NOTES ON PLANAR SEMIMODULAR LATTICES. IV. THE SIZE OF A MINIMAL CONGRUENCE LATTICE REPRESENTATION WITH RECTANGULAR LATTICES
|
|
- Mervin Hamilton
- 5 years ago
- Views:
Transcription
1 NOTES ON PLANAR SEMIMODULAR LATTICES. IV. THE SIZE OF A MINIMAL CONGRUENCE LATTICE REPRESENTATION WITH RECTANGULAR LATTICES G. GRÄTZER AND E. KNAPP Abstract. Let D be a finite distributive lattice with n join-irreducible elements. In Part III, we proved that D can be represented as the congruence lattice of a special type of planar semimodular lattices of O(n 3 ) elements, we called rectangular. In this paper, we show that this result is best possible. Let D be a finite distributive lattice whose order of join-irreducible elements is a balanced bipartite order on n elements. Then any rectangular lattice L whose congruence lattice is isomorphic to D has at least kn 3 elements, for some constant k > Introduction In Part III of this series of notes on semimodular lattices [6], we defined a rectangular lattice as a planar semimodular lattice L with exactly two doubly-irreducible elements (denoted by u l and u r ) on the boundary of L that are complementary and distinct from 0 and 1. We proved the following result. Theorem 1. Let D be a finite distributive lattice with n join-irreducible elements. Then D can be represented as the congruence lattice of a rectangular lattice L of O(n 3 ) elements. Equivalently, Theorem 2. Let P be a finite order of n elements. Then P can be represented as the order of join-irreducible congruences of a rectangular lattice L of O(n 3 ) elements. In this paper, we show that the construction in Part III is of optimal size. An order P is called bipartite, if every element of P is either minimal or maximal. Let A be the set of minimal elements of P and M the set of maximal elements of P. We call the order P balanced bipartite if (i) A M = ; (ii) P is complete (that is, every element of A is covered by all elements of M); (iii) either A = M or A = M + 1. The last condition, namely that A = M or A = M + 1 is artificial; the natural form is A M 1. The form we use simplifies some computations. Date: November 5, Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 06C10; Secondary: 06B10. Key words and phrases. Semimodular lattice, planar, congruence, rectangular. The research of the authors was supported by the NSERC of Canada. 1
2 2 G. GRÄTZER AND E. KNAPP Theorem 3 (Main Theorem). Let L n be a rectangular lattice whose order of join-irreducible congruences is a balanced bipartite order on n elements. Then, for some constant k > 0, the inequality L n kn 3 holds. This is only the second result in the representation theory of finite distributive lattices as congruence lattices of finite lattices proving that a size estimate for the lattice to be constructed is optimal. The first result of this type was published in two papers. In G. Grätzer, H. Lakser, and E. T. Schmidt [7] it was proved that any finite distributive lattice D with n join-irreducible elements can be represented as the congruence lattice of a (planar) lattice L of O(n 2 ) elements. In G. Grätzer, I. Rival, and N. Zaguia [9], it was proved that O(n 2 ) is optimal in this result. In [9], optimal is proved by assuming that representation with O(n α ) elements is possible, for some α < 2, and deriving a contradiction. In this paper, we prove that O(n 3 ) is optimal by finding a cubic lower bound for the size of the lattice, kn 3, in case P is a balanced bipartite order on n elements. So combined with the result of [6], we obtain: Theorem 4. Let L be a rectangular lattice. Let us assume that the order of joinirreducible congruences of L is isomorphic to a balanced bipartite order on n elements. If L is of minimal size, then it satisfies (1) kn 3 L 2 3 n3 + 2n n + 1, for some constant k > 0. In Section 6, we verify (1) with the constant k = = This paper belongs to the field: representation theory of finite lattices as congruence lattices of finite lattices. For a general survey of this field, see the book [2]. The present paper is a contribution to Problem 9.1 of [2] asking whether the O(n 3 ) result of G. Grätzer, H. Lakser, and E. T. Schmidt [8] (any finite distributive lattice D with n join-irreducible elements can be represented as the congruence lattice of a (planar) semimodular lattice L of O(n 3 ) elements) is optimal for planar semimodular lattices. There are three obvious problems to raise in connection with Theorem 4. The first two raise questions whether (1) can be improved. Problem 1. Is there a lower bound k 1 n 3 (k 1 > 0) that works for planar semimodular lattices? Problem 2. How close can one bring the constant k in (1) to 2 3? The next problem raises the question whether the O(n 2 ) result can be improved. Problem 3. Let L be a (planar) lattice such that the order of join-irreducible congruences of L is a balanced bipartite order on n elements. Is it true that L has at least k 2 n 2 elements, for some constant k 2 > 0? Outline. This paper relies heavily on Parts I III of this series of papers; see [3] [6] (and [4]). In Section 2, we revisit the basic definitions and develop a useful lemma. In Section 3, we investigate slim rectangular lattices and we show how the representation theorem of Part I can be strengthened in this case. We also prove the Decomposition Theorem (Theorem 18), which splits a slim rectangular lattice into four smaller rectangular lattices; this is the basis of the induction in Section 5.
3 MINIMAL CONGRUENCE LATTICE REPRESENTATION 3 In Section 4, we investigate tight S 7 sublattices (introduced in Part II) in rectangular lattices. To prove the Main Theorem, we have to find a lot of elements in L; we utilize tight S 7 -s to locate them. The section culminates in the Partition Theorem, showing that the Decomposition Theorem of Section 3 yields a natural partitioning of the set of tight S 7 -s. The hard proofs are in Section 5. The Lower Bound Theorem (Theorem 28) constructing a large interval is rather computational. Utilizing the results of Sections 4 and 5, the proof of the Main Theorem is easily derived in Section 6. Notation and terminology. We use the notation of [2]. The Glossary of Notation of [2] is available as a pdf file at In particular, for a meet-irreducible element x in a finite lattice, we denote by x the unique upper cover of x; we define x dually. For congruence-perspectivity, we use [a, b] [c, d] for down (that is, a d = c and d b) and [a, b] [c, d] for up. Acknowledgement. We would like to thank the Lattice Theory seminar, especially, R. W. Quackenbush and B. Wolk, for their patient participation in the lectures on this paper. Their comments were constructive and incisive, resulting in a much improved presentation. We received an excellent report from the referee, suggesting many small improvements and catching a major error: in the proof of the Lower Bound Theorem (Theorem 28), in Case III we had a coefficient wrong. Correcting it caused a ripple effect, having to change coefficients in all the proofs that followed (and it changed the k given after the statement of Theorem 4 from to ). The corrections were carried out by R. W. Quackenbush. 2. Preliminaries Let A be a planar lattice, which, by definition, is finite. A left corner (resp., right corner) of the lattice A is a doubly-irreducible element in A {0, 1} on the left (resp., right) boundary of A. A corner of A is either a left or a right corner. We define a rectangular lattice L as a planar semimodular lattice which has exactly one left corner, u l, and exactly one right corner, u r, and they are complementary that is, u l u r = 1 and u l u r = 0, see Figure 1. In Part III, we show many diagrams of rectangular lattices. Let L be a rectangular lattice. We define A L as the set of elements on the left boundary of L greater than or equal to u l and call it the top left boundary. Symmetrically and dually, we define B L, C L, D L, respectively, the top right, bottom left, and bottom right boundary of L. We drop the subscript when L is understood. Let L be a rectangular lattice. A top interval I of L is an interval of the form [x y, 1], where x A {1} and y B {1}. We prove in Corollary 16 that I is a rectangular lattice and x is the left corner and y is the right corner of I. Let A be a planar lattice. We define a cell B of A: (1) B = C D, where C and D are chains in A; (2) 0 C = 0 D and 1 C = 1 D ; (3) c d, for all c C {0 C, 1 C } and d D {0 D, 1 D }; (4) there are no elements of A in the interior of B.
