis, etc. In the medical field, a serious challenge is abdominal pain in children. There are many reasons for this disease and it is hard to detect the main cause. This theory helps the doctors to detect the cause through discharge observations.
In 1934, Vandiver studied the structure of semirings [20]. A large amount of work has been conducted on this mathematical algebraic structure in the fields of medical science, social science, engineering, arts, economics and environmental science. From an algebraic point of view, semirings provide the most natural common generalization of the theories of rings and bounded distributive lattices, and the techniques used in analyzing them are taken from both areas.
Fuzzy semirings, introduced by Ahsan et al. [21], have drawn widespread interest from scholars. In addition, a large amount of related findings have emerged by Ahsan et al. [22]. Many experts have investigated roughness in algebra and fuzzy algebraic structures [23,24,25,26]. Hosseini et al. studied the generalizations of roughness or T-roughness in fuzzy algebra [27]. In 2020, Bashir et al. studied the roughness of fuzzy ideals with three-dimensional congruence relations of ternary semigroups [28]. In 2019, Shabir et al. [29] worked on BF ideals of regular semigroups. Moreover, Bashir et al. extended the work of [29] to regular ordered ternary semigroups [30] and regular ternary semirings [31]. However, approximation of BF sets has not been commonly used in semirings so far, to our knowledge. Therefore, consideration of a new framework of approximation of BF subsemirings (resp. ideals) is reasonable and necessary. We address the principles of RBF subsemirings (resp. ideals) in this article and analyze related properties by extending [29,32].
This paper is arranged as follows. In Section 1, we introduce all of the terms used in this paper. In Section 2, we discuss the ideas of rough sets and BF sets and present some basic definitions. The main section of this paper is Section 3, where we will present RBF ideals, bi-ideals and interior ideals of semirings and their related theorems on the basis of CRs and CCRs. In the last section, a comparative study and conclusions are given.
The list of acronyms used in the research article is given in Table 1.

2. Preliminaries

A nonempty set ( S , + , · ) is known as a semiring if ( S , + ) is a commutative semigroup, ( S , · ) is a semigroup and s . ( p + q ) = s . p + s . q , ( p + q ) . s = p . s + q . s for every s , p , q S . By a subset, we always mean a nonempty one. A subset P of a semiring S is known as a subsemiring of S if P is itself a semiring under addition and multiplication as defined in S . A subset P of a semiring S is known as a left (resp. right) ideal of S if ( P , + ) is a groupoid and s p P ( p s P ) for every s S , p P . If P is both a right and left ideal, then it is said to be an ideal of S . A subset P of a semiring S is called a bi-ideal if P is a subsemiring of S and P S P P . A subset P of a semiring S is known as an interior ideal if P is a subsemiring and S P S P .
In BF subset ρ = ( S , ρ p , ρ n ) of S , ρ p ( z ) presents the satisfaction degree of z to the correlated characteristic of ρ and ρ n ( z ) is the satisfaction degree of z to the somewhat opposite characteristic of ρ . The fuzzy set presents only positive aspects of a situation with membership function [ 0 , 1 ] . The difference between the fuzzy set and the BF set is shown by the following example. Let A = { u , v , w , x , y , z } be a set of workers of a company. Define a fuzzy set on A with fuzzy property “honesty”, the workers v , x and y having property “honesty” mapped to [ 0 , 1 ] , as shown by the bar graph in Figure 1.
Other workers have no membership degree in range [ 0 , 1 ] , as they are not honest. In the fuzzy set, we can cover only positive aspects of any situation. We cannot deal with negative aspects of situations. To facilitate, we deal with such problems with the BF set. The property “dishonesty” is opposite to “honesty”. The workers u , w and z are mapped to [ 1 , 0 ] with property “dishonesty”. In such a way, the BF set gives information about all elements, as shown in Figure 2.
Throughout this article, S represents a semiring. Let λ , ρ B F ( S ) . Then, λ ρ if and only if λ p ( z ) ρ p ( z ) and λ n ( z ) ρ n ( z ) for every z S , and λ = ρ if and only if λ ρ and ρ λ . Let λ , ρ B F ( S ) . Then, λ + ρ = ( S , λ p + ρ p , λ n + ρ n ) , the sum of λ and ρ , is defined as
( λ p + ρ p ) ( z ) = z = a + c { λ p ( a ) ρ p ( c ) }
and
( λ n + ρ n ) ( z ) = z = a + c { λ n ( a ) ρ n ( c ) }
for a , c , z S . For λ , ρ B F ( S ) , define the BF subset λ ρ = ( S , λ p ρ p , λ n ρ n ) of S as
( λ p ρ p ) ( z ) = z = Σ i = 1 n a i b i { i = 1 n ( λ p ( a i ) ρ p ( b i ) ) } , 0 if z is not expressible as z = Σ i = 1 n a i b i
and
( λ n ρ n ) ( z ) = z = Σ i = 1 n a i b i { i = 1 n ( λ p ( a i ) ρ p ( b i ) ) } , 0 if z is not expressible as z = Σ i = 1 n a i b i
for z , a i , b i S .
Definition 1
([29]). Let ρ B F ( S ) . Then, ρ is known as a BF subsemiring of S if for every a , z S :
(i) 
ρ p ( 0 ) ρ p ( z ) , ρ n ( 0 ) ρ n ( z ) ;
(ii) 
ρ p ( a + z ) m i n { ρ p ( a ) , ρ p ( z ) } , ρ n ( a + z ) m a x { ρ n ( a ) , ρ n ( z ) } ;
(iii) 
ρ p ( a z ) m i n { ρ p ( a ) , ρ p ( z ) } , ρ n ( a z ) m a x { ρ n ( a ) , ρ n ( z ) } .
Definition 2
([29]). Let ρ B F ( S ) . Then, ρ is known as a BF left (resp. right) ideal of S if for every a , z S :
(i) 
ρ p ( a + z ) m i n { ρ p ( a ) , ρ p ( z ) } , ρ n ( a + z ) m a x { ρ n ( a ) , ρ n ( z ) } ;
(ii) 
( ρ p ( a z ) ρ p ( z ) , ρ n ( a z ) ρ n ( z ) ) ( resp. ρ p ( a z ) ρ p ( a ) , ρ n ( a z ) ρ n ( a ) ) .
If ρ is both a BF left and right ideal, then it is known as a BF ideal of S .
Definition 3
([29]). Let ρ B F ( S ) . Then ρ is known as a BF bi-ideal of S if for every a , c , z S :
(i) 
ρ p ( a + z ) m i n { ρ p ( a ) , ρ p ( z ) } , ρ n ( a + z ) m a x { ρ n ( a ) , ρ n ( z ) } ;
(ii) 
ρ p ( a z ) m i n { ρ p ( a ) , ρ p ( z ) } , ρ n ( a z ) m a x { ρ n ( a ) , ρ n ( z ) } ;
(iii) 
ρ p ( a z c ) m i n { ρ p ( a ) , ρ p ( c ) } , ρ n ( a z c ) m a x { ρ n ( a ) , ρ n ( c ) } .
Definition 4.
Let ρ B F ( S ) . Then, ρ is known as a BF interior ideal of S if for every a , c , z S :
(i) 
ρ p ( a + z ) m i n { ρ p ( a ) , ρ p ( z ) } , ρ n ( a + z ) m a x { ρ n ( a ) , ρ n ( z ) } ;
(ii) 
ρ p ( a z ) m i n { ρ p ( a ) , ρ p ( z ) } , ρ n ( a z ) m a x { ρ n ( a ) , ρ n ( z ) } ;
(iii) 
ρ p ( a c z ) ρ p ( c ) , ρ n ( a z c ) ρ n ( c ) .
Let W be a universe and Θ ^ an equivalence relation on W. Then E = ( W , Θ ^ ) is known as an approximation space. The equivalence classes of Θ ^ are the main constituents of the rough sets. Let Y ( φ ) W . The set Y is called a definable subset of W if it is the collection of some equivalence classes of the universal set W; otherwise, it is not definable. The set Y is approximated in the form of upper and lower approximations, which are given as:
A p r ¯ ( Y ) = w W : [ w ] Θ ^ Y φ ,
A p r ̲ ( Y ) = w W : [ w ] Θ ^ Y ,
where [ w ] Θ ^ is the equivalence class of w for w W .
The rough set is a pair ( A p r ¯ ( Y ) , A p r ̲ ( Y ) ) if A p r ¯ ( Y ) A p r ̲ ( Y ) . The set Y is a definable set if A p r ¯ ( Y ) = A p r ̲ ( Y ) .

3. Approximations of Bipolar Fuzzy Ideals in Semirings

This is the main section of our paper in which we present the concepts of RBF subsets of semirings and concentrate on their key properties. RBF subsemirings, RBF ideals, RBF bi-ideals and RBF interior ideals of the semirings are additionally discussed in this section. The lower and upper RBF approximations of ξ under the relation Θ ^ are the BF subsets Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) and Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) of S , respectively, defined as:
Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) = { ( s , Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( s ) , Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( s ) ) : s S } ; Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) = { ( s , Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( s ) , Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( s ) ) : s S } ,
where
Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( s ) = b [ s ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) , Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( s ) = b [ s ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) ; Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( s ) = b [ s ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) , Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( s ) = b [ s ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) .
If Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) = Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) , then ξ is Θ ^ -definable; else, ξ is an RBF subset of S [33]. An equivalence relation Θ ^ on S which satisfies the additional condition that if ( i , j ) and ( k , l ) Θ ^ then ( i + k , j + l ) Θ ^ and ( i k , j l ) Θ ^ is known as a congruence relation (CR) on S . A CR Θ ^ on S is complete if for every j , k S , [ j ] Θ ^ + [ k ] Θ ^ = [ j + k ] Θ ^ and [ j ] Θ ^ [ k ] Θ ^ = [ j k ] Θ ^ [32]. Some authors used the term full congruence instead of complete congruence in their research.
Theorem 1.
If Θ ^ is a CCR on S , then Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) Θ ^ ̲ ( ρ ) Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ρ ) for any ξ, ρ B F ( S ) .
Proof. 
Since the CR Θ ^ is complete on S , [ u ] Θ ^ [ v ] Θ ^ = [ u v ] Θ ^ for all u , v S . Let ξ , ρ B F ( S ) . The following two cases arise for z S :
Case (i): If z i = 1 n a i b i for a i , b i S , then ( Θ ^ ̲ ξ p Θ ^ ̲ ρ p ) ( z ) = 0 = ( Θ ^ ̲ ξ n Θ ^ ̲ ρ n ) ( z ) . Thus, ( Θ ^ ̲ ξ p Θ ^ ̲ ρ p ) ( z ) = 0 Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ p ρ p ) ( z ) and ( Θ ^ ̲ ξ n Θ ^ ̲ ρ n ) ( z ) = 0 Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ n ρ n ) ( z ) .
Case (ii): If z = i = 1 n a i b i for a i , b i S , then
( Θ ^ ̲ ξ p Θ ^ ̲ ρ p ) ( z ) = z = i = 1 n a i b i i = 1 n Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( a ) Θ ^ ̲ ρ p ( b ) = z = i = 1 n a i b i i = 1 n { ( s [ a i ] Θ ^ ξ p ( s ) ) ( t [ b i ] Θ ^ ρ p ( t ) ) } = z = i = 1 n a i b i i = 1 n { s [ a i ] Θ ^ t [ b i ] Θ ^ ( ξ p ( s ) ρ p ( t ) ) } z = i = 1 n a i b i i = 1 n { s t [ a i b i ] Θ ^ s t = i = 1 n s i t i ξ p ( s i ) ρ p ( t i ) }
where s t [ a i ] Θ ^ [ b i ] Θ ^ = [ a i b i ] Θ ^ and
( Θ ^ ̲ ξ p Θ ^ ̲ ρ p ) ( z ) = z = i = 1 n a i b i s t [ a i b i ] Θ ^ s t = i = 1 n s i t i { i = 1 n ξ p ( s i ) ρ p ( t i ) } = z = i = 1 n a i b i s t [ a i b i ] Θ ^ ξ p ρ p ( s t ) = z = i = 1 n a i b i Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ρ p ( a i b i ) z = i = 1 n a i b i Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ρ p ( Σ i = 1 n a i b i ) = Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ρ p ( z ) .
Similarly, ( Θ ^ ̲ ξ n Θ ^ ̲ ρ n ) ( z ) Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ρ n ( z ) . Hence, Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) Θ ^ ̲ ( ρ ) Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ρ ) .
Theorem 2.
If Θ ^ is a CR on S , then Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) Θ ^ ¯ ( ρ ) Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ρ ) for any ξ, ρ B F ( S ) .
Proof. 
As Θ ^ is a CR on S , [ u ] Θ ^ [ v ] Θ ^ [ u v ] Θ ^ for all u , v S . Let ξ , ρ B F ( S ) . The following two cases arise for z S :
Case (i): If z i = 1 n a i b i for a i , b i S , then it is obvious.
Case (ii): If z = i = 1 n a i b i for a i , b i S , then we have
( Θ ^ ¯ ξ p Θ ^ ¯ ρ p ) ( z ) = z = i = 1 n a i b i i = 1 n ( Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( a ) Θ ^ ¯ ρ p ( b ) ) = z = i = 1 n a i b i i = 1 n { ( s [ a i ] Θ ^ ξ p ( s ) ) ( t [ b i ] Θ ^ ρ p ( t ) ) } = z = i = 1 n a i b i i = 1 n { s [ a i ] Θ ^ t [ b i ] Θ ^ ξ p ( s ) ρ p ( t ) } z = i = 1 n a i b i i = 1 n { s t [ a i b i ] Θ ^ s t = i = 1 n s i t i ξ p ( s i ) ρ p ( t i ) } where , s t [ a i ] Θ ^ [ b i ] Θ ^ [ a i b i ] Θ ^ = z = i = 1 n a i b i s t [ a i b i ] Θ ^ s t = i = 1 n s i t i { i = 1 n ξ p ( s i ) ρ p ( t i ) } = z = i = 1 n a i b i s t [ a i b i ] Θ ^ ξ p ρ p ( s t ) = z = i = 1 n a i b i Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ρ p ( a i b i ) z = i = 1 n a i b i Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ρ p ( Σ i = 1 n a i b i ) = Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ρ p ( z ) .
Similarly, ( Θ ^ ¯ ξ n Θ ^ ¯ ρ n ) ( z ) Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ρ n ( z ) . Hence, Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) Θ ^ ¯ ( ρ ) Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ρ ) .
Theorem 3.
If Θ ^ is a CCR on S , then Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) + Θ ^ ̲ ( ρ ) Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ + ρ ) for any ξ, ρ B F ( S ) .
Proof. 
Since the CR Θ ^ is complete on S , [ u ] Θ ^ + [ v ] Θ ^ = [ u + v ] Θ ^ for all u , v S . Let ξ , ρ B F ( S ) and z S . Consider
( Θ ^ ̲ ξ p + Θ ^ ̲ ρ p ) ( z ) = z = u + x Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( u ) Θ ^ ̲ ρ p ( x ) = z = u + x ( b [ u ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) ) ( c [ x ] Θ ρ p ( c ) ) = z = u + x b [ u ] Θ ^ c [ x ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) ρ p ( c ) = z = u + x b [ u ] Θ ^ , c [ x ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) ρ p ( c ) z = u + x b [ u ] Θ ^ , c [ x ] Θ ^ b + c = m + n ξ p ( m ) ρ p ( n ) = z = u + x ( b + c ) [ u + x ] Θ ^ ξ p + ρ p ( b + c ) = z = b + c Θ ^ ̲ ξ p + ρ p ( b + c ) = Θ ^ ̲ ξ p + ρ p ( z ) .
Similarly, ( Θ ^ ̲ ξ n + Θ ^ ̲ ρ n ) ( z ) Θ ^ ̲ ξ n + ρ n ( z ) . Thus, Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) + Θ ^ ̲ ( ρ ) Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ + ρ ) .
