DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:Math/0307321V2

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:Math/0307321V2 A Group-theoretic Approach to Fast Matrix Multiplication Henry Cohn Christopher Umans Microsoft Research Department of Computer Science One Microsoft Way California Institute of Technology Redmond, WA 98052-6399 Pasadena, CA 91125 [email protected] [email protected] Abstract known, but since 1990 nobody has been able to improve on them. In this paper: We develop a new, group-theoretic approach to bound- ing the exponent of matrix multiplication. There are two • We developa new approach to bounding ω that imports components to this approach: (1) identifying groups G that the problem into the domain of group theory and repre- admit a certain type of embedding of matrix multiplication sentation theory. The approach is relatively simple and into the group algebra C[G], and (2) controlling the dimen- almost entirely separate from the existing machinery sions of the irreducible representations of such groups. We built up since Strassen’s original algorithm. present machinery and examples to support (1), including a • We demonstrate the feasibility of the group theory as- proof that certain families of groups of order n2+o(1) sup- pect of the approach by identifying a family of groups port n × n matrix multiplication, a necessary condition for for which a parameter that mirrors ω approaches 2. We the approach to yield exponent 2. Although we cannot yet also exhibit techniques for bounding this critical pa- completely achieve both (1) and (2), we hope that it may be rameter and prove non-trivial bounds for a number of possible, and we suggest potential routes to that result using diverse groups and group families. the constructions in this paper. • We pose a question in representation theory (Ques- tion 4.1 below) that represents a potential barrier to 1. Introduction directly obtaining non-trivial bounds on ω using this approach. We do not know the answer to this question. Strassen [14] made the startling discovery that one can A positive answer would illuminate a path that might multiply two n × n matrices in only O(n2.81) field opera- lead to ω = 2 using the techniques that we present in tions, compared with 2n3 for the standard algorithm. This this paper. immediately raises the question of the exponent of matrix multiplication: what is the smallest number ω such that Our approach is reminiscent of a question asked by for each ε > 0, matrix multiplication can be carried out Coppersmith and Winograd (in Section 11 of [6]) about in at most ω+ε operations? Clearly . It is avoiding “three disjoint equivoluminous subsets” in abelian arXiv:math/0307321v2 [math.GR] 31 Oct 2003 O(n ) ω ≥ 2 widely believed that ω = 2, but the best bound known is groups, which would lead to ω = 2 if it has a positive an- ω < 2.38, due to Coppersmith and Winograd [6], follow- swer. However, our technique is completely different, and ing a sequence of improvements to Strassen’s original algo- our framework seems to have more algebraic structure to rithm (see [4, p. 420]for the history). It is knownthat all the make use of (whereas theirs is more combinatorial). standard linear algebra problems (for example, computing determinants, solving systems of equations, inverting ma- 1.1. Analogy with fast polynomial multiplication trices, computing LUP decompositions—see Chapter 16 of [4]) have the same exponent as matrix multiplication, which There is a close analogy between the framework we pro- makes ω a fundamental number for understanding algorith- pose in this paper and the well-known algorithm for multi- mic linear algebra. In addition, there are non-algebraic al- plying two degree n polynomials in O(n log n) operations gorithms whose complexity is expressed in terms of ω (see, using the Fast Fourier Transform (FFT). In this section we e.g., Section 16.9 in [4]). elucidate this analogy to give a high-level description of our Several fairly elaborate techniques for bounding ω are technique. 438 Copyright c 2003 IEEE. Reprinted from Proceedings of the 44th Annual Symposium on Foundations of Computer Science. This material is posted here with permission of the IEEE. Such permission of the IEEE does not in any way imply IEEE endorsement of any of Cornell University’s products or services. Internal or personal use of this material is permitted. However, permission to reprint/republish this material for advertising or promotional purposes or for creating new collective works for resale or redistribution must be obtained from the IEEE by writing to [email protected]. By choosing to view this document, you agree to all provisions of the copyright laws protecting it. Suppose we wish to multiply the polynomials A(x) = and |T | × |U| matrices, respectively, then we define n 1 i n 1 i − a x and B(x) = − b x . The naive way to i=0 i i=0 i 1 1 2 A¯ = a s− t and B¯ = b t− u. do this is to compute n products of the form aibj , and s,t t,u fromP these the 2n−1 coefficientsP of the product polynomial If S,T,UXsatisfy the triple product propertyX (see Defini- A(x) · B(x). Of course a far better algorithm is possible; tion 2.1), then we can read off the entries of the product we describe it below in language that easily translates into matrix AB from A¯B¯ ∈ C[G]: entry (AB) is simply the our framework for matrix multiplication. s,u coefficient of the group element s 1u. Let G bea groupand let C[G] be the group algebra—that − C In the case of polynomial multiplication, the simplicity is, every element of [G] is a formal sum g G agg with ∈ of the embedding obscures the fact that if G is too large ag ∈ C, and the product of two such elements is 2 P (e.g., if |G| = n rather than O(n)), then the benefit of the entire scheme is destroyed. Avoiding this pitfall turns out to be the main challenge in the new setting. We wish to em- a g · b h = a b f. g h g h bed matrix multiplication into a group algebra over a small g G h G f G gh=f X∈ X∈ X∈ X group G, as the size of G is a lower bound on the com- plexity of multiplication in C[G]. It is not surprising, for We often identify the element g G agg with the vector ∈ example, that n × n matrix multiplication can be embed- of its coefficients. If G is the cyclic group of order m, then 3 P ded into the group algebra of a group of order n . We show the product of two elements a = (ag)g G and b = (bg)g G 3 ∈ ∈ that abelian groups cannot beat n and we identify families is a cyclic convolution of the vectors a and b. The impor- of non-abelian groups of size n2+o(1) that admit such an tant observation is that a cyclic convolution is almost what embedding. is needed to compute the coefficients of the product polyno- It might seem that this result together with the above mial A(x)·B(x)—the only problem is that it wraps around. trick for performing group algebra multiplication (i.e., tak- To avoid this problem, we embed A(x) and B(x) as ele- ing the DFT, multiplying in the Fourier domain, and trans- ¯ ¯ C ments A, B ∈ [G] as follows: Let z be a generator of G, forming back) would imply that ω = 2. There are, how- which we assume to be a cyclic group of order m> 2n − 1, ever, two complications introduced by the fact that we are and define forced to work with non-abelian groups. The first is that we n 1 n 1 know of fast algorithms to compute the DFT only for lim- − − i i ited classes of non-abelian groups (see Section 13.5 in [4]). A¯ = aiz and B¯ = biz . i=0 i=0 However, the DFT is linear, and because of the recursive X X structure of divide and conquer matrix multiplication algo- Since the group size m is large enough to avoid wrapping rithms, linear transformations applied before and after the around, we can read off the coefficients of the product poly- recursive step are “free.” For example, in Strassen’s original nomial from the element A¯B¯ ∈ C[G]: the coefficient of matrix multiplication algorithm, the number of matrix addi- xi in A(x)B(x) is the coefficient of the group element zi tions and scalar multiplications in the recursive step does in A¯B¯. This is a wordy account of a so-far simple cor- not affect the bound on ω. So this potential complication is respondence, but the payoff is near. The Discrete Fourier in fact no