Loading [MathJax]/jax/element/mml/optable/MathOperators.js
Research article Special Issues

Construction of BCK-neighborhood systems in a d-algebra

  • The BCK-neighborhood systems in d-algebras as measures of distance of these algebras from BCK-algebras is introduced. We consider examples of various cases and situations related to the general theory, as well as a compilcated analytical example of one of particular interest in the theory of pseudo-BCK-algebras. It appears also that a digraph theory may play a constructive role in this case as it dose in the theory of BCK-algebras.

    Citation: Hee Sik Kim, J. Neggers, Sun Shin Ahn. Construction of BCK-neighborhood systems in a d-algebra[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(9): 9422-9435. doi: 10.3934/math.2021547

    Related Papers:

    [1] Abdelaziz Alsubie, Anas Al-Masarwah . MBJ-neutrosophic hyper BCK-ideals in hyper BCK-algebras. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(6): 6107-6121. doi: 10.3934/math.2021358
    [2] Anas Al-Masarwah, Abd Ghafur Ahmad . Subalgebras of type (α, β) based on m-polar fuzzy points in BCK/BCI-algebras. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(2): 1035-1049. doi: 10.3934/math.2020072
    [3] Rajab Ali Borzooei, Hee Sik Kim, Young Bae Jun, Sun Shin Ahn . MBJ-neutrosophic subalgebras and filters in BE-algebras. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(4): 6016-6033. doi: 10.3934/math.2022335
    [4] Ibrahim Senturk, Tahsin Oner, Duygu Selin Turan, Gozde Nur Gurbuz, Burak Ordin . Axiomatic analysis of state operators in Sheffer stroke BCK-algebras associated with algorithmic approaches. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(1): 1555-1588. doi: 10.3934/math.2025072
    [5] Hee Sik Kim, Choonkil Park, Eun Hwa Shim . Function kernels and divisible groupoids. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(7): 13563-13572. doi: 10.3934/math.2022749
    [6] Anas Al-Masarwah, Abd Ghafur Ahmad . On (complete) normality of m-pF subalgebras in BCK/BCI-algebras. AIMS Mathematics, 2019, 4(3): 740-750. doi: 10.3934/math.2019.3.740
    [7] Seok-Zun Song, Hee Sik Kim, Young Bae Jun . Commutative ideals of BCK-algebras and BCI-algebras based on soju structures. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(8): 8567-8584. doi: 10.3934/math.2021497
    [8] M. Mohseni Takallo, Rajab Ali Borzooei, Seok-Zun Song, Young Bae Jun . Implicative ideals of BCK-algebras based on MBJ-neutrosophic sets. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(10): 11029-11045. doi: 10.3934/math.2021640
    [9] Yiwei Zheng . On the structure of irreducible Yetter-Drinfeld modules over D. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(8): 21321-21336. doi: 10.3934/math.20241035
    [10] Jinlei Dong, Fang Li, Longgang Sun . Derived equivalence, recollements under H-Galois extensions. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(2): 3210-3225. doi: 10.3934/math.2023165
  • The BCK-neighborhood systems in d-algebras as measures of distance of these algebras from BCK-algebras is introduced. We consider examples of various cases and situations related to the general theory, as well as a compilcated analytical example of one of particular interest in the theory of pseudo-BCK-algebras. It appears also that a digraph theory may play a constructive role in this case as it dose in the theory of BCK-algebras.



    Imai and Iséki introduced two classes of abstract algebras: BCK-algebras and BCI-algebras [5,6]. Neggers and Kim introduced the notion of d-algebras which is another useful generalization of BCK-algebras, and they investigated several relations between d-algebras and BCK-algebras [10]. Allen et al. [1] developed a theory of companion d-algebras in sufficient detail to demonstrate considerable parallelism with the theory of BCK-algebras as well as obtaining a collection of results of a novel type. Allen et al. [2] introduced the notion of deformation in d/BCK-algebras. Using such deformations they constructed d-algebras from BCK-algebras in such a manner as to maintain control over properties of the deformed BCK-algebras via the nature of the deformation employed, and observed that certain BCK-algebras cannot be deformed at all, leading to the notion of a rigid d-algebra, and consequently of a rigid BCK-algebra as well. Kim et al. [7] explored properties of the set of d-units of a d-algebra. Moreover, they discussed the notions of a d-integral domain and a left-injectivity.

    Since the notion of a d-algebra was defined simply by deleting two complicated axioms from a BCK-algebra, d-algebras became a wider class than the class of BCK-algebras. The following question arises: Can a d-algebra X which is not a BCK-algebra be a union of its subsets Uα which satisfy the two complicated BCK-axioms, i.e., (Uα{0},,0) forms a BCK-algebra? In the sense of this concept, we introduce the notion of a BCK-neighborhood system of a d-algebra. In this paper, we introduce 3 different cases of the BCK-neighborhood system in different d-algebras.

    In this paper, we introduce BCK-neighborhood systems in d-algebras as measures of distance of these algebras from BCK-algebras. We find examples of various cases and situations related to the general theory, as well as a complicated analytical example of one of particular interest in the theory of pseudo-BCK-algebras. It appears also that a digraph theory may play a constructive role in this case as it dose in the theory of BCK-algebras.

    There are many algebraic structures which are generalizations of BCK-algebras in the literature, e.g., BCH-algebras, BCI-algebras, BE-algebras, BF-algebras, etc.. If we use the notion of the BCK-neighborhood system to such algebras, then we can develop the theory of BCK-algebras and general algebraic structures also. There will be some interesting results.

    A d-algebra [9,10] is a non-empty set X with a constant 0 and a binary operation "" satisfying the axioms:

    (D1) xx=0,

    (D2) 0x=0,

    (D3) xy=0 and yx=0 imply x=y, for all x,yX.

    A d-algebra X is said to be edge if x0=x for all xX.

    For brevity, we also call X a d-algebra. In X we can define a binary relation "" by xy if and only if xy=0. A non-empty subset I of a d-algebra X is a d-subalgebra of X if x,yI implies xyI.

    A BCK-algebra [3,4,8] is a d-algebra (X,,0) satisfying the following additional axioms:

    (D4) ((xy)(xz)(zy)=0,

    (D5) (x(xy))y=0, for all x,y,zX.

    There are many d-algebras which are not BCK-algebras. Among them, we can find some d-algebras which can be divided into its subsets satisfying all BCK-axioms. We formulate this concept as below:

    Definition 3.1. Let (X,,0) be a d-algebra. A family {Uα}αΣ of subsets of X is said to be a BCK-neighborhood system of X if

    (N1) αΣUα=X,

    (N2) αΣ, x,yUα, (x(xy))y=0,

    (N3) αΣ, x,y,zUα, ((xy)(xz))(zy)=0.

    Such examples of BCK-neighborhood systems can be found in Examples 5.4 and 6.4 below.

    Proposition 3.2. Let (X,,0) be an edge d-algebra. If Σ:=X and Ux:={x},xX, then N0:={Ux|xX} is a BCK-neighborhood system of X.

    Proof. Straightforward.

    By Proposition 3.2, we have the following corollary.

    Corollary 3.3. Every edge d-algebra X permits a BCK-neighborhood system.

    Example 3.4. Let {Uα}αΣ be a BCK-neighborhood system of X where Σ:={0} and U0:=X. Then X is a BCK-algebra.

    Let X be a non-empty set and "" be a binary relation on X. A system (X,) is said to be a quasi ordered set if is reflexive and transitive.

    Proposition 3.5. Let N:={Uα}αΣ be a BCK-neighborhood system of X and let M:={Vβ}βT be a system of subsets of X such that

    (i) βTVβ=X,

    (ii) VβM,UαN such that VβUα.

    Then M is also a BCK-neighborhood system of X.

    Proof. (N1) By (i), we have βTVβ=X.

    (N2) If x,yVβ (βT), then there exists UαN such that VβUα. Hence x,yUα. Since {Uα}αΣ is a BCK-neighborhood system of X, we have (x(xy))y=0.

    (N3) If x,y,zVβ (βT), then there exists UαN such that VβUα. Hence x,y,zUα. Since {Uα}αΣ is a BCK-neighborhood system of X, we have ((xy)(xz))(zy)=0. Hence M is a BCK-neighborhood system of X.

    In Proposition 3.5, we denote it by MN. We call M a sub-BCK-neighborhood system of N. We denote the set of all BCK-neighborhood systems of X by BCK(X).

    Proposition 3.6. (BCK(X),) is a quasi ordered set. The BCK-neighborhood system N0 in Proposition 3.2 is the unique minimal BCK-neighborhood system of BCK(X).

    Proof. Clearly, (BCK(X),) is a quasi ordered set. Let N be any BCK-neighborhood system of BCK(X). We show that N0N. The first two conditions hold trivially. Since N0={{x}|xX}, we have Vβ={β}, for any VβN0. Since N is a BCK-neighborhood system of X, there exists Uα in N such that βUα. Hence VβUα. Therefore N0N. It completes the proof.

    In this section, we construct the BCK-neighborhood systems using analytic methods. We give a main assumption that X:=[0,) is a set of all positive real numbers, and "" is a binary operation defined on X as follows: For any x,yX,

    xy:={0ifxy,2xπtan1(lnxy)ify<x.

    Proposition 4.1. (X,,0) is an edge d-algebra.

    Proof. Clearly, we have xx=0=0x for any xX. We claim that if xy=0, then xy. In fact, if we assume that xy=0 and x>y for some x,yX. Then 2xπtan1(lnxy)=xy=0. It follows that either x=0 or tan1(lnxy)=0, i.e., lnxy=0. Therefore either x=0 or y=x, which is a contradiction to y<x. Assume that xy=0=yx for any x,yX. Then, by claim, we obtain xy and yx. Therefore x=y. Thus (X,,0) is a d-algebra. For any xX, we have x0=2xπtan1(lnx0)=2xππ2=x. Hence (X,,0) is an edge d-algebra.

    We want to find a BCK-neighborhood system {Uα}αΣ based on Proposition 4.1. By analytic method, we search to find such an Uα.

    Proposition 4.2. Let xX with x>0 and y=1λx(λ>1). Then xyx.

    Proof. For such x and y in X, we have

    xy=2xπtan1(lnxy)=2xπtan1(lnx1λx)=2xπtan1(lnλ)=2xπtan1(τ)[λ=eτ,τ>0]2xππ2=x

    Since xyx, we obtain

    x(xy)=2xπtan1(lnxxy). (4.1)

    Lemma 4.3. Let xX with x>0 and y=1λx(λ>1). Then

    x(xy)0. (4.2)

    Proof. If xy=0, then x(xy)=x0=x0. If xy0, then xxy1, since xyx. It follows that ln(xxy)ln1=0, and hence tan1(lnxxy)tan10=0. This shows that x(xy)=2xπtan1(lnxxy)2xπtan10=0.

    Theorem 4.4. Let xX with x>0 and let y=1λx(λ>1). Then the condition x(xy)y is equivalent to the following inequality.

    lnπln2ln(tan1τ)tan(π2λ). (4.3)

    Proof. Since y=1λx, by (1), we have

    x(xy)y2xπtan1(lnxxy)ytan1(lnxxy)πy2xlnxxytan(πy2x)lnxxytan(π2λ)

    We compute lnxxy as follows:

    lnxxy=lnxln(xy)=lnxln(2xπtan1(τ))=lnxln2πlnxln(tan1(τ))=lnπln2ln(tan1(τ))

    where λ=eτ,τ>0 as in Proposition 4.2. Hence the condition x(xy)y is equivalent to the inequality (3).

    Remark. Consider (3). If we let λ:=1 in (3), then tan(π2λ)=tanπ2=. Hence the inequality (3) holds. If we let τ, since λ=eτ and τ>0, we have λ and so tan(πλ)=0. On the while, lnπln2ln(tan1τ)=lnπln2ln(π2)=0. Therefore the inequality (3) holds.

