Composition-Diamond Lemma for Tensor Product of Free Algebras

L. A. Bokut, Yuqun Chen and Yongshan Chen

arXiv: 0804.2115v2 · PDF · 15 April 2008
Categories: math.RA
Journal: Journal of Algebra, 323(2010), 2520-2537.
DOI: 10.1016/j.jalgebra.2010.02.021
Licence: CC BY 4.0 The site shows the text.

Abstract

In this paper, we establish Composition-Diamond lemma for tensor product k< X> \otimes k< Y> of two free algebras over a field. As an application, we construct a Groebner-Shirshov basis in k< X> \otimes k< Y> by lifting a Groebner-Shirshov basis in k[X] \otimes k< Y>, where k[X] is a commutative algebra.

Items 20

Lemma

Lemma 2.1

TBO7

(Composition-Diamond lemma for associative algebras) Let S\subset k \langle X\rangle be a set of monic polynomials and < a monomial order on X^*. Then the following statements are equivalent:

(1) S is a Gröbner-Shirshov basis in k \langle X\rangle.
(2) f\in Id(S)\Rightarrow \bar{f}=a\bar{s}b for some s\in S and a,b\in X^*, where Id(S) is the ideal of k \langle X\rangle generated by S.
(3) Irr(S) = \{ u \in X^* | u \neq a\bar{s}b ,s\in S,a ,b \in X^*\} is a basis of the algebra A=k\langle X | S \rangle.

Lemma

Lemma 3.1

J3CZ

Let f\in k\langle X\rangle \otimes k\langle Y\rangle be a monic polynomial. Then \overline{ufv}=u\bar{f}v for any u,v\in N.

Lemma

Lemma 3.2

NU0W

Let S be a Gröbner-Shirshov basis in k\langle X\rangle \otimes k\langle Y\rangle and s_1,s_2\in S. If w=a_1\bar{s_1}b_1=a_2\bar{s_2}b_2 for some a_i,b_i\in N, \ i=1,2, then a_1s_1b_1\equiv a_2s_2b_2 \ mod(S,w).

Used by Proof

Proof of Lemma 3.2

There are four cases to consider.

Case 1 Inclusion

(1.1) X-inclusion only

Suppose that w_1^X=\bar {s_1}^X=a\bar{s_2}^Xb, \ a,b\in X^* and \bar {s_1}^Y, \ \bar{s_2}^Y are disjoint. Then a_2^X=a_1^Xa and b_2^X=bb_1^X. There are two cases to consider: w_1^Y=\bar{s_1}^Yc\bar{s_2}^Y and w_1^Y=\bar{s_2}^Yc\bar{s_1}^Y, where c\in Y^*.

For w_1^Y=\bar{s_1}^Yc\bar{s_2}^Y, we have w_1=s_1^X\bar{s_1}^Yc\bar{s_2}^Y, \ a_2^Y=a_1^Y\bar{s_1}^Yc, b_1^Y=c\bar{s_2}^Yb_2^Y, w=a_1w_1b_1^Xb_2^Y=a_1\bar{s_1}ac\bar{s_2}b_2 and

\begin{aligned} a_1s_1b_1-a_2s_2b_2&=a_1s_1b_1^Xc\bar{s_2}^Yb_2^Y-a_1^Xaa_1^Y\bar{s_1}^Ycs_2bb_1^Xb_2^Y\\ &=a_1(s_1c\bar{s_2}^Y-\bar{s_1}^Ycas_2b)b_1^Xb_2^Y\\ &=a_1(s_1,s_2)_{w_1}b_1^Xb_2^Y\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S,w). \end{aligned}

For w_1^Y=\bar{s_2}^Yc\bar{s_1}^Y, we have w_1=s_1^X\bar{s_2}^Yc\bar{s_1}^Y, \ a_1^Y=a_2^Y\bar{s_2}^Yc, b_2^Y=c\bar{s_1}^Yb_1^Y, w=a_1^Xa_2^Yw_1b_1 and

\begin{aligned} a_1s_1b_1-a_2s_2b_2&=a_1^Xa_2^Y\bar{s_2}^Ycs_1b_1-a_1^Xaa_2^Ys_2bb_1^Xc\bar{s_1}^Yb_1^Y\\ &=a_1^Xa_2^Y(\bar{s_2}^Ycs_1-as_2bc\bar{s_1}^Y)b_1\\ &=a_1^Xa_2^Y(s_1,s_2)_{w_1}b_1\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S,w). \end{aligned}

(1.2) Y-inclusion only

This case is similar to (1.1).

(1.3) X,Y-inclusion

We may assume that \bar{s_2} is a subword of \bar{s_1}, i.e., w_1=\bar{s_1}=ac\bar{s_2}bd, a,b\in X^*, c,d\in Y^*, a_2^X=a_1^Xa, b_2^X=bb_1^X, a_2^Y=a_1^Yc and b_2^Y=db_1^Y. Thus, a_2=a_1ac, \ b_2=bdb_1, \ w=a_1w_1b_1 and

\begin{aligned} a_1s_1b_1-a_2s_2b_2&=a_1s_1b_1-a_1acs_2bdb_1\\ &=a_1(s_1-acs_2bd)b_1\\ &=a_1(s_1,s_2)_{w_1}b_1\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ mod(S,w). \end{aligned}

