Sign Relations, Triadic Relations, Relations • 7

Re: Ontolog ForumJS

A binary relation is a set of ordered pairs of the elements of some other set.

That is the first definition I learned for binary relations.

Slightly more generally, a binary relation L is a subset of a cartesian product X \times Y of two sets, X and Y.  In symbols, L \subseteq X \times Y.  Of course X and Y could be the same, but that’s not always the case.

I have long used the adjectives, 2-place, binary, and dyadic pretty much interchangeably in application to relations but I developed a bias toward dyadic on account of computational contexts where binary is reserved for binary numerals.

Once again, partly due to computational exigencies, I would now regard this first definition as the weak typing version.

The strong typing definition of a k-place relation L \subseteq X_1 \times \ldots \times X_k includes the cartesian product X_1 \times \ldots \times X_k as an essential part of its specification.  This serves to harmonize the definition of a k-place relation with the use of mathematical category theory in computer science.

When I get more time, I’ll go through the material I linked on relation theory in a slightly more leisurely manner …


This entry was posted in C.S. Peirce, Inquiry Driven Systems, Knowledge Representation, Logic, Logic of Relatives, Mathematics, Ontology, Peirce, Pragmatism, Relation Theory, Semiosis, Semiotics, Sign Relations, Triadic Relations and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.