Khan and Khan Journal of Inequalities and Applications (2022) 2022:153

https://doi.org/10.1186/s13660-022-02893-y

RESEARCH Open Access

Nonlinear operators between neutrosophic

normed spaces and Fréchet differentiation
Vakeel A. Khan1* and Mohammad Daud Khan1
*
Correspondence:
[email protected] Abstract
1
Department of Mathematics,
Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, The article focuses on the introduction of neutrosophic continuity and neutrosophic
202002, India boundedness, which is a fair extension of intuitionistic fuzzy continuity and
intuitionistic fuzzy boundedness, respectively. The article further advances to illustrate
the Fréchet derivative of nonlinear operators between neutrosophic normed spaces
(NNS). Examples have been provided in compliance with the theory with the aid of
some standard sequence spaces.
Keywords: Bounded Linear operator; Fréchet derivative; Continuity; Neutrosophic
normed space

1 Introduction
The researchers persistently come across distinct mathematical problems that quite often
fail to get solved or analyzed by the classical theory of nonlinear analysis. A handful of the
arduous problems can be reduced to operator equations to analyze them, and the Fréchet
derivative plays a crucial role in solving such problems. The extension of crisp sets was
put forth by Zadeh [1], wherein each element had a degree of membership indicating the
extent to which an element belongs in a set. This notion is a strong mathematical tool
to deal with the complexity of uncertainty in the form of vagueness in several problems
arising in the area of science and engineering. It has valuable applications in areas such as
population dynamics [2], computer programming [3], chaos control [4, 5]. As an extension
of fuzzy sets, Atanassov [6] proposed the concept of intuitionistic fuzzy sets in 1986, which
incorporated the degree of non-membership and hesitant function along with the degree
of membership. A few papers depicting convergence in the setting of intuitionistic fuzzy
sets were defined by Mursaleen et al. [7, 8], where he analyzed the statistical and ideal
convergence in intuitionistic fuzzy topological space. Recently, Khan et al. [9] studied the
continuous and bounded linear operators in neutrosophic normed spaces.
In the ultimate presence of quantum gravitational effects, the theory of the Heisenberg
uncertainty principle must be generalized on the basis of fuzzy structure spacetime. These
facts were mainly encouraged by string theory and non-commutative geometry. Quantum
gravity robustly explained the spacetime points in a fuzzy way. So, the contrariety of deter-
mining the exact location of articles gives spacetime a vague structure [4, 10, 11]. Due to
this ambiguous structure, the position space depiction of quantum mechanics may break

© The Author(s) 2022. Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which
permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit
to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The
images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise
in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not
permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright
holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.
Khan and Khan Journal of Inequalities and Applications (2022) 2022:153 Page 2 of 13

down. Therefore, in this manner, a generalized normed space of quasi-position eigenfunc-

tion is specifically required [12]. It is monitored that in the quantum gravity regime, the
most basic idea of spacetime in self-identity causes diffusion on the wave packet profile.
The formed fact originates in the quantum fluctuation of spacetime, best described as
fuzzy spacetime.
Smarandache et al. [13] projected another idea, which can be said to be a neutrosophic
set by counting a transitional membership function, which was expected to be a formal
setting trying to compute the truth, indeterminacy, and falsehood. Later on in [14], he
furthermore studied the contrariness between intuitionistic fuzzy set and neutrosophic
set, as well as the relations between these two sets [10]. In the generated neutrosophic
set, the components T (truth), S (indeterminacy), and U (falsity) have values in between
]0– , 1+ [.
Bera and Mahapatra [15, 16] imported the neutrosophic soft normed linear space and
defined convexity, metric, and Cauchy sequence on it. Recently, Kirişci & Şimşek [12] ex-
amined the statistical convergence on NNS, while Khan et al. [17] evaluated some results of
NNS via the Fibonacci matrix. By reviewing the literature, we can conclude that there has
been exponential growth in the study of neutrosophic theory in dissimilar fields by various
researchers. There are a number of conditions where the norm of a vector is impossible
to get, and the concept of neutrosophic norm [18–20] looks more authentic in such cases.
These theories can best deal with situations by modeling the inexactness through the neu-
trosophic norm.
This presented paper resolves and studies the Fréchet derivative of nonlinear opera-
tors between NNS, which may produce a helpful functional tool to explain the operator
equations. Likewise, particular and universal discordance analysis of solutions of oper-
ator mathematical equations are determinate over this concept. So, here we have tried
a proper approach of nonlinear functional analysis of operator equations by applying
Fréchet derivative.

