How statement and proof provenance work
The first chip identifies the source of the statement or construction; the second identifies the source of its local proof or verification.
- Literature-sourced: the exact statement appears in a cited source; only wording and notation differ.
- AI-adapted: a semantically identical restatement of literature-sourced material, modulo indexing, notation, and boundary cases adopted by the library.
- AI-generated: a genuinely novel statement formulated by AI, with no source for the claim itself.
These labels describe origin, not correctness: citations and verification chips remain separate evidence.
Reflexive, irreflexive, symmetric, asymmetric, antisymmetric, transitive, and connex relations on a set
Definition
Let be a set and let be a relation on , that is (Relation, , , , and the specialisations "relation from to " and "relation on ", The Cartesian product ). Then is:
- reflexive on when for every ;
- irreflexive when for every ;
- symmetric when implies , for all ;
- asymmetric when implies , for all ;
- antisymmetric when and imply , for all ;
- transitive when and imply , for all ;
- connex on when, for all , or .
Reflexivity and irreflexivity have short forms in terms of the identity relation of The identity relation and the membership relation , because the elements of are exactly the pairs with : is reflexive on if and only if (Subset , proper subset , and the separation notation ), and irreflexive if and only if and have no common element.
Remarks
-
Reflexivity and connexity mention ; the others do not. Whether is symmetric, asymmetric, antisymmetric or transitive depends on alone, whereas "reflexive on " and "connex on " depend on the ambient set: the empty relation is reflexive on and on no other set. The qualifier is therefore kept in the name of those two.
-
"Total" is ambiguous, "connex" is not. The connex property above is also called total in much of the literature, but "total relation" is used elsewhere for the unrelated condition that every element of is related to something. Only "connex" is used here for the property defined above.
-
The named combinations, and the exact agreement with Partial order and partially ordered set. That item names its structures in terms of a relation on a set , and each of its clauses is one of the properties above applied to , so the two vocabularies describe one set of conditions and not two:
- a partial order on is a relation on satisfying its clauses (R), (A) and (T), which are reflexivity on , antisymmetry and transitivity as defined above, quantified over the same set ;
- the strict order and associated there with a partial order is the relation of the properties above, and it is irreflexive and transitive; that identification and the fact that nothing is lost in passing between the two presentations are proved in On a set , and are mutually inverse bijections between the partial orders on and the irreflexive, transitive relations on ; is the strict order of , and every irreflexive transitive relation is asymmetric, whose clause on asymmetry also reconciles the two usual definitions of a strict order;
- two elements are comparable there when or , so a relation on is connex on exactly when every two elements of are comparable;
- consequently what that item calls a total order — a partial order in which every two elements are comparable — is a relation on that is reflexive on , antisymmetric, transitive and connex on . "Connex" here and "total order" there are therefore the same condition read twice: connexity is the single extra clause that turns a partial order into a total one, and it is the connex reading of the word total, never the left-total one warned against above.
Reflexive on , symmetric and transitive is what Equivalence relation, equivalence class, and the quotient set calls an equivalence relation.
Depends on
- Relation, $\operatorname{dom} R$, $\operatorname{ran} R$, $\operatorname{fld} R$, and the specialisations "relation from $A$ to $B$" and "relation on $A$"
- The Cartesian product $A \times B := \{\, z \in \mathcal{P}(\mathcal{P}(A \cup B)) : \exists a \in A\ \exists b \in B\ z = (a,b) \,\}$
- The identity relation $\Delta_A = \{\,(a,b) \in A \times A : a = b\,\}$ and the membership relation $\in_A\, = \{\,(a,b) \in A \times A : a \in b\,\}$
- Subset $x \subseteq y$, proper subset $x \subsetneq y$, and the separation notation $\{\, z \in x : \varphi(z) \,\}$
Used by
- A symmetric and transitive relation on a two-element set that is not reflexive on it Counterexample
- Equivalence relation, equivalence class, and the quotient set A/∼ Definition
- ∅ is a relation on every set, is the unique equivalence relation on ∅, is a function ∅ → B for every B, is a bijection ∅ → ∅, and is not a surjection ∅ → {∅} Example
- FALSE: a symmetric and transitive relation on a set A is reflexive on A, so reflexivity is redundant in the definition of an equivalence relation False statement
- For a function f : A → B the relation ker f := { (a,a') ∈ A × A : f(a) = f(a') } is an equivalence relation on A Lemma
- On a set A, R ↦ R ∖ Δ_A and S ↦ S ∪ Δ_A are mutually inverse bijections between the partial orders on A and the irreflexive, transitive relations on A; R ∖ Δ_A is the strict order of R, and every irreflexive transitive relation is asymmetric Theorem
Dependency tree · next 3 levels
Direct dependencies and their dependencies through the next three levels: 17 results over 9 levels. An arrow runs from a result to what uses it, and this result sits at the bottom with a heavier outline. Click the chart to enlarge it.
Sources
- B. Kaya, MATH 320 Set Theory (METU), §3.1 and §3.3 (standard reference, not scraped)
- Binary relation (Wikipedia) (standard reference, not scraped)
- Equivalence relation (Wikipedia) (standard reference, not scraped)