Abstract
Hesitant interval-valued fuzzy set is an extension of hesitant fuzzy set. It permits the membership degree of an element to a set to be represented as several possible interval numbers. The study of hesitant interval-valued fuzzy sets has opened a new area of research and applications. A number of mathematical results have been introduced and proved to enhance the applicability range of hesitant interval-valued fuzzy sets to wider areas. In this paper, we propose four new operations on hesitant interval valued fuzzy sets and study their properties and relations in details.
Similar content being viewed by others
Explore related subjects
Discover the latest articles, news and stories from top researchers in related subjects.Avoid common mistakes on your manuscript.
1 Introduction
Torra and Narukawa [21] and Torra [22] proposed the concept of hesitant fuzzy sets, as a new generalization of the notion of classical fuzzy sets [43], permitting an element to have a set of several possible membership values. They also discussed the relationships among hesitant fuzzy sets and other generalizations of fuzzy sets such as intuitionistic fuzzy sets [1, 2], type-2 fuzzy sets [8], and fuzzy multisets [41]. Hesitant fuzzy set can reflect the human’s hesitancy more objectively than the other classical extensions of fuzzy sets. Recently, a number of studies have focused on hesitant fuzzy sets and their applications [4, 9–20, 23–25, 30–40, 42, 44–53].
However, in many real decision making problems, the preference information provided by decision-maker is often imprecise or uncertain due to the increasing complexity of social-economic environment and lack of data about the problem domains. It may as well be due to an expert not having enough expertise or possess sufficient level of knowledge to precisely express their preferences over the objects considered. He/she has some uncertainty in providing his/her preferences. To handle such type of situations, Chen et al. [5, 7] introduced the notion of hesitant interval-valued fuzzy sets, permitting an element to have a set of several possible interval membership values. Some operations on hesitant interval valued fuzzy sets have been proposed by Chen et al. [5]. Wei et al. [29] developed some hesitant interval valued fuzzy information aggregation operators based on arithmetic and geometric means and then studied some desirable properties of these operators. Further, apart from study of aggregation operators, Chen at el. [7] studied preference relations under hesitant interval valued environment. Wei et al. [27] came out with a detailed study on distance and similarity measures for hesitant interval-valued fuzzy sets. Chen et al. [5] proposed correlation coefficients for hesitant fuzzy sets and hesitant interval valued fuzzy sets and studied their applications in clustering analysis. Bai [3] proposed some distance similarity measures for hesitant interval valued fuzzy sets and found their application in multicriteria decision making. Wei and Zhao [26] developed some hesitant interval valued fuzzy information aggregation operators based on Einstein operation on hesitant fuzzy set. Wei et al. [28] developed some models for hesitant interval valued fuzzy multiple attribute decision making based on correlation coefficient with incomplete weight information. Recently, Chen and Xu [6] gave a detailed study on properties of hesitant interval valued fuzzy sets. Broumi and Smarandache [4] proposed some new operations on interval valued intuitionistic hesitant fuzzy sets. Liao et al. [17] developed a qualitative decision making method based on hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. Merigó et al. [18] presented an overview of fuzzy research with bibliometric indicators.
These approaches employ different ways of defining measures in terms of aggregation operators. The important next step is the study of sets arises by coming set operations and then operations on elements of a set. In this paper, we first propose four new operations on hesitant interval valued fuzzy sets and study their properties.
The paper is organized as follows: In Sect. 2, some basic definitions related to hesitant fuzzy sets and hesitant interval valued fuzzy sets are briefly discussed. In Sect. 3, four new operations on hesitant interval valued fuzzy sets are proposed with their properties. Section 4 concludes the paper with some remarks.
2 Preliminaries
We start with the concept of hesitant fuzzy sets (HFSs) introduced by Torra and Narukawa [21] and Torra [22]. An HFS permits the membership degree of an element to be a set of several possible membership values between 0 and 1. This better describes the situations where a set of people have differing hesitancy in providing their preferences over objects in the process of decision making.
Definition 1
(Hesitant fuzzy set [22]): Let \(X = \left\{ {x_{1} ,\,x_{2} , \ldots ,x_{n} } \right\}\) be a reference set, a set \(E\) defined on \(X\) given by
where \(h_{E} \left( x \right)\) is a set of some different values in \(\left[ {0,\,1} \right]\), denoting the possible membership degrees of the element \(x \in X\) to the set \(E\), is called a hesitant fuzzy set.
