Abstract
In this article, bipolar fuzzy algebra and bipolar fuzzy relation are defined, and then, the bipolar fuzzy matrix is introduced. Also, an order relation (\(\le \)) is defined and it is proved that the bipolar fuzzy set is a poset and a lattice. Some results on transitive closure and power-convergent of bipolar fuzzy matrices are investigated. Some applications of bipolar fuzzy sets and bipolar fuzzy matrix are included in this study.
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
We know that almost every word has its opposite word. So, every matter has two sides; one is called positive side, and another is called negative side due to the observer’s point of view, which can be measured with certain degree of membership levels. In this article, we focus on problems that present positive and negative preferences and it is called bipolar preference problem.
Bipolar is an important topic in several domains, for example, psychology, multi-criteria decision making, artificial intelligence, qualitative reasoning, etc. In a real-life situation, both positive and negative preferences are useful to handle the problem; in this aspect, this topic is our next issue.
The membership degrees of elements range over the interval [0, 1] in traditional fuzzy set. Sometimes, the membership degree means the satisfaction degree of elements to some property or constraint corresponding to a fuzzy set. So, some elements have irrelevant characteristics to the property corresponding to a fuzzy set and the others have contrary elements in fuzzy sets where the membership degrees ranged only in the interval [0, 1]. If a set representation could express this kind of difference, it would be more informative than the traditional fuzzy set representation. Based on these observations, Zhang (1994) introduced an extension of fuzzy set, named bipolar fuzzy set (BFS).
Major advantages of the BFS theory include
-
It formalizes a unified approach to polarity and fuzziness,
-
It captures the bipolar or double-sided nature of human perception and cognition,
-
It provides a basis for bipolar cognitive modeling and multi-agent decision analysis .
Like classical (crisp) matrices, fuzzy matrices (FMs) are now a very rich topic, in modeling uncertain situations that occur in science, engineering, automata theory, logic of binary relations, medical diagnosis, etc. FMs defined first time by Thomson in (1977) and discussed about the convergence of the powers of a fuzzy matrix. The theories of fuzzy matrices were developed by Kim and Roush FW (1980) as an extension of Boolean matrices. With max–min operation, the fuzzy algebra and its matrix theory are considered by many authors Bhowmik and Pal (2008a), Gavalec (1997), Khan and Pal (2006, 2007), Pal (2001), Shyamal and Pal (2004), Xin (1992) who studied controllable fuzzy matrices. The transitivity of matrices over path algebra (i.e., additively idempotent semiring) is discussed by Hashimoto (1983a, b, 1985). Generalized fuzzy matrices, matrices over an incline and some results about the transitive closer, determinant, adjoint matrices, convergence of powers and conditions for nilpotency are considered by Duan (2004) and Lur et al. (2004). In FMs, rows and columns are taken as certain. But, they may be uncertain. Pal (2015a) has introduced this concept. Here, rows and columns are taken as uncertain. He also investigated different properties of these types of matrices along with applications.
There are some limitations in dealing with uncertainties by fuzzy set. To overcome these difficulties, Atanassov (1983) introduced theory of intuitionistic fuzzy set as a generalization of fuzzy set. Based on this concept, Pal (2001) have defined intuitionistic fuzzy determinant (Pal 2001) and intuitionistic fuzzy matrices (IFMs) in 2002 (Pal et al. 2002). Bhowmik and Pal (2008a, b, 2009, 2010a), Bhowmik et al. (2008) introduced some results on IFMs, intuitionistic circulant fuzzy matrix and generalized intuitionistic fuzzy matrix. Shyamal and Pal (2002, 2005) defined the distances between IFMs and hence defined a metric on IFMs. They also cited few applications of IFMs. In Mondal and Pal (2013b), the similarity relations, invertibility conditions and eigenvalues of IFMs are studied. Idempotent, regularity, permutation matrix and spectral radius of IFMs are also discussed. Also, intuitionistic fuzzy incline matrix and determinant are studied in Mondal and Pal (2014). The parameterizations tool of IFM enhances the flexibility of its applications. For other works on IFMs, see Adak et al. (2012a, b, 2013), Pradhan and Pal (2012, 2013a, b).
The concept of interval-valued fuzzy matrices (IVFMs) as a generalization of FM was introduced and developed in Shyamal and Pal (2006) by extending the max–min operation in fuzzy algebra. We introduced interval-valued fuzzy vector space (Mondal 2012), rank and its associated properties on IVFMs Mondal and Pal (2016). Pal (2015b) defined a new type of IVFM whose rows and column are uncertain along with uncertain elements.
Combining IFMs and IVFMs, a new fuzzy matrix called interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy matrix (IVIFM) is defined Khan and Pal (2005). For other works on IVIFMs, see Bhowmik and Pal (2010b, 2012).
After the invention of BFSs Cacioppo et al. (1997), Zhang (1994, 1998) introduced fuzzy equilibrium relations and bipolar fuzzy clustering (Zhang 1999), bipolar logic and bipolar fuzzy partial ordering for clustering and coordination (Zhang 2002), bipolar logic and bipolar fuzzy logic (Zhang 2002) and Yin Yang bipolar logic, bipolar fuzzy logic (Zhang and Zhang 2004). The bipolar-valued fuzzy sets were introduced by Lee (2000a, b). After that, many authors Benferhat et al. (2006), Dubois and Prade (2008), Dudziak and Pekala (2010) are working on this topic till now. Samanta and pal introduced the bipolar fuzzy hypergraphs (Samanta and PaL 2012a). They investigated irregular bipolar fuzzy graphs (Samanta and PaL 2012b) and bipolar fuzzy intersection graphs (Samanta and PaL 2014). But, no one introduced the bipolar fuzzy matrix.
1.1 Motivation
Bipolar (fuzzy) set theory becomes popular due to its wide applications to model real-life situation. Bipolar logic is also used to represent bistable devices in computer and communication systems, particularly to represent electrical and electronics systems. Often it is seen that, to model or to solve such problems, a matrix is constructed, i.e., matrix is used as a tool. If uncertainties are present in the system, then fuzzy matrix is considered instead of crisp matrix. To solve or model a problem relating to bipolar uncertain system, a bipolar fuzzy matrix is essential.
