8
$\begingroup$

Is there a common notation for the set of all injections from $A$ into $B$?

Some set-theorists use $B^{(A)}$, e.g., A. Levy in his book Basic Set Theory.

But some combinatorists use $B^{\underline{A}}$ or $(B)_A$, e.g. JMoravitz's answer in this question.

Some other combinatorists also use $\mathrm{Inj}(A,B)$, e.g., M. Aigner in his book Combinatorial Theory. But I don't like a notation of this kind, since I want something similar to $B^A$ or ${}^AB$ which is commonly used to denote the set of all maps from $A$ to $B$.

Any suggestions for a notation are welcome.

$\endgroup$
  • 2
    $\begingroup$ I don't think this question is suitable here.. $\endgroup$ – Praphulla Koushik Oct 24 '19 at 4:03
  • $\begingroup$ @Praphulla I'm sorry for that. If not, I will delete it tomorrow. $\endgroup$ – Guozhen Shen Oct 24 '19 at 5:07
  • 12
    $\begingroup$ Personally I think terminology and notation are worth topics. I would be curious to read the answer to this question $\endgroup$ – Pietro Majer Oct 24 '19 at 6:53
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ About $B^{(A)}$: at least in group theory, it is frequently used in another meaning. Namely $A$ is a set, $(B,o)$ is a pointed set (typically a group), and $B^{(A)}$ is the set of finitely supported functions $f:A\to B$, that is, such that $f(a)=o$ for all but finitely many $a\in A$. $\endgroup$ – YCor Oct 24 '19 at 11:29
  • $\begingroup$ @YCor A. Levy also has a similar concept in his book, but he uses $\mathrm{exp}(B,A)$. I also think $B^{(A)}$ is not good for denoting the set of injections. Besides the reason you just mentioned, some combinatorists use $B^{(A)}$ for another meaning, namely rising factorials. $\endgroup$ – Guozhen Shen Oct 24 '19 at 11:54
11
$\begingroup$

The notation suggested by cardinal equalities such as

\begin{array}{l|l|l} \text{concept} & \text{notation} & \text{cardinality} \\ \hline \text{disjoint union of $A$ and $B$} & A + B & |A + B| = |A| + |B| \\ \text{Cartesian product of $A$ and $B$} & A \times B & |A \times B| = |A| \times |B| \\ \text{set of functions from $A$ to $B$, also $A \rightarrow B$} & B^A & |B^A| = |B|^{|A|} \\ \text{set of permutations of $A$, also $\text{Sym}(A)$} & A! & |A!| = |A|! \\ \text{set of $k$-element subsets of $A$} & \binom{A}{k} & \left|\binom{A}{k}\right| = \binom{|A|}{k} \\ \text{set of $k$-element partitions of $A$} & \left\{{A \atop k}\right\} & \left| \left\{{A \atop k}\right\} \right| = \left\{{|A| \atop k}\right\} \end{array}

is

\begin{array}{l|l|l} \text{concept} & \text{notation} & \text{cardinality} \\ \hline \text{set of injections from $A$ to $B$} & B^{\underline{A}} & |B^{\underline{A}}| = |B|^{\underline{|A|}} \end{array}

because the falling factorial

\begin{align*} |B|^\underline{|A|} = \frac{|B|!}{(|B| - |A|)!} \end{align*}

is precisely the number of injections from $A$ to $B$.

$\endgroup$
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ @YCor I'm not. I'm reusing the latter's notation for the former, as is already done in the examples I listed. $\endgroup$ – user76284 Oct 25 '19 at 17:04
  • $\begingroup$ @YCor I've edited the answer. Hopefully it's clearer now. $\endgroup$ – user76284 Oct 25 '19 at 19:05
  • $\begingroup$ Thank you. This is one of the notations mentioned in the post. $\endgroup$ – Guozhen Shen Oct 26 '19 at 2:06
3
$\begingroup$

If I take your question literally, it seems to me that the correct answer is simply "No". But I quite happily use $B^A_{\neq}$. Analogously, if $A$ and $B$ happen to be ordered, I write $B^A_{<}$ for the set of all strictly increasing functions from $A$ to $B$. For me, this works well.

$\endgroup$
  • 5
    $\begingroup$ I didn't immediately notice this notation is not just arbitrary but views injections as maps between preserving the binary relation $\neq$. $\endgroup$ – YCor Oct 25 '19 at 19:11

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.