
In real world uncertainty exist in almost every problem. Decision-makers are often unable to describe the situation accurately or predict the outcome of potential solutions due to uncertainty. To resolve these complicated situations, which include uncertainty, we use expert descriptive knowledge which can be expressed as fuzzy data. Pakistan, a country with a key geographic and strategic position in South Asia, relies heavily on irrigation for its economy, which involves careful consideration of the limits. A variety of factors can affect yield, including the weather and water availability. Crop productivity from reservoirs and other sources is affected by climate change. The project aims to optimize Kharif and Rabbi crop output in canal-irrigated areas. The optimization model is designed to maximize net profit and crop output during cropping seasons. Canal-connected farmed areas are variables in the crop planning model. Seasonal crop area, crop cultivated area, crop water requirement, canal capacity, reservoir evaporation, minimum and maximum storage, and overflow limits affect the two goals. The uncertainties associated with the entire production planning are incorporated by considering suitable membership functions and solved using the Multi-Objective Neutrosophic Fuzzy Linear Programming Model (MONFLP). For the validity and effectiveness of the technique, the model is tested for the wheat and rice production in Pakistan. The study puts forth the advantages of neutrosophic fuzzy algorithm which has been proposed, and the analyses derived can be stated to deal with yield uncertainty in the neutrosophic environments more effectively by considering the parameters which are prone to abrupt changes characterized by unpredictability.
Citation: Sajida Kousar, Maryam Nazir Sangi, Nasreen Kausar, Dragan Pamucar, Ebru Ozbilge, Tonguc Cagin. Multi-objective optimization model for uncertain crop production under neutrosophic fuzzy environment: A case study[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(3): 7584-7605. doi: 10.3934/math.2023380
[1] | Abdullah Ali H. Ahmadini, Firoz Ahmad . Solving intuitionistic fuzzy multiobjective linear programming problem under neutrosophic environment. AIMS Mathematics, 2021, 6(5): 4556-4580. doi: 10.3934/math.2021269 |
[2] | T. K. Buvaneshwari, D. Anuradha . Solving bi-objective bi-item solid transportation problem with fuzzy stochastic constraints involving normal distribution. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 21700-21731. doi: 10.3934/math.20231107 |
[3] | D. Jeni Seles Martina, G. Deepa . Some algebraic properties on rough neutrosophic matrix and its application to multi-criteria decision-making. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(10): 24132-24152. doi: 10.3934/math.20231230 |
[4] | Atiqe Ur Rahman, Muhammad Saeed, Mazin Abed Mohammed, Alaa S Al-Waisy, Seifedine Kadry, Jungeun Kim . An innovative fuzzy parameterized MADM approach to site selection for dam construction based on sv-complex neutrosophic hypersoft set. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(2): 4907-4929. doi: 10.3934/math.2023245 |
[5] | Muhammad Kamran, Rashad Ismail, Shahzaib Ashraf, Nadeem Salamat, Seyma Ozon Yildirim, Ismail Naci Cangul . Decision support algorithm under SV-neutrosophic hesitant fuzzy rough information with confidence level aggregation operators. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 11973-12008. doi: 10.3934/math.2023605 |
[6] | Shima Soleimani Manesh, Mansour Saraj, Mahmood Alizadeh, Maryam Momeni . On robust weakly $ \varepsilon $-efficient solutions for multi-objective fractional programming problems under data uncertainty. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 2331-2347. doi: 10.3934/math.2022132 |
[7] | Ali Hussein AL-Marshadi, Muhammad Aslam, Abdullah Alharbey . Design of double acceptance sampling plan for Weibull distribution under indeterminacy. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(6): 13294-13305. doi: 10.3934/math.2023672 |
[8] | Md. Musa Miah, Ali AlArjani, Abdur Rashid, Aminur Rahman Khan, Md. Sharif Uddin, El-Awady Attia . Multi-objective optimization to the transportation problem considering non-linear fuzzy membership functions. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 10397-10419. doi: 10.3934/math.2023527 |
[9] | Jiaxin Chen, Yuxuan Wu, Shuai Huang, Pei Wang . Multi-objective optimization for AGV energy efficient scheduling problem with customer satisfaction. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(9): 20097-20124. doi: 10.3934/math.20231024 |
[10] | Muhammad Kamran, Shahzaib Ashraf, Nadeem Salamat, Muhammad Naeem, Thongchai Botmart . Cyber security control selection based decision support algorithm under single valued neutrosophic hesitant fuzzy Einstein aggregation information. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(3): 5551-5573. doi: 10.3934/math.2023280 |
In real world uncertainty exist in almost every problem. Decision-makers are often unable to describe the situation accurately or predict the outcome of potential solutions due to uncertainty. To resolve these complicated situations, which include uncertainty, we use expert descriptive knowledge which can be expressed as fuzzy data. Pakistan, a country with a key geographic and strategic position in South Asia, relies heavily on irrigation for its economy, which involves careful consideration of the limits. A variety of factors can affect yield, including the weather and water availability. Crop productivity from reservoirs and other sources is affected by climate change. The project aims to optimize Kharif and Rabbi crop output in canal-irrigated areas. The optimization model is designed to maximize net profit and crop output during cropping seasons. Canal-connected farmed areas are variables in the crop planning model. Seasonal crop area, crop cultivated area, crop water requirement, canal capacity, reservoir evaporation, minimum and maximum storage, and overflow limits affect the two goals. The uncertainties associated with the entire production planning are incorporated by considering suitable membership functions and solved using the Multi-Objective Neutrosophic Fuzzy Linear Programming Model (MONFLP). For the validity and effectiveness of the technique, the model is tested for the wheat and rice production in Pakistan. The study puts forth the advantages of neutrosophic fuzzy algorithm which has been proposed, and the analyses derived can be stated to deal with yield uncertainty in the neutrosophic environments more effectively by considering the parameters which are prone to abrupt changes characterized by unpredictability.
Modeling of complex dynamic systems can pose some challenges given their main attributes, so there needs to be a requirement of the development of methods regarding qualitative analysis to handle the dynamics and behavior of such systems besides the constructing of efficient control algorithms toward efficient operation, classification, recognition, identification, optimization and simulation. Several types of uncertainty representation can be addressed such as interval, fuzzy, granular as well as combined uncertain sets. The concept of the fuzzy set given by Zadeh [1] to deal with ambiguity and vagueness is valid for situations where true grades of membership exist. However, all physical and logical models may not rely completely on the valuations of membership. The generalization of fuzzy sets was introduced as intuitionistic fuzzy set [2], being more effective in dealing with ambiguity. In contrast to the traditional the fuzzy set theory, it assigns membership and non-membership to generic elements. Fuzzy optimization is an improved method that handles the uncertainty and imprecision associated with any optimization problem by involving parameters, arithmetic operations and relations governed from fuzzy sets. Bellman and Zadeh [3] were the first individuals to combine the ideas of programming and fuzziness. Tanaka et al. [4] and Zimmerman [5] extended the work from single objective to several objective functions. Angelov [6] established intuitionistic optimization technique that depends on the remodeling of single objective minimizations problem in fuzzy environment. The single objective is converted into two objectives that are to maximize the membership degree and minimize the non-membership degree. Using intuitionistic fuzzy sets is one way to tackle uncertainty since it yields the guarantee of less violation of risks emerging from vagueness during decision-making processes. While assigning and designating the priorities in multi-objective situations, flexibility can be generated corresponding to each objective and evaluation [7]. Complex optimization problems pose multiple unknown parameters that occur due to uncontrollable and unavoidable factors. Climate, weather and water storage are some of these elements which are bound by such uncontrollable factors. Imprecise data that are reliant of different parameters can be well represented by fuzzy numbers and membership grades. More complexity occurs when there is uncertainty involved in that process regarding the membership degree with parameters being uncertain as well. Thus, the degrees of membership function are important in decision-making under uncertainty and vagueness [8]. The neutrosophic optimization technique involves degree of truth, falsity and indeterminacy memberships. Degrees of truth and falsity memberships are not complemented of each other. They are, in fact, independent of degree of indeterminacy.
Founded by Florentin Smarandache in 1998, the neutrosophic theory constitutes a further generalization of fuzzy sets, triangular dense fuzzy sets [9,10], picture fuzzy sets [11,12] and spherical fuzzy sets [13] among others. Accordingly, the study [14] developed robust neutrosophic programming model to deal with multi-objective intuitionistic fuzzy optimization problem where the approach is based on intuitionistic fuzzy numbers and ranking functions for these numbers. The model proposed in the study is effective in such a way that it includes neutral thoughts during decision-making. The study, with its practical implications, provides the different types of membership functions depicted for the marginal evaluation of each objective concurrently. Another relevant study [15] has the aim of showing how neutrosophic optimization technique can be employed for the solution of a nonlinear structural problem. The problem involves the requirement of investigating the consequence of non-linearity of the truth, indeterminacy and falsity membership function in view of multi-objective optimization problem under consideration. The study considers a non-linear three bar truss design problem. A further study [16] involves the development of an algorithm to evaluate the multi-level and multi-objective fractional programming problems by making use of the notion of a neutrosophic fuzzy set. The authors construct a neutrosophic fuzzy goal model to minimize the group tolerance of a satisfactory degree and attain the optimal degree for truth, falsity and indeterminacy of each kind of the prearranged membership functions goals to the most possible through minimizing their corresponding deviational variables, with the ultimate goal of obtaining the optimal solutions. The study puts forward the key benefit of the neutrosophic fuzzy goal programming algorithms proposed, which can be stated that if the attained optimal solution is refused by the relevant stakeholders repeatedly, the problem can be reevaluated by defining suitable and more appropriate membership functions until the desired result is obtained.
