Research article

A cosine similarity measures between hesitancy fuzzy graphs and its application to decision making

  • Received: 28 November 2022 Revised: 11 January 2023 Accepted: 21 February 2023 Published: 17 March 2023
  • MSC : 05C72, 03E72, 94D05

  • A new cosine similarity measure between hesitancy fuzzy graphs, which have been shown to have greater discriminating capacity than certain current ones in group decision making problems by example verification. This study proposes a novel method for estimating expert-certified repute scores by determining the ambiguous information of hesitancy fuzzy preference relations as well as the regular cosine similarity grades from one separable hesitancy fuzzy preference relation to some others. The new approach considers both "objective" and "subjective" information given by experts. We construct working procedures for assessing the eligible reputational scores of the experts by applying hesitancy fuzzy preference relations. In an evaluation in which multiple conflicting factors are taken into consideration, this can be applied to increase or reduce the relevancy of specified criteria. Applying the two effective methods, the newly developed cosine similarity measure, the energy of hesitancy fuzzy graph, and we provide a solution to a decisional issue. Finally, the two working procedures and examples are given to verify the practicality and dominance of the proposed techniques.

    Citation: Rajagopal Reddy N, Sharief Basha S. A cosine similarity measures between hesitancy fuzzy graphs and its application to decision making[J]. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(5): 11799-11821. doi: 10.3934/math.2023597

    Related Papers:

    [1] Shovan Dogra, Madhumangal Pal, Qin Xin . Picture fuzzy sub-hyperspace of a hyper vector space and its application in decision making problem. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(7): 13361-13382. doi: 10.3934/math.2022738
    [2] Abdul Razaq, Ibtisam Masmali, Harish Garg, Umer Shuaib . Picture fuzzy topological spaces and associated continuous functions. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(8): 14840-14861. doi: 10.3934/math.2022814
    [3] Sumbal Ali, Asad Ali, Ahmad Bin Azim, Ahmad ALoqaily, Nabil Mlaiki . Averaging aggregation operators under the environment of q-rung orthopair picture fuzzy soft sets and their applications in MADM problems. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(4): 9027-9053. doi: 10.3934/math.2023452
    [4] M. N. Abu_Shugair, A. A. Abdallah, Malek Alzoubi, S. E. Abbas, Ismail Ibedou . Picture fuzzy multifunctions and modal topological structures. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(3): 7430-7448. doi: 10.3934/math.2025341
    [5] Noura Omair Alshehri, Rania Saeed Alghamdi, Noura Awad Al Qarni . Development of novel distance measures for picture hesitant fuzzy sets and their application in medical diagnosis. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(1): 270-288. doi: 10.3934/math.2025013
    [6] Rukchart Prasertpong . Roughness of soft sets and fuzzy sets in semigroups based on set-valued picture hesitant fuzzy relations. AIMS Mathematics, 2022, 7(2): 2891-2928. doi: 10.3934/math.2022160
    [7] Jingjie Zhao, Jiale Zhang, Yu Lei, Baolin Yi . Proportional grey picture fuzzy sets and their application in multi-criteria decision-making with high-dimensional data. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(1): 208-233. doi: 10.3934/math.2025011
    [8] Ali Ahmad, Humera Rashid, Hamdan Alshehri, Muhammad Kamran Jamil, Haitham Assiri . Randić energies in decision making for human trafficking by interval-valued T-spherical fuzzy Hamacher graphs. AIMS Mathematics, 2025, 10(4): 9697-9747. doi: 10.3934/math.2025446
    [9] Sijia Zhu, Zhe Liu . Distance measures of picture fuzzy sets and interval-valued picture fuzzy sets with their applications. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(12): 29817-29848. doi: 10.3934/math.20231525
    [10] Min Woo Jang, Jin Han Park, Mi Jung Son . Probabilistic picture hesitant fuzzy sets and their application to multi-criteria decision-making. AIMS Mathematics, 2023, 8(4): 8522-8559. doi: 10.3934/math.2023429
  • A new cosine similarity measure between hesitancy fuzzy graphs, which have been shown to have greater discriminating capacity than certain current ones in group decision making problems by example verification. This study proposes a novel method for estimating expert-certified repute scores by determining the ambiguous information of hesitancy fuzzy preference relations as well as the regular cosine similarity grades from one separable hesitancy fuzzy preference relation to some others. The new approach considers both "objective" and "subjective" information given by experts. We construct working procedures for assessing the eligible reputational scores of the experts by applying hesitancy fuzzy preference relations. In an evaluation in which multiple conflicting factors are taken into consideration, this can be applied to increase or reduce the relevancy of specified criteria. Applying the two effective methods, the newly developed cosine similarity measure, the energy of hesitancy fuzzy graph, and we provide a solution to a decisional issue. Finally, the two working procedures and examples are given to verify the practicality and dominance of the proposed techniques.



    Zadeh [32] inculcated the theory of vagueness and uncertainty into a new class of fuzzy sets. Contributions to the theory of ambiguousness play a significant part in solving many predicament problems involved with impreciseness. Applications of fuzzy sets are extended and disseminated to various fields such as information [22], control [23], robotics [14,15,16], etc.

    Chang [8] has made a promising contribution to applying fuzzy sets in topological structures. Atanassov [6,7] generalized the fuzzy set intuitionistically, and the intuitionistic fuzzy set theory emerged. Coker [9] developed the theory on intuitionistic fuzzy set. The fuzzy set theory provides the degree of membership, while the intuitionistic fuzzy set also aggregates the degree of non-membership. B. Cong and V. Kerinovich [11] defined the concept of picture fuzzy set, which was deduced from the fuzzy set and intuitionistic fuzzy set. Abdul Razaaq et al. [19] defined the rank of picture fuzzy topological space and properties related to continuous functions. Tareq M. Al-Shami et al. [1] introduced SR fuzzy set and its relationship with generalizations of fuzzy sets, weighted aggregated operators to facilitate the multiattribute decision makers. An effective approach in decision making problems using aggregation operations for (m, n) fuzzy sets are established by Tareq M. Al-Shami et al. [2]. Multi criteria decision making problems under (a, b) fuzzy soft set and (2, 1) fuzzy sets are obtained by aggregated operators defined by Tareq M. Al-Shami et al. [3,4]. A new fuzzy ordered weighted averaging (OWA) operator is proposed by Juan-juan Peng et al. [17] to solve the aggregation problem associated with many fuzzy numbers. Moreover, various operators are defined with their desirable properties. Chao Tian et al. [26] developed the weighted picture fuzzy power Choquet ordered geometric (WPFPCOG) operator and a weighted picture fuzzy power Shapley Choquet ordered geometric (WPFPSCOG) operator based on fuzzy measure to deal with multi criteria decision making problems. Sustainability evaluation index system for water environment treatment public-private-partnership (WET-PPP) projects is constructed by Chao Tian et al. [27] to improve the accuracy of decision-making problems and applied effectively to evaluation problems.

    Picture fuzzy set has adequate applications in various situations involving many human perspectives in addition to yes, no, refusal, etc. Picture fuzzy set incorporates the degree of neutrality, membership, and non-membership. Manufacturing the components in a fabrication industry by an employee emulates the picture fuzzy set, where the completion of the product by the employee is the degree of membership, the incomplete products contribute the degree of non-membership, and the damaged product is the degree of neutrality.

    Statistical data analysis can be effectively implemented by clustering analysis techniques, which are extensively applied in several domains, such as pattern recognition, microbiology analysis, data mining, information retrieval, etc. In an empirical world, the data considered for clustering may be linguistic and uncertain. Abundant clustering algorithms corresponding to various fuzzy environments have been proposed, e.g., intuitionistic clustering algorithm [29,30] concerning the correlation coefficient formulas for IFSs, classification of picture fuzzy sets using correlation coefficients [21] and Sanchez et al.[20] created a new method, Fuzzy Granular Gravitational Clustering Algorithm (FGGCA) and also compared FGGCA with other clustering techniques. The correlation coefficient analyzes the association and interdependencies between variables. The correlation coefficient is observed under probability distribution in classical statistics, whereas many real situations are subjective. Correlation coefficients between intuitionistic fuzzy sets are applied to linguistic variables, which overcome the limitations obtained in fuzzy correlation measures. The correlation coefficient between two picture fuzzy sets is the one in which the membership values have different and unique consequences, which helps the decision makers to classify their attributes more effectively. Picture fuzzy clustering [25] is one of the computational intelligence methods used in pattern recognition. The enhancement of the traditional and intuitionistic fuzzy sets is picture fuzzy sets. In computational intelligence, a picture fuzzy set provides a better clustering quality than other admissible clustering algorithms involved with different fuzzy sets.

    Picture fuzzy set has a robust application in medical diagnosis [12]. In the medical diagnosis of a specific disease, some symptoms do not directly affect the particular disorder, and those symptoms have neutral membership. In this way, the picture fuzzy set constitutes a good effect on the medical diagnosis. The topological structures: filters, grills, clusters, etc., have many applications in the field of pattern analysis in the context of camouflaged objects [18], their applications of obtaining a C structure compactification [28], intuitionistic fuzzy C-ends [31] and Q neighbourhoods, infra fuzzy topological spaces, infra fuzzy homeomorphism, infra fuzzy isomorphisms [5] triggered us to define the picture fuzzy topological structures like filters, grills, ultrafilter. Picture fuzzy filters have a wide variety of applications in the field of Science and Technology, including pattern recognition, image analysis, digital image processing, and forgery detection. Picture fuzzy filters, picture fuzzy grills, and picture fuzzy ultrafilters may contribute to better analysis of various pattern recognition in the context of camouflaged objects.

    Many clustering algorithms are available to classify the data set among picture fuzzy sets, which reflects the significance of the degree of positive, negative and neutral membership. In this paper, the clustering algorithm defined using the correlation coefficient between picture fuzzy sets belonging to the picture fuzzy filter collection enhances the data set's classification method. A straightforward approach based on the picture fuzzy filter is applied to the clustering algorithm, which classifies the data set more effectively in the picture fuzzy topological space domain than the other existing classifications. Classification of picture fuzzy clusters among the picture fuzzy filter collection of any cardinality can be obtained at the fourth stage of the iteration process of the equivalent coefficient matrix involved in the clustering algorithm employed in the paper. An illustration is provided in this paper to experience the ease of classification using a picture fuzzy filter collection. It is compared with some intuitionistic fuzzy set collection and intuitionistic fuzzy filter collection.

    The paper is structured as follows: Section 2 deals with the fundamentals of Picture fuzzy sets and the corresponding topological structures. Section 3 explores the fundamental properties of various structures like picture fuzzy filter, grill and ultrafilter. Section 4 deals with an illustration of the application of the clustering algorithm of picture fuzzy sets. For a practical example, the cotton industry is considered. The primary four processes involved in producing yarn are assumed as the attributes. An employee whose performance is based on completion, damage and incomplete of the product plays the role of picture fuzzy sets. A clustering algorithm for picture fuzzy sets is applied to the filter collection to classify the picture fuzzy sets in a filter collection, which helps the industry analyze the employee's performance. The abbreviations and acronyms used in the paper are listed in Table 1.

    Table 1.  List of abbreviations and acronyms used in the paper.
    Abbreviations Definitions
    PFS Picture Fuzzy Set
    PFS(X) Collection of all Picture Fuzzy Sets on X
    PFTS Picture Fuzzy Topological Space
    IFS Intuitionistic Fuzzy Set
    IFTS Intuitionistic Fuzzy Topological Space
    PFOS Picture Fuzzy Open Set
    PFCS Picture Fuzzy Closed Set
    PFNF Picture Fuzzy Normal Family
    int(D) Interior of D
    cl(D) Closure of D
    Ep(D) Informational energy of D
    Cp2(D,E) Correlation between D and E
    Kp3(D,E) Correlation Coefficient between D and E
    PFsec(E) Picture Fuzzy Section of (E)
    MC Correlation Matrix
    C Association Matrix

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Definition 2.1. [10] A picture fuzzy set(PFS) D on X is of the form of D = {(x,γD(x),νD(x), ηD(x))|xX}. In this form γD(x), νD(x), ηD(x) denote the degree of positive membership, the degree of negative membership, the degree of neutral membership of x in D respectively which satisfying, xX,γD(x)+νD(x)+ηD(x)1. The degree of refusal membership of x in D is given by ρD(x)=(1(γD(x)+νD(x)+ηD(x))). Such collection of sets is represented as PFS(X).

    Definition 2.2. [10] Let D and E any two PFSs, then

    (i) DE iff (yX, γD(y)γE(y) and νD(y)νE(y) and ηD(y)ηE(y));

    (ii) D=E iff (DE and ED);

    (iii) DE = {(x,(γD(x),γE(x)),(νD(x),νE(x)),(ηD(x),ηE(x)))|xX};

    (iv) DE = {(x,(γD(x),γE(x)),(νD(x),νE(x)),(ηD(x),ηE(x)))|xX};

    (v) CO(D)=¯D={(νD(x),γD(x),ηD(x))|xX}.

    Definition 2.3. [10] Some Special PFSs are as follows:

    (i) A constant picture fuzzy set is the PFS ^(ϑ,ε,ϱ)={(y,ϑ,ε,ϱ)|yX};

    (ii) Picture fuzzy universe set is 1X defined as 1X=^(1,0,0)={(y,1,0,0)|yX};

    (iii) Picture fuzzy empty set is ϕ defined as ϕ=0X=^(0,0,1)={(y,0,0,1)|yX}.

    Definition 2.4. [24] A picture fuzzy topology on X is a collection σ of PFS satisfying

    (1) ^(ϑ,ε,ϱ)σ,^(ϑ,ε,ϱ)PFS(X);

    (2) GHσ for any G,Hσ;

    (3) iIHi for {Hi|iI}σ.

    Then (X,σ) is said to be a picture fuzzy topological space (PFTS) and the member of σ is picture fuzzy open set (PFOS) in X. The picture fuzzy closed set (PFCS) is the complement of it. σc denote the collection of all PFCSs.

    Definition 2.5. [24] For a picture fuzzy topological space (X,σ), int(D) and cl(D) denotes the interior and closure operator of a picture fuzzy set D in (X,σ) and is defined as follows:

    int(D)={H|H  is  a  PFOS,HD},cl(D)={K|K  is  a  PFOS,DK}.

    Definition 2.6. [10] The image of DPFS(X) under the function f from X into Y is defined as follows:

    f(D)(b)={(af1(b)γD(a),af1(b)νD(a),af1(b)ηD(a)),if  f1(b)ϕ,(0,0,0),if  f1(b)=ϕ.

    The pre image of EPFS(Y) under f is f1(E)(a) = (γE(f(a)),νE(f(a)),ηE(f(a))).

    Let X={x1,x2,,xn} be a discrete universe of discourse, D and E be a two IFSs on X denoted as D={(xi,γD(xi),νD(xi))|xiX,i=1,2,,n} and E={(xi,γE(xi),νE(xi))|xiX,i=1,2,,n} respectively.

    Definition 2.7. [13] For IFS D = {(xi,γD(xi),νD(xi))|xiX,i=1,2,,n}, the informational energy of the set D is defined as

    EIFS(D)=ni=1(γ2D(xi)+ν2D(xi)). (2.1)

    Definition 2.8. [13] For D,EIFSs, the correlation Cp2(D,E) is defined by

    CIFS1(D,E)=ni=1(γD(xi)γE(xi)+νD(xi)νE(xi)). (2.2)

    Definition 2.9. [13] The correlation coefficient between any two intuitionistic fuzzy sets D and E is given by,

    KIFS1(D,E)=CIFS1(D,E)(EIFS(D))12(EIFS(E))12=ni=1(γD(xi)γE(xi)+νD(xi)νE(xi)/{ni=1ui(γ2D(xi)+ν2D(xi))}12{ni=1(γ2E(xi)+ν2E(xi))}12. (2.3)

    Proposition 2.1. [13] The correlation coefficient between two IFSs D and E defined in Eq (2.3), satisfies:

    (1) KIFS1(D,E)=KIFS1(E,D);

    (2) 0KIFS1(D,E)1;

    (3) KIFS1(D,E)=1 iff D=E.

    Definition 2.10. [13] Let Dj(j=1,2,,m) be m IFSs, and C=(Kij)m×m be a correlation matrix, where Kij=K(Di,Dj) denotes the correlation coefficient of two IFSs Di and Dj and satisfies:

    (1) 0Kij1;

    (2) Kii=1;

    (3) Kij=Kji.

    Definition 2.11. [30] The correlation matrix of m IFSs is given by MC=(Kij)m×m, the composition matrix of a correlation matrix is M2C=MCMC=(¯Kij)m×m, where

    ¯Kij=maxn{min{Kin,Knj}}. (2.4)

    Definition 2.12. [30] Let MC=(Kij)m×m be a correlation matrix, if M2CMC, i.e.,

    maxn{min{Kin,Knj}}Kij i,j=1,2,,m. (2.5)

    Then MC is called an equivalent correlation matrix.

    Definition 2.13. [30] Let MC=(Kij)m×m be an equivalent correlation matrix. Then we call (MC)λ=(λKij)m×m the λ-cutting matrix of MC, where

    λKij={0,if Kij<λ,1,if Kijλ, (2.6)

    and λ is the confidence level with λ[0,1].

    Let X={x1,x2,,xn} be a discrete universe of discourse, D and E be a two PFSs on X denoted as D = {(xi,γD(xi),νD(xi), ηD(xi))|xiX,i=1,2,,n} and E = {(xi,γE(xi),νE(xi), ηE(xi))|xiX, i= 1,2,,n} respectively. Let u=(u1,u2,,un)T be the weight vector of xi(i=1,2,,n) with ui0 and ni=1ui=1.

    Definition 2.14. [21] For PFS D = {(xi,γD(xi),νD(xi), ηD(xi))|xiX,i=1,2,,n}, the informational energy of the set D is defined as

    Ep(D)=ni=1ui(γ2D(xi)+ν2D(xi)+η2D(xi)+ρ2D(xi)). (2.7)

    Definition 2.15. [21] For D,EPFSs, the correlation Cp2(D,E) is defined by

    Cp2(D,E)=ni=1ui(γD(xi)γE(xi)+νD(xi)νE(xi)+ηD(xi)ηE(xi)+ρD(xi)ρE(xi)). (2.8)

    Definition 2.16. [21] The correlation coefficient between any two picture fuzzy sets D and E is given by,

    Kp3(D,E)=Cp2(D,E)(Ep(D))12(Ep(E))12=ni=1ui(γD(xi)γE(xi)+νD(xi)νE(xi)+ηD(xi)ηE(xi)+ρD(xi)ρE(xi))/{ni=1ui(γ2D(xi)+ν2D(xi)+η2D(xi)+ρ2D(xi))}12{ni=1ui(γ2E(xi)+ν2E(xi)+η2E(xi)+ρ2E(xi))}12. (2.9)

    Kp3(D,E) in Eq (2.9) depends on the following factors:

    (1) The amount of information expressed by the degree of positive membership, the degree of neutral membership, the degree of negative membership.

    (2) The reliability of the information expressed by refusal membership.

    Proposition 2.2. [21] Let u=(u1,u2,,un)T be the weight vector of xi(i=1,2,,n) with ui0 and ni=1ui=1 then correlation coefficient between two PFSs D and E defined in Eq (2.9), satisfies:

    (1) Kp3(D,E)=Kp3(E,D);

    (2) 0Kp3(D,E)1;

    (3) Kp3(D,E)=1 iff D=E.

    Definition 2.17. [21] Let Dj(j=1,2,,m) be m PFSs, and C=(Kij)m×m be a correlation matrix, where Kij=K(Di,Dj) denotes the correlation coefficient of two PFSs Di and Dj and satisfies:

    (1) 0Kij1;

    (2) Kii=1;

    (3) Kij=Kji.

    Definition 2.18. [30] The correlation matrix of m PFSs is given by MC=(Kij)m×m, the composition matrix of a correlation matrix is M2C=MCMC=(¯Kij)m×m, where

    ¯Kij=maxn{min{Kin,Knj}}. (2.10)

    Definition 2.19. [30] Let MC=(Kij)m×m be a correlation matrix, if M2CMC, i.e.,

    maxn{min{Kin,Knj}}Kij i,j=1,2,,m. (2.11)

    Then MC is called an equivalent correlation matrix.

    Definition 2.20. [30] Let MC=(Kij)m×m be an equivalent correlation matrix. Then we call (MC)λ=(λKij)m×m the λ-cutting matrix of MC, where

    λKij={0,if Kij<λ,1,if Kijλ, (2.12)

    and λ is the confidence level with λ[0,1].

    Throughout the paper picture fuzzy topology is observed in the sense of Chang [8].

    Definition 3.1. Let (X,σ) be a PFTS. Picture fuzzy filter Eσc on X is a collection of PFS(X) satisfying

    (1) E is nonempty and 0XE;

    (2) If D1,D2E then D1D2E;

    (3) If DE where DE and Eσc then EE.

    Definition 3.2. If (X,σ) is a PFTS and YX, the collection σY={D1Y:Dσ} is a picture fuzzy topology on Y. (Y,σY) is called a picture fuzzy subspace on X.

    Example 3.1. Let X={k, l, m} and σ={1X, 0X, H, K, E=HK, D=HK}, the membership values of H, K, E and D are provided in Table 2.

    Table 2.  Membership values.
    H K E D 1X 0X
    γ 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 1 0
    k η 0.2 0.2 0.2 0.2 0 0
    ν 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0 1
    γ 0.2 0.7 0.2 0.7 1 0
    l η 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.0 0 0
    ν 0.3 0.2 0.3 0.2 0 1
    γ 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.4 1 0
    m η 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0
    ν 0.3 0.4 0.4 0.3 0 1

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Thus (X, σ) is a picture fuzzy topological space. Let Y={k, l}. σY={D1Y|Dσ} is a picture fuzzy topology on Y.

    Definition 3.3. Let (X,σ) be a PFTS. Picture fuzzy grill Gσc on X is a collection of PFS(X) satisfying

    (1) G is non empty and 0XG;

    (2) If DG and DE then EG;

    (3) If DEG then DG or EG.

    Definition 3.4. Picture fuzzy section of E is PFsec(E)={Eσc:DE0X,DE}.

    Definition 3.5. BE is a picture fuzzy base for E if for every DE EB with ED.

    Definition 3.6. Hσc is a picture fuzzy subbase for E if {ni=1Di|DiH} is a picture fuzzy base for E.

    Proposition 3.1. Let (X,σ) be a PFTS and Bσc. Then (i) and (ii) are equivalent.

    (i) There is only one picture fuzzy filter E having B as a picture fuzzy base;

    (ii) (a) B is non empty and 0XB;

    (b) If E1,E2B there is E3B with E3E1E2.

    Proof.

    (i)(ii). Assume that there is only one picture fuzzy filter E having B as a picture fuzzy base. Since B is a picture fuzzy base for E and 0XE, 0XB and also B is non empty. Also if E1,E2B such that E1D1 and E2D2, for D1,D2E. Since D1,D2E, D1D2=D3E, E1E2D1D2=D3. Thus E3BE3=E1E2D3.

    (ii) (i). Suppose that B is a picture fuzzy base for two different picture fuzzy filters E1 and E2. For each D1E1 E1B E1D1. Similarly for each D2E2 E2B E2A2. Also if D1D2=0X then 0XB which is impossible. Hence D1D20X. Therefore D1D2 lies in both E1,E2 and thus the picture fuzzy filters are same.

    Proposition 3.2. If there is a picture fuzzy base B satisfies (a) and (b) of Proposition 3.1, then

    E={Dσc|EB  with  ED}

    is a picture fuzzy filter generated by B.

