Single Valued Neutrosophic Filters

1
Giorgio Nordo, 2 Arif Mehmood, 3 Said Broumi
1
MIFT - Department of Mathematical and Computer Science, Physical Sciences and Earth Sciences,
Messina University, Italy.
2
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, Riphah International University Sector I-14, Islamabad, Pakistan
3
Laboratory of Information Processing, Faculty of Science, University Hassan II, Casablanca, Morocco
[email protected] , [email protected] , [email protected]

Abstract
In this paper we give a comprehensive presentation of the notions of filter base, filter and ultrafilter on single
valued neutrosophic set and we investigate some of their properties and relationships. More precisely, we
discuss properties related to filter completion, the image of neutrosophic filter base by a neutrosophic induced
mapping and the infimum and supremum of two neutrosophic filter bases.
Keywords: neutrosophic set, single valued neutrosphic set, neutrosophic induced mapping, single valued
neutrosophic filter, neutrosophic completion, single valued neutrosophic ultrafilter.

1 Introduction
The notion of neutrosophic set was introduced in 1999 by Smarandache [20] as a generalization of both the
notions of fuzzy set introduced by Zadeh in 1965 [22] and intuitionistic fuzzy set introduced by Atanassov in
1983 [2].
In 2012, Salama and Alblowi [17] introduced the notion of neutrosophic topological space which gen-
eralizes both fuzzy topological spaces given by Chang [8] and that of intuitionistic fuzzy topological spaces
given by Coker [9]. Further contributions to Neutrosophic Sets Theory, which also involve many fields of
theoretical and applied mathematics were recently given by numerous authors (see, for example, [6], [3], [4],
[15], [1], [13], [14] and [16]). In particular, in [18] Salama and Alagamy introduced and studied the notion of
neutrosophic filter and they gave some applications to neutrosophic topological space.
In General Topology, filter bases, filters and ultrafilters are widely known notions and very popular tools
for proving many properties and characterizations (see, for example [5, 7, 10]).
Rather surprisingly, despite the fact that the class of single valued neutrosophic sets, is more versatile and
has a particular aptitude for application purposes and resolution of practical real-world problems than that of
neutrosophic sets, the authors of this article were not able to find any generalizations of such notions respect
on single valued neutrosophic sets, in known scientific literature.
In this paper, we introduce the notions of filter base, filter and ultrafilter on single valued neutrosophic sets,
and we prove some of their fundamental properties and relationships which may be useful for further studies
and applications in the class of single valued neutrosophic topological spaces.

2 Preliminaries
In this section we present some basic definitions and results on neutrosophic sets and suitably exemplify them.
Terms and undefined concepts are used as in [10] and [11].
The original definition of neutrosophic set, given in 1999 by Smarandache [20], refers to the interval
]0− , 1+ [ of the nonstandard real numbers and although it is consistent from a philosophical point of view,
unfortunately, it is not suitable to be used for approaching real-world problems. For such a reason, in 2010,
the same author, jointly with Wang, Zhang and Sunderraman [21], also introduced the notion of single valued
neutrosophic set which, referring instead to the [0, 1] unit range of the usual R set of real numbers, can be
usefully used in scientific and engineering applications.
Notation 2.1. Let U be a set, I = [0, 1] be the unit interval of the real numbers, for every r ∈ I, with r we
denote the constant mapping r : U → I that, for every u ∈ U is defined by r(u) = r.
For every family {fi }i∈I of mappings fi : U → I, we denote by:

• Vi∈I fi the infimum mapping i∈I fi : U → I that, for every u ∈ U is defined by

V V V

i∈I fi (u) =
i∈I fi (u) = inf {fi (u) : i ∈ I}, and by

1
 U → I that, for every u ∈
W W W

• Wi∈I fi the supremum mapping i∈I fi : U is defined by i∈I fi (u) =
i∈I fi (u) = sup {fi (u) : i ∈ I}.

In particular, if f and g are two mappings from U to I, we denote their infimum (which is the minimum) by
f ∧ g and their supremum (which is the maximum) by f ∨ g.
Definition 2.2. [21] Let U be an initial universe set and A ⊆ U, a single valued neutrosophic set over U
e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i, is a set of the form
(SVN-set for short), denoted by A
e = {(u, µA (u) , σA (u) , ωA (u)) : u ∈ U}
A

where µA : U → I, σA : U → I and ωA : U → I are the membership function, the indeterminacy function

and the nonmembership function of A, respectively. For every u ∈ U, µA (u), σA (u) and ωA (u) are said the
degree of membership, the degree of indeterminacy and the degree of nonmembership of u, respectively.
Since I = [0, 1], it clearly results 0 ≤ µA (u) + σA (u) + ωA (u) ≤ 3, for every u ∈ U.
Notation 2.3. The set of all the single valued neutrosophic sets over a universe U will be denoted by SVN (U).
Definition 2.4. [20, 21] Let A e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i and Be = hU, µB , σB , ωB i be two SVN-sets over the
universe set U, we say that A is a neutrosophic subset (or simply a subset) of B
e ebB
e and we write A e if, for
every u ∈ U, it results µA (u) ≤ µB (u), σA (u) ≤ σB (u) and ωA (u) ≥ ωB (u). We also say that A e is
contained in B or that B contains A.
e e e

It is worth noting that the relation b satisfies the reflexive, antisymmetrical and transitive properties and
so that (SVN (U), b) forms a partial ordered set (poset) but not a totally ordered set (loset) as shown in the
following example.
Example 2.5. Let U = {a, b, c} be a finite universe set and A
e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i , B
e = hU, µB , σB , ωB i be
two SVN-sets on SVN (U) respectively defined by the following tabular representations:

A
e µA σA ωA B
e µB σB ωB
U U
a 0.5 0.3 0.2 a 0.2 0.2 0.2
b 0.6 0.2 0.3 b 0.4 0.1 0.6
c 0.4 0.2 0.7 c 0.8 0.3 0.1

Then A e 6b B e 6b A
e because µA (a) = 0.5 > 0.2 = µB (a) and B e because ωB (c) = 0.1 < 0.7 = ωA (c) and
so the SVN-sets A and B are not comparable.
e e

Definition 2.6. [20, 21] Let Ae = hU, µA , σA , ωA i and B

e = hU, µB , σB , ωB i be two SVN-sets over the
universe set U, we say that A
e is a neutrosophically equal (or simply equal) to B e = B
e and we write A e if
ebB
A e and B e b A.
e

Definition 2.7. [21] The SVN-set hU, 0, 0, 1i is said to be the neutrosophic empty set over U and it is denoted
∅U in case it is necessary to specify the corresponding universe set.
∅, or more precisely by e
by e
Definition 2.8. [21] The SVN-set hU, 1, 1, 0i is said to be the neutrosophic absolute set over U and it is
denoted by U
e.

Evidently, for every A ∈ SVN (U), it results e

∅bAbU
e.

Definition 2.9. [20, 21] Let A e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i be a SVN-set over the universe set U, the neutrosophic
complement (or, simply, the complement) of A, e denoted by A e{ = hU, ωA , 1 − σA , µA i that
e{, is the SVN-set A
is A = {(u, ωA (u) , 1 − σA (u) , µA (u)) : u ∈ U}.
e {

e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i ∈ SVN (U), it results A

 {
It is a simple matter to verify that for every A e{ = A e and,

in particular, that U
e{= e∅ and e∅{ = Ue.

Remark 2.10. It is important to point out that, unlike in the crisp sets theory, the neutrosophic intersection of
a SVN-set with its complement is not always the neutrosophic empty set, and the neutrosophic intersection of
a SVN-set with its complement is not always the neutrosophic absolute set. In fact, if we consider the universe
set U = {a, b} and the SVN-set on SVN (U) defined by the following tabular representations:
2
 A
e µA σA ωA
U
a 0.2 0.6 0.8
b 1 0.5 0

we can easily verify that the neutrosophic intersection, A e{ and the neutrosophic union, A
eeA e{ are,
edA
respectively, given by the following tabular representations:

A e{
eeA µAe
e Ae{ σAe
e Ae{ ωAe
e Ae{
U
a 0.2 0.4 0.8
b 0 0.5 1
and

A e{
edA µAd
e Ae{ σAd
e Ae{ ωAd
e Ae{
U
a 0.8 0.6 0.2
b 1 0.5 0

and so that A e{ 6= e
eeA ∅ and A e{ 6= U
edA e.

Proposition 2.11. [21] For every pair A e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i and Be = hU, µB , σB , ωB i of SVN-sets in
SVN (U), we have that A b B iff B b A .
e e e { e {

ei = hU, µA , σA , ωA i over a common

n o
Definition 2.12. [18] Let A ei be a family of SVN-sets A i i i
i∈I
universe set U, its neutrosophic union (or simply union), denoted by
[
[
Ai , is the neutrosophic set
e
V i∈I
A = hU, µA , σA , ωA i where µA = i∈I µAi , σA = i∈I σAi , and ωA = i∈I ωAi .
e W W

In particular, the neutrosophic union of two single SVN-sets A e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i and B e = hU, µB , σB , ωB i,
denoted by A d B, is the neutrosophic set defined by hU, µA ∨ µB , σA ∨ σB , ωA ∧ ωB i.
e e

ei = hU, µA , σA , ωA i over a common universe

n o
Definition 2.13. [18] Let A ei be a family of SVN-sets A i i i
i∈I
set U, its neutrosophic intersection (or simply intersection), denoted by
\
\
Aei , is the neutrosophic set
i∈I
Ae = hU, µA , σA , ωA i where µA = V V W
i∈I µAi , σA = i∈I σAi , and ωA = i∈I ωAi . In particular, the
neutrosophic intersection of two SVN-sets A e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i and Be = hU, µB , σB , ωB i, denoted by
A e is the neutrosophic set defined by hU, µA ∧ µB , σA ∧ σB , ωA ∨ ωB i.
e e B,

e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i and B
Definition 2.14. [21] Let A e = hU, µB , σB , ωB i be two SVN-sets over U, we say
that A and B are neutrosophically disjoint if A e B = e
e e e e ∅. On the contrary, if A eeB e 6= e
∅ we say that Ae
neutrosophically meets B (or that A and B neutrosophically meet each other).
e e e

Definition 2.15. [18] Let A, B ⊆ SVN (U) be two nonempty families of SVN-sets over U, we say that A
neutrosophically meets B (or that A and B neutrosophically meet each other) if every member of A neutro-
sophically meets any member of B, that is if for every A e ∈ A and every B
e ∈ B it results A
eeB e 6= e
∅.
e = hU, µC , σC , ωC i is a SVN-set over U which neutrosophically meets each member of the
In particular, if C
family A, we say that Ce neutrosophically meets A.

The neutrosophic operators of union, intersection and complement satisfy many relations similar to those
of crisp set theory, which are summarized in the following propositions.
e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i ∈ SVN (U), we have:
Proposition 2.16. [21] For every SVN-set A
(1) A
edA e=A e

(2) A ∅=A
ede e

3
 edU
(3) A e =U
e
(4) A e=A
eeA e

(5) A
eee ∅ =e
∅
(6) A e U = A
e e
e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i and B
Proposition 2.17. [21] For every pair A e = hU, µB , σB , ωB i of SVN-sets in
SVN (U), we have:
(1) A
edB e=B edA e
(2) A e=B
eeB eeA
e
e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i, B
Proposition 2.18. [21] For every triplet A e = hU, µB , σB , ωB i and C
e = hU, µC , σC , ωC i
of SVN-sets in SVN (U), we have:
   
(1) A
ee B eeC e = A eeB e eC e
   
(2) A
ed B e = A
edC edB
e dCe

e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i, B
Proposition 2.19. [21] Let A e = hU, µB , σB , ωB i ∈ SVN (U) be two SVN-sets over
a universe U, then:
(1) AebB e iff A e=A
eeB e
ebB
(2) A e iff A e=B
edB e
e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i and B
Proposition 2.20. [21] For every pair A e = hU, µB , σB , ωB i of SVN-sets in
SVN (U), we have:
 
ed A
(1) A eeB e =A e
 
(2) A
ee A edB e =A e

Proposition 2.21. [21] Let A e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i, B

e = hU, µB , σB , ωB i, C
e = hU, µC , σC , ωC i and D
e =
hU, µD , σD , ωD i be SVN-sets in SVN (U) such that A b B and C b D, then:
e e e e
(1) A
edC ebB edD e
(2) A ebB
eeC eeD
e

ei = hU, µA , σA , ωA i over a common

n o
Proposition 2.22. [21] Let A
be a family of SVN-sets A
ei
i i i
i∈I
universe set U, then, for every i ∈ I, we have that
\
\ [
[
ei b A
A ei b A
ei .
i∈I i∈I

e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i ∈ SVN (U) be a SVN-set and B

n o
Proposition 2.23. [21] Let respectively A ei ⊆
i∈I
SVN (U) be a family of SVN-sets Bei = hU, µB , σB , ωB i over a common universe set U, then we have:
i i i
[[  [
[  
(1) A e
e Bi =
e A e Bi
e e
i∈I i∈I
\\  \
\  
(2) A
ed ei =
B A
edB ei
i∈I i∈I

⊆ SVN (U) be a family of SVN-sets Aei = hU, µA , σA , ωA i over a

n o
Proposition 2.24. [21] Let A ei
i i i

common universe set U, it results:

i∈I

[ { \
e{
[ \
(1) ei =
A A
i∈I i i∈I
\ {
e{
\ [
[
(2) A
ei = A i
i∈I i∈I

Definition 2.25. [12, 19] Let f : U → V be a mapping between two universe sets  U and
 V, and A =
e
hU, µA , σA , ωA i be a SVN-set over U. The neutrosophic image of A e by f , denoted by fe A
e , is the SVN-set
over V defined by:
e = hV, f (µA ) , f (σA ) , f (ωA )i
 
fe A

4
where the mappings f (µA ) : V → I, f (σA ) : V → I and f (ωA ) : V → I are defined respectively by:

 inf µA (u) if f −1 ({v}) 6= ∅
u∈f −1 ({v})
f (µA ) (v) = ,
0 otherwise


 inf σA (u) if f −1 ({v}) 6= ∅
u∈f −1 ({v})
f (σA ) (v) = ,
0 otherwise


 sup ωA (u) if f −1 ({v}) 6= ∅
f (ωA ) (v) = u∈f −1 ({v})

1 otherwise


for every v ∈ V.
Definition 2.26. [12, 19] Let f : U → V be a mapping between two universe sets U and V, and  B =
e
hV, µB , σB , ωB i be a SVN-set over V. The neutrosophic inverse image of B e by f , denoted by fe−1 B
e , is
the SVN-set over U defined by:

e = U, f −1 (µB ) , f −1 (σB ) , f −1 (ωB )

 

fe−1 B


where the mappings f −1 (µB ) : U → I, f −1 (σB ) : U → I and f −1 (ωB ) : U → I are defined respectively
by:
f −1 (µB ) (u) = µB (f (u)) ,

f −1 (σB ) (u) = σB (f (u)) ,

f −1 (ωB ) (u) = ωB (f (u))

for every u ∈ U.
Remark 2.27. Let us note that the notation used to denote neutrosophic images and neutrosophic inverse
images implicitly underlines the fact that they are not real images or counterimages since the mapping f is
defined between the universe sets U and V while the definition refers to the sets SVN (U) and SVN (V)
of all the SVN-sets of that respective universe sets. More properly, this means that we consider a mapping
fe : SVN (U) → SVN (V) induced by f : U → V over the corresponding sets of all SVN-sets.
Example 2.28. Let U = {a, b, c} and V = {α, β, γ, δ} be two finite universe sets, f : U → V be a mapping
e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i on SVN (U) and
defined by f (a) = f (c) = β and f (b) = α. Let us consider a SVN-set A
a SVN-set B = hU, µB , σB , ωB i on SVN (V) respectively defined by the following tabular representations:
e

A
e µA σA ωA B
e µB σB ωB
U V
a 0.5 0.3 0.2 α 0.1 0.7 0.9
b 0.6 0.2 0.3 β 0.5 0.3 0.1
c 0.4 0.2 0.7 γ 0.8 0.4 0.2
δ 0.4 0.6 0.8

e = hV, f (µA ) , f (σA ) , f (ωA )i of A

 
Then the neutrosophic image fe A e by f and the neutrosophic inverse
e = U, f −1 (µB ) , f −1 (σB ) , f −1 (ωB ) of B
 

image fe−1 B

e by f are given by:

 
fe A
e f (µA ) f (σA ) f (ωA )
V
α 0.6 0.2 0.3
β 0.4 0.2 0.7
γ 0 0 1
δ 0 0 1

5
and:

 
fe−1 B
e f −1 (µB ) f −1 (σB ) f −1 (ωB )
U
a 0.5 0.3 0.1
b 0.1 0.7 0.9
c 0.5 0.3 0.1
respectively.
Proposition 2.29. [19] Let f : U → V be a mapping between two universe sets U and V, A e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i
be a SVN-set over U and Be = hV, µB , σB , ωB i be a SVN-set over V, then the following hold:
 
(1) fe e∅U = e ∅V
 
(2) fe−1 e∅V = e ∅U

(3) fe−1 Ve =U
 
e
  
(4) Ae b fe−1 fe A e and the identity holds if fe is injective
  
(5) fe fe−1 B e bBe and the identity holds if fe is surjective
   
(6) fe−1 B e { = fe−1 Be {

Proposition 2.30. [19] Let f : U → V be a mapping between two universe sets U and V, A ei = hU, µA , σA , ωA i
(with i = 1, 2) be SVN-sets over U and Bi = hV, µBi , σBi , ωBi i (with i = 1, 2) be SVN-sets over V, then the
i i i
e
following hold:
   
e1 b A
(1) if A e2 then fe Ae1 b fe Ae2
   
e1 b B
(2) if B e2 then fe−1 Be1 b fe−1 B e2

Proposition 2.31. [19] Let f : U → V be a mapping between two universe sets U and V, A
n o
ei be a family
i∈I
ei = hU, µA , σA , ωA i over U and B ei = hV, µB , σB , ωB i
n o
of SVN-sets A i i i
ei be a family of SVN-sets B i i i

over V , then the following hold:

i∈I

[
[  [ [  
(1) fe Aei = fe Aei
i∈I i∈I
\
\  \ \  
(2) fe Aei b fe Aei and the identity holds if fe is injective
i∈I i∈I
[  [  
(3) fe−1
[ [
Aei = fe−1 A ei
i∈I i∈I
\  \  
(4) fe−1 fe−1 A
\ \
Aei = ei
i∈I i∈I

3 Single Valued Neutrosophic Filters

In [18], A.A. Salama and H. Alagamy introduced the notion of filter on neutrosophic set. That study, unfortu-
nately, is rather incomplete and certainly not exhaustive because it does not cover the neutrosophic equivalent
of many fundamental notions and properties such as those concerning the lower or upper bound of two filter
bases, the proof of the ultrafilter’s existence, etc. For this reason, together with the fact that – as already men-
tioned – the class of the single valued neutrosophic sets lends itself with greater ductility to resolution of real
life problems and applications, we give here a comprehensive presentation about theory of filters on SVN-sets
which includes new notions and properties that are not present in that article.
Definition 3.1. Let A ⊆ SVN (U) be a nonempty family of SVN-sets over the universe set U, we say
that F is a single valued neutrosophic filter subbase (SVN-filter subbase for short, or simply a filter sub-
base) on SVN (U) if it has the finite intersection property, i.e. if for every A fn ∈ A (with A
f1 , . . . A ei =
hU, µAi , σAi , ωAi i for every i = 1, . . . n, and n ∈ N ), it results
∗
\n
\
Ai 6= ∅.
e e
i=1

6
Definition 3.2. A nonempty family F ⊆ SVN (U) of SVN-sets over the universe set U is single valued
neutrosophic filter base (SVN-filter base for short, or simply a filter base) on SVN (U) if the following two
conditions hold:
∅∈
(i) e /F
e ∈ F there exists some H
(ii) for every Fe , G e b Fe e G.
e ∈ F such that H e

Definition 3.3. A nonempty family F ⊆ SVN (U) of SVN-sets over the universe set U is single valued
neutrosophic filter (SVN-filter for short or simply a filter) on SVN (U) if:
(i) F is a SVN-filter base, and
(ii) for every Fe = hU, µF , σF , ωF i ∈ F and every A
e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i ∈ SVN (U) such that Fe b A
e it
e ∈ F.
follows that A
An equivalent definition of SVN-filter is given by the following proposition.
Proposition 3.4. A nonempty family F ⊆ SVN (U) of SVN-sets over the universe set U is a SVN-filter on
SVN (U) if and only if the following three conditions hold:
∅∈
(i) e /F
e ∈ F, it follows that Fe e G
(ii) for every Fe, G e∈F
(iii) for every Fe ∈ F and every A e ∈ SVN (U) such that Fe b A e ∈ F.
e we have that A

Proof. Let F be a SVN-filter over U. Evidently, conditions (i) and (iii) are satisfied. Let Fe, G e ∈ F. By
condition (ii) of the definition of SVN-filter base, there exists some H ∈ F such that H b F e G
e e e e and so, by
the peculiar condition of SVN-filter, it also follows that F e G ∈ F.
e e
Conversely, if F is a nonempty family of SVN-sets over the universe set U satisfying conditions (i), (ii)
and (iii), it is enough to note that (ii) implies condition (ii) of Definition 3.2 and so that F is SVN-filter over
U.
It is a simple routine to show that the condition (ii) of the Proposition 3.4 can be generalized to any finite
neutrosophic intersection as it is pointed out in the following corollary.
Corollary 3.5. A nonempty family F ⊆ SVN (U) of SVN-sets over the universe set U is a SVN-filter on
SVN (U) if and only if the following three conditions hold:
∅∈
(i) e /F
\
\
(ii) for every Fe1 , . . . Fen ∈ F, it follows that Fei ∈ F
i∈I
e ∈ SVN (U) such that Fe b A
(iii) for every Fe ∈ F and every A e ∈ F.
e we have that A

Remark 3.6. Evidently every SVN-filter is a SVN-filter base and every SVN-filter base is a SVN-filter sub-
base. It is also trivial to note that every SVN-filter on SVN (U) contains U.

Example 3.7. Let U = {a, b, c} be a finite universe set and let F = Fe, G, e U e ⊆ SVN (U) be a set
n o
e H,
of the SVN-sets Fe = hU, µF , σF , ωF i , G e = hU, µG , σG , ωG i , H
e = hU, µH , σH , ωH i and U
e = hU, 1, 1, 0i
respectively defined by the following tabular representations:

Fe µF σF ωF G
e µG σG ωG
U U
a 0.4 0.3 0.2 a 0.7 0.1 0.3
b 0.8 0.2 0.1 b 0.9 0.2 0.2
c 0.6 0.5 0.4 c 0.2 0.6 0.5

H
e µH σH ωH Ue µU σU ωU
U U
a 0 0.4 0.8 a 1 1 0
b 0.5 0.3 0.6 b 1 1 0
c 0.1 0.8 0.5 c 1 1 0

7
It is easy to check that F is a SVN-filter base on SVN (U). However, by using Proposition 3.4, we have that
F is not a SVN-filter since, for example, the neutrosophic intersection W
f = Fe e G e ∈ F computated
e of Fe, G
as shown in the following tabular representation:

W
f µW σW ωW
U
a 0.4 0.3 0.3
b 0.8 0.2 0.2
c 0.2 0.6 0.5
is a SVN-set over U which does not belong to the family F.
Notation 3.8. The set of all the single valued neutrosophic filters over the universe set U will be denoted by
F(U).

Definition 3.9. Let F and G be two SVN-filter bases on SVN (U), we say that G is finer than F if F ⊆ G.
We also say that F is coarser than G.
Let us note that the set F(U) equipped with the finess relation ⊆ forms a poset although it is not a loset.
Proposition 3.10. Let S be a SVN-filter subbase on SVN (U) and let
( n )
fi = hU, µA , σA , ωA i ∈ S, n ∈ N
\
∗ ∗
\
S = Afi : A
i i i
i=1

be the set of all finite neutrosophic intersections of S. Then S ∗ is a SVN-filter base on SVN (U) containing S,
i.e. S ⊆ S ∗ .
Proof. Let S be a SVN-filter subbase over U. Since, by Definition 3.1, S has the finite intersection property,
it is evident that S ∗ satisfies the condition (i) of Definition 3.2. Furthermore, for every A,
e Be ∈ S ∗ , there exist
some m, n ∈ N , Ai = hU, µAi , σAi , ωAi i ∈ S (with i = 1, . . . m) and B
∗ f fj = U, µB , σB , ωB ∈ S


j j j
\m
\ \\n
(with j = 1, . . . n) such that A e= A
fi and B e = fi and so, by definition of S ∗ , it is clear that
B
i=1 j=1
AeeB e ∈ S ∗ . Thus, S ∗ also satisfies condition (ii) of Definition 3.2 and it is a SVN-filter base. Finally,
e ∈ S, since by Proposition 2.16 (4) it results A
for every A eeA e = A,e we have that A e ∈ S ∗ and hence that
∗
S⊆S .

Definition 3.11. Let S be a SVN-filter subbase on SVN (U) , the SVN-filter base S ∗ defined in the proposition
above is called the neutrosophic filter base generated by its neutrosophic filter subbase S.
Proposition 3.12. Let F be a SVN-filter base on SVN (U) and let

e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i ∈ SVN (U) : ∃Fe = hU, µF , σF , ωF i ∈ F, Fe b A

n o
hFi = A e

be the set of all neutrosophic supersets of members of F, then hFi is a SVN-filter on SVN (U) containing F,
i.e. F ⊆ hFi.
Proof. Let F be a SVN-filter base over U. Evidently, every member of hFi is nonempty and for every
A,
e B e ∈ F such that Fe b A
e ∈ hFi, there exist some Fe, G e and Ge b B.
e So, by Proposition 2.21 (2), it follows
e e b
that F e G A e B and, by condition (ii) of Definition 3.2, we have that there exists some H
e e e ∈ F such that
e b e e e b
H F e G which implies that H A e B and hence that A e B ∈ hFi. Furthermore, for every A
e e e e e ∈ hFi and
B ∈ SVN (U) such that A b B, we have that there exists some F ∈ F such that F b A and, consequently,
e e e e e e
Fe b B e which means that B e ∈ hFi. Thus, hFi satisfies all the conditions of Proposition 3.4 and so it is a
SVN-filter on SVN (U). Furthemore, we have that F ⊆ hF i since it is clear that for every Ae ∈ F, it results
A b A and hence A ∈ hFi.
e e e

Definition 3.13. Let F be a SVN-filter base on SVN (U), the SVN-filter hFi defined in the proposition above
is called the neutrosophic filter completion of F. Additionally, we say that F is a neutrosophic filter base for
the SVN-filter hFi.

8
Proposition 3.14. If F and G are two SVN-filter bases on SVN (U) such that F ⊆ G then hFi ⊆ hGi.
e ∈ hFi we have that there exists some Fe ∈ F such that Fe b A
Proof. In fact, for every A e and since F ⊆ G it
also follows that F ∈ G and hence that A ∈ hGi.
e e

Definition 3.15. Let F and G be two SVN-filter bases on SVN (U). We say that F and G are equivalent if
they are both neutrosophic filter base for the same SVN-filter, that is if hFi = hGi.

Remark 3.16. It is a simple matter to verify that:

(1) if S is a SVN-filter base on SVN (U) then S ∗ = S,
(2) if F is a SVN-filter on SVN (U) then F ∗ = F and hFi = F.

Proposition 3.17. If S is a SVN-filter subbase on SVN (U) then hS ∗ i is the coarsest SVN-filter on SVN (U)
containing S, i.e. such that:
(i) S ⊆ hS ∗ i, and
(ii) for every SVN-filter H on SVN (U) such that S ⊆ H it follows that hS ∗ i ⊆ H.
Proof. Let S be a SVN-filter subbase over U. Condition (i) is trivially verified since by Propositions 3.10 and
3.12, we immediately have that S ⊆ S ∗ ⊆ hS ∗ i. Now, suppose that H is a SVN-filter on SVN (U) such that
\n
\
S ⊆ H and let A e ∈ hS ∗ i. Then, for some n ∈ N∗ , there exist B en ∈ S such that
e1 , . . . B ei b A.
B e Since
i=1 \
\n
S ⊆ H, it follows that every B ei ∈ H (for i = 1, . . . n) and, by Corollary 3.5, we obtain that ei ∈ H
B
i=1
e ∈ H which proves condition (ii) and concludes our proof.
and therefore that A
Definition 3.18. Let S be a SVN-filter subbase on SVN (U), the SVN-filter hS ∗ i defined in the proposition
above is called the neutrosophic filter generated by its neutrosophic filter subbase S.
e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i is a nonempty SVN-set over the universe set U, the SVN-filter
In particular, if A n o
hS ∗ i generated by the singleton S = A e , being the coarser (smallest) SVN-set containing S, coincides
D E
e is denoted simply with A
with the family of all single valued neutrosophic superset of A, e and is called the
SVN-principal filter generated by A.e

Proposition 3.19. If F is a finite SVN-filter base on SVN (U), then the neutrosophic filter completion hFi is
a SVN-principal filter over U.

Proof. Let F = Fe1 , . . . Fen (with Fei = hU, µFi , σFi , ωFi i, i = 1, . . . n) be a finite SVN-filter base and let
n o

\n
\ n o
Ge= Fei . We will show that G = G e is an equivalent SVN-filter base for the SVN-filter hFi. In fact,
i=1
since F is a SVN-filter base, by Remark 3.16 (1), we have that G e ∈ F ∗ = F. Thus G ⊆ F and by Proposition
3.14 it follows that hGi ⊆ hFi. On the other hand, for every A e ∈ hFi, we have that there exists some
\n
\
j = 1, . . . n such that Fj b A and since by Proposition 2.22 we know that G
e e e= Fei b Fej , it follows that
i=1 D E
GebA e and so that A e ∈ hGi. This proves that hFi ⊆ hGi and consequently that hFi = hGi = G e , i.e. that
hFi is a SVN-principal filter generated by G. e

Proposition 3.20. Let F and G be two SVN-filter bases on SVN (U) and let

e : Fe = hU, µF , σF , ωF i ∈ F, G
e = hU, µG , σG , ωG i ∈ G
n o
F ∧ G = Fe d G

be the set of all neutrosophic unions of the members of F and G, then F ∧ G is a SVN-filter base on SVN (U).
Additionally, if F and G are SVN-filter over U then F ∧ G is a SVN-filter on SVN (U) which is coarser than
both F and G, i.e. F ∧ G ⊆ F and F ∧ G ⊆ G.

Proof. If F and G are two SVN-filter bases on SVN (U), for every Fe ∈ F and G e ∈ G, it is evident that
F d G 6= ∅ and so that F ∧ G verifies the condition (i) of Definition 3.2. Moreover, for every A
e e e e1 , Ae2 ∈ F ∧ G,
we have that there exist some F1 , F2 ∈ F and G1 , G2 ∈ G such that A1 = F1 d G1 and A2 = F2 d G
e e e e e e e e e e 2 . Since
F and G are SVN-filter bases, there exist F3 ∈ F and G3 ∈ G such that F3 F
e e e b 1 e F2 and
e e e b
 G3 G1 eG2 .
e e
So, Fe3 d Ge 3 ∈ F ∧ G and, by using Proposition 2.23, it results Fe3 d G e 3 b Fe1 e Fe2 d G e1 e G e2 =

9
         
Fe1 d Ge1 e G
e 2 e Fe2 d Ge1 e G
e2 b Fe1 d G e2 = A
e 1 e Fe2 d G e2 and this means that F ∧ G
e1 e A
also verifies condition (ii) of Definition 3.2 and hence that it is a SVN-filter base on SVN (U).
Now, suppose that F and G are are SVN-filters and let Fe ∈ F, G e ∈ G and A e ∈ SVN (U) such that Fe d G
e b A.
e
b e e b
Since F is a SVN-filter and F F d G A, we have that A ∈ F. Analogously, by the fact that G is a SVN-
e e e
e b Fe d G
filter and G e b A, e we have that A e ∈ G. Thus Ae=A edA e ∈ F ∧ G and this proves that F ∧ G is a
SVN-filter over U.
In such a situation, for every Fe d G e ∈ F ∧ G, with Fe ∈ F and G e ∈ G, being Fe b Fe d G,
e we have that
F d G ∈ F and so that F ∧ G ⊆ F. In a similar way, one can also proves that F ∧ G ⊆ G.
e e

Proposition 3.21. Let F and G be two SVN-filter bases on SVN (U) such that F nuetrosophically meets G
and let
e : Fe = hU, µF , σF , ωF i ∈ F, G
e = hU, µG , σG , ωG i ∈ G
n o
F ∨ G = Fe e G

be the set of all neutrosophic intersections of the members of F and G, then F ∨ G is a SVN-filter base on
SVN (U).
Additionally, if F and G are SVN-filters over U then F ∨ G is a SVN-filter on SVN (U) which is finer than
both F and G, i.e. F ⊆ F ∨ G and G ⊆ F ∨ G.
Proof. Since F neutrosophically meets G, it is clear that e∅ ∈ / F ∨ G, i.e. that F ∨ G verifies the condition
(i) of Definition 3.2. Moreover, for every A e2 ∈ F ∨ G, we have that there exist some Fe1 , Fe2 ∈ F and
e1 , A
G e 2 ∈ G such that A
e1 , G e1 = Fe1 e Ge 1 and Ae2 = Fe2 e Ge 2 . Since F and G are SVN-filter bases, there exist
F3 ∈ F and
e
 G3 ∈ G such
e e b
 that F3  F1 e F2 and
e e
 G3 b G1 e
e e
 G2 . So, F3 e G3 ∈ F ∨ G and it results
e e e
F3 e G3 b F1 e F2 e G1 e G2 = F1 e G1 e F2 e G2 = A1 e A2 and this means that F ∨ G also
e e e e e e e e e e e e
verifies the condition (ii) of Definition 3.2 is verified and hence that it is a SVN-filter base on SVN (U).
Now, suppose that  F andG are SVN-filters and let F ∈ F, G ∈ G and A ∈ SVN (U) such that F e G b A.
e e e e e e
Since Fe = Fe d Fe e G e b Fe d A e and F is a SVN-filter, we have that Fe d A e ∈ F. In a similar way, since
   
GebG edA e and G is a SVN-filter, it follows that G edA e ∈ G and hence that Fe d A e e G edA e ∈ F ∨ G.
     
By Proposition 2.23 (2) and Proposition 2.19 (2) we have that Fe d A e e G edA e = Fe e G e dA e=A e and
so that Ae ∈ F ∨ G which proves that F ∨ G is a SVN-filter over U.
In such a situation, for every Fe ∈ F and for any fixed G e ∈ G, we have that Fe e G e b Fe with Fe e Ge ∈F ∨G
and so that also F ∈ F ∨ G which proves that F ⊆ F ∨ G. In a similar way, one can also proves that
e
G ⊆ F ∨ G.
Proposition 3.22. Let F be a SVN-filter base on SVN (nU) and Ae = hU, µA , σA , ωA i be a SVN-set over U
o
which neutrosophically meets F, then the set F ∨ A
e = Fe e Ae : Fe ∈ F of all neutrosophic intersections
e with the members of F is a SVN-filter base over U. Additionally, if F is a SVN-filter then F ∨ A
of A e is a
SVN-filter on SVN (U) which is finer than F, i.e. F ⊆ F ∨ A.
e

Proof. Since by hypothesis F neutrosophically meets A e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i it is evident that e∅ ∈/ F ∨ A. e

Moreover, for every G e2 ∈ F ∨ A
e1 , G e there exist Fe1 , Fe2 ∈ F such that G
e 1 = Fe1 e A e and Ge 2 = Fe2 e A.
e Since
F is a SVN-filter base, there exists some Fe3 ∈ F such that such that Fe3 b Fe1 e Fe2 . So, let G e 3 = Fe3 e A,
e we
e3 ∈ F ∨ A
note that G e3 b G
e and it results G e1 e Ge 2 which proves that F ∨ A e is a SVN-filter base on SVN (U).
Now, suppose that F is aSVN-filter  over U and let F ∈ F and B ∈ SVN (U) such that F e A b B, with
e e e e e
Be b A.e Since Fe = Fe d Fe e A e b Fe d B e and F is a SVN-filter, we have that Fe d B e ∈ F and hence that
 
Fe d B
e eA e ∈ F ∨ A. e Moreover, by Proposition 2.23 (2) and Proposition 2.19 (2), B ebA e and Fe e AebB e
       
imply that Fe d B e eA e = Fe e A e d B eeA e = Fe e A e dB e=B e and hence that B e ∈ F ∨A e which
proves that F ∨ A e is a SVN-filter over U.
In such a situation, for every Fe ∈ F, we have that Fe e A e∈ F ∨A e and since Fe e A e b Fe and F ∨ A e is a
SVN-filter, it follows that also F ∈ F ∨ A and hence that F ⊆ F ∨ A.
e e e

Proposition 3.23. Let f : U → V be a mapping

n between
  two universe sets U and V and let F be a SVN-filter
base on SVN (U). Then, the family f (F) = f F : F ∈ F of all neutrosophic images on SVN (U) by
o
e e e e
the mapping f is a neutrosophic filter base on SVN (V).

10
Proof. Let us consider a mapping f : U → V and a SVN-filter  F over U. Evidently, for every A ∈ F,
 base
e
being A ∅U , by Proposition 2.29 (1), we also have that fe Fe 6= e
e 6= e ∅V and this means that fe(F) satisfies
the condition (i) of for every G e 2 ∈ fe(F), there are some Fe1 , Fe2 ∈ F such
e1 , G
 Definition 3.2. Moreover,

e 1 = fe Fe1 and G
that G e 2 = fe Fe2 . Since F is a SVN-filter base, there exists some Fe3 ∈ F such that
 
Fe3 b Fe1 e Fe2 . Hence, said G e 3 = fe Fe3 , we have that G e 3 ∈ fe(F), while by Proposition 2.30 (1) and
       
Proposition 2.31 (2), we obtain that Ge 3 = fe Fe3 b fe Fe1 e Fe2 b fe Fe1 e fe Fe2 = G e1 e G e 2 . This
shows that fe(F) satisfies also the condition (ii) of Definition 3.2 and concludes our proof.

4 Single Valued Neutrosophic Ultrafilters

In this section we consider the class of SVN-ultrafilters, first proving that it is not empty and then establishing
some characterizations and properties that we think may be useful for further investigations.
Definition 4.1. Let U be a SVN-filter base on SVN (U), we say that it is a SVN-ultrafilter if it is maximal in
the partial ordered set (F(U), ⊆) of all SVN-filters over U, that is if there is no SVN-filter on SVN (U) strictly
finer than U, or, equivalently, if any other SVN-filter containing U coincides with U.
Proposition 4.2. Every SVN-filter base on SVN (U) is contained in some SVN-ultrafilter over U.
Proof. Let F be a SVN-filter base over U and let us consider the set S = {G ∈ F(U) : F ⊆ G} of all SVN-
filters on SVN (U) containing F. Obviously S is a nonempty
S subset of the poset (F(U), ⊆) because hFi ∈ S.
Now, let C be a nonempty chain of S and define M = G∈C G as the union of all SVN-filters of C. Now, we
have that M is a SVN-filter over U because it satisfies all the conditions of Definitions 3.3 and 3.2, that is:
e ∈ M, we have that there exists some G ∈ C such that G
(i) For every G e ∈ G and since G is a SVN-filter,
e 6= ∅.
we immediately have that G e
(ii) For every G e 2 ∈ M, there are some G1 , G2 ∈ C such that G
e1 , G e 1 ∈ G1 and Ge 2 ∈ G2 . Since C is a chain,
i.e. a totally ordered subset of (S, ⊆), G1 and G2 must be comparable and, without loss of generality, we
can suppose that G1 ⊆ G2 . Thus, G e 2 ∈ G2 and since G2 is a SVN-filter, there exists some G
e1 , G
S
e 3 ∈ G2
b
such that G3 G1 e G2 with G3 ∈ G2 ⊆ G∈C G = M.
e e e e

(iii) For every Ge ∈ M, and A e ∈ SVN (U) such that G e b A,e there exists some G ∈ C such that G
e ∈ G and
S
since G is a SVN-filter, we immediately have that also A ∈ G and hence that A ∈ G ⊆ G∈C G = M.
e e
S
Moreover, being F ⊆ G, for every G ∈ C, we have that F ⊆ G∈C G = M and so that M ∈ S is an upper
bound for C. Hence, by the Zorn’s Lemma (see [11]), it follows that (S, ⊆) has a maximal element, that is a
SVN-ultrafilter U containing F.
Proposition 4.3. Let U be a SVN-filter base on SVN (U). Then U is a SVN-ultrafilter over U if and only if
e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i ∈ SVN (U) which neutrosophically meets U we have that A
for every A e ∈ U.

Proof. Suppose that U is a SVN-ultrafilter and consider a SVN-set A e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i ∈ SVN (U) which
neutrosophically meets U, By Proposition 3.22, we have that U ∨ A is a SVN-filter such that U ⊆ U ∨ A
e e but,
being U a SVN-ultrafilter, it must necessarily follow that U ∨ A = U and so that A ∈ U.
e e
Conversely, suppose that every SVN-set which neutrosophically meets the SVN-filter base U belongs to U. In
order to prove first that U is a SVN-filter over U, let Ue ∈ U and A e ∈ SVN (U) such that U e b A.
e We claim
that A meets U. In fact, for each V ∈ U, since U is a SVN-filter base, we have that there exist some W
e e f∈U
such that W b U e V b U b A and, by Proposition 2.21 (2), we have that W e V b A e V . On the other
f e e e e f e e e
hand, being also WfbU e e Ve b Ve , by Proposition 2.19 (1), we have W
f e Ve = W
f and hence that WfbA e e Ve ,
with W ∈ U. Thus, by Definition 3.2, it follows that A e V 6= ∅ and, by hypothesis, we obtain that A ∈ U,
f e e e e
which proves that U is a SVN-filter on SVN (U).
Moreover, in order to prove that U is SVN-ultrafilter over U, suppose, by contradiction, that there is some
SVN-filter M over U such that U ⊂ M and so that there exists some M f ∈ M such that M f∈/ U. Hence, by
hypothesis, we have that M f does not meet U, i.e. that there exists some U e ∈ U such that U e eMf=e ∅ but,
being M ∈ M and U ∈ U ⊂ M, this contradicts the fact that M is a SVN-filter and concludes our proof.
f e

Corollary 4.4. If U is a SVN-ultraffilter on SVN (U), then for every A

e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i ∈ SVN (U) it
e e {
results A ∈ U or A ∈ U.

11
Proof. Let A e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i ∈ SVN (U) an suppose, by contradiction, that A e∈/ U and A e{ ∈
/ U. By
Proposition 4.3, we should have that neither A e does not neutrosophically meet U nor A e{ does not neutrosoph-
ically meet U, i.e. that there are some U e2 ∈ U such that U
e1 , U e1 e Ae=e ∅ and U e2 e Ae{ = e ∅. Since U is a
SVN-filter base, it follows that there exists some U3 ∈ U such that U3 b U1 e U2 . Hence, by Proposition 2.22,
e e e e
we have that Ue3 b U e1 and Ue3 b Ue2 and, by Proposition 2.21 (2), it also follows that Ue3 e AebU e1 e Ae and
{
e bU { e = ∅ and U {
U   = ∅. Thus, by Propositions
e3 e A e2 e A
e . Hence, Ue3 e A e e3 e A
e e 2.16 (4), 2.20 and 2.23 (1),we
      
have that U3 = U3 e U3 = U3 d U3 e A e U3 d U3 e A
e e e e e e e e e { = U3 e U3 e A d U
e e e e{ =
e3 e A
 
Ue3 e e ∅ de∅ =e ∅ which is a contradiction to the fact that Ue3 ∈ U and U is a SVN-filter.

Remark 4.5. In the classical filter’s theory on crisp sets, the condition of Corollary 4.4 is a ultrafilters charac-
terization, but in the case of filters on single valued neutrosophic sets the converse does not hold. This is due
to the fact that, as pointed out in Remark 2.10, in general, the neutrosophic intersection of a SVN-set with its
neutrosophic complement is not the neutrosophic empty set, and it can be confirmed by the following example.

Example 4.6. Let U = {a, b, c} be a finite universe set and consider the SVN-principal filter F = A
D E
e =
e U e = hU, µA , σA , ωA i , B
e = hU, µB , σB , ωB i , C
n o
A,
e B,
e C, e generated by A, e where the SVN-sets A e =
hU, µC , σC , ωC i and Ue = hU, 1, 1, 0i are respectively defined by the following tabular representations:

A
e µA σA ωA B
e µB σB ωB
U U
a 0.8 0.4 0 a 0.9 0.5 0
b 0 0.1 0.9 b 0.8 0.6 0.1
b 0 0 1 c 0 0.2 0.3

C
e µC σC ωC Ue µU σU ωU
U U
a 1 0.5 0 a 1 1 0
b 0 0.2 0.8 b 1 1 0
c 0.7 0.6 0.5 c 1 1 0

e is a SVN-ultrafilter on SVN (U).

D E
ebB
After observing that A e b C,
e and A e one can easily check that A
e = hU, µZ , σZ , ωZ i defined by the following tabular representation:
However, if we consider the SVN-set Z

Ze µZ σZ ωZ
U
a 0 0 1
b 0.7 0.3 0.5
c 0.8 0.4 0.6
D E
e nor its complement Ze { belong to A
it is a trivial matter to verify that neither Z e .

5 Conclusions and Perspectives

In this paper we have introduced the notions of SVN-filter base, SVN-filter and SVN-ultrafilter on the set
SVN (U) of all the single valued neutrosophic sets and we have investigated some of their fundamental prop-
erties and relationships concerning, in particular, the SVN-filter and SVN-filter base generated by some neu-
trosophic filter subbase, the neutrosophic filter completion, the principal SVN-filters, the infimum and the
supremum of two SVN-filter bases, the image of a SVN-filter base by a neutrosophic induced mapping be-
tween two universe sets, the existence of SVN-ultrafilters and some their characterizations.
We expect to continue the research on these topics by investigating supplementary features and properties
related to SVN-filters and we hope that this comprehensive study will stimulate further developments in the
theory of Neutrosophic Sets and will provide useful tools to demonstrate in an elegant and concise way new

12
properties for the class of Single Valued Neutrosophic Topological Spaces.

Acknowledgements The authors would like to express their sincere gratitude to the Anonymous Referees for
their valuable suggestions and comments which were precious in improving of the paper.

References
[1] Al-Omeri W., Jafari S. On Generalized Closed Sets and Generalized Pre-Closed Sets in Neutrosophic
Topological Spaces. Mathematics 7 (1), pp. 1-12. 2019.
[2] Atanassov K.T. Intuitionistic Fuzzy Sets. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 20 (1), pp. 87-96, 1986.
[3] Bera T., Mahapatra N.K. Introduction to neutrosophic soft topological spaces, Opsearch (March, 2017),
DOI: 10.1007/s12597-017-0308-7.

[4] Bera T., Mahapatra N.K. On neutrosophic soft topological space. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems 19 (1),
pp. 3-15, 2018.
[5] Bourbaki N. .General Topology. Springer Science and Business Media, 2020.
[6] Broumi S., Talea M., Bakali A., Smarandache F. Single valued neutrosophic graphs. Journal of New
theory 10, pp. 86-101, 2016.
[7] Cartan H. Théorie des filtres. Comptes Rendus de l’Académie des Sciences 205, pp. 595-598, 1937.
[8] Chang C.L. Fuzzy Topological Spaces. Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications 24, pp. 182-
190, 1968.

[9] Coker D. An Introduction to Intuitionistic Fuzzy Topological Spaces. Fuzzy Sets and Systems 88, pp.
81-89, 1997.
[10] Engelking R. General Topology. Berlin: Heldermann Verlag, 1989.
[11] Gemignani M.C. Elementary Topology. New York: Dover Publications Inc., 1990.

[12] Latreche A., Barkat O., Milles S., Ismail F. Single valued neutrosophic mappings defined by single valued
neutrosophic relations with applications. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems 1, pp. 203-220, 2020.
[13] Mehmood A., Nordo G., Zamir M., Park C., Nazia H., Nadeem F., Shamona J. Soft b-separation axioms
in neutrosophic soft topological structures. Annals of Fuzzy Mathematics and Informatics 18, pp. 93–105,
2019.

[14] Mehmood A., Nadeem F., Nordo G., Zamir M., Park C., Kalsoom H., Jabeen S., Khan M.Y. Generalized
neutrosophic separation axioms in neutrosophic soft topological spaces. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems
32 (1), pp. 38–51, 2020.
[15] Parimala M., Karthika M., Smarandache F., Broumi S., On αω-closed sets and itsconnectedness in terms
of neutrosophic topological spaces, International Journal of Neutrosophic Science 2 (2), pp. 82-88, 2020.

[16] Saber Y., Alsharari F., Smarandache F. On Single-Valued Neutrosophic Ideals in Şostak Sense. Symmetry
12 (2):193, 2020.
[17] Salama A.A., Alblowi S.A. Neutrosophic Set and Neutrosophic Topological Spaces. ISOR Journal of
Mathematics 3 (4), pp. 31-35, 2012.

[18] Salama A.A., Alagamy H. Neutrosophic Filters. International Journal of Computer Science Engineering
and Information Technologt Research 3 (1), pp. 307-312, 2013.
[19] Salama A.A., Smarandache F., Kromov V. Neutrosophic Closed Set and Neutrosophic Continuous Func-
tions, Neutrosophic Sets and Systems 4, pp- 4-8, 2014.

[20] Smarandache F. A Unifying Field in Logics. Neutrosophy: Neutrosophic Probability, Set and Logic.
Rehoboth: American Research Press, 1999.

13
[21] Wang H., Smarandache F., Zhang Y.Q., Sunderraman R. Single Valued Neutrosophic Sets. Technical
Sciences and Applied Mathematics, pp. 10-14, 2012.
[22] Zadeh L.A. Fuzzy Sets, Information and Control 8 (3), pp. 338-353, 1965.

14