Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

Let $f:X \to Y$ be a function.

Suppose first that $\leq_X$ is a partial order on $X$.

Is it possible to define a partial order $\leq_Y$ on $Y$, induced by $\leq_X$ (and optimal in some way), so that $f:(X, \leq_X) \to (Y, \leq_Y)$ becomes order-prerserving (and thus can be viewed as a morphism of posets)?

Now suppose that $\leq_Y$ is a partial order on $Y$, and consider the converse problem:

Find a partial order for $X$, optimal in some sense, so that $f$ is order-preserving.

Are there standard names for these "induced" partial orders?

(I'm thinking of something in the spirit of weak/strong topologies.)

More generally, if $R$ is an arbitrary asymmetric binary relation, and $\bar{R}$ its transitive closure, then $I\cup \bar{R}$ is a partial order.

Is there a name for such order (vis-à-vis $R$)?

I've searched for likely candidates such as "the partial order generated by", etc., without much success?

share|cite|improve this question
up vote 1 down vote accepted

Without extra assumptions on $f$, you can't always do it.

For the first situation, say that $f$ is not injective, and there exists $x_1\lt x_2\lt x_3$ such that $f(x_1)=f(x_3)$ but $f(x_2)\neq f(x_1)$. For $f$ to be order preserving, we would need $f(x_1)\lt_Y f(x_2)$, and we would also need $f(x_2)\lt_Y f(x_3)=f(x_1)$, which means that $\leq_Y$ is not antisymmetric.

If $f$ is injective, you can always use transport of structure to define a partial order on $f(X)$, and then extend to a partial order on all of $Y$ by adding $y\leq_Y y$ for every $y\in Y$ and nothing else. More generally, using transport of structure for any $f$ and adding the diagonal will give you a pre-order on $Y$ (a relation that is reflexive and transitive, but not necessarily antisymmetric), and then you can take the appropriate quotient to get an order on $Y/\sim$ so that $f$ is order preserving.

The second situation is a bit better: there is always at least one possibility. Take the trivial partial order on $X$ ($x_1\leq_X x_2$ if and only if $x_1=x_2$). Then $f$ is certainly order-preserving. Thus, the collection of all partial orders on $X$ such that $f$ is order preserving is non-empty. Moreover, if you have a chain of partial orders on $X$ such that $f$ is order-preserving, then their union is a partial order on $X$ (verify!), and $f$ is order-preserving relative to the union. So by Zorn's Lemma, the collection of partial orders on $X$ for which $f$ is order preserving has maximal elements.

(Note that $f$ is order-preserving if $x_1\leq x_2$ implies $f(x_1)\leq f(x_2)$, but we do not require the implication in the other direction).

share|cite|improve this answer
Thanks! Clarification: by "chain of partial orders" do you mean an inclusion chain, like $\leq_0 \;\subseteq\; \leq_1 \;\subseteq\; \leq_2 \cdots$? – kjo Feb 21 '12 at 0:44
@kjo: Yes; partial orders on $X$ are subsets of $X\times X$, and they are naturally partially ordered by inclusion (as subsets of $X\times X$). – Arturo Magidin Feb 21 '12 at 2:02

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.