Example 1
Let \(X = \left\{ {x_{1} ,x_{2} ,x_{3} } \right\}\) be a reference set. Also let \(h_{{^{E} }} \left( {x_{1} } \right) = \left\{ {0.2,0.4} \right\}\), \(h_{{^{E} }} \left( {x_{2} } \right) = \left\{ {0.5,0.7,0.8} \right\}\) and \(h_{{^{{\tilde{E}}} }} \left( {x_{3} } \right) = \left\{ {0.3,0.6} \right\}\) denote the membership degree sets of \(x_{i}\), \(\left( {i = 1,2,3} \right)\) to the set \(E\) respectively. Then \(E\), an HFS is expressed as
Further, Torra [22] defined the ‘empty hesitant fuzzy set’ and the ‘full hesitant fuzzy set’ as follows:
For convenience, Xia and Xu [33] named the set \(h = h_{E} \left( x \right)\) as the hesitant fuzzy element (HFE) and let \(HFE\left( X \right)\) represents the family of all hesitant fuzzy elements defined on \(X\).
Definition 2
(Operations on HFEs): Let \(h,h_{1} \,{\text{and}}\,h_{2} \in HFE\left( X \right)\), Torra [22] and Xia and Xu [33] defined the following operations:
-
(i)
\(h^{C} = \left\{ {1 - \gamma |\gamma \in h} \right\};\)
-
(ii)
\(h_{1} \cup h_{2} = \,\left\{ {\left( {\gamma_{1} \vee \gamma_{2} } \right)\,|\gamma_{1} \in h_{1} ,\gamma_{2} \in h_{2} } \right\};\)
-
(iii)
\(h_{1} \cap h_{2} = \,\left\{ {\left( {\gamma_{1} \wedge \gamma_{2} } \right)\,|\gamma_{1} \in h_{1} ,\gamma_{2} \in h_{2} } \right\};\)
-
(iv)
\(h^{\lambda } = \,\,\,\left\{ {\left( \gamma \right)^{\lambda } |\gamma \in h} \right\},\lambda > 0;\)
-
(v)
\(\lambda h = \,\,\,\left\{ {1 - \left( {1 - \gamma } \right)^{\lambda } |\gamma \in h} \right\},\lambda > 0;\)
-
(vi)
\(h_{1} \oplus h_{2} = \,\left\{ {\gamma_{1} + \gamma_{2} - \gamma_{1} \gamma_{2} \,|\gamma_{1} \in h_{1} ,\gamma_{2} \in h_{2} } \right\};\)
-
(vii)
\(h_{1} \otimes h_{2} = \,\left\{ {\gamma_{1} \gamma_{2} \,|\gamma_{1} \in h_{1} ,\gamma_{2} \in h_{2} } \right\}.\)
Recently, Verma and Sharma [24] proposed the four new operations on HFEs.
Definition 3
Let \(h,h_{1} \,{\text{and}}\,h_{2} \in HFE\left( X \right)\), Verma and Sharma [24] defined the following operations:
-
(i)
\(h_{1} @h_{2} = \cup_{{\gamma_{1} \in h_{1},\gamma_{2} \in h_{2} }} \left\{ {\frac{{\left( {\gamma_{1} + \gamma_{2} } \right)}}{2}} \right\};\)
-
(ii)
\(h_{1} \$ h_{2} = \cup_{{\gamma_{1} \in h_{1},\gamma_{2} \in h_{2} }} \left\{ {\sqrt {\gamma_{1} \gamma_{2} } } \right\};\)
-
(iii)
\(h_{1} \# h_{2} = \,\,\, \cup_{{\gamma_{1} \in h_{1},\gamma_{2} \in h_{2} }} \left\{ {\frac{{2\gamma_{1} \gamma_{2} }}{{\left( {\gamma_{1} + \gamma_{2} } \right)}}} \right\};\)
for which we shall accept that if \(\gamma_{1} = \gamma_{2} = 0\), then \(\frac{{2\gamma_{1} \gamma_{2} }}{{\gamma_{1} + \gamma_{2} }} = 0.\)
-
(iv)
\(h_{1} * h_{2} = \,\,\, \cup_{{\gamma \in h_{1} }} ,_{{\gamma_{2} \in h_{2} }} \left\{ {\frac{{\gamma_{1} + \gamma_{2} }}{{2\left( {\gamma_{1} \gamma_{2} + 1} \right)}}} \right\}\,\,.\)
As explained in introduction, the precise membership degrees of an element to a set are sometimes hard to be specified. To overcome this issue, Chen et al. [5] introduced the concept of hesitant interval-valued fuzzy sets (HIVFSs) that represent the membership degrees of an element to a set with several possible interval values on \(\left[ {0,\,1} \right]\).
Definition 4
(Hesitant interval-valued fuzzy set [5]): Let \(X = \left\{ {x_{1} ,\,x_{2} , \ldots ,x_{n} } \right\}\) be a reference set and \(D\left[ {0,\,1} \right]\) be the set of all closed subintervals of \(\left[ {0,\,1} \right]\), a set \(\tilde{E}\) defined on \(X\) given by
where \(\tilde{h}_{{\tilde{E}}} \left( x \right)\) is a set of some different interval values on \(\left[ {0,\,1} \right]\), representing the possible membership degrees of the element \(x \in X\) to the set \(\tilde{E}\), is called an hesitant interval-valued fuzzy set.