    Proof. Since B is nonempty implies E is nonempty. If DE then DE for some EB. By assumption E0X thus D0X. If D1, D2 E there exists E1,E2B with EiDi for i=1,2. Then D1D2E1E2E3 for some E3B. Thus D1D2E. This proves that E is a picture fuzzy filter on X.

    Proposition 3.3. Let E be a picture fuzzy filter and Dσc. E{D} lies in some picture fuzzy filter iff for each EE, ED0X.

    Definition 3.7. A picture fuzzy ultrafilter E is a maximal picture fuzzy filter among the set of all picture fuzzy filters {Ej}jJ.

    Proposition 3.4. Every picture fuzzy filter E extends to picture fuzzy ultrafilter V.

    Proposition 3.5. For any picture fuzzy filter E on X, we have the equivalence.

    (i) E is a picture fuzzy ultrafilter;

    (ii) If Dσc and EE with DE0X, then DE;

    (iii) If D is PFCS and D is not in E, then there is EE DE=0X.

    Proof.

    (i)(ii). Suppose D be a PFCS and DE0X, for all EE. From Proposition 3.3, E{D} lies in some picture fuzzy filter E. By (i), E=E.

    (ii) (iii). Let D is PFCS and is not in E. By (ii), for some EE we have DE0X.

    (iii) (i). Let M be a picture fuzzy filter with EM and EM. Let DM DE. By (iii), EE with DE=0X. Since E,DM, EDM implies 0XM, contradicts our assumption. Hence E=M which is a picture fuzzy ultrafilter.

    Proposition 3.6. If V1, V2 the two different picture fuzzy ultrafilters on X, then (iDi)(jDj)=0X for all DiV1 and DjV2.

    Proof. Suppose (iDi)(jDj)0X, for all DiV1 and DjV2. Then there exists an xX for which, i(γDi(x))0, i(νDi(x))1, i(ηDi(x))0. Also j(γDj(x))0, j(νDj(x))1, j(ηDj(x))0, (γDi(x),γDj(x))>0, (νDi(x),νDj(x))<1, (ηDi(x),ηDj(x))>0, for all i, j. Which implies DiDj0X. By Proposition 3.5, DiV2 and DjV1 for all i, j. Then it leads to contradiction.

    Proposition 3.7. Every picture fuzzy ultrafilter is a picture fuzzy grill.

    Proof. Let D, E be PFCS with DE lies in picture fuzzy ultrafilter V. Suppose D,E is not in V. Then there exists D1,E1V with DD1=0X and EE1=0X. Since V is a picture fuzzy ultrafilter, (DE)D1E1V. Now, [(DE)D1]E1 = [(DD1)(EE1)]E1 = [0X(ED1)]E1 = [0XE1][(ED1)E1] = 0X[EE1D1] = 0X0X = 0X. This leads a contradiction. Hence V is a picture fuzzy grill on X.

    Proposition 3.8. If P(E) is the collection of picture fuzzy grills containing E, then we have E=GP(E)G.

    Proof. If A be a PFCS and is not in E. Now, L denotes the inductive set consisting of all picture fuzzy filters G containing E and AG. L posses the maximal filter V. We claim V is a picture fuzzy grill. Let B1,B2σc with B1B2V such that B1,B2V. Consider the family J = {Fσc|FB2V}. Since B1σc and B1B2V, implies that B1J. This implies J is non empty. Suppose if 0X is in J, B2V. Contradicts our assumption. Hence 0XJ. If F1,F2J. By definition of J, F1B2V and F2B2V. Since V is a picture fuzzy filter. [F1B2][F2B2] V (F1F2)B2V F1F2J. If FJ and Bσc such that FB, FB2V, V is ultrafilter. B1B2V, implies that BJ. Thus J is a picture fuzzy filter. Since B1B2V, (B1B2)B2V, implies that B1B2J. Thus VJ. Since B1J and B1V. Thus VJ. Let K={Cσc|ACV}. Suppose 0XK, then by definition of K, AV. Contradicts our assumption VL and AV. Hence 0XK. Since 1xV, implies that 1XK. K satisfies the first condition of picture fuzzy filter. If A, AK. By definition of K, the picture fuzzy sets AA and AA are in V. Since V is a picture fuzzy filter, AAAV. Therefore AAK. If AK and Aσc such that AA then AK. Hence K is a picture fuzzy filter.

    Now, EK. AK for AV. Hence K also lies in L and VK. V = K since V is maximal. If AJ, then AB2V, implies that B2K=V. Contradicts our assumption B2V. Thus AJ. V=J, since JL, VJ. However, VJ. So it is absurd to assume B1,B2V. Thus B1,B2V. Therefore V is a picture fuzzy grill and AV. Hence GP(E)GE.

    Definition 3.8. A picture fuzzy filter Ex(ϑ,ε,ϱ) generated by picture fuzzy point x(ϑ,ε,ϱ), if the non empty collection Ex(ϑ,ε,ϱ)={Eσc|x(ϑ,ε,ϱ)E} is a picture fuzzy grill on X.

    Definition 3.9. Picture fuzzy normal family(PFNF) is a collection of PFCS if given D1,D2σc such that D1D2=0X there exist E1,E2σc with E1E2=1X, D1E1=0X and D2E2=0X.

    Proposition 3.9. Let (X,σ) be any PFTS and σc be a PFNF. Every picture fuzzy grill G on X lies exactly in one picture fuzzy ultrafilter.

    Proof. Assume that V1 and V2 are the picture fuzzy ultrafilters having GV1, GV2, V1V2. Then D1V1 and D2V2 with D1D2=0X. Since σc is a PFNF, there exist E1,E2σc with E1E2=1X, D1E1=0X and D2E2=0X. Since E1E2=1X and G is a picture fuzzy grill, E1G or E2G. Suppose if E1G, then E1V1 and E1V2. Thus D1E1=0X with D1,E1V1, contradicts our assumption. Similarly, E2G, then E2V1 and E2V2. Thus D2E2=0X with D2,E2V2, contradicts our assumption. Hence V1=V2.

    Proposition 3.10. If σc be a PFNF and for every picture fuzzy point x(ϑ,ε,ϱ) there exists a unique picture fuzzy ultrafilter Vx(ϑ,ε,ϱ) which contains Ex(ϑ,ε,ϱ).

    Proof. Proof follows from Definition 3.8 and Proposition 3.9.

    Proposition 3.11. For any two picture fuzzy points x(ϑ,ε,ϱ), y(γ,δ,φ) with x=y, we have Vx(ϑ,ε,ϱ)=Vy(γ,δ,φ).

    Proof. Proof is obtained from Proposition 3.6.

    Proposition 3.12. Let (X,σ) is a picture fuzzy topological space. Then

    (a) E is a picture fuzzy filter on X iff PFsec(E) is picture fuzzy grill on X.

    (b) G is a picture fuzzy grill on X iff PFsec(G) is picture fuzzy filter on X.

    Proof.

    (a) Let E be a picture fuzzy filter on X. First two conditions of PFsec(E) is true by the nature of E. Let DEPFsec(E), then for all CE, C(DE)E. By definition of PFsec(E), D,EPFsec(E). Hence PFsec(E) is a picture fuzzy grill on X. Conversely, PFsec(E) satisfies first and third condition of picture fuzzy filter. If D1,D2PFsec(E), D1D2PFsec(E). Hence PFsec(E) is a picture fuzzy filter on X.

    (b) Let E be a picture fuzzy grill on X. First and second conditions of picture fuzzy filter is true for PFsec(E). For the second condition let D1,D2PFsec(E), (D1C)0X and (D2C)0X, CE). Therefore D1D2PFsec(E). Hence PFsec(E) is a picture fuzzy filter on X. Conversely, PFsec(E) is a picture fuzzy filter on X. First and second conditions of picture fuzzy grill is obvious. For the third condition DEPFsec(E), C(DE)0X. Hence both D,E is in PFsec(E). Hence PFsec(E) is a picture fuzzy grill on X.

    By the above Proposition, it is easy to analyze that there is a one to one correspondence between the set of all picture fuzzy filters and the set of all picture fuzzy grills.

