[Pramaniiketal.

,3(7)):July,2016]]ISSN23494
4506

Imp
pactFactor:2
2.545

GlobalJJournaloff EngineeringScienceandRessearchManagement
a
t
G
PROGRAMMIN
NG
NEUTROSOPHIC LINEAR GOAL
Surapati Pramanik*
*Departm
ment of Mathematics, Nanndalal Ghoshh B.T. Colleg
ge, Panpur, P.O.-Narayanp
P
pur, District
North 24 Parganas,
P
Pinn code-743126, West Benggal, India
DOI:
KEYWOR
RDS:Goal prrogramming, fuzzy goal programming,
p
intuitionisticc fuzzy goall programminng,
neutrosophhic goal prograamming, neutroosophic set, sinngle valued neu
utrosophic set.

ACT
ABSTRA
This paperr proposes the framework
f
of neutrosophic linear
l
goal prog
gramming (NG
GP) approach for
f solving muulti
objective optimization
o
prroblems involvving uncertaintty and indeterm
minacy. In the pproposed apprroach, the degrree
of membeership (acceptaance), indeterrminacy and falsity (rejectiion) of the oobjectives are simultaneoussly
consideredd. Three neutroosophic linear goal program
mming models have been prooposed. The drrawbacks of thhe
existing neeutrosophic opptimization models have beenn addressed annd new directioon of research in neutrosophhic
optimizatio
on problem haas been proposeed. The essencce of the propoosed approach is that it is caapable of dealinng
with indeteerminacy and falsity
f
simultanneously.

INTROD
DUCTION
Goal progrramming can be
b viewed in tw
wo ways. In firsst consideration
n, it is an extennsion of linear programming to
include muulti objectives, expressed by means of attem
mpted achievem
ment of goal vaalues. In seconnd consideratioon,
linear prog
gramming is a special case of
o goal program
mming having single objectiive. These two considerationns
reflect thatt goal program
mming lies withhin the paradiggm of multi objjective program
mming [1]. Gooal programminng
may be chharacterized as an analytical approach deviised to address multi objectiive decision making
m
problem
ms
having inhherent multiplee conflicting objectives
o
wheere targets hav
ve been assignned to all the attributes in thhe
planning horizon
h
and wh
here decision making
m
unit is m
mainly interested in minimiziing the non-ach
hievement of thhe
goals.The ethos of goall programmingg lies in the Simons
S
conceept [2] of satiisfying of objectives. GP has
h
a robust tool for multi objeective decisionn analysis. It appears
a
to be an appropriatee, powerful, annd
appeared as
flexible tecchnique in operations researcch for decision making probleems with multiiple conflictingg objectives. Thhe
literature on
o goal program
mming has trem
mendously grown.
multi criteria deecision makingg (MCDM) app
proach. The idea
Goal progrramming is perrhaps the most widely used m
of GP can be visualized from the conccept of efficienncy introduced by Koopmanss [3] in the con
ntext of resourrce
allocation planning. Thee roots of goal programmingg lie in the stuudy of Charness, Cooper and Ferguson [4] in
w
they deaal with executiive compensattion methods. In 1961, Charrnes and Coop
per [5] offeredd a
1955 in which,
more expliicit definition and
a coined the term goal proogramming.
Thereafter,, a large number of studies have been madee by pioneer reesearchers and the significantt methodologiccal
developmeent of goal pro
ogramming haave been achieeved by Ijiri [66], Lee [7], Iggnizio [8], Scchniederjans [99],
Romero [110], Schniederj
rjans [11] and other researchhes. The vast literature of ggoal programm
ming reflects its
i
theoretical elegance and significance.
In 1980, Narasimhan
N
[12] employedd the concept of fuzzy set theory introdduced by Zadeeh [13] in gooal
programmiing by incorpoorating fuzzy goals
g
and consstraints withinn the traditionaal goal program
mming model in
order to addd new dimenssion in modeliing flexibility and accuracy to
t the goal proorgramming model
m
for dealinng
with uncerrtainty. Thereaafter, fuzzy goaal progammingg has been furtther developedd by Hannan [114], Ignizio [155],
Tiwari et al.
a [16, 17], Mohamed [18], Pramanik
P
and Roy [19, 20], Pramanik andd Dey [21,], Praamanik [22] annd
other reseaarchers.
Atanassov [23, 24] incorrporated the degree
d
of non-m
membership (rrejection) as ann independent component annd
defined inttuitionistic fuzzy set to deal uncertainty
u
in more flexible way. In 1995 Angelov [25] presented a neew

