DOCSLIB.ORG

Arxiv:2103.00938V1 [Math.CT] 1 Mar 2021 6

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Arxiv:2103.00938V1 [Math.CT] 1 Mar 2021 6 DIFFERENTIAL 2-RIGS FABRIZIO ROMANO GENOVESE AND FOSCO LOREGIAN Abstract. We explore the notion of a category with coproducts + and a monoidal structure ⊗ distributing over it, endowed with an endo-functor @ which is ‘linear and Leibniz’. Such @ can be legitimately called a derivation on C, and the pair (C;@) appears as the categorification of a differential ri(n)g: a differential 2-rig. We explore a number of possible special examples: when C is semicartesian (i.e., its ⊗-monoidal unit is the terminal object), derivations are better behaved in some respect; interesting examples arise when C = [A; Set] is a presheaf topos endowed with a convolu- tion product: among these, the operation of Brzozowski’s derivative in formal language theory; we retrieve the ‘chain rule’ in a category of ‘non-symmetric species’ [Fin; Set], obtained when a substitution product F G is interpreted as composition TF ◦ TG of the associated finitary functors, regarded as formal power series. Derivations on a 2-rig are tightly related to tensorial strengths; this draws a connection between the present theory and applicative structures in functional programming. More- over, given a derivation on C, the derivative of the ⊗-monoidal unit @I is a self-similar object, i.e. a solution to the equation X =∼ X + X; we explore the many consequences of this apparently innocuous observation. This has connection with the category-theoretic analysis of dynamical systems. Contents Introduction2 1. Monoidal categories with derivation4 2. Properties and generalisations 10 3. Constants and tautness 16 4. Derivations on presheaf categories 20 5. The chain rule: substitution product 25 arXiv:2103.00938v1 [math.CT] 1 Mar 2021 6. More on tautness, and related open problems 28 Acknowledgements 30 References 31 1 2 FABRIZIO ROMANO GENOVESE AND FOSCO LOREGIAN Introduction The present paper starts from a simple speculation: what is a pair (C;@), where C is a ‘categorified ring’ and @ : C ! C a ‘linear operator’ satisfying the ‘Leibniz rule’? Borrowing the terminology from classical ring theory, such a structure should be termed a differential 2-rig, and @ a derivation thereof.1 Confident that the essential inspiration for the present work is rather self-explanatory, we concentrate on the results we have obtained, while describing the structure of the paper. At the very outset of section1 we set all the foundation in place (Definition 1.1, Defi- nition 1.10); the theory of 2-rigs is a special case of the following problem: find a precise definition and a coherence theorem for categories (C; ⊗; ⊕) having two monoidal struc- tures, and such that ⊗ distributes over ⊕. As shown by Laplaza, this apparently simple setting yields instead a notoriously complicated set of coherence conditions. Definition 1.10 is the core of the section: a derivation on a 2-rig C is an endofunctor of C that preserves coproducts, and endowed with a family of maps lAB : @A ⊗ B + A ⊗ @B ! @(A ⊗ B) (cf. (1.9)) subject to a number of coherence conditions (naturality, compatibility with the two monoidal structures and with the distributive maps,. ). Section2 investigates some ‘sanity checks’ to which we submit our definition: the deriv- ⊗n ative @(A ) of a power, the derivative of an n-fold tensor of a tuple @(A1 ⊗ · · · ⊗ An), and the n-fold derivative of a product X ⊗ Y all behave as expected. Proposition 2.3 provides proof that in suitable circumstances, the Leibniz rule extends to infinite products: curiously enough, the classical proof (say, for analytic functions expressed as an infinite coproduct Q df f(z) = n fn(z)) is based on the formula for logarithmic derivative, d log f(z) = f ; our proof ‘requires analysis’ in the sense that it shows a universal property by coinduction. We then provide a series of examples of differential 2-rigs, drawing from various parts of category theory. We then categorify a generalisation of the notion of derivation ‘valued in a bimodule’; this derivation can be ‘twisted’ by a 2-rig endomorphism γ : C ! C (cf. Remark 2.7). A toy example of a differential rig with a γ-twisted derivation is given by Brzozowski derivative ([Brz64]; cf. Construction 2.8): in a sense, this example is not genuinely 2- dimensional (the category in question is a poset), but we show that the Brzozowski derivative falls quite naturally in our framework: it satisfies the Leibniz rule for a convolution monoidal structure when the powerset P (A∗) of the free monoid on a set is regarded as a presheaf category. The intuition that a module accounts for some sort of ‘tangent space’ upon which a module is acting is reinforced by our Proposition 2.10: if M is a ⊗-monoid object on a differential 2-rig (C;@), its derivative is an M-module. Section3 starts to investigate a very enticing problem: in a differential 2-rig, there is no reason for the ⊗-monoidal unit to be a ‘constant’ (an object in the ‘kernel’ of @). This appar- ently innocuous observation, based on the fact that @I =∼ @I + @I does not imply @I =∼ ? has 1A rig (R; +; ·) is a ring without negatives, in the sense that a ring is precisely a rig such that the additive monoid (R; +) is an abelian group. DIFFERENTIAL 2-RIGS 3 deep consequences, connecting the theory of differential 2-rigs to the theory of self-similarity in a category-theoretic framework;2 differential 2-rigs ‘too rigid to allow for the presence of self-similar objects’, thus where @I = ?, are called taut. Interestingly enough, tautness is a smallness condition of some sort on C: finite sets, finite dimensional vector spaces, and more generally categories with a notion of ‘dimension’ (cf. Definition 3.6, Proposition 3.7), and finitary functors T : Set ! Set that are right dualisable (cf. Remark 3.4), are all taut; by contrast, self-similar objects tend to be ‘big’ in genuinely categorical settings: a trivial example of a nontaut category is a lattice: there, every object is self-similar; by constrast, in the category of sets an object is self-similar if it is infinite or empty. Given this, it’s easy to build an example of a nontaut differential 2-rig: cf. Example 3.9. The subsequent section studies differential 2-rigs where C = [A; Set] is a presheaf category, endowed with Day convolution; extending a derivation @ on A to a derivation @¯ on C requires somewhat strong assumptions on A (cf. Proposition 4.3). In the case where A is semicartesian, and C has a derivation @, we can at least show that the constant functors are @-constants. The reader might think and rightly so that these examples are somewhat poor in spirit. We suggest this happens for a reason; the most interesting result of the section is of a foundational nature (cf. Theorem 4.11): motivated by the fact that the ‘Leibniz rule’ for distributional derivatives in functional analysis is @(f ∗ g) = @f ∗ g = f ∗ @g, we show that a derivation on a 2-rig is more or less the same thing as a coproduct preserving endofunctor D endowed with a pair of tensorial strengths, one on the left and one on the right, with the property that the sum DA ⊗ B + A ⊗ DB / D(A ⊗ B) is an isomorphism. Thus, at least as a rule of thumb, the theory of derivations on a presheaf category is more or less the same thing as the study of endofunctors of [A; Set] equipped with a tensorial strength of a suitable sort. The subsequent section studies an eminent special case of a presheaf category: (non- symmetric) combinatorial species, i.e. the presheaf categories ([Fin; Set] and) [P; Set] of symmetric