LARA

Differences

This shows you the differences between two versions of the page.

Link to this comparison view

Both sides previous revision Previous revision
Next revision
Previous revision
Last revision Both sides next revision
sav07_homework_1_solution [2007/03/17 19:00]
vkuncak
sav07_homework_1_solution [2007/03/19 12:00]
wikiadmin
Line 4: Line 4:
  
 <​latex>​ <​latex>​
-r \circ (s \cap t) \subseteq (r \circ s) \cap (r \circ t)+r \circ (s \cap t) \subseteq (r \circ s) \cap (r \circ t) 
 </​latex>​ </​latex>​
  
-holds. Namely, suppose ​ <​latex>​(x,​z) \in r \circ (s \cap t)</​latex>​.+holds. Namely, suppose ​ <​latex>​(x,​z) \in r \circ (s \cap t) </​latex>​.
 Then there is a y such Then there is a y such
 that <​latex>​(x,​y) \in r</​latex>​ and <​latex>​(y,​z) \in s \cap t</​latex>​. ​ Therefore, that <​latex>​(x,​y) \in r</​latex>​ and <​latex>​(y,​z) \in s \cap t</​latex>​. ​ Therefore,
Line 103: Line 103:
 is true and follows from the characterization of wp in Task 4 and the distribution of the right-hand side of implication and universal quantification is true and follows from the characterization of wp in Task 4 and the distribution of the right-hand side of implication and universal quantification
 with respect to conjunction. with respect to conjunction.
-