DOCSLIB.ORG

Content Semimodules

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Content Semimodules E extracta mathematicae Vol. 32, N´um.2, 239 { 254 (2017) Content Semimodules Rafieh Razavi Nazari, Shaban Ghalandarzadeh Faculty of Mathematics, K. N. Toosi University of Technology, Tehran, Iran [email protected] [email protected] Presented by Juan Antonio Navarro Received November 27, 2016 Abstract: The purpose of this paper is to study content semimodules. We obtain some results on content semimodules similar to the corresponding ones on content modules. We study normally flat content semimodules and multiplication content semimodules. More- over, we characterize content semimodules over discrete valuation semirings and Boolean algebras. Key words: Semiring, Content semimodule, Multiplication semimodule, Normally flat semi- module. AMS Subject Class. (2010): 16Y60. Introduction Semirings and semimodules have many applications in different branches of mathematics (see [7], [8] and [9]). Semiring is a generalization of ring and bounded distributive lattice. We recall here some definitions: A semiring is a nonempty set S with two binary operations addition (+) and multiplication (·) such that the following conditions hold: 1) (S; +) is a commutative monoid with identity element 0; 2) (S; :) is a monoid with identity element 1 =6 0; 3) 0a = 0 = a0 for all a 2 S; 4) a(b + c) = ab + ac and (b + c)a = ba + ca for every a; b; c 2 S. The semiring S is commutative if the monoid (S; :) is commutative. All semirings in this paper are commutative. An ideal I of a semiring S is a nonempty subset of S such that a + b 2 I and sa 2 I for all a; b 2 I and s 2 S. An ideal I is subtractive if a + b 2 I and b 2 I imply that a 2 I for all a; b 2 S. A semiring is entire if ab = 0 implies that a = 0 or b = 0. Further, an element a of a semiring S is multiplicatively cancellable (abbreviated as MC) if ab = ac implies that b = c. If every nonzero element of S is multiplicatively 239 240 r. razavi nazari, sh. ghalandarzadeh cancellable we say that the semiring S is a semidomain. An element a of a semiring S is multiplicatively idempotent if a2 = a. Let I×(S) denote the set of all multiplicatively idempotent elements of S. We say that S is multiplicatively idempotent, if I×(S) = S. Let S be a semiring. An S-semimodule is an additive abelian monoid (M; +) with additive identity 0M and a function S × M ! M ((s; m) 7! sm), called scalar multiplication, such that the following conditions hold for all s; s0 2 S and all m; m0 2 M: 1) (ss0)m = s(s0m); 2) s(m + m0) = sm + sm0; 3) (s + s0)m = sm + s0m; 4) 1m = m; 5) s0M = 0M = 0m; A subset N of an S-semimodule M is a subsemimodule of M if N is closed under addition and scalar multiplication. We say that a subsemimodule N of an S-semimodule M is subtractive if m+m0 2 N and m 2 N imply that m0 2 N for all m; m0 2 M. Let M and M 0 be S-semimodules. Then a function α from M to M 0 is an S-homomorphism if α(m + m0) = α(m) + α(m0) for all m; m0 2 M and α(sm) = s(α(m)) for all m 2 M and s 2 S. The kernel of α is ker(α) = α−1f0g. Then ker(α) is a subtractive S-semimodule of M. The set α(M) = fα(m) j m 2 Mg is a subsemimodule of M 0. An S-homomorphism α : M ! M 0 is an S- monomorphism if αβ = αβ0 implies β = β0 for all S-semimodule K and all S-homomorphisms β; β0 : K ! M. If α is an S-monomorphism, then ker(α) = 0. But the converse need not be true. For example, let S be an entire semiring and b 2 S such that it is not multiplicatively cancellative. Thus there exists a =6 a0 2 S such that ab = a0b. Define a map ϕ : S ! Sb by s 7! sb. Then ϕ is an S-homomorphism with ker(ϕ) = 0. But ϕ is not injective, since ϕ(a) = ϕ(a0). An S-homomorphism α : M ! M 0 is surjective if α(M) = M 0. Let S be a semiring and M an S-semimodule. For any x 2 M, we de- fine c(x) = \fI j I is an ideal of S and x 2 IMg. Then c is a function from M to the set of ideals of S and it is called the content function. An S- semimodule M is called a content semimodule if for every x 2 M, x 2 c(x)M. In this paper, we study content semimodules and extend some results of [14] to semimodules over semirings. In Section 1, we recall some properties of content