edited by
725 views
0 votes
0 votes

Argument: R2 is straight away eliminated. For R3, to satisfy Antisymmetric relation.. Say -2 and +2 satisfy it then +2 and -2 should not satisfy. But its not the case. Answer is given as C. Am I so blind that I couldn't figure out my mistake?

edited by

4 Answers

0 votes
0 votes
answer should be d). only R1 is partial order. clearly R3 is not satisfying criterion of antisymmetric relation.
0 votes
0 votes

answer would be D:

R1 is definitely partial order set (>= is classic example of poset)

R2 is clearly not reflexive therefore not partial order set

coming to R3 : we have to check whether it is antisymmetric or not: i.e (aRb and bRa) implies a=b

suppose we take +3 and -3 now (3)2 <= (-3)and (-3)2 <= (3)2 implies that 3=-3 which is false therefore it is not antisymmetric in nature following not a partial order.

Related questions

0 votes
0 votes
1 answer
2
Badayayash asked Jan 26, 2019
1,060 views
Let Q denote the set of rational numbers and S = {x | x belongs N ; N; x>=10}Consider the Following POSETsI. (Q ∩ [0, 1], ≤)II. (S, ≤)Which of the above POSETs are ...
0 votes
0 votes
1 answer
3
srestha asked Mar 7, 2019
852 views
Let $A=\left \{ 1,2,3 \right \}$. Number of relation on $A$ which are neither reflexive, nor irreflexive but symmetric is ___________Ans given 48but I got 8Please verify
4 votes
4 votes
1 answer
4
ram_18051996 asked Jul 7, 2017
2,508 views
Is (S, R) a poset if S is the set of all people in the world and (a, b) ∈ R, where a and b are people,if a is not taller than b?