Skew lattice

Last updated

In abstract algebra, a skew lattice is an algebraic structure that is a non-commutative generalization of a lattice. While the term skew lattice can be used to refer to any non-commutative generalization of a lattice, since 1989 it has been used primarily as follows.

Contents

Definition

A skew lattice is a set S equipped with two associative, idempotent binary operations and , called meet and join, that validate the following dual pair of absorption laws

,
.

Given that and are associative and idempotent, these identities are equivalent to validating the following dual pair of statements:

if ,
if . [1]

Historical background

For over 60 years, noncommutative variations of lattices have been studied with differing motivations. For some the motivation has been an interest in the conceptual boundaries of lattice theory; for others it was a search for noncommutative forms of logic and Boolean algebra; and for others it has been the behavior of idempotents in rings. A noncommutative lattice, generally speaking, is an algebra where and are associative, idempotent binary operations connected by absorption identities guaranteeing that in some way dualizes . The precise identities chosen depends upon the underlying motivation, with differing choices producing distinct varieties of algebras.

Pascual Jordan, motivated by questions in quantum logic, initiated a study of noncommutative lattices in his 1949 paper, Über Nichtkommutative Verbände, [2] choosing the absorption identities

He referred to those algebras satisfying them as Schrägverbände. By varying or augmenting these identities, Jordan and others obtained a number of varieties of noncommutative lattices. Beginning with Jonathan Leech's 1989 paper, Skew lattices in rings, [3] skew lattices as defined above have been the primary objects of study. This was aided by previous results about bands. This was especially the case for many of the basic properties.

Basic properties

Natural partial order and natural quasiorder

In a skew lattice , the natural partial order is defined by if , or dually, . The natural preorder on is given by if or dually . While and agree on lattices, properly refines in the noncommutative case. The induced natural equivalence is defined by if , that is, and or dually, and . The blocks of the partition are lattice ordered by if and exist such that . This permits us to draw Hasse diagrams of skew lattices such as the following pair:

Skew diag.png

E.g., in the diagram on the left above, that and are related is expressed by the dashed segment. The slanted lines reveal the natural partial order between elements of the distinct -classes. The elements , and form the singleton -classes.

Rectangular Skew Lattices

Skew lattices consisting of a single -class are called rectangular. They are characterized by the equivalent identities: , and . Rectangular skew lattices are isomorphic to skew lattices having the following construction (and conversely): given nonempty sets and , on define and . The -class partition of a skew lattice , as indicated in the above diagrams, is the unique partition of into its maximal rectangular subalgebras, Moreover, is a congruence with the induced quotient algebra being the maximal lattice image of , thus making every skew lattice a lattice of rectangular subalgebras. This is the Clifford–McLean theorem for skew lattices, first given for bands separately by Clifford and McLean. It is also known as the first decomposition theorem for skew lattices.

Right (left) handed skew lattices and the Kimura factorization

A skew lattice is right-handed if it satisfies the identity or dually, . These identities essentially assert that and in each -class. Every skew lattice has a unique maximal right-handed image where the congruence is defined by if both and (or dually, and ). Likewise a skew lattice is left-handed if and in each -class. Again the maximal left-handed image of a skew lattice is the image where the congruence is defined in dual fashion to . Many examples of skew lattices are either right- or left-handed. In the lattice of congruences, and is the identity congruence . The induced epimorphism factors through both induced epimorphisms and . Setting , the homomorphism defined by , induces an isomorphism . This is the Kimura factorization of into a fibred product of its maximal right- and left-handed images.

Skew pullback.png

Like the Clifford–McLean theorem, Kimura factorization (or the second decomposition theorem for skew lattices) was first given for regular bands (bands that satisfy the middle absorption identity, ). Indeed, both and are regular band operations. The above symbols , and come, of course, from basic semigroup theory. [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10]

Subvarieties of skew lattices

Skew lattices form a variety. Rectangular skew lattices, left-handed and right-handed skew lattices all form subvarieties that are central to the basic structure theory of skew lattices. Here are several more.

