Soft Computing

https://doi.org/10.1007/s00500-020-05180-4

METHODOLOGIES AND APPLICATION

Pragmatic results in Taiwan education system based IVFG & IVNG

Soumitra Poulik1 · Ganesh Ghorai1 · Qin Xin2

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2020

Abstract
An interval-valued fuzzy graph (IVFG) and degree of vertices have been applied for performance evaluation in an educational
system. The approach is mainly developed based on real membership values of vertices of an IVFG. In this manuscript,
some definitions of generalized fuzzy graphs and neutrosophic graphs structures are improved. First, we have concentrated
to improve the existing definitions for union and join of two IVFG’s, complete IVFG with supporting examples. Then, their
modified version is developed. Secondly, the modified version of interval-valued neutrosophic graph (IVNG) is given. Third,
an algorithm and a flowchart of the proposed method are described. Fourth, the generalized form of complete and strong
IVNG is given with examples. Finally, a real-life application using interval-valued fuzzy graph in education system in Taiwan
is exhibited.

Keywords Interval-valued fuzzy graphs · Union and join · Interval-valued neutrosophic graphs · Complete and strong IVNG ·
Education system

Abbreviations μhB Upper bound of membership value of edges

FG Fuzzy graph in IVFG
IVFG Interval-valued fuzzy graph Sl , I l , Dl Lower bounds of membership, neutral &
IVNG Interval-valued neutrosophic graph non-membership values of vertices of IVNG,
TWAEA Taiwan Assessment and Evaluation Associa- respectively
tion Su , I u , Du Upper bounds of membership, neutral & non-
μlA Lower bound of membership value of vertex membership values of vertices of IVNG,
in IVFG respectively
μhA Upper bound of membership value of vertex Ŝl , Iˆl , D̂l Lower bounds of membership, neutral &
in IVFG non-membership values of edges of IVNG,
μB
l Lower bound of membership value of edge in respectively
IVFG Ŝ u , Iˆu , D̂ u Upper bounds of membership, neutral &
non-membership values of edges of IVNG,
respectively
Communicated by V. Loia.

B Ganesh Ghorai
math.ganesh@mail.vidyasagar.ac.in 1 Introduction
Soumitra Poulik
poulikmsoumitra@gmail.com 1.1 Research background
Qin Xin
qinx@setur.fo Graph theory and its various operations have a huge num-
1 ber of applications for solving many problems which are
Department of Applied Mathematics with Oceanology and
Computer Programming, Vidyasagar University, Midnapore connected to our real life. Xin and Xia (2017) explained
721 102, India application of graph for optimal broadcasting in wireless net-
2 Faculty of Science and Technology, University of the Faroe works. Algorithm and wireless network in graph theory are
Islands, Vestarabryggja 15, FO 100 Tórshavn, Faroe Islands clearly described in Manne and Xin (2008), Yu et al. (2014).

123

Zadeh’s fuzzy sets (Zadeh 1965) gives the modern mathe-
matics an extraordinary tool to explain the situation where
uncertainty present. Due to the existence of fuzziness or
uncertainty in vertices and edges in graph theory, Rosenfeld’s
fuzzy graph (FG) (Rosenfield 1975) helps us in decision mak-
ing in many application field including optimization, network
routing, computer engineering, artificial intelligence, image
segmentation, city planning, medical science, etc. The strong
path between any two vertices in FG is formulated in Bhutani
and Rosenfeld (2003). Many operations and their properties
in FG theory have been clearly explained in Mordeson and
Peng (1994). Ghorai and Pal (2016, 2017, 2018) established
various type of FG with their several properties. Different
types of nodes and indices in FG have been discussed in
Poulik and Ghorai (2020a), Poulik and Ghorai (2020b).
Cornelis et al. (2006) introduced the concept of interval-
valued fuzzy sets. Bustince and Burillo (2000) initiated
interval-valued fuzzy relation and its application in approx-
imation reasoning. Guha et al. (2009) introduced clustering
which are based on interval-valued fuzzy relation. Mezei and
Wikstrom (2013) defined many operators based on interval-
valued fuzzy numbers. In some connected, we have seen that
the membership values of vertices and edges in FG are not
constant and these varies in a range whose upper and lower
values are fixed. The IVFG (Akram and Dudek 2011) gives
more errorless solution in this situation. After that, Jan et al.
(2019) created the generalized IVFG and its several proper-
ties which are used for solving many problems in real-life
fields like wireless network, CCTV network system, water
connection planning in town, decision making in education
system, etc. Talebi et al. (2016) explained the operations
on IVFG. Many works depending on data mining analytic
had been done in Ali (2013), Al-Janabi et al. (2020), Mahdi
and Al-Janabi (2020). In Al-Janabi (2020), Alkaim and Al-
Janabi (2020) optimization problems in education system and
gas flaring reduction are discussed. Al-Janabi and Alkaim
(2020), Al-Janabi et al. (2020) introduced many mathemati-
cal models on innovative synthesis and collaborative analysis
of renewable energy and prediction for decision making with
algorithms. In Al-Janabi et al. (2020), using recurrent neu-
ral network, an intelligent predictor model for air pollutants
based on deep learning techniques are designed.
Considering the neutral opinion and abstaining informa-
tion for the analysis, Wang et al. (2012) structured a form
of neutrosophic logic and neutrosophic sets. Peng and Dai
(2018) explained many application of interval-valued neu-
trosophic logic in decision making and similarity measure
for score function. Yang et al. (2016), Yang et al. (2017)
introduced different types of interval-valued sets and rela-
tion with their properties. If the vertices or edges or both
in a connected graph, work to help the system or does not
any work or works against the system means the vertices and
edges have three characteristic values which are member-
123
S. Poulik et al.
ship, non-membership and neutral value, then single-valued
neutrosophic graph (Broumi et al. 2016) is more helpful for
decision making in these type of situations. Wang et al. (2005)
initiated a clear idea on interval-valued neutrosophic sets.
Zhang et al. (2014) described applications of interval-valued
neutrosophic logic in decision making. Broumi et al. (2014)
defined relation based on interval-valued neutrosophic sets.
Again, if the three characteristics are moving in a fixed range,
i.e., lies in an interval, then IVNG can be used to get more
precious for decision making.
1.2 Framework of this study
This paper is structured as follows: Sect. 1.3 is based on
the description and comparison of some related works. Sec-
tion 2 contains some basic definitions which are used in this
manuscripts. Section 3 contains some defects in the defini-
tion of union, join of two IVFGs and complete IVFG. These
are discussed by example here and their corrected version
are established. In Sect. 4, we have discussed the definition
of IVNG and showed by example that this definition is inap-
propriate. The corrected definition is given with example.
Section 5 contains algorithm and flowchart of our proposed
method. Also, by this definition of IVNG, we found some
defect in the definitions of complete and strong IVNG and
then their updated versions are given defined. In Sect. 6, an
application of IVFG is provided to determine the order of the
main criteria’s in Taiwan education system. Some hypothe-
sis, limitations and advantages, disadvantages are discussed
in Sects. 7 and 8, respectively. Lastly, conclusion is given in
Sect. 9.
1.3 Related works
Rosenfield (1975) first gives the notion of fuzzy graph and
this idea can be used if the vertices and edges are uncertain
with membership values lies in [0, 1]. But, if the membership
values are not fixed, i.e., lies in a subinterval of [0, 1], then
IVFG can be used to measure the uncertainty of vertices and
edges.
Akram and Dudek (2011) defined IVFG and its various
operations like union, join, etc. But, in this work the definition
of IVFG, join and union of two IVFG are not true in general.
The modified definition defined in Jan et al. (2019) and the
operations join, union of two IVFG has been established in
our work.
Jan et al. (2019) introduced many modified definitions of
IVFG, IVNG, complete IVFG and their complement. But, the
definition of IVFG is not true in general. Here, the definition
of IVNG has been corrected with examples.
In Poulik and Ghorai (2020c) and Rashmanlou and Jouy-
bari (2017), degree of vertices and edges in an IVFG and
bipolar fuzzy graphs (membership values having two oppo-
Pragmatic results in Taiwan education system based IVFG & IVNG
Table 1 Related works of IVFG and IVNG
Authors Years
Rosenfield (1975) 1975
Guha et al. (2009) 2009
Akram and Dudek (2011) 2011
Rashmanlou and Jouybari (2017) 2017
Jan et al. (2019) 2019
Al-Janabi and Alkaim (2020) 2020
Al-Janabi et al. (2020) 2020
Al-Janabi et al. (2020) 2020
This paper – Pragmatic results in Taiwan education system based IVFG & IVNG
site components positive and negative). But, a real-life
application of degree of vertices in an IVFG is presented
in this work.
Guha et al. (2009) explained the idea of Taiwan education
system in terms of interval-valued fuzzy relation. In our work,
all the criteria are shown by an IVFG and the main important
criteria are determined (Table 1).
2 Preliminary
Here, some basic definitions related to FG and IVFG are
presented, which have been used in this paper.
Definition 2.1 (Rosenfield 1975) A FG G = (V , μ, σ ) of
the graph G ∗ = (V , E) is defined by μ : V → [0, 1] and
σ : V × V → [0, 1] such that for all a, b ∈ V ,
σ (ab) ≤ μ(a) ∧ μ(b), where μ(a) and σ (ab) values of the
vertex a and the edge ab in G, respectively, and ‘∧’ denote
minimum value.
Definition 2.2 (Mordeson and Peng 1994) A FG G is com-
plete if σ (ab) = μ(a) ∧ μ(b), ∀a, b ∈ V .
Definition 2.3 (Mordeson and Peng 1994) The union of two
FGs G  = (V  , μ , σ  ) and G  = (V  , μ , σ  ) of the graphs
∗ ∗
G  = (V  , E  ) and G  = (V  , E  ) is denoted by G  ∪
G  = (V  ∪ V  , μ ∪ μ , σ  ∪ σ  ) and is defined as
(i) (μ ∪ μ )(a) = μ (a) if a ∈ V  − V  ,
(μ ∪ μ )(a) = μ (a) if a ∈ V  − V  and
(μ ∪ μ )(a) = max{μ (a), μ (a)} if a ∈ V  ∩ V  ,
(ii) (σ  ∪ σ  )(ab) = σ  (ab), if ab ∈ E  − E  ,
(σ  ∪ σ  )(ab) = σ  (ab), if ab ∈ E  − E  and
(σ  ∪ σ  )(ab) = max{σ  (ab), σ  (ab)}, if ab ∈ E  ∩ E  .
Works
Generalized fuzzy graphs
Interval-valued fuzzy relation-based clustering with its application to
performance evaluation
Interval-valued fuzzy graphs
New concepts of interval-valued fuzzy graphs with application
Some root level modifications in interval valued fuzzy graphs and their
generalizations including neutrosophic graphs
A nifty collaborative analysis to predicting a novel tool (DRFLLS) for
missing values estimation
An innovative synthesis of deep learning techniques (DCapsNet & DCOM)
for generation electrical renewable energy from wind energy
A new method for prediction of air pollution based on intelligent computation
Definition 2.4 (Mordeson and Peng 1994) The join of two
FGs G  = (V  , μ , σ  ) and G  = (V  , μ , σ  ) of the graphs
∗ ∗
G  = (V  , E  ) and G  = (V  , E  ) with V  ∩ V  = φ is
denoted by G  + G  = (V  ∪ V  , μ + μ , σ  + σ  ) and is
defined as
(i) (μ + μ )(a) = (μ ∪ μ )(a), ∀a ∈ V  ∪ V 
(ii) (σ  + σ  )(ab) = (σ  ∪ σ  )(ab), if ab ∈ E  ∪ E 
(iii) (σ  + σ  )(ab) = μ (a) ∧ μ (b), if ab ∈ E 1 , a ∈
V  , b ∈ V  where E 1 is the set of all edges joining the
nodes of V  and V  .
Definition 2.5 (Jan et al. 2019) An IVFG G is a pair (A, B)
of the graph G ∗ = (V , E), where V and E are the set of all
nodes and edges of G, respectively, satisfying the following
two conditions
(i) for any b ∈ V , the function μ A (b) represents the
membership value of b and
μ A (b) = [μlA (b), μhA (b)] is a subinterval of [0, 1],
(ii) for any ab ∈ E, the function μ B (ab) represents the
membership value of ab and
μ B (ab) = [μlB (ab), μhB (ab)] is a subinterval of [0, 1]
such that
μlB (ab) ≤ min{μlA (a), μlA (b)} and
μhB (ab) ≤ min{μhA (a), μhA (b)} with μhB (ab) ≥ min
{μlA (a), μlA (b)}.
First, we recall the definition of the union of two IVFGs
given in Akram and Dudek (2011). It is shown in Sect. 3 that
this definition is not true in general.
Definition 2.6 (Akram and Dudek 2011) The union of two
IVFGs G  = (A , B  ) and G  = (A , B  ) of the graphs
123
 S. Poulik et al.

∗ ∗
G  = (V  , E  ) and G  = (V  , E  ) is denoted by G  ∪ Example 3.1 (Example 3.10 of Akram and Dudek 2011)
G  = (A ∪ A , B  ∪ B  ) and is defined by Here, we write G  , G  , V  , V  , E  , E  , A , A , B  , B  in
place of G 1 , G 2 , V1 , V2 , E 1 , E 2 , A1 , A2 , B1 , B2 , respectively.
⎧
⎪ 
⎨(μ A ∪ μ A )(a) = μ A (a) if a ∈ V and a ∈
l l l / V  Here, G  and G  satisfy the Definition 2.5. So G  and G  are
(i) (μ A ∪ μ A )(a) = μ A (a) if a ∈
l l l / V and a ∈ V 
 IVFGs. But in G  ∪ G  , we see that
⎪
⎩ l
(μ A ∪ μ A )(a) = max{μ A (a), μlA (a)} if a ∈ V  ∩ V  .
l l (μlA ∪ μlA )(b) = 0.4, (μhA ∪ μhA )(b) = 0.5, (μlA ∪
⎧ μ A )( f ) = 0.4, (μhA ∪ μhA )( f ) = 0.6,
l
⎪  / V 
⎨(μ A ∪ μ A )(a) = μ A (a) if a ∈ V and a ∈
h h h
(μlB  ∪ μlB  )(b f ) = 0.1, (μhB  ∪ μhB  )(b f ) = 0.2.
(ii) (μ A ∪ μ A )(a) = μ A (a) if a ∈
h h h / V and a ∈ V 

⎪
⎩ h Here (μhB  ∪μhB  )(b f ) = 0.2  min{(μlA ∪μlA )(b), (μlA ∪
(μ A ∪ μhA )(a) = max{μhA (a), μhA (a)} if a ∈ V  ∩ V  ,
⎧ μ A )( f )} = min{0.4, 0.4} = 0.4, which contradict the fact
l
⎪  / E 
⎨(μ A ∪ μ A )(ab) = μ B  (ab) if ab ∈ E and ab ∈
l l l
that the union of two IVFGs is again an IVFG, by Proposition
(iii) (μ A ∪ μ A )(ab) = μ B  (ab) if ab ∈
l l l / E and ab ∈ E 

3.11 of Akram and Dudek (2011).
⎪
⎩ l
(μ A ∪ μ A )(ab) = max{μ B  (ab), μlB  (ab)} if ab ∈ E  ∩ E  ,
l l
⎧ So the Definition 3.9 of Akram and Dudek (2011) is incor-
⎪  / E 
⎨(μ A ∪ μ A )(ab) = μ B  (ab) if ab ∈ E and ab ∈
h h h

(iv) (μ A ∪ μ A )(ab) = μ B  (ab) if ab ∈

h h h / E and ab ∈ E 
 rect. The modified version is established in such a way that
⎪
⎩ h Proposition 3.11 of Akram and Dudek (2011) becomes true.
(μ A ∪ μ A )(ab) = max{μ B  (ab), μhB  (ab)} if ab ∈ E  ∩ E  .
h h

Definition 3.2 (Modified definition of union of two IVFGs)

Now, recall the definition of join of two IVFGs given in ∗
The union of two IVFGs G  and G  of the graphs G  and
(Akram and Dudek 2011) and in Sect. 3 we will show by ∗
G  is denoted by G  ∪ G  = (A ∪ A , B  ∪ B  ) defined by
counter example that this definition is also not correct.
⎧
l l l  / V 
Definition 2.7 (Akram and Dudek 2011) The join of two ⎨(μ A ∪ μ A )(a) = μ A (a) if a ∈ V and a ∈
⎪
∗  and a ∈ V 
IVFGs G  and G  of the graphs G  and (i) (μl  ∪ μl  )(a) = μl  (a) if a ∈
⎪
/ V
∗ ⎩ lA A A
G  denoted by G  + G  = (A + A , B  + B  ) and is (μ A ∪ μlA )(a) = max{μlA (a), μlA (a)} if a ∈ V  ∩ V  .
⎧ h
defined as ⎪
⎪ (μ ∪ μhA )(a) = μhA (a) if a ∈ V  and a ∈ / V 
⎨ A
 (ii) (μ  ∪ μ  )(a) = μ  (a) if a ∈
h h h / V and a ∈ V 

⎪
⎪ A A A
(μlA + μlA )(a) = (μlA ∪ μlA )(a) ⎩ h
(i) (μ A ∪ μhA )(a) = max{μhA (a), μhA (a)} if a ∈ V  ∩ V  ,
(μhA + μhA )(a) = (μhA ∪ μhA )(a) if a ∈ V  ∪ V  , ⎧ l
 ⎪
⎪ (μ ∪ μlA )(ab) = min{(μlA ∪ μlA )(a), (μlA ∪ μlA )(b)
(μlB  + μlB  )(ab) = (μlB  ∪ μlB  )(ab) ⎨ A
(ii) (iii) if either ab ∈ E  or ab ∈ E  but ab ∈ / E  ∩ E  ,
(μhB  + μhB  )(ab) = (μhA ∪ μhA )(ab) if x y ∈ E  ∩ E  , ⎪
⎪
⎩ l
 (μ A ∪ μlA )(ab) = max{μlB  (ab), μlB  (ab)} if ab ∈ E  ∩ E  ,
(μlB  + μlB  )(ab) = min(μlA (a), μlA (b)) ⎧
(iii) h h h h h h
⎨(μ A ∪ μ A )(ab) = min{(μ A ∪ μ A )(a), (μ A ∪ μ A )(b)
⎪
(μhB  + μhB  )(ab) = min(μhA (a), μhA (b)) if ab ∈ E,    
(iv) if either ab ∈ E or ab ∈ E but ab ∈ / E ∩E ,
⎪
⎩ h
(μ A ∪ μhA )(ab) = max{μhB  (ab), μhB  (ab)} if ab ∈ E  ∩ E  .
where E is the set of all edges joining the nodes of V  and
V  . Example 3.3 From Example 3.1, G  and G  of Fig. 1 are
IVFGs. Now according to the Definition 3.2, we have

3 Operations on IVFG (μlA ∪ μlA )(b) = 0.4,

In FG, the membership values of the vertices as well as edges (μlA ∪ μlA )(b) = 0.5,
lie in a subinterval of [0, 1]. Then, the IVFG and its vari- (μlA ∪ μlA )( f ) = 0.4,
ous operations give better results for solving many real-life (μlA ∪ μlA )( f ) = 0.6,
problems. In this section, first the definition of union of two (μlB  ∪ μlB  )(b f ) = 0.4,
IVFGs, join of two IVFGs and complete IVFG are reviewed
(μlB  ∪ μlB  )(b f ) = 0.5.
by various counterexamples. After that, the new generalized
form of all these definitions is developed with examples. 0.4 ≤ min{0.4, 0.4}, 0.5
Throughout the paper, G ∗ denotes the crisp graph and G ≤ min{0.5, 0.6}, with0.5 ≥ min{0.4, 0.4}
denotes the IVFG of G ∗ . ⇒ (μlB  ∪ μlB  )(b f ) ≤ min{(μlA ∪ μlA )(b),
Here, we consider the example given in Akram and Dudek
(μlA ∪ μlA )( f )},
(2011). Then, we show that this example which is constructed
based on the Definition 2.6 does not satisfy the definition of (μhB  ∪ μhB  )(b f ) ≤ min{(μhA ∪ μhA )(b),
IVFG 2.5. (μhA ∪ μhA )( f )}with

123
Pragmatic results in Taiwan education system based IVFG & IVNG
Fig. 1 Two IVFGs G  , G  and their union G  ∪ G 
Fig. 2 Join G  + G  of two IVFGs G  , G  using Definition 2.7
(μhB  ∪ μhB  )(b f ) ≥ min{(μlA ∪ μlA )(b),
(μlA ∪ μlA )( f )}.
So the edge b f of G  ∪ G  satisfies the conditions of Defini-
tion 3.2 of an IVFG. Similarly, all the other edges of G  ∪ G 
also satisfy the conditions of Definition 3.2 of an IVFG.
Hence, G  ∪ G  is an IVFG.
Now, we consider an example to construct join of two
IVFGs using Definition 2.7. Then, show that this definition
does not satisfy the Definition 2.5 of IVFG .
Example 3.4 Consider the IVFGs G  and G  and their join
G  + G  as shown in Fig. 2.
Here, μlA (a) = 0.1, μhA (a) = 0.2, μlA (b) = 0.3, μhA (b) =
0.4,
μlB  (ab) = 0.1 ≤ min{μlA (a), μlA (b)} and
μhB  (ab) = 0.2 ≤ min{μhA (a), μhA (b)} with μhB  (ab) ≥
min{μlA (a), μlA (b)}.
So G  is an IVFG. Similarly, G  is also an IVFG.
But to determine G  + G  , using Definition 2.7, we can-
not determine (μlB  + μlB  )(ab), (μhB  + μhB  )(ab), (μlB  +
μlB  )(ad) and (μhB  + μhB  )(ad), since a ∈ V  ∩ V  , b ∈ V  ,
b ∈ V  and it is not given in Definition 3.12 of Akram and
Dudek (2011). So G  + G  is undefined. Thus, the above def-
inition of join of two IVFGs in Akram and Dudek (2011) is
incorrect. Now, we develop a definition of join of two IVFGs
to overcome this type of situation.
The modified definition of join of two IVFG is defined as
follows.
Definition 3.5 (Modified definition of join of two IVFGs) The
∗
join of two IVFGs G  and G  of the graphs G  = (V  , E  )
∗
and G  = (V  , E  ) with V  ∩ V  = φ is denoted by
G  + G  = (A + A , B  + B  ) and is defined as

(μlA + μlA )(a) = (μlA ∪ μlA )(a)
(i)
(μhA + μhA )(a) = (μhA ∪ μhA )(a) if a ∈ V  ∪ V  ,

(μlB  + μlB  )(ab) = (μlB  ∪ μlB  )(ab)
(ii)
(μhB  + μhB  )(ab) = (μhA ∪ μhA )(ab) if x y ∈ E  ∩ E  ,

(μlB  + μlB  )(ab) = min(μlA (a), μlA (b))
(iii)
(μhB  + μhB  )(ab) = min(μhA (a), μhA (b)) if ab ∈ E,
123

Fig. 3 Two IVFGs G  , G  and their join G  + G 
where E is the set of all edges joining the nodes of V1 and
V2 .
Example 3.6 Consider the IVFG G  and G  of Fig. 3. Here,
V  = {a, b}, V  = {c, d}, so V  ∩ V  = φ.
μlA (a) = 0.1, μhA (a) = 0.2, μlA (b) = 0.3, μhA (b) = 0.4,
μlA (c) = 0.4, μhA (c) = 0.5, μlA (d) = 0.5, μhA (d) = 0.8,
μlB  (ab) = 0.1, μhB  (ab) = 0.2, μlB  (cd) = 0.4, μhB  (cd) =
0.5.
According to Definition 3.5, we have
(μlA + μlA )(a) = 0.1, (μhA + μhA )(a) = 0.2,
(μlA + μlA )(b) = 0.3, (μhA + μhA )(b) = 0.4,
= [0.3, 0.7] = [min{μlA (a), μlA (b)}, min{μhA (a),
(μlA + μlA )(c) = 0.4, (μhA + μhA )(c) = 0.5,
(μlA + μlA )(d) = 0.5, (μhA + μhA )(d) = 0.8,
(μlB  + μlB  )(ab) = 0.1, (μhB  + μhB  )(ab) = 0.2,
(μlB  + μlB  )(ac) = 0.1, (μhB  + μhB  )(ac) = 0.2,
(μlB  + μlB  )(cd) = 0.4, (μhB  + μhB  )(cd) = 0.5,
(μlB  + μlB  )(bd) = 0.3, (μhB  + μhB  )(bd) = 0.4,
(μlB  + μlB  )(ad) = 0.1, (μhB  + μhB  )(ad) = 0.2,
(μlB  + μlB  )(bc) = 0.3, (μhB  + μhB  )(bc) = 0.4.
Now, 0.1 ≤ min{0.1, 0.3}, 0.2 ≤ min{0.2, 0.4} with 0.2 ≥
min{0.1, 0.3}
⇒ (μlB  ∪ μlB  )(ab) ≤ min{(μlA ∪ μlA )(a), (μlA ∪ μlA )(b)}
(μhB  ∪ μhB  )(ab) ≤ min{(μhA ∪ μhA )(a), (μhA ∪ μhA )(b)} with
(μhB  ∪ μhB  )(ab) ≥ min{(μlA ∪ μlA )(a), (μlA ∪ μlA )(b)}.
So the edge ab of G  + G  satisfies the conditions of Defini-
tion 2.4 of an IVFG. Similarly, all the other edges of G  + G 
also satisfy the conditions of Definition 2.4 of an IVFG.
Hence, G  + G  is an IVFG.
Now, we recall the definition of complete IVFG given in
Akram and Dudek (2011) and verify its flaws in the following
example.
Definition 3.7 An IVFG G = (A, B) is said to be complete
if
123
S. Poulik et al.
Fig. 4 An IVFG G
Fig. 5 A complete IVFG G
μlB (ab) = min{μlA (a), μlA (b)} and μhB (ab) = min{μhA
(a), μhA (b)}, ∀ab ∈ E.
Example 3.8 For the IVFG G of Fig. 4, we see that there is no
edge between the nodes a and b. So, [μlB (ab), μhB (ab)] =
[0, 0]
μhA (b)}]. So, here G is a strong IVFG but not a complete
IVFG. Thus, the above definition is incorrect.
The modified definition of complete IVFG is defined
below.
Definition 3.9 (Modified definition of complete IVFG) An
IVFG G = (A, B) is said to be complete if
μlB (ab) = min{μlA (a), μlA (b)} and μhB (ab) = min{μhA
(a), μhA (b)}, ∀a, b ∈ V .
Example 3.10 For the IVFG G of Fig. 5, we have
μlA (a) = 0.5, μhA (a) = 0.8, μlA (b) = 0.3, μhA (b) = 0.7,
μlA (c) = 0.2, μhA (c) = 0.7, μlB (ab) = 0.3, μhB (ab) = 0.7,
μlB (bc) = 0.2, μhB (bc) = 0.7, μlB (ac) = 0.2, μhB (ac) =
0.7.
So μlB (ab) = min{μlA (a), μlA (b)}, μhB (ab) = min{μhA (a),
μ A (b)} with μhB (ab) = min{μlA (a), μlA (b)}.
h
So the edge ab of G satisfies the conditions of a complete
IVFG. Similarly, all the other edges of G also satisfy the
conditions of Definition 3.9 of a complete IVFG. Therefore,
G is a complete IVFG. Hence, G is a complete IVFG.
4 Interval-valued neutrosophic graph
In various problems connected to graph theory, it is seen
that sometimes the vertices behave as a membership and
sometimes its constant means neutral and sometimes its
work against the system means non-membership. So, the
Pragmatic results in Taiwan education system based IVFG & IVNG
vertices have three characters and similarly every edges also
have three characters. All these three character cannot work
together for all the vertices and edges, so characters are uncer-
tain and lies in interval. Therefore, to control many conditions
of this form, IVNG plays one of the egregious role. In this sec-
tion, we pointed out many flaws in the definitions of IVNG,
complete IVNG and strong IVNG. The generalized version
of all these definitions are established.
First, let us recall the definition of IVNG given in Jan et al.
(2019) and we will show that this definition is incorrect by
giving an example.
Definition 4.1 (Jan et al. 2019) A pair G = (V , E), where V
denote the set of all nodes and E denote the set of all edges,
is called an IVNG if the following are satisfied
(i) for all ai ∈ V , there are three functions namely
the membership, neutral and non-membership value of ai ,
which are denoted by S, I and D, respectively. Mainly,
S = [Sl , S u ], I = [I l , I u ], D = [Dl , D u ] and all of these
are subintervals of [0, 1] such that 0 ≤ S u + I u + D u ≤ 3;
(ii) for all edges ai a j ∈ E, there are three functions
namely membership, neutral and non-membership value of
ai a j ∈ V × V which are denoted by Ŝ, Iˆ and D, respec-
tively. Mainly, Ŝ = [ Ŝl , Ŝl ], Iˆ = [ Iˆl , Iˆu ] and D̂ = [ D̂l , D̂l ]
are subinterval of [0, 1] such that
Ŝl (ai , a j ) ≤ min(Sl (ai ), Sl (a j )),
Ŝ u (ai , a j ) ≤ min(S u (ai ), S u (a j ))
Iˆl (ai , a j ) ≤ max(I l (ai ), I l (a j )),
Iˆu (ai , a j ) ≤ max(I u (ai ), I u (a j ))
D̂l (ai , a j ) ≤ max(Dl (ai ), Dl (a j )),
D̂ (ai , a j ) ≤ max(D (ai ), D (a j ))
u u u G = (V , E) is defined by G c = (V c , E c ) where V c = V
provided that Ŝ u (ai , a j ) ≤ Ŝl (ai ,a j ), Iˆl (ai , a j ) ≤ Iˆu (ai , a j ),
D̂l (ai , a j ) ≤ D̂ u (ai , a j ) and 0 ≤ Ŝ u + Iˆu + D̂ u ≤ 3.
There are two types of mistakes in the Definition 4.1.
First there are typing errors and in the second place the con-
ditions “ Ŝ u (ai , a j ) ≤ Ŝl (ai , a j ), Iˆl (ai , a j ) ≤ Iˆu (ai , a j ),
D̂l (ai , a j ) ≤ D̂ u (ai , a j )” have to be modified.
If we use this definition of IVNG, then the complement
of an IVNG (Definition 18 of Jan et al. 2019) may not be an
IVNG. Now, the typing mistakes are
Ŝ = [ Ŝl , Ŝl ], D̂ = [ D̂l , D̂l ] and Ŝ u (ai , a j ) ≤ Ŝ u (ai , a j ).
If these typos are corrected, then the Definition 4.1
becomes as follows:
Definition 4.2 A pair G = (V , E), where V denote the set of
all nodes and E denote the set of all edges, called an IVNG
if the following are satisfied
(i) for all ai ∈ V there are three functions namely the mem-
bership, neutral and non-membership value of ai , which are
Fig. 6 An IVNG G
denoted by S, I and D, respectively. Mainly, S = [Sl , S u ],
I = [I l , I u ], D = [Dl , D u ] and all of these are subintervals
of [0, 1] such that 0 ≤ S u + I u + D u ≤ 3;
(ii) for all edges ai a j ∈ E, there are three functions
namely membership, neutral and non-membership value of
ai a j ∈ V × V which are denoted by Ŝ, Iˆ and D, respectively.
Mainly, Ŝ = [ Ŝl , Ŝ u ], Iˆ = [ Iˆl , Iˆu ] and D̂ = [ D̂l , D̂ u ] are
subinterval of [0, 1] such that
Ŝl (ai , a j ) ≤ min(Sl (ai ), Sl (a j )),
Ŝ u (ai , a j ) ≤ min(S u (ai ), S u (a j ))
Iˆl (ai , a j ) ≤ max(I l (ai ), I l (a j )),
Iˆu (ai , a j ) ≤ max(I u (ai ), I u (a j ))
D̂l (ai , a j ) ≤ max(Dl (ai ), Dl (a j )),
D̂ u (ai , a j ) ≤ max(D u (ai ), D u (a j ))
provided that Ŝl (ai , a j ) ≤ Ŝ u (ai , a j ), Iˆl (ai , a j ) ≤ Iˆu (ai , a j ),
D̂l (ai , a j ) ≤ D̂ u (ai , a j ) and 0 ≤ Ŝ u + Iˆu + D̂ u ≤ 3.
Now, we show by example that the Definition 4.2 also vio-
lates the definition of complement of an IVNG. For this, first
we recall the Definition 18 of Jan et al. (2019) of complement
of an IVNG.
Definition 4.3 (Jan et al. 2019) The complement of an IVNG
and the membership, abstinence and non-membership grades
of E satisfy the conditions:
( Ŝl )c (ai , a j ) = min(Sl (ai ), S L (a j )) − Ŝl ((ai , a j ))
( Ŝ u )c (ai , a j ) = min(S u (ai ), S u (a j )) − Ŝ u (ai , a j )
+ min(Sl (ai ), Sl (a j ))
( Iˆl )c (ai , a j ) = max(I l (ai ), I l (a j )) − Iˆl ((ai , a j ))
( Iˆu )c (ai , a j ) = max(I u (ai ), I u (a j )) − Iˆu (ai , a j )
+ max(I l (ai ), I l (a j ))
( D̂l )c (ai , a j ) = max(Dl (ai ), Dl (a j )) − D̂l ((ai , a j ))
( D̂ u )c (ai , a j ) = max(D u (ai ), D u (a j )) − D̂ u (ai , a j )
+ max(Dl (ai ), Dl (a j ))
Now, we demonstrate by two examples that how the Def-
inition 4.2 of an IVNG violates the above Definition 4.3.
Example 4.4 Consider the IVNG G of Fig. 6.
Here, Ŝl (a, b) = 0.1 ≤ min{0.7, 0.6} = min{(Sl (a), Sl (b)},
123

Fig. 7 G c , the complement of G of Fig. 6
Fig. 8 An IVNG G
Ŝ u (a, b) = 0.2 ≤ min{0.8, 0.7} = min{(S u (a), S u (b)}.
So Ŝl (a, b) ≤ Ŝ u (a, b). Similarly, Iˆl (a, b) ≤ Iˆu (a, b)
and D̂l (a, b) ≤ D̂ u (a, b).
Also, 0 ≤ 0.8+0.9+0.9 ≤ 3, 0 ≤ 0.7+0.8+0.9 ≤ 3 and
0 ≤ 0.2+0.3+0.4 ≤ 3 means 0 ≤ S u (a)+ I u (a)+ D u (a) ≤
3, 0 ≤ S u (b)+I u (b)+D u (b) ≤ 3 and 0 ≤ Ŝ u + Iˆu + D̂ u ≤ 3.
Now, using the Definition 4.3, the complement of the IVNG
G of Fig. 6 is shown in Fig. 7.
We know that the complement of an IVNG is an IVNG.
But here ( Ŝ u )c (a, b) = 1.1 > 1, ( Iˆu )c (a, b) = 1.2 > 1 and
( D̂ u )c (a, b) = 1.1 > 1. Also, ( Ŝ u )c (a, b) + ( Iˆu )c (a, b) +
( D̂ u )c (a, b) = 3.4 > 3. So G c is not an IVNG, which con-
tradicts that the complement of an IVNG is again an IVNG.
Example 4.5 Consider the IVNG G of Fig. 8
Here, Ŝl (a, b) = 0.2 ≤ min{0.8, 0.6} = min{(Sl (a), Sl (b)},
Ŝ u (a, b) = 0.2 ≤ min{0.9, 0.8} = min{(S u (a), S u (b)}.
So Ŝl (a, b) ≤ Ŝ u (a, b). Similarly, Iˆl (a, b) ≤ Iˆu (a, b),
D̂l (a, b) ≤ D̂ u (a, b), Ŝl (b, c) ≤ Ŝ u (b, c), Iˆl (b, c) ≤
Iˆu (b, c), D̂l (b, c) ≤ D̂ u (b, c).
0 ≤ 0.9 + 0.8 + 0.8 ≤ 3, 0 ≤ 0.8 + 0.8 + 0.8 ≤ 3, 0 ≤ 0.9 +
0.8+0.9 ≤ 3, 0 ≤ 0.3+0.2+0.2 ≤ 3, 0 ≤ 0.2+0.3+0. ≤ 3,
means
0 ≤ S u (a) + I u (a) + D u (a) ≤ 3, 0 ≤ S u (b) + I u (b) +
D u (b) ≤ 3, 0 ≤ S u (c) + I u (c) + D u (c) ≤ 3 and 0 ≤
Ŝ u + Iˆu + D̂ u ≤ 3.
Now, using the Definition 4.3, the complement of the
IVNG G of Fig. 8 is shown in Fig. 9.
But here ( Ŝ u )c (a, b) = 1.1 > 1, ( Iˆu )c (a, b) = 1.3 >
1 and ( D̂ u )c (a, b) = 1.3 > 1. Also, ( Ŝ u )c (a, b) +
( Iˆu )c (a, b)+( D̂ u )c (a, b) = 3.7 > 3. So G c is not an IVNG,
which contradicts that the complement of an IVNG is again
an IVNG.
The correct definition of IVNG is given in Definition 4.6.
Definition 4.6 (Modified definition of IVNG) A pair G =
(V , E), where V denote the set of all nodes and E denote the
set of all edges, is called an IVNG if the following conditions
are satisfied
123
S. Poulik et al.
Fig. 9 G c , the complement of G of Fig. 8
(i) for all ai ∈ V , there are three functions namely
the membership, neutral and non-membership value of ai ,
which are denoted by S, I and D, respectively. Mainly,
S = [Sl , S u ], I = [I l , I u ], D = [Dl , D u ] and all of these
are subintervals of [0, 1] such that 0 ≤ S u + I u + D u ≤ 3;
(ii) for all edges ai a j ∈ E, there are three functions
namely membership, neutral and non-membership value of
ai a j ∈ V × V which are denoted by Ŝ, Iˆ and D̂, respectively.
Mainly, Ŝ = [ Ŝl , Ŝ u ], Iˆ = [ Iˆl , Iˆu ] and D̂ = [ D̂l , D̂ u ] are
subinterval of [0, 1] such that
Ŝl (ai , a j ) ≤ min(Sl (ai ), Sl (a j )), Ŝ u (ai , a j ) ≤ min(S u (ai ), S u (a j )),
Ŝ u (ai , a j ) ≥ min(Sl (ai ), Sl (a j )) Iˆl (ai , a j ) ≤ max(I l (ai ), I l (a j )),
Iˆu (ai , a j ) ≤ max(I u (ai ), I u (a j )), Iˆu (ai , a j ) ≥ max(I l (ai ), I l (a j ))
D̂l (ai , a j ) ≤ max(Dl (ai ), Dl (a j )), D̂ u (ai , a j ) ≤ max(D u (ai ), D u (a j )),
D̂ u (ai , a j ) ≥ max(Dl (ai ), Dl (a j ))
with 0 ≤ Ŝ u + Iˆu + D̂ u ≤ 3.
In this case, we call G a generalized IVNG.
If we use above definition for an IVNG, then the comple-
ment of an IVNG is always an IVNG. This is verified in the
following.
Note 4.7 From Definition 4.6, we have
0 ≤ min(Sl (ai ), Sl (a j )) ≤ Ŝ u (ai , a j ) ≤ min(S u (ai ),
S (a j )) ≤ 1.
u
Consider min(Sl (ai ), Sl (a j )) = R, Ŝ u (ai , a j ) = Q and
min(S u (ai ), S u (a j )) = P.
So 0 ≤ R ≤ Q ≤ P ≤ 1, where P, Q, R ∈ [0, 1].
Now, Q ≥ R and Q ≥ R, Q ≤ 1, R ≥ 0
⇒ Q − R ≥ 0 and Q − R ≤ 1
⇒ 0 ≤ Q − R ≤ 1.
Again P ≥ Q, R ≥ 0 ⇒ P ≥ Q − R.
Now, P ≥ Q − R and P ≥ Q − R, P ≤ 1, Q − R ≥ 0
⇒ P − (Q − R) ≥ 0 and P − (Q − R) ≤ 1
⇒ 0 ≤ P − (Q − R) ≤ 1
⇒ 0 ≤ P − Q + R ≤ 1.
Thus, 0 ≤ min(S u (ai ), S u (a j ))− Ŝ u (ai , a j )+min(Sl (ai ), Sl ;
(a j )) ≤ 1
⇒ 0 ≤ ( Ŝ u )c (ai , a j ) ≤ 1, from Definition 4.3.
Similarly, it can prove that 0 ≤ ( Iˆu )c (ai , a j ) ≤ 1, 0 ≤
( D̂ u )c (ai , a j ) ≤ 1.
Pragmatic results in Taiwan education system based IVFG & IVNG

Hence, according to the Definition 4.8, G is not an IVNG.

Therefore, the Definition 4.8 is not correct. Now, the modified
definition of a complete IVNG is given below with example.

Definition 4.10 (Complete IVNG) An IVNG is called com-

plete if
 
Fig. 10 An IVNG G  1. Ŝl (ai , a j ) = min Sl (ai ), Sl (a j ) ,
 
Ŝ u (ai , a j ) = min S u (ai ), S u (a j ) ,
 
2. Iˆl (ai , a j ) = max I l (ai ), I l (a j ) ,
 
Iˆu (ai , a j ) = max I u (ai ), I u (a j ) ,
 
3. D̂l (ai , a j ) = max Dl (ai ), Dl (a j ) ,
 
D̂ u (ai , a j ) = max D u (ai ), D u (a j ) , for all ai , a j ∈ V .

Now, recall the definition of strong IVNG given in Akram

Fig. 11 G  , complement of G  of Fig. 10
c

and Nasir (2017) and we found out the flaws in this definition
by example.
Definition 4.11 (Akram and Nasir 2017) An IVNG is called
strong if
Fig. 12 A defective complete IVNG  l 
1. Ŝl (ai , a j ) = min  S (ai ), Sl (a j ) , Ŝ u (ai , a j ) = min
S u (ai ), S u (a j ) ,
Therefore 0 ≤ ( Ŝ u )c + ( Iˆu )c + ( D̂ u )c ≤ 3.  l 
2. Iˆl (ai , a j ) = min  I (ai ), I l (a ) , Iˆu (a , a ) = min
j i j
Now, according to Definition 4.6, we consider an example I u (ai ), I u (a j ) ,
 l 
of an IVNG G  which is shown in Fig. 10 and the complement 3. D̂l (ai , a j ) = min  D (ai ), Dl (a j ) , D̂ u (ai , a j ) = min
of G  is G  which is shown in Fig. 11. We can see that (G  )c
c
D u (ai ), D u (a j ) , for all a j a j ∈ E.
is also an IVNG.
Now, recall the definition of complete IVNG given in Example
 l 4.12 Consider the IVNG G of Fig. 14. Here, S(b)  =
Akram and Nasir (2017) and then we found out the flaws S (b), S u (b) = [0.1, 0.2], I (b)  = I l (b), I u (b) =
in this definition by example. [0.3,
 l 0.4],u D(b)  = D (b), D (b) = [0.3,
l u
 0.4] and S(c)  =
S (c), S (c) =  [0.2, 0.3], I (c)  = I l (c), I u (c) =
Definition 4.8 (Akram and Nasir 2017) An IVNG G = [0.1, 0.2], D(c) = Dl (c), D u (c) = [0.1, 0.2].
(V , E) is called complete if Ŝ(b, c) = [0.1, 0.2], Iˆ(b, c) = [0.1, 0.2], D̂(b, c) =
  [0.1, 0.2]. So G satisfies all the conditions of the Defini-
1. Ŝl (ai , a j ) = min  S l (a ), S l (a ) , Ŝ u (a , a ) = min
i j i j tion 4.11.
S u (ai ), S u (a j ) , But, 0.2  max{0.1, 0.3}, i.e., Iˆu (b, c)  max{I l (b), I l (c)}
  
2. Iˆl (ai , a j ) = min I l (ai ), I l (a j ) , Iˆu (ai , a j ) = min I u (ai ), and D̂ u (b, c)  max{Dl (b), Dl (c)}.
I u (a j ) ,
 l  Hence, according to the Definition 4.11, G is not an IVNG.
3. D̂l (ai , a j ) = min  D (ai ), D l (a ) , D̂ u (a , a ) = min
j i j Therefore, the Definition 4.11 is not correct. Now, the modi-
D u (ai ), D u (a j ) , for all ai , a j ∈ V . fied definition of a strong IVNG is given below with example.

Definition 4.13 (Strong IVNG) An IVNG is called strong if

Example 4.9 Consider
 the IVNG G of Fig.12. Here, S(b)  =
 l 
Sl (b), S u (b) = [0.2, 0.3], I (b) = I l (b), I u (b) = 1. Ŝl (ai , a j ) = min S (ai ), Sl (a j ) , Ŝ u (ai , a j ) = min

[0.1,  = D (b), D (b) = [0.1,  =
l u
0.2], D(b)  0.2] and S(c) S u (ai ), S u (a j ) ,
S (c), S (c) =  [0.1, 0.2], I (c)
l u = I (c), I (c) =
l u  l 
 2. Iˆl (ai , a j ) = max  I (ai ), I l (a ) , Iˆu (a , a ) = max
j i j
[0.3, 0.4], D(c) = Dl (c), D u (c) = [0.3, 0.4]. I u (ai ), I u (a j ) ,
Ŝ(b, c) = [0.1, 0.2], Iˆ(b, c) = [0.1, 0.2], D̂(b, c) =  
3. D̂l (ai , a j ) = max Dl (ai ), Dl (a j ) , D̂ u (ai , a j ) =
[0.1, 0.2]. So G satisfies all the conditions of the Defini- max D u (ai ), D u (a j ) , for all ai a j ∈ E.
tion 4.8.
But, 0.2  max{0.1, 0.3}, i.e., Iˆu (b, c)  max{I l (b), I l (c)} Example 4.14 The IVNG G of Fig. 13 is a strong IVNG.
and D̂ u (b, c)  max{Dl (b), Dl (c)}.

123

Fig. 13 Example of a complete
IVNG
= j, 1 ≤
Fig. 14 A defective strong IVNG
= j
= j μ B (bi b j ).
Fig. 15 Flowchart of the proposed algorithm
5 Algorithm to calculate the half of the sum
of degrees of vertices in an IVFG
An algorithm to determine the half of sum of the upper and
lower boundary of degree of the vertices of an IVFG is pro-
posed. Using the Dijkstra’s algorithm (Douglas 2002), first
draw a crisp graph G ∗ = (V , E), where V and E denote
the set of all vertices and edges with |V | = n and |E| = m,
respectively (Fig. 15).
Step 1 Put the membership values μ A (bi ) = [μlA (bi ),
μ A (bi )] ⊆ [0, 1] of the vertices bi ’s, i = 1, 2, . . . , n,
h departments, the TWAEA tried to establish various achieve-
μhA (bi ) ∈ [0, 1], μlA (bi ) ∈ [0, 1] with μhA (bi ) ≥ μlA (bi ).
123
S. Poulik et al.
Step 2 Write the membership values μ B (bi b j ) = [μlB
(bi b j ), μhB (bi b j )] ⊆ [0, 1] of the edges bi b j , i
i, j ≤ n such that μlB (bi b j ) ≤ min{μlA (bi ), μlA (b j )},
μhB (bi b j ) ≤ min{μhA (bi ), μhA (b j )}, with μhB (bi b j ) ≥
min{μlA (bi ), μlA (b j )}.
Step 3 Calculate degree of vertices bi (i = 1, 2, . . . , n),
deg(bi ) = (deg(bi )l , deg(bi )h ), where deg(bi )l = i
bi b j ∈E
μlB (bi b j ), deg(bi )h = i
h
bi b j ∈E
Step 4 Calculate half of sum of the upper and lower bound-
deg(b )l +deg(b )h
i j
ary of degree of the vertices, i.e., 2 , for all
1 ≤ i ≤ n.
deg(bi )l +deg(b j )h
Step 5 Select maximum { 2 } for all 1 ≤ i ≤
n.
6 Application: criteria’s in education system
in Taiwan in terms of IVFG
IVFG is an important factor to know the information in many
real connected graphical system, in which the vertices and
edges both are lies in an interval. In this section, using the
help of sum of the lower and upper boundary of the vertices,
i.e., 21 [degl (a) + degu (a)] for all vertices a in an IVFG G,
we can arrange the vertices in an IVFG in Taiwan education
system for communication.
6.1 Model construction
Taiwan’s higher education has experienced a quick devel-
opment over the past decade and that time the number of
institutions was at the university level has been reached 160.
Facing serve competition, all this type of institutions have
strived to maintain one of the best position by proposing
quality teaching, services and research. Contrary to this back-
drop, the Taiwan Assessment and Evaluation Association
(TWAEA) a profitless organization that was consecrated in
2000 to serve third-party evaluations of the execution of sev-
eral universities in Taiwan. The TWAEA was founded by the
senior members of business sectors and academia.
To assist every institution for understanding the oppor-
tunities, strengths, threats and weakness of its subservient
ment evaluation models for different academic departments.
Pragmatic results in Taiwan education system based IVFG & IVNG

tionship, to achieve the hierarchical evaluation framework,

Fig. 16 An IVFG G whose membership values of vertices are given in
Table 2 and membership values of edges are given in Table 3
was proposed by the committee. Here, we represent the total
process as an IVFG G, which is exhibited in Fig. 16. Ver-
tices of G denote the criteria’s TI, TQ, TM, JP, RG, PA,
AA, SC, PS and US. Since the committee members will be
able to evaluate and acknowledge their acceptance using only
an incompletely included interval values, so the vertices are
uncertain and the membership values of the vertices are given
in Guha et al. (2009). The membership values of vertices are
given in Table 2. The committee members were asked to
compare for similarity between these criteria’s. The edges
represent the relation between every pair of vertices, which
are also uncertain and interval valued. The membership val-
ues of edges are given in Table 3.

Table 2 Membership values of vertices of the IVFG of Fig. 16

6.3 Decision making
TI TQ TM JP RG
(0.6, 0.9) (0.6, 0.8) (0.5, 0.7) (0.4, 0.8) (0.5, 0.9)
From Table 4, it turns out that, the upper and lower value
AA PA SC PS US
of the interval of degree of some vertices is greater than or
(0.2, 0.7) (0.4, 0.9) (0.3, 0.8) (0.5, 0.7) (0.6, 0.8)
less than or equal to the upper and lower value of the interval
of degree of the other vertices. Again, the interval of degree
of some vertices totally belongs to the interval of degree
A hierarchical evaluation framework was adopted, using of some other vertices. So from here, the order of the ver-
the engineering school as an example and considering var- tices of G cannot be determined. Thus, using the half of sum
ious aspects of departmental development. For evaluating of the upper and lower boundary of degree of the vertices,
the performance, there are 10 criteria was used: teaching we can write the vertices in ascending or descending order
innovations, teaching quality, journal paper, teaching mate- to their contributions. Therefore, from Table 5 we have the
rial, research grant, patent acquisition, academic award, descending order of the vertices according to the half of sum
student consultation, university service and professional ser- of the lower and upper boundary of degree of the vertices
vice which are denoted by TI, TQ, JP, TM, RG, PA, AA, SC, of G which are US, TQ or PA, TM, RG, TI or PS, JP, SC,
US and PS, respectively. AA. Hence, there are four types of order of the ten criteria’s
which are : (i) US, TQ, PA, TM, RG, TI, PS, JP, SC, AA; (ii)
6.2 Illustration of membership values US, TQ, PA, TM, RG, PS, TI, JP, SC, AA; (iii) US, PA, TQ,
TM, RG, PS, TI, JP, SC, AA; (iv) US, PA, TQ, TM, RG, TI,
At the beginning, the core discussions focused on this fact that PS, JP, SC, AA.
how to make a group of these criteria to set up a hierarchical Therefore, the criteria US, i.e., University Service main-
framework for evaluation. A clustering based on fuzzy rela- tained is the most significant criteria.

Table 3 Membership values of

edges of the IVFG of Fig. 16 TI-TQ TI-TM TI-JP TI-RG TI-AA TI-PA TI-SC TI-PS
(0.5, 0.6) (0.4, 0.5) (0.2, 0.4) (0.3, 0.6) (0.2, 0.7) (0.4, 0.5) (0.2, 0.6) (0.4, 0.5)
TI-US TQ-TM TQ-JP TQ-RG TQ-AA TQ-PA TQ-SC TQ-PS
(0.6, 0.7) (0.4, 0.7) (0.4, 0.6) (0.3, 0.6) (0.2, 0.6) (0.3, 0.5) (0.3, 0.7) (0.4, 0.6)
TQ-US TM-JP TM-RG TM-AA TM-PA TM-SC TM-PS TM-US
(0.3, 0.6) (0.3, 0.6) (0.4, 0.6) (0.1, 0.7) (0.4, 0.6) (0.2, 0.7) (0.3, 0.6) (0.4, 0.6)
JP-RG JP-AA JP-PA JP-SC JP-PS JP-US RG-AA RG-PA
(0.4, 0.7) (0.2, 0.7) (0.3, 0.7) (0.3, 0.5) (0.4, 0.6) (0.3, 0.6) (0.2, 0.6) (0.4, 0.8)
RG-SC RG-PS RG-US AA-PA AA-SC AA-PS AA-US PA-SC
(0.2, 0.5) (0.2, 0.5) (0.4, 0.7) (0.1, 0.7) (0.2, 0.6) (0.2, 0.7) (0.1, 0.5) (0.2, 0.6)
PA-PS PA-US SC-PS SC-US PS-US
(0.3, 0.6) (0.4, 0.8) (0.4, 0.6) (0.2, 0.7) (0.3, 0.7)

123
 S. Poulik et al.

Table 4 Degree of vertices of

the IVFG of Fig. 16 deg(TI) deg(TQ) deg(TM) deg(JP) deg(RG)
= (3.2, 5.1) = (3.1, 5.5) = (2.9, 5.6) = (2.8, 5.4) = (2.8, 5.6)
deg(AA) deg(PA) deg(SC) deg(PS) deg(US)
= (1.5, 5.8) = (2.8, 5.8) = (2.2, 5.5) = (2.9, 5.4) = (3.0, 5.9)

Table 5 Half of sum of lower

deg(TI)l +deg(TI)u deg(TQ)l +deg(TQ)u deg(TM)l +deg(TM)u
and upper boundary of the 2 = 4.15 2 = 4.3 2 = 4.25
degree of vertices of the IVFG deg(JP)l +deg(JP)u deg(RG)l +deg(RG)u deg(AA)l +deg(AA)u
G 2 = 4.1 2 = 4.2 2 = 3.65
deg(PA)l +deg(PA)u deg(SC)l +deg(SC)u deg(PS)l +deg(PS)u
2 = 4.3 2 = 3.85 2 = 4.15
deg(US)l +deg(US)u
2 = 4.45

7 Hypothesis and limitations • A real application of IVFG is presented to maintain an

The main hypothesis of this work is to found out the main
characteristics in an education system for evaluation struc-
ture. All the characteristics are connected by a graphical
structure in terms of interval-valued fuzzy graph structure.
We pointed out that there are some defects in the definitions
of some operations of IVFG and in the definition of IVNG
and its complement and strong IVNG. These definitions and
operations needed to be corrected. Then, the selection of
important characteristics is shown using the degree of ver-
tices in an IVFG.
Some of the limitations of this study are as follows:
• This work mainly focused on IVFG & IVNG.
• Collecting all the data may not be easy in these environ-
ment.
• If the membership values of the character’s are given in
different environment, then IVFG cannot be used.
8 Discussion: advantages and disadvantages
for soft computing
Soft computing is mainly used for approximations, and it
gives imprecise and usable solution for solving complex com-
putational problems. As a role model in human mind, soft
computing is tolerant of uncertainty or fuzzy logic, approxi-
mation and imprecision unlike traditional computers models.
The main advantages are
• This work mainly depends on fuzzy logic in a network
system, so this work is compatible with soft computing.
• Many important definitions are improved in this study
which are very useful.
• It contains algorithm, flowchart which are the other
important parts of soft computing.
educational system.
Some of the disadvantages of this study are as follows:
• All the data must be given. But collection of membership
values may not be easy.
• If the membership values are crisp or binary process, then
the system reduces to hard computing.
• These results are applicable only to IVFG and IVNG.
9 Conclusion
Graphical structure is one of the most cited model to describe
complicated problems in which relationships between all
related criteria are similar and uncertain but not fixed. IVFG
and its operations give more precision, where the vertices
and edges continue at a certain interval in fuzzy graph.
First, this manuscripts identify many defects on the union,
join of two IVFGs and complete IVFG using many exam-
ples. Improved versions of these definitions are established
with examples. Also, the flaws in the definition of IVNG
have been pointed out using counterexample and its gen-
eral form is initiated. Using this definition of IVNG, it is
determined that the definitions of complete and strong IVNG
are also not correct. Modified versions of these are also
given. Fourth, an algorithm and a flowchart of the proposed
algorithm are established to evaluate the highest impor-
tant vertices in an IVFG system. Fifth, an application of
IVFG is depicted for decision making in the Taiwan edu-
cation system. Using the degree of vertices of the IVFG
corresponding to the education system, the most valuable
criteria for feature are shown. Sixth, the main hypothesis
with limitations of this work has been described. Lastly,
some of the important advantages and disadvantages are dis-
cussed.

123
Pragmatic results in Taiwan education system based IVFG & IVNG
Acknowledgements The first author is thankful to the Department of
Higher Education, Science and Technology and Biotechnology, Gov-
ernment of West Bengal, India, for the award of Swami Vivekananda
merit-cum-means scholarship (Award No. 52-Edn (B)/5B-15/2017
dated 07/06/2017) to meet up the financial expenditure to carry out the
research work. The third author is supported by Research Council Faroe
Islands and University of the Faroe Islands. The authors are grateful to
the learned reviewers for their valuable comments and suggestions to
improve the quality of the article.
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of
interest.
Ethical approval This article does not contain any studies with human
participants or animals performed by any of the authors.
References
Akram M, Dudek WA (2011) Interval-valued fuzzy graphs. Comput
Math Appl 61(2):289–299
Akram M, Nasir M (2017) Concepts of interval-valued neutrosophic
graphs. Int J Algebra Stat 6(1–2):22–41
Ali SH (2013) Novel approach for generating the key of stream cipher
system using random forest data mining algorithm. In: IEEE, 2013
sixth international conference on developments in esystems engi-
neering, Abu Dhabi, 2013, pp 259–269. https://doi.org/10.1109/
DeSE.2013.54
Al-Janabi S (2020) Smart system to create an optimal higher education
environment using IDA and IOTs. Int J Comput Appl. https://doi.
org/10.1080/1206212X.2018.1512460
Al-Janabi S, Alkaim AF (2020) A nifty collaborative analysis to pre-
dicting a novel tool (DRFLLS) for missing values estimation. Soft
Comput 24(1):555–569
Al-Janabi S, Alkaim AF, Adel Z (2020) An innovative synthesis
of deep learning techniques (DCapsNet & DCOM) for genera-
tion electrical renewable energy from wind energy. Soft Comput
24:10943–10962
Al-Janabi S, Mohammad M, Al-Sultan A (2020) A new method for
prediction of air pollution based on intelligent computation. Soft
Comput 24:661–680
Al-Janabi S, Yaqoob A, Mohammad M (2020) Pragmatic method based
on intelligent big data analytics to prediction air pollution. In:
Farhaoui Y (ed) Big data and networks technologies. BDNT 2019,
vol 81. Lecture notes in networks and systems. Springer, Cham.
https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23672-4_8
Alkaim AF, Al-Janabi S (2020) Multi objectives optimization to gas
flaring reduction from oil production. In: Farhaoui Y (ed) Big data
and networks technologies. BDNT 2019, vol 81. Lecture notes in
networks and systems. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/
978-3-030-23672-4_10
Bhutani KR, Rosenfeld A (2003) Strong arc in fuzzy graphs. Inf Sci
152:319–322
Broumi S, Deli I, Smarandache F (2014) Relations on interval valued
neutrosophic soft sets. J New Results Sci. https://doi.org/10.5281/
zenodo.30306
Broumi S, Talea M, Bakali A, Smarandache F (2016) Single valued
neutrosophic graphs. J New Theory 10:86–101
Bustince H, Burillo P (2000) Mathematical analysis of interval-valued
fuzzy relations: application to approximate reasoning. Fuzzy Sets
Syst 113(2):205–219
Cornelis C, Deschrijver G, Kerre EE (2006) Advances and challenges
in interval-valued fuzzy logic. Fuzzy Sets Syst 157(5):622–627
Douglas BW (2002) Introduction to graph theory. Pearson Education
India, Noida
Ghorai G, Pal M (2016) Some isomorphic properties of m-polar fuzzy
graphs with applications. SpringerPlus. https://doi.org/10.1186/
s40064-016-3783-z
Ghorai G, Pal M (2017) Certain types of product bipolar fuzzy graphs.
Int J Appl Comput Math 3(2):605–619
Ghorai G, Pal M (2018) A note on “Regular bipolar fuzzy graphs”
Neural Computing and Applications 21(1) 2012 197–205. Neural
Comput Appl 30(5):1569–1572
Guha YY, Yangb MS, Poc RW, Lee S (2009) Interval-valued fuzzy
relation-based clustering with its application to performance eval-
uation. Comput Math Appl 57(5):841–849
Jan N, Ullah K, Mahmood T, Garg H, Davvaz B, Saeid AB, Broumi
S (2019) Some root level modifications in interval valued fuzzy
graphs and their generalizations including neutrosophic graphs.
Mathematics 7(1):72
Mahdi MA, Al-Janabi S (2020) A nobel software to improve health-
care base on predictive analytics and mobile services for cloud
data centers. In: Farhaoui Y (ed) Big data and networks technolo-
gies. BDNT 2019, vol 81. Lecture notes in networks and systems.
Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-23672-4_8
Manne F, Xin Q (2008) Time effcient radio broadcasting in planar
graphs. J Netw 3(2):9–16
Mezei J, Wikstrom R (2013) Aggregation operators and interval-valued
fuzzy numbers in decision making. Adv Inf Syst Technol 206:535–
544
Mordeson JN, Peng CS (1994) Operation on fuzzy graphs. Inf Sci
79:159–170
Peng X, Dai J (2018) Approaches to single-valued neutrosophic MADM
based on MABAC, TOPSIS and new similarity measure with score
function. Neural Comput Appl 29(10):939–954
Poulik S, Ghorai G (2020) Certain indices of graphs under bipolar fuzzy
environment with applications. Soft Comput 24(7):5119–5131
Poulik S, Ghorai G (2020) Detour g-interior nodes and detour g-
boundary nodes in bipolar fuzzy graph with applications. Hacet
J Math Stat 49(1):106–119
Poulik S, Ghorai G (2020) Note on “bipolar fuzzy graphs with applica-
tions”. Knowl Based Syst. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.knosys.2019.
105315
Rashmanlou H, Jouybari MN (2017) New concepts of interval-valued
fuzzy graphs with application. J Math Inform 8:69–81
Rosenfield A (1975) Fuzzy graphs. In: Zadeh LA, Fu KS, Shimura M
(eds) Fuzzy sets and their application. Academic press, New York,
pp 77–95
Talebi AA, Rashmanlou H, Ameri R (2016) New concepts of product
interval-valued fuzzy graph. J Appl Math Inform 34(3–4):179–192
Wang H, Smarandache F, Zhang YQ, Smarandache R (2005) Interval
neutrosophic sets and logic: theory and applications in computing.
Hexis, Phoenix
Wang H, Smarandache F, Zhang YQ, Sunderraman R (2012) Single
valued neutrosophic sets. Tech Sci Appl Math 4:410–413
Xin Q, Xia Y (2017) Latency optimal broadcasting in noisy wireless
mesh networks. In: 2017 27th International telecommunication
networks and applications conference (ITNAC). https://doi.org/
10.1109/ATNAC.2017.8215431
Yang HL, Guo ZL, She Y, Liao X (2016) On single valued neutrosophic
relations. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 30(2):1045–1056
Yang HL, Zhang CL, Guo ZL, Liu YL, Liao X (2017) A hybrid model
of single valued neutrosophic sets and rough sets: single valued
neutrosophic rough set model. Soft Comput 21(21):6253–6267
123
 S. Poulik et al.

Yu CW, Xin Q, Chilamkurti N, Jiang S (2014) Algorithm and theory for

robust wireless sensor networks. Int J Distrib Sens Netw 10(4):1–1
Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets, information. Control 8(3):338–353
Zhang H, Wang J, Chen X (2014) Interval neutrosophic sets and their
application in multicriteria decision making problems. Hindawi
Publishing Corporation, London. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/
645953

Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to juris-

dictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

123