problem at all. Transform (DFT) for C[G] is an invertible linear transfor- The second complication is that for C[G] when G is non- G mation D : C[G] → C| |, which turns multiplication in abelian, multiplication in the Fourier domain is not simply C C G G [G] into pointwise multiplication of vectors in | |. We pointwise multiplication of vectors in C| |. Instead it is can therefore compute the product A¯B¯ by first computing block-diagonal matrix multiplication, where the dimensions D(A¯) and D(B¯) and then computing the inverse DFT of of the blocks are the dimensions of the irreducible repre- their pointwise product. Thus, using the O(m log m) Fast sentations of G. We thus obtain a reduction of n × n ma- Fourier Transform algorithm, we can perform multiplica- trix multiplication to a number of smaller matrix multipli- tion in C[G] (and therefore polynomial multiplication, via cations of varying sizes, which gives rise to an inequality the embedding above) in O(m log m) operations.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Convolution.Pdf
    Convolution March 22, 2020 0.0.1 Setting up [23]: from bokeh.plotting import figure from bokeh.io import output_notebook, show,curdoc from bokeh.themes import Theme import numpy as np output_notebook() theme=Theme(json={}) curdoc().theme=theme 0.1 Convolution Convolution is a fundamental operation that appears in many different contexts in both pure and applied settings in mathematics. Polynomials: a simple case Let’s look at a simple case first. Consider the space of real valued polynomial functions P. If f 2 P, we have X1 i f(z) = aiz i=0 where ai = 0 for i sufficiently large. There is an obvious linear map a : P! c00(R) where c00(R) is the space of sequences that are eventually zero. i For each integer i, we have a projection map ai : c00(R) ! R so that ai(f) is the coefficient of z for f 2 P. Since P is a ring under addition and multiplication of functions, these operations must be reflected on the other side of the map a. 1 Clearly we can add sequences in c00(R) componentwise, and since addition of polynomials is also componentwise we have: a(f + g) = a(f) + a(g) What about multiplication? We know that X Xn X1 an(fg) = ar(f)as(g) = ar(f)an−r(g) = ar(f)an−r(g) r+s=n r=0 r=0 where we adopt the convention that ai(f) = 0 if i < 0. Given (a0; a1;:::) and (b0; b1;:::) in c00(R), define a ∗ b = (c0; c1;:::) where X1 cn = ajbn−j j=0 with the same convention that ai = bi = 0 if i < 0.
    [Show full text]
  • Tensor Products of F-Algebras
    Mediterr. J. Math. (2017) 14:63 DOI 10.1007/s00009-017-0841-x c The Author(s) 2017 This article is published with open access at Springerlink.com Tensor Products of f-algebras G. J. H. M. Buskes and A. W. Wickstead Abstract. We construct the tensor product for f-algebras, including proving a universal property for it, and investigate how it preserves algebraic properties of the factors. Mathematics Subject Classification. 06A70. Keywords. f-algebras, Tensor products. 1. Introduction An f-algebra is a vector lattice A with an associative multiplication , such that 1. a, b ∈ A+ ⇒ ab∈ A+ 2. If a, b, c ∈ A+ with a ∧ b = 0 then (ac) ∧ b =(ca) ∧ b =0. We are only concerned in this paper with Archimedean f-algebras so hence- forth, all f-algebras and, indeed, all vector lattices are assumed to be Archimedean. In this paper, we construct the tensor product of two f-algebras A and B. To be precise, we show that there is a natural way in which the Frem- lin Archimedean vector lattice tensor product A⊗B can be endowed with an f-algebra multiplication. This tensor product has the expected univer- sal property, at least as far as order bounded algebra homomorphisms are concerned. We also show that, unlike the case for order theoretic properties, algebraic properties behave well under this product. Again, let us emphasise here that algebra homomorphisms are not assumed to map an identity to an identity. Our approach is very much representational, however, much that might annoy some purists. In §2, we derive the representations needed, which are very mild improvements on results already in the literature.
