On Some Classes Of Nearly Open Sets In Nano Topological Spacesdocx

=== On some classes of nearly open sets in nano topological spaces ===

On Some Classes of Nearly Open Sets in Nano Topological Spaces

A. A. Nasef1, A. I. Aggour2 and S. M. Darwesh2

1Department of Physics and Engineering Mathematics, Faculty of Engineering, Kafr El-Sheikh University, Kafr El-Sheikh, Egypt.

2Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Science, Al-Azhar University Nasr City (11884), Cairo, Egypt.

E-mail:[anonimizat], [anonimizat]

Abstract

One of the aims of this paper is to study some near nano open sets in nano topological spaces. Secondly, we establish results about the relationships between these types of near nano open (closed) sets. Also, we introduce the notion of nano β-continuity and we study the relationships between some types of nano continuous functions between nano topological spaces. Finally, we introduce two application examples in nano topology.

Keywords: Nano topological space, nano regular open, nano semi-open, nano α-open, nano preopen, nano γ-open, nano β-open, nano β-continuity.

2010 AMS Subject Classification : 54A05, 54C10, 54B05.

Introduction and Preliminaries

L. Thivagar [1] introduced the concept of nano topological spaces with respect to a subset X of a universe U. We study the relationships between some near nano open sets in nano topological spaces. In this paper we study the relationships between some weak forms of nano open sets in nano topological spaces. Also, we introduce the notion of nano β-continuity between nano topological spaces and we investigate several properties of these types of near nano continuity. Finally, we introduce two examples as an applications in nano topological spaces.

Definition 1.1. [2] Let U be a non-empty finite set of objects called the universe and R be an equivalence relation on U named as the in discernibility relation. Elements belonging to the same equivalence class are said to be indiscernible with one another. The pair (U,R) is said to be the approximation space. Let

X ⊆ U.

The lower approximation of X with respect to R is the set of all objects, which can be for certain classified as X with respect to R and it is denoted by LR(X). That is, LR(X) = ∪x∈U{R(x) : R(x) ⊂ X} where R(x) denotes the equivalence class determined by x.

The upper approximation of X with respect to R is the set of all objects, which can be possibly classified as X with respect to R and it is denoted by HR(X). That is, HR(X) = ∪x∈U{R(x) : R(x) ∩ X 6= φ}.

The boundary region of X with respect to R is the set of all objects, which can be classified neither as X nor as not X with respect to R and it is denoted by BR(X). That is, BR(X) = HR(X) − LR(X).

According to Pawlak’s definitions, X is called a rough set if LR(X) 6= HR(X).

Figure 1:

Definition 1.2. [1] Let U be the universe and R be an equivalence relation on U. Then for X ⊆ U, τR(X) = {U,φ,LR(X),HR(X),BR(X)} is called the nano topology on U .We call (U,τR(X)) is a nano topological space.

The elements of τR(X) are called a nano open sets and the complement of a nano open sets is called nano closed sets.

Definition 1.3. [4] Let (U,τR(X)) be a nano topological space, the set β = {U,LR(X),BR(X)} is called a bases for the nano topology τR(X) on U with respect to X.

Definition 1.4. [1] If (U,τR(X)) is a nano topological space with respect to

X, where X ⊆ U and if A ⊆ U, then

The nano interior of the set A is defined as the union of all nano open subsets contained in A, and is denoted by nint(A). That is nint(A) is the largest nano open subset of A.

The nano closure of the set A is defined as the intersection of all nano closed subsets containing A, and is denoted by ncl(A). That is, ncl(A) is the smallest nano closed set containing A.

Definition 1.5. [1, 5] Let (U,τR(X)) be a nano topological space and A ⊆ U. Then A is said to be:

Nano regular open if A = nint(ncl(A)),

Nano α-open if A ⊆ nint(ncl(nint(A))),

Nano semi-open if A ⊆ ncl(nint(A)),

Nano preopen if A ⊆ nint(ncl(A)),

Nano γ-open (or nano b-open) if A ⊆ ncl(nint(A)) ∪ nint(ncl(A)),

Nano β-open (or nano semi- preopen) if A ⊆ ncl(nint(ncl(A))).

