Clones (3&4) Martin Goldstern. TACL Olomouc, June Discrete Mathematics and Geometry, TU Wien

Similar documents
Lewis Dichotomies in Many-Valued Logics

A strongly rigid binary relation

Clones containing all almost unary functions

ClC (X ) : X ω X } C. (11)

Lattices, closure operators, and Galois connections.

AMS regional meeting Bloomington, IN April 1, 2017

THE JOIN OF TWO MINIMAL CLONES AND THE MEET OF TWO MAXIMAL CLONES. Gábor Czédli, Radomír Halaš, Keith A. Kearnes, Péter P. Pálfy, and Ágnes Szendrei

DO FIVE OUT OF SIX ON EACH SET PROBLEM SET

CLONES FROM CREATURES MARTIN GOLDSTERN AND SAHARON SHELAH

ON ENDOMORPHISM MONOIDS OF PARTIAL ORDERS AND CENTRAL RELATIONS 1

BASICS OF CLONE THEORY DRAFT. Contents

Bernhard Nebel, Julien Hué, and Stefan Wölfl. June 27 & July 2/4, 2012

SELF-DUAL UNIFORM MATROIDS ON INFINITE SETS

Sets and Motivation for Boolean algebra

Notes about Filters. Samuel Mimram. December 6, 2012

Disjoint n-amalgamation

March 3, The large and small in model theory: What are the amalgamation spectra of. infinitary classes? John T. Baldwin

Equational Logic. Chapter Syntax Terms and Term Algebras

MATH 3300 Test 1. Name: Student Id:

October 12, Complexity and Absoluteness in L ω1,ω. John T. Baldwin. Measuring complexity. Complexity of. concepts. to first order.

A GUIDE FOR MORTALS TO TAME CONGRUENCE THEORY

Lattice Theory Lecture 5. Completions

More Model Theory Notes

Universal Algebra for Logics

Bounded width problems and algebras

2.2 Lowenheim-Skolem-Tarski theorems

ACLT: Algebra, Categories, Logic in Topology - Grothendieck's generalized topological spaces (toposes)

TUKEY QUOTIENTS, PRE-IDEALS, AND NEIGHBORHOOD FILTERS WITH CALIBRE (OMEGA 1, OMEGA) by Jeremiah Morgan BS, York College of Pennsylvania, 2010

Definitions. Notations. Injective, Surjective and Bijective. Divides. Cartesian Product. Relations. Equivalence Relations

A general Stone representation theorem

The Lattice of All Clones Definable by Binary Relations on a Three-Element Set

Intersecting valuation rings in the Zariski-Riemann space of a field

Symbol Index Group GermAnal Ring AbMonoid

What is the right type-space? Humboldt University. July 5, John T. Baldwin. Which Stone Space? July 5, Tameness.

TESTING FOR A SEMILATTICE TERM

Learnability and Numberings of Families of Computably Enumerable Sets

UNIVERSALITY OF THE LATTICE OF TRANSFORMATION MONOIDS

REVIEW OF ESSENTIAL MATH 346 TOPICS

Tutorial on the Constraint Satisfaction Problem

INSTITUTE OF MATHEMATICS THE CZECH ACADEMY OF SCIENCES. Galois connection for multiple-output operations. Emil Jeřábek

3. FORCING NOTION AND GENERIC FILTERS

Automata and Languages

Logics of n-ary Contact

Notes on ordinals and cardinals

(Pre-)Algebras for Linguistics

Tree sets. Reinhard Diestel

CLASSIFYING THE COMPLEXITY OF CONSTRAINTS USING FINITE ALGEBRAS

Extensions Of S-spaces

Boolean Algebras, Boolean Rings and Stone s Representation Theorem

Unless otherwise specified, V denotes an arbitrary finite-dimensional vector space.

Homogeneity and compactness: a mystery from set-theoretic topology

THE SEMIGROUP βs APPLICATIONS TO RAMSEY THEORY

arxiv: v1 [math.lo] 30 Aug 2018

Relationships between Topological Properties of X and Algebraic Properties of Intermediate Rings A(X)

Part II. Logic and Set Theory. Year

Class Notes on Poset Theory Johan G. Belinfante Revised 1995 May 21

Jónsson posets and unary Jónsson algebras

P-Spaces and the Prime Spectrum of Commutative Semirings

Filters and sets of Vitali type

arxiv: v1 [math.ds] 22 Jan 2019

Diagonalize This. Iian Smythe. Department of Mathematics Cornell University. Olivetti Club November 26, 2013

Qualifying Exam Logic August 2005

A Discrete Duality Between Nonmonotonic Consequence Relations and Convex Geometries

A CLASS OF INFINITE CONVEX GEOMETRIES

Common idempotents in compact left topological left semirings

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

ULTRAFILTER AND HINDMAN S THEOREM

2. Prime and Maximal Ideals

Prime Properties of the Smallest Ideal of β N

Large subsets of semigroups

The Vaught Conjecture Do uncountable models count?

