Content deleted Content added
I don't find it clearer, the textbooks are about 50/50 on transitive + irreflexive vs. transitive + asymmetric. try a different wording. the proofs are in the cited source and not relevant per MOS:MATH |
|||
Line 20:
=== Strict partial orders ===
An '''irreflexive''', '''strong''',<ref name=Wallis/> or '''{{visible anchor|strict partial order|Strict partial order|Irreflexive partial order}}''' is a homogeneous relation < on a set <math>P</math> that is [[Transitive relation|transitive]]
# [[Transitive relation|Transitivity]]: if <math>a < b</math> and <math>b < c</math> then <math>a < c</math>.
# [[Irreflexive relation|Irreflexivity]]: <math>\neg\left( a < a \right)</math>, i.e. no element is related to itself (also called anti-reflexive).
▲* [[Asymmetric relation|Asymmetry]]: if <math>a < b</math> then not <math>b < a</math>,
▲since if it were true that <math>a < b</math> and <math>b < a</math> then, by transitivity, <math>a<a</math>, which is forbidden by irreflexivity. Alternatively, one could require only transitivity and asymmetry, since a transitive relation is asymmetric if and only if it is irreflexive.<ref name="Flaška 2007">{{cite journal |last1=Flaška |first1=V. |last2=Ježek |first2=J. |last3=Kepka |first3=T. |last4=Kortelainen |first4=J. |title=Transitive Closures of Binary Relations I |journal=Acta Universitatis Carolinae. Mathematica et Physica |year=2007 |volume=48 |issue=1 |pages=55–69 |publisher=School of Mathematics – Physics Charles University |___location=Prague |url=http://dml.cz/dmlcz/142762 }} Lemma 1.1 (iv). This source refers to asymmetric relations as "strictly antisymmetric".</ref>
A strict partial order is also known as an asymmetric [[strict preorder]].
| |||