See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: [Link]

net/publication/283120221

An Overview on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets

Article · March 2014

CITATIONS READS

17 6,369

1 author:

Ejegwa Paul Augustine

Federal University of Agriculture, Makurdi
88 PUBLICATIONS 817 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Pythagorean fuzzy sets with applications View project

Non-classical sets and their applications View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Ejegwa Paul Augustine on 24 October 2015.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC & TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH VOLUME 3, ISSUE 3, MARCH 2014 ISSN 2277-8616

An Overview on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets

P. A. Ejegwa, S.O. Akowe, P.M. Otene, J.M. Ikyule

Abstract: We present a brief overview on Intuitionistic fuzzy sets which cuts across some definitions, operations, algebra, modal operators and
normalization on Intuitionistic fuzzy set.

Keywords: algebra, fuzzy sets, intuitionistic fuzzy sets, modal operators, normalization.
——————————
——————————

Introduction It can be interpreted as “the degree that the object  belongs to

IFS  is 0.5, the degree that the object  does not belong to IFS 
The theory of fuzzy sets (FS) introduced by [1] has showed meaningful
applications in many field of studies. The idea of fuzzy set is welcomed is 0.3, the degree of hesitancy or indetermacy of  belonging to
because it handles uncertainty and vagueness which Cantorian set IFS  is 0.2, the degree of favour of  belonging to IFS  is 0.6
could not address. In fuzzy set theory, the membership of an element and the degree of against of  not belonging to IFS  is 0.36”.
to a fuzzy set is a single value between zero and one. However in
reality, it may not always be true that the degree of non-membership of
an element in a fuzzy set is equal to 1 minus the membership degree Definition 4 (Similar IFS): Two IFS  and " are said to be
because there may be some hesitation degree. Therefore, a similar or cognate if ∃ () = # () or  () = # () .
generalization of fuzzy sets was introduced by [2, 3] as intuitionistic
fuzzy sets (IFS) which incorporated the degree of hesitation called Definition 5 (Comparable IFS): Two IFS  and " are said to be
hesitation margin (and is defined as 1 minus the sum of membership
and non-membership degrees respectively). We will present a concise equal or comparable if () = # () and  () = # () .
overview on IFS viz: some definitions, basic operations, some algebra,
modal operators and its normalization. Definition 6 (Equivalent IFS): Two IFS  and " are said to be
equivalent to each other i.e.  is equivalent to ", denoted by ~"
Brief Introduction of Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets if ∃ functions &: () → # () and &:  ()→# () which are
both injection and surjection (i.e. bijection ). Then, the functions
Definition 1: Let
be a nonempty set. A fuzzy set  drawn from define a one-to-one correspondence between  and ".

is defined as  = 〈, ()〉:  ∈
 , where () :

⟶ [0, 1] is the membership function of the fuzzy set . Definition 7 (Inclusive IFS): Let  and " be two IFS,
⊆" ⇒ () ≤ # () and  () ≥ # () for ∈
. Then  is a
Definition 2: Let
be a nonempty set. An intuitionistic fuzzy set subset of " and " is a superset of .
 in
is an object having the form  = 〈, (),  ()〉:  ∈

 , where the functions (),  () :
⟶ [0, 1] define Definition 8 (Proper Subset):  is a proper subset of " i.e. ⊂"
respectively, the degree of membership and degree of non- if ⊆" and  ≠ ". It means () ≤ # ()and  () ≥ # ()
membership of the element  ∈
to the set , which is a subset but () ≠ # () and  () ≠ # ()for ∈
.
of
, and for every element  ∈
, 0 ≤ () +  () ≤ 1 .
Definition 9 (Dominations): An IFS  is dominated by another
Furthermore, we have  () = 1 − () −  () called the
IFS " (i.e. ≼"), if there exist an injection from  to ".  is
intuitionistic fuzzy set index or hesitation margin of  in .
strictly dominated by " (i.e. ≺"), if (i) ≼" and (ii)  is not
 () is the degree of indeterminacy of  ∈
to the IFS  and
equinumerous with ".
 () ∈ [0, 1] i.e., ():
⟶ [0, 1 ]and 0 ≤  ≤ 1 for every
 ∈
.  ()expresses the lack of knowledge of whether  Definition 10 (Relations): Let , " and + be IFSs. Then;
belongs to IFS  or not. i. ≼ i.e.  is reflexive relation,
Definition 3: Let  ∈
be IFS, then; ii. ≼" and "≼ i.e. symmetric relation,
1.  () = 1 − () −  () is called the degree of iii.  ≼ " and " ≼ + ⇒  ≼ + i.e. transitive
indetermacy of the element  ∈ . relation.
2.  () = () +  () () is called the degree of Corollary1: For any IFS  and ", if ≼" and "≼ ⇒ ~".
favour of  ∈ .
3.  () =  () +  () () is called the degree of Corollary 2: For any IFS  and ", if ≼, ≼" and "≼⇒ 
against of  ∈ . and " are compatible to each other.

