Iranian Journal of Fuzzy Systems Vol. 8, No. 5, (2011) pp.

81-101 81
A NEW WAY TO FUZZY -IDEALS OF HEMIRINGS
Y. YIN, J. ZHAN AND X. HUANG
Abstract. By means of a kind of new idea, we consider the (, q)-fuzzy
-ideals of a hemiring. First, the concepts of (, q)-fuzzy left(right) -
ideals of a hemiring are provided and some related properties are investigated.
Then, a kind of quotient hemiring of a hemiring by an (, q)-fuzzy -ideal
is presented and studied. Moreover, the notions of generalized ,-compatible
(, q)-fuzzy left(right) -ideals of a hemiring are introduced and some prop-
erties of them are provided. Finally, the relationships among (, q)-fuzzy
-ideals, quotient hemirings and homomorphisms are explored and several ho-
momorphism theorems are provided.
1. Introduction
Semirings which are regarded as a generalization of rings and bounded distribu-
tive lattice have been found useful in solving problems in dierent disciplines of
applied mathematics and information sciences, since the structure of a semiring
provides an algebraic framework for modelling and studying the key factors in
these applied areas. By a hemiring, we mean a special semiring with a zero and
with a commutative addition. In applications, hemirings are useful in automata
and formal languages [4, 13].
It is well known that ideals of semirings play a central role in the structure theory
and are useful for many purposes. However, they do not in general coincide with
the usual ring ideals and, for this reason, their use is somewhat limited in trying
to obtain analogues of ring theorems for semirings. Indeed, many results in rings
apparently have no analogues in semirings using only ideals. In order to overcome
this deciency, Henriksen [5] dened a more restricted class of ideals in semirings,
which is called the class of k-ideals, with the property that if the semiring o is a
ring then a complex in o is a /-ideal if and only if it is a ring ideal. A still more
restricted class of ideals in hemirings has been given by Iizuka [7]. According to
Iizulas denition, an ideal in any additively commutative semiring o can be given
which coincides with a ring ideal provided o is a hemiring, and it is called h-ideal.
The properties of -ideals and /-ideals of hemirings were thoroughly investigated
by La Torre [9] and by using the -ideals and /-ideals, La Torre established some
analogous ring theorems for hemirings. The general properties of fuzzy -ideals
have been considered by Huang, Jun, Zhan, Yin and others. The reader is refereed
to [6, 8, 10, 14, 16].
Received: January 2010; Revised: August 2010; Accepted: October 2010
Key words and phrases: Hemiring, (, q)-fuzzy left(right) -ideals, Generalized ,-
compatible (, q)-fuzzy left(right) -ideals.
82 Y. Yin, J. Zhan and X. Huang
After the introduction of fuzzy groups by Rosenfeld [12], there have been a num-
ber of generalizations of this fundamental concept. Using the notion belongingness
() and quasi-coincidence (q) of fuzzy points with fuzzy sets, the concept of
(c, a)-fuzzy subgroups where c, a are any two of {, , , } with c =
was introduced by Bhakat and Das [1] in 1992, in which the (, )-fuzzy sub-
group is an important and useful generalization of Rosenfelds fuzzy subgroup. It
is now natural to investigate similar types of generalizations of the existing fuzzy
subsystems with other algebraic structures. Davvaz and Corsini [2] introduced
the notion of (c, a)-fuzzy H
u
-ideals of H
u
-rings and investigated especially the
(, )-fuzzy H
u
-ideals of H
u
-rings. Zhan et al. [17] introduced and studied the
notions of (, )-fuzzy j-ideals, (, )-fuzzy -ideals and (, )-fuzzy
o-ideals in BCI-algebras . Recently, Ma et al. [11] introduced the concept of an
(, )-fuzzy -bi-ideal (resp., -quasi-ideal) of a hemiring and investigated some
of its properties. Dudek et al. [3] studied (, )-prime and semiprime ideals of
hemirings. Yin et al. [15] presented and investigated the concept of (, )-fuzzy
-ideals and (, )-fuzzy -interior ideals of a hemiring by a new ideal. In par-
ticular, they considered the characterization of -semisimple hemirings in terms of
these ideals.
The rest of this paper is organized as follows. In Section 2, we summarize some
basic concepts which will be used throughout the paper. In Section 3, by a new
idea, we redene the concept of left(right) (, )-fuzzy -ideals of hemirings and
investigate some of their properties. Two kinds of quotient hemirings of a hemiring
by an (, )-fuzzy -ideal are also introduced and studied. In Section 4, the
notion of generalized ,-compatible (, )-fuzzy left(right) -ideals of a hemir-
ing is introduced and the relationships among (, )-fuzzy -ideals, quotient
hemirings and homomorphisms are explored. Several homomorphism theorems are
provided. Some conclusions are given in the last Section.
2. Preliminaries
A semiring is an algebraic system (o, +, ) consisting of a non-empty set o to-
gether with two binary operations on o called addition and multiplication (denoted
in the usual manner) such that (o, +) and (o, ) are semigroups and the following
distributive laws
o (/ +c) = o / +/ c and (o +/) c = o c +/ c
are satised for all o, /, c o.
By zero of a semiring (o, +, ) we mean an element 0 o such that 0r = r0 = 0
and 0+r = r+0 = r for all r o. A semiring (o, +, ) with zero is called a hemiring
if (o, +) is commutative. A hemiring is called additive cancellable if r +. = j +.
implies r = j for all r, j, . o. For the sake of simplicity, we shall omit the symbol
, writing o/ for o / (o, / o).
A subset in a hemiring o is called a left(resp., right) ideal of o if is closed
under addition and o (resp., o ). Further, is called an ideal of o if it
is both a left ideal and a right ideal of o.
A New Way to Fuzzy -ideals of Hemirings 83
A left ideal of o is called a left -ideal if r, . o, o, / , and r+o+. = /+.
implies r . Right -ideals, h-ideals are dened similarly.
We now recall some fuzzy logic concepts. A fuzzy subset j in a hemiring o
is dened as a mapping from o to [0, 1], where [0, 1] is the usual interval of real
numbers. We denote by F(o) the set of all fuzzy subsets in o. A fuzzy subset j
in o of the form
j(j) =
{
:(= 0) if j = r,
0 otherwise
is said to be a fuzzy point with support r and value : and is denoted by r
:
. A
fuzzy point r
:
is said to belong to (resp., be quasi-coincident with) a fuzzy set j,
written as r
:
j (resp., r
:
j) if j(r) : (resp., j(r) + : 1). If j(r) : or
j(r) +: 1, then we write r
:
j.
For j F(o) and : (0, 1]. The sets j
:
= {r oj(r) :} and [j]
:
= {r
or
:
j} are called a level subset of j and an -level subset of j, respectively.
And j is said to have the sup-property if for any non-empty subset in o, there
exists r such that j(r) =

