U | 'cheap' | 'beautiful' | 'big area' | 'good location' | 'in the green surroundings' |
h1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
h2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
h3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
h4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
h5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
h6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
This investigation aims to present the unsteady motion of second grade fluid in an oscillating duct induced by rectified sine pulses. Some of the most dominant means for solving problems in engineering, mathematics and physics are transform methods. The objective is to modify the domain of the present problem to a new domain which is easier for evaluation. Such modifications can be done by different ways, one such way is by using transforms. In present work Fourier sine transform and Laplace transform techniques are used. The solution thus obtained is in form of steady state, with combination of transient solution which fulfills all required initial and boundary conditions. The influence of various parameters of interest for both developing and retarding flows on the flow characteristics will also be sketched and discussed. Also, the problem is reduced to the flow model where side walls are absent by bringing the aspect ratio parameter (ratio of length to width) to zero.
Citation: Kehong Zheng, Fuzhang Wang, Muhammad Kamran, Rewayat Khan, Ali Sikandar Khan, Sadique Rehman, Aamir Farooq. On rate type fluid flow induced by rectified sine pulses[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 1615-1627. doi: 10.3934/math.2022094
[1] | Aissa Boukarou, Kaddour Guerbati, Khaled Zennir, Mohammad Alnegga . Gevrey regularity for the generalized Kadomtsev-Petviashvili I (gKP-I) equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(9): 10037-10054. doi: 10.3934/math.2021583 |
[2] | Xiaochun Sun, Yulian Wu, Gaoting Xu . Global well-posedness for the 3D rotating Boussinesq equations in variable exponent Fourier-Besov spaces. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(11): 27065-27079. doi: 10.3934/math.20231385 |
[3] | Muhammad Imran Liaqat, Fahim Ud Din, Wedad Albalawi, Kottakkaran Sooppy Nisar, Abdel-Haleem Abdel-Aty . Analysis of stochastic delay differential equations in the framework of conformable fractional derivatives. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(5): 11194-11211. doi: 10.3934/math.2024549 |
[4] | William O. Bray, Ellen Hunter . Wave equations & energy. AIMS Mathematics, 2019, 4(3): 463-481. doi: 10.3934/math.2019.3.463 |
[5] | Phuong Nguyen Duc, Ahmet Ocak Akdemir, Van Tien Nguyen, Anh Tuan Nguyen . Remarks on parabolic equation with the conformable variable derivative in Hilbert scales. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(11): 20020-20042. doi: 10.3934/math.20221095 |
[6] | Kedong Wang, Xianguo Geng, Mingming Chen, Ruomeng Li . Long-time asymptotics for the generalized Sasa-Satsuma equation. AIMS Mathematics, 2020, 5(6): 7413-7437. doi: 10.3934/math.2020475 |
[7] | Said Mesloub, Faten Aldosari . Well posedness for a singular two dimensional fractional initial boundary value problem with Bessel operator involving boundary integral conditions. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(9): 9786-9812. doi: 10.3934/math.2021569 |
[8] | Zhongdi Cen, Jian Huang, Aimin Xu . A posteriori mesh method for a system of singularly perturbed initial value problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(9): 16719-16732. doi: 10.3934/math.2022917 |
[9] | Murat A. Sultanov, Vladimir E. Misilov, Makhmud A. Sadybekov . Numerical method for solving the subdiffusion differential equation with nonlocal boundary conditions. AIMS Mathematics, 2024, 9(12): 36385-36404. doi: 10.3934/math.20241726 |
[10] | Dumitru Baleanu, Babak Shiri . Generalized fractional differential equations for past dynamic. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(8): 14394-14418. doi: 10.3934/math.2022793 |
This investigation aims to present the unsteady motion of second grade fluid in an oscillating duct induced by rectified sine pulses. Some of the most dominant means for solving problems in engineering, mathematics and physics are transform methods. The objective is to modify the domain of the present problem to a new domain which is easier for evaluation. Such modifications can be done by different ways, one such way is by using transforms. In present work Fourier sine transform and Laplace transform techniques are used. The solution thus obtained is in form of steady state, with combination of transient solution which fulfills all required initial and boundary conditions. The influence of various parameters of interest for both developing and retarding flows on the flow characteristics will also be sketched and discussed. Also, the problem is reduced to the flow model where side walls are absent by bringing the aspect ratio parameter (ratio of length to width) to zero.
Various mathematical theories, such as fuzzy set theory [6,11], rough set theory [38,39], vague set theory [2,31], etc., have been proposed by researchers to deal with vagueness and uncertainty in practical problems in engineering, economics, social science, medical science and so on. However, Molodtsov [1] pointed out that the parameterization tools of the above aforementioned theories were inadequate due to inherent limitation. Then he instead proposed soft set theory, which is a new mathematical tool to deal with uncertain problems. It is free from the inherent limitations, and its parameterization tools are adequate to process uncertainties. Objects can be described based on soft set theory through establishing the mapping from parameters to universe. The result from the mapping in a soft set is not a set, but a parameterized family of subsets of universe, so parameters of soft sets can be any form such as numerical values, words, logical language, sentences and so on.
On the basis of Molodtsov's research [1], many researchers have enriched the theory of soft set through discussing some classical set theoretic laws and algebraic properties in soft set theory, including the equality of two soft sets, subset and super set of soft set, complement of a soft set, null soft set, absolute soft set, the binary operations between two soft sets, such as AND, OR, union, intersection, De Morgan's law and so on [10,12,15,16,18,23,28]. With the establishment and development of soft set theory, it was applied to various research fields such as data analysis and recognition [37], combined forecasting [40], information system [24], decision-making [4,5,17,26,36], evaluation [14], economic [25], medical diagnosis [42], fixed point theory [27], and feature selection [13,30,34]. The application of soft sets in decision-making (DM) problems, among many others, is of great interest to many researchers [8].
Vagueness and uncertainty of information widely exist in practical DM problems and prevent an appropriate decision-making. Expressing the information accurately by mathematical languages to modeling DM problems is an effective method. Therefore, the first step of an efficient decision-making is to transform the vague and uncertain information into numerical variables through mathematical languages, such as fuzzy language, vague language, rough language, interval language, etc. In addition, by exploring the advantage of soft sets in providing unlimited parameterization tools, the above mathematical languages and soft set theory were combined to study practical DM problems. For example, Yang [32] combined soft sets with interval-valued fuzzy set to deal with the DM problems with interval-valued fuzzy information. Guan [33] introduced a new order relation on fuzzy soft sets, called soft information order, by combining soft sets with fuzzy sets to analyze DM problems. Likewise, many other researches focused on proposing new DM methods by constructing different kinds of hybrid soft sets, including N-soft set [7], trapezoidal interval type-2 fuzzy soft sets [41], Pythagorean fuzzy soft sets [29] and so on. Apparently, these methods facilitated DM under different types of information environment.
However, by each hybrid soft set mentioned above, only one type of information in practical DM problems can be processed. In order to describe objects exactly and make an optimal decision, several attributes with different types of data should be used to represent alternatives comprehensively and accurately. As a consequence, the information in practical DM problems may be heterogeneous. That is to say, there may be coexistence of continuous data, discrete data, dual/Multilevel semantic data and other data types in one DM model, which cannot be processed effectively by any kinds of hybrid soft sets at hand. Therefore, the focus of this paper is to develop a new method to process heterogeneous information in DM problems in order to deliver better decisions in practice.