(1.4) X,Y-skew-inclusion

Assume that w_1^X=\bar{s_1}^X=a\bar{s_2}^Xb, \ a,b\in X^* and w_1^Y=\bar{s_2}^Y=c\bar{s_1}^Yd, \ c,d\in Y^*. Then a_2^X=a_1^Xa, b_2^X=bb_1^X, a_1^Y=a_2^Yc and b_1^Y=db_2^Y. Thus, w=a_1^Xa_2^Yw_1b_1^Xb_2^Y and

\begin{aligned} a_1s_1b_1-a_2s_2b_2&=a_1^Xa_2^Ycs_1b_1^Xdb_2^Y-a_1^Xaa_2^Ys_2bb_1^Xb_2^Y\\ &=a_1^Xa_2^Y(cs_1d-as_2b)b_1^Xb_2^Y\\ &=a_1^Xa_2^Y(s_1,s_2)_{w_1}b_1^Xb_2^Y\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ mod(S,w). \end{aligned}

Case 2 Intersection

(2.1) X-intersection only

We may assume that \bar{s_1}^X is at the left of \bar{s_2}^X, i.e., w_1^X=\bar{s_1}^Xb=a\bar{s_2}^X, a,b\in X^* and |\bar{s_1}^X|+|\bar{s_2}^X|>|w_1^X|. Then a_2^X=a_1^Xa and b_1^X=bb_2^X. There are two cases to be consider: w_1^Y=\bar{s_1}^Yc\bar{s_2}^Y and w_1^Y=\bar{s_2}^Yc\bar{s_1}^Y, \ c\in Y^*.

For w_1^Y=\bar{s_1}^Yc\bar{s_2}^Y, i.e., w_1=\bar{s_1}bc\bar{s_2}^Y, we have a_2^Y=a_1^Y\bar{s_1}^Yc, b_1^Y=c\bar{s_2}^Yb_2^Y, w=a_1\bar{s_1}ac\bar{s_2}b_2=a_1w_1b_2 and

\begin{aligned} a_1s_1b_1-a_2s_2b_2&=a_1s_1bb_2^Xc\bar{s_2}^Yb_2^Y-a_1^Xaa_1^Y\bar{s_2}^Ycs_2b_2\\ &=a_1(s_1bc\bar{s_2}^Y-a\bar{s_2}^Ycs_2)b_2\\ &=a_1(s_1,s_2)_{w_1}b_2\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S,w). \end{aligned}

For w_1^Y=\bar{s_2}^Yc\bar{s_1}^Y, i.e., w_1=\bar{s_2}^Yc\bar{s_1}b, we have a_1^Y=a_2^Y\bar{s_2}^Yc, b_2^Y=c\bar{s_1}^Yb_1^Y, \ w=a_1^Xa_2^Yw_1b_2^Xb_1^Y and

\begin{aligned} a_1s_1b_1-a_2s_2b_2&=a_1^Xa_2^Y\bar{s_2}^Ycs_1bb_2^Xb_1^Y-a_1^Xaa_2^Ys_2b_2^Xc\bar{s_1}^Yb_1^Y\\ &=a_1^Xa_2^Y(\bar{s_2}^Ycs_1b-as_2c\bar{s_1}^Y)b_2^Xb_1^Y\\ &=a_1^Xa_2^Y(s_1,s_2)_{w_1}b_2^Xb_1^Y\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S,w). \end{aligned}

(2.2) Y-intersection only

This case is similar to (2.1).

(2.3) X,Y-intersection

Assume that w_1^X=\bar{s_1}^Xb=a\bar{s_2}^X, w_1^Y=\bar{s_1}^Yd=c\bar{s_2}^Y, a,b\in X^*, \ c,d\in Y^*, |\bar{s_1}^X|+|\bar{s_2}^X|>|w_1^X| and |\bar{s_1}^Y|+|\bar{s_2}^Y|>|w_1^Y|. Then a_2^X=a_1^Xa, b_1^X=bb_2^X, a_2^Y=a_1^Yc, b_1^Y=db_2^Y, w=a_1w_1b_2 and

\begin{aligned} a_1s_1b_1-a_2s_2b_2&=a_1s_1bb_2^Xdb_2^Y-a_1^Xaa_1^Ycs_2b_2\\ &=a_1(s_1bd-acs_2)b_2\\ &=a_1(s_1,s_2)_{w_1}b_2\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ mod(S,w). \end{aligned}

(2.4) X,Y-skew-intersection

Assume that w_1^X=\bar{s_1}^Xb=a\bar{s_2}^X, w_1^Y=c\bar{s_1}^Y=\bar{s_2}^Yd, |\bar{s_1}^X|+|\bar{s_2}^X|>|w_1^X|, |\bar{s_1}^Y|+|\bar{s_2}^Y|>|w_1^Y|, a,b\in X^*, \ c,d\in Y^*. Then a_2^X=a_1^Xa, b_1^X=bb_2^X, a_1^Y=a_2^Yc, b_2^Y=db_1^Y, w=a_1^Xa_2^Yw_1b_2^Xb_1^Y and

\begin{aligned} a_1s_1b_1-a_2s_2b_2&=a_1^Xa_2^Ycs_1bb_2^Xb_1^Y-a_1^Xaa_2^Ys_2b_2^Xdb_1^Y\\ &=a_1^Xa_2^Y(cs_1b-as_2d)b_2^Xb_1^Y\\ &=a_1^Xa_2^Y(s_1,s_2)_{w_1}b_2^Xb_1^Y \\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S,w). \end{aligned}

Case 3 Both inclusion and intersection

(3.1) X-inclusion and Y-intersection

We may assume that w_1^X=\bar{s_1}^X=a\bar{s_2}^Xb, a,b\in X^*. Then a_2^X=a_1^Xa and b_2^X=bb_1^X. There two cases to consider: w_1^Y=\bar{s_1}^Yd=c\bar{s_2}^Y and w_1^Y=c\bar{s_1}^Y=\bar{s_2}^Yd, where c,d\in Y^*, |\bar{s_1}^Y|+|\bar{s_2}^Y|>|w_1^Y|.