Symmetric skew lattices

A skew lattice S is symmetric if for any , if . Occurrences of commutation are thus unambiguous for such skew lattices, with subsets of pairwise commuting elements generating commutative subalgebras, i.e., sublattices. (This is not true for skew lattices in general.) Equational bases for this subvariety, first given by Spinks [11] are: and . A lattice section of a skew lattice is a sublattice of meeting each -class of at a single element. is thus an internal copy of the lattice with the composition being an isomorphism. All symmetric skew lattices for which admit a lattice section. [10] Symmetric or not, having a lattice section guarantees that also has internal copies of and given respectively by and , where and are the and congruence classes of in . Thus and are isomorphisms. [8] This leads to a commuting diagram of embedding dualizing the preceding Kimura diagram.

Skew lsection.png

Cancellative skew lattices

A skew lattice is cancellative if and implies and likewise and implies . Cancellatice skew lattices are symmetric and can be shown to form a variety. Unlike lattices, they need not be distributive, and conversely.

Distributive skew lattices

Distributive skew lattices are determined by the identities:

(D1)

(D'1)

Unlike lattices, (D1) and (D'1) are not equivalent in general for skew lattices, but they are for symmetric skew lattices. [9] [12] [13] The condition (D1) can be strengthened to

(D2)

in which case (D'1) is a consequence. A skew lattice satisfies both (D2) and its dual, , if and only if it factors as the product of a distributive lattice and a rectangular skew lattice. In this latter case (D2) can be strengthened to

and . (D3)

On its own, (D3) is equivalent to (D2) when symmetry is added. [3] We thus have six subvarieties of skew lattices determined respectively by (D1), (D2), (D3) and their duals.

Normal skew lattices

As seen above, and satisfy the identity . Bands satisfying the stronger identity, , are called normal. A skew lattice is normal skew if it satisfies

For each element a in a normal skew lattice , the set defined by {} or equivalently {} is a sublattice of , and conversely. (Thus normal skew lattices have also been called local lattices.) When both and are normal, splits isomorphically into a product of a lattice and a rectangular skew lattice , and conversely. Thus both normal skew lattices and split skew lattices form varieties. Returning to distribution, so that characterizes the variety of distributive, normal skew lattices, and (D3) characterizes the variety of symmetric, distributive, normal skew lattices.

Categorical skew lattices

A skew lattice is categorical if nonempty composites of coset bijections are coset bijections. Categorical skew lattices form a variety. Skew lattices in rings and normal skew lattices are examples of algebras in this variety. [4] Let with , and , be the coset bijection from to taking to , be the coset bijection from to taking to and finally be the coset bijection from to taking to . A skew lattice is categorical if one always has the equality , i.e. , if the composite partial bijection if nonempty is a coset bijection from a -coset of to an -coset of . That is . All distributive skew lattices are categorical. Though symmetric skew lattices might not be. In a sense they reveal the independence between the properties of symmetry and distributivity. [3] [4] [6] [9] [10] [11] [13] [14]

Skew Boolean algebras

A zero element in a skew lattice S is an element 0 of S such that for all or, dually, (0)

A Boolean skew lattice is a symmetric, distributive normal skew lattice with 0, such that is a Boolean lattice for each Given such skew lattice S, a difference operator \ is defined by x \ y = where the latter is evaluated in the Boolean lattice [1] In the presence of (D3) and (0), \ is characterized by the identities:

and (S B)

One thus has a variety of skew Boolean algebras characterized by identities (D3), (0) and (S B). A primitive skew Boolean algebra consists of 0 and a single non-0 D-class. Thus it is the result of adjoining a 0 to a rectangular skew lattice D via (0) with , if and otherwise. Every skew Boolean algebra is a subdirect product of primitive algebras. Skew Boolean algebras play an important role in the study of discriminator varieties and other generalizations in universal algebra of Boolean behavior. [15] [16] [17] [18] [19] [20] [21] [22] [23] [24] [25]

Skew lattices in rings

Let be a ring and let denote the set of all idempotents in . For all set and .