    Theorem 4.5. Let xX with x>0 and let y=1λx(λ>1). Then there exists λ0 such that if λλ0, then (x(xy))y=(x(x1λx))1λx=0.

    Proof. If we let α:=lnπln2ln(tan1τ) and β:=tan(π2λ), then, by using L'Hˆopital's rule, we obtain

    limλαβ=limλlnπln2ln(tan1τ)tan(π2λ)=limλlnπ2ln(tan1(ln(λ))tan(π2λ)=limλ1tan1(lnλ)11+(lnλ)21λsec2(π2λ)(π21λ2)=limλ2λ2tan1(lnλ)[1+(lnλ)2]sec2(π2λ)λπ=limλ(2πtan1(lnλ)sec2(π2λ))(λ1+(lnλ)2)=limλ(2πtan1(lnλ)sec2(π2λ))(limλλ1+(lnλ)2)=2ππ21limλλ1+(lnλ)2=4π2limλ12(lnλ)1λ=2π2limλλlnλ=2π2limλ11λ=.

    It follows that there exists λ0X such that if λ>λ0, then α>β, i.e., λ0 such that λ>λ0 implies x(xy)>y. This shows that λλ0 implies x(xy)y. Therefore there exists λ0X such that

    λλ0implies (x(xy))y=(x(x1λx))1λx=0. (4.4)

    Remark. It is a problem to determine λ0 exactly. A partial answer is that if we take τ:=0.824, then λ=eτ=e0.824. Let \lambda_0: = 2.2796 .

    We construct a BCK -neighborhood system \mathscr{A} = \{ U_x | x\in X \} , where U_x: = [\frac{x}{\sqrt{\lambda_0 }}, \sqrt{\lambda_0 }x] . Here we use the real number \lambda_0 which is obtained from Theorem 4.5.

    Lemma 4.6. If a, b \in U_x = [\frac{x}{\sqrt{\lambda_0 }}, \sqrt{\lambda_0 }x] , then (a*(a*b))*b = 0 .

    Proof. If a\leq b , then (a*(a*b))*b = (a*0)*b = a*b = 0 by Proposition 4.1. If a > b , then there exists \lambda > 1 such that b = \frac{a}{\lambda} . Since a, b \in U_x , we have \frac{x}{\sqrt{\lambda_0}} \leq b \leq a \leq \sqrt{\lambda_0} x and so

    \frac{b}{a} \geq \frac{\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_0 }} x} { \sqrt{\lambda_0 } x} = \frac {1} {\lambda_0},

    i.e., \frac{a}{\lambda} = b \geq \frac{1}{\lambda_0 }a . Hence \lambda \leq \lambda_0 . By applying Theorem 4.5, we prove that (a*(a*b))*b = 0 .

    Given x, y, z \in X with y \leq x\leq z in X , we have the following:

    x*y = \frac{2x}{\pi}\; \tan^{-1} (\ln \; \frac{x}{y})\, \; \text{and}\, \; z*y = \frac{2z}{\pi} \; \tan^{-1} (\ln \; \frac{z}{y}).

    Lemma 4.7. If y \leq x \leq z , then x*y \leq z*y .

    Proof. If y \leq x \leq z , then \ln(\frac{x}{y}) \leq \ln(\frac{z}{y}) , and hence \tan^{-1}(\ln \frac{x}{y}) \leq \tan^{-1}(\ln \; \frac{z}{y}) . Since x\leq z , we obtain x*y = \frac{2x}{\pi}\; \tan^{-1}(\ln \frac{x}{y}) \leq \frac{2z}{\pi}\tan^{-1}(\ln \; \frac{z}{y}) = z*y . It completes the proof.

    Lemma 4.8. If z \leq y \leq x , then x*y \leq x*z .

    Proof. The proof is similar to Lemma 4.7, and we omit it.

    Let y \leq z \leq x in X . By Lemma 4.8, we obtain x*z \leq x*y . It follows that

    \begin{equation} (x*y)*(x*z) = \frac{2(x*y)}{\pi}\; \tan^{-1}( \ln \; \frac{x*y}{x*z}) \end{equation} (4.5)

    and

    \begin{equation} z*y = \frac{2z}{\pi}\; \tan^{-1}( \ln \; \frac{z}{y}). \end{equation} (4.6)

    In order to satisfy the condition (N3) , we need to show that (5) \leq (6) , i.e.,

    \begin{eqnarray*} & & \frac{2(x*y)}{\pi} \; \tan^{-1} ( \ln \; \frac{x*y}{x*z}) \leq \frac{2z}{\pi}\tan^{-1}(\ln \frac{z}{y}) \\ &\Leftrightarrow & \frac{\; \tan^{-1}( \ln \; \frac{x*y}{x*z})}{\; \tan^{-1}( \ln \; \frac{z}{y})} \leq \frac{z}{x*y} \\ &\Leftrightarrow& \frac{(x*y)\; \tan^{-1}( \ln \; \frac{x*y}{x*z})}{z\; \tan^{-1}( \ln \; \frac{z}{y})} \leq 1 \end{eqnarray*}

