See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/375371861

Exploring the Algebraic Structures of Q-Complex Neutrosophic Soft Fields

Article in International Journal of Neutrosophic Science · November 2023

DOI: 10.54216/IJNS.220408

CITATIONS READS

0 27

4 authors:

Mamika Ujianita Romdhini Ashraf Al-Quran

University of Mataram King Faisal University
36 PUBLICATIONS 67 CITATIONS 41 PUBLICATIONS 575 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Faisal Al-Sharqi Abdalwali Lutfi

University of Anbar King Faisal University
50 PUBLICATIONS 317 CITATIONS 88 PUBLICATIONS 2,031 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Faisal Al-Sharqi on 05 November 2023.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

International Journal of Neutrosophic Science (IJNS) Vol. 22, No. 04, PP. 93-105, 2023

Exploring the Algebraic Structures of Q-Complex Neutrosophic Soft

Fields
Mamika Ujianita Romdhini1 ∗ , Ashraf Al-Quran 2 , Faisal Al-Sharqi 3 , Mohammad K. Tahat 4 ,
Abdalwali Lutfi5,6,7
1
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Mathematics and Natural Science, Universitas Mataram, Mataram,
83125,Indonesia
2
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, College of Science, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa 31982,
Saudi Arabia
3
Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Education for Pure Sciences, University Of Anbar, Ramadi, Anbar,
Iraq
4
Academic Department, Saudi Petroleum Services Polytechnic,Dammam, Saudi Arabia
5
Department of Accounting, College of Business, King Faisal University, Al-Ahsa 31982, Saudi Arabia
6
MEU Research Unit, Middle East University, Amman, 11831, Jordan
7
Applied Science Research Center, Applied Science Private University, Amman 11931, Jordan
8
College of Engineering, National University of Science and Technology, Dhi Qar, Iraq
Emails: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected],
[email protected]

Abstract

A field is a fundamental algebraic structure that finds extensive applications in algebra and various mathemat-
ical domains. On the other hand, a Q-complex neutrosophic soft set (Q-CNSS) is a unique hybrid model that
combines the characteristics of soft sets and neutrosophic sets within a complex number framework. It utilizes
the effectiveness of Q-set as a powerful tool in the domain of this particular model. In this article, we leverage
this model to define fields under uncertainty. We present the Q-complex neutrosophic soft field (Q-CNSF) and
examine the unique algebraic properties associated with this model. Additionally, we explore the relationships
between Q-CNSF and Q-neutrosophic soft field (Q-NSF). Furthermore, we define the Cartesian product of Q-
CNSFs and delve into the relevant properties. Through this comprehensive exploration, our aim is to enhance
the understanding of Q-CNSFs and their properties, ultimately contributing to the field of algebraic analysis
and its practical applications in handling uncertainty and vagueness.

Kewords: Complex neutrosophic soft set; Q-complex neutrosophic soft set; Q-neutrosophic soft field; Q-
neutrosophic soft set.

1 introduction

In real-life situations, human thinking faces many situations that are fully hidden, uncertain, and impartial.
To translate these positions and to handle the outlined uncertainties, Smarandache1 provided the definition of
a neutrosophic set (NS), since the preserve is not able to handle the outlined issues. On the other hand, one
of the Russian researchers set out to introduce a new mathematical tool called the soft set (SS).2 This set is
distinguished by giving a more accurate description of the data on daily life issues. The NSs and SSs attracted
the attention of researchers around the world to present many research works that have wide applications.

https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220408 93
Received: June 17, 2023 Revised: August 22, 2023 Accepted: October 28, 2023
International Journal of Neutrosophic Science (IJNS) Vol. 22, No. 04, PP. 93-105, 2023

As a combination of SS and NS in several environments, scholars proposed different models with a more pow-
erful ability to process real-life problems. For instance,3, 4 discusses the topic in the context of soft computing,
while6, 7 covers its import to analysis and8, 9 to graph theory, complex analysis,10, 11 and algebraic structures.12
Additionally, Palanikumar et al.13 proposed many methods to solve design-making problems. A multi-criteria
decision-making approach was introduced by Broumi et al.14 when they extended NSs to plithogenic set. Al-
Sharqi et al.15 came up with NSS in matrix form and showed its application to real-life problems. Working on
NSSs Al-Quran et al.16 also presented some studies with some applications. Some researchers17–19 also give
similarity measures between NS-sets and some of their properties and applications.

On the opposite side,since its inception in 1971 with the pioneering work of Rosenfeld,20 the study of fuzzy
abstract algebra has continued to captivate the attention of numerous researchers. Over the years, the academic
landscape has been enriched by the emergence of numerous scholarly papers exploring a wide array of fuzzy
substructures within algebraic systems. Within this extensive body of literature, one particular focus of investi-
gation has been the fundamental algebraic structure known as fields. Extensive research has been conducted by
Malik and Mordeson21 on the subject of fuzzy subfields, where they thoroughly examined their fundamental
properties. Based on this foundation, Mordeson22 delved into the exploration of fuzzy field extensions, verify-
ing the connection between fuzzy sets and finite fields. Anandh and Giri23 conducted an in-depth analysis of
the concept of intuitionistic fuzzy subfields in relation to (T, S)-norms. Bera and Mahapatra,24 investigated the
structural characteristics of neutrosophic soft field. This work was further expanded upon by Abu Qamar et
al.,25 who extended the study to the realm of Q-neutrosophic soft fields. In the complex setting, Gulzar et al.26
extended the discourse on complex fuzzy sets by introducing a novel concept of complex fuzzy subfields. This
advancement involved the incorporation of a second dimension into the membership function of a fuzzy set,
resulting in a significant expansion of the concept and its applications in complex space. Khamis and Ahmad27
introduced a novel structure called the Q-complex intuitionistic fuzzy subfield, which originated from the ex-
isting framework of complex fuzzy subfields. This new model expands the scope of investigation beyond TM
values to include both TM and FM function values.

On the other hand, Ali and Smarandache28 coined the concept of complex neutrosophic set (CNS) as an
extension of neutrosophic sets (NSs) . To further enhance its practicality in solving decision-making problems,
Broumi et al.19 extended the CNS framework by proposing the notion of complex neutrosophic soft sets
(CNSS). Expanding on these advancements, Al-Quran et al.29, 30 took the CNSS framework even further
by introducing the concept of Q-complex neutrosophic soft sets (Q-CNSSs). In this paper, our objective is
twofold. Firstly, we seek to extend the range of Q-NSF beyond the unit interval [0,1] in the real space to the
unit disc in the complex space. Alternatively, we endeavor to incorporate the complex-valued IM function to
the structure of Q-CIFS field. This enhancement will pave the way for the introduction of Q-CNSF as a novel
concept deserving of exploration.

2 Preliminaries

Within this section, we provide an overview of the fundamental principles underlying Q-neutrosophic soft set
(Q-NSS),25 Q-CNSS with their operations, Q-NSF and Q-CIFS field. These essential concepts and operations
serve as the building blocks for our forthcoming analysis in this article.
Definition 2.1. 25 Let Y and Q be two non-empty sets, and let A denote a set of parameters. The Q-NSS
(F, A) in Y is unequivocally defined by the following distinct characteristics:

(F, A) = {< a; ΓF (a) (y, q), ΛF (a) (y, q), ΩF (a) (y, q) >: a ∈ A, y ∈ Y, q ∈ Q}. The resolute functions
ΓF (a) (y, q), ΛF (a) (y, q), and ΩF (a) (y, q), unyieldingly, represent the TM, IM and FM functions, respectively.
Definition 2.2. 29 Consider W and Q as two non-empty sets, and let A represent a set of parameters. We
define a Q-CNSS (H, A) in W as follows.