Motivated from the above works and properties of BFS, we define bipolar fuzzy matrices. In this article, we introduce some basic properties of bipolar fuzzy elements by using max–min composition. Bipolar fuzzy relation, matrix and its basic properties are also introduced here. The properties of transitive closure, power-convergent are investigated with examples.
2 Preliminaries
The BFS is one of the extensions of fuzzy sets with positive and negative membership values. In this section, some basic notions of BFS are introduced. Also, some basic operations both binary and unary, viz., \(+,\cdot ,\times ,-,\lnot ,\Rightarrow \) on BFS, are given.
Definition 1
(Bipolar fuzzy set) A BFS \({\mathcal {B}}_F\) in X (universe of discourse) is an object having the form
where \(\mu _{\underline{n}}: X\rightarrow [-1,0]\) and \(\mu _{\overline{p}}: X\rightarrow [0,1]\) are two mappings.
The positive membership degree \(\mu _{\overline{p}}(x)\) denotes the satisfaction degree of an element x to the property corresponding to a BFS \({\mathcal {B}}_F\), and the negative membership degree \(\mu _{\underline{n}}(x)\) denotes the satisfaction degree of x to some implicit counter-property of \({\mathcal {B}}_F\).
If \(\mu _{\overline{p}}(x)\ne 0\) and \(\mu _{\underline{n}}(x)=0\), it is the situation that x is regarded as having only positive satisfaction for \({\mathcal {B}}_F\). If \(\mu _{\overline{p}}(x)=0\) and \(\mu _{\underline{n}}(x)\ne 0\), it is the situation that x does not satisfy the property of \({\mathcal {B}}_F\) but somewhat satisfied the counter-property of \({\mathcal {B}}_F\). There is a possibility that for an element x, \(\mu _{\overline{p}}(x)\ne 0\) and \(\mu _{\underline{n}}(x)\ne 0\), when the membership function of the property overlaps that of its counter-property over some portion of the domain Lee (2000b).
To understand the definition, we consider the following examples below.
Example 1
Let us consider five students from a school and one student from other school. If we consider the property co-operation of five students with the other particular students separately, the counter-property is competition. Then, the bipolar function is (competition and co-operation), and the corresponding BFS is
Here, in the first element 0.3 denotes the satisfaction degree of co-operation of first student among five with only student from another school and \(-0.5\) denotes the corresponding satisfaction value of competition. It is similar for other cases.
Following is another example of BFS.
Example 2
Suppose that the minimum height of an adult man is 2ft. and maximum height is 8ft.; therefore, the height of the shortest adult man is 2ft. and that of the tallest adult man is 8ft. and for all other cases (heights) the membership functions are linear. The geometrical presentation of the above BFS \(B_2\) is shown in Fig. 1.
We consider the property as tall man, so the counter-property is short man and their corresponding linear membership functions are
Example 3
In Example 1, the universe X for \(B_1\) is discrete set but for \(B_2\) the universe X (Example 2) is continuous and bounded set. For continuous unbounded universe X, if the counter-property is the exactly opposite to the property, then the geometrical presentation of the BFS looks like Fig. 2.
Second geometric interpretation of BFS indicates that the bipolar fuzzy membership function maps from the universe of discourse X to the square region OPQR which is shown in Fig. 3.
In arithmetic operations (such as addition and multiplication), only the membership values of BFS are needed. So, from now we represent a BFS as
where \(-x_n\in [-1,0]\), i.e., \(x_n\in [0,1]\) and \(x_p\in [0,1]\) are the, respectively, negative and positive membership degree of \(x\in X\) in \({\mathcal {B}}_F\).
Definition 2
(Equality) Let \(x,y\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\) where \(x=(-x_n,x_p)\) and \(y=(-y_n,y_p)\), then the equality of two elements x and y is denoted by \(x=y\) and is defined by, \(x=y\) if and only if \(x_n=y_n\) and \(x_p=y_p\).
Definition 3
Let \(x,y\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\) where \(x=(-x_n,x_p),y=(-y_n,y_p)\) and \(x_n,x_p,y_n,y_p\in [0,1]\) then the following operations are defined by Zhang and Zhang (2004).
-
1.
The disjunction of x and y is denoted by \(x+y\) and is defined by
$$\begin{aligned} x+y= & {} (-x_n,x_p)+(-y_n,y_p)\\= & {} (-\max \{x_n,y_n\},\max \{x_p,y_p\})\\= & {} (-\{x_n\vee y_n\},\{x_p\vee y_p\}). \end{aligned}$$ -
2.
The parallel conjunction of x and y is denoted by \(x\cdot y\) and is defined by
$$\begin{aligned} x\cdot y= & {} (-x_n,x_p)\cdot (-y_n,y_p)\\= & {} (-\min \{x_n,y_n\},\min \{x_p,y_p\})\\= & {} (-\{x_n\wedge y_n\},\{x_p\wedge y_p\}). \end{aligned}$$ -
3.
The serial conjunction of x and y is denoted by \(x\times y\) and is defined by
$$\begin{aligned} x\times y= & {} (-x_n,x_p)\times (-y_n,y_p)\\= & {} (-\{(x_n\wedge y_p)\vee (x_p\wedge y_n)\},\\&\{(x_n\wedge y_n)\vee (x_p\wedge y_p)\}). \end{aligned}$$ -
4.
The negation of x is denoted by \(-x\) and is defined by \(-x=-(-x_n,x_p)=(-x_p,x_n).\)
-
5.
The compliment of x is denoted by \(\lnot x\) and is defined by
$$\begin{aligned} \lnot x= & {} \lnot (-x_n,x_p)=(\lnot (-x_n),\lnot x_p)\\= & {} (-1+x_n,1-x_p). \end{aligned}$$ -
6.
The implication of x to y is denoted by \(x\Rightarrow y\) and is defined by \((x\Rightarrow y)=\lnot x+y\).
3 Some properties on BFSs
In this section, we introduced some basic definitions related to BFS, and then, we prove some simple properties on it.
Definition 4
(Zero element) The zero element of a BFS is denoted by \(o_b\) and is defined by \(o_b=(0,0)\).
Definition 5
(Unit element) The unit element of a BFS is denoted by \(i_b\) and is defined by \(i_b=(-1,1)\).
Definition 6
(Identity element) The identity element of a BFS in respect to serial conjunction is denoted by \(e_b\) and is defined by \(e_b=(0,1)\).