.
j(j).
Next we dene a new ordering relation on F(o), which is called the
fuzzy inclusion or quasi-coincidence relation, as follows:
For any j, i F(o), j i if and only if r
:
j implies r
:
i for all
r o and : (0, 1].
And we dene a relation on F(o) as follows:
For any j, i F(o), j i if and only if j i and i j.
In the sequel, unless otherwise stated, `(:
1
, :
2
, , :
n
), where n is a positive
integer, will denote :
1
:
2
:
n
for all :
1
, :
2
, , :
n
[0, 1], means
does not hold and implies is not true.
Lemma 2.1. [15] Let j, i F(o). Then j i if and only if i(r) `(j(r), 0.5)
for all r o.
Lemma 2.2. [15] Let j, i, . F(o) be such that j i and i .. Then
j ..
Then Lemma 2.1 implies that j i if and only if `(j(r), 0.5) = `(i(r), 0.5) for
all r o and j, i F(o), and it follows from Lemmas 2.1 and 2.2 that is
an equivalence relation on F(o).
Next, we will give the denition of the product and sum of two fuzzy subsets in
a hemiring o.
Denition 2.3. Let o be a hemiring and j, i F(o). We dene the sum and
product, denoted by j +i and j i, of j and i by
(j +i)(r) = sup
i=o+b
`(j(o), i(/))
84 Y. Yin, J. Zhan and X. Huang
and
(j i)(r) =
{
sup
i=ob
`(j(o), i(/)) if there exist o, / o such that r = o/,
0 otherwise,
respectively, for all r o. For any r o, dene r +j by
(r +j)(j) =
{
sup
=i+o
j(o) if there exists o o such that j = r +o,
0 otherwise,
for all j o.
Note that if r o and j F(o), then r +j = r
1
+j. The -sum of two fuzzy
subsets in a hemiring o is given as follows.
Denition 2.4. [15] Let j and i be fuzzy subsets in a hemiring o. Then the -sum
of j and i is dened by
(j +

i)(r) = sup
i+o
1
+b
1
+:=o
2
+b
2
+:
`(j(o
1
), j(o
2
), i(/
1
), i(/
2
))
if there exist o
1
, o
2
, /
1
, /
2
, . o such that r +o
1
+/
1
+. = o
2
+/
2
+.. Otherwise,
(j +

i)(r) = 0.
Example 2.5. Let o = {0, o, /} be a set with an addition operation (+) and a
multiplication operation () as follows:
+ 0 o /
0 0 o /
o o 0 /
/ / / 0
and
0 o /
0 0 0 0
o 0 0 0
/ 0 0 /
Then o is a hemiring. Dene two fuzzy subsets j and i in o by
j(0) = 0.2, j(o) = 0.5, j(/) = 0.6 and i(0) = 0.2, i(o) = 0.2, i(/) = 0.6,
respectively. Then routine verication gives that
(j +i)(0) = 0.6, (j +i)(o) = 0.2, (j +i)(/) = 0.5
and
(j +

i)(0) = 0.6, (j +

i)(o) = 0.6, (j +

i)(/) = 0.2.
Example 2.5 indicates that there is not necessary connection between j +i and
j +

i. However, in Section 3 we will see that j + i j +

i under certain
conditions.
Lemma 2.6. Let o be a hemiring and j
1
, j
2
, i
1
, i
2
F(o) such that j
1
j
2
and i
1
i
2
. Then
(1) j
1
+i
1
j
2
+i
2
, j
1
+

i
1
j
2
+

i
2
and j
1
i
1
j
2
i
2
.
(2) j
1
i
1
j
2
i
2
.
A New Way to Fuzzy -ideals of Hemirings 85
Proof. We only prove j
1
+ i
1
j
2
+ i
2
. The other properties can be similarly
proved. For any r o, since j
1
j
2
and i
1
i
2
, we have
(j
2
+i
2
)(r) = sup
i=o+b
`(j
2
(o), i
2
(/)) sup
i=o+b
`(`(j
1
(o), 0.5), `(i
1
(/), 0.5))
=`
(
sup
i=o+b
`(j
1
(o), i
1
(/), 0.5
)
= `((j
1
+i
1
)(r), 0.5).
Hence j
1
+i
1
j
2
+i
2
by Lemma 2.1.
Lemma 2.6 indicates that the equivalence relation is a congruence relation
on (F(o), +), (F(o), +

) and (F(o), ).
Lemma 2.7. Let o be a hemiring and j, i, . F(o). Then
(1) j + (i .) = j +i j +., (j i) +. = j +. i +..
(2) j + (i .) j +i j +., (j i) +. j +. i +..
(3) j +

(i .) = j +

i j +

., (j i) +

. = j +

. i +

..
(4) j +

(i .) j +

i j +

., (j i) +

. j +

. i +

..
(5) j (i .) = j i j ., (j i) . = j . i ..
(6) j (i .) j i j ., (j i) . j . i ..
Proof. The proof is similar to that of Lemma 2.6.
3. (, )-fuzzy -ideals of Hemirings
It is well known that ideal theory plays a fundamental role in the development of
hemirings. In this section, using the new ordering relation on F(o), we dene and
investigate (, )-fuzzy left(right) -ideals of hemirings in a dierent manner
compared with [15].
Denition 3.1. A fuzzy subset j in a hemiring o is called an (, )-fuzzy
left(resp., right) -ideal if it satises:
(F1a) j +j j,
(F2a)

j j(resp., j

j),
(F3a) r + o + . = / + ., o
:
, /
s
j r
1(:,s)
j for all o, /, r, . o and
:, : (0, 1].
A fuzzy subset in a hemiring o is called an (, )-fuzzy h-ideal of o if it is
both an (, )-fuzzy right -ideal and an (, )-fuzzy left -ideal of o.
Let us rst provide some auxiliary lemmas as follows.
Lemma 3.2. Let o be a hemiring and j F(o). Then (F1a) holds if and only if
one of the following conditions holds:
(F1b) r
:
, j
s
j (r +j)
1(:,s)
j for all r, j o and :, : (0, 1].
(F1c) j(r +j) `(j(r), j(j), 0.5) for all r, j o.
Proof. (F1a)(F1b) Let r, j o and :, : (0, 1] be such that r
:
, j
s
j. Then
86 Y. Yin, J. Zhan and X. Huang
(j +j)(r +j) =

i+=o+b
`(j(o), j(/)) `(j(r), j(j)) `(:, :).
Hence (r +j)
1(:,s)
j +j and so (r +j)
1(:,s)
j by (F1a).
(F1b)(F1c) If possible, let j(r+j) < : = `(j(r), j(j), 0.5) for some r, j o.
Then r
:
, j
:
j and j(r+j)+: < :+: 1, that is, (r+j)
:
j, a contradiction.
Hence (F1c) is valid.
(F1c)(F1a) For r
:
j + j, if possible, let r
:
j. Then j(r) < : and
j(r) +: 1, which gives that j(r) < 0.5. If r = j +. for some j, . o, by (F1c),
we have 0.5 j(r) `(j(j), j(.), 0.5), which implies j(r) `(j(j), j(.)).
Hence we have
: (j +j)(r) = sup
i=o+b
`(j(o), j(/)) sup
i=o+b
j(r) = j(r),
a contradiction. Hence (F1a) is satised.
Lemma 3.3. Let o be a hemiring and j F(o). Then (F2a) holds if and only if
one of the following conditions holds:
(F2b) r
:
j (jr)
:
j(resp., r
:
j (rj)
:
j) for all r, j o and
: (0, 1].
(F2c) j(rj) `(j(j), 0.5)(resp., j(rj) `(j(r), 0.5)) for all r, j o.
Proof. The proof is similar to that of Lemma 3.2.
Lemma 3.4. Let o be a hemiring and j F(o). Then (F3a) holds if and only if
the following condition holds:
(F3c) r +o +. = / +. j(r) `(j(o), j(/), 0.5) for all o, /, r, . o.
Proof. (F3a)(F3c) If there exist r, ., o, / o such that r + o + . = / + . but
j(r) < : = `(j(o), j(o), 0.5), then o
:
, /
:
j and j(r) + : < : + : 1, that is,
r
:
j, a contradiction. Hence (F3c) is valid.
(F3c)(F3a) Let r, ., o, / o be such that r+o+. = /+. and o
:
, /
s
j. Then
j(o) : and j(/) :, If r
1(:,s)
j, then j(r) < `(:, :) and j(r)+`(:, :) 1,
which gives that j(r) < 0.5 and j(r) < `(:, :) `(j(o), j(/)). Thus j(r) <
`(j(o), j(/), 0.5), a contradiction. Hence (F3a) is satised.
By Lemma 3.4, if j is an (, )-fuzzy left(right) -ideal, then j(0) A(j(a), 0.5)
for all r o since 0 +r + 0 = r + 0.
The next theorem provides the relationships between (, )-fuzzy left(right)
-ideals of hemirings and crisp left(right) -ideals of hemirings.
Theorem 3.5. Let o be a hemiring and j F(o). Then
(1) j is an (, )-fuzzy left(resp., right) -ideal of o if and only if j
:
(j
:
= )
is a left(resp., right) -ideal of o for all : (0, 0.5].
(2) j is an (, )-fuzzy left(resp., right) -ideal of o if and only if [j]
:
([j]
:
=
) is a left(resp., right) -ideal of o for all : (0, 0.5].
A New Way to Fuzzy -ideals of Hemirings 87
Proof. The proof is straightforward.
Theorem 3.6. Let j and i be any two (, )-fuzzy left(resp., right) -ideals of
a hemiring o. Then so are j i and j +

i.
Proof. Let j and i be any two (, )-fuzzy left -ideals of o. It is clear that
j i is also an (, )-fuzzy left -ideal of o. Now we show that j +

i is an
(, )-fuzzy left -ideal of o. In fact:
(1) For any r, j o, we have
(j +

i)(r +j) = sup

i++o
1
+b
1
+:=o
2
+b
2
+:
`(j(o
1
), j(o
2
), i(/
1
), i(/
2
))
`
(
sup
i+t
1
+J
1
+:
1
=t
2
+J
2
+:
1
`(j(c
1
), j(c
2
), i(d
1
), i(d
2
)),
sup
+c
1
+}
1
+:
2
=c
2
+}
2
+:
2
`(j(c
1
), j(c
2
), i()
1
), i()
2
)), 0.5
)
=`((j +

i)(r), (j +

i)(j), 0.5).
(2) For any r, j o, we have
`((j +

i)(j), 0.5) =`
(
sup
+o
1
+b
1
+:=o
2
+b
2
+:
`(j(o
1
), j(o
2
), i(/
1
), i(/
2
)), 0.5
)
sup
i+io
1
+ib
1
+i:=io
2
+ib
2
+i:
`(j(ro
1
), j(ro
2
), i(r/
1
), i(r/
2
))
sup
i+t
1
+J
1
+:
1
=t
2
+J
2
+:
1
`(j(c
1
), j(c
2
), i(d
1
), i(d
2
))
=(j +

i)(rj).
(3) Let o, /, r and .
1
be any elements of o such that r+o +.
1
= / +.
1
. If there
exist c
1
, c
2
, d
1
, d
2
, c
1
, c
2
, )
1
, )
2
, .
2
, .
3
o such that
o +c
1
+d
1
+.
2
= c
2
+d
2
+.
2
and / +c
1
+)
1
+.
3
= c
2
+)
2
+.
3
,
then we have
r +c
2
+d
2
+c
1
+)
1
+.
4
= c
1
+d
1
+c
2
+)
2
+.
4
,
where .
4
= .
1
+.
2
+.
3
, and so
(j +

i)(r)
= sup
i+o
1
+b
1
+:=o
2
+b
2
+:
`(j(o
1
), j(o
2
), i(/
1
), i(/
2
))
`(j(c
2
+c
1
), j(c
1
+c
2
), i(d
2
+)
1
), i(d
1
+)
2
))
`(`(j(c
2
), j(c
1
), 0.5), `(j(c
1
), j(c
2
), 0.5), `(i(d
2
), i()
1
), 0.5),
`(i(d
1
), i()
2
), 0.5))
= `(`(j(c
1
), j(c
2
), i(d
1
), i(d
2
)), `(j(c
1
), j(c
2
), i()
1
), i()
2
)), 0.5),
this gives
88 Y. Yin, J. Zhan and X. Huang
(j +

i)(r) `
(
sup
o+t
1
+J
1
+:
2
=t
2
+J
2
+:
2
`(j(c
1
), j(c
2
), i(d
1
), i(d
2
)),
sup
b+c
1
+}
1
+:
3
=c
2
+}
2
+:
3
`(j(c
1
), j(c
2
), i()
1
), i()
2
)), 0.5
)
=`((j +

i)(o), (j +

i)(/), 0.5).
Otherwise, we have (j +

i)(o) = 0 or (j +

i)(/) = 0, and so
(j +

i)(r) 0 = `((j +

i)(o), (j +

i)(/), 0.5).
Summing up the above statements, j+

i is an (, )-fuzzy left -ideal of o.

The case for (, )-fuzzy right -ideals can be similarly proved.
Now denote by G11(o) the set of all (, )-fuzzy left(right) -ideals of a
hemiring o with the same tip t, that is, j(0) = i(0) for all j, i G11(o). Then
we have the following result.
Theorem 3.7. Let o be a hemiring. Then (G11(o), +

, ) is a bounded complete
lattice under the relation .
Proof. Let j, i G11(o). It follows from Theorem 3.6 that j i G11(o) and
j+

i G11(o). It is clear that ji is the greatest lower bound of j and i. We

now show that j +

i is the least upper bound of j and i. Since j(0) = i(0), for

any r o, we have
(j +

i)(r) =

i+o
1
+b
1
+:=o
2
+b
2
+:
`(j(o
1
), j(o
2
), i(/
1
), i(/
2
))
`(j(0), j(r), i(0), i(0)) = `(j(0), j(r)) `(j(r), 0.5),
hence j j+

i. Similarly, we have i j+

i. Now, let . G11(o) be such

that j, i .. Then, we have j +

i . +

. .. Hence j i = j +

i.
There is no diculty in replacing the {j, i} with an arbitrary family of G11(o)
and so (G11(o), +

, ) is a complete lattice under the relation . It is easy

to see that and
S
are the minimal and the maximal elements in (G11(o), +

, ),
respectively. Therefore, (G11(o), +

, ) is a bounded complete lattice.