At present, the main method for processing the heterogeneous information in DM problems is either by limiting the description of objects under an information circumstance with only one data type, or by transforming different types of data into the same [35]. Either way, the information can be used is restricted or may be lost in the process of transformation, which may result in incorrect decisions.
Neighborhood space, introduced by Fix and Hodges [3], is a popular learning and classification technique and a more general topological space than equivalence space. Some new types neighborhoods system in classical rough set theory have been recently presented[21,22], and it has been applied to many fields such as attribute reduction, feature selection, classification, information recognition [9,19,20] and so on. By using some gathering rules in neighborhood space, objects can be classified into several groups according to their similarity and some neighborhood granules can be generated. More importantly, these gathering rules and neighborhood granules can be generated from a heterogeneous information environment. That means there is no limitation on the types of data in description on objects, or no need to transfer different types of data into the same in the process of DM. On the contrary, neighborhood space can process the heterogeneous information directly. Considering soft sets have the advantage of providing adequate parameterization tools and neighborhood space is capable of classifying objects with heterogeneous information, this paper proposes a new method to deal with DM problems which contain heterogeneous information by combining soft sets with neighborhood space.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows: Section 2 introduces the basic definitions of soft sets and neighborhood space. The concept of a neighborhood soft set which is a combination of the soft set and neighborhood space is presented in section 3. Besides, the operation rules on the neighborhood soft set are discussed in this section. In section 4, the definition of a neighborhood soft decision system is proposed and the method of DM under heterogeneous information environment based on the neighborhood soft decision system is proposed, followed by an illustrative example and a comparison analysis. Section 5 applies the new method in the medical diagnosis, and the last section discusses our main conclusions.
Definition 1. [1] Suppose that U is an initial universe set and A is a set of parameters. Let P(U) denote the set of all subsets of U, a pair (F,A) is called a soft set over U, where F is a mapping given by
F:A→P(U). | (2.1) |
Clearly, a soft set is a mapping from parameters to P(U), and it is not a set, but a parameterized family of subsets of U. For e∈A, F(e) can be considered as the set of e-approximate elements of the soft set (F,A).
Example 1. Suppose the following:
i. U is a set of houses under consideration;
ii. A is a set of parameters, each parameter is a word or a sentence.
For example,
U={h1,h2,h3,h4,h5,h6} |
and
A={e1,e2,e3,e4,e5}={cheap,beautiful,bigarea,goodlocation,inthegreensurroundings}. |
In this case, to define a soft set means to point out cheap houses, beautiful houses, and so on. The soft set (F,A) describes the 'attractiveness of the houses' which Mr. X is going to buy.
Thus, we can view the soft set (F,A) as a collection of approximations as below:
(F,A)={cheap houses={h2,h4},beautiful houses={h1,h3},big houses={h3,h4,h5},good location houses={h1,h3,h5},in the green surroundings={h1}}. |
The soft set of 'attractiveness of the houses' in Example 2.1 can also be tabulated as in Table 1.
U | 'cheap' | 'beautiful' | 'big area' | 'good location' | 'in the green surroundings' |
h1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
h2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
h3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
h4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
h5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
h6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
Definition 2. [3] Let U={x1,x2,⋯,xn} be an initial universe set, and A={e1,e2,⋯,em} be a set of parameters. ∀xi∈U and B⊆A, the neighborhood of xi in the subspace B denoted by δB(xi) is defined as:
δB(xi)={xj|xj∈U,ΔPB(xi,xj)≤δ} | (2.2) |
where δ is an arbitrary small nonnegative number and Δ is a metric function which satisfies:
i. Δ{xi,xj}≥0;
ii. Δ{xi,xj}=0, if and only if xi and xj are the same;
iii. Δ{xi,xj}=Δ{xj,xi};
iv. Δ{xi,xk}≤Δ{xi,xj}+Δ{xj,xk} and
ΔPB(xi,xj)=(∑|f(xi,ek)−f(xj,ek)|P)1/P(P=1,2,⋯,∞) | (2.3) |
where ΔPB(xi,xj) is a Minkowsky distance [19], xi,xj∈U, ek∈B⊆A, f(x,ek) is the value function of object x in the kth dimension.
From Definition 2, it is obvious that the family of neighborhood granules {δB(xi)|xi∈U} forms an elemental granule system, which gathers similar objects from the universe set, rather than partitions off it into several mutual exclusive subsets.
Based on Definition 1 and Definition 2, we can combine the concepts of soft sets and neighborhood space to get the following definition of a neighborhood soft set.
Definition 3. Let U={x1,x2,⋯,xn} be an initial universe set and A={e1,e2,⋯,em} be a set of parameters. A pair (Fδ,A) is called a neighborhood soft set over U, where Fδ is a mapping given by:
Fδ:A→Pδ(U), | (3.1) |
where Pδ(U) denotes the set of all neighborhoods of each object in U. For any xi∈U(i=1,2,⋯,n) and ek∈A(k=1,2,⋯,m), let δek(xi) denotes the neighborhood of xi on ek and
δek(xi)={xj|xj∈U,Δek(xi,xj)≤δ}, | (3.2) |
where j=1,2,⋯,n and δ is a threshold parameter which defines the range of the neighborhood δek(xi). δ can be defined on any type of data but should be small enough. We can calculate the range according to the Eq (2.3), and for the purpose of simplicity, let P=1, then
Δek(xi,xj)=|f(xi,ek)−f(xj,ek)|, | (3.3) |
where f(xi,ek) is the value function of the object xi on the parameter ek.
Obviously, a neighborhood soft set is also a special case of a soft set, because it is still a mapping from parameters to the universe. For e∈A, Fδ(e) can be considered as the set of e-approximate elements of the neighborhood soft set (Fδ,A). Unlike the other subtypes of soft sets, such as fuzzy soft sets, interval-valued fuzzy soft sets and so on, which express information by a uniform type of data (the discrete data 0 or 1, or the interval number between 0 and 1), neighborhood soft sets store information by neighborhood granules, which are determined by the threshold parameter δ and are the sets of approximate objects of xi on parameter ek.
According to the Definition 3, there is no restriction on the data types of the threshold parameter δ. It can be any form if it can weigh the distance between two objects. We can define it according to the actual situation. For example, for numerical data, δ can be an arbitrarily small nonnegative number, which denotes the maximum acceptable difference between two objects; for semantic data, δ can be a word/sentence, which can identify the difference of objects precisely. Therefore, neighborhood soft sets can process the heterogeneous information in DM problems. The following example can make this easier to understand.