sequences fC(n) j n ≥ 0g. In both cases the ‘chain rule’ holds: @(F G) = LanJ @F (Gn) × @Gn (cf. Equation (5.5)). This is certainly a well-known result in the circle of Canadian cate- gorical combinatorialists, yet our proof of Theorem 5.3 involves no combinatorics, just the manipulation of a coend. We end the paper with a small section sketching a series of open problems, aiming at a future investigation: it is likely that one can extend the theory of polynomial functors adding a derivation operation; an example of such an equation is F : X 7! A ⊗ X(2) + B ⊗ X(1) + C ⊗ X 2As explained on page 16, the terminology is motivated by the following fact: consider the category Top of topological spaces and continuous maps, and the endofunctor S : A 7! A + A; then, the terminal coalgebra for S is the Cantor set; see [Fre08, Lei10]. 4 FABRIZIO ROMANO GENOVESE AND FOSCO LOREGIAN where A; B; C 2 C are fixed objects of a differential 2-rig (C;@), and X(n) is a shorthand for @nX.A solution for F is a fixed point, when it is regarded as an endofunctor of C. 1. Monoidal categories with derivation Throughout the whole paper we will consider a category C satisfying the following as- sumptions: Definition 1.1. A 2-rig is a category C such that • C admits finite coproducts, denoted A + B. This also includes 0-ary coproducts, and hence entails the presence of an initial object, denoted ?. We usually refer informally to this as the additive monoidal structure on C; • In addition, C admits a (multiplicative) monoidal structure ⊗ : C × C ! C, with monoidal unit object I, that is bilinear, i.e. the functors A ⊗ and ⊗ B commute with coproducts. This is witnessed by the presence of natural isomorphisms with components3 l r δA;Y;Z δY;Z;B A ⊗ (Y + Z) −−−− A ⊗ Y + A ⊗ Z (Y + Z) ⊗ B −−−− Y ⊗ B + Z ⊗ B: (1.1) In simple terms, we want to capture a notion that categorifies rigs (rings without ad- ditive inverses), i.e.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • New Combinatorial Computational Methods Arising from Pseudo-Singletons Gilbert Labelle
    New combinatorial computational methods arising from pseudo-singletons Gilbert Labelle To cite this version: Gilbert Labelle. New combinatorial computational methods arising from pseudo-singletons. 20th Annual International Conference on Formal Power Series and Algebraic Combinatorics (FPSAC 2008), 2008, Viña del Mar, Chile. pp.247-258. hal-01185187 HAL Id: hal-01185187 https://hal.inria.fr/hal-01185187 Submitted on 19 Aug 2015 HAL is a multi-disciplinary open access L’archive ouverte pluridisciplinaire HAL, est archive for the deposit and dissemination of sci- destinée au dépôt et à la diffusion de documents entific research documents, whether they are pub- scientifiques de niveau recherche, publiés ou non, lished or not. The documents may come from émanant des établissements d’enseignement et de teaching and research institutions in France or recherche français ou étrangers, des laboratoires abroad, or from public or private research centers. publics ou privés. FPSAC 2008, Valparaiso-Vi~nadel Mar, Chile DMTCS proc. AJ, 2008, 247{258 New combinatorial computational methods arising from pseudo-singletons Gilbert Labelley Laboratoire de Combinatoire et d'Informatique Math´ematique,Universit´edu Qu´ebec `aMontr´eal,CP 8888, Succ. Centre-ville, Montr´eal(QC) Canada H3C3P8 Abstract. Since singletons are the connected sets, the species X of singletons can be considered as the combinatorial logarithm of the species E(X) of finite sets. In a previous work, we introduced the (rational) species Xb of pseudo-singletons as the analytical logarithm of the species of finite sets. It follows that E(X) = exp(Xb) in the context of rational species, where exp(T ) denotes the classical analytical power series for the exponential function in the variable T .