For w_1^Y=\bar{s_1}^Yd=c\bar{s_2}^Y, we have a_2^Y=a_1^Yc, b_1^Y=db_2^Y, \ w=a_1w_1b_1^Xb_2^Y and

\begin{aligned} a_1s_1b_1-a_2s_2b_2&=a_1s_1b_1^Xdb_2^Y-a_1^Xaa_1^Ycs_2bb_1^Xb_2^Y\\ &=a_1(s_1d-acs_2b)b_1^Xb_2^Y\\ &=a_1(s_1,s_2)_{w_1}b_2\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ mod(S,w). \end{aligned}

For w_1^Y=c\bar{s_1}^Y=\bar{s_2}^Yd, we have a_1^Y=a_2^Yc, b_2^Y=db_1^Y, w=a_1^Xa_2^Yw_1b_2^Xdb_1^Y and

\begin{aligned} a_1s_1b_1-a_2s_2b_2&=a_1^Xa_2^Ycs_1b_1-a_1^Xaa_2^Ys_2bb_1^Xdb_1^Y\\ &=a_1^Xa_2^Y(cs_1-as_2bd)b_1\\ &=a_1^Xa_2^Y(s_1,s_2)_{w_1}b_1 \\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S,w). \end{aligned}

(3.2) X-intersection and Y-inclusion

Assume that w_1^X=\bar{s_1}^Xb=a\bar{s_2}^X, a,b\in Y^* with |\bar{s_1}^X|+|\bar{s_2}^X|>|w_1^X|. Then a_2^X=a_1^Xa, b_1^X=bb_2^X. There are two cases to consider: w_1^Y=\bar{s_1}^Y=c\bar{s_2}^Yd and \bar{s_2}^Y=c\bar{s_1}^Yd, where c,d\in Y^*.

For w_1^Y=\bar{s_1}^Y=c\bar{s_2}^Yd, we have a_2^Y=a_1^Yc, b_2^Y=db_1^Y, w=a_1w_1b_2^Xb_1^Y and

\begin{aligned} a_1s_1b_1-a_2s_2b_2&=a_1s_1bb_2^Xb_1^Y-a_1acs_2b_2^Xdb_1^Y\\ &=a_1(s_1b-acs_2d)b_2^Xb_1^Y\\ &=a_1(s_1,s_2)_{w_1}b_2^Xb_1^Y\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ mod(S,w). \end{aligned}

For w_1^Y=\bar{s_2}^Y=c\bar{s_1}^Yd, we have a_1^Y=a_2^Yc, b_1^Y=db_2^Y, w=a_1^Xa_2^Yw_1b_2 and

\begin{aligned} a_1s_1b_1-a_2s_2b_2&=a_1^Xa_2^Ycs_1bb_2^Xdb_2^Y-a_1^Xaa_2^Ys_2b_2\\ &=a_1^Xa_2^Y(cs_1bd-as_2)b_2\\ &=a_1^Xa_2^Y(s_1,s_2)_{w_1}b_2\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ mod(S,w). \end{aligned}

Case 4. \bar{s_1} and \bar{s_2} disjoint

For w=w^Xw^Y, by symmetry, there are two cases to consider: w^Y=a_1^Y\bar{s_1}^Yc\bar{s_2}^Yb_2^Y and w^Y=a_2^Y\bar{s_2}^Yc\bar{s_1}^Yb_1^Y, where w^X=a_1^X\bar{s_1}^Xa\bar{s_2}^Xb_2^X, \ a\in X^*, \ a_2^X=a_1^X\bar{s_1}^Xa, \ b_1^X=a\bar{s_2}^Xb_2^X and c\in Y^*.

For w=a_1^X\bar{s_1}^Xa\bar{s_2}^Xb_2^Xa_1^Y\bar{s_1}^Yc\bar{s_2}^Yb_2^Y=a_1\bar{s_1}ac\bar{s_2}b_2, we have a_2=a_1\bar{s_1}ac, \ b_1=ac\bar{s_2}b_2 and

\begin{aligned} a_1s_1b_1-a_2s_2b_2&=a_1s_1ac\bar{s_2}b_2-a_1\bar{s_1}acs_2b_2\\ &=a_1(s_1-\bar{s_1})acs_2b_2-a_1s_1ac(s_2-\bar{s_2})b_2\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S,w). \end{aligned}

For w=a_1^X\bar{s_1}^Xa\bar{s_2}^Xb_2^Xa_2^Y\bar{s_2}^Yc\bar{s_1}^Yb_1^Y, we have a_1^Y=a_2^Y\bar{s_2}^Yc, \ b_2^Y=c\bar{s_1}^Yb_1^Y and

\begin{aligned} a_1s_1b_1-a_2s_2b_2&=a_1^Xa_2^Y\bar{s_2}^Ycs_1a\bar{s_2}^Xb_2^Xb_1^Y-a_1^X\bar{s_1}^Xaa_2^Ys_2b_2^Xc\bar{s_1}^Yb_1^Y\\ &=a_1^Xa_2^Y(\bar{s_2}^Ycs_1a\bar{s_2}^X-\bar{s_1}^Xas_2c\bar{s_1}^Y)b_2^Xb_1^Y.\\ \end{aligned}

