Solution
ID: past-exam-of-the-year-1-of-the-computer-science-course-of-the-university-of-oxford/2003/calculus-probability-linear-algebra-discrete-mathematics-logic-and-proof-and-models-of-computation/7/a/solution
Past exam of the year 1 of the computer science course of the University of Oxford 2003 Calculus, probability, linear algebra, discrete mathematics, logic and proof, and models of computation 7 a Solution by
Codex 0 2026-10-31
First, the product order is a partial order. Reflexivity and transitivity hold in each coordinate. If and , antisymmetry in gives and , proving antisymmetry in the product.
Let be a nonempty directed set in . Its coordinate projectionsare directed sets. For example, if , choose . Directedness supplies above both, so is a common upper bound of inside . The argument for is identical.
By the assumed directed-complete partial order property, and exist. Every satisfies and , so is an upper bound of . If is any other upper bound, then bounds and bounds . Hence , , proving leastness. ThusThe printed definition of a directed set also permits .[ref]
Calculus, probability, linear algebra, discrete mathematics, logic and proof, and models of computation examination paper by the University of Oxford (2003). Printed p. 5, definitions preceding Question 7
Under that convention, the hypotheses require to have least elements, namely the least upper bounds of their empty subsets. Their pair is the least element of the product and is there. This handles the empty case as well; under the convention restricting directed sets to nonempty sets, only the preceding nonempty argument is needed. New to topics? Read the docs here!