For example, let  be an intuitionistic fuzzy set with () = 0.5 Note: 1. If a relation is reflexive, symmetric and transitive, such a
and  () = 0.3 then,  () = 0.2 ,  () = 0.6, and relation is called an “equivalence relation”. 2. The proofs of
 () = 0.36. Cor.1 and Cor.2 are obvious.
_____________________
Basic Operations on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets
P. A. Ejegwa, S.O. Akowe, P.M. Otene, J.M. Ikyule [Inclusion] ⊆" ↔ μ () ≤ μ# () ./0  () ≥ # () ∀ ∈

DEPARTMENT OF MATHEMATICS, UNIVERSITY [Complement] 2 = 〈,  (), μ ()〉:  ∈

OF AGRICULTURE, P.M.B. 2373, MAKURDI [Union]
NIGERIA ocholohi@[Link] ;  ∪ " = 〈, 4. 5μ (), μ# ()6 , 47/( (), # ())〉:  ∈

+234(0)7062583323

142
IJSTR©2014
[Link]
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC & TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH VOLUME 3, ISSUE 3, MARCH 2014 ISSN 2277-8616

[Intersection] Theorem 2: Let
be nonempty. For every two IFS  and " in
;
 ∩ " = 〈, 4 in5μ (), μ# ()6 , 4.( (), # ())〉:  ∈
 (a) ( ∩ ") =  ∩ "
[Addition] (b) ◊( ∩ ") = ◊ ∩◊"
⊕ " = {〈,μ () + μ# () − μ ()μ# (), ()# ()〉: ∈
} (c) ( ∪ ") =  ∪ "
[Multiplication] (d) ◊( ∪ ") = ◊ ∪◊"
⊗ " ={〈, μ ()μ# (),  () + # () −  ()# ()〉: ∈
} (e) (⊕") = ⊕ "
(f) (⊗") = ⊗ "
Algebra Laws in Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets (g) ◊(⊗B) = ◊⊗◊"
Let , " and + be IFS in
, then the following are the algebra: (h) ◊(⊕") = ◊⊕◊"
1. (2 )2 =  i.e. complementary law.
2. (7) ∪  =  (77) ∩  =  i.e. idempotent law. Proof
3. ( 7 )  ∪ " = " ∪  ( 77 )  ∩ " = " ∩  i.e. (.) ∩ " ={〈  , 47/ ( (), # () ), 4. ( () , ())〉:  ∈
commutative law.
}
4. ( 7 ) ( ∪ ") ∪ + =  ∪ (" ∪ +) ( 77 ) ( ∩ ") ∩ + =  ∩ (  ∩ ") = {〈  , 47/ ( (), # () )〉: ∈
} = {〈  , () 〉: ∈
(" ∩ +)i.e. associative law.
}∩{〈, # ()〉: ∈
}=  ∩ "
5. (7) ∪ ( " ∩ +) = ( ∪ ") ∩ ( ∪ +) ( ∩ ") =  ∩ "
(77) ∩ ( " ∪ +) = ( ∩ ") ∪ ( ∩ +) i.e. distributive (A) ∩ " ={〈  , 47/ ( (), # ()), 4. ( (), () )〉:  ∈
law. It also holds for right distributive law.
}
6. (7) ( ∪ ")2 = 2 ∩ "2 (77) ( ∩ ")2 = 2 ∪ "2 i.e.  ∩ " = {〈, 47/ (1 −  (), 1 − # ()), 4. (1 − (), 1 −
DeMorgan’s laws. ())〉:  ∈
}
7. (7)  ∩ ( ∪ ") =  (77)  ∪ ( ∩ ") =  i.e. ◊ (  ∩ ") = {〈, 47/ (1 −  (), 1 −  ())〉:  ∈
}
absorption laws. ◊(  ∩ ") = {〈, 1 −  ()〉:  ∈
}∩ {〈, 1 − # ())〉:  ∈
}=
8. (7)⊕ " = "⊕  (77)⊗ " = "⊗  ◊ ∩◊"
9. (7)⊕("⊕ +) = (⊕ ")⊕ + (77)⊗("⊗ +) = ◊( ∩ ") = ◊ ∩◊"
(⊗ ")⊗ + Note: From the proofs of (a) and (b), Def. 11 and the algebra