    P. Singh[21] proposed the clustering algorithm for picture fuzzy set. The proposed algorithm is applied to the picture fuzzy filter collection and the classification of picture fuzzy sets is obtained.

    Proposition 4.1. [30] The composition matrix M2C is also a correlation matrix.

    Proposition 4.2. [30] Let MC be a correlation matrix. Then for any non-negative integers p1 and p2, the composition matrix. Mp1p2C derived from Mp1p2C=Mp1CMp2C is still a correlation matrix.

    Proposition 4.3. [30] Let MC=(Kij)m×m be a correlation matrix. Then after the finite times of compositions:

    MCM2CM4CM2kC, there must exist a positive integer k such that M2kC=M2k+1C and M2kC is also an equivalent correlation matrix.

    Step 1. Let {D1,D2,,Dm} be a set of PFSs in X={x1,x2,,xn}. Using the formula, correlation coefficient of picture fuzzy set can be calculated and the correlation matrix MC=(Kij)m×m, where Kij=K(Di,Dj) can be constructed.

    Step 2. Check whether M2CMC, where M2C=MCMC=(¯Kij)m×m=maxn{min{Kin,Knj}}Kij i,j=1,2,,m. If it does not hold, construct the equivalent correlation matrix M2kC: MCM2CM4CM2kC, until M2kC=M2k+1C.

    Step 3. For confidence level λ, construct a λ-cutting matrix (MC)λ=(λKij)m×m through Definition 2.13 in order to classify the PFSs Pj(j=1,2,,m). If all element of the ith column in (MC)λ are the same as the corresponding elements of the jth column in (MC)λ, then the PFSs Di and Dj are of the same type. The classification of picture fuzzy sets can be done by the above principle.

    Illustration 1. For a practical example, an employee from a subunit of the cotton industry is considered. As the production of yarn depends on four crucial processes blowing, carding, drawing, and roving can be performed by the workers. After completing the above-said stages, the product yarn can be obtained through machines automatically. While doing the first four processes, there are positive, negative, and flaws in an employee's performance. We attempted to define a picture fuzzy topological space on the collection of picture fuzzy sets obtained from employee performance. Later picture fuzzy filter collection is obtained and applied with the clustering algorithm leads to a classification of the employee based on their performance. Each employee is associated with four different attributes denoted by X = {k, l, m, n}, k: Blowing; l: Carding; m: Drawing; n: Roving with weight vector u = (0.4, 0.2, 0.3, 0.1). Based on the expert's information, the evaluation of each employee is expressed in the form of PFSs. Table 3 represents the degree of positive, negative, and neutral membership of each attribute of X given by the experts.

    Table 3.  Employees experts membership values.
    ¯E1 ¯E2 ¯E3 ¯E4 ¯E5 ¯E6 ¯E7 ¯E8 ¯E9 ¯0X ¯1X
    γ 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.2 1 0
    k η 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0
    ν 0.7 0.8 0.4 0.8 0.7 0.8 0.7 0.4 0.4 0 1
    γ 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 1 0
    l η 0.0 0.1 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0.0 0.0 0.1 0 0
    ν 0.9 0.8 0.7 0.9 0.9 0.8 0.8 0.7 0.7 0 1
    γ 0.0 0.7 0.3 0.0 0.0 0.3 0.7 0.3 0.3 1 0
    m η 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0 0
    ν 0.8 0.1 0.6 0.8 0.8 0.6 0.1 0.6 0.1 0 1
    γ 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.2 0.1 1 0
    n η 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.1 0.1 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.2 0 0
    ν 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.7 0.7 0.6 0.6 0.6 0.6 0 1

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Let σ={1X,0X,E1,E2,E3,E4,E5,E6,E7,E8,E9} be the picture fuzzy topology on X where

    E1={(k,0.7,0.1,0.2),(l,0.9,0.0,0.1),(m,0.8,0.1,0.0),(n,0.7,0.1,0.2)},E2={(k,0.8,0.1,0.1),(l,0.8,0.1,0.1),(m,0.1,0.1,0.7),(n,0.6,0.2,0.1)},E3={(k,0.4,0.2,0.2),(l,0.7,0.1,0.2),(m,0.6,0.1,0.3),(n,0.6,0.3,0.1)},E4=E1E2,E5=E1E3,E6=E2E3,E7=E1E2,E8=E1E3,E9=E2E3

    and (X,σ) be the PFTS. Then σc={¯1X,¯0X,¯E1,¯E2,¯E3,¯E4,¯E5,¯E6,¯E7,¯E8,¯E9}. Consider the picture fuzzy filter F1={¯0x,¯E2,¯E3,¯E6,¯E9}.

    Applying clustering algorithm to picture fuzzy sets from F1.

    Step 1. The correlation coefficient of PFSs ¯Ej(j=2,3,6,9) can be computed by using Eq (2.9) and the correlation matrix MC is constructed:

    MC=(10.79400.89240.90640.73950.794010.83640.83640.84950.89240.836410.77520.94860.90640.83640.775210.59750.73950.84950.94860.59751).

    Step 2. Construct equivalent correlation matrices:

    M2C=(10.83640.89240.90640.89240.836410.84950.83640.84950.89240.849510.89240.94860.90640.83640.892410.83640.89240.84950.94860.83641),
    M4C=(10.84950.89240.90640.89240.849510.84950.84950.84950.89240.849510.89240.94860.90640.84950.892410.89240.89240.84950.94860.89241),
    M8C=(10.84950.89240.90640.89240.849510.84950.84950.84950.89240.849510.89240.94860.90640.84950.892410.89240.89240.84950.94860.89241).

    Therefore M8C=M4C. Hence M4C is equivalent matrix.

    Step 3. λ-cutting matrix MCλ=(λKij)m×m is computed using the Eq (2.12), based on which, we get all possible classification of the employee ¯Ej(j=2,3,6,9): classification shown in Table 6.

    Thus the above illustration leads to classifying an employee from the picture fuzzy filter collection obtained in the third iteration. The number of iterations is more for some collection of picture fuzzy sets. Thus if the collection is a picture fuzzy filter, the classification is obtained at the earliest.

    Illustration 2. Let σ={1X,0X,A1,A2,A3,A4,A5,A6,A7,A8,A9,A10} be the IFT and (X,σ) be the IFTs. The membership values of intuitionistic fuzzy sets belongs to σc is given in Table 4. Consider the intuitionistic fuzzy filter F2={¯0x,¯A1,¯A6,¯A8,¯A10}.

    Table 4.  The data of σc.
    ¯A1 ¯A2 ¯A3 ¯A4 ¯A5 ¯A6 ¯A7 ¯A8 ¯A9 ¯A10 ¯0x ¯1x
    x1 γAi 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.40 0.10 0.30 0.40 0.10 0.40 0.10 1.00 0.00
    νAi 0.30 0.40 0.40 0.30 0.80 0.40 0.60 0.90 0.40 0.90 0.00 1.00
    x2 γAi 0.70 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.20 0.50 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.00 1.00 0.00
    νAi 0.20 0.50 0.60 0.90 0.70 0.30 0.40 0.70 1.00 0.80 0.00 1.00
    x3 γAi 0.50 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.60 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.30 1.00 0.00
    νAi 0.40 0.60 0.80 0.80 0.70 0.20 0.70 0.70 0.90 0.60 0.00 1.00
    x4 γAi 0.80 0.70 0.60 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.60 0.50 0.20 0.20 1.00 0.00
    νAi 0.10 0.20 0.20 0.70 0.40 0.50 0.30 0.40 0.60 0.50 0.00 1.00
    x5 γAi 0.50 0.30 0.70 0.80 0.20 0.40 0.70 0.50 0.70 0.10 1.00 0.00
    νAi 0.40 0.60 0.30 0.10 0.80 0.50 0.30 0.40 0.20 0.80 0.00 1.00
    x6 γAi 0.70 0.20 0.20 0.80 0.60 0.60 0.10 0.00 0.80 0.40 1.00 0.00
    νAi 0.20 0.70 0.50 0.20 0.40 0.30 0.60 0.80 0.10 0.60 0.00 1.00

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Applying clustering algorithm to intuitionistic fuzzy sets from F2.

    Step 1. The correlation coefficient of IFSs ¯Aj(j=1,6,8,10) can be computed by using Eq (2.3) and the correlation matrix MC is constructed:

    MC=(10.43060.94360.52040.14280.430610.33450.87500.52850.94360.334510.45110.05710.52040.87500.451110.38570.14280.52850.05710.38571).

    Step 2. Construct equivalent correlation matrices:

    M2C=(10.52040.94360.87500.43060.520410.45110.87500.52850.94360.451110.52040.38570.87500.87500.520410.52850.43060.52850.38570.52851),
    M4C=(10.87500.94360.87500.52850.875010.52040.87500.52040.94360.520410.87500.52040.87500.87500.875010.52850.52850.52040.52040.52851),
    M8C=(10.87500.94360.87500.52850.875010.52040.87500.52040.94360.520410.87500.52040.87500.87500.875010.52850.52850.52040.52040.52851).

    Therefore M8C=M4C. Hence M4C is equivalent matrix.

    Step 3. λ-cutting matrix MCλ=(λKij)m×m is computed using the Eq (2.6), based on which, we get all possible classification of the ¯Aj(j=1,6,8,10): classification is shown in Table 6.

    Illustration 3.

    Now we utilize the algorithm-IFSC to cluster the ten new cars Ai(i=1,1,,10) whose positive and negative membership values are provided in Table 5, which involves the following steps:

    Table 5.  The car data set.
    A1 A2 A3 A4 A5 A6 A7 A8 A9 A10
    x1 γAi 0.30 0.40 0.40 0.30 0.80 0.40 0.60 0.90 0.40 0.90
    νAi 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.40 0.10 0.30 0.40 0.10 0.40 0.10
    x2 γAi 0.20 0.50 0.60 0.90 0.70 0.30 0.40 0.70 1.00 0.80
    νAi 0.70 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.20 0.50 0.20 0.20 0.00 0.00
    x3 γAi 0.40 0.60 0.80 0.80 0.70 0.20 0.70 0.70 0.90 0.60
    νAi 0.50 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.00 0.60 0.20 0.10 0.10 0.30
    x4 γAi 0.80 0.20 0.20 0.70 0.40 0.50 0.30 0.40 0.60 0.50
    νAi 0.10 0.70 0.60 0.10 0.10 0.20 0.60 0.50 0.20 0.20
    x5 γAi 0.40 0.30 0.30 0.10 0.80 0.50 0.30 0.40 0.20 0.80
    νAi 0.50 0.60 0.70 0.80 0.20 0.40 0.70 0.50 0.70 0.10
    x6 γAi 0.20 0.70 0.50 0.20 0.40 0.30 0.60 0.80 0.10 0.60
    νAi 0.70 0.20 0.20 0.80 0.60 0.60 0.10 0.00 0.80 0.40

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Step 1. Utilize to calculate the association coefficients of Ai(i=1,1,,10), and then construct an association matrix:

    C=(1.0000.6670.6450.7090.6330.9190.6960.6090.6660.6110.6671.0000.9090.6610.6660.6650.9130.8200.6650.6400.6450.9091.0000.7680.7400.5760.9370.8620.7710.6700.7090.6610.7681.0000.7550.6100.7170.7280.9680.7110.6330.6660.7400.7551.0000.6230.7130.4760.7640.8610.9190.6650.5760.6100.6231.0000.6340.5790.5660.6220.6960.9130.9370.7170.7130.6341.0000.8890.7220.6920.6090.8200.8620.7280.4760.5790.8891.0000.7400.8110.6660.6650.7710.9680.7640.5660.7220.7401.0000.7320.6110.6400.6700.7110.8610.6220.6920.8110.7321.000).

    Step 2. Similarly, C2,C4 has be computed and C8,C16 are as follows:

    C8=(1.0000.7090.7090.7090.7090.9190.7090.7090.7090.7090.7091.0000.9130.7710.8110.7090.9130.8890.7710.8110.7090.9131.0000.7710.8110.7090.9370.8890.7710.8110.7090.7710.7711.0000.7710.7090.7710.7710.9680.7710.7090.8110.8110.7681.0000.7090.8110.8110.7710.8610.9190.7090.7090.7090.7091.0000.7090.7090.7090.7090.7090.9130.9370.7710.8110.7091.0000.8890.7710.8110.7090.8890.8890.7710.8110.7090.8891.0000.7710.8110.7090.7710.7710.9680.7710.7090.7710.7711.0000.7710.7090.8110.8110.7710.8610.7090.8110.8110.7711.000),
    C16=(1.0000.7090.7090.7090.7090.9190.7090.7090.7090.7090.7091.0000.9130.7710.8110.7090.9130.8890.7710.8110.7090.9131.0000.7710.8110.7090.9370.8890.7710.8110.7090.7710.7711.0000.7710.7090.7710.7710.9680.7710.7090.8110.8110.7681.0000.7090.8110.8110.7710.8610.9190.7090.7090.7090.7091.0000.7090.7090.7090.7090.7090.9130.9370.7710.8110.7091.0000.8890.7710.8110.7090.8890.8890.7710.8110.7090.8891.0000.7710.8110.7090.7710.7710.9680.7710.7090.7710.7711.0000.7710.7090.8110.8110.7710.8610.7090.8110.8110.7711.000),

    hence, C8=C16, i.e., C8 is an equivalent association matrix.

    Step 3. Since the confidence level λ has a close relationship with the element of the equivalent association matrix C8, in the following, we give a detailed sensitivity analysis with respect to the confidence level λ and we get all possible classifications of the 10 new cars Ai(i=1,2,...,10): classification is shown in Table 6.

    Table 6.  Classification of intuitionistic and picture fuzzy sets using clustering algorithm.
    Class Confidence level Clustering result
    PFSf 5 0.9486λ1 {¯E2},{¯E3},{¯E6},{¯E9},{¯0X}
    4 0.9064λ0.9486 {¯E2},{¯E3}{¯E6,¯0X},{¯E9}
    3 0.8924λ0.9064 {¯E2,¯E9},{¯E3},{¯0X,¯E6}
    2 0.8495λ0.8924 {¯E3},{¯E2,¯E6,¯E9,¯0X}
    1 0λ0.8495 {¯E2,¯E3,¯E6,¯E9,¯0X}
    IFSf 5 0.9436λ1 {¯A6},{¯A8},{¯A1},{¯A10},{¯0X}
    4 0.8750λ0.9436 {¯A6,¯A8},{¯A1},{¯A10},{¯0X}
    4 0.5285λ0.8750 {¯A6,¯A8},{¯A1},{¯A10},{¯0X}
    4 0.5204λ0.5285 {¯A6,¯A8},{¯A1},{¯A10},{¯0X}
    1 0λ0.5204 {¯A1,¯A6,¯A8,¯A10,¯0X}
    IFS 10 0.968λ1 {A3},{A7},{A5},{A10}, {A6},{A1} {A2}, {A8} {A4},{A9}
    9 0.937λ0.968 {A3},{A7},{A5},{A10}, {A6},{A1} {A2}, {A8} {A4,A9}
    8 0.919λ0.937 {A3,A7},{A5},{A10}, {A6},{A1} {A2}, {A8} {A4,A9}
    7 0.913λ0.919 {A3,A7},{A5},{A10}, {A6,A1} {A2}, {A8} {A4,A9}
    6 0.889λ0.913 {A3,A2,A7},{A5},{A10}, {A6,A1}, {A8} {A4,A9}
    7 0.861λ0.889 {A3,A7},{A5},{A10}, {A6,A1} {A2}, {A8} {A4,A9}
    6 0.811λ0.861 {A3,A7},{A5,A10}, {A6,A1} {A2}, {A8} {A4,A9}
    5 0.771λ0.811 {A3,A5,A7,A10}, {A6,A1}, {A2}, {A8} {A4,A9}
    2 0.709λ0.771 {A2,A3,A4,A5,A7,A8,A9,A10}, {A6,A1}
    1 0λ0.709 {A1,A2,A3,A4,A5,A6,A7,A8,A9,A10}

     | Show Table
    DownLoad: CSV

    Classification of the above Illustrations are provided in Table 6.

