Recipe
Test a relation for transitivity
Use when: you're given a relation R on a set A and asked whether every two-step chain already has its shortcut pair in R
Goal: an answer, backed by either a complete check of every chain or one specific broken chain
Taught in Transitive relations
Quick recipe
-
1
Scan R for every pair whose second entry matches another pair's first entry; each match is one chain to check.
Example
R = \{(1,2),(2,3),(1,3)\} on \{1,2,3\} has one chain: (1,2) with (2,3), sharing the middle element 2.
Why: transitivity only makes a claim about chains that actually exist in R, so chains that are not present need no checking.
-
2
A chain (a,b) and (b,c) requires the pair (a,c) to also be in R; check whether it actually is.
Example
The chain (1,2) with (2,3) requires (1,3); that pair is already in R, so this chain checks out.
Why: transitivity is defined exactly as "every such shortcut pair must be present," not "most of them."
-
3
Every chain's shortcut pair present means R is transitive; even one missing shortcut pair makes R not transitive.
Example
For R = \{(1,2),(2,3)\} on \{1,2,3\}: the chain (1,2),(2,3) requires (1,3), which is missing, so R is not transitive.
- every chain's shortcut pair is present — R is transitive.
- at least one chain's shortcut pair is missing — R is not transitive; name that specific missing pair.
Why: transitivity is a universal condition across every chain in R, so a single counterexample settles the answer.
Common mistakes
- Assuming a relation is transitive because it "feels like" a chain, such as friendship, without checking every actual chain.
- Checking only one chain and generalizing the result to the whole relation.
- Confusing transitive with symmetric -- a chain needing a shortcut pair is a different requirement from a pair needing its reverse.
- Missing a chain because the two pairs sharing a middle element are listed far apart in R.