Let s_1=\sum_{i=1}^n\alpha_iu_{1i}^Xu_{1i}^Y and s_2=\sum_{j=1}^m\beta_ju_{2j}^Xu_{2j}^Y, where \alpha_1=\beta_1=1. Then

\begin{aligned} \bar{s_2}^Ycs_1a\bar{s_2}^X-\bar{s_1}^Xas_2c\bar{s_1}^Y&= \sum_{i=2}^n\alpha_iu_{1i}^Xa\bar{s_2}cu_{1i}^Y-\sum_{j=2}^m\beta_iu_{2j}^Yc\bar{s_1}au_{2j}^X\\ &=\sum_{i=2}^n\alpha_iu_{1i}^Xa(\bar{s_2}-s_2)cu_{1i}^Y+\sum_{j=2}^m\beta_ju_{2j}^Yc(s_1-\bar{s_1})au_{2j}^X\\ & \ &+\sum_{i=2}^n\alpha_iu_{1i}^Xas_2cu_{1i}^Y-\sum_{j=2}^m\beta_ju_{2j}^Ycs_1au_{2j}^X\\ &\equiv&\sum_{i=2}^n\sum_{j=2}^m\alpha_i\beta_ju_{1i}^Xau_{2j}^Xu_{2j}^Ycu_{1i}^Y- \sum_{j=2}^m\sum_{i=2}^n\alpha_i\beta_ju_{2j}^Ycu_{1i}^Yu_{1i}^Xau_{2j}^X\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S,w_1), \end{aligned}

where w_1=\bar{s_2}^Yc\bar{s_1}a\bar{s_2}^X=\bar{s_1}^Xa\bar{s_2}c\bar{s_1}^Y. Since w=a_1^Xa_2^Yw_1b_2^Xb_1^Y, we have

\begin{aligned} a_1s_1b_1-a_2s_2b_2&=a_1^Xa_2^Y(\bar{s_2}^Ycs_1a\bar{s_2}^X-\bar{s_1}^Xas_2c\bar{s_1}^Y)b_2^Xb_1^Y\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S,w). \end{aligned}

This completes the proof. \square

Lemma

Lemma 3.3

BSYU

Let S\subset k\langle X\rangle \otimes k\langle Y\rangle with each s\in S monic and Irr(S)=\{w \in N|w\neq a\overline{s}b, \ a,b\in N, \ s\in S\}. Then for any f\in k\langle X\rangle \otimes k\langle Y\rangle,

f=\sum_{a_i \bar{s_i}b_i\leq \bar{f}} \alpha_i a_i s_ib_i+\sum_{u_j\leq \bar{f}} \beta_j u_j,

where \alpha_i, \ \beta_j \in k, \ a_i,b_i\in N, \ s_i\in S \ \mbox{and} \ u_j\in Irr(S).

Used by Proof

Proof of Lemma 3.3

Let f=\sum\limits_{i}\alpha_{i}u_{i}\in k\langle X\rangle \otimes k\langle Y\rangle, where 0\neq{\alpha_{i}\in{k}} and u_{1}>u_{2}>\cdots. If u_1\in{Irr(S)}, then let f_{1}=f-\alpha_{1}u_1. If u_1\not\in{Irr(S)}, then there exist some s\in{S} and a_1,b_1\in N, such that \bar f=a_1\bar{s_1}b_1. Let f_1=f-\alpha_1a_1s_1b_1. In both cases, we have \bar{f_1}<\bar{f}. Then the result follows from the induction on \bar{f}. \square

Theorem

Theorem 3.4

4V4L

(Composition-Diamond lemma for tensor product k\langle X\rangle\otimes k\langle Y\rangle) Let S\subset k\langle X\rangle\otimes k\langle Y\rangle with each s\in S monic and < the order on N=X^*Y^* as before. Then the following statements are equivalent:

(1) S is a Gröbner-Shirshov basis in k\langle X\cup Y|T\rangle.
(2) f\in Id(S)\Rightarrow\overline{f}=a\overline{s}b for some a,b\in N , \ s\in S.
(3) Irr(S)=\{w \in N|w\neq a\overline{s}b, \ a,b\in N, \ s\in S\} is a k-linear basis for the factor k\langle X\cup Y|T\rangle/Id(S).

Proof of Theorem 3.4

(1)\Rightarrow (2). Suppose that 0\neq f\in Id(S). Then f=\sum \alpha_i a_i s_i b_i for some \alpha_i\in k, \ a_i,b_i\in N, \ s_i\in S. Let w_i=a_i \overline{s}_ib_i and w_1=w_2=\cdots=w_l>w_{l+1}\geq \cdots. We will prove that \overline{f}=a\overline{s}b for some a,b\in N, \ s\in S, by using induction on l and w_1. If l=1, then the result is clear. If l>1, then w_1=a_1 \bar{s_1}b_1=a_2 \bar{s_2}b_2. Now, by (1) and Lemma 3.2, a_1s_1b_1\equiv a_2s_2b_2 \ \ mod(S,w_1). Thus,

\begin{aligned} \alpha_1a_1 s_1b_1+\alpha_2a_2 s_2 b_2&=(\alpha_1+\alpha_2)a_1s_1b_1+\alpha_2(a_2 s_2b_2-a_1s_1b_1)\\ &\equiv&(\alpha_1+\alpha_2)a_1s_1b_1 \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S,w_1). \end{aligned}

By induction on l and w_1, we have the result.

(2)\Rightarrow (3). For any 0\neq f\in k\langle X\cup Y|T\rangle, by Lemma 3.3, we can express f as

f=\sum \alpha_i a_i s_ib_i+\sum \beta_j u_j,

where \alpha_i, \ \beta_j \in k, \ a_i,b_i\in N, \ s_i\in S \ \mbox{and} \ u_j\in Irr(S). Then Irr(S) generates the factor algebra. Moreover, if 0\neq h=\sum \beta_j u_j\in Id(S), u_j\in Irr(S), u_1>u_2>\cdots \ and \ \beta_1\neq 0, then u_1=\bar{h}=a\bar{s}b for some a,b\in N, \ s\in S by (2), a contradiction. This shows that Irr(S) is a linear basis of the factor algebra.

(3)\Rightarrow (1). For any f, \ g\in S, we have h=(f,g)_w\in Id(S). The result is trivial if (f,g)_w=0. Assume that (f,g)_w\neq 0. Then, by Lemma 3.3 and (3), we have

h=\sum_{a_i \bar{s_i}b_i\leq \bar{h}} \alpha_i a_i s_ib_i.

Now, by noting that \bar{h}=\overline{(f,g)_w}<w, we know that (1) holds. \square

Uses Lemma 3.2, Lemma 3.3

Remark

MMPX

Theorem 3.4 is valid for any monomial order on X^*Y^*.

Remark

B0E4

Theorem 3.4 is exact the Composition-Diamond lemma for associative algebras (Lemma 2.1) when Y=\emptyset.

Example

Example 4.1

B4FX

Suppose that for the deg-lex order, S_1 and S_2 are Gröbner-Shirshov bases in k\langle X\rangle and k\langle Y\rangle respectively. Then for the deg-lex order on X^*Y^*, S_1\cup S_2 is a Gröbner-Shirshov basis in k\langle X\cup Y|T\rangle=k\langle X\rangle\otimes k\langle Y\rangle. It follows that k\langle X|S_1\rangle\otimes k\langle Y|S_2\rangle=k\langle X\cup Y|T\cup S_1\cup S_2 \rangle.

Proof of Example 4.1

The possible compositions in S_1\cup S_2 are X-including only, X-intersection only, Y-including only and Y-intersection only. Suppose f,g\in S_1 and (f,g)_{w_1}\equiv 0 \ \ mod(S_1,w_1) in k\langle X\rangle. Then in k\langle X\cup Y|T\rangle, (f,g)_w=(f,g)_{w_1}c, where w=w_1c for any c\in Y^*. From this it follows that each composition in S_1\cup S_2 is trivial modulo S_1\cup S_2. \square

Example

Example 4.2

48WN

Let X,Y be linearly ordered sets, k[X] the free commutative associative algebra generated by X. Then S=\{x_ix_j=x_jx_i|x_i>x_j, x_i,x_j\in X \} is a Gröbner-Shirshov basis in k\langle X\rangle\otimes k\langle Y\rangle with respect to the deg-lex order. Therefore, k[X]\otimes k\langle Y \rangle=k\langle X\cup Y|T\cup S\rangle.

Lemma

Lemma 4.3

KDQK

Let a,b\in X^*, \ a=\delta(\gamma(a)), \ b=\delta(\gamma(b)) and s\in k[X]. If w=a\delta(\bar{s})b=\delta(\gamma(ab)\bar{s}), then, in k\langle X\rangle,

a\delta(s)b\equiv\delta(\gamma(ab)s) \ \ \ \ mod(S_1,w).

Used by Proof

Proof of Lemma 4.3

Suppose that s=\bar{s}+s' and h=a\delta(s)b-\delta(\gamma(ab)s). Since a\delta(\bar{s})b=\delta(\gamma(ab)\bar{s}), we have h=a\delta(s')b-\delta(\gamma(ab)s'), and \bar{h}<w. By noting that \gamma(\delta(\gamma(ab)s')=\gamma(\delta(\gamma(ab)s')), h\equiv0 \ \ \ mod(S_1,w). \square

Lemma

Lemma 4.4

V17I

Let f,g\in k[X], \ \bar{g}=x_{i_1}x_{i_2}\cdots x_{i_r} \ (i_1\leq i_2\leq\cdots\leq i_r ) \ and \ w=\delta(\bar{f}\bar{g}). Then, in k\langle X\rangle,

\delta((f-\bar{f})g)\equiv \sum\alpha_ia_i\delta(u_ig)b_i \ \ \ mod(S_1,w)

where \alpha_i\in k, \ a_i\in [x\in X | x\leq x_{i_1}], \ b_i\in [x\in X | x\geq x_{i_r}], \ u_i\in U(\bar{g}) and \gamma(\sum\alpha_ia_iu_ib_i)=f-\bar{f}.

Used by Proof

Theorem

Theorem 4.5

5PZA

([eisenbud]) Let the orders on [X] and X^* be defined as above. If S is a minimal Gröbner basis in k[X], then S'=\{\delta(us) | s\in S, u\in U(\bar{s}) \} \cup S_1 is a Gröbner-Shirshov basis in k\langle X\rangle.

Used by Proof

Proof of Theorem 4.5

We will show that all the possible compositions of elements in S' are trivial. Let f=\delta(us_1), \ g=\delta(vs_2) and h_{ij}=x_ix_j-x_jx_i \in S'.

(1) f \wedge g

Case 1. f and g have a composition of including, i.e., w=\delta(u\bar{s_1})=a\delta(v\bar{s_2})b for some a,b\in X^* and a=\delta(\gamma(a)),b=\delta(\gamma(b)).

If s_1 and s_2 have no composition in k[X], i.e., lcm(\bar{s_1}\bar{s_2})=\bar{s_1}\bar{s_2}, then u=u'\bar{s_2}, \ \gamma(ab)v=u'\bar{s_1} for some u'\in [X]. By Lemma 4.3 and Lemma 4.4, we have

\begin{aligned} (f,g)_w &= \delta(us_1)-a\delta(vs_2)b \\ &\equiv&\delta(us_1)-\delta(\gamma(ab)vs_2) \\ &\equiv&\delta(u'\bar{s_2}s_1)-\delta(u'\bar{s_1}s_2) \\ &\equiv&\delta(u'(s_1-\bar{s_1})s_2)-\delta(u'(s_2-\bar{s_2})s_1) \\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S',w). \end{aligned}

Since, in k[X], S is a minimal Gröbner basis, the possible compositions are only intersection. If s_1 and s_2 have composition of intersection in k[X], i.e., (s_1,s_2)_{w'}=a's_1-b's_2, where a',b'\in[X], \ w'=a'\bar{s_1}=b'\bar{s_2} and |w'|<|\bar{s_1}|+|\bar{s_2}|, then w' is a subword of \gamma(w). Therefore, we have w=\delta(tw')=\delta(ta'\bar{s_1})=\delta(tb'\bar{s_2}) and u=ta', \gamma(ab)v=tb' for some t\in [X]. Then

\begin{aligned} (f,g)_w &= \delta(us_1)-a\delta(vs_2)b \\ &\equiv&\delta(us_1)-\delta(\gamma(ab)vs_2) \\ &\equiv&\delta(ta's_1)-\delta(tb's_2) \\ &\equiv&\delta(t(a's_1-b's_2)) \\ &\equiv&\delta(t(s_1,s_2)_{w'})\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S',w) \end{aligned}

since t\overline{(s_1,s_2)_{w'}}<tw'=\gamma(w).

Case 2. If f and g have a composition of intersection, we may assume that \bar{f} is on the left of \bar{g}, i.e., w=\delta(u\bar{s_1})a=b\delta(v\bar{s_2}) for some a,b\in X^* and a=\delta\gamma(a), b=\delta\gamma(b). Similarly to Case 1, we have to consider whether s_1 and s_2 have compositions in k[X] or not. One can check that both cases are trivial mod(S',w) by Lemma 4.3 and Lemma 4.4.

(2) f \wedge h_{ij}

By noting that \overline{h_{ij}}=x_ix_j can not be a subword of \bar{f}=\delta(u\bar{s_1}) since i>j, only possible compositions are intersection. Suppose that \bar{s_1}=x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_r}x_i, \ (i_1\leq i_2\leq\cdots\leq i_r\leq i). Then \bar{f}=\delta(u\bar{s_1})=x_{i_1}vx_i for some v\in k\langle X\rangle, \ v=\delta\gamma(v) and w=\delta(u\bar{s_1})x_j.

If j\leq i_1, then

\begin{aligned} (f,h_{ij})_w &= \delta(us_1)x_j- x_{i_1}v(x_ix_j-x_jx_i)\\ &=\delta(u(s_1-\bar{s_1}))x_j+ x_{i_1}vx_jx_i \\ &\equiv& x_j\delta(u(s_1-\bar{s_1}))+x_j x_{i_1}vx_i \\ &\equiv& x_j(\delta(u(s_1-\bar{s_1}))+\delta(u\bar{s_1}) ) \\ &\equiv&x_j\delta(us_1)\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S',w). \end{aligned}

If j> i_1, then ux_j\in U(\bar{s_1}) and

\begin{aligned} (f,h_{ij})_w &= \delta(us_1)x_j- x_{i_1}v(x_ix_j-x_jx_i)\\ &=\delta(u(s_1-\bar{s_1}))x_j+ x_{i_1}vx_jx_i \\ &\equiv& \delta(ux_j(s_1-\bar{s_1}))+\delta( x_{i_1}vx_ix_j) \\ &\equiv& \delta(ux_j(s_1-\bar{s_1}))+\delta(ux_j\bar{s_1}) \\ &\equiv&\delta(ux_js_1)\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S',w). \end{aligned}

Then we complete the proof. \square

Uses Lemma 4.3, Lemma 4.4

Theorem

Theorem 4.6

H6B2

Let the orders on [X]Y^* and X^*Y^* be defined as before. If S is a minimal Gröbner-Shirshov basis in k[X]\otimes k\langle Y \rangle, then S'=\{\delta(us) | s\in S, u\in U(\bar{s}^X) \} \cup S_1 is a Gröbner-Shirshov basis in k\langle X\rangle\otimes k\langle Y\rangle, where S_1=\{h_{ij}=x_ix_j-x_jx_i| \ i>j\}.

Proof of Theorem 4.6

We will show that all the possible compositions of elements in S' are trivial.

For s_1,s_2\in S, let f=\delta(us_1), \ g=\delta(vs_2), \ h_{ij}=x_ix_j-x_jx_i \in S' and L=lcm(\bar {s_1}^X,\bar {s_2}^X).

1. f \wedge g

In this case, all the possible compositions of f \wedge g are related the ambiguities w’s (in the following, a,b\in X^*, \ c,d\in Y^*).

(1.1) X-inclusion only

w^X=\delta(u\bar {s_1}^X)=a\delta(v\bar{s_2}^X)b, w^Y=\bar{s_1}^Yc\bar{s_2}^Y or w^Y=\bar{s_2}^Yc\bar{s_1}^Y.