Next, we will construct the quotient hemirings of a hemiring o by an (, )-
fuzzy -ideal of o. Before proceeding, let us provide an auxiliary lemma.
Lemma 3.8. Let o be a hemiring and j, i, . F(o). Then
(1) j (i +.) j i +j ., (i +.) j i j +. j.
(2) If j and i are (, )-fuzzy left(right) -ideals of o, then j+i j+

i
and j +j j +

j j.
(3) If j is an (, )-fuzzy left(right) -ideal of o such that 0.5 1:(j), then
j(0) 0.5 and r
1
r +j for all r o.
A New Way to Fuzzy -ideals of Hemirings 89
Proof. (1) Let r o. If r can not be expressed as r = o/ for all o, / o, then
(j (i + .))(r) = 0 and so (j (i + .))(r) = 0 (j i + j .)(r). Otherwise,
we have
(j (i +.))(r) =

i=ob
`(j(o), (i +.)(/)) =

i=ob
`
(
j(o),

b=t+J
`(i(c), .(d))
)
=

i=ob,b=t+J
`(j(o), i(c), j(o), .(d))

i=ot+oJ
`((j i)(oc), (j .)(od))

i=o

+b

`((j i)(o

), (j .)(/

))
= (j i +j .)(r).
Hence j(i +.) ji +j.. In a similar way, we have (i +.)j i j+.j.
(2) Let j and i be (, )-fuzzy left -ideals of o, and let r, c, d o be such
that r = c +d. Then
(j +

i)(r) =

i+o
1
+b
1
+:=o
2
+b
2
+:
`(j(o
1
), j(o
2
), i(/
1
), i(/
2
))
`(j(c), j(0), i(d), i(0)) `(j(c), i(d), 0.5),
and so
(j +

i)(r)

i=o+b
`(j(o), i(/), 0.5) = `((j +i)(r), 0.5).
This implies j + i j +

i. In particular, we have j + j j +

j. On the
other hand, we have
(j +j)(r) =

i=o+b
`(j(o), j(/)) `(j(r), j(0)) `(j(r), 0.5).
This gives j j +j.
In the following, we show j +

j j. For r
:
j +

j, if possible, let
r
:
j. Then j(r) < : and j(r) + : 1, which gives that j(r) < 0.5. If there
exist o
1
, o
2
, /
1
, /
2
, r, . o with r +o
1
+/
1
+. = o
2
+/
2
+., then by Lemmas 3.2
and 3.4, we have
0.5 j(a) A(j(o
1
+o
1
), j(o
2
+o
2
), 0.5) A(A(j(o
1
), j(o
1
), 0.5), A(j(o
2
), j(o
2
), 0.5), 0.5)
=A(j(o
1
), j(o
2
), j(o
1
), j(o
2
), 0.5),
which implies j(r) `(j(o
1
), j(o
2
), j(/
1
), j(/
2
)). Hence we have
: (j +

j)(r) = sup
i+o
1
+b
1
+:=o
2
+b
2
+:
`(j(o
1
), j(o
2
), j(/
1
), j(/
2
))
sup
i+o
1
+b
1
+:=o
2
+b
2
+:
j(r) = j(r),
90 Y. Yin, J. Zhan and X. Huang
a contradiction. Hence j +

j j. Thus, we have
j +j j +

j j j +j,
and so j +j j +

j j.
The case for (, )-fuzzy right -ideals can be similarly proved.
(3) It is straightforward.
Let o be a hemiring and j an (, )-fuzzy -ideal of o. We denote by o,j
the set of all r +j, where r o.
Theorem 3.9. Let o be a hemiring and j an (, )-fuzzy -ideal of o with
0.5 1:(j). Then (o,j, , ) is a hemiring, called the quotient hemiring of o by
j, under the relation with respect to the operations and dened by
r +j jj = (r +j) +j ond r +j j +j = rj +j,
respectively.
Proof. We shall rst show that the given operations are well-dened. Let r, j, r

, j

o be such that r + j r

+ j and j + j j

+ j. We need to show that

r + j j + j r

+ j j

+ j. In fact, since j is an (, )-fuzzy -ideal of

o and 0.5 Im(j), it follows from Lemma 3.8 that j + j j and r
1
r + j.
Thus we have
r +j j +j =(r +j) +j = (r
1
+j
1
) +

j ((r +j) + (j +j)) +j

((r

+j) + (j

+j)) +j = ((r

+j

) +j +j) +j
((r

+j

) +j +j) +

j (r

+j

) +j
=r

+j j

+j.
This implies r+jj+j r

+jj

+j. In a similar way, we have r

+jj

+j
r +j j +j. Hence is well dened. On the other hand, we have
r +j j +j = rj +

j = (r
1
j
1
) +j ((r +j) (j +j)) +j
((r

+j) (j

+j)) +j (r

+r

j +j j

+j j) +j
(r

+j +

j +j) +j r

+j = r

+j j

+j.
Hence r+jj +j r

+jj

+j. In a similar way, we have r

+jj

+j
r + j j + j. Therefore, r + j j + j r

+ j j

+ j and so is well
dened. Now it is easy to verify that (o,j, , ) is a hemring.
Theorem 3.10. Let o be a hemiring, j an (, )-fuzzy -ideal of o with 0.5
1:(j) and i L(o). Dene a fuzzy subset i,j in o,j by
i,j(r +j) =

i++
i(j)
for all r o. If i is an (, )-fuzzy left(resp., right) -ideal of o, then i,j is
also an (, )-fuzzy left(resp., right) -ideal of (o,j, , ).
A New Way to Fuzzy -ideals of Hemirings 91
Proof. Let i be an (, )-fuzzy left -ideal of o. We show that i,j is also
an (, )-fuzzy left -ideal of (o,j, , ). The case for (, )-fuzzy right
-ideals can be similarly proved. Let r, r

, j, j

o be such that r + j r

+ j
and j +j j

+j. Then
i,j(r +j j +j) =i,j((r +j) +j) =

(i+)+:+
i(.)
i(r

+j

) `(i(r

), i(j

), 0.5).
Hence
i,j(r +j j +j)

i+o+

+b+
`(i(o), i(/), 0.5)
=`

i+o+
i(o),

+b+
i(/), 0.5

=`(i,j(r +j), i,j(j +j), 0.5).

In a similar way, we may show that i,j(r + j j + j) `(i,j(j + j), 0.5)
and that r + j o + j . + j / + j . + j implies i,j(r + j) `(i,j(o +
j), i,j(/ +j), 0.5) for all r, j, o, /, . o. This completes the proof.
4. The Homomorphism of Hemirings in the Framework of Fuzzy Setting
Let (o, +, ) and (o

, +

) be two hemirings. Recall that a mapping , : o o

is said to be a homomorphism of (o, +, ) to (o

, +

) if
,(r +j) = ,(r) +

,(j) and ,(r j) = ,(r)

,(j)
for all r, j o. If such a homomorphism is surjective, injective or bijective, it is
called an epimorphism, a monomorphism or an isomorphism.
Denition 4.1. Let (o, +, ) and (o

, +

) be two hemirings and , : o o

a
homomorphism of hemirings. A left(right) -ideal of o is called ,-compatible if,
for all r, . o, o, / , ,(r +o +.) = ,(/ +.) implies r . An (, )-fuzzy
left(right) -ideal j of o is called generalized ,-compatible if, for all r, o, /, . o,
,(r +o +.) = ,(/ +.) implies j(r) `(j(o), j(/), 0.5).
Clearly, if , is a monomorphism, then every ((, )-fuzzy) left(right) -ideal
of o is (generalized) ,-compatible.
Example 4.2. Let (
0
, +, ) be the hemiring of all non-negative integers and
(
0
,
<10.
, +, ) the residue class hemiring of (
0
, +, ) modulo 10. Dene a mapping
, :
0