    If y = z or x = z in y\leq z \leq x , then the condition ((x*y)*(x*z))*(z*y) = 0 holds trivially. We may assume y < z < x . Let y: = \alpha x, \; z: = \beta x , where \alpha < \beta, \; \beta = \lambda \alpha < 1 . Then 1\leq \lambda \leq \frac{1}{\alpha} . Therefore, we have

    \begin{equation} \begin{split} \frac{z}{y} = \frac{\beta x}{\alpha x} = \frac{\beta}{\alpha} = \frac{\lambda \alpha}{\alpha} = \lambda, \end{split} \end{equation} (4.7)

    and hence

    \begin{equation} \begin{split} \frac{x*y}{x*z} \, = \, & \frac{\frac{2x}{\pi} \tan^{-1} (\ln \; \frac{x}{y})}{\frac{2x}{\pi} \tan^{-1}(\ln\; \frac{x}{z})} \\ \, = \, & \frac{ \tan^{-1} (\ln \; \frac{x}{\alpha x})} { \tan^{-1}(\ln\; \frac{x}{\beta x})} \\ \, = \, & \frac{\tan^{-1}(\ln \; \alpha)}{\tan^{-1}(\ln \; \lambda \alpha)} \end{split} \end{equation} (4.8)

    and

    \begin{equation} \begin{split} \frac{x*y}{z} \, = \, & \frac{\frac{2x}{\pi}\; \tan^{-1} (\ln \; \frac{x}{\alpha x})} {\lambda \alpha x} \\ \, = \, & \frac{2\; \tan^{-1} (- \ln \; \alpha)} { \pi \lambda \alpha } \\ \, = \, & \frac{- 2\; \tan^{-1} ( \ln \; \alpha)} { \pi \lambda \alpha }. \end{split} \end{equation} (4.9)

    Note that \frac{1}{\tan^{-1} (\ln \; \lambda)} \geq \frac{2}{\pi} , since \tan^{-1} (\ln \; \lambda) \leq \frac{\pi}{2} . If we let

    A: = \frac{(x*y)\; \tan^{-1}( \ln \; \frac{x*y}{x*z} )}{z\; \tan^{-1} (\ln \; \frac{z}{y})},

    then

    \begin{eqnarray} A & = & \frac{ -2\tan^{-1}(\ln\alpha)\tan^{-1}[\ln \frac{\; \tan^{-1}( \ln \; \alpha )}{\; \tan^{-1}( \ln \; \lambda \alpha)}]}{\; \pi\lambda \alpha \tan^{-1} (\ln \; \lambda) } \end{eqnarray} (4.10)
    \begin{eqnarray} &\geq & -\frac{2}{\pi}\frac{1}{\lambda\alpha}\frac{2}{\pi}\tan^{-1}(\ln \alpha)\tan^{-1}[\ln \frac{\; \tan^{-1}( \ln \; \alpha )}{\; \tan^{-1}( \ln \; \lambda \alpha)}] \\ & = &\frac{1}{\lambda}[\frac{4}{\pi^2\alpha} \tan^{-1}(\ln\frac{1}{\alpha})\tan^{-1}[\ln \frac{\; \tan^{-1}( \ln \; \alpha )}{\; \tan^{-1}( \ln \; \lambda \alpha)}]] \end{eqnarray} (4.11)

    By formula (10), we see that A is a function of \lambda and so we replace A by A(\lambda) .

    Note that if A(\lambda) = 0 , then

    \tan^{-1}(\ln\alpha)\tan^{-1}[\ln \frac{\; \tan^{-1}( \ln \; \alpha )}{\; \tan^{-1}( \ln \; \lambda \alpha)}] = 0.

    It follows that either \tan^{-1}(\ln\alpha) = 0 or \tan^{-1}[\ln \frac{\; \tan^{-1}(\ln \; \alpha)}{\; \tan^{-1}(\ln \; \lambda \alpha)}] = 0 , and hence either \alpha = 1 or \lambda = 1 . Since \lambda\alpha < 1 , we conclude \lambda \doteqdot 1 is an approximate solution of A(\lambda) = 0 . We denote such a solution by \lambda_1 .

    Pick \alpha near zero and \beta = \lambda\alpha near 1. Then we simplify the bracket expression of (11) to the following:

    \begin{eqnarray*} \phantom{A} &\phantom{ = }& \frac{4}{\pi^2 \alpha}\; \tan^{-1}(\ln \; \frac{1}{\alpha})\, \, \; \tan^{-1} (\ln \; \frac{\tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha)}{\tan^{-1} (\ln \; \lambda \alpha)}) \\ &\doteqdot & \frac{4}{\pi^2 \alpha} \frac{\pi}{2}\; \tan^{-1} (\ln \; ( \frac{\frac{-\pi}{2}}{0}) ) = \frac{2}{\pi \alpha} \cdot \frac{\pi}{2} = \frac{1}{\alpha}. \end{eqnarray*}

    Hence A(\lambda) \geq \frac{1}{\lambda} \frac{1}{\alpha} = \frac{1}{\beta} > 1 . Take \lambda so that \frac{1}{\alpha} > \lambda , say \lambda \alpha : = 1-\epsilon for some \epsilon > 0 . Then \lambda = \frac{1- \epsilon}{\alpha} < \frac{1}{\alpha} . Hence A(\lambda) > 1 is possible for some \lambda .

    Let \lambda: = e in A(\lambda) . Then we get

    \begin{equation} \begin{split} A(e)\, = \, & \frac{-2\; \tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha)\cdot \tan^{-1} (\ln \; ( \frac{\tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha)}{\tan^{-1}(\ln\; \alpha e ) })) } {\pi \alpha e \cdot \tan^{-1} (\ln \; e)} \\ \, = \, & \frac{-2\; \tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha)\cdot \tan^{-1} (\ln \; ( \frac{\tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha)}{\tan^{-1}(\ln\; \alpha+ 1 ) })) } {\pi \alpha e \cdot \tan^{-1} (1)} \\ \, = \, & \frac{-8} {\pi^2 \alpha e} \cdot \tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha)\cdot \tan^{-1} (\ln \; ( \frac{\tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha)}{\tan^{-1}(\ln\; \alpha+ 1 ) })) \end{split} \end{equation} (4.12)

    Since \lambda = e and 1 < \lambda < \frac{1}{\alpha} , we have 0 < \alpha < \frac{1}{\lambda} = \frac{1}{e} < 1 and so \ln \; \alpha < 0 . Hence we get

    \begin{equation} \begin{split} \tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha) < 0. \end{split} \end{equation} (4.13)

