DOCSLIB.ORG

Fs-Complement Operator –A Symmetric Difference Operation Between Fs-Subsets

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Fs-Complement Operator –A Symmetric Difference Operation Between Fs-Subsets International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Volume 118 No. 20 2018, 4721-4734 ISSN: 1314-3395 (on-line version) url: http://www.ijpam.eu Special Issue ijpam.eu FS-COMPLEMENT OPERATOR –A SYMMETRIC DIFFERENCE OPERATION BETWEEN FS-SUBSETS 1 2 3 4 VaddiparthiYogeswara ,K.V.Umakameswari ,D.Raghu Ram , Ch. Ramasaynasi Rao 1Associate Professor Dept. of Mathematics, GIT, GITAM University, Visakhapatnam-530045,A.P,India 2Research Scholar: Dept. of Mathematics, GIS, GITAM University, Visakhapatnam 530045, A.P, India 3Research Scholar: Dept. of Mathematics, GIS, GITAM University, Visakhapatnam 530045, A.P, India 4Research Scholar: Dept. of Mathematics, GIS, GITAM University, Visakhapatnam 530045, A.P , India [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Abstract :In this paper ,we define a symmetric difference operation between two given Fs-subsets of a given Fs-set and prove collection of all Fs-subsets of a given Fs-set with this symmetric operation is a commutative group with some conditions Keywords:Fs-set, Fs-subset, Fs-union, Fs-intersection , Fs-Complement, symmetric difference operation . I. INTRODUCTION Ever since Zadeh [8] introduced the notion of fuzzy sets in his pioneering work, several mathematicians studied numerous aspects of fuzzy sets. Recently many researchers put their efforts in order to prove collection of all fuzzy subsets of a given fuzzy set is Boolean algebra under suitable operations [21].VaddiparthiYogeswara ,G.Srinivas and BiswajitRath[11] introduced the concept of Fs-set and developed the theory of Fs-sets in order to prove collection of all Fs-subsets of given Fs-set is a complete Boolean algebra under Fs-unions, Fs- intersections and Fs-complements. The Fs-sets they introduced contain Boolean valued membership functions. In this paper, we define a binary operation namely ,symmetric differenceoperation between to Fs-subsets and prove collection of all Fs-sub sets of a given Fs-set under this operation is a commutative group along with some conditions. For smooth reading of the paper, the theory of Fs-sets is introduced briefly in the section-II. All other relevant results are proved in the next section. We denote the largest element of a complete Boolean algebra LA [1.1] by MA or 1or1A . For all lattice theoretic, set theoretic properties and Boolean algebraic properties one can refer Szasz [3], Garret Birkhoff[4],Steven Givant• Paul Halmos[2] and Thomas Jech[5]. II.THEORY OF FS-SETS 2.1 Fs-set: Let U be a universal set, A1 ⊆ U and let A⊆U be non-empty. A four tuple = A1 ,A, A μ1A1 ,μ2A , LA is said be an Fs-set if, and only if (1) A ⊆ A1 (2) LA is a complete Boolean Algebra (3) μ1A1 : A1 ⟶ LA ,μ2A : A ⟶ LA ,are functions such that μ1A1 |A ≥ μ2A c (4) A:A⟶ LA is defined by Ax = μ1A1 x ⋀ μ2Ax ,for each x ∈ A 2.2 Fs-subset: Let = A1, A, A μ1A1,μ2A , LA and ℬ= B1, B, B μ1B1,μ2B , LB be a pair of Fs-sets. ℬ is said to be an Fs-subset of , denoted by ℬ⊆, if, and only if 4721 International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue (1) B1 ⊆ A1, A ⊆ B (2) LB is a complete subalgebra of LA or LB ≤ LA (3) μ1B1 ≤ μ1A1 |B1, and μ2B|A ≥ μ2A 2.3Fs-empty set For some LX , such that LX ≤ LA a four tuple 풳 = X1, X, X μ1X1 , μ2X , LX is not an Fs-set if, and only if (a)X ⊈ X1or (b) μ1X1 x ≱ μ2X x , for some x ∈ X ∩ X1 Here onwards, any object of this type is called an Fs-empty set of first kind and we accept that it is an Fs-subset of 퓑 for any 퓑 ⊆ 퓐. Definition An Fs-subset 풴= Y1, Y, Y μ1Y1 , μ2Y , LY of , is said to be an Fs-empty set of second kind if, and only if (a') Y1 = Y = A (b') LY ≤ LA (c') Y = 0 i.e. μ1Y1 = μ2Y Unless otherwise there is a specific situation we treat Fs-empty set of first kind and Fs-empty set of second kind are same and denoted by Φand observe that [11]. Φis the least Fs-subset among all Fs- subsets of Fs- Union and Fs-Intersection 2.4Definition :Let ℬ = B1, B, B μ1B1,μ2B , LB and 풞= C1, C, C μ1C1 , μ2C , LC be a pair of Fs-subsets of. Then, the Fs-union of ℬ and 풞, denoted by ℬ∪풞 is defined as ℬ∪풞=풟= D1, D, D μ1D1 , μ2D , LD ,where (1) D1 = B1 ∪ C1 , D = B ∩ C (2) LD = LB ∨ LC = The complete subalgebra generated by LB ∪ LC (3) μ1D1 : D1 LD is defined by μ1D1 x = (μ1B1 ∨ μ1C1 )x μ2D ∶ D LDis defined by μ2Dx = μ2B x ∧ μ2Cxand D : D LD is defined by c Dx = μ1D1 x ∧ μ2Dx 4722 International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue 2.5 Definition:Let ℬ = B1, B, B μ1B1,μ2B , LB and 풞= C1, C, C μ1C1 , μ2C , LC be a pair of Fs-subsets of. Then, the Fs-intersection of ℬ and 풞, denoted byℬ ∩풞 is defined as ℬ ∩풞=풟= D1, D, D μ1D1 , μ2D , LD ,where (1) LD = LB ∧ LC = The complete subalgebra generated by LB ∩ LC (2) μ1D1 : D1 LD is defined by μ1D1 x = μ1B1 x ∧ μ1C1 x μ2D ∶ D LDis defined by μ2Dx = μ2B ∨ μ2C x and D : D LD is defined by c Dx = μ1D1 x ∧ μ2Dx III. Fs- COMPLEMENT ANDSYMMETRIC DIFFERENCE OPERATION BETWEEN TWO FS-SUBSETS 3.0 Definition of Fs-complement of an Fs-subset: Consider a particular Fs-set = A1 ,A, A μ1A1 ,μ2A , LA ,A ≠ Φ,where [1] A ⊆ A1 [2] LA = 0, MA , MA =∨ A A = a∈A A a [3] μ1A1 = MA,μ2A = 0 , c Ax = μ1A1 x ⋀ μ2Ax = MA , for each x ∈ A C Given ℬ = B1, B, B μ1B1,μ2B , LB ⊆ We define Fs-complement of ℬ, denoted by ℬ for B=A and LB = LA as follows: C ℬ = 풟= D1, D, D μ1D1 , μ2D , LD , where c (a') D1 = CA B1 = B1 ∪ A, D = B = A (b') LD = LA (c') μ1D1 : D1 ⟶ LA, is defined by μ1D1 x = MA c μ2D: A ⟶ LA , is defined by μ2Dx = Bx = μ1B1 x⋀ μ2Bx c c c 3.1Remark:ClearlyD ∶ A ⟶ LA ,is given byDx = μ1D1 x⋀ μ2Dx = MA ∧ Bx = Bx . 