2 Preliminaries
Definition 2.1 ([6]) Let F = φ be the intuitionistic fuzzy set, and F ⊆ Y is an ordered
triplet defined by

  
F = η, T(η), U(η) : η ∈ Y ,

where T(η), U(η) : Y → [0, 1] represent the degree of membership and degree of non-
membership, respectively, in such a way that

0 ≤ T(η) + U(η) ≤ 1

1 – T(η) – U(η) is also said to be degree of hesitancy. The intuitionistic fuzzy components
T(η), U(η) and degree of hesitancy depend on each other.

Definition 2.2 ([14]) Let A = φ, A ⊆ Y . Then,

  
ANS = η, T(η), S(η), U(η) : η ∈ Y ,
Khan and Khan Journal of Inequalities and Applications (2022) 2022:153 Page 3 of 13

where T(η), S(η), U(η) : Y → [0, 1] represent the degree of membership, degree of indeter-
minacy, and degree of nonmembership, respectively, in such a way that

0 ≤ T(η) + S(η) + U(η) ≤ 3.

The neutrosophic components T(η), S(η) and U(η) are independent of each other.

Definition 2.3 ([21]) A continuous t-norm is a binary operation  : [0, 1] × [0, 1] → [0, 1]
with the following conditions: (i)  is associative and commutative; (ii)  is continuous;
(iii) ρ1  1 = ρ1 , ∀ρ1 ∈ [0, 1]; (iv) ρ1  ρ2 ≤ ρ3  ρ4 whenever ρ1 ≤ ρ3 and ρ2 ≤ ρ4 , for each
ρ1 , ρ2 , ρ3 , ρ4 ∈ [0, 1].

Definition 2.4 ([21]) A continuous t-conorm is a binary operation ◦ : [0, 1] × [0, 1] →

[0, 1] with the following conditions (i) ◦ is associative and commutative; (ii) ◦ is continu-
ous; (iii) ρ1 ◦ 0 = ρ1 , ∀ρ1 ∈ [0, 1]; (iv) ρ1 ◦ ρ2 ≤ ρ3 ◦ ρ4 whenever ρ1 ≤ ρ3 and ρ2 ≤ ρ4 , for
each ρ1 , ρ2 , ρ3 , ρ4 ∈ [0, 1].

Definition 2.5 ([22]) Consider Y be a linear space and M = { η, T(η), S(η), U(η)
: η ∈ Y }
be a normed space in such a way that M : Y × R+ → [0, 1]. Let • and  be continuous t-
norm and continuous t-conorm, respectively. Then, the four-tuple (Y , M, •, ) is called
neutrosophic normed space (NNS) if it satisfies the following axioms, ∀η, y, z ∈ Y and
d, t > 0;
(i) 0 ≤ T(η, t), S(η, t), U(η, t) ≤ 1,
(ii) 0 ≤ T(η, t) + S(η, t) + U(η, t) ≤ 3,
(iii) T(η, t) = 0 for t ≤ 0,
(iv) T(η, t) = 1 for t > 0 iff η = 0
(v) T(cη, t) = T(η, |c|t ) ∀ c = 0, t > 0,
(vi) T(η, t) • T(y, d) ≤ T(η + y, t + d)
(vii) T(η, •) is continuous nondecreasing function for t > 0, limt→∞ T(η, t) = 1
(viii) S(η, t) = 1 for t ≤ 0,
(ix) S(η, t) = 0 for t > 0 iff η = 0
(x) S(cη, t) = S(η, |c|t ), ∀ c = 0
(xi) S(η, t)  S(y, d) ≥ S(η + y, t + d),
(xii) S(η, ) is continuous nonincreasing function, limt→∞ S(η, ) = 0,
(xiii) U(η, t) = 1 for t ≤ 0,
(xiv) U(η, t) = 0 for t > 0 iff η = 0,
(xv) U(cη, t) = U(η, |c|t ) ∀c = 0
(xvi) U(η, t)  U(y, d) ≥ U(η + y, t + d),
(xvii) U(η, ) is continuous nonincreasing function, limt→∞ U(η, t) = 0.
In this case, M is called neutrosophic norm (NN).

Since all the components lie between [0, 1], therefore, if the indetreminacy is zero, then
still neutrosophic components are more flexible and more general then fuzzy and intu-
itionistic fuzzy components. If all the neutrosohic components on a vector space sat-
isfy all conditions of Definition 2.5, then we say that (Y , M, •, ) is NNS, where M =
{ η, T(η), S(η), U(η)
: η ∈ Y }.
Khan and Khan Journal of Inequalities and Applications (2022) 2022:153 Page 4 of 13

Neutrosophic normed space is more general than norm space. This is illustrated by
proper example
Let (Y , M, •, ) be NNS. Assume that η • y = ηy and η  y = η + y – ηy for all η, y ∈ Y and
t > 0 with the condition

T(η, t) > 0 and S(η, t) < 1, U(η, t) < 1 ⇒ η=0 for all t > 0.