    The clustering algorithm for picture fuzzy sets applied to picture fuzzy filter collection to classify the picture fuzzy sets can accommodate situations in which the inputs are picture fuzzy in nature. As the picture fuzzy set is the generalization of the fuzzy set and intuitionistic fuzzy set and hence the proposed method can be widely used. In Illustration 3, the classification of the intuitionistic fuzzy set is obtained by the C16 associative matrix, whereas the classification of the intuitionistic fuzzy set belonging to the intuitionistic fuzzy filter by the clustering technique is obtained at the fourth stage. In Illustration 1, the classification of picture fuzzy sets belonging to picture fuzzy filter collection is obtained at the fourth stage, and the result is more generalized than the intuitionistic fuzzy set.

    The correlation coefficient for the intuitionistic fuzzy set has some limitations and cannot reflect the complete information about the nature of the fuzzy set. Picture fuzzy set is an extension of the intuitionistic fuzzy set, which reflects the information about positive, negative, and neutral membership and also the degree of refusal membership. The correlation coefficient between picture fuzzy sets proposed by P. Singh[21] is applied to the picture fuzzy filter collection to effectively classify picture fuzzy sets from the picture fuzzy topological space. Classification of picture fuzzy set from picture fuzzy filter collection of any cardinality is obtained at the fourth stage of an equivalent correlation coefficient. The classification is compared with other intuitionistic fuzzy set collection to show fewer iterations required to classify the sets.

    This paper introduces the notion of picture fuzzy filter, picture fuzzy grill, and picture fuzzy ultrafilter. Properties of the picture fuzzy base and subbase are discussed. Interrelations between picture fuzzy filter, picture fuzzy grill and picture fuzzy ultrafilter are established along with their characterization. Picture fuzzy compact space is studied, and its characterization based on picture fuzzy filter, grill, and ultrafilter has been studied. A clustering algorithm for picture sets in a picture fuzzy filter is implemented with an illustration. Picture fuzzy filter collection reduces the number of iterations required to classify the picture fuzzy sets.

    The clustering algorithm based on the correlation coefficient between picture fuzzy sets reflects the significance of positive, negative, and neutral membership. Classification of picture fuzzy sets using the clustering algorithm proposed by P. Singh[21] is applied to the collection of filters obtained from the picture fuzzy topological space. Thus the paper shows that the decision-making problem in picture fuzzy topological space can be performed in a better way by using the picture fuzzy filter collection. The computational process for the correlation matrix in this work is obtained using MAPLE. The iteration for the equivalent correlation matrix will end at the fourth stage for any cardinality of picture fuzzy filter collection obtained from the picture fuzzy topological space, and the comparison among picture fuzzy filter and Intuitionistic fuzzy filter collection of different cardinalities have been classified at the fourth stage of the equivalent correlation matrix. In the future, the proposed work can be explored more precisely by defining a new clustering algorithm using picture fuzzy topological distance measure and picture fuzzy filter to analyze the classification in the topological structure and compare the accuracy with the other existing clustering algorithms and also pattern recognition problems.

    The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.

    The authors extend their appreciation to the Deanship of Scientific Research at King Khalid University for funding this work through Small group Research Project under grant number RGP1/325/44.

    The authors would like to express their gratitude to King Khalid University, Saudi Arabia for providing administrative and technical support. Also, the authors would like to thank the referee for their comments and suggestions on the manuscript.

    The authors declare no conflicts of interest regarding the publication of this article.