http: // www.gjesrm.com

G
Global Journall of Engineeriing Science aand Research Managementt


[Pramaniiketal.,3(7)):July,2016]]ISSN23494
4506

Imp
pactFactor:2
2.545

GlobalJJournaloff EngineeringScienceandRessearchManagement
a
t
concept to
o optimizationn problem inn intuitionisticc fuzzy envirronment. In 11997, Angelov
v [26] restateed
intuitionisttic fuzzy linear programmiing problem [25] consideriing maximizinng membershiip function annd
minimizingg the non-meembership funnctions simulltaneously by extending fuuzzy linear multim
objectivve
programmm
ming proposed
d by Zimmerm
mann [27]. In 2001, Angelov [28] also presented a generaal formulation of
the optimizzation problem
m of an air condditioning system
m in the framew
work of intuitiionistic fuzzy set
s theory.
uitionistic fuzzzy goal program
mming. In 20005,
Goal progrramming in inttuitionistic fuzzy environmennt is called intu
Pramanik and Roy [29]] proposed inttuitionistic fuzzzy goal proggramming (IFG
GP) by extendding fuzzy gooal
programmiing. Pramanik and Roy [30, 31, 32] also ppresented intuittionistic fuzzy goal programm
ming for qualiity
control prooblem, transpo
ortation problem
ms and bi-leveel programmin
ng problems reespectively butt these problem
ms
are numerrical problems.. Major success has not been achieved in
n intuitionisticc multi-objectiive optimizatioon
problems.
Smarandacche [33, 34, 355, 36] introducced the conceppt of the degreee of indeterminnacy/neutralityy as independeent
componentt in 1998 andd defined the neutrosophic set in order to
t deal with uuncertainty andd indeterminaccy
involved inn real world problems. The significance of Smarandachees work [33] is that it is cap
pable of dealinng
with indeteerminacy which is beyond thee scope of fuzzzy set and intuiitionistic fuzzyy set. The needd of neutrosophhic
set was feelt and actuallyy discovered by
b Smarandachhe in 1995 annd he wrote thhe manuscript in 1995 but he
h
published it in 1998. When
W
the new paradigm was grounded by
y Smarandachee [33], the usu
ual process off a
paradigm shift
s
started. The
T concept off neutrosophicc set, derived from
f
neutrosopphy, which un
nderlies the neew
paradigm, was initially ig
gnored, ridiculled, or attackedd by many [37
7, 38], while it was supported
d only by a veery
few, mostly young, unknnown, and uninnfluential reseaarchers. Inspite of the initial lack of interest, skepticism [337,
38], or op
pen hostility, the
t new paraddigm persevereed with virtuaally no supporrt in the 19900s. Smarandachhe
becomes th
he torchbearer of neutrosoph
hy, neutrosophiic set and neutrrosophic logic. He has tried his level best to
propagate the new parad
digm by writinng books, e-boooks, providingg the free dow
wnloads of his writings in free
journals an
nd websites. The
T new parad
digm matured significantly and
a gained som
me supports inn the 2010s annd
started to demonstrate
d
itss superior praggmatic utility inn the 2010s. The
T paradigm sshift initiated by
b the concept of
neutrosophhy [33] and neutrosophic
n
seet and the ideea of mathemaatics based onn neutyrosophiic set, which is
currently ongoing,
o
possesses similar charactewristics to other paaradigm shift recognized in
n the history of
science. The
T new paraddigm shift covvers a broad rrange of subjeects, from phillosophy to maathematics. Thhe
paradigm shift
s
is still onggoing and it seeems that it willl probably takee much longer time
t
than usuaal to complete it.
i
This can be
b concluded because
b
of thee fact that thee scope of the paradigm shift is very wid
de and open annd
competitivve.
W
et al. [39
9] defined singge valued neutrrosophic set (S
SVNS) which is an instance of neutrosophhic
In 2010, Wang
set, whose truth memberrship degree, inndeterminacy aand falsity deggrees lie in thee unit interval [0,
[ 1]. It can be
b
stated that an important point
p
of evolutiion of the moddern concept off uncertainty w
was the publicattion of a seminnal
marandache [33]. Although mathematics
m
baased on SVNSs has far greatter expressive power
p
than crisp
work of Sm
set, fuzzy sets, intuitionnistic fuzzy seets, its usefulnness depends critically on ones capabiliity to formulaate
appropriatee membership functions, inddeterminate funnctions and fallsity functions for various giiven concepts in
various conntexts and theiir multiple opeerational rules.. Union and inntersections of two SVNSs caan be differenttly
defined andd different resu
ults can be obtaained for the saame optimizatiion problem.
o the theory of
o SVNSs has been growing steadily since its inception iin 2010. The body
b
of conceppts
Research on
and resultss pertaining to the theory of SVNS
S
is now iimpressive. Reesearch on a broad variety of applications has
h
also been very
v
attractive and has produ
uced results thaat are perhaps even
e
more imppressive [40, 41
1, 42, 43, 44, 45,
4
46, 47].
In 2015, Roy
R and Das [48] presented multi-objective
m
production plaanning problem
m based on neuutrosophic lineear
programmiing approach. Das and Rooy [49] preseented multi-obbjective non-liinear program
mming based on
o
neutrosophhic optimizatio
on technique and
a its applicaation in riser design problem
m. Hezam et al. [50] studieed
Taylor seriies approximattion to solve neeutrosophic muulti-objective programming
p
pproblem. In 20016, Abdel-Basset
et al. [51] proposed
p
neutrrosophic goal programming
p
u
using
deviation
n variables. In tthe studies [48, 49, 50, 51], thhe
researcherss maximize inddeterminacy. But
B in a real maanagement systtem, decision m
making unit do
oes not show anny
interest to maximize inddeterminacy. Because
B
maxim
mization of in
ndeterminacy does
d
offer anyy benefit to thhe