4 4 G. GRÄTZER AND E. KNAPP 1 x A I y B u l x y u r C D 0 x D Figure 1. The notation for a rectangular lattice and a top interval We call A a 4-cell lattice, if each cell in A contains exactly 4 elements. As we observed in [3], if A is semimodular, then A is a 4-cell lattice. In a planar 4-cell lattice A, the element x is immediately to the left of the element y, if x y and x and y belong to the same 4-cell; the two chains are {x y, x, x y} and {x y, y, x y}. The following statement is trivial but important: Lemma 5. Let L be a planar 4-cell lattice. Let y be an element not on the left boundary of L. Then there is an element x of L immediately to the left of the element y. Let L be a planar semimodular lattice. If there is no sublattice in L isomorphic to a covering M 3, then we call L slim. If L is not slim, then we may form the slim lattice L slim L by removing from L the interiors of covering M 3 -s; see [3] for further information. We call L slim the slimming of L. Next we state an interesting property of slim, planar, semimodular lattices. Lemma 6. An element of a slim, planar, semimodular lattice L has at most two covers. Proof. Let a, b, and c be distinct covers of x L such that a is to the left of b and b is to the left of c. Since L is semimodular a, c a c. Since L is planar, it follows {x, a, b, c, a c} = M 3. Therefore L is not slim. Let S be a sublattice of the lattice L. If S is isomorphic to the lattice S 7 of Figure 2, then we refer to S as an S 7. If S is an S 7 and all the covers of S are preserved with the possible exceptions 0 S d S and 0 S e S, we call S a tight S 7. In a tight S 7, the element a S is immediately to the left of b S, the element b S is immediately to the left of c S, and a S = b S = c S = 1 S. We denote by TS7 L the set of tight S 7 -s in the lattice L. For a sublattice S and a congruence Θ of the lattice L, we denote by Θ S the restriction of Θ to S; of course, Θ S is a congruence of S. We denote by Con J L the order of join-irreducible congruences of L. Next we restate the main result of Part II [5].
5 MINIMAL CONGRUENCE LATTICE REPRESENTATION 5 1 S a S b S c S d S e S 0 S Figure 2. The lattice S 7 Theorem 7. Let L be a finite semimodular lattice. Let α β in Con J L. Then there exists a sublattice S TS7 L such that α = con(b S, 1 S ) and β = con(a S, 1 S ). 3. Slim rectangular lattices In Part I, we showed that a slim, planar, semimodular lattice is a cover-preserving join-homomorphic image of a direct product U V of two finite chains. 1 The chains U and V are not internal to the lattice but constructed by induction. In contrast, for a slim rectangular lattice we have the following result. Theorem 8. Let L be a slim rectangular lattice. join-homomorphic image of C D. Then L is a cover-preserving To prove this result, we need some lemmas. In this next lemma, and also in the rest of this section, let L be a slim rectangular lattice. Lemma 9. If x L is join-irreducible, then x is on the boundary of L. Proof. Let x be join-irreducible and let it be in the interior of L. Then there exist 4-cells X = {0 X, a X, b X, 1 X } with a X to the left of b X and Y = {0 Y, a Y, b Y, 1 Y } with a Y to the left of b Y such that x = b X = a Y. The element x is join-irreducible, so 0 X = 0 Y. Since 1 X = 1 Y contradicts that L is slim, it follows that 1 X 1 Y. But then X Y generates a cover-preserving sublattice, the dual of S 7, contradicting the semimodularity of L. Since all join-irreducible elements in a slim lattice are on the boundary, they form two chains, described in the next few lemmas. We restate Lemma 3 of Part III. Lemma 10. Every x (A B) {1} is meet-irreducible and every x (C D) {0} is join-irreducible. Lemma 11. In the lattice L, C D = J(L) {0}. Proof. By Lemma 9, x A B C D. So this lemma follows from Lemma 10 and the definition of a rectangular lattice. 1 This result has been extended to arbitrary finite semimodular lattices by G. Czédli and E. T. Schmidt [1].
6 6 G. GRÄTZER AND E. KNAPP Lemma 12. In the lattice L, the relation x y holds, for all x C {0} and y D {0}. Proof. Indeed, if x y and x C {0}, y D {0}, then x u l u r, contradicting that u l and u r are complementary. Proof of Theorem 8. We prove that the map defined by ϕ: C D L (2) (c, d)ϕ = c d, for c C and d D, is a cover-preserving join-homomorphism of C D onto L. It is obvious that (2) defines a join-homomorphism. Every element of L is a join of join-irreducible elements. Since all the join-irreducible elements of L are in C D by Lemma 11, it follows that every element of L is of the form c d, for some c C and d D. Therefore, ϕ is onto. To prove that ϕ is cover-preserving, let (a, b) (c, d) in C D. By symmetry, we can assume that a c and b = d. By the semimodularity of L, it follows that a b c d in L, so (a, b)ϕ = a b c d = (c, d)ϕ. We also need Lemma 4 of Part III (we added to it a second statement that is obvious from Lemma 10): Lemma 13. The top boundaries A, B are filters and the bottom boundaries C, D are ideals. In addition, all four are chains. Every x L can be represented as a join of join-irreducible elements. So by Lemmas 10 and 11, we can represent x as c d with c C and d D. Obviously, we obtain the largest such representation with c = x u l and d = x u r. We introduce the notation (see Figure 3) 1 A B u l x C x u r C x D D 0 Figure 3. The projections x C and x D (3) x C = x u l and x D = x u r
7 MINIMAL CONGRUENCE LATTICE REPRESENTATION 7 and obtain: Lemma 14. Let x L. Then there is a largest element (x C, x D ) that ϕ (defined by (2)) maps onto x. Also (4) x = (x u l ) (x u r ). A planar lattice has many planar diagrams. It follows from the considerations of this section, that for slim rectangular lattices, there are some particularly nice ones. Indeed, for a slim rectangular lattice L, form C D, a direct product of two chains. We regard C D as a planar lattice, with C on the left and D on the right lower boundary. Then x (x u l, x u r ) is a meet-embedding of L into C D, which also preserves 0 and 1. We regard the image of L in C D as the natural planar diagram representing L. For instance, Figure 2 shows the natural planar diagram representing S 7. From now on, we assume that we consider the natural planar diagram for a slim rectangular lattice. From a slim rectangular lattice, we can construct many others. Lemma 15. Let L be a slim rectangular lattice. Let y B {1, u r }. Then N t = [u l y, 1] and N b = [0, y] are slim rectangular lattices. Similarly, if x A {1, u l }, then [x u r, 1] and [0, x] are slim rectangular lattices. Proof. We prove only the case y B {1, u r }. The interval N t is a slim, planar, semimodular lattice which has exactly one left corner, u l. We have to show that it has exactly one right corner, y. First, we show that y is a right corner of N t. It is, indeed, on the right boundary of N t. Since y B L, it is meet-irreducible in L by Lemma 10, and therefore, in N t. To show that y is join-irreducible in N t, assume that it is not, so there are a b N t with u l y a y and u l y b y. Let u l y c, where c is on the left boundary of N t. Obviously, c y and so c a b. By semimodularity, a b (a b) c; furthermore, (a b) c a and (a b) c b. So a b is covered by three distinct elements, contradicting Lemma 6. This proves that y is a right corner. Second, we show that y is the only right corner of N t. So let z be on the right boundary of N t. If z > y, then z is join-reducible in L and so in N t. Let z < y; we show that z has two distinct covers in N t and so is meet-reducible. Let z i y. Since u l y c y, it follows that z c z y, and so c z i. This shows that N t has exactly one right corner, y. Since u l and y are obviously complementary, N t is rectangular. Now we consider the interval N b of L; it is a slim, planar, semimodular lattice which has exactly one right corner, u r. Since u l y is join-irreducible in L, it is join-irreducible in N b. In L, the element u l y has two covers; one of these is c, which does not belong to N b. Hence, u l y is meet-irreducible in N b, and so is a left corner of N b. Now let z be on the left boundary of N b. If z > u l y, then z is join-reducible in L and it is join-reducible in N b. If z < u l y, let z j u l y and 0 d u r. Then z z d u l y, and so z d j, implying that z is meet-reducible in N b. Thus, u l y is the unique left corner in N b. Finally, since u l y is the largest join-irreducible below y and u l, it follows that u l y and u r are complements in N b. Repeated applications of Lemma 15 yield:
8 8 G. GRÄTZER AND E. KNAPP Corollary 16. Let L be a slim rectangular lattice. Then any top interval of L is also a slim rectangular lattice. For a slim rectangular lattice L and x A {1, u l }, y B {1, u r }, we introduce some notations (see Figure 4): (5) (6) (7) (8) L top (x, y) = [x y, 1], L left (x, y) = [u l y, x], L right (x, y) = [x u r, y], L bottom (x, y) = [0, (u l y) (x u r )]. If x and y are understood, we write L top for L top (x, y), and the same for the three other intervals. Note that by (4), the unit of L bottom is (u l y) (x u r ) = x y. 1 A x L top y B u l u r L left L right C L bottom D 0 Figure 4. Decomposing a slim rectangular lattice The next statement follows by repeated applications of Lemma 15: Lemma 17. Let L be a slim rectangular lattice, and let x A {1, u l }, y B {1, u r }. Then the intervals L top, L left, L right, L bottom (see (5) (8)) are slim rectangular lattices. By three applications of Lemma 13, we can glue L bottom and L left, also L right and L top, and we can glue the results together to obtain L. We summarize this as follows: Theorem 18 (Decomposition Theorem). Let L be a slim rectangular lattice, and let x A {1, u l }, y B {1, u r }. Then L can be decomposed into four slim rectangular lattices L top, L left, L right, L bottom (see (5) (8)), and the lattice L can be reconstructed from these by repeated gluing. 4. Tight S 7 -s To prove Theorem 3, we have to find lots of elements in L. We construct them from tight S 7 -s whose existence was provided by the results of Part II, restated in Theorem 7 of this paper. This section contains some more detailed considerations of tight S 7 -s.
