inverse correspondenceの例文

例文

もっと例文:   1  2

1. The inverse correspondence is the opposite one : given two relational structures, one encodes the values of the first in the variables of a constraint satisfaction problem, and the values of the second in the domain of the same problem.
2. :: The same question may be asked about a " one to one function between A and B " : Does it mean that every " b " belonging to B is correspondent ( by the inverse correspondence ) to many elements, of which one single element only-is in A, or : does the phrase " one to one function between A and B " mean that every " b " belonging to B is correspondent ( by the inverse correspondence ) to one single element " a "-only, and that " a " is in A?
3. :: The same question may be asked about a " one to one function between A and B " : Does it mean that every " b " belonging to B is correspondent ( by the inverse correspondence ) to many elements, of which one single element only-is in A, or : does the phrase " one to one function between A and B " mean that every " b " belonging to B is correspondent ( by the inverse correspondence ) to one single element " a "-only, and that " a " is in A?
4. On one hand, if the first option is correct, and " Ln ( X ^ 2 ) " is really a bijection between the positive numbers and the domain of discourse, although when Ln ( k ^ 2 ) belongs to the domain of discourse then k is unnecessarily a positive number, then how should I "'briefly "'express the fact that : " f ( X ) " is a bijection between the set " A " and the domain of discourse, so that every " k " ( belonging to the domain of discourse ) is correspondent-by the inverse correspondence of " f "-to a single number, and this number belongs to A?
5. :: Does the phrase " one to one correspondence between A and B " mean that every " a " belonging to A may indeed be correspondent ( by that correspondence ) to many elements, of which one single element only-is in B, and that every " b " belonging to B may indeed be correspondent ( by the inverse correspondence ) to many elements, of which one single element only-is in A, or : does the phrase " one to one correspondence between A and B " mean that every " a " belonging to A is correspondent ( by that correspondence ) to one single element " b " only, and that " b " is in B, and that every " b " belonging to B is correspondent ( by the inverse correspondence ) to one single element " a "-only, and that " a " is in A?