Graded poset definition trouble

  • Context: MHB 
  • Thread starter Thread starter caffeinemachine
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Definition
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

A graded poset is defined as a partially ordered set (poset) \( P \) with a function \( \rho: P \to \mathbb{N} \) that satisfies \( x < y \Rightarrow \rho(x) < \rho(y) \) and \( \rho(b) = \rho(a) + 1 \) whenever \( b \) covers \( a \). The discussion highlights a specific example \( P = \{a, b, c, d\} \) where \( a < b, b < d, a < c, a < d \) and all other pairs are incomparable. While this example meets the criteria for being a graded poset, it fails to be a bounded poset, which requires the existence of both least and greatest elements.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of posets and their properties
  • Familiarity with functions and mappings in mathematics
  • Knowledge of the concepts of bounded and unbounded sets
  • Basic comprehension of mathematical notation and terminology
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the properties of bounded posets and their implications
  • Explore alternative characterizations of graded posets
  • Investigate examples of graded posets and their applications in combinatorics
  • Learn about maximal chains in posets and their significance
USEFUL FOR

Mathematicians, students of discrete mathematics, and anyone interested in the study of order theory and combinatorial structures will benefit from this discussion.

caffeinemachine
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
799
Reaction score
15
Graded poset on wiki: Graded poset - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wikipedia defines a 'graded Poset' as a poset $P$ such that there exists a function $\rho:P\to \mathbb N$ such that $x< y\Rightarrow \rho(x)< \rho(y)$ and $\rho(b)=\rho(a)+1$ whenever $b$ covers $a$.

Then if you go to the 'Alternative Characterizations' on the page whose link I gave above you would see that the first line reads:
A bounded poset admits a grading if and only if all maximal chains in $P$ have the same length.
Here's the problem. Consider $P=\{a,b,c,d\}$ with $a<b,b<d,a<c,a<d$. All other pairs are incomparable. Then according to the first definition $P$ is a graded poset while the second definition says otherwise.

Maybe I am committing a very silly mistake but just can't find it.

Please help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Re: graded poset definition trouble

caffeinemachine said:
Consider $P=\{a,b,c,d\}$ with $a<b,b<d,a<c,a<d$. All other pairs are incomparable. Then according to the first definition $P$ is a graded poset while the second definition says otherwise.
This is indeed a graded poset, but it is not a bounded poset. The latter has to have a least and a greatest elements.
 
Re: graded poset definition trouble

Evgeny.Makarov said:
This is indeed a graded poset, but it is not a bounded poset. The latter has to have a least and a greatest elements.

Thanks! Guess it will take some time for the definitions to sink in.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
12
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K