A binary function, or function of two variables, is like a function but with two domains. That is, while a function from the set to the set maps an element of to a unique element of , a binary function from and to maps an element of and an element of to a unique element of .
We can generalise further to multiary functions, or functions of several variables.
The possible definitions depend on foundations; for us, the simplest is probably this:
A binary function from and to is simply a function to from the binary cartesian product . We write for .
This is natural in structural set theory; it makes sense in any set theory and (suitably interpreted) in a foundational type theory.
In material set theory, one often declines to specify the domain of a function (since this can be recovered from it); then we can say this:
A binary function to is simply a function to such that every element of the domain of is an ordered pair. Again, we write for .
An equivalent (but different) definition in material set theory is this:
A binary function to is a ternary relation such that
Now we write for the unique (if any) such that .
Either way, the material concept is actually more general than the structural one, because the domain of a material binary function might not be a cartesian product. The link is provided by the binary version of a partial function:
A partial binary function from and to is a function to from a subset of .
One can also define a notion of binary function without any notion of ordered pair, as long as one has the set of functions from any set to any other set. This is called a curried representation.
A binary function from and to is a function from to the set of all functions from to .
The connection is that if is a binary function defined as having ordered pairs in its domain, the corresponding function from to sends to the function that sends to . One can give a similar comparison of material and structural versions of this definition. In addition, this definition is usually the one used in type theory.
It's also possible to take the concept of binary function as an undefined primitive concept, on the same level as that of function. Then we want axioms such as the following (depending on the style of foundations):
Given an element of the set , an element of , and a binary function from and to , we have an element of .
If and are equal elements of and and are equal elements of , then .
Given two such binary functions and , if for every in and every in , then .
The cartesian-product-based definitions make sense internal to any category with binary cartesian products. More generally, we can consider any monoidal category.
Similarly, the curried definition makes sense internal to any closed category. The cartesian analogue of a closed category (not to be confused with a cartesian closed category, which also has finite products) exists but is not well-known.
Finally, the undefined concept of “binary function” can be internalized to the binary morphisms in any multicategory, in particular perhaps a cartesian multicategory. If a multicategory has tensor products, then its binary morphisms are representable in the ordered-pair style, while if it has hom-objects, they are representable in the curried style; but in general a multicategory may have neither.
A binary function to the set of truth values is a binary relation.
A binary function from and to may be simply called a binary function from to .
A binary function from to is symmetric if always.
binary function, bilinear map, multilinear map
Last revised on August 30, 2022 at 06:40:42. See the history of this page for a list of all contributions to it.