U | a1 | a2 | a3 | a4 | a5 |
℧1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
℧4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
℧5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
℧6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
Motivated by some variational problems from a nonlocal model of mechanics, this work presents a set of sufficient conditions that guarantee a compact inclusion in the function space of Lp vector fields defined on a domain Ω that is either a bounded domain in Rd or Rd itself. The criteria are nonlocal and are given with respect to nonlocal interaction kernels that may not be necessarily radially symmetric. Moreover, these criteria for vector fields are also different from those given for scalar fields in that the conditions are based on nonlocal interactions involving only parts of the components of the vector fields. The Lp compactness criteria are utilized in demonstrating the convergence of minimizers of parameterized nonlocal energy functionals.
Citation: Qiang Du, Tadele Mengesha, Xiaochuan Tian. Lp compactness criteria with an application to variational convergence of some nonlocal energy functionals[J]. Mathematics in Engineering, 2023, 5(6): 1-31. doi: 10.3934/mine.2023097
[1] | G. Nandini, M. Venkatachalam, Raúl M. Falcón . On the r-dynamic coloring of subdivision-edge coronas of a path. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(5): 4546-4562. doi: 10.3934/math.2020292 |
[2] | Shahbaz Ali, Muhammad Khalid Mahmmod, Raúl M. Falcón . A paradigmatic approach to investigate restricted hyper totient graphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(4): 3761-3771. doi: 10.3934/math.2021223 |
[3] | Lyimo Sygbert Mhagama, Muhammad Faisal Nadeem, Mohamad Nazri Husin . On the edge metric dimension of some classes of cacti. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(6): 16422-16435. doi: 10.3934/math.2024795 |
[4] | Xinqiang Ma, Muhammad Awais Umar, Saima Nazeer, Yu-Ming Chu, Youyuan Liu . Stacked book graphs are cycle-antimagic. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 6043-6050. doi: 10.3934/math.2020387 |
[5] | Muhammad Amir Asif, Rashad Ismail, Ayesha Razaq, Esmail Hassan Abdullatif Al-Sabri, Muhammad Haris Mateen, Shahbaz Ali . An application on edge irregular reflexive labeling for mt-graph of cycle graph. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(1): 1300-1321. doi: 10.3934/math.2025060 |
[6] | Xiaoling Zhou, Chao Yang, Weihua He . The linear k-arboricity of digraphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(3): 4137-4152. doi: 10.3934/math.2022229 |
[7] | S. Gajavalli, A. Berin Greeni . On strong geodeticity in the lexicographic product of graphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(8): 20367-20389. doi: 10.3934/math.2024991 |
[8] | Xia Hong, Wei Feng . Completely independent spanning trees in some Cartesian product graphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(7): 16127-16136. doi: 10.3934/math.2023823 |
[9] | Imrana Kousar, Saima Nazeer, Abid Mahboob, Sana Shahid, Yu-Pei Lv . Numerous graph energies of regular subdivision graph and complete graph. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(8): 8466-8476. doi: 10.3934/math.2021491 |
[10] | T. Deepa, Raúl M. Falcón, M. Venkatachalam . On the r-dynamic coloring of the direct product of a path with either a complete graph or a wheel graph. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(2): 1470-1496. doi: 10.3934/math.2021090 |
Motivated by some variational problems from a nonlocal model of mechanics, this work presents a set of sufficient conditions that guarantee a compact inclusion in the function space of Lp vector fields defined on a domain Ω that is either a bounded domain in Rd or Rd itself. The criteria are nonlocal and are given with respect to nonlocal interaction kernels that may not be necessarily radially symmetric. Moreover, these criteria for vector fields are also different from those given for scalar fields in that the conditions are based on nonlocal interactions involving only parts of the components of the vector fields. The Lp compactness criteria are utilized in demonstrating the convergence of minimizers of parameterized nonlocal energy functionals.
Pawlak introduced the rough set theory [1,2] as a conceptual framework designed to address the challenges posed by vagueness and uncertainty inherent in data analysis and information systems. Atef et al. [3] discussed the generalization of three types of rough set models based on j-neighborhood structure and explored some of their basic properties. Alcantud et al. [4] introduced a new model that combines multi-granularity, soft set, and rough set-based overlays. It strives to provide a hybrid model that captures the strengths of each theory and can be applied to a variety of industries. Another approximation space based on topological near open sets and the properties of these spaces is presented by Mareay et al. [5]. It also includes an algorithm to detect the side effects of the COVID-19 infection. Azzam et al. [6] discussed a proposed reduction method based on similarity relations and pretopology concepts, as well as new pretopological structures for creating information systems. Hu et al. [7] discussed the combination of kernel methods and rough sets in machine learning. It also proposes a fuzzy rough set model and a Gaussian kernel approximation algorithm for feature ranking and reduction. Rough sets and their applications have attracted many researchers in different fields. Stefania Boffa discussed "Sequences of Refinements of Rough Sets". The idea discussed in the thesis is known as "sequences of orthopairs" within the generalized hard set theory. This notion aims to establish operations between sequences of orthopairs and explore methods for generating them based on operations related to common rough sets [8]. The writer demonstrates multiple representation theorems for the class of finite centered Kleene algebras [9].
Covering based rough set involves the utilization of sets to approximate other sets [10,11,12]. Bonikowski et al. [13] put forth a new model of covering sets via minimal description concepts. Many other models of covering rough set depending on the neighborhood and the complementary neighborhood are proposed in [14,15,16]. An intuitionistic fuzzy set (IFS) on the structure of rough sets based on covering is introduced by using the notion of the neighborhood in [17]. It defines three models of IFS approximation structure based on covering. Interestingly, any covering can be linked to a tolerance relation, and vice versa. This technique leaves the upper approximations in rough set theory unchanged. An axiomatic description of the second type of covering higher approximations is also given. Tolerance relations and coverings are powerful tools for comprehending the structure and interactions within sets. Partitions and overlapping covers are mathematical constructions that assist in understanding similarity and discernment [18].
