(3,2)-FUZZY UP (BCC)-SUBALGEBRAS AND (3.

2)-FUZZY
UP (BCC)-FILTERS

Y. B. Jun , B. Brundha , N. Rajesh , and R. k. Bandaru

Dedicated to sincere professor Mashaallah Mashinchi

Article type: Research Article

(Received: 30 December 2021, Received in revised form: 09 March 2022)

(Accepted: 4 April 2022, Published Online: 15 April 2022)

Abstract. The aim of this article is to apply a (3, 2)-fuzzy set to the
UP (BCC)-subalgebras and UP (BCC)-filters of UP (BCC)-algebras. The
concepts of (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra, (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-
filter and (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter in UP (BCC)-algebras are intro-
duced and several properties, including their relations, are investigated.
The conditions under which the (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra (resp.,
(3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter) can be the (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-
filter (resp., (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter) are searched. Some character-
izations of (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter is provided and the relationship
between intuitionistic fuzzy UP-subalgebra and (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-
subalgebra is discussed. We use fuzzy UP-subalgebra (resp., fuzzy near
UP-filter, fuzzy UP-filter) to create a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra
(resp., (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter, (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter).

Keywords: (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra, (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-

filter, (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter, intuitionistic fuzzy UP-subalgebra.
2020 MSC : Primary 03G25, 06F35, 08A72.

1. Introduction
Atanasov is a Bulgarian mathematician and a member of the Bulgarian
Academy of Sciences. He is best known for introducing the concept of in-
tuitionistic fuzzy sets, which is one of the fuzzy set extensions with better
applications such as medical diagnostics, optimization challenges, and multi-
criteria decision making, etc. (see [1–4]). Yager [15] offered a new fuzzy set
called a Pythagorean fuzzy set, which is a generalization of intuitionistic fuzzy
sets. Ibrahim et al. defined the notion of a (3, 2)-fuzzy set, which is also a
generalization of intuitionistic fuzzy sets, and compared it with other kinds of
fuzzy sets, and then they discussed topological space based on (3, 2)-fuzzy sets
(see [8]). Iampan introduced the concept of UP-algebras (see [6]) as a gen-
eralization of KU-algebras (see [12]) and investigated their properties. Later
several substructures of UP-algebras have been discussed by several researchers

[email protected], ORCID: 0000-0002-0181-8969

DOI: 10.22103/jmmrc.2022.18786.1191 © the Authors
Publisher: Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman
How to cite: Y. B. Jun, B. Brundha, N. Rajesh and R. K. Bandaru, (3,2)-fuzzy UP
(BCC)-subalgebras and (3,2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filters, J. Mahani Math. Res. 2022; 11(3):
1-14.

1
2 Y. B. Jun, B. Brundha, N. Rajesh and R. K. Bandaru

(see [7,9]). Somjanta et al. applied the concept of fuzzy sets to UP-algebras and
investigated various properties (see [14]). Kesorn et al. [10] applied the concept
of intuitionistic fuzzy sets to UP-algebras and investigated various properties.
In developing a new algebraic structure, everyone has to study the existing
algebraic structure seriously and in depth, but the author A. Iampan of UP-
algebras seems to have neglected the study of the existing algebraic structure.
This is because the concept of UP (BCC)-algebras was first introduced by
Komori in 1984 (see [11]), and it can be observed that UP-algebras are the
same as UP (BCC)-algebras. In general, we think that the basic virtue of the
researcher is to use the concept first introduced when using the existing concept
in the study of algebraic structures. So in this paper, we will use the concept
of UP (BCC)-algebras instead of the concept of UP-algebras.
In this study, we are going to apply a (3, 2)-fuzzy set to the UP (BCC)-
subalgebras and UP (BCC)-filters of UP (BCC)-algebras. The main points of
this study are as follows.
(1) Introducing the concepts of (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra, (3, 2)-
fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter and (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter in UP
(BCC)-algebras, and investigating related properties.
(2) To discuss relationship between (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra, (3, 2)-
fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter, and (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter.
(3) To provide conditions under which the structure becomes (3, 2)-fuzzy
UP (BCC)-subalgebra and (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter.
(4) Providing conditions that (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra (resp.,
(3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter) becomes (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-
filter (resp., (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter).
(5) Considering the characterization of (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter.
(6) Discussting the relationship between intuitionistic fuzzy UP-subalgebra
and (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra.
(7) Deriving (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra (resp., (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP
(BCC)-filter, (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter) from a given fuzzy UP-
subalgebra (resp., fuzzy near UP-filter, fuzzy UP-filter).