(H, A) = {< a; TH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (s, q) >: a ∈ A, s ∈ W, q ∈ Q},

where ∀a ∈ A, s ∈ W, q ∈ Q, TH(a) (s, q) = ΓH(a) (s, q)ei2πµH(a) (s,q) , IH(a) (s, q) = ΛH(a) (s, q)ei2πνH(a) (s,q) ,
and FH(a) (s, q) = ΩH(a) (s, q)ei2πωH(a) (s,q) , are, respectively, the complex-valued TM, IM and FM functions.

https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220408 94
Received: June 17, 2023 Revised: August 22, 2023 Accepted: October 28, 2023
International Journal of Neutrosophic Science (IJNS) Vol. 22, No. 04, PP. 93-105, 2023

Definition 2.3. 29 The union of two Q-CNSSs (H, A) and (G, B) in W is a Q-CNSS (M, E), where E = A∪B
and ∀ e ∈ E, ∀ (s, q) ∈ W × Q,

 ΓH(e) (s, q).ei2πµH(e) (s,q) , if e ∈ A − B
TM(e) (s, q) = ΓG(e) (s, q).ei2πµG(e) (s,q) , if e ∈ B − A
(ΓH(e) (s, q) ∨ ΓG(e) (s, q)).ei2π(µH(e) (s,q)∨µG(e) (s,q)) , if e ∈ A ∩ B,



 ΛH(e) (s, q).ei2πνH(e) (s,q) , if e ∈ A − B
IM(e) (s, q) = ΛG(e) (s, q).ei2πνG(e) (s,q) , if e ∈ B − A
(ΛH(e) (s, q) ∧ ΛG(e) (s, q)).ei2π(νH(e) (s,q)∧νG(e) (s,q)) , if e ∈ A ∩ B,



 ΩH(e) (s, q).ei2πωH(e) (s,q) , if e ∈ A − B
FM(e) (s, q) = ΩG(e) (s, q).ei2πωG(e) (s,q) , if e ∈ B − A
(ΩH(e) (s, q) ∧ ΩG(e) (s, q)).ei2π(ωH(e) (s,q)∧ωG(e) (s,q)) , if e ∈ A ∩ B,


Here, ∨ represents the maximum operator and ∧ represents the minimum operator. The union of (H, A) and
(G, B) is denoted as (M, E), i.e., (H, A) ∪ (G, B) = (M, E).
Definition 2.4. 30 The intersection of two Q-CNSSs (H, A) and (G, B) in W is a Q-CNSS (M, E), where
E = A ∩ B and ∀ e ∈ E, ∀ (s, q) ∈ W × Q, the membership degrees of (M, E) are:

TM(e) (s, q) = (ΓH(e) (s, q) ∧ ΓG(e) (s, q)).ei2π(µH(e) (s,q)∧µG(e) (s,q)) ,

IM(e) (s, q) = (ΛH(e) (s, q) ∨ ΛG(e) (s, q)).ei2π(νH(e) (s,q)∨νG(e) (s,q)) ,

FM(e) (s, q) = (ΩH(e) (s, q) ∨ ΩG(e) (s, q)).ei2π(ωH(e) (s,q)∨ωG(e) (s,q)) .

Here, ∨ represents the maximum operator and ∧ represents the minimum operator. The intersection of (H, A)
and (G, B) is denoted as (M, E), i.e., (H, A) ∩ (G, B) = (M, E).

This part unequivocally elucidates the profound connection between Q-CNSS and Q-NSS.
Definition 2.5. 29 Let’s consider the sets W and Q, and suppose (H, A) represents a Q-CNSS in W . The Q-
CNSS (H, A) can be represented by a collection of elements in the form {< a; TH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (s, q) >:
a ∈ A, s ∈ W, q ∈ Q}, where a ∈ A, s ∈ W , and q ∈ Q. In this context, the TM, IM, and FM functions
can be defined as follows: TH(a) (s, q) = ΓH(a) (s, q)ei2πµH(a) (s,q) , IH(a) (s, q) = ΛH(a) (s, q)ei2πνH(a) (s,q) , and
FH(a) (s, q) = ΩH(a) (s, q)ei2πωH(a) (s,q) . Based on this, (H, A) generates two real Q-NSSs in W using the
following formulations:

(1) The Q-NSS (h, A) is defined in the form of {< a; Γh(a) (s, q), Λh(a) (s, q), Ωh(a) (s, q) >: a ∈ A, s ∈
W, q ∈ Q}, where a ∈ A, s ∈ W, and q ∈ Q. Within this context, Γh(a) (s, q), Λh(a) (s, q), and Ωh(a) (s, q) rep-
resent the amplitude terms associated with the complex valued membership functions TH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (s, q),
and FH(a) (s, q), respectively.

(2) The Q-NSS (K, A) is defined in the form of {< a; µK(a) (s, q), νK(a) (s, q), ωK(a) (s, q) >: a ∈ A, s ∈
W, q ∈ Q}, where a ∈ A, s ∈ W, and q ∈ Q. Within this context, µK(a) (s, q), νK(a) (s, q), and ωK(a) (s, q)
represent the phase terms associated with the complex valued membership functions TH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (s, q),
and FH(a) (s, q), respectively.
Definition 2.6. 30 Let’s consider two non-empty sets, W and Q. Suppose we have a Q-CNSS (H, A) in W ,
characterized by complex-valued membership functions defined as:

TH(a) (s, q) = ΓH(a) (s, q)ei2πµH(a) (s,q) , IH(a) (s, q) = ΛH(a) (s, q)ei2πνH(a) (s,q) , FH(a) (s, q) = ΩH(a) (s, q)ei2πωH(a) (s,q) .

https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220408 95
Received: June 17, 2023 Revised: August 22, 2023 Accepted: October 28, 2023
International Journal of Neutrosophic Science (IJNS) Vol. 22, No. 04, PP. 93-105, 2023

Now, for a set (H, A) to be considered a homogeneous Q-CNSS, the following conditions must hold for any
s, t in W and a in A:

(1) ΓH(a) (s, q) ≤ ΓH(a) (t, q) if and only if µH(a) (s, q) ≤ µH(a) (t, q),

(2) ΛH(a) (s, q) ≤ ΛH(a) (t, q) if and only if νH(a) (s, q) ≤ νH(a) (t, q),

(3) ΩH(a) (s, q) ≤ ΩH(a) (t, q) if and only if ωH(a) (s, q) ≤ ωH(a) (t, q),

Definition 2.7. 30 Consider (H, A) and (G, B) as two Q-CNSSs in W , which are characterized by the following
complex-valued membership functions:

For (H, A): TH(a) (s, q) = ΓH(a) (s, q)ei2πµH(a) (s,q) , IH(a) (s, q) = ΛH(a) (s, q)ei2πνH(a) (s,q) and FH(a) (s, q) =
ΩH(a) (s, q).ei2πωH(a) (s,q) .
For (G, B): TG(a) (s, q) = ΓG(a) (s, q)ei2πµG(a) (s,q) , IG(a) (s, q) = ΛG(a) (s, q)ei2πνG(a) (s,q) and FG(a) (s, q) =
ΩG(a) (s, q).ei2πωG(a) (s,q) .

Q-CNSS (H, A) is said to be homogeneous with (G, B) if and only if for all a ∈ A ∩ B, s ∈ W and q ∈ Q, we
have

(1) ΓH(a) (s, q) ≤ ΓG(a) (s, q) if and only if µH(a) (s, q) ≤ µG(a) (s, q),

(2) ΛH(a) (s, q) ≤ ΛG(a) (s, q) if and only if νH(a) (s, q) ≤ νG(a) (s, q),

(3) ΩH(a) (s, q) ≤ ΩG(a) (s, q) if and only if ωH(a) (s, q) ≤ ωG(a) (s, q).
Definition 2.8. 29 Consider a Q-NSS (D, A) over a field (F, +, .) . Then, (D, A) is said to be a Q-NSF if it is
satisfying the following conditions for all m, n ∈ F, q ∈ Q and a ∈ A:

1. ΓD(a) (m+n, q) ≥ min{ΓD(a) (m, q), ΓD(a) (n, q)}, ΛD(a) (m+n, q) ≤ max{ΛD(a) (m, q), ΛD(a) (n, q)},
and ΩD(a) (m + n, q) ≤ max{ΩD(a) (m, q), ΩD(a) (n, q)}.
2. ΓD(a) (−m, q) ≥ ΓD(a) (m, q), ΛD(a) (−m, q) ≤ ΛD(a) (m, q) and ΩD(a) (−m, q) ≤ ΩD(a) (m, q).
3. ΓD(a) (m.n, q) ≥ min{ΓD(a) (m, q), ΓD(a) (n, q)}, ΛD(a) (m.n, q) ≤ max{ΛD(a) (m, q), ΛD(a) (n, q)},
and ΩD(a) (m.n, q) ≤ max{ΩD(a) (m, q), ΩD(a) (n, q)},
4. ΓD(a) (m−1 , q) ≥ ΓD(a) (m, q), ΛD(a) (m−1 , q) ≤ ΛD(a) (m, q) and ΩD(a) (m−1 , q) ≤ ΩD(a) (m, q).
Theorem 2.9. 29 Let’s consider a Q-NSS denoted as (D, A) defined over a field (F, +, ·). In order for (D, A)
to be classified as a Q-NSF, it must satisfy the following conditions for all m, n ∈ F, q ∈ Q, and a ∈ A:

1. ΓD(a) (m−n, q) ≥ min{ΓD(a) (m, q), ΓD(a) (n, q)}, ΛD(a) (m−n, q) ≤ max{ΛD(a) (m, q), ΛD(a) (n, q)},
and ΩD(a) (m − n, q) ≤ max{ΩD(a) (m, q), ΩD(a) (n, q)}.
2. ΓD(a) (m.n−1 , q) ≥ min{ΓD(a) (m, q), ΓD(a) (n, q)}, ΛD(a) (m.n−1 , q) ≤ max{ΛD(a) (m, q), ΛD(a) (n, q)},
and ΩD(a) (m.n−1 , q) ≤ max{ΩD(a) (m, q), ΩD(a) (n, q)},
Definition 2.10. 27 Let (S, A) be a homogeneous Q-complex intuitionistic fuzzy soft set(Q-CIFSS) over a field
(F, +, .). Then (S, A) is said to be Q-CIFS field over (F, +, .), if for all a ∈ A, q ∈ Q and all m, n ∈ F, the
following conditions are fulfilled:

1. TS(a) (−m, q) ≥ TS(a) (m, q),

2. FS(a) (−m, q) ≤ FS(a) (m, q),
3. TS(a) (m.n, q) ≥ min{TS(a) (s, q), TS(a) (t, q)},
4. FS(a) (m.n, q) ≤ max{FS(a) (s, q), FS(a) (t, q)},
5. TS(a) (m + n, q) ≥ min{TS(a) (s, q), TS(a) (t, q)},
6. FS(a) (m + n, q) ≤ max{FS(a) (s, q), FS(a) (t, q)}.
7. TS(a) (m−1 , q) ≥ TS(a) (s, q),
8. FS(a) (m−1 , q) ≤ FS(a) (s, q),

https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220408 96
Received: June 17, 2023 Revised: August 22, 2023 Accepted: October 28, 2023
International Journal of Neutrosophic Science (IJNS) Vol. 22, No. 04, PP. 93-105, 2023

3 Q-Complex Neutrosophic Soft Field

In this section, we introduce and rigorously define the powerful concept of Q-CNSF. We delve into an in-depth
exploration of its various properties, thoroughly examining and analyzing their intricate interconnections.

Definition 3.1. Suppose that (H, A) is a homogeneous Q-CNSS over a field (F, +, .). It is stated that (H, A)
is categorized as a Q-CNSF in (F, +, .) if, for every a ∈ A, q ∈ Q and all s, t ∈ F, the following conditions
are fulfilled:

1. TH(a) (−s, q) ≥ TH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (−s, q) ≤ IH(a) (s, q), and FH(a) (−s, q) ≤ FH(a) (s, q),

2. TH(a) (s.t, q) ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t, q)}, IH(a) (s.t, q) ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t, q)}, and FH(a) (s.t, q) ≤
max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (t, q)},
3. TH(a) (s + t, q) ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t, q)}, IH(a) (s + t, q) ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t, q)}, and
FH(a) (s + t, q) ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (t, q)}.

4. TH(a) (s−1 , q) ≥ TH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (s−1 , q) ≤ IH(a) (s, q), and FH(a) (s−1 , q) ≤ FH(a) (s, q),

Proposition 3.2. Consider (H, A) is a Q-CNSF in (F, +, .). In this context, we establish the following prop-
erties for the additive identity 0F and the multiplicative identity 1F . For all a ∈ A, q ∈ Q and all s ∈ F, we
have:

1. TH(a) (0F , q) ≥ TH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (0F , q) ≤ IH(a) (s, q) and FH(a) (0F , q) ≤ FH(a) (s, q).
2. TH(a) (1F , q) ≥ TH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (1F , q) ≤ IH(a) (s, q) and FH(a) (1F , q) ≤ FH(a) (s, q).
3. TH(a) (0F , q) ≥ TH(a) (1F , q), IH(a) (0F , q) ≤ IH(a) (1F , q) and FH(a) (0F , q) ≤ FH(a) (1F , q).

Proof. For all a ∈ A, q ∈ Q and all s ∈ F, we have:

1. TH(a) (0F , q) = TH(a) (s − s, q) ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (s, q)} = TH(a) (s, q),
IH(a) (0F , q) = IH(a) (s − s, q) ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (s, q)} = IH(a) (s, q),
FH(a) (0F , q) = FH(a) (s − s, q) ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (s, q)} = FH(a) (s, q),
2. TH(a) (1F , q) = TH(a) (s.s−1 , q) ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (s−1 , q)} = TH(a) (s, q),
IH(a) (1F , q) = IH(a) (s.s−1 , q) ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (s, q)} = IH(a) (s, q),
FH(a) (1F , q) = FH(a) (s.s−1 , q) ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (s, q)} = FH(a) (s, q),
3. TH(a) (0F , q) = TH(a) (1F − 1F , q) ≥ min{TH(a) (1F , q), TH(a) (1F , q)} = TH(a) (1F , q),
IH(a) (0F , q) = IH(a) (1F − 1F , q) ≤ max{IH(a) (1F , q), IH(a) (1F , q)} = IH(a) (1F , q),
FH(a) (0F , q) = FH(a) (1F − 1F , q) ≤ max{FH(a) (1F , q), FH(a) (1F , q)} = FH(a) (1F , q),

Definition 3.3. Consider two homogeneous Q-CNSSs denoted as (H, A) and (G, B). It is asserted that (H, A)
is designated as a Q-CNS subfield of (G, B) only when the following conditions are met with absolute cer-
tainty:

1 (H, A) ⊆ (G, B), where ⊆ is a Q-CNS subset.

2 Both (H, A) and (G, B) are Q-CNSFs.

https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220408 97
Received: June 17, 2023 Revised: August 22, 2023 Accepted: October 28, 2023
International Journal of Neutrosophic Science (IJNS) Vol. 22, No. 04, PP. 93-105, 2023

Definition 3.4. Suppose that (H, A) is a homogeneous Q-CNSS over a field (F, +, .). It is stated that (H, A)
is categorized as an anti- Q-CNSF in (F, +, .) if, for every a ∈ A, q ∈ Q and all s, t ∈ F, the following
conditions are fulfilled:

1. TH(a) (−s, q) ≤ TH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (−s, q) ≥ IH(a) (s, q), and FH(a) (−s, q) ≥ FH(a) (s, q),
2. TH(a) (s.t, q) ≤ max{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t, q)}, IH(a) (s.t, q) ≥ min{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t, q)}, and FH(a) (s.t, q) ≥
min{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (t, q)},
3. TH(a) (s + t, q) ≤ max{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t, q)}, IH(a) (s + t, q) ≥ min{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t, q)}, and
FH(a) (s + t, q) ≥ min{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (t, q)}.
4. TH(a) (s−1 , q) ≤ TH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (s−1 , q) ≥ IH(a) (s, q), and FH(a) (s−1 , q) ≥ FH(a) (s, q),

Theorem 3.5. Consider a homogeneous Q-CNSS denoted as (H, A) over a field (F, +, .). It is asserted that
(H, A) can be classified as a Q-CNSF in (F, +, .), if and only if, for every a ∈ A, q ∈ Q, and s , t ∈ F, the
following conditions are satisfied:

1. TH(a) (s − t, q) ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t, q)},

2. IH(a) (s − t, q) ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t, q)},

3. FH(a) (s − t, q) ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (t, q)},
4. TH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t, q)},
5. IH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t, q)},

6. FH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (t, q)}.

Proof. ⇒ Consider that (H, A) is a Q-CNSF in (F, +, .). Then,

TH(a) (s − t, q) = TH(a) (s + (−t), q) ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (−t, q)} ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t, q)},

IH(a) (s − t, q) = IH(a) (s + (−t), q) ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (−t, q)} ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t, q)},

FH(a) (s − t, q) = FH(a) (s + (−t), q) ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (−t, q)} ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (t, q)}.

TH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t−1 , q)} ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t, q)},

IH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t−1 , q)} ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t, q)},

FH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (t−1 , q)} ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (t, q)}.

⇐ In the converse scenario, where conditions 1-6 are met, our objective is to establish that for every element
a ∈ A , the pair (H, A) fulfills the criteria to be classified as a Q- complex neutrosophic subfield.

Consequently, TH(a) (−s, q) = TH(a) (0F −s, q) ≥ min{TH(a) (0F , q), TH(a) (s, q)} ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (s, q)} =
TH(a) (s, q),

IH(a) (−s, q) = IH(a) (0F − s, q) ≤ max{IH(a) (0F , q), IH(a) (s, q)} ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (s, q)} =
IH(a) (s, q),

FH(a) (−s, q) = FH(a) (0F − s, q) ≤ max{FH(a) (0F , q), FH(a) (s, q)} ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (s, q)} =
FH(a) (s, q).

TH(a) (s.t, q) = TH(a) (s.(t−1 )−1 , q) ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t−1 , q)} ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t, q)},

IH(a) (s.t, q) = IH(a) (s.(t−1 )−1 , q) ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t−1 , q)} ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t, q)},

https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220408 98
Received: June 17, 2023 Revised: August 22, 2023 Accepted: October 28, 2023
International Journal of Neutrosophic Science (IJNS) Vol. 22, No. 04, PP. 93-105, 2023

FH(a) (s.t, q) = FH(a) (s.(t−1 )−1 , q) ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (t−1 , q)} ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (t, q)}.

TH(a) (s + t, q) = TH(a) (s − (−t), q) ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (−t, q)} ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t, q)},

IH(a) (s + t, q) = IH(a) (s − (−t), q) ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (−t, q)} ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t, q)},

FH(a) (s + t, q) = FH(a) (s − (−t), q) ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (−t, q)} ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (t, q)}.

TH(a) (s−1 , q) = TH(a) (1F .s−1 , q) ≥ min{TH(a) (1F , q), TH(a) (s, q)} ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (s, q)} = TH(a) (s, q)},

IH(a) (s−1 , q) = IH(a) (1F .s−1 , q) ≤ max{IH(a) (1F , q), IH(a) (s, q)} ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (s, q)} =
IH(a) (s, q)},

FH(a) (s−1 , q) = FH(a) (1F .s−1 , q) ≤ max{FH(a) (1F , q), FH(a) (s, q)} ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (s, q)} =
FH(a) (s, q)}.

This completes the proof.

Theorem 3.6. Let (F, +, .) be a field, and let (H, A) = {< a; TH(a) (r, q), IH(a) (r, q), FH(a) (r, q) >: a ∈
A, r ∈ W, q ∈ Q} be homogeneous Q-CNSS over (F, +, .). Suppose (H, A) generates the two Q-NSSs
(h, A) = {< a; Γh(a) (r, q), Λh(a) (r, q), Ωh(a) (r, q) >: a ∈ A, r ∈ W, q ∈ Q} and (K, A) = {< a; µK(a) (r, q), νK(a) (r, q),
ωK(a) (r, q) >: a ∈ A, r ∈ W, q ∈ Q}. Then, (H, A) is a Q-CNS subfield of F if and only if both (h, A) and
(K, A) are Q-NS subfields.

Proof. ⇒ In order to establish the validity of the first direction of this theorem, it is essential to demonstrate
adherence to the conditions specified in Theorem (2.9).

Consider that (H, A) is a Q-CNS subfield of F, then for all a ∈ A, s, t ∈ F, q ∈ Q, we have,

ΓH(a) (s−t, q).eiµH(a) (s−t,q) = TH(a) (s−t, q) ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t, q)} = min{ΓH(a) (s, q).eiµH(a) (s,q) ,
ΓH(a) (t, q).eiµH(a) (t,q) } = min{ΓH(a) (s, q), ΓH(a) (t, q)}.ei min{µH(a) (s,q),µH(a) (t,q)} . Thus,
ΓH(a) (s − t, q) ≥ min{ΓH(a) (s, q), ΓH(a) (t, q)} and µH(a) (s − t, q) ≥ min{µH(a) (s, q), µH(a) (t, q)}, (Since
(H, A) is homogeneous ).

Likewise, we can derive,

ΛH(a) (s−t, q).eiνH(a) (s−t,q) = IH(a) (s−t, q) ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t, q)} = max{ΛH(a) (s, q).eiνH(a) (s,q) ,
ΛH(a) (t, q).eiνH(a) (t,q) } = max{ΛH(a) (s, q), ΛH(a) (t, q)}.ei max{νH(a) (s,q),νH(a) (t,q)} . Thus,
ΛH(a) (s − t, q) ≤ max{ΛH(a) (s, q), ΛH(a) (t, q)} and νH(a) (s − t, q) ≤ max{νH(a) (s, q), νH(a) (t, q)}, (Since
(H, A) is homogeneous ).

By employing a similar approach, we can obtain ΩH(a) (s−t, q) ≤ max{ΩH(a) (s, q), ΩH(a) (t, q)} and ωH(a) (s−
t, q) ≤ max{ωH(a) (s, q), ωH(a) (t, q)}. Therefore, condition 1 is satisfied.
−1
Next, ΓH(a) (s.t−1 , q).eiµH(a) (s.t ,q) = TH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t, q)} = min{ΓH(a) (s, q).eiµH(a) (s,q) ,
ΓH(a) (t, q).eiµH(a) (t,q) } = min{ΓH(a) (s, q), ΓH(a) (t, q)}.ei min{µH(a) (s,q),µH(a) (t,q)} . Thus,
ΓH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≥ min{ΓH(a) (s, q), ΓH(a) (t, q)} and µH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≥ min{µH(a) (s, q), µH(a) (t, q)}, (Since
(H, A) is homogeneous ).

Similarly, we can obtain

−1
ΛH(a) (s.t−1 , q).eiνH(a) (s.t ,q) = IH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t, q)} = max{ΛH(a) (s, q).eiνH(a) (s,q) ,
ΛH(a) (t, q).eiνH(a) (t,q) } = max{ΛH(a) (s, q), ΛH(a) (t, q)}.ei max{νH(a) (s,q),νH(a) (t,q)} . Thus,
ΛH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≤ max{ΛH(a) (s, q), ΛH(a) (t, q)} and νH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≤ max{νH(a) (s, q), νH(a) (t, q)}, (Since
(H, A) is homogeneous ).

https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220408 99
Received: June 17, 2023 Revised: August 22, 2023 Accepted: October 28, 2023
International Journal of Neutrosophic Science (IJNS) Vol. 22, No. 04, PP. 93-105, 2023

In the same way we get,

ΩH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≤ max{ΩH(a) (s, q), ΩH(a) (t, q)} and ωH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≤ max{ωH(a) (s, q), ωH(a) (t, q)}.

Therefore, condition 2 is satisfied. Which implies that (h, A) and (K, A) are Q-CNS fields.

In order to prove the second direction of this theorem, it should satisfy previously defined six conditions listed
in Theorem (3.5).

⇐ Suppose that (h, A) and (K, A) are two Q-NS subfields. To prove that (H, A) is a Q-CNS subfield, we have
to show that:

TH(a) (s − t, q) = ΓH(a) (s − t, q).eiµH(a) (s−t,q) ≥ min{ΓH(a) (s, q), ΓH(a) (t, q)}.ei min{µH(a) (s,q),µH(a) (t,q)} =
min{ΓH(a) (s, q).eiµH(a) (s,q) , ΓH(a) (t, q).eiµH(a) (t,q) } = min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t, q)}. ((H, A) is homoge-
neous).

Thus, we obtain TH(a) (s − t, q) ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t, q)}.

In a similar manner : IH(a) (s − t, q) = ΛH(a) (s − t, q).eiνH(a) (s−t,q) ≤ max{ΛH(a) (s, q), ΛH(a) (t, q)}.
ei max{νH(a) (s,q),νH(a) (t,q)} = max{ΛH(a) (s, q).eiνH(a) (s,q) , ΛH(a) (t, q).eiνH(a) (t,q) } = max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t, q)}.
((H, A) is homogeneous).

Thus, we obtain IH(a) (s − t, q) ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t, q)}.

In the same manner we show that FH(a) (s − t, q) ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (t, q)}. Therefore, conditions 1,
2, and 3 are satisfied.

To verify the validity of the conditions 4, 5, and 6, we have to show that:

−1
TH(a) (s.t−1 , q) = ΓH(a) (s.t−1 , q).eiµH(a) (s.t ,q)
≥ min{ΓH(a) (s, q), ΓH(a) (t, q)}.ei min{µH(a) (s,q),µH(a) (t,q)} =

min{ΓH(a) (s, q).eiµH(a) (s,q) , ΓH(a) (t, q).eiµH(a) (t,q) } = min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t, q)}. ((H, A) is homoge-
neous).

Thus, we obtain TH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≥ min{TH(a) (s, q), TH(a) (t, q)}.

Similarly, we can obtain

−1
IH(a) (s.t−1 , q) = ΛH(a) (s.t−1 , q).eiνH(a) (s.t ,q)
≤ max{ΛH(a) (s, q), ΛH(a) (t, q)}.ei max{νH(a) (s,q),νH(a) (t,q)} =

max{ΛH(a) (s, q).eiνH(a) (s,q) , ΛH(a) (t, q).eiνH(a) (t,q) } = max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t, q)}. ((H, A) is homoge-
neous).

Thus, we obtain IH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≤ max{IH(a) (s, q), IH(a) (t, q)}.

Using the same steps, we can show that FH(a) (s.t−1 , q) ≤ max{FH(a) (s, q), FH(a) (t, q)}.

Thus, the six conditions listed in Theorem (3.5) have been verified. Which proves that (H, A) is Q-CNS
subfield.
Theorem 3.7. Consider a field (F, +, .) and let (H, A) and (G, B) be two Q-CNSSs in F, where (H, A) is
homogeneous with (G, B). If both (H, A) and (G, B) are Q-CNSFs in F, then their intersection (H, A) ∩
(G, B) is also a Q-CNSF in F.

https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220408 100
Received: June 17, 2023 Revised: August 22, 2023 Accepted: October 28, 2023
International Journal of Neutrosophic Science (IJNS) Vol. 22, No. 04, PP. 93-105, 2023

Proof. Suppose (H, A) and (G, B) are two Q-CNSFs. Let’s begin by establishing the validity of the first three
conditions of Theorem (3.5).

First, We examine the complex-valued truth membership function of the intersection.

For all e ∈ A ∩ B, q ∈ Q, and s, t ∈ F,

TH∩G(e) (s − t, q) = ΓH∩G(e) (s − t, q).ei2πµH∩G(e) (s−t,q)

= min{ΓH(e) (s − t, q), ΓG(e) (s − t, q)}.ei2π min{µH(e) (s−t,q),µG(e) (s−t,q)}
≥ min{min{ΓH(e) (s, q), ΓH(e) (t, q)}, min{ΓG(e) (s, q), ΓG(e) (t, q)}}.
ei2π min{min{µH(e) (s,q),µH(e) (t,q)},min{µG(e) (s,q),µG(e) (t,q)}}
= min{min{ΓH(e) (s, q), ΓG(e) (s, q)}, min{ΓH(e) (t, q), ΓG(e) (t, q)}}.
ei2π min{min{µH(e) (s,q),µG(e) (s,q)},min{µH(e) (t,q),µG(e) (t,q)}}
= min{min{ΓH(e) (s, q), ΓG(e) (s, q)}.
ei2π min{µH(e) (s,q),µG(e) (s,q)} , min{ΓH(e) (t, q), ΓG(e) (t, q)}.ei2π min{µH(e) (t,q),µG(e) (t,q)} } ((H, A) is homogeneous
with (G, B))
= min{ΓH∩G(e) (s, q).ei2πµH∩G(e) (s,q) , ΓH∩G(e) (t, q).ei2πµH∩G(e) (t,q) }
= min{TH∩G(e) (s, q), TH∩G(e) (t, q)}. Thus,
TH∩G(e) (s − t, q) ≥ min{TH∩G(e) (s, q), TH∩G(e) (t, q)}.

Second: We will verify whether the condition for the indeterminacy membership function of the intersection
is met.

