In this paper, the sine, cosine and cotangent similarity measures of interval rough neutrosophic sets is proposed. Some properties of the proposed measures are discussed.

© All Rights Reserved

0 views

In this paper, the sine, cosine and cotangent similarity measures of interval rough neutrosophic sets is proposed. Some properties of the proposed measures are discussed.

© All Rights Reserved

- Statics Problems by DkMamonai
- SL Math Trig Practice Sheet 1
- HS Advanced Topics Final
- Practice Exercise on Trigonometry p3
- Spring Mass Vibration
- Trig Ident
- ExamView - Practice Test
- Module 1 Mathematics Workbook ETBN 0474 Iss 1 01082010(1)-1
- Hybrid Model of Rough Sets & Neural Network for Classifying Renal stones Patient
- 1203.3170
- Graphs of the Trigonometric Functions
- 50
- Introducing a Graduate Research Problem to a Junior Level Class
- Precalculus Sample Lesson
- MATHEMATICS Paper 2 - MEMO.docx
- 3RD PTESTfinals
- PreCalc1
- h alg 2 t10 3 filled in
- Simolpe
- Fss 4e5n Prelimam1 2009

You are on page 1of 9

Trigonometric Hamming Similarity Measures under

Interval Rough Neutrosophic Environment

Surapati Pramanik1, Rumi Roy2, Tapan Kumar Roy3, Florentin Smarandache4

1

Department of Mathematics, Nandalal Ghosh B.T. College, Panpur, P.O.-Narayanpur, District –North 24 Parganas, Pin code-743126, West Bengal,

India. *E-mail: sura_pati@yahoo.co.in

2

Department of Mathematics, Indian Institute of Engineering Science and Technology, Shibpur, P.O.-Botanic Garden, Howrah-711103, West Bengal,

India, E-mail: roy.rumi.r@gmail.com

3

Department of Mathematics, Indian Institute of Engineering Science and Technology, Shibpur, P.O.-Botanic Garden, Howrah-711103, West Bengal,

India, E-mail: roy_t_k@gmail.com

Abstract. In this paper, the sine, cosine and cotangent similarity proposed multi attribute decision making approaches based on

measures of interval rough neutrosophic sets is proposed. Some proposed similarity measures. To demonstrate the applicability, a

properties of the proposed measures are discussed. We have numerical example is solved.

Keywords: sine hamming similarity measure, cosine hamming similarity measure, cotangent hamming similarity measure, interval

rough neutrosophic set.

rough neutrosophic sets and its application to medical

The basic concept of neutrosophic set grounded by

diagnosis. Pramanik and Mondal [21] presented

Smarandache [1, 2, 3, 4, 5] is a generalization of classical

trigonometric Hamming similarity measure of rough

set or crisp set [6], fuzzy set [7], intuitionistic fuzzy set [8].

neutrosophic sets. Pramanik et al. [22] proposed rough

Wang et al.[9] extended the concept of neutrosophic set to

neutrosophic multi attribute decision making based on

single valued neutrosophic sets (SVNSs). Broumi et al.

correlation coefficient. Pramanik et al. [23] also proposed

[10, 11] proposed new hybrid intelligent structure namely,

rough neutrosophic projection and bidirectional projection

rough neutrosophic set combing the concept of rough set

measures. Mondal et al. [24] presented multi attribute

theory [12] and the concept of neutrosophic set theory to

decision making based on rough neutrosophic variational

deal with uncertainty and incomplete information. Rough

coefficient similarity measures. Mondal at al. [25] also

neutrosophic set is the generalization of rough fuzzy sets

presented rough neutrosophic TOPSIS for multi attribute

[13, 14] and rough intuitionistic fuzzy sets [15]. Several

group decision making. Mondal and Pramanik [26]

studies of rough neutrosophic sets have been reported in

presented tri-complex rough neutrosophic similarity

the literature. Mondal and Pramanik [16] applied the

measure and its application in multi-attribute decision

concept of rough neutrosophic set in multi-attribute

making. In 2015, Broumi and Smarandache [27]

decision making based on grey relational analysis.

combined the concept of rough set theory [12] and interval

Pramanik and Mondal [17] presented cosine similarity

neutrosophic set theory [28] and defined interval rough

measure of rough neutrosophic sets and its application in

neutrosophic set. Pramanik et al. [29] presented multi

medical diagnosis. Pramanik and Mondal [18] also

attribute decision making based on projection and

proposed some rough neutrosophic similarity measures

bidirectional projection measures under interval rough

namely Dice and Jaccard similarity measures of rough

neutrosophic environment.

neutrosophic environment. Mondal and Pramanik [19]

proposed rough neutrosophic multi attribute decision

making based on rough score accuracy function. Pramanik

Surapati Pramanik, Rumi Roy, Tapan Kumar Roy, Florentin Smarandache, Multi-attribute Decision Making Based on

Several Trigonometric Hamming Similarity Measures under Interval Rough Neutrosophic Environment

Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 19, 2018 111

2 Preliminaries

Multi-attribute decision making using trigonometric In this Section, we provide some basic definitions

Hamming similarity measures under interval rough regarding SVNSs, IRNSs which are useful in the paper.

neutrosophic environment is not addressed in the literature.

In 1999, Smarandache presented the following definition

Research gap MADM strategy using sine, cosine and of neutrosophic set (NS) [1].

cotangent similarity measures under interval rough

Definition 2.1.1. Let X be a space of points (objects) with

neutrosophic environment.