Example 2
Let \(X = \left\{ {x_{1} ,x_{2} ,x_{3} } \right\}\) be a reference set. Also let \(\tilde{h}_{{^{{\tilde{E}}} }} \left( {x_{1} } \right) = \left\{ {\left[ {0.4,0.6} \right]} \right\}\), \(\tilde{h}_{{^{{\tilde{E}}} }} \left( {x_{2} } \right) = \left\{ {\left[ {0.2,0.3} \right],\left[ {0.5,0.7} \right],\left[ {0.6,0.8} \right]} \right\}\) and \(\tilde{h}_{{^{{\tilde{E}}} }} \left( {x_{3} } \right) = \left\{ {\left[ {0.3,0.4} \right],\left[ {0.5,0.7} \right]} \right\}\) denote the membership degree sets of \(x_{i} \left( {i = 1,2,3} \right)\) to the set \(\tilde{E}\) respectively. Then \(\tilde{E}\) is an HIVFS and express it by
Chen and Xu [6] defined the ‘empty hesitant interval-valued fuzzy set’ and the ‘full hesitant interval-valued fuzzy set’ as follows:
For convenience, Chen et al. [5] named the set \(\tilde{h}_{{\tilde{E}}} \left( x \right)\) as the hesitant interval-valued fuzzy element (HIVFE) and denoted by
where \(\tilde{\gamma } = \left[ {\tilde{\gamma }^{L} ,\tilde{\gamma }^{U} } \right]\) is an interval number. \(\tilde{\gamma }^{L} = \inf \tilde{\gamma }\) and \(\tilde{\gamma }^{L} = \sup \tilde{\gamma }\) represent the lower and upper limits of \(\tilde{\gamma }\), respectively. An HIVFE is the basic unit of an HIVFS and it can be considered as a special case of the HIVFS. The relationship between HIVFE and HIVFS is similar to that between interval-valued fuzzy number and interval-valued fuzzy sets. Let \(HIVFE\left( X \right)\) represents the family of all hesitant interval-valued fuzzy elements defined on \(X\).
In addition, Chen et al. [5] defined the following seven operations on HIVFE and studied their properties.
Definition 5
(Operations on HIVFEs): Let \(\tilde{h}\),\(\tilde{h}_{1}\) and \(\tilde{h}_{2}\) be three HIVFEs, then
-
(i)
\(\tilde{h}^{C} = \left\{ {\left[ {1 - \tilde{\gamma }^{U} ,1 - \tilde{\gamma }^{L} } \right]|\tilde{\gamma } \in \tilde{h}} \right\};\)
-
(ii)
\(\begin{aligned} \tilde{h}_{1} \cup \tilde{h}_{2} &= \bigg\{ \left[ {\left( {\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} \vee \tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} } \right),\left( {\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} \vee \tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} } \right)} \right]\,|\tilde{\gamma }_{1} \in \tilde{h}_{1} , \\ &\quad \tilde{\gamma }_{2} \in \tilde{h}_{2} \bigg\}; \end{aligned}\)
-
(iii)
\(\begin{aligned} \tilde{h}_{1} \cap \tilde{h}_{2} &= \bigg\{ \left[ {\left( {\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} \wedge \tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} } \right),\left( {\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} \wedge \tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} } \right)} \right]\,|\tilde{\gamma }_{1} \in \tilde{h}_{1} , \\ &\quad \tilde{\gamma }_{2} \in \tilde{h}_{2} \bigg\}; \end{aligned}\)
-
(iv)
\(\tilde{h}^{\lambda } = \left\{ {\left[ {\left( {\tilde{\gamma }^{L} } \right)^{\lambda } ,\,\left( {\tilde{\gamma }^{U} } \right)^{\lambda } } \right]|\tilde{\gamma } \in \tilde{h}} \right\},\lambda > 0;\)
-
(v)
\(\begin{aligned} \lambda \tilde{h} &= \bigg\{ \left[ {1 - \left( {1 - \tilde{\gamma }^{L} } \right)^{\lambda } ,\,1 - \left( {1 - \tilde{\gamma }^{U} } \right)^{\lambda } } \right] \\ &\quad\quad\quad\quad\quad |\tilde{\gamma } \in \tilde{h} \bigg\},\lambda > 0; \end{aligned}\)
-
(vi)
\(\begin{aligned} \tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} &= \bigg\{ \left[ {\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} + \tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} - \tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} \tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} ,\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} + \tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} - \tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} \tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} } \right] \\ &\quad |\tilde{\gamma }_{1} \in \tilde{h}_{1} ,\tilde{\gamma }_{2} \in \tilde{h}_{2} \bigg\} \end{aligned}\)
-
(vii)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} = \,\left\{ {\left[ {\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} \tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} ,\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} \tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} } \right]\,|\tilde{\gamma }_{1} \in \tilde{h}_{1} ,\tilde{\gamma }_{2} \in \tilde{h}_{2} } \right\}.\)
Remark:
It is noted that if \(\tilde{\gamma }^{L} = \tilde{\gamma }^{U}\), then the operations in Definition 4 reduce to those of HFEs.
