Overview

A partial order describes comparisons that respect equality and can be composed, without requiring every pair to be comparable. Inclusion between sets and divisibility between positive integers are basic examples. This language makes it possible to discuss smallest objects, compatible requirements and bounds without first assigning numerical sizes.

Prerequisites

Understand a binary relation on PP as a subset of P×PP\times P, together with implication and equality. The domain is part of the data: a relation may satisfy the order axioms on one domain and fail them on a larger one.

Definition and conventions

A relation ≤\le on PP is a partial order if, for all a,b,c∈Pa,b,c\in P, it satisfies reflexivity a≤aa\le a, antisymmetry

(a≤b and b≤a)⟹a=b,(a\le b\text{ and }b\le a)\Longrightarrow a=b,

and transitivity: a≤ba\le b and b≤cb\le c imply a≤ca\le c. The pair (P,≤)(P,\le) is a partially ordered set, or poset. The Chinese title 偏序 names the relation; 偏序集 names the equipped set.

Distinct elements are incomparable if neither comparison holds. A total order additionally requires comparability of every pair. Write a<ba<b when a≤ba\le b and a≠ba\ne b. This associated strict order is irreflexive and transitive, so it follows a different reflexivity convention.

Intuition

Think of a≤ba\le b as saying that bb contains at least the information or requirements present in aa. Two objects can offer different information without either containing the other. Antisymmetry says that mutual containment identifies the objects; it does not prohibit all comparisons in opposite directions, since equality must remain possible.

For a finite poset, a Hasse diagram draws only covers: bb covers aa if a<ba<b and no element lies strictly between them. Upward paths recover the omitted transitive comparisons. Reflexive loops are omitted as well.

Examples and non-examples

Order the positive divisors D={1,2,3,4,6,12}D=\{1,2,3,4,6,12\} of 1212 by divisibility. Reflexivity follows from a=a⋅1a=a\cdot1; transitivity follows by multiplying the two quotient integers. If positive a,ba,b divide one another, b=rab=ra and a=sba=sb give rs=1rs=1, hence r=s=1r=s=1 and a=ba=b.

Here 22 and 33 are incomparable. Their greatest common lower bound is 11, and their least common upper bound is 66. The word “least” concerns this divisibility order, rather than the ordinary size of the labels.

Restrict instead to {2,3,6}\{2,3,6\} with the same relation. Both 22 and 33 are minimal: neither has a smaller member in this domain. Neither is a least element, because neither lies below the other. There is no common lower bound within this restricted set.

Divisibility on all integers is not antisymmetric: 22 divides −2-2 and −2-2 divides 22. Another non-example is the usual strict relation << regarded as a non-strict partial order; it fails reflexivity.

Important properties

A least element, if it exists, is unique. If ll and mm are both least, then l≤ml\le m and m≤lm\le l, so antisymmetry gives equality. The same argument proves uniqueness of a least upper bound. Existence is an additional property, not an order axiom.

Every nonempty finite poset has a minimal element. Proof sketch: keep moving strictly downward while possible. Transitivity and irreflexivity prohibit repetition, so finiteness forces termination. Removing a minimal element repeatedly gives a linear extension: a total order preserving all original comparisons. For the divisor example, 1,2,3,4,6,121,2,3,4,6,12 is one such extension, and 1,3,2,6,4,121,3,2,6,4,12 is another.

The finite assumption matters to this argument. The integers in their usual order have no minimal element, so there is no first removal step of that kind.

Connections and further reading

Well-orders add a least-element requirement for every nonempty subset. Inclusion orders organize subspaces, ideals and families of sets. Rooting a tree similarly gives an ancestor order along its unique paths. These are useful preparations for universal constructions, where a candidate is often characterized by a comparison property.

Read Logic and Proof, §§13.1–13.2 and Keller–Trotter, §§6.1 and 6.4 for order conventions, diagrams and linear extensions.