In 1990, Dubois and Prade [19] introduced rough fuzzy sets and fuzzy rough sets, which marked a significant development in the field. Scholars have extensively explored these concepts, as evidenced by studies conducted by various researchers [20,21,22,23,24,25]. Deng et al. [22] introduced fuzzy covering based on fuzzy relations in 2007, while Ma [23] devised two categories of fuzzy covering rough sets in 2016 using fuzzy β-neighborhood. In 2017, Yang and Hu [24] established various types of fuzzy covering-based rough sets through fuzzy β-neighborhood. Hu [26] conducted a comprehensive study in 2019, investigating four types of fuzzy neighborhood operators and their properties by introducing the concept of fuzzy β-minimal description. Deer et al. [27] delved into fuzzy neighborhoods based on fuzzy covering.
In the realm of soft computing, the synergy of soft sets, rough sets, and fuzzy sets has emerged as a pivotal area of research, providing a nuanced framework for handling uncertainties in diverse domains. The foundational principles of soft set theory were initially formulated by Molodtsov [28] as a versatile mathematical framework tailored to address vagueness and uncertainty. Subsequently, an expanding body of research has explored the properties and advantages of soft set theory [29,30].
SRFSs incorporate elements from three distinct mathematical frameworks: Rough sets, fuzzy sets, and soft sets. In this hybrid model, we examine uncertainty, ambiguity, and indiscernibility at the same time. SRFS enables us to manage imprecise data and make more flexible decisions. Researchers investigated many algebraic structures and operations within this paradigm [31]. The SRFS model builds on classical rough set theory by including fuzzy membership degrees. It addresses ambiguity and gentle transitions between different granularities. By combining rough set approximations with fuzzy membership functions, this paradigm improves our capacity to analyze complex data. Applications include data mining, pattern recognition, and decision-making [32]. Zhan [33] introduced the concept of soft fuzzy rough set-based covering through the notion of soft neighborhoods. Zhan's model for soft rough fuzzy coverings stands at the forefront of this convergence, offering a distinctive perspective on the interplay between soft, rough, and fuzzy characteristics. The relations between models for soft rough fuzzy covering sets and Zhan's model for SRF covering must be investigated in order to comprehend their synergy. These relations shed light on how various mathematical constructs can be combined or related. Researchers explore the implications of these connections and their practical applications in [34].
Throughout in this paper, we analyze and enhance Zhan's model for soft rough fuzzy coverings, emphasizing the interplay between soft, rough, and fuzzy characteristics and developing mathematical formulations and algorithms for accurate representation and manipulation. For Zhan's model, we increase the lower approximation while simultaneously reducing the upper approximation to make it more accurate. Furthermore, we introduce three novel models of SRFSs, strategically grounded in the concept of covering via the core of the neighborhood concept. These additions are crafted to address specific challenges and intricacies encountered in real-world applications, where the management of uncertainties is paramount.
First, we present the basic concepts of rough sets and soft sets. Second, a new model of SRFSs based on covering is introduced in Section 3 by using the core of the neighborhood concept. We put forth new other two models of soft rough fuzzy covering SRFC based on neighborhood in Section 4 and established the relations between our models and Zhan's model. The conclusions are presented in Section 5.
Along this section, consider R as an equivalence relation on a nonempty set U. Hence, U/R={Y1,Y2,Y3,...,Ym} is a partition on U, where R is an equivalence relation that generates the classes of equivalence Y1,Y2,Y3,...,Ym. For the soft set, consider U is a universe set, A is a set of parameters on U, P(U) is the power set of U, and we fix a soft set ℧G=(F,A) over U.
Definition 2.1. [35] If X1⊆U and U≠ϕ, then the set of approximation operators lower (upper) is defined as : R_(X1)=⋃{Yi∈U/R:Yi⊆X1}. ¯R(X1)=⋃{Yi∈U/R:Yi∩X1≠∅}, respectively.
Proposition 2.1. [35] If K=(U,R) is an approximation structure, then the following axioms hold for Q1,Q2⊆U :
(I) R_(Q1)=Q1, ¯R(Q1)=Q1;
(II) R_(∅)=∅, ¯R(∅)=∅;
(III) R_(Q1)⊆Q1⊆¯R(Q1);
(IV) R_(Q1∩Q2)=R_(Q1)∩R_(Q2);
(V) ¯R(Q1∪Q2)=¯R(Q1)∪¯R(Q2);
(VI) R_(Qc1)=[¯R(Q1)]c, where (Qc1) is the complement of Q1;
(VII) R_(R_(Q1))=R_(Q1);
(VIII) ¯R(¯R(Q1))=¯R(Q1);
(IX) Q1⊆Q2⇒ R_(Q1)⊆R_(Q2) and ¯R(Q1)⊆¯R(Q2);
(X) R_(R_(Q1))c=(R_(Q1))c, ¯R(¯R(Q1))c=(¯R(Q1))c;
(XI) R_(Q1)∪R_(Q2)⊆R_(Q1∪Q2);
(XII) ¯R(Q1∩Q2)⊆¯R(Y)∩¯R(Q2).
Definition 2.2. [13] Consider C is a family of subsets of the universe U. We call C a covering of U if ∪ C=U, where no subset in C is empty.
Definition 2.3. [13,36] Assume that C is a covering of the nonempty set U, so the structure ≺U,C≻ is a rough approximation structure based on covering.
Definition 2.4. [13,36] Suppose that ≺U,C≻ is covering rough approximation structure and let ℧1∈U. Hence, the set family Md(℧1) is called the minimal description of ℧1, since Md(℧1)={ω∈C:℧1∈ω∧(∀S∈C∧℧1∈S∧S⊆ω⇒ω=S)}.
Definition 2.5. [37] Let F:A→P(U), so the structure ℧G=≺F,A≻ is called a soft set on U. If ⋃e∈AF(e)=U, then the soft set is full soft set.
Definition 2.6. [38] Let ℧G=(F,A) be a soft set over U. The structure S=(U,℧G) is called a soft covering approximation structure (SCAS) based on S.
Definition 2.7. [33] If S=(U,℧G) is a soft covering approximation structure, then the soft neighborhood of x∈U is defined as follows:
Ns(x)=∩{F(e):x∈F(e)}.
