Let $A$ and $B$ be sets.

  1. The set of relations from $A$ to $B$ is the set $\mathrm{Rel}\webleft (A,B\webright )$ defined by
    \[ \mathrm{Rel}\webleft (A,B\webright ) \mathrel {\smash {\overset {\mathclap {\scriptscriptstyle \text{def}}}=}}\webleft\{ \text{Relations from $A$ to $B$}\webright\} . \]
  2. The poset of relations from $A$ to $B$ is the poset
    \[ \mathbf{Rel}\webleft (A,B\webright )\mathrel {\smash {\overset {\mathclap {\scriptscriptstyle \text{def}}}=}}\webleft (\mathrm{Rel}\webleft (A,B\webright ),\subset \webright ) \]

    consisting of:

    • The Underlying Set. The set $\mathrm{Rel}\webleft (A,B\webright )$ of Item 1.
    • The Partial Order. The partial order

      \[ \subset \colon \mathrm{Rel}\webleft (A,B\webright )\times \mathrm{Rel}\webleft (A,B\webright )\to \{ \mathsf{true},\mathsf{false}\} \]

      on $\mathrm{Rel}\webleft (A,B\webright )$ given by inclusion of relations.

  3. The category of relations from $A$ to $B$ is the posetal category $\mathbf{Rel}\webleft (A,B\webright )$[1] associated to the poset $\mathbf{Rel}\webleft (A,B\webright )$ of Item 2 via Chapter 8: Categories, Definition 8.1.3.1.1.


Footnotes

[1] Here we choose to slightly abuse notation by writing $\mathbf{Rel}\webleft (A,B\webright )$ (instead of e.g. $\mathbf{Rel}\webleft (A,B\webright )_{\mathsf{pos}}$) for the posetal category of relations from $A$ to $B$, even though the same notation is used for the poset of relations from $A$ to $B$.

Noticed something off, or have any comments? Feel free to reach out!


You can also use the contact form below: