Monoids, Acts and Categories.

de Gruyter Expositions in Mathematics 29
Editors
. H. Kegel, Albert-Ludwigs-Universitt, Freiburg V. P. Maslov, Academy of Sciences, Moscow W. D. Neumann, Columbia University, New York R.O.Wells, Jr., Rice University, Houston
de Gruyter Expositions in Mathematics

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 The Analytical and Topological Theory of Semigroups, . H. Hofmann, J. D. Lawson, J. S. Pym (Eds.) Combinatorial Homotopy and 4-Dimensional Complexes, H. J. Baues The Stefan Problem, A. M. Meirmanov Finite Soluble Groups, K. Doerk, T. O. Hawkes The Riemann Zeta-Function, A. A. Karatsuba, S. M. Voronin Contact Geometry and Linear Differential Equations, V. E. Nazaikinskii, B. Yu. Sternin V. E. Shatalov,
Infinite Dimensional Lie Superalgebras, Yu. A. Bahturin, A. A. Mikhalev, V. M. Petrogradsky, . V. Zaicev Nilpotent Groups and their Automorphisms, . I. Khukhro Invariant Distances and Metrics in Complex Analysis, M. Jarnicki, P. Pflug The Link Invariants of the Chern-Simons Field Theory, E. Guadagnini Global Affine Differential Geometry of Hypersurfaces, A. -M. Li, U. Simon, G. Zhao Moduli Spaces of Abelian Surfaces: Compactification, Degenerations, and Theta Functions, K. Hulek, C. Kahn, S. H. Weintraub Elliptic Problems in Domains with Piecewise Smooth Boundaries, S. A. Nazarov, B. A. Plamenevsky Subgroup Lattices of Groups, R. Schmidt Orthogonal Decompositions and Integral Lattices, A. I. Kostrikin, P. H. Tiep The Adjunction Theory of Complex Projective Varieties, M. C. Beltrametti, A. J. Sommese The Restricted 3-Body Problem: Plane Periodic Orbits, A. D. Bruno Unitary Representation Theory of Exponential Lie Groups, H. Leptin, J. Ludwig Blow-up in Quasilinear Parabolic Equations, A.A. Samarskii, V.A. Galaktionov, S. P. Kurdyumov, A. P. Mikhailov Semigroups in Algebra, Geometry and Analysis, . H. Hofmann, J. D. Lawson, . B. Vinberg (Eds.) Compact Projective Planes, H. Salzmann, D. Betten, . Grundhfer, . Hhl, R. Lwen, . Stroppel An Introduction to Lorentz Surfaces, . Weinstein Lectures in Real Geometry, Broglia (Ed.) Evolution Equations and Lagrangian Coordinates, A. M. Meirmanov, V. V. Pukhnachov, S. I. Shmarev Character Theory of Finite Groups, B. Huppert Positivity in Lie Theory: Open Problems, J. Hilgert, J. D. Lawson, K. -H. Neeb, . B. Vinberg (Eds.) Algebra in the Stone-Cech Compactification, N. Hindman, D. Strauss Holomorphy and Convexity in Lie Theory, K.-H. Neeb
Monoids, Acts and Categories

With Applications to Wreath Products and Graphs A Handbook for Students and Researchers
by
Mati Kilp Ulrich Knauer Alexander V. Mikhalev
W DE G_
Walter de Gruyter Berlin New York 2000
Authors Mati Kilp Dept. of Mathematics Tartu University 2400 Tartu Estonia Ulrich Knauer Mathematik Ossietzky Universitt Oldenburg 26111 Oldenburg Germany Alexander V. Mikhalev Dept. of Mechanics and Mathematics Moscow State University Moscow 119899, Russia
1991 Mathematics Subject Classification: 18-02, 20M10, 2M30, 20M50 Keywords: monoids, acts, categories, graphs, homological classification, Morita theory, wreath products
Printed o n acid-free paper w h i c h falls within the guidelines o f the A N S I to ensure p e r m a n e n c e and durability.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Monoids, acts, and categories with applications to wreath products and graphs : a handbook for students and researchers / by Mati Kilp, Ulrich Knauer, Alexander Mikhalev. p. cm. - (De Gruyter expositions in mathematics, ISSN 0938-6572 ; 29) ISBN 3 11 015248 7 (alk. paper) 1. Monoids. 2. Algebra, Homological. 3. Categories (Mathematics) I. Knauer, U., 1942II. Mikhalev, . V. (Aleksandr Vasil'evich) III. Title. IV. Series. QA169 K55 1999 512'.55-dc21 99-045793
Die Deutsche Bibliothek Cataloging-in-Publication Data Kilp, Mati: Monoids, acts and categories : with applications to wreath products and graphs ; a handbook for students and researchers / by M. Kilp ; U. Knauer ; . V. Mikhalev. - Berlin ; New York : de Gruyter, 2000 (De Gruyter expositions in mathematics ; 29) ISBN 3-11-015248-7
Copyright 2000 by Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, 10785 Berlin, Germany. All rights reserved, including those of translation into foreign languages. No part of this book may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopy, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publisher. Typesetting using the author's TgX files: I. Zimmermann, Freiburg. Printing: WB-Druck GmbH & Co., Rieden/Allgu. Binding: Lderitz & Bauer-GmbH, Berlin. Cover design: Thomas Bonnie, Hamburg.
Contents
Foreword Introduction I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 II Sets and relations Groupoids, semigroups and monoids Some classes of semigroups Acts over monoids (monoid automata) Decompositions and components Categories Functors
vii xii 1 1 13 24 42 62 78 89 103 103 114 138 149 155 165 175 183 184 195 200 204 205 207 214 218 223 225 233
Constructions 1 Products and coproducts 2 Pullbacks and pushouts 3 Free objects and generators 4 Cofree objects and cogenerators 5 Tensor products 6 Wreath products of monoids and acts 7 The wreath product of a monoid with a small category
. . . .
III Classes of acts 1 Injective acts 2 Divisible acts 3 Principally weakly injective acts 4 fg-weakly injective acts 5 Weakly injective acts 6 Absolutely pure acts 7 Cogenerators and overview 8 Torsion free acts 9 Flatness of acts and related properties 10 Principally weakly flat acts 11 Weakly flat acts
vi 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
Contents Flat acts Acts satisfying Condition () Acts satisfying Condition (E) Equalizer flat acts Pullback flat acts and overview Projective acts Generators Regular acts and overview 238 249 257 262 267 274 291 300 306 307 311 319 322 326 335 339 344 360 367 372 381 385 394 397 398 427 437 455 467 483 517 521
I V Homological classification of monoids 1 Principal weak injectivity 2 On fg-weak injectivity 3 Weak injectivity 4 Absolute purity 5 Injectivity and overview 6 Torsion freeness and principal weak 7 Weak flatness 8 Flatness 9 Condition (P) 10 Strong flatness 11 Projectivity 12 Projective generators 13 Freeness and overview 14 Regularity of acts V Equivalence and Duality 1 Adjoint functors 2 Categories equivalent to A c t S 3 Morita equivalence of monoids 4 Endomorphism monoids of generators 5 On Morita duality
flatness
Bibliography Index of symbols Index
Foreword
About this book

