Help me understand the definition of complete residue system. Definition: The set of integers {r1, r2, ..., rs} is called a complete residue system if: i) r_i not congruent to r_j whenever i ≠ j; ii) for each integer n, there corresponds an r_i such that n ≡ r_i (mod m). Is the set {1,2,3} a complete residue system mod 3?
I think condition (i) is easy to check. Having difficult time with condition (ii)
Condition ii just says, you need \(n\) integers to form a complete residue set in modulus \(n\)
so if we have modulo 6 would the complete residue be [0,1,2,3,4,5] ?
condition i says, those \(n\) integers must be incongruent
Any set of \(n\) consecutive integers form a complete residue set in modulus \(n\)
@UsukiDoll that's one of them for mod 6. (I think). @ganeshie8 uhm.. yeah, it's proved in the book. if a set is a complete residue system mod m, then there exactly m elements in the set. Let's just check the conditions
For example, in mod 3, below set satisfies condition i \[\{1,2\}\] because the integers in this set are incongruent to each other
the same set fails condition ii because there is no element in the set that is congruent to the integer \(0\)
so the negation of (ii) is there exists an integer such that for all r_i, n is not congruent to r_i (mod m) 0 ≡ 1 (mod 3) is false 0 ≡ 2 (mod 3) is false. ok, How do I check condition (ii) for the set {1,2,3} though?
\(1 \equiv 1\\ 2 \equiv 2\\ 3 \equiv 0\\ \) so the given set of integers are congruent to \(\{0, 1, 2\}\) in some order By euclid division algorithm, any integer can be represented in one of the forms \(3k, ~3k+1, ~3k+2\). It follows that "any" integer is congruent to one of the integers from the given set.
so if n = 3k, then let r = 3. if n = 3k+1, let r = 1 if n = 3k+2, let r = 2 3k ≡ 3 (mod 3) is true for all for all k 3k + 1 ≡ 1 (mod 3) is true for all k 3k + 2 ≡ 2 (mod 3) is true for all k
that will do
Awesome! thank you ;)
np, btw notice that consecutive integers is not a "required" condition, below set also forms a complete residue set modulo 3 : \[\{1,2,6\}\]
Yeah. The book mentioned there is more than one set that forms a complete residue system mod m; though it didn't stately explicitly how many there would be or how to form such set.
didn't *state*
there are infinitely many, so there is not much use in thinking too much about this
:O oh.. infinitely many
divide integers into 3 groups : {3k}, {3k+1} and {3k+2} pick one integer from each group and form a set : {3a, 3b+1, 3c+2} this forms a complete residue set
we almost always are interested in one complete residue set : the set in which the least element is 0
ah I see. Can I pick two integers in a same set? for example, 3 and 6?
that breaks condition i because \(3\equiv 6\)
I mean something like {1,3,6}
check that set for condition i
ah yes. That would violate condition (i)
cool. Now I know how to form such set. ^^
think of it like this : Any set of \(n\) incongruent integers form a complete residue system in modulo \(n\)
The converse of that statement is also true : If a set forms a complete residue system in modulo \(n\), then it has \(n\) incongruent integers.
btw, when you say " incongruent integers", do you mean no two distinct integers are congruent? (like condition (i) ?)
Exactly!
I see! thanks so much =]
np
Join our real-time social learning platform and learn together with your friends!