Abstract
Considering all physical, biological, and social systems, fuzzy graph (FG) models serve the elemental processes of all natural and artificial structures. As the indeterminate information is an essential real-life problem, which is mostly uncertain, modeling the problems based on FGs is highly demanding for an expert. Vague graphs (VGs) can manage the uncertainty relevant to the inconsistent and indeterminate information of all real-world problems, in which FGs possibly will not succeed in bringing about satisfactory results. In addition, VGs are a very useful tool to examine many issues such as networking, social systems, geometry, biology, clustering, medical science, and traffic plan. The previous definition restrictions in FGs have made us present new definitions in VGs. A wide range of applications has been attributed to the domination in graph theory for several fields such as facility location problems, school bus routing, modeling biological networks, and coding theory. Concepts from domination also exist in problems involving finding the set of representatives, in monitoring communication and electrical networks, and in land surveying (e.g., minimizing the number of places a surveyor must stand in order to take the height measurement for an entire region). Hence, in this article, we introduce different concepts of dominating, equitable dominating, total equitable dominating, weak (strong) equitable dominating, equitable independent, and perfect dominating sets in VGs and also investigate their properties by some examples. Finally, we present an application in medical sciences to show the importance of domination in VGs.
1 Introduction
Many real-world situations can accessibly be explained by means of a diagram consisting of a set of points together with lines joining certain pairs of these points. Notice that in such diagrams one is mainly interested in whether two given points are joined by a line; the manner in which they are joined is immaterial. A mathematical abstraction of situations of this type gives rise to the concept of a graph. To exemplify the objects and the connection between them, the graph nodes and edges are being employed accordingly. FGs are intended to demonstrate the connection structure among objects so that the concrete object existence (node) and the relationship between two objects (edge) are matters of degree. FG models are advantageous mathematical tools for addressing the combinatorial problems in several fields integrating research, algebra, computing, environmental science, and topology. Owing to the vagueness and ambiguity of natural existence, fuzzy graphical models outperform other graphical models. In 1965, Zadeh [44] proposed fuzzy set (FS) theory as a model for the exemplification of uncertainty and vagueness in real-world systems. FS theory is an exceedingly influential mathematical tool for resolving approximate reasoning-related problems. By defining the VS notion through changing the value of an element in a set with a subinterval of [0,1], Gau and Buehrer [13] introduced the VS theory. More probabilities are illustrated by VSs compared to FSs. A VS is more effective for explaining the false membership degree existence. Many events in the real world provided the incentive for introducing FGs. Kauffman [15] described FGs based on Zadeh’s fuzzy relation [44]. Kosari et al. [16] defined vague graph structure. Fuzzy Graph was introduced by Rosenfeld [32]. Akram et al. [1–6] proposed new definitions on FGs. Mordeson et al. [17–19] studied some results in FGs. Borzooie and Rashmanlou [7–11] analyzed several concepts of VGs. Samanta et al. [33–38] defined fuzzy competition graphs and some bipolar fuzzy graph results. Shao et al. [25, 26, 39–41] introduced new results in FGs and intuitionistic fuzzy graphs. Ramakrishna [24] presented VG concepts and examined their properties. Rashmanlou et al. [27–31] advanced new concepts in VGs.
A VG is a generalized structure of a FG that provides more exactness, adaptability, and compatibility to a system when matched with systems that run on FGs. In addition, a VG is capable of concentrating on determining the uncertainty coupled with the inconsistent and indeterminate information of any real-world problem, where FGs may not lead to adequate results. There exist an extensive array of applications for domination in graph theory in several fields such as school bus routing, facility location problems, and electrical networks. The domination idea was introduced first in the chessboard problem. In 1962, Ore [22] pioneered to apply the expression “domination” for undirected graphs. Somasundaram [42] presented the domination and independent domination in FGs. Gani and Chandrasekaran [20, 21] investigated the fuzzy-DS and independent-DS notion utilizing strong arcs. Cockayne [12] and Hedetniemi [14] described the independent and irredundance domination number in graphs. The domination concept in intuitionistic fuzzy graphs was examined by Parvathi and Thamizhendhi [23]. Talebi and Rashmanlou [43] studied new applications of domination in VGs. Domination in VGs has several uses in different fields. Hence, this study seeks to consider different concepts of dominating, equitable dominating, total equitable dominating, weak (strong) equitable dominating, equitable independent, and perfect dominating sets in VGs and investigate their properties by some examples.
