0 votes 0 votes Set Theory & Algebra set-theory&algebra + – jatin khachane 1 asked Jan 13, 2019 • recategorized Jan 13, 2019 by Mk Utkarsh jatin khachane 1 827 views answer comment Share Follow See all 17 Comments See all 17 17 Comments reply Mk Utkarsh commented Jan 13, 2019 reply Follow Share $I.$ is not reflexive 1 votes 1 votes jatin khachane 1 commented Jan 13, 2019 reply Follow Share i did very silly mistake while checking for 2 i checked reflexive and symmetric but for poset it should be antisymmetric which is true here :( 0 votes 0 votes Mk Utkarsh commented Jan 13, 2019 reply Follow Share Happens :| for quick revision 1 votes 1 votes jatin khachane 1 commented Jan 13, 2019 reply Follow Share have you givem CBT ? @Mk Utkarsh 0 votes 0 votes Mk Utkarsh commented Jan 13, 2019 reply Follow Share No 0 votes 0 votes Magma commented Jan 13, 2019 reply Follow Share @Mk Utkarsh I ask you very silly question but i have to clear my doubt :p {(1,1),(2,2) , (3,3)} ---> this is POSET (3,3) R (1,1) --- > but his is not even hold the 2nd condition right ?? 0 votes 0 votes Magma commented Jan 13, 2019 reply Follow Share what's the approach that's we have to follow ? 0 votes 0 votes Mk Utkarsh commented Jan 13, 2019 reply Follow Share but (1,1)R(3,3) will hold 1 votes 1 votes Mk Utkarsh commented Jan 13, 2019 reply Follow Share or you can interchange postions of (1,1) and (3,3) but still it will be anti-symmetric 1 votes 1 votes Magma commented Jan 13, 2019 reply Follow Share but it also accept (1,3) R (3,1) nah ?? which is not valid here ? 0 votes 0 votes Mk Utkarsh commented Jan 13, 2019 reply Follow Share why not valid? (am i missing something :|) 0 votes 0 votes Magma commented Jan 13, 2019 i edited by Magma Jan 13, 2019 reply Follow Share (1,3) R (3,1) is not closed under anti-symmetric matrix right ??? but here The statement II accept that relation too which is not correct right ? 0 votes 0 votes Mk Utkarsh commented Jan 13, 2019 reply Follow Share anti-symmetric* (1,3) R (3,1) is closed because 1 < 3 but (3,1) R (1,3) is not in relation as it is a anti-symmetric 1 votes 1 votes Magma commented Jan 13, 2019 reply Follow Share Now i got it completely thanks 0 votes 0 votes Mk Utkarsh commented Jan 13, 2019 reply Follow Share Magma you made me question myself :p 1 votes 1 votes Magma commented Jan 13, 2019 reply Follow Share xD 0 votes 0 votes Learner_jai commented Jan 14, 2019 reply Follow Share @jatin khachane 1 the this statement must be false too Round robin sheduling algorithm always five better performance compared to FCFS sheduling algorithm 0 votes 0 votes Please log in or register to add a comment.