Uncertainty and counter intuition in geological interpretations generate an often-unquantified risk for related industries and activities. The challenge related to quantifying such interpretation for uncertainty has been addressed using various methods including the empirical quantification of uncertainties as derived from comparison of interpretations of different complex data. Pakistan, in that regard, holds a significant position in South Asia in terms of its geographic and geo-political conjuncture. Moreover, the country is highly vulnerable to the climatic changes that cause unpredictable weather patterns. Droughts and floods have frequently been observed in the last two decades resulting in a huge loss in the country's GDP. Pakistan is classified as an agricultural to semi-agricultural country, to put it differently, an agrarian country. Agriculture is the major supplier to food security and acts as a major contributor in Pakistan's economy [17]. More than 60% of the population living in rural areas of Pakistan is dependent on agriculture of the country [18,19]. Approximately 22 million hectors (Mha) of land are cultivated out of the total land and is a major user of water resources. Water used with the ratio of 17:5 Mha of a total 22 Mha is irrigated and rain is fed, respectively. Pakistan's irrigation system relies primarily on fresh surface water and it possesses the world's largest network of canals and reservoirs. With three major reservoirs, 19 barrages, 12 link canals, 46 main canals and thousands of hydraulic structures, Pakistan has the world's largest continuous irrigation system [20]. The most imported source of water for irrigation in Pakistan is the Indus basin which rises from Gilgit in Pakistan (see Figure 1). Flowing through the North in a southerly direction along the entire length of Pakistan, it falls into the Arabian Sea near Pakistan's port city of Karachi. It is also aided by the four other large rivers like Jehlum, Chenab and Sutluj as well as several some small rivers like Kabul, Swat, Haro, Kunhar and Chitral [21].
In terms of agricultural production, Kharif and Rabbi make up the two types of seasonal crops in Pakistan. The growing of Kharif starts from May and ends in October. Rice, sugar cane, cotton, maize, and millet belong to the class of Kharif crops, whereas Rabbi Season starts from November and ends in April. Wheat, gram, tobacco, rapeseed, barley and mustard belong to the category of Rabi crops [22]. The season of these crops is influenced by different climatic variables such as temperature and rainfall. Excess of any climatic variables has unfavorable impacts on the agricultural crops [23]. Climate change severely impacts water and land, which can cause a change in output as much as 60%. It can also stimulate the timing of agricultural seasons, water stress, the magnitude and duration of heat [24]. Several uncertainties must be considered when analyzing the effects of climate change. Most impact assessments rely on general circulation models (GCM) forecasts [25]. In an unpredictable situation, exact reservoir capacity and reservoir operation policies are among the climate change adaptation solutions. Hence, uncertainty analysis is regarded as an essential component of reservoir yield analysis [26]. The multi-objective optimization problem (MOP) is widely used in water management, agriculture, industry, engineering, economics, mining and many other fields where it is necessary to optimize several conflicting objectives at the same time. Multi-objective optimization models are extensively used in agriculture under the influence of climate change [27,28,29,30,31,32,33].
A two-stage stochastic fuzzy-interval credibility constraint programming method (ISFICP) has been developed that can be applied to the allocation of water resources under uncertain and complex situations. There may be trade-offs between system benefits and risk of violation in this strategy and the many complications of water resource management. To address the problem of farmland and ecological water allocation in irrigation regions under uncertainty, Pan et al. [34] proposed an interval multi-objective fuzzy-interval credibility-constrained nonlinear prograg (IMFICNP) model. The water demand of ecological vegetation is upgraded from a site-specific sample to a spatial decision-making unit (DMU), which offers a full range of spatial data for constraint inputs and the water requirement of ecological vegetation is divided into three categories using remote sensing (RS) and geoinformation system (GIS) tools, including forest land, grassland and shrubland. Jin et al. [35] developed an improved teaching-learning-based optimization algorithm for the purpose of capturing more robust scheduling schemes. The authors aimed to obtain promising solutions with score values of the uncertain completion times on each machine having been compared and optimized. The definition of distinct levels of fluctuations or uncertainties on processing times was performed in testing Kim's benchmark instances and the performance of computational results was analyzed in the related study. Moreover, Ren et al. [36] proposed an improved interval multi-objective programming system for dealing with numerous objectives and uncertainties in irrigation water resource allocation. The model was tested in a case study in China's Shaanxi Province's Jinghuiqu basin. Maximizing economic benefit and lowering energy use are two of the planning goals. Various planting structure optimization strategies were found in multiple typical hydrological years. They found that a lack of water resources negatively influenced the development of irrigation systems in that study. The Fuhe River basin was used to test a multi-objective water resource allocation (GWAS) model, which considered the goals of socioeconomic water consumption, power generation and river biological flow. Yue et al. [37,38] designed the models to cope with the water shortage caused by diverse natural conditions and ineffective irrigation water management Type-2 fuzzy mixed-integer bi-level and full fuzzy-interval credibility-constrained nonlinear programming approach. Sahoo et al. [39] discussed the Genetic algorithm and particle swarm optimization in combined form to solve mixed integer nonlinear reliability optimization issues in series, series-parallel, and bridge systems.
Indeterminacy allows flexibility in the decision-making process since the function and decision variable obtain optimum indeterminate outcomes. Improved and advanced methods are required as fuzzy framework has shown an ever-growing expansion. Fuzziness, ambiguity, uncertainty and vagueness connected with real-life data and the desire to get the optimal solution under these factors are what determine the formulation of fuzzy optimization. Neutrosophic set and logic appear to be a comparatively new idea introduced by Smarandache [40] and further flourished by Wang et al. [41]. Since indeterminacy always appears in our routine activities, the Neutrosophic theory and its generalization can analyze various situations smoothly [42,43]. The goal functions are transformed into neutrosophic constraints when using the neutrosophic technique for optimization. Neutrosophic is also used in many fields related to real-life problems such as transportation, tourism management, supply-demand chain, production planning, health sector, and matrix game solving, in a stock portfolio, among others [44,45,46,47,48,49,50,51,52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59,60].
The complexity of environmental and socio-economic factors has increased agricultural production uncertainty, especially under present climate change, highlighting the need for robust multi-objective optimization models. Crop production is subject to a variety of uncertainties, including crop yield, crop quality, input parameters, and output objectives. Multi-objective optimization models based on unified frameworks must be devised to address these uncertainties. A multi-objective optimization model for uncertain crop production in a neutrosophic fuzzy environment is proposed to integrate various uncertainty handling strategies to address the various crop production uncertainties. The proposed model will use neutrosophic fuzzy logic to account for uncertainty in input parameters, fuzzy logic to account for uncertainty in output objectives, and optimization techniques to optimize the multi-objective problem. The proposed model will provide an effective method for optimizing the multi-objective problem in the presence of several sources of uncertainty like climate change and active reservoirs, thereby addressing the issue of uncertain crop production. Furthermore, the proposed model can be used to assess the effectiveness of various crop management practices in a variety of situations.
There are many challenges involved in linear programming, including maximizing or minimizing an objective function with constraints. The constraints are linear equality/inequality. It consists of the following parts:
Decision variables set X;
Objective Function: a linear function f(x) to be maximized (minimized);
Both the objective function and constraints can be different in multi-objective linear programming [5]. Multi-objective linear programming can be shown in mathematics as:
Minimize /maximize fs(x)=as1.x1+as2.x2+...+asn.xn for all s.
Such that
at1.x1+at1.x1+...+at1.x1>=<bt. |
In general, there will not exist a single point (x)=(x1,x2,...,xn) which optimizes each objective function individually. Multi-objective linear programming problems (MOLP) can be used to mimic a variety of real-world issues. A multiple objective linear programme is a linear programme with numerous objective functions.
Fuzzy linear programming [5] represented as:
Max˜Z.x, |
subject to ∑nj=1˜Xij.xj≥˜Yi,i=1,2,...m
xj≥0,j=1,2,...n. |
Where Xij are decision variables in the constraints and xj are non-negative fuzzy number. Mathematical modelling, manufacturing, environmental management, supply chain management, and transportation management are all applications of fuzzy linear programming. Fuzziness is considered in fuzzy linear programming's objective function and constraint equations.
Neutrosophic set [8] is a generalized concept in which each component x∈X to a set ˜AN has a membership degree T˜AN(x), non membership degree F˜AN(x) as well as a degree of indeterminacy I˜AN(x), where T˜AN(x),I˜AN(x) and F˜AN(x) are real standard or nonstandard subsets of ]0−,1+[.
The two related functions are constructed in this section of the study. Water shortage, being the main issue for crop production and availability of water during a specific period in Pakistan, determines the productivity of the sectors in the country concerned with agriculture. Within this framework, modern agriculture is characterized by several parameters including conflicting optimization criteria (total cost, net benefit, production, and so forth).
The set of parameters used in this study are presented in Table 1.
