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

net/publication/336819700

Domination integrity and efficient fuzzy graphs

Article in Neural Computing and Applications · July 2020

DOI: 10.1007/s00521-019-04563-5

CITATIONS READS

7 724

4 authors:

M. Saravanan Sujatha Ramalingam

Mannar Thirumalai Naicker College Sri Sivasubramaniya Nadar College of Engineering
8 PUBLICATIONS 48 CITATIONS 76 PUBLICATIONS 271 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

R. Sundareswaran Goksen Bacak Turan

Sri Sivasubramaniya Nadar College of Engineering Manisa Celal Bayar University
66 PUBLICATIONS 191 CITATIONS 21 PUBLICATIONS 72 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by R. Sundareswaran on 12 March 2022.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Neural Computing and Applications
https://doi.org/10.1007/s00521-019-04563-5 (0123456789().,-volV)(0123456789().
,- volV)

ORIGINAL ARTICLE

Domination integrity and efficient fuzzy graphs

Saravanan Mariappan1 • Sujatha Ramalingam2 • Sundareswaran Raman2 • Goksen Bacak-Turan3

Received: 4 February 2019 / Accepted: 10 October 2019

Ó Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2019

Abstract
In this paper, domination integrity of fuzzy graph and efficient fuzzy graph concepts is introduced with examples. An
algorithm is developed to find whether an arc is strong or not. If it is strong, another algorithm will classify it as a strong arc
and b strong arc. The next algorithm is used to find whether the given fuzzy graph is a fuzzy tree or not. Domination and
integrity are two different parameters used to define the stability of a graph in various situations. Using the strong arc
concept a new parameter, domination integrity is defined and lower and upper bounds are found. This paper discusses the
domination integrity for standard graphs such as path, cycle and complete graph. The domination integrity for Cartesian
product of fuzzy graphs is also discussed. Finally, the new class of fuzzy graph, efficient fuzzy graph, is introduced.
Efficient fuzzy graph is a special type of fuzzy graph that has the same dominating set, other than vertex set V, for both
fuzzy graph and its underlying crisp graph.

Keywords Fuzzy graph  Vertex integrity  Dominating set  Strong arcs

1 Introduction it is being further developed in various periods since 1862,

In the field of applied mathematics, graph theory plays a
vital role. It has a direct impact on computer science,
networking, data transformation, route scheduling, inven-
tory allocation, biological image processing and many
other engineering fields. In advance graph theory, domi-
nation concept relates the real-life situations and their
theoretical concepts. Domination theory was introduced by
Ore [1] in his book. As it has a wide range of applications,
& Sujatha Ramalingam
sujathar@ssn.edu.in
Saravanan Mariappan
msaran81@gmail.com
Sundareswaran Raman
sundareswaranr@ssn.edu.in
Goksen Bacak-Turan
goksenbacak@gmail.com
1
Department of Mathematics, Mannar Thirumalai Naicker
College, Pasumalai, Madurai, Tamil Nadu, India
2
Department of Mathematics, SSN College of Engineering,
Old Mahabalipuram Road, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India
3
Department of Mathematics, Celal Bayar University,
45140 Manisa, Turkey
by finding minimum number of queens to cover the entire
8  8 chess board till date. We can find a set of vertices
which dominates the remaining vertices in the vertex set,
where these vertices are removed from the graph; it may be
either connected or disconnected. Domination parameter
does not consider the remaining subgraph when the dom-
inating set was deleted. We need another parameter relat-
ing a vertex set and subgraph after deleting the vertex set.
This concept is integrity of graph. Integrity accounts car-
dinality of removed vertex set and maximum connected
component after removing that vertex set.
In real-life situations, when a mathematical model is
converted as graph, every vertex and edge does not have
equal weightage. According to the nature of the model, the
importance of any particular edge and vertex can have a
fuzzified value. This fuzzified value takes the weighted
graph into fuzzy graph. The main advantage of fuzzy graph
is the any linguistic terms can be fuzzified and can take
values in (0, 1].
Barefoot et al. [2] introduced the vulnerability parame-
ter, namely integrity of graph. Integrity value of family of
graphs is discussed in [3]. Basic theorems and interesting
results are found in [4, 5]. Integrity of union, join, com-
position and product of two graphs are discussed in [6]. All
these results are consolidated in the survey paper [7].

123

Integrity results of total graphs, middle graphs and hub
integrity are found in [8–10]. Other vulnerability parame-
ters such as edge integrity [11], rupture [12], scattering
number [13], tenacity [14] and toughness [15] play a vital
role in analyzing the stability of network.
Domination integrity was defined by Sundareswaran
et al. in [16]. They developed the domination integrity
concepts in middle graphs [17], in trees [18], in powers of
cycles [19] and in gear graphs [20]. The global domination
number was introduced by Sampathkumar in [21], and the
global domination integrity was introduced and further
discussed by Sultan Senan Mahde et al. in [22].
Basic fuzzy concepts like fuzzy sets and fuzzy relations
were introduced in 1965 in [23] by Zadeh. He proved basic
theorems and defined fuzzy tree, connectedness, bridges
and cut nodes. Rosenfeld developed fuzzy graphs from
fuzzy relations in [24]. Bhutani and Rosenfeld defined
strong arcs and fuzzy end nodes in [25] and discussed some
basic properties. These strong arcs are further classified as
alpha, beta and gamma arcs in [26] by Mathew and Suni-
tha. The fuzzy domination theory was introduced by
Somasundaram and Somasundaram [27]. They developed
the fuzzy domination theory by using effective edge. This
concept was extended to union, join and composition of
fuzzy graph by Somasundaram in [28]. This concept was
redefined by Nagoorgani in [29, 30] by means of strong
arcs and strong neighborhood. Some results in [27] were
modified by Sunitha in [31]. Metrics in fuzzy graphs are
found in [32]. OT Manjusha et al. define strong domination
by using strong arcs in [33]. In [34], the fuzzy vertex
integrity concept was introduced and the vertex integrity
value of some standard graphs was discussed. Edge
integrity of fuzzy graphs was found in [35]. Vertex integ-
rity and edge integrity values of join, union and Cartesian
product of fuzzy graph are discussed in [36]. The appli-
cation of power domination in electrical network is found
in [37].
Special types of fuzzy graphs such as fuzzy planar
graphs, k-competition fuzzy graphs and p-competition
fuzzy graphs, m-step fuzzy competition graphs and bipolar
fuzzy hypergraphs were discussed by Samanta, Pal in
[38–41]. Interval-valued fuzzy graph, antipodal interval-
valued fuzzy graphs and irregular interval-valued fuzzy
graphs were discussed by H. Rashmanlou, M. Pal in
[42–44].
Node strength sequence of fuzzy graph is defined and its
properties are studied in [45]. An another sequence such as
graphic integer sequence in graph integrity was found in
[46]. Dominating sets are needed to observe the domination
integrity parameter. Fuzzy planar graphs are discussed in
[47]. Clustering techniques are different from domination
integrity parameter. Density-based clustering techniques
[48], a maximal clique sets [49], are decomposing the
123
Neural Computing and Applications
vertex set into vertex subsets with some properties. Clus-
tering using neighborhood information and weighted
MUSE for subgraph pattern are discussed in [50, 51]. But
the algorithms developed in this paper classify the edges as
strong edges, and using these strong edges, domination
property is defined. With these dominating sets, integrity
property is discussed.
Probabilistic graph models are graph with probability
values as edge membership values and vertex membership
values need not be less than one. But in fuzzy graphs, both
edge membership value and vertex membership value
should be less than one, satisfying the condition that the
edge membership value must be less than or equal to the
membership values of the incident vertices. Reducing some
edges has a high impact on the stability of the graphs. Such
edges which affect the stability of the graph are discussed
in the name of strong edges in fuzzy graphs.
1.1 Motivation
In crisp graph, every edge and every vertex have equal
importance. But in fuzzy graph, every vertex and every edge
have their own importance in terms of fuzziness. The fuzzified
arcs are classified as strong and non-strong arcs. There are
many interesting results found in [25, 26] using strong arcs.
But still there is no algorithm to identify strong arcs in a fuzzy
graph. This paper attempts to frame an algorithm to identify
whether an arc is strong or not. Also there is no algorithm to
classify a fuzzy graph as fuzzy tree or not. This paper tries to
bring out an algorithm to find fuzzy tree. Any connectivity
parameter dealt in graph does not consider the stability of the
network. The stability of a network is guaranteed by the
vulnerability parameter and integrity. The domination integ-
rity is a new parameter that deals with the stability of the graph
and also the domination property.
1.2 Organization of the paper
This paper deals with fuzzy domination integrity, which
provides the reliability of the graph and also covers other
vertices by means of dominating set. Section 1 introduces
the concept of the paper. Section 2 lists out all the basic
definitions in fuzzy graphs. Section 3 discusses the algo-
rithm to find strong arcs, classification of strong arcs and
fuzzy tree in fuzzy graph. Section 4 gives the formal def-
inition for domination integrity in fuzzy graph with
example. It also discusses the basic results in domination
integrity for standard graphs like path, cycle, complete
graph, bipartite graph and Cartesian product of K2 with Pn .
Section 5 deals with efficient fuzzy graph. Formal defini-
tion and explanation are given with examples. Section 6
gives a practical situation dealing with domination integrity
in fuzzy graph.
Neural Computing and Applications