    Since y = \tan^{-1} x is a monotone increasing function, we obtain \tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha) < \tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha+1) and hence \frac{\tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha)}{\tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha+1)} < 1 . If we take a logarithm, then \ln\; (\frac{\tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha)}{\tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha+1)}) < 0 . Therefore we get

    \begin{equation} \begin{split} \tan^{-1}(\ln\; \frac{\tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha )}{\tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha+1)}) < 0. \end{split} \end{equation} (4.14)

    By (12)–(14), we obtain

    \begin{equation*} \begin{split} A(e) \, = \, & - \frac{8}{\pi^2 \alpha e}\; \tan^{-1}(\ln \; \alpha)\; \tan^{-1} ( \ln \frac{\tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha )}{\tan^{-1} (\ln \; \alpha+1)})\\ \, \geq \, & - \frac{8}{\pi^2 e} \tan^{-1}(\ln \; e)\; \tan^{-1} ( \ln \frac{\tan^{-1} (\ln \; e )}{\tan^{-1} (\ln \; e+1)}) \\ \, = \, & - \frac{8}{\pi^2 e}\frac{\pi}{4}\; \tan^{-1} (\ln \; \frac{\tan^{-1}1 }{\tan^{-1} 2}) \\ \, \geq \, & - \frac{8}{\pi^2 e} (\frac{\pi}{4})^2 \, = \, -\frac{1}{2e}. \end{split} \end{equation*}

    From the observation, we see that A(\lambda) is a continuous function and A(\lambda) > 1 is possible for some \lambda . Moreover, we showed that A(e)\geq -\frac{1}{2e} . Hence there exists \lambda_2 such that A(\lambda_2) = 1 . Let \lambda_3\in X such that \lambda_2 < \lambda_3 < \lambda_1 and let \widehat{U_a} : = [\frac{a}{\sqrt{\lambda_3 }}, a \sqrt{\lambda_3}] where a\in X . The largest spread is y = \frac{a}{ \sqrt{\lambda_3 }}, z = a\sqrt{\lambda_3}(1-\epsilon), x = a\sqrt{\lambda_3} for some \epsilon > 0 . This shows that \widehat{U_a} satisfies the conditions (N2) and (N3) . Therefore we have the following theorem.

    Theorem 4.9. Let \lambda_1 be a solution of A(\lambda) = 0 as in (10) and let \lambda_2 be a solution of A(\lambda) = 1 . Given \lambda_3\in X such that \lambda_2 < \lambda_3 < \lambda_1 , define a set \widehat{U_a}: = [\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_3 }}, a\sqrt{\lambda_3}] where a\in X . Then the conditions (N2), (N3) hold on \widehat{U_a} .

    Now, we show that \mathscr{A} = \{ \widehat{U_a }| a\in X \} forms a BCK -neighborhood system on (X, *) .

    Given x, y, z\in X , we have 6 cases: (i) x \leq y \leq z , (ii) x \leq z \leq y , (iii) y \leq x\leq z , (iv) z \leq x \leq y , (v) z \leq y \leq x , (vi) y \leq z \leq x . If x*y = 0 , i.e., cases (i), (ii), (iv), then the condition (N3) holds, since (X, *) is an edge d -algebra. For the case (iii), we have x*z = 0 , and hence (x*y)*(x*z) = (x*y)*0 = x*y \leq z*y by Lemma 4.7. Hence we obtain ((x*y)*(x*z))*(z*y) = 0 . We consider (v) z \leq y \leq x . Since z*y = 0 , by Lemma 4.8, we obtain ((x*y)*(x*z))*(z*y) = ((x*y)*(x*z))*0 = (x*y)*(x*z) = 0 . Finally, we consider the case (vi) y \leq z \leq x . It was already proved by Theorem 4.9. We summarize:

    Theorem 4.10. Let \lambda_1 be a solution of A(\lambda) = 0 as in (10) and let \lambda_2 be a solution of A(\lambda) = 1 . Given \lambda_3\in X such that \lambda_2 < \lambda_3 < \lambda_1 , define a set \widehat{U_a}: = [\frac{1}{\sqrt{\lambda_3 }}, a\sqrt{\lambda_3}] where a\in X . Then \mathscr{A} = \{ \widehat{U_a }| a\in X \} forms a BCK -neighborhood system on (X, *) .

    Theorem 5.1. X: = [0, \infty) be a set. Define a binary operation " * " on X by

    (i) x*x = 0 = 0*x ,

    (ii) if x \neq 0, x \neq y , we define x*y: = \varphi(x, y) and \varphi(x, y)\geq x+y , where \varphi:X \times X \rightarrow X is a map,

    (iii) x*0 = x

    for all x, y \in X . Then (X, *, 0) is an edge d -algebra.

    Proof. It is enough to show the anti-symmetry law holds. Assume that there exist a, b \in X such that a*b = 0 = b*a, a \neq b . If a \not = 0 , then 0 = a*b = \varphi(a, b) \geq a + b \geq a > 0 , a contradiction. If b \not = 0 , then 0 = b*a = \varphi(b, a)\geq b + a\geq b > 0 , a contradiction. If a = 0 , then 0 = b*a = b*0 = b , a contradiction. Similarly, if b = 0 , then 0 = a*b = a*0 = a , a contradiction.

    We construct a BCK -neighborhood system on the d -algebra (X, *) as in Theorem 5.1.

    Theorem 5.2. Let (X, *, 0) be an edge d -algebra as in Theorem 5.1. Define a set U_x by

    \begin{eqnarray*} U_x : = \left\{\begin{array}{ll} \{ x, 0\} & \text{if}\; x \neq 0 , \\ \{0\} & \text{if} \; x = 0 \\ \end{array}\right. \end{eqnarray*}

    for any x\in X . Then \mathscr{A}: = \{ U_x | x \in X\} is a BCK -neighborhood system of X .

    Proof. (N1) \cup \mathscr{A} = \underset{x\in X}\cup U_x = \underset{x\in X} \cup \{x, 0\} = \underset{x\in X} \cup \{x\} = X.