3. Abstract Boolean Algebras

Quick course in Universal Algebra and Tame Congruence Theory

A bitopological point-free approach to compactifications

Weak Choice Principles and Forcing Axioms

THE WONDERLAND OF REFLECTIONS

CHAPTER 4. βs as a semigroup

COLLAPSING PERMUTATION GROUPS

MATH 318 Mathematical Logic Class notes

BOOLEAN SUBALGEBRAS OF ORTHOALGEBRAS

International Workshop on Mathematics of Constraint Satisfaction: Algebra, Logic and Graph Theory

Extending Algebraic Operations to D-Completions

Free and Finitely Presented Lattices

On the interval of strong partial clones of Boolean functions containing Pol((0,0),(0,1),(1,0))

Expansions of Heyting algebras

A locally finite characterization of AE(0) and related classes of compacta

Part V. 17 Introduction: What are measures and why measurable sets. Lebesgue Integration Theory

Morley s Proof. Winnipeg June 3, 2007

Data Cleaning and Query Answering with Matching Dependencies and Matching Functions

USING ULTRAPOWERS TO CHARACTERIZE ELEMENTARY EQUIVALENCE

COMPLETE SETS OF CONNECTIVES FOR GENERALIZED ŁUKASIEWICZ LOGICS KAMERYN J WILLIAMS. CUNY Graduate Center 365 Fifth Avenue New York, NY USA

Ultrafilters and Semigroup Algebras

SPECTRAL-LIKE DUALITY FOR DISTRIBUTIVE HILBERT ALGEBRAS WITH INFIMUM

AN ALGEBRAIC APPROACH TO GENERALIZED MEASURES OF INFORMATION

* 8 Groups, with Appendix containing Rings and Fields.

20 Ordinals. Definition A set α is an ordinal iff: (i) α is transitive; and. (ii) α is linearly ordered by. Example 20.2.

A Non-Topological View of Dcpos as Convergence Spaces

Subdirectly Irreducible Modes

Relational semantics for a fragment of linear logic

Ultrafilters and Set Theory. Andreas Blass University of Michigan Ann Arbor, MI

Transcription:

Martin Goldstern Discrete Mathematics and Geometry, TU Wien TACL Olomouc, June 2017

Galois connections Let A, B be sets, R A B. For any S A and any T B let S u := {b B a S : arb} T l := {a A b T : arb}. Then the maps T T l and S S u are -antitone. the maps S S := S ul and T T := T lu are closure operators (S S = S) S ulu = S u, T lul = l. Usually it is of interest to characterize the family of closed sets {S S = S} and the closure operator from below.

Galois connections, examples Let A, B be sets, R A B. S u := {b B a S : arb} = a S {b B arb} T l := {a A b T : arb} = b T {a A arb} Examples A = vector space, B = dual space = set of linear forms. arb b(a) = 0. S A S ul = linear hull of S. A = all formulas, B = all structures, arb b a (the formula a holds in the structure b). S = all consequences of S = {a : S a} A = operations on X, B = relations, f Rρ f ρ. S ul = S = clone generated by S.

k-ary clones, clones O (k) := {f f : X k X}. O X := k=1 O(k) X. Definition (k-ary clone) A k-ary clone on X is a set T O (k) X which is closed under composition and contains the k projections. Definition (Clone) A clone on X is a set T O X = k=1 O(k) X which is closed under composition and contains all projections. Definition (Composition) Let f O (k), g 1,..., g k O (m) X. f (g 1,..., g k )( x) := f ( g 1 ( x),..., g k ( x) ) for all x X m. If C is a clone, then C (k) := C O (k) is a k-ary clone, the k-ary fragment of C.

Vector-valued operations C is a clone: f, g 1,..., g k C f (g 1,..., g k ) C). We can view (g 1,..., g k ) as a single function g : X m X k, and write f g instead of f (g 1,..., g k ). Definition For any set S O X let S be the set of all operations f : X k X n with the property that all components are in S: S := k,n{f : X k X n i {1,..., n} : π n i f S)} where πi n : X n X is the i-th projection function. The set S is a clone iff S contains all projection functions and is closed under composition: g : X m X k f : X k X n : (f, g S f g S)

Examples of clones Every subset S O X will generate a clone S, the smallest clone containing S. For any relation ρ X n : Pol(ρ) := {f O ( f ) X ρ} is a clone. For any relation ρ X K (K infinite), Pol(ρ) is a clone. For any set R of relations, POL(R) := ρ R Pol(ρ) is a clone. C = POL(INV(C)), where INV(C) := f C Inv(f ), Inv(f ) := {ρ f ρ}. (For infinite X, need to allow infinitary relations; operations still have finite arity!)

The lattice of all clones on X For finite X, O X is countable. For infinite X of size κ, O X has 2 κ elements. Definition For any nonempty set X let Cl(X) be the set of all clones on X. (Cl(X) is a subset of the power set of O X.) Cl(X) is a complete lattice. (meet = intersection, join = clone generated by union) Cl(X) is Countable for X = 2. (Post s lattice. wikipedia!) Cl(X) is of size R = 2 ℵ 0 for X finite with > 2 elements. For infinite X of size κ: Cl(X) 2 2κ. In fact: = 2 2κ. (Later)

Minimal clones Definition We call a clone M minimal if J M (J is the smallest clone, containing only the projections), but there is no clone D with J D M. The minimal clones are the atoms of the clone lattice. An operation m is minimal iff m is a minimal clone. Instead of minimal clones we consider minimal operations. If m is minimal, then f m \ J : m f. If m is unary, then have m m j for all j except if m j = id. Hence j 2 = id ( retraction ), or m is a permutation of prime order. If m not essentially unary, then m must be idempotent. m(x,..., x) = m.

Minimal operations, examples Every constant operation. Every permutation whose order is a prime number. The meet operation of any meet-semilattice. The median operation in any linear order.... (many more. Some necessary conditions known, but no explicit criterion.) Fact If X is finite, then there are finitely many minimal operations. Every clone J contains a minimal clone. (This is not true for infinite sets. Let s : Z Z be defined by s(x) = x + 1, then every non-projection in s is of the form s j (j {1, 2,...}, and none of them is minimal, as s 2j s j.)

Complete sets Theorem For every X: O (2) X = O X. Proof for infinite X. Let p 2 : X 2 X be a bijection. Find bijections p j : X j X for j = 3, 4,..., with p j O (2). For example, p 3 (x, y, z) := p 2 (x, p 2 (y, z)). For every f : X k X, let ˆf := f p 1 k. So f ( x) = ˆf (p k ( x)) for all x X k. As ˆf is unary, ˆf O (2). From ˆf O (2) and p k O (2) conclude f O (2).

Complete sets For every X: O (2) X = O X. Proof for finite X ( Lagrange interpolation ). Let (X, +,, 0, 1) be a finite lattice with smallest element 0 and greatest element 1. So x + 0 = 0 + x = x = 1 x for all x. For each a X let χ a : X X be the characteristic function of the set {a}. So χ a O (1) O (2). For each a X k let χ a : X k X be the characteristic function of { a}: χ a = i χ a i (x i ). So χ a O (2). For any b X let c b O (1) be constant with value b. Every operation f O (k) can now be written as f = a X k (χ a c f ( a) ). So f O(2). (Remark: This proof also works for strongly amorphous sets.)

Precomplete clones Definition A clone C O X is precomplete (or maximal ) if C O X, but there is no clone D satisfying C D O X. Theorem For any clone C O X there is a precomplete clone C with C C. (Remark: Not true for infinite sets! At least if the continuum hypothesis holds.)

Post s lattice The lattice of all clones on a 2-element set is countably infinite. It has 5 coatoms ( precomplete clones) and 7 atoms.

Precomplete clones, example 1 Let ρ be a nontrivial unary relation, i.e. ρ X. Then Pol(ρ) is the set of all operations f such that ρ is a subalgebra of (X, f ). This clone is precomplete. Proof. Let g : X k X, g / Pol(ρ). Let C := Pol(ρ) {g}. We show C = O X. Sufficient: C O (2) X. For v X, let c v be the constant function with value v. There are a = (a 1,..., a k ) ρ k, b / ρ with g( a) = b, So c b = g(c a1,..., c ak ) is in C. For f O (2) X define ˆf (x 1, x 2, y) := { x 1 if y ρ f (x 1, x 2 ) if y / ρ. So ˆf C. Now f = ˆf (π 2 1, π2 2, c b), i.e., f (x 1, x 2 ) = ˆf (x 1, x 2, b). So f C.

Precomplete clones, example 2 a nontrivial equivalence relation Pol( ) is precomplete. Proof. For a, b X k write a b iff i a i b i. This is an equivalence relation on X k. Let g : X k X, g / Pol( ). Let C := Pol( ) {g}. We have to show C = O X. Sufficient: C O (2) X. There is k and a b X k with 1 := g( a) g( b) =: 0. We claim that for each p X 2 there is a function χ p : X 2 X which maps p to 1, everything else to 0 1. For each p X 2 let h p : X 2 X k be defined by h p (p) = a, h p (x) = b otherwise. Clearly h p Pol( ). So χ p := g h p C. (continued on next page)

Proof that Pol( ) is precomplete, continued. We started with a clone C Pol( ). For each p X 2 we have found χ p C, χ p : X 2 X with χ p (p) = 1, χ p (x) = 0 for x p. (And 0 1) Define χ : X 2 X X 2 by χ( x) = (χ p (x) : p X 2 ). So χ C. Let f O (2) X be arbitrary. We will show f C. Define ˆf : X 2+ X 2 X as follows: ˆf is constant on each -class. (So ˆf Pol( ) C) ˆf ( x, χ( x)) = f ( x). This two requirements are compatible, as x x implies that χ( x) χ( x ). Clearly f ( x) = ˆf ( x, χ( x)). So f C.

Precomplete clones, example 3 Definition Let r : X X, f : X k X. We say that f commutes with r if: x 1,..., x k X : f ( r(x 1 ),..., r(x k ) ) = r( f (x 1,..., x k ) ) Writing r for the relation {(x, r(x)) x X}, f commutes with r iff f r. (We may write f r instead of f r ) Clearly f r f r j for all j. Hence e.g. Pol(r) Pol(r 2 ). But if r is a permutation of order p, then Pol(r) = Pol(r j ) whenever p does not divide j. Theorem Assume that r : X X is a permutation and all cycles have the same prime length. Then Pol(r) is precomplete.

Precomplete clones, examples 4,5 monotone : Let ρ X X be a partial order with smallest and greatest element. Pol(ρ) is the set of all pointwise monotone operations. affine Assume X = p m, so wlog X is a finite field X = GF(p m ). Let ρ = {(a, b, c, d) X 4 a + b = c + d}. Then Pol(ρ) is the set of all operations f of the form f (x 1,..., x k ) = a 0 + k i=1 m 1 j=0 x pj i All these clones are precomplete.

Post s lattice, again The 5 precomplete clones in Cl({0, 1}): operations preserving {0}. operations preserving {1}. monotone operations commuting : f ( x) = f (x). affine operations

Rosenberg s list Theorem Let X = {1,..., k}. Then there is an explicit finite list of relations ρ 1,..., ρ m such that every precomplete clone on X is one of Pol(ρ 1 ),..., Pol(ρ m ). The list includes all central relations (generalisations of ρ X) all nontrivial equivalence relations ( if X = 2) all prime permutations All bounded partial orders affine relations (only if X = p n ) (others. more complicated but still explicit)

Rosenberg s list Theorem Let X = {1,..., k}. Then there is an explicit finite list of relations ρ 1,..., ρ m such that every precomplete clone on X is one of Pol(ρ 1 ),..., Pol(ρ m ). Completeness criterion S O X iff there is some ρ i from the list with f S : f ρ i.

A complicated interval in the clone lattice Definition Let C idem be the clone of all idempotent operations: f (x,..., x) = x. (Assume X 3.) Find all clones between C idem and O X! Example Let Y X. Then C idem Y := {f x Y : f (x,..., x) = x} is a clone C idem. Theorem Every clone between C idem and O X is of the form C idem Y. Hence: the interval [C idem, O X ] is (anti-)isomophic to the power set of X. (Precomplete clones correspond to singletons, O X to.)

[C idem, O X ], proof sketch Let C be a clone containing all idempotent operations f (x,..., x) = x. We want to find Y such that C = C idem Y = {f y Y : f (y,..., y) = y}.. fix(f ) := {a X f (a,..., a) = a}, nix(f ) := X \ fix(f ). Let R := {nix(f ) f C}. R is downward closed. R is upward directed, hence an ideal. Let Z be the largest element of R, Y := X \ Z. So C C idem Y. If nix(f ) nix(g) and g C, then f C. Hence C = C idem Y.

A complicated interval, continued C idem = the clone of all idempotent operations: f (x,..., x) = x. Theorem (X finite) Every clone between C idem and O X is of the form C idem Y. For infinite X: Definition For every filter F on X, let C F := C idem Y = {f Y F y Y f (y,..., y) = y} Y F Each C F is a clone above C idem.

A complicated interval, conclusion C F := {f Y F y Y f (y,..., y) = y} Theorem Let X be any set. Then the map F C F is an order-preserving bijection between the filters on X and the clones above C F. Ultrafilters correspond to precomplete clones in this interval, and the improper filter corresponds to O X. (For finite sets, all filters are principal.) Translation to topology: the interval [C idem, O X ] is anti-isomorphic to the family of closed sets of βx, the Čech-Stone compactification of the discrete space X. (Precomplete clones correspond to points, O X to.)

Another complicated interval Let X be infinite. We will find very many clones with trivial unary fragment, i.e., below C idem, the clone of all idempotent operations. (Unfortunately: no complete classification.) In fact all our operations will be conservative : f (x 1,..., x k ) {x 1,..., x k }. Let (A i : i I) be a family of sufficiently independent sets. (In particular: we demand that for any finite I 0 I and any j I \ I 0 the set ( i I0 A i ) (X \ A j ) contains at least 2 elements. It is possible to find such a family with 2 X elements, in particular: an uncountable such family.) Fix a linear order i on A i, with minimum operation i. Extend i to X by requiring x i y = x outside A i. For any I I let C I := { i i I }. Then all C I are distinct. (Note: the numbers of such clones = 2 2 X!)

Local clones Let X be infinite. A clone C is local if each fragment C O X k is closed in the product topology (pointwise convergence) on X X k (with discrete X). Equivalently: If there is a set R of relations of finite arity such that C = POL(R). The lattice of local clones has only 2 X elements; the lattice of all clones: 2 2 X. Example: On a finite set with k elements, the intervall [O (1) X, O X ] has k + 1 elements. On any infinite set X, the intervall [O (1) X, O X ] in the lattice of all clones has at least 2 2 N elements. On any infinite set X, the intervall [O (1) X, O X ] in the lattice of local clones has at only countably many elements.

Bonus round: non-ac We used X X X to show that O (2) X = O X (for infinite sets X). But X X X uses the axiom of choice (and in fact X infinite : X X X is equivalent to AC). Was that necessary? Yes, probably. Proof sketch. Really: a hint. An idea of a hint. No satisfaction guaranteed. Let (M, R 3 ) be the random 3-uniform hypergraph. That is, R 3 is a totally symmetric totally irreflexive relation which is as random as possible. For example: For all (reasonable) finite sets {a 1, b 1,..., a k, b k, c 1, d 1,..., c n, d n } M there is some e M with R(a i, b i, e) for all i, and R(c j, d j, e) for all j. (Technically: the Fraïssé limit of all finite 3-uniform hypergraphs.)

non-ac, continued Continuation of the proof. Let (M, R 3 ) be the random 3-uniform hypergraph. (M countable, R 3 M 3 is random or generic.) Let f 1,..., f m be first order definable binary operations, say definable from m 1,..., m k in the structure (M, R). Then the set X X can be partitioned into finitely many sets according to the type a pair (x, y) can have over m 1,... m k. On each type each operation f i must be either constant or a projection, so the same is true for any element of f 1,..., f k. But the function χ R is neither a projection or a constant on any type. So we have found a definable ternary function not in the clone generated by the definable binary functions.

non-ac, conclusion We have found a definable ternary function on (M, R), definable from R, but not in the clone generated by the definable binary functions. Now construct a model of ZF+ AC in which all operations on M are definable from R and finitely many parameters. In this model, all binary operations are trivial on a large set, but not all ternary operations.

Summary The clone lattice on {0, 1} is well understood. (But nontrivial.) Cl(X) for larger finite sets X: many fragments are explicitly known (certain intervals, coatoms,... ), others only partially (atoms), or only for very small sets (say, X 4, 5). To analyse k-ary operations, it is often helpful to consider k + 1-ary operations. (Or 2k-ary. or (k + X 2 )-ary, etc.) Many open questions. For infinite X: set theory kicks in. Local clones more interesting than all clones?

Thank you for your attention! and for your questions!... and for your corrections!!