    [Show full text]
  • Convolution Products of Monodiffric Functions
    View metadata, citation and similar papers at core.ac.uk brought to you by CORE provided by Elsevier - Publisher Connector JOC‘RNAL OF MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS AND APPLICATIONS 37, 271-287 (1972) Convolution Products of Monodiffric Functions GEORGE BERZSENYI Lamar University, Beaumont, Texas 77710 Submitted by R. J. Dufin As it has been repeatedly pointed out by mathematicians working in discrete function theory, it is both essential and difficult to find discrete analogs for the ordinary pointwise product operation of analytic functions of a complex variable. R. P. Isaacs [Ill, the initiator of monodiffric function theory, is to be credited with the first results in this direction. Later G. J. Kurowski [13] introduced some new monodiffric analogues of pointwise multiplication while the present author [2] succeeded in sharpening and generalizing Isaacs’ and Kurowski’s results. However, all of these attempts were mainly concerned with trying to preserve as many of the pointwise aspects as possible. Consequently, each of these operations proved to be less than satisfactory either from the algebraic or from the function theoretic viewpoint. In the present paper, a different approach is taken. Influenced by the suc- cess of R. J. Duffin and C. S. Duris [5] in a related area, we utilize the line integrals introduced in Ref. [l] and the conjoint line integral of Isaacs [l I] to define several convolution-type product operations. It is shown that if D is a suitably restricted discrete domain then monodiffricity is preserved by each of these operations. Further algebraic and function theoretic properties of these operations are investigated and some examples of their applicability are given.
    [Show full text]
  • Vector Space Theory
    Vector Space Theory A course for second year students by Robert Howlett typesetting by TEX Contents Copyright University of Sydney Chapter 1: Preliminaries 1 §1a Logic and commonSchool sense of Mathematics and Statistics 1 §1b Sets and functions 3 §1c Relations 7 §1d Fields 10 Chapter 2: Matrices, row vectors and column vectors 18 §2a Matrix operations 18 §2b Simultaneous equations 24 §2c Partial pivoting 29 §2d Elementary matrices 32 §2e Determinants 35 §2f Introduction to eigenvalues 38 Chapter 3: Introduction to vector spaces 49 §3a Linearity 49 §3b Vector axioms 52 §3c Trivial consequences of the axioms 61 §3d Subspaces 63 §3e Linear combinations 71 Chapter 4: The structure of abstract vector spaces 81 §4a Preliminary lemmas 81 §4b Basis theorems 85 §4c The Replacement Lemma 86 §4d Two properties of linear transformations 91 §4e Coordinates relative to a basis 93 Chapter 5: Inner Product Spaces 99 §5a The inner product axioms 99 §5b Orthogonal projection 106 §5c Orthogonal and unitary transformations 116 §5d Quadratic forms 121 iii Chapter 6: Relationships between spaces 129 §6a Isomorphism 129 §6b Direct sums Copyright University of Sydney 134 §6c Quotient spaces 139 §6d The dual spaceSchool of Mathematics and Statistics 142 Chapter 7: Matrices and Linear Transformations 148 §7a The matrix of a linear transformation 148 §7b Multiplication of transformations and matrices 153 §7c The Main Theorem on Linear Transformations 157 §7d Rank and nullity of matrices 161 Chapter 8: Permutations and determinants 171 §8a Permutations 171 §8b Determinants
    [Show full text]
  • C*-Algebraic Schur Product Theorem, P\'{O} Lya-Szeg\H {O}-Rudin Question and Novak's Conjecture
    C*-ALGEBRAIC SCHUR PRODUCT THEOREM, POLYA-SZEG´ O-RUDIN˝ QUESTION AND NOVAK’S CONJECTURE K. MAHESH KRISHNA Department of Humanities and Basic Sciences Aditya College of Engineering and Technology Surampalem, East-Godavari Andhra Pradesh 533 437 India Email: [email protected] August 17, 2021 Abstract: Striking result of Vyb´ıral [Adv. Math. 2020] says that Schur product of positive matrices is bounded below by the size of the matrix and the row sums of Schur product. Vyb´ıral used this result to prove the Novak’s conjecture. In this paper, we define Schur product of matrices over arbitrary C*- algebras and derive the results of Schur and Vyb´ıral. As an application, we state C*-algebraic version of Novak’s conjecture and solve it for commutative unital C*-algebras. We formulate P´olya-Szeg˝o-Rudin question for the C*-algebraic Schur product of positive matrices. Keywords: Schur/Hadamard product, Positive matrix, Hilbert C*-module, C*-algebra, Schur product theorem, P´olya-Szeg˝o-Rudin question, Novak’s conjecture. Mathematics Subject Classification (2020): 15B48, 46L05, 46L08. Contents 1. Introduction 1 2. C*-algebraic Schur product, Schur product theorem and P´olya-Szeg˝o-Rudin question 3 3. Lower bounds for C*-algebraic Schur product 7 4. C*-algebraic Novak’s conjecture 9 5. Acknowledgements 11 References 11 1. Introduction Given matrices A := [aj,k]1≤j,k≤n and B := [bj,k]1≤j,k≤n in the matrix ring Mn(K), where K = R or C, the Schur/Hadamard/pointwise product of A and B is defined as (1) A ◦ B := aj,kbj,k .
