Abstract
Fuzzy set (FS) theory and rough sets (RSs) are constructed to accommodate the data uncertainty. In contrast, the bipolar FS (BFS) theory can tackle the uncertainty and the bipolarity of the data in different circumstances. This article aims to introduce the idea of rough bipolar fuzzy ideals in semigroup (SG), which is a generalization of the concept of rough BFSs (RBFSs) in an SG. We also investigate the roughness in the bipolar fuzzy subsemigroup (BF-SSG) with the help of congruence relation (cng-R) defined on the SG and studied some relevant structural properties. Moreover, the idea is extended to the rough bipolar fuzzy left ideal, rough bipolar fuzzy right ideal, rough bipolar fuzzy two-sided ideal, rough bipolar fuzzy interior ideal, and rough bipolar fuzzy bi-ideal in SGs. Further, it is seen that cng-Rs and complete cng-Rs play vital roles in the construction of rough approximations of bipolar fuzzy ideals. Consequently, their associated properties are explored by using cng-Rs and complete cng-Rs.
Similar content being viewed by others
Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
Introduction
To handle uncertainty and imprecision of the data, FS theory and RS theory are two very prominent notions. Although these theories are different, they can be combined in a very productive way.
The basic idea of FSs established by Zadeh [61] is an extension of classical sets. This idea not only brought a revolution in mathematics and logic but also in science and technology. FS theory depends on the fuzzy membership function (MF), through which we can evaluate the membership degree (MD) of an object w.r.t to a set. The larger the MD, the greater the belongingness of that object to the associated set. In line with the progress and to deal with new challenges, it has been proposed several types of extensions of FSs [6, 24, 46].
The primary and fundamental idea of RS theory [47] was initially developed by Pawlak as a valuable mathematical approach to tackle uncertainty in data analysis. In the recent, this theory has got broad attention in the research domains in both real-life applications and the theory itself [4, 22, 45]. Dubois and Prade [14] suggested the idea of rough FS (RFS) by combining FSs and RSs. Initially, Rosenfeld [49] pioneered the idea of fuzzy subgroups. The concept of fuzzy SGs was introduced and studied by Kuroki [32] in 1991 for the first time. The fuzzy bi-ideals, fuzzy radicals, and fuzzy prime ideals of ordered SGs are presented in [28, 56]. Hussain et al. [23] offered the conception of roughness for fuzzy ideals in ordered SGs. Mahmood et al. [43] offered the concept of roughness in fuzzy filters and fuzzy ideals with thresholds in ordered semigroups. Bashir et al. [10] projected the idea of rough fuzzy ideals induced by set-valued homomorphism in ternary SGs. Qurashi and Shabir [48] proposed the notion of roughness in quantales using generalized approximation space. RSs are hybridized with FSs in [8, 14, 15]. Biswas and Nanda [12] fostered the notions of rough groups and rough subgroups.
In many real-life scenarios apart from the MF, the non-MF is also required. The MF speaks about the positive aspects of the data, while non-MF reveals the negative aspects of the data. To address such conditions, the concept of bipolar FSs (BFSs) was put forward by Zhang [62] as an extension of FSs. Since its inception, several scholars have taken an eager interest in the theory of BFSs, and many applications have been reported in different domains. Han et al. [18] established a bipolar-valued rough fuzzy set model with applications to the decision information system. Luo and Hu [38] presented a bipolar three-way decision model and its application in analyzing incomplete data. Mahmood et al. [41] developed a multiple-criteria decision-making based on BFSs. For more about BFSs, we refer to References [3, 5, 44, 57].
A lot of research has been accomplished on fuzzy and bipolar fuzzy structures. Mahmood and Munir [42] initiated bipolar fuzzy subgroups. Yiarayong [60] developed some algebraic structures on SGs by applying BFS theory. Jun and Park [25], Jun et al. [26], and Lee [34] implemented BFSs to BCK/BCI-algebras. Kim et al. [30] discovered several properties of bases, neighborhoods, and continuities in bipolar fuzzy topological spaces. Gaketem et al. [16] give the concept of SGs in terms of cubic bipolar fuzzy ideals. Kang and Kang [27] applied BFS to sub-SGs with operators in SGs. In [64, 65], Zhou and Li discussed applications of BFS theory to hemirings and semiring. Hayat et al. [19] present the notions of bipolar anti-fuzzy h-ideals and bipolar anti-fuzzy interior h-ideals in hemirings. In 2019, Shabir et al. [53] worked on regular and intra-regular semirings in terms of bipolar fuzzy ideals. Recently, it has been discussed algebra and \(\sigma \)-algebra via soft set theory by Al-shami et al. [7] and Ameen et al. [9].
Numerous attempts have been conducted to hybridize RSs and BFS theory [18, 57, 58]. The notion of RBFSs handles the vagueness and uncertainty, as well as bipolarity in data which can not be avoided in many real-life problems. The concepts of roughness, fuzziness, and bipolarity are also correlated to the SGs in different manners by many authors to study the data having the structure of SGs. Gul and Shabir [17] put forward a novel concept of the roughness of a set based on \((\alpha , \beta )\)-indiscernibility of a bipolar fuzzy relation. Yang et al. [57] fostered the idea of the transformation of bipolar fuzzy RS models. Malik and Shabir [40] developed a consensus model based on rough bipolar fuzzy approximations.
The theory of SGs is a substantial portion of algebra and this theory is frivolous without the study of ideals. Ideal theory in SGs is correlated to the FSs by many authors in different ways. Ahsan et al. [1] presented the fuzzy quasi-ideals in SGs. Ahsan et al. [2] established SGs characterized by their fuzzy bi-ideals. Fuzzy interior ideals in SGs were initiated by Hong et al. [21]. Khan and Shabir [29] pioneered the idea of (\(\alpha ,\beta \))-fuzzy interior ideals in ordered SGs. In [50], Shabir and Ali studied soft ideals and generalized fuzzy ideals in SGs. Shabir and Khan [51] fostered fuzzy quasi-ideals of ordered SGs. Characterizations of regular SGs by (\(\alpha ,\beta \))-fuzzy ideals are investigated by Shabir et al. [52]. Shabir et al. [54] offered the notions of SGs characterized by (\(\epsilon ,\epsilon \vee qk\))-fuzzy ideals. It was applied fuzzy settings to address various practical issues as given in [55, 63].
In SGs, the idea of rough ideals was first initiated by Kuroki [33] in 1997. Bipolar fuzzy ideals in SGs were presented by Kim et al. [31]. Yiarayong [60] proposed a new approach to deal with the algebraic structure of SGs by applying BFS theory. In 2011, Hedayati [20] defined the interval-valued \((\alpha ,\beta )\)-fuzzy bi-ideals of SGs, and investigated some fundamental properties. Bashir et al. [11] investigated the roughness of fuzzy ideals with three-dimensional congruence relation of ternary SGs.
Based on the research survey, we can observe that many scholars have studied the roughness of various algebraic structures. According to the best of our knowledge, in the current literature on BFSs and RS theory, there are no studies of SGs and ideals. Therefore, in this study, we attempt to fill the research gap by developing the idea of rough bipolar fuzzy ideals in SGs. In this respect, we have discussed the BFSs and bipolar fuzzy ideals (BF ideals) in an SG. Moreover, we studied the roughness in the BF-SSGs with the help of a cng-R defined on the SG and investigated some properties of the rough BF-SSG. Also, the rough BF ideal (RBF ideal), rough bipolar fuzzy interior ideal (RBFI ideal), and rough bipolar fuzzy bi-ideal (RBF bi-ideal) in the SGs are defined and discussed in this study.
