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.
Introduction to Equivalence Relations
Unlock Audio Lesson
Today, we'll discuss equivalence relations, which must be reflexive, symmetric, and transitive. Can anyone define these properties for me?
Reflexive means every element is related to itself.
Symmetric means if one element is related to another, then that second element must be related to the first.
Transitive means if one element relates to a second and that second relates to a third, then the first must relate to the third.
Exactly! These properties must hold for any equivalence relation.
Properties of Union and Intersection
Unlock Audio Lesson
Let's examine the union of two equivalence relations. Who can tell me if the union of two equivalence relations is also an equivalence relation?
It might be, but I'm not sure about transitivity!
You're right! The union is reflexive and symmetric, but it may not be transitive. Why do you think that is?
Because you might have pairs that don't connect through a third element?
Good insight! Let's illustrate this with my example of set X = {a, b, c}.
Union Counterexamples
Unlock Audio Lesson
Consider R1 = {(a,a), (b,b), (c,c), (a,b), (b,a)} and R2 = {(a,a), (b,b), (c,c), (b,c), (c,b)}. What do you think R1 ∪ R2 looks like?
It will include all pairs from both relations!
Right! Now, does R1 ∪ R2 guarantee transitivity?
I don't think so... We have (a,b) and (b,c) but not (a,c).
Exactly! That's why we can’t conclude that the union is always an equivalence relation.
Intersection of Equivalence Relations
Unlock Audio Lesson
Now let's shift to intersections. Why does the intersection of two equivalence relations always remain an equivalence relation?
Because it keeps properties of both the relations, so it stays reflexive, symmetric, and transitive.
Correct! Each of those properties transfers over because both relations satisfy them individually.
Composition and Set Equality
Unlock Audio Lesson
We found that R1 ∪ R2 is an equivalence relation if and only if R1 ∘ R2 = R1 ∪ R2. Why might that condition be true?
Because composition needs all connections from both relations to create a transitive bridge!
Well put! So, the richness of these relations allows us to combine them effectively or restrict them based on need.
How about we summarize today's key insights?
Yes, please!
Introduction & Overview
Read a summary of the section's main ideas. Choose from Basic, Medium, or Detailed.
Quick Overview
Standard
This section elaborates on the relationships between two equivalence relations on a non-empty set, specifically demonstrating through proof and examples that the intersection of two equivalence relations is always an equivalence relation, while their union is not. The critical condition for the union to be an equivalence relation is explored through composition.
Detailed
Union and Composition of Equivalence Relations
In this section, we analyze two equivalence relations, R1 and R2, defined on a non-empty set X. The goal is to investigate when their union (R1 ∪ R2) is itself an equivalence relation. It is established that while the intersection (R1 ∩ R2) of two equivalence relations over the same set is always an equivalence relation (as it remains reflexive, symmetric, and transitive), the same cannot be said for their union.
A key takeaway is that the union of R1 and R2 will be reflexive and symmetric, given that both R1 and R2 preserve these properties individually. However, it may fail the transitivity property, which is crucial for it to remain an equivalence relation.
Through a detailed examination, we ascertain that the condition under which the union of two equivalence relations is also an equivalence relation is when the composition of the two relations (R1 ∘ R2) is equivalent to their union (R1 ∪ R2). This necessitates proving both directions: if R1 ∪ R2 is an equivalence relation, then R1 ∘ R2 must equal R1 ∪ R2, and vice versa. Each direction is supported by logical reasoning and structure. Understanding these properties provides foundational knowledge in discrete mathematics, particularly in relation to partitioning sets and analyzing relational structures.
Youtube Videos
Audio Book
Dive deep into the subject with an immersive audiobook experience.
Equivalence Relations and Union
Unlock Audio Book
Signup and Enroll to the course for listening the Audio Book
Let us prove the implication in the direction where I assume \( R_1 \circ R_2 = R_1 \cup R_2 \). Under that assumption I will be showing that \( R_1 \cup R_2 \) is an equivalence relation. I will focus on proving that \( R_1 \cup R_2 \) is a transitive relation. Because we can always show that \( R_1 \cup R_2 \) will satisfy the reflexive property and symmetric property.
Detailed Explanation
In this section, we are discussing the properties of union and composition of equivalence relations. First, we have the equivalence relations \( R_1 \) and \( R_2 \) over a non-empty set. We claim that the union of these two equivalence relations is also an equivalence relation under certain conditions. To do so, we only need to verify its transitivity property because reflexivity and symmetry can be established through the inclusion of elements in each relation. We take two pairs of elements \( (a, b) \) and \( (b, c) \) from the union and look into three different scenarios to establish transitivity. If both pairs are from one relation, transitivity follows directly from the properties of equivalence relations. If one is from each relation, we must show how they lead to a related pair in the union.
Examples & Analogies
Consider a class of students where some are friends. Let \( R_1 \) represent 'is friends with' for one group and \( R_2 \) for another. If Alice and Bob are friends (in \( R_1 \)) and Bob and Charlie are friends (in \( R_2 \)), we can infer a transitive relationship. If Alice is friends with Bob and Bob is a friend with Charlie through both relations, we conclude that Alice and Charlie have a connection through friendship as well.
Composition of Equivalence Relations
Unlock Audio Book
Signup and Enroll to the course for listening the Audio Book
Let us prove the implication in the other direction. So, I am going to prove that if \( R_1 \cup R_2 \) is an equivalence relation, then \( R_1 \circ R_2 = R_1 \cup R_2 \). So, I have to prove the equality of two sets. I have to prove that \( R_1 \circ R_2 \subseteq R_1 \cup R_2 \) and I have to prove that \( R_1 \cup R_2 \subseteq R_1 \circ R_2 \).
Detailed Explanation
In this chunk, we switch our approach and test the converse: if the union of two equivalence relations is itself an equivalence relation, does it mean that their composition is the same as their union? To establish this, we check the subset relationships: if we take an element from the composition, it must appear in the union, and vice versa. We prove each side of the subset relationship. For the first side, if a pair can be formed through a third element from either relation, it shows that the composition indeed falls within the union. Then we scrutinize the union's pairs to illustrate that they would necessarily align with the composition if the union is transitive.
Examples & Analogies
Imagine two car rental companies that have their networks. Let \( R_1 \) be the set of rental agreements from company A and \( R_2 \) from company B. If utilizing both companies implies you can join two contracts (composition), establishing that all agreements from A and B shared reflect the total agreements (union), then we've created a greater network. The equality signifies that every shared rental agreement provides a consistent outing experience across both organizations from the perspective of transitive connections.
Definitions & Key Concepts
Learn essential terms and foundational ideas that form the basis of the topic.
Key Concepts
-
Equivalence Relation: A relation that is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive.
-
Union of Relations: Combines two relations, where elements can belong to either or both.
-
Intersection of Relations: Contains elements that are common to both relations.
-
Composition of Relations: A new relation formed by combining two relations.
Examples & Real-Life Applications
See how the concepts apply in real-world scenarios to understand their practical implications.
Examples
-
Example of Equivalence Relations: R1 = {(1, 1), (2, 2), (3, 3), (1, 2), (2, 1)} and R2 = {(1, 1), (2, 2), (3, 3), (2, 3), (3, 2)}.
-
Example illustrating the failure of the union to be transitive when using pairs (1, 2) and (2, 3) but missing (1, 3).
Memory Aids
Use mnemonics, acronyms, or visual cues to help remember key information more easily.
🎵 Rhymes Time
-
Reflexive, Symmetric, Transitive three, together they form equivalence key!
📖 Fascinating Stories
-
Once upon a time, there were three friends in a relation. They only connected if they met the rules of reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity to form a strong equivalence bond!
🧠 Other Memory Gems
-
Remember the acronym 'RST' for Reflexivity, Symmetry, Transitivity to keep in mind what makes up an equivalence relation!
🎯 Super Acronyms
EASY
- Equivalence = Always Symmetric and Yields transitive.
Flash Cards
Review key concepts with flashcards.
Glossary of Terms
Review the Definitions for terms.
-
Term: Equivalence Relation
Definition:
A relation that is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive.
-
Term: Union
Definition:
The set containing all elements that are in either of two sets.
-
Term: Intersection
Definition:
The set containing all elements that are in both sets.
-
Term: Composition
Definition:
The operation that combines two relations to form a new relation.