Clearly but also is associative. If a subset is closed under and , then is a distributive, cancellative skew lattice. To find such skew lattices in one looks at bands in , especially the ones that are maximal with respect to some constraint. In fact, every multiplicative band in that is maximal with respect to being right regular (= ) is also closed under and so forms a right-handed skew lattice. In general, every right regular band in generates a right-handed skew lattice in . Dual remarks also hold for left regular bands (bands satisfying the identity ) in . Maximal regular bands need not to be closed under as defined; counterexamples are easily found using multiplicative rectangular bands. These cases are closed, however, under the cubic variant of defined by since in these cases reduces to to give the dual rectangular band. By replacing the condition of regularity by normality , every maximal normal multiplicative band in is also closed under with , where , forms a Boolean skew lattice. When itself is closed under multiplication, then it is a normal band and thus forms a Boolean skew lattice. In fact, any skew Boolean algebra can be embedded into such an algebra. [26] When A has a multiplicative identity , the condition that is multiplicatively closed is well known to imply that forms a Boolean algebra. Skew lattices in rings continue to be a good source of examples and motivation. [23] [27] [28] [29] [30]

Primitive skew lattices

Skew lattices consisting of exactly two D-classes are called primitive skew lattices. Given such a skew lattice with -classes in , then for any and , the subsets

{} and {}

are called, respectively, cosets of A in B and cosets of B in A. These cosets partition B and A with and . Cosets are always rectangular subalgebras in their -classes. What is more, the partial order induces a coset bijection defined by:

iff , for and .

Collectively, coset bijections describe between the subsets and . They also determine and for pairs of elements from distinct -classes. Indeed, given and , let be the cost bijection between the cosets in and in . Then:

and .

In general, given and with and , then belong to a common - coset in and belong to a common -coset in if and only if . Thus each coset bijection is, in some sense, a maximal collection of mutually parallel pairs .

Every primitive skew lattice factors as the fibred product of its maximal left and right- handed primitive images . Right-handed primitive skew lattices are constructed as follows. Let and be partitions of disjoint nonempty sets and , where all and share a common size. For each pair pick a fixed bijection from onto . On and separately set and ; but given and , set

and

where and with belonging to the cell of and belonging to the cell of . The various are the coset bijections. This is illustrated in the following partial Hasse diagram where and the arrows indicate the -outputs and from and .

Skew primitive.png

One constructs left-handed primitive skew lattices in dual fashion. All right [left] handed primitive skew lattices can be constructed in this fashion. [3]

The coset structure of skew lattices

A nonrectangular skew lattice is covered by its maximal primitive skew lattices: given comparable -classes in , forms a maximal primitive subalgebra of and every -class in lies in such a subalgebra. The coset structures on these primitive subalgebras combine to determine the outcomes and at least when and are comparable under . It turns out that and are determined in general by cosets and their bijections, although in a slightly less direct manner than the -comparable case. In particular, given two incomparable D-classes A and B with join D-class J and meet D-class in , interesting connections arise between the two coset decompositions of J (or M) with respect to A and B. [4]

Skew diamond.png

Thus a skew lattice may be viewed as a coset atlas of rectangular skew lattices placed on the vertices of a lattice and coset bijections between them, the latter seen as partial isomorphisms between the rectangular algebras with each coset bijection determining a corresponding pair of cosets. This perspective gives, in essence, the Hasse diagram of the skew lattice, which is easily drawn in cases of relatively small order. (See the diagrams in Section 3 above.) Given a chain of D-classes in , one has three sets of coset bijections: from A to B, from B to C and from A to C. In general, given coset bijections and , the composition of partial bijections could be empty. If it is not, then a unique coset bijection exists such that . (Again, is a bijection between a pair of cosets in and .) This inclusion can be strict. It is always an equality (given ) on a given skew lattice S precisely when S is categorical. In this case, by including the identity maps on each rectangular D-class and adjoining empty bijections between properly comparable D-classes, one has a category of rectangular algebras and coset bijections between them. The simple examples in Section 3 are categorical.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Associative algebra</span> Algebraic structure with (a + b)(c + d) = ac + ad + bc + bd and (a)(bc) = (ab)(c)

In mathematics, an associative algebraA is an algebraic structure with compatible operations of addition, multiplication, and a scalar multiplication by elements in some field K. The addition and multiplication operations together give A the structure of a ring; the addition and scalar multiplication operations together give A the structure of a vector space over K. In this article we will also use the term K-algebra to mean an associative algebra over the field K. A standard first example of a K-algebra is a ring of square matrices over a field K, with the usual matrix multiplication.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Boolean algebra (structure)</span> Algebraic structure modeling logical operations

In abstract algebra, a Boolean algebra or Boolean lattice is a complemented distributive lattice. This type of algebraic structure captures essential properties of both set operations and logic operations. A Boolean algebra can be seen as a generalization of a power set algebra or a field of sets, or its elements can be viewed as generalized truth values. It is also a special case of a De Morgan algebra and a Kleene algebra.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Complex conjugate</span> Fundamental operation on complex numbers

In mathematics, the complex conjugate of a complex number is the number with an equal real part and an imaginary part equal in magnitude but opposite in sign. That is, the complex conjugate of is equal to The complex conjugate of is often denoted as or .

In mathematics, a linear form is a linear map from a vector space to its field of scalars.

In mathematics, a Heyting algebra is a bounded lattice equipped with a binary operation ab of implication such that ≤ b is equivalent to c ≤. From a logical standpoint, AB is by this definition the weakest proposition for which modus ponens, the inference rule AB, AB, is sound. Like Boolean algebras, Heyting algebras form a variety axiomatizable with finitely many equations. Heyting algebras were introduced by Arend Heyting (1930) to formalize intuitionistic logic.

In mathematics, a distributive lattice is a lattice in which the operations of join and meet distribute over each other. The prototypical examples of such structures are collections of sets for which the lattice operations can be given by set union and intersection. Indeed, these lattices of sets describe the scenery completely: every distributive lattice is—up to isomorphism—given as such a lattice of sets.

In mathematics, the Gelfand representation in functional analysis is either of two things:

A lattice is an abstract structure studied in the mathematical subdisciplines of order theory and abstract algebra. It consists of a partially ordered set in which every pair of elements has a unique supremum and a unique infimum. An example is given by the power set of a set, partially ordered by inclusion, for which the supremum is the union and the infimum is the intersection. Another example is given by the natural numbers, partially ordered by divisibility, for which the supremum is the least common multiple and the infimum is the greatest common divisor.

In mathematical order theory, an ideal is a special subset of a partially ordered set (poset). Although this term historically was derived from the notion of a ring ideal of abstract algebra, it has subsequently been generalized to a different notion. Ideals are of great importance for many constructions in order and lattice theory.

In the mathematical area of order theory, there are various notions of the common concept of distributivity, applied to the formation of suprema and infima. Most of these apply to partially ordered sets that are at least lattices, but the concept can in fact reasonably be generalized to semilattices as well.

In mathematics, a sesquilinear form is a generalization of a bilinear form that, in turn, is a generalization of the concept of the dot product of Euclidean space. A bilinear form is linear in each of its arguments, but a sesquilinear form allows one of the arguments to be "twisted" in a semilinear manner, thus the name; which originates from the Latin numerical prefix sesqui- meaning "one and a half". The basic concept of the dot product – producing a scalar from a pair of vectors – can be generalized by allowing a broader range of scalar values and, perhaps simultaneously, by widening the definition of a vector.

In mathematical group theory, the root datum of a connected split reductive algebraic group over a field is a generalization of a root system that determines the group up to isomorphism. They were introduced by Michel Demazure in SGA III, published in 1970.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Mathematical descriptions of the electromagnetic field</span> Formulations of electromagnetism

There are various mathematical descriptions of the electromagnetic field that are used in the study of electromagnetism, one of the four fundamental interactions of nature. In this article, several approaches are discussed, although the equations are in terms of electric and magnetic fields, potentials, and charges with currents, generally speaking.

In mathematics, the congruence lattice problem asks whether every algebraic distributive lattice is isomorphic to the congruence lattice of some other lattice. The problem was posed by Robert P. Dilworth, and for many years it was one of the most famous and long-standing open problems in lattice theory; it had a deep impact on the development of lattice theory itself. The conjecture that every distributive lattice is a congruence lattice is true for all distributive lattices with at most 1 compact elements, but F. Wehrung provided a counterexample for distributive lattices with ℵ2 compact elements using a construction based on Kuratowski's free set theorem.

In mathematics, the spin representations are particular projective representations of the orthogonal or special orthogonal groups in arbitrary dimension and signature. More precisely, they are two equivalent representations of the spin groups, which are double covers of the special orthogonal groups. They are usually studied over the real or complex numbers, but they can be defined over other fields.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Classical group</span>

In mathematics, the classical groups are defined as the special linear groups over the reals R, the complex numbers C and the quaternions H together with special automorphism groups of symmetric or skew-symmetric bilinear forms and Hermitian or skew-Hermitian sesquilinear forms defined on real, complex and quaternionic finite-dimensional vector spaces. Of these, the complex classical Lie groups are four infinite families of Lie groups that together with the exceptional groups exhaust the classification of simple Lie groups. The compact classical groups are compact real forms of the complex classical groups. The finite analogues of the classical groups are the classical groups of Lie type. The term "classical group" was coined by Hermann Weyl, it being the title of his 1939 monograph The Classical Groups.

In universal algebra and lattice theory, a tolerance relation on an algebraic structure is a reflexive symmetric relation that is compatible with all operations of the structure. Thus a tolerance is like a congruence, except that the assumption of transitivity is dropped. On a set, an algebraic structure with empty family of operations, tolerance relations are simply reflexive symmetric relations. A set that possesses a tolerance relation can be described as a tolerance space. Tolerance relations provide a convenient general tool for studying indiscernibility/indistinguishability phenomena. The importance of those for mathematics had been first recognized by Poincaré.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Complexification (Lie group)</span> Universal construction of a complex Lie group from a real Lie group

In mathematics, the complexification or universal complexification of a real Lie group is given by a continuous homomorphism of the group into a complex Lie group with the universal property that every continuous homomorphism of the original group into another complex Lie group extends compatibly to a complex analytic homomorphism between the complex Lie groups. The complexification, which always exists, is unique up to unique isomorphism. Its Lie algebra is a quotient of the complexification of the Lie algebra of the original group. They are isomorphic if the original group has a quotient by a discrete normal subgroup which is linear.

Łukasiewicz–Moisil algebras were introduced in the 1940s by Grigore Moisil in the hope of giving algebraic semantics for the n-valued Łukasiewicz logic. However, in 1956 Alan Rose discovered that for n ≥ 5, the Łukasiewicz–Moisil algebra does not model the Łukasiewicz logic. A faithful model for the ℵ0-valued (infinitely-many-valued) Łukasiewicz–Tarski logic was provided by C. C. Chang's MV-algebra, introduced in 1958. For the axiomatically more complicated (finite) n-valued Łukasiewicz logics, suitable algebras were published in 1977 by Revaz Grigolia and called MVn-algebras. MVn-algebras are a subclass of LMn-algebras, and the inclusion is strict for n ≥ 5. In 1982 Roberto Cignoli published some additional constraints that added to LMn-algebras produce proper models for n-valued Łukasiewicz logic; Cignoli called his discovery proper Łukasiewicz algebras.

References

  1. 1 2 Leech, J, Skew lattices in rings, Algebra Universalis, 26(1989), 48-72.
  2. Jordan, P. Uber Nichtkommutative Verbände, Arch. Math. 2 (1949), 56–59.
  3. 1 2 3 4 5 Leech, J, Skew lattices in rings, Algebra Universalis, 26(1989), 48-72
  4. 1 2 3 4 Leech, J, Recent developments in the theory of skew lattices, Semigroup Forum, 52(1996), 7-24.
  5. Leech, J, Magic squares, finite planes and simple quasilattices, Ars Combinatoria 77(2005), 75-96.
  6. 1 2 Leech, J, The geometry of skew lattices, Semigroup Forum, 52(1993), 7-24.
  7. Leech, J, Normal skew lattices, Semigroup Forum, 44(1992), 1-8.
  8. 1 2 Cvetko-Vah, K, Internal decompositions of skew lattices, Communications in Algebra, 35 (2007), 243-247
  9. 1 2 3 Cvetko-Vah, K, A new proof of Spinks’ Theorem, Semigroup Forum 73 (2006), 267-272.
  10. 1 2 3 Laslo, G and Leech, J, Green’s relations on noncommutative lattices, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged), 68 (2002), 501-533.
  11. 1 2 Spinks, M, Automated deduction in non-commutative lattice theory, Tech. Report 3/98, Monash U, GSCIT, 1998
  12. Spinks, M, Automated deduction in non-commutative lattice theory, Tech. Report 3/98, Monash University, Gippsland School of Computing and Information Technology, June 1998
  13. 1 2 Spinks, M, On middle distributivity for skew lattices, Semigroup Forum 61 (2000), 341-345.
  14. Cvetko-Vah, Karin ; Kinyon, M. ; Leech, J. ; Spinks, M. Cancellation in skew Lattices. Order 28 (2011), 9-32.
  15. Bignall, R. J., Quasiprimal Varieties and Components of Universal Algebras, Dissertation, The Flinders University of South Australia, 1976.
  16. Bignall, R J, A non-commutative multiple-valued logic, Proc. 21st International Symposium on Multiple-valued Logic, 1991, IEEE Computer Soc. Press, 49-54.
  17. Bignall, R J and J Leech, Skew Boolean algebras and discriminator varieties, Algebra Universalis, 33(1995), 387-398.
  18. Bignall, R J and M Spinks, Propositional skew Boolean logic, Proc. 26th International Symposium on Multiple-valued Logic, 1996, IEEE Computer Soc. Press, 43-48.
  19. Bignall, R J and M Spinks, Implicative BCS-algebra subreducts of skew Boolean algebras, Scientiae Mathematicae Japonicae, 58 (2003), 629-638.
  20. Bignall, R J and M Spinks, On binary discriminator varieties (I): Implicative BCS-algebras, International Journal of Algebra and Computation, to appear.
  21. Cornish, W H, Boolean skew algebras, Acta Math. Acad. Sci. Hung., 36 (1980), 281-291.
  22. Leech, J, Skew Boolean algebras, Algebra Universalis, 27(1990), 497-506.
  23. 1 2 Leech and Spinks, Skew Boolean algebras generated from generalized Boolean algebras, Algebra Universalis 58 (2008), 287-302, 307-311.
  24. Spinks, M, Contributions to the Theory of Pre-BCK Algebras, Monash University Dissertation, 2002.
  25. Spinks, M and R Veroff, Axiomatizing the skew Boolean propositional calculus, J. Automated Reasoning, 37 (2006), 3-20.
  26. Cvetko-Vah, K, Skew lattices in matrix rings, Algebra Universalis 53 (2005), 471-479.
  27. Cvetko-Vah, K, Pure skew lattices in rings, Semigroup Forum 68 (2004), 268-279.
  28. Cvetko-Vah, K, Pure ∇-bands, Semigroup Forum 71 (2005), 93-101.
  29. Cvetko-Vah, K, Skew lattices in rings, Dissertation, University of Ljubljana, 2005.
  30. Cvetko-Vah, K and J Leech, Associativity of the ∇-operation on bands in rings, Semigroup Forum 76 (2008), 32-50