The outliving part of the article is presented as follows: In section “inlinkPreliminariessec2”, some prior literature which is necessary for understanding our research work. Section “Bipolar fuzzy sets in semigroups” is dedicated to study BFSs in SGs along with their important structural properties. Section “Rough bipolar fuzzy sets in semigroups” offers a novel idea of rough BFS in SGs. In Section “Rough bipolar fuzzy ideals in semigroups”, we established the concept of RBF ideals in SGs. In Section “Comparative analysis and discussion”, a comparative study of the proposed technique is given with some already existing techniques in the literature. Finally, in Section “Conclusions”, we summarize our findings and give a few recommendations for future perspectives.
Preliminaries
In this section, we will give and deliberate several rudimentary ideas associated with RSs, FSs, BFSs, ideals, rough ideals in SGs, and BF ideals in SGs.
RS theory
One can always relate certain information to each element of the universe. The RS theory [47] uses the lower and upper approximations of a cluster of elements to describe how close the elements are to the data associated with them. Pawlak constructed these approximations from an equivalence relation (ER) \(\sigma \) on a universe U of objects. The equivalence class in \(U/\sigma \) consisting of the element x of U is symbolized by \([x]_{\sigma }\). These classes work as the fundamental building blocks of the information.
Definition 1
[47] Let U be a finite and non-empty universe, and \(\sigma \subseteq U\times U\) be an ER. With the help of this ER \(\sigma \), a subset S of U can be characterized through a pair of lower and upper rough approximations
The pair \(\big ( {\underline{\sigma }}(S),{\overline{\sigma }}(S) \big )\) is called an RS of S in U.
FSs and BFSs
The theory of FSs measures the uncertainty of phenomena related to the objects through a mapping, known as the MF.
Definition 2
[61] A FS \(\xi \) in U is characterized by a MF \(\xi : U \longrightarrow \left[ 0, 1\right] \). Thus, an FS \(\xi \) assigns to each element \(x\in U\), a membership value \(\xi (x)\) specifying the degree to which x belongs to \(\xi \).
The idea of BFS was introduced by Zhang [62] as a generalization of the FSs to resolve a specific class of DM problems. In the BFSs, the MDs are described by a pair of MFs: a positive MF (PMF) and a negative MF (NMF).
Definition 3
[62] A BFS \(\mu \) in U is a structure of the form
where \(\mu ^{P}: U \longrightarrow \left[ 0, 1\right] \) and \(\mu ^{N}: U \longrightarrow \left[ -1, 0\right] \) are the PMF and the NMF, respectively.
If \(\mu \) is defined by a property A and \(x\in U\), then the PMF \(\mu ^{P}(x)\) indicates the degree of fulfillment of x to the property A, while the NMF \(\mu ^{N}(x)\) demonstrates the fulfillment degree of x to some implicit counter property of A. If \(\mu ^{P}(x) = 0 = \mu ^{N}(x)\), then the object x is irrelevant to the property A.
The collection of all BFSs in U is represented by BF(U). We write \(\mu (x) = \big (\mu ^{P}(x), \mu ^{N}(x)\big )\) for \(\big (x, \mu ^{P}(x), \mu ^{N}(x)\big )\).
Lee [35] defined some basic operations on the BFSs.
Definition 4
[35] Let \(\mu , \nu \in BF(U)\). Then, \(\mu \) is contained in \(\nu \), that is, \(\mu \subseteq \nu \), if \(\mu ^{P}(x)\le \nu ^{P}(x)\) and \(\mu ^{N}(x)\ge \nu ^{N}(x)\) for all \(x\in U\). Clearly, \(\mu = \nu \) if and only if \(\mu \subseteq \nu \) and \(\nu \subseteq \mu \).
Definition 5
[35] The whole BFS in U is represented by \(I_{U} = \big (I^{P}, I^{N} \big )\), where \(I^{P}(x) = 1\) and \(I^{N}(x) = 0\) for all \(x \in U\). The null BFS in U is expressed as \(O_{U}= \big (O^{P}, O^{N}\big )\), where \(O^{P}(x) = 0\) and \(O^{N}(x) = -1\) for all \(x \in U\). Thus, \(I_{U}(x) = (1,0)\) and \(O_{U}(x)= (0,-1)\) for all \(x\in U\).
Definition 6
[35] Let \(\mu , \nu \in BF(U)\). Then
Definition 7
[35] The complement \(\mu ^c\) of \(\mu \in BF(U)\) is characterized as
Ideals and rough ideals in SGs
Here, we review some definitions of ideals and rough ideals in SGs and their characterizations.
Recall that, an SG \(\varUpsilon \) is a non-empty set on which an associative binary operation is defined. Take a non-empty subset Q of a SG \(\varUpsilon \). Then
-
Q is called a subsemigroup (SSG) of \(\varUpsilon \), if \(ab\in Q\) for each \(a, b\in Q\) (that is, \(QQ \subseteq Q\)).
-
Q is called a left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), if \(xa\in Q\) (that is, \(\varUpsilon Q \subseteq Q\)) and Q is the right ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), if \(ax \in Q\) (that is, \(Q\varUpsilon \subseteq Q\)) for each \(a\in Q\) and \(x\in \varUpsilon \).
-
Q is an ideal of \(\varUpsilon ,\) if it is both, the left and right ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
-
Q is called an interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), if \(xay \in Q\) for each \(a\in Q\) and \(x,y\in \varUpsilon \) (that is, \(\varUpsilon Q\varUpsilon \subseteq Q\)).
-
Q is called a bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), if Q is an SSG of \(\varUpsilon \) and \(axb\in Q\) for each \(a,b\in Q\), and \(x\in \varUpsilon \) (that is, \(Q\varUpsilon Q\subseteq Q\)).
Definition 8
A cng-R \(\Re \) on an SG \(\varUpsilon \) is an ER \(\Re \) on \(\varUpsilon \) which is right and left compatible \(\big (\hbox {that is}, (x,y)\in \Re \) implies that \((ax, ay), (xa, ya)\in \Re \) for each \(a, x, y \in \varUpsilon \big )\). Let \([x]_{\Re }\) denote the \(\Re \)-cng-class of \(x\in \varUpsilon \). For a cng-R \(\Re \) on \(\varUpsilon \), we generally have \([x]_{\Re }[y]_{\Re }\subseteq [xy]_{\Re }\) for each \(x, y\in \varUpsilon \). A cng-R \(\Re \) on \(\varUpsilon \) is complete, if \([x]_{\Re }[y]_{\Re }=[xy]_{\Re }\) for each \(x, y \in \varUpsilon \).
This can be observed in the subsequent example.
Example 1
Let \(\varUpsilon =\{s,t,u,v\}\) represent an SG whose table of binary operation is given below.
We take two cng-Rs \(\Re _{1}\) and \(\Re _{2}\) on \(\varUpsilon \), defined below
Then, \(\Re _{1}\) defines the cng-classes \(\{s\},\{t\}\) and \(\{u,v\},\) while \(\Re _{2}\) defines the cng-classes \(\{s\},\{t,u\}\) and \(\{v\}.\) It can be easily checked that, \([x]_{\Re _{1}}[y]_{\Re _{1}}=[xy]_{\Re _{1}}\) for each \(x,y\in \varUpsilon \). That is, \(\Re _{1}\) is a complete cng-R on \(\varUpsilon \). While, \([v]_{\Re _{2}}[v]_{\Re _{2}}\subsetneq [vv]_{\Re _{2}}\) for \(v\in \varUpsilon \), because \([v]_{\Re _{2}} = \{v\}\), so \([v]_{\Re _{2}}[v]_{\Re _{2}} = \{vv\} = \{u\}\) and \([vv]_{\Re _{2}}=[u]_{\Re _{2}} = \{t,u\}\). This means that \(\Re _{2}\) is not a complete cng-R.
Rough subsets in SGs were defined by Kuroki [33], which are given below. He also gave some characterizations of the lower and upper approximations of these subsets under the cng-R defined on the SG.