0
,
<10.
by ,(r) = [r]
<10.
. Then , is an epimorphism of (
0
, +, ) onto
(
0
,
<10.
, +, ). Now dene a fuzzy subset j in
0
by
j(r) =

1 if r = 0,
0.6 if r < 10 {0},
0.2 otherwise,
92 Y. Yin, J. Zhan and X. Huang
for all r
0
. Then j is a generalized ,-compatible (, )-fuzzy -ideal of
0
.
Let (o, +, ) and (o

, +

) be two hemirings, j a fuzzy subset in A and j

a
fuzzy subset in A

. Then the inverse image ,

1
(j

) of j

is the fuzzy subset in o

dened by ,
1
(j

)(r) = j

(,(r)) for all r o. The image ,(j) of j is the fuzzy

subset in o

dened by
,(j)(r

) =
{
i
1
(i

)
j(r) if ,
1
(r

) =
0 otherwise
for all r

. The following basic assertions hold:

(1) For any j L(o), j ,
1
(,(j)). If , is injective, then j = ,
1
(,(j)).
(2) For any j L(o

), ,(,
1
(j

)) j

. If , is surjective, then j

= ,(,
1
(j

)).
Lemma 4.3. Let (o, +, ) and (o

, +

) be hemirings and , : o o

a homomor-
phism of hemirings and let j, i L(o), j

, i

L(o

). Then:
(1) If j i, then ,(j) ,(i).
(2) If j

, then ,
1
(j

) ,
1
(i

).
(3) ,(j +

i) ,(j) +

,(i). If , is injective, then ,(j +

i) = ,(j) +

,(i).
(4) ,(j +i) = ,(j) +

,(i) and ,(j i) = ,(j)

,(i).
Proof. The proof of (1) and (2) is straightforward by Lemma 2.1. We prove (3). The
proof of (4) is similar. Let r

. If ,
1
(r

) = , it is clear that ,(j +

i)(r

) =
0 (,(j) +

,(i))(r

). Otherwise, we have
(,(j) +

,(i))(a

)
=

1
+

1
+

=u

2
+

2
+

A(,(j)(o

1
), ,(j)(o

2
), ,(i)(/

1
), ,(i)(/

2
))
=

1
,u

2
,l

1
,l

2
1r(,),i

1
+

1
+

=u

2
+

2
+

A(,(j)(o

1
), ,(j)(o

2
), ,(i)(/

1
), ,(i)(/

2
))
=

1
,u

2
,l

1
,l

2
1r(,),i

1
+l

1
+

=u

2
+l

2
+

A
(

,(u
1
)=u

1
j(o
1
),

,(u
2
)=u

2
j(o
2
),

,(l
1
)=l

1
i(/
1
),

,(l
2
)=l

2
i(/
2
)
)
=

,(u
1
)+

,(l
1
)+

=,(u
2
)+

,(l
2
)+

A(j(o
1
), j(o
2
), i(/
1
), i(/
2
))
=

,(i)=i

,,(i+u
1
+l
1
+:)=,(u
2
+l
2
+:)
A(j(o
1
), j(o
2
), i(/
1
), i(/
2
))

,(i)=i

,i+u
1
+l
1
+:=u
2
+l
2
+:
A(j(o
1
), j(o
2
), i(/
1
), i(/
2
))
=

,(i)=i

(j +

i)(a) = ,(j +

i)(a

).
A New Way to Fuzzy -ideals of Hemirings 93
This implies ,(j +

i) ,(j) +

,(i). If , is injective, then the inequality

can be replaced by an equal = . Hence ,(j +

i) = ,(j) +

,(i).
Lemma 4.4. Let (o, +, ) and (o

, +

) be hemirings, , : o o

a homomorphism
of hemirings and j an (, )-fuzzy left(right) -ideal of o. Then j is generalized
,-compatible if and only if non-empty subset j
:
(j
[:]
) is ,-compatible for all :
(0, 0.5].
Proof. The proof is straightforward.
Theorem 4.5. Let (o, +, ) and (o

, +

) be hemirings, , : o o

an epimor-
phism of hemirings. If j is a generalized ,-compatible (, )-fuzzy left(resp.,
right) -ideal of o, then ,(j) is an (, )-fuzzy (resp., right) -ideal of o

.
Proof. Let j be a generalized ,-compatible (, )-fuzzy left -ideal of o. We
show that ,(j) is an (, )-fuzzy left -ideal of o

. The case for (, )-fuzzy

right -ideals can be similarly proved.
(1) Let r

, j

. Then
,(j)(a

) =

,(u)=i

j(o)

,(i)=i

,,()=

j(a +)

,(i)=i

,,()=

A(j(a), j(), 0.5) = A

,(i)=i

j(a),

,()=

j(), 0.5

=A(,(j)(a

), ,(j)(

), 0.5).
(2) Let r

, j

. In a similar way we have ,(j)(r

) `(,(j)(j

), 0.5).
(3) Let r, o, /, . o and r

, o

, /

, .

be such that r

= /

,
,(r) = r

, ,(o) = o

, ,(/) = /

and ,(.) = .

. Then ,(r +o +.) = ,(/ +.). Since

j is generalized ,-compatible, we have j(r) `(j(o), j(/), 0.5). Thus we have
,(j)(r

) =

(i)=i

j(r) `(j(o), j(/), 0.5),

and so
,(j)(r

(o)=o

,(b)=b

`(j(o), j(/), 0.5) = `

(o)=o

j(o),

(b)=b

j(/), 0.5

=`(,(j)(o

), ,(j)(/

), 0.5)
Summing up the above arguments, ,(j) is an (, )-fuzzy left -ideal of o

.
It is worth noting that if j is not generalized ,-compatible, then Theorem 4.5
may not be true in general as shown in the following example.
Example 4.6. We use the hemiring (
0
, +, ) to dene operations +

and

on
the subset o

= {0, 1, 2, 3}
0
by r+

j = min{r+j, 3} and r

j = min{r j, 3}.
Then (o

, +

) is a hemiring. We further dene a mapping , :

0
o

by
94 Y. Yin, J. Zhan and X. Huang
,(r) = min{r, 3} for all r
0
. Routine calculation gives that , is an epimorphism
of hemirings. Now dene a fuzzy subset j in
0
by
j(r) =
{
0.6 if r < 2 ,
0.2 otherwise.
Then j is an (, )-fuzzy -ideal of
0
but it is not generalized ,-compatible
since ,(3+2+1) = ,(4+1) but j(3) = 0.2 < 0.5 = `(j(2), j(4), 0.5), and routine
verication gives that ,(j) is a fuzzy subset in o

such that
,(j)(r) =
{
0.6 if r {0, 2, 3},
0.2 otherwise.
Clearly, ,(j) is not an (, )-fuzzy -ideal of o

since 1 +

2 +

3 = 2 +

3 but
,(j)(1) = 0.2 < 0.5 = `(,(j)(2), 0.5).
Theorem 4.7. Let (o, +, ) and (o

, +

) be hemirings, , : o o

a homomor-
phism of hemirings. If j

is an (, )-fuzzy left(resp., right) -ideal of o

, then
,
1
(j) is a generalized ,-compatible (, )-fuzzy left(resp., right) -ideal of o.
Proof. Let j

be an (, )-fuzzy left -ideal of o

. We show that ,
1
(j) is a
generalized ,-compatible (, )-fuzzy left -ideal of o. The case for (, )-
fuzzy right -ideals can be similarly proved.
(1) Let r, j o. Then
,
1
(j