Symbol | Parameter |
sc | Seeds cost (PKR/ha) |
ca | Cultivated area (Hector) |
cst | Cost of chemical for seeds treatment (PKR/ha) |
drp | Dry ploughing cost (PKR/ha) |
wp | Wet ploughing cost (PKR/ha) |
dep | Deep ploughing (PKR/ha) |
pc | Ploughing/cultivator (PKR/ha) |
plk | Planking (PKR/ha) |
wp∗ | Wet planking (PKR/ha) |
ll | Laser leveling (PKR/ha) |
bm | Bund making (PKR/ha) |
ur | Urea (PKR/ha) |
dap | DAP (PKR/ha) |
zs | Zinc sulphate (PKR/ha) |
fta | Fertilizer transport & application (PKR/ha) |
mn | Manual (25%) (PKR/ha) |
wc | Weedicides (75%) (PKR/ha) |
pp | Plant protection (PKR/ha) |
qpr | Quintal average production per hectare |
cpq | Crop price of one quintal |
up | Uprooting transplanting & transport (PKR/ha) |
cwc | Canal water cost (PKR/ha) |
pt | Private tube well (PKR/ha) |
li | Labor for irrigation and cleaning (PKR/ha) |
lc | Labor cost (PKR/ha) |
ait | Agriculture income tax (PKR/ha) |
mngc | Management charges (PKR) |
rlc | Cost of rent land (PKR/ha) |
hc | Harvesting cost (PKR/ha) |
thc | Threshing cost (PKR/ha) |
~Kk | Profit obtained from Kharif crops (PKR/ha) |
~Rr | Profit obtained from Rabbi crops (PKR/ha) |
Kk,c: Canal c connected cultivated area for Kharif crop k.
Rr,c: Canal c connected cultivated area Rabbi crop r.
The first objective is to maximize net profit obtained by cultivating various crops in canal-connected areas
MaximizeZ1=∑wc=1∑mk=1~KkKk,c+∑wc=1∑nr=k+1~RrRr,c. |
Where k= Kharif Crop index, r = Rabbi Crop index, Kk,c = Kharif k canal-connected cultivated area, Rr,c= Rabbi Crop r canal-connected cultivated area. Here ~Kk, ~Rr is the profit obtained from Kharif and Rabbi crops, respectively. Profit is calculated by subtracting the total cost from the gross income. Calculation of the total cost from Kharif and Rabbi Crops is performed as follows:
(1) Land Preparation Cost Kharif Crops: LPCk=drp+wp+wp∗
(2) Land Preparation Cost Rabbi Crops: LPCr=dep+pc+plk+ll
(3) Seed and Sowing Cost Kharif Crops :SOCk=sc+up,
(4) Seed and Sowing Cost Rabbi Crops :SOCr=sc+cst+pc+plk+bm+tc
(5) Weeding Cost Kharif Crops: WCk=mn+wc+pp
(6) Fertilizer Cost: FCk=FCr=ur+dap+zs+fta
(7) Protection Measure Cost: PMCk=PMCr=cp
(8) Irrigation Cost Kharif Crops: ICk=cwc+pt+li
(9) Irrigation Cost Rabbi Crops: ICk=cwc+pt
(10) Harvesting and Threshing Cost: HTCk=HTCr=hc+thc
(11) Cost of Miscellaneous Activities: MCr=MCk=rlc+ait+mngc+lc
(12) Total Cost Kharif Crops:TCk=SCk+LPCk+SOCk+WCk+FCk+PMCk+HTCk+MCk
(13) Total Cost Rabbi Crops:TCr=SCr+LPCr+SOCr+FCr+PMCr+HTCr+MCr
(14) Gross Income:GIr=GIk=qpr×cpq
(15) ~Kg=GIk−TCk and ~Rg=GIr−TCr.
Secondly, the multi-objective optimization model maximizes the yield of various crops grown in the connected regions to the dam irrigation system during the Rabi and Kharif seasons. An area is directly related to the amount of crop productivity.
MaximizeZ2=∑wc=1∑mk=1YgKk,c+∑wc=1∑kr=k+1YgRr,c. |
Where Yg denotes the average yield of crop g in tones/ha.
During each growing season, the area allocated for cultivation near the dam should be smaller than or equal to the total land area of all crops.
KharifCrop:∑kg=1Kg,c≤ZKcc=1,...,10. |
RabbiCrop:∑ng=k+1Rg,c≤ZRcc=1,...,10. |
Where ZRc and ZKc represent the maximum areas of the canals during the Rabbi and Kharif seasons, respectively.
In the dam-operating region, staple crops must be grown to satisfy social needs. Therefore, the social constraint must be used.
KharifCrop:Kk,c≥Kming,cg=1,...,k;c=1,...,w. |
RabbiCrop:Rr,c≥Rming,cg=k+1,...,n;c=1,...,w. |
Where Kming,c and Rming,c are the minimal area to be planted for crop g with canal c in both seasons.
Modified Penman method is used to estimate the amount of water required for different crops in the area connected to the canal in each season. Water loss during the entire process is also considered while estimating the total irrigation requirement. The constraints for kharif and rabbi seasons are given as follows:
KharifTime:ρξRt,c≥∑kg=1WRg,tKg,ct=1,...,4;c=1,...,w. |
RabbiTime:ρξRt,c≥∑ng=k+1WRg,tRg,ct=5,...,8;c=1,...,w. |
Where Rt,c is the water discharge from the canal, WRg,t is the water required for irrigation in the time t for the cultivation area Kg,c and Rg,c of the crop. The time regarding the Rabi and Kharif crops is considered, respectively. ρ and ξ are the application and transmission efficiencies.
Water discharged for irrigation from the dam in the time t should be less than or equal to the maximum capacity of the canal. We have:
Rt,c≤Cct=1,...,12:c=1,...,w. |
Where Cc is the maximum capacity of the canal c.
The water loss caused by evaporation (ˊEn,t) from reservoir n in the period t can be calculated by counting the final and initial storage in the given period. The reservoir evaporation constraint is presented as:
ˊEn,t=an,t×(Ɣn,t+Ɣn,t+1)2+bn,tn=1,...,5;t=1,...,12. |
Where an,t and bn,t are the regression coefficients. Ɣn,t and Ɣn,t+1 are reservoir n water levels during the time t.
Physically for the safety of any reservoir, water storage level at any time should be kept under the maximum storage capacity and to compete with the demand it should be above the minimum storage level. The storage constraint is conveyed as follows:
Ɣn,min≤Ɣn,t≤Ɣn,maxn=1,...,5;t=1,...,12 |
where Ɣn,min and Ɣn,max are precisely the extreme storage capacities of the reservoir n.
Natural phenomena like excessive rains, floods and melting of glaciers turn into heavy water inflow to the reservoirs in that case the water beyond maximum storage capacity need to release immediately. The overflow constraint is stated as follows:
On,t=Ɣn,t+1−Ɣn,maxn=1,...,5;t=1,...,12 |
On,t≥0n=1,...,5;t=1,...,12 |
where On,t is the amount of water released from the water reservoir n in time t. The crop production planning objectives are initially solved as single objective functions subjected to the given set of constraints by using the linear programming (LP) technique. The optimal values of the objective functions obtained are then used to establish Multi-Objective Neutrosophic Fuzzy Linear Programming Model (MONFLP) approach to maximize net profit and crop production in uncertain environment.
The programming model previously noted is based on the formulation of membership and non-membership function but there are several situations where these two components are not enough to incorporate all the necessary information about the problem. It is obvious that there will be some sorts on neutrality or indeterminacy within the information about the data under consideration. To deal with such scenario the intuitionistic fuzzy subset is upgraded in terms of the neutrosophic sets. As defined earlier in a neutrosophic set, each z∈X to a set ˜ASN is characterized by T˜ASN(z),I˜ASN(z),F˜ASN(z), where T˜ASN(z), I˜ASN(z), F˜ASN(z) belongs to [0,1] termed as degree of truth, indeterminacy and falsity, respectively. These components must satisfy
0≤T˜ASN(z)+I˜ASN(z)+F˜ASN(z)≤3. |
Thus, a single-valued neutrosophic set ˜ASN is expressed as
˜ASN={(x,T˜ASN(z),I˜ASN(z),F˜ASN(z)):z∈X}. |
Recall the optimization problem with the following steps:
MaximizeZ1(Kg,c,Rg,c); |
MaximizeZ2(Kg,c,Rg,c), |
which are subject to the following related constraints:
(1) Seasonal crop area constraint;
(2) Crop area constraint;
(3) Crop cultivated area constraint;
(4) Crop water requirement constraint;
(5) Canal capacity constraint;
(6) Reservoir evaporation constraint;
(7) Constraint of mass balance;
(8) Minimum and maximum storage constraint;
(9) Overflow constraint.
To conduct optimization in a neutrosophic environment, we define the decision set ˜D, of neurotrophic objectives and constraints as follows:
˜D=₫z1∩₫z29∩ℓ=1₫Cℓ, |
where ₫z1, ₫z2 and ₫Cℓ represent the decision set for objectives Z1, Z2 and the ℓth constraint set respectively. Over the decision set ˜D the truth, indeterminacy and falsity of neutrosophic set can be evaluated as
T˜D(Kg,c,Rg,c)=min{T₫z1(Kg,c,Rg,c),T₫z2(Kg,c,Rg,c),T₫C1(Kg,c,Rg,c),…,T₫C9(Kg,c,Rg,c)} |
I˜D(Kg,c,Rg,c)=min{I₫z1(Kg,c,Rg,c),I₫z2(Kg,c,Rg,c),I₫C1(Kg,c,Rg,c),…,I₫C9(Kg,c,Rg,c)} |
F˜D(Kg,c,Rg,c)=max{F₫z1(Kg,c,Rg,c),F₫z2(Kg,c,Rg,c),F₫C1(Kg,c,Rg,c),…,F₫C9(Kg,c,Rg,c)} |
At this point, we remodel the optimization problem by defining aspiration levels α,β,γ for truth, indeterminacy and falsity, respectively. The new optimization problem is narrated as:
Maximizeα,Maximizeβ,Minimizeγ, |
such that
(1) T₫z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)≥∝,T₫z2(Kg,c,Rg,c)≥∝
(2) T₫C1(Kg,c,Rg,c)≥∝,…,T₫C9(Kg,c,Rg,c)≥∝
(3) I₫z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)≥β,I₫z2(Kg,c,Rg,c)≥β
(4) I₫C1(Kg,c,Rg,c)≥β,…,I₫C9(Kg,c,Rg,c)≥β
(5) F₫z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)≥γ,F₫z2(Kg,c,Rg,c)≥γ
(6) F₫C1(Kg,c,Rg,c)≥γ,…,F₫C9(Kg,c,Rg,c)≥γ
(7) α≥βandα≥γ
(8) α+β+γ≤3
(9) α,β,γ∈[0,1]
(10) ∑wc=1∑kg=1Kg,c≤ZZK
(11) ∑wc=1∑ng=k+1Rg,c≤ZZR
(12) ∑kg=1Kg,c≤ZZKcc=1,...,10
(13) ∑ng=k+1Rg,c≤ZZRcc=1,...,10
(14) Kg,c≥Kming,cg=1,...,k;c=1,...,w
(15) Rg,c≥Rming,cg=k+1,...,n;c=1,...,w
(16) ρξRt,c≥∑kg=1WRg,tKg,ct=1,...,4;c=1,...,w
(17) ρξRt,c≥∑ng=k+1WRg,tRg,ct=5,...,8;c=1,...,w
(18) Rt,c≤Cct=1,...,12:c=1,...,w
(19) ˊEn,t=an,t×(Ɣn,t+Ɣn,t+1)2+bn,tn=1,...,5;t=1,...,12
(20) Ɣn,min≤Ɣn,t≤Ɣn,maxn=1,...,5;t=1,...,12
(21) On,t=Ɣn,t+1−Ɣn,maxn=1,...,5;t=1,...,12
(22) On,t≥0n=1,...,5;t=1,...,12.
Computational algorithm based on multi-objective neutrosophic linear programming
The computation algorithm for multi-objective neutrosophic linear programming is based on the following six steps:
Step 1: Solve the objective function Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c) as a single objective subject to the given set of constraints and decision variables.
Step 2: Using the solution computed in step 1, find value of objective function Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c).
Step 3: Solve the objective function Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c) as a single objective subject to the given set of constraints and decision variables. Use the value of decision variables and compute the value of the first objective function. Suppose (K∗1g,c,R∗1g,c) and (K∗2g,c,R∗2g,c) be values of decision variables computed by considering Z1 and Z2 as a single objective function subject to the given set of constraints, respectively. Using these values, the pay-off matrix will be
[Z∗1(K∗1g,c,R∗1g,c)Z2(K∗1g,c,R∗1g,c)Z1(K∗2g,c,R∗2g,c)Z∗2(K∗2g,c,R∗2g,c)]. |
Step 4: Compute the upper bound UT and lower bound LT for truth function of each objective function as:
UTZ1=max{Z∗1(K∗1g,c,R∗1g,c),Z1(K∗2g,c,R∗2g,c)} |
LTZ1=min{Z∗1(K∗1g,c,R∗1g,c),Z1(K∗2g,c,R∗2g,c)} |
UTZ2=max{Z∗2(K∗1g,c,R∗1g,c),Z2(K∗2g,c,R∗2g,c)} |
LTZ2=min{Z∗2(K∗1g,c,R∗1g,c),Z2(K∗2g,c,R∗2g,c)}. |
Upper UF and lower LF bounds for falsity membership of objectives are
UFZ1=UTZ1andLFZ1=LTZ1+t(UTZ1−LTZ1) |
UFZ2=UTZ2andLFZ2=LTZ2+t(UTZ2−LTZ2) |
and upper UI and lowers LI for indeterminacy membership of objectives are
UIZ1=LTZ1+s(UTZ1−LTZ1)andLIZ1=LTZ1 |
UIZ2=LTZ2+s(UTZ2−LTZ2)andLIZ2=LTZ2 |
where t,s∈(0,1).
Step 5: Define membership functions for truth, indeterminacy and falsity of each objective function
TZ1(Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c))={1Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)≤LTZ1UTZ1−Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)UTZ1−LTZ1LTZ1≤Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)≤UTZ10Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)≥UTZ1 |
FZ1(Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c))={0Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)≤LFZ1Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)−LFZ1UFZ1−LFZ1LFZ1≤Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)≤UFZ11Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)≥UFZ1 |
IZ1(Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c))={1Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)≤LIZ1UIZ1−Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)UIZ1−LIZ1LIZ1≤Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)≤UIZ10Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c))≥UIZ1 |
TZ2(Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c))={1Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c)≤LTZ2UTZ2−Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)UTZ2−LTZ2LTZ2≤Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c)≤UTZ20Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c)≥UTZ2 |
FZ2(Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c))={0Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c)≤LFZ2Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c)−LFZ2UFZ2−LFZ2LFZ2≤Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c)≤UFZ21Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c)≥UFZ2 |
IZ2(Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c))={1Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c)≤LIZ2UIZ2−Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)UIZ2−LIZ2LIZ2≤Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c)≤UIZ20Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c))≥UIZ2. |
Step 6: At this step, it is necessary to solve the following neutrosophic linear programming problem Maximize α+β−γ such that
Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)+(UTZ1−LTZ1).ζ≤UTZ1,Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)−(UFZ1−LFZ1).η≤LFZ1 |
Z1(Kg,c,Rg,c)+(UIZ1−LIZ1).ξ≤UIZ1,Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c)+(UTZ2−LTZ2).ζ≤UTZ2 |
Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c)−(UFZ2−LFZ2).η≤LFZ2,Z2(Kg,c,Rg,c)+(UIZ2−LIZ2).ξ≤UIZ2 |
α≥βandα≥γ,α+β+γ≤3,α,β,γ∈[0,1] |
∑wc=1∑kg=1Kg,c≤ZZK,∑wc=1∑ng=k+1Rg,c≤ZZR |
∑kg=1Kg,c≤ZZKc,∑ng=k+1Rg,c≤ZZRcc=1,...,10 |
Kg,c≥Kming,cg=1,...,k;c=1,...,w, |
Rg,c≥Rming,cg=k+1,...,n;c=1,...,w, |
ρξRt,c≥∑kg=1WRg,tKg,ct=1,...,4; |
ρξRt,c≥∑ng=k+1WRg,tRg,ct=5,...,8;c=1,...,w, |
Rt,c≤Cct=1,...,12:c=1,...,w, |
ˊEn,t=an,t×(Ɣn,t+Ɣn,t+1)2+bn,tn=1,...,5;t=1,...,12 |
Ɣn,min≤Ɣn,t≤Ɣn,max,On,t=Ɣn,t+1−Ɣn,max,On,t≥0n=1,...,5;t=1,...,12. |
The accuracy of multi-objective neurotrophic linear programming model is higher than the accuracy of other related models while dealing with imprecise date. These steps are presented in the Figure 2.
Pakistan has two distinguish cropping seasons and despite of modern irrigation technologies still a large fragment of agriculture is highly depending upon water flow from dams and canals. Climatic changes affect the water supply and ultimately the crop production in the adjacent areas. There is a need to construct a Multi-objective Neutrosophic Model for Rabbi and Kharif crop production using water reservoirs active storage under yield uncertainty. The primary data was taken from the agriculture marketing information services to calculate and maximize net profit from Rabbi and Kharif crops and crop production. For the validation of the constructed model, the two main crops play a significant role in the agriculture of Pakistan: wheat and rice from Rabbi and Kharif crops, respectively. The cultivation areas are in Figures 3 and 4.
First, the profit from Rabbi and Kharif crops using active storage water reservoirs is separately calculated since profit is the subtraction of gross income and the total cost used for crop production. Various factors are involved in cost production.
The first step of crop production is the land preparation involving deep ploughing, cultivator, planking, laser levelling, wet ploughing and wet planking are included. Rabbi's seed and sowing costs include seed treatment, ploughing, planking, bund making and tractor with the drill as depicted in Table 2.
Crops | Deep ploughing | Ploughing/cultivator | Planking | Laser leveling | Wet ploughing | Wet planking | Total cost/Acre |
Wheat | 235 | 1033 | 516 | 360 | -- | -- | 2144 |
Rice | -- | 2533 | -- | -- | 2041 | 510 | 5084 |
In contrast, for Kharif seeding, uprooting, transplanting and transporting, manure weedicides and seed treatment are shown in Table 3.