Example 2. Let U={x1,x2,x3,x4,x5,x6} be an initial universe set which represents a set of six houses, and A={e1,e2,e3,e4} be a parameter set which describes the status of the houses. Specifically, e1 denotes the area of house; e2 denotes the appearance of house; e3 describes the public transportation of house; and e4 represents the price of house. The data are listed in Table 2:
e1(m2) | e2 | e3(number of buses/trains) | e4(thousand yuan/m2) | |
x1 | 122 | beautiful | 4 | 13 |
x2 | 83 | ordinary | 7 | 11 |
x3 | 75 | beautiful | 8 | 12.5 |
x4 | 69 | ordinary | 3 | 9 |
x5 | 91 | beautiful | 7 | 12 |
x6 | 155 | beautiful | 0 | 15 |
From Table 2 we can see that the types of data which describe the six houses are different: e1 and e4 are continuous variables, e2 is a semantic variable, e3 is a discrete variable. For the four variables we specify the following threshold parameters δ respectively:
For e1, let δ1=10m2. According to the definition of neighborhood soft sets, it means if the difference between the area of two houses xi and xj is not bigger than 10 m2, then they can be regarded as similar area, and xj should be in the neighborhood of xi. Analogously, we can define that δ2 = "the same", δ3 = 2 bus/train routes, and δ4 = 1.5 thousand yuan/m2.
Then according to Definition 3, a neighborhood soft set (Fδ,A) can be used to describe the six houses on the shortlist, the mapping from parameters to the universe in (Fδ,A) is given as follows:
(Fδ,A)={Fδ(e1),Fδ(e2),Fδ(e3),Fδ(e4)}, |
where:
Fδ(e1)={{x1}x1,{x2,x3,x5}x2,{x2,x3,x4}x3,{x3,x4}x4,{x2,x5}x5,{x6}x6}, |
Fδ(e2)={{x1,x3,x5,x6}x1,{x2,x4}x2,{x1,x3,x5,x6}x3,{x2,x4}x4,{x1,x3,x5,x6}x5,{x1,x3,x5,x6}x6}, |
Fδ(e3)={{x1,x4}x1,{x2,x3,x5}x2,{x2,x3,x5}x3,{x1,x4}x4,{x2,x3,x5}x5,{x6}x6}, |
Fδ(e4)={{x1,x3,x5}x1,{x2,x3,x5}x2,{x1,x2,x3,x5}x3,{x4}x4,{x1,x2,x3,x5}x5,{x6}x6}. |
In Example 2, the raw data which describes the houses can be processed directly by the neighborhood soft set defined by this paper. It is obvious that through setting the value of δ carefully, the new mapping method under the framework of neighborhood soft sets is capable of processing various types of data, and there is no need to transform the different types of data into the same. Therefore, neighborhood soft sets can provide a holistic approach to process heterogeneous information directly and precisely. It can classify the universe U into several categories through finding the neighborhood of each object.
Figure 1 illustrates an example of classification based on two parameters in the neighborhood soft set (Fδ,A): e1 and e3, which is a simplified version of Example 2. Consider x3, its neighborhood on parameter e1 with δ1 can be defined by the space between parallel dashed lines R1 and R2, so x2, x4, and of course including x3 itself, are in the neighborhood of x3 based on e1. That means the houses x2, x3 and x4 in U can be treated as similar to x3 in terms of the area of house; similarly, x2, x5 and also x3 itself are in the neighborhood of x3 based on e3 with δ3. If both e1 and e3 are considered, then only x2 and x3 are in the neighborhood of x3.
Based on the definition of neighborhood soft sets, the following properties of neighborhood soft sets can be derived:
i. Reflexive: xi∈Fδ(e)xi.
Proof. Δe(xi,xi)=0≤δ, then according to Definition 3, xi∈δe(xi), i.e. xi∈Fδ(e)xi.
ii. Symmetric: xi∈Fδ(e)xj⇔xj∈Fδ(e)xi.
Proof. xi∈Fδ(e)xj, i.e. xi∈δe(xj), then Δe(xi,xj)≤δ, that is to say xj∈δe(xi). Thus, xj∈Fδ(e)xi.
iii. Nontransitive: xj∈Fδ(e)xi,xk∈Fδ(e)xi⇏xk∈Fδ(e)xj or xj∈Fδ(e)xk.
Proof. xj∈Fδ(e)xi,xk∈Fδ(e)xi, then Δe(xj,xi)≤δ and Δe(xk,xi)≤δ, which implies Δe(xk,xj)≤2δ, not Δe(xk,xj)≤δ. Therefore, the neighborhood soft set is nontransitive. A counterexample in Example 2 can be given to prove it: x2∈Fδ(e1)x3,x4∈Fδ(e1)x3, but x4∉Fδ(e1)x2.
Definition 4. Let U be an initial universe set and E be a set of parameters. Suppose that A,B⊆E, (Fδ,A), and (Gδ,B) are two neighborhood soft sets, we say that (Fδ,A) is a neighborhood soft subset of (Gδ,B), denoted by (Fδ,A)⊆δ(Gδ,B) if and only if:
i. A⊆B, and;
ii. ∀e∈A, Fδ(e)/xi⊆Gδ(e)/xi.
(Fδ,A) is a neighborhood soft super set of (Gδ,B), denoted by (Fδ,A)⊇δ(Gδ,B), if (Gδ,B) is a neighborhood soft subset of (Fδ,A).
Example 3. Given two neighborhood soft sets (Fδ,A) and (Gδ,B), U={x1,x2,x3,x4,x5,x6}. Here U is the set of houses on the list.
Let A={e1,e2}={cheap,beautiful}, B={e1,e2,e3}={cheap,beautiful,bigarea}, and
Fδ(e1)={{x1}x1,{x2,x3}x2,{x2,x3}x3,{x4}x4,{x5}x5,{x6}x6}, |
Fδ(e2)={{x1,x3,x5,x6}x1,{x2,x4}x2,{x1,x3,x5,x6}x3,{x2,x4}x4,{x1,x3,x5,x6}x5,{x1,x3,x5,x6}x6}, |
Gδ(e1)={{x1}x1,{x2,x3,x5}x2,{x2,x3,x4}x3,{x3,x4}x4,{x2,x5}x5,{x6}x6}, |
Gδ(e2)={{x1,x3,x5,x6}x1,{x2,x4}x2,{x1,x3,x5,x6}x3,{x2,x4}x4,{x1,x3,x5,x6}x5,{x1,x3,x5,x6}x6}, |
Gδ(e3)={{x1,x4}x1,{x2,x3,x5}x2,{x2,x3,x5}x3,{x1,x4}x4,{x2,x3,x5}x5,{x6}x6}. |
Therefore, we have (Fδ,A)⊆δ(Gδ,B).
Definition 5. For two neighborhood soft sets (Fδ,A) and (Gδ,B), we say (Fδ,A) and (Gδ,B) are neighborhood soft equal, denoted by (Fδ,A)=δ(Gδ,B), if and only if:
i. (Fδ,A)⊆δ(Gδ,B),
ii. (Fδ,A)⊇δ(Gδ,B).
Definition 6. Let U be an initial universe set, E be a set of parameters, and A,B⊆E. (Fδ,A) is called a null neighborhood soft set (with respect to the parameter set A), denoted by ∅Aδ, if Fδ(e)=∅ for all e∈A; (Gδ,B) is called a whole neighborhood soft set (with respect to the parameter set B), denoted by UBδ, if Gδ(ε)=U for all ε∈B.
However, because of the reflexive in neighborhood soft sets as proved above, i.e. xi∈Fδ(e)xi. So Fδ(e)≠∅, the null neighborhood soft set does not exist.
