Partially Ordered Set - Strict and Non-strict Partial Orders

Strict and Non-strict Partial Orders

In some contexts, the partial order defined above is called a non-strict (or reflexive, or weak) partial order. In these contexts a strict (or irreflexive) partial order "<" is a binary relation that is irreflexive and transitive, and therefore asymmetric. In other words, asymmetric (hence irreflexive) and transitive.

Thus, for all a, b, and c in P, we have that:

  • ¬(a < a) (irreflexivity);
  • if a < b then ¬(b < a) (asymmetry); and
  • if a < b and b < c then a < c (transitivity).

There is a 1-to-1 correspondence between all non-strict and strict partial orders.

If "≤" is a non-strict partial order, then the corresponding strict partial order "<" is the reflexive reduction given by:

a < b if and only if (ab and ab)

Conversely, if "<" is a strict partial order, then the corresponding non-strict partial order "≤" is the reflexive closure given by:

ab if and only if a < b or a = b.

This is the reason for using the notation "≤".

Strict partial orders are useful because they correspond more directly to directed acyclic graphs (dags): every strict partial order is a dag, and the transitive closure of a dag is both a strict partial order and also a dag itself.

Read more about this topic:  Partially Ordered Set

Famous quotes containing the words strict, partial and/or orders:

    My father and I were always on the most distant terms when I was a boy—a sort of armed neutrality, so to speak. At irregular intervals this neutrality was broken, and suffering ensued; but I will be candid enough to say that the breaking and the suffering were always divided up with strict impartiality between us—which is to say, my father did the breaking, and I did the suffering.
    Mark Twain [Samuel Langhorne Clemens] (1835–1910)

    The only coöperation which is commonly possible is exceedingly partial and superficial; and what little true coöperation there is, is as if it were not, being a harmony inaudible to men. If a man has faith, he will coöperate with equal faith everywhere; if he has not faith, he will continue to live like the rest of the world, whatever company he is joined to.
    Henry David Thoreau (1817–1862)

    Really, if the lower orders don’t set us a good example, what on earth is the use of them? They seem, as a class, to have absolutely no sense of moral responsibility.
    Oscar Wilde (1854–1900)