DISTRIBUTIVE LATTICES

Similar documents
Assignment # 4 Selected Solutions

Basic Combinatorics. Math 40210, Section 01 Fall Homework 4 Solutions

PROBLEM SET 1 SOLUTIONS MAS341: GRAPH THEORY 1. QUESTION 1

Compact Sets. James K. Peterson. September 15, Department of Biological Sciences and Department of Mathematical Sciences Clemson University

K 4,4 e Has No Finite Planar Cover

Shannon Switching Game

2. CONNECTIVITY Connectivity

Synthetic Geometry. 1.1 Foundations 1.2 The axioms of projective geometry

1. The following graph is not Eulerian. Make it into an Eulerian graph by adding as few edges as possible.

AXIOMS FOR THE INTEGERS

MATH20902: Discrete Maths, Solutions to Problem Set 1. These solutions, as well as the corresponding problems, are available at

Two trees which are self-intersecting when drawn simultaneously

Lemma. Let G be a graph and e an edge of G. Then e is a bridge of G if and only if e does not lie in any cycle of G.

Graph theory - solutions to problem set 1

Triangle Congruence Packet #3

The Six Color Theorem

Graph Theory Questions from Past Papers

Not Conway s 99-Graph Problem

Matching Algorithms. Proof. If a bipartite graph has a perfect matching, then it is easy to see that the right hand side is a necessary condition.

Semantics via Syntax. f (4) = if define f (x) =2 x + 55.

2017 SOLUTIONS (PRELIMINARY VERSION)

5. THE ISOPERIMETRIC PROBLEM

Discrete Mathematics I So Practice Sheet Solutions 1

Testing Isomorphism of Strongly Regular Graphs

Graphs That Are Randomly Traceable from a Vertex

8 Matroid Intersection

/633 Introduction to Algorithms Lecturer: Michael Dinitz Topic: Approximation algorithms Date: 11/27/18

Math236 Discrete Maths with Applications

Algebra of Sets (Mathematics & Logic A)

SYNERGY INSTITUTE OF ENGINEERING & TECHNOLOGY,DHENKANAL LECTURE NOTES ON DIGITAL ELECTRONICS CIRCUIT(SUBJECT CODE:PCEC4202)

Matching and Planarity

Theorem 3.1 (Berge) A matching M in G is maximum if and only if there is no M- augmenting path.

Example of a Demonstration that a Problem is NP-Complete by reduction from CNF-SAT

Two Characterizations of Hypercubes

Answers to specimen paper questions. Most of the answers below go into rather more detail than is really needed. Please let me know of any mistakes.

Lecture 19 Thursday, March 29. Examples of isomorphic, and non-isomorphic graphs will be given in class.

The statement implies that any three intersection points of two distinct planes lie on a line.

QED Q: Why is it called the triangle inequality? A: Analogue with euclidean distance in the plane: picture Defn: Minimum Distance of a code C:

Solution : a) C(18, 1)C(325, 1) = 5850 b) C(18, 1) + C(325, 1) = 343

Solutions to In-Class Problems Week 4, Fri

INTRODUCTION Joymon Joseph P. Neighbours in the lattice of topologies Thesis. Department of Mathematics, University of Calicut, 2003

Definition. Given a (v,k,λ)- BIBD, (X,B), a set of disjoint blocks of B which partition X is called a parallel class.

Suggested problems - solutions

Ramsey s Theorem on Graphs

IT 201 Digital System Design Module II Notes

Introduction to Boolean Algebra

W4231: Analysis of Algorithms

γ(ɛ) (a, b) (a, d) (d, a) (a, b) (c, d) (d, d) (e, e) (e, a) (e, e) (a) Draw a picture of G.

