On some new operations in soft set theory
1.5K
TL;DR: This paper points out that several assertions in a previous paper by Maji et al. are not true in general, and gives some new notions such as the restricted intersection, the restricted union, therestricted difference and the extended intersection of two soft sets.
read more
Abstract: Molodtsov introduced the theory of soft sets, which can be seen as a new mathematical approach to vagueness. In this paper, we first point out that several assertions (Proposition 2.3 (iv)-(vi), Proposition 2.4 and Proposition 2.6 (iii), (iv)) in a previous paper by Maji et al. [P.K. Maji, R. Biswas, A.R. Roy, Soft set theory, Comput. Math. Appl. 45 (2003) 555-562] are not true in general, by counterexamples. Furthermore, based on the analysis of several operations on soft sets introduced in the same paper, we give some new notions such as the restricted intersection, the restricted union, the restricted difference and the extended intersection of two soft sets. Moreover, we improve the notion of complement of a soft set, and prove that certain De Morgan's laws hold in soft set theory with respect to these new definitions.
read more
Chat with Paper
AI Agents for this Paper
Find similar papers on Google Scholar, PubMed and Arxiv
Write a critical review of this paper
Analyze citations of this paper to find unaddressed research gaps
Citations
Novel MCGDM analysis under m-polar fuzzy soft expert sets
TL;DR: The goal of this article is to produce a new MCGDM model which covers criteria evaluation by different experts, developed by the combination of m-polar fuzzy soft expert sets and a comparison of the developed model with existing mathematical methods is provided.
33
Decision making algorithmic techniques based on aggregation operations and similarity measures of possibility intuitionistic fuzzy hypersoft sets
TL;DR: In this article , the possibility intuitionistic fuzzy hypersoft set (PIFS) structure is proposed to generalize the existing structure and to make it adequate for multi-argument approximate function.
33
Some Results on Fuzzy Soft Topological Spaces
Cigdem Gunduz,Sadi Bayramov +1 more
TL;DR: F fuzzy soft continuous mapping, fuzzy soft open and fuzzy soft closed mappings, and fuzzysoft homeomorphism for fuzzy soft topological spaces are given and structural characteristics are discussed and studied.
33
Elicitation criterions for restricted intersection of two incomplete soft sets
TL;DR: Several elicitation criterions for decision making of incomplete soft sets which are generated by restricted intersection are developed and compared to show that their elicitation methods can potentially be embedded in recommender or decision support systems.
33
Soft hyperstructure
TL;DR: It is shown that soft hypergroupoids are closely related to L-subhypergroupoid, and using the notion of soft hyper groupoid, some new properties ofsoft hypergroupoid are obtained.
32
References
Soft set theory—First results
TL;DR: The main purpose of this paper is to introduce the basic notions of the theory of soft sets, to present the first results of the the theory, and to discuss some problems of the future.
4.7K
Soft set theory
TL;DR: The authors define equality of two soft sets, subset and super set of a soft set, complement of asoft set, null soft set and absolute soft set with examples and De Morgan's laws and a number of results are verified in soft set theory.
2.5K
Soft sets and soft groups
Hacı Aktaş,Naim Çağman +1 more
TL;DR: The basic properties of soft sets are introduced, and compare soft sets to the related concepts of fuzzy sets and rough sets, and a definition of soft groups is given.
1.2K
Soft semirings
TL;DR: This paper initiates the study of soft semirings by using the soft set theory, and the notions of soft Semirings, soft subsemirings,soft ideals, idealistic softSemirings and soft semiring homomorphisms are introduced, and several related properties are investigated.
657
A note on Soft Set Theory [Comput. Math. Appl. 45 (4-5) (2003) 555-562]
TL;DR: It is pointed out that the assertion of Maji, Biswas and Roy that (F,A,A)@?@? @?@F=@F, is incorrect by a counterexample.