Skip to content
Official PYQ · 2005

GATE CS 2005 Q42 — Sets, Relations and Functions

Explain with AI

Let RR and SS be any two equivalence relations on a non-empty set AA. Which one of the following statements is TRUE?

Choose one option
View worked solution

Answer: C

An equivalence relation must satisfy three properties: reflexivity, symmetry, and transitivity.

Let RR and SS be two equivalence relations on a non-empty set AA. Let us analyze the properties of their intersection and union.

1. Intersection (R∩SR \cap S) is always an equivalence relation:

  • Reflexivity: For any a∈Aa \in A, since RR and SS are reflexive, (a,a)∈R(a, a) \in R and (a,a)∈S(a, a) \in S. Therefore, (a,a)∈R∩S(a, a) \in R \cap S.
  • Symmetry: If (a,b)∈R∩S(a, b) \in R \cap S, then (a,b)∈R(a, b) \in R and (a,b)∈S(a, b) \in S. Since RR and SS are symmetric, (b,a)∈R(b, a) \in R and (b,a)∈S(b, a) \in S. Thus, (b,a)∈R∩S(b, a) \in R \cap S.
  • Transitivity: If (a,b)∈R∩S(a, b) \in R \cap S and (b,c)∈R∩S(b, c) \in R \cap S, then:
    • (a,b)∈R(a, b) \in R and (b,c)∈R  ⟹  (a,c)∈R(b, c) \in R \implies (a, c) \in R (since RR is transitive)
    • (a,b)∈S(a, b) \in S and (b,c)∈S  ⟹  (a,c)∈S(b, c) \in S \implies (a, c) \in S (since SS is transitive)
    Therefore, (a,c)∈R∩S(a, c) \in R \cap S.

Since R∩SR \cap S is reflexive, symmetric, and transitive, it is always an equivalence relation.

2. Union (R∪SR \cup S) is not necessarily an equivalence relation:

While R∪SR \cup S is always reflexive and symmetric, it often fails to be transitive. Consider the following counterexample:

  • Let A={1,2,3}A = \{1, 2, 3\}.
  • Let R={(1,1),(2,2),(3,3),(1,2),(2,1)}R = \{(1,1), (2,2), (3,3), (1,2), (2,1)\} (equivalence classes: {1,2},{3}\{1, 2\}, \{3\}).
  • Let S={(1,1),(2,2),(3,3),(2,3),(3,2)}S = \{(1,1), (2,2), (3,3), (2,3), (3,2)\} (equivalence classes: {1},{2,3}\{1\}, \{2, 3\}).
  • The union is R∪S={(1,1),(2,2),(3,3),(1,2),(2,1),(2,3),(3,2)}R \cup S = \{(1,1), (2,2), (3,3), (1,2), (2,1), (2,3), (3,2)\}.

Here, (1,2)∈R∪S(1, 2) \in R \cup S and (2,3)∈R∪S(2, 3) \in R \cup S, but (1,3)∉R∪S(1, 3) \notin R \cup S. Thus, transitivity is violated, meaning R∪SR \cup S is not an equivalence relation.

Therefore, only R∩SR \cap S is guaranteed to be an equivalence relation.

Free practice · Your answers on this page are not saved.

Published
Report a correction
Keep exploringMore Sets, Relations and Functions questions