The material of the first part of this book, mainly in Chapters 1 and 2, should provide a selfcontained and relatively broad scenery for (undergraduate and graduate) students working with monoids, acts, (partial) transformations, congruences, and non-abelian categories. At the same time this part of the book gives a background for semigroup theory and automata, formal languages, and other applications of semigroups. Wreath products of monoids, acts and categories are presented at the end of Chapter 2 in Sections 2.6 and 2.7. They may be of interest for readers with applied background and are used as applications and examples in many other places. The second part of the book starting from Chapter 3 is concentrated on results on homological classification of monoids including Morita type theorems on equivalences and dualities and homological properties of monoids. This part of the text requires some advanced knowledge of algebra and, what is more important, a wide interest to discover the relations of monoids and acts with different parts of mathematics and applications. In both parts we show how the concepts developed for acts can be applied to other areas like graphs (which with various classes of their endomorphisms form acts) and after Sections 2.6 and 2.7 to wreath products, which themselves model several other structures like endomorphism monoids of free acts or in the generalized form of Section 2.7 endomorphism monoids of arbitrary acts and cascade decomposition of automata. It is possible to use this book for courses on representation theory of monoids, homological algebra, category theory. As far as we know this is the first monograph on representation theory of monoids and on non-additive homological algebra interpreted as the interplay between monoids and their categories of acts. Contents in brief The first chapter provides the background for the subsequent chapters. Here we deal with basic notions of semigroups and monoids. We collect quite a few results which either will be used later or seem indispensable for an understanding of semigroup theory. We introduce the concept of semigroup and monoid
viii
Foreword
act and give first results and examples. We also start a systematic study of biacts and bihomomorphisms. Finally, in this chapter we give some introduction to categories and functors under the guideline of what will be needed later directly or for explaining special features of act categories compared to other algebraic categories. For a better understanding of various concepts we sometimes include examples of categories which will not be of main interest in this book. The second chapter gives an account of constructions starting from the usual categorical concepts of products and coproducts up to free and cofree objects, generators and cogenerators, and to tensor products, and identifies them in act categories (and sometimes other categories). Then we proceed to wreath products of monoids and acts in Section 2.6 and to various generalizations in Section 2.7. In the third chapter we go into detail with certain classes of acts, i.e. acts which enjoy special properties, thereby taking up the concepts of free and projective, cofree and injective objects, and tensor products introduced earlier mainly under categorical aspects. The logic here is to some extent self-guiding by generalizing or weakening concepts which have already been presented. On the other hand we may always look at module theory which shows striking similarities as well as striking differences. The main guideline, however, is to get prepared for the fourth chapter where we give results on homological classification of monoids. There exists a big amount of such results and we present connected results in tabulated form at several places. It should be noted that all these results are describing internal properties of monoids S by external properties, namely properties of subclasses of the category of S-acts and vice versa. In the final fifth chapter we present Morita theory of monoids, which as well might be considered as the basic homological problem. This is to say, we determine to which extent a monoid is characterized by its act category or subcategories thereof. In other words, how close are two monoids if they have the same act categories up to categorical equivalence (Morita equivalence of monoids) or up to dual categorical equivalence (Morita dual monoids). To be self-contained we start the chapter with some more category theory concerned with adjoint functors and go into details for act categories, thereby using a great deal of the material presented in Chapters 1 to 3. We also charaterize act categories abstractly and study endomorphism monoids of generators. Obviously the authors have had to be selective in their choice of the material. Thus, topics that at the time of writing were of interest to them were included as well as such which had a rather developed theory. Of course we are aware that this way we have excluded a lot of results which are also important and pretty as, for example, radical theory of semigoups and torsion theory.
Foreword
ix
Several open problems are given in the text together with many exercises. At many places we inserted comments where we make historical remarks or refer to other directions and results which are related but have not been included. A detailed list of references is given at the end also including some papers connected with our subjects whose contents are only mentioned in the book or may be not even that. For a better orientation the titles of the occuring subsections are given at the beginning of every section. We made subsections rather small, so that their titles should give a relatively complete and detailed information on the contents of the book. Definitions, lemmas etc. are numbered in every chapter by 2.1. etc. for example; when citing them, at the first place we give the chapter to which it belongs. So 2.1 from Chapter III is cited as 3.2.1. Suggestions how selected parts of this book could be used In Chapter 1, Sections 1.2 and 1.3 contain some basics on semigroups and monoids, Sections 1.4 and 1.5 do the same for acts over monoids. These parts can be used for courses in general algebra and are basic for rest of this book. Sections 1.6, 1.7, 2.1 to 2.5 and 5.1 can be used to study some basics of category theory where act categories serve as important examples. Section 5.2 is a neat application characterizing act categories abstractly. Various parts of Sections 2.1 to 2.5 will be used in the sequel continuously. Assuming some basic knowledge of these concepts it should be possible to use these parts just for references when reading Chapters 3 to 5. Section 2.6 on wreath products will be used only in examples and exercises with the one exception of Theorem 3.17.27. Section 2.7 contains partially new generalizations from 2.6 which are used for the description of the monoid of strong endomorphism of graphs which sometimes appears in examples and exercises. Chapter 3 can be studied in parts. The injectivity branch and the projectivity branch are rather independent of each other. On the other hand injectivity and projectivity can also be studied without the other related weaker concepts. Either approach could be the contents of an introductory course on acts (representations of monoids) possibly combined with corresponding results on homological classification in Chapter 4 or Morita equivalence in Chapter 5. Chapter 4 contains results on homological classification of monoids, that is results of the type: all strongly flat right 5-acts are free if and only if S is a group. We present all combinations of two such properties introduced in Chapter 3 for which results or partial results are known. This chapter can be seen as one basic subject of the book and is parallel to Chapter 5. We recommend to use it for study, it contains many directions for further research, in particular around flatness and also around purity. It can also be used in
Foreword
parts as a basis for advanced courses - the injective branch (Sections 4.1 to 4.5) and the projective branch (Sections 4.6 to 4.13 or parts thereof), the latter possibly enriched with act-regularity (Section 4.14). We have tried to make the various interconnections clear by giving pictures and tables at appropriate places, being aware, however, that an adequate method to become familiar with the subject and to gain a deeper understanding is to construct own tables and schemes according to individually preferable systematics. Chapter 5 needs some parts of Chapter 2, basic knowledge of categories and functors from Chapter 1 (Sections 1.6 and 1.7) and basics on acts and monoids from Chapter 1 (anybody who is familiar with these basics could start reading Chapter 5 only occasionally going back to Chapter 3 about projectives and generators needed in Sections 5.3 and 5.4, or about injectives needed in Section 5.5). So, for example Section 5.3 (with or without Section 5.5) could also be the core of a course for advanced students. Section 5.1 contains facts on adjoint functors which are needed for the rest of Chapter 5. However, they are developed broader than needed later. Here it is also possible to look up results from Section 5.1 whenever they are cited in the other parts of Chapter 5. Section 5.4, although related to various parts of the text, has a somewhat special position, it presents analogues of the Gabriel-Popescu Theorem on full embeddings, now for act categories, and on endomorphism monoids of generators in these categories. Acknowledgements The writing of the manuscript was performed at the Carl von Ossietzky University Oldenburg (Germany), Tartu University (Estonia), and Moscow State University (Russia). As a result of the combination of Estonian, German and Russian languages we have this book in English. Many colleagues helped us to bring this enterprise to fruition. However, without the hospitality of the universities of Oldenburg and Tartu, the Oberwolfach Mathematical Institute and the financial support from Deutscher Akademischer Austauschdienst, Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft, Estonian Science Foundation, Estonian Academy of Sciences, and Volkswagen Foundation the final preparation of the manuscript may have taken another decade. To all these persons and institutions we offer here our sincere gratitude. We gratefully acknowledge contributions to the final draft by Prof. S. Bulman-Fleming, Dr. V. Fleischer, K. Guhl, Prof. H. Herrlich, Dr. V. Laan, Prof. P. Normak, Prof. H.-E. Porst, Prof. . M. Schein, Dr. Helga Oltmanns, and Dr. Elke Wilkeit; with technical problems we received help in various forms by Dr. P. Harmand, Ursula Just, Dr. U. Nummert, and Reet Samel. In advance we thank every reader who would be willing to show us mistakes which we have overseen.
Foreword
xi
Finally we would like to thank Dr. M. Karbe and Prof. O. Kegel for taking this book for de Gruyter Expositions in Mathematics Series and the editorial staff of Walter de Gruyter for their constructive valuable service.
Introduction
The concept of a monoid, that is a semigroup with identity is relatively young. The first, often fragmentary, studies were carried out in the early twentieth century, mainly in connection with the investigation of invertible transformations which played an important role in the development of group theory. As far as we know the term "demigroupe" first appeared in the book "Elements de la theorie des groupes abstraites", Paris 1904, by Monsieur Abbe J. A. de Seguier. In 1905 L. E. Dickson published an article "On semigroups and the general isomorphism between infinite groups" where he cites de Seguier. He defines semigroups explicitly as cancellative, associative structures which in his context naturally appear in a corrected version of a theorem of de Seguier. This event clearly marks a point where it becomes necessary to consider general transformations of a set rather than only permutations. In 1916 O. J. Schmidt introduces the term semigroup in his book "Abstract Group Theory" (in Russian) and means semigroups which are cancellative from both sides and possibly without identity. After that again more than ten years passed before semigroups became a direct object of investigation. In the first papers various different names were used like "group", "kernelgroup", "abstract composition system", "Ubergruppe", " Schief", "abstract transmutation system", "Mischgruppe", cf. [Kna80]. Today we can say that the beginning of the theory of semigroups is marked by A. K. Suskewic [Sus28], D. Rees [Ree40], and P. Dubreil [Dub41], In some respects the theory of semigroups has very close relations with group theory and in some other respects with ring theory. It is quite understandable that the early major contributions to the theory were strongly motivated by comparisons with groups and with rings. In more recent years the subject has developed its own characteristic problems, methods and results. There exist many books on semigroup theory, we mention the works by A. K. Suskewic [SUS37], E. S. Ljapin [LJA60], A. H. Clifford and G. B. Preston [CL/PR61], [CL/PR67], L. Redei [RED63], M. Petrich [PET67], [PET73], [PET77], [PET84], T. Tamara [TAM72], . Yamada [YAM76], J. M. Howie [HOW76], [HOW95], G. Lallement [LAL79], H. Jrgensen, F. Migliorini and J. Szep [JU/MI/SZ91], P. M. Higgins [HIG92], and P. A. Grillet [GRI95]. There exist many more which treat semigroup theory under different aspects as topology by A. B. Paalman-de Miranda [PAA64], . H. Hofman and P. S. Mostert [H0/M066], A. C. Shershin [SHE79], J. H. Carruth, J. A. Hilde-
Introduction
xiii
brandt and R. J. Koch [CA/HI/K083], [CA/HI/K086], universal algebra by J. Almeida [ALM94], lattice theory by L. N. Shevrin and A. J. Ovsyannikov [SH/OV96], order theory by T. S. Blyth and M. F. Janowitz [BL/JA72], formal languages and automata theory by M. A. Arbib [ARB68], A. Ginzburg [GIN69], P. Deussen [DEU71], S. Eilenberg [EIL74], [EIL76], L. Budach and H.-J. Hoehnke [BU/H075], S. Ginsberg [GIN75], J.-E. Pin [PIN86], V. N. Salij [SAL88], J. M. Howie [HOW91], H. J. Shyr [SHY91], or together with other algebraic structures by R. Bruck [BRU58], A. Pultr and V. Trnkova [PU/TR80], M. S. Putcha [PUT88], J. Okninski [OKN91], J. D. P. Meldrum [MEL95] and on the rather different approach from functional analysis by B. Hille [HIL48], . Hille and R. S. Philipps [HI/PH57]. There is an enormous number of places in textbooks and monographs on groups, rings, algebraic systems, universal algebra, and lattice theory, where material and references on semigroups and their representations can be found. Complementary to the monographs devoted to semigroup theory we present a systematic exposition of representation theory of monoids focussing on homological classification of monoids. We lead the reader to the frontiers of present research in this direction. At the same time we also look at familiar material from this perspective. We remark that one of the starting points of the book was a common survey article together with L. A. Skornjakov in 1975 [KI/KN/MI/SK75]. Recall that group actions (i.e. acts over groups) have been considered as long as groups have been known starting from P. Ruffini, A. Cayley, S. Lie [Lie91]. Even at the basic level of group theory in many university textbooks (S. Lang, A. I. Kostrikin, P. M. Cohn, I. N. Herstein, M. Artin etc.) we find effective and elegant ways of proving Sylow's theorems and other results on representation theory of finite groups applying results on orbits of group actions. Representations of semigroups by transformations of a set, i.e. acts over semigroups, play an essential role in semigroup theory from the beginnings (as can be seen from the title of A. K. Suschkewitsch's dissertation "The theory of action as generalized group theory"(in Russian), 1922). A representation of a semigroup S by transformations of a set defines an S-act just as a representation of a ring R by endomorphisms of an abelian group defines an /2-module. More precisely, a right act As over the monoid S is a set A for which a "product" as G A for s G S and a G A is defined such that for all si, S2 G S, a G A a(sis2) = (asi)s2
an
= if 5 has an identity 1.
Left S-acts are defined analogously. Probably first, in this form, the definition of 5-acts appeared in two papers by H.-J. Hoehnke [Hoe63], [Hoe66] with a different name in connection with the consideration of radicals of semigroups. Note that in different books and articles we meet 5-acts under different names: S-automata, S-operands, S-polygons, S-sets, S-systems, monars, ac-
xiv
Introduction
tions, representation spaces, transition systems etc. In this book we use the name "5-act" to stress the role of the action of S on the set A. Acts over semigroups appeared and were used in a variety of applications like algebraic automata theory, mathematical linguistics etc. Semigroups and acts over them are the simplest type of algebras to which the methods of universal algebra must be applied, because their congruences are not defined by special subsets. Recall that for groups and rings the consideration of normal subgroups and ideals, respectively, avoids the direct use of congruences. We note the remarkable ubiquity of acts over semigroups in mathematics and its applications. The starting points inside the theory of semigroups were results on representations by means of partial transformations of sets. Besides of the type of representations considered in this book one has the classical Rees representations by matrices, Schiitzenberger representations by matrices which have at most one non-vanishing entry in each row or more generally by representations of monomial matrices over a semigroup. The extension of group representations to semigroups has been considered by R. R. Stoll [Sto44]. An approach to the subject was presented by E. J. Tully in his dissertation "Representation of a semigroup by transformations of sets", Tulane University, 1960, and [Tul61], and by H. J. Hoehnke [Hoe63], [Hoe65]. Earlier the theory of representations of inverse semigroups by one-to-one partial transformations was initiated by V. V. Wagner [Wag52], G. B. Preston [Pre54], and . M. Schein [Sch61]. As we have mentioned earlier, acts were useful in the structure theory of semigroups when considering radicals of semigroups. The same is true for semigroups of quotients and torsion theories. On i'-acts in connection with semigroups of quotients the reader may consult M. Delorme [Del69], M. D. Allouch [A1174], [A1176] and also H. J. Weinert's survey [Wei80]. Torsion theory for acts over groupoids was laid down by W. Lex and R. Wiegandt [Le/Wi81]. Aspects of topological acts over topological semigroups can be found in Isbell [Isb71], in [Kn/Mi73] and in [Nor94]. Partially ordered acts naturally appear in results on mappings between posets (see, for example, [HIG92], [BL/JA72], [Wag56] and [Kn/Mi73]). Injective ordered acts were touched by L. A. Skornjakov [Sko86a]. Lattice-ordered acts over bands and over monoids are used for the algebraic description of Petri nets by E. Wilkeit in [WIL98]. The investigation of stochaastic acts has been started by L. A. Skornjakov, fuzzy acts have been considered by V. Neklioudova [Nek97b]. In ring theory it is nowadays impossible to imagine the main directions without homological methods using categories of modules (see, for example, the book by R. Wisbauer [WIS91]). It is similarly important for monoids to consider associated categories of acts. Since these categories are highly nonadditive (and generally they are as bad as the category of all sets; nevertheless the category of 5-acts for a given S is a topos), one has to develope appropriate
Introduction
xv
methods of homological algebra. This approach has proved to be a very effective tool in developing the so-called homological classification of monoids. The whole project of such classification for monoids, as also for rings, was suggested by L. A. Skornjakov ([Sko69a],[Sko69b]). We recall some pioneer results in the directions of: - projective and injective acts, projective covers, injective envelopes (P. Berthiaume [Ber67], J. Isbell [Isb71]; C. S. Johnson and F. R. McMorris [Jo/Mc72b], U. Knauer [Kna72a], [Kna72b], and . M. Schein [Sch76]); - monoids over which all acts are (injective) projective (L. A. Skornjakov [Sko69b], . H. Feller and R. Gantos [Fe/Ga69a], [Fe/Ga69b], [Fe/Ga69c]). - Morita equivalences of monoids (B. Banaschewski [Ban72], U. Knauer [Kna72a], [Kna72b]); - an abstract characterization of act categories (L. A. Skornjakov [Sko69a], see also [Ban72]); - the tensor product for acts over monoids and flat acts (M. Delorme [Del69]), B. Stenstrm [Ste70], M. Kilp [Kil70], [KIL71], Similarly, homological classification of -rings (generalizing rings, semigroups, distributive lattices, semirings) was investigated by V. Fleischer [Fle75b]. Together with a right act As over a monoid S it is natural to consider its endomorphism monoid = End (^s). Then As is a biact, i.e. a right 5-act, a left E-act such that a(aS) a(a)S for all s G S, a G , G E. We mention some directions of research citing early publications on: - determinability of a free act by its endomorphism monoid (U. Knauer and . V. Mikhalev [Kn/Mi73], V. Fleischer [Fle74], [Fle75a]); - isomorphisms and antiisomorphisms of endomorphism monoids of generators (U. Knauer and . V. Mikhalev [Kn/Mi92]); - abstract characterization of endomorphism monoids of free acts (V. Fleischer [Fie74], [Fle75a]) and of simple acts (W. A. Lampe and W. Taylor [La/Ta82]); - presentation of endomorphism monoids of free and projective acts as wreath products (L. A. Skornjakov [Sko79], U. Knauer and . V. Mikhalev [Kn/Mi80a], [Kn/Mi80b], [Kn/Mi80c], and V. Fleischer and U. Knauer [Fl/Kn88]).
xvi
Introduction
For acts over monoids in many cases one tries to model the situation in modules. At the same time in rings and modules representation theory of semigroups find applications, in particular, when considering endomorphism monoids of modules (see, for example, L. M. Gluskin [Glu66], . V. Mikhalev [Mik66], [Mik96]) and when studying the multiplicative structure of rings (see, for example, B. M. Schein [Sch66], F. Eckstein [Eck69], C. F. Nelius [NEL74], . V. Mikhalev [Mik88], . I. Beidar, U. Knauer, . V. Mikhalev [Be/Kn/Mi94]). Universal algebra provides one of the ways of finding a common language for different branches of algebra. With any universal algebra A we may associate various derived semigroups S (for example, the group of all automorphisms, the monoid of all endomorphisms, the inverse semigroup of all partial automorphisms) and we get important acts over S. We use category theory to study categories of acts over monoids, considering them as a non-additive analogue of module categories over rings. On the other hand we may consider the category of S-acts as the category of functors from a one object category into the category of sets (similarly, the category of /^-modules can be considered as functors from a one object category into the category of abelian groups). This point of view leads to the consideration of arbitrary small categories instead of one object categories (see L. V. Polin [Pol74b], [Pol74c], [Pol78]; . V. Kacov [Kac76], [Kac78]; B. Elkins and J. A. Zilber [1/76]). Another non-additive categorical generalization, connected with the tensor product functor, was suggested by B. Pareigis [PAR70], [Par77a], [Par77b], [Par78], [Par79], [Par80]. Acts over monoids and in particular over groups are appearing frequently in combinatorial problems (for example, in connection with the Burnside problem and with MacMahon's master theorem, see G. Lallement [LAL79]). The model theory of modules has been investigated and continues to be extensively investigated (see M. Prest [PRE88], C. U. Jensen and H. Lenzing [JE/LE89], . I. Beidar, . V. Mikhalev, and G. E. Puniski [Be/Mi/Pu95]). In contrast, less is known about the model theory of acts over monoids. We mention some results on axiomatizability problems for some classes of acts: injective acts (L. A. Skornjakov [Sko78]), weakly injective acts (V. A. Kuzicheva, [Kuz80]), projective and flat acts (V. Gould [Gou87a]), regular acts (A. A. Stepanova [Ste91], [Ste94], . V. Ovchinnikova [Ovc95]). Stability of acts has been discussed by T. G. Mustafin [Mus88], [Mus89], J. Fountain and V. Gould (unpublished), model companions of acts by V. Gould [Gou87b]; categoricity of the theory of acts by . B. Kacov [Kac82],[Kac87]. The most notable difference between the two model theories over rings and over monoids is possibly the fact, discovered by T. G. Mustafin, J. Fountain, and V. Gould, that there exist S-acts which have unstable theories whereas all complete theories of modules are stable. Note that in this direction general results on perfect and coherent monoids and on finitely presented acts are especially useful.
Introduction
xvii
For many model theory considerations with acts over monoids (as for modules over rings) it is convenient to have in mind so-called multisorted systems (see, for example G. Birkhoff and J. D. Lipson [Bi/Li70], . V. Mikhalev [Mik86] and . B. Kacov [Kac97a]). Note that an attempt to expose algebraic automata theory with accents on multisorted algebras and category theory was made by G. M. Brodskii [BR088]. Finally we briefly touch relations of acts over monoids to other mathematical applications, in particular in graph theory, algebraic automata theory, theory of machines, theory of formal languages, mathematical linguistic, system theory, information theory, theory of communications and electronic circuits, d a t a bases and other fields of theoretical computer science. Graphs and diagrams provide an interesting intuitive guide on some results. If we have a graph G (V,E), where V is a non-empty set and C V V is a binary relation on V, then we may consider the endomorpism monoid End(G) of all endomorphisms of G, its submonoid Send(G) of strong endomorphisms, and the group Aut(G) of all automorphisms of G. In this way each graph G becomes a left act over any of these monoids. Several aspects of this view are spread in the the text of this book as applications, examples or exercises, where we usually give reference to the original papers. The general idea of an automaton, which goes back to Descartes, Turing, Kleene, in spite of its simplicity, has led to deep results both in mathematics itself and in a wide spectrum of applications including theoretical computer science. All forms in which one meets automata or machines have a set of states each of which can be transformed into other states by inputs. This explains the close relationship between automata and actions of semigroups. In fact, acts over free monoids are automata without outputs. We have many important examples of different type actions of monoids in algebraic automata theory. For example, X*, the free monoid on the alphabet X, acts on the set of its subsets: Yu = U^Y = {s e * US e Y} for c x*, U e X*. A coherent mathematical presentation of algebraic automata theory was given by S. Eilenberg ([EIL74], [EIL76]). An introduction with many worked examples to this theory can be found in W. M. L. Holcombe [HOL82], Other works to be mentioned here are the books by J. M. Howie [HOW91], G. Lallement [LAL79], J. D. P. Meldrum [MEL95], and J.-E. Pin [PIN86], For automata theory wreath product constructions have great importance. Note that wreath product constructions for groups go back to Krasner-Kaloujnine's embedding theorem ([Kr/Ka50]) and to W. Specht [Spe33]. The idea of transferring embedding theorems for semigroups motivated . H. Neuman also to consider wreath products for semigroups ([Neu60]). J. D. P. Meldrum [MEL95] devoted a book to wreath products of groups and semigroups. Group actions and wreath products are used by Kerber [Ker97] to describe combinatorial problems connected with graphs, codes, designs and chemical isomeres.
Chapter I
Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
Sets and relations Groupoids, semigroups and monoids Some classes of semigroups Acts over monoids (monoid automata) Decompositions and components Categories Functors
In Section 1.1 we give the necessary terminology and also include some basic vocabulary from graph theory which will be useful to gain examples later on. Sections 1.2 and 1.3 are on semigroups and monoids, Sections 1.4 and 1.5 are on monoid acts, Sections 1.6 and 1.7 give a basis for category theory.
1 Sets and relations