Let ηβ = inf{t > 0 : T(η, t) ≥ β and S(η, t) ≤ 1 – β, U(η, t) ≤ 1 – β}, ∀β ∈ (0, 1). Then,
{ · β : β ∈ (0, 1)} is an ascending family of norms on Y . These norms are said to be β-
norms on Y compatible to neutrosophic norm (T, S, U).

3 Neutrosophic continuity
Definition 3.1 ([23]) Let (Y , T1 , S1 , U1 , •, ) and (W , T , S , U •, ) be two NNS, and con-
sider a mapping h from (Y , T1 , S1 , U1 , •, ) → (W , T , S , U •, ). Then,
(i) ξ is called strong neutrosophic limit of h at some η0 ∈ Y if for each  > 0, ∃ some
δ = δ() > 0 such that

 
T h(η) – ξ ,  ≥ T1 (η – η0 , δ),
 
S h(η) – ξ ,  ≤ S1 (η – η0 , δ),
 
U h(η) – ξ ,  ≤ U1 (η – η0 , δ).

In this case, we write (Strong Neutrosophic-SN)-limη→η0 h(η) = ξ , which also

means that

 
lim T h(η) – ξ , t = 1, (SN) and
T1 (η–η0 ,t)→1
 
lim S h(η) – ξ , t = 0 (SN),
S1 (η–η0 ,t)→0
 
lim U h(η) – ξ , t = 0 (SN)
U1 (η–η0 ,t)→0

or
⎧
⎨T (h(η) – ξ , t) = ξ , (SN) as T (η – η , t) → 1, and S (h(η) – ξ , t) = ξ , (SN) as
1 0 1
⎩S (η – η0 , t) → 0 U1 (h(η) – ξ , t) = ξ , (SN) as U (η – η0 , t) → 0

∀t > 0.
(ii) ξ is called weak neutrosophic limit of h at some η0 ∈ Y if for given  > 0 & β ∈ (0, 1),
δ = δ(, β) > 0 s.t

 
T1 (η – η0 , δ) ≥ β ⇒ T h(η) – ξ ,  and
 
S (η – η0 , δ) ≤ 1 – β ⇒ S1 h(η) – ξ ,  ,
 
U (η – η0 , δ) ≤ 1 – β ⇒ U1 h(η) – ξ ,  .
Khan and Khan Journal of Inequalities and Applications (2022) 2022:153 Page 5 of 13

In this case, we write (Weak Neutrosophic-WN)-limη→η0 h(η) = ξ , which also

means that

 
lim T h(η) – ξ , t = ξ , (WN) and
T1 (η–η0 ,t)→1
 
lim S h(η) – ξ , t = ξ (SN),
S1 (η–η0 ,t)→0
 
lim U h(η) – ξ , t = ξ (SN).
U1 (η–η0 ,t)→0

or
⎧
⎨T (h(η) – ξ , t) = ξ , (WN) as T (η – η , t) → 1, and S (h(η) – ξ , t) = ξ , (WN) as
1 0
⎩S1 (η – η0 , t) → 0 U (h(η) – ξ , t) = ξ , (WN) as U1 (η – η0 , t) → 0

for all t > 0.

Definition 3.2 Let hn : (Y , T1 , S1 , U1 , •, ) → (W , T , S , U , •, ) be a sequence of func-

tions. Then
n is called pointwise neutrosophic convergent on Y to a function
w.r.t
(T, S, U) if for each η ∈ Y , the sequence (
n (η)) is convergent to
(η) w.r.t (T, S, U).

Definition 3.3 ([12]) Suppose (Y , M, •, ) is an NNS. A sequence m = (mi ) is said to be

a Cauchy sequence w.r.t M, if for each  > 0 & t > 0, ∃ d ∈ N s.t T(mi – mk , t) > 1 – ,
S(mi – mk , t) <  and U(mi – mk , t) <  for all i, k ≥ d.

Definition 3.4 Suppose (Y , T1 , S1 , U1 , •, ) and (W , T , S , U , •, ) are two NNS. A map-

ping h from (Y , T1 , S1 , U1 , •, ) → (W , T , S , U •, ) is called neutrosophic continuous at
ρ0 ∈ Y if for any given  > 0, ∃ t = t(b, ), d = d(b, ) ∈ (0, 1) such that ∀ρ ∈ Y and for all
b ∈ (0, 1),

 
T1 (ρ – ρ0 , t) > 1 – γ ⇒ T
(ρ) –
(ρ0 ),  > 1 – b,
 
S1 (ρ – ρ0 , t) < γ ⇒ S
(ρ) –
(ρ0 ),  < b,
 
U1 (ρ – ρ0 , t) < γ ⇒ U
(ρ) –
(ρ0 ),  < b.