In the next section, we define four new operations on hesitant interval-valued fuzzy sets analogous to operations defined in Definition 3 and study their properties.
3 Four new operations on hesitant inter-valued fuzzy sets and their properties
Definition 6:
For \(\tilde{h}_{1} ,\tilde{h}_{2} \in HIVFE\left( X \right)\), we propose the following operations on HIVFEs as follows
-
(i)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} = \,\left\{ {\left[ {\frac{{\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} + \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{L} }}{2},\frac{{\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} + \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{U} }}{2}} \right]|\tilde{\gamma }_{1} \in \tilde{h}_{1} ,\tilde{\gamma }_{2} \in \tilde{h}_{2} } \right\},\)
-
(ii)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} = \,\left\{ {\,\left[ {\sqrt {\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{L} } ,\sqrt {\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{U} } } \right]|\tilde{\gamma }_{1} \in \tilde{h}_{1} ,\tilde{\gamma }_{2} \in \tilde{h}_{2} } \right\};\)
-
(iii)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} = \,\left\{ {\left[ {\frac{{2\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{L} }}{{\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} + \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{L} }},\frac{{2\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{U} }}{{\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} + \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{U} }}} \right]|\tilde{\gamma }_{1} \in \tilde{h}_{1} ,\tilde{\gamma }_{2} \in \tilde{h}_{2} } \right\}\)
for which we shall accept that if \(\tilde{\gamma }_{1} = \tilde{\gamma }_{2} = \left[ {0,0} \right]\), then \(\frac{{2\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{L} }}{{\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} + \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{L} }} = 0\) and \(\frac{{2\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{U} }}{{\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} + \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{U} }} = 0.\)
-
(iv)
\(\begin{aligned} \tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} &= \left\{ \left[ {\frac{{\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} + \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{L} }}{{2\left( {\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{L} + 1} \right)}},\frac{{\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} + \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{U} }}{{2\left( {\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{U} + 1} \right)}}} \right] \right. \\ &\quad \left. \vphantom{\left[ {\frac{{\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} + \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{L} }}{{2\left( {\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{L} \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{L} + 1} \right)}},\frac{{\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} + \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{U} }}{{2\left( {\tilde{\gamma }_{1}^{U} \tilde{\gamma }_{2}^{U} + 1} \right)}}} \right]} |\tilde{\gamma }_{1} \in \tilde{h}_{1} ,\tilde{\gamma }_{2} \in \tilde{h}_{2} \right\}. \end{aligned}\)
Obviously, for every two HIVFEs \(\tilde{h}_{1} \,\,{\text{and}}\,\,\tilde{h}_{2}\), \(\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} ,\,\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2}\), \(\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} \,\,{\text{and}}\,\,\tilde{h}_{1} *\tilde{h}_{2}\) are also an HIVFE.
Remark:
It is noted that if \(\tilde{\gamma }^{L} = \tilde{\gamma }^{U}\), then the operations in Definition 6 reduce to those of HFEs.
