Ad
related to: upper bounds of functions graph theory
Search results
Results From The WOW.Com Content Network
Similarly, a function g defined on domain D and having the same codomain (K, ≤) is an upper bound of f, if g(x) ≥ f (x) for each x in D. The function g is further said to be an upper bound of a set of functions, if it is an upper bound of each function in that set.
In graph theory, a bound graph expresses which pairs of elements of some partially ordered set have an upper bound.Rigorously, any graph G is a bound graph if there exists a partial order ≤ on the vertices of G with the property that for any vertices u and v of G, uv is an edge of G if and only if u ≠ v and there is a vertex w such that u ≤ w and v ≤ w.
In graph theory, the Lovász number of a graph is a real number that is an upper bound on the Shannon capacity of the graph. It is also known as Lovász theta function and is commonly denoted by (), using a script form of the Greek letter theta to contrast with the upright theta used for Shannon capacity.
If T is the empty set, then {v} is an upper bound for T in P. Suppose then that T is non-empty. We need to show that T has an upper bound, that is, there exists a linearly independent subset B of V containing all the members of T. Take B to be the union of all the sets in T. We wish to show that B is an upper bound for T in P.
An upper bound for R(r, s) can be extracted from the proof of the theorem, and other arguments give lower bounds. (The first exponential lower bound was obtained by Paul Erdős using the probabilistic method.) However, there is a vast gap between the tightest lower bounds and the tightest upper bounds.
In the graph at right the top line y = n − 1 is an upper bound valid for all n other than one, and attained if and only if n is a prime number. A simple lower bound is φ ( n ) ≥ n / 2 {\displaystyle \varphi (n)\geq {\sqrt {n/2}}} , which is rather loose: in fact, the lower limit of the graph is proportional to n / log log n .
If (,) is a partially ordered set, such that each pair of elements in has a meet, then indeed = if and only if , since in the latter case indeed is a lower bound of , and since is the greatest lower bound if and only if it is a lower bound. Thus, the partial order defined by the meet in the universal algebra approach coincides with the original ...
By the boundedness theorem, f is bounded from above, hence, by the Dedekind-completeness of the real numbers, the least upper bound (supremum) M of f exists. It is necessary to find a point d in [a, b] such that M = f(d). Let n be a natural number. As M is the least upper bound, M – 1/n is not an upper bound for f.