If the lattice satisfies the meet distributive law
where is an arbitrary collection of elements of , then "weak partitioning" implies "strong partitioning." More precisely, you only need the above to hold when the right hand side is .
An example of a complete lattice where weak and strong partitioning are inequivalent is the lattice consisting of all closed subsets of (as a subspace of ) and the collection . The weak-partitioning property is easily verified since the points are isolated. The strong partitioning property fails for the two sets and , for example, since and both contain the point .
PS: In your formulation of weak and strong partitioning, I interpret as a collection of nonzero elements of , since "nonempty subsets" doesn't make much sense in context.
No comments:
Post a Comment