Notation Relations Mappings Cartesian product Order relations Zorn's Lemma (1.1.1-1.1.2) Equivalence relations and partitions (1.1.3) Inverse relation, restriction and composition Transitive and equivalence closure (1.1.4-1.1.7) Kernel equivalence and Homomorphism Theorem for sets (1.1.8) Graphs (1.1.9-1.1.12) Lexicographic products of graphs (1.1.13-1.1.14) Strong factor graphs (1.1.15-1.1.16)
I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories
In this preliminary section we collect some basic notation and simple facts we shall use throughout this book. We shall not become involved with problems of foundation of mathematics/set theory. In particular, we shall use Zorn's Lemma or equivalent axioms like the Axiom of Choice and even for classes if needed. For any uncertainty which might be caused by this procedure for a puristic viewpoint of mathematics we ask your pardon. We, personally, comfort ourselves with the old materialistic view that praxis is the criterion of truth; this means in our case that the approach chosen works out quite well.
Notation
= { 1 , 2 , 3 , . . . } the set of natural numbers; NO = { 0 , 1 , 2 , 3 , . . . } the set of natural numbers with 0 adjoined; the set of integers; Q the set of rational numbers; the set of real numbers; C the set of complex numbers; \X\ denotes the cardinality of a set X ; V(X) denotes the set of all subsets of X, the power set of X; denotes the set { 1,..., }. We shall use the common symbols G, P|, (J, C, c , \ and (for the disjoint union). The symbol reads "equals according to the definition", the symbol => reads "implies", the symbol <=> reads "if and only if".
Relations
Let X be a set. Every subset of the cartesian product X is called a (binary) relation on X. If C X we shall also write py for (x,y) , x,y e X. The set { x G X | there exists y G F with (x, y) pj is called the domain The set of and is denoted by dom p.
{ y G I there exists X with ( , y) G } is called the range of and is denoted by ran p. The set of all binary on X is denoted by B{X).
Note that C for , r (-AT) means that xpy implies xry for all x,y X. The fact that C for p, r G will be often denoted also by < . The complement of a relation B(X) is the relation B(X) defined by (.x,y) G A relation G B(X) is called (x,y) .
reflexive, if for all G X ; symmetric, if x p y implies y p x ; antisymmetric, if x p y and y px together imply = y; transitive, if xpy and y p z together imply a;2; right unique, ' py and 2 together imply y = z; left unique, if x p y and ,zpy together imply = z; right total, if for every y X there exists X with x p y ; /e/t total, if for every X there exists y X with x p y . The last four concepts also apply to subsets (relations) C Y for two possibly different sets X and Y.
Mappings
Let , Y be sets. A mapping : X > Y is defined to be a right unique and left total relation, i.e. a subset of Y, such that for every X there exists exactly one y Y with (x, y) G . As usual we write then () y but sometimes, when it is convenient to write mappings on the right side, we use also the notation = y. For the set of all mappings from X to Y we use the notation Map(X, Y ) or and T(X) for Map(X, X). The elements of T(X) are also called transformations of X . The mapping is called infective if the relation is also left unique, i.e. if ' for ,' X implies {) {') It is called surjective if the relation is right total, i.e. for all y G Y there exists X with () = y. It is called bijective if it is injective and surjective. The subset of all bijective transformations in T(X) is denoted by S(X), its elements are called permutations or bijections of X. The identity mapping idx : X X is defined by i d x ( x ) = for all X. A constant mapping cy : X Y for y G Y is defined by cy(x) = y for all X. If : Y is a mapping, A C X a subset, then the restriction of to A is defined as :A > Y with \ () = () for all a A. Conversely we say that extends \
A partial mapping : X > Y is defined to be a right unique relation, i.e. : dornig > Y is a mapping where dome/? C X , dom is called the domain of . B y VT(X) we denote the set of all partial mappings from X to X. Note that VT(X) contains an element with both empty domain and empty range which is called the empty mapping.
Cartesian product
T h e cartesian product of X and Y, i.e. the set of all ordered pairs { (x, y) \ X, y Y } is denoted by Y. T h e cartesian product of a family {Xi I i / } , i.e. the set of all sequences (xi)j /, is denoted by X^jXi and the usual projections of this product onto X3 are denoted by pj for every j I (i.e. Pj((xi)iei) = xj, j I, (xi)iei X i e / X ; )
Order relations
A reflexive, antisymmetric and transitive relation on a set X is called a partial ordering on X or sometimes just ordering of X and is usually denoted by < . One writes < y for x, y X if ( x,y ) a and calls (X, < ) a partially ordered set or a poset. If a partial ordering < has the property that for all x, y X either < y or y < x then we say that < is a total ordering. In this case ( X , <) is also called a linearly ordered set or a chain. Let X be a poset. A n element w X is called a maximal (minimal) element of ( X , < ) if w < ( < w) implies w for X. We say that a poset (X, <) satisfies the minimal condition if every nonempty subset of X has a minimal element. Then we say also that ( X , < ) is well-ordered. If Y is a non-empty subset of a poset X then we say that c X is a lower bound for Y if c < y for every y EY. A n element u G X is called the greatest lower bound or meet of Y if u is a lower bound for Y and < u for every lower bound of 7 . (It is easy to see that a subset can have at most one greatest lower bound.) The greatest lower bound of Y is denoted b y A { j / | y y } and if Y = { a, b } then by a A b. If ( X , < ) is such that a Ab exists for every pair a,b X then we say that ( X , < ) is a lower semilattice. W i t h the stronger property that { y \ y G Y } exists for every non-empty Y C X we say that ( X , <) is a complete lower semilattice. Analogously we define the least upper bound or join with the notation V{y I V ^ Y } for a non-empty subset Y of X and a V b for two elements a,b X , an upper semilattice and a complete upper semilattice.
If a poset (X, <) is both a (complete) lower semilattice and a (complete) upper semilattice then we call it a (complete) lattice and use the notation: (X,<,A,V). Remark. The set B(X) of all binary relations on a set X, that is the set of all subsets of X is a poset under inclusion, i.e. < for , e B{X) if and only if C r . Moreover, it is a lattice with = and V = U , which is called the lattice of relations on X, and denoted by (B{X), <, , V).
Zorn's Lemma
The following statement can neither be proved, nor can it be refuted, in the context of "everyday set theory". It is regarded as an additional axiom and we shall use it frequently. Lemma 1.1 (Zorn's Lemma). If (X, <) is a non-empty poset such that every chain of elements of X has an upper bound in X then X has at least one maximal element. Note that Zorn's Lemma is equivalent to the following Theorem 1.2 (Zermelo's Theorem on well-ordering). Every can be well-ordered. non-empty set
Equivalence relations and partitions

