Industry-relevant training in Business, Technology, and Design to help professionals and graduates upskill for real-world careers.
Fun, engaging games to boost memory, math fluency, typing speed, and English skills—perfect for learners of all ages.
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.
Listen to a student-teacher conversation explaining the topic in a relatable way.
Today, we will discuss equivalence relations, which are based on three key properties: reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity. Can someone remind me what these terms mean?
Reflexivity means every element is related to itself.
Symmetry implies that if one element is related to another, then the reverse is also true.
Transitivity means if one element relates to a second, and that second relates to a third, then the first relates to the third.
Perfect! Now, can anyone provide an example of a relation that is symmetric and transitive but not reflexive?
Here's an example: the relation that includes pairs (1, 2) and (2, 1) is symmetric and transitive but lacks reflexivity since (2, 2) is missing.
Great example! Such relations help us understand that symmetry and transitivity alone do not guarantee reflexivity. Remember the acronym 'SRT' for Symmetry, Reflexivity, Transitivity!
To summarize, we need to be cautious when assuming reflexivity in relations that are only symmetric and transitive.
Let's dive deeper into functions. Can anyone explain the difference between injective, surjective, and bijective functions?
Injective functions map distinct elements to distinct images.
Surjective functions ensure every element of the codomain has at least one pre-image.
A bijective function is both injective and surjective, meaning that they pair each element of the domain and codomain uniquely.
Excellent! What if we have a surjective function: does it imply the function is injective?
Not necessarily! A surjective function can map multiple elements to the same image and still cover every element in the codomain.
Exactly! This is an important distinction, as shown in our earlier example with infinite sets. Remember the acronym 'SIB' for Surjective, Injective, Bijective. Now, can someone explain how we can find injective functions from one set to another?
We can only assign unique images to each element from the set of possible images, ensuring no duplicates.
Great point! Let's summarize: Injective functions require unique mapping, surjective functions cover every image in the codomain, and bijective functions meet both requirements. Keep SIB in mind!
Now, let's transition to the Stirling function of type 2. Who can tell me what it does?
It counts the number of ways to partition a set into a certain number of non-empty subsets!
This is really helpful when counting surjective functions since they require that every element in the codomain has a pre-image.
Exactly! By partitioning the domain into subsets, we can map these subsets uniquely to images in the codomain. Can anyone tell me how Stirling numbers help in counting surjective functions using these partitions?
By using the Stirling function, we can create those partitions first and then calculate permutations of those subsets!
Right! This means the total number of surjective functions can be derived by multiplying the number of partitions by all possible permutations. Excellent work! To sum up, the Stirling function plays a crucial role in combinatorial counting.
Read a summary of the section's main ideas. Choose from Basic, Medium, or Detailed.
In this section, we delve into different types of relations, specifically focusing on properties such as symmetry, transitivity, and reflexivity. Additionally, we address injective, surjective, and bijective functions, while emphasizing the importance of these concepts in understanding mathematical mappings. We also introduce the Stirling function of type 2, discussing its relevance in combinatorics and its application in counting surjective functions.
This section provides an extensive examination of key concepts in relations and functions. We begin with a discussion on the properties of relations, focusing on equivalence relations, augmenting our understanding of reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity.
We explore the idea that a non-empty symmetric and transitive relation need not be reflexive, providing a counterexample to support this claim. The distinction between surjective, injective, and bijective functions is highlighted, demonstrating how these mappings function in disparate scenarios. Specifically, we delve into the implications of a function being surjective, ensuring all elements in the codomain have pre-images from the domain.
Furthermore, we introduce the Stirling function of type 2, detailing its significance in combinatorics for partitioning sets. By discussing partitioning possibilities, the section connects the Stirling function to the broader theme of counting surjective functions through the generated partitions, revealing a fruitful application of these mathematical concepts.
Dive deep into the subject with an immersive audiobook experience.
Signup and Enroll to the course for listening the Audio Book
In question 10a, you are asked to either prove what is proof that every non-empty symmetric and transitive relation is also reflexive. Well we can give a very simple counter example to prove that the statement is false. Imagine you are given a relation R over this set X, the relation is clearly symmetric. It is also transitive. If you are wondering why it is transitive you have (1, 1) and (1, 1) present and also (1, 1) present and you have (1, 2), (2, 1) present. So, you should have (1, 1) in the relation which is present in the relation but the relation is not reflexive because (2, 2) not present.
This chunk discusses the properties of relations, specifically focusing on symmetric, transitive, and reflexive relations. A symmetric relation means if (a, b) is in R, then (b, a) must also be in R. A transitive relation means if (a, b) and (b, c) are in R, then (a, c) must also be in R. However, not every symmetric and transitive relation is reflexive, which requires that (a, a) must be in R for every element a in the set. The example presented shows a relation that is symmetric and transitive but does not include (2, 2), making it not reflexive, thus disproving the initial statement.
Think of a group of friends where 'friendship' can be seen as a relation. If Alice is friends with Bob (A, B) and Bob is friends with Alice (B, A), then friendship is symmetric. If Alice is friends with Bob and Bob is friends with Charlie, then Alice must also be friends with Charlie, which is transitive. However, if Alice isn't friends with herself (A, A), the 'friendship' relation isn't reflexive, demonstrating that it can be symmetric and transitive without being reflexive.
Signup and Enroll to the course for listening the Audio Book
In part 2, you are given two functions f: A → B and g: B → C respectively. And you are also given that g ∘ f is injective. Then the question is, is it necessary that f is also injective? The statement is true and we can prove it by contradiction. So, imagine that g o f is injective but f is not injective. Since f is not injective that means I have a pair of distinct elements from the A set, say a1 and a2 getting mapped to the same image, say b and say the image of b as for the g function is c. Then I get a contradiction that g ∘ f(a1) and g ∘ f(a2) are same namely c, but a1 ≠ a2 showing that g ∘ f is not injective which is a contradiction to my premise here.
This chunk explains the relationship between the injectivity of the composition of two functions and the injectivity of the first function. When we say that g ∘ f is injective, it means that for every distinct element in set A, g(f(a1)) and g(f(a2)) must yield distinct outputs. If f isn't injective, it maps two different inputs a1 and a2 to the same output b. Therefore, g(f(a1)) equals g(f(a2)), implying that g ∘ f isn't injective, which contradicts the assumption that it is. Hence, if the composition is injective, f must also be injective.
Imagine a factory producing two different models of a product. The first machine in the assembly line can produce either model A or B; however, if both model A and model B are indistinguishable to the assembly line afterward, and you have a complaint about the quality of one model, you can only trace the issue back effectively if you can differentiate between the models at the first stage (function f). If function f was not able to differentiate, the assumption of the quality check (function g) would fail since multiple instances would lead to the same output.
Signup and Enroll to the course for listening the Audio Book
In part d, you are given the f and g functions and your g ∘ f function is surjective none is it necessary that the function f is also surjective again this is not necessary here is a very simple counterexample this is your f function this is your g function. Your g ∘ f is surjective because indeed there is only one element in your set C, namely c and the pre-image for that c is a because you have g ∘ f(a) = c. So, the function g ∘ f is indeed surjective, but the function f is not surjective because if you take the element b it has no pre-image.
This chunk addresses the relationship between the surjectiveness of composite functions and their individual components. A function is surjective if every element in the codomain has at least one pre-image in the domain. Even if g ∘ f is surjective, it does not necessarily imply that f is surjective. If f does not cover all elements in its codomain, there could still exist elements in the composition g ∘ f which match those that g outputs from the mapped results of f. Hence, f can be non-surjective while maintaining a surjective composition when combined appropriately with g.
Imagine a mail delivery service (g) that ensures every mailbox (i.e., every output in set C) gets at least one letter (input from set A through f). If some streets (outputs of f) are left out from the delivery route, the service can still ensure that every mailbox receives at least one letter (the condition for g ∘ f being surjective). However, it doesn't mean that the service covers every street, hence f is not surjective.
Learn essential terms and foundational ideas that form the basis of the topic.
Key Concepts
Equivalence Relation: A tripartite property involving reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity.
Injective Function: Mappings where no two elements share the same image.
Surjective Function: Ensures the codomain is fully covered by the mapping.
Bijective Function: A one-to-one correspondence between elements of domain and codomain.
Stirling Function: Counts the partitions of a set into non-empty subsets.
See how the concepts apply in real-world scenarios to understand their practical implications.
An equivalence relation example: the relation on integers defined by x ~ y if x - y is divisible by 3.
Injective function example: f(x) = 2x is injective since no two distinct x values yield the same result.
Use mnemonics, acronyms, or visual cues to help remember key information more easily.
A function is injective; its images must be unique, otherwise, their overlap could cause a leak.
Imagine a party where guests are matched to drinks. Each unique guest (input) receives a specific drink (output). If two guests get the same drink, the function isn't injective!
Remember 'SIR' for relations: Symmetric, Injective, Reflexive. Check if your relation is a SIR!
Review key concepts with flashcards.
Review the Definitions for terms.
Term: Equivalence Relation
Definition:
A relation that is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive.
Term: Injective Function
Definition:
A function where each element of the domain maps to a unique element in the codomain.
Term: Surjective Function
Definition:
A function where every element of the codomain has at least one pre-image in the domain.
Term: Bijective Function
Definition:
A function that is both injective and surjective.
Term: Stirling Function
Definition:
A function that counts the number of ways to partition a set into a specific number of non-empty subsets.