    [1] M. Akram, A. Adeel, J. C. R. Alcantud, Multi-criteria group decision-making using an m-polar hesitant fuzzy TOPSIS approach, Symmetry, 11 (2019), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.3390/sym11060795 doi: 10.3390/sym11060795
    [2] M. Akram, D. Saleem, B. Davvaz, Energy of double dominating bipolar fuzzy graphs, J. Appl. Math. Comput., 61 (2019), 219–234. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12190-019-01248-z doi: 10.1007/s12190-019-01248-z
    [3] M. Akram, M. Sarwar, W. A. Dudek, Energy of bipolar fuzzy graphs, In: Graphs for the analysis of bipolar fuzzy information, Singapore: Springer, 2020,309–347. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-15-8756-6_8
    [4] M. Akram, A. Luqman, C. Kahraman, Hesitant Pythagorean fuzzy ELECTRE-Ⅱ method for multi-criteria decision-making problems, Appl. Soft Comput., 108 (2021), 107479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.asoc.2021.107479 doi: 10.1016/j.asoc.2021.107479
    [5] M. Akram, N. Waseem, Similarity measures for new hybrid models: mF sets and mF soft sets, Punjab Univ. J. Math., 51 (2019), 115–130.
    [6] N. Anjali, S. Mathew, Energy of a fuzzy graph, Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform., 6 (2013), 455–465.
    [7] J. J. Arockiaraj, T. Pathinathan, Index matrix representation and various operations on hesitancy fuzzy graphs, J. Comput. Math. Sci., 8 (2017), 38–49.
    [8] J. J. Arockiaraj, T. Pathinathan, Various Cartesian products of vertex degree and edge degree in hesitancy fuzzy graphs, IJMRME, 2 (2016), 166–173. http://dx.doi.org/10.5281/ZENODO.154666 doi: 10.5281/ZENODO.154666
    [9] K. T. Atanassov, Generalized index matrices, C. R. Acad. Bulgare Sci., 40 (1987), 15–18.
    [10] K. Atanassov, G. Gargov, Elements of intuitionistic fuzzy logic. Part Ⅰ, Fuzzy Sets Syst., 95 (1998), 39–52. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(96)00326-0 doi: 10.1016/S0165-0114(96)00326-0
    [11] K. T. Atanassov, Index matrices: towards an augmented matrix calculus, Cham: Springer, 2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-10945-9
    [12] K. T. Atanassov, Intuitionistic fuzzy sets, Fuzzy Sets Syst., 20 (1986), 87–96. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(86)80034-3 doi: 10.1016/S0165-0114(86)80034-3
    [13] K. T. Atanassov, An equality between intuitionistic fuzzy sets, Fuzzy Sets Syst., 79 (1996), 257–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(95)00173-5. doi: 10.1016/0165-0114(95)00173-5
    [14] K. T. Atanassov, Remark on the intuitionistic fuzzy logics, Fuzzy Sets Syst., 95 (1998), 127–129. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0165-0114(96)00343-0. doi: 10.1016/S0165-0114(96)00343-0
    [15] P. Bhattacharya, Some remarks on fuzzy graphs, Pattern Recogn. Lett., 6 (1987), 297–302. https://doi.org/10.1016/0167-8655(87)90012-2 doi: 10.1016/0167-8655(87)90012-2
    [16] E. Bolturk, C. Kahraman, A novel interval-valued neutrosophic AHP with cosine similarity measure, Soft Comput., 22 (2018), 4941–4958. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-018-3140-y doi: 10.1007/s00500-018-3140-y
    [17] R. Chinram, T. Mahmood, U. Ur Rehman, Z. Ali, A. Iampan, Some novel cosine similarity measures based on complex hesitant fuzzy sets and their applications, J. Math., 2021 (2021), 1–20. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/6690728 doi: 10.1155/2021/6690728
    [18] B. Farhadinia, Similarity-based multi-criteria decision making technique of pythagorean fuzzy sets, Artif. Intell. Rev., 55 (2021), 2103–2148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10462-021-10054-8 doi: 10.1007/s10462-021-10054-8
    [19] H. Garg, T. Mahmood, U. Ur Rehman, Z. Ali, CHFS: Complex hesitant fuzzy sets-their applications to decision making with different and innovative distance measures, CAAI Trans. Intell. Technol., 6 (2021), 93–122. https://doi.org/10.1049/cit2.12016 doi: 10.1049/cit2.12016
    [20] Z. T. Gong, J. H. Wang, Hesitant fuzzy graphs, hesitant fuzzy hypergraphs and fuzzy graph decisions, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst., 40 (2021), 865–875. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-201016 doi: 10.3233/JIFS-201016
    [21] F. Herrera, E. Herrera-Viedma, Choice functions and mechanisms for linguistic preference relations, Eur. J. Oper. Res., 120 (2000), 144–161. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-2217(98)00383-X doi: 10.1016/S0377-2217(98)00383-X
    [22] C. Hwang, K. Yoon, Methods for multiple attribute decision making, In: Multiple attribute decision making, Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer, 1981, 58–191. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-642-48318-9_3
    [23] N. Jan, L. Zedam, T. Mahmood, E. Rak, Z. Ali, Generalized dice similarity measures for q-rung orthopair fuzzy sets with applications, Complex Intell. Syst., 6 (2020), 545–558. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40747-020-00145-4 doi: 10.1007/s40747-020-00145-4
    [24] E. Kartheek, S. S. Basha, The minimum dominating energy of fuzzy graph, J. Inform. Optim. Sci., 38 (2017), 443–453. https://doi.org/10.1080/02522667.2016.1190569 doi: 10.1080/02522667.2016.1190569
    [25] K. Kalpana, S. Lavanya, Connectedness energy of fuzzy graph, J. Comput. Math. Sci., 9 (2018), 485–492.
    [26] D. F. Li, C. T. Cheng, New similarity measures of intuitionistic fuzzy sets and application to pattern recognitions, Pattern Recogn. Lett., 23 (2002), 221–225. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0167-8655(01)00110-6 doi: 10.1016/S0167-8655(01)00110-6
    [27] Y. H. Li, D. L. Olson, Z. Qin, Similarity measures between intuitionistic fuzzy (vague) sets: a comparative analysis, Pattern Recogn. Lett., 28 (2007), 278–285. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patrec.2006.07.009 doi: 10.1016/j.patrec.2006.07.009
    [28] S. Y. Mohamed, A. M. Ali, Energy of spherical fuzzy graph, Adv. Math. Sci. J., 9 (2020), 321–332. https://doi.org/10.37418/amsj.9.1.26 doi: 10.37418/amsj.9.1.26
    [29] T. Mahmood, Z. Ali, Entropy measure and TOPSIS method based on correlation coefficient using complex q-rung orthopair fuzzy information and its application to multi-attribute decision making, Soft Comput., 25 (2021), 1249–1275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-020-05218-7 doi: 10.1007/s00500-020-05218-7
    [30] S. Naz, S. Ashraf, F. Karaaslan, Energy of a bipolar fuzzy graph and its application in decision making, Ital. J. Pure Appl. Math., 40 (2018), 339–352.
    [31] B. Praba, V. M. Chandrasekaran, G. Deepa, Energy of an intuitionistic fuzzy graph, Ital. J. Pure Appl. Math., 32 (2014), 431–444.
    [32] T. Pathinathan, J. J. Arockiaraj, J. J. Rosline, Hesitancy fuzzy graphs, Indian J. Sci. Technol., 8 (2015), 1–5. https://doi.org/10.17485/ijst/2015/v8i35/86672 doi: 10.17485/ijst/2015/v8i35/86672
    [33] N. R. Reddy, S. S. Basha, The correlation coefficient of hesitancy fuzzy graphs in decision making, Comput. Syst. Sci. Eng., 46 (2023), 579–596. https://doi.org/10.32604/csse.2023.034527 doi: 10.32604/csse.2023.034527
    [34] N. R. Reddy, M. Z. Khan, S. S. Basha, A. Alahmadi, A. H. Alahmadi, C. L. Chowdhary, The Laplacian energy of hesitancy fuzzy graphs in decision-making problems, Comput. Syst. Sci. Eng., 44 (2023), 2637–2653. https://doi.org/10.32604/csse.2023.029255. doi: 10.32604/csse.2023.029255
    [35] M. Sarwar, M. Akram, F. Zafar, Decision making approach based on competition graphs and extended TOPSIS method under bipolar fuzzy environment, Math. Comput. Appl., 23 (2018), 1–17. https://doi.org/10.3390/mca23040068 doi: 10.3390/mca23040068
    [36] T. Tanino, Fuzzy preference orderings in group decision making, Fuzzy Sets Syst., 12 (1984), 117–131. https://doi.org/10.1016/0165-0114(84)90032-0 doi: 10.1016/0165-0114(84)90032-0
    [37] V. Torra, Hesitant fuzzy sets, International Journal of Intelligent Systems, 25 (2010), 529–539. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.20418 doi: 10.1002/int.20418
    [38] V. Torra, Y. Narukawa, On hesitant fuzzy sets and decision, 2009 IEEE International Conference on Fuzzy Systems, 2009, 1378–1382. https://doi.org/10.1109/FUZZY.2009.5276884 doi: 10.1109/FUZZY.2009.5276884
    [39] Y. H. Wang, Z. F. Shan, L. Huang, The extension of TOPSIS method for multi-attribute decision-making with q-rung orthopair hesitant fuzzy sets, IEEE Access, 8 (2020), 165151–165167. https://doi.org/10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3018542 doi: 10.1109/ACCESS.2020.3018542
    [40] M. M. Xia, Z. S. Xu, Hesitant fuzzy information aggregation in decision making, Int. J. Approx. Reason., 52 (2011), 395–407. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijar.2010.09.002 doi: 10.1016/j.ijar.2010.09.002
    [41] M. M. Xia, Z. S. Xu, Managing hesitant information in GDM problems under fuzzy and multiplivative preference relations, Int. J. Uncertain. Fuzziness Knowl. Based Syst., 21 (2013), 865–897. https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218488513500402 doi: 10.1142/S0218488513500402
    [42] Z. S. Xu, M. M. Xia, Distance and similarity measures for hesitant fuzzy sets, Inform. Sci., 181 (2011), 2128–2138. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ins.2011.01.028 doi: 10.1016/j.ins.2011.01.028
    [43] Z. S. Xu, Incomplete linguistic preference relations and their fusion, Inform. Fusion, 7 (2006), 331–337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.inffus.2005.01.003 doi: 10.1016/j.inffus.2005.01.003
    [44] Z. S. Xu, M. M. Xia, Hesitant fuzzy entropy and cross-entropy and their use in multiattribute decision-making, Int. J. Intell. Syst., 27 (2012), 799–822. https://doi.org/10.1002/int.21548 doi: 10.1002/int.21548
    [45] J. X. Yang, X. A. Tang, S. L. Yang, Novel correlation coefficients for hesitant fuzzy sets and their applications to supplier selection and medical diagnosis, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst., 35 (2018), 6427–6441. https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-181393 doi: 10.3233/JIFS-181393
    [46] R. M. Zulqarnain, X. L. Xin, M. Saeed, A development of Pythagorean fuzzy hypersoft set with basic operations and decision-making approach based on the correlation coefficient, Theory Appl. Hypersoft Set, 6 (2021), 85. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4788064 doi: 10.5281/zenodo.4788064
  • This article has been cited by:

    1. Li Chen, Suyun Wang, Yongjun Li, Jinying Wei, New results for fractional ordinary differential equations in fuzzy metric space, 2024, 9, 2473-6988, 13861, 10.3934/math.2024674
    2. Saliha Karadayi-Usta, Achieving sustainability via micromobility solutions in hospitality industry: A risk analysis case study with internal stakeholders' perspectives, 2025, 60, 22105395, 101374, 10.1016/j.rtbm.2025.101374
    3. Ömer Özden, Murat Duman, Pınar Gençpınar, Şule Çağlayan Sözmen, Durgül Yılmaz, Evaluation of the Patients Admitted to the Pediatric Emergency Department with Influenza Like Illness During 2009 Influenza A/H1N1 Pandemic Period, 2025, 21462399, 10.4274/cayd.galenos.2025.72324
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2023 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

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

Metrics

Article views(1960) PDF downloads(66) Cited by(2)

Figures and Tables

Figures(9)  /  Tables(4)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog