Filomat 37:11 (2023), 3559–3573 Published by Faculty of Sciences and Mathematics,

https://doi.org/10.2298/FIL2311559Z University of Niš, Serbia

Available at: http://www.pmf.ni.ac.rs/filomat

On (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness relations

Hu Zhaoa , Yu-Jie Zhaoa , Shao-Yu Zhangb

a School of Science, Xi’an Polytechnic University, Xi’an, 710048, P.R. China
b Beijing Key Laboratory on MCAACI, School of Mathematics and Statistics, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing, 102488, P.R.China

Abstract. In this paper, aiming at the shortcomings of the definition of LRG-Galois connections in [51], we
give a new definition of (strong) LRG-Galois connections, and we also introduce the notions of (L, N)-fuzzy
betweenness relations. By using a strong LRG-Galois connection in our sense, it is shown that the category of
(L, N)-fuzzy betweenness spaces and the category of (L, M)-fuzzy convex spaces are isomorphic. Moreover,
it is proved that the lattice of (L, M)-fuzzy convex structures and the lattice of (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness
relations are complete lattice isomorphic.

1. Introduction

Abstract convexity theory [30, 32] is one of the important branches of mathematics, it deals with set-
theoretic structures which satisfies axioms similar to that usual convex sets fulfill. It plays an important
role in various branches of mathematics. There are many different mathematical research fields that can
be applied to axiomatic convexity, such as lattices, topological spaces, metric spaces and graphs (see, for
example, [8, 13, 29, 31, 33, 34, 37, 44]).
Rosa [23, 24] first generalized convex structure to I-convex structure. Also, introduced fuzzy topology
fuzzy convexity spaces and the notion of fuzzy local convexity. Subsequently, many scholars generalize
convex structures to other fuzzy context from different viewpoints. Generally speaking, there are three
approaches to extensions of convex structures to the fuzzy context, they are called L-convex structures(see,
for example, [7, 9, 12, 15–17, 53]), M-fuzzifying convex structures (see, for example, [10, 14, 27, 36, 41, 42,
44, 51]) and (L, M)-fuzzy convex structures(see, for example, [25, 28]), respectively. Recently, there has been
significant research on fuzzy convex structures (see, for example, [2, 11, 18–21, 26, 38–40, 43, 47–49, 52]).
It should be stressed here that the notion of (L, M)-fuzzy convex structures was first introduced by Shi
and Xiu in [28], and the concept of the product of (L, M)-fuzzy convex structures was presented and their
fundamental properties were discussed. In particular, it was shown that that both L-convex structures and
M-fuzzifying convex structures can be regarded as special cases of (L, M)-fuzzy convex structures.
When studying the relationship between convex structures and other structures, An order-reversing
involution on lattice M plays an important role. An order-reversing involution can be regarded as a

2020 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 03E72; Secondary 52A01, 54A40

Keywords. (L, M)-fuzzy convex structures; (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness spaces; (L, M)-fuzzy restricted hull operators; LRG-Galois
connections, isomorphic.
Received: 26 May 2022; Revised: 20 January 2023; Accepted: 22 January 2023
Communicated by Ljubiša D.R. Kočinac
The work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 12171386), and the Postdoctoral Science
Foundation of China (No. 2020M670142).
Email address: zhaohu@xpu.edu.cn (Hu Zhao)
 H. Zhao et al. / Filomat 37:11 (2023), 3559–3573 3560

kind of generalization of complement. By using an order-reversing involution, Shi and Li [27] given
the isomorphism between M-fuzzifying convex spaces and M-fuzzifying betweenness spaces. Yang and
Pang[45] showed L-betweenness relations are categorically isomorphic to restricted L-hull operators and
L-remotehood systems, respectively. Pang[21] introduced two types of fuzzy hull operators, which are
called (L, M)-fuzzy hull operators and (L, M)-fuzzy restricted hull operators, respectively. It was shown
that they can be used to characterize (L, M)-fuzzy convex structures. But an order-reversing involution
can only transform each other on the same lattice. In view of this, Zhang[51] introduced a connection
combined with the wedge-below relation, by using this tool, it was shown that the category of M-fuzzifying
betweenness spaces and the category of M-fuzzifying convex spaces are isomorphic. It’s worth mentioning
that M-fuzzifying convex structures is a special kind of (L, M)-fuzzy convex structures. And there is a close
relationship between M-fuzzifying betweenness space and M-fuzzifying hull spaces. This inspires us to
define and study betweenness spaces in (L, N) (resp., (L, M))-fuzzy setting. We know that a pair mappings
f
M ⇄ N in [51] is called an LRG-Galois connection, if it satisfies the following conditions: For any x ∈ M
1
and y ∈ N,
(SG) f (x) ≥ y ⇐⇒ 1(y) ≥ x.
(LRG) f (x) ◁op y ⇐⇒ 1(y) ◁ x.
The idea of LRG-Galois connections proposed by Zhang is very good, because they can transform each
f
other on two completely distributive lattices. However, if a pair mappings M ⇄ N satisfies (LRG), then,
1
for each A ⊆ M, f ( A) = f (A) need not be ture, and there is no f (1M ) = 0N in general. Noticing this,
V W
in the current paper, we will redefine the concept of (strong) LRG-Galois connections on two completely
distributive lattices to ensure that they have the function similar to order-reversing involutions.
This paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we recall some necessary concepts which will be used
f
in this paper. In Section 3, we will give a counterexamples to show that if a pair mappings M ⇄ N satisfies
1
(LRG), then f need not be an − mapping and there is no f (1M ) = 0N in general, then we will give a new
V W
defnition of (strong) LRG-Galois connections. In Section 4, as a generalization of L-betweenness spaces and
N-fuzzifying betweenness spaces, we will introduce the concept of (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness spaces, then
we will use a (strong) LRG-Galois connection to discuss the categorical relationship between (L, M)-fuzzy
convex spaces and (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness spaces. Meanwhile, we also discuss the lattice relationship
between (L, M)-fuzzy convex structures and (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness relations.

2. Preliminaries
Let X be a non-empty set, M (resp. N) be a complete lattice and 0M (resp. 0N ) and 1M (resp. 1N ) denote
the least and the greatest elements in M, respectively. If a pair of mappings f : M −→ N and 1 : N −→ M (
f
M ⇄ N for short) satisfies f (x) ≥ y if and only if 1(y) ≥ x for any x ∈ M and y ∈ N, then the pair mappings
1
f
M ⇄ N is called a connection between M and N (see[51]). We say that a is wedge below b in M, denoted
1
W
by a ◁ b, if for every subset C ⊆ M, C ⩾ b implies W c ⩾ a for some c ∈ C (see [6]). A complete lattice M
is completely distributive lattice if and only if b = {a ∈ M | a ◁ b}. β(b) is the greatest minimal
V family of
b. Further, the relation ◁op in M is defined as follows: b ◁op a iff for every subset D ⊆ M, b ⩾ D implies
a ⩾ d for some d ∈ D. α(b) = {a ∈ M | b ◁op a} is the greatest maximal family of b. When M is a completely
distributive
W lattice,Veach element b in M has the greatest minimal family (resp. the greatest maximal family),
and b = β(b) = α(b) for each b ∈ M(see [35]).
Let L be a complete
W lattice, we say that a is way below b in L, denoted by a ≪ b, if for all directed
subsets E ⊆ L, E ⩾ b implies e ⩾ aWfor some e ∈ E. A complete lattice L is said to be continuous, if
for all c ∈ L, ⇓ c is directed and c = ⇓ c, where ⇓ c = {a ∈ L | a ≪ c} (see [4]). An L-fuzzy subset of
X in [5] is a mapping C : X −→ L and the family LX denoted the set of all fuzzy subsets of a given X.
 H. Zhao et al. / Filomat 37:11 (2023), 3559–3573 3561

The operators on L can be translated onto LX in a pointwise way. The greatest and the least elements in
LX are denoted by 1X and 0X , respectively. For each λ ∈ L, let λ denote the constant L-fuzzy subset of
X with the value λ. xλ is defined by xλ (y) = λ if y = x and xλ (y) = 0 otherwise, is called a fuzzy point.
The set of all fuzzy points in LX is denoted by J(LX ). We say {Bi }i∈I is a directed subset of LX , in symbols
dir
{Bi }i∈I ⊆ LX if for each B1 , B2 ∈ {Bi }i∈I , there exists B3 ∈ {Bi }i∈I such that B1 , B2 ≤ B3 . We usually use the
symbol di∈I Bi to represent the supremum of a directed subset {Bi }i∈I of LX . Let L(X) denote the family of all
W
finite L-subsets of X, i.e., L(X) = {B ∈ LX | B is a finite L-subset of X}, where B is finite means the support set
of B, SuppB = {x ∈ X | B(x) , 0L } is finite (see [21]). Some concepts related to category theorey can be found
in [1].

Definition 2.1. ([27]) A pair (X, B) is called an M-fuzzifying betweeenness space, where B : X × 2(X) −→ M
satisfies the following conditions:
(MB1) For each x ∈ X, B(x, ∅) = 0M .
(MB2) If A ∈ 2(X) and x ∈ A, then B(x, A) = 1M .
(MB3)For each A, B ∈ 2(X) and x ∈ X, B(x, A) ≥ B(x, B) ∧ y∈B B(y, A).
V

Where 2(X) be the family of all finite subsets of X, i.e., A ∈ 2(X) indicates that A is finite.

Definition 2.2. ([45]) A pair (X, B) is called an L-betweenness space, where B ⊆ L(X) × J(LX ) satisfies the
following conditions:
(LB1) For each xλ ∈ J(LX ), (0X , xλ ) < B.
(LB2) If xλ ≤ A, then (A, xλ ) ∈ B.
(LB3) For each A, B ∈ L(X) and xλ ∈ J(LX ), if (A, xλ ) ∈ B and (B, yµ ) ∈ B for all yµ ≤ A, then (B, xλ ) ∈ B.
(LB4) (A, xλ ) ∈ B if and only if ∀µ ≪ λ, there exists B ≪ A such that (B, xµ ) ∈ B.
(LB5) (A, xW λi ) ∈ B if and only if ∀i ∈ I, (A, xλi ) ∈ B.
i∈I

Definition 2.3. ([3]) A mapping C : LX −→ M is called an (L, M)-fuzzy closure system on X if it satisfies the
following axioms:
(LMC1) C(0X ) = C(1X ) = 1M .
(LMC2) If {A j : j ∈ J} ⊆ LX is nonempty, then C( j∈J A j ) ≥ j∈J C(A j ).
V V

If C : LX −→ M is an (L, M)-fuzzy closure system on X, then the pair (X, C) is called an (L, M)-fuzzy closure
space.

Definition 2.4. ([20, 21, 25, 28]) A closure system C is called an (L, M)-fuzzy convex structure, if one of the
following conditions hold (the second then following as a consequence)
(LMC3) If {A j : j ∈ J} ⊆ LX is nonempty and totally ordered by inclusion, then C( j∈J A j ) ≥ j∈J C(A j ).
W V

(LMC3) ⋆ If {Ak : k ∈ K} ⊆ LX is directed, then C( dk∈K Ak ) ≥ k∈K C(Ak ).

W V
The pair (X, C) is called an (L, M)-fuzzy convex space. A mapping h : X −→ Y from an (L, M)-fuzzy convex
space (X, C) to another (L, M)-fuzzy convex space (Y, D) is said to be (L, M)-fuzzy convexity preserving
function ((L, M)-CP in short) if C(h← (B)) ≥ D(B) for all B ∈ LY . The category of all (L, M)-fuzzy convex
spaces as objects and all (L, M)-CPs as morphisms is denoted by (L, M)-FC. Obviously, (L, M)-fuzzy convex
space can degenerate to M-fuzzifying convex space and L-convex space by restricting L = {0, 1}, and
M = {0, 1}.
X
Definition 2.5. ([21]) A pair (X, H) is called an (L, M)-fuzzy restricted hull space, where H : L(X) −→ M J(L )

satisfies the following conditions:

(LMRH1) H(0X )(xλ ) = 0M .
(LMRH2) H(F)(xλ ) = 1M for each xλ ≤ F.
V
(LMRH3) H(F)(yµ ) ≥ H(G)(yµ ) ∧ xλ ≤G H(F)(xλ ).
(LMRH4) H(F)(xλ ) = µ≪λ G≪F H(G)(xµ ).
V W
 H. Zhao et al. / Filomat 37:11 (2023), 3559–3573 3562

(LMRH5) H(F)(xW λi ) =
V
i∈I H(F)(xλi ).
i∈I

A mapping h : X −→ Y from an (L, M)-fuzzy restricted hull space (X, H1 ) to another (L, M)-fuzzy
restricted hull space (Y, H2 ) is said to be (L, M)-restricted hull-preserving mapping ((L, M)-RHP in short)
if H2 (h→ (U))(h(x)λ ) ≥ H1 (U)(xλ ) for each U ∈ L(X) and each xλ ∈ J(LX ). The category of all (L, M)-fuzzy
restricted hull spaces as objects and all (L, M)-RHPs as morphisms is denoted by (L, M)-FRH.
→ X ← Y
Definition 2.6. ([22, 46]) Let Wh : X −→ Y. Then the image h ←(A) of A ∈ L and the preimage h (B) of B ∈ L
are defined by: h (A)(y) = {A(x) : x ∈ X, h(x) = y} and h (B) = B ◦ h, respectively. It can be verified that
→

the pair (h→ , h← ) is a Galois connection on (LX , ≤) and (LY , ≤).

Lemma 2.7. ([21]) (L, M)-FC is isomorphic to (L, M)-FGH.
In the following sections, if not emphasized, we always assume that both M and N are completely
distributive lattices, and L is a continuous lattice.

3. A new definition of LRG-Galois connections

f
In [51], if a pair of mappings M ⇄ N is a connection and it satisfies the following condition:
1
(LRG) f (x) ◁op y ⇐⇒ 1(y) ◁ x for any x ∈ M and y ∈ N.
f
Then the pair mappings M ⇄ N is called an LRG-Galois connection.
1

f V W
Remark 3.1. If a pair of mappings M ⇄ N satisfies (LRG), then f need not be an − mapping and there
1
is no f (1M ) = 0N in general, i.e., Corollary 3.4 in [51] need not be true. For example, let M = {0M , p, q, 1M } be a
diamond-type lattice (see Fig.1), and let N = {0N , a, b, c, d, 1N } (see Fig.2). Define two mappings f : M −→ N
and 1 : N −→ M as follows:
0M , if y = d,



= ,

a, if x 1
 
M
 

0M , if y = 1N ,

 


 

 
=
 


 b, if x p, 


f (x) =  1(y) =  if y = c,
 
 q,
 

c, if x = q,

 


 

p, if y = b,

 


 

 1 ,

otherwise,


N


1M ,

otherwise.



Notice that 0M ̸◁ 0M ◁ p ◁ p (q ◁ q) ◁ 1M ̸◁ 1M , and 0N ◁op 0N ◁op a ̸◁op a ◁op b ◁op b (c ◁op c) ◁op
̸ op 1N . We can verify that f (x) ◁op y ⇐⇒ 1(y) ◁ x for any x ∈ M and y ∈ N. However,
d ◁op d ◁op 1N ◁
f
f (p ∧ q) , f (p) ∨ f (q), and f (1M ) , 0N , i.e., the pair mappings M ⇄ N satisfies (LRG). But f need not be an
1
− mapping and there is no f (1M ) = 0N .
V W

1N
•
1M
• •d
p • @• q b • @• c
@• @• a
0M •
0N
Fig.1 The structure of M Fig.2 The structure of N
 H. Zhao et al. / Filomat 37:11 (2023), 3559–3573 3563

In order to give a reasonable definition with respect to LRG-Galois connections, let us recall that an
order-reversing involution ′ on M is a map (−)′ : M −→ M such that for any c, d ∈ M, the following conditions
hold: (1) c ≤ d implies d′ ≤ c′ . (2) c′′ = c. The following properties hold for any subset {di : i ∈ J} ∈ M: (1)
W ′ V V ′ W
i∈J di = i∈J di . (2) i∈J di = i∈J di . In particular, c ≥ d ⇐⇒ d ≥ c, 1 = 0 and 0 = 1.
′ ′ ′ ′ ′ ′

Notice that the properties of the order-reversing involution mentioned above, we redefine an LRG-Galois
connection as follows.

f f
Definition 3.2. A pair mappings M ⇄ N is called an LRG-Galois connection, if M ⇄ N satisfies the
1 1
following conditions: for any x ∈ M and y ∈ N,
(SC) (Connection) f (x) ≥ y ⇐⇒ 1(y) ≥ x.
(LG) (◁op connection on the left ) f (x) ◁op y ⇐⇒ 1(y) ◁ x.
(RG) (◁op connection on the right) f (x) ◁ y ⇐⇒ 1(y) ◁op x.
(MJ) ( − mapping) f ( A) = f (A) for any A ⊆ M.
V W V W
f
If a pair mappings M ⇄ N is an LRG-Galois connection in our sense, and f is a bijection between M and N,
1
f
then we say that the pair mappings M ⇄ N is a strong LRG-Galois connection.
1

Remark 3.3. By (SC), W we obtain f ◦ 1 ≥ idN and 1 ◦ f ≥ idM . By (LG), we obtain f is an antitone mapping,
f (0M ) = 1N , and f ( A) = W
V
f (A) forVany A ⊆ M(see [51]). Similarly, by (RG), we obtain 1 is also an antitone
mapping, 1(0N ) = 1M and 1( B) = 1(B) for any B ⊆ N.

Here we provide an example of an LRG-Galois connection in our sense.

Example 3.4. Let M = {0M , c, d, e, 1M } (see Fig.3), and let N = {0N , a, b, 1N } be a diamond-type lattice (see
f
Fig.4). Define a pair mappings M ⇄ N as follows:
1

a, if x = c, 1M , if y = 0N ,
 

 


 


 

if x = d, if y = a,
 


 b, 

 c,
f (x) =  1(y) = 

 

1N , if x = 0M , if y = b,
 
d,

 


 


 


 

 0 ,

otherwise,  0 ,

otherwise.
N M

f
Then we can verify that the pair mappings M ⇄ N is an LRG-Galois connection as defined in Definition
1
3.2.

1M
•
e 1N
• •
c • @• d a • @• b
@• @•
0M 0N

Fig.3 The structure of M Fig.4 The structure of N

 H. Zhao et al. / Filomat 37:11 (2023), 3559–3573 3564

4. (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness relations

f
In this section, if not emphasized, we always assume that a pair mappings M ⇄ N is an LRG-Galois
1
connection as defined in Definition 3.2.

Definition 4.1. A mapping B : J(LX ) × L(X) −→ N is called an (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness relation on X if it
satisfies the following conditions:
(LNB1) B(xλ , 0X ) = 0N .
(LNB2) B(xλ , F) = 1N for each xλ ≤ F.
(LNB3) ^
B(xλ , G) ∧ B(yµ , F) ≤ B(xλ , F).
yµ ≤G

(LNB4) ^_
B(xλ , F) = B(xµ , G).
µ≪λ G≪F

(LNB5) ^
B(xW λi , F) = B(xλi , F).
i∈I
i∈I

The pair (X, B) is called an (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness space. A mapping h : X −→ Y from an (L, N)-
fuzzy betweenness space (X, B1 ) to another (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness space (Y, B2 ) is said to be (L, N)-fuzzy
betweenness-preserving mapping ((L, N)-BP in short) if B1 (xλ , A) ≤ B2 (h(x)λ , h→ (A)) for each A ∈ L(X)
and each xλ ∈ J(LX ). The category of all (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness spaces as objects and all (L, N)-BPs as
morphisms is denoted by (L, N)-FB.

Remark 4.2. Obviously, if L = {0, 1} and N = M, then (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness spaces can degenerate to
M-fuzzifying betweenness spaces. If N = {0, 1}, then (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness spaces can degenerate to
L-betweenness spaces. And, if N = M, then (L, M)-FRH is isomorphic to (L, M)-FB.

Theorem 4.3. Let (X, B) be an (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness space. Define CB : LX −→ M by

^ ^
∀A ∈ LX , CB (A) = 1(B(xλ , B)).
xλ ≰A B≪A

Then (X, CB ) is an (L, M)-fuzzy convex space.

Proof. It suffices to verify that CB satisfies (LMC1), (LMC2) and (LMC3)⋆ . Indeed,
(LMC1) ^ ^ ^  _ ^

CB (0X ) = 1(B(xλ , B)) = 1 B(xλ , B) = 1(0N ) = 1M ,
xλ ≰0X B≪0X xλ ≰0X B≪0X xλ ≰0X

and ^ ^ ^  _  ^ _
CB (1X ) = 1(B(xλ , B)) = 1 B(xλ , B) = 1( ∅) = 1M .
xλ ≰1X B≪1X B≪1X xλ ≰1X B≪1X

(LMC2) If {A j : j ∈ J} ⊆ L is nonempty. Let α ∈ M and CB ( j∈J A j ) ◁op α, then

X
V

 _ _  ^ ^
1 B(xλ , B) = 1(B(xλ , B)) ◁op α.
V V V V
xλ ≰ A j B≪ Aj xλ ≰ A j B≪ Aj
j∈J j∈J j∈J j∈J
 H. Zhao et al. / Filomat 37:11 (2023), 3559–3573 3565

By (RG), we have
_ _
f (α) ◁ B(xλ , B).
V V
xλ ≰ A j B≪ Aj
j∈J j∈J

There exists xλ ∈ J(LX ) and B0 ∈ L(X) such that xλ ≰ j∈J A j , B0 ≪ j∈J A j , and f (a) ◁ B(xλ , B0 ). Further,
V V
there exists j0 ∈ J such that xλ ≰ A j0 , B0 ≪ A j0 , and 1(B(xλ , B0 )) ◁op α. So, we have
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
CB (A j ) = 1(B(yµ , C)) ≤ 1(B(yµ , C)) ≤ 1(B(xλ , B0 )) ◁op α.
j∈J j∈J yµ ≰A j C≪A j yµ ≰A j0 C≪A j0

CB (A j ) ◁op α. Hence, we obtain

V
It follows that j∈J

^ ^
CB ( A j ) ≥ CB (A j )
j∈J j∈J

as desired.
(LMC3) ⋆ If {Ak : k ∈ K} ⊆ LX is directed. Let α ∈ M and CB ( dk∈K Ak ) ◁op α, then
W

 _ _  ^ ^
1 B(xλ , B) = 1(B(xλ , B)) ◁op α.
Wd Wd
xλ ≰ dk∈K Ak B≪ dk∈K Ak
W W
xλ ≰ k∈K Ak B≪ k∈K Ak

By (RG), we have
_ _
f (a) ◁ B(xλ , B).
xλ ≰ dk∈K Ak B≪ dk∈K Ak
W W

There exists xλ ∈ J(LX ) and B0 ∈ L(X) such that

d
_ d
_
xλ ≰ Ak , B0 ≪ Ak and f (a) ◁ B(xλ , B0 ).
k∈K k∈K

Further, there exists k0 ∈ K such that B0 ≪ Ak0 and 1(B(xλ , B0 )) ◁op α. And, if xλ ≰ dk∈K Ak , then xλ ≰ Ak for
W
each k ∈ K. So, we have
^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^
CB (Ak ) = 1(B(yµ , C)) ≤ 1(B(yµ , C)) ≤ 1(B(xλ , B0 )) ◁op α.
k∈K k∈K yµ ≰Ak C≪Ak yµ ≰Ak0 C≪Ak0

CB (Ak ) ◁op α. Hence, we obtain

V
It follows that k∈K

d
_ ^
CB ( Ak ) ≥ CB (Ak )
k∈K k∈K

as desired.

Theorem 4.4. Let (X, C) be an (L, M)-fuzzy convex space. Define BC : J(LX ) × L(X) −→ N by
^
∀F ∈ L(X) , ∀xλ ∈ J(LX ), BC (xλ , F) = f (C(G)).
xλ ≰G≥F

Then (X, BC ) is an (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness space.

 H. Zhao et al. / Filomat 37:11 (2023), 3559–3573 3566

Proof. It suffices to verify that BC satisfies (LNB1)-(LNB5). Indeed,

(LNB1) By (MJ), we have
^
BC (xλ , 0X ) = f (C(G)) ≤ f (C(0X )) = 0N .
xλ ≰G≥0X

(LNB2) For each xλ ≤ F, we have

^ ^
BC (xλ , F) = f (C(G)) = ∅ = 1N .
xλ ≰G≥F

(LNB3) Let α ∈ N, and ^

α ◁ BC (xλ , G) ∧ BC (yµ , F),
yµ ≤G

then α ≤ BC (xλ , G), and α ≤ BC (yµ , F) for each yµ ≤ G. Let

_
D0 = {zw ∈ J(LX ) | α ≤ BC (zw , F)},

then G ≤ D0 , and ^ ^
α ≤ BC (xλ , G) = f (C(H)) ≤ f (C(D0 )) = BC (xλ , D0 ).
xλ ≰H≥G xλ ≰H≥D0

This implies that α ≤ BC (xλ , D0 ). By the definition of BC , we have

^  _   _ ^ 
BC (xλ , F) = f (C(G)) = f C(G) = f C(G)
xλ ≰G≥F xλ ≰G≥F xλ ≰G≥F zδ ≰G
 _ ^ _ 
≥ f C(H)
xλ ≰G≥F zδ ≰G zδ ≰H≥G
^ ^ _ 
= f C(H)
xλ ≰G≥F zδ ≰G zδ ≰H≥G
^  _ 
≥ f C(G)
xλ ≰G≥F xλ ≰H≥G
 _ 
≥ f C(H)
xλ ≰H≥F
= BC (xλ , F).
Hence, ^ ^ _ 
BC (xλ , F) = f C(H) .
xλ ≰G≥F zδ ≰G zδ ≰H≥G

Now, we only need to show that α ≤ BC (xλ , F). If not, there exists G0 ∈ L(X) such that xλ ≰ G0 ≥ F, and
^ _  _  _ 
α≰ f C(H) ≥ f C(H) .
zδ ≰G0 zδ ≰H≥G0 zδ ≰G0 zδ ≰H≥G0

Hence,
_  _  _
α≰ f C(H) = BC (zδ , G0 ). (1)
zδ ≰G0 zδ ≰H≥G0 zδ ≰G0

It implies that α ≰ W
BC (zδ , G0 ) for each zδ ≰ G0 , i.e., if zδ ∈ {xγ ∈ J(LX ) | α ≤ BC (xγ , G0 )}, then zδ ∈ {xγ ∈ J(LX ) |
xγ ≤ G0 }. Let H0 = {xγ ∈ J(LX ) | α ≤ BC (xγ , G0 )}, then xλ ≰ G0 ≥ H0 ≥ D0 . By (1), we have
_  _   _ 
α≰ f C(H) ≥ f C(H) = BC (xλ , D0 ).
zδ ≰G0 zδ ≰H≥G0 xλ ≰H≥D0
 H. Zhao et al. / Filomat 37:11 (2023), 3559–3573 3567

So, we have α ≰ BC (xλ , D0 ). Which is a contradiction. Therefore, α ≤ BC (xλ , F). Hence,

^
BC (xλ , G) ∧ BC (yµ , F) ≤ BC (xλ , F).
yµ ≤G

(LNB4) Let β ∈ N and BC (xλ , F) ◁op β. By (LG), we have

 _  _
f C(G)) ◁op β ⇐⇒ 1(β) ◁ C(G)),
xλ ≰G≥F xλ ≰G≥F

there exists G0 ∈ LX such that µ≪λ xµ = xλ ≰ G0 ≥ F and 1(β) ◁ C(G0 ). Further, there exists µ0 ≪ λ such
W
that xµ0 ≰ G0 ≥ F, and 1(β) ◁ C(G0 ). Notice that
_^ _ _ _ _
C(H) ≥ C(H) ≥ C(H) ≥ C(G0 ).
µ≪λ G≪F xµ ≰H≥G µ≪λ xµ ≰H≥F xµ0 ≰H≥F

So, we have _^ _
1(β) ◁ C(H).
µ≪λ G≪F xµ ≰H≥G

By (LG), we have ^ ^ _  _ ^ _ 
f C(H) = f C(H) ◁op β.
µ≪λ G≪F xµ ≰H≥G µ≪λ G≪F xµ ≰H≥G

Notice that ^_ ^_  _  ^ ^ _ 
BC (xµ , G) = f C(H) ≤ f C(H) .
µ≪λ G≪F µ≪λ G≪F xµ ≰H≥G µ≪λ G≪F xµ ≰H≥G

So, we have ^_
BC (xµ , G) ◁op β.
µ≪λ G≪F

Hence, ^_
BC (xλ , F) ≥ BC (xµ , G).
µ≪λ G≪F

Conversely, let β ∈ N and BC (xµ , G) ◁op β, then

V W
µ≪λ G≪F
^_ ^  
f C(H) ◁op β.
µ≪λ G≪F xµ ≰H≥G

So, we have _ ^ _  _^ _
f C(H) ◁op β ⇐⇒ 1(β) ◁ C(H).
µ≪λ G≪F xµ ≰H≥G µ≪λ G≪F xµ ≰H≥G

Notice that _^ _ _
C(H) ≤ C(H).
µ≪λ G≪F xµ ≰H≥G xλ ≰H≥F
W
Thus, we obtain 1(β) ◁ xλ ≰H≥F C(H). By (LG), we have
 _ 
BC (xλ , F) = f C(H) ◁op β.
xλ ≰H≥F

Hence, ^_
BC (xλ , F) ≤ BC (xµ , G).
µ≪λ G≪F
 H. Zhao et al. / Filomat 37:11 (2023), 3559–3573 3568

(LNB5) Let β ∈ N and BC (xW λi , F) ◁op β. By (LG), we have

i∈I
 _  _ _ _
f C(G)) ◁op β ⇐⇒ 1(β) ◁ C(G)) = C(G)
x W λi ≰G≥F x W λi ≰G≥F i∈I xλi ≰G≥F
i∈I i∈I

_ _  ^
⇐⇒ f C(G) = BC (xλi , F) ◁op β.
i∈I xλi ≰G≥F i∈I

Hence, BC (xW λi , F) = BC (xλi , F).

V
i∈I
i∈I

Proposition 4.5. (1) If h : (X, CX ) −→ (Y, CY ) is an (L, M)-CP, then 1 : (X, BCX ) −→ (Y, BCY ) is an (L, N)-BP.
(2) If h : (X, BX ) −→ (Y, BY ) is an (L, N)-BP, then h : (X, CBX ) −→ (Y, CBY ) is an (L, M)-CP.
Proof. The proof is straightforward. So, we omit it.
Theorem 4.6. If (X, C) is an (L, M)-fuzzy convex space, and (X, B) an (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness space. Then,
(1) ∀A ∈ LX , CBC (A) ≥ C(A).
(2) ∀F ∈ L(X) , ∀xλ ∈ J(LX ), BCB (xλ , F) ≥ B(xλ , F).
Proof. For (1), ∀A ∈ LX . By (SC), we have
^ ^
CBC (A) = 1(BC (xλ , B))
xλ ≰A B≪A
^ ^  ^  
= 1 f C(G))
xλ ≰A B≪A xλ ≰G≥B
^ ^   _ 
= 1 f C(G))
xλ ≰A B≪A xλ ≰G≥B
^ ^ _
≥ C(G))
xλ ≰A B≪A xλ ≰G≥B
^ ^ _
= C(G))
B≪A xλ ≰A xλ ≰G≥B
^ ^ _
≥ C(G))
B≪A xλ ≰A xλ ≰G≥A
^ ^
≥ C(A) = C(A).
B≪A xλ ≰A

For (2), ∀F ∈ L(X) , ∀xλ ∈ J(LX ), we have

^
BCB (xλ , F) = f (CB (G))
xλ ≰G≥F
 _ ^ ^ 
= f 1(B(yµ , H))
xλ ≰G≥F yµ ≰G H≪G
 _ ^ ^ 
= f 1(B(yµ , H))
xλ ≰G≥F H≪G yµ ≰G
_ _ ^ ^ 
= f 1(B(yµ , H)) .
ω≪λ xω ≰G≥F H≪G yµ ≰G

Let α ∈ N and BCB (xλ , F) ◁ α, then op

_ _ ^ ^ 
f 1(B(yµ , H)) ◁op α.
ω≪λ xω ≰G≥F H≪G yµ ≰G
 H. Zhao et al. / Filomat 37:11 (2023), 3559–3573 3569

By (LG), we obtain
_ _ ^ ^
1(α) ◁ 1(B(yµ , H))
ω≪λ xω ≰G≥F H≪G yµ ≰G
_ _ ^
≤ 1(B(xω , H))
ω≪λ xω ≰G≥F H≪G
_ _ ^
≤ 1(B(xω , H))
ω≪λ xω ≰G≥F H≪F
_ ^
= 1(B(xω , H))
ω≪λ H≪F
_ _ 
= 1 B(xω , H) ,
ω≪λ H≪F

W 
there exists ω0 ≪ λ such that 1(α) ◁ 1 H≪F B(xω0 , H) , which is equivalent to that
 _ 
f 1 B(xω0 , H) ◁op α.
H≪F

Notice that ^ _ _  _ 
B(xλ , F) = B(xµ , H) ≤ B(xω0 , H) ≤ f 1 B(xω0 , H) .
µ≪λ H≪F H≪F H≪F

So, we have B(xλ , F) ◁op α. It follows that BCB (xλ , F) ≥ B(xλ , F).

By Theorem 4.3 and Proposition 4.5, we obtain a concrete functor Θ : (L, N)-FB−→ (L, M)-FC by

Θ : (X, B) 7→ (X, CB ) and h 7→ h.

Similarly, by Theorem 4.4 and Proposition 4.5, we obtain a concrete functor Ψ : (L, M)-FC−→ (L, N)-FB
by
Ψ : (X, C) 7→ (X, BC ) and h 7→ h.
f
Next, let us prove that if a pair mappings M ⇄ N is a strong LRG-Galois connection, then Θ and Ψ are
1
isomorphic functors.

f
Theorem 4.7. If a pair mappings M ⇄ N is a strong LRG-Galois connection, then (L, M)-FC is isomorphic to
1
(L, N)-FB.

Proof. We only need show that the following results: if (X, C) is an (L, M)-fuzzy convex space, and (X, B) an
(L, N)-fuzzy betweenness space. Then,
(1) ∀A ∈ LX , CBC (A) ≤ C(A).
(2) ∀F ∈ L(X) , ∀xλ ∈ J(LX ), BCB (xλ , F) ≤ B(xλ , F).
Indeed, for (1), since
^ _ _ ^ _ ^
∀A ∈ LX , C(A) ≤ C(G) = C(h(xλ )) ≤ C( h(xλ )) = C(A),
Q Q
xλ ≰A xλ ≰G≥A h∈ Dxλ xλ ≰A h∈ Dx λ xλ ≰A
xλ ≰A xλ ≰A
 H. Zhao et al. / Filomat 37:11 (2023), 3559–3573 3570

where Dxλ = {G ∈ LX | xλ ≰ G ≥ A}. This implies that C(A) = xλ ≰A xλ ≰G≥A C(G). By (MJ), we have
V W
^ _
CBC (A) = CBC (G)
xλ ≰A xλ ≰G≥A
^ _ ^ ^
= 1(BC (yω , H))
xλ ≰A xλ ≰G≥A yω ≰G H≪G
^ _ ^ ^  ^  
= 1 f C(W)
xλ ≰A xλ ≰G≥A yω ≰G H≪G yω ≰W≥H
^ _ ^ ^ _
= C(W)
xλ ≰A xλ ≰G≥A yω ≰G H≪G yω ≰W≥H
^ _ _ ^ ^ _
= C(W)
xλ ≰A µ≪λ xµ ≰G≥A yω ≰G H≪G yω ≰W≥H
^ _ _ ^ _
≤ C(W)
xλ ≰A µ≪λ xµ ≰G≥A H≪G xµ ≰W≥H
^ _ _ ^ _
≤ C(W)
xλ ≰A µ≪λ xµ ≰G≥A H≪A xµ ≰W≥H
^ _ ^ _
= C(W)
xλ ≰A µ≪λ H≪A xµ ≰W≥H
^ ^ _ ^  
= 1 f C(W)
xλ ≰A µ≪λ H≪A xµ ≰W≥H
^ ^ _ 
= 1 BC (xµ , H)
xλ ≰A µ≪λ H≪A
_ 
= 1 BC (xλ , A)
xλ ≰A
 ^ _ 
= 1 f C(G)
xλ ≰A xλ ≰G≥A
^ _
= C(G)
xλ ≰A xλ ≰G≥A
= C(A).
For (2), by (MJ), we have
^
BCB (xλ , F) = f (CB (G))
xλ ≰G≥F
^ ^ ^ 
= f 1(B(zω , H))
xλ ≰G≥F zω ≰G H≪G
^ _ _  
= f 1(B(zω , H))
xλ ≰G≥F zω ≰G H≪G
^ _ _
= B(zω , H).
xλ ≰G≥F zω ≰G H≪G

Let a ∈ N, and a ◁ BCB (xλ , F), then for each G ∈ {G ∈ LX | xλ ≰ G ≥ F}, there exists zω ∈ J(LX ) and
H ∈ LX , such that W zω ≰ G, H ≪ G and a ≤ B(zω , H). Now, we only need to show that a ≤ B(xλ , F).
If not, let G0 = {yµ ∈ J(LX ) | B(yµ , F) ≥ a}, then by (LNB2) and (LNB5), we have xλ ≰ G0 ≥ F, i.e.,
G0 ∈ {G ∈ LX | xλ ≰ G ≥ F}. So, there exists (z0 )ω ∈ J(LX ) and H0 ∈ LXV , such that (z0 )ω ≰ G0 , H0 ≪ G0
and a ≤ B((z0 )ω , H0 ). By (LNB3) and (LNB5), we obtain a ≤ B((z0 )ω , H0 ) ∧ yµ ≤H0 B(yµ , F) ≤ B((z0 )ω , F). This
 H. Zhao et al. / Filomat 37:11 (2023), 3559–3573 3571

implies that (z0 )ω ≤ G0 . Which is a contradiction. Hence, a ≤ B(xλ , F). By the arbitrariness of a, we obtain
BCB (xλ , F) ≤ B(xλ , F) as desired.
Now, let (L, M)-FCS(X) be the family of all (L, M)-fuzzy convex structures on X, define a relation ≤ on
(L, M)-FCS(X) as follows: C1 ≤ C2 if and only if C1 (A) ≤ C2 (A) for all A ∈ LX , then we easily verify that
((L, M)-FCS(X), ≤) is a poset. Further, define C1 : LX −→ M as follows: ∀A ∈ LX , C1 (A) = 1M , then C1 is
X
the greatest element V in ((L, M)-FCS(X), ≤), and ∀{C j } j∈J ⊆ (L, M)-FCS(X), we easily show that C : L −→ M
defined by C(A) = j∈J C j (A) is the infimum of {C j } j∈J . So, ((L, M)-FCS(X), ≤) is a complete lattice (see [50]).
Similarly, let (L, N)-FB(X) be the family of all (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness relations on X, define a relation ≤
on (L, N)-FB(X) as follows: B1 ≤ B2 if and only if B1 (xλ , A) ≥ B2 (xλ , A) for all A ∈ L(X) and xλ ∈ J(LX ), then
we easily verify that ((L, N)-FB(X), ≤) is also a poset.
f
Theorem 4.8. Suppose a pair mappings M ⇄ N is a strong LRG-Galois connection. Define a mapping F : ((L, M)-
1
FCS(X), ≤) −→ ((L, N)-FB(X), ≤) as follows: ∀F ∈ L(X) , ∀xλ ∈ J(LX ),
^
F(C)(xλ , F) = BC (xλ , F) = f (C(G)),
xλ ≰G≥F

and define a mapping G : ((L, N)-FB(X), ≤) −→ ((L, M)-FCS(X), ≤) as follows:

^ ^
∀A ∈ LX , G(B)(A) = CB (A) = 1(B(xλ , B)).
xλ ≰A B≪A

Then,
(1) F is a bijection. And, both F and F−1 are order preserving mappings.
(2) ((L, M)-FCS(X), ≤) and ((L, N)-FB(X), ≤) are complete lattice isomorphic.
Proof. (1) By Theorem 4.7, we easily obtain F is a bijection. And, both F and F−1 are order preserving
mappings.
(2) For all F ∈ L(X) and xλ ∈ J(LX ). If xλ ≤ F, then F(C1 )(xλ , F) = BC1 (xλ , F) = 1N ; if xλ ≰ F, then
^
F(C1 )(xλ , F) = BC1 (xλ , F) = f (C1 (G)) ≤ f (C1 (F)) = f (1M ) = 0N .
xλ ≰G≥F

So, we easily obtain F(C1 ) is the greatest element in ((L, N)-FB(X), ≤). Now, we only need to prove that
it’s closed for non-empty intersection operation in ((L, N)-FB(X), ≤). Indeed, for any B ⊆ (L, N)-FB(X)
and
V B , V ∅, since F is a bijection, there exists
V C ⊆ (L, M)-FCS(X) such that F(C) = B. Thus, we obtain
B = =
V
F(C). Now, we will prove that F(C) F( C). Notice that ((L, M)-FCS(X),
V ≤) is a complete
lattice. So, C ∈V(L, M)-FCS(X), and F( C) ∈ (L, N)-FB(X). By (1), we have F( C) ≤ C∈C F(C) = F(C).
V V V V
It implies that F( C) is a lower bound of {F(C)}C∈C . Let B⋆ is another element of (L, N)-FB(X) and ⋆
V B ≤ F(C)
⋆ ⋆
for each C ∈ C. By (1), for each C ∈ C, we have G(B ) ≤ G(F(C)) = C. It follows that G(B ) ≤ C. Further,
by (1), we have B⋆ = F(G(B⋆ )) ≤ F( C). So, we have B = F(C) = C∈C F(C) = F( C). Hence, F( C)
V V V V V V
is the infimum of B, i.e., it’s closed for non-empty intersection operation in ((L, N)-FB(X), ≤). It follows that
((L, N)-FB(X), ≤) is a complete lattice. Further, ((L, M)-FCS(X), ≤) and ((L, N)-FB(X), ≤) are complete lattice
isomorphic.

5. Conclusion
In this study, we gave a reasonable definition with respect to (strong) LRG-Galois connections. With the
help of this tool, it is proved not only that (L, M)-fuzzy convex spaces and (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness spaces
are categorically isomorphic, but also that (L, M)-fuzzy convex structures and (L, N)-fuzzy betweenness
relations are complete lattice isomorphic. This tool can effectively transform on two completely distributive
lattices, and has the function of order-reversing involutions. This provides a new idea for us to study the
relationship between convex structures and other structures in the future.
 H. Zhao et al. / Filomat 37:11 (2023), 3559–3573 3572

Acknowledgement

The authors are extremely grateful to the Editors and anonymous referees for giving them many valuable
comments and helpful suggestions, which helped to improve the presentation of this paper.

References
[1] J. Adámek, H. Herrlich, G.E. Strecker, Abstract and Concrete Categories, Wiley, NewYork, 1990.
[2] I. Alshammari, A.M. Alghamdi, A. Ghareeb, A New Approach to Concavity Fuzzification, J. Math. 2021 (2021) Article ID 6699295,
11 pages.
[3] J.-M. Fang,Y.-L. Yue, L-fuzzy closure systems, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 161 (2010) 2130–2149.
[4] G. Gierz, K.H. Hofmann et al., Contionuous Lattices and Domains, Cambridge University Press, 2003.
[5] J.A. Goguen, L-fuzzy sets, J. Math. Anal. Appl. 18 (1967) 145–174.
[6] J. Goubault-Larrecq, Non-Hausdorff Topology and Domain Theory, Cambridge University Press, 2013.
[7] Q. Jin, L.-Q. Li, On the embedding of L-convex spaces in stratified L-convex spaces, SpringerPlus 5 (2016) 1610.
[8] M. Lassak, On metric B-convexity for which diameters of any set and its hull are equal, Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci. Ser. Sci. Math.
Astronom. Phys. 25 (1977) 969–975.
[9] Q.-H. Li, H.-L. Huang, Z.-Y. Xiu, Degrees of special mappings in the theory of L-convex spaces, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 37 (2019)
2265–2274.
[10] E. Li, F.-G. Shi, Some properties of M-fuzzifying convexities induced by M-orders, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 350 (2018) 41=-54.
[11] L. Q. Li, On the category of enriched (L, M)-convex spaces, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 33 (2017 3209–3216.
[12] C.-Y. Liao, X.-Y. Wu, L-topological-convex spaces generated by L-convex bases, Open Math. 17 (2019) 1547–1566.
[13] Y. Maruyama, Lattice-valued fuzzy convex geometry, RIMS Kokyuroku 1641 (2009) 22–37.
[14] B. Pang, Convergence structures in M-fuzzifying convex spaces, Quaest. Math. 43 (2020) 1541–1561.
[15] B. Pang, F.-G. Shi, Subcategories of the category of L-convex spaces, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 313 (2017) 61–74.
[16] B. Pang, F.-G. Shi, Fuzzy counterparts of hull operators and interval operators in the framework of L-convex spaces, Fuzzy Sets
Syst. 369 (2019) 20–39.
[17] B. Pang, F.-G. Shi, Strong inclusion orders between L-subsets and its applications in L-convex spaces, Quaest. Math. 41 (2018)
1021–1043.
[18] B. Pang, Z.-Y. Xiu, An axiomatic approach to bases and subbases in L-convex spaces and their applications, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 369
(2019) 40–56.
[19] B. Pang, Y. Zhao, Characterization of L-convex spaces, Iran. J. Fuzzy Syst. 13 (2016) 51–61.
[20] B. Pang, Bases and subbases in (L, M)-fuzzy convex spaces. Comp. Appl. Math. 39 (2020) 41.
[21] B. Pang, Hull operators and interval operators in the (L, M)-fuzzy convex spaces, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 405(2021) 106–127
[22] S. E. Rodabaugh, Powerset operator based foundation for point-set latticetheoretic (poslat) fuzzy set theories and topologies,
Quaest. Math. 20 (1997) 463–530.
[23] M.V. Rosa, A study of fuzzy convexity with special reference to separation properties, Ph.D. Thesis, Cochin University of Science
and Technology, Kerala, India, (1994).
[24] M.V. Rosa, On fuzzy topology fuzzy convexity spaces and fuzzy local convexity, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 62 (1994) 97–100.
[25] O. R. Sayed, E. El-Sanousy, Y. H. Raghp Sayed, On (L, M)-fuzzy convex structures, Filomat 33 (2019) 4151–4163.
[26] C. Shen, F.-G. Shi, Characteriztions of L-convex spaces via domain theory, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 380 (2020) 44–63.
[27] F.-G. Shi, E.-Q. Li, The restricted hull operator of M-fuzzifying convex structures, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 30 (2015) 409–421.
[28] F.-G. Shi, Z.-Y. Xiu, (L, M)-Fuzzy convex structures, J. Nonlinear Sci. Appl. 10 (2017) 3655–3669.
[29] V.P. Soltan, d-convexity in graphs, (Russian) Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 272 (1983) 535–537.
[30] V.P. Soltan, Introduction to the Axiomatic Theory of Convexity, Shtiinca, Kishinev, 1984 (In Russian).
[31] A.P. Šostak, On a fuzzy topological structure Rend. Circ. Mat. Palermo 11 (1985) 89–103.
[32] M.L.J. Van de Vel, Theory of Convex Structures, North-Holland Mathematical Library, North-Holland Publishing CO., Amster-
dam, (1993).
[33] J. van Mill, Supercompactness and Wallman Spaces, Mathematical Centre Tracts, Mathematisch Centrum Amsterdam, (1977).
[34] J. C. Varlet, Remarks on distributive lattices, Bull. Acad. Polon. Sci. Ser. Sci. Math. Astronom. Phys. 23 (1975) 1143–1147.
[35] G.-J. Wang, Theory of topological molecular lattices, Fuzzy Sets Syst. 47 (1992) 351–376.
[36] K. Wang, B. Pang, Coreflectivities of (L, M)-fuzzy convex structures and (L, M)-fuzzy cotopologies in (L, M)-fuzzy closure systems,
J. Intel. Fuzzy Syst. 37 (2019) 3751–3761.
[37] K. Wang, F.-G. shi, M-fuzzifying topological convex spaces, Iran. J. Fuzzy Syst. 15 (2018) 159–174.
[38] X.-Y. Wu, E.-Q. Li, Category and subcategories of (L, M)-fuzzy convex spaces, Iran. J. Fuzzy Syst. 16 (2019) 173–190.
[39] X.-Y. Wu, C.-Y. Liao, (L, M)-fuzzy topological-convex spaces, Filomat 33 (2019) 6435–6451.
[40] Z.-Y. Xiu, Q.-G. Li, Relations among (L, M)-fuzzy convex structures, (L, M)-fuzzy closure systems and (L, M)-fuzzy Alexandrov
topologies in a degree sense, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 36 (2019) 385–396.
[41] Z.-Y. Xiu, B. Pang, M-fuzzifying cotopological spaces and M-fuzzifying convex spaces as M-fuzzifying closure spaces, J. Intel.
Fuzzy Syst. 33 (2017) 613–620.
[42] Z.-Y. Xiu, B. Pang, Base axioms and subbase axioms in M-fuzzifying convex spaces, Iran. J. Fuzzy Syst. 15 (2018) 75–87.
[43] Z.-Y. Xiu, Q.-G. Li, Some characterizations of (L, M)-fuzzy convex spaces, J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 37 (2019) 5719–5730.
[44] Z.-Y. Xiu, F.-G. Shi, M-fuzzifying interval spaces, Iran. J. Fuzzy Syst. 14 (2017) 145–162.
[45] H. Yang, B. Pang, Fuzzy Points Based Betweenness Relations in L-Convex Spaces, Filomat 35 (2021) 3521–3532.
 H. Zhao et al. / Filomat 37:11 (2023), 3559–3573 3573

[46] L. A. Zadeh, Fuzzy sets, Information and Control 8 (1965) 338–353.

[47] H. Zhao, O.R. Sayed, E. El-Sanousy et al., On separation axioms in (L, M)-fuzzy convex structures, J. Intel. Fuzzy Syst. 40 (2021)
8765–8773.
[48] H. Zhao, Q.-L. Song, O.R. Sayed et al., Corrigendum to ”On (L, M)-fuzzy convex structures”, Filomat 35 (2021) 1687–1691.
[49] H. Zhao, X. Hu, O.R. Sayed et al., Concave (L, M)-fuzzy interior operators and (L, M)-fuzzy hull operators, Comp. Appl. Math.
40 (2021) 301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40314-021-01690-5.
[50] H. Zhao, L.-Y. Jia, G.-X. Chen, Product and coproduct structures of (L, M)-fuzzy hull operators, J. Intel. Fuzzy Syst. DOI:
10.3233/JIFS-222911.
[51] S.-Y. Zhang, Characterizations of M-fuzzifying convex spaces via Galois connections, J. Intel. Fuzzy Syst. 40 (2021) 11915–11925.
[52] Y. Zhong, F.-G. Shi, J.-T Zou, C.-Y Zou, Degrees of (L, M)-fuzzy convexities, J. Intel. Fuzzy Syst. 36 (2019) 6619–6629.
[53] X.-W. Zhou, F.-G. Shi, On the sum of L-convex spaces, J. Intel. Fuzzy Syst. 40 (2021) 4503–4515