semimodules 241 content semimodules from [12] and we show that projective semimodules are content semimodules. We study normally flat content semimodules in Sec- tion 2. In Section 3, we characterize content S-semimodules over discrete valuation semirings. In Section 4, we investigate some properties of faithful multiplication content semimodules, as a generalization of faithful multipli- cation modules. In the last section, we prove that if every subsemimodule of a content S-semimodule is a content S-semimodule with restricted content function, then S is a multiplicatively regular semiring. We also characterize content semimodules over Boolean algebras. 1. Content semimodules The concepts of content modules and content algebras were introduced in [14]. The concept of content semimodules is studied in [12]. Let S be a semiring and M an S-semimodule. For any x 2 M, we define the content of x by, { } cS;M (x) = \ I j I is an ideal of S and x 2 IM : Therefore cS;M is a function from M to the set of ideals of S which is called the content function.P If N is any non-empty subset of M, we define cS;M (N) to be the ideal x2N cS;M (x). Whenever there is no fear of ambiguity, either or both of the subscripts S and M will be omitted. Definition 1. Let S be a semiring. An S-semimodule M will be called a content S-semimodule if for every x 2 M, x 2 c(x)M. Example 2. Let S be a multiplicatively idempotent semiring, J an ideal of S and x 2 J. It is clear that (x) ⊆ c(x) = \fI j I ⊆ S; x 2 IJg. Thus (x)J ⊆ c(x)J. But x = x2 2 (x)J and hence x 2 c(x)J. Therefore J is a content S-semimodule. Now, we recall next results from [12], which will be used repeatedly. Theorem 3. Let M be an S-semimodule. Then the following statements are equivalent: 1) M is a content S-semimodule. 2) For every set of ideals fIig of S, (\Ii)M = \(IiM). 3) For every set of finitely generated ideals fIig of S, (\Ii)M = \(IiM). 242 r. razavi nazari, sh. ghalandarzadeh 4) There exists a function f from M to the set of ideals of S such that for every x 2 M and every ideal I of S, x 2 IM if and only if f(x) ⊆ I. Moreover, if M is a content S-semimodule and x 2 M, then c(x) is a finitely generated ideal. Theorem 4. Let M be a content S-semimodule, and N a subsemimodule of M. Then the following statements are equivalent: 1) IM \ N = IN for every ideal I of S. 2) For every x 2 N, x 2 cM (x)N. 3) N is a content S-semimodule and cM restricted to N is cN . We know that every free module and every projective module as a direct summand of a free module, are content modules by [14, Corollary 1.4]. More- over every free semimodule is a content semimodule by [12, Corollary 26]. But not all projective semimodules are direct summands of free semimodules (cf. [3, Example 2.3]). We can prove that every projective semimodule is a content semimodule as follows: Theorem 5. Any projective semimodule is a content semimodule. Proof. Let S be a semiring and M a projective S-semimodule. Then by [18, f g ⊆ f g ⊆ Theorem 3.4.12], there exist mi i2I M and fi i2I HomP S(M; S) such 2 2 that for any x M, fi(x) =P 0 for almost all i I, and x = i fi(x)mi. Sup- 2 n 2 pose that x M. Then x = i=1 fi(x)mi and hence x (f1(x); : : : ; fn(x))M. Thus c(x) ⊆ (f1(x); : : : ; fn(x)). Now assume that x 2 IM for some ideal I 2 N 2 2 of S. ThenP there exist m , r1; : : : ; rm I andP x1; : : : ; xm M such m ≤ ≤ m that x = i=1 rixi. For each 1 j n, fj(x) = i=1 rifj(xi), and hence fj(x) 2 (r1; : : : ; rm). Therefore (f1(x); : : : ; fn(x)) ⊆ (r1; : : : ; rm) ⊆ I. This implies (f1(x); : : : ; fn(x)) ⊆ c(x), by definition of content function. Therefore (f1(x); : : : ; fn(x)) = c(x), and x 2 (f1(x); : : : ; fn(x))M = c(x)M. Let M be an S-semimodule, N a subsemimodule of M and I an ideal of S. Put (N :M I) = fx j x 2 M and Ix ⊆ Ng: Then (N :M I) is a subsemimodule of M.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • On the Cohen-Macaulay Modules of Graded Subrings
