Finding the Minimum Non-Zero Element of a Set

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on defining the minimum non-zero element of a set in a mathematical context. The original formulation is complex, involving multiple indices and conditions. A simpler alternative is proposed, which streamlines the notation while maintaining clarity. The revised expression effectively communicates the same concept without excessive complexity. This approach enhances readability and understanding of the mathematical definition.
azal
Messages
8
Reaction score
0
Hi there,

As part of my paper I need to define the minimum non-zero element of some set.
In particular I have,
<br /> \begin{equation}<br /> \zeta(j):= \displaystyle \min_{\substack{ k\in1..\kappa\\<br /> t\in 1..\kappa+1,~i \in \mathcal I^{t,j},\\<br /> b_i^{t,j} \mod \theta_k \neq 0}} b_i^{t,j} \mod \theta_k.<br /> \end{equation}<br />
But this is not very nice.
Is there maybe a nicer and more concise way to do this?
 
Last edited:
Mathematics news on Phys.org
you don't absolutely have to put everything in the 'minimum of' sign you could just state

ζ(j):=min b^{t,j}_{i} modθ_{k}

where k\in{1,...,κ}, t\in{1,...,κ+1},
i\inI^{t,j} and b^{t,j}_{i} modθ_{k}\neq0.
 
oh that's a good idea ... haha, don't know why i didn't think of that!
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Back
Top