IH∩G(e) (s − t, q) = ΛH∩G(e) (s − t, q).ei2πνH∩G(e) (s−t,q)

= max{ΛH(e) (s − t, q), ΛG(e) (s − t, q)}.ei2π max{νH(e) (s−t,q),νG(e) (s−t,q)}
≤ max{max{ΛH(e) (s, q), ΛH(e) (t, q)}, max{ΛG(e) (s, q), ΛG(e) (t, q)}}.
ei2π max{max{νH(e) (s,q),νH(e) (t,q)},max{νG(e) (s,q),νG(e) (t,q)}}
= max{max{ΛH(e) (s, q), ΛG(e) (s, q)}, max{ΛH(e) (t, q), ΛG(e) (t, q)}}.
ei2π max{max{νH(e) (s,q),νG(e) (s,q)},max{νH(e) (t,q),νG(e) (t,q)}}
= max{max{ΛH(e) (s, q), ΛG(e) (s, q)}.
ei2π max{νH(e) (s,q),νG(e) (s,q)} , max{ΛH(e) (t, q), ΛG(e) (t, q)}.ei2π max{νH(e) (t,q),νG(e) (t,q)} } ((G, A) is homoge-
neous with (H, B))
= max{ΛH∩G(e) (s, q).ei2πνH∩G(e) (s,q) , ΛH∩G(e) (t, q).ei2πνH∩G(e) (t,q) }
= max{IH∩G(e) (r, q), IH∩G(e) (t, q)}. Thus,
IH∩G(e) (s − t, q) ≤ max{IH∩G(e) (s, q), IH∩G(e) (t, q)}.

Third: Using the same steps as in the case of indeterminacy membership function, we obtain:

FH∩G(e) (s − t, q) ≤ max{FH∩G(e) (s, q), FH∩G(e) (t, q)}.

Conditions 4-6 of Theorem (3.5) can be examined as follows.

For the complex-valued truth membership function of the intersection, we obtain

−1
TH∩G(e) (s.t−1 , q) = ΓH∩G(e) (s.t−1 , q).ei2πµH∩G(e) (s.t ,q)
−1 −1
= min{ΓH(e) (s.t−1 , q), ΓG(e) (s.t−1 , q)}.ei2π min{µH(e) (s.t ,q),µG(e) (s.t ,q)}
≥ min{min{ΓH(e) (s, q), ΓH(e) (t, q)}, min{ΓG(e) (s, q), ΓG(e) (t, q)}}.
ei2π min{min{µH(e) (s,q),µH(e) (t,q)},min{µG(e) (s,q),µG(e) (t,q)}}
= min{min{ΓH(e) (s, q), ΓG(e) (s, q)}, min{ΓH(e) (t, q), ΓG(e) (t, q)}}.
ei2π min{min{µH(e) (s,q),µG(e) (s,q)},min{µH(e) (t,q),µG(e) (t,q)}}
= min{min{ΓH(e) (s, q), ΓG(e) (s, q)}.
ei2π min{µH(e) (s,q),µG(e) (s,q)} , min{ΓH(e) (t, q), ΓG(e) (t, q)}.ei2π min{µH(e) (t,q),µG(e) (t,q)} } ((G, A) is homogeneous
with (H, B))
= min{ΓH∩G(e) (s, q).ei2πµH∩G(e) (s,q) , ΓH∩G(e) (t, q).ei2πµH∩G(e) (t,q) }
= min{TH∩G(e) (s, q), TH∩G(e) (t, q)}. Thus,
TH∩G(e) (s.t−1 , q) ≥ min{TH∩G(e) (s, q), TH∩G(e) (t, q)}.

https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220408 101
Received: June 17, 2023 Revised: August 22, 2023 Accepted: October 28, 2023
International Journal of Neutrosophic Science (IJNS) Vol. 22, No. 04, PP. 93-105, 2023

For the complex-valued indeterminacy membership function of the intersection, we obtain:

−1
IH∩G(e) (s.t−1 , q) = ΛH∩G(e) (s.t−1 , q).ei2πνH∩G(e) (s.t ,q)
−1 −1
= max{ΛH(e) (s.t−1 , q), ΛG(e) (s.t−1 , q)}.ei2π max{νH(e) (s.t ,q),νG(e) (s.t ,q)}
≤ max{max{ΛH(e) (s, q), ΛH(e) (t, q)}, max{ΛG(e) (s, q), ΛG(e) (t, q)}}.
ei2π max{max{νH(e) (s,q),νH(e) (t,q)},max{νG(e) (s,q),νG(e) (t,q)}}
= max{max{ΛH(e) (s, q), ΛG(e) (s, q)}, max{ΛH(e) (t, q), ΛG(e) (t, q)}}.
ei2π max{max{νH(e) (s,q),νG(e) (s,q)},max{νH(e) (t,q),νG(e) (t,q)}}
= max{max{ΛH(e) (s, q), ΛG(e) (s, q)}.
ei2π max{νH(e) (s,q),νG(e) (s,q)} , max{ΛH(e) (t, q), ΛG(e) (t, q)}.ei2π max{νH(e) (t,q),νG(e) (t,q)} } ((G, A) is homoge-
neous with (H, B))
= max{ΛH∩G(e) (s, q).ei2πνH∩G(e) (s,q) , ΛH∩G(e) (t, q).ei2πνH∩G(e) (t,q) }
= max{IH∩G(e) (s, q), IH∩G(e) (t, q)}. Thus,
IH∩G(e) (s.t−1 , q) ≤ max{IH∩G(e) (s, q), IH∩G(e) (t, q)}.

In the similar way, we can show that FH∩G(e) (s.t−1 , q) ≤ max{FH∩G(e) (s, q), FH∩G(e) (t, q)}.

Thus, the six conditions listed in Theorem (3.5) have been verified. Which proves that the intersection (H, A)
∩ (G, B) is a Q-CNSF.

4 Cartesian product of Q- complex neutrosophic soft fields

Within this section, we establish the definition of the Cartesian product of Q-CNSFs and subsequently demon-
strate its status as a Q-CNSF.
Definition 4.1. Consider two Q-CNSFs, (H, A) and (G, B), defined over (F1 , +, ·) and (F2 , +, ·), respectively.
Let (H, A) be homogeneous with (G, B). We define their Cartesian product, denoted as (M, A × B) =
(H, A) × (G, B), where M(α, β) = H(α) × G(β) for (α, β) ∈ A × B.

In an analytical representation, for s ∈ F1 , t ∈ F2 , and q ∈ Q, we have:

M(α, β) = { ((s, t), q), TM(α,β) ((s, t), q), IM(α,β) ((s, t), q), FM(α,β) ((s, t), q) }, where:

TM(α,β) ((s, t), q) = min{TM(α) (s, q), TM(β) (t, q)},

IM(α,β) ((s, t), q) = max{IM(α) (s, q), IM(β) (t, q)},

FM(α,β) ((s, t), q) = max{FM(α) (s, q), FM(β) (t, q)}.

Theorem 4.2. Let’s consider two Q-CNSFs, (H, A) and (G, B), which are defined over (F1 , +, ·) and (F2 , +, ·),
respectively. Let (H, A) be homogeneous with (G, B). Then, the Cartesian product of these two Q-CNSFs, i.e.,
(H, A) × (G, B) is also a Q-CNSF defined over F1 × F2 .