    TRANSACTIONS OF THE AMERICAN MATHEMATICAL SOCIETY Volume 357, Number 2, Pages 735{756 S 0002-9947(04)03562-7 Article electronically published on April 27, 2004 ON THE COHEN-MACAULAY MODULES OF GRADED SUBRINGS DOUGLAS HANES Abstract. We give several characterizations for the linearity property for a maximal Cohen-Macaulay module over a local or graded ring, as well as proofs of existence in some new cases. In particular, we prove that the existence of such modules is preserved when taking Segre products, as well as when passing to Veronese subrings in low dimensions. The former result even yields new results on the existence of finitely generated maximal Cohen-Macaulay modules over non-Cohen-Macaulay rings. 1. Introduction and definitions The notion of a linear maximal Cohen-Macaulay module over a local ring (R; m) was introduced by Ulrich [17], who gave a simple characterization of the Gorenstein property for a Cohen-Macaulay local ring possessing a maximal Cohen-Macaulay module which is sufficiently close to being linear, as defined below. A maximal Cohen-Macaulay module (abbreviated MCM module)overR is one whose depth is equal to the Krull dimension of the ring R. All modules to be considered in this paper are assumed to be finitely generated. The minimal number of generators of an R-module M, which is equal to the (R=m)-vector space dimension of M=mM, will be denoted throughout by ν(M). In general, the length of a finitely generated Artinian module M is denoted by `(M)(orby`R(M), if it is necessary to specify the ring acting on M).
    [Show full text]
  • Modules and Lie Semialgebras Over Semirings with a Negation Map 3
    MODULES AND LIE SEMIALGEBRAS OVER SEMIRINGS WITH A NEGATION MAP GUY BLACHAR Abstract. In this article, we present the basic definitions of modules and Lie semialgebras over semirings with a negation map. Our main example of a semiring with a negation map is ELT algebras, and some of the results in this article are formulated and proved only in the ELT theory. When dealing with modules, we focus on linearly independent sets and spanning sets. We define a notion of lifting a module with a negation map, similarly to the tropicalization process, and use it to prove several theorems about semirings with a negation map which possess a lift. In the context of Lie semialgebras over semirings with a negation map, we first give basic definitions, and provide parallel constructions to the classical Lie algebras. We prove an ELT version of Cartan’s criterion for semisimplicity, and provide a counterexample for the naive version of the PBW Theorem. Contents Page 0. Introduction 2 0.1. Semirings with a Negation Map 2 0.2. Modules Over Semirings with a Negation Map 3 0.3. Supertropical Algebras 4 0.4. Exploded Layered Tropical Algebras 4 1. Modules over Semirings with a Negation Map 5 1.1. The Surpassing Relation for Modules 6 1.2. Basic Definitions for Modules 7 1.3. -morphisms 9 1.4. Lifting a Module Over a Semiring with a Negation Map 10 1.5. Linearly Independent Sets 13 1.6. d-bases and s-bases 14 1.7. Free Modules over Semirings with a Negation Map 18 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Irreducible Representations of Finite Monoids
    U.U.D.M. Project Report 2019:11 Irreducible representations of finite monoids Christoffer Hindlycke Examensarbete i matematik, 30 hp Handledare: Volodymyr Mazorchuk Examinator: Denis Gaidashev Mars 2019 Department of Mathematics Uppsala University Irreducible representations of finite monoids Christoffer Hindlycke Contents Introduction 2 Theory 3 Finite monoids and their structure . .3 Introductory notions . .3 Cyclic semigroups . .6 Green’s relations . .7 von Neumann regularity . 10 The theory of an idempotent . 11 The five functors Inde, Coinde, Rese,Te and Ne ..................... 11 Idempotents and simple modules . 14 Irreducible representations of a finite monoid . 17 Monoid algebras . 17 Clifford-Munn-Ponizovski˘ıtheory . 20 Application 24 The symmetric inverse monoid . 24 Calculating the irreducible representations of I3 ........................ 25 Appendix: Prerequisite theory 37 Basic definitions . 37 Finite dimensional algebras . 41 Semisimple modules and algebras . 41 Indecomposable modules . 42 An introduction to idempotents . 