DOCSLIB.ORG

On the Construction and Properties of Lattice-Group Structure in Cartesian Product Spaces

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
On the Construction and Properties of Lattice-Group Structure in Cartesian Product Spaces Journal of Computer Science Original Research Paper On the Construction and Properties of Lattice-Group Structure in Cartesian Product Spaces Davronbek Malikov and Susmit Bagchi Department of Aerospace and Software Engineering (Informatics), Gyeongsang National University, Jinju, Republic of Korea Article history Abstract: The lattice theory and group algebra have several applications in Received: 24-12-2019 computing sciences as well as physical sciences. The concept of lattice- Revised: 06-03-2020 group structure is an interesting hybrid algebraic structure having potential Accepted: 3-4-2020 applications. In this paper, the algebraic construction of lattice-group structure is formulated and associated algebraic properties are established. Corresponding Author: Susmit Bagchi The proposed construction considers Cartesian product spaces. The concept Department of Aerospace and of two-dimensional monoid is formulated in Cartesian product spaces of Software Engineering real numbers and a related lattice-group structure is established in the space (Informatics), Gyeongsang having reduced dimension. The different categories of functions are National University, Jinju, employed for dimension reduction while establishing the lattice-group Republic of Korea structure. The proposed lattice-monoid and lattice-group structures are Email: [email protected] finite in nature. The algebraic properties of lattice-group as well as associated structures are formulated. A set of numerical examples are presented in the paper to illustrate structural properties. Finally, the comparative analysis of the proposed structure with other contemporary work is included in the paper. Keywords: Lattice, Group, Lattice-Group, Partial Order, Monoid, Invertibility Introduction theory are developed to compute slices for temporal logic formulas (Sen and Garg, 2003). These algorithms Group algebra, especially finite field is the are useful in detecting temporal logic formulas in a fundamental part of Advanced Encryption Standard distributed computation (Mauricio et al ., 1999). In other (AES). The construction of variants of the Diffie– words, partial-order relation and lattices help in obtaining Hellman key agreement protocol become easy by using clear, concise and efficient formulations of problems group theory, where the nonAbelian groups can be requiring the ability to take transitive closures, solve applied in public key cryptography (Vasco and circular constraints and perform aggregate operations. Steinwandt, 2015; Tzu-Chun, 2018). Furthermore, group Lattice theory can be used in the implementation of a theory has applications in physics and particularly in knowledge representation language. For example, the condensed matter physics (Mildred et al ., 2010). knowledge base system is realized by processing a Moreover, the properties of partial order relation as sequence of terminological axioms by using Birkhoff’s well as lattice theory are widely applied to various Representation theorem and finite distributive lattices domains of computer science and distributed systems (Seymour and Marc, 2007; Frank, 2000). including programming languages (Vijay, 2015). The Interestingly, lattice theory plays a role in other applications of the lattice theory in distributed branches of mathematics such as, probability theory computing are comprised of vector clocks design and and graph theory (George, 2009; Louis, 2016). The global predicate detection (Lamport, 1978). The applications of lattice theory with other results lead to a properties of lattice linear predicates enable efficient decomposition technique that expresses all the trees of detection of global predicates in distributed systems a graph in the form of set unions of Cartesian products (Chase and Garg, 1995). The lattice agreement in of the sets of subgraphs of the component graphs asynchronous message passing systems is useful due to (Wen-Hai et al ., 1990). The algebraic relation between its applications in atomic snapshot objects and fault- lattice theory and group is an interesting topic having tolerant replicated state machines (Attiya et al ., 1995; several application possibilities. Thus, the algebraic Xiong et al ., 2018). Computational aspects of lattice interrelationship between lattice and groups needs © 2020 Davronbek