Previously, many emergency patients died due to delays in transportation to the hospital; therefore, we introduce an application in the transportation system to show the importance of domination in VGs.
2 Preliminaries
In this section, to consider the stage for our analysis and to facilitate the following of our discussion, a brief overview of some of the basic definitions is introduced. A graph denotes a pair satisfying . The elements of V and E are the nodes and edges of the graph , correspondingly.
An FG has the form of , where and are defined as , , and ν is a symmetric fuzzy relation on γ and denotes the minimum.
Definition 2.1. [13] A VS A is a pair on set V where and are used as real valued functions which can be defined on , so that , for all a belongs V. The interval is considered as the vague value of a in A. will be a crisp graph and ζ a VG throughout this article.
Definition 2.2. [13] The support of a vague set , denoted by , is defined as , where , .
Definition 2.3. [24] A pair is called a VG on a crisp graph that is a VS on V and is a VS on such that and , for each edge .
Definition 2.4. [8] Let be a VG. Then, the vertex cardinality of ζ is described by and defined as and the edge cardinality of ζ is described by and defined as
Definition 2.5. [8] Let be a VG. If , then the t-strength of connectedness between and is defined as and f-strength of connectedness is as . In addition, we haveand
Definition 2.6. [8] An edge in a VG is called strong edge if and .
Definition 2.7. [8] Two nodes and in a VG are called to be adjacent if either one of the following conditions holds. and . and , . A node a in a VG ζ is called an isolated node if and , , . That is, .
Definition 2.8. [9] The degree of a node a in a VG ζ is defined as the sum of weights of edges incident to a. It is defined by . The minimum degree of ζ is . The maximum degree of ζ is .
Definition 2.9. [8] Let be a VG. Suppose that ; then, a dominates b in ζ if a strong edge between a and b.
Definition 2.10. [8] A subset S of V is called a DS in ζ if for each , so that a dominates b. A DS S of a VG ζ is referred to as a Minimal DS if no proper subset of S is a DS.
Definition 2.11. [8] If ζ is a VG, then the vertex cardinality of is defined as follows:All the basic notations are shown in Table 1.
TABLE 1
| Notation | Meaning |
| FG | Fuzzy graph |
| VS | Vague set |
| ζ | Vague graph |
| DS | Dominating set |
| EN | Equitable neighborhood |
| EDS | Equitable dominating set |
| END | Equitable neighborhood degree |
| DEVG | Degree equitable vague graph |
| EIS | Equitable independent set |
| EDN | Equitable dominating number |
| TEDS | Total equitable dominating set |
| EIN | Equitable isolated node |
| EIDS | Equitable independent dominating set |
| PDS | Perfect dominating set |
| PDN | Perfect domination number |
| MI-EDS | Minimal equitable dominating set |
| MA-EDS | Maximal equitable dominating set |
| MA-EIS | Maximal equitable independent set |
Some basic notations.
3 Domination in VGs
Definition 3.1. Let be a VG. The equitable neighborhood (EN) of a node , described by and defined as , where , , , .
Definition 3.2. The END of a node , denoted by , is defined as , where and .The minimum END, denoted by , is defined as , where and .The maximum END, denoted by , is defined as , where and .
Example 3.3. Let be a VG on so that is a vague subset of V, in Table 2, and is a vague subset of defined in Table 3. The VG is shown in Figure 1. By simple calculation, we have , , , , , and .The ENDs of nodes are calculated as , , , , , and . The minimum END of VG ζ is and the maximum END of a VG ζ is .
TABLE 2
| A | a | b | c | d | e | f |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| tA | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.4 | 0.1 | 0.4 |
| fA | 0.3 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.5 | 0.3 | 0.6 |
Vague set A on set V.
TABLE 3
| B | ab | bd | ac | cd | bf | ce |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| tB | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.2 | 0.3 | 0.3 | 0.1 |
| fB | 0.5 | 0.5 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 | 0.6 |
Vague set B in V×V.
FIGURE 1
Definition 3.4. Let be a VG. A node is called an EIN in ζ if, for each , , , and , , i.e., .
Example 3.5.Consider a VG on which is shown in Figure 2.From Figure 2, we have , , , , and . Since , , and , , i.e., . Also, , , and , , i.e., . Hence, e and d are isolated nodes in ζ.
FIGURE 2
Definition 3.6.Let ζ be a VG. A subset is called an EDS of ζ if for each node , a node so that , , , and , . The EDN of ζ, denoted by , is defined as the minimum cardinality of an EDS of S.