Proof. Let (M, A × B) = (H, A) × (G, B), where M(α, β) = H(α) × G(β) for (α, β) ∈ A × B. Then for
((s1 , t1 ), q), ((s2 , t2 ), q) ∈ (F1 × F2 ) × Q, we have for the complex-valued truth membership function:

TM(α,β) ((s1 , t1 ) − (s2 , t2 ), q)

= TM(α,β) ((s1 − s2 , t1 − t2 ), q)

= ΓH(α,β) ((s1 − s2 , t1 − t2 ), q).eiµH(α,β) ((s1 −s2 ,t1 −t2 ),q)

= min{ΓH(α) ((s1 − s2 ), q), ΓG(β) ((t1 − t2 ), q)}.ei min{µH(α) ((s1 −s2 ),q),µG(β) ((t1 −t2 ),q)}
= min{ΓH(α) ((s1 − s2 ), q).eiµH(α) ((s1 −s2 ),q) , ΓG(β) ((t1 − t2 ), q).eiµG(β) ((t1 −t2 ),q) } ( (H, A) is homogeneous
with (G, B))

https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220408 102
Received: June 17, 2023 Revised: August 22, 2023 Accepted: October 28, 2023
International Journal of Neutrosophic Science (IJNS) Vol. 22, No. 04, PP. 93-105, 2023

= min{TH(α) ((s1 − s2 ), q), TG(β) ((t1 − t2 ), q)}

≥ min{min{TH(α) (s1 , q), TH(α) (s2 , q)}, min{TG(β) (t1 , q), TG(β) (t2 , q)}}. ( (H, A) and (G, B) are Q-CNSFs)

= min{min{TH(α) (s1 , q), TG(β) (t1 , q)}, min{TH(α) (s2 , q), TG(β) (t2 , q)}}.
= min{TM(α,β) (s1 , t1 ), TM(α,β) (s2 , t2 )}. Thus,

TM(α,β) ((s1 , t1 ) − (s2 , t2 ), q) ≥ min{TM(α,β) (s1 , t1 ), TM(α,β) (s2 , t2 )}.

To validate the condition of complex-valued indeterminacy membership function, we employ a similar ap-
proach as that used for the complex-valued truth membership function.

IM(α,β) ((s1 , t1 ) − (s2 , t2 ), q)

= IM(α,β) ((s1 − s2 , t1 − t2 ), q)
= ΛH(α,β) ((s1 − s2 , t1 − t2 ), q).eiνH(α,β) ((s1 −s2 ,t1 −t2 ),q)
= max{ΛH(α) ((s1 − s2 ), q), ΛG(β) ((t1 − t2 ), q)}.ei max{νH(α) ((s1 −s2 ),q),νG(β) ((t1 −t2 ),q)}
= max{ΛH(α) ((s1 − s2 ), q).eiνH(α) ((s1 −s2 ),q) , ΛG(β) ((t1 − t2 ), q).eiνG(β) ((t1 −t2 ),q) }
( (H, A) is homogeneous with (G, B))
= max{IH(α) ((s1 − s2 ), q), IG(β) ((t1 − t2 ), q)}
≤ max{max{IH(α) (s1 , q), IH(α) (s2 , q)}, max{IG(β) (t1 , q), IG(β) (t2 , q)}}. ( (H, A) and (G, B) are Q-CNSFs)
= max{max{IH(α) (s1 , q), IG(β) (t1 , q)}, max{IH(α) (s2 , q), IG(β) (t2 , q)}}.
= max{IM(α,β) (s1 , t1 ), IM(α,β) (s2 , t2 )}. Thus,
IM(α,β) ((s1 , t1 ) − (s2 , t2 ), q) ≤ max{IM(α,β) (s1 , t1 ), IM(α,β) (s2 , t2 )}.

Similarly, we can demonstrate that: FM(α,β) ((s1 , t1 ) − (s2 , t2 ), q) ≤ max{FM(α,β) (s1 , t1 ), FM(α,β) (s2 , t2 )}.

Next, we will proceed to prove the remaining conditions as follows:

TM(α,β) ((s1 , t1 ).(s2 , t2 )−1 , q)

= TM(α,β) ((s1 .s−1 −1
2 , t1 .t2 ), q)
iµH(α,β) ((s1 .s−1 −1
= ΓH(α,β) ((s1 .s−1 −1
2 , t1 .t2 ), q).e
2 ,t1 .t2 ),q)

i min{µH(α) ((s1 .s−1 −1

= min{ΓH(α) ((s1 .s−1 −1
2 ), q), ΓG(β) ((t1 .t2 ), q)}.e
2 ),q),µG(β) ((t1 .t2 ),q)}

iµH(α) ((s1 .s−1 iµG(β) ((t1 .t−1

= min{ΓH(α) ((s1 .s−1 2 ), q).e
2 ),q) , Γ
−1
G(β) ((t1 .t2 ), q).e 2 ),q) } ( (H, A) is homogeneous

with (G, B))

= min{TH(α) ((s1 .s−1 −1
2 ), q), TG(β) ((t1 .t2 ), q)}
≥ min{min{TH(α) (s1 , q), TH(α) (s2 , q)}, min{TG(β) (t1 , q), TG(β) (t2 , q)}}. ( (H, A) and (G, B) are Q-CNSFs)
= min{min{TH(α) (s1 , q), TG(β) (t1 , q)}, min{TH(α) (s2 , q), TG(β) (t2 , q)}}.
= min{TM(α,β) (s1 , t1 ), TM(α,β) (s2 , t2 )}. Thus,

TM(α,β) ((s1 , t1 ).(s2 , t2 )−1 , q) ≥ min{TM(α,β) (s1 , t1 ), TM(α,β) (s2 , t2 )}.

To verify the condition of the complex-valued indeterminacy membership function, we follow a similar ap-
proach as we did for the complex-valued truth membership function.

IM(α,β) ((s1 , t1 ).(s2 , t2 )−1 , q)

= IM(α,β) ((s1 .s−1 −1
2 , t1 .t2 ), q)
iνH(α,β) ((s1 .s−1 −1
= ΛH(α,β) ((s1 .s−1 −1
2 , t1 .t2 ), q).e
2 ,t1 .t2 ),q)

i max{νH(α) ((s1 .s−1 −1

= max{ΛH(α) ((s1 .s−1 −1
2 ), q), ΛG(β) ((t1 .t2 ), q)}.e
2 ),q),νG(β) ((t1 .t2 ),q)}

iνH(α) ((s1 .s−1 iνG(β) ((t1 .t−1

= max{ΛH(α) ((s1 .s−1 2 ), q).e
2 ),q) , Λ
−1
G(β) ((t1 .t2 ), q).e 2 ),q) } ( (H, A) is homogeneous

with (G, B))

= max{IH(α) ((s1 .s−1 −1
2 ), q), IG(β) ((t1 .t2 ), q)}
≤ max{max{IH(α) (s1 , q), IH(α) (s2 , q)}, max{IG(β) (t1 , q), IG(β) (t2 , q)}}. ( (H, A) and (G, B) are Q-CNSFs)
= max{max{IH(α) (s1 , q), IG(β) (t1 , q)}, min{IH(α) (s2 , q), IG(β) (t2 , q)}}.
= max{IM(α,β) (s1 , t1 ), IM(α,β) (s2 , t2 )}. Thus,

IM(α,β) ((s1 , t1 ).(s2 , t2 )−1 , q) ≤ max{IM(α,β) (s1 , t1 ), IM(α,β) (s2 , t2 )}.

Likewise, we can establish that: FM(α,β) ((s1 , t1 ).(s2 , t2 )−1 , q) ≤ max{FM(α,β) (s1 , t1 ), FM(α,β) (s2 , t2 )}.

https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220408 103
Received: June 17, 2023 Revised: August 22, 2023 Accepted: October 28, 2023
International Journal of Neutrosophic Science (IJNS) Vol. 22, No. 04, PP. 93-105, 2023

Thus, the six conditions listed in Theorem (3.5) have been verified. Which proves that (H, A) × (G, B) is a
Q-CNSF.

5 Conclusion

This paper presented the notion of Q-CNSF. We defined and developed the algebraic structures pertaining
to fields for the Q-complex neutrosophic soft model. We explored the relationship between neutrosophic
fields in both real space and complex space, shedding light on their interplay. Additionally, we examined the
cartesian product of Q-complex neutrosophic soft fields. The proposed notion of Q-CNSF presents a novel
and promising idea within the realm of algebraic structure theory. It has the potential to be extensively utilized
in the future for solving a wide range of algebraic problems, making it a significant contribution to the field.