The family of all nano regular open (resp. nano α-open, nano semi-open, nano preopen, nano γ-open and nano β-open) sets in a nano topological space (U,τR(X)) is denoted by NRO(U,X) (resp. NαO(U,X), NSO(U,X), NPO(U,X), NγO(U,X) and NβO(U,X)).

Definition 1.6. [4] A subset K of a nano topological space (U,τR(X)) is called nano regular closed (resp. nano α-closed, nano semi-closed, nano preclosed, nano γ-closed and nano β-closed) if its complements is nano regular open (resp. nano α-open, nano semi-open, nano preopen, nano γ-open and nano β-open).

Definition 1.7. [1] A nano topological space (U,τR(X)) is called nano extremally disconnected if the nano closure of each nano open subset of U is nano open, or equivalently, if every nano regular closed subset of U is nano open.

Definition 1.8. Let (U,τR(X)) and (V,τR∗0(Y )) be nano topological spaces. A mapping f : (U,τR(X)) → (V,τR∗0(Y )) is said to be:

nano continuous [6] if f−1(B) is nano open set in U for every nano open set B in V .

nano α-continuous [7] if f−1(B) is nano α-open set in U for every nano open set B in V .

nano semi-continuous [7] if f−1(B) is nano semi-open set in U for every nano open set B in V .

nano precontinuous [7] if f−1(B) is nano preopen set in U for every nano open set B in V .

nano γ-continuous [8] (or nano b-continuous) if f−1(B) is nano γ-open (or nano b-open) set in U for every nano open set B in V .

Fundamental Properties of Nano Near Open Sets

The following diagram holds for a subset A of a nano topological space (U,τR(X))

Figure 2:

The following examples shows that, none of these implications is reversible.

Example 2.1. Let U = {a,b,c,d} with U/R = {{a},{d},{b,c}} and A = {a,d}. Then one can deduce that τR(A) = {U,φ,{a,d}}. Her, the set {a,b,d} is nano α-open but not nano open in (U,τR(A)).

Example 2.2. Let U = {a,b,c,d} with U/R = {{a},{c},{b,d}} and A = {a,b}. Then the nano topology is defined as τR(A) = {U,φ,{a},{b,d},{a,b,d}}. Then, we have the following:-

If B = {a,b,d}, then B is nano open but not nano regular open.

If C = {a,c}, then C is nano semi-open but not nano α-open.

If D = {a,b}, then D is nano preopen but not nano α-open.

If E = {a,b,c}, then E is nano γ-open but not nano semi-open.

If G = {b,c}, then G is nano β-open but not nano γ-open.

If F = {b,c,d}, then F is nano γ-open but not nano preopen.

Proposition 2.1. For every nano topological space (U,τR(X)), we have that: NPO(U,X)∪NSO(U,X) ⊆ NγO(U,X) ⊆ NβO(U,X) holds but none of these implications can be reversed.

Proposition 2.2. Let (U,τR(X)) be a nano topological space then:

If A ⊆ U is nano open and B ⊆ U is nano semi-open (resp. nano preopen, nano β-open, nano γ-open) then A ∩ B is nano semi-open (resp, nano preopen, nano β-open, nano γ-open).

For every subset A ⊆ U, A ∩ nint(ncl(A)) is nano preopen.

A ⊆ U is nano γ-open, if and only if A is the union of a nano semi-open set and a nano preopen set.

Proposition 2.3. If (U,τR(X)) is nano extremally disconnected space. Then, the following statements hold:

Each nano β-open set is nano preopen.

Each nano β-closed set is nano preclosed. (3) Each nano semi-open set is nano α-open.

(4) Each nano semi-closed set is nano α-closed.

Proof. It follows from the fact that if (U,τR(X)) is nano extremally disconnected, then the notions of nano α-open sets, nano semi-open sets ,nano preopen sets and nano β-open sets are equivalent.

Proposition 2.4. For a nano topological space (U,τR(X)) the following properties are equivalent:

(U,τR(X)) is nano extremally disconnected.