Example 3
Let \(\tilde{h}_{1} \left( x \right) = \left\{ {\left[ {0.3,0.5} \right],\left[ {0.2,0.6} \right]} \right\}\), and \(\tilde{h}_{2} \left( x \right) = \left\{ {\left[ {0.6,0.8} \right]} \right\}\) be two hesitant interval valued fuzzy elements. Then we have
-
\(\begin{aligned} \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\left( x \right) &= \left\{\left[ {\frac{0.3 + 0.6}{2},\frac{0.5 + 0.8}{2}} \right], \right. \\ &\quad \left. \left[ {\frac{0.2 + 0.6}{2},\frac{0.6 + 0.8}{2}} \right] \right\} \\ & = \left\{ {\left[ {0.4500,0.6500} \right],\left[ {0.4000,0.7000} \right]} \right\}. \hfill \\ \end{aligned}\)
-
\(\begin{aligned} \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\left( x \right) &= \left\{ \left[ {\sqrt {0.3 \times 0.6} ,\sqrt {0.5 \times 0.8} } \right], \right. \\ &\quad \left. \left[ {\sqrt {0.2 \times 0.6} ,\sqrt {0.6 \times 0.8} } \right] \right\} \hfill \\ & = \left\{ {\left[ {0.4243,0.6325} \right],\left[ {0.3464,0.6928} \right]} \right\}. \hfill \\ \end{aligned}\)
-
\(\begin{aligned} \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\left( x \right) &= \left\{ \left[ {\frac{2 \times 0.3 \times 0.6}{0.3 + 0.6},\frac{2 \times 0.5 \times 0.8}{0.5 + 0.8}} \right], \right. \\ &\quad \left. \left[ {\frac{2 \times 0.2 \times 0.6}{0.2 + 0.6},\frac{2 \times 0.6 \times 0.8}{0.6 + 0.8}} \right] \right\} \hfill \\ &= \left\{ {\left[ {0.4000,0.6154} \right],\left[ {0.3000,0.6857} \right]} \right\}. \hfill \\ \end{aligned}\)
-
\(\begin{aligned} \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\left( x \right) &= \left\{ \left[ {\frac{0.3 + 0.6}{{2 \times \left( {0.3 \times 0.6 + 1} \right)}},\frac{0.5 + 0.8}{{2 \times \left( {0.5 \times 0.8 + 1} \right)}}} \right], \right. \\ &\quad \left. \left[ {\frac{0.2 + 0.6}{{2 \times \left( {0.2 \times 0.6 + 1} \right)}},\frac{0.6 + 0.8}{{2 \times \left( {0.6 \times 0.8 + 1} \right)}}} \right] \right\} \hfill \\ &= \left\{ {\left[ {0.3814,0.4643} \right],\left[ {0.3571,0.4730} \right]} \right\}. \hfill \\ \end{aligned}\)
Using the operations defined in Definitions 5 and 6, we now present some properties and relations between the operations on HIVFEs:
Theorem 1
For every HIVFE \(\tilde{h}\) and for every \(\lambda ,\,\lambda_{1} ,\lambda_{2} > 0\), the following properties hold:
-
(a)
\(\tilde{h}\,@\tilde{h} = \tilde{h};\)
-
(b)
\(\tilde{h}\,\$ \tilde{h} = \tilde{h};\)
-
(c)
\(\tilde{h}\,\# \tilde{h} = \tilde{h};\)
-
(d)
\(\tilde{h}\,\$ \tilde{h}^{\circ} = \tilde{h}^{\circ};\)
-
(e)
\(\tilde{h}\,\$ \tilde{h}^{*} = \tilde{h}\) ½;
-
(f)
\(\tilde{h}\,\# \tilde{h}^{\circ} = \tilde{h}^{\circ};\)
-
(g)
\(\lambda_{1} \tilde{h}\, \cup \lambda_{2} \tilde{h} = \lambda_{1} \tilde{h}\) when \(\lambda_{1} > \lambda_{2}\) and \(\lambda_{1} \tilde{h}\, \cup \lambda_{2} \tilde{h} = \lambda_{2} \tilde{h}\) when \(\lambda_{1} < \lambda_{2} ;\)
-
(h)
\(\lambda_{1} \tilde{h}\, \cap \lambda_{2} \tilde{h} = \lambda_{2} \tilde{h}\) when \(\lambda_{1} > \lambda_{2}\) and \(\lambda_{1} \tilde{h}\, \cap \lambda_{2} \tilde{h} = \lambda_{1} \tilde{h}\) when \(\lambda_{1} < \lambda_{2} ;\)
-
(i)
\(\tilde{h}^{{\lambda_{1} }} \, \cup \tilde{h}^{{\lambda_{2} }} = \tilde{h}^{{\lambda_{2} }}\) when \(\lambda_{1} > \lambda_{2}\) and \(\tilde{h}^{{\lambda_{1} }} \, \cup \tilde{h}^{{\lambda_{2} }} = \tilde{h}^{{\lambda_{1} }}\) when \(\lambda_{1} < \lambda_{2} ;\)
-
(j)
\(\tilde{h}^{{\lambda_{1} }} \, \cap \tilde{h}^{{\lambda_{2} }} = \tilde{h}^{{\lambda_{1} }}\) when \(\lambda_{1} > \lambda_{2}\) and \(\tilde{h}^{{\lambda_{1} }} \, \cup \tilde{h}^{{\lambda_{2} }} = \tilde{h}^{{\lambda_{2} }}\) when \(\lambda_{1} < \lambda_{2} .\)
where \(h^{ \circ }\) and \(\tilde{h}^{ * }\) are respectively the empty hesitant interval-valued fuzzy element and full hesitant interval-valued fuzzy element.
Proof
These follow directly from the definitions. □
Theorem 2
For \(\tilde{h}_{1} ,\tilde{h}_{2} \in HIVFE\left( X \right),\)
-
(a)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} = \tilde{h}_{2} @\tilde{h}_{1} ;\)
-
(b)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} = \tilde{h}_{2} \$ \,\tilde{h}_{1} ;\)
-
(c)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} = \tilde{h}_{2} \# \tilde{h}_{1} ;\)
-
(d)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} = \tilde{h}_{2} * \,\tilde{h}_{1} .\)
Proof
These also simply follow from definitions. □
Note
One can easily verify that,
-
(a)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} @\left( {\tilde{h}_{2} @\tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right)@\tilde{h}_{3} ;\)
-
(b)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \# \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \# \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\,\# \tilde{h}_{3} ;\)
-
(c)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \$ \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\,\$ \,\tilde{h}_{3} ;\)
-
(d)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} * \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} * \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) * \tilde{h}_{3} .\)
Theorem 3
For \(\tilde{h}_{1} ,\tilde{h}_{2} \,{\text{and}}\,\tilde{h}_{3} \in HIVFE\left( X \right),\)
-
(a)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} @\left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \cup \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(b)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} @\left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \cap \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(c)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \cup \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(d)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \cap \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(e)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \cup \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(f)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \cap \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(g)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} @\tilde{h}_{3} } \right) = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)@\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(h)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} @\tilde{h}_{3} } \right) = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)@\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(i)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \$ \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\$ \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \,\tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(j)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cup \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)@\tilde{h}_{3} = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} @\tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(k)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cap \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)@\tilde{h}_{3} = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} @\tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(l)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cup \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(m)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cap \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(n)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cup \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(o)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cap \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(p)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} } \right)@\left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(q)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right)@\left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(r)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right)\$ \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right).\)
Proof
We prove (a), (c), (e), (g), (i), (k), (m), (o) and (q) results (b), (d), (f), (h), (j), (l), (n) and (r) can be proved analogously.
(a) Using Definitions in 5 and 6, we have
This proves (a).
(c) From Definitions in 5 and 6, we have
This proves (c).
(e) Using definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (e).
(g) From definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (g).
(i) Using definitions in (5) and (6), we have
On the other hand, we have
This proves (i)
(k) From definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (k).
(m) From definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (m).
(o) Using definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (o).
(q) From definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (q).
This proves the theorem. □
Note
It can be easily verify that,
-
(a)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \otimes \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(b)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \oplus \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(c)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} @\left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \otimes \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(d)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} @\left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \oplus \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(e)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \otimes \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \,\tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(f)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \oplus \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(g)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \$ \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\$ \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \,\tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(h)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \# \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \otimes \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \,\tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(i)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \# \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \oplus \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(j)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \# \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\# \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \,\tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(k)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \# \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\# \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \,\tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(l)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} * \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \otimes \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \otimes \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} * \,\tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(m)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} * \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} \oplus \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \oplus \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{3} } \right);\)
-
(n)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} * \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) * \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \,\tilde{h}_{3} } \right)\)
-
(o)
\(\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \left( {\tilde{h}_{2} * \tilde{h}_{3} } \right) \ne \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) * \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \,\tilde{h}_{3} } \right).\)
Theorem 4
For \(\tilde{h}_{1} ,\tilde{h}_{2} \in HIVFE\left( X \right),\)
-
(a)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cup \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \oplus \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cap \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right);\)
-
(b)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cup \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \otimes \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cap \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right);\)
-
(c)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cup \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)@\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cap \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(d)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cup \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\$ \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cap \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(e)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cup \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\# \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cap \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(f)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cup \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) * \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cap \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} .\)
Proof
We shall use the fact that for every two real numbers \(a\,\,{\text{and}}\,\,b\) it follows
(a) Using definitions in (5), we have
This proves (a).
(b) From definitions in (5), we have
This proves (b).
(c) Using definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (c).
(d) From definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (d).
(e) Using definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (e).
(f) From definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (f).
This proves the theorem. □
Theorem 5
For \(\tilde{h}_{1} ,\tilde{h}_{2} \in HIVFE\left( X \right)\), then the following relations are valid
-
(a)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\$ \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(b)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\$ \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(c)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\$ \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(d)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\$ \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(e)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\$ \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(f)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)@\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(g)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)@\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(h)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)@\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(i)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right)@\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(j)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)@\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(k)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)@\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} .\)
Proof
In the following, we prove (a) and (f), other results can be proved analogously.
(a) Using definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (a).
(f) From definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (f).
This proves the theorem. □
Theorem 6
For \(\tilde{h}_{1} ,\tilde{h}_{2} \in HIVFE\left( X \right)\), then the following relations are valid:
-
(a)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(b)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(c)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(d)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(e)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(f)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(g)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(h)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} * \tilde{h}_{2} .\)
Proof
These results follow directly from definitions.
Theorem 7
For \(\tilde{h}_{1} ,\tilde{h}_{2} \in HIVFE\left( X \right)\), we have the following identities:
-
(a)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(b)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(c)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(d)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(e)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(f)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(g)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(h)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(i)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(j)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(k)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(l)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(m)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(n)
\(\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} .\)
Proof
We prove (a), (c), (e), (g), (i), (k) and (m), other results can be proved analogously.
(a) Using definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (a).
(c) From definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (c).
(e) Using definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (v).
(g) From definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (g).
(i) Using definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (i).
(k) From definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (k).
(m) Using definitions in (5) and (6), we have
This proves (m).