Definition 1.3. An equivalence or equivalence relation on X is a reflexive, symmetric and transitive relation on X. Special equivalence relations on X are idx = { ( , ) | G X }, the diagonal relation on X, also denoted by , and the total relation X, also denoted by V x . Let C X be a subset. Define the Rees equivalence by setting ', x, x' X, if x, x' or = x'. We denote the set of all equivalences on a set X by S(X). As a subset of B(X) it is partially ordered by inclusion. We call the intersection of all equivalences containing the relation B(X) the equivalence on X generated by or the equivalence closure of and denote it by pe. I f { p i ( X ) | i / } i s a non-empty set of equivalences on X then f ] i l pi is again an equivalence on X. If G B(X) then the intersection of all equivalences containing is the unique minimal equivalence on X containing p.
In fact S(X) is also a lattice: if , G S(X) then their greatest lower bound is and their least upper bound V is ( U ). For G S(X),AC X, set
p(A) := { b G X I there exists a G A with (a, b) G } . For A = { a } we write instead of p(a) also [a]p or just [a] and call this set the p- class of a or the class of a ( with respect to p). Let , G (X) Then C if and only if every -class is a union of p-classes. A family of subsets X i , i G I, of a set X is called a partition of X if the subsets X i are pairwise disjoint, non-empty, and their union is X . If is an equivalence relation on X then the set of equivalence classes <P) = { [ I G X } is the partition of X corresponding to p. On the other hand, if = { Xi \ i G I } is a partition of X into subsets Xi then the relation () = { (, y) G X x X \ there exists i G / such that x, y G X i } is an equivalence relation on X . Note that ( ( ) ) = , ( ( ( ) ) = . The set of classes with respect to an equivalence relation is called the factor set of X with respect to and denoted by X/p. The mapping - \ X > Xj > [x}p is called the canonical surjection with respect to p.
Inverse relation, restriction and composition

Let C Y. The inverse (sometimes converse) eY X \ (x,y) relation to is e p} . \> of a relation
p-1 = {(y,x)
Similar as for mappings we now define the restriction G B(X) for a subset X' C X by \' =(' The composition X') . is defined as
of relations , G B(X)
o r = { (, ) G X x I there exists y G X with y and y pz},
if we start with the right relation a and analogously for a C , C as or = { (, ) I there exists y & with ay and y } . If we start with the left relation p, we define = { (, ) I there exists y with py and ya }, for , er () and analogously for pCXx , aCYxZ as
{ (, ) I there exists y Y with a: y and y 2 } . Usually for convenience we will denote either o r or o ; by o. We will be careful in any situation to indicate the use of either convention. If e Map(X, Y) and Map (, Z) are mappings, then in the case when mapping symbols are written to the left of the elements on which they act, by we mean or , i.e., ()() = (()) for every X. In the case when mapping symbols are written to the right of the elements on which they act, by we mean / , i.e., () = () for every X.
Transitive and equivalence closure

It is clear that the operation on B(X) is associative and thus ( B ( X ) , o) will be one of the examples of monoids (see Definition 1.2.9) with the identity element . Sometimes we write for p. We define powers of a relation B(X) as follows: p = and 1 = , i times, for j g N . Definition 1.4. The transitive closure of a relation B(X) is the relation oo = \J p* e B(X). i=1 then p is the smallest transitive relation in
Lemma 1.5. If B(X), (B(X),<) containing p. Proof. If (x,y),(y,z) (y, ) pn and
then there exist m , such that (x,y) pm,
(, ) pm pn = p m + i l C p . Thus, p is a transitive relation and C p. If now is a transitive relation on X and Ca then 2 = pop<ZaoaCa. By induction it follows easily that pn C a for all , i.e. p Ca. Theorem 1.6. If B(X), then for the equivalence pîpp-'Ax)00 . closure pe we get
Proof. It is clear that = ( U p - 1 ) contains and is transitive and reflexive. The relation u = U p~1 U is symmetric and therefore un = (u~l)n = (z/ n ) _ 1 . Thus, if (x,y) G r , then (x,?/) G for some and therefore ( y , x ) G Thus, (y, x) G r , i.e. r is symmetric. This means that G S{X). If G S{X) and C , then C , p _ 1 C _ 1 = , and therefore = U p _ 1 U C . Since uouCaoaCa and so vn C for all G N, we have C . Corollary 1.7. / / p G then (x,y) G p6 i/ and only if = y or for some G there exists a sequence of elements = z\, Z2, , zn y in X such that for every i G { 1 , . . . , 1 } either (zi, Zi+1) G or (zi+i,zi) G p. In particular, if and are equivalence relations on a set X then in {X) their join pV is the relation defined by: x(p V a)y there exist z\, 2, , zn G X such that = z\,y zn and (zi,zi+1) G , G { , }, i G { 1 , . . . , - 1} .
Kernel equivalence and Homomorphism Theorem for sets

Let : X > Y be a mapping. The relation ker = { (, ') G X x \ () = {') } is an equivalence on X which is called the kernel equivalence or the kernel of . It follows from the definition of the composition of relations that ker = ~ = or . The following theorem contains the set level part of all homomorphism theorems of algebraic systems. T h e o r e m 1.8 (Homomorphism Theorem for sets). Let : X Y be a mapping and let be an equivalence on X such that xpx' implies () = ('), i.e. < ker . Then ' : / > , with '{[}) := (), x G , is the unique mapping such that the following diagram is commutative X Y
X/p > i.e. such that ' = , where denotes the canonical surjection. If ker , then ' is infective, and if is surjective, then ' is surjective.
Proof. Define ' : X/p * Y by '{[\) = () for any X. Suppose [x]p = [x']p for ,' X. Then (,') and thus () = ('). Hence ' is well-defined. Suppose '([]) = '([']). Then () = (') and thus ( , ' ) ker^. If = ker<^> then [x]p = \x'}p and thus ' is injective.
Graphs
Graphs will turn out to be useful as examples and means of representation in several places. For the convenience of the reader we give the basic definitions here. For further information see, for example, [HAR69]. Definition 1.9. Let V and be sets. A pair G = (V, E) is called a directed graph if C V V and an undirected graph if C { W C V | 1 < | W\ < 2 }. We call V the set of vertices of G and the set of edges of G. Graphs defined this way do not have multiple edges and therefore are sometimes called simple graphs. A mapping c : > (or into any other suitable set) is called a coloring of G and (G, c) = (V,E,c) is called a colored graph. Let G = (V,E) and G' = (V',E') be two directed graphs. A mapping : V > V' is called a graph homomorphism if ( v,v ') G implies ((),(')) G ', a strong graph homomorphism if (, ') is equivalent to ((), (')) ', for , ' V, a graph isomorphism if is a bijective graph homomorphism and ~ is also a graph homomorphism. Note that graph isomorphisms are exactly the bijective strong graph homomorphisms. Analogous definitions are made for undirected graphs, where we denote edges by { , ' }. We use the terms endomorphism, strong endomorphism and automorphism if G = G' and denote the respective sets of endomorphisms by End(G), Send(G), Aut(G). A graph G is called rigid if | End(G)| = 1. Edges of the form ( v,v ) or { } for V are called loops. A vertex v' with (,') or (', ) in a directed graph or with { v, v' } G in an undirected graph is called a neighbor of v. Other classes of endomorphisms, so-called half-strong, locally strong and quasi strong endomorphisms have been introduced and investigated in [Bo/Kn92], [Kna92], [Kna94] and [Fan95a]. Graph-theoretical conditions for coincidences of different classes of endomorphisms have been studied in [Kna87], [Kna90], [Fan94a] and [Fan94b].
10
It is clear that End(G) and Send(G) form monoids and Aut(G) forms a group with composition of mappings (formal definitions of monoids and groups will follow in Section 1.2). For the other classes of endomorphisms mentioned this is not the case in general (cf. [Bo/Kn92]). It is known [Hel68] that rigid graphs exist with any number of vertices except for 2 upto 7. If we have an edge (i>,i/) in a directed graph G we say that we paste in a rigid graph R if we identify and v' with two non-adjacent vertices of R and replace (v, v') by R. This is a special case of the construction which Hell called sipproduct [Hel72], [Hel74]. If for all edges of a directed graph G without loops the same rigid graph R is pasted in then the endomorphism monoid does not change (see, for example, [Hel75]). Definition 1.10. A graph G = (V, E) with V = Vi L J V2 such that no edge connects vertices inside Vi or inside is called bipartite. Let G = (V,E) be a directed graph. A sequence of edges (vi,v2), (^2,^3), ..(vn-i, vn) for vi,v2,... ,vn V is called a path connecting and vn if Vi j for i j except possibly v\ and vn, i,j { l , . . . , r c } . Paths in undirected graphs are defined analogously. An undirected graph G = (V, E) is called connected if for any two vertices v,v' G V, ', there exists a path connecting and v'. Definition 1.11. Let V,E,C be sets. A triple G = (V,E,C) will be called a directed colored multigraph if ECVxVxC and an undirected colored multigraph if C { W C V | 1 < \W\ < 2 } C. We call the elements of V vertices of G, the elements of colored edges of G and the elements of C the colors of the edges. Note that in Definition 1.1.11 we can distinguish between several "parallel" edges connecting a given pair of vertices. If G is a colored graph then color preserving endomorphisms of G form a monoid as well. Example 1.12. Let 6 . By Kn we denote the complete graph on vertices, i.e. in Kn any two different vertices are neighbors. By K^ denote Kn where m vertices have a loop. By Kn denote the completely disconnected graph with vertices, i.e. Kn is a set with elements. Consider the undirected path P3 with 3 vertices 1 2 3
where = { { 1,2 }, { 2,3 } }, Aut(P 3 ) = S2, permuting 1 and 3,
1 Sets and relations If we consider the undirected graph 1 where E = { { 2 , 3 } } , then Aut(tf) = S e n d W = { ( J ' ) ( } 3 2 2 _
11
and End ( i f ) contains the additional elements / 1 2 y 2 2 3 3 J' / 1 2 ^ 3 2 3 3 / '
\2 3 2 ) ' \3 3 2
/ 1
Consider the path P ^ with one loop at the middle vertex
2.
1 Here = { { 1 , 2}, { 2 } , { 2 , 3 } } . Then 2 3
Send (P 3 ( 1 ) ) contains the elements of A u t ( P g ^ ) and / 1 2 V 1 2 3 \ 1
J' {3
2 3 3 \ 2 /'
/ 1
2 3 2 3
and End(P3^) contains the elements of S e n d ( 1 ' ) and /I 2 2 2 3 \ / 1 3 ' I 2 2 2 3 \
1 j'
/ 1
( I 23 \
I 3 2 2 J'
/ 1 I 2
2 2
3 2
Lexicographic products of graphs

The following quite common definition of the lexicographic product can be found, for example, in Harary's book [HAR69]. For the generalized lexicographic product compare, for example, Sabidussi [Sab61] or also [Kn/Ni89]. Definition 1.13. Let The
G = (V(G),E(G)), = (V(H),E(H)) be graphs. lexicographic product G[H] of G and is the graph with vertex set V{G[H\) = V(G) V(H) and edge set E(G[H}) = {(,,), (r>')} I {,'} e V(G) or = v' and {w,w'} V(H)} .
12
Let now { \ G} be a family of graphs (indexed with the vertices of G). The generalized lexicographic product G[(Hv)vG] is defined by V(G[(Hv)veG}) and
E(G[(Hv)vG}) = {{(V,wv),(v',w'v,)} I {V,V'} e E(G)
= {(,7 ) I V e V(G),wv
V(Hv)}
or = v' and {wv,w'v} These concepts carry over to directed graphs, too.
E(HV)}
Example 1.14. Take P3 from Example 1.1.12 and K2, then
PZ[K2]
that is the graph where P3 defines three levels corresponding to its vertices, each level contains one K2 and two levels are connected by all possible edges if the corresponding vertices of P3 are connected. The following is an example of the generalized lexicographic product.
,^,,,)}
Strong factor graphs

Definition 1.15 [Kn/Ni89]. Define the relation xux' for x,x' 6 F on an undirected graph if and x' have the same neighbors in G. Call G/u with vertex set V/v and edge set such that [x\u and [y]u are neighbors if all elements of [x\u are neighbors of all elements of [y\u in G and vice versa for x, y V, the canonical strong factor graph of G. Note that the canonical surjection : G > G/u is a strong graph homomorphism. It can easily be proved that there exists a strong endomorphism / of G with f(x) = f(x') if and only if xux'. Consequently, G/u does not have non-trivial strong endomorphisms. Observe that for adjacent vertices and x' "having the same neighbors" means in particular that and x' have loops in G.
2 Groupoids, semigroups and monoids
13
R e m a r k 1.16 [Kn/Ni89]. Let G be an undirected graph and let U = G/v be the canonical strong factor graph of G. Then we have that G is a generalized lexicographic product of the form U[(Yu)ueu] which is called the canonical strong decomposition of G. Here |FU| = and Yu Kn if |YM|, in case that does not have a loop in G, and Yu = ^ if = |FU|, in case that has a loop in G. If we apply this to P3, numbered as in Example 1.1.12, then p 3 = A:2[(r2,"i)] where K 2 = { 1 , 3 } , Kx = { 2 } . Similarly, P ^ = K 2 [ K 2 , [ 1 ] } . The concepts from graph theory introduced here will turn out helpful not only when defining commutative diagrams. Graphs with their homomorphisms, strong homomorphisms or automorphisms also form interesting categories and each graph can be considered as an act over its different endomorphism monoids which for small graphs can often be computed quite easily. This situation will make it possible to use graphs as examples at several places in this book. For other monoids of endomorphisms associated with graphs compare, for example [Bo/Kn92],

Groupoids and multiplication tables (1.2.1-1.2.2) Identities and zeros in groupoids (1.2.3-1.2.7) Semigroups and monoids (1.2.8-1.2.9) Groups (1.2.10-1.2.13) Examples of groupoids, semigroups, monoids and groups (1.2.14-1.2.15) Adjunction of identities and zeros in semigroups (1.2.16-1.2.17) Zero semigroups (1.2.18) Sub semigroups, generating sets and ideals (1.2.19-1.2.20) Congruences and factor semigroups (1.2.21-1.2.22) Homomorphisms (1.2.23-1.2.25) Homomorphism Theorem (1.2.26-1.2.28) Free semigroups (1.2.29-1.2.33) Cayley's Theorem for semigroups (1.2.34-1.2.35) Comments The concept of a semigroup is met in two contexts. The multiplicative structure of an associative ring is a semigroup and, as already indicated by the name, a semigroup is a generalization of a group. Historically this second aspect had
14
priority. Beginning at the end of the 19th century a set with an associative binary composition was called a group although the existence of an identity and of inverse elements was not required. For representation theory of semigroups we use semigroup acts or automata as the non-additive version of modules over rings. Consequently we will stress the similarities with rings in our introductory presentation of monoids and semigroups. In this section we collect the basic concepts for semigroups and monoids which will be used in the sequel. First we consider the objects ( = semigroups or monoids) and their elements, then homomorphisms.
Groupoids and multiplication tables

D e f i n i t i o n 2.1. A non-empty set A with a binary composition A x A - > A, (, ') > a' is called a groupoid. The composition of a groupoid is often called cation. Instead of a a' we usually write aa!. multipli-
If A is finite, then the multiplication table is a square matrix having the elements of A in the headline and in the left margin, listed in the same order. We adopt the convention that the element ab in the table denotes the "product" of a from the left margin with b in the headline, i.e. a b a2 ba b ab b2
The multiplication in a groupoid indicates a natural way for multiplying subsets as follows. D e f i n i t i o n 2.2. Let A be a groupoid. For non-empty subsets B,C C A we define the product of subsets BC : {be \ b G B, c C}. We write 2 = B B and analogously for any finite products, using brackets if necessary.
Identities and zeros in groupoids

Groupoids may possess several one-sided identities and also one-sided zeros. Moreover, we can always furnish them with an identity or a zero, even with a new one if they already have one. These procedures are simple but very useful constructions, they are presented in 1.2.16 and 1.2.17.
2 Groupoids, semigroups and monoids Definition 2.3. Let S be a groupoid. A n element e G S is called a left identity of S right identity of S identity of S if if if es = s se = s se = s es element
15
for all s e S. Instead of the term identity the term neutral common.
is also
P r o p o s i t i o n 2.4. If a groupoid S has both a left and a right identity then they coincide. In particular, S has at most one identity element. Proof Let e' and e" be left and right identities, respectively, of a groupoid S.
Then e " = e'e" = e'.
In the sequel we will usually denote the identity element (if it exists) of a groupoid S by 1 or more precisely by IsDefinition 2.5. A n element s of a groupoid S with identity is called left (right) invertible if there exists t S such that ts = 1 (st 1). In this case t is called a left (right) inverse for s. If there exists e S with ts = st = 1 then s is called invertible and t is called an inverse for s, which is denoted by s - 1 if it is unique. Note that the term "inverse element" will be used in a more general sense later. Definition 2.6. Let S be a groupoid. A n element e S is called a left zero of S right zero of S zero of S if if if zs sz = sz = zs
for all s 6 S. A zero is often denoted by 0. Exercise 2.7. If a groupoid S has a left zero and a right zero, then they coincide. In particular, S has at most one zero.
Semigroups and monoids