3.2SYMMETRIC DIFFERENCE OPERATION BETWEENTWO FS-SUBSETS A family 픊 of allFs-subsetsℬ⊆ and = A1 ,A, A μ1A1 ,μ2A , LA with ℬ = B1, B, B μ1B1,μ2B , LB with B=A and LB = LA is a commutative group along with (1.3a) and (1.3b) with the operation ∆ as defined below 4723 International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue 퓑 ∆ 퓒= ℬ ∩ 풞퐶 ∪ ℬC ∩ 풞 where ℬ &퐶 areFs- subsets of 3.3Proposition: We can easily observe that for any Fs-subsets ℬ &퐶, the following Resultsaretrue a)ℬ ∆ 풞 = 풞 ∆ ℬ b) ℬ ∆Φ = ℬ c)ℬ ∆ℬ = Φ 3.4 Proposition : For any Fs-subsetsℬ, 풞&풟퓑 ∆ (퓒 ∆ 퓓) = (퓑 ∆ 퓒) ∆ 퓓 is true provided a)μ1D1 x = μ1B1 x, 퐶 퐶 b)(휇2퐷푥) ∨ 휇2퐵푥 = (휇2퐵푥) ∨ 휇2퐷푥 c)휇2퐷푥 ∨ 퐵 푥 = 휇2퐵푥 ∨ 퐷 푥 for each x ∈ A Proof : Say ℬ △ 풞 △ 풟 = 풬, 풞 △ 풟 = 풨 ,ℬ푐 = ℱ,풞푐 = ,풟푐 = ℋ, 풞 ∩ 풟퐶 = 풥 , 풞C ∩ 풟 =풦 , 풥 ∪ 풦 = 풨, 풨푐 = 풩, ℬ ∩ 풨퐶 = 풫 ℬC ∩ 풨 =풧 ,풫 ∪ 풧 = 풬,(ℬ △ 풞) △ 풟 = 풵 , ℬ △ 풞 = 풯 , ℬ ∩ 풞퐶 = 풭, ℬC ∩ 풞 =풮 , 풭 ∪ 풮 = 풯, 풯푐 = 풰, 풯 ∩ 풟퐶 = 풫 C 풯 ∩ 풟 =풲 , 풱 ∪ 풲 = 풵 푐 Thenℱ = ℬ = 퐹1, 퐹, 퐹 휇1퐹1,휇2퐹 , 퐿퐹 Where 퐶 퐶 (i) 퐹1 = 퐶퐴퐵1 = 퐵1 ∪ 퐴, F=B=A where퐵1 = 퐴1 − 퐵1 (ii) 퐿퐹=퐿퐴 (iii) 휇1퐹1 : 퐹1 퐿퐴is given by휇1퐹1 푥=푀퐴 푐 휇2퐹: 퐴 퐿퐴is given by휇2퐹 = 퐵푥 = 휇1퐵1 푥 ∧ 휇2퐵푥 푐 퐹: 퐴 퐿퐴is given by퐹푥 = 휇1퐹1 푥 ∧ 휇2퐵푥 푐 푐 = 푀퐴 ∧ 퐵 푥 = 퐵 푥 푐 = 풞 = 퐺1, 퐺, 퐺 휇1퐺1,휇2퐺 , 퐿퐺 푤here 퐶 푖 퐺1 = 퐶퐴퐶1 = 퐶1 ∪ 퐴 , G=C=A (ii)퐿퐺=퐿퐶=퐿퐴 (iii) 휇1퐺1 : 퐺1 퐿퐴is given by휇1퐺1 푥=푀퐴 휇2퐺 : 퐴 퐿퐴is given by휇2퐺 푥 = 퐶 푥 4724 International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue 푐 푐 푐 퐺 : 퐴 퐿퐴is given by퐺푥 = 휇1퐺1 푥 ∧ 휇2퐺 푥 = 푀퐴 ∧ 퐶푥 = 퐶푥 푐 ℋ = 풟 = 퐻1, 퐻, 퐻 휇1퐻1,휇2퐻 , 퐿퐻 Where 퐶 (푖) 퐻1 = 퐶퐴퐷1 = 퐷1 ∪ 퐴 , H=D=A (푖푖) 퐿퐻=퐿퐷=퐿퐴 (iii)휇1퐻1 : 퐻1 퐿퐴is given by휇1퐻1 푥=푀퐴 휇2퐻: 퐻 퐿퐴is given by 휇2퐻푥 = 퐷 푥 푐 푐 푐 퐻: 퐴 퐿퐴 is given by퐻푥 = 휇1퐻1 푥 ∧ 휇2퐻푥 = 푀퐴 ∧ 퐷푥 = 퐷푥 풥 = 퐽1, 퐽, 퐽 휇1퐽1, 휇2퐽 , 퐿퐽 where 퐶 (1) 퐽1 = 퐶1 ∩ 퐻1 = (퐶1 ∩ 퐷1 ) ∪ 퐴, J=C ∪ H=A 2 퐿퐽 = 퐿퐶 ∧ 퐿퐻= 퐿퐴 (3) 휇1퐽1 : 퐽1 퐿퐽 is defined by휇1퐽1 푥 = 휇1퐶1 푥 ∧ 휇1퐻1 푥 =휇1퐶1 푥 ∧ 푀퐴=휇1퐶1 푥 휇2퐽 ∶ 퐽 퐿푗 is defined by휇2퐽 푥 = 휇2퐶푥 ∨ 휇2퐻푥 = 휇2퐶푥 ∨ 퐷 푥 푐 푥 퐽: 퐽 퐿 퐽 is definedby퐽푥 = 휇1퐽1 푥 ∧ 휇2퐽 푐 = 휇1퐽1 푥 ∧ ( 휇2푐 ∨ 휇2퐻 푥) 푥 푐 푥 푐 = 휇1퐽1 푥 ∧ (휇2푐 ) ∧ (휇2퐻 ) 푥 푐 = 퐶 푥 ∧ 휇2퐻 =퐶 푥 ∧ 퐷 푥 푐 풦 = 퐾1, 퐾, 퐾 휇1퐾1,휇2퐾 , 퐿퐾 where 퐶 퐶 퐶 (4) 퐾1 = 퐺1 ∩ 퐷1 = (퐶1 ∪ 퐴) ∩ 퐷1=(퐶1 ∪ 퐷1) ∪ (퐴 ∩ 퐷1) = (퐶1 ∩ 퐷1) ∪ 퐴 , K=G∪ 퐷=A (5)퐿퐾= 퐿퐺 ∧ 퐿퐷=퐿퐴 (6) 휇1퐾1 : 퐾1 퐿퐾is defined by휇1퐾1 푥 = 휇1퐺1 푥 ∧ 휇1퐷1 푥 = 푀퐴 ∧ 휇1퐷1 푥 =휇1퐷1 푥 푥 휇2퐾 ∶ 퐾 퐿퐾 isdefined by 휇2퐾 = 휇2퐺 ∨ 휇2퐷 푥 = 휇2퐺 푥 ∨ 휇2퐷푥 = 퐶푥 ∨ 휇2퐷푥 푐 퐾:퐾 퐿퐾 is definedby 퐾푥 = 휇1퐾1 푥 ∧ 휇2퐾푥 4725 International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue 푐 = 휇1퐷1 푥 ∧ ( 휇2퐺 ∨ 휇2퐷 푥) 푐 푐 = 휇1퐷1 푥 ∧ (휇2퐺 푥) ∧ (휇2퐷푥) 푐 푐 = 휇1퐷1 푥 ∧ 휇2퐷푥 ∧ 휇2퐺 푥 = 퐷 푥 ∧ 퐶 푥 푐 풨 = 푀1, 푀, 푀 휇1푀1,휇2푀 , 퐿푀 Where 퐶 퐶 (7) 푀1 = 퐽1 ∪ 퐾1 = [(퐶1 ∩ 퐷1 ) ∪ 퐴] ∪ [(퐶1 ∩ 퐷1) ∪ 퐴] = (퐶1∆ 퐷1) ∪ 퐴 , 푀 = 퐽 ∩ 퐾 = 퐴 ∩ 퐴=퐴 (8) 퐿푀=퐿퐽 ∨ 퐿퐾=퐿퐴 (9) 휇1푀1 : 푀1 퐿퐴isdefined by휇1푀1 푥 = 휇1퐽1 ∨ 휇1퐾1 푥 Case (i) x∈A ⟹ 휇1푀1 푥 =휇1퐶1 푥 ∨ 휇1퐷1 푥 Case (ii) x∉ 퐴, x∈C ⟹ 휇1푀1 푥 = 휇1퐽1 푥=휇1퐶1 푥 Case (iii) x∉ 퐴, x∈D ⟹ 휇1푀1 푥 = 휇1퐾1 푥 =휇1퐷1 푥 휇2푀 ∶ 푀 퐿퐴isdefined by휇2푀푥 = 휇2퐽 푥 ∧ 휇2퐾푥 = (휇2퐶푥 ∨ 퐷 푥)∧ (퐶 푥 ∨ 휇2퐷푥) 푥 = (퐶 푥 ∧ 퐷 푥) ∨ (휇2퐶푥 ∧ 휇2퐷 ) 푐 푀: M 퐿퐴 is defined by푀푥 = 휇1푀1 푥 ∧ 휇2푀푥 푐 = 휇1퐽1 ∨ 휇1퐾1 푥 ∧ 휇2퐽 푥 ∧ 휇2퐾푥 c =(휇1퐶1 푥 ∨ 휇1퐷1 푥) ∧ [휇2퐶푥 ∨ 퐷푥) ∧ (퐶푥 ∨ 휇2퐷푥) ] C c =(휇1퐶1 푥 ∨ 휇1퐷1 푥) ∧[(퐶푥 ∧ 퐷푥) ∨ (휇2퐶푥 ∧ 휇2퐷푥) ] 풩 = N1, N, N μ1N1 , μ2N , LN , where 푐 (a') N1 = CA 푀1 = 푀1 ∪ A, N = M = A (b') LD = LA (c') μ1N1 : N1 ⟶ LA, is defined byμ1푁1 x = MA μ2N : N ⟶ LA, is defined byμ2Nx = 푀 x c N: N ⟶ LA ,isdefined byDx = μ1N1 x⋀ μ2N x c c = MA ∧ M x = M x C 푥 c c 푥 = (휇1퐶1 푥 ∨ 휇1퐷1 푥) ∧[(퐶푥 ∧ 퐷푥) ∨ (휇2푐 ∧ 휇2퐷 ) ]} 풫 = 푃, 푃, 푃 휇1푃1,휇2푃 , 퐿푃 where 4726 International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics Special Issue 퐶 퐶 (10) 푃1 = 퐵1⋂푁1=퐵1 ∩ 퐶1 △ 퐷1 ∪ 퐴 = 퐵1 ∩ (퐶1 △ 퐷1) ∪ 퐵1 ∩ 퐴 퐶 = 퐵1 ∩ (퐶1 △ 퐷1) ∪ A , P=B ∪ 푁 = 퐵 ∪ (퐽 ∪ K)=B∪ (퐴 ∪ 퐴)=B ∪ 퐴=A (11) 퐿푃 = 퐿퐵⋀퐿푁퐿퐴 (12) 휇1푃1 : 푃1 퐿퐴is defined by 휇1푝1 푥 = 휇1퐵1 푥⋀ 휇1푁1 푥 =휇1퐵1 푥 ∧ 푀퐴 =휇1퐵1 푥 휇2푃: 푃 퐿퐴 is defined by휇2푝 푥 = 휇2퐵 ∨ 휇2푁 x = 휇2퐵푥 ∨ 휇2푁푥 =휇2퐵푥 푀 x 퐶 =휇2퐵푥 ∨ 휇2퐽 푥 ∨ 휇2퐾푥 퐶 =휇2퐵푥 ∨ 휇1퐶1 푥 ∨ 휇1퐷1 푥 ∧ [(휇2퐶푥 ∨ 퐷푥) ∧ (퐶푥 ∨ 휇2퐷푥)] 푥 푐 푃: 푃 퐿퐴 is defined by푃푥 = 휇1푃1 ∧ 휇2푃푥 퐶 =휇1퐵1 푥 ∧[휇2퐵푥 ∨ 휇1퐶1 푥 ∨ 휇1퐷1 푥 ∧ [(휇2퐶푥 ∨ 퐷푥) ∧ (퐶푥 ∨ 휇2퐷푥)]
Load more

Recommended publications
  • A Characterization of the Canonical Extension of Boolean
    A CHARACTERIZATION OF THE CANONICAL EXTENSION OF BOOLEAN HOMOMORPHISMS LUCIANO J. GONZALEZ´ Abstract. This article aims to obtain a characterization of the canon- ical extension of Boolean homomorphisms through the Stone-Cechˇ com- pactification. Then, we will show that one-to-one homomorphisms and onto homomorphisms extend to one-to-one homomorphisms and onto homomorphisms, respectively. 1. Introduction The concept of canonical extension of Boolean algebras with operators was introduced and studied by J´onsson and Tarski [13, 14]. Then, the notion of canonical extension was naturally generalized to the setting of distribu- tive lattices with operators [7]. Later on, the notion of canonical extension was generalized to the setting of lattices [8, 9, 6], and the more general setting of partially ordered sets [3]. The theory of completions for ordered algebraic structures, and in particular the theory of canonical extensions, is an important and useful tool to obtain complete relational semantics for several propositional logics such as modal logics, superintuitionistic logics, fragments of substructural logics, etc., see for instance [1, 5, 10, 16, 3]. The theory of Stone-Cechˇ compactifications of discrete spaces and in particular of discrete semigroup spaces has many applications to several branches of mathematics, see the book [12] and its references. Here we are interested in the characterization of the Stone-Cechˇ compactification of a discrete space through of the Stone duality for Boolean algebras. In this paper, we prove a characterization of the canonical extension of a arXiv:1702.06414v2 [math.LO] 1 Jun 2018 Boolean homomorphism between Boolean algebras [13] through the Stone- Cechˇ compactification of discrete spaces and the Stone duality for Boolean algebras.
    [Show full text]
  • TOPOLOGY and ITS APPLICATIONS the Number of Complements in The
    TOPOLOGY AND ITS APPLICATIONS ELSEVIER Topology and its Applications 55 (1994) 101-125 The number of complements in the lattice of topologies on a fixed set Stephen Watson Department of Mathematics, York Uniuersity, 4700 Keele Street, North York, Ont., Canada M3J IP3 (Received 3 May 1989) (Revised 14 November 1989 and 2 June 1992) Abstract In 1936, Birkhoff ordered the family of all topologies on a set by inclusion and obtained a lattice with 1 and 0. The study of this lattice ought to be a basic pursuit both in combinatorial set theory and in general topology. In this paper, we study the nature of complementation in this lattice. We say that topologies 7 and (T are complementary if and only if 7 A c = 0 and 7 V (T = 1. For simplicity, we call any topology other than the discrete and the indiscrete a proper topology. Hartmanis showed in 1958 that any proper topology on a finite set of size at least 3 has at least two complements. Gaifman showed in 1961 that any proper topology on a countable set has at least two complements. In 1965, Steiner showed that any topology has a complement. The question of the number of distinct complements a topology on a set must possess was first raised by Berri in 1964 who asked if every proper topology on an infinite set must have at least two complements. In 1969, Schnare showed that any proper topology on a set of infinite cardinality K has at least K distinct complements and at most 2” many distinct complements.
    [Show full text]
  • Determinacy in Linear Rational Expectations Models
    Journal of Mathematical Economics 40 (2004) 815–830 Determinacy in linear rational expectations models Stéphane Gauthier∗ CREST, Laboratoire de Macroéconomie (Timbre J-360), 15 bd Gabriel Péri, 92245 Malakoff Cedex, France Received 15 February 2002; received in revised form 5 June 2003; accepted 17 July 2003 Available online 21 January 2004 Abstract The purpose of this paper is to assess the relevance of rational expectations solutions to the class of linear univariate models where both the number of leads in expectations and the number of lags in predetermined variables are arbitrary. It recommends to rule out all the solutions that would fail to be locally unique, or equivalently, locally determinate. So far, this determinacy criterion has been applied to particular solutions, in general some steady state or periodic cycle. However solutions to linear models with rational expectations typically do not conform to such simple dynamic patterns but express instead the current state of the economic system as a linear difference equation of lagged states. The innovation of this paper is to apply the determinacy criterion to the sets of coefficients of these linear difference equations. Its main result shows that only one set of such coefficients, or the corresponding solution, is locally determinate. This solution is commonly referred to as the fundamental one in the literature. In particular, in the saddle point configuration, it coincides with the saddle stable (pure forward) equilibrium trajectory. © 2004 Published by Elsevier B.V. JEL classification: C32; E32 Keywords: Rational expectations; Selection; Determinacy; Saddle point property 1. Introduction The rational expectations hypothesis is commonly justified by the fact that individual forecasts are based on the relevant theory of the economic system.
    [Show full text]
  • 180: Counting Techniques
    180: Counting Techniques In the following exercise we demonstrate the use of a few fundamental counting principles, namely the addition, multiplication, complementary, and inclusion-exclusion principles. While none of the principles are particular complicated in their own right, it does take some practice to become familiar with them, and recognise when they are applicable. I have attempted to indicate where alternate approaches are possible (and reasonable). Problem: Assume n ≥ 2 and m ≥ 1. Count the number of functions f :[n] ! [m] (i) in total. (ii) such that f(1) = 1 or f(2) = 1. (iii) with minx2[n] f(x) ≤ 5. (iv) such that f(1) ≥ f(2). (v) that are strictly increasing; that is, whenever x < y, f(x) < f(y). (vi) that are one-to-one (injective). (vii) that are onto (surjective). (viii) that are bijections. (ix) such that f(x) + f(y) is even for every x; y 2 [n]. (x) with maxx2[n] f(x) = minx2[n] f(x) + 1. Solution: (i) A function f :[n] ! [m] assigns for every integer 1 ≤ x ≤ n an integer 1 ≤ f(x) ≤ m. For each integer x, we have m options. As we make n such choices (independently), the total number of functions is m × m × : : : m = mn. (ii) (We assume n ≥ 2.) Let A1 be the set of functions with f(1) = 1, and A2 the set of functions with f(2) = 1. Then A1 [ A2 represents those functions with f(1) = 1 or f(2) = 1, which is precisely what we need to count. We have jA1 [ A2j = jA1j + jA2j − jA1 \ A2j.
    [Show full text]
  • Set Difference and Symmetric Difference of Fuzzy Sets
    Preliminaries Symmetric Dierence Set Dierence and Symmetric Dierence of Fuzzy Sets N.R. Vemuri A.S. Hareesh M.S. Srinath Department of Mathematics Indian Institute of Technology, Hyderabad and Department of Mathematics and Computer Science Sri Sathya Sai Institute of Higher Learning, India Fuzzy Sets Theory and Applications 2014, Liptovský Ján, Slovak Republic Vemuri, Sai Hareesh & Srinath Symmetric Dierence Preliminaries Introduction Symmetric Dierence Earlier work Outline 1 Preliminaries Introduction Earlier work 2 Symmetric Dierence Denition Examples Properties Applications Future Work References Vemuri, Sai Hareesh & Srinath Symmetric Dierence Preliminaries Introduction Symmetric Dierence Earlier work Classical set theory Set operations Union- [ Intersection - \ Complement - c Dierence -n Symmetric dierence - ∆ .... Vemuri, Sai Hareesh & Srinath Symmetric Dierence Preliminaries Introduction Symmetric Dierence Earlier work Classical set theory Set operations Union- [ Intersection - \ Complement - c Dierence -n Symmetric dierence - ∆ .... Vemuri, Sai Hareesh & Srinath Symmetric Dierence Preliminaries Introduction Symmetric Dierence Earlier work Classical set theory Set operations Union- [ Intersection - \ Complement - c Dierence -n Symmetric dierence - ∆ .... Vemuri, Sai Hareesh & Srinath Symmetric Dierence Preliminaries Introduction Symmetric Dierence Earlier work Classical set theory Set operations Union- [ Intersection - \ Complement - c Dierence -n Symmetric dierence - ∆ .... Vemuri, Sai Hareesh & Srinath Symmetric Dierence Preliminaries
    [Show full text]
  • E. A. Emerson and C. S. Jutla, Tree Automata, Mu-Calculus, And
    Tree Automata MuCalculus and Determinacy Extended Abstract EA Emerson and CS Jutla The University of Texas at Austin IBM TJ Watson Research Center Abstract that tree automata are closed under disjunction pro jection and complementation While the rst two We show that the prop ositional MuCalculus is eq are rather easy the pro of of Rabins Complemen uivalent in expressivepower to nite automata on in tation Lemma is extraordinarily complex and di nite trees Since complementation is trivial in the Mu cult Because of the imp ortance of the Complemen Calculus our equivalence provides a radically sim tation Lemma a numb er of authors have endeavored plied alternative pro of of Rabins complementation and continue to endeavor to simplify the argument lemma for tree automata which is the heart of one HR GH MS Mu Perhaps the b est of the deep est decidability results We also showhow known of these is the imp ortant work of Gurevich MuCalculus can b e used to establish determinacy of and Harrington GH which attacks the problem innite games used in earlier pro ofs of complementa from the standp oint of determinacy of innite games tion lemma and certain games used in the theory of While the presentation is brief the argument is still online algorithms extremely dicult and is probably b est appreciated Intro duction y the page supplementofMonk when accompanied b Mon We prop ose the prop ositional Mucalculus as a uniform framework for understanding and simplify In this pap er we present a new enormously sim ing the imp ortant and technically challenging
    [Show full text]
  • Naïve Set Theory Basic Definitions Naïve Set Theory Is the Non-Axiomatic Treatment of Set Theory
    Naïve Set Theory Basic Definitions Naïve set theory is the non-axiomatic treatment of set theory. In the axiomatic treatment, which we will only allude to at times, a set is an undefined term. For us however, a set will be thought of as a collection of some (possibly none) objects. These objects are called the members (or elements) of the set. We use the symbol "∈" to indicate membership in a set. Thus, if A is a set and x is one of its members, we write x ∈ A and say "x is an element of A" or "x is in A" or "x is a member of A". Note that "∈" is not the same as the Greek letter "ε" epsilon. Basic Definitions Sets can be described notationally in many ways, but always using the set brackets "{" and "}". If possible, one can just list the elements of the set: A = {1,3, oranges, lions, an old wad of gum} or give an indication of the elements: ℕ = {1,2,3, ... } ℤ = {..., -2,-1,0,1,2, ...} or (most frequently in mathematics) using set-builder notation: S = {x ∈ ℝ | 1 < x ≤ 7 } or {x ∈ ℝ : 1 < x ≤ 7 } which is read as "S is the set of real numbers x, such that x is greater than 1 and less than or equal to 7". In some areas of mathematics sets may be denoted by special notations. For instance, in analysis S would be written (1,7]. Basic Definitions Note that sets do not contain repeated elements. An element is either in or not in a set, never "in the set 5 times" for instance.
    [Show full text]
  • Boolean-Valued Equivalence Relations and Complete Extensions of Complete Boolean Algebras
    BULL. AUSTRAL. MATH. SX. MOS 02JI0, 02J05 VOL. 3 (1970), 65-72. Boolean-valued equivalence relations and complete extensions of complete boolean algebras Denis Higgs It is remarked that, if A is a complete boolean algebra and 6 is an /-valued equivalence relation on a non-empty set J , then the set of 6-extensional functions from J to A can be regarded as a complete boolean algebra extension of A and a characterization is given of the complete extensions which arise in this way. Let A be a boolean algebra, I any non-empty set. An A-valued equivalence relation on I is a function 6 : I x I •*• A such that 6(i, i) = 1 , 6(i, j) = 6(j, i) , and 6(i, j) A 6(J, k) 2 6(i, fc) for all i, j, k in J . Boolean-valued equivalence relations occur of course in boolean-valued model theory and in this context they were first introduced, so far as I know, by -Los [5], p. 103. (As it happens, it is the complement d{i, j) = 6(i, j)' of a boolean-valued equivalence relation which tos describes and he requires in addition that d{i, j) = 0 only if i = j ; such a function d(i, j) may be regarded as an /-valued metric on I . Boolean-valued metrics have been considered by a number of authors - see, for example, Ellis and Sprinkle [7], p. 25^•) Given an /J-valued equivalence relation 6 on the non-empty set I , where from now on we suppose that the boolean algebra A is complete, we Received 28 March 1970.
    [Show full text]
  • Regularity Properties and Determinacy
    Regularity Properties and Determinacy MSc Thesis (Afstudeerscriptie) written by Yurii Khomskii (born September 5, 1980 in Moscow, Russia) under the supervision of Dr. Benedikt L¨owe, and submitted to the Board of Examiners in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of MSc in Logic at the Universiteit van Amsterdam. Date of the public defense: Members of the Thesis Committee: August 14, 2007 Dr. Benedikt L¨owe Prof. Dr. Jouko V¨a¨an¨anen Prof. Dr. Joel David Hamkins Prof. Dr. Peter van Emde Boas Brian Semmes i Contents 0. Introduction............................ 1 1. Preliminaries ........................... 4 1.1 Notation. ........................... 4 1.2 The Real Numbers. ...................... 5 1.3 Trees. ............................. 6 1.4 The Forcing Notions. ..................... 7 2. ClasswiseConsequencesofDeterminacy . 11 2.1 Regularity Properties. .................... 11 2.2 Infinite Games. ........................ 14 2.3 Classwise Implications. .................... 16 3. The Marczewski-Burstin Algebra and the Baire Property . 20 3.1 MB and BP. ......................... 20 3.2 Fusion Sequences. ...................... 23 3.3 Counter-examples. ...................... 26 4. DeterminacyandtheBaireProperty.. 29 4.1 Generalized MB-algebras. .................. 29 4.2 Determinacy and BP(P). ................... 31 4.3 Determinacy and wBP(P). .................. 34 5. Determinacy andAsymmetric Properties. 39 5.1 The Asymmetric Properties. ................. 39 5.2 The General Definition of Asym(P). ............. 43 5.3 Determinacy and Asym(P). ................. 46 ii iii 0. Introduction One of the most intriguing developments of modern set theory is the investi- gation of two-player infinite games of perfect information. Of course, it is clear that applied game theory, as any other branch of mathematics, can be modeled in set theory. But we are talking about the converse: the use of infinite games as a tool to study fundamental set theoretic questions.
    [Show full text]
  • Seminar I Boolean and Modal Algebras
    Seminar I Boolean and Modal Algebras Dana S. Scott University Professor Emeritus Carnegie Mellon University Visiting Scholar University of California, Berkeley Visiting Fellow Magdalen College, Oxford Oxford, Tuesday 25 May, 2010 Edinburgh, Wednesday 30 June, 2010 A Very Brief Potted History Gödel gave us two translations: (1) classical into intuitionistic using not-not, and (2) intuitionistic into S4-modal logic. Tarski and McKinsey reviewed all this algebraically in propositional logic, proving completeness of (2). Mostowski suggested the algebraic interpretation of quantifiers. Rasiowa and Sikorski went further with first-order logic, giving many completeness proofs (pace Kanger, Hintikka and Kripke). Montague applied higher-order modal logic to linguistics. Solovay and Scott showed how Cohen's forcing for ZFC can be considered under (1). Bell wrote a book (now 3rd ed.). Gallin studied a Boolean-valued version of Montague semantics. Myhill, Goodman, Flagg and Scedrov made proposals about modal ZF. Fitting studied modal ZF models and he and Smullyan worked out forcing results using both (1) and (2). What is a Lattice? 0 ≤ x ≤ 1 Bounded x ≤ x Partially Ordered x ≤ y & y ≤ z ⇒ x ≤ z Set x ≤ y & y ≤ x ⇒ x = y x ∨ y ≤ z ⇔ x ≤ z & y ≤ z With sups & z ≤ x ∧ y ⇔ z ≤ x & z ≤ y With infs What is a Complete Lattice? ∨i∈Ixi ≤ y ⇔ (∀i∈I) xi ≤ y y ≤ ∧i∈Ixi ⇔ (∀i∈I) y ≤ xi Note: ∧i∈Ixi = ∨{y|(∀i∈I) y ≤ xi } What is a Heyting Algebra? x ≤ y→z ⇔ x ∧ y ≤ z What is a Boolean Algebra? x ≤ (y→z) ∨ w ⇔ x ∧ y ≤ z ∨ w Alternatively using Negation x ≤ ¬y ∨ z ⇔ x ∧ y ≤ z Distributivity Theorem: Every Heyting algebra is distributive: x ∧ (y ∨ z) = (x ∧ y) ∨ (x ∧ z) Theorem: Every complete Heyting algebra is (∧ ∨)-distributive: ∧ ∨ = ∨ ∧ x i∈Iyi i∈I(x yi) Note: The dual law does not follow for complete Heyting algebras.
    [Show full text]
  • FORCING 1. Ideas Behind Forcing 1.1. Models of ZFC. During the Late 19
    FORCING ROWAN JACOBS Abstract. ZFC, the axiom system of set theory, is not a complete theory. That is, there are statements such that ZFC + ' and ZFC + :' are both consistent. The Continuum Hypothesis| the statement that the size of the real numbers is the first uncountable cardinal @1|is a famous example. This paper will investigate why ZFC is incomplete and what structures satisfy its axioms. The proof technique of forcing is a powerful way to construct structures satisfying ZFC + ' for a wide range of '. This technique will be developed and its applications to the Continuum Hypothesis and the Axiom of Choice will be demonstrated. 1. Ideas Behind Forcing 1.1. Models of ZFC. During the late 19th and early 20th century, set theory played the role of a solid foundation underneath other fields, such as algebra, analysis, and topology. However, without an axiomatization, set theory opened itself up to paradoxes, such as Russell's Paradox. If every predicate defines a set, then we can define a set S of all sets which do not contain themselves. Does S contain itself? If so, then it must not contain itself, since it is an element of S, and all elements of S are sets that do not contain themselves. If not, then it must contain itself, since it is a set that does not contain itself, and all sets that do not contain themselves are in S. With this and similar paradoxes, it became clear that the naive form of set theory, in which any predicate over the entire universe of sets can define a set, could not stand as a foundation for other fields of mathematics.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Boolean Algebras
    California State University, San Bernardino CSUSB ScholarWorks Electronic Theses, Projects, and Dissertations Office of aduateGr Studies 12-2016 AN INTRODUCTION TO BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS Amy Schardijn California State University - San Bernardino Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd Part of the Algebra Commons Recommended Citation Schardijn, Amy, "AN INTRODUCTION TO BOOLEAN ALGEBRAS" (2016). Electronic Theses, Projects, and Dissertations. 421. https://scholarworks.lib.csusb.edu/etd/421 This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Office of aduateGr Studies at CSUSB ScholarWorks. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses, Projects, and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of CSUSB ScholarWorks. For more information, please contact [email protected]. An Introduction to Boolean Algebras A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, San Bernardino In Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Master of Arts in Mathematics by Amy Michiel Schardijn December 2016 An Introduction to Boolean Algebras A Thesis Presented to the Faculty of California State University, San Bernardino by Amy Michiel Schardijn December 2016 Approved by: Dr. Giovanna Llosent, Committee Chair Date Dr. Jeremy Aikin, Committee Member Dr. Corey Dunn, Committee Member Dr. Charles Stanton, Chair, Dr. Corey Dunn Department of Mathematics Graduate Coordinator, Department of Mathematics iii Abstract This thesis discusses the topic of Boolean algebras. In order to build intuitive understanding of the topic, research began with the investigation of Boolean algebras in the area of Abstract Algebra. The content of this initial research used a particular nota- tion. The ideas of partially ordered sets, lattices, least upper bounds, and greatest lower bounds were used to define the structure of a Boolean algebra.
    [Show full text]