FundingThis article is partial funded by Universitas Mataram, Indonesia. We thank the Deanship of Scientific
Research, Vice Presidency for Graduate Studies and Scientific Research, King Faisal University, Saudi Arabia
for their supported under [Grant No. ].
Acknowledgments: We would like to express our gratitude to Universitas Mataram, Indonesia, for providing
partial funding assistance. This work was supported by the Deanship of Scientific Research, Vice Presidency
for Graduate Studies and Scientific Research, King Faisal University, Saudi Arabia [Grant No. GRANT4708].

Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

[1] F. Smarandache, Neutrosophic probability, set, and logic, American Research Press: Rehoboth, IL, USA,
1998.
[2] D. Molodtsov, Soft set theory, first results, Computers and Mathematics with Applications, vol. 37, no.
4-5, pp. 19-31, 1999.
[3] Al-Jumaili, A. F.; Abed, M.M.; Al-Sharqi, F. Other new types of Mappings with Strongly Closed Graphs
in Topological spaces via e-θ and δ − β − θ-open sets. Journal of Physics: Conference Series, 2019,
1234(1), 012101.
[4] Z. bin M. Rodzi et al., “Integrated Single-Valued Neutrosophic Normalized Weighted Bonferroni Mean
(SVNNWBM)-DEMATEL for Analyzing the Key Barriers to Halal Certification Adoption in Malaysia,”
Int. J. Neutrosophic Sci., vol. 21, no. 3, pp. 106–114, 2023.

[5] S. H. Zail, M. M. Abed and F. Al-Sharqi, (2022). Neutrosophic BCK-algebra and -BCK-algebra. Inter-
national Journal of Neutrosophic Science, 19(3), 8-15.
[6] F. Al-Sharqi, A. Al-Quran, M. U. Romdhini, Decision-making techniques based on similarity measures
of possibility interval fuzzy soft environment, Iraqi Journal for Computer Science and Mathematics, vol.
4, pp.18–29, 2023.
[7] F. Al-Sharqi, Y. Al-Qudah and N. Alotaibi, Decision-making techniques based on similarity measures of
possibility neutrosophic soft expert sets. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, 55(1) (2023), 358-382.
[8] A. Al-Quran, F. Al-Sharqi, K. Ullah, M. U. Romdhini, M. Balti and M. Alomai, Bipolar fuzzy hypersoft
set and its application in decision making, International Journal of Neutrosophic Science, vol. 20, no. 4,
pp. 65-77, 2023.
[9] M. U. Romdhini, F. Al-Sharqi, A. Nawawi, A. Al-Quran and H. Rashmanlou, Signless Laplacian Energy
of Interval-Valued Fuzzy Graph and its Applications, Sains Malaysiana 52(7), 2127-2137, 2023.

https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220408 104
Received: June 17, 2023 Revised: August 22, 2023 Accepted: October 28, 2023
 International Journal of Neutrosophic Science (IJNS) Vol. 22, No. 04, PP. 93-105, 2023

[10] F. Al-Sharqi, A. G. Ahmad, A. Al Quran, Mapping on interval complex neutrosophic soft sets, Interna-
tional Journal of Neutrosophic Science, vol.19(4), pp.77-85, 2022.
[11] Mohammed Alqarni, Ahmed H. Samak, Safaa S. I. Ismail, Rasha M. Abd El-Aziz, Ahmed I. Taloba.
(2023). Utilizing a Neutrosophic Fuzzy Logic System with ANN for Short-Term Estimation of Solar
Energy. International Journal of Neutrosophic Science, 20 ( 4 ), 240-259.
[12] Abed, M., Al-Jumaili, A. F., Al-Sharqi, F. G. Some mathematical Structures in topological group. J.
Algab. Appl. Math., 2018, 16(2), 99-117.
[13] M Palanikumar, N Kausar, H Garg, SF Ahmed, C Samaniego, Robot sensors process based on gener-
alized Fermatean normal different aggregation operators framework, AIMS Mathematics 8 (7), 16252-
16277, 2023.
[14] Broumi, S., Sundareswaran, R., Shanmugapriya, M., Bakali, A., Talea, M. (2022). Theory and Applica-
tions of Fermatean Neutrosophic Graphs. Neutrosophic Sets and Systems, 50, 248-286.
[15] F. Al-Sharqi, M. U. Romdhini, A. Al-Quran, Group decision-making based on aggregation operator
and score function of Q-neutrosophic soft matrix, Journal of Intelligent and Fuzzy Systems, vol. 45,
pp.305–321, 2023.
[16] F. Al-Sharqi, A.G. Ahmad, A. Al-Quran, Interval-valued neutrosophic soft expert set from real space to
complex space, Computer Modeling in Engineering and Sciences, vol. 132(1), pp. 267–293, 2022.
[17] Al-Sharqi, F. G., Abed, M. M., Mhassin, A. A. On Polish Groups and their Applications. J. Eng. Appl.
Sci., 2018, 13(18), 7533-7536.
[18] F. Al-Sharqi, A.G. Ahmad, and A. Al-Quran, Similarity measures on interval-complex neutrosophic soft
sets with applications to decision making and medical diagnosis under uncertainty, Neutrosophic Sets
and Systems, vol. 51, pp.495–515, 2022.
[19] Broumi, S., Mohanaselvi, S., Witczak, T., Talea, M., Bakali, A., Smarandache, F. (2023). Complex
fermatean neutrosophic graph and application to decision making. Decision Making: Applications in
Management and Engineering, 6(1), 474-501.
[20] A. Rosenfeld, Fuzzy groups, Journal of Mathematical Analysis and Applications, vol. 35, pp. 512-517,
1971.
[21] D. S. Malik and J. N. Mordeson, Fuzzy subfields, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, vol. 37, pp. 383-388, 1990.
[22] J. N. Mordeson, Fuzzy algebraic fields extensions, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, vol. 45, pp. 359-365, 1992.
[23] B. Anandh, and R. Giri, Intuitionistic fuzzy subfields of a field with respect to (T,S)-norm, Advanced in
Fuzzy Mathematics, vol. 12, pp. 1007-1015, 2017.
[24] T. Bera and N. K. Mahapatra, On neutrosophic soft field, International Journal of Mathematics Trends
and Technology, vol. 56 , pp. 472-494 , 2018.
[25] M. Abu Qamar, A. G. Ahmad and N. Hassan, On Q-neutrosophic soft fields, Neutrosophic Sets and
Systems, vol. 32, pp.80-93, 2020.
[26] M. Gulzar, F. Dilawar, D. Alghazzawi, M. H. Mateen, A note on complex fuzzy subfield, Indonesian
Journal of Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, vol. 21, pp. 1048–1056, 2021.
[27] A. Khamis and A. G. Ahmad, On fundamental algebraic characterizations of complex intuitionistic -
fuzzy subfield, Mathematics, vol. 8, 7032-7060, 2023.
[28] M. Ali, F. Smarandache, Complex neutrosophic set, Neural Computing and Applications, vol.28 , pp.
1817-1834, 2017.
[29] A. Al-Quran, F. Al-Shaqi, Z. Rodzi, M. U. Romdhini, The algebraic structures of Q-complex neutro-
sophic soft sets associated with groups and subgroups, International Journal of Neutrosophic Science ,
vol. 22, pp. 60-76, 2023.
[30] A. Al Quran, A. G. Ahmad, F. Al-Sharqi, A. Lutfi, Q-Complex Neutrosophic Set, International Journal
of Neutrosophic Science, vol. 20(2), pp.08-19, 2023.

https://doi.org/10.54216/IJNS.220408 105
Received: June 17, 2023 Revised: August 22, 2023 Accepted: October 28, 2023

View publication stats