Professional Courses
Industry-relevant training in Business, Technology, and Design to help professionals and graduates upskill for real-world careers.
Categories
Interactive Games
Fun, engaging games to boost memory, math fluency, typing speed, and English skills—perfect for learners of all ages.
Typing
Memory
Math
English Adventures
Knowledge
Enroll to start learning
You’ve not yet enrolled in this course. Please enroll for free to listen to audio lessons, classroom podcasts and take practice test.
Interactive Audio Lesson
Listen to a student-teacher conversation explaining the topic in a relatable way.
Subset Relation Proofs
Unlock Audio Lesson
Welcome, everyone! Today, we're going to start by discussing how to prove that if (A ∩ C) is a subset of (B ∩ C) for any set C, then A must be a subset of B. Can anyone tell me what a subset is?
A subset is a set where all its elements are also contained in another set.
Exactly! Now, if we substitute C with A, what does that give us?
It gives us A ∩ A, which is just A, making it A ⊆ B ∩ A.
Great! Therefore, any element x in A suggests that it must be in B as well. With that in mind, let's continue building on similar principles. Remember, the acronym PIM for 'Proof Involves Manipulation' to help remember this approach.
Analyzing Implications
Unlock Audio Lesson
Let's explore the implications surrounding sets A, B, and C further. If x is in A and we have the implication that x in B leads to x in C, what do you think happens?
So, if x is in A and follows that rule, it should also be in C when it's in B.
Exactly! And thus, we prove that A intersect B is a subset of C. Always remember this: Implications build assertions of relationships between sets!
Is there a formula for counting subsets based on these properties?
Good question! We'll touch on counting later in today's tutorial, so keep that in mind.
Defining Symmetry
Unlock Audio Lesson
Now, will someone define a symmetric relation for me?
If (i, j) is in a relation, then (j, i) must also be included for it to be symmetric.
Absolutely! So based on that definition, how do we form a symmetric relation from n elements?
We need to focus on pairs of ordered elements and include their inverses. What happens if we pick one from the upper triangle of a relation matrix?
Great observation! The total pairs can lead to many combinations as they are mutually inclusive in symmetric relations.
Understanding Anti-symmetry
Unlock Audio Lesson
Who can explain the anti-symmetric property to me?
If both (a, b) and (b, a) are present in a relation, then a must equal b.
Exactly! So, applying this definition in counting how many relations we can form becomes crucial. Can anyone summarize how we calculate these pairs?
We consider non-diagonal pairs and ensure either or condition while excluding both in the count.
Well said! Remember, anti-symmetric relations challenge you to think critically about what pairs can coexist.
Conclusion and Recap
Unlock Audio Lesson
As we wrap up, can anyone recap what we learned about set relations today?
We established proofs for subset relations and the implications for whether A is a subset of B.
And we classified relations into symmetric, anti-symmetric, reflexive, and irreflexive categories.
Exactly! Also, remember how you can calculate the number of possible relations depending on the properties defined. Great job today, everyone!
Introduction & Overview
Read a summary of the section's main ideas. Choose from Basic, Medium, or Detailed.
Quick Overview
Standard
In this tutorial, we explore foundational concepts related to sets and their relations. Through various problems, we analyze and demonstrate the properties of subsets, implications of relations, and specific classifications of relations such as symmetric, anti-symmetric, and reflexive. Each problem emphasizes logical reasoning and proofs to derive key conclusions in set theory.
Detailed
Detailed Summary
In Tutorial 3, we dive deeper into the properties of sets and relations using various logical and mathematical proofs. The tutorial is structured around a series of questions focused on the assertion of set relations and their implications.
Key Points Covered:
- Subset Relations: The first part of the tutorial asserts that if for any set C, the intersection of sets A and C is a subset of the intersection of B and C, then it can be concluded that A is a subset of B. The proof relies on substituting specific sets into the initial premise and showing that any element in A must also exist in B.
- Implications of Relations: The second question investigates the relationship between sets A, B, and C, demonstrating that if an element x in A satisfies certain implications regarding B and C, then it leads to a conclusion that establishes the relation between A, B, and C.
- Types of Relations: The tutorial progresses to defining various types of relations—including symmetric, anti-symmetric, irreflexive, and reflexive. For each type, the tutorial provides proofs and counts the number of possible relations based on the properties dictated by the definitions. Through these exercises, students learn how to construct and analyze relations within a set of n elements, seeking to determine how many valid subsets follow particular rules.
- Counting Techniques: The problems propose calculating the total number of valid relations by breaking down possibilities for diagonal versus non-diagonal pairs and applying logical rules such as symmetry and anti-symmetry to derive the final counts.
Overall, the tutorial reinforces set theory foundations through an exploration of various logical constructs and provides procedural strategies for solving complex relational problems.
Youtube Videos
Audio Book
Dive deep into the subject with an immersive audiobook experience.
Understanding Set Inclusion
Unlock Audio Book
Signup and Enroll to the course for listening the Audio Book
Hello everyone welcome to tutorial number 3.
So, let us start the question number 1, here you are given that arbitrary sets A and B.
And the sets A and B as such that, this condition holds namely (A ∩ C) ⊆ (B ∩C) for any set C that you consider. If that is the case and you have to show that A ⊆ B, so you are given the premise that the (A ∩ C) ⊆ (B ∩ C) for any set C.
So, since this condition holds for any set C if I substitute C = A in this condition then I get that A ∩ A ⊆ B ∩ A, but I know that A ∩ A is nothing but the set A, so that means I can say that my premise, which I obtained by substituting C = A is that is A ⊆ A ∩ B.
Detailed Explanation
In this section, we start by examining the implications of a condition involving arbitrary sets A and B. The premise states that for any set C, if the intersection of A with C is a subset of the intersection of B with C, then we aim to prove that A is a subset of B. By substituting C with A, we find that A is contained in the intersection of A and B, hence establishing that A must be included in B.
Examples & Analogies
Imagine two classrooms, A and B, where A contains all students who play soccer. The condition states that if any additional group of students (C) that overlaps in both classrooms shows that soccer players are also students in B, we need to prove that all soccer players in A are also in B. By examining overlaps, we confirm that every soccer player (A) is also enrolled in the second classroom (B).
Demonstrating the Relationship Between Sets
Unlock Audio Book
Signup and Enroll to the course for listening the Audio Book
Now my goal is to show that A ⊆ B, so for showing that A ⊆ B; I have to show that you take any element x in the set A, it should be present in the set B as well. So, I am taking an arbitrary element x and I am assuming it is present in the set A and since, I have established the premise that A ⊆ (A ∩ B), that means if since the element x is present in A same element x will be present in the A ∩ B as well.
Now, as per the definition of A ∩ B it means the element x is present in A and simultaneously it is present in B as well, that means definitely it is present in B as well, so what I have established here is that if I start with an arbitrary element x which is present in the set A, I have established that it is present in the set B as well where and since x was chosen arbitrarily here.
Detailed Explanation
Here, we demonstrate that any arbitrary element x in the set A can be shown to also exist in B, using the earlier established premise that A is a subset of A ∩ B. By showing that if an element x belongs to A, it must also belong to A ∩ B, it implies that x, being in both A and B set, thus confirming A ⊆ B.
Examples & Analogies
Consider a company where set A represents employees who work in the marketing department. If we establish through a company's policy (A ∩ B) that these employees also have access to a database (set B), we conclude that any marketing employee (x) has access to the database, reinforcing that all marketing employees are included in the database group.
Universal Quantification in Set Relations
Unlock Audio Book
Signup and Enroll to the course for listening the Audio Book
In question two you are given the following; you are given 3 sets A, B, C such that this predicate holds for every element x in the set A and the property here is that if x ∈ A then the implication that x ∈ B → x ∈ C is true and this is a universally quantified statement, that means this condition holds for every element x in the set A.
Then you have to show, you have to either prove or disprove whether the A ∩ B ⊆ C or not, so in fact we are going to prove this statement we will prove that you take any element x which is arbitrarily chosen, and if it is present in the A ∩ B then it is present in C as well.
Detailed Explanation
This section introduces a situation involving three sets. The condition asserts that for all elements x in A, if x belongs to B, then it must also be in C. The task is to either validate or refute the assertion that A ∩ B is a subset of C. The next steps involve proving that any element x from A ∩ B is indeed contained within C based on the given logical relationships.
Examples & Analogies
Think about the relationship between students (set A), who are enrolled in specific courses (set B), and those who pass a specific exam (set C). The assertion states that if a student is in a course (B), then they also pass the exam (C). Thus, proving that all students enrolled (A ∩ B) would indeed pass that examination (C) encourages a structured approach to education.
Constructing Valid Relations
Unlock Audio Book
Signup and Enroll to the course for listening the Audio Book
So, we start with an arbitrary we chosen an element x and we start by reworking the premise that is given to be true here.
So, the premise here is that this universally quantified statement is true for every element x. So, what I am doing here is I am rewriting this implication here, so remember the statement p → q is logically equivalent to the disjunction of negation p and q. So, that is why I have splitted this implication into a disjunction and I get this equivalent form, then I apply the same rule again over this implication.
So, this implication is now replaced by this disjunction and I put a negation here. Now you see everywhere I have disjunction, I can apply the associativity property of the disjunction.
Detailed Explanation
The focus here is on the logical manipulation of a statement derived from the universal property of sets. By rewriting implications into logical disjunctions using p → q equivalent transformations, we proceed to show that the properties translate through negation and disjunction effectively, thus confirming the original statement.
Examples & Analogies
Think of a locked room analogy where students can only enter if they possess a key (B). The statement asserts that having a key implies they have permission (C). Reorganizing the statement provides insights into how keys and permissions interconnect, bringing clarity to access protocols in systems.
Counting Relations with Properties
Unlock Audio Book
Signup and Enroll to the course for listening the Audio Book
Now in question 3, there are several parts and, you are given a set S, consisting of n elements where n is not 0. So, implicitly I am assuming here that n is greater than equal to 1. And now I have to count various number possible relations satisfying some properties. So, the first property here is I am interested to count the number of relations on this set S which are symmetric.
Detailed Explanation
This part lays out a task of calculating the number of different types of relations formed among 'n' elements, specifically focusing first on symmetric relations. A symmetric relation involves an ordered pair, and if (i, j) exists, then (j, i) must also be included. The goal is structured count of how these pairs can be organized within the total relationships across the set.
Examples & Analogies
Consider a friendship circle where friendships can be mutual. If person A is friends with person B, then B is also friends with A. Hence, the various ways in which friendships can form versus friendship pairs can be counted symmetrically to reflect these relationships.
Understanding Anti-Symmetric Relations
Unlock Audio Book
Signup and Enroll to the course for listening the Audio Book
Now in part b of the question I want to find out the number of relations over the set S, which are anti-symmetric and just to recap, this is the requirement from a anti-symmetric relation. If both (a, b) and (b, a) are present in the relation then that is allowed only if a is equal to b that means a is not equal to b contra-positively if a is not equal to b then you cannot have simultaneously both (a, b) as well as (b, a) present in the relation R.
Detailed Explanation
Here we define anti-symmetric relations, where reciprocal pairs of distinct members of the set are not allowed to coexist. The challenge is then to calculate how many of these anti-symmetric relations can exist in a set of 'n' elements, taking into account both diagonal pairs (which can appear) and the restrictions on distinct pairs.
Examples & Analogies
Imagine a family hierarchy where a person can inherit a position. If person A is designated as the successor over B, B cannot overturn that designation by also naming that relationship, thus emphasizing the anti-symmetrical nature of hierarchy where one can lead but two can't equal the path.
Definitions & Key Concepts
Learn essential terms and foundational ideas that form the basis of the topic.
Key Concepts
-
Subset Relations: If (A ∩ C) ⊆ (B ∩ C), A ⊆ B.
-
Symmetric Relations: (a, b) ∈ R implies (b, a) ∈ R.
-
Anti-symmetric Relations: (a, b) ∈ R and (b, a) ∈ R implies a = b.
-
Irreflexive Relations: No (a, a) exists in R for all a.
-
Reflexive Relations: All (a, a) must exist in R.
Examples & Real-Life Applications
See how the concepts apply in real-world scenarios to understand their practical implications.
Examples
-
Given sets A = {1, 2}, B = {1, 2, 3}, C = {2}. Since (A ∩ C) = {2}, and (B ∩ C) = {2} holds true, A ⊆ B.
-
To show a symmetric relation, consider A = {(1, 2), (2, 1)}; it is symmetric because it includes both (1, 2) and (2, 1).
Memory Aids
Use mnemonics, acronyms, or visual cues to help remember key information more easily.
🎵 Rhymes Time
-
To see a subset, just check the set, all elements meet, no need for a fret.
📖 Fascinating Stories
-
Imagine A and B are friends in a group, if C sees them both, they'll hang in a loop.
🧠 Other Memory Gems
-
Remember 'SARA' for Symmetric, Anti-symmetric, Reflexive, and Irreflexive relations.
🎯 Super Acronyms
For relations remember 'SARA' - Symmetric, Anti-symmetric, Reflexive, and Irreflexive.
Flash Cards
Review key concepts with flashcards.
Glossary of Terms
Review the Definitions for terms.
-
Term: Subset
Definition:
A set A is a subset of set B if every element of A is also an element of B.
-
Term: Symmetric Relation
Definition:
A relation R is symmetric if for all a, b, if (a, b) is in R then (b, a) is also in R.
-
Term: Antisymmetric Relation
Definition:
A relation R is anti-symmetric if for all a, b, if (a, b) and (b, a) are both in R, then a must equal b.
-
Term: Irreflexive Relation
Definition:
A relation R is irreflexive if for every element a in the set, (a, a) is not in R.
-
Term: Reflexive Relation
Definition:
A relation R is reflexive if for every element a in the set, (a, a) is in R.