NON-COMMUTATIVE KRULL MONOIDS: A DIVISOR THEORETIC APPROACH AND THEIR ARITHMETIC

Transcription

1 Geroldinger, A. Osaka J. Math. 50 (2013), NON-COMMUTATIVE KRULL MONOIDS: A DIVISOR THEORETIC APPROACH AND THEIR ARITHMETIC ALFRED GEROLDINGER (Received May 10, 2011, revised September 26, 2011) Abstract A (not necessarily commutative) Krull monoid as introduced by Wauters is defined as a completely integrally closed monoid satisfying the ascending chain condition on divisorial two-sided ideals. We study the structure of these Krull monoids, both with ideal theoretic and with divisor theoretic methods. Among others we characterize normalizing Krull monoids by divisor theories. Based on these results we give a criterion for a Krull monoid to be a bounded factorization monoid, and we provide arithmetical finiteness results in case of normalizing Krull monoids with finite Davenport constant. 1. Introduction The arithmetic concept of a divisor theory has its origin in early algebraic number theory. Axiomatic approaches to more general commutative domains and monoids were formulated by Clifford [17], by Borewicz and Šafarevič [8], and then by Skula [61] and Gundlach [33]. The theory of divisorial ideals was developed in the first half of the 20th century by Prüfer, Krull and Lorenzen [56, 44, 45, 46, 48], and its presentation in the book of Gilmer [31] strongly influenced the development of multiplicative ideal theory. The concept of a commutative Krull monoid (defined as completely integrally closed commutative monoids satisfying the ascending chain condition on divisorial ideals) was introduced by Chouinard [16] 1981 in order to study the Krull ring property of commutative semigroup rings. Fresh impetus came from the theory of non-unique factorizations in the 1990s. Halter-Koch observed that the concept of monoids with divisor theory coincides with the concept of Krull monoids [34], and Krause [43] proved that a commutative domain is a Krull domain if and only if its multiplicative monoid of non-zero elements is a Krull monoid. Both, the concepts of divisor theories and of Krull monoids, were widely generalized, and a presentation can be found in the monographs [36, 29] (for a recent survey see [37]). The search for classes of non-commutative rings having an arithmetical ideal theory generalizing the classical theory of commutative Dedekind and Krull domains was 2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 20M13, 13F05, 16H10. This work was supported by the Austrian Science Fund FWF, Project Number P21576-N18.

2 504 A. GEROLDINGER started with the pioneering work of Asano [3, 4, 5, 6]. It lead to a theory of Dedekind-like rings, including Asano prime rings and Dedekind prime rings. Their ideal theory and also their connection with classical maximal orders over Dedekind domains in central simple algebras is presented in [53]. From the 1970s on a large number of concepts of non-commutative Krull rings has been introduced (see the contributions of Brungs, Bruyn, Chamarie, Dubrovin, Jespers, Marubayashi, Miyashita, Rehm and Wauters, cited in the references). Always the commutative situation was used as a model, and all these generalizations include Dedekind prime rings as a special case (see the survey of Jespers [38], and Section 5 for more details). The case of semigroup rings has received special attention, and the reader may want to consult the monograph of Jespers and Okniński [40]. In 1984 Wauters [63] introduced non-commutative Krull monoids generalizing the concept of Chouinard to the non-commutative setting. His focus was on normalizing Krull monoids, and he showed, among others, that a prime polynomial identity ring is a Chamarie Krull ring if and only if its monoid of regular elements is a Krull monoid (see Section 5). In the present paper we study non-commutative Krull monoids in the sense of Wauters, which are defined as completely integrally closed monoids satisfying the ascending chain condition on divisorial two-sided ideals. In Section 3 we develop the theory of divisorial two-sided ideals in analogy to the commutative setting (as it is done in [36, 29]). In Section 4 we introduce divisor theoretic concepts, and provide a characterization of normalizing Krull monoids in divisor theoretic terms (Theorem 4.13). Although many results and their proofs are very similar either to those for commutative monoids or to those for non-commutative rings, we provide full proofs. In Section 5 we discuss examples of commutative and non-commutative Krull monoids with an emphasis on the connection to ring theory. The existence of a suitable divisor homomorphism is crucial for the investigation of arithmetical finiteness properties in commutative Krull monoids (see [29, Section 3.4]). Based on the results in Sections 3 and 4 we can do some first steps towards a better understanding of the arithmetic of non-commutative Krull monoids. Among others, we generalize the concept of transfer homomorphisms, give a criterion for a Krull monoid to be a bounded-factorization monoid, and we provide arithmetical finiteness results in case of normalizing Krull monoids with finite Davenport constant (Theorem 6.5). 2. Basic concepts Let Æ denote the set of positive integers, and let Æ 0 Æ {0}. For integers a, b ¾, we set [a, b] {x ¾ a x b}. If A, B are sets, then A B means that A is contained in B but may be equal to B. By a semigroup we always mean an associative semigroup with unit element. If not denoted otherwise, we use multiplicative notation. Let H be a semigroup. We say

3 NON-COMMUTATIVE KRULL MONOIDS 505 that H is cancellative if for all elements a, b, c ¾ H, the equation ab ac implies b c and the equation ba ca implies b c. Clearly, subsemigroups of groups are cancellative. A group Q is called a left quotient group of H (a right quotient group of H, resp.) if H Q and every element of Q can be written in the form a 1 b with a, b ¾ H (or in the form ba 1, resp.). We say that H satisfies the right Ore condition (left Ore condition, resp.) if ah bh (Ha Hb, resp.) for all a, b ¾ H. A cancellative semigroup has a left quotient group if and only if it satisfies the left Ore condition, and if this holds, then the left quotient group is unique up to isomorphism (see [18, Theorems 1.24 and 1.25]). Moreover, a semigroup is embeddable in a group if and only if it is embeddable in a left (resp. right) quotient group (see [19, Section 12.4]). If H is cancellative and satisfies the left and right Ore condition, then every right quotient group Q of H is also a left quotient group and conversely. In this case, Q will simply be called a quotient group of H (indeed, if Q is a right quotient group and s ax ¾ 1 Q with a, x ¾ H, then the left Ore condition implies the existence of b, y ¾ H such that ya bx and hence s ax 1 y 1 b; thus Q is a left quotient group). Throughout this paper, a monoid means a cancellative semigroup which satisfies the left and the right Ore condition, and every monoid homomorphism ³Ï H D satisfies ³(1 H ) 1 D. Let H be a monoid. We denote by q(h) a quotient group of H. If ³Ï H D is a monoid homomorphism, then there is a unique homomorphism q(³)ï q(h) q(d) satisfying q(³) H ³. If S is a semigroup with H S q(h), then S is cancellative, q(h) is a quotient group of S, and hence S is a monoid. Every such monoid S with H S q(h) will be called an overmonoid of H. Let H op denote the opposite monoid of H (H op is a semigroup on the set H, where multiplication H op H op H op is defined by (a, b) ba for all a, b ¾ H; clearly, H op is a monoid in the above sense). We will encounter many statements on left and right ideals (quotients, and so on) in the monoid H. Since every right-statement (r) in H is a left-statement (l) in H op, it will always be sufficient to prove the left-statement. Let a, b ¾ H. The element a is said to be invertible if there exists an a ¾ ¼ H such that aa ¼ a ¼ a 1. The set of invertible elements of H will be denoted by H, and it is a subgroup of H. We say that H is reduced if H {1}. A straightforward calculation shows that ah bh if and only if ah bh. We say that a is a left divisor (right divisor, resp.) if b ¾ ah (b ¾ Ha, resp.), and we denote this by a l b (a r b, resp.). If b ¾ ah Ha, then we say that a is a divisor of b, and then we write a b. The element a is called an atom if a H and, for all u, Ú ¾ H, a uú implies u ¾ H or Ú ¾ H. The set of atoms of H is denoted by A(H). H is said to be atomic if every u ¾ H Ò H is a product of finitely many atoms of H.