MAT 3271: Selected Solutions to the Assignment 6

Advanced Methods in Algorithms HW 5

Math 485, Graph Theory: Homework #3

by conservation of flow, hence the cancelation. Similarly, we have

Graphs and networks Mixed exercise

Introduction to Boolean Algebra

Extremal Graph Theory: Turán s Theorem

Menu. Algebraic Simplification - Boolean Algebra EEL3701 EEL3701. MSOP, MPOS, Simplification

5. Lecture notes on matroid intersection

The Satisfiability Problem [HMU06,Chp.10b] Satisfiability (SAT) Problem Cook s Theorem: An NP-Complete Problem Restricted SAT: CSAT, k-sat, 3SAT

An Investigation of the Planarity Condition of Grötzsch s Theorem

K 4 C 5. Figure 4.5: Some well known family of graphs

PACKING DIGRAPHS WITH DIRECTED CLOSED TRAILS

The University of Sydney MATH2969/2069. Graph Theory Tutorial 2 (Week 9) 2008

Treewidth and graph minors

Pentagons vs. triangles

Discharging and reducible configurations

Lecture 2 September 3

Number Theory and Graph Theory

Module 11. Directed Graphs. Contents

Betweenness and the Crossbar Theorem. Lemma: Let A, B, and C be distinct points. If A*B*C, then neither A*C*B nor B*A*C.

Partitioning Complete Multipartite Graphs by Monochromatic Trees

1 Definition of Reduction

A NOTE ON INCOMPLETE REGULAR TOURNAMENTS WITH HANDICAP TWO OF ORDER n 8 (mod 16) Dalibor Froncek

14 More Graphs: Euler Tours and Hamilton Cycles

Normal Forms for CFG s. Eliminating Useless Variables Removing Epsilon Removing Unit Productions Chomsky Normal Form

MATH 682 Notes Combinatorics and Graph Theory II

Chapter 3. Set Theory. 3.1 What is a Set?

6. Lecture notes on matroid intersection

The Filter Space of a Lattice: Its Role in General Topology B. Banaschewski

Graph Theory. Chapter 4.

Turing Machine Languages

Pebble Sets in Convex Polygons

1. Relations 2. Equivalence relations 3. Modular arithmetics. ! Think of relations as directed graphs! xry means there in an edge x!

Lecture 6: Faces, Facets

Math 443/543 Graph Theory Notes 11: Graph minors and Kuratowski s Theorem

EXTREME POINTS AND AFFINE EQUIVALENCE

COT 3100 Spring 2010 Midterm 2

Math 443/543 Graph Theory Notes 5: Planar graphs and coloring

Kuratowski Notes , Fall 2005, Prof. Peter Shor Revised Fall 2007

Lecture 6: Graph Properties

WALL, NICOLE TURPIN, M.A. On the Reconstruction Conjecture. (2008) Directed by Dr. Paul Duvall. 56 pp.

Jade Yu Cheng ICS 311 Homework 7 Sep 18, 2008

A GRAPH FROM THE VIEWPOINT OF ALGEBRAIC TOPOLOGY

MAT 145: PROBLEM SET 6

(d) If the moon shares nothing and the sun does not share our works, then the earth is alive with creeping men.

Graph Connectivity G G G

P Is Not Equal to NP. ScholarlyCommons. University of Pennsylvania. Jon Freeman University of Pennsylvania. October 1989

EDGE MAXIMAL GRAPHS CONTAINING NO SPECIFIC WHEELS. Jordan Journal of Mathematics and Statistics (JJMS) 8(2), 2015, pp I.

REPRESENTATION OF DISTRIBUTIVE LATTICES BY MEANS OF ORDERED STONE SPACES

CHAPTER 2. Graphs. 1. Introduction to Graphs and Graph Isomorphism

Bulgarian Math Olympiads with a Challenge Twist

Transcription:

DISTRIBUTIVE LATTICES FACT 1: For any lattice <A, >: 1 and 2 and 3 and 4 hold in <A, >: The distributive inequalities: 1. for every a,b,c A: (a b) (a c) a (b c) 2. for every a,b,c A: a (b c) (a b) (a c) 3. for every a,b,c A: (a b) (b c) (a c) (a b) (b c) (a c) The modular inequality: 4. for every a,b,c A: (a b) (a c) a (b (a c)) FACT 2: For any lattice <A, >: 5 holds in <A, > iff 6 holds in <A, > iff 7 holds in <A, >: 5. for every a,b,c A: a (b c) = (a b) (a c) 6. for every a,b,c A: a (b c) = (a b) (a c) 7. for every a,b,c A: a (b c) b (a c). A lattice <A, > is distributive iff 5. holds. FACT 3: For any lattice <A, >: 8 holds in <A, > iff 9 holds in <A, >: 8. for every a,b,c A:(a b) (a c) = a (b (a c)) 9. for every a,b,c A: if a b then a (b c) = b (a c) A lattice <A, > is modular iff 8. holds. FACT 4: Every distributive lattice is modular. Namely, let <A, > be distributive and let a,b,c A and let a b. a (b c) = (a b) (a c) [by distributivity] = b (a c) [since a b =b]. The pentagon: The diamond: o 1 o 1 o z o y x o o y o z o x o 0 o 0

THEOREM 5: A lattice is modular iff the pentagon cannot be embedded in it. PROOF: 1. The pentagon is not modular. x y x ( y z) = x y (x z) = y The class of modular lattices is defined by identity 8, hence it is closed under sublattices: every sublattice of a modular lattice is itself a modular lattice. If the pentagon can be embedded in a lattice, then that lattice has a non-modular sublattice, hence it is not modular. 2. Let <A, > be a non-modular lattice. Let a,b,c A, and a b and let a (b c) b (a c). We first show: a < b, (c a), (a c), (c b), (b c) a < b a b. If a = b, then a (b c) = a (a c) = a and b (a c) = a (a c) = a. Hence a (b c) = b (a c), contradicting the assumption. Hence a b. Hence a < b. (a c) If a c, then a c = c, hence b (a c) = b c. Since a b and a c, a b c. Then a (b c) = b c. Hence b (a c) = a (b c), contradicting the assumption. Hence (a c). (c a) If c a, then c b, hence b c = c, hence a (b c) = a c = a. Similarly, b (a c) = b a = a. Then b (a c) = a (b c), contradicting the assumption. Hence (c a). (b c) If b c, then b c = b. Then a (b c) = b. Also a c = c, hence b (a c) = b. Then b (a c) = a (b c), contradicting the assumption. Hence (b a).

(c b) If c b, then b c = c, hence a (b c) = a c. Since a b and c b, a c b. Hence b (a c) = (a c). Then b (a c) = a (b c), contradicting the assumption. Hence (c b). Now let: 1' = a c z = c y = b (a c) x = a (b c) 0' = b c What we are going to prove is: 0' < x < y < 1' 0' < z < 1' (x z), (z x), (y z), (z y) x z = y z = 0' x z = y z = 1' 0' < x b c a (b c) If b c = a (b c), then a b c, and hence a c. But (a c). Hence b c a (b c). Hence 0' < x. x < y (2.) under FACT 1, tells us that a (b c) (a b) (a c). Since a < b, a b = b, Hence we know that: a (b c) b (a c). By the assumption, it follows that: a (b c) < b (a c). Hence x < y. y < 1' b (a c) a c If b (a c) = a c, then a c b, and hence c b. But (c b). Hence b (a c) a c. Hence y < 1'.

0 < z b c c If b c = c, c b. But (c b). Hence b c c. Hence 0' < z. z < 1' c a c If c = a c, then a c. But (a c). Hence c a c. Hence z < 1'. z y = 0' z y = c (b (a c)) = (c (a c)) b = b c = 0' (z y), (y z) If z y, then z y = z. Since z y = 0', then z = 0'. But 0' < z. Hence (z y). Similarly (y z). z x = 1' z x = c (a (b c)) = (c (b c)) a = a c = 1' (z x), (x z) If z x, then z x = x. Since z x = 1', then z = 1'. But z < 1' Hence (z x). Similarly, (x z). z x = 0' z y = 0' and 0' x, hence z y x. z y z, hence z y z x. x y, hence z x y. z x z, hence z x z y. Hence z x = z y, hence z x = 0'. z y = 1' z x = 1' and y 1', hence y z x. z z x, hence z y z x. x y, hence x z y. z z y, hence z x z y. Hence z y = z x, hence z y = 1'.

What we have shown now is that {0',x,y,z,1'} A is closed under join and meet. Hence <{0',x,y,z,1'}, {0',x,y,z,1'}> is a sublattice of <A, >. But, of course, this sublattice of <A, > is isomorphic to the pentagon, hence the pentagon can be embedded in <A, >.

THE STORY IN PICTURES For the non-modular lattice, the story is simple. Let <A, > be a lattice, let a b, and let a (b c) < b (a c). As we have seen, we easily esablish that then a < b, and c is independent of a and of b, and, for that matter, of a (b c) and of b (a c). We get structure A F b a b c a c b (a c) a (b c) b c a c c We need to check now which of the lines in this picture represent 'smaller than' and which represent 'smaller or equal than'. This is done in the following picture: thick and double lines represent 'smaller than', thin lines represent 'smaller or equal than': b y 1' a x 0' z = c Homomorphisms can contract thin lines, but not thick or double lines. This means that the picture really stands for two structures: A 1, where a < x, A 1 = A F, and A 2 where a = x. A 2 is the pentagon. We know then that A contains the sublattice in the picture, [{a,b,c}], which is either A F, which contains the pentagon as a sublattice, or the pentagon itself.

THEOREM 6: A modular lattice is distributive iff the diamond cannot be embedded in it. PROOF: 1. The diamond is modular, but not distributive. That the diamond is modular follows from theorem 5. Obviously the pentagon cannot be embedded in it. The diamond is not distributive: y (x z) = y (y x) (y z) = 1 The class of distributive lattices is defined by identity 5, hence it is closed under sublattices: every sublattice of a distributive lattice is itself a distributive lattice. If the diamond can be embedded in a lattice, then that lattice has a non-distributive sublattice, hence it is not distributive. 2. Let <A, > be a modular, non-distributive lattice. Let a,b,c A and let a (b c) (a b) (a c). By (1.) of FACT 1, this means that: (a b) (a c) < a (b c). This implies that: (a b), (b a), (a c), (c a), (b c), (c b). If a b, then a b = a. Hence (a b) (a c) = a (a c) = a Then a < a (b c), which is impossible. Hence (a b). If b a, then a b = b. Then (a b) (a c) = b (a c). Hence b (a c) < a (b c). But, since <A, > is modular and b a, b (a c) = a (b c). Contradiction. Hence (b a). Obviously, the same argument shows that (a c) and (c a). If b c, then a (b c) = a c. Hence (a b) (a c) < (a c). This is obviously impossible. Hence (b c). Similarly, (c b).

Now let: 1' = (a b) (a c) (b c) x = (a 1') 0' y = (b 1') 0' z = (c 1') 0' 0' = (a b) (a c) (b c) 0 1'. This is (3.) of FACT 1. 0' x, 0' y, 0' z. Obviously. x 1', y 1', z 1'. a 1' 1' and 0 1', hence ((a 1') 0' 1', hence x 1'. Similarly, y 1' and z 1'. What we are going to prove is: 0' < x < 1, 0' < y < 1', 0 < z < 1' (x y), (y x), (x z), (z x), (y z), (z y) x y = x z = y z = 0' x y = x z = y z = 1' We will start by deriving some useful facts. I will call the use of modularity principle 7, modularity. I will call the use of modularity principle 8, with a b, a/b modulation (so note that use of a/b modulation requires that a b). (a 1') = a (b c) 1. (a 1') = 2. a ((a b) (a c) (b c)) = 3. a (b c)

Similarly: (a 0') = a (b c) (a 0') = (a b) (a c) 1. (a 0') = 2. a ((a b) (a c) (b c)) = 3. a (((a b) (b c)) (a c)) = [by modularity] 4. (a ((a b) (b c))) (a c) = 5. ((a ((b c) (a b))) (a c) = [by modularity] 6. ((a (b c)) (a b)) (a c) = 7. (a b c) (a b) (a c).= [since a b c a b] 8. (a b) (a c) Similarly: (a 1') = (a b) (a c) (a x) = (a 1') 1. (a x) = 2. (a ((a 1') 0') = 3. (a (0' (a 1'))) = [by modularity] 4. (a 0') (a 1') = [because, by (1) of FACT 1, (a 0') (a 1')] 5. (a 1'). Now we go through the list of things to prove. x y = 0' 1. x y = 2. ((a 1') 0') ((b 1') 0') 2. ((a 1') 0') ((b 1') 0') = [by 0/(b 1') 0' modulation] 3. ((a 1') ((b 1') 0')) 0' 3. ((a 1') ((b 1') 0')) 0' = [by 0'/1' modulation] 4. ((a 1') ((b 0') 1))) 0' = 5. (a 1' 1 (b 0')) 0' = 6. ((a 1') (b 0')) 0' a 1' = a (b c) b 0' = b (a c)

So, 6. ((a 1') (b 0')) 0' = 7. ((a (b c)) (b (a c))) 0' = 8. ((b c) (a (b (a c)))) 0' = [modularity] 9. ((b c) ((a b) (a c))) 0' By (1) of FACT 1: ((a b) (a c)) (b c), Hence: (b c) ((a b) (a c)) = (a b) (a c), and hence: 9. ((b c) ((a b) (a c))) 0' = 10. ((a b) (a c)) 0' = 11. 0' So, x y = 0'. Similarly, x z = 0' and y z = 0'. x y = 1' 1. x y = 2. ((a 1') 0') ((b 1') 0') = [by twice 0'/1' modulation] 3. ((a 0') 1') ((b 0') 1') 3. ((a 0') 1') ((b 0') 1') = [by (b 0') 1'/1' modulation] 4. ((a 0') ((b 0') 1')) 1' 4. ((a 0') ((b 0') 1')) 1' = [by 0'/1' modulation] 5. ((a 0') ((b 1') 0')) 1' = 6. ((a 0') (b 1')) 1' a 0' = a (b c) b 1' = b (a c) So, 6. ((a 0') (b 1')) 1' = 7. ((a (b c)) (b (a c))) 1' = 8. ((b c) (a (b (a c)))) 1' = [with a/a c modulation] 9. ((b c) ((a c) (a b))) 1' By (2) of FACT 1, (b c) ((a b) (a c)) Hence: (b c) ((a b) (a c)) = (a b) (a c), and hence:

9. ((b c) ((a c) (a b))) 1' = 10. ((a b) (a c)) 1' = 11. 1'. So, x y = 1'. Similarly, x z = 1' and y z = 1'. We know that: 0' x 1', 0 y 1, 0 z 1'. 0' < 1' (a b) (a c) < a (b c), by assumption. (a b) (a c) = (a 0') (a (b c) = (a 1') Hence (a 0') < (a 1'). Hence 0' 1. Since 0' 1': 0' < 1'. 0' < x (a x) = (a 1') If x = 0', then (a x) = (a 0'). Hence (a 0') = (a 1'). But (a 0') < (a 1'). Hence x 0. Since 0' x, 0' < x. 0' < y x y = 1'. If y = 0', then x y = x 0', hence x 0' = 1, hence x = 1'. Since x z = 0', then 1' z = 0', hence z = 0'. But then y z = 0' 0' = 0'. But y z = 1' and 0' < 1'. Hence y 0'. Since 0' y, 0' < y. Similarly, 0' < z. x < 1' x y = 0' If x = 1', then, x y = 1' y, hence 1' y = 0', hence y = 0'. But 0' < y. Hence x 1. Since x 1', x < 1'.

Similarly, y < 1', z < 1'. (x y) x y = 0'. If x y, then x y = x, hence x = 0. But 0 < x, hence (x y). Similarly, (y x), (x z), (z x), (y z), (z y) What we have shown now is that {0',x,y,z,1'} A is closed under join and meet. Hence <{0',x,y,z,1'}, {0',x,y,z,1'}> is a sublattice of <A, >. But, of course, this sublattice of <A, > is isomorphic to the diamond, hence the diamond can be embedded in <A, >. CORROLLARY 7: A lattice is distributive iff the pentagon and the diamond cannot be embedded in it.

THE STORY IN PICTURES The modular, non-distributrive case is, not surprisingly, more difficult. Here we have a modular lattice <A, > with three independent elements a,b,c, such that (a b) (b c) < a (b c) The partial order below represents the obvious information you can extract from this: a b c a b a c b c a 1' b 1' c 1' (a b) (a c) (b c) = 1' a b c a 1'= a (b c) (a b) (a c) (b c) = 0' a 0' = (a b) (a c) c 0' b 0' a b b c a c a b c First we add the join of a (b c) and 0', which is x, and the join of x and a, which is a 0'.

a b c a 1' b 1' c 1' 1' a a 0' x b c a 1' 0' a 0' c 0' b 0' a b c Note what we have done: We have added a 0' such that a < a 0' < a 1' We have added a 1' such that a 0' < a 1' < a We have added x such that 0' < x < 1' (In the picture, we pulled the line from 0' to 1' to the left to run through x.) The idea, now, about modularity, is that similar joins and meets relative to b, (b 0') and (b 1'), and relative to c, (c 0') and (c 1') are added in exactly the same way. First, we add c 0' such that c < c 0' < c 1.' And we add c 1' such that c 0' < c 1' < c And we add z such that 0' < z < 1' And, since a and c are independent, x and z are too:

a b c a 1' b 1' c 1' 1' a 0' a x z a 1' 0' c 0' b c 1' c a 0' c 0' b 0' a b c In the next step, we do the same for b: we add b 0' such that b < b 0' < b 1.' we add b 1' such that b 0' < b 1' < b And we add y such that 0' < y < 1' And, since a and c and b are independent, x and y and z are too:

a b c a 1' b 1' c 1' 1' b 0' c 0' a 0' y b c a x z a 1' 0' b 1' c 1' a 0' c 0' b 0' a b c The structure we have derived, we call A F. A F is a modular lattice. As before, with the pentagon, we need to check now, which lines in the diagram here represent 'smaller than' and which represent 'smaller or equal than'. This is given in the following picture, which is a picture of modular sublattice of A [{a,b,c}].:

a b c 1' a y b c z x 0' a b c Again, thick lines or double lines cannot contract under homorphism, but thin lines can. So we can contract a to a 0', or to a 1', or to x, and similarly for b and for c. This means that the picture really stands for 64 structures, the maximal one of which is A F, and the minimal one of which, in which a =x and b = y and c = z, is the diamond. As can clearly be seen in the picture, the lines of the diamond in the middle cannot contract. Hence each of these 64 structures has the diamond as a substructure. Thus sublattice [{a,b,c}] of A has the diamond as a substructure, hence A has the diamond as a substructure.

The free modular lattice with three generators. a b c 1' a y b c z x 0' a b c How do you turn this into a distributive lattice? By contraction, of course. FACT: take any two points u and v inside one of these encircled areas, such that u and v are in the same encircled area. If you contract u and v (i.e. you set: u = v), then each of the encircled areas contracts into a point. Thus, a 1 collapses into a 0, a 0 into a 1, the same for b and for c, and the whole diamond collapses into a single point. The resulting structure no longer contains the diamond, and is a distributive lattice. If you don't contract any of the other points, you get the free distributive lattice with three generators:

The free distributive lattice on three generators: a b c a u b c ' a b c In this picture, the former diamond has contracted into point u. Obviously, the free distributive lattice is not complemented: in fact, only 0 and 1 have a complement. Now we are interested in turning this, minimally, into a Boolean lattice with generators a, b, c. This means that we're only interested in contractions that contract a,b,c into independent elements. It is simple to see that there are exactly two ways of doing that: a = a u, b = b u, c = c u, u = 0 a = a u, b = b u, c = c u, u = 1 a b c a b c a b c a u b c a b c = u ' a b c

The result is, of course, the free Boolean lattice with three generators (i.e. with three atoms).