Theorem 4.
If Θ ^ is a CR on S , then Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) + Θ ^ ¯ ( ρ ) Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ + ρ ) for any ξ, ρ B F ( S ) .
Proof. 
As Θ ^ is a CR on S , [ u ] Θ ^ + [ v ] Θ ^ [ u + v ] Θ ^ for all u , v S . Let ξ , ρ B F ( S ) . Then, for any z S , consider
( Θ ^ ¯ ξ p + Θ ^ ¯ ρ p ) ( z ) = z = u + x Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( u ) Θ ^ ¯ ρ p ( x ) = z = u + x ( b [ u ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) ) ( c [ x ] Θ ^ ρ p ( c ) ) = z = u + x b [ u ] Θ ^ c [ x ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) ρ p ( c ) = z = u + x b [ u ] Θ ^ , c [ x ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) ρ p ( c ) z = u + x b + c [ u + x ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) ρ p ( c ) = b + c [ z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) ρ p ( c ) = r [ z ] Θ ^ , r = b + c ξ p ( b ) ρ p ( c ) = r [ z ] Θ ^ r = b + c ( ξ p ( b ) ρ p ( c ) ) = r [ z ] Θ ^ ( ξ p + ρ p ) ( r ) = Θ ^ ¯ ξ p + ρ p ( z ) .
Similarly, ( Θ ^ ¯ ξ n + Θ ^ ¯ ρ n ) ( z ) Θ ^ ¯ ξ n + ρ n ( z ) . Hence, Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) + Θ ^ ¯ ( ρ ) Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ + ρ ) .
Definition 5.
Let Θ ^ be a CR on S and ξ B F ( S ) . Then, ξ is a lower (resp. upper) RBF subsemiring of S if Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) ( Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) ) is a BF subsemiring of S .
A BF subset ξ of S which is both a lower and upper RBF subsemiring of S is known as an RBF subsemiring of S .
Theorem 5.
If Θ ^ is a CR on S , then each BF subsemiring ξ = ( S ; ξ p , ξ n ) of S is an upper RBF subsemiring of S .
Proof. 
For all u , z S , consider
Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( u + z ) = s [ u + z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( s ) s ( [ u ] Θ ^ + [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( s ) , sin ce [ u ] Θ ^ + [ z ] Θ ^ [ u + z ] Θ ^ = ( b + c ) ( [ u ] Θ ^ + [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( b + c ) b [ u ] Θ ^ , c [ z ] Θ ^ ( ξ p ( b ) ξ p ( c ) ) = b [ u ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) c [ z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( c ) = Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( u ) Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( z ) .
Similarly, Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( u + z ) Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( u ) Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( z ) . In addition,
Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( u z ) = s [ u z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( s ) s ( [ u ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( s ) , sin ce [ u ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ [ u z ] Θ ^ = b c ( [ u ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( b c ) b [ u ] Θ ^ , c [ z ] Θ ^ ( ξ p ( b ) ξ p ( c ) ) = b [ u ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) c [ z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( c ) = Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( u ) Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( z ) .
Similarly, Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( u z ) Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( u ) Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( z ) . Thus, Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) is a BF subsemiring of S . Therefore, ξ is an upper RBF subsemiring of S . □
Theorem 6.
If Θ ^ is a CCR on S , then each BF subsemiring ξ = ( S ; ξ p , ξ n ) of S is a lower RBF subsemiring of S .
Proof. 
Let ξ = ( S ; ξ p , ξ n ) be a BF subsemiring of S . Now, for all u , z S , consider
Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( u + z ) = s [ u + z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( s ) = s ( [ u ] Θ ^ + [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( s ) , sin ce [ u ] Θ ^ + [ z ] Θ ^ = [ u + z ] Θ ^ = ( b + c ) ( [ u ] Θ ^ + [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( b + c ) b [ u ] Θ ^ , c [ z ] Θ ^ ( ξ p ( b ) ξ p ( c ) ) = b [ u ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) c [ z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( c ) = Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( u ) Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( z ) .
Similarly, Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( u + z ) Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( u ) Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( z ) . In addition,
Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( u z ) = s [ u z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( s ) = s ( [ u ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( s ) , sin ce [ u ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ = [ u z ] Θ ^ = b c ( [ u ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( b c ) b [ u ] Θ ^ , c [ z ] Θ ^ ( ξ p ( b ) ξ p ( c ) ) = b [ u ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) c [ z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( c ) = Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( u ) Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( z ) .
Similarly, Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( u z ) Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( u ) Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( z ) . Thus, Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) is a BF subsemiring of S . Therefore, ξ is a lower RBF subsemiring of S . □
The example defined below illustrates that Theorem 6 does not hold if the CR Θ ^ is not complete.
Example 1.
Let S = { 0 , 1 , ι , κ , ν } be a semiring with the addition “+” and multiplication “· ” given in Table 2 and Table 3.
Consider a binary relation Θ ^ = { ( 0 , 0 ) , ( 1 , 1 ) , ( ι , ι ) , ( κ , κ ) , ( ν , ν ) , ( ι , ν ) , ( ν , ι ) } on S . Then, Θ ^ is a CR on S , defining the congruence classes { 0 } , { 1 } , { ι , ν } and { κ } , and Θ ^ is not complete, since { 1 } + { κ } = { ι } { ι , ν } . We take a BF subset ξ of S , as below.
ξ = { ( 0 , 0.6 , 0.7 ) , ( 1 , 0.6 , 0.4 ) , ( ι , 0.6 , 0.5 ) , ( κ , 0.6 , 0.4 ) , ( ν , 0.5 , 0.2 ) } .
Then, ξ is a BF subsemiring of S . Now,
Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) = { ( 0 , 0.6 , 0.7 ) , ( 1 , 0.6 , 0.4 ) , ( ι , 0.6 , 0.5 ) , ( κ , 0.6 , 0.4 ) , ( ν , 0.6 , 0.5 ) } , Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) = { ( 0 , 0.6 , 0.7 ) , ( 1 , 0.6 , 0.4 ) , ( ι , 0.5 , 0.2 ) , ( κ , 0.6 , 0.4 ) , ( ν , 0.5 , 0.2 ) } .
It can be vindicated by simple calculations that Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) is also a BF subsemiring of S , whereas Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) is not, as Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ p ) ( 1 + κ ) Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ p ) ( 1 ) Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ p ) ( κ ) .
Definition 6.
If Θ ^ is a CR on S and ξ B F ( S ) , then ξ is a lower (resp. upper) RBF left (resp. right) ideal of S if Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) ( resp. Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) ) is a BF left (resp. right) ideal of S .
Theorem 7.
If Θ ^ is a CR on S , then each BF left (resp. right) ideal ξ = ( S ; ξ p , ξ n ) of S is an upper RBF left (resp. right) ideal of S .
Proof. 
For u , z S , consider
Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( u + z ) = s [ u + z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( s ) s ( [ u ] Θ ^ + [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( s ) , sin ce [ u ] Θ ^ + [ z ] Θ ^ [ u + z ] Θ ^ = ( b + c ) ( [ u ] Θ ^ + [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( b + c ) b [ u ] Θ ^ , c [ z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) ξ p ( c ) = b [ u ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) c [ z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( c ) = Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( u ) Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( z ) .
Similarly, Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( u + z ) Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( u ) Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( z ) . In addition,
Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( u z ) = s [ u z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( s ) s ( [ u ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( s ) , sin ce [ u ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ [ u z ] Θ ^ = b c ( [ u ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( b c ) = b [ u ] Θ ^ , c [ z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b c ) c [ z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( c ) = Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( z ) .
Similarly, Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( u z ) Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( z ) . This implies that Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) is a BF left ideal. Therefore, ξ is an upper RBF left ideal of S . Similarly, the case of a BF right ideal can be verified. □
Theorem 8.
Let Θ ^ be a CCR on S . Then, each BF left (resp. right) ideal ξ = ( S ; ξ p , ξ n ) of S is a lower RBF left (resp. right) ideal of S .
Proof. 
For u , z S , consider
Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( u + z ) = s [ u + z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( s ) = s ( [ u ] Θ ^ + [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( s ) , sin ce [ u ] Θ ^ + [ z ] Θ ^ = [ u + z ] Θ ^ = ( b + c ) ( [ u ] Θ ^ + [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( b + c ) b [ u ] Θ ^ , c [ z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) ξ p ( c ) = b [ u ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) c [ z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( c ) = Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( u ) Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( z ) .
Similarly, Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( u + z ) Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( u ) Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( z ) . In addition,
Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( u z ) = s [ u z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( s ) = s ( [ u ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( s ) , sin ce [ u ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ = [ u z ] Θ ^ = b c ( [ u ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( b c ) = b [ u ] Θ ^ , c [ z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b c ) c [ z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( c ) = Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( z ) .
Similarly, Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( u z ) Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( z ) . Thus, Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) is a BF left ideal. Therefore, ξ is a lower RBF left ideal of S . Similarly, the case of a BF right ideal of S can be verified. □
The example defined below illustrates that Theorem 8 does not hold if the CR Θ ^ is not complete.
Example 2.
Let S = { ι , κ , ν } be a semiring with the addition “+” and multiplication “·” defined in Table 4 and Table 5.
Consider a binary relation Θ ^ = { ( ι , ι ) , ( κ , κ ) , ( ν , ν ) , ( ι , ν ) , ( ν , ι ) } on S . Then, Θ ^ is a CR on S . Defining the congruence classes { κ } and { ι , ν } , Θ ^ is not complete. Therefore, { κ } { ι , ν } = { ι } { ι , ν } .
We take a BF subset ξ of S , as below.
ξ = { ( ι , 0.8 , 0.45 ) , ( κ , 0.7 , 0.4 ) , ( ν , 0.5 , 0.4 ) } .
Then, ξ is a BF left ideal of S . Now,
Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) = { ( ι , 0.8 , 0.45 ) , ( κ , 0.7 , 0.4 ) , ( ν , 0.8 , 0.45 ) } , Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) = { ( ι , 0.5 , 0.4 ) , ( κ , 0.7 , 0.4 ) , ( ν , 0.5 , 0.4 ) } .
It can be vindicated by simple calculations that Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) is also a BF left ideal of S , whereas Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) is not, as Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ p ) ( ι . κ ) = 0.5 0.7 = Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ p ) ( κ ) .
Definition 7.
If Θ ^ is a CR on S and ξ B F ( S ) , then ξ is a lower (resp. upper) RBF bi-ideal of S if Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) ( Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) ) is a BF bi-ideal of S .
A BF subset ξ of S which is both a lower and upper RBF bi-ideal is called an RBF bi-ideal of S .
Theorem 9.
For a CR Θ ^ on S , each BF bi-ideal ξ = ( S ; ξ p , ξ n ) is an upper RBF bi-ideal of S .
Proof. 
A BF bi-ideal ξ is also a BF subsemiring of S . We have by Theorem 5 that Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) is a BF subsemiring of S . Now, for u , x , z S , consider
Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( u x z ) = s [ u x z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( s ) s ( [ u ] Θ ^ [ x ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( s ) , sin ce [ u ] Θ ^ [ x ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ [ u x z ] Θ ^ = b c d ( [ u ] Θ ^ [ x ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( b c d ) b [ u ] Θ ^ , c [ x ] Θ ^ , d [ z ] Θ ^ ( ξ p ( b ) ξ p ( d ) ) = b [ u ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) d [ z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( d ) = Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( u ) Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( z ) .
and Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( u x z ) Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( u ) Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( z ) . Thus, Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) is a BF bi-ideal of S . Therefore, ξ is an upper RBF bi-ideal of S . □
Theorem 10.
For a CCR Θ ^ on S , each BF bi-ideal ξ = ( S ; ξ p , ξ n ) is a lower RBF bi-ideal of S .
Proof. 
A BF bi-ideal ξ is also a BF subsemiring of S . In addition, by Theorem 6, Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) is a BF subsemiring of S . Now, for u , x , z S , consider
Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( u x z ) = s [ u x z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( s ) = s ( [ u ] Θ ^ [ x ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( s ) , sin ce [ u ] Θ ^ [ x ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ = [ u x z ] Θ ^ = b c d ( [ u ] Θ ^ [ x ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( b c d ) b [ u ] Θ ^ , c [ x ] Θ ^ , d [ z ] Θ ^ ( ξ p ( b ) ξ p ( d ) ) = b [ u ] Θ ^ ξ p ( b ) d [ z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( d ) = Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( u ) Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( z ) .
and Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( u x z ) Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( u ) Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( z ) . This implies Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) is a BF bi-ideal of S . Therefore, ξ is a lower RBF bi-ideal of S . □
The example defined below illustrates that Theorem 10 does not hold if CR Θ ^ is not complete.
Example 3.
Let S = { ι , κ , ν } be the semiring and Θ ^ be the CR on S , as defined in Example 2 , which is not complete, and define the congruence classes { κ } , { ι , ν } .
We take a BF subset ξ of S , as below.
ξ = { ( ι , 0.6 , 0.5 ) , ( κ , 0.4 , 0.2 ) , ( ν , 0.2 , 0.2 ) } .
Then, ξ is a BF bi-ideal of S . Then,
Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) = { ( ι , 0.6 , 0.5 ) , ( κ , 0.4 , 0.2 ) , ( ν , 0.6 , 0.5 ) } , Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) = { ( ι , 0.2 , 0.2 ) , ( κ , 0.4 , 0.4 ) , ( ν , 0.2 , 0.2 ) } .
It can be seen by simple calculations that Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) is also a BF bi-ideal, whereas Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) is not, as
Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ p ) ( κ ι κ ) = 0.2 0.4 = Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ p ) ( κ ) Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ p ) ( κ ) .
Definition 8.
For a CR Θ ^ on S and ξ B F ( S ) , ξ is a lower (resp. upper) RBF interior ideal of S if Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) ( Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) ) is a BF interior ideal of S .
If ξ is both a lower and upper RBF interior ideal, then it is called an RBF interior ideal of S .
Theorem 11.
For a CR Θ ^ on S , each BF interior ideal, ξ = ( S ; ξ p , ξ n ) is an upper RBF interior ideal of S .
Proof. 
Since a BF interior ideal ξ is also a BF subsemiring of S , by Theorem 5, Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) is a BF subsemiring of S . Now, for all u , x , z S ,
Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( u x z ) = s [ u x z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( s ) s ( [ u ] Θ ^ [ x ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( s ) , sin ce [ u ] Θ ^ [ x ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ [ u x z ] Θ ^ = b c d ( [ u ] Θ ^ [ x ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( b c d ) c [ x ] Θ ^ ( ξ p ( c ) ) = Θ ^ ¯ ξ p ( x ) .
Similarly, Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( u x z ) Θ ^ ¯ ξ n ( x ) . This implies Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) is a BF interior ideal of S . Therefore, ξ is an upper RBF interior ideal of S . □
Theorem 12.
Consider a CCR Θ ^ on S . Then, each BF interior ideal ξ = ( S ; ξ p , ξ n ) is a lower RBF interior ideal of S .
Proof. 
We have by Theorem 6 that Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) is a BF subsemiring of S . Consider, for every u , x , z S ,
Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( u x z ) = s [ u x z ] Θ ^ ξ p ( s ) = s ( [ u ] Θ ^ [ x ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( s ) , sin ce [ u ] Θ ^ [ x ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ = [ u x z ] Θ ^ = b c d ( [ u ] Θ ^ [ x ] Θ ^ [ z ] Θ ^ ) ξ p ( b c d ) c [ x ] Θ ^ ( ξ p ( c ) ) = Θ ^ ̲ ξ p ( x ) .
Similarly, Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( u x z ) Θ ^ ̲ ξ n ( x ) . Thus, Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) is a BF interior ideal of S . Therefore, ξ is a lower RBF interior ideal of S . □
The example defined below illustrates that Theorem 12 does not hold if the CR Θ ^ is not complete.
Example 4.
Let S = { ι , κ , ν } be the semiring and Θ ^ be the CR on S , as defined in Example 2 , which is not complete, and define the congruence classes { κ } a n d { ι , ν } .
We take a BF subset ξ of S , as below.
ξ = { ( ι , 0.6 , 0.6 ) , ( κ , 0.5 , 0.2 ) , ( ν , 0.1 , 0.5 ) } .
Thus, ξ is a BF interior ideal of S . Now,
Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) = { ( ι , 0.6 , 0.6 ) , ( κ , 0.5 , 0.2 ) , ( ν , 0.6 , 0.6 ) } , Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) = { ( ι , 0.1 , 0.5 ) , ( κ , 0.5 , 0.2 ) , ( ν , 0.1 , 0.5 ) } .
It can be seen by simple calculations that Θ ^ ¯ ( ξ ) is also a BF interior ideal of S , whereas Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ ) is not, because
Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ p ) ( ι κ ν ) = 0.1 0.5 = Θ ^ ̲ ( ξ p ) ( κ ) .

