Defining Membership Uniqueness in a Set X with One True Value

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter delphi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Uniqueness
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on defining the uniqueness of a member within a set X, specifically identifying a single element whose evaluation with a function f() yields true. The participants suggest using mathematical notation such as |{ x ∈ X | f(x) = true }| = 1 or the quantifier notation ∃! x ∈ X: f(x) = true to express this uniqueness formally. Additionally, they emphasize the importance of having an identifying property for the unique member, especially in practical applications where distinguishing elements is crucial.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of set theory and notation
  • Familiarity with mathematical functions and their evaluations
  • Knowledge of quantifiers in formal logic
  • Experience with practical applications of set uniqueness in problem-solving
NEXT STEPS
  • Research formal set theory notation and its applications
  • Learn about the use of quantifiers in mathematical logic
  • Explore practical examples of uniqueness in data structures
  • Investigate methods for identifying unique elements in programming languages
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, computer scientists, and anyone involved in data analysis or algorithm design who needs to understand and apply concepts of uniqueness within sets.

delphi
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hello All,

I am trying to define a uniqueness of a member of a set, please bear with me as my notation is not as refined as it ought to be:

For a set X:

{ x(i) } union { f(x(j)) = true, where j is not equal to i } = { x(i) }

what I am trying to say is, for this set X there exists only one member whose evaluation with f() results in true.

I am defining this by saying that the union of any element with any other element other than itself in the set who's value is true is equal to the first element, however this doesn't quite work - I almost need a count() function on the right side and say that the count() is always = 1.

Is there a more correct elegant way to say this?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, you can use the "count" function. The common mathematical notation for this is |{...}| or #{...}:

[tex]\left| \{ x \in X \mid f(x) = \text{true} \} \right| = 1[/tex]
[tex]\#\{ x \in X \mid f(x) = \text{true} \} = 1[/tex]

Or you could use quantifiers:
[tex]\exists! x \in X: f(x) = \text{true}[/tex]
(I don't know if this is official notation, with the ! meaning "unique", but I'm pretty sure any mathematician will understand it).

Or you could write this correct-but-ugly line,
[tex]\exists x \in X: \left( f(x) = \text{true} \wedge \forall y \in X: y \neq x \implies f(x) \neq \text{true} \right)[/tex]
 
delphi said:
Hello All,

I'm trying to define a uniqueness of a member of a set, please bear with me as my notation is not as refined as it ought to be:

what I am trying to say is, for this set X there exists only one member whose evaluation with f() results in true.

It depends on what you mean by "uniqueness". Ir's one thing to know there's exactly one murderer in the room, and another to know which person in the room is the murderer. If you want to know who the murderer is, there needs to be some identifying property or set of properties.

This was a practical problem for me in my work. We solved the problem by creating a family of sets Ai such that each set was identified with a unique property in a way that an intersection of some of the sets contained exactly one member.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
6K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K