Definition 3.7.An EDS S of a VG ζ is called a MI-EDS of ζ if for each node , the set is not an EDS; i.e., no proper subset of S is an EDS of ζ.
Example 3.8.Consider a VG , as shown in Figure 3.It is easy to show that the MI-EDS of VG ζ is . The EDN of ζ is .
FIGURE 3
Definition 3.9.Let be a VG. ζ is called a DEVG if, for each , a node so that , , , and , .
Example 3.10.Consider a VG ζ, as shown in Figure 4. Simple calculations show that ζ is a degree equitable VG.
FIGURE 4
Definition 3.11.A subset is called an EIS of a VG if , , and , , for all . The EIN of ζ, denoted by , is defined as the minimum cardinality of an EIS of ζ.
Definition 3.12.An EIS I is called a MA-EIS of ζ if, for each node , the set is not an EIS.
Example 3.13. Consider a VG given in Figure 5. It is clear that is maximal EIS. The EIN is .
FIGURE 5
Definition 3.14.Let be a VG. For any two nodes , a strongly dominates b in ζ if , , and , . Similarly, a weakly dominates b if , , , and .
Definition 3.15.An EDS is called a weak (strong) EDS of ζ if, for each node , at least one node so that a weakly (strongly) dominates b. The weak (strong) EDN of ζ, denoted by , is called as the minimum cardinality of a weak (strong) EDS of ζ.
Example 3.16.Consider the VG given in Figure 6. It is easy to see that the strong EDSs of ζ are and . The strong EDN of ζ is .
FIGURE 6
Let be a VG. An EDS S of ζ is a minimal EDS if and only if, for every , one of the following conditions holds: b is an isolated node in S, , or a node so that .
Proof. Let ζ be a VG with minimal EDS S; then, for each node , the set is not an EDS. Hence, at least one node so that a is not dominated by any node in . So, we have two cases.
If , then b is an isolated node in S; i.e., b is not neighbor to any node so that . Thus, ; that is, every node in S has a neighbor in .
If , i.e., , then a is dominated by some node of S but not dominated by any node in . Hence, a is neighbor only to one node , so .
Conversely, suppose that S is an EDS of a VG ζ and, for every node , one of the given conditions holds. Assume that S is not a MI-EDS, then clearly a node so that is an EDS of ζ. Therefore, b is neighbor to at least one node of set ; i.e., b is not an isolated node in S, and thus condition is false. In addition, if we get as an EDS of ζ, then each node of is neighbor to at least one node in . Hence, conditions and are also false which is a contradiction. ∎
Let be a VG with order , then: , .
Proof.According to definition, every weak (strong) EDS of a VG ζ is an EDS of ζ, and . Let a and b be two arbitrary nodes of ζ. If and , then is a strong EDS of ζ and is a weak EDS of ζ. Hence, and , i.e.,and
∎
Let ζ be a VG without single nodes and S be a MI-EDS of ζ; then is an EDS of ζ.
Proof.Let ζ be a VG with MI-EDS S; then, for each node , there is at least one node so that , and , . Hence, dominates each element of S. So, is an EDS of ζ. ∎
Let ζ be a VG with EIDS I; then I is both a MI-EDS and a MA-EIS of ζ. Conversely, any MA-EIS I of a VG ζ is an EIDS of ζ.
Proof. Let ζ be a VG with EIDS K; then, for each node , the set is not an EIS and the set is not an EDS of ζ. So, K is both a MI-EDS and a MA-EIS of ζ.Conversely, assume that K is a MA-EIS of ζ; then, for each node , the set is not an EIS of ζ. Hence, the set K dominates each node and so K is an EDS of ζ. Therefore, K is an EIDS of ζ. ∎
A subset is an EIS and EDS of a VG ζ if and only if I is a MA-EIS of ζ.
Proof.Assume that K is both an EDS and an EIS of a VG ζ. Suppose that K is not a MA-EIS of ζ, then clearly there exists a node so that is an EIS; namely, a is not dominated by any node that shows K is not an EDS of ζ, a contradiction, so K is a MA-EIS of ζ. Conversely, let K be a MA-EIS of ζ; then, for each node , the set is not an EIS of ζ. Hence, the set K dominates each node ; that is, K is an EDS of ζ. So, K is both an EDS and an EIS of ζ. ∎
Definition 3.22.A total-EDS (TEDS) of a VG is a subset if for each node , at least one node so that , , , and , . The TEDN of ζ, denoted by , is defined as the minimum cardinality of a TEDN S.