)(r +j) =j

(,(r +j)) = j

(,(r) +

,(j)) `(j

(,(r)), j

(,(j)), 0.5)
=`(,
1
(j

)(r), ,
1
(j

)(j), 0.5).
(2) Let r, j o. In a similar way, we have ,
1
(j

)(rj) `(,
1
(j

)(j), 0.5).
(3) Let r, o, /, . o be such that ,(r +o +.) = ,(/ +.). Then ,(r) +

,(o) +

,(.) = ,(/) +

,(.). Since j

is an (, )-fuzzy left -ideal of o

, we have
j

(,(a)) A(j

(,(o)), j

(,(o)), 0.5), that is, ,

1
(j

)(a) A(,
1
(j

)(o), ,
1
(j

)(o), 0.5).
Summing up the above arguments, ,
1
(j

) is a generalized ,-compatible (,
)-fuzzy left -ideal of o.
Combining Theorems 4.5 and 4.7, we have the following result.
Theorem 4.8. Let (o, +, ) and (o

, +

) be hemirings, , : o o

an epimor-
phism of hemirings. Then the mapping : j ,(j) denes a one-to-one corre-
spondence between the set of all generalized ,-compatible (, )-fuzzy left(resp.,
right) -ideals of o and the set of all (, )-fuzzy left(resp., right) -ideals of o

.
Next, we will establish the generalized fuzzy homomorphism theorems of hemir-
ings. In the sequel, unless otherwise stated, the quotient hemirings are II-quotient
hemirings. Before proceeding, let us give an auxiliary lemma.
Lemma 4.9. Let o be a hemiring and j an (, )-fuzzy left(right) -ideal of o.
Then
(1) `(j(0), 0.5) `((r +j)(j), 0.5) for all r, j o.
A New Way to Fuzzy -ideals of Hemirings 95
r + j j + j `(j(0), 0.5) = `((j + j)(r), 0.5) = `((r + j)(j), 0.5). In
particular, if 0.5 1:(j), then
r +j j +j `((j +j)(r), (r +j)(j)) 0.5.
(2) Dene j
S
= {r o`(j(0), 0.5) = `(j(r), 0.5)}, then j
S
is a left(right)
-ideal of o. If j has the sup-property, then
r +j j +j r +j
S
= j +j
S
.
In particular, if 0.5 1:(j), then j
S
= {r oj(r) 0.5}.
Proof. Let j be an (, )-fuzzy left -ideal of o. The proof of (1) is straight-
forward. We show (2) and (3). The case for (, )-fuzzy right -ideals can be
similarly proved.
(2) Let r, j o be such that r +j j +j. Then
`((j +j)(r), 0.5) =`((r +j)(r), 0.5) = `
(

i=i+o
j(o), 0.5
)
= `(j(0), 0.5).
In a similar way, we have `(j(0), 0.5) = `((r +j)(j), 0.5).
Now, assume that `(j(0), 0.5) = `((j + j)(r), 0.5) = `((r + j)(j), 0.5). Let
. be any element of o. Then, by (1), we have
A((a + j)(.), 0.5)
= A (A((a + j)(.), 0.5), A(j(0), 0.5)) = A (A((a + j)(.), 0.5), A((j + j)(a), 0.5))
= A

A
(

:=i+u
j(o), 0.5
)
, A

i=+l
j(/), 0.5

= A

:=i+u,i=+l
A(j(o), j(/)), 0.5

= A

:=+u+l
A(j(o), j(/)), 0.5

:=+u+l
A(j(o), j(/), 0.5)

:=+u+l
j(o + /)

:=+o
j(c) = (j + j)(.).
This implies r +j j +j. In a similar way, we have j +j r +j. Hence
r +j j +j.
If 0.5 Im(j), then j(0) 0.5 and so
r +j j +j `((j +j)(r), (r +j)(j)) 0.5.
(3) We rst show that j
S
is a left -ideal of o. Let r, j j
S
. Then
`(j(r +j), 0.5) `(`(j(r), j(j), 0.5), 0.5) = `(j(0), 0.5) `(j(r +j), 0.5),
96 Y. Yin, J. Zhan and X. Huang
this implies `(j(r +j), 0.5) = `(j(0), 0.5) and so r +j j
S
. Similarly, we may
show that rj j
S
for all r o and j j
S
and that r + o + . = / + . implies
r j
S
for all o, / j
S
and r, . o. Hence j
S
is a left -ideal of o.
Now assume that j has the sup-property. Let r, j o be such that r+j j+j.
By (2), we have `(j(0), 0.5) = `((j + j)(r), 0.5) = `((r + j)(j), 0.5), that is,
`(j(0), 0.5) = `
(

=i+o
j(o), 0.5
)
. Since j has the sup-property, there exists
. o such that j = r +. and `(j(0), 0.5) = `(j(.), 0.5), that is, . j
S
and so
j +j
S
= r +. +j
S
r +j
S
. In a similar way, we have r +j
S
j +j
S
. Hence
r + j
S
= j + j
S
. Conversely, assume that r + j
S
= j + j
S
. Then there exists
. j
S
such that j = r +.. Thus we have
`(j(0), 0.5) `((r +j)(j), 0.5) `(j(.), 0.5) = `(j(0), 0.5).
This implies A(j(0), 0.5) = A((a+j)(j), 0.5). In a similar way, we have A(j(0), 0.5) =
A((j + j)(a), 0.5). By (1), we have r +j j +j. This completes the proof.
Theorem 4.10. Let (o, +, ) be a hemiring and j an (, )-fuzzy -ideal with
0.5 1:(j). Dene ,(r) = r + j for all r o. Then , is an epimorphism from
(o, +, ) onto (o,j, , ) with 1c:(,) = j
S
under the relation . Moreover, if
j has the sup-property, then o,j
S

= o,j.
Proof. It is clear that , is surjective. Let r, j o. Then
,(r +j) = r +j +j = (r +j) (j +j) = ,(r) ,(j)
and
,(rj) = rj +j = (r +j) (j +j) = ,(r) ,(j).
Hence , is a homomorphism. Finally, by Lemma 4.9(2), r 1c:(,) ,(r) =
r + j j j(r) 0.5 r j
S
. Now assume that j has the sup-property. To
show o,j
S

= o,j, it suces to show that r+j j +j implies r+j
S
= j +j
S
. In
fact, if r+j j +j for some r, j o, it follows from 4.9(3) that r+j
S
= j +j
S
.
This completes the proof.
Lemma 4.11. Let (o, +, ) and (o

, +

) be hemirings, , : o o

a homomor-
phism of hemirings. If o +o = o for all o H and o

is additive cancellable, then

,(r) = ,(j) implies r +1c:(,) = j +1c:(,) for all r, j o.
Proof. Assume that o + o = o for all o o and that o

is additive cancellable.
Let ,(r) = ,(j) for some r, j o. Then j = r + . for some . o since
o + o = o for all o o. Thus ,(r) = ,(j) = ,(r + .) = ,(r) + ,(.) and so
it follows from additive cancellativity of o

that ,(.) = 0

, that is, . 1c:(,).