Definition 9
[33] Let \(\varUpsilon \) be an SG and \(\Re \) be a cng-R on \(\varUpsilon \). The lower and upper approximations of a subset Q of \(\varUpsilon \) are the subsets \({\underline{Q}}\) and \({\overline{Q}}\) of \(\varUpsilon \), respectively, which are defined as follows:
A subset Q of \(\varUpsilon \) is said to be a rough subset of the SG \(\varUpsilon \), if \({\underline{Q}} \ne {\overline{Q}}\); otherwise, Q is a definable subset of \(\varUpsilon \). The subset Q of an SG \(\varUpsilon \) is called a lower (an upper) rough SSG of \(\varUpsilon \), if \({\underline{Q}}\) \(({\overline{Q}})\) is an SSG of \(\varUpsilon \). The subset Q of \(\varUpsilon \) is a lower rough left (right, two-sided, interior, bi-) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) if \({\underline{Q}}\) is a left (right, two-sided, interior, bi-) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) and Q is an upper rough left (right, two-sided, interior, bi-) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) if \({\overline{Q}}\) is a left (right, two-sided, interior, bi-) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). The subset Q of \(\varUpsilon \) is called a rough left (right, two-sided, interior, bi-) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), if it is both, lower and upper left (right, two-sided, interior, bi-) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
Theorem 1
[33] Let \(\Re \) be a cng-R on an SG \(\varUpsilon \). Then, we have the subsequent assentations.
-
1.
Each SSG of \(\varUpsilon \) is an upper rough SSG of \(\varUpsilon \).
-
2.
Each left (right, bi-) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) is an upper rough left (right, bi-) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
Theorem 2
[33] Let \(\Re \) be a complete cng-R on a SG \(\varUpsilon \). Then, we have the subsequent assentations.
-
1.
Each SSG Q of \(\varUpsilon \) is a lower rough SSG of \(\varUpsilon \), if \({\underline{Q}}\ne \phi \).
-
2.
Each left (right, bi-) ideal Q of \(\varUpsilon \) is a lower rough left (right, bi-) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), if \({\underline{Q}}\ne \phi \).
BF ideals in SGs
The BF ideals in SGs were defined by Kim et al. [31]. Yaqoob [59] studied BF ideals in LA-SGs. This subsection reviews some definitions of the BF ideals in an SG.
Definition 10
[59] Let \(\varUpsilon \) be an SG and let \(\lambda , \mu \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\). The composition \(\lambda \circ \mu \) of \(\lambda \) and \(\mu \) in \(\varUpsilon \) is defined as
where
and
for each \(s\in \varUpsilon \).
Definition 11
[31] A BFS \(\lambda \) in a SG \(\varUpsilon \) is called a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \) if for each \(m, n\in \varUpsilon \)
Definition 12
[31] A BFS \(\lambda \) in an SG \(\varUpsilon \) is called a BF left (or right) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) if \(\lambda ^{P}(mn) \ge \lambda ^{P}(n)\) and \(\lambda ^{N}(mn)\le \lambda ^{N}(n)\) (or \(\lambda ^{P}(mn)\ge \lambda ^{P}(m)\) and \(\lambda ^{N}(mn)\le \lambda ^{N}(n)\)) for each \(m,n\in \varUpsilon \).
A BFS \(\lambda \) in a \(\varUpsilon \) is called a BF ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) if it is both, a BF left and a BF right ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), that is, \(\lambda ^{P}(mn)\ge \lambda ^{P}(m)\vee \lambda ^{P}(n)\) and \(\lambda ^{N}(mn)\le \lambda ^{N}(m)\wedge \lambda ^{N}(n)\) for each \(m, n \in \varUpsilon \).
Definition 13
[59] A BFS \(\lambda \) in an SG \(\varUpsilon \) is called a BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) if for each \(s, t, u \in \varUpsilon \)
Definition 14
[31] A BF-SSG \(\lambda \) of an SG \(\varUpsilon \) is called a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) if for each \(s, t, u \in \varUpsilon \)
Example 2
Recall the SG \(\varUpsilon =\{s,t,u,v\}\) as established in Example 1. Take some BFSs in \(\varUpsilon \), defined below
Simple calculations confirm that \(\lambda _{1}\) is a BF-SSG, \(\lambda _{2}\) is a BF left ideal, \(\lambda _{3}\) is a BF interior ideal, and \(\lambda _{4}\) is a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
Bipolar fuzzy sets in semigroups
In this section, we link the BF-SSGs to the SSGs of an SG and the BF left (right, two-sided, interior, bi-) ideals in SGs to the left (right, two-sided, interior, bi-) ideals of SGs, using the \(\alpha \)-level P-cuts (positive cut) and \(\alpha \)-level N-cuts (negative cut) of the BFS.
Definition 15
Let \(\lambda \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\). Then, the \(\alpha -\) level P-cut and the \(\alpha -\) level N-cut of \(\lambda \) in U are, respectively, defined as
respectively, for each \(0 \lvertneqq \alpha \le 1\). Then, we have the following results.
Theorem 3
Let \(\varUpsilon \) be an SG and \(\lambda \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\). Then, \(\lambda \) is a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \) if and only if \(\lambda _{\alpha }\) and \(\lambda ^{\alpha }\), if non-empty, are SSGs of \(\varUpsilon \), for each \(\alpha \in [0,1]\).
Proof
Let \(\lambda \) be a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \), and let \(a, b\in \lambda _{\alpha }\). Then, \(\lambda ^{p}(a)\geqslant \alpha \) and \(\lambda ^{p}(b)\geqslant \alpha \). Since \(\lambda \) is a BF-SSGs of \(\varUpsilon \), so
which implies that \(ab\in \lambda _{\alpha }\). Therefore, \(\lambda _{\alpha }\) is an SSG of \(\varUpsilon \) for each \(\alpha \). Similarly, \(\lambda ^{\alpha }\) is an SSG of \(\varUpsilon \) for each \(\alpha \).
Conversely, let \(\lambda _{\alpha }\) and \(\lambda ^{\alpha }\) be non-empty SSGs of \(\varUpsilon \) for each \(\alpha \in [0, 1],\) and let \(a, b\in \varUpsilon \). Denote \(\lambda ^{P}(a)\wedge \lambda ^{P}(b)\) by \(\alpha _{\circ }\in [0, 1]\). Then surely, \(\lambda ^{P}(a),\lambda ^{P}(b)\geqslant \alpha _{\circ }\), and so, \(a, b\in \lambda _{\alpha _{\circ }}\). However, \(\lambda _{\alpha _{\circ }}\) is an SSG of \(\varUpsilon \), so \(ab\in \lambda _{\alpha _{\circ }}\); which yields \(\lambda ^{P}(ab)\geqslant \alpha _{\circ }\). That is
Now, denote \(\lambda ^{N}(a)\vee \lambda ^{N}(b)\) by \(-\alpha _{1},\) where \(\alpha _{1}\in [0,1]\). Then, \(\lambda ^{N}(a),\lambda ^{N}(b)\leqslant -\alpha _{1}\), and so, \(a,b\in \lambda ^{\alpha _{1}}\). However, \(\lambda ^{\alpha _{1}}\) is an SSG of \(\varUpsilon \), so \(ab\in \lambda ^{\alpha _{1}}\); which yields \(\lambda ^{N}(ab)\leqslant -\alpha _{1}.\) That is
Assertions (3.3) and (3.4) prove that \(\lambda \) is a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \). \(\square \)
Theorem 4
Let \(\varUpsilon \) be an SG and \(\lambda \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\). Then, \(\lambda \) is a BF left (right, two-sided) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) if and only if \(\lambda _{\alpha }\) and \(\lambda ^{\alpha },\) if non-empty, are left (right, two-sided) ideals of \(\varUpsilon \), for each \(\alpha \in [0,1]\).