Definition 3.23.A TEDS S of a VG ζ is called a minimal TEDS if, for each node , the set is not a TEDS; i.e., no proper subset of S is a TEDS of ζ.
Example 3.24.Consider a VG , as shown in Figure 7. It is clear that and are TEDSs of ζ.
FIGURE 7
Let ζ be a VG with no isolated nodes; then .
Proof.As each TEDS of a VG ζ is a total dominating set, so . ∎
Definition 3.26.Let be a VG. A subset is called a PDS of ζ if, for each node , there exists exactly one vertex so that a dominates b.
Definition 3.27.A PDS S of a VG ζ is called a minimal PDS if, for each , the set is not a PDS in ζ. The minimum cardinality between all MI-PDSs is called the PDN of ζ and it is denoted by or simply .
Example 3.28.Consider a VG given in Figure 8. By simple computation, it is clear that is a MI-PDS. The PDN of ζ is .
FIGURE 8
4 The Application of VDS in Medical Sciences
In the past, many emergency patients died due to the delays in transportation to the hospital, but today the number has dropped dramatically. Traffic problems in cities are one of the factors influencing this delay. In addition, the specialization of hospitals has meant that each patient must be transferred to the relevant hospital based on the main complaint, even though this specialized hospital is further away than other available hospitals. Therefore, in this study, we have tried to identify the nearest hospital based on distance, traffic load, and patient complaints. For this purpose, we consider four hospitals located in one city. We show hospitals as B, C, D, and E. In this vague graph, one vertex represents the patient’s home and other vertices are related to the hospitals in the city. The edges indicate the accumulation of cars in the city. (See Figure 9).
FIGURE 9
The node means that it has of the necessary facilities for treating the patient and unfortunately lacks of the necessary equipment.
The edge shows that only of the patient’s transport route to the hospital by ambulance has a low traffic load, and unfortunately of the route between these two points has a heavy traffic load during most hours of the day. The EDSs for Figure 8 are as follows:
After calculating the cardinality of , we obtain
It is obvious that has the smallest size between other DSs; hence, we conclude that it can be the best choice because first there is more free space for the ambulance from the patient’s home to hospital B, so that it can get the patient to the desired location faster, saving time and money. Second, hospital B has more medical services compared to other hospitals. So, the government should invest more on widening roads and controlling traffic between cities so that ambulances can transport patients to the relevant specialized hospitals faster.
5 Conclusion
Considering the precision, elasticity, and compatibility in a system, vague models outweigh the other FGs. The VG concept generally has a large variety of applications in different areas such as computer science, operation research, topology, and natural networks. Domination in graph theory has a wide range of applications in several fields such as facility location problems, school bus routing, and coding theory. Therefore, in this research, we described several concepts of dominating sets, ED, TED, weak (strong) ED, EISs, and PDS, in VGs and also studied their properties incorporating some basic examples. Finally, we introduced an application of domination in the transportation system. Future research will hold the investigation of new concepts of vague planer graphs, vague bridges, vague cycles, and vague competition graphs and represent their applications in medical sciences and social networks.
Statements
Data availability statement
The original contributions presented in the study are included in the article/Supplementary Material; further inquiries can be directed to the corresponding author.
Author contributions
All authors have contributed equally to this work. All authors have read and agreed to the possible publication of the manuscript.
Funding
This work was supported by the National Key R&D Program of China (No. 2018YFB1005100).
Conflict of interest
The authors declare that the research was conducted in the absence of any commercial or financial relationships that could be construed as a potential conflict of interest.
References
1.
AkramMNazS. Energy of pythagorean fuzzy graphs with Applications. Mathematics (2018) 6:136. 10.3390/math6080136
2.
AkramMSitaraM. Certain concepts in intuitionistic neutrosophic graph structures. Information (2017) 8:154. 10.3390/info8040154
3.
AkramMNazSSmarandacheF. Generalization of maximizing Deviation and TOPSIS Method for MADM in simplified neutrosophic hesitant fuzzy environment. Symmetry (2019) 11:1058. 10.3390/sym11081058
4.
AkramMZafarF. Rough fuzzy digraphs with application. J Appl Math Comput (2019) 59:91–127. 10.1007/s12190-018-1171-2
5.
AkramMDarJMNazS. Pythagorean Dombi fuzzy graphs. J Intell Fuzzy Syst (2020) 6:29–54. 10.1007/s40747-019-0109-0
6.