    [Show full text]
  • Matrix Theory” Involves the Use of Matrices and Operations Defined on Them As Conceptual Data Structures for Understanding Various Ideas in Algebra and Combinatorics
    Matrix Canonical Forms notational skills and proof techniques S. Gill Williamson arXiv:1407.5130v1 [math.HO] 18 Jul 2014 ©S. Gill Williamson 2012. All rights reserved. Preface This material is a rewriting of notes handed out by me to beginning graduate students in seminars in combinatorial mathematics (Department of Mathematics, University of California San Diego). Topics covered in this seminar were in algebraic and algorithmic combinatorics. Solid skills in linear and multilinear algebra were required of students in these seminars - especially in algebraic combinatorics. I developed these notes to review the students' undergraduate linear algebra and improve their proof skills. We focused on a careful development of the general matrix canonical forms as a training ground. I would like to thank Dr. Tony Trojanowski for a careful reading of this material and numerous corrections and helpful suggestions. I would also like to thank Professor Mike Sharpe, UCSD Department of Mathematics, for considerable LaTeX typesetting assistance and for his Linux Libertine font options to the newtxmath package. S. Gill Williamson, 2012 http://cseweb.ucsd.edu/∼gill 3 x 4 CONTENTS Chapter 1. Functions and Permutations7 Algebraic terminology7 Sets, lists, multisets and functions 14 Permutations 19 Exercises 24 Chapter 2. Matrices and Vector Spaces 27 Review 27 Exercises: subspaces 30 Exercises: spanning sets and dimension 30 Matrices { basic stuff 33 Chapter 3. Determinants 39 Elementary properties of determinants 41 Laplace expansion theorem 49 Cauchy-Binet theorem 54 Exercises: Cauchy Binet and Laplace 59 Chapter 4. Hermite/echelon forms 61 Row equivalence 61 Hermite form, canonical forms and uniqueness 67 Stabilizers of GL(n; K); column Hermite forms 73 Finite dimensional vector spaces and Hermite forms 76 Diagonal canonical forms { Smith form 81 Chapter 5.
    [Show full text]
  • 3 Arithmetic in Finite Fields
    18.783 Elliptic Curves Spring 2015 Lecture #3 02/10/2015 3 Arithmetic in finite fields In order to perform explicit computations with elliptic curves over finite fields, we first need to understand how to do arithmetic in finite fields. In many of the applications we will consider, the finite fields involved will be quite large, so it is important to understand the computational complexity of finite field operations. This is a huge topic, one to which an entire course could be devoted, but we will spend just one week on finite field arithmetic (this lecture and the next), with the goal of understanding the most commonly used algorithms and analyzing their asymptotic complexity. This will force us to omit many details. The first step is to fix an explicit representation of finite field elements. This might seem like a technical detail, but it is actually crucial; questions of computational complexity are meaningless otherwise. Example 3.1. As we will prove shortly, the multiplicative group of a finite field is cyclic. So one way to represent nonzero elements of a finite field is as powers of a fixed generator. With this representation multiplication and division are easy, and solving the discrete logarithm problem is essentially trivial. But addition is hard. We will instead choose a representation that makes addition and subtraction very easy, multiplication slightly harder but still easy, and division slightly harder still, but still easy (all quasi-linear time). But solving the discrete logarithm problem will be very difficult (no polynomial-time algorithm known). For they sake of brevity, we will focus primarily on finite fields of large characteristic, and prime fields in particular, although the algorithms we describe will work in any finite field of odd characteristic.