Proof
Let \(\lambda \) be a BF left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) and let \(x\in \varUpsilon \). Then, for any \(\alpha \in [0,1]\) and for each \(a\in \lambda _{\alpha }\), we have
which implies that \(xa\in \lambda _{\alpha }\) for each \(x\in \varUpsilon \) and \(a\in \lambda _{\alpha }\). That is, \(\lambda _{\alpha }\) is a left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) for each \(\alpha \in [0,1]\). Now, for each \(a\in \lambda ^{\alpha },\) we have
which implies that \(xa\in \lambda ^{\alpha }\) for each \(x\in \varUpsilon \) and \(a\in \lambda ^{\alpha }\). That is, \(\lambda ^{\alpha }\) is also a left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) for each \(\alpha \in [0,1]\).
Conversely, let \(\lambda _{\alpha }\) and \(\lambda ^{\alpha }\) be non-empty left ideals of \(\varUpsilon \) for each \(\alpha \in [0, 1]\) and let \(a, b\in \varUpsilon \). Denote \(\lambda ^{P}(b)\) by \(\alpha _{\circ }\in [0, 1]\). Then surely, \(b\in \lambda _{\alpha _{\circ }}.\) Thus, \(ab\in \lambda _{\alpha _{\circ }},\) as \(\lambda _{\alpha _{\circ }}\) is a left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \); which gives \(\lambda ^{P}(ab)\geqslant \alpha _{\circ }\). That is
Now, denote \(\lambda ^{N}(b)\) by \(-\alpha _{1},\) where \(\alpha _{1}\in [0,1]\). Then, \(b\in \lambda ^{\alpha _{1}}\) and \(\lambda ^{\alpha _{1}} \) is a left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). Thus, \(ab\in \lambda ^{\alpha _{1}}\); which gives \(\lambda ^{N}(ab)\leqslant -\alpha _{1}\). That is
The expressions (3.5) and (3.6) prove that \(\lambda \) is a BF left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
Similar is the proof when \(\lambda \) is a BF right (or two-sided) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). \(\square \)
Theorem 5
Let \(\varUpsilon \) be an SG and \(\lambda \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\). Then, \(\lambda \) is a BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) if and only if \(\lambda _{\alpha }\) and \(\lambda ^{\alpha },\) if non-empty, are interior ideals of \(\varUpsilon \), for each \(\alpha \in [0,1]\).
Proof
Let \(\lambda \) be a BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) and let \(x,y\in \varUpsilon \). Then, for any \(\alpha \in [0,1]\) and for each \(a\in \lambda _{\alpha }\), we have
which implies that \(xay\in \lambda _{\alpha }\) for each \(x,y\in \varUpsilon \) and \(a\in \lambda _{\alpha }\). That is, \(\lambda _{\alpha }\) is an interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) for each \(\alpha \in [0,1]\). Now, for each \(a\in \lambda ^{\alpha },\) we have
which implies that \(xay\in \lambda ^{\alpha }\) for each \(x,y\in \varUpsilon \) and \(a\in \lambda ^{\alpha }\). That is, \(\lambda ^{\alpha }\) is also an interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) for each \(\alpha \in [0,1]\).
Conversely, let \(\lambda _{\alpha }\) and \(\lambda ^{\alpha }\) be non-empty interior ideals of \(\varUpsilon \) for each \(\alpha \in [0, 1]\) and let \(a, b, c\in \varUpsilon \). Denote \(\lambda ^{P}(b)\) by \(\alpha _{\circ }\in [0, 1]\). Then surely, \(b \in \lambda _{\alpha _{\circ }}.\) Thus, \(abc\in \lambda _{\alpha _{\circ }}\), as \(\lambda _{\alpha _{\circ }}\) is interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). Which gives \(\lambda ^{P}(abc)\geqslant \alpha _{\circ }\). That is
Now, denote \(\lambda ^{N}(b)\) by \(-\alpha _{1},\) where \(\alpha _{1}\in [0,1]\). Surely, \(b\in \lambda ^{\alpha _{1}}\) and \(\lambda ^{\alpha _{1}}\) is an interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). Thus, \(abc\in \lambda ^{\alpha _{1}}\) for each \(a,c\in \varUpsilon \); which gives \(\lambda ^{N}(abc)\leqslant -\alpha _{1}\). That is
The expressions (3.7) and (3.8) prove that \(\lambda \) is a BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). \(\square \)
Theorem 6
Let \(\varUpsilon \) be an SG and \(\lambda \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\). Then, \(\lambda \) is a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) if and only if \(\lambda _{\alpha }\) and \(\lambda ^{\alpha }\), if they are non-empty, are bi-ideals of \(\varUpsilon \), for each \(\alpha \in [0,1]\).
Proof
Let \(\lambda \) be a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). Then, \(\lambda \) is also a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \). Hence, \(\lambda _{\alpha }\) and \(\lambda ^{\alpha }\), if non-empty, are SSGs of \(\varUpsilon \), for each \(\alpha \in [0, 1]\), by Theorem 3. Now, let \(a, c\in \lambda _{\alpha }\). Then, \(\lambda ^{P}(a)\geqslant \alpha \) and \(\lambda ^{P}(c)\geqslant \alpha \). Since \(\lambda \) is a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), so for each \(b \in \varUpsilon \), we have
which implies \(abc\in \lambda _{\alpha }\) for each \(a,c\in \lambda _{\alpha }\) and \(b\in \varUpsilon \). Therefore, \(\lambda _{\alpha }\) is a bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) for each \(\alpha \). Similarly, \(\lambda ^{\alpha }\) is a bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) for each \(\alpha \).
Conversely, let \(\lambda _{\alpha }\) and \(\lambda ^{\alpha }\) be non-empty bi-ideals of \(\varUpsilon \) for each \(\alpha \in [0, 1]\), and let \(a, b, c \in \varUpsilon \). Denote \(\lambda ^{P}(a)\wedge \lambda ^{P}(c)\) by \(\alpha _{\circ }\in [0,1]\). Then surely, \(\lambda ^{P}(a),\lambda ^{P}(c)\geqslant \alpha _{\circ }\), and so \(a, c \in \lambda _{\alpha _{\circ }}\). However, \(\lambda _{\alpha _{\circ }}\) is a bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). Therefore, \(abc\in \lambda _{\alpha _{\circ }}\) for each \(b\in \varUpsilon \); which yields \(\lambda ^{P}(abc)\geqslant \alpha _{\circ }\). Or
Now, denote \(\lambda ^{N}(a)\vee \lambda ^{N}(c)\) by \(-\alpha _{1},\) where \(\alpha _{1}\in [0,1]\). Then, \(\lambda ^{N}(a),\lambda ^{N}(c)\leqslant -\alpha _{1}\), and so, \(a,c\in \lambda ^{\alpha _{1}}\). However, \(\lambda ^{\alpha _{1}}\) is a bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). Therefore, \(abc\in \lambda ^{\alpha _{1}}\) for each \(b\in \varUpsilon \); which yields \(\lambda ^{N}(abc)\leqslant -\alpha _{1}\). Or
Assertions (3.9) and (3.10) prove that \(\lambda \) is a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). \(\square \)
Rough bipolar fuzzy sets in semigroups
The RBFSs in SGs are defined with the help of lower and upper RBF approximations of the BFSs in the SG \(\varUpsilon \), on which a cng-R \(\Re \) is defined. These approximations are defined and discussed in this section. We also define the RBF SSG of \(\varUpsilon \).
Definition 16
Let \(\Re \) be a cng-R on a SG \(\varUpsilon \) and let \(\lambda \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\). The lower and upper RBF approximations of \(\lambda \) w.r.t \(\Re \) are the BFSs \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) and \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) in \(\varUpsilon \), respectively, defined for each \(s\in \varUpsilon \) as
where
If \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )={\overline{\Re }}(\lambda )\), then \(\lambda \) is said to be \(\Re \)-definable; otherwise, \(\lambda \) is an RBFS in \( \varUpsilon .\)
In [40], some characterizations of RBFSs in a non-empty set U having an ER \(\Re \) were presented. These characterizations are also valid when the set U is replaced by the SG \(\varUpsilon \) and the ER \(\Re \) on U is replaced by the cng-R \(\Re \) on \(\varUpsilon \). Therefore, the results in [40] also hold for the lower and upper RBF approximations of the BFSs in the SG \(\varUpsilon \), given in Definition 16. Some other results are as follows.
Theorem 7
Let \(\Re \) be a cng-R on a SG \(\varUpsilon \). Then, \(\overline{\Re }(\lambda )\circ {\overline{\Re }}(\nu )\subseteq \overline{\Re }(\lambda \circ \nu )\) holds for each \(\lambda ,\nu \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\).
Proof
Since \(\Re \) is a cng-R on \(\varUpsilon \), so \([x]_{\Re }[y]_{\Re }\subseteq [xy]_{\Re }\) for each \(x, y\in \varUpsilon \). Let \(\lambda , \nu \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\). We have
Take any \(s\in \varUpsilon \). If there exist elements \(x,y\in \varUpsilon \), such that \(s=xy,\) then we have
If there are no such elements \(x,y\in \varUpsilon \), such that \(s=xy,\) then
Similarly, for each \(s\in \varUpsilon \), we have
Thus, by Definition 3, we have
for each \(\lambda ,\nu \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\). \(\square \)
Theorem 8
Let \(\Re \) be a complete cng-R on an SG \(\varUpsilon \). Then, \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\circ {\underline{\Re }}(\nu )\subseteq {\underline{\Re }}(\lambda \circ \nu )\) holds for each \(\lambda , \nu \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\).
Proof
Since \(\Re \) is a complete cng-R on \(\varUpsilon \), so \([x]_{\Re }[y]_{\Re } = [xy]_{\Re }\) for each \(x, y \in \varUpsilon \). Let \(\lambda ,\nu \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\). We have
Take any \(s\in \varUpsilon \). If there exist elements \(x,y\in \varUpsilon \), such that \(s = xy,\) then we have
If there are no such elements \(x, y \in \varUpsilon \), such that \(s = xy,\) then
Similarly, for each \(s\in \varUpsilon \), we have
Thus, by Definition 3, we get
for each \(\lambda ,\nu \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\). \(\square \)
Definition 17
Let \(\Re \) be a cng-R on an SG \(\varUpsilon \) and let \(\lambda \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\). Then, \(\lambda \) is a lower (or upper) RBF SSG of \(\varUpsilon \), if \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) (or \({\overline{\Re }} (\lambda ))\) is a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \).
A BFS \(\lambda \) in \(\varUpsilon \), which is both, lower and upper RBF SSG of \(\varUpsilon \), is called an RBF SSG of \(\varUpsilon \).
Theorem 9
Let \(\Re \) be a cng-R on a SG \(\varUpsilon \). Then, each BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \) is an upper RBF SSG of \(\varUpsilon \).
Proof
Take a BF-SSG \(\lambda \) of \(\varUpsilon \). Then, \(\lambda ^{P}(ab)\ge \lambda ^{P}(a)\wedge \lambda ^{P}(b)\) and \(\lambda ^{N}(ab)\le \lambda ^{N}(a)\vee \lambda ^{N}(b)\) for each \(a,b\in \varUpsilon \). Now, for each \(x,y\in \varUpsilon \), we have
and
This verifies that \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \). Thus, \(\lambda \) is an upper RBF SSG of \(\varUpsilon \). \(\square \)
The converse statement of the Theorem 9 is invalid in general, as exhibited in the next example.
Example 3
Let \(\varUpsilon = \{a,b,c,d\}\) represent an SG with the following table of binary operation given in Table 2.
Consider a binary relation \(\Re = \big \{(a,a),(b,b),(c,c),(d,d),(b,d),(d,b) \big \}\) on \(\varUpsilon \). Then, \(\Re \) is a cng-R on \(\varUpsilon \), defining the cng-classes \(\{a\},\{c\},\{b,d\}\). We take a BFS \(\lambda \) in \(\varUpsilon \), as follows:
The upper RBF approximation of \(\lambda \) is calculated as
Simple calculations verify that \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \). However, \(\lambda \) is not a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \), as
Theorem 10
Let \(\Re \) be a complete cng-R on a SG \(\varUpsilon \). Then, each BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \) is a lower RBF SSG of \(\varUpsilon \).
Proof
Let \(\Re \) be a complete cng-R on \(\varUpsilon \) and \(\lambda \) be a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \). Now, for each \(x, y\in \varUpsilon \), we have
and
This verifies that \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \). Hence, \(\lambda \) is a lower RBF SSG of \(\varUpsilon \). \(\square \)
The converse statement of the Theorem 10 is not true generally, as exhibited in the next example.
Example 4
Let us consider an SG \(\varUpsilon =\{s,t,u,v\}\) whose binary operation is given in Table 3.
Take a cng-R \(\Re \) on \(\varUpsilon \), defining cng-classes \(\{s\},\{t\}\) and \(\{u,v\}\). Then, \(\Re \) is a complete cng-R on \(\varUpsilon \). We take a BFS \(\lambda \) in \(\varUpsilon \), as follows:
The lower RBF approximation \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) of \(\lambda \) is calculated as
Simple calculations verify that \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \). However, \(\lambda \) is not a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \), as
The next example demonstrates that Theorem 10 is invalid if the cng-R \(\Re \) is not complete.
Example 5
Recall the SG \(\varUpsilon =\{a,b,c,d\}\) and the cng-R \(\Re \) on \(\varUpsilon \), as established in Example 3. Then, \(\Re \) is not complete. We take a BFS \(\lambda \) in \(\varUpsilon \), as follows:
Then, \(\lambda \) is a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon .\) The RBF approximations of \(\lambda \) are calculated by Definition 16 as
Simple calculations verify that \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is also a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon ,\) while \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is not a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \), as
Rough bipolar fuzzy ideals in semigroups
This section presents the notions of the RBF left ideal, RBF right ideal, RBF two-sided ideal, RBFI ideal, and RBF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). We also explore some of their characteristics.
Definition 18
Let \(\Re \) be a cng-R on an SG \(\varUpsilon \) and let \(\lambda \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\). Then, \(\lambda \) is a lower RBF left (right, two-sided) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), if \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF left (right, two-sided) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
Definition 19
Let \(\Re \) be a cng-R on an SG \(\varUpsilon \) and let \(\lambda \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\). Then, \(\lambda \) is an upper RBF left (right, two-sided) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), if \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF left (right, two-sided) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
A BFS \(\lambda \) in \(\varUpsilon \), which is both, lower and upper RBF left (right, two-sided) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), is called an RBF left (right, two-sided) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
Theorem 11
Let \(\Re \) be a cng-R on an SG \(\varUpsilon \). Then, \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda \circ \nu )\subseteq {\overline{\Re }}(\lambda )\cap {\overline{\Re }}(\nu )\) holds for each BF right ideal \(\lambda \) and BF left ideal \(\nu \) of \(\varUpsilon \).
Proof
Take a BF right ideal \(\lambda \) and a BF left ideal \(\nu \) of \(\varUpsilon \). We have
Now, for each \(s\in \varUpsilon \), we have
Similarly, for each \(s\in \varUpsilon \), we have
Thus, Definition 3 gives
for each BF right ideal \(\lambda \) and BF left ideal \(\nu \) of \(\varUpsilon \). \(\square \)
Theorem 12
Let \(\Re \) be a cng-R on a SG \(\varUpsilon \). Then, each BF left (right, two-sided) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) is an upper RBF left (right, two-sided) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
Proof
Take a BF left ideal \(\lambda \) of \(\varUpsilon \). Then, \(\lambda ^{P}(ab)\ge \lambda ^{P}(b)\) and \(\lambda ^{N}(ab)\le \lambda ^{N}(b)\) for each \( a,b\in \varUpsilon .\) Now, for each \(x,y\in \varUpsilon \), we have
and
This verifies that \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). Hence, \(\lambda \) is an upper RBF left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
Similarly, the cases of BF right ideal and BF (two-sided) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) can be verified. \(\square \)
The converse statement of the Theorem 12 is not valid generally, as shown in the next example.
