Connected relation

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Transitive binary relations
Symmetric Antisymmetric Connected Well-founded Has joins Has meets Reflexive Irreflexive Asymmetric
Total,
Semiconnex
Anti-
reflexive
Equivalence relation Green tickY Green tickY
Preorder (Quasiorder) Green tickY
Partial order Green tickY Green tickY
Total preorder Green tickY Green tickY
Total order Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY
Prewellordering Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY
Well-quasi-ordering Green tickY Green tickY
Well-ordering Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY
Lattice Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY
Join-semilattice Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY
Meet-semilattice Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY
Strict partial order Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY
Strict weak order Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY
Strict total order Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY Green tickY
Symmetric Antisymmetric Connected Well-founded Has joins Has meets Reflexive Irreflexive Asymmetric
Definitions,
for all a,b and S:
aRbbRa aRb and bRaa=b abaRb or bRa minSexists abexists abexists aRa not aRa aRbnot bRa
Green tickY indicates that the column's property is always true for the row's term (at the very left), while indicates that the property is not guaranteed
in general (it might, or might not, hold). For example, that every equivalence relation is symmetric, but not necessarily antisymmetric,
is indicated by Green tickY in the "Symmetric" column and in the "Antisymmetric" column, respectively.

All definitions tacitly require the homogeneous relation R be transitive: for all a,b,c, if aRb and bRc then aRc.
A term's definition may require additional properties that are not listed in this table.

In mathematics, a relation on a set is called connected or complete or total if it relates (or "compares") all distinct pairs of elements of the set in one direction or the other while it is called strongly connected if it relates all pairs of elements. As described in the terminology section below, the terminology for these properties is not uniform. This notion of "total" should not be confused with that of a total relation in the sense that for all xX there is a yX so that xRy (see serial relation).

Connectedness features prominently in the definition of total orders: a total (or linear) order is a partial order in which any two elements are comparable; that is, the order relation is connected. Similarly, a strict partial order that is connected is a strict total order. A relation is a total order if and only if it is both a partial order and strongly connected. A relation is a strict total order if, and only if, it is a strict partial order and just connected. A strict total order can never be strongly connected (except on an empty domain).

Some authors do however use the term connected with a much looser meaning, which applies to precisely those orders whose comparability graphs are connected graphs. This applies for instance to the fences, of which none of the nontrivial examples are total orders.

Formal definition

[edit | edit source]

A relation R on a set X is called connected when for all x,yX,  if xy then xRyoryRx, or, equivalently, when for all x,yX, xRyoryRxorx=y.

A relation with the property that for all x,yX, xRyoryRx is called strongly connected.[1][2][3]

Terminology

[edit | edit source]

The main use of the notion of connected relation is in the context of orders, where it is used to define total, or linear, orders. In this context, the property is often not specifically named. Rather, total orders are defined as partial orders in which any two elements are comparable.[4][5] Thus, total is used more generally for relations that are connected or strongly connected.[6] However, this notion of "total relation" must be distinguished from the property of being serial, which is also called total. Similarly, connected relations are sometimes called complete,[7] although this, too, can lead to confusion: The universal relation is also called complete,[8] and "complete" has several other meanings in order theory. Connected relations are also called connex[9][10] or said to satisfy trichotomy[11] (although the more common definition of trichotomy is stronger in that exactly one of the three options xRy,yRx,x=y must hold).

When the relations considered are not orders, being connected and being strongly connected are importantly different properties. Sources which define both then use pairs of terms such as weakly connected and connected,[12] complete and strongly complete,[13] total and complete,[6] semiconnex and connex,[14] or connex and strictly connex,[15] respectively, as alternative names for the notions of connected and strongly connected as defined above.

Characterizations

[edit | edit source]

Let R be a homogeneous relation. The following are equivalent:[14]

  • R is strongly connected;
  • URR;
  • RR;
  • R is asymmetric,

where U is the universal relation and R is the converse relation of R.

The following are equivalent:[14]

  • R is connected;
  • IRR;
  • RRI;
  • R is antisymmetric,

where R is the complementary relation of R, I is the identity relation and R is the converse relation of R.

Introducing progressions, Russell invoked the axiom of connection:

Whenever a series is originally given by a transitive asymmetrical relation, we can express connection by the condition that any two terms of our series are to have the generating relation.

Properties

[edit | edit source]
  • The edge relation[note 1] E of a tournament graph G is always a connected relation on the set of G's vertices.
  • If a strongly connected relation is symmetric, it is the universal relation.
  • A relation is strongly connected if, and only if, it is connected and reflexive.[proof 1]
  • A connected relation on a set X cannot be antitransitive, provided X has at least 4 elements.[16] On a 3-element set {a,b,c}, for example, the relation {(a,b),(b,c),(c,a)} has both properties.
  • If R is a connected relation on X, then all, or all but one, elements of X are in the range of R.[proof 2] Similarly, all, or all but one, elements of X are in the domain of R.

Notes

[edit | edit source]
  1. ^ Defined formally by vEw if a graph edge leads from vertex v to vertex w
Proofs
  1. ^ For the only if direction, both properties follow trivially. — For the if direction: when xy, then xRyyRx follows from connectedness; when x=y, xRy follows from reflexivity.
  2. ^ If x,yXran(R), then xRy and yRx are impossible, so x=y follows from connectedness.

References

[edit | edit source]
  1. ^ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
  2. ^ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
  3. ^ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value)., p. 135
  4. ^ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value). Here: Ch.14. Halmos gives the names of reflexivity, anti-symmetry, and transitivity, but not of connectedness.
  5. ^ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value). Here: Sect.6.3, p.878
  6. ^ a b Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value)., p. 6
  7. ^ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value)., p. 50
  8. ^ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
  9. ^ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value). page 114.
  10. ^ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value). Page 7.
  11. ^ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value). p. 24
  12. ^ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
  13. ^ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value). page 29
  14. ^ a b c Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value).
  15. ^ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value). p. 86
  16. ^ Lua error in Module:Citation/CS1/Configuration at line 2172: attempt to index field '?' (a nil value). Lemma 8.2, p.8.