10. (7) (⊕ ")2 = 2 ⊗" 2 (77)(⊗ ")2 = 2 ⊕" 2 laws in IFS; the proofs of (c) – (h) are straightforward.
11. (7)⊕(" ∪ +) = (⊕") ∪ (⊕ +)(77)⊕(" ∩ +) = Theorem 3: Let
be a nonempty IFS. Let , " ∈
, then;
(⊕ ") ∩ (⊕ +) (.)⊆ " if and only if  ⊆ ",
(iii) ⊗(" ∪ +) = (⊗") ∪ (⊗ +)(7=) ⊗(" ∩ +) = (A) ⊆ ◊" if and only if ◊⊆ ◊".
(⊗") ∩ (⊗ +)
Note that (11) also holds for right distributive law and all these Proof
laws can be verified numerically.
(a)Given that  = {〈  , (),  () 〉:  ∈
} and
" ={〈, # (), ()
# 〉: ∈
}
Some Modal Operators on Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets
We define over the set of IFS, two modal operators which " ={〈, # ()〉:  ∈
 ={〈, # (),1 − # ()〉: ∈
 =
transform every IFS into fuzzy set. These operators are similar to {〈, # (), # ()〉:  ∈
 = "
the operators ‘necessity’ and ‘possibility’ defined in some modal i.e. " = " and consequently  =  whenever IFS is
logics. This idea is drawn from the modal operators on IFS transformed to fuzzy set by the modal operators.
proposed by [3].  ⊆ " ⇒ () ≤ # () and () ≥ # () ∀∈
. Since  =
⇒ ⊆ ".
Definition 11(Modal operators): Let
be nonempty. If  is an Conversely, if  ⊆ " ⇒⊆ " for the same reason as in above.
IFS drawn from
, then; (A) ◊ " = {〈 , 1 − # () 〉: ∈
 = {〈  , 1 −# () , # () 〉:
(i)  = 〈 , () 〉:  ∈ X = 〈, (), 1 − ∈
 = {〈  , # () , # ()〉: ∈
 = " ⇒◊ " = " and also
()〉:  ∈
 ◊  = . Then if  ⊆◊ " ⇒ () ≤ # () and  () ≥
(ii) ◊  = {〈 , 1 −  () 〉: ∈
 = 〈, 1 − # ()∀∈
. Obviously, ◊⊆◊" since ◊ = .
 (),  (), 〉:  ∈
. Conversely, if ◊⊆◊" ⇒⊆◊" is true for the same reason as in
above.□
Theorem 1: Let
be nonempty. For every IFS  in
; Normalization of Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets
(a) = 
(b) ◊ = ◊ Definition 12: Let X be a nonempty universal set. The
(c) ◊  =  normalization of an intuitionistic fuzzy set  denoted by
(d) ◊◊ = ◊ BCDE(A) is defined as:
BCDE(A) = {〈  , GHIJ( ) (), GHIJ( ) () 〉:  ∈
Proof KL (M)
(.)  ={〈, (),  ()〉: ∈
} X, where GHIJ( ) () =
NOP(KL (M))
and GHIJ( ) () =
QL (M)RSTU(QL (M))
 = 〈, () 〉:  ∈ X = {〈 , () , 1 − () 〉:  ∈ forX = .
VRSTU(QL (M))
X}={〈, (),  ()〉: ∈
},
Incorporating GHIJ( ) () ,
 = 〈, ()〉:  ∈ X = 〈, (), 1− , ()〉:  ∈ X =
BCDE() = {〈  , GHIJ( ) (), GHIJ( ) (), GHIJ( ) () 〉:

Note: From Def. 11 and the proof of (a), the proofs of (b) - (d) are  ∈
 for GHIJ( ) () = 1 − GHIJ( ) () − GHIJ( ) () .
straightforward.

143
IJSTR©2014
[Link]
INTERNATIONAL JOURNAL OF SCIENTIFIC & TECHNOLOGY RESEARCH VOLUME 3, ISSUE 3, MARCH 2014 ISSN 2277-8616