http: // www.gjesrm.com

G
Global Journall of Engineeriing Science aand Research Managementt


[Pramaniiketal.,3(7)):July,2016]]ISSN23494
4506

Imp
pactFactor:2
2.545

GlobalJJournaloff EngineeringScienceandRessearchManagement
a
t
managemeent system and
d the organizattion. So it is not pragmatic to maximize indeterminacyy function in thhe
process off optimizing off the objective functions of thhe decision maaking problemss. So, the techn
niques presenteed
in the papeers [48, 49, 50,, 51] are neutroosophic in natuure. Their apprroaches went inn wrong directiions. The claim
ms
of getting better optimall solutions in the
t studies [488, 49] are thereefore not validd. However, they initiated neew
i
i
indeterminacy.
The errors coommitted by thhem occur due to the choice of
idea in opttimization by incorporating
defnitions of intersection
n of two neuttrosophicsets. Therefore new
w methods forr neutrosophicc multi-objectivve
a urgently needed.
programmiing problems are
Fuzzy goall programmingg and intuitionnistic fuzzy goaal programmin
ng have been developed
d
in orrder to deal wiith
uncertaintyy. However, th
hese two approoaches are not capable of deaaling with indeeterminacy. It seems, therefoore
that in manny environmennts it is more reealistic to endeavor achievingg several objectives simultaneeously involvinng
indeterminnacy and incom
mpleteness. This
T
observatiion reflects thhat real world problems havve to be solveed
optimally according
a
to criteria
c
involvinng indeterminaacy. Consequeently, we mustt acknowledge the presence of
several objjectives which
h are at least contradictory, conflicting, in
ndeterminate aand often non--commensurabble
leading to the
t developmeent of neutrosopphic optimizattion technique.

w framework off neutrosophic llinear goal proogramming model.

This paperr develops new
Rest of thhe paper has been
b
organizedd in the follow
wing way. Seection 2 presennts some basiic definitions of
neutrosophhic sets, Sectiion 3 is devooted to presennt the proposeed frameworkk of neutrosopphic linear gooal
programmiing and intuitionistic fuzzy goal
g
programm
ming models. Section
S
4 preseents the concluusion and futuure
direction of
o research worrk.

PRELIM
MINARIES
We recall some
s
basic deffinitions related
d to neutrosophhic sets which are important tto develop the paper.
2.1 Definittion of neutrosophic set [33]
Let V be a space of pointts (objects) with
h a generic eleement v V. A neutrosophic set S in V is ch
haracterized byy a
mbership functiion TS ( v) , an indeterminacyy membershipp function I S (v) , and a falssity membershhip
truth mem
function FS (v) and is den
noted by
S = { v , TS ( v ), I S ( v ), FS ( v ) v V.}
Here TS ( v ) , I S (v) and FS (v) have beenn defined as follows:

TS : V ] 0, 1+ [

I S : V] 0, 1+ [

FS : V ] 0, 1+ [

Here, TS ( v ) , I S ( v) and FS ( v) are the real

r standard annd non-standarrd subset of] 0, 1+ [ . In genneral, there is no
n
restriction on TS ( v ) , I S (v) and FS ( v) . Therefore,

0 Inf TS ( v ) + inf I S (v) +infFS(v) Sup TS ( v ) + Suup I S (v) +Sup FS(v) 3+

2.2. Definiition: Single valued
v
neutrosophic set [39]
Let V be a space of pointts with generic element vV. A single valueed neutrosophiic set S in V is characterized by
b
a truth-meembership funcction TS(v), an
n indeterminaccy-membership
p function IS (v) and a falssity-membershhip
function FS(v), for each
h point v in V, TS(v), IS (v)), FS(v)[0, 1]], when V is continuous
c
theen single-valueed
neutrosophhic set S can bee written as
S = < TS (v), I G (v), FG (v) > / v, v V.
V

When V is discrete, single-valued neutrrosophic set S can

c be written as follows:
n

S = < TS ( v i ), I S ( v i ), FS ( v i ) > vi, viV

i =1

Definition
n 2.3 [39]: The complement of
o a single valued neutrosophiic set S is denooted by S c and is defined by
T c (v) = FS ( v) ; I c ( v ) = 1 I S ( x ) ; F c (v) = TS (v)
S
S
S

http: // www.gjesrm.com

G
Global Journall of Engineeriing Science aand Research Managementt


[Pramaniiketal.,3(7)):July,2016]]ISSN23494
4506

Imp
pactFactor:2
2.545

GlobalJJournaloff EngineeringScienceandRessearchManagement
a
t
Definition
n 2.4 [39]: Twoo single valuedd neutrosophic sets P and Q are
a equal, writtten as P = Q, iff and only if P
Q and P Q.
Definition
n 2.5 [52]:The union
u
of two siingle valued neeutrosophic setts P and Q is a single valued neutrosophic set
s
R, written as R= P Q, whose
w
truth membership, inddeterminacy-m
membership andd falsity membbership functionns
are related to thosse of P and
a
Q by TR ( v ) = max ( TP ( v ), TQ ( v )) ; I R ( x ) = minn ( I p ( v), I Q ( v )) ;
FR ( x ) = miin ( FP ( v), FQ ( v)) for all v in V.
Definition
n 2.6 [52]: Thee intersection of
o two single vvalued neutrossophic sets P aand Q is a neu
utrosophic set R
written as R = P Q, whose
w
truth meembership, inddeterminacy-meembership andd falsity memb
bership functionns
a
Q by TR ( v) = min ( TP ( v), TQ ( x )) ; I R ( v ) = maxx ( I P ( v), I Q ( x ))) ;
are related to thosse of P and
FR ( x ) = maax ( FP ( v ), FQ ( v )) for all v in V.

Definition
n 2.7 [52]: Assuume that { Pj : jJ} be an arbitrary family of
o single valuedd neutrosophic sets in V, thenn

i)

Pj

mayy be defined as follows:

Pj =

v, TPj (v), IPj (v), FP j (v)

j J

j J

jJ

(ii) P j may
m be defined as follows:
P j = v, TPi (v), IPj (v), FPi (v)
j j

j J

j J

FORMU
ULATION OF
O NEUTR
ROSOPHIC LINEAR GOAL
G
PRO
OGRAMMIN
NG
To formullate neutrosophhic goal programming, we start from multi-objective
m
programing problem
p
in crisp
environmeent.
Consider an
a optimizationn problem of th
he form in crispp environment::
Max i ( v) , i = 1, 2, , r1
(1)
Subject to
i ( v ) 0, i = r1+1, , r
v0
where i ( v) represents the i-th objecttive function, v is the vector of decision vaariables (v1,v2, , vk ), i ( v )
denotes i-thh constraint, r denotes the nuumber of objecttive functions and
a s denotes tthe number of constraints.