Hence j + 1c:(,) = r + . + 1c:(,) r + 1c:(,). In a similar way, we have
r +1c:(,) j +1c:(,). Therefore, r +1c:(,) = j +1c:(,).
Theorem 4.12. Let (o, +, ), (o

, +

) be hemirings, and , : o o

an epi-
morphism of hemirings. Let j be an (, )-fuzzy -ideal of o such that 0.5
A New Way to Fuzzy -ideals of Hemirings 97
1:(j), j
S
1c:(,) and that j has the sup-property. Then there exists an unique
epimorphism from (o,j, , ) onto (o

, +

) such that , = j under the

relation , where j(r) = r + j for all r o. Moreover, if o + o = o for all
o o, j
S
= 1c:(,) and o

is additive cancellable, then is an isomorphism.

Proof. Dene a mapping : o,j o

by (r+j) = ,(r) for all r o. Then is

well dened. In fact, if r+j j +j for some r, j o, then it follows from Lemma
4.9 that r+j
S
= j+j
S
. Since j
S
1c:(,), we have r+1c:(,) = j+1c:(,) and
so ,(r) = ,(j) by Lemma 4.11. Now it is easy to check that is a homomorphism.
Further, since , is onto, is also onto. On the other hand, ,(r) = (r + j) =
(j(r)) = (j)(r) for all r o. Finally, we show that is unique. If there exists
another epimorphism c from (o,j, , ) onto (o

, +

) such that , = cj. Then

(r +j) = ,(r) = (c j)(r) = c(r +j) for all r o. This implies = c.
Suppose o + o = o for all o o, j
S
= 1c:(,) and o

is additive cancellable.
To show that is an isomorphism, it remains to show that is injective. In fact,
let r, j o be such that ,(r) = ,(j). By Lemma 4.11, we have r + 1c:(,) =
j + 1c:(,). Since j
S
= 1c:(,), we have r + j
S
= j + j
S
and so r + j j + j
by Lemma 4.9. This completes the proof.
Theorem 4.13. Let (o, +, ), (o

, +

) be hemirings, and , : o o

a homomor-
phism of hemirings and j and j

(, )-fuzzy -ideals of o and o

, respectively,
such that ,(j) j

and 0.5 1:(j). Then there exists a homomorphism

: o,j o

,j

such that the diagram

o

//
o

o,j
r
//
o

,j

is commutative. Moreover, if , is an isomorphism and j

,(j), then is also

an isomorphism.
Proof. Dene a mapping : o,j o

,j

by (r + j) = ,(r) + j

for all r o.
We rst show that is well dened. In fact, if r + j j + j for some r, j o,
since 0.5 Im(j), it follows from Lemma 4.9 that `((r + j)(j), (j + j)(r))
0.5 and 0.5 Im(j

). To show ,(r) + j

,(j) + j

, it needs only to show

`((,(r) +

)(,(j)), (,(j) +

)(,(r))) 0.5 by Lemma 4.9 since 0.5 Im(j

).
Now, by the assumption, ,(j) j

, we have ,(r) +

,(j) ,(r) +

and so
(,(r) +

)(,(j)) `((,(r) +

,(j))(,(j)), 0.5) = `(,(r +j)(,(j)), 0.5)

`((r +j)(j), 0.5) 0.5.
In a similar way, we have (,(j) +

)(,(r)) 0.5. Hence is well dened. Now it

is easy to check that is a homomorphism and that the diagram is commutative.
Next assume that , is an isomorphism and j

,(j). Since , is onto, it is

clear that is also onto. Let r, j o be such that ,(r) + j

,(j) + j

. Then
98 Y. Yin, J. Zhan and X. Huang
,(r) +,(j) ,(j) +,(j) and so
`((,(r) +,(j))(,(j)), (,(j) +,(j))(,(r))) 0.5.
Since , is injective, we have
(,(r) +,(j))(,(j)) =

()=(i)+o

,(j)(o

) =

()=(i+o)
,(j)(,(o))
=

=i+o
j(o) = (r +j)(j) 0.5.
In a similar way, we have (,(j) + ,(j))(,(r))) 0.5. Hence r + j j + j by
Lemma 4.9, and so is injective. Therefore, is an isomorphism. This completes
the proof.
As two special cases of Theorem 4.13, we have the following results.
Theorem 4.14. Let (o, +, ) and (o

, +

) be hemirings, , : o o

an epimor-
phism of hemirings and j a generalized ,-compatible (, )-fuzzy -ideal of o
such that 0.5 1:(j). Then there exists an epimorphism from o,j onto o

,,(j).
Moreover, if , is an isomorphism, then o,j

= o

,,(j).
Proof. Since j is a generalized ,-compatible (, )-fuzzy -ideal of o, ,(j) is an
(, )-fuzzy -ideal of o

by Theorem 4.5. Dene a mapping : o,j o

,,(j)
by (r + j) = ,(r) +

,(j) for all r o. By the proof of Theorem 4.13,

is a homomorphism. Since , is onto, it is clear that is also onto. If , is an
isomorphism, then so is by Theorem 4.13. Hence o,j

= o

,,(j).
Theorem 4.15. Let (o, +, ) and (o

, +

) be hemirings, , : o o

a homomor-
phism of hemirings and j

an (, )-fuzzy -ideal of o

such that 0.5 1:(j

).
Then there exists a homomorphism from o,,
1
(j

) to o

,j

. Moreover, if , is an
isomorphism, then o,,
1
(j

)

= o

,j

.
Proof. Since j

is an (, )-fuzzy -ideal of o

, ,
1
(j

) is a generalized ,-
compatible (, )-fuzzy -ideal of o by Theorem 4.7. Dene a mapping :
o,,
1
(j

) o

,j

by (r+,
1
(j

)) = ,(r)+

for all r o. Since ,(,

1
(j

))
j

, that is, ,(,

1
(j

)) j

, then is a homomorphism by the proof of Theorem

4.13. If , is an isomorphism, then so is by Theorem 4.13. Hence o,,
1
(j

)

=
o

,j

.
Theorem 4.16. Let (o, +, ) be a hemiring, j and i two (, )-fuzzy -ideals
of o such that 0.5 1:(j) 1:(i). Then j
S
,j i

= (j
S
+i
S
),i.
Proof. It is clear that both j
S
and j
S
+ i
S
are hemirings, and that j i and i
are (, )-fuzzy -ideals of j
S
and j
S
+ i
S
, respectively. Thus it follows from
Theorem 3.12 that both (j
S
,j, , ) and ((j
S
+i
S
),i, , ) are hemirings.
Dene a mapping , : j
S
,j i (j
S
+ i
S
),i by ,(r + j i) = r + i for all
r j
S
. We rst show that , is well dened. In fact, let r, j j
S
be such that
r +j i j +j i. Since 0.5 1:(j) 1:(i), it follows from Lemma 4.9 that
A New Way to Fuzzy -ideals of Hemirings 99
`((r +j i)(j), (j +j i)(r)) 0.5. Thus we have `((r +i)(j), (j +i)(r))
`((r +j i)(j), (j +j i)(r)) 0.5 and so r +i j +i by Lemma 4.9. Hence
, is well dened. Then it is easy to check that , is a homomorphism.
Now let r be any element of j
S
+ i
S
. Then there exist j j
S
, . i
S
such
that r = j + .. Since . i
S
, we have i(.) 0.5 and (. + i)(0) =