2. Preliminaries
This section provides the basics required for this research.
The concept of BCC-algebra was first introduced by Komori in 1984 as
follows.
Definition 2.1 ( [11]). A BCC-algebra is an algebra A := (A; →, 1) of type
(2,0) such that for every x, y, z ∈ A the following conditions are satisfied:
(BCC-1) (y → z) → ((x → y) → (x → z)) = 1,
(BCC-2) x → x = 1,
(BCC-3) x → 1 = 1,
(BCC-4) 1 → x = x,
(BCC-5) If x → y = 1 and y → x = 1, then x = y.
 (3,2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebras and (3.2)-fuzzy UP... – JMMR Vol. 11, No. 3 (2022) 3

Remark 2.2. The condition (BCC-2) may be caused by the other conditions.
In fact, if we put x = y = 1 and z = x in (BCI-1), then
1 = (1 → x) → ((1 → 1) → (1 → x)) = x → (1 → x) = x → x
by (BCC-4).
By Remark 2.2, the BCC-algebra can be newly defined without condition
(BCC-2).
Definition 2.3 ( [5], p.33). Let X be a set with a special element 0 and
a binary operation “ ∗ ”. Then X := (X, ∗, 0) is called a BCC-algebra if it
satisfies:
(C1) (∀x, y, z ∈ X) ((y ∗ z) ∗ ((x ∗ y) ∗ (x ∗ z)) = 0),
(C2) (∀x ∈ X) (x ∗ 0 = 0),
(C3) (∀x ∈ X) (0 ∗ x = x),
(C4) (∀x, y ∈ X) (x ∗ y = 0, y ∗ x = 0 ⇒ x = y).
In 2017, Iampan introduced the concept of UP-algebras in [6] as follows.
Definition 2.4 ( [6]). An algebra X = (X, ∗, 0) of type (2, 0) is called a UP-
algebra if it satisfies the following conditions.
(1) (∀x, y, z ∈ X)((y ∗ z) ∗ ((x ∗ y) ∗ (x ∗ z)) = 0),
(2) (∀x ∈ X)(0 ∗ x = x),
(3) (∀x ∈ X)(x ∗ 0 = 0),
(4) (∀x, y ∈ X)(x ∗ y = 0 = y ∗ x ⇒ x = y).
We can observe that the concept of UP-algebras and the concept of BCC-
algebras are exactly the same. So in this paper, we would like to honor Komori’s
achievements by using the the concept of BCC-algebras instead of the concept
of UP-algebras.
We define a binary relation “ ≤ ” on a BCC-algebra X as follows:


(5) (∀x, y ∈ X) x ≤ y ⇔ x ∗ y = 0 .
In a BCC-algebra X, the following assertions are valid (see [6]).
(6) (∀x ∈ X)(x ∗ x = 0),
(7) (∀x, y, z ∈ X)(x ∗ y = 0, y ∗ z = 0 ⇒ x ∗ z = 0),
(8) (∀x, y, z ∈ X)(x ∗ y = 0 ⇒ (z ∗ x) ∗ (z ∗ y) = 0),
(9) (∀x, y, z ∈ X)(x ∗ y = 0 ⇒ (y ∗ z) ∗ (x ∗ z) = 0),
(10) (∀x, y ∈ X)(x ∗ (y ∗ x) = 0),
(11) (∀x, y ∈ X)((y ∗ x) ∗ x = 0 ⇔ x = y ∗ x),
(12) (∀x, y ∈ X)(x ∗ (y ∗ y) = 0).
A subset F of a UP (BCC)-algebra X is called
4 Y. B. Jun, B. Brundha, N. Rajesh and R. K. Bandaru

• a UP-subalgebra of X (see [6]) if it satisfies the following condition.

(13) (∀x, y ∈ X)(x ∈ F, y ∈ F ⇒ x ∗ y ∈ F ).
• a UP-filter of X (see [14]) if it satisfies the following conditions.
(14) 0 ∈ F,
(15) (∀x, y ∈ X)(x ∈ F, x ∗ y ∈ F ⇒ y ∈ F ).
• a near UP-filter of X (see [7]) if it satisfies (14) and
(16) (∀x, y ∈ X)(y ∈ F ⇒ x ∗ y ∈ F ).
Let X be a UP (BCC)-algebra. A fuzzy set µ : X → [0, 1] is called
• a fuzzy UP-subalgebra of X (see [14]) if it satisfies:
(17) (∀x, y ∈ X)(µ(x ∗ y) ≥ min{µ(x), µ(y)}),
• a fuzzy UP-filter of X (see [14]) if it satisfies:
(18) (∀x ∈ X)(µ(0) ≥ µ(x)),
(19) (∀x, y ∈ X)(µ(y) ≥ min{µ(x), µ(x ∗ y)}),
• a fuzzy near UP-filter of X (see [13]) if it satisfies (18) and
(20) (∀x, y ∈ X)(µ(x ∗ y) ≥ µ(y)).
Let X be a nonempty set. Consider a structure
(21) EX := {hx, f (x), g(x)i | x ∈ X},
where f : X → [0, 1] is the degree of membership of x to E and g : X → [0, 1]
is the degree of non-membership of x to E. The structure in (21) is simply
denoted by EX := (X, f, g).
A structure EX := (X, f, g) is called
• an intuitionistic fuzzy set on X (see [1]) if it satisfies:
(22) (∀x ∈ X)(0 ≤ f (x) + g(x) ≤ 1),
• a (3, 2)-fuzzy set on X (see [8]) if it satisfies:
(23) (∀x ∈ X)(0 ≤ (f (x))3 + (g(x))2 ≤ 1).
In what follows, we use the notations f m (x) and g n (x) instead of (f (x))m
and (g(x))n for (m, n) = (3, 2), respectively.
A structure EX := (X, f, g) on a BCC-algebra X is called an intuitionistic
fuzzy UP-subalgebra of X (see [10]) if it satisfies:
 
f (x ∗ y) ≥ min{f (x), f (y)}
(24) (∀x, y ∈ X) .
g(x ∗ y) ≤ max{g(x), g(y)}
 (3,2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebras and (3.2)-fuzzy UP... – JMMR Vol. 11, No. 3 (2022) 5

3. (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebras/UP (BCC)-filters

In this section, we define the notions of (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebras
and (3, 2)-fuzzy (near) UP (BCC)-filters, and explore several properties, rela-
tions and characterization etc.
In what follows, let X denote a UP (BCC)-algebra unless otherwise specified.
Definition 3.1. A structure EX := (X, f, g) on X is called
• a (3, 2)-fuzzy BCC-subalgebra of X if it satisfies:
 3
f (x ∗ y) ≥ min{f 3 (x), f 3 (y)}

(25) (∀x, y ∈ X) .
g 2 (x ∗ y) ≤ max{g 2 (x), g 2 (y)}
• a (3, 2)-fuzzy BCC-filter of X if it satisfies:
(26) (∀x ∈ X)(f 3 (0) ≥ f 3 (x), g 2 (0) ≤ g 2 (x)),
 3
f (y) ≥ min{f 3 (x ∗ y), f 3 (x)}

(27) (∀x, y ∈ X) .
g 2 (y) ≤ max{g 2 (x ∗ y), g 2 (x)}
• a (3, 2)-fuzzy near BCC-filter of X if it satisfies (26) and
 3
f (x ∗ y) ≥ f 3 (y)

(28) (∀x, y ∈ X) .
g 2 (x ∗ y) ≤ g 2 (y)
Example 3.2. (1) Let X = {0, a, b, c} be a set with the binary operation “ ∗ ”
given in the following table:
∗ 0 a b c
0 0 a b c
a 0 0 a c
b 0 0 0 c
c 0 a a 0
Then X is a UP (BCC)-algebra. Define a structure EX := (X, f, g) on X by
the table below:

X 0 a b c
f (x) 0.93 0.74 0.82 0.55
g(x) 0.17 0.43 0.19 0.66
It is routine to verify that EX := (X, f, g) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra
of X.
(2) Let X = {0, a, b, c} be a set with the binary operation “ ∗ ” given in the
following table:
∗ 0 a b c
0 0 a b c
a 0 0 b c
b 0 0 0 c
c 0 0 0 0
6 Y. B. Jun, B. Brundha, N. Rajesh and R. K. Bandaru

Then X is a UP (BCC)-algebra. Define a structure EX := (X, f, g) on X by

the table below:

X 0 a b c
f (x) 0.99 0.74 0.83 0.79
g(x) 0.11 0.65 0.38 0.41

It is routine to verify that EX := (X, f, g) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter

of X.
(3) Let X = {0, a, b, c} be a set with the binary operation “ ∗ ” given in the
following table:
∗ 0 a b c
0 0 a b c
a 0 0 b b
b 0 a 0 b
c 0 a 0 0
Then X is a UP (BCC)-algebra. Define a structure EX := (X, f, g) on X by
the table below:

X 0 a b c
f (x) 0.91 0.58 0.26 0.26
g(x) 0.19 0.48 0.58 0.58

It is routine to verify that EX := (X, f, g) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter of

X.
Proposition 3.3. Every (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra EX := (X, f, g) of
X satisfies the condition (26).
Proof. It is straightforward by the combination of (6) and (25). 