Example 6
Let \(\varUpsilon =\{k,l,m,n\}\) represent an SG with binary operation given in Table 4.
Let \(\Re \) be a cng-R on \(\varUpsilon \), defining cng-classes \(\{k,l,n\}\) and \(\{m\}\). We take a BFS \(\lambda \) in \(\varUpsilon \), defined as follows:
The upper RBF approximation of \(\lambda \) is calculated as
Simple calculations verify that \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). However, \(\lambda \) is not a BF left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), as
Theorem 13
Let \(\Re \) be a complete cng-R on a SG \(\varUpsilon \). Then, each BF left (right, two-sided) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) is a lower RBF left (right, two-sided) ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
Proof
Let \(\Re \) be a complete cng-R on \(\varUpsilon \) and \(\lambda \) be a BF left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). Now, for each \(x, y\in \varUpsilon \), we have
and
This verifies that \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). Thus, \(\lambda \) is a lower RBF left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
Similarly, the cases of BF right ideal and the BF two-sided ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) can be verified. \(\square \)
The converse statement of the Theorem 13 is not valid generally, as exhibited in the following example.
Example 7
Recall the SG \(\varUpsilon =\{s,t,u,v\}\) and the complete cng-R \(\Re \) on \(\varUpsilon \), as established in Example 4. We take a BFS \(\lambda \) in \(\varUpsilon \), as follows:
The lower RBF approximation \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) of \(\lambda \) is calculated as
Simple calculations verify that \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). However, \(\lambda \) is not a BF left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), as
The following example indicates that Theorem 13 is not valid if the cng-R \(\Re \) is not complete.
Example 8
Let \(\varUpsilon =\{a,b,c,d\}\) be the SG as established in Example 3, on which, we define a cng-R \(\Re = \{(a,a),(b,b),(c,c),(d,d),(b,c),(c,b)\}.\) Then, \(\Re \) defines the cng-classes \(\{a\},\{b,c\},\{d\}\) and \(\Re \) is not complete. We take a BFS \(\lambda \) in \(\varUpsilon \), as follows:
Then, \(\lambda \) is a BF left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). The RBF approximations of \(\lambda \) are calculated by Definition 16 as
Simple calculations verify that \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is also a BF left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), while \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is not a BF left ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), as
Definition 20
Let \(\Re \) be a cng-R on a SG \(\varUpsilon \) and let \(\lambda \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\). Then, \(\lambda \) is a lower (or upper) RBFI ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), if \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) (or \({\overline{\Re }} (\lambda ))\) is a BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
A BFS \(\lambda \) in \(\varUpsilon \), which is both, lower and upper RBFI ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), is named as an RBFI ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
Theorem 14
Let \(\Re \) be a cng-R on a SG \(\varUpsilon \). Then, each BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) is an upper RBFI ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
Proof
Take a BF interior ideal \(\lambda \) of \(\varUpsilon \). Then, \(\lambda ^{P}(abc)\ge \lambda ^{P}(b)\) and \(\lambda ^{N}(abc)\le \lambda ^{N}(b)\) for each \(a,b,c\in \varUpsilon \). Now, for each \(x,w,y\in \varUpsilon \), we have
and
This verifies that \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). Hence, \(\lambda \) is an upper RBFI ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). \(\square \)
The following example indicates that the converse statement of Theorem 14 is not valid generally.
Example 9
Recall the SG \(\varUpsilon = \{k,l,m,n\}\) and the cng-R \(\Re \) on \(\varUpsilon \), as established in Example 6. We take a BFS \(\lambda \) in \(\varUpsilon \), defined as follows:
The upper RBF approximation of \(\lambda \) is calculated as
Simple calculations verify that \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). However, \(\lambda \) is not a BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), as
Theorem 15
Let \(\Re \) be a complete cng-R on a SG \(\varUpsilon \). Then, each BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) is a lower RBFI ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
Proof
Let \(\Re \) be a complete cng-R on \(\varUpsilon \) and \(\lambda \) be a BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). Now, for each \(x, w, y \in \varUpsilon \), we have
and
This verifies that \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). Hence, \(\lambda \) is a lower RBFI ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). \(\square \)
The converse statement of Theorem 15 is invalid generally, as exhibited in the next example.
Example 10
Recall the SG \(\varUpsilon =\{s,t,u,v\}\) and the complete cng-R \(\Re \) on \(\varUpsilon \), as established in Example 4. We take a BFS \(\lambda \) in \(\varUpsilon \), as follows:
The lower RBF approximation \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) of \(\lambda \) is calculated as
Simple calculations verify that \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). However, \(\lambda \) is not a BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), as
The next example reveals that Theorem 15 is invalid if the cng-R \(\Re \) is not complete.
Example 11
Let \(\varUpsilon = \{a,b,c,d\}\) be the SG as established in Example 3 and \(\Re \) be the cng-R on \(\varUpsilon \) as in Example 8, which is not complete and defines the cng-classes \(\{a\},\{b,c\},\{d\}\). We take a BFS \(\lambda \) in \(\varUpsilon \), as follows:
Then, \(\lambda \) is a BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). The \(\Re \)-RBF approximations of \(\lambda \) are calculated by Definition 16 as
Simple calculations verify that \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is also a BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), while \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is not a BF interior ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), as
Definition 21
Let \(\Re \) be a cng-R on an SG \(\varUpsilon \) and let \(\lambda \in BFS(\varUpsilon )\). Then, \(\lambda \) is a lower (or upper) RBF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), if \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) (or \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda ))\) is a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
A BFS \(\lambda \) in \(\varUpsilon \), which is both, lower and upper RBF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), is said to be an RBF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
Theorem 16
Let \(\Re \) be a cng-R on a SG \(\varUpsilon \). Then, each BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) is an upper RBF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
Proof
Take a BF bi-ideal \(\lambda \) of \(\varUpsilon \). Then, \(\lambda \) is also a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \). Which implies by Theorem 9, that, \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda ) = ({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda ^{P}), {\overline{\Re }}(\lambda ^{N}))\) is a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \). Now, for each \(x, w, y\in \varUpsilon \), we have
and
This verifies that \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). Thus, \(\lambda \) is an upper RBF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). \(\square \)
The converse statement of Theorem 16 is invalid generally, as exhibited in the following example.
Example 12
Recall the SG \(\varUpsilon = \{k,l,m,n\}\) and the cng-R \(\Re \) on \(\varUpsilon \), as established in Example 6. We take a BFS \(\lambda \) in \(\varUpsilon \), defined as follows:
The upper RBF approximation of \(\lambda \) is calculated as
Simple calculations verify that \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). However, \(\lambda \) is not a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), as
Theorem 17
Let \(\Re \) be a complete cng-R on a SG \(\varUpsilon \). Then, each BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \) is a lower RBF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \).
Proof
Let \(\Re \) be a complete cng-R on \(\varUpsilon \) and \(\lambda \) be a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). Then, \(\lambda \) is also a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \). Which implies by Theorem 10 that \({\underline{\Re }} (\lambda )=({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda ^{P}),{\underline{\Re }}(\lambda ^{N}))\) is a BF-SSG of \(\varUpsilon \). Now, for each \(x, w, y\in \varUpsilon \), we have
and
This verifies that \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). Hence, \(\lambda \) is a lower RBF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). \(\square \)
The converse statement of Theorem 17 is invalid generally, as exhibited in the next example.