Definition 2.8. T h e multiplication in a groupoid A is called associative
a(bc) = (ab)c for all a , 6 , c G A.
if
Associativity allows us to write products of any finite length unambiguously without use of brackets, a fact which can be proved by induction on the length of products.
16
Definition 2.9. A groupoid with associative multiplication or, for short, an associative groupoid, is called a semigroup. A semigroup S with 1 is called a monoid.
Groups
Proposition 2.10. If an element of a monoid has both a left and a right inverse then they coincide. Proof. Suppose s, t,t' G S and ts = 1 and st' = 1. Then t' = (ts)t' = t(st') = t.
Corollary 2.11. Every element of a monoid has at most one inverse. Definition 2.12. A monoid S such that for every is called a group.
there exists s _ 1 G S,
Note that for any two elements a and b of a group G we have ( ab)~ l b~1a~1 and ( a - 1 ) - 1 = a. Exercise 2.13. If S is a semigroup such that there exists e G S with es s for all s G S and such that for every s G S there exists t G S with ts e, then S is a group.
Examples of groupoids, semigroups, monoids and groups

Example 2.14. Groupoids with non-associative composition. zx - z2.
(a) (Z, - ) where (21,22)
(b) (Q\{ 0 },:) where (p, q) t-* : q = p/q. (c) (N, t) where (, ) 1 > | m nm. (d) {1, 2,3,4,5,6 } with ( , y) 1 > number of prime factors in 10a; + y. (e) (M3, x) where x stands for the vector product, i.e. X2 3/ (Vl \ \ , I 2/2 I I \V3 J J (X2V3 - X3V2 \ ^32/1 - Zli/3 ) . \Xiy2-X2yiJ
(f) Latin squares (= finite quasigroups): finite multiplication tables, such that every row and every column contains every element exactly once, if they do not represent groups.
17
Example 2.15. (1) Semigroups and monoids. (a) If (R, + , ) is an associative ring, then (f?, + ) is a group and (R, ) is a semigroup. (b) (N, ) is a monoid, (N, + ) is a semigroup.
( c ) ( ( ) , ) the full transformation monoid of X for any set X
with composition of mappings, i.e.

f g
If |X| = < oo we will use the notation Tn instead of (T(X),
o).
(d) (PT(X), o) for any set X with composition of mappings as operation. Note that ran dom = 0 means that is the empty mapping. (e) (B(X),o) where B(X) = V{X X) is the set of binary relations on X with composition as defined in Section 1.1. The diagonal = { (, ) I e } G B{X) is the identity in (B(X), o). ( f ) Let X be a set, 0, which we call here an alphabet. Let X+ be the set of all words on the alphabet X , i.e. the set of all sequences X1X2 xn where Xi e X, i , 6 . The words X\X2 a n d 2 / 1 2 / 2 2 / m from X+ are equal if and only if = to and xt yt) t e n . Defining the multiplication of the words (concatenation) by
{2 .--) {yiV2 Vm) = - XnViy2 Vm ,
we turn X+
word the basis
into a semigroup. This semigroup X+

over the set X or the free X. word monoid
is called the free

semigroup with
semigroup
(g) Let X+
be the free semigroup with the basis X. Then X* = X+ U

over X or the free monoid
{ } is called the free
with the basis X where concatenation with the empty leaves everything unchanged.
word
Later on we shall consider free semigroups and free monoids from a more abstract viewpoint (cf. Definition 1.2.30). (h) (Z, gcd) with (21,22) common divisor". gcd(21,22) where gcd denotes the "greatest
(i) (, ) where = No x No and multiplication defined by (TO, n)(p, q) = (TO + max(n,p), q p + max(n,p)) _ f (m n + p,q) if > [ (TO, + q) if <
18
I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories is called the bicyclic 1.3.13). ( j ) Let G be a group, A and be non-empty sets, and : A > a mapping (for the definition of G see Construction 1.2.17). Set M(G, , , P) = {{a,g,b) | a G A,g G G, b G } U { 0 } monoid with identity (0,0) (cf. also Remark
where 0 is an element different from all triples ( a , g , b ) . Define a multiplication on i ( G , , , ) so that 0 ( a , g , b ) = (a,g, b)0 = 00 = 0 for any triple (a, g,b) and ( . , , < A 0 - { ottaw*/
0
T h e result is a semigroup which is called a Rees matrix semigroup with zero with sandwich matrix P. The semigroup M(G,A,B,P) is called a regular Rees matrix semigroup if there are non-zero elements in every row and every column of the "matrix" P , i.e. for every b G there exists a A such that P(b, a) ^ 0 and for every a G A there exists b G such that Starting with : A > G and taking M(G,A,B,P) one gets a Rees matrix = { (a, g, b) \ aeA,ge semigroup without G,beB} zero.
( k ) ( M a t n ^ ) , ) the monoid of all matrices with coefficients in a field under usual multiplication of matrices. (1) Let S be a semigroup (monoid), X a set. Then Sx ()() (2) Groups. (a) (Z,+). (Q\{0},). class group (Zr,+) modulo r where = 0(mod r ) } for all G , , G Sx M a p ( X , S) is = a semigroup (monoid) with pointwise composition, i.e. ( ) ( ) (and c\ is the identity if 1 G S).
( b ) (Q, + ) ,
(c) T h e residue
z r = { [0], [ 1 ] , . . . , [r - 1] } , [x] = {ueZ\u-x and [x] + [y] = [x + y}.
( d ) (S(X), o) the full permutation group of X for any non-empty set X with composition of mappings, i.e. f9
If |X| = < oo we will use the notation Sn instead of (<S(X), o).
19
Adjunction of identities and zeros in semigroups

Construction 2.16 (Adjunction of an identity). To every semigroup S without identity an identity 1 can be adjoined by setting Is = s = si and 1 - 1 = 1 for all s S. We set qi _ f S _ \ S LJ { 1 } if S has an identity element otherwise.
Note that if there already exists an identity in S we denote by S = S LI { } the monoid obtained from S by adjoining a new identity . Construction 2.17 (Adjunction of a zero). To every semigroup S without zero a zero 0 can be adjoined by setting Os = 0 = sO and 0 0 = 0 for all s e S. We set S if S has a zero S { 0 } otherwise. Note that if there exists already a zero in S we denote by Sw = S { } the monoid obtained from S by adjoining a new zero .
Zero semigroups
Definition 2.18. A semigroup S such that every element of S is a left zero of S is called a left zero semigroup. Analogously a right zero semigroup is defined. We call S a zero semigroup if st = 0 S for all s , i 6 5. Every non-empty set S can be turned into a left zero semigroup, right zero semigroup or zero semigroup by defining si = s, st = t or st 0 respectively for all s,t S and any fixed element 0 S.
Subsemigroups, generating sets and ideals

Definition 2.19. A non-empty subset of a semigroup S is called a subsemigroup of 5 if T2 C T. If S is a monoid with identity element 1 then a subsemigroup is called a submonoid if 1 T. For every non-empty subset A of a semigroup S
oo
(A) = U An
n=l
is the smallest subsemigroup of S which contains A and is called the subsemigroup of S generated by A. If (A) = S then A is called a set of generating elements of S.
20
If A = { a } and (^4) = (a) = S then S is called a monogenic semigroup, a is then called a generating element of S. Note that every subsemigroup S of a finite group G is a group.
or a cyclic
Definition 2.20. A non-empty subset C S is called a left ideal of S if SK C K, a right ideal of S if KS C K, an ideal or a two-sided ideal of S if KS C and SK C K.
Congruences and factor semigroups

Following the general procedure, we now consider structure preserving mappings. Different from the situation for groups or rings, where homomorphisms can be described by normal subgroups for groups or by ideals for rings, this is not possible here. We are stuck with the defining congruence, which therefore will be called the kernel congruence (see Definition 1.2.23) in analogy to sets (cf. Section 1.1). Definition 2.21. Let C S S called a left congruence on S right congruence on S two-sided congruence on S for all s,t,u G S. be an equivalence relation on S. Then is if spt implies (us) (ut) if spt implies ( su) (tu) if spt implies (us)p(ut) and
(su)p(tu)
Note that an equivalence relation on a semigroup S is a congruence if and only if s pt and upv imply (su) (tv). Recall that the class of a G S with respect to an equivalence relation is denoted by p(a) or [a]p or [a]. If is a congruence on S we define a multiplication in S/p by [,s]p[i]p = [st]p for s,t G S. Then S/p becomes a semigroup which is called the factor semigroup of S by p. Note that if S is a monoid then S/p is also a monoid with the identity [l] p . L e m m a 2.22. If C S is a left (right, two-sided) ideal of a semigroup S then the Rees equivalence is a left (right, two-sided) congruence on S, which is called a left (right, two-sided) Rees congruence on S.
Homomorphisms
Definition 2.23. Let S and be semigroups. A mapping : S is called a semigroup homomorphism of S into if <^( s s / ) = f r all s, s' G S. A semigroup homomorphism between monoids S and with <p(ls) = I t is called a monoid homomorphism. In both cases
21
ker = {(a,b) e S x S \ (a) = <p(b) } is called the kernel congruence of the homomorphism . Isomorphisms, endomorphisms and automorphisms of semigroups or of monoids are defined as usual, i.e. a homomorphism is an isomorphism if it is both surjective and injective, it is an endomorphism if S = T, and it is an automorphism if it is both an isomorphism and an endomorphism. If there exists a semigroup (monoid) isomorphism : S > then we say that S and are isomorphic and write S = T. A mapping : S > is called an antihomomorphism of semigroups r if v?(ss') = </?(s')</?(s) for all s, s S. Let be a congruence on a semigroup S. The canonical mapping p : S > S/p - [] is called the canonical surjection.
Exercise 2.24. Let : S be a semigroup homomorphism. Then (1) \. = <p{S) is a subsemigroup of T. If is a monoid homomorphism then Im = () is a submonoid of T. (2) ker = { (, b) S x S | () = (p(b) } is a congruence on S. Exercise 2.25. Let be a congruence on a semigroup S. canonical surjection is a homomorphism. Prove that the
Homomorphism Theorem
On the basis of the Homomorphism Theorem 1.1.8 for sets we get Theorem 2.26 (Homomorphism Theorem for semigroups). Let : S > be a homomorphism of semigroups and a congruence on S such that apa' implies () = ('), i.e. < ker^. Then ' : S/p with '([]) := (), S, is the unique homomorphism such that the following diagram is commutative S
S/p. If = ker , then ' is injective, and if is surjective, then ' is surjective.
22
Proof. The mapping v3'([s]/>) = <p(s) f r a n y s S makes the diagram commutative by the Homomorphism Theorem 1.1.8 for sets and is obviously a homomorphism of semigroups. Corollary 2.27. If : S > is a surjective homomorphism then = S/kenp. Exercise 2.28. (1) Let : S > and : ^ U be semigroup isomorphisms. Then the product : S > U is also an isomorphism. Let : S > be a semigroup isomorphism. Then the inverse mapping _1 (/3 : S is also an isomorphism. Thus, the relation S = for semigroups is an equivalence relation on the class of semigroups. (2) Let : S G be a semigroup isomorphism and G a monoid (group). Then S is a monoid (group). of semigroups
Free semigroups
D e f i n i t i o n 2.29. A subset of generating elements of a semigroup S is called a basis of S if every element of S can be uniquely presented as a product of elements of . D e f i n i t i o n 2.30. A semigroup is called free if it contains a basis. A monoid is called free if = S1 for a free semigroup S. Note that the semigroups X+ and monoids X* we constructed in Example 1.2.15(1) are free in the sense of Definition 1.2.30. The next proposition justifies the name of free semigroups. P r o p o s i t i o n 2.31. Let F(X) be a free semigroup with a basis X and f : X * S any mapping from the basis X into a semigroup S. Then there exists a unique homomorphism f : F(X) > S which extends f , i.e. f\ = f . Proof Define the mapping / : F(X) > S by 7(XlX2 Xk) = f(Xl)f(X2) for any X1X2 Xk F(X). Then we have X C F(X) f(xk)
23
Since every element of F(X) can be uniquely presented as a product of elements of X, f is well and uniquely defined. Now / is a homomorphism since for any xxx2 ... Xk, yiV2 Vi F(X) one has f{{xix2 Xk){y\V2 yi)) = = f(xi2 XkViy2 yi) f(x1)f(x2)...f(xk)f(y1)f(y2)...f(yl)
= (/(*i)/(*2).
/(a*))(/(Vi)/(lfc) /(w))
= f(x 1x2 Xk)f{y\y2 yi) Finally, f(x) = f(x) for all X by the definition of /.
Corollary 2.32. Any free semigroup F(X) the free word semigroup X+.
with a basis X is isomorphic to
Theorem 2.33. Every semigroup is isomorphic to a factor semigroup of a free semigroup. Proof Let S be a semigroup. Consider the free semigroup S+ and the mapping ids : S > S. By applying Proposition 1.2.31 we get a homomorphism g = ids : S+ > S such that g\s = ids Clearly, g is surjective. Now we have by Corollary 1.2.27 that S = S+ /keng.
Cay ley's Theorem for semigroups