Analogouss fuzzy optimiization problem

In general,, fuzzy optimizzation problem
m comprises off a set of objecctives and constraints. The objectives
o
and or
constraintss or parameterss and relationss are expressedd by fuzzy setss which explaiin the degree of
o satisfaction of
the respecttive condition and
a expressed by their membbership function
ns [53].
Consider thhe analogous fuzzy
f
optimizattion problem:
~

Max i ( v) , i = 1, 2, ,, r1

(22)

Subject to
~

0 i = r1+1, , r
i ( v ) 0,
v0
~

ax denottes fuzzy maxiimization and denotes the fuzzy inequaliity.

To maximiize the degree of membershipp of the objectiives and constrraints to the resspective fuzzy sets:
Max i( v ),
) v k, i = 1,, 2, , r1, r1+1,, , r
Subject to
r1, r1+1, , r
0 i( v ) 1, i = 1, 2, ,

(33)

v0

http: // www.gjesrm.com

G
Global Journall of Engineeriing Science aand Research Managementt


[Pramaniiketal.,3(7)):July,2016]]ISSN23494
4506

Imp
pactFactor:2
2.545

GlobalJJournaloff EngineeringScienceandRessearchManagement
a
t
Where i( v ) denotes th
he degree of membership
m
off i-th objectivee function i ( v) (i = 1, 2, r1) and i( v )
denotes thee degree of i-thh membership function of coonstraint i ( v ) (i = r1+1, , r ).
Minimum operator of Beellman and Zad
deh [54] can bee applied to thee optimization pproblem (3).
r

D( v ) = i ( v ) , v 0 , i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r

(44)

Therefore, D( v ) i ( v ) , i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r

s
as follow
ws:
According to Zimmermannn [55], the problem can be solved

(55)

i =1

D ( v ) = Max (min ( 1 ( v ) , 2 ( v ) , ,
r1 ( v) , r1+1 ( v) , , r ( v ) )

(66)

Subject to
0 i( v ) 1, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r
v0 .
m:
The probleem (6) is equivalent to the folllowing problem
Max
i( v ), i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r

(77)

v0 .

gous intuitioniistic fuzzy optiimization (IFO

O) problem
An analog
An analogoous intuitionisttic fuzzy optim
mization probleem can be repreesented as folloows:
To maxim
mize the degreee of acceptannce of intuitioonistic fuzzy objective
o
funcctions and connstraints, and to
minimize the
t degree of reejection of intuuitionistic fuzzyy objective fun
nctions and connstraints we caan write:
Max i( v ),
) v k , i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1
1, , r
(88)
Min i( v ), v k, i = 1,, 2, , r1, r1+1,, , r
(99)
Subject to
i( v ) + i( v ) 1 i = 1, 2,
2 , r1, r1+1, , r,
i( v ) [00, 1], i = 1, 2, ,
r1, r1+1, ,, r,
i( v ) [0
0, 1], i = 1, 2, ,
r1, r1+1, , r,
v0
d
of memb
bership of i-th objective funcction i ( v) (i = 1, 2, r1) an
nd i( v ) denottes
Here i( v ) denotes the degree
the degree of i-th membeership functionn of constraint i ( v ) (i = r1+1, , r).
Here i( v ) denotes the degree of nonn-membership of i-th objective function i ( v) (i = 1, 2,, r1)and i( v )
denotes thee degree of i-thh non-memberrship function oof constraint i ( v ) (i = r1+1,, , r).
Conjunctioon of intuitionistic fuzzy sets can be definedd as follows:
G C = { v , G( v ) C( v ),G( v ) C( v )| v k},
(10)
where G reepresents an in
ntuitionistic fuzzzy objectives and
a C represen
nts constraints. This conjuncttion operator caan
be easily generalized
g
and
d applied to thee IFO problem..
Here,
r

i =1

i =1

D = { v , D( v )),D( v )| v k}, D( v ) = i( v ),D( v ) = i( v )

(11)

where D reepresents an inttuitionistic fuzzzy set based reepresentation of

o the decision.
Min-operattor can be usedd for conjunctioon and max-opperator for disju
unction.
r

D( v ) = i( v ), v k, i = 1, 2, , r1,1 r1+1, , r,
i =1
r

D( v ) = i( v ), v k, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,
i =1

http: // www.gjesrm.com

(122)
(13)

G
Global Journall of Engineeriing Science aand Research Managementt


[Pramaniiketal.,3(7)):July,2016]]ISSN23494
4506

Imp
pactFactor:2
2.545

GlobalJJournaloff EngineeringScienceandRessearchManagement
a
t
Therefore, D( v ) i( v ),D ( v ) i( v ),
) i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,

(14))

mization problem can be transformed iinto intuitionistic fuzzy gooal

The abovee intuitionisticc fuzzy optim
programmiing problem ass follows: To maximize
m
the ddegree the acceptance of intuuitionistic fuzzzy objectives annd
constraintss, and to minim
mize the degreee of rejection off intuitionistic objectives andd constraints, we
w can write
k
(15)
Max i( v ),
) v , i = 1,, 2, , r1, r1+1,, , r,
(166)
Min i( v ),, v k, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+11, , r ,
Subject to
i( v ) 0, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,
i( v ) + i( v ) 1 i = 1, 2,
2 , r1, r1+1, , r,
v 0 .