Example 13
Recall the SG \(\varUpsilon = \{s,t,u,v\}\) and the complete cng-R \(\Re \) on \(\varUpsilon \), as established in Example 4. We take a BFS \(\lambda \) in \(\varUpsilon \), as follows:
The lower RBF approximation \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) of \(\lambda \) is calculated as
Simple calculations verify that \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \). However, \(\lambda \) is not a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon \), as
The subsequent example indicates that Theorem 17 is invalid if the cng-R \(\Re \) is not complete.
Example 14
Let \(\varUpsilon = \{a,b,c,d\}\) be the SG as established in Example 3 and \(\Re \) be the cng-R on \(\varUpsilon \), which defines the cng-classes \(\{a\},\{b,c\},\{d\}\). Then, \(\Re \) is not complete. We take a BFS \(\lambda \) in \(\varUpsilon \), as follows:
Then, \(\lambda \) is a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon .\) The RBF approximations of \(\lambda \) are calculated by Definition 16 as
Simple calculations verify that \({\overline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is also a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon ,\) while \({\underline{\Re }}(\lambda )\) is not a BF bi-ideal of \(\varUpsilon ,\) as
Comparative analysis and discussion
Rough bipolar fuzzy ideals in SGs are a novel concept that incorporates RS theory and bipolarity in the study of fuzzy ideals in SGs. This approach provides a more flexible and refined way of handling uncertainties in SG theory by investigating rough approximations and bipolarity in the construction of fuzzy ideals. This approach leads to more realistic and accurate models of SGs. When compared to other theories, rough bipolar fuzzy ideals in SGs offer several unique advantages:
-
(1)
One of the biggest advantages of rough bipolar fuzzy ideals is their flexibility in representing uncertainty and ambiguity. By combining RS theory and BFS theory, they can handle a wider range of data types and better represent the imprecision and vagueness that often arise in real-world applications.
-
(2)
FS theory is hybridized with ideal theory in SGs in many ways (see [1, 2, 21, 29, 50,51,52, 54]). Some authors have investigated roughness in different types of fuzzy ideals in SGs (see [10, 23]), but their work does not capture the bipolarity which is an essential aspect of the data and human thinking. On the other hand, the bipolar nature of rough bipolar fuzzy ideals offered and can capture both positive and negative data, as well as the trade-offs between them more naturally and understandably.
-
(3)
Some work on the bipolarity in fuzzy ideals can also be found in the literature [31, 59], but the roughness of the presented ideals is not investigated in these articles. Our work is a conglomeration of FS theory, RS theory, and the bipolarity of data applied to the ideal theory of SGs. In this article, we apply the concept of roughness to the bipolar fuzzy ideals in SGs, which is the distinctiveness and novelty of our work.
In summary, rough bipolar fuzzy ideals in SGs offer a more versatile and flexible approach than traditional theories to study fuzzy ideals in SGs. They are more flexible, provide a unified framework for analyzing different types of SGs, offer more accurate results, and represent a novel and advanced approach to study fuzzy ideals in SGs. Therefore, they can be considered superior to existing notions of fuzzy ideals in semigroups.
Conclusions
The RS theory has been more popular in recent years. It offers a novel theoretical framework for tackling complicated problems in an uncertain environment. Meanwhile, BFS theory is a generalization of FSs and plays a vital role in human decision-making. Positive information depicts what is considered possible, whereas negative information indicates what is considered impossible. In the present study, the notions of BFSs in SGs are presented. Then, the idea is extended to RBFSs in SGs by defining the lower and upper approximations of BFSs in SGs. Meanwhile, the notions of the RBF left (resp. right) ideals, RBF two-sided ideal, RBFI ideal, and RBF bi-ideal of SGs are presented. Some important properties associated with these ideas are also given. Several illustrations, where required, have been included to perceive the notions presented with ease.
Keeping aside the notional and theoretic features, the ideas unveiled have enough potential to be expanded in coping intelligently with day-to-day life situations including business and trade analysis, robotics, social sciences, life sciences, agricultural sciences, human resource management, pattern recognition, water management, medicine, economics, energy crisis problems, recruit problems, and many other fields of practical usage. In the future, we intend to focus on the roughness of bipolar fuzzy ideals of semigroups in the context of soft set theory. Also, we will give attention to the roughness of multi-polar fuzzy ideals and multi-polar hyperideals of semihypergroups.
References
Ahsan J, Latif RM, Shabir M (2001) Fuzzy quasi-ideals in semigroups. J Fuzzy Math 9(2):259–270
Ahsan J, Li KY, Shabir M (2002) Semigroups characterized by their fuzzy bi-ideals. The Journal of Fuzzy Mathematics 10(2):441–450
Al-shami TM, Alshammari I (2023) Rough sets models inspired by supra-topology structures. Artif Intell Rev 56(7):6855–6883
Al-shami TM (2021) Improvement of the approximations and accuracy measure of a rough set using somewhere dense sets. Soft Comput 25(23):14449–14460
Al-shami TM (2021) Bipolar soft sets: relations between them and ordinary points and their applications. Complexity 6621854:14
Al-shami TM (2023) (2,1)-Fuzzy sets: properties, weighted aggregated operators and their applications to multi-criteria decision-making methods. Complex & Intelligent Systems 9:1687–1705
Al-shami TM, Ameen ZA, Mhemdi A (2023) The connection between ordinary and soft -algebras with applications to information structures. AIMS Mathematics 8(6):14850–14866
Al-shami TM, Alcantud JCR, Mhemdi A (2023) New generalization of fuzzy soft sets: \((a, b)\)-Fuzzy soft sets. AIMS Mathematics 8(2):2995–3025
Ameen ZA, Al-shami TM, Abu-Gdairi R, Mhemdi A (2023) The relationship between ordinary and soft algebras with an application. Mathematics 11(9):2035
Bashir S, Aslam M, Mazhar R, Asghar J (2022) Rough Fuzzy Ideals Induced by Set-Valued Homomorphism in Ternary Semigroups, Journal of Function Spaces
Bashir S, Abbas H, Mazhar R, Shabir M (2020) Rough fuzzy ternary subsemigroups based on fuzzy ideals with three-dimensional congruence relation. Comput Appl Math 39:1–16
Biswas R, Nanda S (1994) Rough groups and rough subgroups. Bulletinof the Polish Academy of Sciences Mathematics 42:251–254
Davvaz B (2008) A short note on algebraic T-rough sets. Inf Sci 178:3247–3252
Dubois D, Prade H (1990) Rough fuzzy sets and fuzzy rough sets, Int. J. Gen. Syst., 17(2,3), 191-209
Feng F, Changxing L, Davvaz B, Ali MI (2010) Soft sets combined with fuzzy sets and rough sets: a tentative approach. Soft Comput 14:899–911
Gaketem T, Deetae N, Khamrot P (2022) Some Semigroups Characterized in Terms of Cubic Bipolar Fuzzy Ideals, Engineering Letters, 30(4)
Gul R, Shabir M (2020) Roughness of a set by \((\alpha,\beta )\)-indiscernibility of Bipolar fuzzy relation. Comput Appl Math 39(3):1–22
Han Y, Shi P, Chen S (2015) Bipolar-Valued Rough Fuzzy Set and Its Applications to the Decision Information System, IEEE Transactions on Fuzzy Systems, 23(6), 2358 - 2370