0=:+o
i(o)

0=:+o
`(i(0), i(.), 0.5) 0.5, hence . + i i. Thus r + i = j + . + i
j + i = ,(j + j i). This implies , is onto. To show that , is injective, let
r

, j

j
S
+ i
S
be such that r

+ i j

+ i. Then it follows from the above

proof that there exist r, j j
S
such that r + i r

+ i j

+ i j + i. Thus
`((r +i)(j), (j +i)(r)) 0.5. On the other hand, since r, j j
S
, we have
(r +j i)(j) =

=i+o
`(j(o), i(o))

=i+o
`(`(j(r), j(j), 0.5), i(o))
=

=i+o
`(0.5, i(o)) = `
(

=i+o
i(o), 0.5
)
=`((r +i)(j), 0.5) = 0.5.
In a similar way, we have (j + j i)(r) = 0.5. Thus r + j i j + j i by
Lemma 4.9. This completes the proof.
Theorem 4.17. Let (o, +, ) be a hemiring and j and i two (, )-fuzzy -ideals
of o such that j i and 0.5 1:(j) 1:(i). Then (o,j),(i
S
,j)

= o,i.
Proof. By Lemma 4.9, i
S
,j is an -ideal of o,j. Dene a mapping , : o,j o,i
by ,(r + j) = r + i for all r o. We rst show that , is well dened. In fact, if
r+j j+j for some r, j o, then `((r+j)(j), (j+j)(r)) 0.5 by Lemma 4.9.
Since j i, we have `((r+i)(j), (j+i)(r)) `((r+j)(j), (j+j)(r), 0.5)
0.5 and so r +i j +i by Lemma 4.9. Hence , is well dened.
Further, it is clear that , is onto, and so (o,j),1c:(,)

= o,i. Now we show
1c:(,) = i
S
,j. Before proceeding, we rst show that r + j j + j for some
r i
S
, j o implies j i
S
. In fact, it follows from r+j j+j that (r+j)(j)
0.5 by Lemma 4.9. Now, if j = r + o for some o o, since r i
S
, that is,
`(i(0), 0.5) = `(i(r), 0.5), we have
i(j) `(i(r), i(o), 0.5) = `(i(0), i(o), 0.5) `(i(o), 0.5) `(j(o), 0.5)
and so
i(j)

=i+o
`(j(o), 0.5) = `((r +j)(j), 0.5) 0.5.
This implies j i
S
. Thus r 1c:(,) r + i i i(r) 0.5 r i
S

r +j i
S
,j. Hence (o,j),(i
S
,j) = (o,j),1c:(,)

= o,i.
100 Y. Yin, J. Zhan and X. Huang
5. Conclusions
In this paper, our aim is to promote research and the development of fuzzy tech-
nology by studying the fuzzy hemirings. The goal is to explain new methodological
development in fuzzy hemirings which will also be of growing importance in the
future. The obtained results can be applied to the other algebraic structures. Our
future work on this topic will focus on studying the relationships among hemirings,
BL-algebras and IS-algebras.
Acknowledgements. We wish to express our heart thanks to the referees for their
interests in our work and spending their valuable times in reading this manuscript
carefully and giving their valuable comments for improving the paper.
This paper was supported in part by the Natural Science Foundation for Young
Scholars of Jiangxi, China (2010GQS0003); in part by the Science Foundation of
Education Committee for Young Scholars of Jiangxi, China (GJJ11143) and in part
by the Innovation Team of Higher Education of Huibei Province, China (T201109).
References
[1] S. K. Bhakat and P. Das, (, q)-fuzzy subgroups, Fuzzy Sets and Systems, 80 (1996),
359-368.
[2] B. Davvaz and P. Corsini, On (c, o)-fuzzy 1
r
-ideals of 1
r
-rings, Iranian Journal of Fuzzy
Systems, 5 (2008), 35-47.
[3] W. A. Dudek, M. Shabir and M. I. Ali, (c, o)-fuzzy ideals of hemirings, Computers and Math.
Appl., 58 (2009), 310-321.
[4] K. Glazek, A guide to the literature on semirings and their applications in mathematics and
information sciences: with complete bibliography, Kluwer Acad. Publ., Dodrecht, 2002.
[5] M. Henriksen, Ideals in semirings with commutative addition, Am. Math. Soc. Notces, 6
(1958), 321.
[6] X. Huang, H. Li and Y. Yin, The -hemiregular fuzzy duo hemirings, International Journal
of Fuzzy Systems, 9 (2007), 105-109.
[7] K. Iizuka, On the Jacobson radical of a semiring, Tohoku Math. J, 11(2) (1959), 409-421.
[8] Y. B. Jun, M. A.

Ozt &rk and S. Z. Song, On fuzzy -ideals in hemirings, Information Sciences,
162 (2004), 211-226.
[9] D. R. La Torre, On -ideals and I-ideals in hemrings, Publ. Math. Debrecen, 12 (1965),
219-226.
[10] H. Li, X. Huang and Y. Yin, the characterization of regular hemirings, Southeast Asian Bull.
Math., 32 (2008), 1091-1100.
[11] X. Ma and J. Zhan, Generalized fuzzy -bi-ideals and -quasi-ideals of hemirings, Information
Sciences, 179 (2009), 1249-1268.
[12] A. Rosenfeld, Fuzzy groups, J. Math. Anal. Appl, 35 (1971), 512-517.
[13] W. Wechler, The concept of fuzziness in automata and language theory, Akademie-Verlag,
Belin, 1978.
[14] Y. Yin and H. Li, The characterizations of -hemiregular hemirings and -intra-hemiregular
hemirings, Information Sciences, 178 (2008), 3451-3464.
[15] Y. Yin, X. Huang, D. Xu and F. Li, The characterization of -semisimple hemirings, Inter-
national Journal of Fuzzy Systems, 11 (2009), 116-122.
[16] J. Zhan and W. A. Dudek, Fuzzy -ideal of hemirings, Information Sciences, 177 (2007),
876-886.
[17] J. Zhan, Y. B. Jun and B. Davvaz, On (, q)-fuzzy ideals of BCI-algebras, Iranian Journal
of Fuzzy Systems, 6 (2009), 81-94.
A New Way to Fuzzy -ideals of Hemirings 101
Yunqiang Yin

, School of Sciences, East China Institute of Technology, Fuzhou,

Jiangxi 344000, China
E-mail address: yunqiangyin@gmail.com
Jianming Zhan, Department of Mathematics, Hubei Institute for Nationalities, Enshi,
Hubei Province 445000, China
E-mail address: zhanjianming@hotmail.com
Xiaokun Huang, Department of Mathematics, Honghe University, Mengzi, Yunnan
661100, China
E-mail address: boyhxk@163.com
*Corresponding author