4. Comparative Study and Discussion

In this section, a connection between this paper and previous papers [29,32] is described. In [32], Ali et al. conducted work on approximations of hemirings (semirings with additive identity), and in [29], Shabir et al. characterized BF ideals and BF bi-ideals in semirings. In this paper, we give a new model of approximations of BF subsemirings (resp. ideals, bi-ideals and interior ideals). Our approach is better than previous approaches because this tackles the vague and complicated problems in both positive and negative aspects. Approximation of BF sets has not been commonly used in semirings so far, to our knowledge. Therefore, consideration of a new framework of approximation of BF subsemirings (resp. ideals) is reasonable and necessary.

5. Conclusions

In this paper, concepts from [29,32] are combined. The CRs and CCRs are used to evaluate rough approximations. These relations help us in a fruitful way to consider roughness in BF ideals of semirings. However, it is probably visible that during the case of lower approximation, the CR fails to obtain the favored result. To tackle this complication, CCRs are being taken into consideration. Furthermore, the idea of approximations is applied to BF subsemirings, BF bi-ideals and BF interior ideals by using CRs and CCRs in semirings.
In the future, we will study the roughness of BF ideals of ternary semigroups and ternary semirings. We will also give attention to the roughness of multipolar fuzzy ideals and multipolar fuzzy hyperideals of semihypergroups.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: S.B. and M.S.; Methodology: F.J.; Software: S.B.; Validation: A.N.A.-K.; Formal Analysis: F.J.; Investigation: M.S.; Resources: A.N.A.-K.; Data Curation, M.S.; Writing—Original Draft Preparation: F.J.; Writing—Review and Editing: S.B. and M.S.; Visualization: M.S.; Supervision: M.S.; Project Administration: F.J.; Funding Acquisition: A.N.A.-K. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