    [Show full text]
  • On a New Method for Defining the Norm of Fourier-Stieltjes Algebras
    Pacific Journal of Mathematics ON A NEW METHOD FOR DEFINING THE NORM OF FOURIER-STIELTJES ALGEBRAS MARTIN E. WALTER Vol. 137, No. 1 January 1989 PACIFIC JOURNAL OF MATHEMATICS Vol. 137, No. 1, 1989 ON A NEW METHOD FOR DEFINING THE NORM OF FOURIER-STIELTJES ALGEBRAS MARTIN E. WALTER This paper is dedicated to the memory of Henry Abel Dye P. Eymard equipped B(G), the Fourier-Stieltjes algebra of a locally compact group G, with a norm by considering it the dual Banach space of bounded linear functional on another Banach space, namely the universal C*-algebra, C*(G). We show that B(G) can be given the exact same norm if it is considered as a Banach subalgebra of 3f(C*(G))9 the Banach algebra of completely bounded maps of C* (G) into itself equipped with the completely bounded norm. We show here how the latter approach leads to a duality theory for finite (and, more generally, discrete) groups which is not available if one restricts attention to the "linear functional" [as opposed to the "completely bounded map99] approach. 1. Preliminaries. For most of this paper G will be a finite (discrete) group, although we consider countably infinite discrete groups in the last section. We now summarize certain aspects of duality theory that we will need. The discussion is for a general locally compact group G whenever no simplification is achieved by assuming G to be finite. The reader familiar with Fourier and Fourier-Stieltjes algebras may proceed to §2 and refer back to this section as might be necessary.
    [Show full text]
  • Reproducing Kernel Hilbert Algebras on Compact Abelian Groups
    REPRODUCING KERNEL HILBERT ALGEBRAS ON COMPACT ABELIAN GROUPS SUDDHASATTWA DAS AND DIMITRIOS GIANNAKIS Abstract. We describe the construction of a nested family of reproducing kernel Hilbert spaces ∗ Hτ , τ > 0, on a compact abelian group G, which also have a unital Banach -algebra structure under the pointwise product and complex conjugation of functions. For any τ > 0, Hτ is dense in the space of continuous functions on G, and has an explicit orthonormal basis consisting of suitably scaled characters, satisfying a convolution criterion. In the case of the circle, G = S1, these spaces are induced from a fractional diffusion semigroup, generated by the p/2-th power of the Laplacian with 0 <p< 1. In higher-dimensional tori, the reproducing kernels of Hτ have the structure of product kernels built from the one-dimensional case. Aspects of the spectra and state spaces of Hτ are also studied. In particular, the spectrum of Hτ is shown to be homeomorphic to G, analogously ∗ to the corresponding property of the C -algebra of continuous functions on G. 1. Introduction and statement of main results In many areas of mathematics and statistics, such as functional analysis, harmonic analysis, analysis on manifolds, and ergodic theory, one is interested in the analysis and approximation of linear operators on functions. In these and many other contexts, it is desirable that the function space employed be endowed with properties, such as a norm, inner product, and algebraic product, which are compatible with the structure of the underlying space and the codomain. For example, if (X, Σ,µ) is a measure space it is natural to consider the Lp(µ) spaces of equivalence classes of complex-valued functions on X.