    (N2) For any x, y \in U_{\alpha} with \alpha \neq 0 , we have 3 cases: (i) x = y = \alpha ; (ii) x = \alpha, y = 0 ; (iii) x = 0, y = \alpha . If x = y = \alpha , then (x*(x*y))*y = (\alpha*(\alpha * \alpha))*\alpha = (\alpha * 0)* \alpha = \alpha* \alpha = 0 , since (X, *, 0) is an edge d -algebra. If x = \alpha, y = 0 , then (x*(x*y))*y = (\alpha*(\alpha*0))*0 = \alpha*(\alpha*0) = \alpha*\alpha = 0 . If x = 0, y = \alpha , then (x*(x*y))*y = (0*(0*\alpha))*\alpha = 0 .

    (N3) Given x, y, z \in U_{\alpha} = \{ 0, \alpha\} with \alpha \neq 0 , we have 8 cases. We consider one case, and the other cases are similar, and so we omit it. If x = \alpha, y = z = 0 , then ((x*y)*(x*z))*(z*y) = ((\alpha *0)((\alpha *0))*(0*0) = ((\alpha *0)*(\alpha*0))*(0*0) = (\alpha*\alpha)*0 = 0 . Hence \mathscr{A}: = \{ U_x | x \in X\} is a BCK -neighborhood system of X .

    Proposition 5.3. Let (X, *, 0) be an edge d -algebra as in Theorem 5.1. Let \mathscr{A}: = \{ U_x | x \in X \} , where

    \begin{eqnarray*} U_x : = \left\{\begin{array}{ll} \{ x, 0\} & \text{if} \; x \neq 0 \\ \{0\} & \text{if} \; x = 0. \\ \end{array}\right. \end{eqnarray*}

    Then \mathscr{A}: = \{ U_x | x \in X\} is a unique maximal BCK -neighborhood system of X , i.e., if \mathscr{B} is a BCK -neighborhood system of X such that \mathscr{A} \subseteq \mathscr{B} , then \mathscr{A} = \mathscr{B} .

    Proof. Assume that there exists a BCK -neighborhood system \mathscr{B} of X such that \mathscr{A} \subsetneq \mathscr{B} . Then \mathscr{B} contains a neighborhood U such that |U| \geq 3 . Let x, y, 0\in U such that x \neq y, x \neq 0 \neq y . Then x*(x*y) = x*\varphi(x, y) . Since \varphi(x, y)\geq x+y > x , we have x \neq \varphi(x, y) . Hence we obtain

    \begin{equation*} \begin{split} x*(x*y)\, = \, & x *\varphi(x, y) \, = \, \varphi(x, \varphi(x, y))\, \geq \, x+\varphi(x, y) \\ \, \geq & \, x+x+y = 2x+y. \end{split} \end{equation*}

    Since x\neq y , we get x*(x*y)\neq y . Hence we obtain

    \begin{equation*} \begin{split} (x*(x*y))*y \, = \, & \varphi ( x *(x*y), y) \, \geq \, x*(x*y)+ y\\ \geq & \, 2x+ y+y \, = \, 2(x+y) > 0. \end{split} \end{equation*}

    This shows that (x*(x*y))*y = 0 does not hold for x\neq y in U . Hence \mathscr{B} is not a BCK -neighborhood system of X , a contradiction. Therefore \mathscr{A} is a unique maximal BCK -neighborhood system of (X, *, 0) .

    Example 5.4. Let X: = [0, \infty) be a set. Define a binary operation " * " on X by x*x = 0*x = 0 , x*0 = x , and x*y : = x +y if x\not = y and x\not = 0 for all x, y \in X , where + is the usual addition of real numbers. Then it is easy to see that (X, *, 0) is an edge d -algebra. Given x\in X , if we define U_x: = \{x, 0\} and \mathscr{A} : = \{U_x\, |\, x\in X\} , then \mathscr{A} is a BCK -neighborhood system of (X, *, 0) .

    Theorem 5.5. Let (X, *, 0) be a d -algebra. Let \mathscr{A}: = \{ U_{\alpha} | \alpha \in \Lambda \} be a BCK -neighborhood system of X . If we define a class of sets

    \widehat{\mathscr{A}}: = \{ \widehat{U_{\alpha}} | \exists \; U_{\alpha_1}, \cdots, U_{\alpha_n}\in \mathscr{A} \; such\; that \; \widehat{U_{\alpha}} = U_{\alpha_1 } \cap \cdots \cap U_{\alpha_n } \neq \emptyset \},

    then \widehat{\mathscr{A}} is a BCK -neighborhood system of X .

    Proof. (N1). Given x\in X , since \mathscr{A} is a BCK -neighborhood of X , there exists U_{\alpha} \in \mathscr{A} such that x\in U_{\alpha} . Let \widehat{U_{\alpha}}: = U_{\alpha} \cap U_{\alpha} . Then \widehat{U_{\alpha}} \neq \emptyset and \widehat{U_{\alpha}} \in \widehat{\mathscr{A}} . Hence x\in \underset{\alpha \in \Lambda} \cup \widehat{U_{\alpha}} \subseteq \cup \{ \widehat{U_{\alpha}}| \widehat{U_{\alpha}} \in \widehat{\mathscr{A}} \} . Therefore X = \cup \{ \widehat{U_{\alpha}} | \widehat{U_{\alpha}} \in \widehat{\mathscr{A}} \} .

    (N2) and (N3). Given \widehat{U_{\alpha}} \in \widehat{\mathscr{A}} , there exist U_{\alpha_1}, \cdots, \; U_{\alpha_n} \in \widehat{\mathscr{A}} such that \widehat{U_{\alpha}} = U_{\alpha_1} \cap U_{\alpha_2} \cap \cdots U_{\alpha_n } \neq \emptyset. If x, y, z \in \widehat{U_{\alpha}} , then x, y, z \in U_{\alpha_i} for all i = 1, \cdots, m . Since \mathscr{A} is a BCK -neighborhood system of X , we get (x*(x*y))*y = 0 and ((x*y)*(x*z))*(z*y) = 0 for all i = 1, \cdots, m , and hence the equations hold for \widehat{U_{\alpha}} . Hence \widehat{\mathscr{A}} is a BCK -neighborhood system.