4 506 A. GEROLDINGER For a set P, we denote by F(P) the free abelian monoid with basis P. Then every a ¾ F(P) has a unique representation in the form a p¾p p v p(a), where v p (a) ¾ Æ 0 and v p (a) 0 for almost all p ¾ P, the length of a. If H F(P) is free abelian and we call a È p¾p v p(a) ¾ Æ 0 with basis P, then H is reduced, atomic with A(H) P and q(h) ( (P), ). We use all notations and conventions concerning greatest common divisors in commutative monoids as in [36, Chapter 10]. 3. Divisorial ideals in monoids In this section we develop the theory of divisorial ideals in monoids as far as it is needed for the divisor theoretic approach in Section 4 and the arithmetical results in Section 6. An ideal will always be a two-sided ideal. We follow the presentation in the commutative setting (as given in [36, 29]) with the necessary adjustments. The definition of a Krull monoid (as given in Definition 3.11) is due to Wauters [63]. For Asano orders H (see Section 5), the commutativity of the group F Ú (H) (Proposition 3.12) dates back to the classical papers of Asano and can also be found in [52, Chapter II, 2]. Our first step is to introduce modules (following the terminology of [37]), fractional ideals and divisorial fractional ideals. Each definition will be followed by a simple technical lemma. DEFINITION 3.1. Let H be a monoid and A, B q(h) subsets. 1. We say that A is a left module (resp. right module) if H A A (resp. AH A), and denote by M l (H) (resp. M r (H)) the set of all left (resp. right) modules. The elements of M(H) M l (H) M r (H) are called modules (of H). 2. We set AB {ab a ¾ A, b ¾ B}, and define the left and right quotient of A and B by (A Ï l B) {x ¾ q(h) x B A} and (A Ï r B) {x ¾ q(h) Bx A}. If B {b}, then (A Ï l b) (A Ï l B) and (A Ï r b) (A Ï r B). The following lemma gathers some simple properties which will be used without further mention (most of them have a symmetric left or right variant). Lemma 3.2. Let H be a monoid, A, B, C q(h) subsets, and c ¾ H. 1. (A Ï l c) Ac 1, (ca Ï l B) c(a Ï l B), (Ac Ï l B) (A Ï l Bc 1 ), and (A Ï l cb) c 1 (A Ï l B). 2. (A Ï l B) Ì b¾b (A Ï l b) Ì b¾b Ab 1.

5 NON-COMMUTATIVE KRULL MONOIDS (A Ï l BC) ((A Ï l C) Ï l B) and ((A Ï l B) Ï r C) ((A Ï r C) Ï l B). 4. A (H Ï l (H Ï r A)) Ì c¾q(h), A Hc Hc and A (H Ï r (H Ï l A)) Ì c¾q(h), A ch ch. 5. (a) If A ¾ M l (H), then (A Ï l B) ¾ M l (H). (b) If A ¾ M r (H), then (A Ï l B) (A Ï l B H). (c) If B ¾ M l (H), then (A Ï l B) ¾ M r (H). Proof. We verify only the statements 3. and 4., as the remaining ones follow immediately from the definitions. 3. We have and (A Ï l BC) {x ¾ q(h) x BC A} {x ¾ q(h) x B (A Ï l C)} ((A Ï l C) Ï l B), ((A Ï l B) Ï r C) {x ¾ q(h) Cx (A Ï l B)} {x ¾ q(h) Cx B A} {x ¾ q(h) x B (A Ï r C)} ((A Ï r C) Ï l B). 4. We check only the first equality. Let a be an element of the given intersection. We have to show that a(h Ï r A) H, whence for all b ¾ (H Ï r A) we have to verify that ab ¾ H. If b¾(h Ï r A), then Ab H implies that A Hb 1. Thus we obtain that a ¾ c¾q(h), A Hc Hc Hb 1, A)). We have to verify and thus ab ¾ H. Conversely, suppose that a ¾ (H Ï l (H Ï r that a ¾ Hc for all c ¾ q(h) with A Hc. If A Hc, then Ac 1 H implies that c ¾ 1 (H Ï r A). Thus we get ac ¾ 1 H and a ¾ Hc. DEFINITION 3.3. Let H be a monoid and A q(h) a subset. Then A is said to be left (resp. right) H-fractional if there exist a ¾ H such that Aa H (resp. a A H). H-fractional if A is left and right H-fractional. a fractional left (resp. right) ideal (of H) if A is left H-fractional and a left module (resp. right H-fractional and a right module). a left (resp. right) ideal (of H) if A is a fractional left ideal (resp. right ideal) and A H. a ( fractional) ideal if A is a (fractional) left and right ideal. We denote by F s (H) the set of fractional ideals of H, and by I s (H) the set of ideals of H. Note that the empty set is an ideal of H. Let A q(h) be a subset. Then A is left H-fractional if and only if (H Ï r A) if and only if (H Ï r A) H.

6 508 A. GEROLDINGER right H-fractional if and only if (H Ï l A) if and only if (H Ï l A) H. Thus, if A is non-empty, then Lemma 3.2 (items 4. and 5.) shows that (H Ï l A) is a fractional left ideal and (H Ï r A) is a fractional right ideal. Lemma 3.4. Let H be a monoid. 1. If (a i ) i¾i is a family of fractional left ideals (resp. right ideals or ideals) and J I is finite, then Ì i¾i a i and É i¾j a i are fractional left ideals (resp. right ideals or ideals). 2. Equipped with usual multiplication, F s (H) is a semigroup with unit element H. 3. If a ¾ F s (H), then (H Ï l a)a H a(h Ï r a) and (H Ï l a) (H Ï r a) ¾ F s (H). 4. For every a ¾ q(h), we have (H Ï l ah) Ha 1, (H Ï r Ha) a 1 H, (H Ï l (H Ï r Ha)) Ha and (H Ï r (H Ï l ah)) ah. 5. If A q(h), then (H Ï l (H Ï r A)) is a fractional left ideal and (H Ï r (H Ï l A)) is a fractional right ideal. 6. If A q(h), a (H Ï l A) and b (H Ï r A), then a (H Ï l (H Ï r a)) and b (H Ï r (H Ï l b)). Proof. 1. Since Ì i¾i a i a j, É i¾j a i a j for some j ¾ J and subsets of left (resp. right) H-fractional sets are left (resp. right) H-fractional, the given intersection and product are left (resp. right) H-fractional, and then clearly they are fractional left ideals (resp. fractional right ideals or ideals). 2. Obvious. 3. Let a ¾ F s (H) and b ¾ F s (H) with ba ab H. Then b (H Ï l a) and hence H ba (H Ï l a)a H, which implies that (H Ï l a)a H. Similarly, we obtain that a(h Ï r a) H, and therefore (H Ï l a) b (H Ï r a) ¾ F s (H). 4. Let a ¾ q(h). The first two equalities follow directly from the definitions. Using them we infer that and (H Ï l (H Ï r Ha)) (H Ï l a 1 H) Ha (H Ï r (H Ï l ah)) (H Ï r Ha 1 ) ah. 5. This follows from 1. and from Lemma By Lemma , we have a (H Ï l (H Ï r a)). Conversely, if q ¾ (H Ï l (H Ï r a)), then and hence q ¾ (H Ï l A) a. DEFINITION 3.5. q A q(h Ï r (H Ï l A)) q(h Ï r a) H, Let H be a monoid and A q(h) a subset. 1. A is called a divisorial fractional left ideal if A (H Ï l (H Ï r A)), and a divisorial fractional right ideal if A (H Ï r (H Ï l A)).

