i am studying discrete math. have a topic lattices, i really cant understand how to find greatest lower bound and lowest upper bound. any help would be appreciated.
2026-03-28 04:33:38.1774672418
understanding upper bound and lower bound in lattice
33.9k Views Asked by Bumbble Comm https://math.techqa.club/user/bumbble-comm/detail At
1
There are 1 best solutions below
Related Questions in DISCRETE-MATHEMATICS
- What is (mathematically) minimal computer architecture to run any software
- What's $P(A_1\cap A_2\cap A_3\cap A_4) $?
- The function $f(x)=$ ${b^mx^m}\over(1-bx)^{m+1}$ is a generating function of the sequence $\{a_n\}$. Find the coefficient of $x^n$
- Given is $2$ dimensional random variable $(X,Y)$ with table. Determine the correlation between $X$ and $Y$
- Given a function, prove that it's injective
- Surjective function proof
- How to find image of a function
- Find the truth value of... empty set?
- Solving discrete recursion equations with min in the equation
- Determine the marginal distributions of $(T_1, T_2)$
Related Questions in LATTICE-ORDERS
- When a lattice is a lattice of open sets of some topological space?
- How to identify if a given Hasse diagram is a lattice
- How to find the smallest cardinal of a minimal generating set of a lattice
- Finding a poset with a homogeneity property
- Why is the "distributive lattice" structure of domino tilings significant?
- Two lattice identities
- Quickly determining whether given lattice is a distributive lattice from a given Hasse diagram
- Characteristic of a lattice that subsets contain their meets and joins
- Equalities in Heyting algebras
- Show that $(\operatorname{Up}(P),\subset)$ is a distributive lattice
Related Questions in BOUNDED-VARIATION
- Method for evaluating Darboux integrals by a sequence of partitions?
- Function of bounded variation which is differentiable except on countable set
- Variation with respect to the projective tensor norm of a matrix of bounded variation functions
- Associativity of an integral against a function with finite variation
- Suppose $f(x)$ is of bounded variation. Show $F(x) = \frac{1}{x} \int_0^x f(t) \, dt$ is also of bounded variation.
- Is there a sufficient condition for which derivative of $\sum_{n=0}^{\infty} a_n x^n$ is bounded for all $x \in \mathbb{R}$?
- Looking for the name of this property, if it has one.
- Bounded Variation Proof
- Rearranging a sequence of bounded variation
- If $f$ is $g$-Riemann-Stieltjes integrable on $[a,b]$, prove that it's $g$-RS-integrable on $[a,c] \subset [a,b]$
Trending Questions
- Induction on the number of equations
- How to convince a math teacher of this simple and obvious fact?
- Find $E[XY|Y+Z=1 ]$
- Refuting the Anti-Cantor Cranks
- What are imaginary numbers?
- Determine the adjoint of $\tilde Q(x)$ for $\tilde Q(x)u:=(Qu)(x)$ where $Q:U→L^2(Ω,ℝ^d$ is a Hilbert-Schmidt operator and $U$ is a Hilbert space
- Why does this innovative method of subtraction from a third grader always work?
- How do we know that the number $1$ is not equal to the number $-1$?
- What are the Implications of having VΩ as a model for a theory?
- Defining a Galois Field based on primitive element versus polynomial?
- Can't find the relationship between two columns of numbers. Please Help
- Is computer science a branch of mathematics?
- Is there a bijection of $\mathbb{R}^n$ with itself such that the forward map is connected but the inverse is not?
- Identification of a quadrilateral as a trapezoid, rectangle, or square
- Generator of inertia group in function field extension
Popular # Hahtags
second-order-logic
numerical-methods
puzzle
logic
probability
number-theory
winding-number
real-analysis
integration
calculus
complex-analysis
sequences-and-series
proof-writing
set-theory
functions
homotopy-theory
elementary-number-theory
ordinary-differential-equations
circles
derivatives
game-theory
definite-integrals
elementary-set-theory
limits
multivariable-calculus
geometry
algebraic-number-theory
proof-verification
partial-derivative
algebra-precalculus
Popular Questions
- What is the integral of 1/x?
- How many squares actually ARE in this picture? Is this a trick question with no right answer?
- Is a matrix multiplied with its transpose something special?
- What is the difference between independent and mutually exclusive events?
- Visually stunning math concepts which are easy to explain
- taylor series of $\ln(1+x)$?
- How to tell if a set of vectors spans a space?
- Calculus question taking derivative to find horizontal tangent line
- How to determine if a function is one-to-one?
- Determine if vectors are linearly independent
- What does it mean to have a determinant equal to zero?
- Is this Batman equation for real?
- How to find perpendicular vector to another vector?
- How to find mean and median from histogram
- How many sides does a circle have?
I’ll use the following Hasse diagram of a partial order (taken from this question) as an example. It isn’t the Hasse diagram of a lattice, but it’s fine for illustrating greatest lower bounds and least upper bounds.
If $x$ and $y$ are elements of a partial order, an upper bound for $x$ and $y$ is simply an element $u$ such that $x\le u$ and $y\le u$; $u$ is the least upper bound of $x$ and $y$ if $u$ is $\le$ all upper bounds of $x$ and $y$. Let’s look at a couple of examples.
Find the elements $n$ and $g$. What elements $x$ have the property that $n\le x$ and $g\le x$? Those are the upper bounds of $n$ and $g$. It’s not hard to see that $r$ is one of them: you can get from $n$ to $r$ by travelling upwards in the diagram, and you can also get from $g$ to $r$ by travelling upwards in the diagram. Similarly, $s,t$, and $u$ are upper bounds for $n$ and $g$. There are two more that are a little harder to spot: $d$ and $a$ are also upper bounds for $n$ and $g$, for the same reason: you can get to each of them from both $n$ and $g$ by travelling upwards in the diagram. On the other hand, $i$ is not an upper bound for $n$ and $g$: $n\le i$, but $g\not\le i$. Now look at the set of upper bounds for $n$ and $g$: it’s $\{r,s,t,u,d,a\}$. The lowest member of that set is $r$: $r\le r,r\le s,r\le t,r\le u,r\le d$, and $r\le a$. That makes $r$ the least upper bound of $n$ and $g$.
What about $j$ and $r$? The elements above $j$ are $b,c,e,m,l,a,k,d,i,t,u$, and the elements above $g$ are $r,d,a,u,s,t$; the elements that are above both $j$ and $g$ are therefore $a,d,u,t$, so these four elements are the upper bounds of $j$ and $g$. Here, howver, we do not have a least upper bound: $d\le d,d\le a$, and $d\le u$, but $d\not\le t$, and none of $a,u$, and $t$ is $\le d$.
Now look at $b$ and $s$: the elements above $b$ are $c$ and $e$, and the elements above $s$ are $t$ and $u$, so there is no element that is above both $b$ and $s$. This means that $b$ and $s$ have no upper bound in this partial order. (In a lattice that could not happen: by definition every pair of elements of a lattice has a least upper bound.)
Finally, look at $d$ and $i$: $a$ and $u$ are upper bounds for $d$ and $i$ (and the only ones), but $a\not\le u$ and $u\not\le a$, so neither of them is a least upper bound for $d$ and $i$. This shows that two elements of a partial order can have upper bounds without having a least upper bound. (Again, this cannot happen in a lattice.)