We provide conditions for a structure to be a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra.

Theorem 3.4. If a structure EX := (X, f, g) satisfies:
 3
f (x ∗ y) ≥ min{f 3 (y), f 3 (z)}
 
(29) (∀x, y, z ∈ X) z ∗ x = 0 ⇒ ,
g 2 (x ∗ y) ≤ max{g 2 (y), g 2 (z)}
then EX := (X, f, g) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra of X.
Proof. Since x ∗ x = 0 for all x ∈ X by (6), it follows from (29) that f 3 (x ∗
y) ≥ min{f 3 (x), f 3 (y)} and g 2 (x ∗ y) ≤ max{g 2 (x), g 2 (y)} for all x, y ∈ X.
Therefore, EX := (X, f, g) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra of X. 

Corollary 3.5. If a structure EX := (X, f, g) satisfies the condition (29), then

it satisfies the condition (26).
 (3,2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebras and (3.2)-fuzzy UP... – JMMR Vol. 11, No. 3 (2022) 7

Corollary 3.6. If a structure EX := (X, f, g) satisfies:

 3
f (x ∗ y) ≥ min{f 3 (y), f 3 (z)}

(30) (∀x, y, z ∈ X) ,
g 2 (x ∗ y) ≤ max{g 2 (y), g 2 (z)}
then EX := (X, f, g) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra of X.
Proof. It is clear that if EX := (X, f, g) satisfies (30), then it also satisfies (29).
Hence, EX := (X, f, g) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra of X by Theorem
3.4. 

The following example shows that there exists a structure EX := (X, f, g)

on X in which the condition (26) holds but the condition (29) does not hold.
Example 3.7. In Example 3.2(3), define a structure EX := (X, f, g) on X by
the table below:

X 0 a b c
f (x) 0.99 0.74 0.79 0.83
g(x) 0.17 0.45 0.66 0.19

Then EX := (X, f, g) satisfies the condition (26). But the condition (29) does
not hold because of c ∗ b = 0 but
f 3 (b ∗ c) = f 3 (b) = 0.493039  0.571787 = f 3 (c) = min{f 3 (c), f 3 (c)}
also
g 2 (b ∗ c) = g 2 (b) = 0.4356  0.0361 = g 2 (c) = max{g 2 (c), g 2 (c)}.
The following example shows that there exists a structure EX := (X, f, g) in
which the condition (29) holds but the condition (30) does not hold.
Example 3.8. Let X = {0, a1 , a2 , a3 } be a set with the binary operation “ ∗ ”
given in the following table:
∗ 0 a1 a2 a3
0 0 a1 a2 a3
a1 0 0 a3 a3
a2 0 a1 0 0
a3 0 a1 a2 0
Then X is a UP (BCC)-algebra. Define a structure EX := (X, f, g) on X by
the table below:

X 0 a1 a2 a3
f (x) 0.87 0.18 0.36 0.26
g(x) 0.42 0.92 0.58 0.87
8 Y. B. Jun, B. Brundha, N. Rajesh and R. K. Bandaru

It is routine to verify that EX := (X, f, g) satisfies the condition (29). The cal-
culation below f 3 (a1 ∗a2 ) = f 3 (a3 ) = 0.017576 < 0.046656 = min{f 3 (0), f 3 (a2 )}
and/or g 2 (a1 ∗a2 ) = g 2 (a3 ) = 0.7569 > 0.3364 = max{g 2 (0), g 2 (a2 )} shows that
EX := (X, f, g) does not satisfy the condition (30).
We provide conditions for a structure to be a (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-
filter.
Theorem 3.9. If a structure EX := (X, f, g) on X satisfies:
(31) (∀x, y ∈ X)(x ∗ y = 0 ⇒ f 3 (x) ≤ f 3 (y), g 2 (x) ≥ g 2 (y)),
then it is a (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter of X.
Proof. Let EX := (X, f, g) be a structure on X that satisfies the condition
(31). The condition (26) is induced by the combination of (3) and (31). Since
y ∗ (x ∗ y) = 0 for all x, y ∈ X, it follows from (31) that f 3 (y) ≤ f 3 (x ∗ y) and
g 2 (y) ≥ g 2 (x ∗ y) for all x, y ∈ X. Hence, EX := (X, f, g) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy near
UP (BCC)-filter of X. 

