English Language & Usage Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for linguists, etymologists, and serious English language enthusiasts. Join them; it only takes a minute:

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

What is the difference in usage between maximum and maximal? When would you use one or the other?

Maximum can be a noun or an adjective:

This is the maximum it can be set to.
This is the maximum value.

whereas "maximal" is always an adjective:

This is the maximal value.

Is this correct? Is there more to it than that? When would you use one or the other as an adjective, or are they completely interchangeable?

share|improve this question
In your third example, maximum must be a typo for maximal. – Tsuyoshi Ito Aug 17 '11 at 12:22
up vote 40 down vote accepted

There is a subtle difference; maximum and minimum relate to absolute values — there is nothing higher than the maximum and nothing lower than the minimum. Maximal and minimal, however, can be more vague.

In "I want to buy this at minimal cost" and "this action carries a minimal risk", minimal means "very small" as opposed to "the lowest possible"; the same distinction is true of maximum and maximal.

share|improve this answer
Why was this downvoted? Seems like a reasonable answer. – Clay Nichols Aug 17 '11 at 12:18
Thanks @Clay, I'd love to know too! – Waggers Aug 17 '11 at 12:42
I don't believe this answer is correct. The usage you cite is simply a misunderstanding about 'maximum' etc., which are frequently used to mean 'very big' rather than their correct meaning which is 'the biggest'. – DJClayworth Aug 17 '11 at 14:29
Surely if words are frequently used to mean something then that becomes their correct meaning? Language isn't static. After all the question was about difference "in usage" not "in original meaning" – Waggers Aug 18 '11 at 7:53

Waggers' answer does an excellent job of explaining the difference in the non-technical meaning. In some areas of mathematics (e.g., in maximal element, maximal matching), a maximal value (you can't use the with this meaning) is essentially a local maximum—it's a maximum value in its neighborhood; i.e., there are no small changes which will increase the value. See this Wikipedia article for a more technical description in relation to partially ordered sets.

share|improve this answer
It seems to me that mathematical definition (a maximal value=the local maximum) effectively means the same as @Waggers "non-technical" one anyway. A maximal value would not be so called if it was easy to identify a higher one "nearby" (whatever "nearby" meant in context). – FumbleFingers Aug 17 '11 at 16:39
@FumbleFingers: you're right ... it's essentially a mathematical adaptation of the non-technical definition. – Peter Shor Aug 17 '11 at 19:10
I have seen maximal used like in Peter's answer: In my algorithms class we used maximal to mean that we would have to backtrack to get a better(larger) answer. – Brian Mar 23 '13 at 2:59
In this two peaks graph, is the maximal point the lower peak? I know that in math, the point near zero is call minimum, but it seems that it doesn't suit the normal meaning. – Ooker Jul 1 '15 at 9:40
Both the higher and lower peaks are maximal; only the higher one is maximum. – Peter Shor Jul 1 '15 at 11:57

The short answer is that, unless you are a mathematician or an economist, there is no difference. However, there is a fine distinction between the two terms that can be relevant in the context of non linearly ordered sets (i.e. sets in which not every pair of elements need be comparable).

An element is maximal if there is no other element greater.

An element is maximum if it is itself greater than every other element.

If the "elements" under discussion are numbers, the definitions coincide, but there are contexts in which the distinction matters.

For example, in an election one might say that candidate 1 is strictly better than candidate 2 if all potential voters prefer candidate 1 to candidate 2. Say that three candidates - Mitt, Barry, and Adolf - are running for president of a club.

The club members are divided into two contingents of equal size. One group unanimously prefers Barry to Mitt and Mitt to Adolf, while the other unanimously prefers Mitt to Barry and Barry to Adolf.

Barry and Mitt are both strictly better candidates than Adolf, as all members rank Adolf last. But since some members prefer Barry to Mitt and some prefer Mitt to Barry, neither is strictly better than the other. Thus neither can be maximum with respect to this ordering. However, because no candidates exist that are strictly better than either of them, both candidates are maximal with respect to this ordering.

share|improve this answer

protected by tchrist Feb 22 '15 at 3:51

Thank you for your interest in this question. Because it has attracted low-quality or spam answers that had to be removed, posting an answer now requires 10 reputation on this site (the association bonus does not count).

Would you like to answer one of these unanswered questions instead?

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.