(1.2) Y-inclusion only

w^X=\delta(u\bar {s_1}^X)a\delta(v\bar{s_2}^X) or w^X=\delta(v\bar{s_2}^X)a\delta(u\bar {s_1}^X), w^Y=\bar{s_1}^Y=c\bar{s_2}^Yd.

(1.3) X,Y-inclusion

w=\delta(u\bar{s_1})=ac\delta(v\bar{s_2})bd.

(1.4) X,Y-skew-inclusion

w^X=\delta(u\bar{s_1})^X=a\delta(v\bar{s_2}^X)b, w^Y=\bar{s_2}^Y=c\bar{s_1}^Yd.

(2.1) X-intersection only

w^X=\delta(u\bar{s_1})^Xa=b\delta(v\bar{s_2}^X), w^Y=\bar{s_1}^Yc\bar{s_2}^Y or w^Y=\bar{s_2}^Yc\bar{s_1}^Y.

(2.2) Y-intersection only

w^X=\delta(u\bar{s_1})^Xa\delta(v\bar{s_2}^X) or w^X=\delta(u\bar{s_2})^Xa\delta(v\bar{s_1}^X), w^Y=\bar{s_1}^Yc=d\bar{s_2}^Y.

(2.3) X,Y-intersection

w^X=\delta(u\bar{s_1})^Xa=b\delta(v\bar{s_2}^X), w^Y=\bar{s_1}^Yc=d\bar{s_2}^Y.

(2.4) X,Y-skew-intersection

w^X=\delta(u\bar{s_1})^Xa=b\delta(v\bar{s_2}^X), w^Y=c\bar{s_1}^Y=\bar{s_2}^Yd.

(3.1) X-inclusion and Y-intersection

w^X=\delta(u\bar{s_1})^X=a\delta(v\bar{s_2}^X)b, w^Y=\bar{s_1}^Yc=d\bar{s_2}^Y or w^Y=c\bar{s_1}^Y=\bar{s_2}^Yd.

(3.2) X-intersection and Y-inclusion

w^X=\delta(u\bar{s_1})^Xa=b\delta(v\bar{s_2}^X), w^Y=\bar{s_1}^Y=c\bar{s_2}^Yd or w^Y=\bar{s_2}^Y=c\bar{s_1}^Yd.

We only check the cases of (1.1), (1.2) and (1.3). Other cases are similarly checked.

(1.1) X-inclusion only

Suppose that w^X=\delta(u\bar {s_1}^X)=a\delta(v\bar{s_2}^X)b, \ a,b\in X^* and \bar {s_1}^Y, \ \bar{s_2}^Y are disjoint. There are two cases to consider: w^Y=\bar{s_1}^Yc\bar{s_2}^Y and w^Y=\bar{s_2}^Yc\bar{s_1}^Y, where c\in Y^*. We will only prove the first case and the second is similar.

If s_1 and s_2 have no composition in k[X]\otimes k\langle Y \rangle, i.e., lcm(\bar{s_1},\bar{s_2})=\bar{s_1}\bar{s_2}, then u=u'\bar{s_2^X}, \ \gamma(ab)v=u'\bar{s_1^X} for some u'\in [X]. By the proof of Theorem 4.5, we have

\begin{aligned} (f,g)_w &= \delta(us_1)c\bar{s_2}^Y-\bar{s_1}^Yca\delta(vs_2)b \\ &\equiv&\delta(us_1\gamma(c\bar{s_2}^Y))-\delta(\gamma(\bar{s_1}^Yc)\gamma(ab)vs_2) \\ &\equiv&\delta(u'\bar{s_2}^Xs_1c\bar{s_2}^Y)-\delta(\bar{s_1}^Ycu'\bar{s_1}^Xs_2) \\ &\equiv&\delta(u's_1c\bar{s_2})-\delta(u'\bar{s_1}cs_2) \\ &\equiv&\delta(u'(s_1-\bar{s_1})cs_2)-\delta(u's_1c(s_2-\bar{s_2})) \\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S',w). \end{aligned}

If s_1 and s_2 have composition of external (the elements of S have no composition of inclusion because S is minimal and s_1 and s_2 have no composition of overlap because s_1^Y and s_2^Y are disjoint ) in k[X]\otimes k\langle Y \rangle, i.e., C_3(s_1,s_2,c)_{w'}=\frac{L}{\bar{s_1}^X}s_1\gamma(c\bar{s_2}^Y)-\frac{L}{\bar{s_2}^X}\gamma(\bar{s_1}^Yc)s_2 =t_2s_1\gamma(c\bar{s_2}^Y)-t_1\gamma(\bar{s_1}^Yc)s_2 where gcd(\bar{s_1}^X,\bar{s_2}^X)=t\neq1,\bar{s_1}^X=tt_1,\bar{s_2}^X=tt_2 and L=tt_1t_2, \ w'=L\gamma(\bar{s_1}^Yc\bar{s_2}^Y), then w' is a subword of \gamma(w). Therefore, we have w=\delta(mw') and u=mt_2,\gamma(ab)v=mt_1 since ut_1=\gamma(ab)vt_2 and gcd(t_1,t_2)=1. Then

\begin{aligned} (f,g)_w &= \delta(us_1)c\bar{s_2}^Y-\bar{s_1}^Yca\delta(vs_2)b \\ &\equiv&\delta(us_1\gamma(c\bar{s_2}^Y))-\delta(\gamma(\bar{s_1}^Yc)\gamma(ab)vs_2) \\ &\equiv&\delta(mt_2s_1\gamma(c\bar{s_2}^Y))-\delta(mt_1\gamma(\bar{s_1}^Yc)s_2) \\ &\equiv&\delta(mC_3(s_1,s_2,c)_{w'}) \\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S',w) \end{aligned}

since m\overline{C_3(s_1,s_2,c)_{w'}}<mw'=\gamma(w).

(1.2) Y-inclusion only

Suppose that w^Y=\bar{s_1}^Y=c\bar{s_2}^Yd, \ c,d\in Y^* and \delta(u\bar {s_1}^X), \ \delta(v\bar{s_2}^X) are disjoint. Then there are two compositions according to w^X=\delta(u\bar {s_1}^X)a\delta(v\bar{s_2}^X) and w^X=\delta(v\bar{s_2}^X)a\delta(u\bar {s_1}^X) for a\in X^*. We only prove the first.

\begin{aligned} (f,g)_w &= \delta(us_1)a\delta(v\bar{s_2}^X)-\delta(u\bar{s_1}^X)ac\delta(vs_2)d \\ &\equiv&\delta(us_1\gamma(a)v\bar{s_2}^X-u\bar{s_1}^X\gamma(a)v\gamma(c)s_2\gamma(d)) \\ &\equiv&\delta(u\gamma(a)v(s_1\bar{s_2}^X-\bar{s_1}^X\gamma(c)s_2\gamma(d))) \\ &\equiv&\delta(u\gamma(a)vC_1(s_1,s_2,\gamma(c))_{w'}) \\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S',w), \end{aligned}

where w'=\bar{s_1}^X\bar{s_2}^X\bar{s_1}^Y=\bar{s_1}^X\bar{s_2}^X\gamma(c)\bar{s_2}^Y\gamma(d) and \overline{u\gamma(a)vC_1(s_1,s_2,\gamma(c))_{w'}}<u\gamma(a)vw'=\gamma(w).

(1.3) X,Y-inclusion

We may assume that \bar{g} is a subword of \bar{f}, i.e., w=\delta(u\bar{s_1})=ac\delta(v\bar{s_2})bd, a,b\in X^*, c,d\in Y^*. Then u\bar{s_1}^X=\gamma(ab)v\bar{s_2}^X=mL for some m\in[X], u\bar{s_1}^Y=\gamma(c)\bar{s_2}^Y\gamma(d).

\begin{aligned} (f,g)_w &= \delta(us_1)-ac\delta(vs_2)bd \\ &\equiv&\delta(us_1-\gamma(ac)vs_2\gamma(bd)) \\ &\equiv&\delta(m\frac{L}{\bar{s_1}^X}s_1-m\frac{L}{\bar{s_2}^X}\gamma(c)s_2\gamma(d)) \\ &\equiv&\delta(mC_1(s_1,s_2,\gamma(c))_{w'}) \\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S',w), \end{aligned}

where w'=L\gamma(c)\bar{s_2}^Y\gamma(d) and \overline{mC_1(s_1,s_2,c)_{w'}}<mw'=\gamma(w).

(2) f \wedge h_{ij}

Similar to the proof of Theorem 4.5, they only have compositions of X-intersection. Suppose that \bar{s_1}^X=x_{i_1}\cdots x_{i_r}x_i, \ (i_1\leq i_2\leq\cdots\leq i_r\leq i). Then \bar{f}=\delta(u\bar{s_1})=x_{i_1}vx_i\bar{s_1}^Y for some v\in k\langle X\rangle, \ and \ v=\delta\gamma(v) and w=\delta(u\bar{s_1})x_j\bar{s_1}^Y.

If j\leq i_1, then

\begin{aligned} (f,h_{ij})_w &= \delta(us_1)x_j- x_{i_1}v\bar{s_1}^Y(x_ix_j-x_jx_i)\\ &=\delta(u(s_1-\bar{s_1}))x_j+ x_{i_1}vx_jx_i\bar{s_1}^Y \\ &\equiv& x_j\delta(u(s_1-\bar{s_1}))+x_j x_{i_1}vx_i\bar{s_1}^Y \\ &\equiv& x_j(\delta(u(s_1-\bar{s_1}))+\delta(u\bar{s_1}) ) \\ &\equiv&x_j\delta(us_1)\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S',w). \end{aligned}

If j> i_1, then ux_j\in U(\bar{s_1}) and

\begin{aligned} (f,h_{ij})_w &= \delta(us_1)x_j- x_{i_1}v\bar{s_1}^Y(x_ix_j-x_jx_i)\\ &=\delta(u(s_1-\bar{s_1}))x_j+ x_{i_1}vx_jx_i\bar{s_1}^Y \\ &\equiv& \delta(ux_j(s_1-\bar{s_1}))+\delta( x_{i_1}vx_ix_j\bar{s_1}^Y) \\ &\equiv& \delta(ux_j(s_1-\bar{s_1}))+\delta(ux_j\bar{s_1}) \\ &\equiv&\delta(ux_js_1)\\ &\equiv&0 \ \ \ \ \ \ \ mod(S',w). \end{aligned}

This completes the proof. \square

Uses Theorem 4.5

Source and licence

The text on this page is from arXiv:0804.2115v2 by L. A. Bokut, Yuqun Chen and Yongshan Chen, under the licence CC BY 4.0. The corpus made these changes: it read the items out of the LaTeX source, it expanded the macros of the paper, it put each proof after its statement, and it converted the text to HTML. The formulas are the TeX of the paper, and KaTeX renders them. A formula or a reference can look different from the PDF. The page is published under CC BY 4.0.

The record of each item is in analysis/objects/0804/0804.2115.jsonl.