Converse relation
In mathematics, the converse of a binary relation is the relation that occurs when the order of the elements is switched in the relation. For example, the converse of the relation 'child of' is the relation 'parent of'. In formal terms, if and are sets and is a relation from to then is the relation defined so that if and only if In set-builder notation,
Since a relation may be represented by a logical matrix, and the logical matrix of the converse relation is the transpose of the original, the converse relation[1][2][3][4] is also called the transpose relation.[5] It has also been called the opposite or dual of the original relation,[6] the inverse of the original relation,[7][8][9][10] or the reciprocal of the relation [11]
Other notations for the converse relation include or [citation needed]
The notation is analogous with that for an inverse function. Although many functions do not have an inverse, every relation does have a unique converse. The unary operation that maps a relation to the converse relation is an involution, so it induces the structure of a semigroup with involution on the binary relations on a set, or, more generally, induces a dagger category on the category of relations as detailed below. As a unary operation, taking the converse (sometimes called conversion or transposition)[citation needed] commutes with the order-related operations of the calculus of relations, that is it commutes with union, intersection, and complement.
Examples
For the usual (maybe strict or partial)
A relation may be represented by a logical matrix such as
Then the converse relation is represented by its
The converse of kinship relations are named: " is a child of " has converse " is a parent of ". " is a
Properties
In the
Since one may generally consider relations between different sets (which form a category rather than a monoid, namely the category of relations Rel), in this context the converse relation conforms to the axioms of a dagger category (aka category with involution).[12] A relation equal to its converse is a symmetric relation; in the language of dagger categories, it is self-adjoint.
Furthermore, the semigroup of endorelations on a set is also a partially ordered structure (with inclusion of relations as sets), and actually an involutive
In the
If a relation is
Inverses
If represents the identity relation, then a relation may have an inverse as follows: is called
- right-invertible
- if there exists a relation called a right inverse of that satisfies
- left-invertible
- if there exists a relation called a left inverse of that satisfies
- invertible
- if it is both right-invertible and left-invertible.
For an invertible homogeneous relation all right and left inverses coincide; this unique set is called its inverse and it is denoted by In this case, holds.[5]: 79
Converse relation of a function
A function is invertible if and only if its converse relation is a function, in which case the converse relation is the inverse function.
The converse relation of a function is the relation defined by the
This is not necessarily a function: One necessary condition is that be
For example, the function has the inverse function
However, the function has the inverse relation which is not a function, being multi-valued.
Composition with relation
Using composition of relations, the converse may be composed with the original relation. For example, the subset relation composed with its converse is always the universal relation:
- ∀A ∀B ∅ ⊂ A ∩B ⇔ A ⊃ ∅ ⊂ B ⇔ A ⊃ ⊂ B. Similarly,
- For U = universe, A ∪ B ⊂ U ⇔ A ⊂ U ⊃ B ⇔ A ⊂ ⊃ B.
Now consider the
Thus The opposite composition is the universal relation.
The compositions are used to classify relations according to type: for a relation Q, when the
If Q is univalent, then QQT is an equivalence relation on the domain of Q, see Transitive relation#Related properties.
See also
- Duality (order theory) – Term in the mathematical area of order theory
- Transpose graph – Directed graph with reversed edges
References
- B. G. Teubner via Internet ArchiveSeite 3 Konversion
- ^ Bertrand Russell (1903) Principles of Mathematics, page 97 via Internet Archive
- ^ C. I. Lewis (1918) A Survey of Symbolic Logic, page 273 via Internet Archive
- ISBN 978-0-521-76268-7.
- ^ ISBN 978-3-642-77970-1.
- ISBN 978-1-4613-0267-4.
- ISBN 978-1-139-45097-3.
- ISBN 978-9814583930.
- )
- ISBN 9783319445618
- ISBN 0-444-70368-3
- ^ ISBN 978-3-7908-1365-4.
- ISBN 978-3-319-74450-6
- ISBN 978-0-387-90092-6