Costs | Wheat | Rice |
Seed | 2250 | -- |
Seed Treatment | 80 | -- |
Ploughing /cultivator | 1033 | -- |
Planking | 516 | -- |
Bund Making | 270 | -- |
Tractor with Drill | 516 | -- |
Seedling | 1200 | |
Uprooting transplanting and transporting | 3412 | |
Manure (25%) | 550 | |
Weedicide (75%) | 1100 | |
Seed Treatment | 1300 |
Fertilizer cost comprises urea, DAP, transportation, fertilizer application, zinc sulphate and plant protection as presented in Table 4.
Crops | Urea | DAP | Transportation | Fertilizer Application | Zinc Sulphate | Plant Protection (Herbicides /Weedicides) | Total cost /Acre |
Wheat | 2460 | 3350 | 100 | 265 | - | 1200 | 7375 |
Rice | 1520 | 3250 | 100 | 200 | 650 | 1200 | 6920 |
Furthermore, irrigation costs are based on canal water rate, private tube-well, labor for irrigation and cleansing, as followed by Table 5.
Crops | Canal Water Rate | Private Tube well | Labor for irrigation and cleansing | Total cost /Acre |
Wheat | 56 | 2000 | 1050 | 3106 |
Rice | 9572 | 7000 | 3150 | 5720 |
Moreover, harvesting and threshing cost is composed of harvesting and threshing cost for both. Additionally, miscellaneous costs involved land rent, agriculture income tax and management charges are presented in Table 6.
Crop | Harvesting and threshing cost | Miscellaneous cost | |||||
Harvesting | Threshing | Total cost /Acre | Land Rent | Agriculture Income Tax | Management charges | Total cost /Acre | |
Wheat | 3600 | 3600 | 7200 | 12500 | 50 | 960 | 13510 |
Rice | 5500 | 3775 | 9275 | 15000 | 50 | 900 | 15950 |
Overall, the total cost and gross income for the Rice (Kharif) and Wheat (Rabbi) is calculated as given in Table 7.
Crops | Total Cost (pkr/hect) | Gross Income (Pkr/hect) |
Rice | 64238 | 327050 |
Wheat | 45653 | 447620 |
While using linear optimization, intuitionistic optimization and neutrosophic optimization the profit for cultivation wheat and rice and average production needed for second objective function in the case of Rice (Kharif) and Wheat (Rabbi) crop is given by Table 8. In this study, the models were solved using MATLAB software version 2018a on a device with the specification Core(TM) i3-8130U CPU and 4GB RAM.
Crops | Profit (Ton/Hect) | Average cultivation (Ton/Hect) | |
Intuitionistic | Rice | 380060 | 7.04 |
Wheat | 200401 | 7.04 | |
Neutrosophic | Rice | 418060 | 8.52 |
Wheat | 285460 | 8.52 | |
Linear | Rice | 356796 | 7.01 |
Wheat | 210056 | 7.01 |
Whereas graphical representation of linear optimization, intuitionistic optimization and neutrosophic optimization the profit is given by Figure 5 and average production needed, is given by Figure 6.
Comparing the results in Table 8 and Figure 5, the profit computed by employing neutrosophic technique is higher than the profit computed by linear and intuitionistic optimization model. Thus, the proposed model is more accurate and efficient in maximizing profit and gross production.
It can be concluded that modelling of complex dynamic systems points some challenges considering their main attributes. Hence, the need of the development of methods regarding qualitative analysis to address the dynamics and behaviors of these systems along with the constructing of efficient control algorithms toward efficient operation, classification, recognition, identification, optimization and simulation becomes conspicuous. Several types of uncertainty representation can be noted such as interval, fuzzy, granular as well as combined uncertain sets. Furthermore, uncertainty is apparently prevalent as a challenge under the unpredictable and uncontrollable climatic conditions, so provision of accurate and prompt solutions are important undertakings to fulfill the required different missions. Neutrosophic optimization techniques have the objective of providing how neutrosophic optimization technique can be employed to solve a structural problem which requires the investigation of the effect of conflicting constraints. Accordingly, our study has aimed to investigate the profitability and marketing of Rabbi and Kharif crops in Pakistan. Firstly, we proposed a multi-objective model in which standard parameters values are taken from agriculture marketing information services. To ensure the applicability of research findings, a selection of rice and wheat crops was undertaken. The analysis in our study adopts a neutrosophic technique that considers the degrees of truth, falsity and indeterminacy. The maximum net profit was obtained by using water reservoirs active storage at 285460 PKR. Ton/ ha. Our study has put forth the benefits of neutrosophic fuzzy algorithm which has been proposed and the analyses derived can be stated to deal with yield uncertainty in the neutrosophic environments more effectively considering the different parameters in nonlinear and dynamic settings in which abrupt changes may occur any time. It is worth noting that decision-making problems manifests the challenge of being imprecise, vague, or ambiguous. Yield production is highly crucial considering the ever-changing dynamics of our current time which affects yield uncertainty. Since uncertainty is considered by a mathematical model, the neutrosophic environment is more appropriate and applicable since it deals with uncertainty more efficiently and effectively. While Uncertainty in crop production is difficult to capture in the model as it is based on assumptions rather than empirical data. Climate change will increase the frequency and intensity of extreme weather events, such as droughts and floods, which can lead to reduce crop yields. This will reduce the amount of food produced, making it more difficult for countries to feed their populations. Increased temperatures and more frequent extreme weather events can also lead to increased crop losses due to increased pests and diseases, and heat and drought stress. Climate change can also cause changes in the suitability of different crop varieties, as some may become better adapted to the changing climate while others may struggle. This could have a significant effect on crop production, as some crops may no longer be suitable for certain regions. Climate change can also lead to water scarcity, as increased temperatures can cause more water to evaporate and less precipitation. This can cause water stress for crops, leading to decreased yields. Climate change can also lead to soil degradation, as increased temperatures can cause soil to dry out, leading to nutrient loss and reduced soil fertility. This can make it more difficult for crops to grow.
The following suggestions as future directions can be outlined to improve Rabbi and Kharif crops' agriculture profitability and marketing using active water reservoirs' storage: first, the government should provide subsidies on pesticides, fertilizer, and other nutrients. There is also a need for appropriate crops farming guidance for farmers. Thus, it would be a viable option if the government could assign active experts and extend departments for relevant guidance to be able to conceptualize, implement, maintain and control the applicable strategies and decision-making processes in a systematic, expeditious and accurate way. In future, using the proposed methodology crop production models can be desinged for the rain fed areas to meet the food requirements of the growing population.
Thanks to American University of the Middle East for their support for this research.
The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest regarding publication of this research work.
[1] |
L. A. Zadeh, Fuzzy sets, Inform. Control, 8 (1965), 338–353. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X doi: 10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X
![]() |
[2] |
K. T. Atansassov, Intuitionistic fuzzy sets, Fuzzy Set. Syst., 20 (1986), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(86)80034-3 doi: 10.1016/S0165-0114(86)80034-3
![]() |
[3] |
R. E. Bellman, L. A. Zadeh, Decision-making in a fuzzy environment, Manag. Sci., 17 (1970), B-141. https://doi.org/10.1287/mnsc.17.4.B141 doi: 10.1287/mnsc.17.4.B141
![]() |
[4] |
H. Tanaka, T. Okuda, K. Asai, Fuzzy mathematical programming, Trans. Soc. Instrum. Control Eng., 9 (1973), 607–613. https://doi.org/10.9746/sicetr1965.9.607 doi: 10.9746/sicetr1965.9.607
![]() |
[5] |
H. J. Zimmermann, Fuzzy programming and linear programming with several objective functions, Fuzzy Set. Syst., 1 (1978), 45–55. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(78)90031-3 doi: 10.1016/0165-0114(78)90031-3
![]() |
[6] |