Malikov and Susmit Bagchi. This open access article is distributed under a Creative Commons Attribution (CC-BY) 3.0 license. Davronbek Malikov and Susmit Bagchi / Journal of Computer Science 2020, 16 (4): 402.421 DOI: 10.3844/jcssp.2020.402 .421 attention. The construction of hybrid algebraic structure Distributive lattice representation (Seymour and involving lattice theory and group algebra would be an Marc, 2007; Birkhoff, 1967; Laszlo, 2015) interesting topic to investigate. The purpose of this paper is inline to such An algebraic lattice L ∨ ∧),,( is a set with two motivation of formulating algebraic hybrid structures. binary operations meet and join ∧ ∨),( respectively, This paper proposes the construction and algebraic such that both operations are commutative and analysis of lattice-group structure in two dimensional associative, where absorption law holds, as mentioned Cartesian product spaces of real numbers. It is below (where ∀x,y,z∈X): considered that the lattice-group structure is finite in nature. First we introduce the concept of lattice and (a) x∧=∧ y yxx, ∨=∨ y yx , lattice-monoid structures in 2D space. Next, we x∧( yz ∧ )( = xy ∧ ), ∧ z construct the group structure under the influence of (b) (1) ∨ ∨ = ∨ ∨ various types of function mappings. The function x( yz )( xy ), z mappings reduce the dimension while transforming the (c) xx=∧( xy ∨ ) =∨ x ( xy ∧ ). 2D lattice into a lattice-group structure. The associated algebraic properties of the multidimensional lattices, A lattice is a partially ordered set in which for every lattice-monoids and lattice-groups are presented in the two elements a and b the least upper bound (called join, paper. The potential applications of the proposed denoted by, (a∨b)) and the greatest lower bound (called algebraic structure as well as analysis can be made in meet, denoted by, (a∧b)) exist. formulation of model of distributed computing. A lattice is distributive if it satisfies distributive law The rest of paper is organized as follows. Second given by, x∧( yz ∨ )( = xy ∧ )( ∨ xz ∧ ) . section presents preliminary concepts. Third section Interestingly, a lattice can be represented presents a set of definitions intended to the constructed graphically. The 2D representation of finite partially 2 structures. Fourth section presents a set of analytical ordered set X (with an implied upward orientation) properties of the algebraic structures and fifth section is the directed graph whose vertices are the elements presents a set of illustrative examples. The comparative X 2 evaluation with the other contemporary works in the of and also, there is a directed edge from (xa, xb) domain is presented in sixth section. Finally, seventh to (xc, xd) in the Cartesian product space such that, (xa, ≤ X 2 section concludes the paper. xb) (xc, xd) in . The 2D lattice representation is a type of Hasse Preliminaries diagram, which represents the elements of lattice in 2 X . We note that 2D lattice representation of poset In this section, we introduce basic definitions and (X 2 ≤), need not to be connected. properties related to lattice theory, posets and group algebra. Binary Operation, Group and Abelian Group (Scott, Binary Relation and Poset (Seymour and Marc, 1987; Herstein, 1975; Milne, 2013; Robert, 1969) 2007; Thomas, 2004; Dushnik and Miller, 1941; Bernd, 2016) If X ≠ φ and a binary operation * is defined as ∗: X 2 → X then the set is called closed under *. A group ⊂ ⊂ Let X be a point set and, A X and B X be such is given by G = X ∗),( such that, the following properties that, A∩B = φ. A binary relation R is an ordered pair hold: such that, R⊂A×B. For any set A, a subset of the An Cartesian product set is called an n-ary relation on (a) ∀xyzGx,, ∈ ,( ∗∗=∗∗ yz )( xy ) z A, where n∈Z+. Let ℜ be denoting set of real numbers. (b) ∀∈xGeGex, ∃∈ : ∗=∗= xe x (2) A partially ordered set or poset is a set P together ∀∈∃∈xGx−1 Gxx ∗ − 1 = x − 1 ∗= xe with a binary relation ≤ such that, the following (c) , : conditions are satisfied for all x,y,z∈P: A group G = ( X, *) is called Abelian if it satisfies the (a) x ≤ x (Reflexivity), commutative law given by, ∀xy, ∈ Gx , ∗=∗ y y x . (b) If x ≤ y and y ≤ x, then x = y (Anti symmetry), (c) If x ≤ y and y ≤ z, then x ≤ z (Transitivity) Functions and Invertibility (Seymour and Marc, 2007; William, 2013; Walter, 1976) An element x of a poset P is said to be a lower bound A function f: A→ B is one-to-one if af )( = af / )( for the subset S ⊂ P if x ≤ s for every s∈S. The element x / is a greatest lower bound of set S if x is a lower