Supriya et al. [4] used BCDE() as operation of normalization 〈, (),  ()〉:  ∈ X = . Then, we conveniently say that
of intuitionistic fuzzy set  and gave the following proposition: A =◊A=  as ()= 0. So BCDE ( A) = BCDE (◊A) is true.
Next, we show that 5BCDE()6 = ◊ 5BCDE()6. From
Proposition: For IFS  of the universe
; Def.12,
(i) if  () = 0, thenGHIJ( ) () = 0, BCDE() = {〈  , GHIJ( ) (), GHIJ( ) (), GHIJ( ) () 〉:  ∈
(ii) BCDE( A) = (BCDE()), X, Since  () = 0 ,then GHIJ( ) () = 0 ,it means
(iii) BCDE(◊A) =◊(BCDE()). that BCDE() = 〈, GHIJ( ) (), GHIJ( ) ()〉:  ∈ X.
So GHIJ( ) () + GHIJ( ) () = 1 .From Def.11,
Zeng and Li [5] challenged Def.12 and the Proposition given by
(BCDE()) = _〈, GHIJ( ) (), 1 − GHIJ( ) ()〉: x ∈ X` =
[4] to be incorrect, because they do not retain the property of
_〈, GHIJ( ) (), GHIJ( ) ()〉: x ∈ X` =NORM(A). Also,
IFS. However, to remedy the problem, we subject the hesitation
margin  ()to tend to zero i.e.  ()≈ 0. ◊ 5 NORM(A)6 = _〈, 1 − GHIJ( ) (), GHIJ( ) ()〉: x ∈ X` =
_〈, GHIJ( ) (), GHIJ( ) ()〉: x ∈ X` = NORM(A) ⇒
Example (BCDE()) =◊(BCDE()).□
Let
=  V , W , X  and let IFS  be s.t.  = {〈0.6,
0.4〉, 〈0.8,0.2〉, 〈0.7,0.3〉. References
[1]. L.A. Zadeh, Fuzzy sets, Inform. and Control 8
Then sup5 ()6 = 0.8
and inf5 ()6 = 0.2 , (1965) 338-353.
thus; GHIJ( ) ( V ) = 0.75 ,
(  ) = 1.0 , (  ) = 0.875 ,  (  ) = [2]. K. Atanassov, Intuitionistic fuzzy sets, VII ITKR’s
GHIJ( ) W GHIJ( ) X GHIJ( ) V
Session, Sofia, 1983.
0.25 , GHIJ( ) ( W ) = 0.0, GHIJ( ) ( X ) =
[Link] BCDE()= {〈0.75,0.25〉, 〈1.0,0.0〉, 〈0.875,0.125〉. [3]. K. Atanassov, Intuitionistic fuzzy sets, Fuzzy Sets
and Systems 20 (1986) 87-96.
Obviously, GHIJ( ) ( V ) + GHIJ( ) ( V ) = 1 ,
GHIJ( ) ( W ) + GHIJ( ) ( W ) = 1 , [4]. K. De Supriya, R. Biswas, A. R. Roy, Some
GHIJ( ) ( X ) + GHIJ( ) ( X ) = 1 , ⇒that GHIJ( ) () = operations on intuitionistic fuzzy sets, Fuzzy Sets
0 since GHIJ( ) () = 1 − GHIJ( ) () − and Systems 114 (2000) 477- 484.
GHIJ( ) () .Hence 0 ≤ GHIJ( ) () + GHIJ( ) () ≤ 1 is
[5]. W. Zeng, H. Li, Note on some operations on
satisfied. Therefore BCDE()is IFS. intuitionistic fuzzy sets, fuzzy sets and Systems
157 (2006) 990- 991.
Now, we verify the Proposition as follows; if  = {〈0.6,
0.4〉, 〈0.8,0.2〉, 〈0.7,0.3〉,

from Def.11, it is clear that ◊A = A =  since  () = 0 and

so GHIJ( ) () + GHIJ( ) () = 1. Then it is crystal clear that, if
 () = 0⇒ GHIJ( ) () = 0.

Next, we show that BCDE( A) = (BCDE()). Since A = A,

then BCDE( A) =
〈0.75,0.25〉, 〈1.0,0.0〉, 〈0.875,0.125〉. If BCDE( A )=
〈0.75,0.25〉, 〈1.0,0.0〉, 〈0.875,0.125〉, then 5BCDE()6 =
〈0.75,0.25〉, 〈1.0,0.0〉, 〈0.875,0.125〉.from Def.11, it is certain that
BCDE ( A) = (BCDE ()).
Then, we show that BCDE (◊A) =◊5BCDE()6. Since◊A = A
as IFS is transformed to fuzzy set by the operators,
BCDE ( ◊ A) = 〈0.75,0.25〉, 〈1.0,0.0〉, 〈0.875,0.125〉. Then
5BCDE ()6 = 〈0.75,0.25〉, 〈1.0,0.0〉, 〈0.875,0.125〉,
BCDE(◊A) =◊(BCDE()).

Corollary 3: For an IFS  of the universe X;

(I)BCDE ( ) = BCDE (◊),
(II) (BCDE()) =◊(BCDE()).
Proof: Given that  = {〈  , (),  () 〉:  ∈
}.Since the
operators transformed IFS to fuzzy set , it means that () =
1 −  ()and  () = 1 − () for every  ∈
. From Def.11,
 = 〈, (), 1 − ()〉: x ∈ X = {〈  , (),  () 〉:  ∈
X}=A. Also, from Def.11,◊ ◊  = 〈, 1 −  (),  ()〉: x ∈ X =

144
IJSTR©2014
[Link]

View publication stats