Definition 2.8. [33] If S is a soft covering approximation structure and A∈F(U), then the two operators:
ℵ−0(A)(x)=∧{A(y):y∈Ns(x)},
ℵ+0(A)(x)=∨{A(y):y∈Ns(x)}, for all x∈U
are called the soft fuzzy covering lower (upper) approximation structure SFCLA−0 (SFCUA−0), respectively.
Clearly, the set A is called a soft rough covering-based fuzzy set (SRCF−0) if ℵ−0(A)≠ℵ+0(A). Otherwise, the set A is definable.
During this research, we will express that ℵ−i(A) (ℵ+i(A)) is the i type of SFCLA (SFCUA) as SFCLA−i (SFCUA−i), and if ℵ−i(A)≠ℵ+i(A), then the set A is called (SRCF−i). Otherwise, the set A is definable.
In this section, we introduce new models of SRFSs based on covering by the core of soft neighborhood. We present the properties of the new models along with some illustrative examples.
Definition 3.1. Consider that (U,℧G) is a soft rough covering approximation structure (SRCAS) where we fix the soft set ℧G=≺F,A≻, then ∀x∈U the core of the soft neighborhood is defined as CNs(x)={y∈U:Ns(x)=Ns(y)}.
Example 3.1. Consider that (U,℧G) is a SRCAS where U={℧1,℧2,℧3,℧4,℧5,℧6}, C={{℧1,℧2}, {℧1,℧2,℧3},{℧1,℧2,℧4,℧5}, {℧3,℧4,℧5,℧6},,{℧3,℧5,℧6}}, and ℧G=≺F,A≻is a soft set defined in Table 1.
U | a1 | a2 | a3 | a4 | a5 |
℧1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
℧4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
℧5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
℧6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
From Table 1, the soft neighborhood and the core of the soft neighborhood are computed as follows: Ns(℧1)={℧1,℧2}, Ns(℧2)={℧1,℧2}, Ns(℧3)={℧3}, Ns(℧4)={℧4,℧5}, Ns(℧5)={℧5}, Ns(℧6)={℧3,℧5,℧6}. Therefore, CNs(℧1)={℧1,℧2}, CNs(℧2)={℧1,℧2}, CNs(℧3)={℧3}, CNs(℧4)={℧4}, CNs(℧5)={℧5}, CNs(℧6)={℧6}.
Definition 3.2. Assume that S=(U,℧G) is SCAS and A1∈F(U). The two operators:
ℵ−1(A1)(x)=∧{A1(y):y∈CNs(x)} for all x∈U} is called SFCLA−1,
ℵ+1(A1)(x)=∨{A1(y):y∈CNs(x)}, for all x∈U} is called SFCUA−1.
Clearly, the set A1 is called (SRCF−1) if ℵ−1(A1)≠ℵ+1(A1). Otherwise the set A1 is definable.
Example 3.2. If A1={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}. By using Example 3.1, we get the following:
ℵ−0(A1)={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.1),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.5)},
ℵ+0(A1)={(℧1,0.3),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.5),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.8)},
ℵ−1(A1)={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.1),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)},
ℵ+1(A1)={(℧1,0.3),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}.
Obviously, ℵ−0(A1)⊆ℵ−1(A1) and ℵ+1(A1⊆ℵ+0(A1).
Theorem 3.1. Assume that S=(U,℧G) is (SRCAS) and A1,A2∈F(U), then ∀℧1,℧2,℧3∈U the following properties are satisfied:
(iL) If A1⊆A2, then ℵ−1(A1)⊆ℵ−1(A2);
(iH) If A1⊆A2, then ℵ+1(A1)⊆ℵ+1(A2);
(iiL) ℵ−1(A1∩A2)=ℵ−1(A1)∩ℵ−1(A2);
(iiH) ℵ+1(A1∩A2)⊆ℵ+1(A1)∩ℵ+1(A2);
(iiiL) ℵ−1(A1)∪ℵ−1(A2)⊆ℵ−1(A1∪A2);
(iiiH) ℵ+1(A1)∪ℵ+1(A2)=ℵ+1(A1∪A2);
(ivL) ℵ−1(Ac1)=(ℵ+1(A1))c;
(ivH) ℵ+1(Ac1)=(ℵ−1(A1))c;
(vL) ℵ−1(A1)=ℵ−1(ℵ−1(A1));
(vH) ℵ+1(A1)=ℵ+1(ℵ+1(A1));
(viLH) ℵ−1(A1)⊆A1⊆ℵ+1(A1).
Proof. We will prove only iL, iiL, iiiL, ivL and ivL items. The proof of other items is similar:
(iL) If A1⊆A2 where A1,A2∈F(U) and ℧1,℧2∈U, hence, we get ℵ−1(A1)(℧1)=∧{A1(℧2):℧2∈CNs(℧1)}≤∧{A2(℧2):℧2∈CNs(℧1)}=ℵ−1(A2)(℧1);
(iiL) ℵ−1(A1∩A2)(℧1)=∧{(A1∩A2)(℧2):℧2∈CNs(℧1)}= ∧{A1(℧2):℧2∈CNs(℧1)}∩∧{A2(℧2):℧2∈CNs(℧1)}=ℵ−1(A1)(℧1)∩ℵ−1(A2)(℧1);
(iiiL) Since A1⊆A1∪A2, A2⊆A1∪A2, then ℵ−1(A1)⊆ℵ−1(A1∪A2) and ℵ−1(A2)⊆ℵ−1(A1∪A2). Therefore, ℵ−1(A1)∪ℵ−1(A2)⊆ℵ−1(A1∪A2);
(ivL) ℵ−1(Ac1)=∧{Ac1(℧2):℧2∈CNs(℧1)}=∧{1−A1(℧2):℧2∈CNs(℧1)}=1−∨{A1(℧2):℧2∈CNs(℧1)}=(ℵ+1(A1))c;
(vL) ℵ−1(ℵ−1(A1))(℧1)=∧{ℵ−1(Ac1(℧2)):℧2∈CNs(℧1)}=∧{∧{Ac1(℧3):℧3∈(CNs(℧2))}:℧2∈CNs(℧1)}=∧{A1(℧3):℧3∈CNs(℧2)∧℧2∈CNs(℧1)}=∧{A1(℧3):℧3∈CNs(℧2)⊆CNs(℧1)}=∧{A1(℧3):℧3∈CNs(℧1)}=ℵ−1(A1)(℧1).