bound of implies a = a . It is said to be an onto function if each S and y ≤ x for any lower bound y of set S. element of B is in the image of some element of A 403 Davronbek Malikov and Susmit Bagchi / Journal of Computer Science 2020, 16 (4): 402.421 DOI: 10.3844/jcssp.2020.402 .421 meaning, f(A) = B. A function f : A → B is invertible Remark if the function both one-to-one and onto. Interestingly, there is a close relationship between partial orders and quasi orders. For example, if ≤ is a Definitions 2 partial order on X , then we can define: In this section, a set of definitions are constructed in xx xx xx xx relation to multidimensional lattices, lattice-monoids and ( ab,,) <( cd) ⇔( ab ,,) ≤( cd ) ∧ lattice-group structures. A few of the proposed ()()xxab, ≠ xx cd , . definitions are direct extension of one-dimensional construction into the multidimensional space. 2 Similarly, if < is quasi order on X , then we can Relation, Partial Ordering and Quasi Order in 2D xx≤ xx define ( ab,) ( cd , ) as: Let us consider, {( x , x ), ( x , x ), ( x , x ),… ( x , x ), a b c d e f r q ⊂ X 2 (xn-1, xn)} and if it is true that: xx xx xx xx ( ab,,) ≤( cd) ⇔( ab ,,) <( cd ) ∨ xx xx ()()ab, = cd , .
Load more

Recommended publications
  • On the Lattice Structure of Quantum Logic
    BULL. AUSTRAL. MATH. SOC. MOS 8106, *8IOI, 0242 VOL. I (1969), 333-340 On the lattice structure of quantum logic P. D. Finch A weak logical structure is defined as a set of boolean propositional logics in which one can define common operations of negation and implication. The set union of the boolean components of a weak logical structure is a logic of propositions which is an orthocomplemented poset, where orthocomplementation is interpreted as negation and the partial order as implication. It is shown that if one can define on this logic an operation of logical conjunction which has certain plausible properties, then the logic has the structure of an orthomodular lattice. Conversely, if the logic is an orthomodular lattice then the conjunction operation may be defined on it. 1. Introduction The axiomatic development of non-relativistic quantum mechanics leads to a quantum logic which has the structure of an orthomodular poset. Such a structure can be derived from physical considerations in a number of ways, for example, as in Gunson [7], Mackey [77], Piron [72], Varadarajan [73] and Zierler [74]. Mackey [77] has given heuristic arguments indicating that this quantum logic is, in fact, not just a poset but a lattice and that, in particular, it is isomorphic to the lattice of closed subspaces of a separable infinite dimensional Hilbert space. If one assumes that the quantum logic does have the structure of a lattice, and not just that of a poset, it is not difficult to ascertain what sort of further assumptions lead to a "coordinatisation" of the logic as the lattice of closed subspaces of Hilbert space, details will be found in Jauch [8], Piron [72], Varadarajan [73] and Zierler [74], Received 13 May 1969.
    [Show full text]
  • ORTHOGONAL GROUP of CERTAIN INDEFINITE LATTICE Chang Heon Kim* 1. Introduction Given an Even Lattice M in a Real Quadratic Space
    JOURNAL OF THE CHUNGCHEONG MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 20, No. 1, March 2007 ORTHOGONAL GROUP OF CERTAIN INDEFINITE LATTICE Chang Heon Kim* Abstract. We compute the special orthogonal group of certain lattice of signature (2; 1). 1. Introduction Given an even lattice M in a real quadratic space of signature (2; n), Borcherds lifting [1] gives a multiplicative correspondence between vec- tor valued modular forms F of weight 1¡n=2 with values in C[M 0=M] (= the group ring of M 0=M) and meromorphic modular forms on complex 0 varieties (O(2) £ O(n))nO(2; n)=Aut(M; F ). Here NM denotes the dual lattice of M, O(2; n) is the orthogonal group of M R and Aut(M; F ) is the subgroup of Aut(M) leaving the form F stable under the natural action of Aut(M) on M 0=M. In particular, if the signature of M is (2; 1), then O(2; 1) ¼ H: O(2) £ O(1) and Borcherds' theory gives a lifting of vector valued modular form of weight 1=2 to usual one variable modular form on Aut(M; F ). In this sense in order to work out Borcherds lifting it is important to ¯nd appropriate lattice on which our wanted modular group acts. In this article we will show: Theorem 1.1. Let M be a 3-dimensional even lattice of all 2 £ 2 integral symmetric matrices, that is, ½µ ¶ ¾ AB M = j A; B; C 2 Z BC Received December 30, 2006. 2000 Mathematics Subject Classi¯cation: Primary 11F03, 11H56.