b
For the deffined membersship function i( v ), the flexibble membershiip goals havingg the aspired leevel unity can be
presented as
a follows:
i( v ) + d i1i d +i1 = 1, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1,
+ , r
(177)
For the casse of rejection (non-membersship), we can w
write

+
i( v ) + d i2i d i2 = 0, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1,
+ , r

(188)

Since decision making unit

u wants to minimize
m
the deegree of rejecttion and maxim
mize the degreee of acceptancce,
IFGP can be
b formulated as:
a
IFGP moddel-1
Min
Subject to
+
i1

=1, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,

+
d i2

= 0, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1,
+ , r,

i( v ) + d i1i - d
i( v ) +

d i2
i

(199)

i( v ) + i( v ) 1 i = 1, 2,
2 , r1, r1+1, , r,

d i1 , i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,
d +i2 , i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,

di1 d +i1 = 0, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,,

d i2 d +i2 = 0, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,
r
di1 0, d +i1i 0, di2 0, d+i2 0, i = 1, 2,
2 , r1, r1+1,
, r,
v0 .

a)
Model (IIa
The minim
mization of the sum of the weiighted deviatioon form:
r

i =1

i =1

Min = w i1- d i1- + w i2i+ d i2+

(20)

Subject to
i( v ) + di1i - d +i1 =1, i = 1,
1 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,

+
i( v ) + d i2i d i2 = 0, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1,
+ , r,

http: // www.gjesrm.com

G
Global Journall of Engineeriing Science aand Research Managementt


[Pramaniiketal.,3(7)):July,2016]]ISSN23494
4506

Imp
pactFactor:2
2.545

GlobalJJournaloff EngineeringScienceandRessearchManagement
a
t
i( v ) + i( v ) 1 i = 1, 2,
2 , r1, r1+1, , r,

di1 d +i1 = 0, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,,

d i2 d +i2 = 0, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,
r
r,
w i1- 0, w i2+ 0, i = 1, 2,, , r1, r1+1, ,

di1 0, d +i1i 0, di2 0, d+i2 0, i = 1, 2,

2 , r1, r1+1,
, r,
v0 .

b)
Model (IIb
The minim
mization of the sum of the devviation form:
r

i =1

i =1

Min = ( d i1- + d i2+ )

(21)

Subject to the same set off constraints (2

20).
+

d
varriables. The num
Here, d i1 , and d +i2 , are deviational
merical weightts w i1 , w i2 asssociated with d i1 , d +i2 represeent
o achieving th
he aspired leveel of the respeective intuitionnistic fuzzy goal subject to thhe
the relativee importance of
given set of
o constraints. To
T assess the relative
r
importaance of the intuuitionistic fuzzzy goals, the weighting
w
schem
me
-

suggested by
b Pramanik and
a Roy [29] caan be used to aassign the valuees of w i1 , w i2 .
Formulatiion of the neuttrosophic goall programmin
ng
Neutrosoph
hic optimizatio
on problem can
n be representeed as follows:
To maximiize the degree of acceptance (truth) of neutrrosophic objecctives and consstraints, to miniimize the degree
of indeterm
minacy and to minimize
m
the degree
d
of rejecttion (falsity) off neutrosophic objectives andd constraints:
k
(222)
Max i( v ),
) v , i = 1,
1 2, , r1, r1+11, , r,
Min i( v ),
) v k, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,
Min i( v ), v k, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,
Subject to
i( v ) + i( v ) + i( v ) 3, i = 1, 2, ,
r1, r1+1, , rr,
i( v )[0, 1], i = 1, 2, ,
r1, r1+1, , r,
r
i( v )[0,, 1], i = 1, 2, ,
r1, r1+1, , r,
r
i( v )[0, 1], i = 1, 2, ,
r1, r1+1, , r,
r
v0 .
where i( v ) denotes thhe degree of membership
m
o v to the i-thh SVNS and i( v ) denotees the degree of
of
rejection of functions v from the i-th SVNS.
S
Conjunctioon of SVNSs iss defined by
G C = { v , G( v ) C( v ),G( v ) C( v ), G( v ) C( v )| v k},
(23)
Here G reppresents a neuttrosophic objecctive function and C represennts neutrosophhic constraint. This
T conjunctioon
operator caan be easily genneralized and applied
a
to the neutrosophic
n
optimization
o
prooblem:
r

i =1

i =1

D = { v , D( v )),D( v )| v k}, D( v ) = i( v ),
D( v )= i ( v ) ,
r

D( v ) = i( v )

(244)

i =1

where D reepresents a singgle valued neutrosophic set bbased representtation of the deecision.
Min-operattor is used for conjunction an
nd max-operatoor for disjunctiion:
D( v )

= i( v ),
i =1

v k,

D( v )

= i( v ), v k,
i =1

D ( v )

i( v ),

i =1

v
k.