Proposition 3.1 (SN) – lim ⇒ (WN) – lim but the contrary need not hold. Further,
(WN) – lim = (SN) – lim whenever (SN) – lim exists.

Proof It is simple to show. Now, we prove that (WN) – lim does not imply (SN) – lim in
regular. 

Example 3.1 Consider Y = W = R

⎧
⎨ t
if t > η,
t+η
T1 (η, t) =
⎩0 otherwise;
⎧
⎨1, if t > η,
T (η, t) =
⎩0, if t ≤ η;
Khan and Khan Journal of Inequalities and Applications (2022) 2022:153 Page 6 of 13

and
⎧
⎨ η
if t > η,
t+η
S1 (η, t) =
⎩1 otherwise;
⎧
⎨1, if t ≤ η,
S (η, t) =
⎩0, if t > η;
⎧
⎨ ηif t > η,
t
U1 (η, t) =
⎩1 otherwise;
⎧
⎨1, if t ≤ η,
U (η, t) =
⎩0, if t > η.

Let the function h from (R, T1 , S1 , U1 , •, ) onto (R, T , S , U , •, ) be defined by h(η) = η.

Then (WN) – limη→0 h(η) = 0. However, (SN) – limη→0 h(η) does not exist. Because, for
η =  there is no δ > 0 satisfying the conditions

δ δ
T (η, ) = 0 ≥ T1 (η, δ) = =
δ + η δ + 

and


S (η, ) = 0 ≤ S1 (η, δ) = ,
δ + 

U (η, ) = 0 ≤ U1 (η, δ) = .
δ + 

Now, we assign the strong and weak neutrosophic continuity of mappings between NNS.

Definition 3.5 ([24]) Suppose (Y , M, •, ) is an NNS. & V ⊂ Y . Then V is called neutro-

sophic open subset Y if for every η ∈ V , there exists some t > 0 and β ∈ (0, 1) such that
B (η, β, t) ⊆ V , where

 
B (η, β, t) := y : T(η – y, t) > 1 – β and S(η – y, t) < β, U(η – y, t) < β .

Definition 3.6 Suppose (Y , T1 , S1 , U1 , •, ) and (W , T , S , U , •, ) are two NNS. A map-

ping h : Y → W . Then h is called
(i) weakly neutrosophic continuous at η0 ∈ Y if for given  > 0 and β ∈ (0, 1) ∃ some
δ = δ(, β) > 0 s.t

 
T1 (η – η0 , δ) ≥ β ⇒ T h(η) – h(η0 ),  and

S1 (η – η0 , δ) ≤ 1 – β ⇒ S (h(η) – h(η0 , ),

U1 (η – η0 , δ) ≤ 1 – β ⇒ U (h(η) – h(η0 , ),

for all η ∈ Y .
Khan and Khan Journal of Inequalities and Applications (2022) 2022:153 Page 7 of 13

(ii) strongly neutrosophic continuous at η0 ∈ Y if for given  > 0 and β ∈ (0, 1) ∃ some
δ = δ(, β) > 0 such that

 
T h(η) – h(η0 ),  ≥ T1 (η – η0 , δ) and S (h(η) – h(η0 , ) ≤ S1 (η – η0 , δ),

U (h(η) – h(η0 , ) ≤ U1 (η – η0 , δ),

for all η ∈ Y .
(iii) Let h be linear. Then h is said be weakly neutrosophic bounded (for short, WNB) on
Y if for given β ∈ (0, 1) ∃ some, nβ > 0 such that
 
t  
T1 η, ≥ β ⇒ T h(η), t ≥ β and
nβ
 
t  
S1 η, ≤ 1 – β ⇒ S h(η), t ≤ 1 – β,
nβ
 
t  
U1 η, ≤ 1 – β ⇒ U h(η), t ≤ 1 – β,
nβ

for all η ∈ Y and t > 0. Let E (Y , W ) indicate the set of all WNB linear operators.
(iv) Let h be linear. Then h is called weakly neutrosophic bounded (for short, SNB) on
Y if for given β ∈ (0, 1), ∃ some, K > 0 such that
   
  t   t
T h(η), t ≥ T1 η, and S h(η), t ≤ S1 η, ,
K K
 
  t
U h(η), t ≤ U1 η, ,
K

for all η ∈ Y and t > 0. Let E(Y , W ) denote the set of all SNB linear operators.