    [Show full text]
  • An Introduction to Combinatorial Species
    An Introduction to Combinatorial Species Ira M. Gessel Department of Mathematics Brandeis University Summer School on Algebraic Combinatorics Korea Institute for Advanced Study Seoul, Korea June 14, 2016 The main reference for the theory of combinatorial species is the book Combinatorial Species and Tree-Like Structures by François Bergeron, Gilbert Labelle, and Pierre Leroux. What are combinatorial species? The theory of combinatorial species, introduced by André Joyal in 1980, is a method for counting labeled structures, such as graphs. What are combinatorial species? The theory of combinatorial species, introduced by André Joyal in 1980, is a method for counting labeled structures, such as graphs. The main reference for the theory of combinatorial species is the book Combinatorial Species and Tree-Like Structures by François Bergeron, Gilbert Labelle, and Pierre Leroux. If a structure has label set A and we have a bijection f : A B then we can replace each label a A with its image f (b) in!B. 2 1 c 1 c 7! 2 2 a a 7! 3 b 3 7! b More interestingly, it allows us to count unlabeled versions of labeled structures (unlabeled structures). If we have a bijection A A then we also get a bijection from the set of structures with! label set A to itself, so we have an action of the symmetric group on A acting on these structures. The orbits of these structures are the unlabeled structures. What are species good for? The theory of species allows us to count labeled structures, using exponential generating functions. What are species good for? The theory of species allows us to count labeled structures, using exponential generating functions.
    [Show full text]
  • Combinatorial Species and Labelled Structures Brent Yorgey University of Pennsylvania, [email protected]
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations 1-1-2014 Combinatorial Species and Labelled Structures Brent Yorgey University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: http://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations Part of the Computer Sciences Commons, and the Mathematics Commons Recommended Citation Yorgey, Brent, "Combinatorial Species and Labelled Structures" (2014). Publicly Accessible Penn Dissertations. 1512. http://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1512 This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. http://repository.upenn.edu/edissertations/1512 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Combinatorial Species and Labelled Structures Abstract The theory of combinatorial species was developed in the 1980s as part of the mathematical subfield of enumerative combinatorics, unifying and putting on a firmer theoretical basis a collection of techniques centered around generating functions. The theory of algebraic data types was developed, around the same time, in functional programming languages such as Hope and Miranda, and is still used today in languages such as Haskell, the ML family, and Scala. Despite their disparate origins, the two theories have striking similarities. In particular, both constitute algebraic frameworks in which to construct structures of interest. Though the similarity has not gone unnoticed, a link between combinatorial species and algebraic data types has never been systematically explored. This dissertation lays the theoretical groundwork for a precise—and, hopefully, useful—bridge bewteen the two theories. One of the key contributions is to port the theory of species from a classical, untyped set theory to a constructive type theory. This porting process is nontrivial, and involves fundamental issues related to equality and finiteness; the recently developed homotopy type theory is put to good use formalizing these issues in a satisfactory way.
    [Show full text]
  • A COMBINATORIAL THEORY of FORMAL SERIES Preface in His
    A COMBINATORIAL THEORY OF FORMAL SERIES ANDRÉ JOYAL Translation and commentary by BRENT A. YORGEY This is an unofficial translation of an article that appeared in an Elsevier publication. Elsevier has not endorsed this translation. See https://www.elsevier.com/about/our-business/policies/ open-access-licenses/elsevier-user-license. André Joyal. Une théorie combinatoire des séries formelles. Advances in mathematics, 42 (1):1–82, 1981 Preface In his classic 1981 paper Une théorie combinatoire des séries formelles (A com- binatorial theory of formal series), Joyal introduces the notion of (combinatorial) species, which has had a wide-ranging influence on combinatorics. During the course of researching my PhD thesis on the intersection of combinatorial species and pro- gramming languages, I read a lot of secondary literature on species, but not Joyal’s original paper—it is written in French, which I do not read. I didn’t think this would be a great loss, since I supposed the material in his paper would be well- covered elsewhere, for example in the textbook by Bergeron et al. [1998] (which thankfully has been translated into English). However, I eventually came across some questions to which I could not find answers, only to be told that the answers were already in Joyal’s paper [Trimble, 2014]. Somewhat reluctantly, I found a copy and began trying to read it, whereupon I discovered two surprising things. First, armed with a dictionary and Google Translate, reading mathematical French is not too difficult (even for someone who does not know any French!)— though it certainly helps if one already understands the mathematics.