42 1 Irreducible representations of finite monoids Christoffer Hindlycke Introduction This paper is a literature study of the 2016 book Representation Theory of Finite Monoids by Benjamin Steinberg [3]. As this book contains too much interesting material for a simple master thesis, we have narrowed our attention to chapters 1, 4 and 5. This thesis is divided into three main parts: Theory, Application and Appendix. Within the Theory chapter, we (as the name might suggest) develop the necessary theory to assist with finding irreducible representations of finite monoids. Finite monoids and their structure gives elementary definitions as regards to finite monoids, and expands on the basic theory of their structure. This part corresponds to chapter 1 in [3]. The theory of an idempotent develops just enough theory regarding idempotents to enable us to state a key result, from which the principal result later follows almost immediately.
    [Show full text]
  • A Topology for Operator Modules Over W*-Algebras Bojan Magajna
    Journal of Functional AnalysisFU3203 journal of functional analysis 154, 1741 (1998) article no. FU973203 A Topology for Operator Modules over W*-Algebras Bojan Magajna Department of Mathematics, University of Ljubljana, Jadranska 19, Ljubljana 1000, Slovenia E-mail: Bojan.MagajnaÄuni-lj.si Received July 23, 1996; revised February 11, 1997; accepted August 18, 1997 dedicated to professor ivan vidav in honor of his eightieth birthday Given a von Neumann algebra R on a Hilbert space H, the so-called R-topology is introduced into B(H), which is weaker than the norm and stronger than the COREultrastrong operator topology. A right R-submodule X of B(H) is closed in the Metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk Provided byR Elsevier-topology - Publisher if and Connector only if for each b #B(H) the right ideal, consisting of all a # R such that ba # X, is weak* closed in R. Equivalently, X is closed in the R-topology if and only if for each b #B(H) and each orthogonal family of projections ei in R with the sum 1 the condition bei # X for all i implies that b # X. 1998 Academic Press 1. INTRODUCTION Given a C*-algebra R on a Hilbert space H, a concrete operator right R-module is a subspace X of B(H) (the algebra of all bounded linear operators on H) such that XRX. Such modules can be characterized abstractly as L -matricially normed spaces in the sense of Ruan [21], [11] which are equipped with a completely contractive R-module multi- plication (see [6] and [9]).
    [Show full text]
  • On Finite Semifields with a Weak Nucleus and a Designed
    On finite semifields with a weak nucleus and a designed automorphism group A. Pi~nera-Nicol´as∗ I.F. R´uay Abstract Finite nonassociative division algebras S (i.e., finite semifields) with a weak nucleus N ⊆ S as defined by D.E. Knuth in [10] (i.e., satisfying the conditions (ab)c − a(bc) = (ac)b − a(cb) = c(ab) − (ca)b = 0, for all a; b 2 N; c 2 S) and a prefixed automorphism group are considered. In particular, a construction of semifields of order 64 with weak nucleus F4 and a cyclic automorphism group C5 is introduced. This construction is extended to obtain sporadic finite semifields of orders 256 and 512. Keywords: Finite Semifield; Projective planes; Automorphism Group AMS classification: 12K10, 51E35 1 Introduction A finite semifield S is a finite nonassociative division algebra. These rings play an important role in the context of finite geometries since they coordinatize projective semifield planes [7]. They also have applications on coding theory [4, 8, 6], combinatorics and graph theory [13]. During the last few years, computational efforts in order to clasify some of these objects have been made. For instance, the classification of semifields with 64 elements is completely known, [16], as well as those with 243 elements, [17]. However, many questions are open yet: there is not a classification of semifields with 128 or 256 elements, despite of the powerful computers available nowadays. The knowledge of the structure of these concrete semifields can inspire new general constructions, as suggested in [9]. In this sense, the work of Lavrauw and Sheekey [11] gives examples of constructions of semifields which are neither twisted fields nor two-dimensional over a nucleus starting from the classification of semifields with 64 elements.