Theorem 3.1 Suppose (Y , T1 , S1 , U1 , •, ) and (W , T , S , U , •, ) are two NNS and h : Y →

W be a linear mapping. Then h is strongly (weakly) neutrosophic continuous if it is strongly
(weakly) neutrosophic bounded.

Definition 3.7 Consider (Y , T1 , S1 , U1 , •, ) be an NNS. Then, a sequence ηp is called

(i) weakly neutrosophic convergent to η ∈ Y if and only if, for every  > 0 & β ∈ (0, 1), ∃
some, p0 = p0 (β, ) such that

T1 (ηp – η0 , ) ≥ β & S1 (ηp – η0 , ) ≤ 1 – β,

U1 (η – η0 , ) ≤ 1 – β for all η ≥ η0 .

WN
In this case, we write ηp −−→ η.
(ii) strongly neutrosophic convergent to η ∈ Y if and only if, for every β ∈ (0, 1), there
exists some p0 = p0 () such that

T1 (ηp – η, t) ≥ 1 – β and S1 (ηp – η0 , t) ≤ β, U1 (η – η0 , t) ≤ β, ∀t > 0,

SN
we write ηp −→ η.
Khan and Khan Journal of Inequalities and Applications (2022) 2022:153 Page 8 of 13

Accordingly, we can define an SN(WN)-Cauchy sequence, SN(WN)-closure of a subset

and an SN(WN)-complete NNS.

Theorem 3.2 If a sequence (ηp ) is SN-convergent then it is WN-convergent to the same

limit, but not conversely.

Example 3.2 It is easy to show that SN-convergence implies WN-convergence. Following

is an example to depict that the converse of the statement may not be true. Consider c0 ,
the Banach space of all sequences η = ηp convergent to zero with the sup-norm η∞ =
supp η, and recognize the neutrosophic norm

⎧
⎨ t–η∞ if t > η∞ ,
t+η∞
T1 (η, t) =
⎩0 if t ≤ η∞ ;

and
⎧
⎨ 2η∞ if t < η∞ ,
t+η∞
S1 (η, t) =
⎩1 if t ≤ η∞ ;
⎧
⎨ 2η∞ if t < η∞ ,
t+η∞
U1 (η, t) =
⎩1 if t ≤ η∞ .

on Y . We can find β-norms of neutrosophic norm (T1 , S1 , U1 ) since it satisfies the condi-
tion (1.1.1). Thus,

t – η∞ 1+β
T1 (η, t) ≥ β ⇐⇒ ≥β ⇐⇒ η∞ ≤ t,
t + η∞ 1–β

and

2η∞ 1+β
S1 (η, t) ≤ 1 – β ⇐⇒ ≤1–β ⇐⇒ η∞ ≤ t,
t + η∞ 1–β
2η∞ 1+β
U1 (η, t) ≤ 1 – β ⇐⇒ ≤1–β ⇐⇒ η∞ ≤ t.
t + η∞ 1–β

This shows that

 
ηβ = inf t > 0 : T1 (η, t) ≥ β and S1 (η, t) ≤ 1 – β, U1 (η, t) ≤ 1 – β = η∞ .

Now, we show that the sequence η = (ηp ) = ( p1 )∞p=1 is WN-convergent but not SN -
convergent. Since each  · β is equivalent to  · ∞ , clearly (ηp ) is WN -convergent to
0. However, this convergence is not uniform in β. In fact, for given  > 0

1+β 1+β
ηβ = η∞ <  ⇐⇒ < 1.
1–β (1 – β)

Since η∞ = 1 for η = ( p1 )∞

p=1 . But this is not possible, since
1+β
(1–β)
→ ∞ as β → 1.
Khan and Khan Journal of Inequalities and Applications (2022) 2022:153 Page 9 of 13

3.1 Neutrosophic Fréchet derivative (NFD)

Definition 3.8 Let (Y , T1 , S1 , U1 , •, ) and (W , T , S , U , •, ) be two NNS, H ⊆ Y be
an neutrosophic open subset, and h : H → W probably nonlinear. Then h is called
strong(weak) neutrosophic Fréchet differentiable at η0 ∈ H if there exists a strongly
(weakly) neutrosophic bounded linear operator T from (Y , T1 , S1 , U1 , •, ) to (W , T , S , U ,
•, ) such that for every t > 0
 
h(η0 + a) – h(η0 ) – Ta

 
lim T , t = 1 SN(WN) ,
T1 (a,t)→1 1 – T1 (a, t)
 
h(η0 + a) – h(η0 ) – Ta  
lim S , t = 0 SN(WN) ,
S1 (a,t)→0 1 – S1 (a, t)
 
h(η0 + a) – h(η0 ) – Ta  
lim U , t = 0 SN(WN) .
U1 (a,t)→0 1 – U1 (a, t)