9 MINIMAL CONGRUENCE LATTICE REPRESENTATION 9 Recall that by Lemma 6, in a slim rectangular lattice L, an element has at most two covers. For a tight S 7, we use the notation introduced in Figure 2. Note that a 4-cell of a tight S 7 in L, is also a a 4-cell in L. We start out by investigating tight S 7 -s in slim rectangular lattices. The next lemma states that distinct tight S 7 -s have distinct middle elements and these elements have distinct projections on C and D. Lemma 19. Let L be a slim rectangular lattice. Let U V TS7 L. Then b U b V, b C U bc V, and bd U bd V. Proof. We assume that U V TS7 L and that b U = b V. Since b U = b V is meetirreducible in L, it follows that 1 U = (b U ) = (b V ) = 1 V. Since U is a tight S 7, the interval [a U b U, 1 U ] is of length 2. Therefore, {1 U = 1 V, a U, b U = b V, a U b U } is a 4-cell. It does not contain a V because L is slim. So a V is outside this cell, contradicting that a V is immediately to the left of b V. This proves that b U b V. We next prove that b C U bc V and bd U bd V. Assume, to the contrary, that this fails. If b C U = bc V and bd U = bd V, then by Lemma 14, b U = b V, a contradiction. So we can assume, by symmetry, that b C U bc V and b D U = bd V ; and again, by symmetry, we can assume that b C U < b C V and b D U = b D V. So b U < b V and c U < 1 U = b U b V. Since c U b V, we have that c D U = c U u r b V u r b D V. Since c U is to the right of b U, it follows that b D U < cd U and so b D U < cd U bd V, contradicting that bd U = bd V. The next lemma will produce more elements for the proof of Theorem 3. In a slim rectangular lattice, we associate with each pair U, V of tight S 7 s satisfying b U b V, a single element, b U b V. We now show that the element b U b V determines the pair U, V. Lemma 20. Let L be a slim rectangular lattice. Let U 1, V 1, U 2, V 2 TS7 L and let b U1 b V1 and b U2 b V2. If b U1 b V1 = b U2 b V2 then {U 1, V 1 } = {U 2, V 2 }. Proof. Set x = b U1 b V1 = b U2 b V2. Let {U 1, V 1 } {U 2, V 2 }. Since x is meetreducible in L, it follows from Lemma 6 that x has exactly two covers, y and z. By symmetry, we can assume that y b U1, y b U2, z b V1, z b V2, and U 1 U 2. Case 1: b U1 and b U2 are comparable. By symmetry, let b U1 b U2. Since U 1 U 2, by Lemma 19, b U1 < b U2 and so z 1 U1 b U2. By semimodularity, b U1 z b U1 1 U1 and therefore b U1 has two covers, contradicting that it is meet-irreducible. Case 2: b U1 and b U2 are not comparable, that is, b U1 b U2. Let t = b U2 b U1. Since L is semimodular and t z = x, we conclude that t z t. The element t has at most two covers, so either z t b U1 or z t b U2. By symmetry, we can assume that z b U2. So z is a lower bound of b U2 and b V2, contradicting that x = b U2 b V2. Lemma 21. Let L be a slim rectangular lattice. Let U, V TS7 L. Then b U b V is not on the boundary of L. Proof. Since b U and b V are interior elements, we can assume that b U b V. By symmetry, we can further assume that b U is to the left of b V. Set x = b U b V. If x 0 U, then x = 0 U b V. Choose the element y such that x y b V. By semimodularity, 0 U 0 U y. The element 0 U has exactly two
10 10 G. GRÄTZER AND E. KNAPP covers, one in [0 U, d U ] and one in [0 U, e U ]. Therefore 0 U y d U or 0 U y e U. In either case, y is a lower bound of b U and b V, contradicting that x = b U b V. Thus we can assume that x 0 U < x and, symmetrically, that x 0 V < x. Note that x 0 U = x 0 V would be an element with three covers, contradicting Lemma 6. So x 0 U x 0 V, Therefore, 0 U is to the left of x and 0 V is to the right of x, therefore, x is in the interior of L. In the next three lemmas, we proceed to investigate tight S 7 -s in rectangular lattices in general; we no longer assume that L is slim. Recall that for a rectangular lattice L, we denote by L slim the slimming of L. Observe that if L is a rectangular lattice, S TS7 L, and S L slim, then S TS7 L slim also holds. So for a tight S 7 of L, the statements: S is a tight S 7 of L slim and S L slim are equivalent. Lemma 22. Let L be a rectangular lattice, and let U TS7 L. Then there exists a sublattice V in L slim such that the following conditions hold: (i) V TS7 L slim ; (ii) x U = x V, for x {0, d, e, b, 1}; (iii) the following two equalities hold: con(a V, 1 V ) = con(a U, 1 U ), con(c V, 1 V ) = con(c U, 1 U ). Proof. Replace a U with the leftmost atom of the interval [d U, 1 U ]; denote it by a V ; define c V symmetrically. Then V = (U {a U, c U }) {a V, c V } is a tight S 7 in L slim. If a V a U, then con(a V, 1 V ) = con(a U, 1 U ), since the interval [d U, 1 U ] is isomorphic to M k, for some k 3. A symmetric argument shows that con(c V, 1 V ) = con(c U, 1 U ). Lemma 23. Let L be a rectangular lattice. Let U TS7 L satisfy U C. Then {0 U, d U } C. Moreover, if a U L slim, then {0 U, d U, a U } C. Proof. By Lemma 13, the element 0 U is in C. By Lemma 22, we can replace U by V, a tight S 7 in L slim, satisfying 0 U = 0 V C = C L slim. If d U / C, then 0 U has at least three covers in L slim, contradicting Lemma 6. So d U C. Similarly, if d U C and L is slim, then a U C. Lemma 24. Let L be a rectangular lattice. Let U, V TS7 L and let U satisfy U C. If 1 V 1 U, then con(a V, 1 V ) con(a U, 1 U ). Proof. We can assume that U V. It follows from Lemma 23 that d U C, and from Lemma 13 that a U b V = d U b V C. Since d V is the leftmost element covered by b V and a U is to the left of b V, it follows that a U b V d V. Now observe that [a U, 1 U ] [a U b V, b V ] [a V, 1 V ]; therefore, con(a V, 1 V ) con(a U, 1 U ). Finally, we switch back to slim rectangular lattices to ascertain the existence of certain left-maximal and right-maximal tight S 7 -s. Let L be a rectangular lattice. Let U TS7 L slim. We call U left-maximal, if the following two conditions hold: (i) U C ; (ii) a W a U holds, for any W TS7 L slim satisfying W C. Note that by Lemma 23, condition (i) is equivalent to {0 U, d U, a U } C. By symmetry, we introduce right-maximal tight S 7 -s.