    [Show full text]
  • Modules Over the Steenrod Algebra
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector Tcwhcv’ Vol. 10. PD. 211-282. Pergamon Press, 1971. Printed in Great Britain MODULES OVER THE STEENROD ALGEBRA J. F. ADAMS and H. R. MARGOLIS (Received 4 November 1970 ; revised 26 March 197 1) 90. INTRODUCTION IN THIS paper we will investigate certain aspects of the structure of the mod 2 Steenrod algebra, A, and of modules over it. Because of the central role taken by the cohomology groups of spaces considered as A-modules in much of recent algebraic topology (e.g. [ 11, [2], [7]), it is not unreasonable to suppose that the algebraic structure that we elucidate will be of benefit in the study of topological problems. The main result of this paper, Theorem 3.1, gives a criterion for a module !M to be free over the Steenrod algebra, or over some subHopf algebra B of A. To describe this criterion consider a ring R and a left module over R, M; for e E R we define the map e: M -+ M by e(m) = em. If the element e satisfies the condition that e2 = 0 then im e c ker e, therefore we can define the homology group H(M, e) = ker elime. Then, for example, H(R, e) = 0 implies that H(F, e) = 0 for any free R-module F. We can now describe the criterion referred to above: for any subHopf algebra B of A there are elements e,-with ei2 = 0 and H(B, ei) = O-such that a connected B-module M is free over B if and only if H(M, ei) = 0 for all i.
    [Show full text]
  • A Gentle Introduction to Rings and Modules
    What We Need to Know about Rings and Modules Class Notes for Mathematics 700 by Ralph Howard October 31, 1995 Contents 1 Rings 1 1.1 The De¯nition of a Ring ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 1 1.2 Examples of Rings :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 3 1.2.1 The Integers :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 3 1.2.2 The Ring of Polynomials over a Field :::::::::::::::::::: 3 1.2.3 The Integers Modulo n ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 4 1.3 Ideals in Rings :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 4 2 Euclidean Domains 5 2.1 The De¯nition of Euclidean Domain ::::::::::::::::::::::::: 5 2.2 The Basic Examples of Euclidean Domains ::::::::::::::::::::: 5 2.3 Primes and Factorization in Euclidean Domains :::::::::::::::::: 6 3 Modules 8 3.1 The De¯nition of a Module :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 8 3.2 Examples of Modules ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 9 3.2.1 R and its Submodules. :::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 9 3.2.2 The Coordinate Space Rn. :::::::::::::::::::::::::: 9 3.2.3 Modules over the Polynomial Ring F[x] De¯ned by a Linear Map. :::: 10 3.3 Direct Sums of Submodules ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: 10 1 Rings 1.1 The De¯nition of a Ring We have been working with ¯elds, which are the natural generalization of familiar objects like the real, rational and complex numbers where it is possible to add, subtract, multiply and divide. However there are some other very natural objects like the integers and polynomials over a ¯eld where we can add, subtract, and multiply, but where it not possible to divide. We will call such rings. Here is the o±cial de¯nition: De¯nition 1.1 A commutative ring (R; +; ¢) is a set R with two binary operations + and ¢ (as usual we will often write x ¢ y = xy) so that 1 1.
    [Show full text]
  • On Coatomic Semimodules Over Commutative Semirings
    C¸ankaya University Journal of Science and Engineering Volume 8 (2011), No. 2, 189{200 On Coatomic Semimodules over Commutative Semirings S. Ebrahimi Atani1 and F. Esmaeili Khalil Saraei1;∗ 1Department of Mathematics, University of Guilan, P.O. Box 1914, Rasht, Iran ∗Corresponding author: [email protected] Ozet.¨ Bu makale, de˘gi¸smelihalkalar ¨uzerindekikoatomik mod¨ullerve yarıbasit mod¨uller hakkında iyi bilinen bazı sonu¸cları,de˘gi¸smeli yarıhalkalar ¨uzerindekikoatomik ve yarıbasit yarımod¨ulleregenelle¸stirmi¸stir.Benzer sonu¸claraula¸smadakitemel zorluk, altyarımod¨ulle- rin sa˘glaması gereken ekstra ¨ozellikleriortaya ¸cıkarmaktır. Yarı mod¨ullerin¸calı¸sılmasında yarımod¨ullerin k-altyarımod¨ullerinin¨onemlioldukları ispatlanmı¸stır.y Anahtar Kelimeler. Yarıhalka, koatomik yarımod¨uller, yarıbasit yarımod¨uller, k-t¨um- lenmi¸syarımod¨uller. Abstract. This paper generalizes some well known results on coatomic and semisimple modules in commutative rings to coatomic and semisimple semimodules over commutative semirings. The main difficulty is figuring out what additional hypotheses the subsemimod- ules must satisfy to get similar results. It is proved that k-subsemimodules of semimodules are important in the study of semimodules. Keywords. Semiring, coatomic semimodules, semisimple semimodules, k-supplemented semimodules. 1. Introduction Study of semirings has been carried out by several authors since there are numerous applications of semirings in various branches of mathematics and computer sciences (see [6],[7] and [9]). It is well known that for a finitely generated module M, every proper submodule of M is contained in a maximal submodule. As an attempt to generalize this property of finitely generated modules we have coatomic modules. In [12], Z¨oschinger calls a module M coatomic if every proper submodule of M is contained in a maximal submodule of M.
    [Show full text]
  • Monoid Modules and Structured Document Algebra (Extendend Abstract)
    Monoid Modules and Structured Document Algebra (Extendend Abstract) Andreas Zelend Institut fur¨ Informatik, Universitat¨ Augsburg, Germany [email protected] 1 Introduction Feature Oriented Software Development (e.g. [3]) has been established in computer science as a general programming paradigm that provides formalisms, meth- ods, languages, and tools for building maintainable, customisable, and exten- sible software product lines (SPLs) [8]. An SPL is a collection of programs that share a common part, e.g., functionality or code fragments. To encode an SPL, one can use variation points (VPs) in the source code. A VP is a location in a pro- gram whose content, called a fragment, can vary among different members of the SPL. In [2] a Structured Document Algebra (SDA) is used to algebraically de- scribe modules that include VPs and their composition. In [4] we showed that we can reason about SDA in a more general way using a so called relational pre- domain monoid module (RMM). In this paper we present the following extensions and results: an investigation of the structure of transformations, e.g., a condi- tion when transformations commute, insights into the pre-order of modules, and new properties of predomain monoid modules. 2 Structured Document Algebra VPs and Fragments. Let V denote a set of VPs at which fragments may be in- serted and F(V) be the set of fragments which may, among other things, contain VPs from V. Elements of F(V) are denoted by f1, f2,... There are two special elements, a default fragment 0 and an error . An error signals an attempt to assign two or more non-default fragments to the same VP within one module.
