Questions tagged [relations]

For questions concerning partial orders, equivalence relations, properties of relations (transitive, symmetric, etc), a composition of relations, or anything else concerning a relation on a set.

A relation $R$ on a set $X \times Y$ (sometimes also called a relation between $X$ and $Y$) is any subset of $X\times Y$. So a relation is any set of ordered pairs $(x,y)$ such that $x\in X$ and $y \in Y$. Often we write $x\mathrel R y$ instead of $(x,y)\in R$. Sometimes we say a relation is defined on a single set $X$, but this just means that we're letting the relation $R$ be a subset of $X \times X$.

Here are some examples of relations:

  • For a very abstract example of a relation, take $X = \{1,2,3\}$ and $Y = \{a,b,c,d\}$, and let $R = \{(1,b),(3,c),(3,d),(2,c),(2,d)\}$. This $R$ is a relation on $X \times Y$. Fun fact, there are $2^{12}$ distinct relations you could put on $X \times Y$.

  • A function $f\colon X\to Y$ can be defined as a relation on $X \times Y$. The pairs in $X \times Y$ that are members of the relation are the input-output pairs $(x, f(x))$.

  • A partial order is a relation that mimics the notion of one element being greater/less than the other. An example of a partial order is the relation $\leq$ on $\mathbf{Z} \times \mathbf{Z}$ where for two integers $n$ and $m$ we say $n \leq m$ if $n$ is less than or equal to $m$.

  • Given a set $X$, let $\mathcal{P}(X)$ denote the set of all subsets of $X$. We can define a partial order $\subseteq$ on $\mathcal{P}(X)$ by saying that for two susbsets $A$ and $B$ of $X$, $A \subseteq B$ if $A$ is a subset of $B$.

  • An equivalence relation is a relation that mimics the notion of two things being "equal". For example, on the set $\mathbf{Z}$ of integers let's define the relation $\equiv_{37}$ on $\mathbf{Z}\times \mathbf{Z}$ by saying $a\equiv_{37} b$ if both $a$ and $b$ give the same remainder when divided by $37$. If $a \equiv_{37} b$ we say that $a$ and $b$ are congruent modulo $37$.

  • Let $T$ be the set of all triangles in the plane. An example of an equivalence relation on $T$ is the relation of two triangles being congruent.

4661 questions
0
votes
0 answers

S = { (a,b) be elements of Real Numbers| |a-b|<2 or |a-b|=2}. List three elements in S[4]?

I know or at least correct me if I'm wrong two elements are {3,2}. How would I come to find another element?
Eve M
  • 1
0
votes
1 answer

Suppose $(S, ∼)$ is an equivalence relation and suppose $a, b ∈ S$. Show $[a] = [b]$ if $a ∼ b$ and $[a] ∩ [b] = ∅$ if $a \not\sim b$.

I am a bit lost on this question to the point that I don't know where to start. I am confused as to how I am supposed to show this without a defined ~ relation. any help would be greatly appreciated, thank you.
0
votes
1 answer

The Matrix of an Equivalence Relation

Perhaps I'm missing something from just the definition of an equivalence relation but wouldn't a matrix representing an equivalence relation on any set be only ones and anything less than that is just an equivalence class? If someone can clarify…
0
votes
1 answer

How do I precisely characterise this "extension" of transitivity?

A binary relation $R$ over a set $X$ is transitive if: $$\forall a,b,c \in X.(aRb\wedge bRc) \Rightarrow aRc$$ Let me define a particular relation $R$ over $\mathbb{N} = \{0, 1, 2,\dots\}$: $$aRb := \exists n\in \mathbb{N}. a = b + n$$ Clearly, $R$…
0
votes
1 answer

Is $(\prod R_i)\circ (\prod R_i)$ the same as $\prod R_i\circ R_i$?

For each $i\in I$, $R_i$ is a (binary) relation (on a set $X_i$). Is $(\prod R_i)\circ (\prod R_i)$ the same as $\prod R_i\circ R_i$ as relations on $\prod_{i\in I}X_i$?
user79193
0
votes
1 answer

What properties does $R$ have to satisfy for $R=\operatorname{graph}(f)$ for some function $f:A\to B$?

Given a relation $R$ between $A$ and $B$, what properties does $R$ have to satisfy for $R=\operatorname{graph}(f)$ for some function $f:A\to B$?
CCola
  • 427
0
votes
1 answer

question on showing transitivity of a relation

Define a relation on Z as xRy if |x−y|<1. I have shown this relation is symetric and reflexive and i am pretty sure its transitive because this is the equality relation isnt it? thats my first question and my second is how to show it is…
0
votes
1 answer

Reflexive property of relations?

If a relation is both symmetric and anti-symmetric, isn't it always reflexive? I am supposed to consider a set, S, where some Relation A is both symmetric and anti-symmetric. I thought that anti-symmetric means that if (x, y) is in the relation,…
0
votes
1 answer

Relations properties prove

Given a relation $r$, define $r^{-1}$ to be the converse relation, and define $r \cdot r$ to be the usual "$x (r \cdot r) y$ if and only if there is $z$ such that $x r z$ and $z r y$". Is it possible that relation $r$ in set A has this property…
avan1235
  • 637
  • 4
  • 10
0
votes
0 answers

Relations Symmetric, Reflexive, Transative

Suppose R1 and R2 are relations on a nonempty set A 1) If R1 and R2 are reflexive, must R1\R2 be reflexive, symmetric or transitive?
0
votes
1 answer

Proof reflexive relation $\{(x,y)\in\{\mathbb{Z}\times\mathbb{Z}\} | x-y\in\mathbb{Z}\}$

I need to verificate or falsify the relation. In this previouse post (Showing $ x-y\in\mathbb{Q}$ is an equivalence relation?) they just showed that $x\in\mathbb{R}, x-x=0\in\mathbb{Q}$ Does this mean, that I only have to proof that $x\in\mathbb{R},…
0
votes
1 answer

Join when multiple tuples could be concatenated

I am not quite sure how exactly join behaves. From what I learned $A\Join_{x=y}B$ means iterating through every tuple $a$ in $A$ and if there is a tuple $b$ in $B$ for which $a_x=b_y$ concatenate both tuples. The join operation is a set containing…
iaquobe
  • 113
0
votes
0 answers

Are there general formula for Reflexive Relation?

I wonder if there is a general formula for Reflexive Relation ? I wonder how to prove it if there is one.
0
votes
1 answer

questions on finding if these relations are transitive or not

1 X is the set of real-valued functions of a real variable whose domain contains the point 2 and R is the relation defined by fRg if and only if f(2) = g(2). Is this relation transitive? Explain. For this one am I suppose to look at one side and fix…
George
  • 117
0
votes
1 answer

On positive integers, $nRm$ iff $n^k=m$ for some non-zero rational $k$. Is relation $R$ anti-symmetric?

$X = \mathbb{Z}^+$ and $R$ is the relation defined by $nRm$ if and only if there is a non-zero $k \in \mathbb{Q}$ for which $n^k = m$. Is this relation anti-symmetric? Explain. I'm pretty sure it isn't, but I don't know how to justify it.
George
  • 117