11 MINIMAL CONGRUENCE LATTICE REPRESENTATION 11 Lemma 25. Let L be a slim rectangular lattice. If the interval I = [0, u l ] contains a tight S 7, then there exists a left-maximal tight S 7. Symmetrically, if the interval J = [0, u r] contains a tight S 7, then there exists a right-maximal tight S 7. Proof. By Lemma 15, I is a slim rectangular lattice. We will show that either I is the direct product of two chains or there is a tight S 7 intersecting C = C I. If 0 u l u r, then it follows from the semimodularity of L that I = C m C 2, for some integer m. Otherwise, 0 is not covered by u l u r. By Lemma 13, C is a chain, so there is a smallest element y C (follow the notation in Figure 6) such that y z, for some element z [u l u r, u l ]. Let u y in C and v z in [u l u r, u l ]. By Lemma 13, y v = w C. By the minimality of y, there exists an element t L such that w t < v. Set s = u t. By semimodularity, u s. Also by semimodularity, every cell is a 4-cell, so s z. Since s is not on the right boundary, there is an element r z immediately to the right of s. Then s r s, r by the selection of r. Therefore, U = {y r, u, s r, y, s, r, z}, the black-filled elements in Figure 6, is a tight S 7 intersecting the left boundary of L. By the minimality of y, the interval [y, u l ] is isomorphic to C m C 2, for some integer m. Therefore, U is a left-maximal tight S 7. Applying the proof symmetrically, the result also holds for J. Where are the tight S 7 -s in a decomposition of a slim rectangular lattice? We start with the following statement: 1 U a U 1 V d U U Let 0 U a V b V C d V V a U b V Figure 5. Illustrating the proof of Lemma 24
12 12 G. GRÄTZER AND E. KNAPP Lemma 26. For a slim rectangular lattice L and x A {1, u l }, let S TS7 L. Then S [u r x, 1] or S [0, x]. Proof. If a S u r x, then b S, c S u r x and since the set {a S, b S, c S } generates S, we conclude that S [u r x, 1]. If a S u r x, then y = a s u r. There exists an element z u r x such that y z. By semimodularity, the equality 1 S = z a S holds. Since x is an upper bound of both z and a S, we conclude that q S x and so S [0, x]. Lemma 26 can be rewritten as follows: (9) TS7 L = TS7[u r x, 1] TS7[0, x], where, in fact, the union is disjoint union. This is the simplest form of the Partition Theorem, which in its full generality we now state: Theorem 27 (Partition Theorem). Let L be a slim rectangular lattice, let x A {1, u l }, y B {1, u r }. We decompose L into the lattices L top, L left, L right, L bottom (see (5) (8)). This defines a partitioning of TS7 L: (10) TS7 L = TS7 L top TS7 L left TS7 L right TS7 L bottom. 5. The Lower Bound Theorem Let L be a rectangular lattice. By Theorem 7 and Lemma 22, we may associate each covering pair in Con J L with some tight S 7 in L slim. Form a collection U L of tight S 7 -s in L slim such that each element in U L is associated with a covering pair in Con J L. Furthermore, we take U L to be minimal in size. We refer to U L as a minimal collection of L. Observe that 2 U L is an upper bound for the number of covering pairs in Con J L. u l u l z s r v C y u w t u l u r 0 Figure 6. Illustrating the proof of Lemma 25
13 MINIMAL CONGRUENCE LATTICE REPRESENTATION 13 1 A B u l W u r u l u r u C D 0 Figure 7. Some notation for N We introduce one more notation. Let U L be a minimal collection. Let N be a sublattice of L. We denote by U L N the collection of those members of U L that lie in N, that is, U L N = U TS7 N. We start with this crucial result ( top interval was introduced in Section 2): Theorem 28 (Lower Bound Theorem). Let L be a rectangular lattice with a minimal collection Û. Let N be a top interval of Lslim and let U = Û N. Let n and i be positive integers. Let us make the following assumptions on L, n, and i: (i) Con J L is a suborder of a balanced bipartite order on 2n elements; (ii) U ni. Then one of the following two conclusions hold: (α) N i2 n 2 ; (β) there exists a positive integer j < i and a top interval M of N satisfying the following two conditions: (a) N M + (i j)in 3 ; (b) U M nj. Proof. We work in N, so N as a subscript will be omitted; for instance, we write C for C N and 0 for 0 N, and the corners of N are u l and u r. Each U U is associated with an element b C U C and an element bd U D see (3). By Lemma 19, either one of these elements determines U. Therefore, by condition (ii), (11) C ni and D ni. We claim that C [u l u r, 1 N ] =. Indeed, if a C [u l u r, 1 N ], then by Lemma 13, the element a u r is in C D. Since N is rectangular, a = 0 N. Let b be such that 0 N b u r. By semimodularity, u l b u l = u l. Since b is a lower bound of u l, we conclude that 0 N b u l u r a u r = 0 N which is a contradiction. Define u = u l u r and W = N top (u l, u r); see Figure 7. Intersecting both sides of (10) with Û, we obtain: (12) U = U N top U N left U N right U N bottom.
14 14 G. GRÄTZER AND E. KNAPP To prove the Lower Bound Theorem, we distinguish three cases. Case I. U (N left N bottom ) < 3n. We distinguish two subcases. Case I.1. i 3. Then, by (11), N C D {1} 2ni i2 n 3, and so conclusion (α) holds. Case I.2. i > 3. Set M = [u l u r, 1] and j = i 3; see Figure 8. By (12), U = U M + U [0, u l ]. It follows that U M = U U [0, u l ] ni 3n = nj, utilizing the assumptions for Case I and Case I.2, verifying (b). C M =, it follows that N M + C M + ni = M + (i j)in, 3 Finally, since verifying (a). This verifies conclusion (β) and completes the proof for Case I.2 and for Case I. Case II. U (N right N bottom ) < 3n. This is symmetric to Case I. Case III. U (N left N bottom ) 3n and U (N right N bottom ) 3n. Set M = W. Applying Lemma 25 to N, we obtain a left-maximal tight S 7, which we denote by U left, and a right-maximal tight S 7, which we denote by U right. We wish to show that U N bottom contains at most 2n elements. If V U N bottom, the from Lemmas 24 and 25, we conclude that con(a V, 1 V ) con(a Uleft, 1 Uleft ), con(c V, 1 V ) con(c Uright, 1 Uright ). Also, con(b V, 1 V ) con(a V, 1 V ), con(c V, 1 V ), so (13) (14) con(b V, 1 V ) con(a V, 1 V ) con(a Uleft, 1 Uleft ), con(b V, 1 V ) con(c V, 1 V ) con(c Uright, 1 Uright ). 1 A B u l u l M u r C D 0 Figure 8. Some notation for N in Case I.2
15 MINIMAL CONGRUENCE LATTICE REPRESENTATION 15 Since a chain in Con J L has at most two elements, it follows that (15) (16) con(b V, 1 V ) con(a Uleft, 1 Uleft ), con(b V, 1 V ) con(c Uright, 1 Uright ). If equality holds, say, in (15), then by (13), we conclude that (17) con(b V, 1 V ) = con(a V, 1 V ). Now V U means that V is associated with a covering pair in Con J L, namely, with con(b V, 1 V ) con(a V, 1 V ) or with con(b V, 1 V ) con(c V, 1 V ). So (17) implies that con(b V, 1 V ) con(c V, 1 V ) holds. So by (14), equality cannot hold in (16). We conclude that equality holds for at most one of (15) and (16). Since the maximal elements of con(v ) are contained in the set {con(a Uleft, 1 Uleft ), con(c Uright, 1 Uright )}, the minimality of Û now gives us that U N bottom 2n. Define U Nleft k 1 =, n U Nright k 2 =. n Since, in this case, we assumed that U (N left N bottom ) 3n and U (N right N bottom ) 3n, and in the previous paragraph we proved that it follows that k 1, k 2 1. Form the set U N bottom 2n, S = { b U b V U U N left, V U N right } N bottom. By Lemma 20, the element b U b V uniquely determines the pair U, V, so S n 2 k 1 k 2. By Lemma 21, the element b U b V is not in C or D. So S (C {0}) D is a disjoint union in N M. We can easily add an element w to make S (C {0}) D {w} one bigger in N M; for instance, any w U left C. The inequality S n 2 k 1 k 2 combined with (11) yields. (18) S C D {w} n 2 k 1 k 2 + 2ni. There are two subcases to compute. Case III.1. i k 1 +k Observe that, by assumption (i), Con J L has at most n 2 covering pairs, so U n 2. Comparing this with assumption (ii), we conclude that i n. Utilizing this and (18): N S C D {w} n 2 k 1 k 2 + 2ni = n 2 (2nk 1k 2 + 4i) n 2 (2ik 1k 2 + 4i) n 2 (ik 1 + ik 2 + 4i) i2 n 2, and so conclusion (α) holds.
16 16 G. GRÄTZER AND E. KNAPP Case III.2. i > k 1 + k Then setting j = i (k 1 + k 2 + 4) so that i j = k 1 + k 2 + 4, we obtain that N M S C D {w} n 2 k 1 k 2 + 2ni ink 1 k 2 + 2in = (k 1 k 2 + 2)in (k 1 + k 2 + 4)in 3 = (i j)in, 3 since for k 1, k 2 1, k 1 k (k 1 + k 2 + 4)/3. This verifies (a). Since i 3 j, U M = U U (N left N bottom ) ni 3n = n(i 3) nj, conclusion (b) and so conclusion (β) are verified. The Lower Bound Theorem does indeed give a lower bound for the size of some intervals of L. Corollary 29. Let L be a rectangular lattice with a minimal collection Û. Let N be a top interval of L slim and let U = Û N. Let n and i be positive integers. Let us make the following assumptions on L, n, and i: (i) Con J L is a suborder of a balanced bipartite order on 2n elements; (ii) U ni. Then (19) N 1 6 i2 n in. Proof. We assume that for all l < i and for all top intervals I = [0 I, 1 L ] of N satisfying U I nl, the inequality (20) I 1 6 l2 n ln holds. By Theorem 28, condition (α) or condition (β) holds for N. If (α) holds for N, then N i2 n i2 n in, as required. If (β) holds for N, then there exists a positive integer j < i and a top interval M of N such that U M nj, and N M + Applying (20) with I = M, we obtain that (i j)in. 3 M 1 6 j2 n jn.