We define the first type of soft measure degree (SMD−1) as follows.
Definition 3.3. Assume that S=(U,℧G) is (SCAS) and ℧1,℧2∈U, then (SMD−1) is defined as:
{D1s(℧1,℧2)=∣CNs(℧1)∩CNs(℧2)CNs(℧1)∪CNs(℧2)∣}. |
Clearly, 0≤D1s(℧1,℧2)≤1, D1s(℧1,℧2)=D1s(℧2,℧1), and D1s(℧1,℧1)=1.
Example 3.3. Let us consider Example 3.1. The (SMD−1) between each two elements ℧i,℧j∈U,i,j=1,2,...,6 is calculated in Table 2.
U | ℧1 | ℧2 | ℧3 | ℧4 | ℧5 | ℧6 |
℧1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
℧6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Based on Definition 3.3, we define the first type of SCRF based on λ-lower (upper) approximation {λ−SFCLA−1, (λ−SFCUA−1)} as follows.
Definition 3.4. If S=(U,℧G) is (SCAS) and D1s(℧1,℧2) is (SMD−1) for ℧1,℧2∈U, for A1∈F(U), the λ−SFCLA−1, (λ−SFCUA−1) is defined as follows, respectively:
ℵ−1λ(A1)(℧1)=∧{A1)(℧2):D1s(℧1,℧2)>λ},
ℵ+1λ(A1)(℧1)=∨{A1)(℧2):D1s(℧1,℧2)>λ}, ∀℧1,℧2∈U.
If ℵ−1λ(A1)≠ℵ+1λ(A1), then A1 is called λ−SCRF−1; otherwise A1 is called definable.
Example 3.4 Continued from Example 3.3 and A1={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}, for λ=0.5, we have the following approximations operators:
ℵ−1λ(A1)={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.1),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)},
ℵ+1λ(A1)={(℧1,0.3),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}.
Theorem 3.2. If S=(U,℧G) is (SCAS), then for A1,A2∈F(U), the following properties hold:
(iL) If A1⊆A2, then ℵ−1λ(A1)⊆ℵ−1λ(A2);
(iH) If A1⊆A2, then ℵ+1λ(A1)⊆ℵ+1λ(A2);
(iiL) ℵ−1λ(A1∩A2)=ℵ−1λ(A1)∩ℵ−1λ(A2);
(iiH) ℵ+1λ(A1∩A2)⊆ℵ+1λ(A1)∩ℵ+1λ(A2);
(iiiL) ℵ−1λ(A1)∪ℵ−1λ(A2)⊆ℵ−1λ(A1∪A2);
(iiiH) ℵ+1λ(A1)∪ℵ+1λ(A2)=ℵ+1λ(A1∪A2);
(ivL) ℵ−1λ(Ac1)=(ℵ+1λ(A1))c;
(ivH) ℵ+1λ(Ac1)=(ℵ−1λ(A1))c;
(vL) If α1≤α2, then ℵ−1λ(A1)⊆ℵ−1λ(ℵ−1λ(A2));
(vH) If α1≤α2, then ℵ+1λ(A1)⊆ℵ+1λ(ℵ+1λ(A2));
(viLH) ℵ−1λ(A1)⊆A1⊆ℵ+1λ(A1).
Proof. Similar to Theorem 3.1.
Definition 3.5. If S=(U,℧G) is (SCAS) and D1s(℧1,℧2) is (SMD−1) for ℧1,℧2∈U, then for A1∈F(U), the first type of SFC D-lower (upper) approximation (D−SFCLA−1), (D−SFCUA−1) is defined as follows, respectively:
ℵ−1D(A1)(℧1)=∧℧2∈U{(1−D1s)(℧1,℧2)∨A1(℧2)},
ℵ+1D(A1)(℧1)=∨℧2∈U{D1s(℧1,℧2)∧A1(℧2)}, ∀℧1∈U.
If ℵ−1D(A1)≠ℵ+1D(A1), then A1 is called D−SCRF−1; otherwise, A1 is called definable.
Example 3.5. Continued from Example 3.3 and A1={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}, then we get the following approximations operators:
ℵ−1D(A1)={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.1),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)},
ℵ+1D(A1)={(℧1,0.3),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}.
Theorem 3.3. Assume that S=(U,℧G) is (SCAS) and A1,A2∈F(U), then ∀℧1,℧2,℧3∈U, and the following properties are satisfied:
(iL) If A1⊆A2, then ℵ−1D(A1)⊆ℵ−1D(A2);
(iH) If A1⊆A2, then ℵ+1D(A1)⊆ℵ+1D(A2);
(iiL) ℵ−1D(A1∩A2)=ℵ−1D(A1)∩ℵ−1D(A2);
(iiH) ℵ+1(A1∩A2)⊆ℵ+1(A1)∩ℵ+1(A2);
(iiiL) ℵ−1D(A1)∪ℵ−1D(A2)⊆ℵ−1D(A1∪A2);
(iiiH) ℵ+1D(A1)∪ℵ+1D(A2)=ℵ+1D(A1∪A2);
(ivL) ℵ−1D(Ac1)=(ℵ+1D(A1))c;
(ivH) ℵ+1D(Ac1)=(ℵ−1D(A1))c;
(vL) ℵ−1D(A1)=ℵ−1D(ℵ−1D(A1));
(vH) ℵ+1D(A1)=ℵ+1D(ℵ+1D(A1));
(viLH) ℵ−1D(A1)⊆A1⊆ℵ+1D(A1).
Proof. Similar to Theorem 3.1.
Suppose that U={℧1,℧2,℧3,℧4,℧5,℧6,℧7,℧8,℧9,℧10} is a set of pilots. They are trained with respect to five attributes A={e1,e2,e3,e4,e5}. They had been evaluated by an expert to determine whether they are sufficiently well trained according to these attributes or not, as shown in Table 3.
