Abstract This paper develops a multi-objective optimization problem. Again,Dey et al. [9] used
Neutrosophic Goal Optimization technique for intuitionistic fuzzy optimization technique to solve
optimizing the design of truss structure with multiple multi objective structural design. Intuitionistic fuzzy
objectives subject to a specified set of constraints. In sets consider both truth and falsity membership and
this optimum design formulation, the objective can only handle incomplete information but not the
functions are weight and the deflection; the design information which is connected with indeterminacy
variables are the cross-sections of the bar; the or inconsistency.
constraints are the stress in member. The classical In due course, any generalization of fuzzy set
three bar truss structure is presented here in to failed to handle problems with indeterminate or
demonstrate the efficiency of the neutrosophic goal inconsistent information. To overcome this,
programming approach. The model is numerically Smarandache [4] proposed a new theory , namely,
illustrated by Neutrosophic Goal Optimization neutrosophic logic, by adding another independent
technique with different aggregation method. The membership function named as indeterminacy
result shows that the Neutrosophic Goal membership I x along with truth membership
Optimization technique is very efficient in finding
the best optimal solutions. T x and falsity F x membership functions.
Neutrosophic set is a generalization of intuitionistic
Keywords - Neutrosophic Set, Neutrosophic Goal fuzzy sets. If hesitancy degree H x of
Programming, Structural Optimization. intuitionistic fuzzy sets and the indeterminacy
I. INTRODUCTION membership degree I x of neutrosophic sets are
In present day, problems are there with different equal, then neutrosophic set will become the
types of uncertainties which cannot be solved by intuitionistic fuzzy set. The components of
classical theory of mathematics. Fuzzy set (FS) neutrosophic set, namely truth-membership degree,
theory has long been introduced to deal with inexact indeterminacy-membership degree and falsity-
and imprecise data by Zadeh[2], Later on the fuzzy membership degree, were suitable to represent
set theory was used by Bellman and Zadeh[3]to the indeterminacy and inconsistent information.
decision making problem. A few works have been Goal Programming (GP) models was originally
doneas an application of fuzzy set theoryon introduced by Charnes and Copper [11] in early
structural design. Several researchers like Wang et 1977. Multiple and conflicting goals can used in
al.[5] first applied -cut method to structural designs goal programming. Also, GP allows simultaneous
wherevarious design levels were used to solve the solution of a system of complex objectives, and the
non-linear problems. In this regard, a generalized solution of the problem requires ascertaining among
fuzzy number has been usedDey et al.[6]in context these multiple objectives. In this case, the model
of a non-linear structural design optimization. Dey must be solved in such a way, that each of the
et al.[8] developed parameterized t-norm based objective to be achieved. Dey et al.[10]proposed
fuzzy optimization method for optimum structural intuitionistic goal programming technique on
design. nonlinear structural model. The Neutrosophic
In such extension, Intuitionistic fuzzy set which approach for goal programming in structural design
is one of the generalizations of fuzzy set theory and is rare. This is the first time NSGO technique is in
was characterized by a membership, a non- application to multi-objective structural design. The
membership and a hesitancy function was first present study investigates computational algorithm
introduced by Atanassove[1]. In fuzzy set theory the for solving multi-objective structural problem by
degree of acceptance is only considered but in case single valued generalized NSGO technique. The
of IFS it is characterized by degree of membership results are compared numerically for different
and non-membership in such a way that their sum aggregation method of NSGO technique. From our
is less or equal to one. Dey et al.[7] solved two bar numerical result, it has been seen that the best result
truss non-linear problem by using intuitionistic fuzzy obtained for geometric aggregation method for
NSGO technique in the perspective of structural Let a set X be a space of points (objects) and
optimization technique. x X .A neutrosophic set A%n in X is defined by a
II. MULTI-OBJECTIVE STRUCTURAL MODEL truth membership function TA x , an indeterminacy-
In the design problem of the structure i.e. lightest membership function IA x and a falsity
weight of the structure and minimum deflection of
the loaded joint that satisfies all stress constraints in membership function FA x and having the form
members of the structure. In truss structure A%n x, TA x , I A x , FA x x X . TA x ,
system ,the basic parameters (including allowable
stress etc.) are known and the optimizations target I A x and FA x are real standard or non-standard
is that identify the optimal bar truss cross-section subsets of ]0 ,1 [ .That is
area so that the structure is of the smallest total
weight with minimum nodes displacement in a given TA x : X ]0 ,1 [
load conditions . IA x : X ]0 ,1 [
The multi-objective structural model can be
expressed as FA x : X ]0 ,1 [
Minimize WT A (1) There is no restriction on the sum of
minimize A TA x , I A x and FA x so
,
subject to A 0 sup TA x sup I A x sup FA x 3 .
min max
A A A
T
D. Single Valued Neutrosophic Set
where A A1 , A2 ,..., An are the design variables Let a set X be the universe of discourse. A
for the cross section, n is the group number of design single valued neutrosophic set A%n over X is an
variables for the cross section object having the form
n
bar , WT A AL is the total weight of the %
An
x, TA x , I A x , FA x x X where
i 1 i i i
structure , A is the deflection of the loaded TA : X 0,1 , I A : X 0,1 and
joint ,where Li , Ai and i are the bar length, cross FA : X 0,1 with 0 TA x IA x FA x 3
th
section area and density of the i group bars for all x X.
respectively. A is the stress constraint and is
E. Single Valued Generalized Neutrosophic Set
allowable stress of the group bars under various
Let a set X be the universe of discourse. A
conditions, Amin and Amax are the lower and upper
single valued neutrosophic set A%n over X is an
bounds of cross section area A respectively.
object having the form
III. MATHEMATICAL PRELIMINARIES A%n x, TA x , I A x , FA x x X where
A. Fuzzy Set TA : X 0, w1 , I A : X 0, w2 and
Let X be a fixed set. A fuzzy set A set of X is FA : X 0, w3 with
an object having the form
0 TA x IA x FA x w1 w2 w3 where
A% x, TA x : x X where the function
w1 , w2 , w3 0,1 for all x X.
TA : X 0,1 defined the truth membership of the
element x X to the set A . F. Complement of Neutrosophic Set
Complement of a single valued neutrosophic set
B. Intuitionistic Fuzzy Set A is denoted by c A and is defined by
Let a set X be fixed. An intuitionistic fuzzy set or
Tc x FA x
IFS A%i in X is an object of the form A
A%i X , TA x , FA x x X where Ic A x 1 FA x
xi 0, i 1, 2,...., n 0 if A 0 a0
1 1
2 2 A1 A2 4 2 2 , 2 2 A1 A2 4 2 2 ,
0.5 0.22 0.5 0.22
2 2 A1 A2 4 4.5 , 2 2 A1 A2 4 4.5 ,
2 2 A1 A2 4, 2 2 A1 A2 4,
20 20
2.5 2.5 1 , 2.5 2.5 1 ,
A1 2 A2 A1 2 A2
20 1 20 1
2.5 , 2.5 ,
A1 2 A2 0.4 0.22 A1 2 A2 0.4 0.22
20 1 20 1
2.5 2.5 2.5 , 2.5 2.5 2.5 ,
A1 2 A2 0.4 0.22 A1 2 A2 0.4 0.22
20 20 4.5
2.5 4.5 , 2.5 ,
A1 2 A2 A1 2 A2 w3
20 20
2.5, 2.5,
A1 2 A2 A1 2 A2
0 3; 0 3;
0,1 , 0,1 , 0,1 ; 0,1 , 0,1 , 0,1 ;
20 2 A1 A2 20 2 A1 A2
20; 20;
2 A12 2 A1 A2 2 A12 2 A1 A2
20 20
20; 20;
A1 2 A2 A1 2 A2
20 A2 20 A2
15; 15;
2 A12 2 A1 A2 2 A12 2 A1 A2
0.1 Ai 5 i 1, 2 0.1 Ai 5 i 1, 2
With the help of truth, indeterminacy, falsity Now these non-linear programming problems
membership function the neutrosophic goal Model-I,II can be easily solved by an appropriate
programming problem (13) based on geometric mathematical programming to give solution of
aggregation operator can be formulated as multi-objective non-linear programming problem
Model II (12) by generalized neutrosophic goal optimization
Minimize 3 1 1 (14) approach and the results are shown in the table 1 as
follows. Here we get best solution in geometric
2 2 A1 A2 4 21 , aggregation method for objective functions.
1
2 2 A1 A2 4 ,
0.5 0.22
Maximum Maximum
Volume allowable allowable Youngs Aimin and Aimax
Applied Length
density tensile compressive modulus E of cross section
load P L
T C of bars
stress stress
KN KN / m3 m KN / m2 4 2
10 m
KN / m2 KN / m2
Aimin 0.1
20 100 1 20 15 2 107
Aimax 5, i 1, 2