Research questions generic element in X denoted by x. A NS A in X is

characterized by a truth-membership function TA, an

(i) Is it possible to define sine, cosine and cotangent indeterminacy membership function I A and a falsity

similarity measures between interval rough membership function FA. The functions TA , IA and FA are

neutrosophic sets? real standard or non-standard subsets of (-0,1+) that is

(ii) Is it possible to develop new MADM strategies TA:X (-0, 1+) , IA:X (-0, 1+) and FA:X (-0, 1+). It

based on the proposed measures in interval should be noted that there is no restriction on the sum of

rough neutrosophic environment? TA(x) , IA(x) and FA(x) i.e.

0 TA (X) I A (X) FA (X) 1

The objectives of the paper are

i. to define sine, cosine and cotangent similarity Definition 2.1.2: (Single-valued neutrosophic set) [9]. Let

measures between interval rough neutrosophic X be a universal space of points (objects) with a generic

sets. element of X denoted by x. A single valued neutrosophic

set A is characterized by a truth membership function TA(x)

ii. to prove the basic properties of sine, cosine and , a falsity membership function FA(x) and indeterminacy

cotangent similarity measures of interval rough function IA(x) with

neutrosophic sets. TA (x),IA (x) and FA (x) [0,1] x in X

iii. to develop new MADM strategies based on the When X is continuous, a SNVS S can be written as

proposed measures in interval rough neutrosophic follows

environment. A TA (x), FA (x), I A (x) / x X

x

follows

(i) In this paper, we propose sine, cosine and

A TA (x), FA (x), I A (x) / x X

cotangent similarity measures under interval

rough neutrosophic environment. For a SVNS S, 0 ≤ supTA(x) + supIA(x) + supFA(x) ≤ 3.

(ii) We develop new MADM strategy based on the

2.2 Rough neutrosophic set

proposed measures in interval rough

neutrosophic environment. Rough neutrosophic sets [10, 11] are the generalization of

(iii) We also present numerical example to show the rough fuzzy sets [13, 14] and rough intuitionistic fuzzy sets

[15].

feasibility and applicability of the proposed

measures. Definition 2.2.1: Let Y be a non-null set and R be an

equivalence relation on Y. Let P be neutrosophic set in Y

Rest of the paper is organized in the following way. with the membership function T P , indeterminacy function

Section 2 describes preliminaries of neutrosophic sets and IP and non-membership function FP . The lower and the

rough neutrosophic sets and interval rough neutrosophic upper approximations of P in the approximation (Y, R)

sets. Section 3, Section 4 and Section 5 presents definitions denoted by are respectively defined as:

and propositions of the proposed measures. Section 6 N(P) x,TN(P) (x), I N(P) (x), FN(P) (x) /y [x]R ,

presents multi attribute decision-making strategies based

on the similarity measures. Section 7 provides a numerical xY

example. Section 8 presents the conclusion and future and

scopes of research. N(P) x, T (x), I (x), F (x) /y [x]R ,

N(P) N(P) N(P)

xY

where,

Surapati Pramanik, Rumi Roy, Tapan Kumar Roy, Florentin Smarandache, Multi-attribute Decision Making Based on

Several Trigonometric Hamming Similarity Measures under Interval Rough Neutrosophic Environment

112 Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 19, 2018

TN(P) (x) z [x]R TP (Y), I N(P) (x) z [x]R I P (Y), 0 A ( RX RX) A (RX RX) 1

FN(P) (x) z [x]R FP (Y)

Definition 2.3.3

and

T (x) z [x]R TP (Y), I (x) z [x]R I P (Y), Assume that, (U, R) be a Pawlak approximation space, for

N(P) N(P)

. an interval neutrosophic set

F (x) z [x]R FP (Y)

N(P) A = {<x, [TAL(x), TAU(x)], [IAL(x), IAU(x)], [FAL(x),

So, FAU(x)]> : x U}

0 TN(P) (x) I N(P) (x) FN(P) (x) 3 The lower approximation AR and the upper approximation

A R of A in the Pawlak approximation space (U, R) are

and

0T (x) I (x) F (x) 3 expressed as follows:

N(P) N(P) N(P)

A R = {<x, [ y[x] {TAL (y)}, y [x] {TA (y)}],

Here and denote “max” and “min” operators [ y[x] {I AL (y)},

R

{I A (y)}],

respectively,TP(y), IP(y) and FP(y) are the membership , R

L

y [x]

{FA (y)}]> : x U}

R

P. A R = {<x, [ y[x] {T (y)}, L

{TA (y)}],

A y [x]

Thus NS mapping, R

N, N : N(Y) N(Y) are, respectively, referred to as the R

y [x]

[ y[x] {FAL (y)}, y {FA (y)}]> : x U}

lower and upper rough NS approximation operators, and R

[x]

the pair (N(P), N(P)) is called the rough neutrosophic set The symbols and indicate “min” and “max”

operators respectively. R denotes an equivalence relation

in (Y, R).

for interval neutrosophic set A. Here [x]R is the

2.3 Interval rough neutrosophic set equivalence class of the element x. It is obvious that

Interval rough neutrosophic set (IRNS) [22] is the hybrid [ y[x] {TAU (y)}, y [x] {TA (y)}] [0,1],

structure of rough sets and interval neutrosophic sets.

R

{I LA (y)}] [0,1],

According to Broumi and Smarandache, IRNS is the R

generalizations of interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy rough [ y[x] {FA (y)}, y [x]

{FAL (y)}] [0,1].

R

{I AU (y)}

R

R

U.Then the pair (U, R) is called a Pawlak Then AR is an interval neutrosophic set (INS)

approximationspace. An equivalence class of R containing Similarly, we have

x will bedenoted by [x]R for X U, the lower and upper

[ y[x] {TAL (y)}, y {TA (y)}] [0,1],

approximationof X with respect to (U, R) are denoted by R

[x]

L

respectively [ y[x] {I (y)}, y

A [x]

{I A (y)}] [0,1],

R

L

RX and RX and are defined by [ y[x] {F (y)}, y

A [x]

{FA (y)}] [0,1] and

R

RX = {x U : [x]R X },

U

0 y[x] {T (y)} y A [x]

{I A (y)}

R

U

RX = { x U : [x]R X ≠ Ø}. y[x] {F (y)}] 3A

R

Xis called a rough set. If AR = A R then A is a definable set, otherwise A is an

Definition 2.3.2 interval valued neutrosophic rough set. Here, AR and A R

Let U be a universe and X, a rough set in U. An are called the lower and upper approximations of interval

intuitionistic fuzzy rough set A in U is characterized by a neutrosophic set with respect to approximation space (U,R)

membership function μA:U→ [0, 1] and non-membership respectively. AR and A R are simply denoted by A and

functionνA: U→ [0, 1] such that μA(RX)=1and νA(RX) = 0

A respectively.

ie, [μA (x),νA (x)]=[1,0] if x∈ (RX) and μA(U− R X)= 0,

νA(U− R X)=1

ie,

Surapati Pramanik, Rumi Roy, Tapan Kumar Roy, Florentin Smarandache, Multi-attribute Decision Making Based on

Several Trigonometric Hamming Similarity Measures under Interval Rough Neutrosophic Environment

Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 19, 2018 113

Hamming distance between two neutrosophic sets Proof:

M (TM ( x), I M ( x), FM ( x)) and N (TN ( x), I N ( x), FN ( x)) is

1. Since the functions

defined as TM ( x), I M ( x), FM ( x), TN ( x), I N ( x) and FN (x)

H (M , N ) the value of the cosine function are within [0, 1], the

1 n similarity measure based on interval rough neutrosophic

( TM ( xi ) TN ( xi ) I M ( xi ) I N ( xi ) cosine Hamming similarity function also lies within [ 0, 1].

3 i 1

Hence 0 cos (M,N) 1.

FM ( xi ) FN ( xi ) ).

This completes the proof.

2. For any two RNSs M and N, if M = N, then the

3. Cosine Hamming Similarity Measure of IRNS following relations hold

TM ( xi ) TN ( xi ), I M ( xi ) I N ( xi ),

Assume that

FM ( xi ) FN ( xi ).

M { x i , ([TiM

, TiM

],[IiM

, IiM

],[FiM

, FiM

], Hence,

[TiM

, TiM

],[IiM

, IiM

],[FiM

, FiM

] : i 1, 2,..., n} TM ( xi ) TN ( xi ) 0, I M ( xi ) I N ( xi ) 0,

N { x i ,[TiN , TiN ],[IiN

, IiN

],[FiN , FiN ], Thus cos(M,N) = 1

[T , T ],[I , I ],[F , F ] :i 1, 2,..., n}

Conversely,

iN iN iN iN iN iN

in X = {x1, x2, …, xn}be any two IRNSs. A cosine If cos(M,N) = 1, then

Hamming similarity operator between IRNS M and N is TM ( xi ) TN ( xi ) 0, I M ( xi ) I N ( xi ) 0,

defined as follows:

FM ( xi ) FN ( xi ) 0.

1 n

cos(M, N) cos( ( TM (x i ) TN (x i ) Since cos(0) = 1. So we can write

n i 1 6

I M (x i ) I N (x i ) FM (x i ) FN (x i ) )). TM ( xi ) TN ( xi ), I M ( xi ) I N ( xi ),

FM ( xi ) FN ( xi ).

Hence M = N.

(TiM

TiM

TiM

TiM

)

TM (x i ) , 3. As

4 1 n

(I

I

IiM

IiM

) cos(M, N) cos( ( TM (x i ) TN (x i )

iM iM n i 1 6

I M (x i ) , I M (x i ) I N (x i ) FM (x i ) FN (x i ) ))

4

(FiM

FiM

FiM

FiM

) 1 n

cos( ( TN (x i ) TM (x i )

FM (x i ) , n i 1 6

4 I N (x i ) I M (x i ) FN (x i ) FM (x i ) ))

(TiN TiN TiN TiN ) cos(N, M)

TN (x i ) ,

4 This completes the proof.

(I I IiN

iN

IiN

iN

)

I N (x i ) , 4. Sine Hamming Similarity Measure of IRNS

4

(FiN FiN FiN FiN ) Assume that

FN (x i ) .

4 M { x i , ([TiM

, TiM

],[IiM

, IiM

],[FiM

, FiM

],

Properties 3.1 [TiM

, TiM

],[IiM

, IiM

],[FiM

, FiM

] : i 1, 2,..., n}

The defined rough neutrosophic cosine hamming similarity and

operator cos(M, N) between IRNSs M and N satisfies the N { x i ,[TiN , TiN ],[IiN

, IiN

],[FiN , FiN ],

following properties:

1. 0 cos (M,N) 1. [TiN , TiN ],[IiN

, IiN

],[FiN , FiN ] :i 1, 2,..., n}

2. cos(M,N) = 1 if and only if M = N.

114 Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 19, 2018

in X = {x1, x2, …, xn}be any two IRNSs. A sine Hamming TM ( xi ) TN ( xi ) 0, I M ( xi ) I N ( xi ) 0,

similarity operator between IRNS M and N is defined as

follows: FM ( xi ) FN ( xi ) 0.

1 n Thus sin(M,N) = 1

sin(M, N) 1 [ sin( ( TM (x i ) TN (x i )

n i 1 Conversely,

I M (x i ) I N (x i ) FM (x i ) FN (x i ) ))].

If sin(M,N) = 1, then

TM ( xi ) TN ( xi ) 0, I M ( xi ) I N ( xi ) 0,

Here,

FM ( xi ) FN ( xi ) 0.

Since sin(0) = 1. So we can write

(TiM TiM TiM TiM )

TM ( xi ) , TM ( xi ) TN ( xi ), I M ( xi ) I N ( xi ),

4

FM ( xi ) FN ( xi ).

( I iM I iM I iM I iM ) Hence M = N.

I M ( xi ) ,

4 3. As

1 n

( FiM FiM FiM FiM ) sin(M, N) 1 [ sin( ( TM (x i ) TN (x i )

FM ( xi ) , n i 1

4 I M (x i ) I N (x i ) FM (x i ) FN (x i ) ))]

(TiN TiN TiN TiN ) 1 n

1 [ sin( ( TN (x i ) TM (x i )

TN ( xi ) , n i 1

4 I N (x i ) I M (x i ) FN (x i ) FM (x i ) ))]

( I iN I iN I iN I iN ) sin(N, M).

I N ( xi ) ,

4 This completes the proof.

( FiN FiN FiN FiN )

FN ( xi ) . 5. Cotangent Hamming Similarity Measure of

4 IRNS

Properties 4.1 Assume that

The defined rough neutrosophic sine hamming similarity M { x i , ([TiM

, TiM

],[IiM

, IiM

],[FiM

, FiM

],

operator sin (M, N) between IRNSs M and N satisfies the [TiM

, TiM

],[IiM

, IiM

],[FiM

, FiM

] : i 1, 2,..., n}

following properties:

1. 0 sin (M,N) 1. and

2. sin (M,N) = 1 if and only if M = N. N { x i ,[TiN , TiN ],[IiN

, IiN

],[FiN , FiN ],

3. sin (M,N) = sin (N,M). [TiN , TiN ],[IiN

, IiN

],[FiN , FiN ] :i 1, 2,..., n}

Proof: in X = {x1, x2, …, xn}be any two IRNSs. A cosine

Hamming similarity operator between IRNS M and N is

1.Since the functions

defined as follows:

TM ( x), I M ( x), FM ( x), TN ( x), I N ( x) and FN (x)

the value of the sine function are within [0,1], the cot(M, N)

similarity measure based on interval rough neutrosophic 1 n

cosine Hamming similarity function also lies within [ 0,1]. cot( ( TM (x i ) TN (x i )

n i 1 4 12

Hence 0 sin (M,N) 1. I M (x i ) I N (x i ) FM (x i ) FN (x i ) )).

This completes the proved.

2.For any two RNSs M and N, if M = N, then the Here,

following relations hold

TM ( xi ) TN ( xi ), I M ( xi ) I N ( xi ), (TiM

TiM TiM TiM )

TM (x i ) ,

FM ( xi ) FN ( xi ). 4

Hence, (IiM

IiM IiM IiM )

IM (x i ) ,

4

Surapati Pramanik, Rumi Roy, Tapan Kumar Roy, Florentin Smarandache, Multi-attribute Decision Making Based on

Several Trigonometric Hamming Similarity Measures under Interval Rough Neutrosophic Environment

Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 19, 2018 115

(FiM

FiM

FiM

FiM

) 6. Decision making under trigonometric interval

FM (x i ) , rough neutrosophic Hamming similarity

4 measures

(TiN TiN TiN TiN )

TN (x i ) , In this section, we apply interval rough cosine, sine and

4 cotangent Hamming similarity measures between IRNSs to

(IiN

IiN

IiN

IiN

) the multi-attribute decision making problem. Consider

I N (x i ) ,

4 C={C1,C2, ... ,Cm} be the set of attributes and A={A1,A2, ...

(F F FiN FiN )

, An} be a set of alternatives. Now we provide an algorithm

iN iN

FN (x i ) . for MADM problems involving interval rough

4 neutrosophic information.

Properties 5.1 Algorithm 1. (see Fig 1)

The defined rough neutrosophic cosine hamming similarity Step 1: Construction of the decision matrix with interval

operator cot(M, N) between IRNSs M and N satisfies the rough neutrosophic number

following properties: Decision maker considers the decision matrix with respect

1. cot(M, N) = 1 if and only if M = N. to m alternatives and n attributes in

2. cot(M, N) = cot(N, M). terms of interval rough neutrosophic numbers as follows:

Z11 Z12 ... ... ... Z1m

1.For any two RNSs M and N, if M = N, then the Z Z ... ... ... Z

following relations hold 21 22 2m

TM ( xi ) TN ( xi ), I M ( xi ) I N ( xi ), FM ( xi ) FN ( xi ). D=<Zij>nxm= ... ... ... ... ... ...

... ... ... ... ... ...

Hence, ... ... ... ... ... ...

TM ( xi ) TN ( xi ) 0, I M ( xi ) I N ( xi ) 0, Zn1 Zn 2 ... ... ... Znm

FM ( xi ) FN ( xi ) 0. Where

Thus cot(M,N) = 1 Zij = <( [TiM

, TiM

],[IiM

, IiM

],[FiM

, FiM

],

with

Conversely, [TiM , TiM ],[IiM , IiM ],[FiM , FiM ])>

A (y)} y[x] R {FA (y)}] 3

U

FM ( xi ) FN ( xi ) 0. Generally, the evaluation attribute can be categorized into

two types: benefit type attribute and cost type attribute. We

define an ideal alternative S* .

Since cot( ) = 1. So we can write

4 For benefit type attribute,

TM ( xi ) TN ( xi ), I M ( xi ) I N ( xi ), S*=

FM ( xi ) FN ( xi ). {(min i Tij , max i I ij , max i Fij ), (maxi Tij , min i I ij , min i Fij )} .

Hence M = N.

For cost type attribute,

2. As,

S*=

1 n

cot(M, N) cot( ( TM (x i ) TN (x i ) {(maxi Tij , min i I ij , min i Fij ), (min i Tij , max i I ij , max i Fij )} .

n i 1 4 12

I M (x i ) I N (x i ) FM (x i ) FN (x i ) )) Step 3: Determination of the interval rough trigonometric

neutrosophic Hamming similarity function of the

1 n alternatives

cot( ( TN (x i ) TM (x i )

n i 1 4 12 We compute interval rough trigonometric neutrosophic

I N (x i ) I M (x i ) FN (x i ) FM (x i ) )) similarity measure between the ideal alternative S* and

cot(N, M). each alternative Zi = <Zij>nxm for all i = 1, ….., n and j = 1,

….., m.

This completes the proof.

Step 4: Ranking the alternatives

Surapati Pramanik, Rumi Roy, Tapan Kumar Roy, Florentin Smarandache, Multi-attribute Decision Making Based on

Several Trigonometric Hamming Similarity Measures under Interval Rough Neutrosophic Environment

116 Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 19, 2018

similarity measure between each alternative and the ideal C1 C2 C3 C4

alternative, the ranking order of all alternatives can be

determined and the best alternative is selected with the

highest similarity value.

Step 5: End. S1 <([.6, .7], <([.5, .7], <([.5, .6], <([.8, .9],

Start [.3, .5], [.3, .4], [.4, .5], [.3, .4],

[.3, .4]), [.1, .2]), [.4, .6]), [.5, .6]),

([.8, .9], ([.7, .9], ([.7, .8], ([.7, .8],

Set the attributes(in terms of IRNSs) [.1, .3], [.3, .5], [.2, .4], [.3, .5],

[.1, .2])> [.3, .4])> [.3, .4])> [.3, .5])>

S2 <([.7, .8], <([.6, .7], <([.5, .7], <([.7, .8],

[.2, .3], [.1, .2], [.2, .3], [.3, .5],

Determine the ideal alternative [.0, .2]), [.0, .2]), [.1, .2]), [.1,.3]),

([.7, .9], ([.6, .7], ([.6, .9], ([.5, .7],

[.1, .2], [.1, .3], [.3, .5], [.5, .6],

[.1, .2])> [.1, .3])> [.2 .4])> [.2, .3])>

Calculate the interval rough trigonometric

neutrosophic Hamming similarity

measures

S3 <([.6, .7], <([.5, .7], <([.6, .8], <([.4, .7],

[.3, .4], [.2, .4], [.2, .4], [.2, .4],

Rank the alternative [.0, .3]), [.2, .4]), [.3, .4]), [.4, .5]),

([.6, .9], ([.6, .8], ([.6, .8], ([.5, .8],

[.1, .2], [.1, .3], [.2, .5], [.2, .5],

[.1, .2])> [.1, .2])> [.3, .5])> [.0, .2])>

End

method Step 2: Determine the benefit type attribute and cost type

attribute

7. Numerical example Here three benefit type attributes C1, C2, C3 and one cost

type attribute C4. We calculate the ideal alternative as

Assume that a decision maker intends to select the most follows:

suitable laptop for random use from the three initially

S*

chosen laptops (S1, S2, S3) by considering four attributes

namely: features C1, reasonable price C2, customer care C3, { ([.6, .7],[.3, .5],[.3, .4]),([.8, .9],[.1, .2],[.1, .2]) ,

risk factor C4. Based on the proposed approach discussed ([.5, .7],[.3, .4],[.2, .4]),([.7, .9],[.1, .3],[.1, .2]) ,

in section 5, the considered problem is solved by the ([.5, .6],[.4, .5],[.4, .6]),([.7, .9],[.2, .4],[.2, .4]) ,

following steps:

([.8, .9],[.2, .4],[.1, .3]),([.5, .7],[.5, .6],[.3, .5]) ) }

Step1: Construct the decision matrix with interval rough

neutrosophic number Step3: Calculate the interval rough trigonometric

neutrosophic Hamming similarity measure of the

The decision maker construct the decision matrix with

alternatives

respect to the three alternatives and four attributes in terms

of interval rough neutrosophic number. cos(S1 ,S* ) 0.999998923,

cos(S1 ,S* ) 0.999997135,

cos(S1 ,S* ) 0.999998505,

sin(S1 ,S* ) 0.999531651,

sin(S1 ,S* ) 0.997658256 ,

Surapati Pramanik, Rumi Roy, Tapan Kumar Roy, Florentin Smarandache, Multi-attribute Decision Making Based on

Several Trigonometric Hamming Similarity Measures under Interval Rough Neutrosophic Environment

Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 19, 2018 117

V [On infinite, linear point-manifolds(sets)]. Mathematische

cot(S1 ,S* ) 70.25049621, Annalen, 21 (1883), 545–591.

cot(S1 ,S* ) 67.22363275, [7] L. A. Zadeh. Fuzzy sets. Information and Control, 8(3)

cot(S1 ,S* ) 68.81008448. (1965), 338-353.

[8] K. T. Atanassov. Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets and

Step 4: Rank the alternatives Systems, 20(1) (1986), 87-96.

Ranking of alternatives is prepared based on the [9] H. Wang, F. Smarandache, Y. Q. Zhang and R. Sunderraman.

descending order of similarity measures. The highest value Single valued neutrosophic sets. Multispace and

Multistructure, 4 (2010), 410-413.

reflects the best alternatives.

[10] S. Broumi, F. Smarandache and M. Dhar. Rough

Here, neutrosophic sets. Italian Journal of Pure and Applied

cos(S1 , S*)> cos(S3 , S*)> cos(S2 , S*). Mathematics, 32 (2014), 493-502.

sin(S1 , S*)> sin(S3 , S*)> sin(S2 , S*). [11] S. Broumi, F. Smarandache and M. Dhar. Rough

cot(S1 , S*)> cot(S3 , S*)> cot(S2 , S*). neutrosophic sets. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, 3 (2014),

60-66.

Hence, the laptop S1 is the best alternative for random use. [12] Z. Pawlak. Rough sets. International Journal of Information

and Computer Sciences, 11(5) (1982), 341-356.

8. Conclusions

[13] D. Dubios and H. Prade. Rough fuzzy sets and fuzzy rough

In this paper, we have proposed interval rough sets. International Journal of General System, 17

trigonometric Hamming similarity measures and proved (1990),191-208.

their properties. We have developed three MADM [14] S. Nanda, and S. Majumdar. Fuzzy rough sets. Fuzzy Sets

strategies base on sine, cosine and cotangent similarity and Systems, 45 (1992), 157–160.

[15] K. V. Thomas and L. S. Nair. Rough intuitionistic fuzzy sets

measures under interval rough neutrosophic environment. in a lattice. International Mathematics Forum, 6 (27) (2011),

Then we solved an illustrative numerical example to 1327-1335.

demonstrate the feasibility, applicability of the developed [16] K. Mondal and S. Pramanik. Rough neutrosophic multi-

attribute decision-making based on grey relational analysis.

strategies. The concept presented in this paper can be

Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, 7 (2015), 8-17.

applied other multiple attribute decision making problems [17] S. Pramanik and K. Mondal. Cosine similarity measure of

such as teacher selection [30, 31, 32], school selection rough neutrosophic sets and its application in medical

[33], weaver selection [34, 35, 36], brick field selection diagnosis. Global Journal of Advanced Research, 2(1)

(2015), 212-220.

[37, 38], logistics center location selection [39, 40], data

[18] S. Pramanik and K. Mondal. Some rough neutrosophic

mining [41] etc. under interval rough neutrosophic similarity measure and their application to multiattribute

environment. decision making. Global Journal of Engineering Science and

Research Management, 2(7) (2015), 61-74.

References attribute decision-making based on rough accuracy score

function. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, 8 (2015), 16-22.

[1] F. Smarandache. A unifying field in logics, neutrosophy: [20] S. Pramanik and K. Mondal. Cotangent similarity measure of

neutrosophic probability, set and logic. AmericanResearch rough neutrosophic sets and its application to medical

Press, Rehoboth, (1998). diagnosis. Journal of New Theory, 4 (2015), 90-102.

[2] F. Smarandache. Linguistic paradoxes and tautologies. [21] K. Mondal, S. Pramanik and F. Smarandache. Several

Libertas Mathematica, University of Texas at Arlington, IX trigonometric Hamming similarity measures of rough

(1999), 143-154. neutrosophic sets and their applications in decision making.

[3] F. Smarandache. A unifying field in logics: neutrosophic New Trends in Neutrosophic Theory and applications, 1,

logics. Multiple Valued Logic, 8(3) (2002), 385-438.

2016, 93-103.

[4] F. Smarandache. Neutrosophic set- a generalization of

intuitionistic fuzzy sets. International Journal of Pure and [22] S. Pramanik, R. Roy, T. K. Roy and F. Smarandache. Multi

Applied Mathematics, 24(3) (2005), 287-297. criteria decision making using correlation coefficient under

[5] F. Smarandache. Neutrosophic set-a generalization of rough neutrosophic environment. Neutrosophic Sets and

intuitionistic fuzzy set. Journal of Defense Resources Systems, 17 (2017), 29-38.

Management, 1(1) (2010), 107-116.

[23] S. Pramanik, R. Roy, and T. K. Roy. Multi criteria decision

making based on projection and bidirectional projection

measures of rough neutrosophic sets. In F. Smarandache, &

Surapati Pramanik, Rumi Roy, Tapan Kumar Roy, Florentin Smarandache, Multi-attribute Decision Making Based on

Several Trigonometric Hamming Similarity Measures under Interval Rough Neutrosophic Environment

118 Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, Vol. 19, 2018

S. Pramanik(Eds.), New Trends in Neutrosophic Theory and [35] P. P. Dey, S. Pramanik and B. C. Giri. An extended grey

Applications, Vol. II. Brussels: Pons Editions. In Press. relational analysis based interval neutrosophic multi-

attribute decision making for weaver selection. Journal of

[24] K. Mondal, S. Pramanik, and F. Smarandache. Multi New Theory, 9 (2015), 82-93.

attribute decision making based on rough neutrosophic [36] P. P. Dey, S. Pramanik and B.C. Giri. Extended projection

variational coefficient similarity measure. Neutrosophic Sets based models for solving multiple attribute decision making

and Systems, 13 (2016), 3-17. problems with interval valued neutrosophic information. In

[25] K. Mondal, S. Pramanik, and F. Smarandache. Rough F. Smarandache, & S. Pramanik (Eds.), New Trends in

Neutrosophic Theory and Applications, Brussels: Pons

neutrosophic TOPSIS for multi-attribute group decision

Edition, 2016, 127-140.

making. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, 13 (2016), 105-

117. [37] K. Mondal and S. Pramanik. Intuitionistic fuzzy multi

criteria group decision making approach to quality-brick

[26] K. Mondal, and S. Pramanik. Tri-complex rough

selection problem. Journal of Applied Quantitative Methods

neutrosophic similarity measure and its application in multi-

attribute decision making. Critical Review, 11 (2015), 26- 9 (2) (2014), 35-50.

[38] K. Mondal and S. Pramanik. Neutrosophic decision making

40.

model for clay-brick selection in construction field based on

[27] S. Broumi and F. Smarandache. Interval neutrosophic rough grey relational analysis. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, 9

sets. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, 7 (2015), 23-31.

(2015), 72-79.

[28] H. Wang, F. Smarandache, Y. Q. Zhang and R.

Sunderraman. Interval neutrosophic sets and logic: theory [39] S. Pramanik, S. Dalapati, and T. K. Roy. Logistics center

and applications in computing. Hexis, Phoenix, (2005). location selection approach based on neutrosophic multi-

[29] S. Pramanik, R. Roy, T. K. Roy and F. Smarandache. Multi criteria decision making. New Trends in Neutrosophic

attribute decision making strategy on projection and Theories and Applications, Pons-Editions, Brussels, 2016,

bidirectional projection measures of interval rough 161-174.

neutrosophic sets. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, 19 [40] S. Pramanik, S. Dalapati, and T. K. Roy. Neutrosophic

(2018). Accepted for publication. multi-attribute group decision making strategy for logistics

center location selection. In F. Smarandache, M. A. Basset,

[30] S. Pramanik, and D. Mukhopadhyaya. Grey relational & V. Chang (Eds), Neutrosophic Operational Research

analysis based intuitionistic fuzzy multi-criteria group Volume III, Brussels: Pons asbl, 2016, 13-32.

decision-making approach for teacher selection in higher [41] K. Mondal, S. Pramanik, and B. C. Giri. Role of

education. International Journal of Computer Applications, Neutrosophic Logic in Data Mining. New Trends in

34 (2011), 21-29. Neutrosophic Theory and Application, Pons-Editions,

[31] K. Mondal and S. Pramanik. Multi-criteria group decision Brussels, 2016, 15-23.

making approach for teacher recruitment in higher education [45] Abdel-Basset, M., Mohamed, M., Smarandache, F., &

under simplified Neutrosophic environment. Neutrosophic Chang, V. (2018). Neutrosophic Association Rule Mining

Sets and Systems, 6 (2014), 28-34. Algorithm for Big Data Analysis. Symmetry, 10(4), 106.

[32] S. Pramanik, R. Roy, and T. K. Roy. Teacher Selection

Strategy Based on Bidirectional Projection Measure in [46] Abdel-Basset, M., & Mohamed, M. (2018). The Role of

Neutrosophic Number Environment. In F. Smarandache, M. Single Valued Neutrosophic Sets and Rough Sets in Smart

Abdel – Basset & V. Chang(Eds.), Neutrosophic City: Imperfect and Incomplete Information Systems.

Operational Research, Vol. II. Brussels: Pons Editions. Measurement. Volume 124, August 2018, Pages 47-55

2017. [47] Abdel-Basset, M., Gunasekaran, M., Mohamed, M., &

[33]K. Mondal and S. Pramanik. Neutrosophic decision making Smarandache, F. A novel method for solving the fully

model of school choice. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, 7 neutrosophic linear programming problems. Neural

(2015), 62-68. Computing and Applications, 1-11.

[34] P. P. Dey, S. Pramanik and B. C. Giri. Multi-criteria group

decision making in intuitionistic fuzzy environment based [48] Abdel-Basset, M., Manogaran, G., Gamal, A., &

on grey relational analysis for weaver selection in Khadi Smarandache, F. (2018). A hybrid approach of neutrosophic

institution. Journal of Applied and Quantitative Methods, 10 sets and DEMATEL method for developing supplier selection

(4) (2015), 1-14. criteria. Design Automation for Embedded Systems, 1-22.

[49] Abdel-Basset, M., Mohamed, M., & Chang, V. (2018).

NMCDA: A framework for evaluating cloud computing

services. Future Generation Computer Systems, 86, 12-29.

Surapati Pramanik, Rumi Roy, Tapan Kumar Roy, Florentin Smarandache, Multi-attribute Decision Making Based on

Several Trigonometric Hamming Similarity Measures under Interval Rough Neutrosophic Environment

- Statics Problems by DkMamonaiUploaded byDarya Memon
- SL Math Trig Practice Sheet 1Uploaded bynora
- HS Advanced Topics FinalUploaded byEdfinity
- Practice Exercise on Trigonometry p3Uploaded bySyukre Geoffery
- Spring Mass VibrationUploaded bysomeguyyabbadabbado
- Trig IdentUploaded byberickson_14
- ExamView - Practice TestUploaded bylornehess
- Module 1 Mathematics Workbook ETBN 0474 Iss 1 01082010(1)-1Uploaded byDragan Ionut
- Hybrid Model of Rough Sets & Neural Network for Classifying Renal stones PatientUploaded byijcsis
- 1203.3170Uploaded byRavindra Jagadale
- Graphs of the Trigonometric FunctionsUploaded byJohn Joshua Montañez
- 50Uploaded bybrendannn
- Introducing a Graduate Research Problem to a Junior Level ClassUploaded bysaeedullah81
- Precalculus Sample LessonUploaded byDylan Grey
- MATHEMATICS Paper 2 - MEMO.docxUploaded byElroi Academy
- 3RD PTESTfinalsUploaded byElsa Mendoza Lim
- PreCalc1Uploaded byareddy_b
- h alg 2 t10 3 filled inUploaded byapi-261379705
- SimolpeUploaded byMpaphi Map'z Dambe
- Fss 4e5n Prelimam1 2009Uploaded bymath3matics3
- An Elementary Trigonometric EquationUploaded byLutfi
- 2009_HSC_Ext2_Solns_-_Jan_Hansen_.pdfUploaded byKingom 885
- Intro to MechUploaded byJChris Esguerra
- 2004_Amaths_Mock1_PaperUploaded byapi-19650882
- Nautical_Astronomy.xlsxUploaded byDuane Daryl Magdato Trul
- calg t6 5Uploaded byapi-261379705
- Chapter9 Trignometry 130411020844 Phpapp02Uploaded byLau Yong Hui
- Practice Midterm SolutionsUploaded byYoshua Octora Renato Sembiring
- Lisp CodesUploaded byJamal Malik
- Jee 2004Uploaded byPawan Babel

- TOPSIS Method for MADM based on Interval Trapezoidal Neutrosophic NumberUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Neutrosophic Sets and Systems. Book series, vol. 23 / 2018Uploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Neutrosophic Sets and Systems. Book series, vol. 22 / 2018Uploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- VIKOR based MAGDM Strategy with Trapezoidal Neutrosophic NumbersUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Operators on Single Valued Trapezoidal Neutrosophic Numbers and SVTN-Group Decision MakingUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- The Basic Notions for (over, off, under) Neutrosophic Geometric Programming ProblemsUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Some Neutrosophic Probability DistributionsUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Single Valued Neutrosophic Hesitant Fuzzy Computational Algorithm for Multiobjective Nonlinear Optimization ProblemUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Validation of the pedagogical strategy for the formation of the competence entrepreneurshipin high education through the use of neutrosophic logic and Iadov techniqueUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Optimization of EOQ Model with Limited Storage Capacity by Neutrosophic Geometric ProgrammingUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Extensions to Linguistic Summaries Indicators based on Neutrosophic TheoryUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- A New Neutrosophic Cognitive Map with Neutrosophic Sets on ConnectionsUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Extension of Soft Set to Hypersoft Set, and then to Plithogenic Hypersoft SetUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- On Single Valued Neutrosophic Signed Digraph and its applicationsUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- A framework for selecting cloud computing services based on consensus under single valued neutrosophic numbersUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Gaussian single-valued neutrosophic numbers and its application in multi-attribute decision makingUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- On single-valued co-neutrosophic graphsUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Sinos River basin social-environmental prospective assessment of water quality management using fuzzy cogmitive maps and neutrosophic AHP-TOPSISUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Positive implicative BMBJ-neutrosophic ideals in BCK-algebrasUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Performance Evaluation of Mutual Funds Via Single Valued Neutrosophic Set (SVNS) Perspective: A Case Study in TurkeyUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- On Neutrosophic Crisp Topology via N-TopologyUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Neutrosophic Soft Normed Linear SpacesUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Neutrosophic Soft Cubic Set in Topological SpacesUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Neutrosophic Shortest Path ProblemUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- MBJ-neutrosophic structures and its applications in BCK/BCI-algebrasUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Intrusion Detection System and Neutrosophic Theory for MANETs: A Comparative StudyUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- A new approach for multi-attribute decision-making problems in bipolar neutrosophic setsUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB
- Algebraic Structure of Neutrosophic Duplets in Neutrosophic RingsUploaded byAnonymous 0U9j6BLllB

- De Morgan, Formal Logic, Or, The Calculus of Inference, Necessary and Probable (1847)Uploaded byHoracio Gianneschi
- Chapter 3 - Sets - ExerciseUploaded byRachael Wong
- Ejercicos Mentales Volumen 7Uploaded byLuis Torres
- Logic gateUploaded byG DEEPIKA
- The Virtualisation of Art PracticeUploaded byCeci_Sunshine
- 116 Problems in Algebra - Functional EquationsUploaded byHoàng Long
- QuotesUploaded byfaizan123khan
- Socionomics ParetoUploaded byFilipe Ramos
- Truth TableUploaded byKishore Venkat
- Analysis and SynthesisUploaded byOscar Andres Romero Alvaran
- Polanyi- The Logic of Tacit InferenceUploaded byTerror Terror
- New Words Make Me Happy and They Should Make You Happy TooUploaded byPatrice
- BeingUploaded byjprgg24
- Spade - Thoughts, Words and ThingsUploaded byVinícius dos Santos
- 1978 - Theism in Asian and Western Thought.pdfUploaded byAsim Raza
- Gauss, Carl FriedrichUploaded bycreesha
- Recursion NinjaUploaded byashish_soni234
- Vann McGee Truth, Vagueness, And Paradox an Essay on the Logic of Truth 1990Uploaded byAzuWillDie
- Falasca, 2014 - Of Tears and Tarantulas Folk Religiosity, De MartinoUploaded byGuillermo Bisbal
- JF Group Theory: Colm Ó Dúnlaing's NotesUploaded byCB93
- Aristotle; Robin Smith trans. Topics Books I & VIII With excerpts from related texts Clarendon Aristotle Bks.1 & 8.pdfUploaded byVyvyan Holland
- Absolute Infinity A Bridge Between Mathematics and Theology?Uploaded bym54237
- position paper rubricUploaded byapi-333756832
- Fuzzy Cognitive MapsUploaded bykoulis123
- PHIRL_II08 Philosophical LogicUploaded byaymansousa
- study of logic gatesUploaded byShubham Deshpande
- F1202001022015402704_Chapter5.pptUploaded byStevia Tjioe
- CHRISTENSON (1983) - The Methodology of Positive Accounting.pdfUploaded bySarah Waichert
- Kant and the Natural NumbersUploaded byLibricus
- Thinking About Evidence1Uploaded byDiego Alonso Collantes