Proposition 1
Let \({\mathcal {B}}_F\) be a BFS and \(x,y,z\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\), where \(x=(-x_n,x_p),\ y=(-y_n,y_p)\) and \(z=(-z_n,z_p)\), then the following properties are satisfied
-
(a)
\(x+y=y+x,\ x\cdot y=y\cdot x,\ x\times y=y\times x\).
-
(b)
\(x+(y+z)=(x+y)+z,\ x\cdot (y\cdot z)=(x\cdot y)\cdot z,\ x\times (y\times z)=(x\times y)\times z\).
-
(c)
\(x+o_b=o_b+x=x,\ x\cdot i_b=i_b\cdot x=x,\ x\times e_b=e_b\times x=x\).
-
(d)
Inverse element does not exist except the identity in respect to the operations.
-
(e)
\(x\cdot (y+z)=x\cdot y+x\cdot z,\ x\times (y+z)=x\times y+x\times z\).
-
(f)
\(x-y=-(y-x)\) [where \(x-y=x+(-y)\)].
-
(g)
\(x\cdot (-y),\ (-x)\cdot y,\ -(x\cdot y)\) are not equal, but \(x\times (-y)=(-x)\times y=-(x\times y)\).
-
(h)
\(x\cdot (y-z)\ne x\cdot y-x\cdot z\), but \(x\times (y-z)=x\times y-x\times z\).
Proof
Given that \(x=(-x_n,x_p)\), \(y=(-y_n,y_p)\) and \(z=(-z_n,z_p)\).
(a)
The proofs are similar for other cases.
(b)
where
Similarly, \(a_p=[\{(x_n\wedge y_p)\vee (x_p\wedge y_n)\}\wedge z_n]\vee [\{(x_n\wedge y_n)\vee (x_p\wedge y_p)\}\wedge z_p]\).
Hence, \(x\times (y\times z)=(x\times y)\times z\).
Other two proofs are similar.
(c) \(x\times e_b=(-x_n,x_p)\times (0,1)=(-x_n,x_p)\) and \(e_b\times x=(0,1)\times (-x_n,x_p)=(-x_n,x_p)\).
Hence, \(x\times e_b=e_b\times x=x\), where \(e_b=(0,1)\) is called the identity in respect to serial conjunction.
Other proofs are similar.
(d) Let \(a=(-a_n,a_p)\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\) be the inverse of \(x=(-x_n,x_p)\) in respect to the disjunction (\(+\)) operation.
Then, \(x+a=a+x=o_b\), i.e., \((-x_n,x_p)+(-a_n,a_p)=(-a_n,a_p)+(-x_n,x_p)=(0,0)\)
or, \((-\max \{x_n,a_n\},\max \{x_p,a_p\})=(-\max \{a_n,x_n\},\max \{a_p,x_p\})=(0,0)\).
Thus, \(\max \{x_n,a_n\}=0\) and \(\max \{x_p,a_p\}=0\), which implies that \(x_n=x_p=a_n=a_p=0\). But, \(x=(-x_n,x_p)\) be any element of \({\mathcal {B}}_F\).
Hence, the inverse element does not exist in respect to the operation disjunction except zero element \(o_b\).
Other proofs can be done by similar way.
(e)
Similarly, we can prove the other result.
(f) \(x-y=x+(-y)=(-x_n,x_p)+(-y_p,y_n)=(-x_n\vee y_p,x_p\vee y_n)\).
Hence, \(x-y=-(y-x)\).
(g) \(x\cdot (-y)=(-x_n,x_p)\cdot (-y_p,y_n)=(-x_n\wedge y_p,x_p\wedge y_n)\)
\((-x)\cdot y=(-x_p,x_n)\cdot (-y_n,y_p)=(-x_p\wedge y_n,x_n\wedge y_p)\)
and \(-(x\cdot y)=-\{(-x_n,x_p)\cdot (-y_n,y_p)\}=-(-x_n\wedge y_n,x_p\wedge y_p)=(-x_p\wedge y_p,x_n\wedge y_n)\).
Thus, \(x\cdot (-y)\), \((-x)\cdot y\) and \(-(x\cdot y)\) are not equal. Actually,
But, for serial conjunction
\(x\times (-y)=(-x_n,x_p)\times (-y_p,y_n)=(-\{x_n\wedge y_n\}\vee \{x_p\wedge y_p\},\{x_n\wedge y_p\}\vee \{x_p\wedge y_n\})\)
and
Hence, \(x\times (-y)=(-x)\times y=-(x\times y)\).
(h) Using (e) and (g), we can easily prove that
But, \(x\times (y-z)=x\times \{y+(-z)\}=x\times y+x\times (-z)=x\times y-x\times z\). \(\square \)
Remark 1
(\({\mathcal {B}}_F,+\)), (\({\mathcal {B}}_F,\cdot \)) and (\({\mathcal {B}}_F,\times \)) are all Abelian groupoids.
Theorem 1
De Morgan’s laws are satisfied on BFS \({\mathcal {B}}_F\). That is, if \(x=(-x_n,x_p)\) and \(y=(-y_n,y_p)\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\) then
-
(a)
\(\lnot (x+y)=(\lnot x)\cdot (\lnot y)\) and
-
(b)
\(\lnot (x\cdot y)=(\lnot x)+(\lnot y)\).
Proof
(a)
Also,
Similarly, we can prove the second part. \(\square \)
Example 4
Let \(x=(-0.5,0.3)\) and \(y=(-0.1,0.8)\), then \(\lnot x=(-1+0.5,1-0.3)=(-0.5,0.7)\) and \(\lnot y=(-1+0.1,1-0.8)=(-0.9,0.2)\).
Therefore, \((\lnot x)+(\lnot y)=(-0.5,0.7)+(-0.9,0.2)=(-0.9,0.7)\) and \((\lnot x)\cdot (\lnot y)=(-0.5,0.7)\cdot (-0.9,0.2)=(-0.5,0.2)\).
Also, \(x+y=(-0.5,0.3)+(-0.1,0.8)=(-0.5,0.8)\) and \(x\cdot y=(-0.5,0.3)\cdot (-0.1,0.8)=(-0.1,0.3)\).
Thus, \(\lnot (x+y)=(-1+0.5,1-0.8)=(-0.5,0.2)\) and \(\lnot (x\cdot y)=(-1+0.1,1-0.3)=(-0.9,0.7)\). Hence, \(\lnot (x+y)=(\lnot x)\cdot (\lnot y)\) and \(\lnot (x\cdot y)=(\lnot x)+(\lnot y)\).
4 Bipolar fuzzy relation
In this section, we define Cartesian product of two BFSs, and relation. Also, several basic properties are investigated.
Definition 7
(Cartesian product of BFSs) Let \(X_1\) and \(X_2\) be two universe of discourses and let \(A=\{x=(-x_n,x_p)|x\in X_1\}\), \(B=\{y=(-y_n,y_p)|y\in X_2\}\) be two BFSs. The Cartesian product of A and B is denoted by \(A\times B\) and is defined by
Definition 8
(Bipolar fuzzy relation) A bipolar fuzzy relation between two BFSs A and B is defined as a BFS in \(A\times B\). If R is a relation between A and B, \(x\in A\) and \(y\in B\), and if \(-r_n(x,y)\), \(r_p(x,y)\) denote the negative and positive membership values to which x is in relation R with y, then \(r=(-r_n,r_p)\in R\).
Now, we define an order relation ‘\(\le \)’ below.
Definition 9
(Inclusion) Let \({\mathcal {B}}_F\) be a BFS over X and let \(x,y\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\) where \(x=(-x_n,x_p)\) and \(y=(-y_n,y_p)\), then \(x\le y\) if and only if \(x_n\le y_n\) and \(x_p\le y_p\). That is, \(x\le y\) if and only if \(x+y=y\).
Definition 10
Let \({\mathcal {B}}_F\) be a BFS over X and let \(x,y\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\), where \(x=(-x_n,x_p)\) and \(y=(-y_n,y_p)\), then \(x<y\) if and only if \(x\le y\) and \(x\ne y\).
Proposition 2
The relation ‘\(\le \)’ is partial order relation in a BFS.
Proof
I. Since \(x_n\le x_n\) and \(x_p\le x_p\), so we write \(x\le x\) for all \(x\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\).
That is, the relation ‘\(\le \)’ is reflexive.
II. Let \(x\le y\) and \(y\le x\) for any \(x,y\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\). Then,
Thus, \(x\le y\) and \(y\le x\) implies \(x=y\) for any \(x,y\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\). That is, the relation ‘\(\le \)’ is antisymmetric.
III. Let \(x\le y\) and \(y\le z\) for any \(x,y,z\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\). Then,
Thus, \(x\le y\) and \(y\le z\) implies \(x\le z\) for any \(x,y,z\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\). That is, the relation ‘\(\le \)’ is transitive.
Hence, the relation ‘\(\le \)’ in a BFS is a partial order relation. \(\square \)
Proposition 3
Let \({\mathcal {B}}_F\) be a BFS over X and let \(x,y,z\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\) where \(x=(-x_n,x_p),y=(-y_n,y_p)\) and \(z=(-z_n,z_p)\), then
-
(a)
\(o_b\le x\le i_b\), for any x.
-
(b)
If \(x\le y\) then \(x+z\le y+z\) and \(x\cdot z\le y\cdot z\).
-
(c)
\(x\le x+y\) and \(y\le x+y\), \(x+y\) is the least upper bound of x and y. In other words, if there is an element z satisfying \(x\le z\) and \(y\le z\) then \(x+y\le z\).
-
(d)
\(x\cdot y\le x\) and \(x\cdot y\le y\). That is, \(x\cdot y\) is a lower bound of x and y.
-
(e)
\(x\cdot y\cdot z\le x\cdot y\).
Proof
-
(a)
Since \(x=(-x_n,x_p)\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\), therefore \(0\le x_n,x_p\le 1\). Hence, \(o_b\le x\le i_b\).
-
(b)
Let \(x\le y\), then \(x_n\le y_n\) and \(x_p\le y_p\). Therefore, \(\max \{x_n,z_n\}{\le }\max \{y_n,z_n\}\) and \(\max \{x_p,z_p\}\le \max \{y_p,z_p\}\). Thus, \(x+z\le y+z\). Also, \(\min \{x_n,z_n\}\le \min \{y_n,z_n\}\) and \(\min \{x_p,z_p\}\le \min \{y_p,z_p\}\). Hence, \(x\cdot z\le y\cdot z\).
-
(c)
We know that \(x_n\le \max \{x_n,y_n\}\) and \(x_p\le \max \{x_p,y_p\}\). So \(x\le x+y\). Similarly, \(y\le x+y\). Thus, \(x+y\) is the upper bound of x and y. If possible let \(z\ne x+y\) be the least upper bound of x and y then
$$\begin{aligned} \begin{array}{rl} &{} x\le z\quad \text{ and }\quad y\le z,\\ \mathrm{i.e.,} &{} x_n\le z_n,\ x_p\le z_p\quad \text{ and }\quad y_n\le z_n,\ y_p\le z_p,\\ \mathrm{i.e.,} &{} \max \{x_n,y_n\}\le z_n\quad \text{ and }\max \quad \{x_p,y_p\}\le z_p. \end{array} \end{aligned}$$Thus
$$\begin{aligned} x+y\le z \end{aligned}$$(1)Also, since \(x+y\) is the upper bound of x, y and z is the least upper bound so
$$\begin{aligned} z\le x+y \end{aligned}$$(2)From Eqs. (1) and (2), we can write as \(x+y=z\). That is, \(x+y\) is the least upper bound of x and y.
-
(d)
Similarly, we can prove that \(x\cdot y\) is the greatest lower bound of x and y.
-
(e)
We know that \(\min \{x_n,z_n,y_n\}\le \min \{x_n,y_n\}\) and \(\min \{x_p,z_p,y_p\}\le \min \{x_p,y_p\}\). Therefore, \(x\cdot z\cdot y\le x\cdot y\).
\(\square \)
Hence, we say that under max–min operation every pair of the partial order set has least upper bound and greatest lower bound in BFS. So, a BFS is a lattice.
5 Bipolar fuzzy matrix
In order to develop the theory of bipolar fuzzy matrix (BFM), we begin with the concept of bipolar fuzzy algebra. A bipolar fuzzy algebra is a mathematical system \(({\mathcal {B}}_F,+,\cdot )\) with two binary operations \(+\) and \(\cdot \) defined on \({\mathcal {B}}_F\) satisfying the following properties.
-
(P1)
Idempotent: \(x+x=x\), \(x\cdot x=x\)
-
(P2)
Commutativity: \(x+y=y+x\), \(x\cdot y=y\cdot x\)
-
(P3)
Associativity: \(x+(y+z)=(x+y)+z\), \(x\cdot (y\cdot z)=(x\cdot y)\cdot z\)
-
(P4)
Absorption: \(x+(x\cdot y)=x\), \(x\cdot (x+y)=x\)
-
(P5)
Distributivity: \(x\cdot (y+z)=(x\cdot y)+(x\cdot z)\), \(x+(y\cdot z)=(x+y)\cdot (x+z)\)
-
(P6)
Universal bounds: \(x+o_b=x\), \(x+i_b=i_b\), \(x\cdot o_b=o_b\), \(x\cdot i_b=x\)
where \(x=(-x_n,x_p),\ y=(-y_n,y_p)\) and \(z=(-z_n,z_p)\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\).
Proof
Most of the results are already proved. The proofs of absorption and second distributive law are given below.
(P4) To prove the absorption property, we take the left-hand side of first as
Similarly, we can prove the second part.
(P5) For second distributive law, we have
Hence, \(({\mathcal {B}}_F,+,\cdot )\) is a bipolar fuzzy algebra. \(\square \)
Definition 11
(Bipolar fuzzy matrix) A bipolar fuzzy matrix (BFM) is the matrix over the bipolar fuzzy algebra. The zero matrix \(O_m\) of order \(m\times m\) is the matrix where all the elements are \(o_b=(0,0)\) and the identity matrix \(I_m\) of order \(m\times m\) is the matrix where all the diagonal entries are \(i_b=(-1,1)\) and all other entries are \(o_b=(0,0)\).
The set of all rectangular BFMs of order \(l\times m\) is denoted by \({\mathcal {M}}_{lm}\) and that of square BFMs of order \(m\times m\) is denoted by \({\mathcal {M}}_m\).
From the definition, we conclude that if \(A=(a_{ij})_{l\times m}\in {\mathcal {M}}_{lm}\), then \(a_{ij}=(-a_{ijn},a_{ijp})\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\), where \(a_{ijn},a_{ijp}\in [0,1]\) are the negative and positive membership values of the element \(a_{ij}\), respectively.
5.1 Operations on BFM
The operations on BFM are as follows:
Definition 12
Let \(A=(a_{ij}),\ B=(b_{ij})\in {\mathcal {M}}_{lm}\) be two BFMs. Therefore, \(a_{ij},b_{ij}\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\), then
Definition 13
Let \(A=(a_{ij})\in {\mathcal {M}}_{lm}\) and \(B=(b_{ij})\in {\mathcal {M}}_{mq}\) be two BFMs. Therefore, \(a_{ij},b_{ij}\in {\mathcal {B}}_F\), then
Proposition 4
If the BFMs A, B, C are conformal for corresponding operations, then
-
(a)
\(A+B=B+A\), \(A\cdot B=B\cdot A\).
-
(b)
\(A+(B+C)=(A+B)+C\), \(A\cdot (B\cdot C)=(A\cdot B)\cdot C\).
-
(c)
\(A\cdot (B+C)=A\cdot B+A\cdot C\), \(A+(B\cdot C)=(A+B)\cdot (A+C)\).
-
(d)
\(A+O=O+A=A\), \(A\cdot O=O\cdot A=A\), if O be the zero matrix, with appropriate order.
-
(e)
\(A\odot B\ne B\odot A\), \(A\otimes B\ne B\otimes A\), in general.
-
(f)
\(A\odot (B\odot C)=(A\odot B)\odot C\), \(A\otimes (B\otimes C)=(A\otimes B)\otimes C\).
-
(g)
\(A\odot I=I\odot A=A\), \(A\otimes I=I\otimes A=A\), where I be the identity matrix, with appropriate order.
-
(h)
\(A\odot (B+C)\ne (A\odot B)+(A\odot C)\), \(A\otimes (B\cdot C)\ne (A\otimes B)\cdot (A\otimes C)\).
Proof
The proof of (a), (b) and (d) is simple for the matrices A, B, C of the same order.
(c) This property can be proved by using the distributive property on BFS.
(e) From the definition, we say that \(A\odot B\) and \(A\otimes B\) are possible if the order of A and B is \(q\times r\) and \(r\times s\), respectively, that is, \(\text{ number } \text{ of } \text{ columns } \text{ of } A=\text{ number } \text{ of } \text{ rows } \text{ of } B.\)
Thus, if the order of A and B is \(q\times r\) and \(r\times s\), then \(B\odot A\) and \(B\otimes A\) do not exist.
Now, if both the matrices are square of same order say m, then for both cases the matrices are conformable, but the equality does not hold in general. To verify it, we consider the following example.
Let
then,
and
Note that, \(A\odot B\ne B\odot A\).
Again,
and
Here also, \(A\otimes B\ne B\otimes A\).
(f) Let \(A\in {\mathcal {M}}_{qr}\), \(B\in {\mathcal {M}}_{rs}\) and \(C\in {\mathcal {M}}_{st}\) and let \(B\odot C=(d_{ij})\in {\mathcal {M}}_{rt}\). Then, the ijth entries of \(B\odot C\) is
Therefore, the ijth entries of \(A\odot (B\odot C)\) is
This is the ijth entry of \((A\odot B)\odot C\).
Thus, \(A\odot (B\odot C)=(A\odot B)\odot C\).
The proof of the second part is similar.
(g) For the square matrix \(A=(a_{ij})\) and the identity matrix \(I=(e_{ij})\) of the same order, say m, then the ijth entry of \(A\odot I=(b_{ij})\), where \(b_{ij}=\sum \limits _{k=1}^m a_{ik}\cdot e_{kj}\). Therefore,
Thus, \(A\odot I=A\). Similarly, \(I\odot A=A\). Hence, \(A\odot I=I\odot A=A\).
The second part can be proved by similar way.
(h) To verify this result, we consider the following example.
Let
and
Therefore
Now,
Thus,
Therefore, \(A\odot (B\otimes C)\ne (A\odot B)\otimes (A\odot C)\).