U | e1 | e2 | e3 | e4 | e5 |
℧1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
℧2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
℧3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
℧4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
℧6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
℧7 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧8 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
℧9 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
℧10 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
The core of soft neighborhood is: CNs(℧1)=CNs(℧10)={℧1,℧10}, CNs(℧2).
=CNs(℧3)=CNs(℧9)={℧2,℧3,℧9}, CNs(℧4)={℧4}, CNs(℧5)=CNs(℧8)={℧5,℧8}, CNs(℧6)={℧6}, CNs(℧7)={℧7}.
Suppose A1={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8), (℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7),(℧7,0.9),(℧8,0.3),(℧9,0.9), (℧10,0.4)}
represents evaluation's degrees which are given by the expert. We can check the accuracy of this evaluation by our model which helps in decision making as follows:
ℵ−1(A1)={(℧1,0.1), (℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.3),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.3),(℧6,0.7),(℧7,0.9), (℧8,0.3),(℧9,0.9),(℧10,0.1)},
ℵ+1(A1)={(℧1,0.4),(℧2,0.9),(℧3,0.9), (℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7),(℧7,0.9),(℧8,0.5),(℧9,0.9), (℧10,0.4)}.
We introduce new two models of SCRF based on merging core soft neighborhoods and soft neighborhoods. The second model of SCRF is denoted by SCRF−2 and the third model is denoted by SCRF−3.
Definition 4.1. If S=(U,℧G) is (SCAS), then for A1∈F(U)
ℵ−2(A1)(℧1)=∧{A1(℧2):℧2∈(Ns∩CNs)(℧1)}, ∀℧1,℧2∈U is called SFCLA−2,
ℵ+2(A1)(℧1)=∨{A1(℧2):℧2∈(Ns∩CNs)(℧1)}, ∀℧1,℧2∈U is called SFCUA−2.
If ℵ−2(A1)≠ℵ+1(A1), then A1 is called SCRF−2; otherwise, A1 is called definable.
Example 4.1 Continued from Example 3.1, CNs(℧1)∩Ns(℧1)={℧1,℧2}, CNs(℧2)∩Ns(℧2)={℧1,℧2}, CNs(℧3)∩Ns(℧3)={℧3}, CNs(℧4)∩Ns(℧4)={℧4}, CNs(℧5)∩Ns(℧5)={℧5}, CNs(℧6)∩Ns(℧6)={℧6}, CNs(℧1)∪Ns(℧1)={℧1,℧2}, CNs(℧2)∪Ns(℧2)={℧1,℧2}, CNs(℧3)∪Ns(℧3)={℧3}, CNs(℧4)∪Ns(℧4)={℧4,℧5}, CNs(℧5)∪Ns(℧5)={℧5}, CNs(℧6)∪Ns(℧6)={℧3,℧5,℧6}. Therefore, ℵ−2(A1)={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.1),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}, and ℵ+2(A1)={(℧1,0.3),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}.
Let us define the second type of soft measure degree (SMD−2) as follows.
Definition 4.2. Assume that S=(U,℧G) is (SCAS) and ℧1,℧2∈U, then the (SMD−2) is defined as:
{D2s(℧1,℧2)=∣(CNs∩Ns)(℧1)∩(CNs∩Ns)(℧2)(CNs∩Ns)(℧1)∪(CNs∩Ns)(℧2)∣}. |
Clearly, 0≤D2s(℧1,℧2)≤1, D2s(℧1,℧2)=D2s(℧2,℧1), and D1s(℧1,℧1)=1.
Example 4.2. According to Example 4.1, the values of SMD−2 are shown in the following Table 4
U | ℧1 | ℧2 | ℧3 | ℧4 | ℧5 | ℧6 |
℧1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
℧6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
Based on Definition 4.1, we define the second type of SCRF based on λ-lower (upper) approximation (λ−SFCLA−2 (λ−SFCUA−2)) as follows.
Definition 4.3. If S=(U,℧G) is (SCAS) and D2s(℧1,℧2) is (SMD−2) for ℧1,℧2∈U, then for A1∈F(U), the λ−SFCLA−2 (λ−SFCUA−2) is defined as follows, respectively:
ℵ−2λ(A1)(℧1)=∧{A1)(℧2):D2s(℧1,℧2)>λ},
ℵ+2λ(A1)(℧1)=∨{A1)(℧2):D2s(℧1,℧2)>λ}, ∀℧1,℧2∈U.
If ℵ−2λ(A1)≠ℵ+2λ(A1), then A1 is called λ−SCRF−2; otherwise A1 is called definable.
Example 4.3. Consider Example 4.2 and A1={(℧1,0.3),(℧2,0.4),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}, then for λ=0.5, we have the following approximations operators:
ℵ−2λ(A1)={(℧1,0.3),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)},
ℵ+2λ(A1)={(℧1,0.4),(℧2,0.4),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}.
Definition 4.4. If S=(U,℧G) is (SCAS) and D2s(℧1,℧2) is (SMD−2) for ℧1,℧2∈U, then for A1∈F(U), the second type of SFC D-lower (upper) approximation D−SFCLA−2 (D−SFCUA−2) is defined as follows, respectively:
ℵ−2D(A1)(℧1)=∧℧2∈U{(1−D2s)(℧1,℧2)∨A1(℧2)},
ℵ+2D(A1)(℧1)=∨℧2∈U{D2s(℧1,℧2)∧A1(℧2)}, ∀℧1∈U.
Example 4.4. Consider Example 4.2 and A1={(℧1,0.3),(℧2,0.4),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}, then we have the following approximations operators:
ℵ−2D(A1)={(℧1,0.3),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}
ℵ+2D(A1)={(℧1,0.4),(℧2,0.4),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}.
Definition 4.5. If S=(U,℧G) is (SCAS), then for A1∈F(U):
ℵ−3(A1)(℧1)=∧{A1(℧2):℧2∈(Ns∪CNs)(℧1)}, ∀℧1,℧2∈U is called SFCLA−3,
ℵ+3(A1)(℧1)=∨{A1(℧2):℧2∈(Ns∪CNs)(℧1)}, ∀℧1,℧2∈U is called SFCUA−3.