(25)

http: // www.gjesrm.com

G
Global Journall of Engineeriing Science aand Research Managementt


[Pramaniiketal.,3(7)):July,2016]]ISSN23494
4506

Imp
pactFactor:2
2.545

GlobalJJournaloff EngineeringScienceandRessearchManagement
a
t
Therefore, D( v )
i( v ),D( v ) i( v ), D( v ) i( v ),i
)
= 1, 22, , r1, r1+1, , r.
(26)
where i( v ) denotes the degree off membership of v to the i-th SVNS, i( v ) denotess the degree of
indeterminnacy, and i( v ) denotes the degree
d
of rejection of functions v from thee i-th SVNS.
del (I).
NGP Mode
Minimize
Subject to
i( v ) + d i1 - d +i1 =1, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1,
+ , r,

(27)

+
i( v ) + d -i2 - d i2 = 0, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,

i( v ) + d -i3 - d +i3 = 0, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,

d i1 , i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,
d +i2 , i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,
d +i3 , i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,
i( v ) + i( v ) + i( v ) 3, i = 1, 2, ,
r1, r1+1, , r,
r

d i1 0, d -i2 0, d -i3 0,
0 i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,
d i1 d +i1 = 0, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,
d -i2 d +i2 = 0, i = 1, 2, ,
r1, r1+1, , r,
r
d -i3 d +i3 = 0, i = 1, 2, ,
r1, r1+1, , r,
i( v )[0, 1],

i = 1, 2,
2 , r1, r1+1, ,
r,

i( v )[0, 1], i = 1, 2, ,
r1, r1+1, , r,
i( v )[0, 1], i = 1, 2, ,
r1, r1+1, , r,
r

v0 .
NGP Mode
del (IIa)
r

i =1

i =1

i =1

Min = w i1- d i1- + w i2+ d i2+ + w i3+ d i3+

(28)

Subject to

i( v ) + d i1 - d +i1 =1, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1,

+ , r,
+
i( v ) + d -i2 - d i2 = 0, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,

i( v ) + d -i3 - d +i3 = 0, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,

i( v ) + i( v ) + i( v ) 3, i = 1, 2, ,
r1, r1+1, , r,
r

d i1 d +i1 = 0, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,

d -i2 d +i2 = 0, i = 1, 2, ,
r1, r1+1, , r,
r
d -i3 d +i3 = 0, i = 1, 2, ,
r1, r1+1, , r,

d i1 0, d +i1 0, d -i2 0, d +i2 0, d -i3 0, d +i3 0, i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1,

+ , r,
w i1- 0, w i2+ 0, w i3+ 0, i = 1, 2, , r1,1 r1+1, , r,

i( v )[0, 1], i = 1, 2, , r1, r1+1, , r,

r
i( v )[0, 1], i = 1, 2, ,
r1, r1+1, , r,

http: // www.gjesrm.com

G
Global Journall of Engineeriing Science aand Research Managementt


[Pramaniiketal.,3(7)):July,2016]]ISSN23494
4506

Imp
pactFactor:2
2.545

GlobalJJournaloff EngineeringScienceandRessearchManagement
a
t
i( v )[0, 1], i = 1, 2, ,
r1, r1+1, , r,
r

v0 .
NGP Modeel (IIb).
r

i1

(29))
r

+
i2

Min = d + d + d
i =1

i =1

i =1

+
i3

Subject to the same set off constraints (2

28).
Here d

i1

, d -i2 , d -i3 , d +i1 , d i2 , d +i3 are deviational

d
varriables. The nu
umerical weighhts wi1 , wi2 , wi33 associated wiith
-

d i1 , d +i2 , d +i3 represent the relative im

mportance of aachieving the aspired level oof the respectiive neutrosophhic
goal subject to the givenn set of constrraints. To asseess the relativee importance oof the neutrosophic goals, thhe
weighting scheme suggessted by Pramannik and Roy [229] can be usedd to assign the vvalues of wi1- , wi2+ , wi3+ .

CONCL
LUSION
This paperr presents fram
mework of neutrosophic linnear goal progrramming probblem. Three neew intuitionisttic
fuzzy goall programming
g models havee been presentted. The proposed intuitioniistic fuzzy goal programminng
models havve been also ex
xtended to neuutrosophic linear goal program
mming modelss. The essence of the proposeed
neutrosophhic linear goaal programmin
ng is that it is capable of
o dealing witth indeterminacy and falsiity
simultaneoously. Abdel-B
Baset et al. [51] presented gooal programminng models in 22016. Howeveer, in their studdy
they maxim
mize indetermiinacy which iss not realistic in
i decision maaking context. In this paper the
t definition of
intersection
n of two singlle valued neuttrosophic sets due to Salamaa and Alblowii [52] has beenn employed annd
direction of
o research in neutrosophic optimization problem has been proposed. The authorr hopes that thhe
proposed framework
f
of neutrosophic
n
liinear goal proggramming will open up new avenue of reseearch in the fieeld
of optimizzation problem
ms in neutrosophic environm
ment. Many arreas need to bbe explored annd developed in
neutrosophhic goal prog
gramming especially prioritty structure of
o neutrosophhic goals and priority baseed
neutrosophhic linear goal programming.
p

REFERE
ENCES
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.