Second part can be verified by similar way. \(\square \)
6 Convergence of BFM
In this section, we introduce the concept of convergence and power of convergence of a BFM.
A sequence of matrices \(A_1,A_2,A_3,\ldots ,A_m,A_{m+1},\cdots \) that is, \(\{A_m\}\) is said to be converged to a finite matrix A (if exist) if
Definition 14
(Power of convergence of a BFM) A least positive integer p is said to be the power of convergence of a BFM A in respect to a binary composition \(*\) if
where \(n\in {\mathbb {N}}\) (set of natural numbers) and
The number p is called the index of A and is denoted by i(A).
Definition 15
The partial order relation ‘\(\le \)’ over \({\mathcal {M}}_m\) is defined as \(A\le B\) if and only if \(a_{ij}\le b_{ij}\) for all \(i,j\in \{1,2,3,\ldots ,m\}\) where \(A=(a_{ij}),\ B=(b_{ij})\in {\mathcal {M}}_m\). That is, \(A\le B\) if and only if \(A+B=B\). \(A<B\) holds if and only if \(A\le B\) and \(A\ne B\).
Definition 16
Let \(A=(a_{ij})\in {\mathcal {M}}_m\) be a BFM. The ijth entry of the square matrix \(A^r\) is denoted by \(a_{ij}^{(r)}\) and obviously
Definition 17
A matrix A is said to be nilpotent of order k if \(A^k=O_m\) for some \(k\in {\mathbb {N}}\), and A is idempotent if \(A^2=A\).
Lemma 1
Let \(A=(a_{ij})\in {\mathcal {M}}_m\) be a BFM. If \(r>m\), then
As a result, \(A^{r+1}\le \sum \nolimits _{k=1}^m A^k\).
Proof
Let \(B=\sum \nolimits _{k=0}^{m-1} A^k\). Now, \(a_{ii}^{(r)}\le i_b=b_{ii}\). Since \(a_{ii}^{(0)}=i_b\).
If \(i\ne j\), we consider an arbitrary summand of right-hand side of equality (3), i.e., \(a_{ij_1}\cdot a_{j_1j_2}\cdot a_{j_2j_3}\cdots a_{j_{r-1}j}\).
Since \(i,j_1,j_2,j_3,\ldots ,j_{r-1},j\in \{1,2,3,\ldots ,m\}\) and \(r+1>m\), there are s, t such that \(j_s=j_t\) (\(0\le s<t\le r,\ j_0=i,j_m=j\)). Deleting \(a_{j_sj_{s+1}}\cdot a_{j_{s+1}j_{s+2}}\cdot a_{j_{s+2}j_{s+3}}\cdots a_{j_{t-1}j_t}\) from the summand \(a_{ij_1}\cdot a_{j_1j_2}\cdot a_{j_2j_3}\cdots a_{j_{r-1}j}\), we obtain
If the number \(s+r-t+2\) of the subscripts in the right-hand side of the above inequality still more than m, the same deleting method is used.
Therefore, there is a positive integer \(q\le m-1\) such that
Hence, by definition of \(A^r\) we have
\(\square \)
Definition 18
Let \(A,B,C\in {\mathcal {M}}_m\). The BFM A is said to be transitive, if \(A^2\le A\). The BFM B is said to be transitive closure of matrix A, if B is transitive, \(A\le B\) and \(B\le C\) for any transitive matrix C, satisfying \(A\le C\). The transitive closure of A is denoted by t(A).
Theorem 2
Let \(A\in {\mathcal {M}}_m\) be a BFM. Then, the transitive closure of A is given by \(t(A)=\sum \nolimits _{k=1}^m A^k\).
Proof
Let \(B=\sum \nolimits _{k=1}^m A^k\), obviously \(A\le B\). Since \({\mathcal {M}}_m\) is idempotent under addition, we have
By Lemma 1,
Hence, \(B^2\le B\).
If there is a matrix C such that \(A\le C\) and \(C^2\le C\), then \(A^2\le AC\le C^2\le C\), and by induction we have \(A^k\le C^k\le C\) for all positive integers k. Hence, \(B\le C\).
Thus, by the definition of transitive closure, \(B=t(A)=\sum \nolimits _{k=1}^m A^k\). \(\square \)
Example 5
Let
The convergence of powers of a fuzzy matrix was studied first time by Thomason (1977). He also pointed out that the power of general fuzzy matrices either converge or oscillate with a finite period. After that, many authors studied the convergence of fuzzy matrices (Bhowmik and Pal 2008b; Duan 2004; Lur et al. 2004; Mondal and Pal 2014. Hashimoto (1983a, b, 1985) introduced the transitivity condition on power of convergence of fuzzy matrices. Using these concepts, we studied some properties about convergence of power of BFMs.
Definition 19
(Periodicity of BFM) Let \(A\in {\mathcal {M}}_m\) be a BFM. If there exists two least positive integers s and t such that, \(A^{s+t}=A^s\) holds, then t is said to be the periodicity of A and s is the starting point of A corresponding to t.
Let \(r>s\) be any positive integer, then \(r-s>0\) and multiplying \(A^{r-s}\) on both sides of \(A^{s+t}=A^s\) we get, \(A^{r+t}=A^r\) which means that every \(r(>s)\) be also a starting point corresponding to t.
Proposition 5
The power of a BFM \(A\in {\mathcal {M}}_m\) is either converged to \(A^p\) for a finite natural p or oscillate with a finite period.
Proof
The operation is max–min or min–max; so, in the powers of A the negative and the positive membership values are not new at all. These are nothing but the negative and positive membership values of A, respectively. Since n is finite and max–min or min–max operations are deterministic, it cannot introduce negative and positive membership values which are not in A. Thus, if A does not converge in its powers, then it must oscillate with finite period. \(\square \)
The following example shows that the matrix A converges and the matrix B oscillates.
Example 6
Let
Therefore,
Again
Hence, the matrix A power converges to the power \(p=2\). That is, \(i(A)=2\).
We consider another matrix
For this matrix, after calculating the values of the power of matrix B we see that \(B^9=B^{11}=B^{13}=\cdots \). Therefore, B oscillates with period 2, and the starting point is 9, where
Also, \(B^{10}=B^{12}=B^{14}=\cdots \). So, the another starting point is 10, where
Theorem 3
Let \(A\in {\mathcal {M}}_m\) be a BFM. If either \(A^q\le A^r\) or \(A^r\le A^q\) holds for every \(q<r\), then A converges.