If ℵ−3λ(A1)≠ℵ+3λ(A1), then A1 is called λ−SCRF−3; otherwise, A1 is called definable.
Example 4.5. From Example 4.1 and A1={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}, we have the following approximations operators:
ℵ−3(A1)={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.1),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.5)},
ℵ−3(A1)={(℧1,0.3),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.5),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.8)}.
We define the third type of soft measure degree (SMD−3) as follows.
Definition 4.6. Assume that S=(U,℧G) is SCAS and ℧1,℧2∈U, then the (SMD−3) is defined as:
{D3s(℧1,℧2)=∣(CNs∪Ns)(℧1)∩(CNs∪Ns)(℧2)(CNs∪Ns)(℧1)∪(CNs∪Ns)(℧2)∣}. |
Clearly, 0≤D3s(℧1,℧2)≤1, D3s(℧1,℧2)=D3s(℧2,℧1), and D3s(℧1,℧1)=1.
Example 4.6. From Example 4.1, the values of SMD−3 are shown in the following Table 5.
U | ℧1 | ℧2 | ℧3 | ℧4 | ℧5 | ℧6 |
℧1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 12 | 14 |
℧5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 1 | 13 |
℧6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 13 | 1 |
Based on Definition 4.6, we define the third type of SFC based on λ-lower(upper) approximation{λ−SFCLA−3(λ−SFCUA−3)} as follows.
Definition 4.7. If S=(U,℧G) is (SCAS) and D3s(℧1,℧2) is (SMD−3) for ℧1,℧2∈U, then for A1∈F(U), the {λ−SFCLA−3(λ−SFCUA−3)} is defined as:
ℵ−3λ(A1)(℧1)=∧{A1)(℧2):D3s(℧1,℧2)>λ},
ℵ+3λ(A1)(℧1)=∨{A1)(℧2):D3s(℧1,℧2)>λ}, ∀℧1,℧2∈U.
If ℵ−3λ(A1)≠ℵ+3λ(A1), then A1 is called λ−SCRF−3; otherwise, A1 is called definable.
Example 4.7. From Example 4.6 and A1={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}, then for λ=0.2, we have the following approximations operators:
ℵ−2λ(A1)={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.1),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.2),(℧6,0.2)},
ℵ+2λ(A1)={(℧1,0.3),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.7),(℧5,0.7),(℧6,0.7)}.
Definition 4.8. If S=(U,℧G) is (SCAS) and D3s(℧1,℧2) is (SMD−3) for ℧1,℧2∈U, then for A1∈F(U), the third type of SFC D-lower (upper) approximation ((D−SFCLA−3), (D−SFCUA−3)) is defined as follows, respectively:
ℵ−3D(A1)(℧1)=∧℧2∈U{(1−D3s)(℧1,℧2)∨A1(℧2)},
ℵ+3D(A1)(℧1)=∨℧2∈U{D3s(℧1,℧2)∧A1(℧2)}, ∀℧1∈U.
Example 4.8. Consider Example 4.6 and A1={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}, then, we have the following approximations operators:
ℵ−3D(A1)={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.1),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)},
ℵ+3D(A1)={(℧1,0.3),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.7),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}.
We set forth the relationship between our proposed SCRF-models and Zhan's model for soft rough fuzzy approximation structure.
Theorem 4.1. If S=(U,℧G) is (SCAS) and A1∈F(U), then the following axioms are satisfied:
(iL) ℵ−3(A1)⊆ℵ−1(A1)⊆ℵ−2(A1);
(iH) ℵ−3(A1)⊆ℵ−0(A1)⊆ℵ−2(A1);
(iiL) ℵ+2(A1)⊆ℵ+1(A1)⊆ℵ+3(A1);
(iiH) ℵ+2(A1)⊆ℵ+0(A1)⊆ℵ+3(A1).
Proof. The proof comes from Definitions 3.2, 4.1, and 4.5.
Remark 4.1. From the previous theorem, the lower approximation of our model ℵ−2 is bigger than Zhan's model ℵ−0 while the upper approximation of our model ℵ+2 is less than Zhan's model ℵ+0. This leads to decreasing the boundary region and makes the soft rough fuzzy set more accurate in solving the uncertainty issues.
Example 4.9. If A1={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}, then by Example 3.1, ℵ−0(A1)={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.1), (℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.5)}, ℵ+0(A1)={(℧1,0.3),(℧2,0.3), (℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.5),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.8)}. ℵ−2(A1)={(℧1,0.1),(℧2,0.1),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2), (℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)} and ℵ+2(A1)={(℧1,0.3), (℧2,0.3),(℧3,0.8),(℧4,0.2),(℧5,0.5),(℧6,0.7)}.
Theorem 4.2. If S=(U,℧G) is (SCAS) and A1∈F(U), then the following properties are satisfied:
(iL) ℵ−2(A1)=ℵ−0(A1)∪ℵ−1(A1);
(iH) ℵ+2(A1)=ℵ−0(A1)∩ℵ−1(A1);
(iiL) ℵ−3(A1)=ℵ−0(A1)∩ℵ−1(A1)
(iiH) ℵ+3(A1)=ℵ−0(A1)∪ℵ−1(A1).
Proof. The proof is straightforward.
Zhan's model for soft rough fuzzy covering stands as an innovative approach, though further exploration and refinement are warranted. Similarly, the exploration of soft covering-based rough fuzzy sets opens avenues for the integration of various mathematical structures. We introduced a combination of soft sets, fuzzy sets and rough sets. Three models of the approximation of SRFS- based covering are presented. We deduced that our approximation is more refined than Zhan's model as we decreased the boundary region. The integration of soft sets with fuzzy logic in soft fuzzy covering and the discernment of upper approximation provide additional layers to the SCRF framework, offering a comprehensive solution to complex problem structures.
The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.
This research is funded by Zarqa University-Jordan.