In this condition, the operator T is said to be strong (weak) neutrosophic, or shot,

SN(WN)-Fréchet derivative of h at η0 and is indicated by DSN(WN) h[η0 ] is called SN(WN)-
Fréchet differentiable on U if it is SN(WN)-Fréchet differentiable at every point of H.
In this condition, η → DSN(WN) h[η] is a basis from H to (F (Y , W )F  (Y , W )), denoted by
DSN(WN) h.

Theorem 3.3 A strongly (weakly) neutrosophic bounded linear operator A is SN(WN)-

Fréchet differentiable at every point η0 & DSN(WN) A[η0 ] = A.

Proof This is explicit since

 
A(η0 + a) – A(η0 ) – Aa
T , t = T (0, t) = 1,
1 – T1 (a, t)

and
 
A(η0 + a) – A(η0 ) – Aa
S , t = S (0, t) = 0,
S1 (a, t)
 
 A(η0 + a) – A(η0 ) – Aa
U , t = U (0, t) = 0,
U1 (a, t)

∀t > 0. 

Proposition 3.2 If h is SN(WN)-Fréchet differentiable at η0 ∈ H, then it is strong (weak)

neutrosophic continuous at η0 .

Proof We take the following inequalities. For given t > 0,

   
T h(η) – h(η0 ), t = T h(η) – h(η0 ) – Ta + Ta, t
    
≥ T h(η) – h(η0 ) – Ta, t 1 – T1 (a, t) • (1 – T Ta, tT1 (a, t)
   
 h(η) – h(η0 ) – Ta  Ta
=T ,t • T ,t ,
(1 – T1 (a, t)) T1 (a, t)
Khan and Khan Journal of Inequalities and Applications (2022) 2022:153 Page 10 of 13

and
   
S h(η) – h(η0 ), t = S h(η) – h(η0 ) – Ta + Ta, t
     
≤ S h(η) – h(η0 ) – Ta, t 1 – S1 (a, t)  1 – S1 Ta, tS (a, t)
   
 h(η) – h(η0 ) – Ta  Ta
=S ,t  S ,t ,
(S1 (a, t)) 1 – S1 (a, t)
   
U h(η) – h(η0 ), t = U h(η) – h(η0 ) – Ta + Ta, t
     
≤ U h(η) – h(η0 ) – Ta, t 1 – U1 (a, t)  1 – U1 Ta, tU (a, t)
   
 h(η) – h(η0 ) – Ta  Ta
=U ,t  U ,t .
(U1 (a, t)) 1 – U1 (a, t)

Since h is SN(WN)-Fréchet differentiable at η0 ∈ H, it follows that

 
  Ta
T h(η) – h(η0 ), t ≥ 1 • T ,t ,
T1 (a, t)

and
 
  Ta
S h(η) – h(η0 ), t ≤ 0  S ,t ,
1 – S1 (a, t)
 

   Ta
U h(η) – h(η0 ), t ≤ 0  U ,t ,
1 – U1 (a, t)

where T = DSN(WN) h[η0 ]. Therefore, h is strong(weak) neutrosophic continuous. 

Theorem 3.4 Suppose (Y , T1 , S1 , U1 , •, ) and (W , T , S , U , •, ) are two NNS, H ⊆ Y be

an neutrosophic open subset, and h : H → W . If h is SN-Fréchet differentiable at some
η0 ∈ H, then it is WN-Fréchet differentiable at some η0 with the same derivative but not
conversely. The proof of the above theorem follows directly from the Proposition 3.2. For the
converse part, let us consider the following example.

Example 3.3 Let Y = W = p (1 ≤ p < ∞), the Banach space of all absolutely p-summable
1
sequences with the norm ηp = ( n |η|p ) p . Define the functions

⎧
⎨ t2
p if t > 0,
t 2 +2ηp
T1 (η, t) =
⎩0 if t < 0;
⎧
⎨1, if t > 0 and t 2 > ηp ,
p
T (η, t) =
⎩0, if t < 0 and t 2 ≤ ηpp ;

and
⎧ p
⎨ 2ηp
p if t > 0,
2
t +2ηp
S1 (η, t) =
⎩0 if t < 0;
Khan and Khan Journal of Inequalities and Applications (2022) 2022:153 Page 11 of 13

⎧
⎨0, if t > 0 and t 2 > ηp ,
p
S (η, t) =
⎩1, if t < 0 and t 2 ≤ ηpp ;
⎧ p
⎨ 2ηp
p if t > 0,
t 2 +2ηp
U1 (η, t) =
⎩0 if t < 0;
⎧
⎨0, if t > 0 and t 2 > ηp ,
p
U (η, t) =
⎩1, if t < 0 and t 2 ≤ ηpp .