    [Show full text]
  • Analytic Combinatorics for Computing Seeding Probabilities
    algorithms Article Analytic Combinatorics for Computing Seeding Probabilities Guillaume J. Filion 1,2 ID 1 Center for Genomic Regulation (CRG), The Barcelona Institute of Science and Technology, Dr. Aiguader 88, Barcelona 08003, Spain; guillaume.fi[email protected] or guillaume.fi[email protected]; Tel.: +34-933-160-142 2 University Pompeu Fabra, Dr. Aiguader 80, Barcelona 08003, Spain Received: 12 November 2017; Accepted: 8 January 2018; Published: 10 January 2018 Abstract: Seeding heuristics are the most widely used strategies to speed up sequence alignment in bioinformatics. Such strategies are most successful if they are calibrated, so that the speed-versus-accuracy trade-off can be properly tuned. In the widely used case of read mapping, it has been so far impossible to predict the success rate of competing seeding strategies for lack of a theoretical framework. Here, we present an approach to estimate such quantities based on the theory of analytic combinatorics. The strategy is to specify a combinatorial construction of reads where the seeding heuristic fails, translate this specification into a generating function using formal rules, and finally extract the probabilities of interest from the singularities of the generating function. The generating function can also be used to set up a simple recurrence to compute the probabilities with greater precision. We use this approach to construct simple estimators of the success rate of the seeding heuristic under different types of sequencing errors, and we show that the estimates are accurate in practical situations. More generally, this work shows novel strategies based on analytic combinatorics to compute probabilities of interest in bioinformatics.
    [Show full text]
  • Species and Functors and Types, Oh My!
    University of Pennsylvania ScholarlyCommons Departmental Papers (CIS) Department of Computer & Information Science 9-2010 Species and Functors and Types, Oh My! Brent A. Yorgey University of Pennsylvania, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://repository.upenn.edu/cis_papers Part of the Discrete Mathematics and Combinatorics Commons, and the Programming Languages and Compilers Commons Recommended Citation Brent A. Yorgey, "Species and Functors and Types, Oh My!", . September 2010. This paper is posted at ScholarlyCommons. https://repository.upenn.edu/cis_papers/761 For more information, please contact [email protected]. Species and Functors and Types, Oh My! Abstract The theory of combinatorial species, although invented as a purely mathematical formalism to unify much of combinatorics, can also serve as a powerful and expressive language for talking about data types. With potential applications to automatic test generation, generic programming, and language design, the theory deserves to be much better known in the functional programming community. This paper aims to teach the basic theory of combinatorial species using motivation and examples from the world of functional pro- gramming. It also introduces the species library, available on Hack- age, which is used to illustrate the concepts introduced and can serve as a platform for continued study and research. Keywords combinatorial species, algebraic data types Disciplines Discrete Mathematics and Combinatorics | Programming Languages and Compilers This conference paper is available at ScholarlyCommons: https://repository.upenn.edu/cis_papers/761 Species and Functors and Types, Oh My! Brent A. Yorgey University of Pennsylvania [email protected] Abstract a certain size, or randomly generate family structures.
    [Show full text]
  • A Species Approach to the Twelvefold
    A species approach to Rota’s twelvefold way Anders Claesson 7 September 2019 Abstract An introduction to Joyal’s theory of combinatorial species is given and through it an alternative view of Rota’s twelvefold way emerges. 1. Introduction In how many ways can n balls be distributed into k urns? If there are no restrictions given, then each of the n balls can be freely placed into any of the k urns and so the answer is clearly kn. But what if we think of the balls, or the urns, as being identical rather than distinct? What if we have to place at least one ball, or can place at most one ball, into each urn? The twelve cases resulting from exhaustively considering these options are collectively referred to as the twelvefold way, an account of which can be found in Section 1.4 of Richard Stanley’s [8] excellent Enumerative Combinatorics, Volume 1. He attributes the idea of the twelvefold way to Gian-Carlo Rota and its name to Joel Spencer. Stanley presents the twelvefold way in terms of counting functions, f : U V, between two finite sets. If we think of U as a set of balls and V as a set of urns, then requiring that each urn contains at least one ball is the same as requiring that f!is surjective, and requiring that each urn contain at most one ball is the same as requiring that f is injective. To say that the balls are identical, or that the urns are identical, is to consider the equality of such functions up to a permutation of the elements of U, or up to a permutation of the elements of V.