2 Preliminaries—fuzzy graphs where ai;j , which is a upper triangular matrix, defines the
connectedness between the vertices ui and uj . That is,
Let G : ðr; lÞ be a fuzzy graph with a pair of functions 
CONNðui ; uj Þ; i[j
defined as r : V ! ½0; 1 and l : V  V ! ½0; 1 such that ai;j ¼
; otherwise:
lðx; yÞ  minðrðxÞ; rðyÞÞ; ð¼ rðxÞ ^ rðyÞÞ for all x, y in V.
The underlying crisp graph is denoted by G : ðV; EÞ, It is clear that the last row of the matrix does not have
where V is the vertex of G and E  V  V. The fuzzy any values. Ignoring the last row, the order of the matrix is
graph H : ðs; tÞ is a subgraph of G : ðr; lÞ if sðuÞ  rðuÞ n  1  n.
and tðu; vÞ  lðu; vÞ for all u, v in V. The fuzzy subgraph
Definition 4 Connectivity adjacency matrix
Hðs; tÞ spans the fuzzy graph G ¼ ðr; lÞ if sðuÞ ¼ rðuÞ for
In the connectivity matrix C(G), every value is associ-
all u in V. A path Pn is a sequence of n distinct nodes
ated with an edge membership value of some edge. If the
u1 ; u2 ; u3 ; . . .; un such that lðui1 ; ui Þ [ 0, 1  i  n. The
corresponding edge is not adjacent to that vertex, then
length of the path is defined as the number of edges in that
ignore that value. This modified matrix is known as
path. The strength of path is defined as the membership
connectivity adjacency matrix, denoted by CA(G). In this
value of weakest edges in that path. If any two nodes of the
matrix, finding the maximum via column and then by row
fuzzy graph G is connected by a path, then G is a connected
gives the strong arcs of the fuzzy graph G.
fuzzy graph. Pn is called fuzzy cycle if u1 ¼ un , n 3, and
it contains more than one weak arc. The connectedness of u Example 1 Consider the fuzzy graph G ¼ ðr; lÞ, with 5
and v is defined as the maximum strength of all paths vertices, V ¼ a; b; c; d; e with lða; bÞ ¼ 0:2, lðb; cÞ ¼ 0:3,
between u and v, and it is denoted by CONNG ðu; vÞ. The lðc; dÞ ¼ 0:2, lðd; eÞ ¼ 0:4, lðe; aÞ ¼ 0:5 as shown in
vertex cardinality of S ð VÞ is sum of vertex membership Fig. 1. Since the definition of strong arc is independent of
values of S. The complement G ¼ ðr; lÞ of G ¼ ðr; lÞ is vertex membership values, we may assign any value so that
defined as r ¼ r, lðu; vÞ ¼ rðuÞ ^ rðvÞ  lðu; vÞ for all u, it does not affect the definition of fuzzy graph G.
v in V. The edge cardinality of S ð EÞ is sum of edge The connectivity matrix of fuzzy graph, in Fig. 1, is
membership values in S. Order of the fuzzy graph is total 0 1
sum of all vertex membership values of G and size of the  0:2 0:2 0:4 0:5
B  0:3 0:2 0:2 C
fuzzy graph is total sum of all edge membership values of B C
CMðGÞ ¼ B C:
G. @   0:2 0:2 A
    0:4

3 Algorithm for classification of strong arcs The (1, 4) value of the matrix is 0.4 which associates
and fuzzy tree CONN(a, d), corresponds to the edge (d, e) and is not
adjacent to vertex a. So, ignore the value. Proceeding in a
Definition 1 An arc (u,v) of a fuzzy graph G : ðr; lÞ is similar manner with all the entries in the matrix, the con-
called strong arc if lðu; vÞ  CONNGðu;vÞ ðGÞ [25]. nectivity matrix CM(G) becomes connectivity adjacency
matrix,
Definition 2 A strong arc (u, v) is called a strong arc if its
weight is greater than the connectedness of u, v when it is
deleted.
A strong arc (u, v) is called b strong arc if its weight is
equal to the connectedness of u, v when it is deleted.
All the remaining arcs are known as d-arc of fuzzy graph
G [26].