    [Show full text]
  • ON the SHELLABILITY of the ORDER COMPLEX of the SUBGROUP LATTICE of a FINITE GROUP 1. Introduction We Will Show That the Order C
    TRANSACTIONS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 353, Number 7, Pages 2689{2703 S 0002-9947(01)02730-1 Article electronically published on March 12, 2001 ON THE SHELLABILITY OF THE ORDER COMPLEX OF THE SUBGROUP LATTICE OF A FINITE GROUP JOHN SHARESHIAN Abstract. We show that the order complex of the subgroup lattice of a finite group G is nonpure shellable if and only if G is solvable. A by-product of the proof that nonsolvable groups do not have shellable subgroup lattices is the determination of the homotopy types of the order complexes of the subgroup lattices of many minimal simple groups. 1. Introduction We will show that the order complex of the subgroup lattice of a finite group G is (nonpure) shellable if and only if G is solvable. The proof of nonshellability in the nonsolvable case involves the determination of the homotopy type of the order complexes of the subgroup lattices of many minimal simple groups. We begin with some history and basic definitions. It is assumed that the reader is familiar with some of the rudiments of algebraic topology and finite group theory. No distinction will be made between an abstract simplicial complex ∆ and an arbitrary geometric realization of ∆. Maximal faces of a simplicial complex ∆ will be called facets of ∆. Definition 1.1. A simplicial complex ∆ is shellable if the facets of ∆ can be ordered σ1;::: ,σn so that for all 1 ≤ i<k≤ n thereexistssome1≤ j<kand x 2 σk such that σi \ σk ⊆ σj \ σk = σk nfxg. The list σ1;::: ,σn is called a shelling of ∆.
    [Show full text]
  • 7 LATTICE POINTS and LATTICE POLYTOPES Alexander Barvinok
    7 LATTICE POINTS AND LATTICE POLYTOPES Alexander Barvinok INTRODUCTION Lattice polytopes arise naturally in algebraic geometry, analysis, combinatorics, computer science, number theory, optimization, probability and representation the- ory. They possess a rich structure arising from the interaction of algebraic, convex, analytic, and combinatorial properties. In this chapter, we concentrate on the the- ory of lattice polytopes and only sketch their numerous applications. We briefly discuss their role in optimization and polyhedral combinatorics (Section 7.1). In Section 7.2 we discuss the decision problem, the problem of finding whether a given polytope contains a lattice point. In Section 7.3 we address the counting problem, the problem of counting all lattice points in a given polytope. The asymptotic problem (Section 7.4) explores the behavior of the number of lattice points in a varying polytope (for example, if a dilation is applied to the polytope). Finally, in Section 7.5 we discuss problems with quantifiers. These problems are natural generalizations of the decision and counting problems. Whenever appropriate we address algorithmic issues. For general references in the area of computational complexity/algorithms see [AB09]. We summarize the computational complexity status of our problems in Table 7.0.1. TABLE 7.0.1 Computational complexity of basic problems. PROBLEM NAME BOUNDED DIMENSION UNBOUNDED DIMENSION Decision problem polynomial NP-hard Counting problem polynomial #P-hard Asymptotic problem polynomial #P-hard∗ Problems with quantifiers unknown; polynomial for ∀∃ ∗∗ NP-hard ∗ in bounded codimension, reduces polynomially to volume computation ∗∗ with no quantifier alternation, polynomial time 7.1 INTEGRAL POLYTOPES IN POLYHEDRAL COMBINATORICS We describe some combinatorial and computational properties of integral polytopes.