Definition 7. Let U={x1,x2,⋯,xn} be an initial universe set, (Fδ,A) be a neighborhood soft set defined on U and X be a subset of U. The operation of "(Fδ,A) restricted AND X" denoted by (Fδ,A)∧δX is given by:
(Fδ,A)∧δX=⋃e∈A{Fδ(e)∧δX}=⋃e∈A{xi|Fδ(e)xi⊆X,xi∈U}. | (3.4) |
Example 4. Reconsider Example 2. Let X={x1,x3,x5,x6} be the set of houses which are preferred by most consumers and are the bestselling houses on the market. Then
(Fδ,A)∧δX=⋃e∈A{Fδ(e)∧δX}={x1,x6}∪{x1,x3,x5,x6}∪{x6}∪{x1,x6}={x1,x3,x5,x6}. |
From the above definition, we have:
i. (Fδ,A)∧δU=U.
Proof. For ∀e∈A, and xi∈U, Fδ(e)/xi⊆U, i.e. (Fδ,A)∧δU=U.
ii. (Fδ,A)∧δ∅=∅.
Proof. For ∀e∈A, and xi∈U, according to the reflexive property: xi∈Fδ(e)/xi, Fδ(e)/xi≠∅, i.e. Fδ(e)/xi⊈∅. Therefore, (Fδ,A)∧δ∅=∅.
iii. (Fδ,A)∧δX⊆X.
Proof. For ∀e∈A, X⊆U and xi,xj∈U.
For xi∈(Fδ,A)∧δX, that means Fδ(e)/xi⊆X, according to the reflexive property: xi∈Fδ(e)/xi, then xi∈X.
For xj∈X, it is not conclusive that Fδ(e)/xj⊆X, then xj may be not in (Fδ,A)∧δX.
Therefore, (Fδ,A)∧δX⊆X.
Definition 8. Let U={x1,x2,⋯,xn} be an initial universe set, (Fδ,A) be a neighborhood soft set defined on U and X be a subset of U. The operation of "(Fδ,A) relaxed AND X" denoted by (Fδ,A)∧δX is given by:
(Fδ,A)∧δX=⋃e∈A{Fδ(e)∧δX}=⋃e∈A{xi|Fδ(e)xi∩X≠∅,xi∈U}. | (3.5) |
Example 5. Continue Example 4:
(Fδ,A)∧δX=⋃e∈A{Fδ(e)∧δX}={x1,x2,x3,x4,x5,x6}∪{x1,x3,x5,x6}∪{x1,x2,x3,x4,x5,x6}∪{x1,x2,x3,x5,x6}={x1,x2,x3,x4,x5,x6}. |
Similarly, from the above definition, we have:
i. (Fδ,A)∧δU=U;
ii. (Fδ,A)∧δ∅=∅;
iii. X⊆(Fδ,A)∧δX.
Proof. Straightforward.
To explore the ability of classification of neighborhood soft sets, we give the definition of the degree of dependency between two neighborhood soft sets.
Definition 9. Suppose that (Fδ,A) and (Gδ,B) are two neighborhood soft sets over U, where A∩B=∅. We say (Fδ,A) has a 'k degree of dependency' on (Gδ,B) denoted by k((Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)) and
k((Fδ,A),(Gδ,B))=|⋃εj∈B⋃xi∈U{(Fδ,A)∧δGδ(εj)/xi}||U|, | (3.6) |
where |∗| denotes the number of elements in a set.
Apparently, k((Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)) is the ratio of the number of elements in two sets, one is the result of (Fδ,A) restricted AND Gδ(εj)/xi, the other is U, and:
i. k(0≤k≤1), we say (Fδ,A) is partially depended on (Gδ,B), which measures the degree of approximation in classification between two neighborhood soft sets.
ii. If k=1 we say (Fδ,A) is completely depended on (Gδ,B), which means the results of classification by the two neighborhood soft sets are exactly the same.
iii. If k=0 we say (Fδ,A) is not depended on (Gδ,B), which means the results of classification by the two neighborhood soft sets are completely different.
Through the definition of the degree of dependency between two neighborhood soft sets, we can compare the similarity of classification results between two neighborhood soft sets.
Example 6. Let (Fδ,A) and (Gδ,B) be two neighborhood soft sets, and
Fδ(e1)={{x1}x1,{x2,x3,x5}x2,{x2,x3,x4}x3,{x3,x4}x4,{x2,x5}x5,{x6}x6}, |
Fδ(e2)={{x1,x3,x5,x6}x1,{x2,x4}x2,{x1,x3,x5,x6}x3,{x2,x4}x4,{x1,x3,x5,x6}x5,{x1,x3,x5,x6}x6}, |
Fδ(e3)={{x1,x4}x1,{x2,x3,x5}x2,{x2,x3,x5}x3,{x1,x4}x4,{x2,x3,x5}x5,{x6}x6}, |
Fδ(e4)={{x1,x3,x5}x1,{x2,x3,x5}x2,{x1,x2,x3,x5}x3,{x4}x4,{x1,x2,x3,x5}x5,{x6}x6}, |
Gδ(ε1)={{x1,x2,x5,x6}x1,{x1,x2}x2,{x3,x4}x3,{x3,x4}x4,{x1,x5,x6}x5,{x1,x5,x6}x6}. |
k((Fδ,A),(Gδ,B))=|⋃εj∈B⋃xi∈U{(Fδ,A)∧δ(Gδ,εj)/xi}||U|=|{x1,x4,x5,x6}||U|=46=23. |
To store the heterogeneous information in DM problems and develop a DM method under a heterogeneous information environment based on neighborhood soft sets, it is necessary to introduce neighborhood soft decision systems.
Definition 10. Suppose that (Fδ,A) and (Gδ,B) are two neighborhood soft sets over a common universe U, where A∩B=∅. Then the information system (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)) is called a neighborhood soft decision system over the common universe U, where A is a condition attributes set, B is a decision attributes set, and (Fδ,A) is a condition neighborhood soft set, (Gδ,B) is a decision neighborhood soft set.
In a neighborhood soft decision system (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)), the condition attributes set A is used for describing characteristics of each alternative object. The decision attributes set B is used for describing the rating of each alternative object.
Then, the degree of dependency of (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)) is defined as the degree of dependency between (Fδ,A) and (Gδ,B), and is denoted by k(U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B))(0≤k≤1). It provides a measure of the similarity of classification results between the condition neighborhood soft set (Fδ,A) and the decision neighborhood soft set (Gδ,B).
Example 7. Reconsider Example 2. Let A={e1,e2,e3,e4} be a condition attribute set, (Fδ,A) is the corresponding condition neighborhood soft set.
Table 3 listed the rating of sold houses.