The following example shows that the converse of Theorem 3.9 is not true.
Example 3.10. Consider (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter EX := (X, f, g) of
X which is given in Example 3.2(2). Since b ∗ a = 0, f 3 (b) = 0.833  0.743 =
f 3 (a) and g 2 (b) = 0.382  0.652 = g 2 (a), we confirm that EX := (X, f, g) does
not satisfy the condition (31).
We discuss relationship among a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra, a (3, 2)-
fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter and a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter.
Theorem 3.11. Every (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP
(BCC)-subalgebra.
Proof. It is straightforward by definitions. 

By the combination of Proposition 3.3 and Theorem 3.11, we know that every
(3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter EX := (X, f, g) of X satisfies the condition
(26).
In Example 3.2(1), the (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra is not a (3, 2)-
fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter because of f 3 (c ∗ b) = f 3 (a) = 0.743 = 0.405224 
0.551368 = 0.823 = f 3 (b) and/or g 2 (c ∗ b) = g 2 (a) = 0.432  0.0.192 = g 2 (b).
This shows that the converse of Theorem 3.11 is not valid.
We provide condition(s) for a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra to be a
(3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter.
Theorem 3.12. If a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra EX := (X, f, g) of X
satisfies f 3 (x) ≥ f 3 (y) and g 2 (x) ≤ g 2 (y) for all x, y ∈ X with x ∗ y 6= 0, then
it is a (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter of X.
 (3,2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebras and (3.2)-fuzzy UP... – JMMR Vol. 11, No. 3 (2022) 9

Proof. Let x, y ∈ X. If x ∗ y 6= 0, then f 3 (x ∗ y) ≥ min{f 3 (x), f 3 (y)} = f 3 (y)

and g 2 (x ∗ y) ≤ max{g 2 (x), g 2 (y)} = g 2 (y) by (25) and the given assumption.
If x ∗ y = 0, then f 3 (x ∗ y) = f 3 (0) ≥ f 3 (y) and g 2 (x ∗ y) = g 2 (0) ≤ g 2 (y) by
Proposition 3.3. Therefore, EX := (X, f, g) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-
filter of X. 

Proposition 3.13. Every (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter EX := (X, f, g) of X

satisfies the condition (31).
Proof. Let x, y ∈ X be such that x ∗ y = 0. Then
f 3 (y) ≥ min{f 3 (x ∗ y), f 3 (x)} = min{f 3 (0), f 3 (x)} = f 3 (x)
and
g 2 (y) ≤ max{g 2 (x ∗ y), g 2 (x)} = max{g 2 (0), g 2 (x)} = g 2 (x)
by (26) and (27). 

The combination of (10) and Proposition 3.13 leads to the following corol-
lary.
Corollary 3.14. Every (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter EX := (X, f, g) of X sat-
isfies:
(32) (∀x, y ∈ X)(f 3 (y) ≤ f 3 (x ∗ y), g 2 (y) ≥ g 2 (x ∗ y)).
Theorem 3.15. If a structure EX := (X, f, g) on X satisfies the condition
(31), then it is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra of X.
Proof. Assume that a structure EX := (X, f, g) satisfies the condition (31). By
the combination of (10) and (31), we know that EX := (X, f, g) satisfies the
condition (30). Hence, EX := (X, f, g) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra
of X by Corollary 3.6. 

Theorem 3.16. Every (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter is a (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP

(BCC)-filter.
Proof. Let EX := (X, f, g) be a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter of X. For every
x, y ∈ X, we have
f 3 ((x ∗ y) ≥ min{f 3 (y ∗ (x ∗ y)), f 3 (y)} = min{f 3 (0), f 3 (y)} = f 3 (y)
and
g 2 ((x ∗ y) ≤ max{g 2 (y ∗ (x ∗ y)), g 2 (y)} = max{g 2 (0), g 2 (y)} = g 2 (y).
Hence, EX := (X, f, g) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter of X. 