    [Show full text]
  • INTEGER POINTS and THEIR ORTHOGONAL LATTICES 2 to Remove the Congruence Condition
    INTEGER POINTS ON SPHERES AND THEIR ORTHOGONAL LATTICES MENNY AKA, MANFRED EINSIEDLER, AND URI SHAPIRA (WITH AN APPENDIX BY RUIXIANG ZHANG) Abstract. Linnik proved in the late 1950’s the equidistribution of in- teger points on large spheres under a congruence condition. The congru- ence condition was lifted in 1988 by Duke (building on a break-through by Iwaniec) using completely different techniques. We conjecture that this equidistribution result also extends to the pairs consisting of a vector on the sphere and the shape of the lattice in its orthogonal complement. We use a joining result for higher rank diagonalizable actions to obtain this conjecture under an additional congruence condition. 1. Introduction A theorem of Legendre, whose complete proof was given by Gauss in [Gau86], asserts that an integer D can be written as a sum of three squares if and only if D is not of the form 4m(8k + 7) for some m, k N. Let D = D N : D 0, 4, 7 mod8 and Z3 be the set of primitive∈ vectors { ∈ 6≡ } prim in Z3. Legendre’s Theorem also implies that the set 2 def 3 2 S (D) = v Zprim : v 2 = D n ∈ k k o is non-empty if and only if D D. This important result has been refined in many ways. We are interested∈ in the refinement known as Linnik’s problem. Let S2 def= x R3 : x = 1 . For a subset S of rational odd primes we ∈ k k2 set 2 D(S)= D D : for all p S, D mod p F× .
    [Show full text]
  • Lattice-Ordered Loops and Quasigroupsl
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector JOIJRNALOFALGEBRA 16, 218-226(1970) Lattice-Ordered Loops and Quasigroupsl TREVOREVANS Matkentatics Department, Emory University, Atlanta, Georgia 30322 Communicated by R. H, Brwk Received April 16, 1969 In studying the effect of an order on non-associativesystems such as loops or quasigroups, a natural question to ask is whether some order condition which implies commutativity in the group case implies associativity in the corresponding loop case. For example, a well-known theorem (Birkhoff, [1]) concerning lattice ordered groups statesthat if the descendingchain condition holds for the positive elements,then the 1.0. group is actually a direct product of infinite cyclic groups with its partial order induced in the usual way by the linear order in the factors. It is easy to show (Zelinski, [6]) that a fully- ordered loop satisfying the descendingchain condition on positive elements is actually an infinite cyclic group. In this paper we generalize this result and Birkhoff’s result, by showing that any lattice-ordered loop with descending chain condition on its positive elements is associative. Hence, any 1.0. loop with d.c.c. on its positive elements is a free abelian group. More generally, any lattice-ordered quasigroup in which bounded chains are finite, is isotopic to a free abelian group. These results solve a problem in Birkhoff’s Lattice Theory, 3rd ed. The proof uses only elementary properties of loops and lattices. 1. LATTICE ORDERED LOOPS We will write loops additively with neutral element0.
    [Show full text]
  • Noncommutative Unique Factorization Domainso
    NONCOMMUTATIVE UNIQUE FACTORIZATION DOMAINSO BY P. M. COHN 1. Introduction. By a (commutative) unique factorization domain (UFD) one usually understands an integral domain R (with a unit-element) satisfying the following three conditions (cf. e.g. Zariski-Samuel [16]): Al. Every element of R which is neither zero nor a unit is a product of primes. A2. Any two prime factorizations of a given element have the same number of factors. A3. The primes occurring in any factorization of a are completely deter- mined by a, except for their order and for multiplication by units. If R* denotes the semigroup of nonzero elements of R and U is the group of units, then the classes of associated elements form a semigroup R* / U, and A1-3 are equivalent to B. The semigroup R*jU is free commutative. One may generalize the notion of UFD to noncommutative rings by taking either A-l3 or B as starting point. It is obvious how to do this in case B, although the class of rings obtained is rather narrow and does not even include all the commutative UFD's. This is indicated briefly in §7, where examples are also given of noncommutative rings satisfying the definition. However, our principal aim is to give a definition of a noncommutative UFD which includes the commutative case. Here it is better to start from A1-3; in order to find the precise form which such a definition should take we consider the simplest case, that of noncommutative principal ideal domains. For these rings one obtains a unique factorization theorem simply by reinterpreting the Jordan- Holder theorem for right .R-modules on one generator (cf.