This proves the theorem. □
Theorem 8
For \(\tilde{h}_{1} ,\tilde{h}_{2} \in HIVFE\left( X \right)\), then the following relations are valid
-
(a)
\(\left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cup \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \oplus \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cap \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right)@\left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cup \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \otimes \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cap \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(b)
\(\left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cup \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)\# \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cap \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right)\$ \left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cup \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)@\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cap \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(c)
\(\left( {\left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cup \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \otimes \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \cap \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right)@\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right)\$ \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(d)
\(\left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \otimes \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right)@\left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \oplus \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(e)
\(\left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right)@\left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(f)
\(\left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right)@\left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(g)
\(\left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right)@\left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(h)
\(\left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cup \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right)@\left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \otimes \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} ;\)
-
(i)
\(\left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} @\tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right)\$ \left( {\left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \oplus \tilde{h}_{2} } \right) \cap \left( {\tilde{h}_{1} \# \tilde{h}_{2} } \right)} \right) = \tilde{h}_{1} \$ \tilde{h}_{2} .\)
Proof
In the following, we prove (a), (c) and (e), other results can be proved analogously.
(a) Using definitions in (5) and (6), we have
and
Now taking @ with (8) and (9), we get
This proves (a).
(c) From definitions in (5) and (6), we have
and
Now taking $ with (10) and (11), we get
This proves (c).
(e) Using definitions in (5) and (6), we have
and
Now taking @ with (12) and (13), we get
This proves (e).
This proves the theorem. □
4 Conclusions
Hesitant interval-valued fuzzy sets present a powerful tool for study of human’s hesitancy more objectively and precisely. This paper introduced four new operations on hesitant interval-valued fuzzy sets. Then, a number of results have been proved, some of which follow simply and bring out the characteristics of the hesitant inter-valued fuzzy sets. The novelty of these operations is that they enriched and developed the theory of hesitant interval valued fuzzy sets and prepare a strong background for applications of these sets in different situations.
References
Atanassov KT (1986) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst 20(1):87–96
Atanassov KT (1999) Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets. Springer Physica-Verlag, Heidelberg
Bai ZY (2013) Distance similarity measures for interval valued hesitant fuzzy sets and their application in multi criteria decision making. J Decis Syst 22(3):190–201
Broumi S, Smarandache F (2014) New operations over interval valued intuitionistic hesitant fuzzy sets. Math Stat 2(2):62–71
Chen N, Xu ZS, Xia M (2013) Correlation coefficients of hesitant fuzzy sets and their applications to clustering analysis. Appl Math Model 37(4):2197–2211
Chen N, Xu ZS (2014) Properties of interval valued hesitant fuzzy sets. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 27(1):143–158
Chen N, Xu ZS, Xia M (2013) Interval valued hesitant preference relations and their applications to group decision making. Knowl Based Syst 37:528–540
Dubois D, Prade H (1980) Fuzzy sets systems. Academic Press, New York
Farhadinia B (2013) A novel method of ranking hesitant fuzzy values for multiple attribute decision making problems. Int J Intell Syst 28(8):1–16
Farhadinia B (2013) Information measures for hesitant fuzzy sets and interval valued hesitant fuzzy sets. Inf Sci 240:129–144
Feng X, Zuo W, Wang J, Feng L (2014) Topsis method for hesitant fuzzy multiple attribute decision making. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26(5):2263–2269
Gu X, Wang Y, Yang B (2011) A method for hesitant fuzzy multiple attribute decision making and its application to risk investment. J Converg Inf Technol 6(6):282–287
Liao HC, Xu ZS (2013) A VIKOR based method for hesitant fuzzy multi criteria decision making. Fuzzy Optim Decis Mak 12(4):373–392
Liao HC, Xu ZS (2014) Some new hybrid weighted aggregation operators under hesitant fuzzy multi criteria decision making environment. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26(4):1601–1617
Liao HC, Xu ZS, Xia MM (2014) Multiplicative consistency of hesitant fuzzy preference relation and its application in group decision making. Int J Inf Technol Decis Mak 13(1):47–76