Hayat K, Mahmood T, Cao BY (2017) On bipolar anti fuzzy h-ideals in hemi-rings. Fuzzy Information and Engineering 9(1):1–19
Hedayati H (2011) Interval valued \((\alpha, \beta )\)-fuzzy biideals of semigroups. Lobachevskii J Math 32(2):135–139
Hong SM, Jun YB, Meng J (1995) Fuzzy interior ideals in semigroups, Indian Journal of. Pure Appl Math 26:859–863
Hosny M, Al-shami TM, Mhemdi A (2023) Novel approaches of generalized rough approximation spaces inspired by maximal neighbourhoods and ideals. Alex Eng J 69:497–520
Hussain A, Ali MI, Mahmood T (2019) Generalized Roughness of \((\epsilon , \epsilon \vee q)\)-Fuzzy Ideals in Ordered Semigroups, Journal of New Theory, (26), 32-53
Ibrahim HZ, Al-shami TM, Mhemdi A (2023) Applications of \(n^{th}\) power root fuzzy sets in multicriteria decision making. Journal of Mathematics 1487724:14
Jun YB, Park CH (2009) Filters of BCH-algebras based on bipolar-valued fuzzy sets, InInternational Mathematical Forum, 4(13), 631-643
Jun YB, Kim HS, Lee KJ (2009) Bipolar fuzzy translations in BCK/BCI-algebras. Journal of the Chungcheong Mathematical Society 22(3):399–408
Kang MK, Kang JG (2012) Bipolar fuzzy set theory applied to sub-semigroups with operators in semigroups. The Pure and Applied Mathematics 19(1):23–35
Kehayopulu N, Tsingelis M (2005) Fuzzy bi-ideals in ordered semigroups. Inf Sci 171(1–3):13–28
Khan A, Shabir M (2009) (\(\alpha,\beta \))-fuzzy interior ideals in ordered semigroups. Lobachevskii Journal of Mathematics 30(1):30–39
Kim J, Samanta SK, Lim PK, Lee JG, Hur K (2019) Bipolar fuzzy topological spaces. Ann Fuzzy Math Inform 17(3):205–29
Kim CS, Kang JG, Kang JM (2011) Ideal theory of semigroups based on the bipolar valued fuzzy set theory. Ann Fuzzy Math Inform 2(2):193–206
Kuroki N (1991) On fuzzy semigroups. Inf Sci 53:201–236
Kuroki N (1997) Rough ideals in semigroups. Inf Sci 100:139–163
Lee KJ (2009) Bipolar fuzzy subalgebras and bipolar fuzzy ideals of BCK/BCI-algebras. Bulletin of the Malaysian Mathematical Sciences Society 32:361–373
Lee KM (2000) Bipolar-valued fuzzy sets and their basic operations. Bangkok Thailand, Proc. Int. Conf. on Intell. Technologies, pp 307–317
Lee KM (2004) Comparison of interval-valued fuzzy sets, intuitionistic fuzzy sets and bipolar-valued fuzzy sets. J. Fuzzy Logic Intell. Syst. 14:125–129
Lu M, Busemeyer JR (2014) Do traditional chinese theories of Yi Jing (’Yin-Yang’and Chinese medicine go beyond western concepts of mind and matter. Mind and Matter 12(1):37–59
Luo J, Hu M (2022) A bipolar three-way decision model and its application in analyzing incomplete data, International Journal of Approximate Reasoning
Ma X X, Liu Q, Zhan J (2017) A survey of decision making methods based on certain hybrid soft set models, Artif. Intell. Rev. 47, 507-530
Malik N, Shabir M (2019) A consensus model based on rough bipolar fuzzy approximations. Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems 36:3461–3470
Mahmood T, Abdullah S, Bilal M, Rashid S (2016) Multiple criteria decision making based on bipolar valued fuzzy set. Ann Fuzzy Math Inf 11(6):1003–1009
Mahmood T, Munir M (2013) On bipolar fuzzy subgroups. World Appl Sci J 27(12):1806–1811
Mahmood T, Ali MI, Hussain A (2018) Generalized roughness in fuzzy filters and fuzzy ideals with thresholds in ordered semigroups. Comput Appl Math 37:5013–5033
Al-shami TM, Mhemdi A (2021) Belong and nonbelong relations on double-Framed soft sets and their applications. Journal of Mathematics 9940301:12
Al-shami TM, Mhemdi A (2023) Approximation spaces inspired by subset rough neighborhoods with applications. In press, Demonstratio Mathematica
Al-shami TM, Mhemdi A (2023) Generalized frame for orthopair fuzzy sets: \((m, n)\)-Fuzzy sets and their applications to multi-criteria decision-making methods. Information (Switzerland) 14(1):56
Pawlak Z (1982) Rough sets. Int J Inf Comput Sci 11:341–356
Qurashi SM, Shabir M (2018) Generalized approximations of \((\epsilon, \epsilon \vee q)\)-fuzzy ideals in quantales. Comput Appl Math 37:6821–6837
Rosenfeld A (1971) Fuzzy groups. J Math Anal Appl 35(3):512–517
Shabir M, Ali MI (2009) Soft ideals and generalized fuzzy ideals in semigroups. New Mathematics and Natural Computation 5(3):599–615
Shabir M, Khan A (2011) Fuzzy quasi-ideals of ordered semigroups. Bulletin of Malaysian Mathematical Sciences Society 34(2):87–102
Shabir M, Jun YB, Nawaz Y (2010) Characterizations of regular semigroups by (\(\alpha,\beta \))-fuzzy ideals. Comput Math Appl 59(1):161–175
Shabir M, Liaquat S, Bashir S (2019) Regular and intra-regular semirings in terms of bipolar fuzzy ideals. Comput Appl Math 38:1–19
Shabir M, Jun YB, Nawaz Y (2010) Semigroups characterized by (\(\epsilon,\epsilon \vee qk\))-fuzzy ideals. Comput Math Appl 60(5):1473–1493
Sun P, Song X, Song S, Stojanovic V (2023) Composite adaptive finite-time fuzzy control for switched nonlinear systems with preassigned performance. Int J Adapt Control Signal Process 37(3):771–789
Xie XY, Tang J (2008) Fuzzy radicals and prime fuzzy ideals of ordered semigroups. Inf Sci 178(22):4357–4374
H. L. Yang, S. G. Li, S. Wang, J. Wang, Bipolar fuzzy rough set model on two different universes and its application, Knowledge-Based Systems, 1(35)(2012), \(94 - 101\)
Yang HL, Li SG, Guo ZL, Ma CH (2012) Transformation of bipolar fuzzy rough set models. Knowl-Based Syst 27:60–68
N. Yaqoob, Bipolar-valued fuzzy ideals in LA-semigroups, Journal of Advanced Studies in Topology 3 (2011) doi 10.20454/jast.2012.236
Yiarayong P (2021) A new approach of bipolar valued fuzzy set theory applied on semigroups. Int J Intell Syst 36(8):4415–4438
Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8:338–353
Zhang WR (1994) Bipolar fuzzy sets and relations: a computational framework for cognitive modeling and multiagent decision analysis. Proc. of the Industrial Fuzzy Control and Intell. Syst. Conf. and NASA Joint Technology Workshop on Neural Networks & Fuzzy Logic and Fuzzy Information Processing Society Biannual Conf., San Antonio, Tex USA, 305–309
Zhang Z, Song X, Sun Xg, Stojanovic V (2023) Hybrid-driven-based fuzzy secure filtering for nonlinear parabolic partial differential equation systems with cyber attacks, International Journal of Adaptive Control and Signal Processing, 37(2), 380–398
Zhou M, Li S (2014) Applications of bipolar fuzzy theory to hemirings. International Journal of Innovative Computing, Information and Control 10(2):767–781
Zhou M, Li S (2014) Application of bipolar fuzzy sets in semirings. Journal of Mathematical Research with Applications 34:61–72
Funding
The sixth author extends her appreciation to the Deanship of Scientific Research at King Khalid University for funding this work through a research groups program under Grant No. RGP2/310/44.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Human participants
This article does not contain any studies with human participants performed by any of the authors.
Informed consent
The authors have read and agreed to submit this version of the manuscript.
Additional information
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
About this article
Cite this article
Malik, N., Shabir, M., Al-shami, T.M. et al. Rough bipolar fuzzy ideals in semigroups. Complex Intell. Syst. 9, 7197–7212 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-023-01132-1
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-023-01132-1