ε1(%) | |
x1 | 90 |
x2 | 86 |
x3 | 72 |
x4 | 76 |
x5 | 91 |
x6 | 92 |
According to Definition 3, let δ=4%, which means the two houses are in the same class if their difference of rating is no more than 4%, we get another neighborhood soft set (Gδ,B), where B={ε1} is the decision attribute set. The two neighborhood soft sets (Fδ,A) and (Gδ,B) are given as follows:
Fδ(e1)={{x1}x1,{x2,x3,x5}x2,{x2,x3,x4}x3,{x3,x4}x4,{x2,x5}x5,{x6}x6}, |
Fδ(e2)={{x1,x3,x5,x6}x1,{x2,x4}x2,{x1,x3,x5,x6}x3,{x2,x4}x4,{x1,x3,x5,x6}x5,{x1,x3,x5,x6}x6}, |
Fδ(e3)={{x1,x4}x1,{x2,x3,x5}x2,{x2,x3,x5}x3,{x1,x4}x4,{x2,x3,x5}x5,{x6}x6}, |
Fδ(e4)={{x1,x3,x5}x1,{x2,x3,x5}x2,{x1,x2,x3,x5}x3,{x4}x4,{x1,x2,x3,x5}x5,{x6}x6}, |
Gδ(ε1)={{x1,x2,x5,x6}x1,{x1,x2}x2,{x3,x4}x3,{x3,x4}x4,{x1,x5,x6}x5,{x1,x5,x6}x6}. |
Apparently according to Definition 10, (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)) can be called a neighborhood soft decision system, and its degree of dependency is:
k(U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B))=|⋃ε1∈B⋃xi∈U{(Fδ,A)∧δ(Gδ,ε1)/xi}||U|=|{x1,x4,x5,x6}||U|=46=23. |
To explore which variables in the condition neighborhood soft set are decisive for DM, we give the definition of the reduction of a neighborhood soft decision system based on the degree of dependency of a neighborhood soft decision system.
Definition 11. Let (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)) be a neighborhood soft decision system, C⊆A, we say attribute subset C is a reduction of (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)) if:
i. k(U,(Fδ,C),(Gδ,B))=k(U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B));
ii. ∀e∈C, k(U,(Fδ,C),(Gδ,B))>k(U,(Fδ,(C−e)),(Gδ,B)).
Obviously, according to Definition 4, (Fδ,C) is a neighborhood soft subset of (Fδ,A) since C⊆A. Through Definition 11, we can compare the degree of dependency between each neighborhood soft subset of (Fδ,A) and (Gδ,B), and identify the subset C which not only contains the minimum number of variables (the key attributes), but also produces the same degree of dependency between (Fδ,C) and (Gδ,B) as that between (Fδ,A) and (Gδ,B).
Example 8. Consider the neighborhood soft decision system in Example 7. Our aim is to figure out which attributes in the condition attribute set A are the major factors in deciding which house is the most favorite house for Mr. X. The burden to make a good choice can be reduced by getting rid of unnecessary information or attributes. Therefore, the reduction of (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)) is indispensable.
⋃x∈U{(Fδ,e1)∧δGδ(ε1)/xi}={x1,x4,x5,x6}, |
⋃x∈U{(Fδ,e2)∧δGδ(ε1)/xi}=∅, |
⋃x∈U{(Fδ,e3)∧δGδ(ε1)/xi}={x6}, |
⋃x∈U{(Fδ,e4)∧δGδ(ε1)/xi}={x4,x6}. |
Then
k((Fδ,e1),(Gδ,B))=k((Fδ,A),(Gδ,B))=2/3. |
Moreover, subset C={e1} can not be reduced anymore, so it is a reduction of (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)). That is to say, the area of house is the major factor in determining which house is the best for Mr. X.
It should be noted that C={e1} is the sole reduction of (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)), because the k between the other minimal neighborhood soft subsets of (Fδ,A) and (Gδ,B) is not equal to k((Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)).
Based on the definition of the reduction of a neighborhood soft decision system, we can define the core attribute of a neighborhood soft decision system and the core attribute set of a neighborhood soft decision system as follows:
Definition 12. The attribute e(e∈A) is a core of a neighborhood soft decision system if it belongs to every reduction of a neighborhood soft decision system.
Definition 13. The attribute set C(C⊆A) is a core attribute set of a neighborhood soft decision system, if all of the elements in C are the core attributes.
Example 9. In Example 8, the attribute e1 belongs to the unique (every) reduction of k((Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)), so e1 is a core of it.
In addition, in the attribute set C={e1}, all of its elements (e1) is a core of k((Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)), so C is a core attribute set of it.
To make a decision based on the neighborhood soft decision system, we need to classify objects in the first place. The follows are classification rules based on the neighborhood soft decision system:
In a neighborhood soft decision system, if Fδ(e)/xi∩Fδ(e)/xj=∅, then xi and xj are in different groups, otherwise they are in the same group.
Example 10. Consider (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)) in Example 7.
For the condition attribute e1, we have:
Fδ(e1)={{x1}x1,{x2,x3,x5}x2,{x2,x3,x4}x3,{x3,x4}x4,{x2,x5}x5,{x6}x6}, |
Fδ(e1)/x1={x1}, |
Fδ(e1)/x2={x2,x3,x5}, |
Fδ(e1)/x1∩Fδ(e1)/x2=∅. |
Therefore, for the condition attribute e1, the two objects x1 and x2 are not the same. From the raw data on e1, we can regard x1 as a medium area house, and x2 as a small area house.
For the decision attribute ε1, we have:
Gδ(ε1)={{x1,x2,x5,x6}x1,{x1,x2}x2,{x3,x4}x3,{x3,x4}x4,{x1,x5,x6}x5,{x1,x5,x6}x6}, |
Gδ(ε1)/x1={x1,x2,x5,x6}, |
Gδ(ε1)/x2={x1,x2}, |
Gδ(ε1)/x1∩Gδ(ε1)/x2≠∅. |
Therefore, for the decision attribute ε1, the two objects x1 and x2 are the same. From the raw data on ε1, we can regard x1 and x2 as two good-selling houses.
Based on the above classification, we can get the decision rules of the neighborhood soft decision system. Through classification rules, the alternatives in a neighborhood soft decision system can be classified into several categories, each category can be seen as a decision rule, that means we can make a decision according to the relationship between the condition attributes and its decision attributes of each category. Therefore, a neighborhood soft decision system is a set of rules actually.
Example 11. In Example 10, there are two categories for condition attribute e1 in (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)), so we can get two decision rules:
(1) If the area of house is like x1 (medium area house), then its rating is like x1 and x2 (good-selling house);
(2) If the area of house is like x2 (small area house), then its rating is like x1 and x2 (good-selling house).
That is to say, if a house is a medium area house or a small area house, then it is a good-selling house. However, we cannot decide whether a big area house is a good-selling house or a bad-selling house based on the above decision rules, and the final decision rules may be different when all objects are considered.
This section attempts to demonstrate how to apply the newly developed neighborhood soft sets to DM problems with heterogeneous information. Based on the above definitions about the neighborhood soft set and the neighborhood soft decision system, the algorithm of DM under heterogeneous information environment is given as follows.
Figure 2 shows the flow of the new algorithm to get the classification rules and decision rules, and then get the optimal decision.
Step 1. Construct a neighborhood soft decision system (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)) using Eqs (3.1)–(3.3) and Definition 10;
Step 2. Calculate the degree of dependency of (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)) using Eq (3.5);
Step 3. Identify the reduction attributes of (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)) according to Definition 11;
Step 4. Derive the classification rules of (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B));
Step 5. Get the decision rules and the optimal decision.
Then we can complete Example 2.
