prev

next

out of 17

View

0Download

0

Embed Size (px)

Semigroup Forum (2018) 96:316–332 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00233-017-9878-1

RESEARCH ARTICLE

Algebraic properties of Zappa–Szép products of semigroups and monoids

Rida-e Zenab1

Received: 14 May 2016 / Accepted: 5 May 2017 / Published online: 23 May 2017 © The Author(s) 2017. This article is an open access publication

Abstract Direct, semidirect and Zappa–Szép products provide tools to decompose algebraic structures, with each being a natural generalisation of its predecessor. In this paper we examine Zappa–Szép products of monoids and semigroups and investigate generalised Greens relationsR∗, L∗, ˜RE and ˜LE for these Zappa–Szép products.We consider a left restriction semigroup S with semilattice of projections E and define left and right actions of S on E and E on S, respectively, to form the Zappa–Szép product E �� S. We further investigate properties of E �� S and show that S is a retract of E �� S. We also find a subset T of E �� S which is left restriction.

Keywords Left restriction semigroups · Generalised Green’s relations · Semidirect products · Zappa–Szép products

1 Introduction

Semidirect products and their generalisation Zappa–Szép products have become well known tools to decompose algebraic structures such as semigroups over recent years. The aim of this paper is to study algebraic properties of Zappa–Szép products of semigroups. The Zappa–Szép products of semigroups were properly developed by Kunze [14] who gave applications of Zappa–Szép products to translational hulls, Bruck–Reilly extensions and Rees matrix semigroups. The Zappa–Szép products of semigroups involve actions of two semigroups on each other. These actions are closely

Communicated by Jean-Eric Pin.

B Rida-e Zenab ridaezenab@iba-suk.edu.pk

1 Department of Mathematics, Sukkur Institute of Business Administration, Sukkur, Pakistan

123

http://crossmark.crossref.org/dialog/?doi=10.1007/s00233-017-9878-1&domain=pdf

Algebraic properties of Zappa–Szép products of semigroups. . . 317

related to the actions of Mealy machines (automata with output). For convenience of the reader we begin by recalling the basic definition of Zappa–Szép products of semigroups.

Definition 1.1 Let S and T be semigroups and suppose that we have maps

T × S → S, (t, s) �→ t · s and T × S → T, (t, s) �→ t s

such that for all s, s′ ∈ S, t, t ′ ∈ T :

(ZS1) t t ′ · s = t · (t ′ · s); (ZS3) (t s)s′ = t ss′ ; (ZS2) t · (ss′) = (t · s)(t s · s′); (ZS4) (t t ′)s = t t ′·s t ′s .

From (ZS1) and (ZS3), we see that T acts on S from the left and S acts on T from the right, respectively. Define a binary operation on S × T by

(s, t)(s′, t ′) = (s(t · s′), t s′ t ′).

It is easy to see that this binary operation is associative. Thus S × T becomes a semigroup known as the (external) Zappa–Szép product of S and T and denoted by S �� T .

Note that if one of the above actions is trivial (that is, one semigroup acts by the identity map), then the second action is by morphisms, and we obtain the semidirect product S � T (if S acts trivially) or S � T (if T acts trivially).

If S and T are monoids then the following four axioms are also required to hold:

(ZS5) t · 1S = 1S; (ZS7) 1T · s = s; (ZS6) t1S = t; (ZS8) 1sT = 1T .

From (ZS6) and (ZS7) we see that the actions are monoid actions and (ZS5) and (ZS8) are saying that the identities are fixed under the actions. Then S �� T becomes a monoid with identity (1S, 1T ).

If we replace monoids by groups in the above definition, then S �� T is a group (see [21,25]). It is well known that there is an equivalence between internal and external Zappa–Szép products of groups. A similar correspondence exists for monoids [14], as we now explain. If Z is a monoid with submonoids S and T such that Z = ST and every element z ∈ Z has a unique decomposition as z = st , where s ∈ S and t ∈ T , then we say that Z is the internal Zappa–Szép product of S and T . If Z = S �� T is the external Zappa–Szép product of monoids S and T , then putting

S′ = {(s, 1T ) : s ∈ S} and T ′ = {(1S, t) : t ∈ T }

we have that S′ and T ′ are submonoids of Z , isomorphic to S and T respectively, such that Z is the internal Zappa–Szép product of S′ and T ′. Conversely if Z = ST is the internal Zappa–Szép product of submonoids S and T then uniqueness of

123

318 R. Zenab

decompositions and associativity enable us to show that Z is isomorphic to an external Zappa–Szépproduct S �� T . For semigroups there is no suchuniversal correspondence between internal and external Zappa–Szép products and indeed not even for semidirect products, as remarked by Preston [20]. Prestonwent on to provide, by judicious adding of identities, a way to move between internal and external semidirect products of semigroups, but the correspondence is weaker than that in the case for monoids [20]. A similar correspondence in the case of Zappa–Szép products of semigroups is given in the thesis of the author [26].

In Sect. 2 we record the behaviour of the generalised Green’s relations on the Zappa–Szép products of semigroups and monoids. Green’s relationsR, L,H, D and J are well known equivalence relations that characterise the elements of a semigroup in terms of one and two-sided principal ideals they generate. The reader is referred to [12] for further details concerning Green’s relations. We explain how generalised Green’s relations may be used to characterise elements of non-regular semigroups.

The relationR∗ (L∗) on a semigroup S is defined by the rule that for any s, t ∈ S, s R∗ t (s L∗ t) if and only if for all u, v ∈ S1 (the extension of S by the addition of an identity element)

us = vs if and only if ut = vt (su = sv if and only if tu = tv). We note that R∗ and L∗ are equivalence relations. Also it is clear that R∗ is a left congruence and L∗ is a right congruence. We observe that an idempotent e of S acts as a left identity for its R∗-class and a right identity for its L∗-class. Also note that R ⊆ R∗ and L ⊆ L∗. If S is regular thenR = R∗ and L = L∗. A useful observation is that unlike Green’s relations, the relations R∗ and L∗ need not commute.

Nowwe turn our attention to the relations that play an important role to define a left (right, two-sided) restriction semigroup. Let S be a semigroup and let E be a subset of E(S), where E(S) denotes the set of idempotents of S. The relation ˜RE on S is defined as for any s, t ∈ S, s ˜RE t if and only if for all e ∈ E ,

es = s if and only if et = t, that is, s and t have same set of left identities in E . Dually, s ˜LE t if and only s and t have same set of right identities in E .

Certainly ˜RE and ˜LE are equivalence relations, however, unlike the case forR, L, R∗ and L∗, it is not true that ˜RE and ˜LE are respectively left and right compatible.

We note that any e ∈ E is a left (right) identity for its ˜RE -class (˜LE -class). This is because, if s ∈ S and s ˜RE e, then since e ∈ E ,

ee = e ⇒ es = s. In fact we can say more about it as we see in the following lemma.

Lemma 1.2 [15] Let S be a semigroup and E ⊆ E(S). If s ∈ S and e ∈ E, then s ˜RE e (s ˜LE e) if and only if es = s (se = s) and for all f ∈ E,

f s = s ⇒ f e = e (s f = s ⇒ e f = e).

123

Algebraic properties of Zappa–Szép products of semigroups. . . 319

It is easy to see that R ⊆ R∗ ⊆ ˜RE and L ⊆ L∗ ⊆ ˜LE . If S is regular and E = E(S), then the foregoing inclusions are replaced by equalities. More generally, if e, f ∈ E then e ˜RE f if and only if eR f and e ˜LE f if and only if eL f . In general, however, the inclusions are strict.

We denote idempotents in the ˜RE -class and ˜LE -class of an element s by s+ and s∗, respectively. Note that s+ and s∗ are unique if E is a semilattice. We note that for any distinguished idempotents s+ and s∗ in ˜RE -class and ˜LE -class of s respectively, we have that

s+s = s and ss∗ = s.

In Sect. 3 we consider the Zappa–Szép product of a left restriction semigroup and a semilattice. Restriction semigroups and their one-sided versions have been developed from various points of view and under different names since the 1960s. Left restriction semigroups appeared in their own right for the first time in the work of Trokhimenko [24]. They were studied as type SL2 γ -semigroups in early 1980s by Batbedat and Fountain [1,2]. Lawson studied (left) restriction semigroups as the idempotent con- nected Ehresmann semigroups by drawing connection between semigroup theory and category theory [15]. In the last decade they were studied by Jackson and Stokes [13] in the guise of (left) twisted C-semigroups motivated by consideration of closure operators, and by Manes [16] as guarded semigroups which arose from the restriction categories of Cockett and Lack [4].

In recent years, an analogous theory to that of structure theory of inverse semigroups has been developed in the broader setting of restriction semigroups. One of the funda- mental results in the structure theory of semigroups is that every inverse semigroup is an idempotent separating homomorphic image of a ‘proper’ inverse semigroupwhere a proper inverse semigroup is isomorphic to a so called ‘P-semigroup’ and embeds into a semidirect product of a semilattice by a group [17–19]. For (left) restriction semi- groups, many authors have p