# Schröder Rule/Proof 1

## Theorem

Let $A$, $B$ and $C$ be relations on a set $S$.

The following statements are equivalent:

- $(1): \quad A \circ B \subseteq C$

- $(2): \quad A^{-1} \circ \overline C \subseteq \overline B$

- $(3): \quad \overline C \circ B^{-1} \subseteq \overline A$

where:

- $\circ$ denotes relation composition
- $A^{-1}$ denotes the inverse of $A$
- $\overline A$ denotes the complement of $A$.

## Proof

### $(1)$ iff $(2)$

By the definition of relation composition and subset we have that statement $(1)$ may be written as:

- $(1'): \quad \forall x, y, z \in S: \paren {\tuple {y, z} \in A \land \tuple {x, y} \in B \implies \tuple {x, z} \in C}$

Using a different arrangement of variable names, statement $(2)$ can be written:

- $(2'): \quad \forall x, y, z \in S: \paren {\tuple {z, y} \in A^{-1} \land \tuple {x, z} \in \overline C \implies \tuple {x, y} \in \overline B}$

By the definition of inverse relation and the complement of a relation we can rewrite this as:

- $(2
*): \quad \forall x, y, z \in S: \paren {\tuple {y, z} \in A \land \tuple {x, z} \notin C) \implies \tuple {x, y} \notin B}$*

We shall use the method of truth tables.

The two statements will be equivalent if and only if the columns under the main connectives, which is $\implies$ in each case, are identical.

**Statement 1:**

$\begin{array}{ccccc} (\tuple {y, z} \in A & \land & \tuple {x, y} \in B) & \implies & \tuple {x, z} \in C \\ \hline \T & \T & \T & \T & \T \\ \T & \T & \T & \F & \F \\ \T & \F & \F & \T & \T \\ \T & \F & \F & \T & \F \\ \F & \F & \T & \T & \T \\ \F & \F & \T & \T & \F \\ \F & \F & \F & \T & \T \\ \F & \F & \F & \T & \F \\ \end{array}$

**Statement 2:**

$\begin{array}{ccccc} (\tuple {y, z} \in A & \land & \tuple {x, z} \notin C) & \implies & \tuple {x, y} \notin B \\ \hline \T & \F & \F & \T & \F \\ \T & \T & \T & \F & \F \\ \T & \F & \F & \T & \T \\ \T & \T & \T & \T & \T \\ \F & \F & \F & \T & \F \\ \F & \F & \T & \T & \F \\ \F & \F & \F & \T & \T \\ \F & \F & \T & \T & \T \\ \end{array}$

$\Box$

### $(2)$ iff $(3)$

This needs considerable tedious hard slog to complete it.To discuss this page in more detail, feel free to use the talk page.When this work has been completed, you may remove this instance of `{{Finish}}` from the code.If you would welcome a second opinion as to whether your work is correct, add a call to `{{Proofread}}` the page. |

## Source of Name

This entry was named for Friedrich Wilhelm Karl Ernst Schröder.

## Sources

This page may be the result of a refactoring operation.As such, the following source works, along with any process flow, will need to be reviewed. When this has been completed, the citation of that source work (if it is appropriate that it stay on this page) is to be placed above this message, into the usual chronological ordering.If you have access to any of these works, then you are invited to review this list, and make any necessary corrections.To discuss this page in more detail, feel free to use the talk page.When this work has been completed, you may remove this instance of `{{SourceReview}}` from the code. |

- 2010: Gunther Schmidt:
*Relational Mathematics*: $\S 4$ Proposition $4.4$