    [Show full text]
  • The Structure of Residuated Lattices
    The Structure of Residuated Lattices Kevin Blount and Constantine Tsinakis May 23, 2002 Abstract A residuated lattice is an ordered algebraic structure L = hL, ∧, ∨, · , e, \ , / i such that hL, ∧, ∨i is a lattice, hL, ·, ei is a monoid, and \ and / are binary operations for which the equivalences a · b ≤ c ⇐⇒ a ≤ c/b ⇐⇒ b ≤ a\c hold for all a, b, c ∈ L. It is helpful to think of the last two operations as left and right division and thus the equivalences can be seen as “di- viding” on the right by b and “dividing” on the left by a. The class of all residuated lattices is denoted by RL. The study of such objects originated in the context of the theory of ring ideals in the 1930’s. The collection of all two-sided ideals of a ring forms a lattice upon which one can impose a natural monoid structure making this object into a residuated lattice. Such ideas were investi- gated by Morgan Ward and R. P. Dilworth in a series of important papers [15], [16],[45], [46], [47] and [48] and also by Krull in [33]. Since that time, there has been substantial research regarding some specific classes of residuated structures, see for example [1], [9], [26] and [38], but we believe that this is the first time that a general structural the- ory has been established for the class RL as a whole. In particular, we develop the notion of a normal subalgebra and show that RL is an “ideal variety” in the sense that it is an equational class in which con- gruences correspond to “normal” subalgebras in the same way that ring congruences correspond to ring ideals.
    [Show full text]
  • Groups with Identical Subgroup Lattices in All Powers
    GROUPS WITH IDENTICAL SUBGROUP LATTICES IN ALL POWERS KEITH A. KEARNES AND AGNES´ SZENDREI Abstract. Suppose that G and H are groups with cyclic Sylow subgroups. We show that if there is an isomorphism λ2 : Sub (G × G) ! Sub (H × H), then there k k are isomorphisms λk : Sub (G ) ! Sub (H ) for all k. But this is not enough to force G to be isomorphic to H, for we also show that for any positive integer N there are pairwise nonisomorphic groups G1; : : : ; GN defined on the same finite set, k k all with cyclic Sylow subgroups, such that Sub (Gi ) = Sub (Gj ) for all i; j; k. 1. Introduction To what extent is a finite group determined by the subgroup lattices of its finite direct powers? Reinhold Baer proved results in 1939 implying that an abelian group G is determined up to isomorphism by Sub (G3) (cf. [1]). Michio Suzuki proved in 1951 that a finite simple group G is determined up to isomorphism by Sub (G2) (cf. [10]). Roland Schmidt proved in 1981 that if G is a finite, perfect, centerless group, then it is determined up to isomorphism by Sub (G2) (cf. [6]). Later, Schmidt proved in [7] that if G has an elementary abelian Hall normal subgroup that equals its own centralizer, then G is determined up to isomorphism by Sub (G3). It has long been open whether every finite group G is determined up to isomorphism by Sub (G3). (For more information on this problem, see the books [8, 11].) One may ask more generally to what extent a finite algebraic structure (or algebra) is determined by the subalgebra lattices of its finite direct powers.
    [Show full text]
  • Thermodynamic Properties of Coupled Map Lattices 1 Introduction
    Thermodynamic properties of coupled map lattices J´erˆome Losson and Michael C. Mackey Abstract This chapter presents an overview of the literature which deals with appli- cations of models framed as coupled map lattices (CML’s), and some recent results on the spectral properties of the transfer operators induced by various deterministic and stochastic CML’s. These operators (one of which is the well- known Perron-Frobenius operator) govern the temporal evolution of ensemble statistics. As such, they lie at the heart of any thermodynamic description of CML’s, and they provide some interesting insight into the origins of nontrivial collective behavior in these models. 1 Introduction This chapter describes the statistical properties of networks of chaotic, interacting el- ements, whose evolution in time is discrete. Such systems can be profitably modeled by networks of coupled iterative maps, usually referred to as coupled map lattices (CML’s for short). The description of CML’s has been the subject of intense scrutiny in the past decade, and most (though by no means all) investigations have been pri- marily numerical rather than analytical. Investigators have often been concerned with the statistical properties of CML’s, because a deterministic description of the motion of all the individual elements of the lattice is either out of reach or uninteresting, un- less the behavior can somehow be described with a few degrees of freedom. However there is still no consistent framework, analogous to equilibrium statistical mechanics, within which one can describe the probabilistic properties of CML’s possessing a large but finite number of elements.
    [Show full text]
  • Cayley's and Holland's Theorems for Idempotent Semirings and Their
    Cayley's and Holland's Theorems for Idempotent Semirings and Their Applications to Residuated Lattices Nikolaos Galatos Department of Mathematics University of Denver [email protected] Rostislav Horˇc´ık Institute of Computer Sciences Academy of Sciences of the Czech Republic [email protected] Abstract We extend Cayley's and Holland's representation theorems to idempotent semirings and residuated lattices, and provide both functional and relational versions. Our analysis allows for extensions of the results to situations where conditions are imposed on the order relation of the representing structures. Moreover, we give a new proof of the finite embeddability property for the variety of integral residuated lattices and many of its subvarieties. 1 Introduction Cayley's theorem states that every group can be embedded in the (symmetric) group of permutations on a set. Likewise, every monoid can be embedded into the (transformation) monoid of self-maps on a set. C. Holland [10] showed that every lattice-ordered group can be embedded into the lattice-ordered group of order-preserving permutations on a totally-ordered set. Recall that a lattice-ordered group (`-group) is a structure G = hG; _; ^; ·;−1 ; 1i, where hG; ·;−1 ; 1i is group and hG; _; ^i is a lattice, such that multiplication preserves the order (equivalently, it distributes over joins and/or meets). An analogous representation was proved also for distributive lattice-ordered monoids in [2, 11]. We will prove similar theorems for resid- uated lattices and idempotent semirings in Sections 2 and 3. Section 4 focuses on the finite embeddability property (FEP) for various classes of idempotent semirings and residuated lat- tices.
    [Show full text]
  • Groups with Almost Modular Subgroup Lattice Provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector
    Journal of Algebra 243, 738᎐764Ž. 2001 doi:10.1006rjabr.2001.8886, available online at http:rrwww.idealibrary.com on View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE Groups with Almost Modular Subgroup Lattice provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector Francesco de Giovanni and Carmela Musella Dipartimento di Matematica e Applicazioni, Uni¨ersita` di Napoli ‘‘Federico II’’, Complesso Uni¨ersitario Monte S. Angelo, Via Cintia, I 80126, Naples, Italy and Yaroslav P. Sysak1 Institute of Mathematics, Ukrainian National Academy of Sciences, ¨ul. Tereshchenki¨ska 3, 01601 Kie¨, Ukraine Communicated by Gernot Stroth Received November 14, 2000 DEDICATED TO BERNHARD AMBERG ON THE OCCASION OF HIS 60TH BIRTHDAY 1. INTRODUCTION A subgroup of a group G is called modular if it is a modular element of the lattice ᑦŽ.G of all subgroups of G. It is clear that everynormal subgroup of a group is modular, but arbitrarymodular subgroups need not be normal; thus modularitymaybe considered as a lattice generalization of normality. Lattices with modular elements are also called modular. Abelian groups and the so-called Tarski groupsŽ i.e., infinite groups all of whose proper nontrivial subgroups have prime order. are obvious examples of groups whose subgroup lattices are modular. The structure of groups with modular subgroup lattice has been described completelybyIwasawa wx4, 5 and Schmidt wx 13 . For a detailed account of results concerning modular subgroups of groups, we refer the reader towx 14 . 1 This work was done while the third author was visiting the Department of Mathematics of the Universityof Napoli ‘‘Federico II.’’ He thanks the G.N.S.A.G.A.
    [Show full text]