Respuesta :
Answer:
it is Anti-symmetric, transitive, reflexive but not symmetric
Step-by-step explanation:
hello,
By definition, a relation R on a set X is Anti-symmetric if for every a,b ∈ X, aRb and a≠b then bRa must not hold
or equivalently, if aRb and bRa, then a=b.
from the question, R is anti-symmetric because the more evolved processor can carry out all the instructions of the original processor but the converse may not hold since more instructions were added to the improved processor. that is, modern x86 can carry out all the instructions of 8086 but 8086 may not carry out all the instructions of x86, thus satisfying the first definition of Anti-symmetric property.
TRANSITIVE: R is also transitive beause by definition of transitivity, if aRb, bRc then aRc for all a,b,c ∈ x. thus if modern x86 carry out all the instructions of 8086 and 8086 carry out all the instructions of CMOS 6502, then definitely modern x86 must carry out all the instructions of CMOS 6502, hence satisfying transitive property.
SYMMETRIC: by definition, a relation R is symmetic if for all a,b ∈ X, aRb⇔ bRa. thus the processor is not symmetric since modern x86 carry out all the instructions of 8086 but 8086 may not carry out the instructions of modern x86.
REFLEXIVE: by definition, R is reflexive if for every a∈X, aRa, this means that a is related to itself, thus R is reflexive since every processor can carry out its instructions designed on it.