Joones, D.F., and

d M. Tamiz. 2002.
2
Goal prrogramming inn the period 19990-2000, in: M. Ehrgott annd
X
X.Gandibleux
(eeds.), Multiplee Criteria Optim
mization: Statee of the art annotated biblioggraphic surveyys,
K
Kluwer
129-170
0.
Siimon, H.A. 1955. Models of man,
m Wiley, N
New York.
K
Koopmans,
T.C. 1951. Activitty analysis of production
p
and
d allocation. Coowels Commission Monograpph
133, New York.
Charnes, A., W.W. Cooper, annd R. Fergusonn. 1955. Optim
mal Estimation of executive compensation
c
b
by
near programm
ming. Managem
ment Science 1, 138-151.
lin
Charnes, A., annd W.W. Coo
oper. 1961. Management
M
m
models
and inddustrial appliccations of lineear
prrogramming. Wiley,
W
New Work.
Ijiri, Y. 1965. Management
M
gooals and accounnting for contrrol, NorthHollland, Amsterdaam.
Lee, S. M. 19722. Goal program
mming for decision analysis, Auerbach Pubblishers, Philaddelphia.
Iggnizio, J.P. 19776. Goal Progrramming and E
Extensions, Lex
xington, Massaachusetts, D. C.
C Health.
Scchniederjans, M.
M J. 1984. Lin
near goal progrramming. Potrocelli Books, N
New Jersey.
R
Romero,
C. 1991. Handbook of
o critical issuees in goal prog
gramming, Perggamon Press, Oxford.
O
Scchniederjans, M. J. 1995. Goal
G
program
mming: methoddology and app
pplications, Klluwer Academ
mic
Puublishers, Bostton.
N
Narasimhan,
R. 1980. Goal pro
ogramming in a fuzzy enviroonment. Decisioon Sciences 111, 325-336.
Zadeh, L.A. 196
65. Fuzzy Setss. Information aand control8, 338353.
3
H
Hannan,
E. L. 1981. On fuzzyy goal program
mming. Decisionn Science 12 (33), 522-531.
Iggnizio, J. P. 198
82. On the (re)) discovery of fuzzy
f
goal proggramming. Deccision Sciencess13, 331336.
Tiwari, R. N., S.
S Dharma and J. R. Rao. 19887. Fuzzy goal programming-- an additive model.
m
Fuzzy Seets
annd Systems24, 27 34.

http: // www.gjesrm.com

G
Global Journall of Engineeriing Science aand Research Managementt


[Pramaniiketal.,3(7)):July,2016]]ISSN23494
4506

Imp
pactFactor:2
2.545

GlobalJJournaloff EngineeringScienceandRessearchManagement
a
t
17. Tiwari,
T
R. N., S.
S Dharmar, annd J. R. Rao. 1986. Priority structure in fuuzzy goal prog
gramming. Fuzzzy
Seets and Systems 19, 251259.
18. Mohamed,
M
R.H.. 1997. The relationship betw
ween goal progrramming and ffuzzy programm
ming. Fuzzy Seets
annd Systems89, 215222.
19. Prramanik, S., an
nd T.K. Roy. 2007. A fuzzyy goal program
mming approacch for multilevvel programminng
prroblems. Europpean Journal of
o Operational Research176 (2),
( 115111666.
20. Prramanik, S., annd T.K. Roy. 2008.
2
Multiobjjective transpoortation model based on prio
ority based fuzzzy
gooal programmiing. Journal off Transportatioon Systems En
ngineering andd Information Technology
T
7(33),
400-48.
21. Prramanik, S., and
a P.P. Dey. 2011. Quadraatic bi-level programming
p
p
problem
basedd on fuzzy gooal
prrogramming appproach. Intern
national Journaal of Software Engineering & Applications 2(4), 41-59.
22. Prramanik, S 20012. Bilevel prrogramming prroblem with fuzzy
f
parameteer: a fuzzy goal programminng
appproach. Journ
nal of Applied Quantitative
Q
M
Methods. 7(1), 09-24.
0
23. Atanassov,
A
K. 1983. Intuitioniistic fuzzy sets, in: Proceedinngs of theVII IT
TKRs Session,, Sofia (Deposeed
inn Central Sci.-T
Techn. Libraryy of Bulgaria A
Academy of Sciience), 1677-16684.
24. Atanassov,
A
K. 1986. Intuitioniistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets an
nd Systems20 (1), 87 96.
25. Angelov,
A
P. 199
95. Intuitionistiic fuzzy optimiization. Notes on
o Intuitionistiic Fuzzy Sets1((2), 123 129.
26. Angelov,
A
P. 199
97. Optimizatio
on in an intuitiionistic fuzzy environment.
e
F
Fuzzy
Sets and
d Systems86, 2999
3306.
27. Zimmermann, H.
H J. 1978. Fuzzy
F
program
mming and liinear program
mming with seeveral objectivve
fuunctions. Fuzzyy Sets and Systeems 1, 4555.
28. Angelov,
A
P. 20001. Multi-obj
bjective optimiization in airrconditioning systems: com
mfort/discomfoort
deefinition by IF sets. Notes on Intuitionistic F
Fuzzy Sets 7(1)), 10-21.
29. Prramanik, S., and
a T.K. Roy. 2005. An inntuitionistic fuuzzy goal proggramming appproach to vecttor
opptimization prooblem. Notes on
o Intuitionisticc Fuzzy Sets 111(5), 0114.
30. Prramanik, S., annd T.K. Roy. 2007. An intuuitionistic fuzzzy goal program
mming approaach for a qualiity
coontrol problem
m: a case study. Tamsui Oxforrd Journal of Management
M
Scciences 23(3), 0118.
0
31. Prramanik, S., annd T.K. Roy. 2007.
2
Intuitioniistic fuzzy goaal programmingg and its appliccation in solvinng
m
multi-objective
transportation problem. Tamssui Oxford Jouurnal of Managgement Sciencees 23(1), 01166.
32. S.. Pramanik, P.P
P. Dey, T. K. Roy.
R
(2011). B
Bilevel program
mming in an inttuitionistic fuzzzy environmennt.
Joournal of Technnology 42, 103
3-114.
33. Sm
marandache, F.
F (1998). A unifying field in logics: Neutroosophic logic, N
Neutrosophy, neutrosophic
n
seet,
neeutrosophic prrobability. Ameerican Researchh Press, Rehob
both.
34. Sm
marandache, F.
F (2002). A unnifying field inn logics: neutrrosophic logicss. Multiple Vallued Logic 8 (3)
(
(22002), 385-438
8.
35. Sm
marandache, F.
F (2005). Neuttrosophic set. A generalizatioon of intuitionisstic fuzzy set. Internal
I
Journnal
off Pure and App
plied Mathema
atics 24, 287-2997.
36. Sm
marandache, F.
F (2010). Neuutrosophic set a generalizzation of intuittionistic fuzzyy set. Journal of
D
Defense
Resourcces Managemeent 1(1) (2010)), 107-116.
37. Georgiev,
G
K. (22005). A simpllification of thhe neutrosophiic sets. Neutroosophic logic and
a intuitionisttic
fuuzzy sets. Notess on Intuitionisstic Fuzzy Sets 11(2), 28-31.
38. Rivieccio,
R
U. (22008). Neutrossophic logics: pprospects and problems. Fuzzzy Sets and Syystems 159 (144),
18860-1868.
39. Wang,
W
H., F. Smarandache,
S
Y. Zhang, R.. Sunderraman
n. (2010). Sinngle valued neeutrosophic setts.
M
Multisspace
and
d Multistructurre 4 (2010), 410-413.
40. Mohan,
M
J., V. Krishnaveni,
K
Y.
Y Guo. (2013).. MRI denoisin
ng using nonloocal neutrosophhic set approacch
off Wiener filteriing, Biomedicaal Signal Proceessing and Conntrol 8(6), 779--791.
41. Ye,
Y J. (2015). Improved cosine similarityy measures off simplified neutrosophic
n
sets
s
for mediccal
diiagnoses, Artifi
ficial Intelligennce in Medicinee 63, 171179.
42. Biswas, P., S. Pramanik,
P
B.C.. Giri (2015). T
TOPSIS methood for multi-atttribute group decision
d
makinng
unnder single-vaalued neutrosoophic environment. Neural computing aand Applicatio
on, 2015. DO
OI:
100.1007/s00521-015-1891-2.
43. Biswas, P., S. Pramanik, B.C. Giri . (20016).Aggregattion of trianguular fuzzy neeutrosophic set
s
innformation and
d its applicationn to multi-attriibute decision making. Neutr
trosophic Sets and Systems 12.
1

http: // www.gjesrm.com

G
Global Journall of Engineeriing Science aand Research Managementt


[Pramaniiketal.,3(7)):July,2016]]ISSN23494
4506

Imp
pactFactor:2
2.545

GlobalJJournaloff EngineeringScienceandRessearchManagement
a
t
Inn Press.
44. Biswas, P., S. Prramanik, B.C. Giri(2016). Vaalue and ambigguity index bassed ranking method
m
of singllevaalued trapezoiidal neutrosopphic numbers and its appliication to muulti-attribute deecision makinng.
N
Neutrosophic
Seets and Systemss 12. In Press.
45. Prramanik, S., P.. Biswas, B.C. Giri. (2015). H
Hybrid vector similarity meaasures and theiir applications to
m
multi-attribute
decision
d
makin
ng under neutroosophic enviro
onment. Neurall Computing and Applicationns,
D 10.1007/s000521-015-2125-3.
DOI
46. Peeng, J.J, J.Q Wang, H.Y. Zhang, X.H. Chen.(2014). An outrankinng approach for
fo multi-criterria
deecision-makingg problems witth simplified neeutrosophic setts. Applied Sofft Computing 25:336-346.
2
47. Gal,
G I.A., L.Vldreanu, F. Smarandache,
S
H. Yu, M. Deeng. (2014). N
Neutrosophic lo
ogic approachhes
appplied to RAB
BOT real timee control 1,55-660,EuropaNov
va, Bruxelles, 22014.
48. Roy,
R
R., P. Dass. (2015). A multi-objective
m
production plaanning roblem
m based on neuutrosophic lineear
roogramming appproach. Interna
al Journal of Fuzzy
F
Mathemaatical Archive 88(2) 81-91.
49. Das,
D
P., T.K. Roy.
R
(2015).M
Multi-objective non-linear pro
ogramming prroblem based on neutrosophhic
opptimization tecchnique and its application inn riser design prroblem. Neutroosophc Sets an
nd Systems 9, 88955.
50. Hezam,
H
I.M., M. Abdel-Baaset, F.Smaranndache. (2015
5). Taylor seeries approxim
mation to solvve
neeutrosophicmuultiobjective pro
ogramming prooblem. Neutrossophic Sets and Systems 10, 39-45.
3
51. Abdel-Baset,
A
M., I.M. Heezam, F. Sm
marandache. (2016)
(
Neutrrosophic goal programminng,
N
Neutrosophic
Seets and Systemss 11, 112-118.
52. Saalama, A.A., S.A. Alblowi. (2012).Neutrrosophic set and
a
neutrosophhic topologicaal spaces. IOSSR
Joournal of Math
hematics (IOSR
R-JM) 3(4), 31--35.
53. Zimmermann, H.J.
H (1991): Fuzzy Set Theoory and its Appplication, Kluw
wer Academic Publishers,
P
Neew
D
Delhi.
54. Bellman, R. F. and L. A. Zadeh.
Z
(1970). Decision-makking in a fuzzzy environmen
nt. Managemeent
Scciences17, 141164.
55. Zimmermann, H.
H J. (1978). Fuzzy progrramming and linear prograamming with several
obbjective functioons. Fuzzy Setss and Systems 1, 4555.

http: // www.gjesrm.com

G
Global Journall of Engineeriing Science aand Research Managementt