Corollary 3.17. Every (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-

subalgebra.
10 Y. B. Jun, B. Brundha, N. Rajesh and R. K. Bandaru

The converse of Theorem 3.16 may not be true. In fact, the (3, 2)-fuzzy
near UP (BCC)-filter EX := (X, f, g) in Example 3.2(2) is not a (3, 2)-fuzzy
UP (BCC)-filter of X since
f 3 (a) = 0.743  0.793 = min{f 3 (c ∗ a), f 3 (c)}
and/or
g 2 (a) = 0.652  0.412 = max{g 2 (c ∗ a), g 2 (c)}.
We explore the conditions under which the converse of Theorem 3.16 is
established.
Theorem 3.18. Let EX := (X, f, g) be a (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter of
X. If it satisfies:
(33) (∀x, y ∈ X)(f 3 (y) ≥ f 3 (x ∗ y), g 2 (y) ≤ g 2 (x ∗ y)),
then EX := (X, f, g) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter of X.
Proof. Let EX := (X, f, g) be a (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter of X that
satisfies the condition (33). The condition (26) is induced by Proposition 3.3
and Theoem 3.11. By the combination of (28) and (33), we have
f 3 (y) ≥ min{f 3 (x), f 3 (y)} ≥ min{f 3 (x), f 3 (x ∗ y)}
and g 2 (y) ≤ max{g 2 (x), g 2 (y)} ≤ max{g 2 (x), g 2 (x ∗ y)}. Therefore, EX :=
(X, f, g) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter of X. 
The theorem below is a characterization of a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter.
Theorem 3.19. A structure EX := (X, f, g) on X is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-
filter of X if and only if it satisfies:
 3
f (y) ≥ min{f 3 (x), f 3 (z)}
 
(34) (∀x, y, z ∈ X) z ∗ (x ∗ y) = 0 ⇒ .
g 2 (y) ≤ max{g 2 (x), g 2 (z)}
Proof. Assume that EX := (X, f, g) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter of X and
let x, y, z ∈ X be such that z ∗ (x ∗ y) = 0. Then
f 3 (x ∗ y) ≥ min{f 3 (z ∗ (x ∗ y)), f 3 (z)} = min{f 3 (0), f 3 (z)} = f 3 (z)
and g 2 (x ∗ y) ≤ max{g 2 (z ∗ (x ∗ y)), g 2 (z)} = max{g 2 (0), E 2 (z)} = g 2 (z). Hence,
f 3 (y) ≥ min{f 3 (x ∗ y), f 3 (x)} ≥ min{f 3 (x), f 3 (z)}
and
g 2 (y) ≤ max{g 2 (x ∗ y), g 2 (x)} ≤ max{g 2 (x), g 2 (z)}.
Conversely, suppose that a structure EX := (X, f, g) on X satisfies the con-
dition (34). Let x, y ∈ X. Since x ∗ (x ∗ 0) = 0 by (3), we have f 3 (0) ≥
min{f 3 (x), f 3 (x)} = f 3 (x) and g 2 (0) ≤ max{g 2 (x), g 2 (x)} = g 2 (x). Since
(x ∗ y) ∗ (x ∗ y) = 0 by (6), we get f 3 (y) ≥ min{f 3 (x ∗ y), f 3 (x)} and g 2 (y) ≤
max{g 2 (x ∗ y), g 2 (x)}. Therefore, EX := (X, f, g) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-
filter of X. 
 (3,2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebras and (3.2)-fuzzy UP... – JMMR Vol. 11, No. 3 (2022) 11

It is routine to verify that if a structure EX := (X, f, g) on X satisfies (34),

then it also satisfies the condition (31). Hence, we have the following corollary
by Theorems 3.9 and 3.19.
Corollary 3.20. If a structure EX := (X, f, g) on X satisfies the condition
(34), then it is a (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter of X.
Theorem 3.21. Given a fuzzy set f on X, consider the induced structure
ẼX := (X, f, g̃) on X where
(35) g̃ : X → [0, 1], x 7→ 1 − f (x).

Then the induced structure ẼX := (X, f, g̃) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy set on X, and if it
is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra (resp., (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter,
(3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter) of X, then f is a fuzzy UP-subalgebra (resp., fuzzy
near UP-filter, fuzzy UP-filter) of X.
Proof. For every x ∈ X, we have
0 ≤ f 3 (x) + g̃ 2 (x) = f 3 (x) + (1 − f (x))2 ≤ f 3 (x) + 1 − f 3 (x) = 1,
and so ẼX := (X, f, g̃) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy set on X. Assume that ẼX := (X, f, g̃)
is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter of X. Then f 3 (0) ≥ f 3 (x) and f 3 (y) ≥
min{f 3 (x ∗ y), f 3 (x)} for all x, y ∈ X. Hence, f (0) ≥ f (x) for all x ∈ X.
If min{f 3 (x ∗ y), f 3 (x)} = f 3 (x ∗ y) or min{f 3 (x ∗ y), f 3 (x)} = f 3 (x), then
f (y) ≥ f (x∗y) or f (y) ≥ f (x). Thus f (y) ≥ min{f (x∗y), f (x)}. Therefore, f is
a fuzzy UP-filter of X. By the similar way, we can check that if ẼX := (X, f, g̃)
is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra (resp., (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter)
of X, then f is a fuzzy UP-subalgebra (resp., fuzzy near UP-filter) of X. 

We now discuss the relationship between an intuitionistic fuzzy UP-subalgebra

and a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra.
Theorem 3.22. Every intuitionistic fuzzy UP-subalgebra is a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP
(BCC)-subalgebra.
Proof. Let E := (X, f, g) be an intuitionistic fuzzy UP-subalgebra of X. Then
f (x ∗ y) ≥ min{f (x), f (y)} and g(x ∗ y) ≤ max{g(x), g(y)} for all x, y ∈ X. We
consider the following cases:
(1) f (x) ≥ f (y) and g(x) ≥ g(y),
(2) f (x) ≥ f (y) and g(x) < g(y),
(3) f (x) < f (y) and g(x) ≥ g(y),
(4) f (x) < f (y) and g(x) < g(y).
The first case implies f 3 (x) ≥ f 3 (y) and g 2 (x) ≥ g 2 (y), and so
f 3 (x ∗ y) = (f (x ∗ y))3 ≥ (min{f (x), f (y)})3
= (f (y))3 = f 3 (y) = min{f 3 (x), f 3 (y)}
12 Y. B. Jun, B. Brundha, N. Rajesh and R. K. Bandaru

and
g 2 (x ∗ y) = (g(x ∗ y))2 ≤ (max{g(x), g(y)})2
= (g(x))2 = g 2 (x) = max{g 2 (x), g 2 (y)}
for all x, y ∈ X. The case 4 implies that f 3 (x) < f 3 (y) and g 2 (x) < g 2 (y), and
so
f 3 (x ∗ y) = (f (x ∗ y))3 ≥ (min{f (x), f (y)})3
= (f (x))3 = f 3 (x) = min{f 3 (x), f 3 (y)}
and
g 2 (x ∗ y) = (g(x ∗ y))2 ≤ (max{g(x), g(y)})2
= (g(y))2 = g 2 (y) = max{g 2 (x), g 2 (y)}
for all x, y ∈ X. In the rest of the cases, we can check that the condition (25)
is true in the same way. Hence, E := (X, f, g) is an (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-
subalgebra of X. 
The converse of Theorem 3.22 may not be true. In fact, the (3, 2)-fuzzy UP
(BCC)-subalgebra E := (X, f, g) of X in Example 3.2(1) is not an intuitionistic
fuzzy UP-subalgebra of X because of f (a) + g(a) = 1.17  1.
It is clear that if f is a fuzzy UP-subalgebra (resp., fuzzy near UP-filter, fuzzy
UP-filter) of X, then the induced structure ẼX := (X, f, g̃) is an intuitionistic
fuzzy UP-subalgebra (resp., intuitionistic fuzzy near UP-filter, intuitionistic
fuzzy UP-filter) of X. Hence, we have the following corollary.
Corollary 3.23. If f is a fuzzy UP-subalgebra (resp., fuzzy near UP-filter,
fuzzy UP-filter) of X, then the induced structure ẼX := (X, f, g̃) is a (3, 2)-fuzzy
UP (BCC)-subalgebra (resp., (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter, (3, 2)-fuzzy UP
(BCC)-filter) of X.

4. Conclusion
The idea of intuitionistic fuzzy sets suggested by Atanassov is one of the
extension of fuzzy sets with better applicability in medical diagnosis, optimiza-
tion problems, and multicriteria decision making, etc. Ibrahim introduced the
notion of (3, 2)-fuzzy set as another extension of intuitionistic fuzzy sets. In
this paper, we have applied the (3, 2)-fuzzy set to the UP (BCC)-subalgebras
and UP (BCC)-filters of UP (BCC)-algebras. We have introduced the con-
cept of (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra, (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter
and (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter in UP (BCC)-algebras, and investigated sev-
eral properties, including their relations. We have given the conditions un-
der which the (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra (resp., (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP
(BCC)-filter) can be the (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter (resp., (3, 2)-fuzzy
UP (BCC)-filter). We have provided some characterizations of (3, 2)-fuzzy
UP (BCC)-filter and discussed the relationship between intuitionistic fuzzy
 (3,2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebras and (3.2)-fuzzy UP... – JMMR Vol. 11, No. 3 (2022) 13

UP-subalgebra and (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra. We have used fuzzy

UP-subalgebra (resp., fuzzy near UP-filter, fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter) to create
a (3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-subalgebra (resp., (3, 2)-fuzzy near UP (BCC)-filter,
(3, 2)-fuzzy UP (BCC)-filter).
In future work, we will apply (3, 2)-fuzzy sets to other algebraic structures
such as MV-algebras, equality algebras, hoops, EQ-algebras, etc. Also, we will
try to study soft and rough set theory based on (3, 2)-fuzzy algebraic structures.
We will explore the possibility of using the ideas and results of this paper for
decision-making theory or medical diagnosis.