AkramMSarwarM. Transversals of m-polar fuzzy hypergraphs with applications. J Intell Fuzzy Syst (2017) 33:351–64. 10.3233/jifs-161668
7.
BorzooeiRARashmanlouH. Ring sum in product intuitionistic fuzzy graphs. J Adv Res Pure Math (2015) 7:16–31. 10.5373/jarpm.1971.021614
8.
BorzooeiRARashmanlouH. Domination in vague graphs and its applications. J Intell Fuzzy Syst (2015) 29:1933–40. 10.3233/ifs-151671
9.
BorzooeiRARashmanlouH. Degree of vertices in vague graphs. J Appl Math Inform (2015) 33:545–57. 10.14317/jami.2015.545
10.
BorzooeiRARashmanlouHSamantaSPalM. Regularity of vague graphs. J Intell Fuzzy Syst (2016) 30:3681–9. 10.3233/ifs-162114
11.
BorzooeiRARashmanlouHSamantaSPalM. A Study on fuzzy labeling graphs. J Intell Fuzzy Syst (2016) 6(30):3349–55. 10.3233/ifs-152082
12.
CockayneEJFavaronOPayanCThomasonAC. Contribution to the theory of domination and irredundance in graphs. Discret Math (1981) 33(3):249–58. 10.1016/0012-365x(81)90268-5
13.
GauWLBuehrerDJ. Vague sets. IEEE Trans Syst Man Cybern (1993) 23:610–4. 10.1109/21.229476
14.
HaynesTWHedetniemiSSlaterP. Fundamentals of domination in graphs. Boca Raton: CRC Press (2013).
15.
KaufmannA. Introduction a la Theorie des Sour-Ensembles Flous. Paris, France: Masson et Cie (1973).
16.
KosariSRaoYJiangHLiuXWuPShaoZ. Vague graph Structure with Application in medical diagnosis. Symmetry (2017) 12(10):15–82. 10.3390/sym12101582
17.
MordesonJNMathewS. Fuzzy end nodes in fuzzy incidence graphs. New Math Nat Comput (2017) 13(3):13–20. 10.1142/s1793005717500028
18.
MordesonJNMathewS. Human trafficking: source, transit, destination, designations. New Math Nat Comput (2017) 13(3):209–18. 10.1142/s1793005717400063
19.
MordesonJNMathewSBorzooeiRA. Vulnerability and government response to human trafficking: Vague fuzzy incidence graphs. New Math Nat Comput (2018) 14(2):203–19. 10.1142/s1793005718500138
20.
NagoorganiAMohamedSYHussainRJ. Point set domination of intuitionistic fuzzy graphs. Int J Fuzzy Math Archive (2015) 7(1):43–9. 10.1007/s12190-015-0952-0
21.
NagoorganiAChandrasekaranVT. Domination in fuzzy graphs. Adv Fuzzy Sets Syst (2006) I(1):17–26. 10.1007/s12190-015-0952-0
22.
OreOTheory of graphs. Providence: American Mathematical Society Publications (1962)
23.
ParvathiRThamizhendhiG. Domination in intuitionistic fuzzy graph, proceedings of 14th international Conference on intuiyionistic fuzzy graphs. Notes Intuit Fuzzy Sets (2010) 16(2):39–49. 10.1007/3-540-34783-6_15
24.
RamakrishnaN. Vague graphs. Int J Comput Cogn (2009) 7:51–8. 10.1155/2014/525389
25.
RaoYKosariSShaoZ. Certain Properties of vague Graphs with a novel application. Mathematics (2020) 8:16–47. 10.3390/math8101647
26.
RaoYKosariSShaoZCaiRXinyueL. A Study on Domination in vague incidence graph and its application in medical sciences. Symmetry (2020) 12:18–85. 10.3390/sym12111885
27.
RashmanlouHBorzooeiRA. Vague graphs with application. J Intell Fuzzy Syst (2016) 30:3291–9. 10.3233/ifs-152077
28.
RashmanlouHSamantaSPalMBorzooeiRA. A study on bipolar fuzzy graphs. Em J Intell Fuzzy Syst (2015) 28:571–80. 10.3233/ifs-141333
29.
RashmanlouHBorzooeiRA. Product vague graphs and its applications. J Intell Fuzzy Syst (2016) 30:371–82. 10.3233/ifs-152077
30.