    [Show full text]
  • The Relation Between Burnside Rings and Combinatorial Species*
    JOURNAL OF COMBINATORIAL THEORY, Series A 50, 269-284 (1989) The Relation between Burnside Rings and Combinatorial Species* J. LABELLE+ AND Y. N. YEH Universitt! du Quebec ci Montkal, Monkal, QuPbec, Canada H3C3P8 Communicated by Gian-Carlo Rota Received July 28, 1987 We describe the close relationship between permutation groups and com- binatorial species (introduced by A. Joyal, Adv. in Math. 42, 1981, l-82). There is a bijection @ between the set of transitive actions (up to isomorphism) of S, on finite sets and the set of “molecular” species of degree n (up to isomorphism). This bijec- tion extends to a ring isomorphism between B(S,) (the Burnside ring of the sym- metric group) and the ring Vy” (of virtual species of degree n). Since permutation groups are well known (and often studied using computers) this helps in finding examples and counterexamples in species. The cycle index series of a molecular species, which is hard to compute directly, is proved to be simply the (P6lya) cycle polynomial of the corresponding permutation group. Conversely, several operations which are hard to define in n,, B(S,) have a natural description in terms of species. Both situations are extended to coefficients in I-rings and binomial rings in the last section. 0 1989 Academic Press, Inc. INTRODUCTION In this paper, we want to highlight the close relationship between per- mutation groups and combinatorial species introduced by A. Joyal in [4]. In Sections 1 and 2, the main properties of species (operations, cycle index series, molecular and atomic species, ring of virtual species) and of the Burnside ring (of the symmetric group S,) are reviewed.
    [Show full text]
  • Combinatorial Species and Generating Functions
    Combinatorial Species Combinatorial species S is any sort of labelled structure built from a finite set A which does not depend on the names or properties of the elements of A. Let’s see some examples. 2 / 49 Example: Trees Let A = f1; 2; 3; 4g. Members of the species Trees built from A: 3 / 49 Example: Linear Orders Let A = fa; b; c; d; eg. Structures of type Linear Orders put on A: 4 / 49 Example: Partitions Let A = f1; 2; 3; 4g. Members of Partitions constructed from A: 5 / 49 Example: Permutations Let A = f1; 2; 3; 4g. Structures of type Permutations built from A: 6 / 49 Combinatorial Species, again Combinatorial species S is any sort of labelled structure built from a finite set A which does not depend on the names or properties of the elements of A. More concretely, S is a function which sends a finite set A to S(A) the set of all structures of S built from A. For the technocrats: a combinatorial species is a functor S : Fin0 ! Fin0 from the groupoid of finite sets with bijections to itself. 7 / 49 Example: Linear Orders L is the species of Linear Orders. 8 / 49 Example: Permutations P is the species of Permutations. 9 / 49 What’s in a name? Members of a species S built from A “can’t interpret” the names of the elements of A. For example, if A = f1; 2; 3; 4; 5g and B = fa; b; c; d; eg, then Trees “knows” how to use i to transform structures built from A into structures built from B.
