3
$\begingroup$

Suppose that $X$ is a set and $\sim$ is a binary relation on $X$ that satisfies for all $x,y \in X$; if $x \sim y$ then $x \sim x$ and $y \sim y$. Is there a name for this type of relation?

I am thinking of using the name "partly reflexive". I prefer this to "partially reflexive" because the set $X$ will usually be a partially ordered set. In case it matters this property will be used to define a generalization of the notion of extreme subset. In the context of extreme subsets the property says: if $x$ is an extreme subset of $y$ then $x$ is an extreme subset of $x$ and $y$ is an extreme subset of $y$.

If there is no common name for this property and you can think of a better name I would appreciate that. Also, if there is a reason why the name "partly reflexive" should be avoided I would appreciate that information as well.

$\endgroup$
8
  • $\begingroup$ The problem with "partially reflexive" is that it doesn't say when it's reflexive. Any relation that has some elements that are reflexive could be described the same way. I don't know a catchier way than "related to itself if it's related to anything". "Reflexive or disjoint", maybe? $\endgroup$
    – wnoise
    Apr 20, 2011 at 2:09
  • $\begingroup$ Your property is not very interesting, because the elements not guaranteed to be reflexive are those that don't relate in any way to anything else. $\endgroup$ Apr 20, 2011 at 6:44
  • $\begingroup$ Reflexive orders are usually less interesting in the confines of set theory, it is somewhat of a "dummy" property that can be added or removed as one likes. Furthermore, the problem with your property being applied to partial orders is that partial order may require reflexivity - which renders your property useless, or they usually turn out as irreflexive which renders this property useless. And one last observation is that if $\sim$ is a full relation (i.e. every $x\in X$ is in $\sim$-relation with someone else) then this implies $\sim$ is just reflexive. $\endgroup$
    – Asaf Karagila
    Apr 20, 2011 at 8:34
  • $\begingroup$ Related but maybe not exactly what you described en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Partial_equivalence_relation $\endgroup$
    – quanta
    Apr 20, 2011 at 11:08
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ Why is everyone saying that this property is uninteresting when the OP already stated why he's interested in it, and I mentioned in my answer that it's relevant in modal logic? $\endgroup$
    – joriki
    Apr 20, 2011 at 11:13

1 Answer 1

13
$\begingroup$

The term for this seems to be "quasi-reflexive". You'll find some examples when you Google that term, among them an entry in Encyclopedia Britannica. This appears to be relevant in modal logic, where a possible world is accessible from itself if it is accessible from some possible world.

$\endgroup$
3
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I added the definition in Wikipedia: en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quasi-reflexive_relation $\endgroup$
    – joriki
    Apr 20, 2011 at 8:23
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ By the way, "quasi-reflexive and serial" is equivalent to "reflexive". $\endgroup$
    – joriki
    Apr 20, 2011 at 8:30
  • $\begingroup$ Thanks for the answer and comments. $\endgroup$
    – Jay
    Apr 21, 2011 at 1:42

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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