17 MINIMAL CONGRUENCE LATTICE REPRESENTATION 17 Therefore, by (a), N M + (i j)in j2 n + 1 (i j)in jn = 1 6 j2 n + 1 (i j)in jn + ( i2 n in) + (1 6 i2 n in) = n 6 (j2 + j + 2i 2 2ij i 2 i) + ( 1 6 i2 n in) = n 6 ((i j)2 (i j)) + ( 1 6 i2 n in) 1 6 i2 n in, proving the corollary. We rephrase Corollary 29, so that it be more straightforward to apply. Corollary 30. Let L be a rectangular lattice with a minimal collection Û. Let N be a top interval of L slim and let U = Û N. Let p and i be positive integers. Let us make the following assumptions on L, p, and i: (i) Con J L is a suborder of a balanced bipartite order on p elements; (ii) U pi. Then (21) N 1 12 i2 p ip. Proof. We may assume that p > 1. Let n = p+1 2. Since p 2n, condition (i) of Corollary 29 follows from the present condition (i). Since p n, condition (ii) of Corollary 29 follows from the present condition (ii), so we can apply Corollary 29, to obtain that N 1 6 i2 n in 1 12 i2 p ip. 6. Proof of the Main Theorem Let L n be a rectangular lattice such that Con J L n is a balanced bipartite order on n elements. We define k = = , and prove that L 3 n has at least kn 3 elements. If n 11, then kn 3 1, so the inequality L n > kn 3 is trivial. So we can assume that n 12. Let Û be a minimal collection in L. Since Con J L is a balanced bipartite order on n elements, there are at least n2 6 covering pairs in Con J L. Each covering pair in Con J L is associated with a tight S 7 in Û and each element of Û is associated with at most two covering pairs in Con J L. It follows that n2 n (22) Û 12 n. 12 We apply Corollary 30 to the lattice L, the minimal collection Û in L, the top interval N = L slim of L slim, and the integers p = n and i = n 12. Let U = Û N. Note that, by definition, Û = U.
18 18 G. GRÄTZER AND E. KNAPP By (21) and (22), we obtain that L L slim = N 1 12 n 12 2n n 12 n = n n ( ) n Since n 12 1 n 12 and n 24 n 12, for n 12, we obtain that L n 12 n 24 n 12 = n = kn3, completing the proof of the Main Theorem. References [1] G. Czédli and E. T. Schmidt, How to derive finite semimodular lattices from distributive lattices? Acta Math. Hung., 121/3 (2008), [2] G. Grätzer, The Congruences of a Finite Lattice, A Proof-by-Picture Approach. Birkhäuser Boston, xxiii+281 pp. ISBN: [3] G. Grätzer and E. Knapp, Notes on planar semimodular lattices. I. Construction, Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged) 73 (2007), [4], A note on planar semimodular lattices, Algebra Universalis 58 (2008), [5], Notes on planar semimodular lattices. II. Congruences. Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged) 74 (2008), [6], Notes on planar semimodular lattices. III. Rectangular lattices Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged) 75 (2009), [7] G. Grätzer, H. Lakser, and E. T. Schmidt, Congruence lattices of small planar lattices, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 123 (1995), [8], Congruence lattices of finite semimodular lattices, Canad. Math. Bull. 41 (1998), [9] G. Grätzer, I. Rival, and N. Zaguia, Small representations of finite distributive lattices as congruence lattices, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 123 (1995), Correction: 126 (1998), Department of Mathematics, University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N2, Canada address, G. Grätzer: gratzer@me.com URL, G. Grätzer: University of Manitoba, Winnipeg, MB R3T 2N2, Canada address, E. Knapp: edward.m.knapp@gmail.com
NOTES ON PLANAR SEMIMODULAR LATTICES. IV. THE SIZE OF A MINIMAL CONGRUENCE LATTICE REPRESENTATION WITH RECTANGULAR LATTICES
NOTES ON PLANAR SEMIMODULAR LATTICES. IV. THE SIZE OF A MINIMAL CONGRUENCE LATTICE REPRESENTATION WITH RECTANGULAR LATTICES G. GRÄTZER AND E. KNAPP Abstract. Let D be a finite distributive lattice with
More informationOn the variety generated by planar modular lattices
On the variety generated by planar modular lattices G. Grätzer and R. W. Quackenbush Abstract. We investigate the variety generated by the class of planar modular lattices. The main result is a structure
More informationA note on congruence lattices of slim semimodular
A note on congruence lattices of slim semimodular lattices Gábor Czédli Abstract. Recently, G. Grätzer has raised an interesting problem: Which distributive lattices are congruence lattices of slim semimodular
More informationCONGRUENCES OF 2-DIMENSIONAL SEMIMODULAR LATTICES (PROOF-BY-PICTURES VERSION)
CONGRUENCES OF 2-DIMENSIONAL SEMIMODULAR LATTICES (PROOF-BY-PICTURES VERSION) E. T. SCHMIDT Abstract. In this note we describe the congruences of slim semimodular lattices, i.e. of 2-dimensional semimodular
More informationFinite pseudocomplemented lattices: The spectra and the Glivenko congruence
Finite pseudocomplemented lattices: The spectra and the Glivenko congruence T. Katriňák and J. Guričan Abstract. Recently, Grätzer, Gunderson and Quackenbush have characterized the spectra of finite pseudocomplemented
More informationSWING LATTICE GAME AND A DIRECT PROOF OF THE SWING LEMMA FOR PLANAR SEMIMODULAR LATTICES
SWING LATTICE GAME AND A DIRECT PROOF OF THE SWING LEMMA FOR PLANAR SEMIMODULAR LATTICES GÁBOR CZÉDLI AND GÉZA MAKAY Dedicated to the eighty-fifth birthday of Béla Csákány Abstract. The Swing Lemma, due
More information10. Finite Lattices and their Congruence Lattices. If memories are all I sing I d rather drive a truck. Ricky Nelson
10. Finite Lattices and their Congruence Lattices If memories are all I sing I d rather drive a truck. Ricky Nelson In this chapter we want to study the structure of finite lattices, and how it is reflected
More informationSUBLATTICES OF LATTICES OF ORDER-CONVEX SETS, III. THE CASE OF TOTALLY ORDERED SETS
SUBLATTICES OF LATTICES OF ORDER-CONVEX SETS, III. THE CASE OF TOTALLY ORDERED SETS MARINA SEMENOVA AND FRIEDRICH WEHRUNG Abstract. For a partially ordered set P, let Co(P) denote the lattice of all order-convex
More informationA structure theorem of semimodular lattices and the Rubik s cube
A structure theorem of semimodular lattices and the Rubik s cube E. Tamás Schmidt To the memory of my friends Ervin Fried and Jiři Sichler Abstract. In [4] we proved the following structure theorem: every
More informationARCHIVUM MATHEMATICUM (BRNO) Tomus 48 (2012), M. Sambasiva Rao
ARCHIVUM MATHEMATICUM (BRNO) Tomus 48 (2012), 97 105 δ-ideals IN PSEUDO-COMPLEMENTED DISTRIBUTIVE LATTICES M. Sambasiva Rao Abstract. The concept of δ-ideals is introduced in a pseudo-complemented distributive
More informationDISTRIBUTIVE, STANDARD AND NEUTRAL ELEMENTS IN TRELLISES. 1. Introduction
Acta Math. Univ. Comenianae Vol. LXXVII, 2 (2008), pp. 167 174 167 DISTRIBUTIVE, STANDARD AND NEUTRAL ELEMENTS IN TRELLISES SHASHIREKHA B. RAI Abstract. In this paper, the concepts of distributive, standard
More informationA CHARACTERIZATION OF LOCALLY FINITE VARIETIES THAT SATISFY A NONTRIVIAL CONGRUENCE IDENTITY
A CHARACTERIZATION OF LOCALLY FINITE VARIETIES THAT SATISFY A NONTRIVIAL CONGRUENCE IDENTITY KEITH A. KEARNES Abstract. We show that a locally finite variety satisfies a nontrivial congruence identity
More informationSimultaneous congruence representations: a special case
Algebra univers. 54 (2005) 249 255 0002-5240/05/020249 07 DOI 10.1007/s00012-005-1931-3 c Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 2005 Algebra Universalis Mailbox Simultaneous congruence representations: a special case
More informationarxiv:math/ v1 [math.gm] 21 Jan 2005
arxiv:math/0501341v1 [math.gm] 21 Jan 2005 SUBLATTICES OF LATTICES OF ORDER-CONVEX SETS, I. THE MAIN REPRESENTATION THEOREM MARINA SEMENOVA AND FRIEDRICH WEHRUNG Abstract. For a partially ordered set P,
More information8. Distributive Lattices. Every dog must have his day.
8. Distributive Lattices Every dog must have his day. In this chapter and the next we will look at the two most important lattice varieties: distributive and modular lattices. Let us set the context for
More informationOn the mean connected induced subgraph order of cographs
AUSTRALASIAN JOURNAL OF COMBINATORICS Volume 71(1) (018), Pages 161 183 On the mean connected induced subgraph order of cographs Matthew E Kroeker Lucas Mol Ortrud R Oellermann University of Winnipeg Winnipeg,
More informationMath 222A W03 D. Congruence relations
Math 222A W03 D. 1. The concept Congruence relations Let s start with a familiar case: congruence mod n on the ring Z of integers. Just to be specific, let s use n = 6. This congruence is an equivalence
More informationCharacterizations of the finite quadric Veroneseans V 2n
Characterizations of the finite quadric Veroneseans V 2n n J. A. Thas H. Van Maldeghem Abstract We generalize and complete several characterizations of the finite quadric Veroneseans surveyed in [3]. Our
More informationUniquely complemented lattices The 45th Summer School on Algebra Sept. 2 7, 2007, Hotel Partizan Tale, Low Tatras Slovakia
Uniquely complemented lattices The 45th Summer School on Algebra Sept. 2 7, 2007, Hotel Partizan Tale, Low Tatras Slovakia G. Grätzer September 3, 2007 The Whitman Conditions P(X ) all polynomials over
More information4 CONNECTED PROJECTIVE-PLANAR GRAPHS ARE HAMILTONIAN. Robin Thomas* Xingxing Yu**
4 CONNECTED PROJECTIVE-PLANAR GRAPHS ARE HAMILTONIAN Robin Thomas* Xingxing Yu** School of Mathematics Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, Georgia 30332, USA May 1991, revised 23 October 1993. Published
More informationChristopher J. TAYLOR
REPORTS ON MATHEMATICAL LOGIC 51 (2016), 3 14 doi:10.4467/20842589rm.16.001.5278 Christopher J. TAYLOR DISCRIMINATOR VARIETIES OF DOUBLE-HEYTING ALGEBRAS A b s t r a c t. We prove that a variety of double-heyting
More informationLOCALLY SOLVABLE FACTORS OF VARIETIES
PROCEEDINGS OF HE AMERICAN MAHEMAICAL SOCIEY Volume 124, Number 12, December 1996, Pages 3619 3625 S 0002-9939(96)03501-0 LOCALLY SOLVABLE FACORS OF VARIEIES KEIH A. KEARNES (Communicated by Lance W. Small)
More information8. Prime Factorization and Primary Decompositions
70 Andreas Gathmann 8. Prime Factorization and Primary Decompositions 13 When it comes to actual computations, Euclidean domains (or more generally principal ideal domains) are probably the nicest rings
More informationDisjointness conditions in free products of. distributive lattices: An application of Ramsay's theorem. Harry Lakser< 1)
Proc. Univ. of Houston Lattice Theory Conf..Houston 1973 Disjointness conditions in free products of distributive lattices: An application of Ramsay's theorem. Harry Lakser< 1) 1. Introduction. Let L be
More informationSergey Norin Department of Mathematics and Statistics McGill University Montreal, Quebec H3A 2K6, Canada. and
NON-PLANAR EXTENSIONS OF SUBDIVISIONS OF PLANAR GRAPHS Sergey Norin Department of Mathematics and Statistics McGill University Montreal, Quebec H3A 2K6, Canada and Robin Thomas 1 School of Mathematics
More informationMaximal perpendicularity in certain Abelian groups
Acta Univ. Sapientiae, Mathematica, 9, 1 (2017) 235 247 DOI: 10.1515/ausm-2017-0016 Maximal perpendicularity in certain Abelian groups Mika Mattila Department of Mathematics, Tampere University of Technology,
More informationCOUNTABLE CHAINS OF DISTRIBUTIVE LATTICES AS MAXIMAL SEMILATTICE QUOTIENTS OF POSITIVE CONES OF DIMENSION GROUPS
COUNTABLE CHAINS OF DISTRIBUTIVE LATTICES AS MAXIMAL SEMILATTICE QUOTIENTS OF POSITIVE CONES OF DIMENSION GROUPS PAVEL RŮŽIČKA Abstract. We construct a countable chain of Boolean semilattices, with all
More informationClass Notes on Poset Theory Johan G. Belinfante Revised 1995 May 21
Class Notes on Poset Theory Johan G Belinfante Revised 1995 May 21 Introduction These notes were originally prepared in July 1972 as a handout for a class in modern algebra taught at the Carnegie-Mellon
More informationPartial cubes: structures, characterizations, and constructions
Partial cubes: structures, characterizations, and constructions Sergei Ovchinnikov San Francisco State University, Mathematics Department, 1600 Holloway Ave., San Francisco, CA 94132 Abstract Partial cubes
More informationarxiv: v2 [math.co] 7 Jan 2016
Global Cycle Properties in Locally Isometric Graphs arxiv:1506.03310v2 [math.co] 7 Jan 2016 Adam Borchert, Skylar Nicol, Ortrud R. Oellermann Department of Mathematics and Statistics University of Winnipeg,
More informationPerfect matchings in highly cyclically connected regular graphs
Perfect matchings in highly cyclically connected regular graphs arxiv:1709.08891v1 [math.co] 6 Sep 017 Robert Lukot ka Comenius University, Bratislava lukotka@dcs.fmph.uniba.sk Edita Rollová University
More informationTHE LATTICE OF SUBVARIETIES OF SEMILATTICE ORDERED ALGEBRAS
THE LATTICE OF SUBVARIETIES OF SEMILATTICE ORDERED ALGEBRAS A. PILITOWSKA 1 AND A. ZAMOJSKA-DZIENIO 2 Abstract. This paper is devoted to the semilattice ordered V-algebras of the form (A, Ω, +), where
More informationFinite Simple Abelian Algebras are Strictly Simple
Finite Simple Abelian Algebras are Strictly Simple Matthew A. Valeriote Abstract A finite universal algebra is called strictly simple if it is simple and has no nontrivial subalgebras. An algebra is said
More informationA CLASS OF INFINITE CONVEX GEOMETRIES
A CLASS OF INFINITE CONVEX GEOMETRIES KIRA ADARICHEVA AND J. B. NATION Abstract. Various characterizations of finite convex geometries are well known. This note provides similar characterizations for possibly
More informationShifting Lemma and shifting lattice identities
Shifting Lemma and shifting lattice identities Ivan Chajda, Gábor Czédli, and Eszter K. Horváth Dedicated to the memory of György Pollák (1929 2001) Abstract. Gumm [6] used the Shifting Lemma with high
More informationDISTINGUISHING PARTITIONS AND ASYMMETRIC UNIFORM HYPERGRAPHS
DISTINGUISHING PARTITIONS AND ASYMMETRIC UNIFORM HYPERGRAPHS M. N. ELLINGHAM AND JUSTIN Z. SCHROEDER In memory of Mike Albertson. Abstract. A distinguishing partition for an action of a group Γ on a set
More informationON FILTERS IN BE-ALGEBRAS. Biao Long Meng. Received November 30, 2009
Scientiae Mathematicae Japonicae Online, e-2010, 105 111 105 ON FILTERS IN BE-ALGEBRAS Biao Long Meng Received November 30, 2009 Abstract. In this paper we first give a procedure by which we generate a
More informationGENERALIZED CANTOR SETS AND SETS OF SUMS OF CONVERGENT ALTERNATING SERIES
Journal of Applied Analysis Vol. 7, No. 1 (2001), pp. 131 150 GENERALIZED CANTOR SETS AND SETS OF SUMS OF CONVERGENT ALTERNATING SERIES M. DINDOŠ Received September 7, 2000 and, in revised form, February
More informationA Class of Infinite Convex Geometries
A Class of Infinite Convex Geometries Kira Adaricheva Department of Mathematics School of Science and Technology Nazarbayev University Astana, Kazakhstan kira.adaricheva@nu.edu.kz J. B. Nation Department
More informationMULTIPLICITIES OF MONOMIAL IDEALS
MULTIPLICITIES OF MONOMIAL IDEALS JÜRGEN HERZOG AND HEMA SRINIVASAN Introduction Let S = K[x 1 x n ] be a polynomial ring over a field K with standard grading, I S a graded ideal. The multiplicity of S/I
More informationCongruence Boolean Lifting Property
Congruence Boolean Lifting Property George GEORGESCU and Claudia MUREŞAN University of Bucharest Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science Academiei 14, RO 010014, Bucharest, Romania Emails: georgescu.capreni@yahoo.com;
More informationFinite groups determined by an inequality of the orders of their elements
Publ. Math. Debrecen 80/3-4 (2012), 457 463 DOI: 10.5486/PMD.2012.5168 Finite groups determined by an inequality of the orders of their elements By MARIUS TĂRNĂUCEANU (Iaşi) Abstract. In this note we introduce
More informationABELIAN GROUPS WHOSE SUBGROUP LATTICE IS THE UNION OF TWO INTERVALS
J. Aust. Math. Soc. 78 (2005), 27 36 ABELIAN GROUPS WHOSE SUBGROUP LATTICE IS THE UNION OF TWO INTERVALS SIMION BREAZ and GRIGORE CĂLUGĂREANU (Received 15 February 2003; revised 21 July 2003) Communicated
More informationMath 530 Lecture Notes. Xi Chen
Math 530 Lecture Notes Xi Chen 632 Central Academic Building, University of Alberta, Edmonton, Alberta T6G 2G1, CANADA E-mail address: xichen@math.ualberta.ca 1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary
More informationSpanning and Independence Properties of Finite Frames
Chapter 1 Spanning and Independence Properties of Finite Frames Peter G. Casazza and Darrin Speegle Abstract The fundamental notion of frame theory is redundancy. It is this property which makes frames
More informationSUMS PROBLEM COMPETITION, 2000
SUMS ROBLEM COMETITION, 2000 SOLUTIONS 1 The result is well known, and called Morley s Theorem Many proofs are known See for example HSM Coxeter, Introduction to Geometry, page 23 2 If the number of vertices,
More informationJónsson posets and unary Jónsson algebras
Jónsson posets and unary Jónsson algebras Keith A. Kearnes and Greg Oman Abstract. We show that if P is an infinite poset whose proper order ideals have cardinality strictly less than P, and κ is a cardinal
More informationProjective Schemes with Degenerate General Hyperplane Section II
Beiträge zur Algebra und Geometrie Contributions to Algebra and Geometry Volume 44 (2003), No. 1, 111-126. Projective Schemes with Degenerate General Hyperplane Section II E. Ballico N. Chiarli S. Greco
More informationDecomposing oriented graphs into transitive tournaments
Decomposing oriented graphs into transitive tournaments Raphael Yuster Department of Mathematics University of Haifa Haifa 39105, Israel Abstract For an oriented graph G with n vertices, let f(g) denote
More informationFaithful embedding on finite orders classes
Faithful embedding on finite orders classes Alain Guillet Jimmy Leblet Jean-Xavier Rampon Abstract We investigate, in the particular case of finite orders classes, the notion of faithful embedding among
More informationMAPPING CHAINABLE CONTINUA ONTO DENDROIDS
MAPPING CHAINABLE CONTINUA ONTO DENDROIDS PIOTR MINC Abstract. We prove that every chainable continuum can be mapped into a dendroid such that all point-inverses consist of at most three points. In particular,
More informationSmall Cycle Cover of 2-Connected Cubic Graphs
. Small Cycle Cover of 2-Connected Cubic Graphs Hong-Jian Lai and Xiangwen Li 1 Department of Mathematics West Virginia University, Morgantown WV 26505 Abstract Every 2-connected simple cubic graph of
More informationarxiv:math/ v1 [math.gm] 21 Jan 2005
arxiv:math/0501340v1 [math.gm] 21 Jan 2005 SUBLATTICES OF LATTICES OF ORDER-CONVEX SETS, II. POSETS OF FINITE LENGTH MARINA SEMENOVA AND FRIEDRICH WEHRUNG Abstract. For a positive integer n, we denote
More informationNew lower bounds for hypergraph Ramsey numbers
New lower bounds for hypergraph Ramsey numbers Dhruv Mubayi Andrew Suk Abstract The Ramsey number r k (s, n) is the minimum N such that for every red-blue coloring of the k-tuples of {1,..., N}, there
More informationAcyclic and Oriented Chromatic Numbers of Graphs
Acyclic and Oriented Chromatic Numbers of Graphs A. V. Kostochka Novosibirsk State University 630090, Novosibirsk, Russia X. Zhu Dept. of Applied Mathematics National Sun Yat-Sen University Kaohsiung,
More informationGeneralized Pigeonhole Properties of Graphs and Oriented Graphs
Europ. J. Combinatorics (2002) 23, 257 274 doi:10.1006/eujc.2002.0574 Available online at http://www.idealibrary.com on Generalized Pigeonhole Properties of Graphs and Oriented Graphs ANTHONY BONATO, PETER
More informationOn lattices of convex sets in R n
Algebra Universalis March 16, 2005 13:32 1934u F03058 (1934u), pages 1 39 Page 1 Sheet 1 of 39 Algebra univers. 00 (0000) 1 39 0002-5240/00/000001 39 DOI 10.1007/s00012-000-1934-0
More informationCHAPTER 7. Connectedness
CHAPTER 7 Connectedness 7.1. Connected topological spaces Definition 7.1. A topological space (X, T X ) is said to be connected if there is no continuous surjection f : X {0, 1} where the two point set
More informationMATH 223A NOTES 2011 LIE ALGEBRAS 35
MATH 3A NOTES 011 LIE ALGEBRAS 35 9. Abstract root systems We now attempt to reconstruct the Lie algebra based only on the information given by the set of roots Φ which is embedded in Euclidean space E.
More informationarxiv:math/ v1 [math.oa] 9 May 2005
arxiv:math/0505154v1 [math.oa] 9 May 2005 A GENERALIZATION OF ANDÔ S THEOREM AND PARROTT S EXAMPLE DAVID OPĚLA Abstract. Andô s theorem states that any pair of commuting contractions on a Hilbert space
More informationMaximum union-free subfamilies
Maximum union-free subfamilies Jacob Fox Choongbum Lee Benny Sudakov Abstract An old problem of Moser asks: how large of a union-free subfamily does every family of m sets have? A family of sets is called
More informationSUBSPACE LATTICES OF FINITE VECTOR SPACES ARE 5-GENERATED
SUBSPACE LATTICES OF FINITE VECTOR SPACES ARE 5-GENERATED LÁSZLÓ ZÁDORI To the memory of András Huhn Abstract. Let n 3. From the description of subdirectly irreducible complemented Arguesian lattices with
More informationTUTTE POLYNOMIALS OF q-cones
TUTTE POLYNOMIALS OF q-cones JOSEPH E. BONIN AND HONGXUN QIN ABSTRACT. We derive a formula for the Tutte polynomial t(g ; x, y) of a q-cone G of a GF (q)-representable geometry G in terms of t(g; x, y).
More informationTHE GROUP OF UNITS OF SOME FINITE LOCAL RINGS I
J Korean Math Soc 46 (009), No, pp 95 311 THE GROUP OF UNITS OF SOME FINITE LOCAL RINGS I Sung Sik Woo Abstract The purpose of this paper is to identify the group of units of finite local rings of the
More informationQUIVERS AND LATTICES.
QUIVERS AND LATTICES. KEVIN MCGERTY We will discuss two classification results in quite different areas which turn out to have the same answer. This note is an slightly expanded version of the talk given
More informationINFINITE RINGS WITH PLANAR ZERO-DIVISOR GRAPHS
INFINITE RINGS WITH PLANAR ZERO-DIVISOR GRAPHS YONGWEI YAO Abstract. For any commutative ring R that is not a domain, there is a zerodivisor graph, denoted Γ(R), in which the vertices are the nonzero zero-divisors
More informationAutomorphism groups of wreath product digraphs
Automorphism groups of wreath product digraphs Edward Dobson Department of Mathematics and Statistics Mississippi State University PO Drawer MA Mississippi State, MS 39762 USA dobson@math.msstate.edu Joy
More informationA DECOMPOSITION OF E 0 -SEMIGROUPS
A DECOMPOSITION OF E 0 -SEMIGROUPS Remus Floricel Abstract. Any E 0 -semigroup of a von Neumann algebra can be uniquely decomposed as the direct sum of an inner E 0 -semigroup and a properly outer E 0
More informationReimer s Inequality on a Finite Distributive Lattice
Reimer s Inequality on a Finite Distributive Lattice Clifford Smyth Mathematics and Statistics Department University of North Carolina Greensboro Greensboro, NC 27412 USA cdsmyth@uncg.edu May 1, 2013 Abstract
More informationTHE CLOSED-POINT ZARISKI TOPOLOGY FOR IRREDUCIBLE REPRESENTATIONS. K. R. Goodearl and E. S. Letzter
THE CLOSED-POINT ZARISKI TOPOLOGY FOR IRREDUCIBLE REPRESENTATIONS K. R. Goodearl and E. S. Letzter Abstract. In previous work, the second author introduced a topology, for spaces of irreducible representations,
More informationSequences of height 1 primes in Z[X]
Sequences of height 1 primes in Z[X] Stephen McAdam Department of Mathematics University of Texas Austin TX 78712 mcadam@math.utexas.edu Abstract: For each partition J K of {1, 2,, n} (n 2) with J 2, let
More informationLocating-Total Dominating Sets in Twin-Free Graphs: a Conjecture
Locating-Total Dominating Sets in Twin-Free Graphs: a Conjecture Florent Foucaud Michael A. Henning Department of Pure and Applied Mathematics University of Johannesburg Auckland Park, 2006, South Africa
More informationFine Structure of 4-Critical Triangle-Free Graphs II. Planar Triangle-Free Graphs with Two Precolored 4-Cycles
Mathematics Publications Mathematics 2017 Fine Structure of 4-Critical Triangle-Free Graphs II. Planar Triangle-Free Graphs with Two Precolored 4-Cycles Zdeněk Dvořák Charles University Bernard Lidicky
More informationKnowledge spaces from a topological point of view
Knowledge spaces from a topological point of view V.I.Danilov Central Economics and Mathematics Institute of RAS Abstract In this paper we consider the operations of restriction, extension and gluing of
More informationSpanning Paths in Infinite Planar Graphs
Spanning Paths in Infinite Planar Graphs Nathaniel Dean AT&T, ROOM 2C-415 600 MOUNTAIN AVENUE MURRAY HILL, NEW JERSEY 07974-0636, USA Robin Thomas* Xingxing Yu SCHOOL OF MATHEMATICS GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF
More informationThe cocycle lattice of binary matroids
Published in: Europ. J. Comb. 14 (1993), 241 250. The cocycle lattice of binary matroids László Lovász Eötvös University, Budapest, Hungary, H-1088 Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544 Ákos Seress*
More informationPrime and irreducible elements of the ring of integers modulo n
Prime and irreducible elements of the ring of integers modulo n M. H. Jafari and A. R. Madadi Department of Pure Mathematics, Faculty of Mathematical Sciences University of Tabriz, Tabriz, Iran Abstract
More informationREPRESENTING CONGRUENCE LATTICES OF LATTICES WITH PARTIAL UNARY OPERATIONS AS CONGRUENCE LATTICES OF LATTICES. I. INTERVAL EQUIVALENCE
REPRESENTING CONGRUENCE LATTICES OF LATTICES WITH PARTIAL UNARY OPERATIONS AS CONGRUENCE LATTICES OF LATTICES. I. INTERVAL EQUIVALENCE G. GRÄTZER AND E. T. SCHMIDT Abstract. Let L be a bounded lattice,
More informationCycles in 4-Connected Planar Graphs
Cycles in 4-Connected Planar Graphs Guantao Chen Department of Mathematics & Statistics Georgia State University Atlanta, GA 30303 matgcc@panther.gsu.edu Genghua Fan Institute of Systems Science Chinese
More informationClearly C B, for every C Q. Suppose that we may find v 1, v 2,..., v n
10. Algebraic closure Definition 10.1. Let K be a field. The algebraic closure of K, denoted K, is an algebraic field extension L/K such that every polynomial in K[x] splits in L. We say that K is algebraically
More informationParameterizing orbits in flag varieties
Parameterizing orbits in flag varieties W. Ethan Duckworth April 2008 Abstract In this document we parameterize the orbits of certain groups acting on partial flag varieties with finitely many orbits.
More informationLattice Theory Lecture 4. Non-distributive lattices
Lattice Theory Lecture 4 Non-distributive lattices John Harding New Mexico State University www.math.nmsu.edu/ JohnHarding.html jharding@nmsu.edu Toulouse, July 2017 Introduction Here we mostly consider
More informationFree and Finitely Presented Lattices
C h a p t e r 2 Free and Finitely Presented Lattices by R. Freese and J. B. Nation This is an extended version of our chapter in the book LatticeTheory: Special Topics and Applications, vol 2, edited by
More informationParity Versions of 2-Connectedness
Parity Versions of 2-Connectedness C. Little Institute of Fundamental Sciences Massey University Palmerston North, New Zealand c.little@massey.ac.nz A. Vince Department of Mathematics University of Florida
More informationNotes on CD-independent subsets
Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged) 78 (2012), 3 24 Notes on CD-independent subsets Eszter K. Horváth and Sándor Radeleczki Communicated by G. Czédli Abstract. It is proved in [8] that any two CD-bases in a finite
More informationUNIVERSALITY OF THE LATTICE OF TRANSFORMATION MONOIDS
UNIVERSALITY OF THE LATTICE OF TRANSFORMATION MONOIDS MICHAEL PINSKER AND SAHARON SHELAH Abstract. The set of all transformation monoids on a fixed set of infinite cardinality λ, equipped with the order
More informationAN AXIOMATIC FORMATION THAT IS NOT A VARIETY
AN AXIOMATIC FORMATION THAT IS NOT A VARIETY KEITH A. KEARNES Abstract. We show that any variety of groups that contains a finite nonsolvable group contains an axiomatic formation that is not a subvariety.
More informationBoolean Inner-Product Spaces and Boolean Matrices
Boolean Inner-Product Spaces and Boolean Matrices Stan Gudder Department of Mathematics, University of Denver, Denver CO 80208 Frédéric Latrémolière Department of Mathematics, University of Denver, Denver
More informationON 2-ABSORBING PRIMARY AND WEAKLY 2-ABSORBING ELEMENTS IN MULTIPLICATIVE LATTICES
italian journal of pure and applied mathematics n. 34 2015 (263 276) 263 ON 2-ABSORBING PRIMARY AND WEAKLY 2-ABSORBING ELEMENTS IN MULTIPLICATIVE LATTICES Fethi Çallialp Beykent University Faculty of Science
More informationMath 6510 Homework 10
2.2 Problems 9 Problem. Compute the homology group of the following 2-complexes X: a) The quotient of S 2 obtained by identifying north and south poles to a point b) S 1 (S 1 S 1 ) c) The space obtained
More informationPlanar and Affine Spaces
Planar and Affine Spaces Pýnar Anapa İbrahim Günaltılı Hendrik Van Maldeghem Abstract In this note, we characterize finite 3-dimensional affine spaces as the only linear spaces endowed with set Ω of proper
More informationHILBERT BASIS OF THE LIPMAN SEMIGROUP
Available at: http://publications.ictp.it IC/2010/061 United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization and International Atomic Energy Agency THE ABDUS SALAM INTERNATIONAL CENTRE FOR THEORETICAL
More informationRINGS IN POST ALGEBRAS. 1. Introduction
Acta Math. Univ. Comenianae Vol. LXXVI, 2(2007), pp. 263 272 263 RINGS IN POST ALGEBRAS S. RUDEANU Abstract. Serfati [7] defined a ring structure on every Post algebra. In this paper we determine all the
More informationarxiv: v1 [math.co] 20 Dec 2016
F-POLYNOMIAL FORMULA FROM CONTINUED FRACTIONS MICHELLE RABIDEAU arxiv:1612.06845v1 [math.co] 20 Dec 2016 Abstract. For cluster algebras from surfaces, there is a known formula for cluster variables and
More informationRemarks on the Thickness of K n,n,n
Remarks on the Thickness of K n,n,n Yan Yang Department of Mathematics Tianjin University, Tianjin 30007, P.R.China yanyang@tju.edu.cn Abstract The thickness θ(g) of a graph G is the minimum number of
More informationUniversal Algebra for Logics
Universal Algebra for Logics Joanna GRYGIEL University of Czestochowa Poland j.grygiel@ajd.czest.pl 2005 These notes form Lecture Notes of a short course which I will give at 1st School on Universal Logic
More informationIRREDUCIBLE REPRESENTATIONS OF SEMISIMPLE LIE ALGEBRAS. Contents
IRREDUCIBLE REPRESENTATIONS OF SEMISIMPLE LIE ALGEBRAS NEEL PATEL Abstract. The goal of this paper is to study the irreducible representations of semisimple Lie algebras. We will begin by considering two
More informationRELATIVE N-TH NON-COMMUTING GRAPHS OF FINITE GROUPS. Communicated by Ali Reza Ashrafi. 1. Introduction
Bulletin of the Iranian Mathematical Society Vol. 39 No. 4 (2013), pp 663-674. RELATIVE N-TH NON-COMMUTING GRAPHS OF FINITE GROUPS A. ERFANIAN AND B. TOLUE Communicated by Ali Reza Ashrafi Abstract. Suppose
More informationPlanar Ramsey Numbers for Small Graphs
Planar Ramsey Numbers for Small Graphs Andrzej Dudek Department of Mathematics and Computer Science Emory University Atlanta, GA 30322, USA Andrzej Ruciński Faculty of Mathematics and Computer Science
More information= ϕ r cos θ. 0 cos ξ sin ξ and sin ξ cos ξ. sin ξ 0 cos ξ
8. The Banach-Tarski paradox May, 2012 The Banach-Tarski paradox is that a unit ball in Euclidean -space can be decomposed into finitely many parts which can then be reassembled to form two unit balls
More information