On regularity of sup-preserving maps: generalizing Zareckiĭ s theorem

Similar documents
On injective constructions of S-semigroups. Jan Paseka Masaryk University

1 Categories, Functors, and Natural Transformations. Discrete categories. A category is discrete when every arrow is an identity.

A NOTE ON MULTIPLIERS OF SUBTRACTION ALGEBRAS

VALUATIVE CRITERIA FOR SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS

University of Cape Town

On Augmented Posets And (Z 1, Z 1 )-Complete Posets

VALUATIVE CRITERIA BRIAN OSSERMAN

SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS

CHOW S LEMMA. Matthew Emerton

SEPARATED AND PROPER MORPHISMS

HSP SUBCATEGORIES OF EILENBERG-MOORE ALGEBRAS

Probabilistic Observations and Valuations (Extended Abstract) 1

Descent on the étale site Wouter Zomervrucht, October 14, 2014

LIMITS AND COLIMITS. m : M X. in a category G of structured sets of some sort call them gadgets the image subset

Derivation, f-derivation and generalized derivation of KUS-algebras

Representation Theory of Hopf Algebroids. Atsushi Yamaguchi

Math 216A. A gluing construction of Proj(S)

Math 248B. Base change morphisms

GENERALIZED ABSTRACT NONSENSE: CATEGORY THEORY AND ADJUNCTIONS

Joseph Muscat Universal Algebras. 1 March 2013

(IC)LM-FUZZY TOPOLOGICAL SPACES. 1. Introduction

Discrete Mathematics. On the number of graphs with a given endomorphism monoid

Span, Cospan, and Other Double Categories

Order-theoretical Characterizations of Countably Approximating Posets 1

CLASS NOTES MATH 527 (SPRING 2011) WEEK 6

THE HOMOTOPY THEORY OF EQUIVALENCE RELATIONS

Topology Proceedings. COPYRIGHT c by Topology Proceedings. All rights reserved.

Logarithm of a Function, a Well-Posed Inverse Problem

On Picard value problem of some difference polynomials

MV-algebras and fuzzy topologies: Stone duality extended

Weak bisimulations for coalgebras over ordered functors

The Clifford algebra and the Chevalley map - a computational approach (detailed version 1 ) Darij Grinberg Version 0.6 (3 June 2016). Not proofread!

(C) The rationals and the reals as linearly ordered sets. Contents. 1 The characterizing results

Categories and Natural Transformations

The basics of frame theory

Joseph Muscat Categories. 1 December 2012

arxiv:math/ v2 [math.ra] 14 Dec 2005

GENERAL ABSTRACT NONSENSE

Problem Set. Problems on Unordered Summation. Math 5323, Fall Februray 15, 2001 ANSWERS

On the embedding of convex spaces in stratified L convex spaces

MADE-TO-ORDER WEAK FACTORIZATION SYSTEMS

On the number of diamonds in the subgroup lattice of a finite abelian group

CATEGORIES. 1.1 Introduction

Extending Algebraic Operations to D-Completions

Algebraic Geometry I Lectures 22 and 23

How to glue perverse sheaves

Cross Connection of Boolean Lattice

2. ETALE GROUPOIDS MARK V. LAWSON

Stolarsky Type Inequality for Sugeno Integrals on Fuzzy Convex Functions

NATURAL WEAK FACTORIZATION SYSTEMS

Proceedings Bidirectional Named Sets as Structural Models of Interpersonal Communication

J. M. Almira A MONTEL-TYPE THEOREM FOR MIXED DIFFERENCES

Completely regular Bishop spaces

Simpler Functions for Decompositions

``Residuated Structures and Many-valued Logics''

STRATIFIED (L, M)-FUZZY Q-CONVERGENCE SPACES

ON SOME BASIC CONSTRUCTIONS IN CATEGORIES OF QUANTALE-VALUED SUP-LATTICES. 1. Introduction

Application of Wavelet Transform Modulus Maxima in Raman Distributed Temperature Sensors

Parameterizing orbits in flag varieties

Regular Elements of the Complete Semigroups of Binary Relations of the Class 8

STATISTICALLY CONVERGENT TRIPLE SEQUENCE SPACES DEFINED BY ORLICZ FUNCTION

Example: When describing where a function is increasing, decreasing or constant we use the x- axis values.

Category Theory. Course by Dr. Arthur Hughes, Typset by Cathal Ormond

Modal-Like Operators in Boolean Lattices, Galois Connections and Fixed Points

The Uniformity Principle on Traced Monoidal Categories

LAWSON SEMILATTICES DO HAVE A PONTRYAGIN DUALITY. Karl Heinrich Hofmann and Michael Mislove. The category L of Lawson semilattices is the catewith

Variations on a Casselman-Osborne theme

A NOTE ON ORDER CONVERGENCE IN COMPLETE LATTICES

ON KAN EXTENSION OF HOMOLOGY AND ADAMS COCOMPLETION

A NOTE ON SHEAVES WITHOUT SELF-EXTENSIONS ON THE PROJECTIVE n-space.

On morphisms of lattice-valued formal contexts

ON THE CONGRUENCE LATTICE OF A FRAME

φ(a + b) = φ(a) + φ(b) φ(a b) = φ(a) φ(b),

Continuity of partially ordered soft sets via soft Scott topology and soft sobrification A. F. Sayed

A Note on Extensional PERs

Classification of effective GKM graphs with combinatorial type K 4

Topos Theory. Lectures 21 and 22: Classifying toposes. Olivia Caramello. Topos Theory. Olivia Caramello. The notion of classifying topos

Lecture 6. s S} is a ring.

Abstract structure of unitary oracles for quantum algorithms

Power-Set Functors and Saturated Trees

Partially ordered monads and powerset Kleene algebras

EQ-algebras: primary concepts and properties

Skew Boolean algebras

Symbolic-Numeric Methods for Improving Structural Analysis of DAEs

DIVISIBILITY THEORY OF ARITHMETICAL RINGS WITH ONE MINIMAL PRIME IDEAL

Finite Dimensional Hilbert Spaces are Complete for Dagger Compact Closed Categories (Extended Abstract)

Reflexive cum Coreflexive Subcategories in Topology*

@FMI c Kyung Moon Sa Co.

The space of located subsets

A CHARACTERIZATION OF CENTRAL EXTENSIONS IN THE VARIETY OF QUANDLES VALÉRIAN EVEN, MARINO GRAN AND ANDREA MONTOLI

EXPANSIONS IN NON-INTEGER BASES: LOWER, MIDDLE AND TOP ORDERS

Monotone insertion and monotone extension of frame homomorphisms

A NOTE ON HENSEL S LEMMA IN SEVERAL VARIABLES

On finite elements in vector lattices and Banach lattices

Modern Algebra Math 542 Spring 2007 R. Pollack Solutions for HW #5. 1. Which of the following are examples of ring homomorphisms? Explain!

An Axiomatic Description of a Duality for Modules

VARIETIES OF ABELIAN TOPOLOGICAL GROUPS AND SCATTERED SPACES

( x) f = where P and Q are polynomials.

Some results on primeness in the near-ring of Lipschitz functions on a normed vector space

THE SNAIL LEMMA ENRICO M. VITALE

Transcription:

Semigroup Forum (2011) 83:313 319 DOI 10.1007/s00233-011-9311-0 RESEARCH ARTICLE On regularity o sup-preserving maps: generalizing Zareckiĭ s theorem Ulrich Höhle Tomasz Kubiak Received: 7 March 2011 / Accepted: 13 May 2011 / Published online: 8 June 2011 The Author(s) 2011. This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Abstract A sup-preserving map between complete lattices L and M is regular i there exists a sup-preserving map g rom M to L such that g =. In the class o completely distributive lattices, this paper demonstrates a necessary and suicient condition or to be regular. When L = M is a power set, our theorem reduces to the well known Zareckiĭ s theorem which characterizes regular elements in the semigroup o all binary relations on a set. Another application o our result is a generalization o Zareckiĭ s theorem or quantale-valued relations. Keywords Sup-preserving map Regular map Complete distributivity Regular relation Quantale Quantale-valued relation 1 Introduction A morphism A B in a category C is regular i there is a morphism B g A in C with g = (c. [4]). The purpose o this paper is to examine regular morphisms in the category Sup whose objects are all complete lattices and whose morphisms are all sup-preserving Communicated by Boris M. Schein. The second named author grateully acknowledges the grant MTM2009-12872-C02-02 rom the Ministry o Science and Innovation o Spain. U. Höhle Fachbereich C Mathematik und Naturwissenschaten, Bergische Universität, Gaußstraße 20, 42097 Wuppertal, Germany e-mail: uhoehle@uni-wuppertal.de T. Kubiak ( ) Wydział Matematyki i Inormatyki, Uniwersytet im. Adama Mickiewicza, Umultowska 87, 61-614 Poznań, Poland e-mail: tkubiak@amu.edu.pl

314 U. Höhle, T. Kubiak maps (c. [3]). We give a suicient condition or a morphism o Sup to be regular as well as a necessary one. Both these conditions involve complete distributivity, so that when gathered together they provide a characterization o regular morphisms o the category o all completely distributive lattices and their sup-preserving maps (see Theorem 3.1). Our result can be viewed as a non-atomic generalization o the amous Zareckiĭ s theorem which characterizes regular elements in the semigroup o all binary relations on a set (c. [14]). As a matter o act, we generalize a recent extension o Zareckiĭ s theorem stated in [12] which characterizes regular morphisms in the category o all relations. We recall that ρ X Y is called regular i there exists σ Y X such that ρσρ = ρ. The result o [12] says: A relation ρ X Y is regular i the lattice {ρ(a) A X} is completely distributive (see Sect. 2 or notation i needed and c. Note 1.2 below). In the case X = Y we have the just mentioned Zareckiĭ s theorem. It may be remarked that with an idempotent ρ X X (i.e. ρρ = ρ), the Zareckiĭ s theorem is already seen in [9]. Another application o Theorem 3.1 is a generalization o Zareckiĭ s theorem or quantale-valued relations (see Theorem 4.3). The extensive literature related to Zareckiĭ s theorem include [1, 5, 8, 11 13] among others. In particular, alternative proos are given in [1, 11, 13] all o which use the act that (2 X, ) is an atomic completely distributive lattice (2 X is the power set o X). Note 1.1 When saying that a morphism o Sup is regular with g =,weo course mean that g is a morphism o Sup too. We recall that in Set each map is regular (c. [4]). Note 1.2 Let L M be a morphism in Sup. Then the range (L) is a complete lattice w.r.t. the partial ordering inherited rom M and sups in (L)are ormed in M, but in general not ins. Obviously, (L)together with the inclusion map is the image o w.r.t. the (extremal epi, mono)-actorization property in Sup. In this context, saying that (L) is completely distributive simply means that the complete lattice (L)is completely distributive. 2 Binary relations as sup-preserving maps Consider the category Rel whose objects are sets and ρ : X Y is a morphism i ρ X Y. The composition o ρ X Y and σ Y Z is the relation σρ X Z where σρ ={(x, z) X Z y Y : (x, y) ρ and (y, z) σ }. Given ρ X Y and A X, letρ(a) be deined by ρ(a) = x A ρ(x) where ρ(x) ={y Y (x, y) ρ}. The assignment A ρ(a) preserves arbitrary unions, hence {ρ(a) A X} is a complete lattice w.r.t the partial ordering inherited by 2 Y. Thus, each ρ X Y determines a union-preserving map 2 X (ρ) 2 Y by (ρ)(a) = ρ(a).

On regularity o sup-preserving maps: generalizing Zareckiĭ s theorem 315 Conversely (c. [2, 6]), any map 2 X 2 Y determines () X Y by (x, y) () y ({x}). I is union-preserving, then sends () back to (c. property (2) below). The category Rel is isomorphic to a ull subcategory o Sup. In act, the ollowing hold: Proposition 2.1 Let ρ X Y and σ Y Z be relations, let 2 X be arbitrary maps. Then: (1) (σρ) = (σ) (ρ) and (g) = (g) (), (2) ( (ρ)) = ρ, and ( ( )) = provided is union-preserving. From Proposition 2.1 we immediately obtain: 2 Y g 2 Z Fact 2.2 The ollowing statements hold: (1) A relation ρ X Y is regular i 2 X (ρ) 2 Y is regular. (2) A union-preserving map 2 X 2 Y is regular i () X Y is a regular relation. The Zareckiĭ s theorem (in its more general version o [12]) can now be ormulated as ollows: Theorem 2.3 A union-preserving map 2 X 2 Y is regular i (2 X ) is a completely distributive lattice. This ormulation is an invitation to consider it in a more general lattice-theoretic setting by replacing the power sets by completely distributive lattices (see Theorem 3.1). We recall that the proos o Zareckiĭ s theorem given in [1, 11, 13] make an essential use o the act that 2 X is an atomic completely distributive lattice. The proo o Theorem 3.1 is valid or arbitrary completely distributive lattices and is thus dierent rom all o them. 3 Regular and sup-preserving maps It is well known that a complete lattice L is completely distributive i L op is. In particular, or each amily {A i } i I o subsets o L the ollowing holds: Ai = ( ) ϕ(i). i I ϕ A i i I Given a complete lattice L, we write a b i, whenever C L and b C, there is c C with a c (c. [3, 9]). Then L is completely distributive i has the approximation property: i I a = {b L b a}

316 U. Höhle, T. Kubiak or each a L. For all a,b,c,d L the ollowing hold (c. [3]): ( 1 ) a b implies a b, ( 2 ) c a b d implies c d, ( 3 ) a b implies a c b or some c L. The ollowing is our generalization o the Zareckiĭ s theorem. Theorem 3.1 Let L and M be completely distributive lattices, and let L M be sup-preserving. Then is regular i (L)is a completely distributive lattice. Since both the i part and the only i part o Theorem 3.1 holdtrueinamore general setting, we wish to split the theorem into two propositions rom which Theorems 3.1 ollows immediately. In act, the only i part is also valid or L a continuous lattice (c. Remark 3.4). Proposition 3.2 Let L and M be complete lattices, and let L M be suppreserving. I both M and (L)are completely distributive, then is regular. Proo For every y M we deine A y ={c L y (c)}. Then we put { G y = b L (b)= } (A y ) where is perormed in (L). Deine a map M g(x) = y x Gy g L by or all x M. LetA M. Byusing( 1 ) ( 3 ),wehavey A i y x or some x A so that g( A) = ( x A y x G y) = x A g(x), hence g is suppreserving. In order to veriy g = we proceed as ollows. As is sup-preserving we have (A y ) = ( G y ) and subsequently ( ) (Ay ) = Gy = g(a), a L. y (a) y (a) Now we make use o the complete distributivity o (L)and obtain: ( ) ϕ(y) = g(a). ϕ (A y ) y (a) y (a) Because o ϕ(y) (A y ) we have y ϕ(y), and the relation (a)= y (a) y g(a)

On regularity o sup-preserving maps: generalizing Zareckiĭ s theorem 317 ollows. On the other hand y (a) implies y (a), and consequently (a) (A y ). Because o (A y ) (a)the relation g(a) (a)holds. Proposition 3.3 Let L and M be complete lattices, let L M be sup-preserving. I is regular and L is completely distributive, then (L)is completely distributive too. Proo Let g = where M g L is sup-preserving, and let a L. Then g (a) L and by complete distributivity o L we have g (a) = {b L b g (a)}. We now check that b g (a) in L implies (b) (a)in (L). Indeed, i (a) (C) or some C L, then g (a) g (C) and there is a c C such that b g (c). This yields (b) (c), so that (b) (a). Consequently, (a)= g(a) {(b) (b) (a)} {y (L) y (a)} (a). We have proved that has the approximation property in (L). Remark 3.4 We recall that a complete lattice L is continuous i a = {b L b a} or all a L, where b a i, whenever a A or some A L, there exists a inite subset D A such that b D. Every completely distributive lattice is continuous (see [3]). It is not diicult to observe that Proposition 3.3 maintains its validity or the relation and continuous lattices. 4 A quantalic version o Zareckiĭ s theorem In what ollows we extend our previous considerations in Sect. 2 rom the two-valued to the many-valued setting. More speciically, we will replace maps 2 X 2 Y by maps L X L Y where the complete lattice L replaces the two point lattice 2. Here and elsewhere L X is the set o all maps rom X into L ordered pointwisely. For this purpose we irst recall that a triple Q = (Q,, &) is called a quantale i (Q, ) is a complete lattice, (Q, &) is a semigroup, and & distributes over arbitrary sups in both variables (c. [10]). We begin with the ollowing example (c. [6, 7]). Example 4.1 (Quantale Q(L)) LetL be a complete lattice. On the set Q(L) o all sup-preserving sel-maps on L we deine a partial ordering in a pointwise way. Then (Q(L), ) is again a complete lattice. In particular, the sup o S Q(L) is given by ( S)(a) = σ S σ(a) or all a L. The composition (σ 1 & σ 2 )(a) = σ 2 (σ 1 (a)), a L,

318 U. Höhle, T. Kubiak induces a semigroup operation & on Q(L) so that the resulting triple Q(L) = (Q(L),, &) becomes a quantale (in act, a unital quantale a detail not needed or our purposes). Let Q be an arbitrary quantale, and X and Y be sets. A Q-valued relation R : X Y is a map X Y R Q. Thecomposition o Q-valued relations R : X Y and S : Y Zis deined or all x X and z Z by (SR)(x, z) = y Y R(x,y)& S(y,z). When L = 2, the category o all Q(L)-valued relations can be identiied with Rel because Q(2) is just the two-point lattice. Now we observe that each Q(L)-valued relation R : X Y determines a suppreserving map L X (R) L Y deined or all L X and y Y by (R)( )(y) = x X R(x, y)( (x)). On the other hand, each sup-preserving map L X ϕ L Y induces a Q(L)-valued relation X Y (ϕ) Q(L) deined or all a L, x X, and y Y by (ϕ)(x, y)(a) = ϕ(a1 x )(y), where { a, z = x, a1 x (z) =, z x and is the bottom element o L. The ollowing provides a Q(L)-valued counterpart (in act, a generalization rom 2 to L) o Proposition 2.1. Proposition 4.2 Let R : X Y and S : Y Zbe Q(L)-valued relations, and let ϕ L Y ψ L Z be arbitrary maps. Then: L X (1) (SR) = (S) (R) and (ψϕ) = (ψ) (ϕ), (2) ( (R)) = R, and ( (ϕ)) = ϕ provided ϕ is sup-preserving. Proo The proos o (1) and the irst part o (2) ollows immediately rom the deinitions o all the involved compositions. Proving the second part o (2) requires a simple observation that each L X has the ollowing decomposition: = x X (x)1 x.

On regularity o sup-preserving maps: generalizing Zareckiĭ s theorem 319 Indeed, ( (ϕ))( )(y) = x X ϕ((x)1 x )(y) ( = ϕ x X = ϕ( )(y) (x)1 x )(y) or all L X and y Y. When L is completely distributive, then so is L X. Using Theorem 3.1 and Proposition 4.2 (also c. Note 1.2), we obtain our quantalic analogue o Zareckiĭ s theorem which when L = 2 yields the characterization o regularity o usual relations as given in Theorem 2.3. Theorem 4.3 Let L be a completely distributive lattice. Then a Q(L)-valued relation R : X Y is regular i (R)(L X ) is a completely distributive lattice. Open Access This article is distributed under the terms o the Creative Commons Attribution Noncommercial License which permits any noncommercial use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original author(s) and source are credited. Reerences 1. Bandelt, H.-J.: Regularity and complete distributivity. Semigroup Forum 19, 123 126 (1980) 2. Erceg, M.A.: Functions, equivalence relations, quotient spaces and subsets in uzzy set theory. Fuzzy Sets Syst. 3, 75 92 (1980) 3. Gierz, G., Homann, K.H., Keimel, K., Lawson, J.D., Mislove, M., Scott, D.S.: A Compendium o Continuous Lattices. Springer, Berlin, Heidelberg, New York (1980) 4. Mac Lane, S.: Categories or the Working Mathematician. Springer, New York, Heidelberg, Berlin (1971) 5. Markowsky, G.: Idempotents and product representations with applications to semigroup o binary relations. Semigroup Forum 5, 95 119 (1972) 6. Mulvey, C.J., Pelletier, J.W.: A quantisation o the calculus o relations. In: CMS Proceedings, vol. 13, pp. 345 360. Am. Math. Soc., Providence (1992) 7. Pelletier, J.W., Rosický, J.: Simple involutive quantales. J. Algebra 195, 367 386 (1997) 8. Plemmons, R.J., West, M.T.: On the semigroup o binary relations. Pac. J. Math. 35, 743 753 (1970) 9. Raney, G.N.: A subdirect-union representation o completely distributive lattices. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 4, 518 522 (1953) 10. Rosenthal, K.I.: Quantales and Their Applications. Pitman Research Notes in Mathematics, vol. 348. Longman Scientiic & Technical, Longman House, Burnt Mill, Harlow (1996) 11. Schein, B.M.: Regular elements o the semigroup o all binary relations. Semigroup Forum 13, 95 112 (1976) 12. Xu, X.-Q., Luo, M.-K.: Regular relations and normality o topologies. Semigroup Forum 72, 477 480 (2006) 13. Yang, J.C.: A theorem on the semigroup o binary relations. Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 22, 134 135 (1969) 14. Zareckiĭ, K.A.: The semigroup o binary relations. Mat. Sb. 61, 291 305 (1963) (in Russian)