NSO(U,X) ⊆ NPO(U,X). (3) NβO(U,X) = NPO(U,X). (4) NγO(U,X) = NPO(U,X).

Proof. (1)⇐⇒(2)and(1)⇐⇒(3)these are obvious. Clearly,(3)=⇒(4)and (4)=⇒(1)follow immediately from Proposition 2.1

Proposition 2.5. The intersection of a nano preopen set and a nano α-open set is nano preopen.

Proof. Let A ∈ NPO(U,X) and B ∈ NαO(U,X), then A ⊂ nint(ncl(A)), B ⊂ nint(ncl(nint(B))). So, A ∩ B ⊂ nint(ncl(A)) ∩ nint(ncl(nint(B))) ⊂ nint(nint(ncl(A))∩ncl(nint(B))) ⊂ nint(ncl(ncl(A)∩nint(B))) ⊂ nint(ncl(ncl(A∩ B))) = nint(ncl(A ∩ B)). Hence, A ∩ B is nano preopen.

Corollary 2.6. The union of a nano preclosed set and a nano α-closed set is nano preclosed set.

Proposition 2.7. The intersection of a nano α-open set and a nano β-open set is nano β-open .

Proof. Obvious.

Corollary 2.8. The union of a nano α-closed set and a nano β-closed set is nano β-closed.

Remark 2.1. The arbitrary intersection of nano β-closed sets is nano β-closed but the union of two nano β-closed sets may not be nano β-closed set. This is clearly by the following example.

Example 2.3. Let U = {a,b,c,d} with U/R = {{a},{c},{b,d}} and A = {a,b}. Then τR(A) = {U,φ,{a},{b,d},{a,b,d}}, the subsets F = {b} and W = {a,d} are nano β-closed sets but F ∪ W = {a,b,d} is not nano β-closed set.

Proposition 2.9. Each nano β-open set which is nano semi-closed is nano semi-open.

Proof. Let A be a nano β-open set and nano semi-closed . Then, A ⊆ ncl(nint(ncl(A))) and nint(ncl(A)) ⊆ A. Therefore, nint(ncl(A)) ⊆ nint(A) and so, ncl(nint(ncl(A))) ⊆ ncl(nint(A)). Hence, A ⊆ ncl(nint(ncl(A))) ⊆ ncl(nint(A)). This means that A is nano semi-open.

Proposition 2.10. A subset F of a nano topological space (U,τR(X)) is nano β-closed if and only if ncl(U − ncl(nint(F))) − (U − ncl(F)) ⊃ ncl(F) − F.

Proof. ncl(U − ncl(F)) − (U − ncl(F)) ⊃ ncl(F) − F if and only if (U −

nint(ncl(nint(F))))−(U−ncl(F)) ⊃ ncl(F)−F if and only if (U−nint(ncl(nint(F)))) ∩ncl(F) ⊃ ncl(F) − F if and only if (U ∩ ncl(F)) − (nint(ncl(nint(F))) ∩ ncl(F)) ⊃ ncl(F)−F if and only if ncl(F)−(nint(ncl(nint(F))) ⊃ ncl(F)−F if and only if F ⊃ init(ncl(ninl(F))) if and only if F is nano β-closed.

Proposition 2.11. Let F be a subset of a nano topological space (U,τR(X)). If F is nano β-closed and nano semi-open, then it is nano semi-closed.

Proof. Since F is nano β-closed and nano semi-open then U −F is nano β-open and nano semi-closed and so by Proposition 2.9. U − F is nano semi-open. Therefore, F is nano semi-closed.

Proposition 2.12. Each nano β-open set and nano α-closed set is nano regular closed.

Proof. Let A ⊆ U be a nano β-open set and nano α-closed set. Then A ⊆

ncl(nint(ncl(A))) and ncl(nint(ncl(A))) ⊂ A, which implies that ncl(nint(ncl(A))) ⊆ A ⊆ ncl(nint(ncl(A))). So, A = ncl(nint(ncl(A))). This means that A is nano closed, and so it is nano regular closed.