3.1 Connectivity matrix of a fuzzy graph 0.2

b 0.3

Connectedness between two vertices was found by using a c

the algorithm stated in [33]. Using connectedness concept,
we can find whether the arc is strong or not and is 0.5 0.2
explained in the following.
e d
Definition 3 Consider the fuzzy graph G : ðl; rÞ, with n 0.4
vertices. Construct the connectivity matrix CMðGÞ ¼ ðai;j Þ,
Fig. 1 Fuzzy graph for calculation of connectivity adjacency matrix

123
 Neural Computing and Applications

0 1 Example 2 Consider the fuzzy graph G:(l; r) with four

 0:2   0:5
B  0:3   C vertices V ¼ fa; b; c; dg with lða; bÞ ¼ 0:1, lðb; cÞ ¼ 1,
B C
CAðGÞ ¼ B C: lðc; dÞ ¼ 1, lðd; aÞ ¼ 0:2, lðb; dÞ ¼ 0:3 (Fig. 2).
@   0:2  A
    0:4
The connectivity matrix of this graph is
The maximum value in the first row is 0.5, which cor- 0 1
responds to the edge (a, e) and indicates it as strong arc.  0:2 0:2 0:2
B C
Similarly, in the remaining rows the edge membership CMðGÞ ¼ @   1 1 A:
values of (b, c), (c, d), (d, e) are the maximum; hence,    1
they are strong arcs. Now consider the matrix via column,
except the edge (a, b) all the edges are marked as strong. Removing the non-adjacent edges from the connectivity
Meanwhile, in the second column, the edge (a, b) has the matrix, connectivity adjacency matrix is
0 1
maximum value and this edge becomes a strong arc of G.    0:2
Thus, the algorithm is consolidated as B C
CAðGÞ ¼ @   1  A:
(i) Find the connectedness between any two vertices    1
and tabulate it as a upper triangular matrix of order
Considering the row and column maximum in the matrix,
n by n  1 to form the connectivity matrix
the edges (a, b), (b, c) and (c, d) are strong edges. lða; dÞ ¼
(ii) Verify whether the corresponding valued arcs is
0:2 is the unique maximum of the vertex of a, lðb; cÞ ¼ 1
adjacent to that vertex or not. If it is adjacent,
is the unique maximum of the vertex of b, and lðc; dÞ ¼ 1
consider the value; otherwise, ignore the value to
is the unique maximum of the vertex of d. Therefore, these
form the connectivity adjacency matrix
three edges are a strong edges.
(iii) Find the maximum value via rows and then by
columns. These maximum valued arcs are strong
arcs which are either a or b strong.
3.3 Fuzzy tree

A fuzzy graph G : ðr; lÞ is fuzzy tree, if and only if there

3.2 Classifying strong arcs exists a unique maximum spanning tree [52]. Write the
adjacency matrix, defined by AðGÞ ¼ ðai;j ), where

From the algorithm defined in 3.1, we can find whether the lðui ; uj Þ; i[j
given arcs are strong or not. In [32], Sunitha et al. classified ai;j ¼ , of order m  1  m of
; otherwise:
the strong arcs as a, b, d. Clearly, an arc which is not strong the given fuzzy graph, where m is the number of vertices.
is d arc. Strong arcs are further classified as a and b arcs. If Choose the column-wise and row-wise maximum values. If
a strong arc has unique maximum to at least one vertex, there exists exactly only one maximum either via row or
then that strong arc is a arc. All the other strong arcs are b column, then that fuzzy graph is a fuzzy tree.
strong arcs.
In Example 1, lða; eÞ ¼ 0:5 is the unique maximum of Example 3 Consider the fuzzy graph G:(l; r) with six
the vertices of a and e. lðb; cÞ ¼ 0:3 is the unique maxi- vertices V ¼ fa; b; c; d; e; f g and edge memberships
mum of the vertices of b and c. lðd; eÞ ¼ 0:4 is the unique lða; bÞ ¼ 0:4, lða; dÞ ¼ 0:2, lðb; cÞ ¼ 0:5, lðb; dÞ ¼ 0:3 ,
maximum adjacent to vertex d. So, these strong arcs are lðb; f Þ ¼ 0:3, lðc; dÞ ¼ 0:7, lðc; eÞ ¼ 0:2, lðc; f Þ ¼ 0:2,
astrong arcs, whereas the other strong arcs (a, b) and (c, d) lðd; eÞ ¼ 0:8.
are b strong arcs. The adjacency matrix for Fig. 3 graph in Example 3 is
0 1
 0:4  0:2  
B  0:5 0:3  0:3 C
B C
AðGÞ ¼ B
B   0:7 0:2 0:2 C
C:
0.1 @    0:8  A
a b      

0.2 1 Considering the maximum with respect to the each vertex,

0.3 each row has a single maximum values 0.4, 0.5, 0.7 and 0.8
corresponding to all the vertices. Similarly every column
d c
1