Proof
Let \(A=(a_{ij})\) and \(A^q\le A^r\) for every \(q<r\). Then
Therefore,
and
Since \(a_{ijn}^{(q)}\le a_{ijn}^{(r)}\) and \(a_{ijp}^{(q)}\le a_{ijp}^{(r)}\) and max–min operation is deterministic, a finite number of distinct negative and positive membership values in the corresponding position occur in the power of A so that
and
for some finite natural numbers s and t. Simply, a finite number of distinct BFM occurs in the powers of A. Hence, A converges.
Similarly, it can be shown that A converges when \(A^r\le A^q\) for every \(q<r\). \(\square \)
Definition 20
Let \(A=(a_{ij})\in {\mathcal {M}}_m\) be a BFM. A is said to be row-diagonally dominant if \(a_{ij}\le a_{ii}\) (\(1\le i,j\le m\)), A is column-diagonally dominant if \(a_{ji}\le a_{ii}\) (\(1\le i,j\le m\)), the matrix A is called diagonally dominant if it is both row- and column-diagonally dominant.
Diagonally dominant property is very important in the matrix and its determinant theory. Here, we investigate some results using this.
Theorem 4
Let \(A\in {\mathcal {M}}_m\) be a BFM. If \(A^q\le A^r\) for every \(q<r\) and A is row- or column-diagonally dominant, then A converges to \(A^l\) for some \(l\le m-1\).
Proof
Let A be row-diagonally dominant. Now,
Similarly, \(a_{iip}^{(k)}\le a_{iip}\). Therefore, \(a_{ii}^{(k)}\le a_{ii}\). On the other hand \(a_{ii}\le a_{ii}^{(k)}\)\((k\ge 1)\) by our assumption.
Therefore, \(a_{ii}^{(k)}=a_{ii}\)\((k\ge 1)\). Also using the Lemma 1 we conclude that
Hence, A converges to \(A^l\) for some \(l\le m-1\). \(\square \)
Theorem 5
Let \(A\in {\mathcal {M}}_m\) be a BFM. If \(A^q\le A^r\) for every \(q<r\) and A is row- or column-diagonally dominant, then A is power-convergent and converges to t(A) (transitive closure of A).
Proof
From Theorem 3, if \(A^q\le A^r\) for every \(q<r\) then A converges, taking \(q=1\), \(r=2\) we get \(A\le A^2\). Similarly, \(A^2\le A^3\le A^4\le \cdots \). Now
Again since A is row- or column-diagonally dominant, A converges to \(A^l\) for some \(l\le m-1\). Then,
Therefore, \(t(A)=A^l\).
Thus, A is power convergence to t(A). \(\square \)
Example 7
The matrix A of order 3 in Example 6 is both row- and column-diagonally dominant and \(i(A)=2=3-1\). If all entries of a matrix A are same, then the BFM is power convergence to 1.
Also, for the matrix A of Example 6, \(A\le A^2\). Therefore, A converges to
7 An application on online education
Nowadays, online education is a very popular learning system. But, the entire system depends on various characteristics such as strength of the network signals, writing and presenting quality of teacher, authentication of the site, i.e., knowledge of the teacher on the topic, capability of the reader.
Suppose a group of five students want to learn a topic from online learning system. Also, it is assumed that there are six valid websites for learning this topic. We consider the positive membership value as the learning level of the students, and the negative membership value represents the inability to achieve that learning level from the lecture from a particular site. Then, the ’learning the students and sites’ system can be written as the following matrix:
Here, \(W_1,\ W_2,\ W_3,\ W_4,\ W_5,\ W_6\) are six different websites and \(S_1,\ S_2,\ S_3,\ S_4,\ S_5\) are five different students. In the first entry, \((-0.2,0.6)\), 0.6 and \(-0.2\) represent the learning and non-learning capacity of the student \(S_1\) from the website \(W_1\).
8 Conclusion
It is well known that matrix theory is a very essential tool to model a large number of problems that occur in science, engineering, medical science and even in social science. Again, the world is full of uncertainty. Also, in many problems, it is observed that for the same attribute there are positive and negative information. So, bipolar fuzzy matrix is now essential to model and solve the problem containing bipolar information. In this paper, first time we introduce the bipolar fuzzy relation and bipolar fuzzy matrix based on bipolar fuzzy algebras. Also, some results on transitive closure and power of convergence are investigated. More results can be done about bipolar fuzzy matrix, determinant, invertible matrix, rank, eigenvalues, etc. We are working on these topics.