P. P. Angelov, Optimization in an intuitionistic fuzzy environment, Fuzzy Set. Syst., 86 (1997), 299–306. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(96)00009-7 doi: 10.1016/S0165-0114(96)00009-7
![]() |
[7] |
F. Ahmad, S. Ahmad, M. Zaindin, A. Y. Adhami, A robust neutrosophic modeling and optimization approach for integrated energy-food-water security nexus management under uncertainty, Water, 13 (2021), 121. https://doi.org/10.3390/w13020121 doi: 10.3390/w13020121
![]() |
[8] | M. Sarkar, T. K. Roy, F. Smarandache, Neutrosophic optimization and its application on structural designs, Infinite Study, Brussels: Pons, 2018. |
[9] |
S. K. De, I. Beg, Triangular dense fuzzy sets and new defuzzification methods, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst., 31 (2016), 469–477. https://doi.org/10.3233/IFS-162160 doi: 10.3233/IFS-162160
![]() |
[10] | S. K. De, I. Beg, Triangular dense fuzzy neutrosophic sets, Neutrosophic Sets Sy., 13 (2016), 24–37. |
[11] |
R. Sahu, S. R. Dash, S. Das, Career selection of students using hybridized distance measure based on picture fuzzy set and rough set theory, Decis. Making: Appl. Manag. Eng., 4 (2021), 104–126. https://doi.org/10.31181/dmame2104104s doi: 10.31181/dmame2104104s
![]() |
[12] |
A. Ashraf, K. Ullah, A. Hussain, M. Bari, Interval valued picture fuzzy Maclaurin symmetric mean operator with application in multiple attribute decision-making, Rep. Mech. Eng., 3 (2022), 210–226. https://doi.org/10.31181/rme20020042022a doi: 10.31181/rme20020042022a
![]() |
[13] |
S. Kousar, U. Shafqat, N. Kausar, D. Pamucar, Y. U. Gaba, Energy source allocation decision-making in textile industry: a novel symmetric and asymmetric spherical fuzzy linear optimization approach, Math. Probl. Eng., 2022. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/2659826 doi: 10.1155/2022/2659826
![]() |
[14] |
F. Ahmad, Robust neutrosophic programming approach for solving intuitionistic fuzzy multiobjective optimization problems, Complex Intell. Syst., 7 (2021), 1935–1954. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-021-00299-9 doi: 10.1007/s40747-021-00299-9
![]() |
[15] | M. Sarkar, S. Dey, T. K. Roy, Multi-objective Neutrosophic optimization technique and its application to structural design, Infinite Study, Brussels: Pons, 2016. https://doi.org/10.5120/ijca2016911325 |
[16] |
F. Ahmad, S. Ahmad, A. T. Soliman, M. Abdollahian, Solving multi-level multiobjective fractional programming problem with rough interval parameter in neutrosophic environment, RAIRO-Oper. Res., 55 (2021), 2567–2581. https://doi.org/10.1051/ro/2021108 doi: 10.1051/ro/2021108
![]() |
[17] |
A. A. Chandio, J. Yuansheng, H. Magsi, Agricultural sub-sectors performance: An analysis of sector-wise share in agriculture GDP of Pakistan, Int. J. Econ. Financ., 8 (2016), 156–162. https://doi.org/10.5539/ijef.v8n2p156 doi: 10.5539/ijef.v8n2p156
![]() |
[18] | Government of Pakistan, 2014-15 Economic survey of Pakistan, Ministry of Finance Division, Economic Advisor's Wing, Islamabad, Pakistan, 2015. |
[19] | Government of Pakistan, 2020-21 Economic survey of Pakistan, Ministry of Finance Division, Economic Advisor's Wing, Islamabad, Pakistan, 2021. |
[20] |
M. Aslam, Agricultural productivity current scenario, constraints and future prospects in Pakistan, Sarhad J. Agricul., 32 (2016), 289–303. https://doi.org/10.17582/journal.sja/2016.32.4.289.303 doi: 10.17582/journal.sja/2016.32.4.289.303
![]() |
[21] | H. Khalil, Irrigation system of Pakistan, Project report, University of Agriculture Faisalabad, Pakistan, 2014. |
[22] |
N. Hassan, U. K. Amjad, B. Nadeem, Investigating the impacts of climate change on crops: A case study of Southern Punjab, Pakistan Soc. Sci. Rev., 5 (2021), 1125–1136. https://doi.org/10.35484/pssr.2021(5-Ⅱ)86 doi: 10.35484/pssr.2021(5-Ⅱ)86
![]() |
[23] |
M. Lemma, A. Alemie, S. Habtu, C. Lemma, Analyzing the impacts of on set, length of growing period and dry spell length on chickpea production in Adaa District (East Showa Zone) of Ethiopia, J. Earth Sci. Climatic Change, 7 (2016), 349. https://doi.org/10.4172/2157-7617.1000349 doi: 10.4172/2157-7617.1000349
![]() |
[24] |
A. A. Chandio, Y. Jiang, W. Akram, S. Adeel, M. Irfan, I. Jan, Addressing the effect of climate change in the framework of financial and technological development on cereal production in Pakistan, J. Clean. Prod., 288 (2021), 125637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125637 doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2020.125637
![]() |
[25] |
C. P. Tung, N. M. Hong, M. H. Li, Interval number fuzzy linear programming for climate change impact assessments of reservoir active storage, Paddy Water Environ., 7 (2009), 349–356. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10333-009-0185-7 doi: 10.1007/s10333-009-0185-7
![]() |
[26] | S. Paseka, D. Marton, Optimal assessment of reservoir active storage capacity under uncertainty, In 19th SGEM International Multidisciplinary Scientific GeoConference EXPO Proceedings, SGEM, 19 (2019), 427–434. https://doi.org/10.5593/sgem2019/3.1/S12.055 |
[27] |
G. M. W. Ullah, M. Nehring, A multi-objective mathematical model of a water management problem with environmental impacts: An application in an irrigation project, PLoS One, 16 (2021), e0255441. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0255441 doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0255441
![]() |
[28] |
A. Jamshidpey, M. Shourian, Crop pattern planning and irrigation water allocation compatible with climate change using a coupled network flow programming-heuristic optimization model, Hydrolog. Sci. J., 66 (2021), 90–103. https://doi.org/10.1080/02626667.2020.1844889 doi: 10.1080/02626667.2020.1844889
![]() |
[29] |
C. Li, Y. Cai, Q. Tan, X. Wang, C. Li, Q. Liu, et al., An integrated simulation-optimization modeling system for water resources management under coupled impacts of climate and land use variabilities with priority in ecological protection, Adv. Water Resour., 154 (2021), 103986. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.advwatres.2021.103986 doi: 10.1016/j.advwatres.2021.103986
![]() |
[30] |
Z. Gao, Q. H. Zhang, Y. D. Xie, Q. Wang, M. Dzakpasu, J. Q. Xiong, et al., A novel multi-objective optimization framework for urban green-gray infrastructure implementation under impacts of climate change, Sci. Total Environ., 825 (2022), 153954. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153954 doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153954
![]() |
[31] |
S. Guo, F. Zhang, B. A. Engel, Y. Wang, P. Guo, Y. N. Li, A distributed robust optimization model based on water-food-energy nexus for irrigated agricultural sustainable development, J. Hydrol., 606 (2022), 127394. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.127394 doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.127394
![]() |
[32] |
W. Yue, Z. Liu, M. Su, M. Xu, Q. Rong, C. Xu, et al., Inclusion of ecological water requirements in optimization of water resource allocation under changing climatic conditions, Water Resour. Manag., 36 (2022), 551–570. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11269-021-03039-3 doi: 10.1007/s11269-021-03039-3
![]() |
[33] |
N. Hao, P. Sun, L. Yang, Y. Qiu, Y. Chen, W. Zhao, Optimal allocation of water resources and eco‐compensation mechanism model based on the interval‐fuzzy two‐stage stochastic programming method for Tingjiang river, Int. J. Environ. Res. Public Health, 19 (2022), 149. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19010149 doi: 10.3390/ijerph19010149
![]() |
[34] |
Q. Pan, C. Zhang, S. Guo, H. Sun, J. Du, P. Guo, An interval multi-objective fuzzy-interval credibility-constrained nonlinear programming model for balancing agricultural and ecological water management, J. Contam. Hydrol., 245 (2022), 103958. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103958 doi: 10.1016/j.jconhyd.2022.103958
![]() |
[35] |
L. Jin, C. Zhang, X. Wen, C. Sun, X. Fei, A neutrosophic set-based TLBO algorithm for the flexible job-shop scheduling problem with routing flexibility and uncertain processing times, Complex Intell. Syst., 7 (2021), 2833–2853. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-021-00461-3 doi: 10.1007/s40747-021-00461-3
![]() |
[36] |
C. Ren, Z. Xie, Y. Zhang, X. Wei, Y. Wang, D. Sun, An improved interval multi-objective programming model for irrigation water allocation by considering energy consumption under multiple uncertainties, J. Hydrol., 602 (2021), 126699. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126699 doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2021.126699
![]() |