Fig. 2 Fuzzy graph for classification of strong arcs

123
Neural Computing and Applications

0.4 4 Domination integrity of fuzzy graphs

a b 0.3
Definition 5 An edge ðu; vÞ 2 E in a fuzzy graph is
0.2 0.5
f effective edge if lðu; vÞ ¼ rðuÞ ^ rðvÞ [27]. Every effec-
0.3
tive arc is strong arc [32].
0.2
d c Definition 6 The edge membership value of (u, v) is not
0.7
equal to zero; then, u and v are neighbors [27]. The set of
0.8 0.2 all neighbors of v is denoted by N(v). The closed neigh-
e borhood of v is NðvÞ [ v, denoted by N[v]. If (u, v) is a
strong arc, then u and v are strong neighbors to each other.
Fig. 3 Fuzzy tree The strong neighbors of v is denoted by Ns ðvÞ. Similarly
the closed strong neighborhood of v is Ns ðvÞ [ v
has a single maximum 0.4, 0.5, 0.7, 0.8 and 0.3. Therefore, Definition 7 Every edge dominates itself and all its strong
the given fuzzy graph is a fuzzy tree. neighbors [29, 30]. A subset S of V is a dominating set of
Example 4 Consider the fuzzy graph G:(l; r) shown as the fuzzy graph G, if every node in V  S is a strong
Fig. 18 [53] with four vertices V ¼ fa; b; c; dg and neighbor of at least one node in S. The minimum cardi-
lða; bÞ ¼ 0:8, lðb; cÞ ¼ 0:2, lðc; dÞ ¼ 0:2, lðd; aÞ ¼ 0:3, nality of such dominating set is domination number of G,
lða; cÞ ¼ 0:2. denoted by cðGÞ, and such set is called the minimal dom-
inating set of G.
In this graph, shown in Fig. 4, all the arcs are strong.
The arcs (a, b) and (a, d) are a strong arc and the Definition 8 Let G ¼ ðr; lÞ be a fuzzy graph. The integ-
remaining arcs are b strong arcs. The adjacency matrix is rity of G, denoted by eIðGÞ, is defined as
0 1
 0:8 0:2 0:3 eIðGÞ ¼ minfjSj þ mðG  SÞ=S  Vg, where |S| denotes the
AðGÞ ¼ @   0:2  A: Choosing the cardinality of S, and mðG  SÞ is order of the biggest
   0:2 component of G  S [34].
column-wise maximum, rows 1, 2 and 3 has maximum
values 0.8, 0.2 and 0.2, respectively. Similarly, columns 2, Definition 9 An eI -set of G ¼ ðr; lÞ is any (strict) subset S
3 and 4 have maximum 0.8, 0.2 and 0.3, respectively. Thus, of V(G) for which eI ðGÞ ¼ fjSj þ mðG  SÞ=S Vg [34].
vertex a, associated with row 1, has two maximum values Definition 10 Domination integrity of crisp graphs
0.8 and 0.3, and vertex c, associated with column 2, has The domination integrity of a graph G : (V, E) is
two maximum values each equals 0.2. Thus, it has maxi- denoted by DI(G) and defined as DIðGÞ ¼ minfjSj þ
mum values that are not unique via column and row, for mðG  SÞ : S  VðGÞg where S is a dominating set of G
these two vertices. Therefore, the given fuzzy graph is not and mðG  SÞ represents the order of the largest component
fuzzy tree. in G  S [39].
We may conclude the algorithm as follows: A subset S of V(G) is a DI set if DIðGÞ ¼ fjSj þ mðG 
(1) Find the adjacency matrix of the graph SÞ : S VðGÞg where S is a dominating set of G.
(2) If each vertex has a single maximum arc incident to In Definition 1, the vertex and edge membership values
it, then that fuzzy graph is a fuzzy tree. are same. But in fuzzy graphs, edge and vertex have their
own importance in terms of their membership values. Thus,
using strong arc concept domination integrity is defined in
fuzzy graphs as follows.
Definition 11 Let G : ðr; lÞ be a fuzzy graph. The domi-
nation integrity number of G, denoted by DIf ðGÞ, is defined
0.8
a b f
as DI ðGÞ ¼ minfjSj þ mðG  SÞ=S is the dominating set of
Gg, where |S| denotes the vertex cardinality of S and mðG 
0.2
0.3 0.2 SÞ denotes the maximum order of the components of
G  S.
c The domination set S, which satisfies
d 0.2 f
DI ðGÞ ¼ fjSj þ mðG  SÞg, is known as minimal domina-
Fig. 4 Example of fuzzy graph which is not a fuzzy tree g -set of G.
tion integrity set, denoted by MDI

123
 Neural Computing and Applications

Example 5 Consider the fuzzy graph G : ðr; l) with ver-
tices V ¼ fa; b; c; dg having rðaÞ ¼ 0:3, rðbÞ ¼ 0:4,
rðcÞ ¼ 0:7, rðdÞ ¼ 0:65, lða; bÞ ¼ 0:3, lða; dÞ ¼ 0:3,
lðb; cÞ ¼ 0:2, lðc; dÞ ¼ 0:65, lðb; dÞ ¼ 0:3.
In this graph, shown in Fig. 5, the arcs
(a, b), (a, d), (c, d), (b, d) are strong arcs. The dominating
sets are S1 ¼ V, S2 ¼ fa; cg and S3 ¼ fb; dg. The domi-
nation number is cðGÞ ¼ minfjS1 j; jS2 j; jS3 jg ¼
minf2:05; 1; 1:05g ¼ 1, which corresponds to S2 . DI f ðGÞ ¼
minf2:05 þ 0; 1 þ 1:05; 1:05 þ 0:7g ¼ 1:75 which corre-
sponds to the set S3 . Thus, the minimal domination integ-
rity set is S3 .
f ðGÞ.
Theorem 1 For any fuzzy graph G : ðr; lÞ, cðGÞ  DI
Proof The domination number of fuzzy graph depends
only on the fuzzy cardinality of the dominating set. But the
domination integrity number depends upon the dominating
set S and the corresponding maximum order of the com-
ponent of G  S. This implies cðGÞ\ DI f ðGÞ. Equality
holds for the fuzzy graph with isolated vertices only. For
the graph with only isolated vertices, the whole vertex set
is the only dominating set. For this set, mðG  SÞ ¼ 0
f ðGÞ. Hence, cðGÞ  DI
implies cðGÞ ¼ DI f ðGÞ. h graph.
Theorem 3 Let G : ðr; lÞ be a fuzzy graph. DI f ðGÞ ¼ p if
and only if G is either complete fuzzy graph or complement
of complete fuzzy graph.
Proof Let G : ðr; lÞ be a complete fuzzy graph. Then any
subset of V is dominating set of G. Eliminating any subset
of V, the remaining graph is a single component consisting
of all the remaining vertices. So, domination integrity of G
is nothing but order of G. Suppose G is complement of the
complete fuzzy graph. Then G is the graph with set of
isolated vertices; thus, NðuÞ ¼ ; for all u in V. The whole
vertex set is the only dominating set of G. For this domi-
nating set S, mðG  SÞ is zero. Hence, domination integrity
of G is nothing but order of G. Thus, the only dominating
set is V. Therefore, cðGÞ ¼ DI f ðGÞ ¼ p.
Conversely, let us assume that domination integrity
number equals order of G. Let S be the dominating set of G.
If G  S contains more than one component, then sum of
cardinality of S and mðG  SÞ must be less than order of G.
So, G  S must be a single connected component. This is
true for all dominating set, in particular for any singleton
vertex set. Thus, this singleton vertex sets dominates all the
remaining vertices of G. This implies G is a complete fuzzy
h

Theorem 2 The domination integrity parameter in fuzzy Definition 12 Complete bipartiate fuzzy graph
graph is a monotonically increasing parameter. A bipartite fuzzy graph G : ðr; lÞ is a fuzzy graph
having non-empty vertex set partition V1 and V2 such that
Let G : ðr; lÞ be a fuzzy graph and H be a subgraph of lðu; vÞ ¼ 0 if u; v 2 V1 or u; v 2 V2
G. Using induction principle, we can easily verify A complete bipartite fuzzy graph G : ðr; lÞ is a bipartite
f ðHÞ  DI
DI f ðGÞ. The equality holds, if G and H have same fuzzy graph with lðu; vÞ ¼ rðuÞ ^ rðvÞ for all u 2 V1 and
strong arc edge set and same vertex set. For all the other v 2 V2 [27].
cases, we get the inequality.
Theorem 4 Let G : ðr; lÞ be a complete bipartite fuzzy
f ðGÞ  p, where p is the order of fuzzy
Remark 1 cðGÞ  DI graph Kr1 ;r2 . The domination integrity of G is
graph. f ðGÞ ¼ minfjV1 j þ maxðr2 ðVÞÞ; jV2 j þ maxðr1 ðVÞÞg
DI
Remark 2 For any fuzzy graph Proof Let G be a complete bipartite fuzzy graph with the
f ðGÞ þ DI
G : ðr; lÞ; DI f ðGÞ
  2p. The inequality is trivial bipartion V1 and V2 . By Proposition 4.8 in [36], the dom-
and the equality holds for complete fuzzy graph and its ination set S of G is either V1 or V2 or one vertex from V1
complement and V2 . If S is V1 , then ðG  SÞ is a collection of isolated
vertices of V2 Therefore, mðG  SÞ ¼ max frðV2 Þg. Simi-
larly, if S is V2 , then ðG  SÞ is a collection of isolated
vertices of V1 which implies mðG  SÞ ¼ max frðV1 Þg. If
S has one vertex from V1 and other form V2 , then G  S
remains a single connected component. Considering the
0.3 0.4 minimum value for the above three dominating sets, we
0.3
a b may ignore the dominating set S, having one vertex in V1
and another one from V2 . Thus, DI f ðGÞ ¼ minfjV1 j þ
0.3 0.2
0.3 maxðr2 ðVÞÞ; jV2 j þ maxðr1 ðVÞÞg. h

d c Definition 13 Independent dominating set

0.65
0.65 0.7

Fig. 5 Fuzzy graph for calculation of domination integrity

123
Neural Computing and Applications

An independent dominating set S  VðGÞ of a fuzzy

graph G : ðl; rÞ is a dominating set of G such that
lðu; vÞ\rðuÞ ^ rðvÞ for u; v 2 S [27].
Theorem 5 Let G be a fuzzy graph with underlying crisp
graph G as Pn , n [ 1 with all the edges as effective edges.
Then there exists at least one independent dominating set
with dn=3e vertices.
Proof The given G is a fuzzy graph with all edges as
effective edges and the underlying graph of G is a path Pn ,
with n vertices. To dominate this path in crisp sense we
need at least dn=3e vertices. Let us construct the inde-
pendent dominating set as follows:
If nðmod3Þ 0, then the vertex set fv2 ; v5 ; v8 ; . . .; vn1 g
forms an independent dominating set.
If nðmod3Þ 1, then the vertex set fv2 ; v4 ; v7 ; . . .; vn g
forms an independent dominating set.
If nðmod3Þ 2, then the vertex set fv2 ; v4 ; v7 ; . . .; vn1 g
forms an independent dominating set.
These dn=3e vertices are not adjacent to each other. So
clearly, they are independent of each other. Hence,
there exists an independent dominating set with dn=3e
vertices.
Theorem 6 Let G be a fuzzy graph with underlying crisp
graph G , as Cn , n [ 3 with all the edges as effective
edges. Then there exists at least one independent domi-
nating set D with dn=3e number of vertices.
Proof By definition, a vertex x is said to be isolated if
lðx; yÞ\rðxÞ ^ rðyÞ for all y in V  fyg. Similarly a set S
of vertices is said to be independent if lðx; yÞ\rðxÞ ^ rðyÞ
for all x, y in S [27]. In particular, there exists no adjacency
between any vertices within a set; then, the set is inde-
pendent vertex set. Let v1 ; v2 ; v3 ; . . .; vn be the vertices of
Cn . The independent set may be constructed as follows:
If nðmod3Þ 0, then the independent vertices are
v1 ; v4 ; v7 ; . . .; vn2 .
If nðmod3Þ 1, then the independent vertices are
v1 ; v4 ; v7 ; . . .; vn3 and vn1 .
If nðmod3Þ 2, then the independent vertices are
v1 ; v4 ; v7 ; . . .; vn1 .
By the choice of G, all the edges are effective, and
hence, these sets form a dominating set with dn=3e number
of vertices. Hence, there exists at least one independent
dominating set D with dn=3e number of vertices.
Theorem 7 Let G be a fuzzy graph with G is Cn , n [ 2 or
Pn , n [ 1. Then
dn=3e
X v2 ; ðu1 ; v1 Þ 2 E1 g with ðr1  r2 Þðu1 ; u2 Þ ¼ r1 ðu1 Þ ^
f ðGÞ
lk  DI
k¼1
where li , denotes the ith minimum edge membership value
of G.
Proof From Theorems 5 and 6, there exists an indepen-
dent dominating set D, with dn=3e vertices. If these ver-
tices take the first dn=3eminimum effective edge values,
this forms a minimal dominating set with
dn=3e
X
f ðGÞ:
lk ¼ DI
k¼1
Suppose any other vertex set S with dn=3e or more vertices,
say m, forms a minimal dominating set, as
dn=3e
X
f ðGÞ:
lk \ DI
k¼1
Hence,
dn=3e
X
f ðGÞ:
lk  DI
k¼1
where li denotes the ith minimum edge membership value
of G. h
h
Theorem 8 Let G : ðr; lÞ be a connected fuzzy graph. G is
a fuzzy tree if and only if there exists a unique strong path
between any two nodes of G. Also a strong path between u
and v is a path of maximum strength between u and v, for
all u; v 2 V [25].
Theorem 9 Let G : ðr; lÞ be a connected fuzzy graph. G is
a fuzzy tree if and only if G has a unique maximum span-
ning tree [45].
Theorem 10 Let G be a fuzzy tree with H as its maximum
f ðGÞ ¼ DI
spanning tree. Then DI f ðHÞ.
Proof Let G : ðr; lÞ be a fuzzy tree and H its maximum
spanning tree. By Theorem 8, all the arcs of H are strong.
By Theorem 9, H is unique. Hence, the strong edge set of
G and the vertex set of G are same as edge set and vertex
f ðGÞ ¼ DI
set of H. Therefore, by Theorem 2, DI f ðHÞ. h
Definition 14 Strong fuzzy graph
A strong fuzzy graph G : ðr; lÞis a fuzzy graph such that
lðu; vÞ ¼ rðuÞ ^ rðvÞ for all (u, v) in E.
h Definition 15 The Cartesian product of two fuzzy graphs
G1 and G2 is defined as a fuzzy graph G ¼ G1  G2 :
ðr1  r2 ; l1  l2 Þ on G : ðV; EÞ where V ¼ V1  V2 and
E ¼ fððu1 ; u2 Þðv1 ; v2 ÞÞ if u1 ¼ v1 ; ðu2 ; v2 Þ 2 E2 or u2 ¼
r2 ðu2 Þ for all ðu1 ; u2 Þ 2 V1  V2 and

123
 Neural Computing and Applications

ðl1  l2 Þððu1 ; u2 Þðv1 ; v2 ÞÞ the domination integrity of G becomes

 f f
DI ðGÞ ¼ jH1 j þ DI ðH2 Þ.
r1 ðu1 Þ ^ l2 ðu2 ; v2 Þ; if u1 ¼ v1 &ðu2 ; v2 Þ 2 E2 ;
¼ Subcase 2: l2 \l1 . Then every arc in G is an
r1 ðu2 Þ ^ l1 ðu1 ; v2 Þ; if u2 ¼ v2 &ðu1 ; v1 Þ 2 E1 :
independent arc. So the total vertex set of G is the only
dominating set for G. This implies DI f ðGÞ ¼ jH1 j þ jH2 j ¼
nðr1 ðxÞ þ r1 ðyÞÞ.
Example 6 Let G1 ¼ ðr1 ; l1 Þ be a fuzzy graph with Subcase 3: l2 ðvi Þ\l1 \l2 ðvj Þ for some i, j. Then the
r1 ðaÞ ¼ 0:7, r1 ðbÞ ¼ 0:5 and l1 ða; bÞ ¼ 0:3. Let G2 ¼ subgraphs H1 and H2 are not strong fuzzy graphs. Every arc
ðr2 ; l2 Þ be a fuzzy graph with r2 ðcÞ ¼ 0:4, r2 ðdÞ ¼ 0:8, having l1 \l2 ðvÞ has new weight l1 ; and other arcs having
r2 ðeÞ ¼ 0:63, l2 ðc; dÞ ¼ 0:4 and l2 ðd; eÞ ¼ 0:5. l2 ðuÞ\l1 remain the same. Hence, in this case
f ðGÞ ¼ jH1 j þ DI
DI f ðH2 Þ.
The Cartesian product G of two fuzzy graphs G1 and G2 Case 2: r2 \r1 . Then H1 and H2 become equal to G2 ,
is G ¼ G1  G2 : ðr1  r2 ; l1  l2 Þ and is shown in having same vertex membership values and edge member-
Fig. 6c. ship values of G2 . Hence, in this case, DI f ðGÞ ¼
Theorem 11 Let G1 : ðr1 ; l1 Þ be strong fuzzy graph with f ðG2 Þ.
jG2 j þ DI
G1  as K2 and G2 : ðr2 ; l2 Þ be any fuzzy graph. Let G be Case 3: r2 ðvi Þ\r1 \r2 ðvj Þ for some i0 s and j0 s, similar
the Cartesian product of G1 and G2 . The domination to subcases.
integrity of G, satisfies the inequality nðr1 ðxÞ þ r1 ðyÞÞ  Subcase 4: If order of H1 is less that H2 , then
f ðGÞ  jG2 j þ DI
DI f ðG2 Þ. f ðGÞ ¼ jH1 j þ DI
DI f ðH2 Þ.
Subcase 5: If order of H2 is less that H1 , then
Proof Let G1 ; G2 be fuzzy graphs with vertex set V1 ¼ f ðGÞ ¼ jH2 j þ DI f ðH1 Þ.
DI
fx; yg and V2 ¼ fv1 ; v2 ; . . .; vn g. Let H1 and H2 be two
Concluding all the cases, nðr1 ðxÞ þ r1 ðyÞÞ 
subgraphs isomorphic to G2 in crisp sense.
f ðGÞ  jG2 j þ DI
DI f ðG2 Þ. h
Case 1: Suppose r1 \r2 . Without loss of generality,
assume that r1 ðxÞ\r1 ðyÞ and assume that every vertex in
H1 has membership r1 ðxÞ; and in H2 ; it has membership 5 Efficient fuzzy graph
r1 ðyÞ.
Subcase 1: l1 \l2 : Then every arc in G has same It is clear that every crisp graph is a special class of fuzzy
membership values l1 . Thus, G becomes a strong fuzzy graph. If the r and l values are equal to one for every
graph. Also G has two strong fuzzy subgraphs H1 and H2 . vertex and every edge in a fuzzy graph, then that fuzzy
Since the order of H1 is less than order of H2 , choosing the graph turns into a crisp graph. It is interesting to note that
vertices of H1 is one part, and in the second part from H2 , the dominating sets of the fuzzy graph and the underlying
crisp graph may or may not be same. Thus, we define a new
class of fuzzy graph, namely efficient fuzzy graph.

0.3 0.5 0.4 0.5 Definition 16 An efficient fuzzy graph is a fuzzy graph
a b c d e f that has same domination set as its crisp graph, other than
0.7 0.5 0.6 0.4 0.8 0.63 V.
(a) G1 = (σ1 , μ1 ) (b) G2 = (σ2 , μ2 )
Remark 3 Every fuzzy graph is not an efficient fuzzy
0.4 0.5 graph.
0.4 a,d a,e a,f
0.7
For, consider the fuzzy graph G : ðr; lÞ with VðGÞ ¼
0.63
0.3 0.3 0.3 fa; b; c; dg having membership values rðaÞ ¼ 0:7,
rðbÞ ¼ 0:5, rðcÞ ¼ 0:6, rðdÞ ¼ 0:6, lða; bÞ ¼ 0:3,
0.4 0.5 lðb; cÞ ¼ 0:4, lðc; dÞ ¼ 0:2, lðd; aÞ ¼ 0:1, lðb; dÞ ¼ 0:1.
0.4 b,d b,e b,f
0.5 0.5 The arcs (a, b), (b,c), (c,d) are a strong arcs. It is clear
0.4 0.5 0.5 that fbg and fdg are the domination sets of G*.
But Ns ðbÞ ¼ fa; b; cg and Ns ðdÞ ¼ fc; dg. Therefore,
0.4 0.5 fbg and fdg are not domination sets of G. Hence, G is not
0.4 c,d c,e c,f
0.5 0.5 an efficient fuzzy graph (Fig. 7).
(c) G = G1 × G2 : (σ1 × σ2 , μ1 × μ2 )
Theorem 12 Let G : ðr; lÞ be a fuzzy graph with G as
path Pn . Then G is an efficient fuzzy graph
Fig. 6 Cartesian product of fuzzy graphs