In step 2, according to the Eq (3.5), the degree of dependency of (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)) is given by
k=k((Fδ,A),(Gδ,B))=|⋃ε∈B⋃x∈U(Fδ,A)∧δ(Gδ,e)/xi||U|=23. |
In step 3, the degree of dependency between the neighborhood soft subset (Fδ,ei) and (Gδ,B) in Example 7 is given by:
k1=k((Fδ,e1),(Gδ,B))=2/3, |
k2=k((Fδ,e2),(Gδ,B))=0, |
k3=k((Fδ,e3),(Gδ,B))=1/6, |
k4=k((Fδ,e4),(Gδ,B))=1/3. |
Then according to Definition 11, we can conclude that attribute e1 is the reduction of (U,(Fδ,A),(Gδ,B)), because k1=k((Fδ,e1),(Gδ,B))=k((Fδ,A),(Gδ,B))=2/3. That means the rating of sold houses is mainly determined by e1, i.e. the area of a house.
In step 4, for the reduction attribute e1:
Fδ(e1)={{x1}x1,{x2,x3,x5}x2,{x2,x3,x4}x3,{x3,x4}x4,{x2,x5}x5,{x6}x6}. |
We can classify objects according to the reduction attribute e1, as demonstrated in Table 4:
Fδ(e1)/xi∩Fδ(e1)/xj | x1 | x2 | x3 | x4 | x5 | x6 |
x1 | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | |
x2 | ∅ | {x2,x3} | {x3} | {x2,x5} | ∅ | |
x3 | ∅ | {x2,x3} | {x3,x4} | {x2} | ∅ | |
x4 | ∅ | {x3} | {x3,x4} | ∅ | ∅ | |
x5 | ∅ | {x2,x5} | {x2} | ∅ | ∅ | |
x6 | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ |
Then we get the classification result: {{x1},{x2,x3,x4,x5},{x6}}, which means the objects were categorized into three classes by condition attribute e1: medium area house x1, small area houses x2,x3,x4,x5, and large area house x6.
For the decision attribute ε1:
Gδ(ε1)={{x1,x2,x5,x6}x1,{x1,x2}x2,{x3,x4}x3,{x3,x4}x4,{x1,x5,x6}x5,{x1,x5,x6}x6}. |
We can classify objects according to the decision attribute ε1, as shown in Table 5:
Gδ(ε1)/xi∩Gδ(ε1)/xj | x1 | x2 | x3 | x4 | x5 | x6 |
x1 | {x1,x2} | ∅ | ∅ | {x1,x5,x6} | {x1,x5,x6} | |
x2 | {x1,x2} | ∅ | ∅ | {x1} | {x1} | |
x3 | ∅ | ∅ | {x3,x4} | ∅ | ∅ | |
x4 | ∅ | ∅ | {x3,x4} | ∅ | ∅ | |
x5 | {x1,x5,x6} | {x1} | ∅ | ∅ | {x1,x5,x6} | |
x6 | {x1,x5,x6} | {x1} | ∅ | ∅ | {x1,x5,x6} |
Then we get the classification result: {{x1,x2,x5,x6},{x3,x4}}, which means decision attribute ε1 classifies the objects into two groups: Good-selling houses x1,x2,x5,x6, and poor-selling houses x3,x4.
And the final decision rules can be gotten as follows:
1) If the area of a house is medium, then it is a best-selling house;
2) If the area of a house is small, then it may be a best-selling house or may not;
3) If the area of a house is large, then it is a best-selling house.
In step 5, according to the above rules, the optimal choice(s) for Mr. X is to buy a medium area house or a large area house, depends on his budgets, because both of them are good-selling houses.
DM methods based on soft sets have been analyzed by many researchers[4,5,17,36]. The common feature of these methods, when dealing with heterogeneous information, is to homogenize the variables or attributes. That means different types of data have to be transformed into the same one before applying other DM methods based on soft sets. Take the research of Maji [17] for example, one of the classical works in this field, Maji [17] presented the rough mathematics soft sets (RMSS) method of decision-making by combining soft sets with rough mathematics of Pawlak[38]. This section compares RMSS with the neighborhood soft sets (NSS) we proposed in this paper to the problem of choosing the best house in Example 2.
The first step of RMSS is to construct a soft set (F,A) according to the raw data set. However, the raw data in Example 2 contains various types of variables which can not be described by soft set theory. In order to implement RMSS, all of the variables should be transformed into binary variables with values of "0" and "1", where "1" indicates "cheap", "beautiful", "big", and "good location" respectively, and "0" indicates otherwise as in table 6. Then the soft set (F,A) is given as follows according to the mapping F from A to U, which consists of the sets of "cheap houses", "beautiful houses", "big houses", and "good location houses":
e1 | e2 | e3 | e4 | ci | |
x1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
x2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
x3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
x4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
x5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
x6 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
(F,A)={F(e1)={cheaphouses}={x1,x6},
F(e2)={beautifulhouses}={x1,x3,x5,x6},
F(e3)={bighouses}={x2,x3,x5},
F(e4)={goodlocationhouses}={x1,x3,x5,x6}}.
In (F,A), F(e1)={cheaphouses}={x1,x6}, for example, is a subset in U, in which the houses x1 and x6 are cheap in price, while the houses x2, x3, x4 and x5 are not cheap in price. F(e2), F(e3) and F(e4) are defined in the same manner.
The choice value ci of each house is given by:
ci=m∑jhij | (4.1) |
where i=1,⋯,n, j=1,⋯,m, hij is the value of the house xi on the attribute ej.
Table 6 is the tabulation of (F,A) with the choice values presented in the last column. The optimal choices are the houses with the largest choice value, i.e. x1, x3, x5 and x6.
From the results of RMSS and NSS, the differences between them can be summarized as follows: Firstly, decision-making with the NSS method is much simpler than with the RMSS method. The former has the capacity to reduce redundant parameters, so decisions can be made based on less but essential parameters and the burden of decision-making is lessened. In RMSS, however, the final decision had to be made based on all attributes. In the house buying example, four houses were determined as the best houses in both methods. With limited budgets, consumers may have to choose one from the four best alternatives. The NSS method simplified the core condition attributes to only one: The area of the houses. Therefore, the final decision can be derived relying on this core attribute and her/his budget. But in the RMSS method, consumers still need to go through all the attributes of the best alternatives to determine her/his final choice. Therefore, the difficulties of making decision with RMSS method were not fundamentally reduced. Secondly, in RMSS method, serious loss of information was obvious. For example, the houses were classified into big and non-big roughly by the area of them. However, the difference of area between houses within one class could be significant for decision-making. Therefore, the RMSS method based on the binary variables may drop a lot of valuable information during transferring. In the NSS method, heterogeneous information in decision-making problems can be integrated straightway, and information losing or distortion can be prevented. Thirdly, the RMSS method did not make full use of the decision values in the process of decision-making, and there was no connection between the conditional attributes and the decision attributes. A single decision rule was generated by ranking the objectives according to their choice values, the objectives with the maximum choice value were selected as the optimum. On the contrary, the NSS method can generate decision rules by making a connection between the conditional parameters and decision parameters, and the decision can be made based on multiple decision rules, which is more suitable for the actual decision-making environment because of its variety and convenience.