The following theorem which was first proved by Suschkevitsch [Sus26] is an analog to Cayley's Theorem for groups. Theorem 2.34. Every semigroup is isomorphic to a subsemigroup of the semigroup of all transformations on a set. Proof. Let S be a semigroup. For every s G S consider the left translation , : S1 S1 defined by Xs(x) = sx Now set = { \s | s e S}. = s(tx) = (st)x = A st (a;) Suppose
for G S1. Clearly, As e T(SJ). A s ,Aj G T. Then (A s A t )(x) = Xs(Xt(x))
= Xs(tx)
for every G S. This means that XsXt = A st and thus AsAt G T. Hence is a subsemigroup of T(S1). Now define a mapping / : S > by
f(s) = Xs
24
for s S. Then / is a homomorphism. Indeed, f(st) for any s, t 5. If f(s) = f(t), = Ast = AA = f(s)f(t)
s,t e S, then As = Xt and s = sl = A s (l) = A t (l) = tl = t.
Hence / is injective. Moreover, / : S > is surjective by the definition of T. Hence S = T. R e m a r k 2 . 3 5 . Note that the idea behind the proof of Cayley's Theorem for finite semigroups is the representation of a semigroup S as a so-called Cayley color graph. Take a set of generating elements C for S \ { 1 } and consider the directed colored multigraph G = (V, E, C) with V = S and (s, s',c) e if c C is such that sc = s'. Then c can be viewed as the color of the edge (s, s', c) and it turns out that the monoid of color preserving graph endomorphisms of G is isomorphic to S (cf. Definition 1.1.9).
Comments
This section contains some basic definitions for semigroups and monoids arranged as conveniently as possible for the needs of this book. We gave many examples and "non-examples" and, of course, turned the reader's attention to such basic things as the Homomorphism Theorem for semigroups in a general form based on the corresponding theorem for sets in Section 1.1.
3 Some classes of semigroups

Commutativity, center, centralizer (1.3.1) Idempotents, bands, semilattices (1.3.2-1.3.7) Structure of monogenic semigroups (1.3.8-1.3.12) Bicyclic monoid (1.3.13) Periodic semigroups, nil semigroups (1.3.14-1.3.17) Reversible, simple, cancellative, solvable (1.3.18-1.3.22) Principal ideals and Green's relations (1.3.23-1.2.26) Regular semigroups (1.3.27-1.3.31) Orthodox semigroups (1.3.32-1.3.33) Inverse semigroups (1.3.34-1.3.36) Right (left) inverse semigroups (1.3.37-1.3.39)
25
Clifford semigroups and completely regular semigroups (1.3.40) Semilattices of semigroups (1.3.41-1.3.44) Right regular bands (1.3.45-1.3.46) Chain and Rees semigroups (1.3.47-1.3.54) Comments
Commutativity, center, centralizer

Definition 3.1. Let S be a semigroup. As in any algebraic structure, we say that s,t S commute if st = ts. The set C(S) = { c e S I es = sc for all s e S }
is called the center of S. If C(S) = S then S is called a commutative or abelian semigroup. Let R C S be a subset of the semigroup S. Then Cs(R) = { s G S I rs = sr for all r G R } is called the centralizer of R in S. Note that C(S) = Cs(S).
Idempotents, bands, semilattices

Definition 3.2. Let S be a semigroup. An element e G S is called an idempotent if e 2 = e. The set of all idempotents of S is denoted by E(S). For a subset of 5 we write E(T) E(S) . We define the natural partial ordering on E(S) by e < / if and only if ef = e = fe. There is a wide variation in the number of idempotents a semigroup may contain. For example, (N, ) has the only idempotent 1, the semigroup (2N, ) does not contain any idempotents, but in (N, gcd) all elements are idempotents. Definition 3.3. If E(S) = S, then S is called an idempotent semigroup or a band. Definition 3.4. Let A and be non-empty sets and set S = . Define a multiplication on S by (a, b)(c, d) = (a, d) for a,c G A, b,d G B. This semigroup is called a rectangular band. Note that S indeed is a band, which is non-commutative, if either \A\ > 1 or \B\ > 1. Moreover, S is a special case of a Rees matrix semigroup without zero (cf. Example 1.2.15 (1)0)) The next exercise shows that we may identify the classes of semilattices and commutative bands.
26
Exercise 3.5. Recall that lower semilattices were defined in Subsection "Order relations" of Section 1.1 as posets in which every two elements have a greatest lower bound. A commutative band S with the natural order < y
for x, y G S is a lower semilattice.
= xy
Conversely, if in a lower semilattice we define a multiplication by xy = Ay for x,y G then we get a commutative band. Exercise 3.6. Let S be a semigroup and e G E(S). Then
He = { a G S I ae = a = ea and there exists a' G S such that aa' = e = a'a } is the greatest subgroup of S with the identity element e. Definition 3.7. Let 5 be a semigroup. For e G E(S) we call He = { a G S I ae = a = ea and there exists a' G S such that aa! = e = a!a } the group of the idempotent e in S.
Structure of monogenic semigroups

Recall that a semigroup S is called monogenic if there exists a subset of generating elements of S consisting of a single element, which is called a generating element of S (see Definition 1.2.19). Now we shall determine the general structure of monogenic semigroups. Definition 3.8. Let S = (a) { a, a2, a 3 , . . . } be a monogenic semigroup with a generating element a. The order of is defined as ord(a) = |(a)| if (a) is finite, oo otherwise. If there exist natural numbers k and I such that k I but ak = a! then let m be the smallest natural number such that am ani+q for some 3 6 and let r be the smallest natural number such that am = a m + r . We call m the index or height of and r the period of a. Theorem 3.9. All infinite monogenic semigroups S are isomorphic to (N, +). All finite monogenic semigroups S are determined up to isomorphism by their height m and period r. In the latter case S contains a cyclic subgroup isomorphic to the residue class group Z r = Z/rZ.
27
Proof. There are two different possibilities for a monogenic semigroup S = (a): If k I, k,l N, implies ak ', i.e. there are no repetitions in the sequence a, a 2 , a 3 , . . . , then S is an infinite semigroup, ord(a) = oo and S =
(N,+).
To prove the latter we define a mapping f : S f(ak) = k
by
for ak G S. This mapping is well-defined, by assumption. Moreover, it is a homomorphism since / ( a V ) = f(ak+l) = k + l = f(ak) + f(al)
for ak,al S. Obviously being both injective and surjective, / is an isomorphism. Thus S ^ ( N , + ) . Now suppose that there exist k,l G N, k I, but ak = a1. Let m,r be as indicated in Definition 1.3.8. Then S = {a,a2,...,arn,arn+\...,aTn+r-1}
where all m+r 1 elements are different, by the choice of m and r. In particular, ord(a) = to + r 1.
m+1
/
a
m+2
'
m+r-1
a"1
a3 a2
Consider the subset Ha = { am, am+1,..., am+r~l } of S. Clearly, Ha is a subsemigroup of S. We shall show that Ha is isomorphic to Z r = Z / r Z = ({ [m], [m + 1 ] , . . . , [m + r 1] }, + ) , the residue class group modulo r. Recall that the addition in Z r is given by the rule [x] + [y] = [x + y]
28
Define a mapping / : Ha > Z r by f(ak) = [fc]
for any ak 6 Ha. Then / is an isomorphism. Hence Ha = Z r .
Since the identity of a group is an idempotent and there are no other idempotents in a group we have the following Corollary 3.10. In every finite monogenic semigroup {a} with height m and period r there exists exactly one idempotent, which is of the form am+n where = m(mod r). Remark 3.11. For a monogenic semigroup with index m and period r we use the notation M(m,r). Example 3.12. If / 1 O 2 2 Q 3 3 4 ... ... m + r-1 m +I r m + r \ m+ > 11 J
G
,f Mul !> 2> > m +
}) "
then (a) = M(m,r). This makes it clear that for every pair (m,r) G there exists a semigroup isomorphic to M(m, r).
Bicyclic monoid
Recall that the bicyclic monoid ( B , ) was defined in Example 1.2.15(l)(i) as = No x No with the multiplication (m, n)(p, q) = (m + max(n,p), q + ma x(n,p)) _ f (m + p,q) if > [ (m, + q) if < . The identity of is (0,0). The monoid is generated by two elements, namely (1,0) and (0,1), which explains the name "bicyclic monoid". Moreover, (0,1)(1,0) = (0,0) but (1,0)(0,1) = (1,1) (0,0). Remark 3.13. It is easy to see that if a monoid S is generated by two elements u and such that vu 1 but uv 1 then S is isomorphic to the bicyclic monoid (see, for example, Lemma 1.31 of [CL/PR61]). A monoid with this property will be called the bicyclic monoid and denoted by (u, v).
29
Periodic semigroups, nil semigroups