RashmanlouHJunYBBorzooeiRA. More results on highly irregular bipolar fuzzy graphs. Ann Fuzzy Math Inform (2014) 8:149–68. 10.1007/978-981-15-8756-6_1
31.
RashmanlouH.BorzooeiR.A.ShoaibM.TalebiY.TaheriM.MofidnakhaeiF. New way for finding shortest path problem in a network. Multiple Valued Logic Soft Comput20205451460. 10.1109/icnn.1993.298689
32.
RosenfeldA. In: ZadehLAFuKSShimuraM, editors. Fuzzy graphs, fuzzy Sets and their applications. New York, NY, USA: Academic Press (1975). p. 77–95.
33.
SamantaSPalM. Fuzzy k-competition graphs and pcompetition fuzzy graphs. Fuzzy Inf Eng (2013) 5:191–204. 10.1007/s12543-013-0140-6
34.
SamantaSAkramMPalM. m-step fuzzy competition graphs. J Appl Math Comput (2014) 11:133–9. 10.1007/s12190-s12014-s10785-s10782
35.
SamantaSPalM. Irregular bipolar fuzzy graphs. Int J Appl Fuzzy Sets (2012) 2:91–102. 10.1109/tfuzz.2014.2387875
36.
SamantaSPalM. Some more results on bipolar fuzzy sets and bipolar fuzzy intersection graphs. J Fuzzy Math (2014) 22:253–62. 10.14569/ijarai.2014.030109
37.
SamantaSPalMRashmanlouHBorzooeiRA. Vague graphs and strengths. J Intell Fuzzy Syst (2016) 30(6):3675–80. 10.3233/ifs-162113
38.
SahooSPalMRashmanlouHBorzooeiRA. Covering and paired domination in intuitionistic fuzzy graphs. J Intell Fuzzy Syst (2017) 33(6):4007–15. 10.3233/jifs-17848
39.
ShaoZKosariSRashmanlouHShoaibM. New Concepts in intuitionistic fuzzy Graph with Application in water supplier systems. Mathematics (2020) 8:12–41. 10.3390/math8081241
40.
ShaoZKosariSShoaibMRashmanlouH. Certain Concepts of vague graphs with Applications to Medical diagnosis. Front Phys (2020) 8:357. 10.3389/fphy.2020.00357
41.
ShaoZLiZWuPChenLZhangX. Multi-factor combination Authentication using fuzzy graph domination model. J Intell Fuzzy Syst (2019) 37:4979–85. 10.3233/JIFS-181859
42.
SomasundaramASomasundaramS. Domination in fuzzy graph-I. Patter Recogn Lett (1998) 19(9):787–91.10.1016/S0167-8655(98)00064-6
43.
TalebiYRashmanlouH. New concepts of domination sets in vague graphs with applications. Int J Comput Sci Mathematics (2019) 10(4):375–89. 10.1504/ijcsm.2019.10024350
44.
ZadehLA. Fuzzy sets. Inf Control (1965) 8:338–53. 10.1016/S0019-9958(65)90241-X
Summary
Keywords
vague set, vague graph, equitable dominating set, equitable neighborhood, medical science, Mathematics Subject Classification: 05C99, 03E72
Citation
Rao Y, Kosari S, Shao Z, Qiang X, Akhoundi M and Zhang X (2021) Equitable Domination in Vague Graphs With Application in Medical Sciences. Front. Phys. 9:635642. doi: 10.3389/fphy.2021.635642
Received
30 November 2020
Accepted
15 January 2021
Published
18 March 2021
Volume
9 - 2021
Edited by
Jinjin Li, Shanghai Jiao Tong University, China
Reviewed by
Veena Mathad, University of Mysore, India
Hossein Rashmanlou, University of Mazandaran, Iran
Updates
Copyright
© 2021 Rao, Kosari, Shao, Qiang, Akhoundi and Zhang.
This is an open-access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (CC BY). The use, distribution or reproduction in other forums is permitted, provided the original author(s) and the copyright owner(s) are credited and that the original publication in this journal is cited, in accordance with accepted academic practice. No use, distribution or reproduction is permitted which does not comply with these terms.
*Correspondence: Saeed Kosari, saeedkosari38@gzhu.edu.cn
This article was submitted to Mathematical and Statistical Physics, a section of the journal Frontiers in Physics
Disclaimer
All claims expressed in this article are solely those of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of their affiliated organizations, or those of the publisher, the editors and the reviewers. Any product that may be evaluated in this article or claim that may be made by its manufacturer is not guaranteed or endorsed by the publisher.