    Proposition 6.1. Let (X^{\prime}, \rightarrow) be a digraph and let 0\not\in X^{\prime} . Let 0 \rightarrow x for any x\in X' , and let X: = X' \cup \{0\} . Define a binary operation " * " on X by

    (i) x*x = 0 = 0*x ,

    (ii) x *0 = x ,

    (iii) x*y = 0, y*x = y if x \rightarrow y ,

    (iv) x*y = x, y*x = y if there is no arrow between x and y

    for any x, y \in X Then (X, *, 0) is an edge d -algebra.

    Proof. It is enough to show that " \leq " is anti-symmetry. Assume that there exist x, y \in X such that x*y = 0 = y*x , x\neq y . If one of x, y is zero, say x = 0, y \neq 0 , then 0 = y*x = y*0 = y by (ii), which is a contradiction. Assume x\neq 0 \neq y . If x\rightarrow y , then we have x*y = 0, y*x = y by using (iii). It leads to 0 = y*x = y , a contradiction. Similarly, if y\rightarrow x , then it leads to x = 0 , a contradiction. If there is no arrow between x and y , then we have x*y = x, y*x = y by (iv). Since x*y = 0 = y*x , we obtain x = 0 = y , which is a contradiction. Hence (X, *, 0) is an edge d -algebra.

    Example 6.2. Consider a digraph (X^{\prime}: = \{a, b, c, d \}, \rightarrow) with the following digraph:

    Adjoin 0 to X' so that 0 \rightarrow \alpha for all \alpha \in X' . Let X: = X^{\prime} \cup \{0\} . By Proposition 6.1, we obtain an edge d -algebra (X, *, 0) as follows:

    {\begin{array}{c|cccccc} * & 0 & a & b & c & d \\ \hline 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ a & a & 0 & 0 & a & a \\ b & b & b & 0 & 0 & b \\ c & c & c & c & 0 & 0 \\ d & d & 0 & d & d & 0 \end{array}}

    In Example 6.2, we call such an algebra (X, *, 0) a prism d -algebra of order 4 .

    Theorem 6.3. Every prism d -algebra (X, *, 0) has a BCK -neighborhood system.

    Proof. We consider two cases: (i) X is a finite set; (ii) X is an infinite set. Case (i): |X| < \infty . We consider two cases. Subcase (i)-1: |X| = 2n \; (n \in \Bbb{N}) . Let X: = \{x_1, x_2, \cdots, x_{2n-1}, x_{2n} \} such that x_1 \rightarrow x_2 \rightarrow x_3 \rightarrow \cdots \rightarrow x_{2n-1} \rightarrow x_{2n} \rightarrow x_1 and 0 \rightarrow x_i for all i = 1, \cdots, 2n . Let N_1 : = \{0, x_1, x_2 \}, N_3 : = \{0, x_3, x_4 \}, \cdots, N_{2n-1}: = \{0, x_{2n-1}, x_{2n} \} . Then X = N_1 \cup \cdots \cup N_{2n-1} . Since 0 \rightarrow x_{2i+1} \rightarrow x_{2i+2} , we have

    {\begin{array}{c|ccc} * & 0 & x_{2i+1} & x_{2i+2} \\ \hline 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ x_{2i+1} & x_{2i+1} & 0 & 0 \\ x_{2i+2} & x_{2i+2} & x_{2i+2} & 0 \\ \end{array}}

    Then it is easy to see that (N_{2i+1}, *, 0) is a BCK -algebra, and so the conditions (N2) and (N3) of Definition 3.1 hold for N_{2i+1} . Then \{N_1, \cdots, N_{2n-1} \} is a BCK -neighborhood system. Subcase (i)-2: |X| = 2n+1 \; (n \in \Bbb{N}) . Let X: = \{x_1, x_2, \cdots, x_{2n}, x_{2n+1} \} such that x_1 \rightarrow x_2 \rightarrow x_3 \rightarrow \cdots \rightarrow x_{2n} \rightarrow x_{2n+1} \rightarrow x_1 and 0 \rightarrow x_i for all i = 1, \cdots, 2n+1 . Let N_2 : = \{0, x_1, x_2 \}, N_4 : = \{0, x_3, x_4 \}, \cdots, N_{2n}: = \{0, x_{2n-1}, x_{2n} \} and N_{2n+1}: = \{0, x_{2n+1} \}. Then X = N_2 \cup \cdots \cup N_{2n}\cup N_{2n+1} . It is already shown that N_{2i} is a BCK -algebra. Since 0 \rightarrow x_{2n+1} , we have

    {\begin{array}{c|cc} * & 0 & x_{2i+1} \\ \hline 0 & 0 & 0 \\ x_{2i+1} & x_{2i+1} & 0 \\ \end{array}}

    Then (N_{2n+1}, *, 0) is a BCK -algebra. Hence \{N_2, N_{4}, \cdots, N_{2n}, N_{2n+1} \} is a BCK -neighborhood system of X .

    Case (ii): |X| = \infty . Assume X = \{x_n | n \in \Bbb{N} \} such that x_1 \rightarrow x_2 \rightarrow \cdots \rightarrow x_n \rightarrow x_{n+1} \rightarrow \cdots and 0 \rightarrow x_i for all i \in \Bbb{N} . Let N_{2i-1}: = \{ 0, x_{2i-1}, x_{2i} \} \; (i = 1, 2, \cdots) . Then X = \cup N_{2i-1} and N_{2i-1} is a BCK -algebra. Therefore X has a BCK -neighborhood system.

    Example 6.4. In Example 6.2, we take N_1 : = \{0, a, b \} , N_2 : = \{0, c, d \} . Then (N_i, *, 0) is a BCK -algebra (i = 1, 2) and X = N_1 \cup N_2 . Then \{ N_1, N_2 \} is a BCK -neighborhood system of X . Also (X, *, 0) in Example 6.2 is not a BCK -algebra, since ((b*d)*(b*c))*(c*d) = (b*0)*0 = b \neq 0 .

    Remark 6.5. There exists a BCK -neighborhood system \mathscr{A}: = \{N_i | i\in \Lambda\} such that there exist N_1, N_2 \in \mathscr{A} such that |N_1 \cap N_2 | \geq 2 .

    Example 6.6. Let X: = \{0, a, b, c, d, e\} be a set satisfying the conditions: a \rightarrow b\rightarrow c \rightarrow d \rightarrow e \rightarrow a and 0\rightarrow x for all x\in X . Then we obtain the following table:

    {\begin{array}{c|cccccc} * & 0 & a & b & c & d & e \\ \hline 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 & 0 \\ a & a & 0 & 0 & a & a & a\\ b & b & b & 0 & 0 & b & b \\ c & c & c & c & 0 & 0 & c\\ d & d & d & d & d & 0 & 0 \\ e & e & 0 & e & e & e & 0 \\ \end{array}}

    by applying Proposition 6.1, and we get (X, *, 0) is an edge d -algebra. If we take N_1 : = \{0, a, b \}, N_2 : = \{0, c, d \} , and N_3 : = \{0, d, e \} , then X = N_1 \cup N_2 \cup N_3 . We see that N_i ( i = 1, 2, 3 ) are BCK -algebras and |N_2 \cap N_3| = 2 .

    As part of the development of a general theory of groupoids (binary systems) a fundamental problem would be to try to determine how much a certain groupoid approximates a certain known type of interest, e.g., a group, a commutative group, a semigroup, etc.. Among these types a very significant type is that of BCK -algebra which may be very closely related to Boolean algebras, partially ordered sets with minimal element 0, and other subclasses. One way of dealing with providing an answer is to consider using the block product (X, \Box) = (X, *)\Box (X, \bullet) of groupoids. It was shown that the block product of strong d -algebras is a strong d -algebra. It is also true that the block product of groups is not a group, but a groupoid which has properties in common with groups and are objects worth investigating in this way. BCK -algebras can be studied using the same tool. Another approach to deal with this question which is also promising is the following stated for example for groups (not yet done): Given a groupoid (X, *) , a group neighborhood system \{(X_{\alpha}, *_{\alpha}, e_{\alpha})\}_{\alpha\in \bigwedge} has the property that \cup_{\alpha\in \bigwedge} X_{\alpha} = X and if x, y, z\in X_{\alpha}, (x*y)*z = x*(y*z) , and x\in X_{\alpha} implies that there is an element x_{\alpha}^{-1} \in X_{\alpha} such that x *_{\alpha} x_{\alpha}^{-1} = x_{\alpha}^{-1} *_{\alpha} x = e_{\alpha} . Obviously, if there is a group neighborhood system containing only one element then the groupoid (X, *) is a group. There will be a detailed investigation of group neighborhood systems.

    In the development of a theory of this nature for a class of groupoids, our first choice has been the class of BCK -algebras. In order to obtain a "strickter" system with a better chance of obtaining sufficiently interesting results, we took the groupoid (X, *) to be a d -algebra (i.e., already somewhat close to a BCK -algebra) and we let 0_{\alpha} = 0_{\beta} = 0 for all \alpha, \beta \in \bigwedge , for a "better fit" of the BCK -algebras X_{\alpha} in the BCK -neighborhood system, where it is obvious that if the system is a sigleton \{(X, *_1, 0_1)\}_{\bigwedge = \{1\}} , then (X, *) = (X, *_1, 0_1) = (X, *, 0) is a BCK -algebra. As far as applications of these results, it is known that BCK -algebras as algebras of logic [4] already play a role in the design of both hardware networks and software algorithms. It is necessary to allow a more flexible approach to deal with groupoids (e.g., d -algebras) which have BCK -neighborhood systems of low cardinality.

    From a purely theoretical viewpoint, it is clear that these "neighborhood systems" approaches are of interest on their own as well as resulting in more general information becoming available for deeper understanding of the structure principles governing the class/variety of groupoids (X, *) for arbitrary sets X and arbitrary products x*y on these sets.

    The authors hereby declare that there are no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this paper.



    [1] P. J. Allen, H. S. Kim, J. Neggers, Companion d-algebras, Math. Slovaca., 57 (2007), 93–106. doi: 10.2478/s12175-007-0001-z
    [2] P. J. Allen, H. S. Kim, J. Neggers, Deformations of d/BCK-algebras, Bull. Korean Math. Soc., 48 (2011), 315–324. doi: 10.4134/BKMS.2011.48.2.315
    [3] Y. Huang, BCI-algebras, Beijing: Science Press, 2006.
    [4] A. Iorgulescu, Algebras of logic as BCK-algebras, Bucharest: Editura ASE, 2008.
    [5] K. Iséki, On BCI-algebras, Math. Semin. Notes, 8 (1980), 125–130.
    [6] K. Iséki, S. Tanaka, An introduction to theory of BCK-algebras, Math. Japonicae, 23 (1978), 1–26.
    [7] H. S. Kim, J. Neggers, K. S. So, Some aspects of d-units in d/BCK-algebras, Jour. Appl. Math., 2012 (2012), 1–10.
    [8] J. Meng, Y. B. Jun, BCK-algebras, Seoul: Kyungmoon Sa, 1994.
    [9] J. Neggers, Y. B. Jun, H. S. Kim, On d-ideals in d-algebras, Math. Slovaca, 49 (1999), 243–251.
    [10] J. Neggers, H. S. Kim, On d-algebras, Math. Slovaca, 49 (1999), 19–26.
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Hee Sik Kim, Choonkil Park, Eun Hwa Shim, Function kernels and divisible groupoids, 2022, 7, 2473-6988, 13563, 10.3934/math.2022749
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2021 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(2525) PDF downloads(80) Cited by(1)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog