Annals of Fuzzy Mathematics and Informatics

Volume 14, No. 1, (July 2017), pp. 7586 @FMI

ISSN: 20939310 (print version) c Kyung Moon Sa Co.
ISSN: 22876235 (electronic version) http://www.kyungmoon.com
http://www.afmi.or.kr

Neutrosophic subalgebras of several types in

BCK/BCI-algebras

Young Bae Jun

Received 24 March 2017; Revised 12 April 2017; Accepted 10 May 2017

Abstract. Given , {, q, q}, the notion of (, )-
neutrosophic subalgebras of a BCK/BCI-algebra are introduced, and
related properties are investigated. Characterizations of an (, )-
neutrosophic subalgebra and an (, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra are pro-
vided. Given special sets, so called neutrosophic -subsets, neutrosophic
q-subsets and neutrosophic q-subsets, conditions for the neutrosophic
-subsets, neutrosophic q-subsets and neutrosophic q-subsets to be
subalgebras are discussed. Conditions for a neutrosophic set to be a (q,
q)-neutrosophic subalgebra are considered.

2010 AMS Classification: 06F35, 03B60, 03B52.

Keywords: Neutrosophic set, neutrosophic -subset, neutrosophic q-subset, neu-
trosophic q-subset, (, )-neutrosophic subalgebra, (, q)-neutrosophic subal-
gebra, (q, )-neutrosophic subalgebra, (q, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra, (, q)-
neutrosophic subalgebra, (q, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra,
Corresponding Author: Y. B. Jun (skywine@gmail.com)

1. Introduction
T he concept of neutrosophic set (NS) developed by Smarandache [5, 6, 7] is a
more general platform which extends the concepts of the classic set and fuzzy set,
intuitionistic fuzzy set and interval valued intuitionistic fuzzy set. Neutrosophic set
theory is applied to various part. For further particulars I refer readers to the site
http://fs.gallup.unm.edu/neutrosophy.htm. Agboola et al. [1] studied neutrosophic
ideals of neutrosophic BCI-algebras. Agboola et al. [2] also introduced the con-
cept of neutrosophic BCI/BCK-algebras, and presented elementary properties of
neutrosophic BCI/BCK-algebras.
In this paper, we introduce the notion of (, )-neutrosophic subalgebra of a
BCK/BCI-algebra X for , {, q, q}, and investigate related properties.
 Y. B. Jun/Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 14 (2017), No. 1, 7586

We provide characterizations of an (, )-neutrosophic subalgebra and an (, q)-

neutrosophic subalgebra. Given special sets, so called neutrosophic -subsets, neu-
trosophic q-subsets and neutrosophic q-subsets, we provide conditions for the
neutrosophic -subsets, neutrosophic q-subsets and neutrosophic q-subsets to
be subalgebras. We consider conditions for a neutrosophic set to be a (q, q)-
neutrosophic subalgebra.

2. Preliminaries
By a BCI-algebra we mean an algebra (X, , 0) of type (2, 0) satisfying the axioms:
(a1) ((x y) (x z)) (z y) = 0,
(a2) (x (x y)) y = 0,
(a3) x x = 0,
(a4) x y = y x = 0 x = y,
for all x, y, z X. If a BCI-algebra X satisfies the axiom
(a5) 0 x = 0 for all x X,
then we say that X is a BCK-algebra. A nonempty subset S of a BCK/BCI-algebra
X is called a subalgebra of X if x y S for all x, y S.
We refer the reader to the books [3] and [4] for further information regarding
BCK/BCI-algebras.
Let X be a non-empty set. A neutrosophic set (NS) in X (see [6]) is a structure
of the form:
A := {hx; AT (x), AI (x), AF (x)i | x X}
where AT : X [0, 1] is a truth membership function, AI : X [0, 1] is an
indeterminate membership function, and AF : X [0, 1] is a false membership
function. For the sake of simplicity, we shall use the symbol A = (AT , AI , AF ) for
the neutrosophic set
A := {hx; AT (x), AI (x), AF (x)i | x X}.

3. Neutrosophic subalgebras of several types

Given a neutrosophic set A = (AT , AI , AF ) in a set X, , (0, 1] and [0, 1),
we consider the following sets:
T (A; ) := {x X | AT (x) },
I (A; ) := {x X | AI (x) },
F (A; ) := {x X | AF (x) },
Tq (A; ) := {x X | AT (x) + > 1},
Iq (A; ) := {x X | AI (x) + > 1},
Fq (A; ) := {x X | AF (x) + < 1},
T q (A; ) := {x X | AT (x) or AT (x) + > 1},
I q (A; ) := {x X | AI (x) or AI (x) + > 1},
F q (A; ) := {x X | AF (x) or AF (x) + < 1}.
76
 Y. B. Jun/Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 14 (2017), No. 1, 7586

We say T (A; ), I (A; ) and F (A; ) are neutrosophic -subsets; Tq (A; ), Iq (A; )
and Fq (A; ) are neutrosophic q-subsets; and T q (A; ), I q (A; ) and F q (A; )
are neutrosophic q-subsets. For {, q, q}, the element of T (A; ) (resp.,
I (A; ) and F (A; )) is called a neutrosophic T -point (resp., neutrosophic I -
point and neutrosophic F -point) with value (resp., and ). It is clear that
(3.1) T q (A; ) = T (A; ) Tq (A; ),
(3.2) I q (A; ) = I (A; ) Iq (A; ),
(3.3) F q (A; ) = F (A; ) Fq (A; ).

Proposition 3.1. For any neutrosophic set A = (AT , AI , AF ) in a set X, ,

(0, 1] and [0, 1), we have
(3.4) [0, 0.5] T q (A; ) = T (A; ),
(3.5) [0, 0.5] I q (A; ) = I (A; ),
(3.6) [0.5, 1] F q (A; ) = F (A; ),
(3.7) (0.5, 1] T q (A; ) = Tq (A; ),
(3.8) (0.5, 1] I q (A; ) = Iq (A; ),
(3.9) [0, 0.5) F q (A; ) = Fq (A; ).

Proof. If [0, 0.5], then 1 [0.5, 1] and 1 . It is clear that T (A; )

T q (A; ) by (3.1). If x / T (A; ), then AT (x) < 1 , i.e., x / Tq (A; ).
Hence x / T q (A; ), and so T q (A; ) T (A; ). Thus (3.4) is valid. Similarly,
we have the result (3.5). If [0.5, 1], then 1 [0, 0.5] and 1 . It is
clear that F (A; ) F q (A; ) by (3.3). Let z F q (A; ). Then z F (A; )
or z Fq (A; ). If z / F (A; ), then AF (z) > 1 , i.e., AF (z) + > 1. Thus
z / Fq (A; ), and so z / F q (A; ). This is a contradiction. Hence z F (A; ),
and therefore F q (A; ) F (A; ). Let (0.5, 1]. Then > 1 . Note
that Iq (A; ) I q (A; ) by (3.2). Let y I q (A; ). Then y I (A; ) or
y Iq (A; ). If y / Iq (A; ), then AI (y) + 1 and so AI (y) 1 < ,
i.e., y / I (A; ). Thus y / I q (A; ), a contradiction. Hence y Iq (A; ).
Therefore I q (A; ) Iq (A; ). This shows that (3.8) is true. The result (3.7) is
proved by the similar way. Let [0, 0.5) and z F q (A; ). Then 1 >
and z F (A; ) or z Fq (A; ). If z / Fq (A; ), then AF (z) + 1 and so
AF (z) 1 > , i.e., z / F (A; ). Thus z / F q (A; ), which is a contradiction.
Hence F q (A; ) Fq (A; ). The reverse inclusion is by (3.3). 

Definition 3.2. Given , {, q, q}, a neutrosophic set A = (AT , AI , AF )

in a BCK/BCI-algebra X is called a (, )-neutrosophic subalgebra of X if the
following assertions are valid.
x T (A; x ), y T (A; y ) x y T (A; x y ),
(3.10) x I (A; x ), y I (A; y ) x y I (A; x y ),
x F (A; x ), y F (A; y ) x y F (A; x y )

for all x, y X, x , y , x , y , (0, 1] and x , y [0, 1).

77
 Y. B. Jun/Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 14 (2017), No. 1, 7586

Theorem 3.3. A neutrosophic set A = (AT , AI , AF ) in a BCK/BCI-algebra X is

an (, )-neutrosophic subalgebra of X if and only if it satisfies:

AT (x y) AT (x) AT (y)
(3.11) (x, y X) AI (x y) AI (x) AI (y) .

AF (x y) AF (x) AF (y)
Proof. Assume that A = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (, )-neutrosophic subalgebra of X.
If there exist x, y X such that AT (x y) < AT (x) AT (y), then
AT (x y) < t AT (x) AT (y)
for some t (0, 1]. It follows that x, y T (A; t ) but x y
/ T (A; t ). Hence
AT (x y) AT (x) AT (y) for all x, y X. Similarly, we show that
AI (x y) AI (x) AI (y)
for all x, y X. Suppose that there exist a, b X and f [0, 1] be such that
AF (a b) > f AF (a) AF (b). Then a, b F (A; f ) and a b
/ F (A; f ), which
is a contradiction. Therefore AF (x y) AF (x) AF (y) for all x, y X.
Conversely, let A = (AT , AI , AF ) be a neutrosophic set in X which satisfies the
condition (3.11). Let x, y X be such that x T (A; x ) and y T (A; y ). Then
AT (x) x and AT (y) y , which imply that AT (xy) AT (x)AT (y) x y ,
that is, x y T (A; x y ). Similarly, if x I (A; x ) and y I (A; y ) then
x y I (A; x y ). Now, let x F (A; x ) and y F (A; y ) for x, y X.
Then AF (x) x and AF (y) y , and so AF (x y) AF (x) AF (y) x y .
Hence x y F (A; x y ). Therefore A = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (, )-neutrosophic
subalgebra of X. 

Theorem 3.4. If A = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (, )-neutrosophic subalgebra of a

BCK/BCI-algebra X, then neutrosophic q-subsets Tq (A; ), Iq (A; ) and Fq (A; )
are subalgebras of X for all , (0, 1] and [0, 1) whenever they are nonempty.
Proof. Let x, y Tq (A; ). Then AT (x) + > 1 and AT (y) + > 1. It follows that
AT (x y) + (AT (x) AT (y)) +
= (AT (x) + ) (AT (y) + ) > 1
and so that x y Tq (A; ). Hence Tq (A; ) is a subalgebra of X. Similarly,
we can prove that Iq (A; ) is a subalgebra of X. Now let x, y Fq (A; ). Then
AF (x) + < 1 and AF (y) + < 1, which imply that
AF (x y) + (AF (x) AF (y)) +
= (AF (x) + ) (AF (y) + ) < 1.
Hence x y Fq (A; ) and Fq (A; ) is a subalgebra of X. 

Theorem 3.5. If A = (AT , AI , AF ) is a (q, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra of a

BCK/BCI-algebra X, then neutrosophic q-subsets Tq (A; ), Iq (A; ) and Fq (A; )
are subalgebras of X for all , (0.5, 1] and [0, 0, 5) whenever they are
nonempty.
78
 Y. B. Jun/Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 14 (2017), No. 1, 7586

Proof. Let x, y Tq (A; ). Then x y T q (A; ), and so x y T (A; ) or

xy Tq (A; ). If xy T (A; ), then AT (xy) > 1 since > 0.5. Hence
x y Tq (A; ). Therefore Tq (A; ) is a subalgebra of X. Similarly, we prove that
Iq (A; ) is a subalgebra of X. Let x, y Fq (A; ). Then x y F q (A; ), and so
x y F (A; ) or x y Fq (A; ). If x y F (A; ), then AF (x y) < 1
since [0, 0, 5). Hence x y Fq (A; ), and therefore Fq (A; ) is a subalgebra of
X. 
We provide characterizations of an (, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra.
Theorem 3.6. A neutrosophic set A = (AT , AI , AF ) in a BCK/BCI-algebra X is
an (, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra of X if and only if it satisfies:
V
AT (x y) {AT (x), AT (y), 0.5}
V
(3.12) (x, y X) AI (x y) {AI (x), AI (y).0.5} .

W
AF (x y) {AF (x), AF (y), 0.5}
Proof. Suppose that A = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra of
X and let x, y X. If AT (x) AT (y) < 0.5, then AT (x y) AT (x) AT (y). For,
assume that AT (x y) < AT (x) AT (y) and choose t such that
AT (x y) < t < AT (x) AT (y).
Then x T (A; t ) and y T (A; t ) but x y / T (A; t ). Also AT (x y) + t <
1, i.e., x y V
/ Tq (A; t ). Thus x y / T q (A; t ), a contradiction. Therefore
AT (x y) {AT (x), AT (y), 0.5} whenever AT (x) AT (y) < 0.5. Now suppose
that AT (x)AT (y) 0.5. Then x T (A; 0.5) and y T (A; 0.5), which imply that
xy T q (A; 0.5). Hence AT (xy) 0.5. Otherwise,
V AT (xy)+0.5 < 0.5+0.5 = 1,
a contradiction. Consequently, AT (xV y) {AT (x), AT (y), 0.5} for all x, y X.
Similarly, we know that AI (x y) {AI (x), AI (y), 0.5} for all x, y X. Suppose
that AF (x)AF (y) > 0.5. If AF (xy) > AF (x)AF (y) := f , then x, y F (A; f ),
xy / F (A; f ) and AF (x y) +Wf > 2f > 1, i.e., x y / Fq (A; f ). This is a
contradiction. Hence AF (x y) {AF (x), AF (y), 0.5} whenever AF (x) AF (y) >
0.5. Now, assume that AF (x) AF (y) 0.5. Then x, y F (A; 0.5) and so
x y F q (A; 0.5). Thus AF (x y) 0.5 or AF (x y) + 0.5 < 1. If AF (x y) > 0.5,
then AF (x y) +W0.5 > 0.5 + 0.5 = 1, a contradiction. Thus AF (x y) 0.5, and
so AF (x y)W {AF (x), AF (y), 0.5} whenever AF (x) AF (y) 0.5. Therefore
AF (x y) {AF (x), AF (y), 0.5} for all x, y X.
Conversely, let A = (AT , AI , AF ) be a neutrosophic set in X which satisfies the
condition (3.12). Let x, y X and x , y , x , y , x , y [0, 1]. If x T (A; x )
and y T (A; y ), then AT (x) x and AT (y) y . If AT (x y) < x y , then
AT (x) AT (y) 0.5. Otherwise, we have
^
AT (x y) {AT (x), AT (y), 0.5} = AT (x) AT (y) x y ,
a contradiction. It follows that
^
AT (x y) + x y > 2AT (x y) 2 {AT (x), AT (y), 0.5} = 1
and so that x y Tq (A; x y ) T q (A; x y ). Similarly, if x I (A; x )
and y I (A; y ), then x y I q (A; x y ). Now, let x F (A; x ) and
79
 Y. B. Jun/Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 14 (2017), No. 1, 7586

y F (A; y ). Then AF (x) x and AF (y) y . If AF (x y) > x y , then

AF (x) AF (y) 0.5 because if not, then
_
AF (x y) {AF (x), AF (y), 0.5} AF (x) AF (y) x y ,
which is a contradiction. Hence
_
AF (x y) + x y < 2AF (x y) 2 {AF (x), AF (y), 0.5} = 1,
and so x y Fq (A; x y ) F q (A; x y ). Therefore A = (AT , AI , AF ) is an
(, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra of X. 
Theorem 3.7. If A = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra of a
BCK/BCI-algebra X, then neutrosophic q-subsets Tq (A; ), Iq (A; ) and Fq (A; )
are subalgebras of X for all , (0.5, 1] and [0, 0.5) whenever they are
nonempty.
Proof. Assume that Tq (A; ), Iq (A; ) and Fq (A; ) are nonempty for all ,
(0.5, 1] and [0, 0.5). Let x, y Tq (A; ). Then AT (x)+ > 1 and AT (y)+ > 1.
It follows from Theorem 3.6 that
^
AT (x y) + {AT (x), AT (y), 0.5} +
^
= {AT (x) + , AT (y) + , 0.5 + }
> 1,
that is, x y Tq (A; ). Hence Tq (A; ) is a subalgebra of X. By the similar way,
we can induce that Iq (A; ) is a subalgebra of X. Now, let x, y Fq (A; ). Then
AF (x) + < 1 and AF (y) + < 1. Using Theorem 3.6, we have
_
AF (x y) + {AF (x), AF (y), 0.5} +
_
= {AF (x) + , AF (y) + , 0.5 + }
< 1,
and so x y Fq (A; ). Therefore Fq (A; ) is a subalgebra of X. 
Theorem 3.8. For a neutrosophic set A = (AT , AI , AF ) in a BCK/BCI-algebra
X, if the nonempty neutrosophic q-subsets T q (A; ), I q (A; ) and F q (A; )
are subalgebras of X for all , (0, 1] and [0, 1), then A = (AT , AI , AF ) is an
(, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra of X.
Proof. Let T q (A; ) be a subalgebra of X and assume that
^
AT (x y) < {AT (x), AT (y), 0.5}
for some x, y X. Then there exists (0, 0.5] such that
^
AT (x y) < {AT (x), AT (y), 0.5}.
It follows that x, y T (A; ) T q (A; ), and so that x y T q (A; ). Hence
AT (x y) or AT (x y) + > 1. This is a contradiction, and so
^
AT (x y) {AT (x), AT (y), 0.5}
80
 Y. B. Jun/Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 14 (2017), No. 1, 7586

for all x, y X. Similarly, we show that

^
AI (x y) {AI (x), AI (y), 0.5}
for all x, y X. Now let F q (A; ) be a subalgebra of X and assume that
_
AF (x y) > {AF (x), AF (y), 0.5}
for some x, y X. Then
_
(3.13) AF (x y) > {AF (x), AF (y), 0.5},
for some [0.5, 1), which implies that x, y F (A; ) F q (A; ). Thus
xy F q (A; ). From (3.13), we have xy / F (A; ) and AF (xy)+ > 2 1,
i.e., x y
/ Fq (A; ). This is a contradiction, and hence
_
AF (x y) {AF (x), AF (y), 0.5}
for all x, y X. Using Theorem 3.6, we know that A = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (,
q)-neutrosophic subalgebra of X. 
Theorem 3.9. If A = (AT , AI , AF ) is an (, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra of
a BCK/BCI-algebra X, then nonempty neutrosophic q-subsets T q (A; ),
I q (A; ) and F q (A; ) are subalgebras of X for all , (0, 0.5] and [0.5, 1).
Proof. Assume that T q (A; ), I q (A; ) and F q (A; ) are nonempty for all
, (0, 0.5] and [0.5, 1). Let x, y I q (A; ). Then
x I (A; ) or x Iq (A; ),
and
y I (A; ) or y Iq (A; ).
Hence we have the following four cases:
(i) x I (A; ) and y I (A; ),
(ii) x I (A; ) and y Iq (A; ),
(iii) x Iq (A; ) and y I (A; ),
(iv) x Iq (A; ) and y Iq (A; ).
The first case implies that x y I q (A; ). For the second case, y Iq (A; )
induces AI (y) > 1 , that is, y I (A; ). Thus x y I q (A; ). Similarly,
the third case implies xy I q (A; ). The last case induces AI (x) > 1 and
AI (y) > 1 , that is, x I (A; ) and y I (A; ). Hence x y I q (A; ).
Therefore I q (A; ) is a subalgebra of X for all (0, 0.5]. By the similar way, we
show that T q (A; ) is a subalgebra of X for all (0, 0.5]. Let x, y F q (A; ).
Then
AF (x) or AF (x) + < 1,
and
AF (y) or AF (y) + < 1.
If AF (x) and AF (y) , then
_ _
AF (x y) {AF (x), AF (y), 0.5} {, 0.5} =
81
 Y. B. Jun/Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 14 (2017), No. 1, 7586

by Theorem 3.6, and so xy F (A; ) F q (A; ). If AF (x) and AF (y)+ <

1, then
_ _
AF (x y) {AF (x), AF (y), 0.5} {, 1 , 0.5} =

by Theorem 3.6. Thus x y F (A; ) F q (A; ). Similarly, if AF (x) + < 1

and AF (y) , then x y F q (A; ). Finally, assume that AF (x) + < 1 and
AF (y) + < 1. Then
_ _
AF (x y) {AF (x), AF (y), 0.5} {1 , 0.5} = 0.5 <

by Theorem 3.6. Hence x y F (A; ) F q (A; ). Consequently, F q (A; ) is

a subalgebra of X for all [0.5, 1). 

Theorem 3.10. If A = (AT , AI , AF ) is a (q, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra of

a BCK/BCI-algebra X, then nonempty neutrosophic q-subsets T q (A; ),
I q (A; ) and F q (A; ) are subalgebras of X for all , (0.5, 1] and [0, 0.5).
Proof. Assume that T q (A; ), I q (A; ) and F q (A; ) are nonempty for all
, (0.5, 1] and [0, 0.5). Let x, y T q (A; ). Then
x T (A; ) or x Tq (A; ).
and
y T (A; ) or y Tq (A; ).
If x Tq (A; ) and y Tq (A; ), then obviously x y T q (A; ). Suppose that
x T (A; ) and y Tq (A; ). Then AT (x) + 2 > 1, i.e., x Tq (A; ). It
follows that x y T q (A; ). Similarly, if x Tq (A; ) and y T (A; ), then
x y T q (A; ). Now, let x, y F q (A; ). Then
x F (A; ) or x Fq (A; ),
and
y F (A; ) or y Fq (A; ).
If x Fq (A; ) and y Fq (A; ), then clearly x y F q (A; ). If x F (A; )
and y Fq (A; ), then AF (x) + 2 < 1, i.e., x Fq (A; ). It follows that x y
F q (A; ). Similarly, if x Fq (A; ) and y F (A; ), then x y F q (A; ).
Finally, assume that x F (A; ) and y F (A; ). Then AF (x) + 2 < 1
and AF (y) + 2 < 1, that is, x Fq (A; ) and y Fq (A; ). Therefore x y
F q (A; ). Consequently, T q (A; ), I q (A; ) and F q (A; ) are subalgebras
of X for all , (0.5, 1] and [0, 0.5). 

Given a neutrosophic set A = (AT , AI , AF ) in a set X, we consider:

X01 := {x X | AT (x) > 0, AI (x) > 0, AF (x) < 1}.

Theorem 3.11. If a neutrosophic set A = (AT , AI , AF ) in a BCK/BCI-algebra

X is an (, )-neutrosophic subalgebra of X, then the set X01 is a subalgebra of X.
82
 Y. B. Jun/Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 14 (2017), No. 1, 7586

Proof. Let x, y X01 . Then AT (x) > 0, AI (x) > 0, AF (x) < 1, AT (y) > 0,
AI (y) > 0 and AF (y) < 1. Suppose that AT (x y) = 0. Note that x T (A; AT (x))
and y T (A; AT (y)). But x y / T (A; AT (x) AT (y)) because AT (x y) =
0 < AT (x) AT (y). This is a contradiction, and thus AT (x y) > 0. By the
similar way, we show that AI (x y) > 0. Note that x F (A; AF (x)) and y
F (A; AF (y)). If AF (x y) = 1, then AF (x y) = 1 > AF (x) AF (y), and so
xy / F (A; AF (x) AF (y)). This is impossible. Hence x y X01 , and therefore
1
X0 is a subalgebra of X. 
Theorem 3.12. If a neutrosophic set A = (AT , AI , AF ) in a BCK/BCI-algebra
X is an (, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra of X, then the set X01 is a subalgebra of X.
Proof. Let x, y X01 . Then AT (x) > 0, AI (x) > 0, AF (x) < 1, AT (y) > 0,
AI (y) > 0 and AF (y) < 1. If AT (x y) = 0, then
AT (x y) + AT (x) AT (y) = AT (x) AT (y) 1.
Hence x y
/ Tq (A; AT (x) AT (y)), which is a contradiction since x T (A; AT (x))
and y T (A; AT (y)). Thus AT (x y) > 0. Similarly, we get AI (x y) > 0. Assume
that AF (x y) = 1. Then
AF (x y) + AF (x) AF (y) = 1 + AF (x) AF (y) 1,
that is, x y / Fq (A; AF (x) AF (y)). This is a contradiction because of x
F (A; AF (x)) and y F (A; AF (y)). Hence AF (xy) < 1. Consequently, xy X01
and X01 is a subalgebra of X. 
Theorem 3.13. If a neutrosophic set A = (AT , AI , AF ) in a BCK/BCI-algebra
X is a (q, )-neutrosophic subalgebra of X, then the set X01 is a subalgebra of X.
Proof. Let x, y X01 . Then AT (x) > 0, AI (x) > 0, AF (x) < 1, AT (y) > 0, AI (y) >
0 and AF (y) < 1. It follows that AT (x)+1 > 1, AT (y)+1 > 1, AI (x)+1 > 1, AI (y)+
1 > 1, AF (x) + 0 < 1 and AF (y) + 0 < 1. Hence x, y Tq (A; 1) Iq (A; 1) Fq (A; 0).
If AT (x y) = 0 or AI (x y) = 0, then AT (x y) < 1 = 1 1 or AI (x y) < 1 = 1 1.
Thus x y / Tq (A; 1 1) or x y
/ Iq (A; 1 1), a contradiction. Hence AT (x y) > 0
and AI (xy) > 0. If AF (xy) = 1, then xy / Fq (A; 00) which is a contradiction.
Thus AF (x y) < 1. Therefore x y X01 and the proof is complete. 
Theorem 3.14. If a neutrosophic set A = (AT , AI , AF ) in a BCK/BCI-algebra
X is a (q, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra of X, then the set X01 is a subalgebra of X.
Proof. Let x, y X01 . Then AT (x) > 0, AI (x) > 0, AF (x) < 1, AT (y) > 0, AI (y) >
0 and AF (y) < 1. Hence AT (x)+1 > 1, AT (y)+1 > 1, AI (x)+1 > 1, AI (y)+1 > 1,
AF (x) + 0 < 1 and AF (y) + 0 < 1. Hence x, y Tq (A; 1) Iq (A; 1) Fq (A; 0). If
AT (x y) = 0 or AI (x y) = 0, then
AT (x y) + 1 1 = 0 + 1 = 1
or
AI (x y) + 1 1 = 0 + 1 = 1,
and so x y / Tq (A; 1 1) or x y
/ Iq (A; 1 1). This is impossible, and thus
AT (x y) > 0 and AI (x y) > 0. If AF (x y) = 1, then AF (x y) + 0 0 = 1, that
83
 Y. B. Jun/Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 14 (2017), No. 1, 7586

is, x y
/ Fq (A; 0 0). This is a contradiction, and so AF (x y) < 1. Therefore
x y X01 and the proof is complete. 
Theorem 3.15. If a neutrosophic set A = (AT , AI , AF ) in a BCK/BCI-algebra
X is a (q, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra of X, then A = (AT , AI , AF ) is neutrosophic
constant on X01 , that is, AT , AI and AF are constants on X01 .
Proof. Assume that AT is not constant on X01 . Then there exist y X01 such
that y = AT (y) 6= AT (0) = 0 . Then either y > 0 or y < 0 . Suppose
y < 0 and choose 1 , 2 (0, 1] such that 1 0 < 1 1 y < 2 . Then
AT (0) + 1 = 0 + 1 > 1 and AT (y) + 2 = y + 2 > 1, which imply that
0 Tq (A; 1 ) and y Tq (A; 2 ). Since
AT (y 0) + 1 2 = AT (y) + 1 = y + 1 1,
we get y 0
/ Tq (A; 1 2 ), which is a contradiction. Next assume that y > 0 .
Then AT (y) + (1 0 ) = y + 1 0 > 1 and so y Tq (A; 1 0 ). Since
AT (y y) + (1 0 ) = AT (0) + 1 0 = 0 + 1 0 = 1,
we have y y / Tq (A; (1 0 ) (1 0 )). This is impossible. Therefore AT is
constant on X01 . Similarly, AI is constant on X01 . Finally, suppose that AF is not
constant on X01 . Then y = AF (y) 6= AF (0) = 0 for some y X01 , and we have
two cases:
(i) y < 0 and (ii) y > 0 .
The first case implies that AF (y)+10 = y +10 < 1, that is, y Fq (A; 10 ).
Hence y y Fq (A; (10 )(10 )), i.e., 0 Fq (A; 10 ), which is a contradiction
since AF (0) + 1 0 = 1. For the second case, there exist 1 , 2 (0, 1) such that
1 0 > 1 > 1 y > 2 .
Then AF (y) + 2 = y + 2 < 1, i.e., y Fq (A; 2 ), and AF (0) + 1 = 0 + 1 < 1,
i.e., 0 Fq (A; 1 ). It follows that y 0 Fq (A; 1 2 ). But
AF (y 0) + 1 2 = AF (y) + 1 = y + 1 > 1,
and so y 0
/ Fq (A; 1 2 ). This is a contradiction. Therefore AF is constant on
X01 . This completes the proof. 
We provide conditions for a neutrosophic set to be a (q, q)-neutrosophic sub-
algebra.
Theorem 3.16. For a subalgebra S of a BCK/BCI-algebra X, let A = (AT , AI , AF )
be a neutrosophic set in X such that
(3.14) (x S) (AT (x) 0.5, AI (x) 0.5, AF (x) 0.5) ,
(3.15) (x X \ S) (AT (x) = 0, AI (x) = 0, AF (x) = 1) .
Then A = (AT , AI , AF ) is a (q, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra of X.
Proof. Assume that x Iq (A; x ) and y Iq (A; y ) for all x, y X and x , y
[0, 1]. Then AI (x) + x > 1 and AI (y) + y > 1. If x y / S, then x X \ S or
y X \ S since S is a subalgebra of X. Hence AI (x) = 0 or AI (y) = 0, which imply
that x > 1 or y > 1. This is a contradiction, and so x y S. If x y > 0.5,
84
 Y. B. Jun/Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 14 (2017), No. 1, 7586

then AI (x y) + x y > 1, i.e., x y Iq (A; x y ). If x y 0.5, then

AI (x y) 0.5 x y , i.e., x y I (A; x y ). Hence x y I q (A; x y ).
Similarly, if x Tq (A; x ) and y Tq (A; y ) for all x, y X and x , y [0, 1],
then x y T q (A; x y ). Now let x, y X and x , y [0, 1] be such that
x Fq (A; x ) and y Fq (A; y ). Then AF (x) + x < 1 and AF (y) + y < 1. It
follows that xy S. In fact, if not then x X \S or y X \S since S is a subalgebra
of X. Hence AF (x) = 1 or AF (y) = 1, which imply that x < 0 or y < 0. This is
a contradiction, and so x y S. If x y 0.5, then AF (x y) 0.5 x y ,
that is, x y F (A; x y ). If x y < 0.5, then AF (x y) + x y < 1,
that is, x y Fq (A; x y ). Hence x y F q (A; x y ), and consequently
A = (AT , AI , AF ) is a (q, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra of X. 

Combining Theorems 3.5 and 3.16, we have the following corollary.

Corollary 3.17. For a subalgebra S of X, if A = (AT , AI , AF ) is a neutrosophic set
in X satisfying conditions (3.14) and (3.15), then Tq (A; ), Iq (A; ) and Fq (A; )
are subalgebras of X for all , (0.5, 1] and [0, 0, 5) whenever they are
nonempty.
Theorem 3.18. Let A = (AT , AI , AF ) be a (q, q)-neutrosophic subalgebra of
X in which AT , AI and AF are not constant on X01 . Then there exist x, y, z X
such that AT (x) 0.5, AI (y) 0.5 and AF (z) 0.5. In particular, AT (x) 0.5,
AI (y) 0.5 and AF (z) 0.5 for all x, y, z X01 .
Proof. Assume that AT (x) < 0.5 for all x X. Since there exists a X01 such that
a = AT (a) 6= AT (0) = 0 , we have a > 0 or a < 0 . If a > 0 , then we
can choose > 0.5 such that 0 + < 1 < a + . It follows that a Tq (A; ),
AT (a a) = AT (0) = 0 < = and AT (a a) + = AT (0) + = 0 + < 1
so that a a / T q (A; ). This is a contradiction. Now if a < 0 , we can take
> 0.5 such that a + < 1 < 0 + . Then 0 Tq (A; ) and a Tq (A; 1), but
a0 / T q (A; 1 ) since AT (a) < 0.5 < and AT (a) + = a + < 1. This is
also a contradiction. Thus AT (x) 0.5 for some x X. Similarly, we know that
AI (y) 0.5 for some y X. Finally, suppose that AF (z) > 0.5 for all z X. Note
that c = AF (c) 6= AF (0) = 0 for some c X01 . It follows that c < 0 or c > 0 .
We first consider the case c < 0 . Then 0 + > 1 > c + for some [0, 0.5),
and so c Fq (A; ). Also AF (c c) = AF (0) = 0 > and AF (c c) + =
AF (0) + = 0 + > 1 which shows that c c / F q (A; ). This is impossible.
Now, if c > 0 , then we can take [0, 0.5) and so that 0 + < 1 < c + .
It follows that 0 Fq (A; ) and c Fq (A; 0). Since AF (c 0) = AF (c) = c >
and AF (c 0) + = AF (c) + = c + > 1, we have c 0 / F q (A; ). This
is a contradiction, and therefore AF (z) < 0.5 for some z X. We now show that
AT (0) 0.5, AI (0) 0.5 and AF (0) 0.5. Suppose that AT (0) = 0 < 0.5. Since
there exists x X such that AT (x) = x 0.5, it follows that 0 < x . Choose 1
[0, 1] such that 1 > 0 and 0 +1 < 1 < x +1 . Then AT (x)+1 = x +1 > 1,
and so x Tq (A; 1 ). Now we have AT (x x) + 1 1 = AT (0) + 1 = 0 + 1 < 1
and AT (x x) = AT (0) = 0 < 1 = 1 1 . Thus x x / T q (A; 1 1 ), a
contradiction. Hence AT (0) 0.5. Similarly, we have AI (0) 0.5. Assume that
AF (0) = 0 > 0.5. Note that AF (z) = z 0.5 for some z X. Hence z < 0 , and
85
 Y. B. Jun/Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform. 14 (2017), No. 1, 7586

so we can take 1 [0, 1] such that 1 < 0 and 0 + 1 > 1 > z + 1 . It follows that
AF (z)+1 = z +1 < 1, that is, z Fq (A; 1 ). Also AF (zz) = AF (0) = 0 > 1 =
1 1 , i.e., z z
/ F (A; 1 1 ), and AF (z z)+1 1 = AF (0)+1 = 0 +1 > 1,
i.e., z z
/ Fq (A; 1 1 ). Thus z z / F q (A; 1 1 ), a contradiction. Hence
AF (0) 0.5. We finally show that AT (x) 0.5, AI (y) 0.5 and AF (z) 0.5
for all x, y, z X01 . We first assume that AI (y) = y < 0.5 for some y X01 ,
and take > 0 such that y + < 0.5. Then AI (y) + 1 = y + 1 > 1 and
AI (0) + + 0.5 > 1, which imply that y Iq (A; 1) and 0 Iq (A; + 0.5). But
y0 / I q (A; + 0.5) since AI (y 0) = AI (y) < + 0.5 < 1 ( + 0.5) and
AI (y 0) + 1 ( + 0.5) = AI (y) + + 0.5 = y + + 0.5 < 1. This is a contradiction.
Hence AI (y) 0.5 for all y X01 . Similarly, we induces AT (x) 0.5 for all
x X01 . Suppose AF (z) = z > 0.5 for some z X01 , and take (0, 0.5) such
that z > 0.5 + . Then z Fq (A; 0) and AF (0) + 0.5 1 < 1, i.e.,
0 Fq (A; 0.5 ). But AF (z 0) = AF (z) > 0.5 > 0.5 and AF (z 0) + 0.5 =
AF (z) + 0.5 = z + 0.5 > 1, which imply that z 0 / F q (A; 0.5 ). This
is a contradiction, and the proof is complete. 

Acknowledgements
The author wishes to thank the anonymous reviewers for their valuable sugges-
tions.

References
[1] A.A.A. Agboola and B. Davvaz, On neutrosophic ideals of neutrosophic BCI-algebras, Critical
Review. Volume X, (2015), 93103.
[2] A.A.A. Agboola and B. Davvaz, Introduction to neutrosophic BCI/BCK-algebras, Inter. J.
Math. Math. Sci. Volume 2015, Article ID 370267, 6 pages.
[3] Y. S. Huang, BCI-algebra, Science Press, Beijing, 2006.
[4] J. Meng and Y. B. Jun, BCK-algebra, Kyungmoon Sa Co. Seoul, 1994.
[5] F. Smarandache, Neutrosophy, Neutrosophic Probability, Set, and Logic, ProQuest Informa-
tion & Learning, Ann Arbor, Michigan, USA, 105 p., 1998. http://fs.gallup.unm.edu/eBook-
neutrosophics6.pdf (last edition online).
[6] F. Smarandache, A Unifying Field in Logics: Neutrosophic Logic. Neutrosophy, Neutrosophic
Set, Neutrosophic Probability, American Reserch Press, Rehoboth, NM, 1999.
[7] F. Smarandache, Neutrosophic set-a generalization of the intuitionistic fuzzy set, Int. J. Pure
Appl. Math. 24(3) (2005), 287297.

Young Bae Jun (skywine@gmail.com)

Department of Mathematics Education, Gyeongsang National University, Jinju 52828,
Korea

86