5. Aknowledgement
The authors wish to thank the anonymous reviewers and language editor of
the journal for their valuable suggestions.

References
[1] K. T. Atanassov, Intuitionistic fuzzy sets, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 20 (1986), no. 1,
87–96.
[2] H. Garg and S. Singh, A novel triangular interval type-2 intuitionistic fuzzy set and
their aggregation operators, Iran. J. Fuzzy Syst., 15 (2018), 69–93.
[3] H. Garg and K. Kumar, An advanced study on the similarity measures of intuitionistic
fuzzy sets based on the set pair analysis theory and their application in decision making,
Soft Computing, 22 (2018), no. 15, 4959–4970.
[4] H. Garg and K. Kumar, Distance measures for connection number sets based on set
pair analysis and its applications to decision-making process, Applied Intelligence, 48
(2018), no. 10, 3346–3359.
[5] Y. Huang, BCI-algebra, Science Press, Beijing, (2006).
[6] A. Iampan, A new branch of the logical algebra: UP-algebras, J. Algebra Relat. Top.,
5(1) (2017), 35–54.
[7] A. Iampan, Multipliers and near UP-filters of UP-algebras, J. Discrete Math. Sci. Cryp-
togr., 24 (2021), no. 3, 667–680. DOI: 10.1080/09720529.2019.1649027
[8] H. Z. Ibrahim, T. M. Al-shami and O. G. Elbarbary, (3, 2)-fuzzy sets and their appli-
cations to topology and optimal choice, Computational Intelligence and Neuroscience,
Volume 2021, Article ID 1272266, 14 pages. https://doi.org/10.1155/2021/1272266
[9] Y. B. Jun, G. Muhiuddin and S. A. Romano, On filters in UP-algebras, A review
and some new reflections, J. Int. Math. Virtual Inst., 11(1) (2021), 35–52. DOI:
10.7251/JIMVI2101035J
[10] B. Kesorn, K. Maimun, W. Ratbandan and A. Iampan, Intuitionistic fuzzy sets in UP-
algebras, Ital. J. Pure Appl. Math. 34 (2015), 339–364.
[11] Y. Komori, The class of BCC-algebras is not a variety, Math. Japonica 29 (1984), no.
3, 391–394.
[12] S. M. Mostafa, M. A. A. Naby, M. M. M. Yousef, Fuzzy ideals of KU-algebras, Int.
Math. Forum, 63 (2011), 3139–3149.
[13] A. Satirad and A. Iampan, Fuzzy soft sets over fully UP-semigroups, Eur. J. Pure Appl.
Math, 12 (2019), no. 2, 294–331.
[14] J. Somjanta, N. Thuekaew, P. Kumpeangkeaw and A. Iampan, Fuzzy sets in UP-
algebras, Ann. Fuzzy Math. Inform., 12 (2016), 739–756.
[15] R. R. Yager, Pythagorean fuzzy subsets, in Proceedings of the 2013 joint IFSA world
congress and NAFIPS annual meeting (IFSA/NAFIPS), pp. 57–61, IEEE, Edmonton,
Canada, 2013.
14 Y. B. Jun, B. Brundha, N. Rajesh and R. K. Bandaru

Young Bae Jun

Orcid number: 0000-0002-0181-8969
Department of Mathematics Education
Gyeongsang National University
Jinju 52828, Korea
Email address: [email protected]

B. Brundha
Orcid number: 0000-0001-7248-660X
Department of Mathematics
Government Arts College for Women
Orathanadu-614625, Tamilnadu, India
Email address: [email protected]

N. Rajesh
Orcid number: 0000-0003-2733-8610
Department of Mathematics
Rajah Serfoji Government College (affliated to Bharathdasan University)
Thanjavur-613005, Tamilnadu, India
Email address: nrajesh [email protected]

Ravikumar Bandaru
Orcid number: 0000-0001-8661-7914
Department of Mathematics
GITAM (Deemed to be University), Hyderabad Campus
Telangana-502329, India
Email address: [email protected]