In this section, we use the newly developed method to facilitate the diagnosis of heart disease. We got a dataset of 297 patients from UCI machine learning repository, which contains 14 parameters for their heart disease diagnosis. Among all of the parameters, the classes of heart disease was regarded as the decision attribute, and the other 13 variables were regarded as the condition attributes for describing the patients. This dataset was chosen because it contains various data types, including binary variables, categorical variables, discrete variables and continuous numerical variables. So the medical diagnosis of heart disease is a practical decision-making problem under a heterogeneous information environment, which can be solved by the NSS method proposed by this paper.
We randomly selected 267 observations for training the NSS algorithm, and used the rest 30 observations for testing the predictive accuracy of the trained decision rules. We also applied the RMSS method in the testing dataset to predict the patients' type of heart disease. The prediction errors of the two methods are shown in Table 7, and it is obvious that our method outperforms RMSS. Moreover, in the process of diagnosis, even though there were more steps in our algorithm compared with Maji's, decision-making based on our algorithm relies on fewer parameters (derived from parameter reduction) and more precise decision rules (obtained from the connection between the conditional attributes and the decision attributes), which can make the decision-making simpler and more efficient. But in Maji's method, there is no parameter reduction involved, and no decision rules specifically defined. As a result, decision-making and prediction using Maji's method is not efficient and less accurate.
The prediction error (%) | |
NSS | 3.3 |
RMSS | 30.0 |
Based on the research of Molodtsov [1], this paper proposed the concepts of neighborhood soft sets and the neighborhood soft decision system. After that, a new decision-making method under heterogeneous information environment was presented. This method not only can provide adequate parameterization tools inherited from the properties of soft sets, but also can integrate heterogeneous information directly with the help of neighborhood space. More accurate decision can be derived based on the new method, because information losing or distortion caused by transformation of information can be avoided. An example of choosing the best houses was used to demonstrate the operation of the newly developed decision-making method. With the same example, we also compared our method with the decision-making method of Maji [17]. The results showed not only the advantage of our method to process heterogeneous information, but also its capacity to develop concise and effective decision rules. Moreover, the decision-making method proposed by this paper can be applied to a wide range of areas such as feature selection, evaluation and forecasting problems with heterogeneous information.
This work has been supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (grants No. 61902370), the Natural Science Foundation of Chongqing (grants No. cstc2020jcyj-msxmX0945), and the Chongqing Municipal Education Commission (grants No. KLQN202100314).
The authors declare no conflicts of interest.
[1] |
M. Ahmad, M. I. Asjad, A. Akgül, D. Baleanu, Analytical solutions for free convection flow of casson nanofluid over an infinite vertical plate, AIMS Math., 6 (2021), 2344–2358. doi: 10.3934/math.2021142. doi: 10.3934/math.2021142
![]() |
[2] |
M. N. Alam, M. A. Akbar, K. Khan, Some new exact traveling wave solutions to the (2+1)-dimensional breaking soliton equation, World Appl. Sci. J., 25 (2013), 500–523. doi: 10.5829/idosi.wasj.2013.25.03.1193. doi: 10.5829/idosi.wasj.2013.25.03.1193
![]() |
[3] |
Y. M. Chu, N. A. Shah, H. Ahmad, J. D. Chung, S. Khaled, A comparative study of semi-analytical methods for solving fractional-order cauchy-reaction diffusion equation, Fractals, 29 (2021), 2150143. doi: 10.1142/S0218348X21501437. doi: 10.1142/S0218348X21501437
![]() |
[4] |
J. E. Dunn, R. L. Fosdick, Thermodynamics, stability, and boundedness of fluids of complexity 2 and fluids of second grade, Arch. Rational Mech. Anal., 56 (1974), 191–252. doi: 10.1007/BF00280970. doi: 10.1007/BF00280970
![]() |
[5] |
M. E. Erdoǧan, C. E. İmrak, Effects of the side walls on the unsteady flow of a second-grade fluid in a duct of uniform cross-section, Int. J. Non-Linear Mech., 39 (2004), 1379–1384. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2003.12.004. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2003.12.004
![]() |
[6] |
M. Erdoǧan, C. İmrak, The effects of the side walls on the flow of a second grade fluid in ducts with suction and injection, Int. J. Non-Linear Mech., 42 (2007), 765–772. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2007.03.001. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2007.03.001
![]() |
[7] |
A. Farooq, M. Kamran, Y. Bashir, H. Ahmad, A. Shahzad, Y. M. Chu, On the flow of mhd generalized maxwell fluid via porous rectangular duct, Open Phys., 18 (2020), 989–1002. doi: 10.1515/phys-2020-0209. doi: 10.1515/phys-2020-0209
![]() |
[8] |
C. Fetecau, C. Fetecau, Starting solutions for some unsteady unidirectional flows of a second grade fluid, Int. J. Eng. Sci., 43 (2005), 781–789, doi: 10.1016/j.ijengsci.2004.12.009. doi: 10.1016/j.ijengsci.2004.12.009
![]() |
[9] |
C. Fetecau, M. Nazar, C. Fetecau, Unsteady flow of an Oldroyd-B fluid generated by a constantly accelerating plate between two side walls perpendicular to the plate, Int. J. Non-Linear Mech., 44 (2009), 1039–1047, doi: 10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2009.08.008. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2009.08.008
![]() |
[10] |
A. Ghosh, S. Pintu, On hydromagnetic channel flow of an Oldroyd-B fluid induced by tooth pulses, Magnetohydrodynamics, 44 (2008), 325–340. doi: 10.22364/mhd.44.3.11
![]() |
[11] |
A. Ghosh, P. Sana, On hydromagnetic channel flow of an Oldroyd-B fluid induced by rectified sine pulses, Comput. Appl. Math., 28 (2009), 365–395. doi: 10.1590/S1807-03022009000300006. doi: 10.1590/S1807-03022009000300006
![]() |
[12] |
M. Husain, T. Hayat, C. Fetecau, S. Asghar, On accelerated flows of an Oldroyd-B fluid in a porous medium, Nonlinear Anal.: Real World Appl., 9 (2008), 1394–1408. doi: 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2007.03.007. doi: 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2007.03.007
![]() |
[13] | A. Johri, M. Singh, Oscillating flow of a viscous liquid in a porous rectangular duct, Def. Sci. J., 38 (1998), 21–24. |