Corollary 2.13. Each nano β-closed set and nano α-open set is nano regular open.

Proposition 2.14. Let τR(X) be the class of nano open subsets of X then, τR(X) = nintNβO(X).

Proof. If G ∈ τR(X) then G ∈ NβO(X). Since G = nint(G), then G ∈ nintNβO(X).

Conversely, let G ∈ nintNβO(X) then G = nint(W) for some W ∈ NβO(X).

Thus G is nano open.

Some Classes of Nano Continuity

Definition 3.1. )) be nano topological spaces. The mapping )) is said to be nano β-continuous or

(nano semi-precontinuous) if f−1(A) is nano β-open set in U for every nano open set A in V .

The relations between the above types of nano near continuous functions is clearly by the following diagram:

Figure 3:

Now: We show that, none of these implications are reversible as shown by the following examples.

Example 3.1. Let U = {a,b,c,d} with U/R = {{a},{d},{b,c}} and X =

{a,d}. Then τR(X) = {U,φ,{a,d}}. Let V = {x,y,z,w} with V/R0 =

{{x},{z},{y,w}}, Y = {x,y} then. Define f : U → V as f(a) = y, f(b) = y, f(c) = z, f(d) = w, then f is nano α-continuous but not nano-continuous.

Example 3.2. Let U = {a,b,c,d} with U/R = {{a},{c},{b,d}} and X = {a,b}.

Then τR(X) = {U,φ,{b,d},{a,b,d}}. Let V = {x,y,z,w} with V/R0 = {{x},{w},{y,z}}. Define f as; f(a) = y, f(b) = y, f(c) = z, f(d) = w, then:

f is nano semi-continuous but not nano α-continuous.

f is nano γ-continuous but not nano precontinuous.

Example 3.3. Let ( )) be nano topological spaces defined as in Example 3.2 and let g : U → V be defined as follows g(a) = w, g(b) = y, g(c) = z, g(d) = w. Then g is nano β-continuous but not nano γ-continuous.

Example 3.4. Let (U,τR(X)) and (V,τR∗0(Y )) be nano topological spaces defined as in Example 3.2 and let h : U → V be defined as follows h(a) = y, h(b) = x, h(c) = z, h(d) = w. Then h is nano γ-continuous but not nano semi-continuous.

Example 3.5. Let (U,τR(X)) and (V,τR∗0(Y )) be nano topological spaces defined as in Example 3.2 and let f : U → V be a mapping defined as follows f(a) = w, f(b) = x, f(c) = w, f(d) = x. Then f is nano precontinuous but not nano α-continuous.

Theorem 3.1. Let (U,τR(X)) and be nano topological spaces, and let be a mapping. Then, the following statements are equivalent:

f is nano β-continuous.

The inverse image of every nano closed set G in V is nano β-closed in U.

f(nβcl(A)) ⊆ ncl(f(A)), for every subset A of U.

nβcl(f−1(F)) ⊆ f−1(ncl(F)), for every subset F of V .

f−1(nint(F)) ⊆ nβint(f−1(F)), for every subset F of V .

Proof. (1)=⇒(2): Let f be nano β-continuous and let F be nano closed set in V . That is V − F is nano open in V . Since f is nano β-continuous mapping. Then f−1(V −F) is nano β-open in U. Then f−1(V −F) = U −f−1(F) which means that, f−1(F) is nano β-closed set in U.

(2)=⇒(1): Let G be nano open set in V . Then, f−1(V −G) is nano β-closed in U. Then f−1(G) is nano β-open in U. Therefore, f is nano β-continuous mapping.

(1)=⇒(3): Let f be nano β-continuous and let A ⊆ U. Since f is nano βcontinuous and ncl(f(A)) is nano closed in V , f−1(ncl(f(A))) is nano β-closed in U. Since f(A) ⊆ ncl(f(A)), f−1(f(A)) ⊆ f−1(ncl(f(A))), then nβcl(A) ⊆ nβcl[f−1(ncl(f(A)))] = f−1(ncl(f(A))). Thus nβcl(A) ⊆ f−1(ncl(f(A))). Therefore, f(nβcl(f(A))) ⊆ ncl(f(A)) for every subset A of U.

(3)=⇒(1): Let f(nβcl(A)) ⊆ ncl(f(A)) for every subset A of U. Let F be nano closed in V , then f(nβcl(F)) ⊆ ncl(f(f−1(F))) = ncl(F) = F that is f(nβcl(f−1(F))) ⊆ F. Thus nβcl(f−1(F)) ⊆ f−1(F), but f−1(F) ⊆ nβcl(f−1(F)). Hence nβcl(f−1(F)) = f−1(F). Therefore, f−1(F) is nano β-closed in U for every nano closed set F in V . That is f is nano β-continuous.

(1)=⇒(4): Let f be a nano β-continuous and let F ⊆ V , then ncl(F) is nano closed in V and hence f−1(ncl(F)) is nano β-closed in U. Therefore, nβcl[f−1(ncl(F))] = f−1(ncl(F)). Since F ⊆ nβcl(F), f−1(F) ⊆ f−1(ncl(F)). Then nβcl(f−1(F)) ⊆ nβcl(f−1(ncl(F))) = f−1(ncl(F)). Thus nβcl(f−1(F)) ⊆ f−1(ncl(F)).

(4)=⇒(1): Let nβcl(f−1(F)) ⊆ f−1(ncl(F)) for every subset F of V . If F be nano closed in V , then ncl(F) = F. By assumption, nβcl(f−1(F)) ⊆ f−1(ncl(F)) = f−1(F). But f−1(F) ⊆ nβcl(f−1(F)). Therefore, nβcl(f−1(F)) = f−1(F). That is, f−1(F) is nano β-closed in U for every nano closed set F in V . Therefore f is nano β-continuous.

(1)=⇒(5): Let f be a nano β-continuous and let F ⊆ V , then nint(F) is nano open in V and hence f−1(nint(F)) is nano β-open in U. Therefore nβint[f−1(nint(F))] = f−1(nint(F)). Also, nint(F) ⊆ F implies that f−1(nint(F)) ⊆ f−1(F). Therefore, nβint(f−1(nint(F))) ⊆ nβint(f−1(F)). That is, f−1(nint(F)) ⊆ nβint(f−1(F))

(5)=⇒(1): Let f−1(nint(F)) ⊆ nβint(f−1(F)) for every F ⊆ V . If F is nano open in V , then nint(F) = F. By assumption, f−1(nint(F)) ⊆ nβint(f−1(F)). Thus f−1(F) ⊆ nβint(f−1(F)). But nβint(f−1(F)) ⊆ f−1(F). Therefore, f−1(F) = nβint(f−1(F)). That is, f−1(F) is nano β-open in U for every nano open set F in V . Therefore, f is nano β-continuous.

Remark 3.1. If f : (U,τR(X)) → (V,τR∗0(Y )) is nano β-continuous where (U,τR(X)) and (V,τR∗0(Y )) are nano topological spaces. Then f(nbcl(A)) is not necessarily equal to ncl(f(A)) . This is clearly by the following example:

Example 3.6. Let U = {a,b,c,d,e} with U/R = {{a,c},{b},{d},{e}}. Let X = {a,b,c} ⊆ U. Then τR(X) = {U,φ,{a,b,c}}. Let V = {u,v,z,y,z} with V/R0 = {{u},{z,v},{x,y}} and Y = {u,v,z} ⊆ V . Then τR∗0(Y ) = {V,φ,{z,u,v}}. Define f : U → V as f(a) = x,f(b) = x,f(c) = u,f(d) = v,f(e) = y. Clearly, f is nano β-continuous. Let A = {a,b,c} ⊆ V . Then f(nβcl(A)) = f({a,b,c,d,e}) = {u,v,x,y}. But, ncl(f(A)) = ncl({x,u}) = V . Thus f(nβcl(A)) 6= ncl(f(A)).

Remark 3.2. In previous theorem equality of the statements 4 and 5 does not hold in general as shown by the following example:

Example 3.7. Let U = {a,b,c,d} with U/R = {{a,d},{b},{c}}. Let X = {a,c} ⊆ U. Then τR(X) = {U,φ,{c},{a,d},{a,c,d}}. Let V = {x,y,z,w} with V/R0 = {{x},{y},{z},{w}} and Y = {x,w} ⊆ V . Then τR∗(Y ) = {V,φ,{x,w}}. Define f : U → V as f(a) = x,f(b) = y,f(c) = z,f(d) = w. Then f is nano β-continuous.

Let F = {z,w}⊆ V . Then f−1(ncl(F)) = f−1(V ) = U and nβcl(f−1(F)) = nβcl({c,d}) = {b,c,d}. Therefore, nβcl(f−1(F)) 6= f−1(ncl(F)).

Let F = {z,w}⊆ V . Then f−1(nint({x,y})) = f−1({x,y}) = {a,b} and nβint(f−1(F)) = nβint(f−1({x,y})) = nβint({a,b}) = {a}. Therefore, f−1(nint(F)) 6= nβint(f−1(F)).

Some Applications in nano topology

Example 4.1. Measles is an acute viral and infectious disease.It is more prevalent in childhood, but may infect adults as well and the cause of this disease is measles virus . It is spread by contact with infected person through coughing and, sneezing and is transmitted by droplet infection or air borne . The virus remains active and contagious on a contaminated surface for up to two hours . The incubation period ranging from 5 to 10 days.The symptoms of this disease are skin rashes , fatigue , dry cough , conjunctivitis and fever.The disease can be prevented through vaccination by measles vaccine.After recovery from measles person acquires immunity against infection for his life.

Consider the following information table giving data about 8 patients.

The columns of table represent the attributes (the symptoms for measles)and the rows represent the objects (the patients). The entries in the table are the attributes values.

Let U = {p1,p2,p3,p4,p5,p6,p7,p8} be the universe, then Case I: Let X = {p3,p6,p7,p8} be the set of patient having measles. Let R be the equivalence relation on U with respect to the condition attributes.

The family of equivalence classes corresponding to R is given by U/I(R) = {{p1},{p2,p3},{p4},{p5},{p6,p8},{p7}}, therefore the nano topology on U with respect to X is given by τR(X) = {U,φ,{p6,p7,p8},{p2,p3,p6,p7,p8},{p2,p3}}.

If we remove the attribute ”Skin rash” from the set of condition attributes, the family of equivalence classes corresponding to the resulting set of attributes is given by U/I(R − (S)) = {{p1},{p2,p3},{p4},{p5,p7},{p6,p8},{p1}}.

Hence τR−(S)(X) = {U,{p6,p8},{p2,p3,p5,p6,p7,p8},{p2,p3,p5,p7}}6= τR(X).

If we remove the attribute ”conjunctivitis” from the set of condition attributes we getU/I(R − (C)) = U/I(R) and hence τR−(C)(X) = τR(X) .

If we remove the attribute ”dry cough” from the set of condition attributes we get U/I(R − (D)) = U/I(R) and hence τR−(D)(X) = τR(X).

If we remove the attribute ”fatigue” from the set of condition attributes we get U/I(R − (F)) = U/I(R) and henceτR−(F)(X) = τR(X) .

If we remove the attribute ”temperature” from the set of condition attributes we get, U/I(R−T) = {{p1,p6,p8},{p2,p3}{p4},{p5},{p7}}. Therefore τR−(T)(X) = {U,φ,{p7},{p1,p2,p3,p6,p7,p8},{p1,p2,p3,p6,p8}}6= τR(X) . From Case I we get core(R) = {S,T}.

Case II: Let X = {p1,p2,p4,p5} be the set of patients not having measles. Then U/I(R) = {{p1},{p2,p3},{p4},{p5},{p6,p8},{p7}}, therefore τR(X) =

{U,φ,{p1,p4,p5},{p1,p2,p3,p4,p5},{p2,p3}}.

If we remove the attribute ”Skin rash” from the set of condition attributes we get, U/I(R−(S)) = {{p1},{p2,p3},{p4},{p5,p7},{p6,p8}}, and hence τR−(S)(X) =

{U,φ,{p1,p4},{p1,p2,p3,p4,p5,p7},{p2,p3,p5,p7}}6= τR(X) .

If the attribute ”conjunctivitis” is removed we get,

U/I(R − (C)) = {{p1},{p2,p4},{p4},{p5},{p6,p8},{p7}} which is the same as

U/I(R) and hence τR−(C)(X) = τR(X).

If the attribute ”dry cough” is removed we get,

U/I(R−(D)) = {{p1},{p2,p3},{p4},{p5},{p6,p8},{p7}}, which is the same as

U/I(R) and hence τR−(D)(X) = τR(X).

If the attribute ”fatigue” is removed we get,

U/I(R−(F)) = {{p1},{p2,p3},{p4},{p5},{p6,p8},{p7}}, which is the same as

U/I(R) and hence τR−(F)(X) = τR(X).

When the attribute ”Temperature” is omitted,

U/I(R−(T)) = {{p1,p6,p8},{p2,p3},{p4},{p5},{p7}} , therefore τR−(T)(X) =

{U,φ,{p4,p5},{p1,p2,p3,p4,p5,p6,p8},{p1,p2,p3,p6,p8}}6= τR(X) .

From Case II we get core(R) = {S,T}.

Observation: From the two cases above, we investigate that, ”skin rash” and ”Temperature” are the necessary and sufficient to say that a patient has measles.

The following example can be seen as an application example of nano continuity.

Example 4.2. Consider the cost of a cab ride as a function of distance travel. Let U = {x1,x2,x3,x4,x5,x6} be the universe of distances of six different places from a rail way junction and let V = {a,b,c,d,e,h} be the universe of a cab fares to reach the six destinations in U from the rail way junction let U/R = {{x1},{x2,x4},{x3,x5},{x6}}. Let X = {x1,x2,x3} be a subset of U, then the nano topological space on U is given by τR(X) = {U,φ,{x1},{x1,x2,x3,x4,x5}}. Let V/R0 = {{a},{b,d},{c,e},{h}}. Let Y = {a,b,c}. Then

{a},{b,c,d,e},{a,b,c,d,e}}. Define f : U → V as f(x1) = a,f(x2) = b,f(x3) = c,f(x4) = d,f(x5) = e,f(x6) = h. Then f is nano continuous.

Conclusion

In this paper some of the properties of nano near open sets and nano continuity are discussed.The results of the Pawlak rough set model are easy to understand,while the results from other methods need an interpretation of the technical parameters.Thus it is advantageous to use nano topology in real life situations.

References

M. L. Thivagar and C. Riclord, On nano forms of weakly open sets,” International Journal of Mathematics and Statistic Inventis, vol. 1, no. 1, pp. 31-37, 2013.

Z. Pawlak, Rough sets,” International Journal of Computer and Information Sciences, vol. 11, no. 5, pp. 341-356, 1982.

A. S. Mashhour, M. E. Abd El-Monsef and S. N. El-Deeb and S. N. ElDeeb, On pre-topological spaces,” Bull. Math. Delta Soc, vol. 28, no. 79, p. 39-45, 1984.

Z. Pawlok, Rough Sets: Theoretical Aspects of Reasoning about Data. Boston: Kluwer Aca- demic Publishers, 1991.

A. Revathy and G. Ilango, On nano β-open sets,” International Journal of Engin. Con- tenparary Math. and Sci, vol. 1, no. 2, p. 1-6, 2015.

M. L. Thivagar and C. Richard, On nano continuity,” Mathematical Theory and Modeling, vol. 7, p. 32-37, 2013.

D. A. Mary and I. Arockiarani, On characterizations of nano rgb-clased sets in nano topological spaces,” International Journal of Modern Engineering Research, vol. 5, no. 1, p. 68-76, 2015.

D. A. Mary and I. Arockiarani, On B-open sets and B-continuous functions in nano topological spaces,” International Journal of Innovative Research and Studies, vol. 3, no. 11, p. 98-116, 2014.