The Metric Dimension of the Zero-Divisor Graph of a Matrix Semiring

Suppose |I|=n-1. Then any matrix A \in T_{I,J} has only one non-zero row. In this row, the zero elements are exactly determined by the set J, so T_{I,J} has exactly one element. Similary, we reason in the case |J|=n-1.

Notice that t_{I,J} is exactly equal to the number of matrices of size (n-|I|) \times (n - |J|) with entries in \mathcal{B} that have no zero row or column. So, let us examine the set of (n-|I|) \times (n - |J|) matrices with elements in \mathcal{B}. Obviously, there are exactly (2^{n-|J|}-1)^{n-|I|} matrices that have all rows nonzero, but naturally some of them may have a few zero columns. Suppose therefore that a matrix has at least k zero columns for some k \in N_{n-|J|}. We have n-|J| \choose k possible ways to choose these k columns. But if we disregard the zero columns, there are 2^{n-|J|-k}-1 possible ways to choose the remaining elements in every (nonzero) row. Since there are n-|I| rows, this yields (2^{n-|J|-k}-1)^{n-|I|} matrices. Now, if we sum this over all possible k, we will have counted some matrices (with more than k zero columns) multiple times, but the inclusion exclusion principle then yields that there are exactly \sum_{k=0}^{n-|J|}{{n-|J| \choose k}(-1)^k(2^{n-|J|-k}-1)^{n-|I|}} matrices of size (n-|I|) \times (n - |J|) with entries in \mathcal{B} that have no zero rows or columns.

Choose A \in T_{I,J} and observe that AB=0 for B \in M_n(\mathcal{B}) if and only if B \in T_{K, L} for some K, L \subseteq N_n with N_n \setminus J \subseteq K, and CA=0 for C \in M_n(\mathcal{B}) if and only if C \in T_{K,L} for some K, L \subseteq N_n with N_n \setminus I \subseteq L. Thus, all matrices in T_{I,J} have the same neighbours in \Gamma(M_n(\mathcal{B})).

Observe firstly that by the construction of R, for any set I \subseteq N_n with |I|=n-1, we have T_{\emptyset,I} \subset R if and only if T_{I, \emptyset} \subset R if and only if I=N_{n-1}. This implies that there are 2(n-1) sets of the form T_{\emptyset,I} and T_{\emptyset,I} with |I|=n-1 that are subsets of W_R. Note that in this case |T_{\emptyset,I}|=|T_{\emptyset,I}|=1 by Lemma 3.2, hence we have the first 2(n-1) elements in W_R. Notice next that R contains exactly one element from T_{I,J} for every \emptyset \subseteq I,J \subsetneq N_n with I \cup J \neq \emptyset and |I|, |J| \leq n-2 and that there are exactly {n \choose i}{n \choose j} different possible pairs of sets I and J in N_n with |I|=i and |J|=j. Lemma 3.3 now concludes this proof.

Denote I_A=\{i\} and J_A=\{j\}. Since B is a zero-divisor, B \in T_{I_B,J_B} for some I_B, J_B \subseteq N_n and there exists k \in N_n such that k \in I_B or k \in J_B. If k \in I_B then E_{jk}B=AE_{jk}=0, so d(A,B) \leq 2. Similarly, if k \in J_B then BE_{ki}=E_{ki}A=0 and again d(A,B) \leq 2.

Obviously it suffices to prove one of the two assertions, the other one can be done with a simetrical proof. Suppose therefore that A \in T_{I_A,\emptyset} and B \in T_{I_B,\emptyset} for some sets I_A, I_B \subsetneq N_n with I_A \cap I_B = \emptyset. By [dolzan, Theorem 1], {\rm diam}(\Gamma(M_n(\mathcal{B}))) \leq 3. Since AB \neq 0 and BA \neq 0, we only have to prove that d(A,B) \neq 2. Note that AC, BC \neq 0 for every 0 \neq C \in M_n(\mathcal{B}). So, suppose there exists C \in Z(M_n(\mathcal{B})) such that CA=CB=0. But CA=0 implies C \in T_{I_C, J_C} for some I_C, J_C \subseteq N_n with N_n \setminus I_A \subseteq J_C. Similarly, CB=0 implies N_n \setminus I_B \subseteq J_C. But I_A \cap I_B = \emptyset, resulting in J_C = N_n, so C=0, a contradiction.

Observe firstly that Z(M_n(\mathcal{B})) \setminus \{0\} = \bigcup\limits_{\emptyset \subseteq I,J \subsetneq N_n \& I \cup J \neq \emptyset}{T_{I,J}}, so Z(M_n(\mathcal{B})) \setminus \{0\} = W_R \cup R. Now, choose arbitrary A, B \in R. We have to prove that A and B have different representations with respect to W_R. Denote by I_A, J_A and I_B, J_B the sets such that A \in T_{I_A,J_A} and B \in T_{I_B,J_B}. By the definition of R, we have I_A \neq I_B or J_A \neq J_B. Suppose without loss of generality that I_A \neq I_B. Now, we have |I_A| \geq |I_B| or |I_B| \geq |I_A|, and again without loss of generality we can assume that |I_A| \geq |I_B|.

We examine firstly the case that |I_A| \geq 2. We denote J_C=N_n \setminus I_A \neq \emptyset and observe that |J_C | \leq n-2, thus |T_{\emptyset,J_C}| \geq 2. Therefore, by the definition of W_R, there exists a matrix C \in W_R such that C \in T_{\emptyset,J_C}. This implies that CA=0 and since I_A \nsubseteq I_B, we see that CB \neq 0. By definition, C is not a right zero-divisor, so d(A,C)=1 and d(B,C) \geq 2 and therefore A and B have different representations with respect to W_R.

Now, assume that |I_A| \leq 1. Since I_A \neq I_B, I_A \neq \emptyset, so it is left for us to examine the case |I_A| = 1. We have two possibilites, either |I_B|=1 or I_B = \emptyset. Assume first that |I_B|=1. Then I_A \neq \{n\} or I_B \neq \{n\}. We can assume without loss of generality that I_A \neq \{n\}. Let us denote J_C=N_n \setminus I_A and observe that |J_C|=n-1 and J_C \neq N_{n-1}, so by the definition of W_R, there exists a matrix C \in W_R such that C \in T_{\emptyset,J_C}. This implies that CA=0 and CB \neq 0. Since C is not a right zero-divisor, we conclude that d(A,C)=1 and d(B,C) \geq 2, so A and B have different representations with respect to W_R. Finally, assume that I_B = \emptyset. Note that J_B \neq N_n, so choose any k \notin J_B and observe that by the definition of W_R and the fact that n \geq 3 there exists C \in W_R such that C \in T_{\emptyset, \{k\}}. Now, Lemma 3.9 yields d(B,C)=3. Denote by l the only element of I_A and observe that E_{kl}A=CE_{kl}=0, so d(A,C) \leq 2, again concluding that A and B have different representations with respect to W_R.

If n=2, Example 3.1 tells us that {\rm dim_M}(\Gamma(M_2(\mathcal{B})) =2, so the result holds in this case. So, let us from now on assume that n \geq 3.

By Lemma 3.6, we have |W_R|=2(n-1)+\sum\limits_{i,j=0 \& ij \neq 0}^{n-2}{n \choose i}{n \choose j} \left[\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n-j}{(-1)^k{n-j \choose k}\left(2^{n-j-k}-1 \right)^{n-i}}-1\right] and by Theorem 3.10, we have {\rm dim_M}(\Gamma(M_n(\mathcal{B})) \leq |W_R|.

Now, we have to prove that we also have {\rm dim_M}(\Gamma(M_n(\mathcal{B})) \geq |W_R|. So, let W be an arbitrary resolving set for \Gamma(M_n(\mathcal{B})).

Remark 3.7 assures us that there are at least \sum\limits_{i,j=0 \& ij \neq 0}^{n-2}{n \choose i}{n \choose j} \left[\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n-j}{(-1)^k{n-j \choose k}\left(2^{n-j-k}-1 \right)^{n-i}}-1\right] "twin" elements in W (all but perhaps one element from T_{I,J} for every 0 \subseteq I,J \subsetneq N_n with I \cup J \neq \emptyset and |I|,|J| \leq n-2). Now, choose i, k \neq j \in N_n and define I_A=\{i\}, J_A=\{j\}, I_B=\{i\}, J_B=\{k\}. Let us examine two arbitrary matrices A \in T_{I_A,J_A}, B \in T_{I_B,J_B}. If neither of A and B is in W, then Lemma 3.8 implies that the only way for A and B to have different representations according to W is that there exists C \in W such that C is a neighbour of A, but not B, or vice versa. But such C has to be either an element of T_{N_n\setminus\{j\},J_C} or T_{N_n\setminus\{k\},J_C} for some N_n\setminus\{i\} \neq J_C \subsetneq N_n. So, we now have one of the following four possibilites: every element of T_{I_A,J_A} is in W, every element of T_{I_B,J_B} is in W, some element of T_{N_n\setminus \{j\},J_C} is in W, or some element of T_{N_n\setminus \{k\},J_C} is in W. In every case, we see that W has to contain one additional element to the "twin" elements described above. We can reason similarly in case I_A=\{i\}, J_A=\{k\}, I_B=\{j\}, J_B=\{k\} for any i \neq j, k \in N_n, yielding again one of the four options: every element of T_{I_A,J_A} is in W, every element of T_{I_B,J_B} is in W, some element of T_{I_C,N_n\setminus \{i\}} is in W, or some element of T_{I_C,N_n\setminus \{j\}} is in W (for some N_n \setminus \{k\} \neq I_C \subsetneq N_n). We can easily see that in this way, we must have at least 2(n-1) (distinct) additional elements in W (one for any two distinct rows and one for any two distinct columns), thus |W| \geq 2(n-1)+\sum\limits_{i,j=0 \& ij \neq 0}^{n-2}{n \choose i}{n \choose j} \left[\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n-j}{(-1)^k{n-j \choose k}\left(2^{n-j-k}-1 \right)^{n-i}}-1\right], which proves the theorem.

This follows directly from the fact that S is an entire antinegative semiring.

Denote A=\sum_{(i,j) \in \Lambda}{\alpha_{ij}E_{ij}} and B=\sum_{(i,j) \in \Lambda}{\beta_{ij}E_{ij}}. By Lemma 4.2, both A and {\rm patt}(A), as well as B and {\rm patt}(B) are twins in \Gamma(M_n(S)). By definition though, {\rm patt}(A)={\rm patt}(B), so A and B are also twins.

Throughout this proof we shall (by a slight abuse of notation) consider that \mathcal{B} is a proper subsemiring in S. Suppose W is a resolving set for \Gamma(M_n(S)). Lemmas 2.2 and 4.3 imply that for every \Lambda \subseteq N_n \times N_n at most one zero-divisor matrix with its pattern of zero and non-zero entries prescribed by \Lambda is not in W. This yields | Z(M_n(S))| - | Z(M_n(\mathcal{B}))| elements that have to be included in W. If n \geq 3, Remark 3.7, Theorem 3.11 and Lemma 4.2 yield additional {\rm dim_M}(\Gamma(M_n(\mathcal{B}))) - 2(n-1) elements that have to be in W. If n=2, {\rm dim_M}(\Gamma(M_2(\mathcal{B}))) = 2(2-1), so in both cases {\rm dim_M}(\Gamma(M_n(S))) \geq | Z(M_n(S))| - | Z(M_n(\mathcal{B}))|+{\rm dim_M}(\Gamma(M_n(\mathcal{B}))) - 2(n-1).

On the other hand, let W = Z(M_n(S)) \setminus Z(M_n(\mathcal{B})) and if n \geq 3, add to W also the {\rm dim_M}(\Gamma(M_n(\mathcal{B})))- 2(n-1) elements from Remark 3.7. By construction, |W| = | Z(M_n(S))| - | Z(M_n(\mathcal{B}))| + {\rm dim_M}(\Gamma(M_n(\mathcal{B}))) - 2(n-1) for every n \geq 2. Let us prove that W is a resolving set. Choose arbitrary non-zero matrices A \neq B \in Z(M_n(S)). Now, if A and B have the same pattern, one of them is in W by definition. Suppose therefore that A and B have different patterns. Remark 3.7 now ensures that if matrices {\rm patt}(A) and {\rm patt}(B) belong to the same set T_{I,J} for some \emptyset \subseteq I,J \subsetneq N_n, at least one of them is in W. So, let us assume that {\rm patt}(A) \in T_{I_A,J_A} and {\rm patt}(B) \in T_{I_B,J_B}, where I_A \neq I_B or J_A \neq J_B. Without loss of generailty (if necessary, swapping the roles of rows and columns, or matrices A and B respectively), assume that I_A \neq I_B and |I_A| \leq |I_B|. Since |S| \geq 3, at least one zero-divisor matrix with every pattern of its zero and non-zero entries is in W, so we can choose C \in W such that {\rm patt}(C) \in T_{\emptyset, N_n \setminus I_B}. Therefore {\rm patt}(C) is not a right zero-divisor, but {\rm patt}(C){\rm patt}(B)=0, and since I_B \nsubseteq I_A also {\rm patt}(C){\rm patt}(A) \neq 0. Lemma 4.2 now implies that A and B have different representations with respect to W. This proves that {\rm dim_M}(\Gamma(M_n(S))) \leq | Z(M_n(S))| - | Z(M_n(\mathcal{B}))|+{\rm dim_M}(\Gamma(M_n(\mathcal{B})))-2(n-1).

Finally, observe that the zero divisors in M_n(S) are exactly those matrices with at least one zero row or column, so with a similar argument as in the proof of Lemma 3.3, we can prove that | Z(M_n(S))|=|S|^{n^2}-\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}{(-1)^k{n \choose k}\left(|S|^{n-k}-1 \right)^{n}}. This yields that | Z(M_n(S))|-| Z(M_n(\mathcal{B}))|=|S|^{n^2}-2^{n^2}-\sum\limits_{k=0}^{n}{(-1)^k{n \choose k}\left[\left(|S|^{n-k}-1 \right)^{n}-\left(2^{n-k}-1 \right)^{n}\right]}, which proves the assertion.