Timeline for Is there a standard term for this graph/set theoretic concept?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
12 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 17, 2017 at 5:30 | history | edited | Martin Sleziak |
added (terminology) tag - the question has been bumped anyway by a new answer
|
|
| Sep 16, 2017 at 6:32 | answer | added | Bjørn Kjos-Hanssen | timeline score: 5 | |
| Sep 10, 2017 at 7:59 | vote | accept | Aryeh Kontorovich | ||
| Jan 19, 2017 at 2:04 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Dec 20, 2016 at 1:26 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Nov 20, 2016 at 1:13 | history | bumped | CommunityBot | This question has answers that may be good or bad; the system has marked it active so that they can be reviewed. | |
| Oct 21, 2016 at 1:07 | answer | added | Vinicius dos Santos | timeline score: 4 | |
| Sep 22, 2016 at 14:25 | comment | added | Ivan Izmestiev | I see. A collection of subsets is sometimes called a hypergraph, but I don't know if there are already terms for what you are defining. | |
| Sep 22, 2016 at 14:06 | history | edited | Aryeh Kontorovich | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Corrected terminology and problem statement in response to comment.
|
| Sep 22, 2016 at 14:03 | comment | added | Aryeh Kontorovich | Good points, will edit! | |
| Sep 22, 2016 at 13:48 | comment | added | Ivan Izmestiev | As you define it, adjacency is not an equivalence relation, since it is not transitive. And if you apply the transitive closure, then every two non-empty sets $A$ and $B$ become equivalent, because $A$ is adjacent to $A \cup B$, and $A \cup B$ is adjacent to $B$... | |
| Sep 22, 2016 at 13:41 | history | asked | Aryeh Kontorovich | CC BY-SA 3.0 |