We did not use any data for this research work.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Zadeh, L.A. Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control. 1965, 8, 338–353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Rosenfeld, A. Fuzzy groups. J. Math. Anal. Appl. 1971, 35, 512–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  3. Mordeson, J.N.; Malik, D.S. Fuzzy Commutative Algebra; World Scientific: Singapore, 1998. [Google Scholar]
  4. Akram, M.; Dar, K.H.; Shum, K.P. Interval-valued (α,β)-fuzzy k-algebras. Appl. Soft. Comput. 2011, 11, 1213–1222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Mandal, D. Fuzzy ideals and fuzzy interior ideals in ordered semirings. Fuzzy Inf. Eng. 2014, 6, 101–114. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  6. Shabir, M.; Mahmood, T. Characterizations of Hemirings by (∈,∈∨qk)-Fuzzy Ideals. Comput. Math. Appl. 2011, 61, 1059–1078. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Zhan, J.; Dudek, W.A. Fuzzy h-ideals of hemirings. Inform. Sci. 2007, 3, 876–886. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  8. Zhang, W.R. Bipolar fuzzy sets and relations: A computational framework for cognitive modeling and multiagent decision analysis. In Proceedings of the Fuzzy Information Processing Socity Biannualn Conference, San Antonio, TX, USA, 18–21 December 1994; pp. 305–309. [Google Scholar]
  9. Kang, M.K.; Kang, J.G. Bipolar fuzzy set theory applied to sub-semigroups with operators in semigroups. Pure Appl. Math. 2012, 19, 23–35. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  10. Lee, K.J. Bipolar fuzzy subalgebras and bipolar fuzzy ideals of BCK/BCI-algebras. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. 2009, 32, 361–373. [Google Scholar]
  11. Zhou, M.; Li, S. Applications of bipolar fuzzy theory to hemirings. Int. J. Innov. Comput. Inf. Control 2014, 199, 767–781. [Google Scholar]
  12. Zhou, M.; Li, S. Applications of bipolar fuzzy sets in semirings. J. Math. Res. Appl. 2014, 34, 61–72. [Google Scholar]
  13. Mehmood, M.A.; Akram, M.; Alharbi, M.G.; Bashir, S. Optimization of-Type Fully Bipolar Fuzzy Linear Programming Problems. Math. Probl. Eng. 2021, 2021, 1199336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Mehmood, M.A.; Akram, M.; Alharbi, M.G.; Bashir, S. Solution of Fully Bipolar Fuzzy Linear Programming Models. Math. Probl. Eng. 2021, 2021, 9961891. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Saqib, M.; Akram, M.; Bashir, S. Certain efficient iterative methods for bipolar fuzzy system of linear equations. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 2020, 39, 71–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Saqib, M.; Akram, M.; Bashir, S.; Allahviranloo, T. Numerical solution of bipolar fuzzy initial value problem. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 2021, 40, 1309–1341. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Saqib, M.; Akram, M.; Bashir, S.; Allahviranloo, T. A Runge Kutta numerical method to approximate the solution of bipolar fuzzy initial value problems. Comput. Appl. Math. 2022, 40, 1–43. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Shabir, M.; Abbas, T.; Bashir, S.; Mazhar, R. Bipolar fuzzy hyperideals in regular and intra-regular semihypergroups. Comput. Appl. Math. 2021, 40, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Pawlak, Z. Rough sets. Int. J. Comput. Inf. Sci. 1982, 341–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Vandiver, H.S. Note on a simple type of algebra in which cancellation law of addition does not hold. Bull. Am. Math. Soc. 1934, 40, 914–920. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  21. Ahsan, J.; Saifullah, K.; Khan, M.F. Fuzzy semirings. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 1993, 60, 309–320. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Ahsan, J.; Mordeson, J.N.; Shabir, M. Fuzzy ideals of semirings. In Fuzzy Semirings with Applications to Automata Theory, Studies in Fuzziness and Soft Computing; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2012; Volume 278. [Google Scholar]