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
[1] |
B. Aksoylu, T. Mengesha, Results on non-local boundary-value problems, Numer. Func. Anal. Optim., 31 (2010), 1301–1317. https://doi.org/10.1080/01630563.2010.519136 doi: 10.1080/01630563.2010.519136
![]() |
[2] | G. Barles, E. Chasseigne, C. Imbert, On the Dirichlet problem for second-order elliptic integro-differential equations, Indiana Univ. Math. J., 57 (2008), 213–246. |
[3] |
J. C. Bellido, C. Mora-Corral, Existence for nonlocal variational problems in peridynamics, SIAM J. Math. Anal., 46 (2014), 890–916. https://doi.org/10.1137/130911548 doi: 10.1137/130911548
![]() |
[4] |
J. C. Bellido, C. Mora-Corral, P. Pedregal, Hyperelasticity as a Γ-limit of peridynamics when the horizon goes to zero, Calc. Var., 54 (2015), 1643–1670. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00526-015-0839-9 doi: 10.1007/s00526-015-0839-9
![]() |
[5] |
A. Bonito, J. P. Borthagaray, R. H. Nochetto, E. Otárola, A. J. Salgado, Numerical methods for fractional diffusion, Comput. Visual. Sci., 19 (2018), 19–46. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00791-018-0289-y doi: 10.1007/s00791-018-0289-y
![]() |
[6] | J. Bourgain, H. Brezis, P. Mironescu, Another look at Sobolev spaces, In: J. L. Menaldi, E. Rofman, A. Sulem, Optimal control and partial differential equations: in honor of professor Alain Bensoussan's 60th anniversary, IOS Press, 2001,439–455. |
[7] | H. Brezis, Functional analysis, Sobolev spaces and partial differential equations, New York: Springer, 2010. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-0-387-70914-7 |
[8] |
A. Coclite, G. M. Coclite, F. Maddalena, T. Politi, A numerical framework for nonlinear peridynamics on two-dimensional manifolds based on implicit P-(EC)k schemes, arXiv, 2022. https://doi.org/10.48550/arXiv.2207.06022 doi: 10.48550/arXiv.2207.06022
![]() |
[9] |
G. M. Coclite, S. Dipierro, F. Maddalena, E. Valdinoci, Wellposedness of a nonlinear peridynamic model, Nonlinearity, 32 (2018), 1. https://doi.org/10.1088/1361-6544/aae71b doi: 10.1088/1361-6544/aae71b
![]() |
[10] |
Q. Du, M. Gunzburger, R. B. Lehoucq, K. Zhou, Analysis and approximation of nonlocal diffusion problems with volume constraints, SIAM Rev., 54 (2012), 667–696. https://doi.org/10.1137/110833294 doi: 10.1137/110833294
![]() |
[11] |
Q. Du, M. Gunzburger, R. B. Lehoucq, K. Zhou, A nonlocal vector calculus, nonlocal volume constrained problems, and nonlocal balance laws, Math. Mod. Meth. Appl. Sci., 23 (2013), 493–540. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218202512500546 doi: 10.1142/S0218202512500546
![]() |
[12] |
Q. Du, M. Gunzburger, R. B. Lehoucq, K. Zhou, Analysis of the volume-constrained peridynamic Navier equation of linear elasticity, J. Elast., 113 (2013), 193–217. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10659-012-9418-x doi: 10.1007/s10659-012-9418-x
![]() |
[13] |
Q. Du, K. Zhou, Mathematical analysis for the peridynamic non-local continuum theory, ESIAM: Math. Modell. Numer. Anal., 45 (2011), 217–234. https://doi.org/10.1051/m2an/2010040 doi: 10.1051/m2an/2010040
![]() |
[14] |
E. Emmrich, D. Puhst, Well-posedness of the peridynamic model with Lipschitz continuous pairwise force function, Commun. Math. Sci., 11 (2013), 1039–1049. https://doi.org/10.4310/CMS.2013.v11.n4.a7 doi: 10.4310/CMS.2013.v11.n4.a7
![]() |
[15] |
E. Emmrich, O. Weckner, On the well-posedness of the linear peridynamic model and its convergence towards the Navier equation of linear elasticity, Commun. Math. Sci., 5 (2007), 851–864. https://doi.org/10.4310/CMS.2007.v5.n4.a6 doi: 10.4310/CMS.2007.v5.n4.a6
![]() |
[16] |
M. Felsinger, M. Kassmann, P. Voigt, The Dirichlet problem for nonlocal operators, Math. Z., 279 (2015), 779–809. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00209-014-1394-3 doi: 10.1007/s00209-014-1394-3
![]() |
[17] | F. G. G. Fabrice, L2-theory for nonlocal operators on domains, PhD Thesis, Bielefeld University, 2020. https://doi.org/10.4119/unibi/2946033 |
[18] |
S. Jarohs, T. Weth, Local compactness and nonvanishing for weakly singular nonlocal quadratic forms, Nonlinear Anal., 193 (2020), 111431. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.na.2019.01.021 doi: 10.1016/j.na.2019.01.021
![]() |
[19] |
R. Lipton, Dynamic brittle fracture as a small horizon limit of peridynamics, J. Elast., 117 (2014), 21–50. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10659-013-9463-0 doi: 10.1007/s10659-013-9463-0
![]() |
[20] |
T. Mengesha, Nonlocal Korn-type characterization of Sobolev vector fields, Commun. Contemp. Math., 14 (2012), 1250028. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0219199712500289 doi: 10.1142/S0219199712500289
![]() |
[21] | G. Maso, An introduction to Γ-convergence: progress in nonlinear differential equations and their applications, Vol. 8, Boston: Birkhäuser Boston, Inc., 1993. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-0327-8 |
[22] |
T. Mengesha, Q. Du, Analysis of a scalar nonlocal peridynamic model with a sign changing kernel, Discrete Cont. Dyn. Syst.-B, 18 (2013), 1415–1437. https://doi.org/10.3934/dcdsb.2013.18.1415 doi: 10.3934/dcdsb.2013.18.1415
![]() |
[23] |
T. Mengesha, Q. Du, Nonlocal constrained value problems for a linear peridynamic Navier equation, J. Elast., 116 (2014), 27–51. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10659-013-9456-z doi: 10.1007/s10659-013-9456-z
![]() |
[24] |
T. Mengesha, Q. Du, The bond-based peridynamic system with Dirichlet-type volume constraint, Proc. R. Soc. Edinburgh Sect. A: Math., 144 (2014), 161–186. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0308210512001436 doi: 10.1017/S0308210512001436
![]() |
[25] |
T. Mengesha, Q. Du, On the variational limit of a class of nonlocal functionals related to peridynamics, Nonlinearity, 28 (2015), 3999. https://doi.org/10.1088/0951-7715/28/11/3999 doi: 10.1088/0951-7715/28/11/3999
![]() |
[26] |
T. Mengesha, D. Spector, Localization of nonlocal gradients in various topologies, Calc. Var., 52 (2015), 253–279. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00526-014-0711-3 doi: 10.1007/s00526-014-0711-3
![]() |
[27] |
T. Mengesha, J. M. Scott, A fractional Korn-type inequality for smooth domains and a regularity estimate for nonlinear nonlocal systems of equations, Commun. Math. Sci., 20 (2022), 405–423. https://doi.org/10.4310/CMS.2022.v20.n2.a5 doi: 10.4310/CMS.2022.v20.n2.a5