    [Show full text]
  • P\'Olya Theory for Species with an Equivariant Group Action
    SPECIES WITH AN EQUIVARIANT GROUP ACTION ANDREW GAINER-DEWAR Abstract. Joyal’s theory of combinatorial species provides a rich and elegant framework for enumerating combinatorial structures by translating structural information into algebraic functional equations. We also extend the theory to incorporate information about “structural” group actions (i.e. those which commute with the label permutation action) on combinatorial species, using the Γ-species of Henderson, and present P´olya-theoretic interpretations of the associated formal power series for both ordinary and Γ-species. We define the appropriate operations +, ·, ◦, and on Γ-species, give formulas for the associated operations on Γ- cycle indices, and illustrate the use of this theory to study several important examples of combinatorial structures. Finally, we demonstrate the use of the Sage computer algebra system to enumerate Γ-species and their quotients. 1. Preliminaries 1.1. Classical P´olya theory. We recall here some classical results of P´olya theory for conve- nience. Let Λ denote the ring of abstract symmetric functions and pi the elements of the power-sum basis of Λ. Further, let P denote the ring of formal power series in the family of indeterminates x1, x2,... , and let η : Λ → P denote the map which expands each symmetric function in the underlying x-variables. Let G be a finite group which acts on a finite set S of cardinality n. The classical cycle index polynomial of the action of G on S is the power series 1 (1) Z (p ,p ,...,p )= p G 1 2 n |G| σ σX∈G σ1 σ2 where pσ = p1 p2 ..
    [Show full text]
  • Combinatorial Species and the Virial Expansion
    Combinatorial Species and the Virial Expansion By Stephen Tate University of Warwick Supervisor: Dr Daniel Ueltschi Funded by: EPSRC Combinatorial Species Definition 1 A Species of Structure is a rule F which i) Produces for each finite set U, a finite set F[U] ii) Produces for each bijection ς: UV, a function F[ς]: F[u]F[V] The functions F[ς] should satisfy the following Functorial Properties: a) For all bijections ς:UV and τ:VW F[τ ∙ ς]=F[τ+ ∙ F*ς] b) For the identity map IdU : U U F[IdU]=IdF[U] An element s ε F[U] is called an F-structure on U The function F[ς] is called the transport of F- structures along ς F[ς] is necessarily a bijection Examples - Set Species S where: S [U]= {U} for all sets U - Species of Simple Graphs G Where s ε G[U] iff s is a graph on the points in U Associated Power Series Exponential Generating Series The formal power series for species of structure F is where is the cardinality of the set F[n]=F[{1 ... n}] Operations on Species of Structure Sum of species of structure Let F and G be two species of structure. An (F+G)-structure on U is an F-structure on U or (exclusive) a G-structure on U. (F+G)*U+ = F*U+x,†- U G*U+x,‡- i.e. a DISJOINT union (F+G)[ς](s)= F[ς](s) if s ε F[U] { G[ς](s) if s ε G[U] Product of a species of structure Let F and G be two species of structures.
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction to the Theory of Species of Structures
    Introduction to the Theory of Species of Structures Fran¸coisBergeron, Gilbert Labelle, and Pierre Leroux November 25, 2013 Université du Québec à Montréal Département de mathématiques Case postale 8888, Succursale Centre-Ville Montréal (Québec) H3C 3P8 2 Contents 0.1 Introduction.........................................1 1 Species 5 1.1 Species of Structures....................................5 1.1.1 General definition of species of structures....................9 1.1.2 Species described through set theoretic axioms................. 10 1.1.3 Explicit constructions of species......................... 11 1.1.4 Algorithmic descriptions.............................. 11 1.1.5 Using combinatorial operations on species.................... 12 1.1.6 Functional equation solutions........................... 12 1.1.7 Geometric descriptions............................... 13 1.2 Associated Series...................................... 13 1.2.1 Generating series of a species of structures.................... 14 1.2.2 Type generating series............................... 15 1.2.3 Cycle index series................................. 16 1.2.4 Combinatorial equality............................... 20 1.2.5 Contact of order n ................................. 22 1.3 Exercises.......................................... 23 2 Operations on Species 27 2.1 Addition and multiplication................................ 27 2.1.1 Sum of species of structures............................ 29 2.1.2 Product of species of structures.......................... 32 2.2 Substitution
    [Show full text]