Then (Y , T1 , S1 , U1 ) and (W , T , S , U ) are neutrosophic norms on p . Consider the

shift operator G(η) = G({η1 , η2 ...}) = {0, η1 , η2 ...} on p . It is simple to see that linear op-
erator G is weakly bounded hence is weakly continuous from (p , T1 , S1 , U1 , •, ) into
(p , T , S , U , •, ) but not strongly continuous; since G is linear, we get from Theorem 3.2
that G = DWN G[η] for all η ∈ p , while DSN G[η] does not exist.

Definition 3.9 A subset B in NNS (Y , T, S, U, , ◦) is called SN(WN)-compact if each se-

quence of elements of B has an SN(WN)-convergent subsequence.

Definition 3.10 (Y , T1 , S1 , U1 , •, ) and (W , T , S , U , •, ) be two NNS and h : Y → W .

Then h is said to be SN(WN)-compact if for every neutrosophic bounded subset B of
Y , the subset h(B ) is relatively SN(WN)-compact, i.e., the closure of h(B ) is SN(WN)-
compact.

Remark 3.1 By the same way as in the proof of [25, Theorem 5], we can prove that h
is SN(WN)-compact if it maps every neutrosophic bounded sequence onto a sequence
which has an SN(WN)-convergent subsequence. Therefore, an SN-compact operator is
WN-compact but not conversely. For example, the identity operator on (c0 , T, S, U, •, ),
in Example 3.3 is not SN-compact while it is WN-compact. Because ( p1 )∞
p=1 cannot have
SN-convergent subsequence.

Theorem 3.5 (Y , T1 , S1 , U1 , •, ) and (W , T , S , U , •, ) be two WN-complete NNS and h :

Y → W be nonlinear WN-compact operator. Let, for some η0 ∈ Y , DWN h[η0 ] = A exist.
Then the linear operator A is also WN-compact.

Proof Suppose ηp ⊂ (Y , T1 , S1 , U1 , •, ) is an arbitrary neutrosophic bounded sequence. ∃

some t0 > 0 and k ∈ (0, 1) such that T1 (ηp , t20 ) ≥ 1 – k and S1 (ηp , t20 ) ≤ k, U1 (ηp , t20 ) ≤ k, for
every +ve integer p. Let the sequence (η0 + ηp )∞ k=1 , and let us show that it is neutrosophic
bounded. If we take 1 – p1 = T1 (ηp , 2 ) • 1 – p and p1 = S1 (ηp , t20 )  p, p1 = U1 (ηp , t20 )  p then
t0

     
t0 t0 t0
T1 (η0 + ηp , t0 ) ≥ T1 η0 , • T1 ηp , > T1 η0 , • (1 – p) = 1 – p1 ,
2 2 2

and
     
t0 t0 t0
S1 (η0 + ηp , t0 ) ≤ S1 η0 ,  S1 ηp , < S1 η0 ,  p = p1 ,
2 2 2
     
t0 t0 t0
U1 (η0 + ηp , t0 ) ≤ U1 η0 ,  U1 ηp , < U1 η0 ,  p = p1
2 2 2
Khan and Khan Journal of Inequalities and Applications (2022) 2022:153 Page 12 of 13

for every positive integer p. Rest of the proof can be done on the same lines as in [26]. 

4 Conclusion
The present paper introduces the Fréchet derivative of nonlinear operators between NNS
and the boundedness of linear operators between neutrosophic normed spaces. Current
work is an increase and extension of the work of Mursaleen et al. [27], i.e., in an NNS which
is more regular than the IFNS. So that, one may await it to be a more practical, modest
work in the domain of neutrosophic topology in modeling the inaccuracy and ambiguity
of several subjects arising in many fields of engineering, economics, and science.

Acknowledgements
The authors would like to thank the referees and the editor for their careful reading and valuable comments.

Funding
This work is financially supported by Aligarh Muslim University, Aligarh, India.

Availability of data and materials

Not applicable.

Declarations
Competing interests
The authors declare no competing interests.

Author contributions
VAK carried out the mathematical studies, participated in the sequence alignment, and drafted the manuscript. MDK
participated in the design of the study and performed the numerical analysis. All authors read and approved the final
manuscript.

