When I've searched up online mostly I found the definition for full trees to be limited to a tree which has 0 or 2 children for each of it's nodes. Which is okay to understand but here is my dilemma.
Most of the examples of full tree shows that the 2nd last level of the tree to be completely filled, suggesting it might be a complete tree. I know this doesn't imply it is a complete tree but still a confusion lingers within me. I searched up whether a full tree is a complete tree too or not but most of the results I found were pretty ambiguous or I simply couldn't get straight yes or no, unless I missed out something important.
What I see on most images is the right hand representation of the full tree. But according to the definition the left one must correct too?
If it is not the case is it okay to say full trees are also complete trees (or their subset)?