References
Adak AK, Bhowmik M, Pal M (2012) Some properties of generalized intuitionistic fuzzy nilpotent matrices over distributive lattice. Fuzzy Inf. Eng. 4(4):371–387
Adak AK, Bhowmik M, Pal M (2012) Intuitionistic fuzzy block matrix and its some properties. Ann Pure Appl Math 1(1):13–31
Adak AK, Bhowmik M, Pal M (2013) Distributive lattice over intuitionistic fuzzy matrices. J Fuzzy Math 21(2):401–416
Atanassov KT (1983) Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. In: Sgurev V (ed) VII ITKR’s Session. Sofia
Benferhat S, Dubois D, Kaci S, Prade H (2006) Bipolar possibility theory in preference modelling: representation, fusion and optimal solutions. Inf. Fusion 7(1):135–150
Bhowmik M, Pal M (2008) Generalized intuitionistic fuzzy matrices. Far-East J Math Sci 29(3):533–554
Bhowmik M, Pal M (2008) Some results on intuitionistic fuzzy matrices and intuitionistic circulant fuzzy matrices. Int J Math Sci 7:81–96
Bhowmik M, Pal M, Pal A (2008) Circulant triangular fuzzy number matrices. J Phys Sci 12:141–154
Bhowmik M, Pal M (2009) Intuitionistic neutrosophic set. J Inf Comput Sci 4(2):142–152
Bhowmik M, Pal M (2010) Intuitionistic neutrosophic set relations and some of its properties. J Inf Comput Sci 5(3):183–192
Bhowmik M, Pal M (2010) Generalized interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. J Fuzzy Math 18(2):357–371
Bhowmik M, Pal M (2012) Some results on generalized interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Int J Fuzzy Syst 14(2):193–203
Cacioppo JT, Gardner WL, Berntson GG (1997) Beyond bipolar conceptualization and measures: the case of attitudes and evaluative spaces. Personal Soc Psychol Rev 1:3–25
Duan J-S (2004) The transitive closure, convergence of powers and adjoint of generalized fuzzy matrices. Fuzzy Sets Syst 145:301–311
Dubois D, Prade H (2008) An introduction to bipolar representations of information and preference. Int J Intell Syst 23(8):866–877
Dudziak U, Pekala B (2010) Equivalent bipolar fuzzy relations. Fuzzy Sets Syst 161:234–253
Gavalec M (1997) Computing matrix period in max-min algebra. Discrete Appl Math 75:63–70
Hashimoto H (1983) Convergence of power of a fuzzy transitive matrix. Fuzzy Sets Syst 9:153–160
Hashimoto H (1983) Canonical form of a transitive fuzzy matrix. Fuzzy Sets Syst 11:157–162
Hashimoto H (1985) Transitivity of generalized fuzzy matrix. Fuzzy Sets Syst 17:83–90
Khan SK, Pal M (2005) Interval-valued intuitionistic fuzzy matrices. Notes Intuit Fuzzy Sets 11(1):16–27
Khan SK, Pal M (2006) Some operations on intuitionistic fuzzy matrices. Acta Cienc Indica XXXII M(2):515–524
Khan SK, Pal M (2007) The generalized inverse of intuitionistic fuzzy matrix. J Phys Sci 11:62–67
Kim KH, Roush FW (1980) Generalized fuzzy matrices. Fuzzy Sets Syst 4:293–315
Lee KM (2000) Bipolar-valued fuzzy sets and their operations. In Proceedings of International Conference on Intelligent Technologies, Bangkok, Thailand, pp 307–312
Lee KM (2000) Comparison of interval-valued fuzzy set, intuitionistic fuzzy sets and bipolar-valued fuzzy sets. J Fuzzy Log Intell Syst 14(2):125–129
Lur Y-Y, Pang C-T, Guu S-M (2004) On nilpotent fuzzy matrices. Fuzzy Sets Syst 145:287–299
Mondal S (2012) Interval-valued fuzzy vector space. Ann Pure Appl Math 2(1):86–95
Mondal S, Pal M (2013) Similarity relations, invertibility and eigenvalues of intuitoinistic fuzzy matrix. Fuzzy Inf Eng 5(4):431–443
Mondal S, Pal M (2014) Intuitionistic fuzzy incline matrix and determinant. Ann Fuzzy Math Inform 8(1):19–32
Mondal S, Pal M (2016) Rank of interval-valued fuzzy matrices. Afr Mat 27(1–2):97–114
Pal M (2001) Intuitionistic fuzzy determinant. V U J Phys Sci 7:87–93
Pal M, Khan SK, Shyamal AK (2002) Intuitionistic fuzzy matrices. Notes Intuit Fuzzy Sets 8(2):51–62
Pal M (2015) Fuzzy matrices with fuzzy rows and columns. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 30(1):561–573
Pal M (2015) Interval-valued fuzzy matrices with interval-valued rows and columns. Fuzzy Inf Eng 7(3):335–368
Pradhan R, Pal M (2012) Intuitionistic fuzzy linear transformations. Ann Pure Appl Math 1(1):57–68
Pradhan R, Pal M (2013) Generalized inverse of block intuitionistic fuzzy matrices. Int J Appl Fuzzy Sets Artif Intell 3:23–38
Pradhan R, Pal M (2013) Convergence of maxgeneralized mean-mingeneralized mean powers of intuitionistic fuzzy matrices. J Fuzzy Math 22(2):477–492
Samanta S, PaL M (2012) Bipolar fuzzy hypergraphs. Int J Fuzzy Log Syst 2(1):17–28
Samanta S, PaL M (2012) Irregular bipolar fuzzy graphs. Int J Appl Fuzzy Sets 2:91–102
Samanta S, PaL M (2014) Some more results on bipolar fuzzy sets and bipolar fuzzy intersection graphs. J Fuzzy Math 22(2):253–262
Shyamal AK, Pal M (2002) Distances between intuitionistic fuzzy matrices. V U J Phys Sci 8:81–91
Shyamal AK, Pal M (2004) Two new operations on fuzzy matrices. J Appl Math Comput 15(1–2):91–107
Shyamal AK, Pal M (2005) Distance between intuitionistic fuzzy matrices and its applications. Nat Phys Sci 19(1):39–58
Shyamal AK, Pal M (2006) Interval-valued fuzzy matrices. J Fuzzy Math 14(3):583–604
Thomason MG (1977) Convergence of powers of a fuzzy matrix. J Math Anal Appl 57:476–480
Xin LJ (1992) Convergence of power of a controllable fuzzy matrices. Fuzzy Sets Syst 45:313–319
Zhang W (1994) Bipolar fuzzy sets and relations: a computational framework for cognitive modeling and multiagent decision analysis. In IEEE, pp 305–309
Zhang W (1998) Bipolar fuzzy sets. In: Proceedings of IEEE world congress on computational science\(-\)fuzz-IEEE, Anchorage, AK, pp 835-840
Zhang W (1999) Fuzzy equilibrium relations and bipolar fuzzy clustering. In: Proceedings of 18th international conference of the North American fuzzy information processing society–NAFIPS, New York, pp 361–365
Zhang W (2002) Bipolar logic and bipolar fuzzy partial ordering for clustering and coordination. In: Proceedings of \(6\)th international conference on information science. Duke University, NC, pp 85–88
Zhang W (2002) Bipolar logic and bipolar fuzzy logic. In: Proceedings of international conference of the North American fuzzy information processing society (NAFIPS), New Orleans, LA, pp 286–291
Zhang W, Zhang L (2004) Yin Yan bipolar logic and bipolar fuzzy logic. Inf Sci 165:265–287
Acknowledgements
Authors have no funding support to study and introduce the article.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Ethics declarations
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Ethical approval
This article does not contain any studies with human participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
Additional information
Communicated by A. Di Nola.
Publisher's Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pal, M., Mondal, S. Bipolar fuzzy matrices. Soft Comput 23, 9885–9897 (2019). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-03912-9
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-019-03912-9