    [Show full text]
  • The Flag Manifold Over the Semifield Z
    ✐ ✐ “BN15N15” — 2020/3/30 — 10:46 — page 63 — #1 ✐ Bulletin of the Institute of Mathematics Academia Sinica (New Series) Vol. 15 (2020), No. 1, pp. 63-92 DOI: 10.21915/BIMAS.2020105 THE FLAG MANIFOLD OVER THE SEMIFIELD Z G. LUSZTIG Department of Mathematics, M.I.T., Cambridge, MA 02139. E-mail: [email protected] Abstract Let G be a semisimple group over the complex numbers. We show that the flag manifold B of G has a version B(Z) over the tropical semifield Z on which the monoid G(Z) attached to G and Z acts naturally. 0. Introduction 0.1. Let G be a connected semisimple simply connected algebraic group over C with a fixed pinning (as in [5, 1.1]). In this paper we assume that G is of simply laced type. Let B be the variety of Borel subgroups of G. In [5, 2.2, 8.8] a submonoid G≥0 of G and a subset B≥0 of B with an action of G≥0 (see [5, 8.12]) was defined. (When G = SLn, G≥0 is the submonoid consisting of the real, totally positive matrices in G.) More generally, for any semifield K, a monoid G(K) was defined in [8], so that when K = R>0 we have G(K)= G≥0. (In the case where K is R>0 or the semifield in (i) or (ii) below, a monoid G(K) already appeared in [5, 2.2, 9.10]; it was identified with G(K) in [9].) This paper is concerned with the question of defining the flag manifold B(K) over a semifield K with an action of the monoid G(K) so that in the case where K = R>0 we recover B≥0 with its G≥0-action.
    [Show full text]
  • Security Coding Module Integer Error – “You Can’T Count That High” – CS1
    Security Coding Module Integer Error – “You Can’t Count That High” – CS1 Summary: Integer values that are too large or too small may fall outside the allowable range for their data type, leading to undefined behavior that can both reduce the robustness of your code and lead to security vulnerabilities. Description: Declaring a variable as type int allocates a fixed amount of space in memory. Most languages include several integer types, including short, int, long, etc. , to allow for less or more storage. The amount of space allocated limits the range of values that can be stored. For example, a 32-bit int variable can hold values from -231 through 231-1. Input or mathematical operations such as addition, subtraction, and multiplication may lead to values that are outside of this range. This results in an integer error or overflow, which causes undefined behavior and the resulting value will likely not be what the programmer intended. Integer overflow is a common cause of software errors and vulnerabilities. Risk – How Can It Happen? An integer error can lead to unexpected behavior or may be exploited to cause a program crash, corrupt data, or allow the execution of malicious software. Example of Occurrence: 1. There is a Facebook group called “If this group reaches 4,294,967,296 it might cause an integer overflow.” This value is the largest number that can fit in a 32 bit unsigned integer. If the number of members of the group exceeded this number, it might cause an overflow. Whether it will cause an overflow or not depends upon how Facebook is implemented and which language is used – they might use data types that can hold larger numbers.
    [Show full text]
  • Spectra of Semimodules
    BULETINUL ACADEMIEI DE ŞTIINŢE A REPUBLICII MOLDOVA. MATEMATICA Number 3(67), 2011, Pages 15–28 ISSN 1024–7696 Spectra of semimodules Reza Ebrahimi Atani, Shahabaddin Ebrahimi Atani Abstract. The purpose of this paper is to investigate possible structures and useful properties of prime subsemimodules of a semimodule M over a semiring R and show various applications of the properties. The main part of this work is to introduce a new class of semimodules over R called strong primeful R-semimodules. It is shown that every non-zero strong primeful semimodule possesses the non-empty prime spectrum with the surjective natural map. Also, it is proved that this class contains the family of finitely generated R-semimodules properly. Mathematics subject classification: 16Y60. Keywords and phrases: Prime subsemimodule, primeful semimodule, strong primeful semimodule, prime spectrum. 1 Introduction Semimodules over semirings also appear naturally in many areas of mathematics. For example, semimodules are useful in the area of theoretical computer science as well as in the solution of problems in the graph theory and cryptography [13, 18]. This paper generalizes some well know results on prime submodules in commutative rings to commutative semirings. The main difficulty is figuring out what additional hypotheses the ideal or subsemimodule must satisfy to get similar results. The two new key notions are that of a "strong ideal" and a "strong subsemimodule". More- over, quotient semimodules are determined by equivalence relations rather than by subsemimodules as in the module case. Allen [1] has presented the notion of a parti- tioning ideal (= Q-ideal) I in the semiring R and constructed the quotient semiring R=I.
    [Show full text]