[14] |
M. Kamran, Y. Bashir, A. Farooq, A. Shahzad, A. M. Abd Allah, H. Alotaibi, H. Ahmad, Study on the helicoidal flow through cylindrical annuli with prescribed shear stresses, Results Phys., 23 (2021), 103993. doi: 10.1016/j.rinp.2021.103993. doi: 10.1016/j.rinp.2021.103993
![]() |
[15] |
M. Khan, C. Fetecau, T. Hayat, MHD transient flows in a channel of rectangular cross-section with porous medium, Phys. Lett. A, 369 (2007), 44–54. doi: 10.1016/j.physleta.2007.04.076. doi: 10.1016/j.physleta.2007.04.076
![]() |
[16] |
M. Khan, E. Naheed, C. Fetecau, T. Hayat, Exact solutions of starting flows for second grade fluid in a porous medium, Int. J. Non-Linear Mech., 43 (2008), 868–879. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2008.06.002. doi: 10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2008.06.002
![]() |
[17] |
M. Khan, A. Anjum, Some oscillating motions of a burgers fluid, Int. J. Phys. Sci., 7 (2012), 5834–5851. doi: 10.5897/IJPS12.402. doi: 10.5897/IJPS12.402
![]() |
[18] |
M. Khan, Zeeshan, MHD flow of an Oldroyd-B fluid through a porous space induced by sawtooth pulses, Chin. Phys. Lett., 28 (2011), 084701. doi: 10.1088/0256-307X/28/8/084701
![]() |
[19] |
Z. A. Khan, H. Ahmad, Qualitative properties of solutions of fractional differential and difference equations arising in physical models, Fractals, 29 (2011), 2140024. doi: 10.1142/S0218348X21400247. doi: 10.1142/S0218348X21400247
![]() |
[20] |
M. Nazar, C. Fetecau, D. Vieru, C. Fetecau, New exact solutions corresponding to the second problem of stokes for second grade fluids, Nonlinear Anal.: Real World Appl., 11 (2010), 584–591. doi: 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2008.10.055. doi: 10.1016/j.nonrwa.2008.10.055
![]() |
[21] |
M. Nazar, F. Shahid, M. S. Akram, Q. Sultan, Flow on oscillating rectangular duct for maxwell fluid, Appl. Math. Mech., 33 (2012), 717–730. doi: 10.1007/s10483-012-1582-6. doi: 10.1007/s10483-012-1582-6
![]() |
[22] |
A. Siddiqui, T. Hayat, S. Asghar, Periodic flows of a non-Newtonian fluid between two parallel plates, Int. J. Non-Linear Mech., 34 (1999), 895–899, doi: 10.1016/S0020-7462(98)00063-8. doi: 10.1016/S0020-7462(98)00063-8
![]() |
[23] |
Q. Sultan, M. Nazar, I. Ahmad, U. Ali, Flow of second grade fluid between two walls induced by rectified sine pulses shear stress, J. Mech., 31 (2015), 573–582, doi: 10.1017/jmech.2015.22. doi: 10.1017/jmech.2015.22
![]() |
[24] | Q. Sultan, M. Nazar, U. Ali, M. Imran, Unsteady flow of oldroyd-b fluid through porous rectangular duct, Int. J. Non-Linear Sci., 15 (2013), 195–211. |
1. | Elhadi E. Elamir, M. El Sayed, Ria H. Egami, Fathea M. Osman Birkea, S.A. Alblowi, M.A. El Safty, Max-min Fuzzy and soft sets approach in constructing fuzzy soft matrix for medical decision-making during epidemics, 2024, 99, 11100168, 319, 10.1016/j.aej.2024.05.006 | |
2. | José Sanabria, Marinela Álvarez, Osmin Ferrer, Aniello Minutolo, Fuzzy Set and Soft Set Theories as Tools for Vocal Risk Diagnosis, 2023, 2023, 1687-9732, 1, 10.1155/2023/5525978 |
U | 'cheap' | 'beautiful' | 'big area' | 'good location' | 'in the green surroundings' |
h1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
h2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
h3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
h4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
h5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
h6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
e1(m2) | e2 | e3(number of buses/trains) | e4(thousand yuan/m2) | |
x1 | 122 | beautiful | 4 | 13 |
x2 | 83 | ordinary | 7 | 11 |
x3 | 75 | beautiful | 8 | 12.5 |
x4 | 69 | ordinary | 3 | 9 |
x5 | 91 | beautiful | 7 | 12 |
x6 | 155 | beautiful | 0 | 15 |
ε1(%) | |
x1 | 90 |
x2 | 86 |
x3 | 72 |
x4 | 76 |
x5 | 91 |
x6 | 92 |
Fδ(e1)/xi∩Fδ(e1)/xj | x1 | x2 | x3 | x4 | x5 | x6 |
x1 | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | |
x2 | ∅ | {x2,x3} | {x3} | {x2,x5} | ∅ | |
x3 | ∅ | {x2,x3} | {x3,x4} | {x2} | ∅ | |
x4 | ∅ | {x3} | {x3,x4} | ∅ | ∅ | |
x5 | ∅ | {x2,x5} | {x2} | ∅ | ∅ | |
x6 | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ |
Gδ(ε1)/xi∩Gδ(ε1)/xj | x1 | x2 | x3 | x4 | x5 | x6 |
x1 | {x1,x2} | ∅ | ∅ | {x1,x5,x6} | {x1,x5,x6} | |
x2 | {x1,x2} | ∅ | ∅ | {x1} | {x1} | |
x3 | ∅ | ∅ | {x3,x4} | ∅ | ∅ | |
x4 | ∅ | ∅ | {x3,x4} | ∅ | ∅ | |
x5 | {x1,x5,x6} | {x1} | ∅ | ∅ | {x1,x5,x6} | |
x6 | {x1,x5,x6} | {x1} | ∅ | ∅ | {x1,x5,x6} |
e1 | e2 | e3 | e4 | ci | |
x1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
x2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
x3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
x4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
x5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
x6 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
The prediction error (%) | |
NSS | 3.3 |
RMSS | 30.0 |
U | 'cheap' | 'beautiful' | 'big area' | 'good location' | 'in the green surroundings' |
h1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 1 |
h2 | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
h3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
h4 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0 |
h5 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 0 |
h6 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
e1(m2) | e2 | e3(number of buses/trains) | e4(thousand yuan/m2) | |
x1 | 122 | beautiful | 4 | 13 |
x2 | 83 | ordinary | 7 | 11 |
x3 | 75 | beautiful | 8 | 12.5 |
x4 | 69 | ordinary | 3 | 9 |
x5 | 91 | beautiful | 7 | 12 |
x6 | 155 | beautiful | 0 | 15 |
ε1(%) | |
x1 | 90 |
x2 | 86 |
x3 | 72 |
x4 | 76 |
x5 | 91 |
x6 | 92 |
Fδ(e1)/xi∩Fδ(e1)/xj | x1 | x2 | x3 | x4 | x5 | x6 |
x1 | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | |
x2 | ∅ | {x2,x3} | {x3} | {x2,x5} | ∅ | |
x3 | ∅ | {x2,x3} | {x3,x4} | {x2} | ∅ | |
x4 | ∅ | {x3} | {x3,x4} | ∅ | ∅ | |
x5 | ∅ | {x2,x5} | {x2} | ∅ | ∅ | |
x6 | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ | ∅ |
Gδ(ε1)/xi∩Gδ(ε1)/xj | x1 | x2 | x3 | x4 | x5 | x6 |
x1 | {x1,x2} | ∅ | ∅ | {x1,x5,x6} | {x1,x5,x6} | |
x2 | {x1,x2} | ∅ | ∅ | {x1} | {x1} | |
x3 | ∅ | ∅ | {x3,x4} | ∅ | ∅ | |
x4 | ∅ | ∅ | {x3,x4} | ∅ | ∅ | |
x5 | {x1,x5,x6} | {x1} | ∅ | ∅ | {x1,x5,x6} | |
x6 | {x1,x5,x6} | {x1} | ∅ | ∅ | {x1,x5,x6} |
e1 | e2 | e3 | e4 | ci | |
x1 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
x2 | 0 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 |
x3 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
x4 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 |
x5 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 1 | 3 |
x6 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 3 |
The prediction error (%) | |
NSS | 3.3 |
RMSS | 30.0 |