Notes from 1131 assignment:

- Put equations on its own line if it’s more significant. It should be typeset on its own
line and centred
- Mathematics that is typed on its own line is part of the sentence which ends in a full
stop
- Avoid using “:”
- Align equal signs
- Vectors need to be in bold
- Letters in questions need to be in math mode
- Not too many equations consecutively
- Try and use words and not notations
- Use transition words
- DON’T START SENTENCES WITH A MATHEMATICAL EXPRESSION
Things I can comment on
- Need to explain this more (and elaborate)
- Invalid arguments  mark is capped at ___
MARKING CRITERIA
Aspect 1 MARK GIVEN: 2
Is the work written in sentences
and paragraphs with correct A score of two was rewarded as the work was written in
grammar? grammatically correct sentences and was free from
misspelled words and punctuation errors. Throughout the
Award student’s work, there were various features which
amplified the cohesiveness and logical flow of the
 0 if there are no sentences; proofs:
 1 if some parts are not
written in sentences, the
- All sentences began with a capital letter and
grammar is poor or
paragraphs are not used
finished with a period. Additionally, commas
where appropriate; were used to separate longer sentences,
 2 if the work is written in consequently improving the flow of the
sentences and paragraphs sentences.
with correct grammar. - Sufficient utilisation of transition and comparison
words such as: it follows, similarly, however.
- Correct use of words that thoroughly elaborates
on each step of the proof. Example of such words
include: rearranging, swapping, modifying,
substituting, multiply.

Overall, the he coalescence of correct grammar with

appropriate mathematical terms enabled the student
to efficiently deliver the methods and ideas in the
written proofs.

Aspect 2 A mark of two was awarded as the overall work provided

is the level of written explanation
detailed and structured explanations which enabled to
sufficient for someone who did not reader to recognise the suitable methods to solve the
know how to solve this problem to given problems.
follow the argument? Are the
explanations concise and
clear? Do the explanations avoid
unnecessary detail or irrelevant
information?
Award
 0 if there is little or no
explanation or very poor
explanations;
 1 if there is some
explanation but it is not
sufficient or unclear or there
is a lot of unnecessary
material that obscures the
argument;
 2 if there is explanation
sufficient for someone who
did not know how to solve
this problem to follow the
argument and it is clear and
concise.
Aspect 3
Are the arguments self-contained
and can be understood without
reference to the question? Are the
conclusions written out clearly?
Arguments can be made self-
contained by copying the question
but this must be re-typed and not
simply an image.
Award
 0 if the arguments are not
self-contained and there are to explain how the objective is achieved.
no concluding statements;
 1 if the arguments are self-
contained or there are
concluding statements but
not both;
 2 if the arguments are self-
contained and the
The student firstly began the proof with basic
assumptions, definitions and a brief description of how
the proof will be set out, thus providing the reader with
an idea of what a sensible approach to the question looks
like. For example, an initial assumption stated in
Question 3 was “Suppose that 𝑓:R→R and𝑔 :R →
{𝑥∈R|𝑥≥0} are given by the rules 𝑓(𝑥)=𝑥2 and 𝑔(𝑥)=𝑥”
Following this, the logic of the proof was made clear as
the student followed a suitable proof pattern. For
example, a proof pattern that was utilised in question 2
was “Suppose that a relation ~ is defined……hence the
relation is (reflexive/symmetric/transitive)”. In question
3, another proof pattern was employed, in which the
given statement was disproved by providing a
counterexample.
By following these proof structures precisely, the student
successfully provided a succinct and organised written
explanation which allowed the reader to grasp the
suitable processes to solve the given problems.
Additionally, the overall proof did not contain irrelevant
information or excessive explanations, thus enhancing
the clarity of the work.
.
Are the arguments self contained? Are the
conclusions written out clearly?
A mark of two was awarded as the arguments in the
proofs are self contained and each proof was finished
with a clear and concise conclusion.
In Question 1, the proof was introduced with the
definitions of set A, B and C and was immediately
followed by a statement which clarified the objective of
the proof: “we can show that A is a proper subset of B if
and only if A is a subset of B and B is not a subset of A”.
A detailed, step by step proof was subsequently provided
Inclusion of the objective along with detailed
explanations enabled the arguments to be understood
without direct reference to the question.
Question 2 and 3 followed a similar layout, in which the
proofs were both introduced with a set of basic
assumptions and followed by elaborate, comprehensive
 conclusions written out
clearly.
Aspect 4
Are the mathematical arguments
valid.
Award
 0 if there are serious errors
of logic in more than one
question;
 1 if there are some invalid
parts in the arguments but
most arguments are sound;
 2 if all answers are
mathematically valid.
Aspect 5
Are the equations typeset using an
equation editor or similar?
Are mathematical symbols within
the text typeset as mathematical
symbols?
explanations. For example, question 2 began with the
assumption “Suppose that a relation ~ is defined….by
(𝑥1, 𝑥2) ~ (𝑦1, 𝑦2) if and only if 𝑥1𝑦2 = 𝑥2𝑦1 ”, with the
remainder of the work utilising various mathematical
operations such as rearrangement, substitution and
multiplication to allow the objective to be achieved.
Such a layout enabled the reader to successfully grasp
the contents of the initial question, and hence, the
arguments in the work are self contained.
Additionally, each question was methodically concluded
with a brief statement which summarised the findings of
the overall proof and reaffirmed whether the written
proof has successfully answered the initial proposition.
Question 1
Although all three questions made a good attempt at
utilising rational deduction, theorems and axioms to form
a mathematically valid proof that proved/disproved the
stated proposition, there are some invalid parts in the
arguments. Hence, a score of one was given.
For example, Question 1 displayed a mathematically
valid proof. All sections of the proof began with a
proposition which explains the conditions in which a set
must satisfy to be a proper subset of another set.
Following this, the student employed various
mathematical operations and introduced new variables to
rearrange the original equation. Through this process, the
student was able to make a connection between the
elements of the two sets and thus provided a logical
solution to the given problem.
However, the proof in question 3 are partially invalid.
For example, one section of the proof attempted to prove
the statement “if 𝑔 ∘ 𝑓 is surjective, then 𝑓 is surjective”. In
the counterexample that was provided, the student should
have begin the proof with the given assumption “𝑔 ∘ 𝑓 is
surjective” and make logical deductions following this
assumption.
Mistakes:
A score of two was awarded as the formatting of the
student’s work is good and most of the mathematical
symbols are correctly typeset.
Some minor flaws that were found in the student’s work
are:
Are equations and mathematical
expressions formatted
appropriately?
Award
 0 if equations and
mathematical symbols are
not correctly typeset;
 1 if some equations and
mathematics symbols are
correctly typeset but others
are not or the formatting
has significant flaws;
 2 if all equations and almost
all mathematical symbols
are correctly typeset and
the formatting is generally
good.
- In question 1, the “C” in the statement “Elements
from C must take the form 6𝑛 – 4” needs to be in
math mode, preferably using an equation editor.
𝑥1𝑦2
- In question 2, the expression 𝑦1 = was not
𝑥2
formatted correctly. The correct format should be
𝑥 𝑦
𝑦1 = 𝑥1 2
2
- In Question 3, the initial conditions
𝑓:R→R and 𝑔:R→{𝑥∈R|𝑥≥0}
and the mathematical expression
(𝑔 ∘ 𝑓)(𝑎) = (𝑔 ∘ 𝑓)(𝑏) = 𝑔(𝑘)
should be centred on a line of its own.