    [Show full text]
  • Lectures on Integration
    Lectures on Integration William G. Faris March 4, 2001 2 Contents 1 The integral: properties 5 1.1 Measurable functions . 5 1.2 Integration . 7 1.3 Convergence theorems . 8 1.4 Measure . 9 1.5 Fubini's theorem . 10 1.6 Problems . 13 2 Function spaces 17 2.1 Spaces of continuous functions . 17 2.2 Lp spaces . 18 2.3 Duality of Lp spaces . 20 2.4 Orlicz spaces . 22 2.5 Problems . 24 3 Probability 27 3.1 Random variables and expectation . 27 3.2 Probability models . 30 3.3 The sample mean . 31 3.4 The sample variance . 32 3.5 Events and probability . 33 3.6 The sample proportion . 34 3.7 Orthogonal projection . 35 3.8 Conditional expectation and probability . 36 3.9 Problems . 38 4 Random walk and martingales 41 4.1 Symmetric simple random walk . 41 4.2 Simple random walk . 43 4.3 Gambler's ruin: fair game . 45 4.4 Gambler's ruin: unfair game . 46 4.5 Martingales . 47 4.6 Problems . 49 3 4 CONTENTS 5 The integral: construction 51 5.1 The Daniell construction . 51 5.2 Product integral and Lebesgue integral . 55 5.3 Image integrals . 58 5.4 Problems . 59 6 Radon integrals 63 6.1 Radon measures . 63 6.2 Lower semicontinuous functions . 65 6.3 Weak* convergence . 66 6.4 The central limit theorem . 67 6.5 Problems . 72 Chapter 1 The integral: properties 1.1 Measurable functions A σ-algebra of measurable functions F is a set of real functions defined on a set X.
    [Show full text]
  • Revision of Ring Theory
    CHAPTER 1 Revision of ring theory 1.1. Basic definitions and examples In this chapter we will revise and extend some of the results on rings that you have studied on previous courses. A ring is an algebraic object in which we can operate in a similar way as we do with integers. Inside the set Z of integers we can perform operations of addition, substraction and multiplication, but in general Z is not closed under division; for instance the quotient 3/2 is not an integer. Addition and multiplication have a series of well known properties; the abstraction of those properties is what constitutes the formal notion of ring. DEFINITION 1.1.1. A ring is a nonempty set R together with two operations, a sum + and a product satisfying the following properties: · Sum S1 Associativity: (a + b)+c = a +(b + c) for all a, b, c R, ∈ S2 Commutativity: a + b = b + a for all a, b R, ∈ S3 Zero: There is an element 0 R such that a +0=a =0+a for each a R, ∈ ∈ S4 Inverses: For each a R there is an element a R such that a +( a)=0. ∈ − ∈ − In what follows we will always write a b to denote a +( b). − − REMARK. These properties simply mean that (R, +) is an abelian group. Product P1 Associativity: a(bc)=(ab)c for all a, b, c R, ∈ P2 Unit: There is an element 1 R such that 1a = a1=a for all a R, ∈ ∈ REMARK. This properties mean that (R, ) is a multiplicative monoid.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Set Theory
    Appendix A: Review of Set Theory In this book, as in most modern mathematics, mathematical statements are couched in the language of set theory. We give here a brief descriptive summary of the parts of set theory that we use, in the form that is commonly called “naive set theory.” The word naive should be understood in the same sense in which it is used by Paul Halmos in his classic text Naive Set Theory [Hal74]: the assumptions of set theory are to be viewed much as Euclid viewed his geometric axioms, as intuitively clear statements of fact from which reliable conclusions can be drawn. Our description of set theory is based on the axioms of Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory together with the axiom of choice (commonly known as ZFC), augmented with a notion of classes (aggregations that are too large to be considered sets in ZFC), primarily for use in category theory. We do not give a formal axiomatic treat- ment of the theory; instead, we simply give the definitions and list the basic types of sets whose existence is guaranteed by the axioms. For more details on the subject, consult any good book on set theory, such as [Dev93,Hal74,Mon69,Sup72,Sto79]. We leave it to the set theorists to explore the deep consequences of the axioms and the relationships among different axiom systems. Basic Concepts A set is just a collection of objects, considered as a whole. The objects that make up the set are called its elements or its members. For our purposes, the elements of sets are always “mathematical objects”: integers, real numbers, complex numbers, and objects built up from them such as ordered pairs, ordered n-tuples, functions, sequences, other sets, and so on.
    [Show full text]