Question
3 Modular arithmetic 3.1 Equivalence relations and partitions
Original question: 3 Modular arithmetic
3.1 Equivalence relations and partitions
Suppose that is a set. In NSF, a relation on is defined to be a property which may, or may not, hold for each ordered pair of elements in (i.e. an element of the set of ordered pairs in ).
More precisely, a relation, formally, is a subset of (the Cartesian product of ordered pairs). We decree that holds (" is related to ") if the (ordered) pair lies in . Conversely, the set of all pairs such that holds defines a subset of . So specifying a subset is equivalent to defining a relation.
A relation is said to be
• reflexive if for every element of ,
• symmetric if implies for all elements of ,
• anti-symmetric if and implies for all elements of ,
• transitive if and implies for all elements of ,
A reflexive, symmetric and transitive relation is said to be an equivalence relation.
Examples/Exercises. Which of the following are equivalence relations?
(1) and if and only if or . (2) and if and only if . (3) and if and only if . (4) and if and only if lives within 100km of . (5) and if and only if and are of the same distance from the origin. (6) and if and only if is a square of (positive integers). (7) and if and only if or . (8) and (where and ) if and only if .
Expert Verified Solution
Key takeaway: This topic checks the definition of a relation and the three properties that make it an equivalence relation. The examples are useful because they show how to test reflexive, symmetric, transitive, and sometimes anti-symmetric behavior directly from the definition.
How to approach these examples
A relation on a set is an equivalence relation only if it is:
- Reflexive: for every .
- Symmetric: .
- Transitive: and .
For each relation, test those three properties one by one.
Example checks
(1) iff or
- Reflexive: yes, since .
- Symmetric: yes, because and are both symmetric conditions.
- Transitive: no. For example, and , but that does not show a new chain; more directly, take and , yet the relation does not stay consistent under chaining in general.
So this is not an equivalence relation.
(2) iff on
- Reflexive: no, because only when .
- Symmetric: yes, since .
Not an equivalence relation.
(3)
Let . Then the relation is .
- Reflexive: yes.
- Symmetric: yes.
- Transitive: yes, because equality is transitive.
This is an equivalence relation.
(4) Living within 100 km of each other
- Reflexive: yes.
- Symmetric: yes.
- Transitive: no. If is within 100 km of and is within 100 km of , need not be within 100 km of .
Not an equivalence relation.
(5) Same distance from the origin
- Reflexive: yes.
- Symmetric: yes.
- Transitive: yes.
This is an equivalence relation.
(6) is a square of a positive integer
- Reflexive: yes, because is a square.
- Symmetric: yes.
- Transitive: not always.
Not an equivalence relation.
(7) On , iff or
- Reflexive: not for and .
- Symmetric: yes.
- Transitive: no.
Not an equivalence relation.
(8) Points with the same distance from the origin
- Reflexive: yes.
- Symmetric: yes.
- Transitive: yes.
This is an equivalence relation.
Final classification
The equivalence relations are (3), (5), and (8).
Pitfalls the pros know 👇 A common mistake is to check only symmetry and transitivity while forgetting reflexivity. Another frequent error is assuming a relation is transitive just because it feels geometric; for distance-based relations, triangle inequality often shows transitivity fails.
What if the problem changes? If the relation in (5) were changed to “distance from the origin differs by at most 1,” reflexivity and symmetry would still hold, but transitivity would fail. If (8) were changed to compare -coordinates only, it would still be an equivalence relation because equality of coordinates is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive.
Tags: reflexive relation, symmetric relation, transitive relation
FAQ
How do I check whether a relation is an equivalence relation?
Check three properties in order: reflexive, symmetric, and transitive. A relation is an equivalence relation only if it satisfies all three.
Which examples here are equivalence relations?
The equivalence relations are (3) $a^2+a=b^2+b$, (5) same distance from the origin, and (8) same distance from the origin for points in the plane.