[37] |
Q. Yue, Y. Wang, L. Liu, J. Niu, P. Guo, P. Li, Type-2 fuzzy mixed-integer bi-level programming approach for multi-source multi-user water allocation under future climate change, J. Hydrol., 591 (2020), 125332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125332 doi: 10.1016/j.jhydrol.2020.125332
![]() |
[38] |
Q. Yue, F. Zhang, C. Zhang, H. Zhu, Y. Tang, P. Guo, A full fuzzy-interval credibility-constrained nonlinear programming approach for irrigation water allocation under uncertainty, Ag. Water Manage., 230 (2020), 105961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.agwat.2019.105961 doi: 10.1016/j.agwat.2019.105961
![]() |
[39] |
L. Sahoo, A. Banerjee, A. K. Bhunia, S. Chattopadhyay, An efficient GA-PSO approach for solving mixed-integer nonlinear programming problem in reliability optimization, Swarm and Evol. Comput., 19 (2014), 43–51. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.swevo.2014.07.002 doi: 10.1016/j.swevo.2014.07.002
![]() |
[40] | F. Smarandache, Neutrosophic seta generalization of the intuitionistic fuzzy set, J. Def. Resour. Manag., 1 (2010), 107–116. |
[41] | H. Wang, F. Smarandache, Y. Q. Zhang, R. Sunderraman, Interval neutrosophic sets and logic: Theory and applications in computing, 2005. |
[42] |
Q. Wang, Y. Huang, K. Shiming, M. Xinqiang, L. Youyuan, S. K. Das, et al., A novel method for solving multiobjective linear programming problems with triangular neutrosophic numbers, J. Math., 2021 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6631762 doi: 10.1155/2021/6631762
![]() |
[43] |
S. A. Edalatpanah, A direct model for triangular neutrosophic linear programming, Int. J. Neutrosophic Sci., 1 (2020), 19–28. https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.010104 doi: 10.54216/IJNS.010104
![]() |
[44] |
I. M. Hezam, S. A. H. Taher, A. Foul, A. F. Alrasheedi, Healthcare's sustainable resource planning using neutrosophic goal programming, J. Healthc. Eng., 2022 (2022), 3602792. https://doi.org/10.1155/2022/3602792 doi: 10.1155/2022/3602792
![]() |
[45] | M. R. Seikh, S. Dutta, A nonlinear programming model to solve matrix games with pay-offs of single-valued neutrosophic numbers, Neutrosophic Sets Sy., 47 (2021), 366–383. |
[46] |
H. A. E. W. Khalifa, P. Kumar, Solving fully neutrosophic linear programming problem with application to stock portfolio selection, Croat. Oper. Res. Rev., 11 (2020), 165–176. https://doi.org/10.17535/crorr.2020.0014 doi: 10.17535/crorr.2020.0014
![]() |
[47] |
K. Khatter, Neutrosophic linear programming using possibilistic mean, Soft Comput., 24 (2020), 16847–16867. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-020-04980-y doi: 10.1007/s00500-020-04980-y
![]() |
[48] |
T. Bera, N. K. Mahapatra, Neutrosophic linear programming problem and its application to real life, Afr. Mat., 31 (2020), 709–726. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13370-019-00754-4 doi: 10.1007/s13370-019-00754-4
![]() |
[49] |
M. F. Khan, A. Haq, A. Ahmed, I. Ali, Multiobjective multi-product production planning problem using intuitionistic and neutrosophic fuzzy programming, IEEE Access, 9 (2021), 37466–37486. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3063725 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2021.3063725
![]() |
[50] |
S. Broumi, D. Ajay, P. Chellamani, L. Malayalan, M. Talea, A. Bakali, et al., Interval valued pentapartitioned neutrosophic graphs with an application to MCDM, Oper. Res. Eng. Sci., 5 (2022), 68–91. https://doi.org/10.31181/oresta031022031b doi: 10.31181/oresta031022031b
![]() |
[51] | A. Haq, S. Gupta, A. Ahmed, A multi-criteria fuzzy neutrosophic decision-making model for solving the supply chain network problem, Neutrosophic Sets Sy., 46 (2021), 50–66. |
[52] |
A. Haq, U. M. Modibbo, A. Ahmed, I. Ali, Mathematical modeling of sustainable development goals of India agenda 2030: A neutrosophic programming approach, Environ. Dev. Sustain., 24 (2021), 11991–12018. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10668-021-01928-6 doi: 10.1007/s10668-021-01928-6
![]() |
[53] |
S. Islam, K. Das, Multi-objective inventory model with deterioration under space constraint: Neutrosophic hesitant fuzzy programming approach, Neutrosophic Sets Sy., 47 (2021), 124–146. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-57197-9_11 doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-57197-9_11
![]() |
[54] |
F. Ahmad, Interactive neutrosophic optimization technique for multiobjective programming problems: An application to pharmaceutical supply chain management, Ann. Oper. Res., 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10479-021-03997-2 doi: 10.1007/s10479-021-03997-2
![]() |
[55] | S. K. Das, Application of transportation problem under pentagonal neutrosophic environment, Infinite Study, 1 (2020), 27–40. |
[56] |
C. Veeramani, S. A. Edalatpanah, S. Sharanya, Solving the multiobjective fractional transportation problem through the neutrosophic goal programming approach, Discrete Dyn. Nat. Soc., 2021 (2021), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/7308042 doi: 10.1155/2021/7308042
![]() |
[57] |
A. Bhaumik, S. K. Roy, G. W. Weber, Multi-objective linguistic-neutrosophic matrix game and its applications to tourism management, J. Dyn. Games, 8 (2021), 101–118. https://doi.org/10.3934/jdg.2020031 doi: 10.3934/jdg.2020031
![]() |
[58] |
S. Luo, W. Pedrycz, L. Xing, Interactive multilevel programming approaches in neutrosophic environments, J. Amb. Intel. Hum. Comp., 2021. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12652-021-02975-7 doi: 10.1007/s12652-021-02975-7
![]() |
[59] |
M. Touqeer, R. Umer, A. Ahmadian, S. Salahshour, M. Ferrara, An optimal solution of energy scheduling problem based on chance-constraint programming model using Interval-valued neutrosophic constraints, Optimiz. Eng., 22 (2021), 2233–2261. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11081-021-09622-2 doi: 10.1007/s11081-021-09622-2
![]() |
[60] |
T. S. Haque, A. Chakraborty, S. P. Mondal, S. Alam, A novel logarithmic operational law and aggregation operators for trapezoidal neutrosophic number with MCGDM skill to determine most harmful virus, Appl. Intell., 52 (2022), 4398–4417. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10489-021-02583-0 doi: 10.1007/s10489-021-02583-0
![]() |
1. | Şule BAYAZİT BEDİRHANDOĞLU, Mahmut ATLAS, Nötrosofik Bulanık Çok Amaçlı Optimizasyon Tekniği ve Tekstil Üretim Planında Uygulaması, 2023, 23, 2667-8683, 1363, 10.18037/ausbd.1253168 | |
2. | Jian Zhu, Zhiyuan Zhao, Xiaoqiang Yao, Huan Wang, Canzhang Chen, Jun Zhou, Operation of Energy and Regulation Reserve Markets in the presence of Virtual Power Plant Including Storage System and Distributed Generation based on Unit Commitment Model, 2024, 19, 1975-0102, 2159, 10.1007/s42835-023-01732-4 | |
3. | Xiao-Wei Zhang, Afshin Pirouzi, Flexible energy management of storage-based renewable energy hubs in the electricity and heating networks according to point estimate method, 2024, 11, 23524847, 1627, 10.1016/j.egyr.2024.01.016 | |
4. | Angammal S, Hannah Grace G, A new bi-level TOPSIS based neutrosophic programming technique for land allocation to medium farm holders, 2024, 10, 24058440, e36166, 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e36166 | |
5. | Mehrdad Heidari, Alireza Soleimani, Maciej Dzikuć, Mehran Heidari, Sayed Hamid Hosseini Dolatabadi, Piotr Kuryło, Baseem Khan, Exploring synergistic ecological and economic energy solutions for low-urbanized areas through simulation-based analysis, 2024, 12, 2333-8334, 119, 10.3934/energy.2024006 | |
6. | Kalaivani Kaspar, Palanivel Kaliyaperumal, A Novel Approach to Sustainable Grain Transportation: A Neutrosophic Bi-Objective Model for Cost and Time Optimization, 2024, 12, 2169-3536, 68497, 10.1109/ACCESS.2024.3399881 | |
7. | Mohsen Khosravi, Hossein Azarinfar, Kiomars Sabzevari, Design of infinite horizon LQR controller for discrete delay systems in satellite orbit control: A predictive controller and reduction method approach, 2024, 10, 24058440, e24265, 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e24265 | |
8. | S. Angammal, G. Hannah Grace, Neutrosophic goal programming technique with bio inspired algorithms for crop land allocation problem, 2024, 14, 2045-2322, 10.1038/s41598-024-69487-0 | |
9. | Marcus Randall, Karin Schiller, Andrew Lewis, James Montgomery, Muhammad Shahinur Alam, A Systematic Review of Crop Planning Optimisation Under Climate Change, 2024, 38, 0920-4741, 1867, 10.1007/s11269-024-03758-3 | |
10. | John Frederick D. Tapia, Optimal multi-period source-sink matching in carbon capture, utilization, and storage (CCUS) systems under neutrosophic environment, 2024, 467, 09596526, 142967, 10.1016/j.jclepro.2024.142967 | |
11. | Shuirong Liao, Robust $${H}_{\infty }$$ filtering and time-varying delay compensation for car suspension systems: a comprehensive approach to reduced disturbance and enhanced estimation, 2024, 7, 2520-8160, 2343, 10.1007/s41939-023-00329-8 | |
12. | Hejun Liang, Sasan Pirouzi, Energy management system based on economic Flexi-reliable operation for the smart distribution network including integrated energy system of hydrogen storage and renewable sources, 2024, 293, 03605442, 130745, 10.1016/j.energy.2024.130745 | |
13. | Alireza Azarhooshang, Alireza Rezazadeh, Energy management of distribution network with inverter‐based renewable virtual power plant considering voltage security index, 2024, 18, 1752-1416, 126, 10.1049/rpg2.12902 | |
14. | Abbas Safari, Hesam Rahbarimagham, Flexible-reliable linear AC security constrained unit commitment considering uncertainties and renewable energy sources, 2023, 10, 23524847, 3814, 10.1016/j.egyr.2023.10.050 | |
15. | Gholam Abbas Ranjbar, Mohsen Simab, Mehdi Nafar, Mohsen Zare, Day-ahead energy market model for the smart distribution network in the presence of multi-microgrids based on two-layer flexible power management, 2024, 155, 01420615, 109663, 10.1016/j.ijepes.2023.109663 | |
16. | Ibrahim M. Hezam, A bi-level humanitarian response plan design model considering equity and efficiency—the example of Yemen, 2023, 8, 2473-6988, 19172, 10.3934/math.2023979 | |
17. | Sasan Pirouzi, Network‐constrained unit commitment‐based virtual power plant model in the day‐ahead market according to energy management strategy, 2023, 17, 1751-8687, 4958, 10.1049/gtd2.13008 | |
18. | Tong Weiwei, Wang Shaohui, Kiomars Sabzevari, What are the key stability challenges in high-bandwidth, non-minimum phase systems with time-varying, and non-smooth delays?, 2024, 10, 24058440, e26949, 10.1016/j.heliyon.2024.e26949 | |
19. | Seyyed Ebrahim Rezai, Ahmad Sharafati, Seyyed Ahmad Edalatpanah, Saeed Jamali, Optimizing the operation of series and parallel reservoirs using the neutrosophic environment: A case study of the Karun watershed, 2024, 2709-8028, 10.2166/aqua.2024.359 | |
20. | Yi Niu, Ming Meng, Xinxin Li, Tingting Pang, Operational decisions of wind–photovoltaic–storage hybrid power systems using improved dung beetle optimizer, 2025, 117, 2352152X, 116225, 10.1016/j.est.2025.116225 | |
21. | Rakesh Kumar, Wattana Viriyasitavat, Assadaporn Sapsomboon, Gaurav Dhiman, Reem Alshahrani, Suhare Solaiman, Rashmi Choudhary, Protyay Dey, R. Sivaranjani, A Symmetric and Comparative Study of Decision Making in Intuitionistic Multi-objective Optimization Environment: Past, Present and Future, 2025, 1134-3060, 10.1007/s11831-025-10243-6 | |
22. | Faiza Gul, Imran Mir, Aseel Smerat, Manzar Abbas, Population‐Based Optimization With Decentralized Method, 2025, 0143-2087, 10.1002/oca.3317 |
Symbol | Parameter |
sc | Seeds cost (PKR/ha) |
ca | Cultivated area (Hector) |
cst | Cost of chemical for seeds treatment (PKR/ha) |
drp | Dry ploughing cost (PKR/ha) |
wp | Wet ploughing cost (PKR/ha) |
dep | Deep ploughing (PKR/ha) |
pc | Ploughing/cultivator (PKR/ha) |
plk | Planking (PKR/ha) |
wp∗ | Wet planking (PKR/ha) |
ll | Laser leveling (PKR/ha) |
bm | Bund making (PKR/ha) |
ur | Urea (PKR/ha) |
dap | DAP (PKR/ha) |
zs | Zinc sulphate (PKR/ha) |
fta | Fertilizer transport & application (PKR/ha) |
mn | Manual (25%) (PKR/ha) |
wc | Weedicides (75%) (PKR/ha) |
pp | Plant protection (PKR/ha) |
qpr | Quintal average production per hectare |
cpq | Crop price of one quintal |
up | Uprooting transplanting & transport (PKR/ha) |
cwc | Canal water cost (PKR/ha) |
pt | Private tube well (PKR/ha) |
li | Labor for irrigation and cleaning (PKR/ha) |
lc | Labor cost (PKR/ha) |
ait | Agriculture income tax (PKR/ha) |
mngc | Management charges (PKR) |
rlc | Cost of rent land (PKR/ha) |
hc | Harvesting cost (PKR/ha) |
thc | Threshing cost (PKR/ha) |
~Kk | Profit obtained from Kharif crops (PKR/ha) |
~Rr | Profit obtained from Rabbi crops (PKR/ha) |
Crops | Deep ploughing | Ploughing/cultivator | Planking | Laser leveling | Wet ploughing | Wet planking | Total cost/Acre |
Wheat | 235 | 1033 | 516 | 360 | -- | -- | 2144 |
Rice | -- | 2533 | -- | -- | 2041 | 510 | 5084 |
Costs | Wheat | Rice |
Seed | 2250 | -- |
Seed Treatment | 80 | -- |
Ploughing /cultivator | 1033 | -- |
Planking | 516 | -- |
Bund Making | 270 | -- |
Tractor with Drill | 516 | -- |
Seedling | 1200 | |
Uprooting transplanting and transporting | 3412 | |
Manure (25%) | 550 | |
Weedicide (75%) | 1100 | |
Seed Treatment | 1300 |
Crops | Urea | DAP | Transportation | Fertilizer Application | Zinc Sulphate | Plant Protection (Herbicides /Weedicides) | Total cost /Acre |
Wheat | 2460 | 3350 | 100 | 265 | - | 1200 | 7375 |
Rice | 1520 | 3250 | 100 | 200 | 650 | 1200 | 6920 |
Crops | Canal Water Rate | Private Tube well | Labor for irrigation and cleansing | Total cost /Acre |
Wheat | 56 | 2000 | 1050 | 3106 |
Rice | 9572 | 7000 | 3150 | 5720 |
Crop | Harvesting and threshing cost | Miscellaneous cost | |||||
Harvesting | Threshing | Total cost /Acre | Land Rent | Agriculture Income Tax | Management charges | Total cost /Acre | |
Wheat | 3600 | 3600 | 7200 | 12500 | 50 | 960 | 13510 |
Rice | 5500 | 3775 | 9275 | 15000 | 50 | 900 | 15950 |
Crops | Total Cost (pkr/hect) | Gross Income (Pkr/hect) |
Rice | 64238 | 327050 |
Wheat | 45653 | 447620 |
Crops | Profit (Ton/Hect) | Average cultivation (Ton/Hect) | |
Intuitionistic | Rice | 380060 | 7.04 |
Wheat | 200401 | 7.04 | |
Neutrosophic | Rice | 418060 | 8.52 |
Wheat | 285460 | 8.52 | |
Linear | Rice | 356796 | 7.01 |
Wheat | 210056 | 7.01 |
Symbol | Parameter |
sc | Seeds cost (PKR/ha) |
ca | Cultivated area (Hector) |
cst | Cost of chemical for seeds treatment (PKR/ha) |
drp | Dry ploughing cost (PKR/ha) |
wp | Wet ploughing cost (PKR/ha) |
dep | Deep ploughing (PKR/ha) |
pc | Ploughing/cultivator (PKR/ha) |
plk | Planking (PKR/ha) |
wp∗ | Wet planking (PKR/ha) |
ll | Laser leveling (PKR/ha) |
bm | Bund making (PKR/ha) |
ur | Urea (PKR/ha) |
dap | DAP (PKR/ha) |
zs | Zinc sulphate (PKR/ha) |
fta | Fertilizer transport & application (PKR/ha) |
mn | Manual (25%) (PKR/ha) |
wc | Weedicides (75%) (PKR/ha) |
pp | Plant protection (PKR/ha) |
qpr | Quintal average production per hectare |
cpq | Crop price of one quintal |
up | Uprooting transplanting & transport (PKR/ha) |
cwc | Canal water cost (PKR/ha) |
pt | Private tube well (PKR/ha) |
li | Labor for irrigation and cleaning (PKR/ha) |
lc | Labor cost (PKR/ha) |
ait | Agriculture income tax (PKR/ha) |
mngc | Management charges (PKR) |
rlc | Cost of rent land (PKR/ha) |
hc | Harvesting cost (PKR/ha) |
thc | Threshing cost (PKR/ha) |
~Kk | Profit obtained from Kharif crops (PKR/ha) |
~Rr | Profit obtained from Rabbi crops (PKR/ha) |
Crops | Deep ploughing | Ploughing/cultivator | Planking | Laser leveling | Wet ploughing | Wet planking | Total cost/Acre |
Wheat | 235 | 1033 | 516 | 360 | -- | -- | 2144 |
Rice | -- | 2533 | -- | -- | 2041 | 510 | 5084 |
Costs | Wheat | Rice |
Seed | 2250 | -- |
Seed Treatment | 80 | -- |
Ploughing /cultivator | 1033 | -- |
Planking | 516 | -- |
Bund Making | 270 | -- |
Tractor with Drill | 516 | -- |
Seedling | 1200 | |
Uprooting transplanting and transporting | 3412 | |
Manure (25%) | 550 | |
Weedicide (75%) | 1100 | |
Seed Treatment | 1300 |
Crops | Urea | DAP | Transportation | Fertilizer Application | Zinc Sulphate | Plant Protection (Herbicides /Weedicides) | Total cost /Acre |
Wheat | 2460 | 3350 | 100 | 265 | - | 1200 | 7375 |
Rice | 1520 | 3250 | 100 | 200 | 650 | 1200 | 6920 |
Crops | Canal Water Rate | Private Tube well | Labor for irrigation and cleansing | Total cost /Acre |
Wheat | 56 | 2000 | 1050 | 3106 |
Rice | 9572 | 7000 | 3150 | 5720 |
Crop | Harvesting and threshing cost | Miscellaneous cost | |||||
Harvesting | Threshing | Total cost /Acre | Land Rent | Agriculture Income Tax | Management charges | Total cost /Acre | |
Wheat | 3600 | 3600 | 7200 | 12500 | 50 | 960 | 13510 |
Rice | 5500 | 3775 | 9275 | 15000 | 50 | 900 | 15950 |
Crops | Total Cost (pkr/hect) | Gross Income (Pkr/hect) |
Rice | 64238 | 327050 |
Wheat | 45653 | 447620 |
Crops | Profit (Ton/Hect) | Average cultivation (Ton/Hect) | |
Intuitionistic | Rice | 380060 | 7.04 |
Wheat | 200401 | 7.04 | |
Neutrosophic | Rice | 418060 | 8.52 |
Wheat | 285460 | 8.52 | |
Linear | Rice | 356796 | 7.01 |
Wheat | 210056 | 7.01 |