Liao HC, Xu ZS (2014) Subtraction and division operations over hesitant fuzzy sets. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 27(1):65–72
Liao HC, Xu ZS, Zeng XJ, Merigó JM (2015) Qualitative decision making with correlation coefficients of hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets. Knowl Based Syst 76:127–138
Lin R, Zhao XF, Wei GW (2014) Models for selecting an ERP system with hesitant fuzzy linguistic information. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26(5):2155–2165
Merigó JM, Gil-Lafuente AM, Yager RR (2014) An overview of fuzzy research with bibliometric indicators. Appl Soft Comput 27:420–433
Rodríguez RM, Martínez L, Herrera F (2012) Hesitant fuzzy linguistic term sets for decision making. IEEE Trans Fuzzy Syst 20(1):109–119
Torra V, Narukawa Y (2009) On hesitant fuzzy sets and decision. In: The 18th IEEE international conference on fuzzy systems, Jeju Island, Korea, pp 1378–1382
Torra V (2010) Hesitant fuzzy sets. Int J Intell Syst 25(6):529–539
Verma R, Sharma BD (2015) Operations on hesitant fuzzy sets: some new results. J Intell Fuzzy Syst. doi:10.3233/IFS-151568
Verma R, Sharma BD (2013) New operations over hesitant fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Inf Eng 5(2):129–146
Wang XR, Zhao ZH, Zhao XF, Wei G (2011) Model for evaluating the government archives website’s construction based on the GHFHWD measure with hesitant fuzzy information. J Digit Content Technol Appl 5(12):418–425
Wei GW, Zhao XF (2013) Induced hesitant interval-valued fuzzy Einstein aggregation operators and their applications to multiple attribute group decision making. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 24(4):789–803
Wei GW, Lin R, Wang H (2014) Distance and similarity measures on hesitant interval valued fuzzy sets. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 27(1):19–36
Wei GW, Zhao XF, Lin R, Wang H (2014) Models for hesitant interval valued fuzzy multiple attribute decision making based on the correlation coefficient with incomplete weight information. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26(4):1631–1644
Wei G, Zhao XF, Lin R (2013) Some hesitant interval valued fuzzy aggregation operators and their applications to multiple attribute decision making. Knowl Based Syst 46:43–53
Wei GW, Zhao XF, Lin R, Wang H (2014) Approaches to hesitant fuzzy multiple attribute decision making with incomplete weight information. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26(1):259–266
Wei G, Zhao XF, Wang HJ, Lin R (2012) Hesitant fuzzy Choquet integral aggregation operators and their applications to multiple attribute decision making. Inf: Interdiscip J 15(2):441–448
Wei G (2012) Hesitant fuzzy prioritized operators and their application to multiple attribute decision making. Knowl Based Syst 31:176–182
Xia MM, Xu ZS (2011) Hesitant fuzzy information aggregation in decision making. Int J Approx Reason 52(3):395–407
Xia MM, Xu ZS, Chen N (2011) Induced aggregation under confidence levels. Int J Uncertainty Fuzziness Knowl-Based Syst 19(2):201–227
Xia MM, Xu ZS, Chen N (2013) Some hesitant fuzzy aggregation operators with their application in decision making. Group Decis Negot 22(2):259–279
Xu ZS, Xia MM (2012) Hesitant fuzzy entropy measures and their use in multi attribute decision making. Int J Intell Syst 27(9):799–822
Xu ZS, Xia MM (2011) Distance and similarity measures on hesitant fuzzy sets. Inf Sci 181(11):2128–2138
Xu ZS, Xia MM (2011) On distance and correlation measures of hesitant fuzzy information. Int J Intell Syst 26(5):410–425
Xu ZS, Zhang X (2012) Hesitant fuzzy multiple attribute decision making based on TOPSIS with incomplete weight information. Knowl Based Syst 52:53–64
Xu ZS, Zhang X (2014) Satisfaction degree based interactive decision making method under hesitant fuzzy environment with incomplete weights. Int J Uncertainty Fuzziness Knowledge Based Syst 22(4):533–572
Yager RR (1986) On the theory of bags. Int J Gen Syst 13(1):23–37
Yu D, Zhang W, Xu Y (2013) Group decision making under hesitant fuzzy environment with application to personnel evaluation. Knowl Based Syst 52:1–10
Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8(3):338–353
Zhang N, Wei G (2013) Extension of VIKOR method for decision making problem based on hesitant fuzzy set. Appl Math Model 37(1):4938–4947
Zhang N, Wei G (2014) A multiple criteria hesitant fuzzy decision making with Shapley value based VIKOR method. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26(2):1065–1075
Zhang X, Xu ZS (2015) Hesitant fuzzy agglomerative hierarchical clustering algorithms. Int J Syst Sci 46(3):562–576
Zhang Y (2014) Models for decision making problems with hesitant fuzzy information. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 27(2):839–847
Zhang ZM (2013) Hesitant fuzzy power aggregation operators and their applications to multiple attribute group decision making. Inf Sci 234:150–181
Zhou L, Zhao XF, Wei GW (2015) Hesitant fuzzy Hamacher aggregation operators and their application to multiple attribute decision making. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 26:325–349
Zhu B, Xu ZS (2013) Hesitant fuzzy Bonferroni means for multi criteria decision making. J Oper Res Soc 64:1831–1840
Zhu B, Xu ZS, Xu J (2014) Deriving a ranking from hesitant fuzzy preference relations under group decision making. IEEE Trans Cybern 44(8):1328–1337
Zhu B, Xu ZS, Xu J (2012) A MST cluster analysis method under hesitant fuzzy environment. Control Cybern 41(3):645–666
Zhu B, Xu ZS, Xia MM (2012) Hesitant fuzzy geometric Bonferroni means. Inf Sci 205(1):72–85
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Verma, R. Hesitant interval-valued fuzzy sets: some new results. Int. J. Mach. Learn. & Cyber. 8, 865–876 (2017). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-015-0452-4
Received:
Accepted:
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13042-015-0452-4