7 NON-COMMUTATIVE KRULL MONOIDS If (H Ï l A) (H Ï r A), then we set A 1 (H Ï A) (H Ï l A). 3. If (H Ï l (H Ï r A)) (H Ï r (H Ï l A)), then we set A Ú (H Ï l (H Ï r A)), and A is said to be a divisorial fractional ideal (or a fractional Ú-ideal) if A A Ú. The set of such ideals will be denoted by F Ú (H), and I Ú (H) F Ú (H) I s (H) is the set of divisorial ideals of H (or the set of Ú-ideals of H). 4. Suppose that (H Ï l c) (H Ï r c) for all fractional ideals c of H. (a) For fractional ideals a, b we define a Ú b (ab) Ú, and we call a Ú b the Ú- product of a and b. (b) A fractional Ú-ideal a is called Ú-invertible if a Ú a 1 a 1 Ú a H. We denote by I Ú (H) the set of all Ú-invertible Ú-ideals. Lemma shows that a divisorial fractional left ideal is indeed a fractional left ideal, and the analogous statement holds for divisorial fractional right ideals and for divisorial fractional ideals. Furthermore, Lemma shows that, for every a ¾ q(h), H a is a divisorial fractional left ideal. We will see that the assumption of Definition holds in completely integrally closed monoids (Definition 3.11) and in normalizing monoids (Lemma 4.5). Lemma 3.6. Suppose that (H Ï l c) (H Ï r c) for all fractional ideals c of H, and let a, b be fractional ideals of H. 1. We have a a Ú (a Ú ) Ú and (a Ú ) 1 a 1 (a 1 ) Ú. In particular, a 1,a Ú ¾F Ú (H). 2. (aa 1 ) Ú (a Ú Ï a) If a,b ¾ F Ú (H), then a Ú b ¾ F Ú (H) and a b ¾ F Ú (H), and if a,b ¾ I Ú (H), then a Ú b ¾ I Ú (H), a b ¾ I Ú (H), and a Ú b a b. 4. If d ¾ q(h) with da b, then da Ú b Ú. Similarly, ad b implies that a Ú d b. 5. We have (ab) Ú (a Ú b) Ú (a Ú b Ú ) Ú. 6. Equipped with Ú-multiplication, F Ú (H) is a semigroup with unit element H, and I Ú (H) is a subsemigroup. Furthermore, if a ¾F Ú (H), then a is Ú-invertible if and only if a ¾ F Ú (H), and hence I (H) I Ú Ú(H) F Ú (H). Proof. 1. By Lemma , we have a a Ú. Therefore it follows that [(a 1 ) 1 ] 1 (a Ú ) 1 a 1 (a 1 ) Ú [(a 1 ) 1 ] 1, hence (a Ú ) 1 a 1 (a 1 ) Ú and (a Ú ) Ú ((a Ú ) 1 ) 1 (a 1 ) 1 a Ú. 2. Using Lemma we infer that (aa 1 ) 1 (H Ï aa 1 ) ((H Ï a 1 ) Ï a) (a Ú Ï a), and hence (aa 1 ) Ú (a Ú Ï a) Let a, b ¾ F Ú (H). Then a Ú b (ab) Ú is a divisorial fractional ideal by 1. Clearly, we have a b (a b) Ú a Ú b Ú a b. The remaining statements are clear.

8 510 A. GEROLDINGER 4. If da b, then we get da Ú d c¾q(h),a ch ch c¾q(h),da dch dch (H Ï r (H Ï l da)) (H Ï r (H Ï l b)) b Ú. e¾q(h),da eh If ad b, we argue similarly. 5. We have (ab) Ú (a Ú b) Ú (a Ú b Ú ) Ú. To obtain the reverse inclusion it is sufficient to verify that (ab) 1 (a Ú b Ú ) 1. Let d ¾ (ab) 1. Then dab H and hence dab H for all a ¾ a. Then 4. implies that dab Ú H Ú H for all a ¾ a and hence dab Ú H. Since ab Ú is a fractional ideal, it follows that ab Ú d H and hence abd H for all b ¾ b Ú. Again 4. implies that a Ú bd H for all b ¾ b Ú and hence a Ú b Ú d H. 6. Using 5. we obtain to first assertion. We provide the details for the furthermore statement. Let a ¾ F Ú (H). Then a ¾ 1 F Ú (H), and thus, if a is Ú-invertible, then a ¾ F Ú (H). Conversely, suppose that a ¾ F Ú (H) and let b ¾ F Ú (H) such that a Ú b b Ú a H. Then ab H, hence b (H Ï a) and ab a(h Ï a) H. This implies that H (ab) Ú a Ú a 1 H. Similarly, we get a 1 Ú a H, and hence a is Ú-invertible. The next topic are prime ideals and their properties. Lemma 3.7. Let H be a monoid and p H an ideal. Then the following statements are equivalent: (a) If a, b H are ideals with ab p, then a p or b p. (b) If a, b H are right ideals with ab p, then a p or b p. (c) If a, b H are left ideals with ab p, then a p or b p. (d) If a, b ¾ H with ahb p, then a ¾ p or b ¾ p. Proof. (a) µ (b) If a, b H are right ideals with ab p, then Ha, Hb H are ideals with (Ha)(Hb) Hab Hp p, and hence a Ha p or b Hb p. (b) µ (d) If a, b ¾ H with ahb p, then (ah)(bh) ph p, and hence a ¾ ah p or b ¾ bh p. (d) µ (a) If a ê p and b p, then there exist a ¾ a Ò p, b ¾ b Ò p, and hence ahb ê p, which implies that ab ê p. The proof of the implications (a) µ (c) µ (d) µ (a) runs along the same lines. An ideal p H is called prime if p H and if it satisfies the equivalent statements in Lemma 3.7. We denote by s-spec(h) the set of prime ideals of H, and by eh

9 NON-COMMUTATIVE KRULL MONOIDS 511 Ú-spec(H) s-spec(h) I Ú (H) the set of divisorial prime ideals of H. Following ring theory ([47, Definition 10.3]), we call a subset S H an m-system if, for any a, b ¾ S, there exists an h ¾ H such that ahb ¾ S. Thus Lemma 3.7 (d) shows that an ideal p H is prime if and only if H Òp is an m-system. A subset m H is called a Ú-maximal Ú-ideal if m is a maximal element of I Ú (H) Ò {H} (with respect to the inclusion). We denote by Ú-max(H) the set of all Ú-maximal Ú-ideals of H. Lemma 3.8. Suppose that (H Ï l c) (H Ï r c) for all fractional ideals c of H. 1. If S H is an m-system and p is maximal in the set {a ¾ I Ú (H) a S }, then p ¾ Ú-spec(H). 2. Ú-max(H) Ú-spec(H). Proof. 1. Assume to the contrary that p ¾I Ú (H) is maximal with respect to p S, but p is not prime. Then there exist elements a, b ¾ H Òp such that ahb p. By the maximal property of p, we have S (p HaH) Ú and S (p HbH) Ú. If s ¾ S (p HaH) Ú and t ¾ S (p HbH) Ú, then sht ¾ S for some h ¾ H, and using Lemma we obtain that sht ¾ (p HaH) Ú H(p HbH) Ú [(p HaH)H(p HbH)] Ú [p HaHbH] Ú p Ú p, a contradiction. 2. If m ¾ Ú-max(H), then m ¾ I Ú (H) is maximal with respect to m {1}, and therefore m is prime by 1. Our next step is to introduce completely integrally closed monoids. Lemma 3.9. Let H be a monoid and H ¼ an overmonoid of H. 1. If I (H Ï r H ¼ ), then H ¼ (I Ï l I ). 2. Let a, b ¾ H with ah ¼ b H. Then there exists a monoid H ¼¼ with H H ¼¼ H ¼ such that (H Ï r H ¼¼ ) and (H ¼¼ Ï l H ¼ ). Proof. 1. Since H ¼ (H ¼ I ) H ¼ I H, it follows that H ¼ I (H Ï r H ¼ ) I and hence H ¼ (I Ï l I ). 2. We set H ¼¼ HaH ¼ H, and obtain that H H ¼¼ H ¼, H ¼¼ H ¼¼ H ¼¼, H ¼¼ b H and ah ¼ H ¼¼. Lemma Let H be a monoid. 1. The following statements are equivalent: (a) There is no overmonoid H ¼ of H with H H ¼ q(h) and ah ¼ b H for some a, b ¾ H.

10 512 A. GEROLDINGER b) H for all non-empty left modules a of H which are (b) (a Ï l a) (b Ï r right H-fractional and for all non-empty right modules b of H which are left H-fractional. (c) (a Ï l a) (a Ï r a) H for all non-empty ideals a of H. 2. Suppose that H satisfies one of the equivalent conditions in 1. Then (H Ï l a) (H Ï r a) and (H Ï l (H Ï r a)) (H Ï r (H Ï l a)) for all non-empty fractional ideals a of H. Proof. 1. If H q(h), then all statements are fulfilled. Suppose that H is not a group. (a) µ (b) Let a q(h) and a ¾ H with Ha a and aa H. Then H ¼ (a Ï l a) is an overmonoid of H. If b ¾ a H, then ah ¼ b aa H and hence H ¼ H by 1. (b) µ (c) Obvious. (c) µ (a) Let H ¼ be an overmonoid of H with ah ¼ b H for some a, b ¾ H. We have to show that H ¼ H. By Lemma , there exists a monoid H ¼¼ with H H ¼¼ H ¼ such that a (H Ï r H ) ¼¼ and b (H Ï ¼¼ l H ¼ ). Then Lemma implies that H ¼¼ (a Ï l a) H and H ¼ (b Ï r b) H. 2. If a q(h) is a non-empty fractional ideal, then Lemma and 1. imply that (H Ï l a) ((a Ï r a) Ï l a) ((a Ï l a) Ï r a) (H Ï r a). Since (H Ï l a) (H Ï r a) is a non-empty fractional ideal, the previous argument implies that (H Ï l (H Ï r a)) (H Ï r (H Ï l a)). DEFINITION A monoid H is said to be completely integrally closed if it satisfies the equivalent conditions of Lemma Ú-noetherian if it satisfies the ascending chain condition on Ú-ideals of H. a Krull monoid if it is completely integrally closed and Ú-noetherian. If H is a commutative monoid, then the above notion of being completely integrally closed coincides with the usual one (see [29, Section 2.3]). We need a few notions from the theory of po-groups (we follow the terminology of [62]). Let Q (Q, ) be a multiplicatively written group with unit element 1 ¾ Q, and let be a partial order on Q. Then (Q,, ) is said to be a po-group if x y implies that axb ayb for all x, y, a, b ¾ Q. directed if each two element subset of Q has an upper and a lower bound. integrally closed if for all a, b ¾ Q, a n b for all n ¾ Æ implies that a 1. Proposition Let H be a completely integrally closed monoid. 1. Every non-empty fractional Ú-ideal is Ú-invertible, and Ú-max(H) Ú-spec(H)Ò{ }.

11 NON-COMMUTATIVE KRULL MONOIDS Equipped with the set-theoretical inclusion as a partial order and Ú-multiplication as group operation, the group F Ú (H) is a directed integrally closed po-group. 3. I Ú (H) is a commutative monoid with quotient group F Ú(H). 4. If a,b ¾ I (H), then a b if and only if a b in Ú I (H). In particular, (a b) Ú Ú gcd(a, b) in I (H), and Ú I Ú (H) is reduced. Proof. 1. Let a ¾ F Ú (H). Using Lemma and that H is completely integrally closed, we obtain that (aa 1 ) Ú (a Ú Ï a) 1 (a Ï a) 1 H 1 H. Since a 1 ¾ F Ú (H), we may apply this relation for a 1 and get (a 1 a) Ú H. Therefore it follows that a Ú a 1 (aa 1 ) Ú H (a 1 a) Ú a 1 Ú a. By Lemma , we have Ú-max(H) Ú-spec(H)Ò{ }. Assume to the contrary that there are p, q ¾ Ú-spec(H) with p q H. Since q is Ú-invertible, we get p q Ú a with a q 1 Ú p H. Since p is a prime ideal and q ê p, it follows that a p. Then a b Ú p with b a Ú p 1 H, whence p q Ú b Ú p and thus H q Ú b, a contradiction. 2. Clearly, (F Ú (H), Ú, ) is a po-group. In order to show that it is directed, consider a, b ¾ F Ú (H). Then a Ú b ¾ F Ú (H) is a lower bound of {a, b}, and (a b) Ú is an upper bound. In order to show that it is integrally closed, let a, b ¾ F Ú (H) be given such that a n b for all n ¾ Æ. We have to show that a H. The set a 0 n 1a n b is a non-empty fractional ideal, and we get a (a 0 Ï l a 0 ) H, since H is completely integrally closed. 3. Since (F Ú (H), Ú, ) is a directed integrally closed po-group by 2., F Ú (H) is a commutative group by [62, Theorem 2.3.9]. Since I (H) F Ú Ú(H) I Ú (H) by Lemma , it follows that I Ú (H) is a commutative monoid. In order to show that F Ú (H) is a quotient group of I Ú (H), let c ¾ F Ú(H) be given. We have to find some a ¾ I Ú (H) such that a Ú c ¾ I Ú (H), and for that it suffices to verify that a Ú c H. Now, since c is a fractional ideal, there exists some c ¾ H such that cc H, thus (HcH) Ú ¾ I Ú (H) and, by Lemma , (HcH) Ú Ú c ((HcH) Ú c) Ú (Hcc) Ú H Ú H. 4. Note that I Ú (H) is commutative by 3., and hence the greatest common divisor is formed in a commutative monoid. Thus the in particular statements follow immediately from the main statement. In order to show that divisibility is equivalent to containment, we argue as before. Let a, b ¾ I Ú (H). If a b in I Ú (H), then b a Ú c for some c ¾ I Ú (H), and therefore b a. If b a, then b Ú a 1 a Ú a 1 H, and