![]() |
[28] |
A. C. Ponce, An estimate in the spirit of Poincaré's inequality, J. Eur. Math. Soc., 6 (2004), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.4171/JEMS/1 doi: 10.4171/JEMS/1
![]() |
[29] |
A. C. Ponce, A new approach to Sobolev spaces and connections to Γ-convergence, Calc. Var., 19 (2004), 229–255. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00526-003-0195-z doi: 10.1007/s00526-003-0195-z
![]() |
[30] |
J. Scott, T. Mengesha, A fractional Korn-type inequality, Discrete Cont. Dyn. Syst., 39 (2019), 3315–3343. https://doi.org/10.3934/dcds.2019137 doi: 10.3934/dcds.2019137
![]() |
[31] |
S. A. Silling, Reformulation of elasticity theory for discontinuities and long-range forces, J. Mech. Phys. Solids, 48 (2000), 175–209. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0022-5096(99)00029-0 doi: 10.1016/S0022-5096(99)00029-0
![]() |
[32] |
S. A. Silling, Linearized theory of peridynamic states, J. Elast., 99 (2010), 85–111. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10659-009-9234-0 doi: 10.1007/s10659-009-9234-0
![]() |
[33] |
S. A. Silling, M. Epton, O. Weckner, J. Xu, E. Askari, Peridynamic states and constitutive modeling, J. Elast., 88 (2007), 151–184. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10659-007-9125-1 doi: 10.1007/s10659-007-9125-1
![]() |
[34] |
X. Tian, Q. Du, Nonconforming discontinuous Galerkin methods for nonlocal variational roblems, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 53 (2015), 762–781. https://doi.org/10.1137/140978831 doi: 10.1137/140978831
![]() |
[35] |
X. Tian, Q. Du, Asymptotically compatible schemes and applications to robust discretization of nonlocal models, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 52 (2014), 1641–1665. https://doi.org/10.1137/130942644 doi: 10.1137/130942644
![]() |
[36] |
X. Tian, Q. Du, M. Gunzburger, Asymptotically compatible schemes for the approximation of fractional Laplacian and related nonlocal diffusion problems on bounded domains, Adv. Comput. Math., 42 (2016), 1363–1380. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10444-016-9466-z doi: 10.1007/s10444-016-9466-z
![]() |
[37] |
K. Zhou, Q. Du, Mathematical and numerical analysis of linear peridynamic models with non-local boundary, SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 48 (2010), 1759–1780. https://doi.org/10.1137/090781267 doi: 10.1137/090781267
![]() |
1. | Baskar Mari, Ravi Sankar Jeyaraj, Further results on the radio number for some construction of the path, complete, and complete bipartite graphs, 2024, 10, 24058440, e34434, 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e34434 | |
2. | Linlin Cui, Feng Li, 2024, Radio Number of the Cartesian Product of Stars and Middle Graph of Cycles, 979-8-3503-9195-4, 200, 10.1109/SNPD61259.2024.10673910 | |
3. | M. E. Abdel-Aal, S. A. Bashammakh, A study on the varieties of equivalent cordial labeling graphs, 2024, 9, 2473-6988, 34720, 10.3934/math.20241653 | |
4. | Feng Li, Linlin Cui, Mohammad Javad Nadjafi-Arani, Optimal radio labeling of Cartesian product of rectangular mesh networks and stars, 2025, 1598-5865, 10.1007/s12190-025-02511-2 |
U | a1 | a2 | a3 | a4 | a5 |
℧1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
℧4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
℧5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
℧6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
U | ℧1 | ℧2 | ℧3 | ℧4 | ℧5 | ℧6 |
℧1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
℧6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
U | e1 | e2 | e3 | e4 | e5 |
℧1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
℧2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
℧3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
℧4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
℧6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
℧7 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧8 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
℧9 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
℧10 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
U | ℧1 | ℧2 | ℧3 | ℧4 | ℧5 | ℧6 |
℧1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
℧6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
U | ℧1 | ℧2 | ℧3 | ℧4 | ℧5 | ℧6 |
℧1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 12 | 14 |
℧5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 1 | 13 |
℧6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 13 | 1 |
U | a1 | a2 | a3 | a4 | a5 |
℧1 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧2 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧3 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
℧4 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
℧5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 |
℧6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
U | ℧1 | ℧2 | ℧3 | ℧4 | ℧5 | ℧6 |
℧1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
℧6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
U | e1 | e2 | e3 | e4 | e5 |
℧1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
℧2 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
℧3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
℧4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧5 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
℧6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
℧7 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧8 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
℧9 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
℧10 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
U | ℧1 | ℧2 | ℧3 | ℧4 | ℧5 | ℧6 |
℧1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
℧5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 |
℧6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 |
U | ℧1 | ℧2 | ℧3 | ℧4 | ℧5 | ℧6 |
℧1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧2 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧3 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
℧4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 12 | 14 |
℧5 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 12 | 1 | 13 |
℧6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 14 | 13 | 1 |