123
Neural Computing and Applications
0.7 0.5
0.3
a b
0.1 0.4
0.1
d c
0.2
0.6 0.6
Fig. 7 Example of not efficient fuzzy graph
Proof Let G : ðr; lÞ be a fuzzy graph with G is a path Pn .
If all the arcs are effective arcs, then G and its underlying
crisp graph G have same vertex set and edge set. There-
fore, they have same dominating set. Hence, G is an effi-
cient fuzzy graph. Suppose all the arcs are not efficient, it is
necessary to prove that all the arcs which are not efficient
are strong arcs. Clearly there exists a unique path between
any two vertices in Pn . Therefore, deleting any edge dis-
connects the graph and hence reduces the connectedness
between the adjacent vertices. Hence, that edge must be a
strong edge. Thus, the arcs which are not effective are
strong arcs in Pn . Therefore, G is an efficient graph. h the network coverage in village (vertex) and normalizing to
Theorem 13 Every complete fuzzy graph is an efficient
fuzzy graph.
Proof In a complete graph, every vertex set is a domi-
nating set of G. Since the given fuzzy graph G is complete
fuzzy graph, every edge in G is a strong arc. Hence, G and
G have same edge and vertex set. Hence, they have same
dominating set. Therefore, every complete fuzzy graph is
an efficient fuzzy graph. h addressed using fuzzy graphs. The fuzzy graph G : ðl; rÞ,
Theorem 14 Every fuzzy graph with constant l value is an
efficient fuzzy graph.
Proof By the definition of strong arc, if all the arc values
are equal then the arcs are b strong arcs. Thus, all the arcs
are become strong arcs. So closed neighborhood set of
every vertex is same for crisp graph G and fuzzy graph G.
Hence, both G and G have same dominating set, making G
an efficient fuzzy graph. h
Theorem 15 Every strong fuzzy graph is an efficient fuzzy
graph.
Proof In a strong fuzzy graph, every arc is an effective
arc. By [32], every effective arc is strong arc. But every
strong arc is not effective arc. Here all the arcs are effective
arcs. Therefore, every arc is strong arc. Thus, the neigh-
borhood set of every vertex is same for both fuzzy graph
and its underlying fuzzy graph which implies they have
same dominating set. Hence, every strong fuzzy graph is an
efficient graph. h
6 Application
Suppose we need to cover a group of villages by mobile
phone network towers. Let us assume that every village has
at least one tower. This problem can be modeled into a
graph theory problem as follows: Every village is denoted
by vertex. If the tower placed in a village covers nearby
villages, then it is linked by an edge. Now this problem
turns to finding dominating set. But we cannot assure this
dominating set gives a best model. At the time of natural
disaster, everyone faces network failure. Even though some
of the tower fail, it is necessary to cover maximum area.
Hence, the network provider must consider the network
group which covers the maximum area. This concept is
developed as integrity of graph. Our new parameter con-
siders both integrity and domination. So a domination
integrity set (set of towers) gives a full coverage and also
assures a better stable network, which covers the maximum
area. In real-time situations, more than one tower is
required at a single place, depending upon the need. So the
coverage in a particular village is not equal. Considering
one, the crisp graph is converted into fuzzy graph. There-
fore, the domination integrity in fuzzy graph is needed.
The network consists of five villages with mobile tow-
ers. In each village, every vertex denotes a tower placed
area. The vertex membership values define the maximum
capacity of a tower unit. The edge membership values
denote the network signal strength between two areas
nodes. The problem of failure of some of the towers can be
corresponding to the mobile network, is shown in Fig. 8. It
consists of five vertices V ¼ fa; b; c; d; eg having mem-
berships, rðaÞ ¼ 0:6, rðbÞ ¼ 0:6, rðcÞ ¼ 0:7, rðdÞ ¼ 0:9,
rðeÞ ¼ 0:8, lða; bÞ ¼ 0:4, lða; dÞ ¼ 0:2, lðb; cÞ ¼ 0:5,
lðb; dÞ ¼ 0:3 , lðc; dÞ ¼ 0:7, lðc; eÞ ¼ 0:2, lðd; eÞ ¼ 0:8.
0.4
0.6 a b 0.6
0.2 0.5
0.3
0.9 d c 0.7
0.7
0.8 0.2
e
0.8
Fig. 8 Example for application of domination integrity
123
 Neural Computing and Applications

Table 1 Domination integrity of fuzzy graph This work further can be extended in bipolar fuzzy
S G–S m (G–S) |S|?m(G–S)
graphs, intuitionistic fuzzy graphs and interval-valued
fuzzy graphs.
fa; dg b–c–e 2.1 3.6
fb; dg {a}, c–e 1.5 3 Acknowledgements The authors thank the Management and the
fb; eg a–d–c 2.2 3.6 Principal, SSN College of Engineering, OMR, Chennai, and Mannar
Thirumalai Naicker College, Pasumalai, Madurai.
fa; b; dg c–e 1.5 3.6
fa; c; dg {b}, {e} 0.8 3
Compliance with ethical standards
fa; e; dg b–c 1.3 3.6
fb; d; eg fag, fcg 0.7 3 Conflict of interest The authors declare that they have no conflict of
fa; b; eg c–d 1.6 3.6 interest.
fb; c; eg a–d 1.5 3.6
fa; b; c; dg feg 0.8 3.6
fa; b; c; eg {d} 0.9 3.6
References
fa; b; d; eg fcg 0.7 3.6
1. Ore O (1962) Theory of graphs. American Mathematical Society,
fa; c; d; eg fbg 0.6 3.6 Providence
fb; c; d; eg fag 0.6 3.6 2. Barefoot CA, Entringer R, Swart H (1987) Vulnerability in
fa; b; c; d; eg ; 0 3.6 graphs—a comparative survey. J Combin Math Combin Comput
1:12–22
3. Barefoot CA, Entringer R, Swart H (1987) Integrity of trees and
powers of cycles. Congr Numer 58:103–114
4. Goddard W (1989) On the vulnerability of graphs, Ph.D. Thesis,
University of Natal, Durban, SA
In this fuzzy graph, the arcs (a, b), (b, c), (c, d), (d, e) are 5. Goddard W, Swart HC (1990) Integrity in graphs: bounds and
strong arcs. The dominating set S, G  S, mðG  SÞ values basics. J Combin Math Combin 7:139–151
are given in Table 1. In this minfjSj þ mðG  SÞg ¼ 3, 6. Goddard W, Swart HC (1988) On the integrity of combinations of
which corresponds to domination set fb; dg; fa; c; dg; graphs. J Combin Math Combin Comput 4:3–18
7. Bagga KS, Beineke LW, Goddard WD, Lipman MJ, Pipert RE
fb; d; eg. Therefore, these sets assure the reliability and (1992) A survey of integrity. Discret Appl Math 37(38):13–28
domination property of the network. Thus, the tower placed 8. Dundar P, Aytac A (2004) Integrity of total graphs via certain
in these nodes gives better coverage even in natural dis- parameters. Math Notes 75(5):665–672
asters, when compared with other nodes. 9. Mamut A, Vumar E (2007) A note on the integrity of middle
graphs. Lect Notes Comput Sci 4381:130–134
10. Mahde SS, Mathad V, Sahal AM (2015) Hub-integrity of graphs.
Bull Int Math Virtual Inst 5:57–64
7 Conclusion 11. Bagga KS, Beineke LW, Lipman MJ, Pippert RE (1994) Edge-
integrity: a survey. Discret Math 124:3–12
12. Li Y, Zhang S, Li X (2005) Rupture degree of graphs. Int J
This paper is aimed to discuss an algorithm to find out the Comput Math 82(7):793–803
strong arcs and to classify the strong arcs as a; b; d arcs in 13. Jung HA (1978) On a class of posets and the corresponding
fuzzy graphs. A new algorithmic procedure is presented to comparability graphs. J Combin Theory Ser B 24(2):125–133
find whether the given fuzzy graph, is a fuzzy tree or not. A 14. Cozzens M, Moazzami D, Stueckle S (1992) The tenacity of a
graph. Graph theory, combinatorics, and algorithms, vol 1, 2.
new vulnerability parameter, domination integrity of fuzzy Wiley, New York, pp 1111–1122
graph is defined to study the stability and domination 15. Bauer D, Broersma H, Schmeichel E (2006) Toughness in graphs:
property of fuzzy graphs. The domination integrity of a survey. Graphs Combin 22:1–35. https://doi.org/10.1007/
cycle, path and complete bipartite fuzzy graph is calcu- s00373-006-0649-0
16. Sundareswaran R, Swaminathan V (2009) Domination integrity
lated. The necessary and sufficient conditions for complete in graphs. Proc Int Conf Math Exp Phys Prague 3–8:46–57
fuzzy graph and complement of complete fuzzy graph are 17. Sundareswaran R, Swaminathan V (2010) Domination integrity
provided. The upper and lower bounds for Cartesian pro- of middle graphs. In: Chelvam T, Somasundaram S, Kala R (eds)
duct of G1  G2 with G1 is K2 . Finally, a new class of Algebra, graph theory and their applications. Narosa Publishing
House, New Delhi, pp 88–92
fuzzy graph, efficient fuzzy graph, is introduced. Fuzzy 18. Sundareswaran R, Swaminathan V (2010) Domination integrity
graph and efficient fuzzy graph are distinguished. It is in trees. Bull Int Math Virtual Inst 2:153–161
established that complete fuzzy graph and strong fuzzy 19. Sundareswaran R, Swaminathan V (2011) Domination integrity
graph are efficient fuzzy graphs. Basic theorems in efficient of powers of cycles. Int J Math Res 3(3):257–265
20. Sundareswaran R, Swaminathan V (2016) Integrity and domi-
fuzzy graphs and the application of these concepts are nation integrity of gear graphs. J Appl Eng Math 6(1):54–64
illustrated for a mobile tower coverage problem discussed. 21. Sampathkumar E (1989) The global domination number of a
graph. J Math Phys Sci 23:377–385

123
Neural Computing and Applications
22. Mahde SS, Mathad V (2017) Global domination integrity of
graphs. Math Sci Lett 6:263–269
23. Zadeh LA (1965) Fuzzy sets. Inf Control 8(3):338–353
24. Rosenfeld A (1975) Fuzzy graphs. In: Zadeh LA, Fu KS, Shimura
M (eds) Fuzzy sets and their applications. Academic press, New
york, pp 77–95
25. Bhutani KR, Rosenfeld A (2003) Strong arcs in fuzzy graphs. Inf
Sci 152:319–322
26. Mathew S, Sunitha MS (2009) Types of arcs in a fuzzy graphs.
Inf Sci 179:1760–1768
27. Somasundaram A, Somasundaram S (1998) Domination in fuzzy
graphs-I. Pattern Recognit Lett 19:787–791
28. Somasundaram A (2005) Domination in fuzzy graphs—II.
J Fuzzy Math 13(2):281–288
29. Nagoorgani A, Chandrasekaran VT (2006) Domination in fuzzy
graph. Adv Fuzzy Sets Syst I(1):17–26
30. Nagoorgani A, Vijayalakshmi P (2011) Insensitive arc in domi-
nation of fuzzy graph. Int J Contemp Math Sci 6(26):1303–1309
31. Manjusha OT, Sunitha MS (2014) Notes on domination in fuzzy
graphs. J Intell Fuzzy Syst 27(6):3205–3212. https://doi.org/10.
3233/IFS-141277
32. Kalathodi S, Sunitha MS (2012) Distance in fuzzy graphs. LAP
LAMBERT Academic Publishing, New York
33. Manjusha OT, Sunitha MS (2015) Strong domination in fuzzy
graphs. Fuzzy Int Eng 7:369–377
34. Saravanan M, Sujatha R, Sundareswaran R (2016) Integrity of
fuzzy graphs. Bull Int Math Virtual Inst 6:89–96
35. Saravanan M, Sujatha R, Sundareswaran R (2015) A study of
regular fuzzy graphs and integrity of fuzzy graphs. Int J Appl Eng
Res 10(82):160–164
36. Saravanan M, Sujatha R, Sundareswaran R (2018) Concept of
integrity and its result in fuzzy graphs. J Intell Fuzzy Syst
34(4):2429–2439
37. Mariappan S, Ramalingam S, Raman S, Muthuselvan B (2018)
Application of domination integrity of graphs in PMU placement
in electric power networks. Turk J Electric Eng Comput Sci
26(4):2066–2076
38. Samanta S, Pal M (2015) Fuzzy planar graphs. IEEE Trans Fuzzy
Syst 23(6):1936–1942. https://doi.org/10.1109/TFUZZ.2014.
2387875
39. Samanta S, Pal M (2013) Fuzzy k-competition graphs and
p-competition fuzzy graphs. Fuzzy Inf Eng 5(5):191–204. https://
doi.org/10.1007/s12543-013-0140-6S
View publication stats
40. Samanta S, Pal M (2012) Bipolar fuzzy hypergraphs. Int J Fuzzy
Logic Syst 2(1):17–28
41. Samanta S, Akram M, Pal M (2015) m-step fuzzy competition
graphs. J Appl Math Comput 47:461–472. https://doi.org/10.
1007/s12190-014-0785-2
42. Rashmanlou H, Pal M (2013) Isometry on interval-valued fuzzy
graphs. Int J Fuzzy Math Arch 3:28–35
43. Rashmanlou H, Pal M (2013) Antipodal interval-valued fuzzy
graphs. Int J Appl Fuzzy Sets Artif Intell 3:107–130
44. Pal M, Rashmanlou H (2013) Irregular interval—valued fuzzy
graphs. Ann Pure Appl Math 3(1):56–66
45. Mathew S, Sunitha MS (2010) Node connectivity and arc con-
nectivity of a fuzzy graph. Inf Sci 180(4):519–531
46. Sensarma D, Sen Sarma S (2019) Role of graphic integer
sequence in the determination of graph integrity. Mathematics
7:261
47. Kalathian S, Ramalingam S, Srinivasan N, Raman S, Broumi S
(2019) Embedding of fuzzy graphs on topological surfaces.
Neural computing and applications. Springer, New York, pp 1–11
48. Halim Z, Khattak JH (2018) Density-based clustering of big
probabilistic graphs. Evolving systems. Springer, New York,
pp 1–18
49. Rashid A, Kamran M, Halim Z (2019) A top down approach to
enumerate a-maximal cliques in uncertain graphs. J Intell Fuzzy
Syst 1–13 (Preprint)
50. Halim Z, Waqas M, Baig AR, Rashid A (2017) Efficient clus-
tering of large uncertain graphs using neighborhood information.
Int J Approx Reason 90:274–291
51. Jamil S, Khan A, Halim Z, Baig AR (2011) Weighted muse for
frequent sub-graph pattern finding in uncertain DBLP data. In:
2011 international conference on internet technology and appli-
cations, IEEE, pp 1–6
52. Sunitha MS, Vijayakumar A (1999) A characterization of fuzzy
trees. Inf Sci 113:293–300
53. Tom M, Sunitha MS (2015) Strong sum distance in fuzzy graphs.
Springerplus 4:214. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40064-015-0935-5
Publisher’s Note Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to
jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.
123