12 514 A. GEROLDINGER thus b Ú a 1 ¾ F Ú (H) I Ú (H) I Ú (H). The relation b (b Ú a 1 ) Ú a shows that a b in I Ú (H). The missing parts are ideal theoretic properties of Ú-noetherian monoids. Proposition Suppose that (H Ï l c) (H Ï r c) for all fractional ideals c of H. 1. The following statements are equivalent: (a) H is Ú-noetherian. (b) Every non-empty set of Ú-ideals of H has a maximal element (with respect to the inclusion). (c) Every non-empty set of fractional Ú-ideals of H with non-empty intersection has a minimal element (with respect to the inclusion). (d) For every non-empty ideal a H, there exists a finite subset E a such that (H E H) 1 a If H is Ú-noetherian and a ¾ I Ú (H), then there exists a finite set E a such that a (H E H) Ú. 3. If H is Ú-noetherian and a ¾ H, then the set {p ¾ Ú-spec(H) a ¾ p} is finite. Proof. 1. (a) µ (b) If Đ I Ú (H) has no maximal element, then every a ¾ Đ is properly contained in some a ¼ ¾ Đ. If a 0 ¾ Đ is arbitrary and the sequence (a n ) n 0 is recursively defined by a n 1 a ¼ n for all n 0, then (a n) n 0 is an ascending sequence of Ú-ideals not becoming stationary. (b) µ (c) Suppose that Đ F Ú (H) and a ¾ a for all a ¾ Đ. Then the set Đ {aa 1 a ¾ Đ} I Ú (H) has a maximal element aa 0 1 with a 0 ¾ Đ, and then a 0 is a minimal element of Đ. (c) µ (d) If E a, then a 1 (H E H) ¾ 1 F Ú (H). Thus the set Đ {(H E H) 1 E a, E finite} has a minimal element (H E 0 H) 1, where E 0 a is a finite non-empty subset. Then (H E 0 H) 1 a 1, and we assert that equality holds. Assume to the contrary that there exists some u ¾ (H E 0 H) 1 Òa 1. Then there exists an element a ¾ a such that ua H, and if E 1 E 0 {a}, then u (H E 1 H) 1 and consequently (H E 1 H) 1 (H E 0 H) 1, a contradiction. (d) µ (a) Let a 1 a 2 be an ascending sequence of Ú-ideals. Then a n 1a n H is an ideal of H, and we pick a finite non-empty subset E a such that (H E H) 1 a 1. Then there exists some m 0 such that E a m. For all n m we obtain a n a a Ú (H E H) Ú a m and hence a n a m. 2. Let H be a Ú-noetherian and a ¾ I Ú (H). By 1., there exists a finite subset E a such that (H E H) 1 a 1 and therefore (H E H) Ú a Ú a. 3. Assume to the contrary that H is Ú-noetherian and that there exists some a ¾ H such that the set Đ {p ¾ Ú-spec(H) a ¾ p} is infinite. Then 1. implies that there

13 NON-COMMUTATIVE KRULL MONOIDS 515 is a sequence (p n ) n 0 in Đ such that, for all n 0, p n is maximal in ĐÒ{p 0,,p n 1 }, and again by 1., the set {p 0 p 1 p n n ¾ Æ 0 } has a minimal element. Hence there exists some n ¾ Æ 0 such that p 0 p n p 0 p n 1 p n 1. Since p n 1 is a prime ideal, Lemma 3.7 implies that there exists some i ¾ [0, n] such that p i p n 1. Since now p n 1 ¾ ĐÒ{p 1,,p n } ĐÒ{p 1,,p i 1 } and p i is maximal in the larger set, it follows that p n 1 p i, and hence p n 1 p i ¾ ĐÒ{p 1,, p n }, a contradiction. In contrast to the commutative setting the set {p¾ú-spec(h) a ¾p} can be empty. We will provide an example in Section 5 after having established the relationship between Krull monoids and Krull rings (see Example 5.2). I Ú Theorem 3.14 (Ideal theory of Krull monoids). Let H be a Krull monoid. Then (H) is a free abelian monoid with basis Ú-max(H) Ú-spec(H)Ò{ }. Proof. Since H is Ú-noetherian and since divisibility in I Ú (H) is equivalent to containment (by Proposition ), I Ú (H) is reduced and satisfies the divisor chain condition. Therefore, it is atomic by [29, Proposition 1.1.4]. Again by the equivalence of divisibility and containment, the set of atoms of I Ú (H) equals Ú-max(H), and by Proposition 3.12, we have Ú-max(H) Ú-spec(H)Ò{ }. Since every non-empty prime Ú-ideal is a prime element of I (H), every atom of Ú I Ú (H) is a prime element, and thus (H) is a free abelian monoid with basis Ú-max(H) by [29, and 1.2.2]. I Ú 4. Divisor homomorphisms and normalizing monoids The classic concept of a divisor theory was first presented in an abstract (commutative) setting by Skula [61], and after that it was generalized in many steps (see e.g. [27], and the presentations in [36, 29]). In this section we investigate divisor homomorphisms and divisor theories in a non-commutative setting. We study normal elements and normalizing submonoids of rings and monoids as introduced by Wauters [63] and Cohn [20, Section 3.1]. For the role of normal elements in ring theory see [32, Chapter 12] and [53, Chapter 10]. The normalizing monoid N(H) of a monoid H plays a crucial role in the study of semigroup algebras K [H] (see [40]). In this context, Jespers and Okniński showed that completely integrally closed monoids, whose quotient groups are finitely generated torsion-free nilpotent groups and which satisfy the ascending chain condition on right ideals, are normalizing (see [39, Theorem 2]). Recall that, if R is a prime ring and a ¾ R Ò {0} is a normal element, then a is a regular element. The main results in this section are the divisor theoretic characterization of normalizing Krull monoids together with its consequences (Theorem 4.13 and Corollary 4.14). DEFINITION A homomorphism of monoids ³Ï H D is called a (left and right) divisor homomorphism if ³(u) l ³(Ú) implies that u l Ú and ³(u) r ³(Ú) implies that u r Ú for all u, Ú ¾ H.

14 516 A. GEROLDINGER (left and right) cofinal if for every a ¾ D there exist u, Ú ¾ H such that a l ³(u) and a r ³(Ú) (equivalently, ad ³(H) and Da ³(H) ). 2. A divisor theory (for H) is a divisor homomorphism ³Ï H D such that D F(P) for some set P and, for every p ¾ P, there exists a finite subset X H satisfying p gcd(³(x)). 3. A submonoid H D is called cofinal if the embedding H D is cofinal. saturated if the embedding H D is a divisor homomorphism. DEFINITION 4.2. Let H be a cancellative semigroup. 1. An element a ¾ H is said to be normal (or invariant) if ah Ha. The subset N(H) {a ¾ H ah Ha} H is called the normalizing submonoid (or invariant submonoid) of H, and H is said to be normalizing if N(H) H (Lemma 4.3 will show that N(H) is indeed a normalizing submonoid). 2. An element a ¾ H is said to be weakly normal if ah H a. The subset H w {a ¾ H ah H a} H is called the weakly normal submonoid of H, and H is said to be weakly normal if H w H. 3. Two elements a, b ¾ H are said to be associated if a ¾ H bh (we write a ³ b, and note that this is an equivalence relation on H). 4. We denote by P(H) {ah a ¾ H} the set of principal right ideals, by P n (H) {ah a ¾ N(H)} the set of normalizing principal ideals, by C(H) {a ¾ H ab ba for all b ¾ H} the center of H, and we set H red {ah a ¾ H w }, Lemma 4.3. Let H be a cancellative semigroup. 1. If H is normalizing, then H is a monoid. 2. N(H) is a subsemigroup with H N(H), and if H is a monoid, then N(H) H is a normalizing saturated submonoid. 3. C(H) N(H) is a commutative saturated submonoid. Proof. 1. Let H be a normalizing semigroup. If a, b ¾ H, then ab ¾ ah Ha implies the existence of an element c ¾ H such that ab ca and hence Ha Hb. Similarly, we get that ah bh. Thus the left and right Ore condition is satisfied, and H is a monoid. 2. If a, b ¾ H with ah Ha and bh Hb, then abh ahb Hab. Since 1 ¾ N(H), it follows that N(H) H is a subsemigroup. Since H H H for all ¾ H, we have H N(H). Suppose that H is a monoid. In order to show that N(H) is normalizing, we have to verify that an(h) N(H)a for all a ¾ N(H). Let a, b ¾ N(H). Since ab ¾ ah Ha, there exists some c ¾ H such that ab ca. Since H is a monoid, a ¾ H is invertible in q(h), and we get ch aba 1 H Haba 1 Hc, which shows shows that c ¾ N(H). This implies that an(h) N(H)a, and by repeating the argument we obtain equality.

15 NON-COMMUTATIVE KRULL MONOIDS 517 In order to show that N(H) H is saturated, let a,b ¾ N(H) be given such that a l b in H. Then there exists an element c ¾ H such that b ac. Since ch a 1 bh Ha 1 b Hc, it follows that c ¾ N(H), and hence a l b in N(H). If a, b ¾ N(H) such that a r b in H, then we similarly get that a r b in N(H). Thus N(H) H is a saturated submonoid. 3. It follows by the definition that C(H) N(H) is a commutative submonoid. In order to show that C(H) N(H) is saturated, let a, b ¾ C(H) be given such that a l b in N(H). Then there exists an element c ¾ N(H) such that b ac. For every d ¾ H, we have cd a 1 bd da 1 b dc, hence c ¾ C(H) and a l b in C(H). We argue similarly in case of right divisibility and obtain that C(H) N(H) is saturated. Lemma 4.4. Let H be a monoid. 1. H w is a monoid with H N(H) H w H. To be associated is a congruence relation on H w, and [a] ³ ah H a for all a ¾ H w. 2. The quotient semigroup H w ³ H red is a monoid with quotient group q(h w ) H. Moreover, H is normalizing if and only if H H w and H red is normalizing. 3. Let D be a monoid and ³Ï H D a monoid homomorphism. Then there exists a unique homomorphism ³ red Ï H red D red satisfying ³ red (ah ) ³(a)D for all a ¾ H w. 4. The map fï I s (H w ) I s (H red ), I Æ I {u H u ¾ I} is an inclusion preserving bijection. Moreover, I is a principal right ideal or a divisorial ideal if and only if Æ I has the same property. Proof. 1. If a, b ¾ H are weakly normal, then abh ah b H ab, and hence ab is weakly normal. Next we show that every normal element is weakly normal. Let a ¾ H be normal. If ¾ H, then a ba ¾ ah Ha with b¾ H and hence a a 1 ¾ H. Similarly, we get a 1 a 1 ¾ H, hence a a 1 ¾ H, and a (a a 1 )a ¾ H a. This shows that ah H a, and by symmetry we get ah H a. By Lemma 4.3, we infer that H w is a monoid with H N(H) H w H. Clearly, ³ is a congruence relation on H w and [a] ³ ah H a for all a ¾ H w. 2. The group q(h w ) H is a quotient group of H red, and hence H red is a monoid. Suppose that H is normalizing. Then N(H) H w H N(H), and we verify that H red is normalizing. Since it follows that {ac c ¾ H} ah Ha {ca c ¾ H}, (ah )H red {ah ch c ¾ H} {ach c ¾ H} {cah c ¾ H} {ch ah c ¾ H} H red (ah ), and thus H red is normalizing.

16 518 A. GEROLDINGER Conversely, suppose that H H w and that H red is normalizing. Let a ¾ H. By symmetry it suffices to verify that ah Ha. Let c ¾ H. Since ach ¾ {(ah )(d H ) ad H d ¾ H} {(d H )(ah ) dah d ¾ H}, there exist d ¾ H and ¾ H such that ac da. Since ah H a, there is an ¾ H such that a a, and hence ac (d )a ¾ Ha. 3. If b, c ¾ H w with bh ch, then ³(b)D ³(c)D. Hence we can define a map ³ red Ï H red D red satisfying ³ red (ah ) ³(a)D. Obviously, ³ red is uniquely determined and a homomorphism. 4. We define a map gï I s (H red ) I s (H w ) by setting g(j) {Ú ¾ H w ÚH ¾ J} for all J ¾I s (H red ). Obviously, f and g are inclusion preserving, inverse to each other, and hence f is bijective. If I ah w, then f (I ) {abh (ah )(bh ) b ¾ H w } (ah )H red, and if J (ah )H red, then g(j) ah w. If A q(h w ), then (H w Ï l A)H {u H u ¾ q(h w ), u A H w } {u H u ¾ q(h w ), u{ah a ¾ A} H red } (H red Ï l {ah a ¾ A}). The analogous statement is true for right quotients, and thus the assertion for divisorial ideals follows. (a) Lemma 4.5. Let H be a monoid. Then the following statements are equivalent: H is normalizing. (b) For all X q(h), (H Ï l X) (H Ï r X). (c) For all X q(h), H X X H. (d) Every ( fractional) left ideal is a ( fractional) ideal. (e) Every divisorial ( fractional) left ideal is a divisorial ( fractional) ideal. (f) For every a ¾ q(h), Ha is a fractional ideal. REMARK. Of course, the statements on right ideals, symmetric to (d), (e) and (f), are also equivalent. Proof of Lemma 4.5. (a) µ (b) If X q(h), then (H Ï l X) a¾x (H Ï l a) a¾x (H Ï l ah) a¾x Ha 1 a¾x a 1 H (H Ï r X).

17 NON-COMMUTATIVE KRULL MONOIDS 519 (b) µ (c) If X q(h), then H X Ha a¾x a¾x (H Ï l a 1 H) a¾x(h Ï l a 1 ) (H Ï r a 1 ) a¾x a¾x ah X H. (c) (d) µ (e) µ (f) Obvious. (f) µ (a) Let a ¾ H. Then Ha HaH ah, Ha 1 Ha 1 H a 1 H and hence ah Ha, which implies that ah Ha. Lemma 4.6. Let H be a weakly normal monoid, Ï H H red the canonical epimorphism, and let ³Ï H D be a homomorphism to a monoid D. 1. If ³ is a divisor homomorphism and Ï D D ¼ is a divisor homomorphism to a monoid D ¼, then Æ ³Ï H D ¼ is a divisor homomorphism. 2. is a cofinal divisor homomorphism, and ³ is a divisor homomorphism if and only if ³ red Ï H red D red is a divisor homomorphism. If ³ is a divisor homomorphism, then ³ red is injective, H red ³ red (H red ) and ³ red (H red ) D red is a saturated submonoid. 3. If D F(P), then ³ is a divisor theory if and only if ³ red Ï H red D is a divisor theory. Proof. 1. Suppose that ³ and are divisor homomorphisms, and let a, b ¾ H such that (³(a)) l (³(b)). Since is a divisor homomorphism, we infer that ³(a) l ³(b), and since ³ is a divisor homomorphism, we obtain that a l b. The analogous argument works for right divisibility. 2. The first statements are clear. Now suppose that ³ is a divisor homomorphism, and let a, b ¾ H with ³(a) ³(b). Then ³(a) ³(b), ³(b) ³(a), hence a b, b a, and thus ah bh. Thus ³ red is injective, H red ³ red (H red ), and since ³ red is a divisor homomorphism, ³ red (H red ) D red is saturated. 3. By 2., it remains to verify that ³ satisfies the condition involving the greatest common divisor if and only if ³ red does. Indeed, if a 1,, a n ¾ H, then ³ red (a i H ) ³(a i ) for all i ¾ [1, n] and hence which implies the assertion. Lemma 4.7. gcd(³(a 1 ),, ³(a n )) gcd(³ red (a 1 H ),, ³ red (a n H )), Let H be a monoid. 1. If a, b ¾ N(H), then ah, bh are divisorial ideals of H, and (ah) Ú (bh) (ah)(bh) abh. Thus the usual ideal multiplication coincides with the Ú-multiplication. 2. Equipped with usual ideal multiplication, P n (H) is a normalizing monoid. It is a saturated submonoid of I Ú (H), and the inclusion is cofinal if and only if a N(H) for all a ¾ I (H). Ú

18 520 A. GEROLDINGER 3. The map f Ï N(H) red P n (H), defined by ah an(h) ah for all a ¾ N(H), is an isomorphism. 4. If H is normalizing, then the map Ï H I Ú a ¾ H, is a cofinal divisor homomorphism. (H), defined by (a) ah for all Proof. 1. If c ¾ N(H), then ch is an ideal of H by definition, and it is divisorial by Lemma If a, b ¾ N(H), then (ah) Ú (bh) ((ah)(bh)) Ú (abh) Ú abh. 2. and 3. Let a, b ¾ H. Since ah bh if and only if ah bh, f is injective, and obviously f is a semigroup epimorphism. Since N(H) is normalizing by Lemma 4.3, its associated reduced monoid N(H) red is normalizing, and thus P n (H) is a normalizing monoid. By 1., it is a submonoid of I (H). Ú In order to show that P n (H) I Ú (H) is saturated, let a, b ¾ N(H) such that ah l bh in I (H). Then there exists some a ¾ Ú I (H) such that bh ah Ú Ú a, and hence a 1 b ¾ a 1 bh (a 1 H)bH (a H) 1 Ú (ah) Ú a a H. The argument for divisibility on the right side is similar. If a ¾ I (H) and a ¾ a N(H), then a Ú Ú a 1 a 1 Ú a H, ah a, and hence a Ú (a 1 Ú ah) ah (ah Ú a ) 1 Ú a. This shows that, if a N(H) for all a ¾ I (H), then P n Ú (H) I Ú (H) is cofinal. An analogous argument shows the converse. 4. If H is normalizing, then H N(H) is weakly normal. Using 2., 3., and Lemma 4.6 we infer that Ï H H red P n (H) P(H) I (H) Ú is a cofinal divisor homomorphism, because it is a composition of such homomorphisms. The following characterization of a divisor homomorphism will be used without further mention. Lemma 4.8. Let ³Ï H D be a monoid homomorphism, and set q(³)ï q(h) q(d). Then the following statements are equivalent: (a) ³ is a divisor homomorphism. (b) 1 (D) H. In particular, if ³ (H D), then H D is saturated if and only if H q(h) D. Proof. (a) µ (b) Clearly, we have H 1 (D). If x a 1 b ¾ 1 (D) with a, b ¾ H, then (x) ³(a) 1 ³(b) ¾ D and therefore ³(a) l ³(b). Hence a l b and x ¾ H. (b) µ (a) Let a, b ¾ H such that ³(a) l ³(b). Then (a 1 b) ³(a) 1 ³(b) ¾ D, hence a 1 b ¾ H and a l b. Similarly, ³(a) r ³(b) implies that a r b.

19 NON-COMMUTATIVE KRULL MONOIDS 521 If ³ (H D), then 1 (D) q(h) D, and the assertion follows. Lemma 4.9. Let D be a monoid and H D a saturated submonoid. 1. If a H is a left ideal of H, then Da D is a left ideal of D, and Da H a (similarly, if a H is a right ideal of H, then ad H a). 2. Let a H be an ideal. If a is a divisorial left ideal, then D Ï l (H Ï r a) is a divisorial left ideal of D with a (D Ï l (H Ï r a)) H. If a is a divisorial right ideal, then (D Ï r (H Ï l a)) is a divisorial right ideal of D with a (D Ï r (H Ï l a)) H. 3. If D satisfies the ascending chain condition on divisorial left ideals, then H is Ú-noetherian. REMARK. All quotients are formed in their respective quotient groups. So (H Ï r a) {q ¾ q(h) aq H}, (D Ï l (H Ï r a)) {q ¾ q(d) q(h Ï r a) D}, and so on. Proof of Lemma Clearly, Da D is a left ideal of D, and we have a Da H. If x uz ¾ H where u ¾ D and z ¾ a H, then u ¾ q(h) D H and hence x ¾ Ha a. 2. Let a H be a divisorial left ideal. Then H (H Ï r a) and D H D (H Ï r a)d which implies that (D Ï l (H Ï r a)) (D Ï l (H Ï r a)d) D. By Lemma , (D Ï l (H Ï r a)) is a divisorial left ideal of D. If a¾a, then a(h Ï r a) H D and hence a¾ (DÏ l (H Ï r a)). If a¾ (DÏ l (H Ï r a)) H, then a(h Ï r a) D q(h) H and hence a ¾ (H Ï l (H Ï r a)) a. Thus we have a (DÏ l (H Ï r a)) H. 3. Let (a n ) n 0 be an ascending chain of divisorial ideals of H, and set A n (D Ï l (H Ï r a n )) for all n 0. Then (A n ) n 0 is an ascending chain of divisorial left ideals of D. If it becomes stationary, then the initial chain (a n ) n 0 becomes stationary because a n A n H for all n 0. Lemma Let ³Ï H D be a monoid homomorphism with ³(H) N(D), and set q(³)ï q(h) q(d). 1. If H ¼ is an overmonoid of H with ah ¼ b H for some a, b ¾ H, then D ¼ D (H ¼ ) is an overmonoid of D with ³(a)D ¼ ³(b) D. 2. Suppose that ³ is a divisor homomorphism. (a) If D is completely integrally closed, then H is completely integrally closed. (b) H is normalizing. Proof. 1. Since ³(H) N(D), we have D (H ¼ ) (H ¼ )D, and hence D ¼ is an overmonoid of D. Furthermore, we get ³(a)D ¼ ³(b) ³(a)D (H ¼ )³(b) D³(a) (H ¼ )³(b) D (ah ¼ b) D.

20 522 A. GEROLDINGER 2. (a) If D is completely integrally closed and H ¼ is an overmonoid of H as in 1., then H ¼ 1 (D ¼ ) 1 (D) H. Thus H is completely integrally closed by Lemma (b) Let a ¾ H. We show that ah Ha, and then by symmetry we get ah Ha. If b ¾ ah, then ³(b) ¾ ³(a)D D³(a), which implies that ³(a) r ³(b), a r b and hence b ¾ Ha. Lemma Let ³Ï H D be a divisor homomorphism into a normalizing monoid D, and set q(³)ï q(h) q(d). 1. For every X H we have X 1 1 ( (X) 1 ). 2. For every a ¾ F Ú (H) we have a 1 ( (a) Ú ). 3. If D F(P), a ¾ I Ú (H) and a gcd(³(a)), then a ³ 1 (ad). 4. Let ³ be a divisor theory. (a) For every a ¾ q(d) there is a finite non-empty set X q(h) such that ad (X) Ú. (b) For every X H, we have gcd(³(x)) gcd(³(x Ú )). Proof. We observe that H is normalizing by Lemma 4.10, and hence (H Ï l X) (H Ï r X) for all X q(h) by Lemma 4.5.(b). We will need the following fact for a commutative monoid M satisfying GCD(E) for all E M (see [36, Theorem 11.5]): for any subset X M we have ( ) X Ú d M if and only if GCD(X) d M. 1. If x ¾ X 1, then x X H, hence (x) (X) (x X) D, and (x)¾ (X) 1, which implies x ¾ 1 ( (X) 1 ). Conversely, if x ¾ 1 ( (X) 1 ), then (x X) (x) (X) D. Hence it follows that x X 1 (D) H and x ¾ X Leta¾F Ú (H). Clearly, we havea 1 ( (a) Ú ). Conversely, let x ¾ 1 ( (a) Ú ). Then (x) ¾ (a) Ú ( (a) 1 ) 1, and hence by 1., we get (xa 1 ) (x 1 ( (a) 1 )) (x) (a) 1 D. Since H 1 (D) by Lemma 4.8, it follows that xa 1 H and thus x ¾ (a 1 ) 1 a. 3. If a gcd(³(a)), then ad ³(a) Ú by ( ), and 2. implies that a ³ 1 (³(a) Ú ) ³ 1 (ad). 4. Suppose that D F(P). 4. (a) First we consider an element a ¾ D. Then a p 1 p l with l ¾ Æ 0 and p 1,, p l ¾ P. For every ¾ [1,l] there exists a finite non-empty set X H such that p gcd(³(x )). Then the product set X 1 X l H is finite and a gcd(³(x 1 X l )) (where we use the convention that X 1 X l {1} if l 0). Now ( ) implies that ad ³(X 1 X l ) Ú.

21 NON-COMMUTATIVE KRULL MONOIDS 523 Let a ¾ q(d) be given. Then there is some u ¾ H such that ³(u)a ¾ D. If X H is a finite non-empty set with ³(u)aD ³(X) Ú, then ad (u 1 X) Ú. 4. (b) We start with the following assertion. A. For every X q(h) we have (X) Ú (X Ú ) Ú. Suppose that A holds, let X H and a gcd(³(x)). Applying A and ( ) we infer that ad ³(X) Ú ³(X Ú ) Ú and hence a gcd(³(x Ú )) by 3. Proof of A. Let X q(h). Clearly, we have (X) Ú (X Ú ) Ú. To show the converse, we assert that (D Ï (X)) (D Ï (X Ú )). This implies that (X Ú ) Ú (D Ï (X Ú )) 1 (D Ï (X)) 1 (X) Ú. Let a ¾ (D Ï (X)) q(d). By 4. (a), there is a finite non-empty set Y q(h) with ad (Y ) Ú. Then (XY ) (X)aD D and hence XY H. This implies that X Ú Y (XY ) Ú H, hence (X Ú ) (Y ) (X Ú Y ) D and therefore (X Ú ) (Y ) Ú ( (X Ú ) (Y )) Ú D. Thus it follows that (X Ú )a (X Ú ) (Y ) Ú D and a ¾ (D Ï (X Ú )). Corollary monoid D. 1. If D is Ú-noetherian, then H is Ú-noetherian. 2. If D is a Krull monoid, then H is a normalizing Krull monoid. Let ³Ï H D be a divisor homomorphism into a normalizing Proof. 1. If (a n ) n 0 is an ascending chain of divisorial ideals of H, then (³(a n ) Ú ) n 0 is an ascending chain of divisorial ideals of D. If this chain becomes stationary, then so does the initial chain in H, because a n 1 ( (a n ) Ú ) for all n 0 by Lemma If D is a normalizing Krull monoid, then H is completely integrally closed by Lemma , and hence the assertion follows from 1. Theorem 4.13 (A divisor theoretic characterization of normalizing Krull monoids). Let H be a monoid. Then the following statements are equivalent: (a) The map Ï H I Ú (H), defined by (a) ah for all a ¾ H, is a divisor theory. (b) H has a divisor theory. (c) There exists a divisor homomorphism ³Ï H F(P) into a free abelian monoid. (d) H is a normalizing Krull monoid. Proof. (a) µ (b) µ (c) Obvious. Since F(P) is a normalizing Krull monoid, this follows from Corol- (c) µ (d) lary

22 524 A. GEROLDINGER (d) µ (a) By Lemma 4.7 4, Ï H I Ú (H) is a cofinal divisor homomorphism. Theorem 3.14 shows that I Ú (H) is a free abelian monoid with basis Ú-spec(H)Ò{ }. Let p be a non-empty divisorial prime ideal. By Proposition , there exists a finite set E {a 1,, a n } p such that (H E H) Ú p. Since H is normalizing, we get H E H a 1 H a n H, where a 1 H,, a n H are divisorial ideals by Lemmas 3.4 and 4.5. Now Proposition implies that Corollary p (a 1 H a n H) Ú gcd((a 1 ),, (a n )). Let H be a monoid. 1. If H is a Krull monoid, then N(H) H is a normalizing Krull monoid, and there is a monomorphism f Ï I Ú (N(H)) I Ú (H) which maps P(N(H)) onto P n (H). 2. N(H) is a normalizing Krull monoid if and only if N(H) red is a normalizing Krull monoid. If this holds, then both, N(H) red P n (H) and C(H), are commutative Krull monoids. Proof. We set S N(H). 1. Suppose that H is a Krull monoid. By Lemma , S H is a normalizing saturated submonoid. Thus the inclusion map S H satisfies the assumption of Lemma , and hence S is completely integrally closed. Let fï I (S) Ú I (H) be defined by f (a) (H Ï Ú l (S Ï r a)) for all a ¾I Ú (S) (with the same notational conventions as in Lemma 4.9; in particular, A (S Ï r a) q(s)). We check that f (a) ¾ I Ú (H). If x ¾ q(h) with x A H, then x H A x AH H, and thus (H Ï l A) is a right module of H. By Lemma , (H Ï l A) is a divisorial left ideal of H. Since H is a Krull monoid, it follows that f (a) is a divisorial ideal of H, and hence f (a) ¾ I (H). Ú Since f (a) S a by Lemma , f is injective and S is Ú-noetherian because H is Ú-noetherian. If a ¾ S, then, by Lemma , we infer that f (Sa) (H Ï l (S Ï r Sa)) (H Ï l a 1 S) (H Ï l a 1 SH) Ha. This shows that f maps P(S) onto P n (H). Since f 1 Ï I (S) Ú I Ú (S Ï a), and f 2 Ï I (H) Ú I Ú (H), defined by a (H Ï a), are homomorphisms, f f 2 Æ f 1 (use Lemma 3.6) is a homomorphism. 2. We freely use Theorem If S red is a normalizing Krull monoid, then there exists a divisor homomorphism ³Ï S red F(P). If Ï S S red denotes the canonical epimorphism, then ³ Æ Ï S F(P) is a divisor homomorphism by Lemma 4.6 and thus S is a normalizing Krull monoid. Suppose that S is a normalizing Krull monoid. Again, by Theorem 4.13 (b) and by Lemma , it follows that S red is a normalizing (S), defined by a Krull monoid. Lemma 4.7 shows that S red and P n (H) are isomorphic, and that P n is a submonoid of the commutative monoid I Ú (H). Lemma implies that C(H) S is saturated, and thus C(H) is a Krull monoid by Corollary

23 NON-COMMUTATIVE KRULL MONOIDS 525 Our next step is to introduce a concept of class groups, and then to show a uniqueness result for divisor theories. Let ³Ï H D be a homomorphism of monoids. The group C(³) q(d) q(³(h)) is called the class group of ³. This coincides with the notion in the commutative setting (see [29, Section 2.4]), and we will point out that in case of a Krull monoid H and a divisor theory ³Ï N(H) D the class group C(³) is isomorphic to the normalizing class group of H (see Equations (4.1) and (4.2) at the end of this section). For a ¾ q(d), we denote by [a] ³ [a] aq(³(h)) ¾ C(³) the class containing a. As usual, the class group C(³) will be written additively, that is, [ab] [a] [b] for all a, b ¾ q(d), and then [1] 0 is the zero element of C(³). If ³Ï H D is a divisor homomorphism, then a straightforward calculation shows that for an element «¾ D, we have [«] 0 if and only if «¾ ³(H). If D F(P) is free abelian, then G P {[p] p ¾ P} C(³) is the set of classes containing prime divisors. Consider the special case H D, ³ (H D), and suppose that q(h) q(d). Then C(³) q(d) q(h), and we define D H {[a] aq(h) a ¾ D} C(³). Then D H C(³) is a submonoid with quotient group C(³), and D H C(³) if and only if H D is cofinal. Suppose that H is a normalizing Krull monoid, and let Ï H I Ú Theorem Then P n (H) P(H) I Ú (H) is cofinal, and C() I Ú (H) P(H) F Ú (H) q(p(h)) (H) be as in is called the Ú-class group of H, and will be denoted by C Ú (H). We continue with a uniqueness result for divisor theories. Its consequences for class groups will be discussed afterwards. We proceed as in the commutative case ([29, Section 2.4]). Recently, W.A. Schmid gave a more explicit approach valid in case of torsion class groups ([60, Section 3]). Proposition 4.15 (Uniqueness of divisor theories). Let H be a monoid.