  23. Biswas, R.; Nanda, S. Rough groups and rough subgroups. Bull Polish Acad. Sci. Math. 1994, 42, 251–254. [Google Scholar]
  24. Davvaz, B. Roughness based on fuzzy ideals. Inf. Sci. 2006, 176, 2417–2437. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  25. Jun, Y.B. Roughness of gamma-subsemigroups/ideals in gamma-subsemigroups. Bull Korean Math. Soc. 2003, 40, 531–536. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  26. Kuroki, N. Rough ideals in semigroups. Inf. Sci. 1997, 100, 139–163. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hosseini, S.B.; Jafarzadeh, N.; Gholami, A. T-rough Ideal and T-rough Fuzzy Ideal in a Semigroup. In Advanced Materials Research; Trans Tech Publications Ltd.: Bäch SZ, Switzerland, 2012; Volume 433, pp. 4915–4919. [Google Scholar]
  28. Bashir, S.; Abbas, H.; Mazhar, R.; Shabir, M. Rough fuzzy ternary subsemigroups based on fuzzy ideals with three-dimensional congruence relation. Comput. Appl. Math. 2020, 39, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Shabir, M.; Liaquat, S.; Bashir, S. Regular and intra-regular semirings in terms of bipolar fuzzy ideals. Comput. Appl. Math. 2019, 4, 197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Bashir, S.; Fatima, M.; Shabir, M. Regular ordered ternary semigroups in terms of bipolar fuzzy ideals. Mathematics 2019, 7, 233. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  31. Bashir, S.; Mazhar, R.; Abbas, H.; Shabir, M. Regular ternary semirings in terms of bipolar fuzzy ideals. Comput. Appl. Math. 2020, 39, 1–18. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Ali, M.I.; Shabir, M.; Tanveer, S. Roughness in hemirings. Neural Comput. Appl. 2012, 21, 171–180. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Malik, N.; Shabir, M. A consensus model based on rough bipolar fuzzy approximations. J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 2019, 36, 3461–3470. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Figure 1. Graph of fuzzy set.
Figure 1. Graph of fuzzy set.
Mathematics 10 01009 g001
Figure 2. Graph of bipolar fuzzy set.
Figure 2. Graph of bipolar fuzzy set.
Mathematics 10 01009 g002
Table 1. List of acronyms.
Table 1. List of acronyms.
AcronymsRepresentation
BFBipolar fuzzy
RBFRough bipolar fuzzy
BF ( S ) A set of all bipolar fuzzy subsets of a semiring S
CRCongruence relation
CCRComplete congruence relation
Table 2. Table of binary addition. ( S = { 0 , 1 , ι , κ , ν } ).
Table 2. Table of binary addition. ( S = { 0 , 1 , ι , κ , ν } ).
+01 ι κ ν
001 ι κ ν
11 κ 1 ι 1
ι ι 1 ι κ ι
κ κ ι κ 1 κ
ν ν 1 ι κ ν
Table 3. Table of binary multiplication. ( S = { 0 , 1 , ι , κ , ν } ).
Table 3. Table of binary multiplication. ( S = { 0 , 1 , ι , κ , ν } ).
·01 ι κ ν
000000
101 ι κ ν
ι 0 ι ι ι ν
κ 0 κ ι 1 ν
ν 0 ν ν ν ν
Table 4. Table of binary addition. ( S = { ι , κ , ν } ).
Table 4. Table of binary addition. ( S = { ι , κ , ν } ).
+ ι κ ν
ι ι κ ν
κ κ κ κ
ν ν κ ν
Table 5. Table of binary multiplication. ( S = { ι , κ , ν } ).
Table 5. Table of binary multiplication. ( S = { ι , κ , ν } ).
· ι κ ν
ι ι ι ι
κ ι ι ι
ν ι ι ι
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Shabir, M.; Al-Kenani, A.N.; Javed, F.; Bashir, S. An Efficient Approach to Approximate Fuzzy Ideals of Semirings Using Bipolar Techniques. Mathematics 2022, 10, 1009. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10071009

AMA Style

Shabir M, Al-Kenani AN, Javed F, Bashir S. An Efficient Approach to Approximate Fuzzy Ideals of Semirings Using Bipolar Techniques. Mathematics. 2022; 10(7):1009. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10071009

Chicago/Turabian Style

Shabir, Muhammad, Ahmad N. Al-Kenani, Fawad Javed, and Shahida Bashir. 2022. "An Efficient Approach to Approximate Fuzzy Ideals of Semirings Using Bipolar Techniques" Mathematics 10, no. 7: 1009. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10071009

APA Style

Shabir, M., Al-Kenani, A. N., Javed, F., & Bashir, S. (2022). An Efficient Approach to Approximate Fuzzy Ideals of Semirings Using Bipolar Techniques. Mathematics, 10(7), 1009. https://doi.org/10.3390/math10071009

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop