- Maximal element
-
In mathematics, especially in order theory, a maximal element of a subset S of some partially ordered set is an element of S that is not smaller than any other element in S. The term minimal element is defined dually. The notion of a maximal is weaker than that of the greatest element and least element (which are also known, respectively, as maximum and minimum); indeed a partially ordered set may have multiple maximal and minimal elements. As an example, in the collection
- S = {{d, o}, {d, o, g}, {g, o, a, d}, {o, a, f}}
ordered by containment, the element {d, o} is minimal, the element {g, o, a, d} is maximal, the element {d, o, g} is neither, and the element {o, a, f} is both minimal and maximal. By contrast, neither a maximum nor a minimum exists for S.
Contents
Definition
Let be a partially ordered set and . Then is a maximal element of S if
for all , implies m = s.
The definition for minimal elements is obtained by using ≥ instead of ≤.
Existence and uniqueness
Maximal elements need not exist.
- Example 1: Let , for all we have but m < s (that is, but not m = s).
- Example 2: Let and recall that .
In general is only a partial order on S. If m is a maximal element and , it remains the possibility that neither nor . This leaves open the possibility that there are many maximal elements.
- Example 3: In the fence b_1 < a_2 > b_2 < a_3 > \cdots" border="0">, all the ai are maximal, and all the bi are minimal.
- Example 4: Let A be a set with at least two elements and let be the subset of the power set P(A) consisting of singletons, partially ordered by . This is the discrete poset – no two elements are comparable – and thus every element is maximal (and minimal) and for any neither nor .
Maximal elements and the greatest element
It looks like m should be a greatest element or maximum but in fact it is not necessarily the case: the definition of maximal element is somewhat weaker. Suppose we find with , then, by the definition of greatest element, so that s = max S. In other words, a maximum, if it exists, is the (unique) maximal element.
The converse is not true: there can be maximal elements despite there being no maximum. Example 3 is an instance of existence of many maximal elements and no maximum. The reason is, again, that in general is only a partial order on S. If m is a maximal element and , it remains the possibility that neither nor .
If there are many maximal elements, they are in some contexts called a frontier, as in the Pareto frontier.
Of course, when the restriction of to S is a total order, the notions of maximal element and greatest element coincide. Let be a maximal element, for any either or . In the second case the definition of maximal element requires m = s so we conclude that . In other words, m is a greatest element.
Finally, let us remark that S being totally ordered is sufficient to ensure that a maximal element is a greatest element, but it is not necessary.
Directed sets
In a totally ordered set, the terms maximal element and greatest element coincide, which is why both terms are used interchangeably in fields like analysis where only total orders are considered. This observation does not only apply to totally ordered subsets of any poset, but also to their order theoretic generalization via directed sets. In a directed set, every pair of elements (particularly pairs of incomparable elements) has a common upper bound within the set. It is easy to see that any maximal element of such a subset will be unique (unlike in a poset). Furthermore, this unique maximal element will also be the greatest element.
Similar conclusions are true for minimal elements.
Further introductory information is found in the article on order theory.
Examples
- In Pareto efficiency, a Pareto optimal is a maximal element with respect to the partial order of Pareto improvement, and the set of maximal elements is called the Pareto frontier.
- In decision theory, an admissible decision rule is a maximal element with respect to the partial order of dominating decision rule.
- In modern portfolio theory, the set of maximal elements with respect to the product order on risk and return is called the efficient frontier.
Consumer theory
In economics, one may relax the axiom of antisymmetry, using preorders (generally total preorders) instead of partial orders; the notion analogous to maximal element is very similar, but different terminology is used, as detailed below.
In consumer theory the consumption space is some set X, usually the positive orthant of some vector space so that each represents a quantity of consumption specified for each existing commodity in the economy. Preferences of a consumer are usually represented by a total preorder so that and reads: x is at most as preferred as y. When and it is interpreted that the consumer is indifferent between x and y but is no reason to conclude that x = y, preference relations are never assumed to be antisymmetric. In this context, for any , we call a maximal element if
- implies
and it is interpreted as a consumption bundle that is not dominated by any other bundle in the sense that , that is and not .
It should be remarked that the formal definition looks very much like that of a greatest element for an ordered set. However, when is only a preorder, an element x with the property above behaves very much like a maximal element in an ordering. For instance, a maximal element is not unique for does not preclude the possibility that (while and do not imply x = y but simply indifference x˜y). The notion of greatest element for a preference preorder would be that of most preferred choice. That is, some with
- implies
An obvious application is to the definition of demand correspondence. Let P be the class of functionals on X. An element is called a price functional or price system and maps every consumption bundle into its market value . The budget correspondence is a correspondence mapping any price system and any level of income into a subset
The demand correspondence maps any price p and any level of income m into the set of -maximal elements of Γ(p,m).
- is a maximal element of .
It is called demand correspondence because the theory predicts that for p and m given, the rational choice of a consumer x * will be some element .
See also
Categories:
Wikimedia Foundation. 2010.