Publisher’s Note
Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Received: 28 April 2022 Accepted: 21 June 2022

References
1. Zadeh, L.A.: Fuzzy sets. Inf. Control 8, 338–353 (1965)
2. Barros, L.C., Bassanezi, R.C., Tonelli, P.A.: Fuzzy modelling in population dynamics. Ecol. Model. 128, 27–33 (2000)
3. Giles, R.: A computer program for fuzzy reasoning. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 4, 221–234 (1980)
4. Feng, G., Chen, G.: Adaptative control of discrete-time chaotic systems: a fuzzy control approach. Chaos Solitons
Fractals 253, 459–467 (2005)
5. Fradkov, A.L., Evans, R.J.: Control of chaos: methods and applications in engineering. Chaos Solitons Fractals 29, 33–56
(2005)
6. Atanassov, K.: Intuitionistic fuzzy sets. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 20, 87–96 (1986)
7. Mursaleen, M., Mohiuddine, S.A.: Statistical convergence of double sequences in intuitionistic fuzzy normed spaces.
Chaos Solitons Fractals 41(5), 2414–2421 (2009)
8. Mursaleen, M., Mohiuddine, S.A., Edely, O.H.H.: On the ideal convergence of double sequences in intuitionistic fuzzy
normed spaces. Comput. Math. Appl. 59(2), 603–611 (2010)
9. Khan, V.A., Esi, A., Ahmad, M., Khan, M.D.: Continuous and bounded linear operators in neutrosophic normed spaces.
J. Intell. Fuzzy Syst. 40, 11063–11070 (2021). https://doi.org/10.3233/JIFS-202189
10. Hong, L., Sun, J.Q.: Bifurcations of fuzzy nonlinear dynamical systems. Commun. Nonlinear Sci. Numer. Simul. 1, 1–12
(2006)
11. Katrasas, A.K.: Fuzzy topological vector spaces. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 12, 143–154 (1984)
12. Kirişci, M., Şimşek, N.: Neutrosophic normed spaces and statistical convergence. J. Anal. 28, 1059–1073 (2020)
13. Smarandache, F.: A Unifying Field in Logics: Neutrosophic Logic. Neutrosophy, Neutrosophic Set, Neutrosophic
Probability: Neutrosophic Logic: Neutrosophy, Neutrosophic Set, Neutrosophic Probability (2003)
14. Smarandache, F.: Neutrosophic set-a generalization of the intuitionistic fuzzy set. Int. J. Pure Appl. Math. 24(3), 287
(2005)
15. Bera, T., Mahapatra, N.K.: On neutrosophic soft linear spaces. Fuzzy Inf. Eng. 9(3), 299–324 (2017)
16. Bera, T., Mahapatra, N.K.: Neutrosophic soft normed linear space. Neutrosophic Sets Syst. 23(1), 1–6 (2018)
17. Khan, V.A., Daud, K., Mobeen, A.: A some results of neutrosophic normed spaces VIA Fibonacci matrix. UPB Sci. Bull.,
Ser. A 83(2), 1–12 (2021)
18. Park, J.H.: Intuitionistic fuzzy metric space. Chaos Solitons Fractals 22, 1039–1046 (2004)
19. Saadati, R.: A note on some results on the IF-normed spaces. Chaos Solitons Fractals 41, 206–213 (2009)
20. Alimohammady, M., Roohi, M.: Compactness in fuzzy minimal spaces. Chaos Solitons Fractals 28, 906–912 (2006)
Khan and Khan Journal of Inequalities and Applications (2022) 2022:153 Page 13 of 13

21. Saadati, R., Park, J.H.: On the intuitionistic fuzzy topological spaces. Chaos Solitons Fractals 27, 331–344 (2006)
22. Muralikrishna, P., Kumar, D.S.: Neutrosophic approach on normed linear space. Neutrosophic Sets Syst. 30(1), 1–18
(2019)
23. Salama, A.A., Smarandache, F., Kromov, V.: Neutrosophic closed set and neutrosophic continuous functions.
Neutrosophic Sets Syst. 4, Article 2 (2014)
24. Kirişci, M., Şimşek, N.: Neutrosophic metric spaces. arXiv:1907.00798. arXiv preprint
25. Kaleva, O., Seikkala, S.: On fuzzy metric spaces. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 12, 215–229 (1984)
26. Schweizer, B., Sklar, A.: Statistical metric spaces. Pac. J. Math. 10, 313–334 (1960)
27. Mursaleen, M., Mohiuddine, S.A.: Nonlinear operators between intuitionistic fuzzy normed spaces and Fréchet
derivative. Chaos Solitons Fractals 42, 1010–1015 (2009)