Definition 3.14. A semigroup is called periodic if all its monogenic subsemigroups are finite. Clearly, any finite semigroup is periodic. Every band is also a periodic semigroup. Corollary 1.3.10 implies directly the following Corollary 3.15. Among the powers of any element of a periodic there exists an idempotent. semigroup
Definition 3.16. An element s of a semigroup S is called aperiodic if there exists 6 such that sn sn+1. A semigroup S is called aperiodic if every s S is aperiodic. Definition 3.17. An element s of a semigroup S is called (right) nilpotent n if there exists such that s = S where is a (right) zero of S. A semigroup S is called (right) nil if all elements of S are (right) nilpotent.
Reversible, simple, cancellative, solvable

Definition 3.18. A semigroup S is called left (right) right (left) ideals of S have a non-empty intersection. reversible if any two
This condition goes back to Ore [Ore31] and Dubreil [Dub41] and is sometimes called the left (right) Ore condition. Note that left zero semigroups (see Definition 1.2.18) are examples of semigroups which are not left reversible. The following concepts, known from groups or rings, are presented here for semigroups and for monoids. Definition 3.19. A semigroup S is called left simple right simple simple if S has no proper if S has no proper if S has no proper left ideals. right ideals. ideals.
A semigroup S with 0 is called 0 -simple if S has no non-trivial ideals (i.e. ideals different from S and {0}) and S2 { 0 } . A semigroup S is called semisimple if 2 = for every ideal C S. Analogously, left and right semisimple semigroups are defined. A semigroup S is called completely simple if S is simple and has no infinite descending chains of left ideals or of right ideals. In other words S is completely simple if S is simple and contains both minimal left and minimal right ideals.
30
Theorem 3.20 (Suschkevitsch [Sus28], Rees [Ree40]). (a) A semigroup S is completely simple if and only if S is isomorphic to a Rees matrix semigroup without zero. (b) A semigroup S is completely 0 -simple if and only if S is isomorphic to a regular Rees matrix semigroup with zero. Proof. For the definitions recall Example 1.2.15(j), the proofs can be found in [LAL79], Theorem 2.7, [HOW95], Theorems 3.2.3, 3.3.1, or in many other books on semigroups. Definition 3.21. An element s S is called left cancellable if sr = st for r , i e 5, implies r = t; right cancellable if rs = ts for r, t e S, implies r = i; cancellable if s is left cancellable and right cancellable. The semigroup S is called left cancellative, right cancellative or cancellative if all elements of S are left cancellable, right cancellable or cancellable, respectively. Definition 3.22. A semigroup is called left (uniquely) solvable if for all a,b e S there exists (a unique) s S such that sa = b. Analogously right (uniquely) solvable semigroups are defined. Left/right uniquely solvable semigroups are also called left/right groups. On the next page we we tabulate the relations between semigroups having the properties defined in 1.3.19 and 1.3.22. A simple arrow A means " implies A". The symbol ]<- C indicates that A and together are equivalent to C. The reader can easily make the corresponding table for monodis which is much smaller than for semigroups because for monoids group = right simple monoid = left simple monoid = right group with 1 = left group with 1 .
Principal ideals and Green's relations

We now consider principal ideals and give some brief information on Green's relations which are famous in Semigroup Theory. Definition 3.23. Let S be a semigroup. The least left ideal of S that contains G S is 5 { } = 5 1 , the principal left ideal generated by a. Analogously aS U { a } = aSl is the principal right ideal generated by a and SaS U a 5 U U { } = S1aS1 is the principal ideal generated by a. A semigroup is called a principal (right, left) ideal semigroup if all of its ideals (right ideals, left ideals) are principal.
31
semisimple left semisimple ~7 simple V right semisimple
left simple = left solvable
right simple - right solvable
right cancellative
left cancellative
cancellative
left group left uniquely solvable
right group = right uniquely solvable
group Table 1.1: Semigroups (simple-cancellative) Definition 3.24. On the semigroup S we define the following relations for every s,t 6 S: sCt silt sjt shit sVt if if if if if S1s = SH, sS1=tS1, S1sS1=S1tS1, S1s = S1t and
sS1 = tS1, and S1u = S1t. on S.
there exists u S with sS1 = uSl relations
C,TZ,JJ,H and T> are called Green's
32
Note that at the end of Section 1.4 we shall consider Green's relations in a more general situation. The next two propositions are in fact corollaries of the results presented there. Proposition 3.25. (1) The relations C, 7Z, J, H, T> are equivalence relations on S. In particular, V is the smallest equivalence
(2) V = Co~R = Ho C = \/. relation containing TZ U . (3) H = HC\C. (4)
SxS I J I V
/
c
\
I
We collect some results which connect Green's relations with other algebraic properties of S. Proposition 3.26. (1) If S is a right zero semigroup, then As = = and TZ = V = S S. (2) If S is a group, then = S S. (3) If S is commutative, then = J. Definition
(4) The group He of an idempotent e 6 S is the -class of e (cf 1.3.7). (5) Let S be a periodic monoid. e2 = e e S.
Then J = V and e j 1 implies e = 1 for
33
Regular semigroups
Von Neumann regularity is widely investigated for rings. The concept turns out to be even richer for semigroups since it gives rise to a broad variety of concepts which for rings mostly coincide. Definition 3.27. Let S be a semigroup. An element s S is called a (von Neumann) regular element, if sxs s for some S. One calls S a (von Neumann) regular semigroup if all its elements are regular. An element S such that s sxs is called a pseudoinverse of s. An element s' S such that s = ss's and s' s'ss' is called an inverse to s. The set of all inverses to an element s is denoted by V (,<?). Note that for a regular element s one has Sls = Ss and sS1 = sS. L e m m a 3.28. For every regular element of a semigroup there exists an inverse element. Proof. Let s be a regular element of a semigroup S and let s Set s' = xsx. Then ss's = s(xsx)s and s'ss' = (xsx)s(xsx) i.e. s' e V(s). Example 3.29. (1) Every group is a regular monoid. (2) Every band is a regular semigroup. (3) For every non-empty set the monoid T(M) is a regular monoid. of all transformations of x(sxs)(xsx) xs(xsx) x(sxs)x xsx s' , = (sxs)(xs) = s(xs) = sxs = s SCCSy OC
(4) For any field and any the monoid (Mat n (.fi), ) of all matrices with entries in is a regular monoid. The next lemma shows that in regular semigroups there are plenty of idempotents. L e m m a 3.30. Let s be a regular element of a semigroup S with s = S. Then xs and sx are idempotents, Ss = S(xs), and sS = (sx)S. sxs,
34
Proof. Multiplying the equality s = sxs on the left by we get xs = x(sxs) = (xs)(xs) ,
i.e. xs is an idempotent. Similarly one can show that sx is an idempotent. The equalities Ss = S(xs) and sS = (sx)S are obvious. Proposition 3.31. The following statements are equivalent for a semigroup S: (i) S is regular. (ii) For every element s G S there exists e G E(S) such that sCe.
(iii) For every element s G S there exists e G E(S) such that sTZe. Proof, (i) ==> (ii). Suppose S is a regular semigroup. Let s G S and let G S be a pseudoinverse to s. Then e = xs E(S) and sCe by Lemma 1.3.30. (ii) = > (i). Suppose that for an element s of a semigroup S there exists e G E(S) such that sCe. Then there exist x,y G S1 such that xs = e and ye = s. Hence s = se = sxs and thus s is a regular element. By symmetry, (iii) is equivalent to (i).
Orthodox semigroups
Definition 3.32. A regular semigroup S is called orthodox idempotents E(S) is a subsemigroup of S. Proposition 3.33. The following statements semigroup S: (i) S is orthodox.
(ii)
if the set of its
are equivalent for any regular
t's' e V(st) for any s,t G S, sf G F ( s ) , t' G V(t). and e V(e) then G E{S).
(iii) If e G E(S)
Proof, (i) = > (ii). Since S is orthodox we have (st)(t's')(st) = ss'stt's'stt't = s(s'stt')2t = ss'stt't = St
and, similarly, ( t V ) ( s i ) = t's'. (ii) (iii). Take e G E(S) and G V(e). Since xe,ex G E(S) we have xe G V(xe) and ex G V(ex). It follows by hypothesis that ex2e G V(xe2x). Since xex xe2x one has ex2e G V{x). Hence x(ex2e)x i.e. G E(S). (xex)(xex) (xex)2 = 2 ,
35
(iii) ==> (i). Let e, / G E(S) and G V(ef). Now, by direct calculation, fxe G E(S) and e / G V(fxe). Hence ef G E(S) by hypothesis.
Inverse semigroups
Definition 3.34. A semigroup is called an inverse ment has a unique inverse. semigroup if every ele-
It is clear from the definition that any inverse semigroup is regular. Example 3.35. The subsemigroup of the partial transformation semigroup ('VT{X), o) consisting of all injective partial transformations of X is an inverse semigroup. T h e o r e m 3.36. The following statements are equivalent for a semigroup S:
(i) S is regular and E(S) is a semilattice. (ii) For every element s G S there exists a unique e G E(S) and a unique g G E(S) such that slZg. (iii) S is an inverse semigroup. such that sCe
Proof. ( i ) = > (ii) Suppose S is a regular semigroup with commuting idempotents and let s G S. By Proposition 1.3.31 there exists e G E(S) such that sCe. Suppose that sCf also for / G E{S). Then there exist x,y G S such that xe = f and yf = e. Since idempotents commute with one another we have e = yf = y f f = ef = fe = xee = xe = f . By symmetry we get the statement for 7Z. (ii)=> (iii). Since by assumption for every element s G S there exists a unique e G E(S) such that sCe, S is a regular semigroup by Proposition 1.3.31 and each of its elements has an inverse by Lemma 1.3.28. Suppose s G S has two inverses s', s" G S. Then s = ss's, s' = s'ss', s = ss"s, s" = s"ss" , and by Lemma 1.3.30 sC(s's) and sC(s"s). By assumption s's = s"s. Using the relation 7 we get similarly ss' = ss". Using these equalities we obtain
s'
= s'ss' = (s's)s' = (s"s)s' = s"(ss') = s"(ss") = s"ss" = s". Let be
(iii)=> (i). Suppose S is an inverse semigroup and e,f G E(S). an inverse for e f , i.e. efxef = e f , xefx = x.
36 Then
( f x e ) ( f x e ) = f(xefx)e
= fxe,
and thus fxe is an idempotent and hence the inverse element of itself. But we also have ( e f ) ( f x e ) ( e f ) = efxef and ( f x e ) ( e f ) ( f x e ) = fxe fxe = fxe which means that also ef is an inverse element for fxe. Since S is an inverse semigroup, ef = fxe. This implies efe = fxe or e / e = fef = e f . Changing the roles of e and / , we obtain efe = fe. Thus ef = fe. = ef
Right (left) inverse semigroups

Now we introduce two classes of semigroups lying between the classes of orthodox semigroups and inverse semigroups. Definition 3.37. A semigroup S is called right (left) inverse if for every element s S there exists a unique e E(S) such that sCe (sTZe). L e m m a 3.38. Any right (left) inverse semigroup is orthodox. Proof. Let S be a right inverse semigroup. Then S is regular by Proposition 1.3.31. Now suppose e E(S) and V(e). From e = e(xe) we obtain (xe) C e. Hence xe = e. The equality = (xe)x now gives = ex and thus = x(ex) = x 2 . Hence S is orthodox by Proposition 1.3.33. L e m m a 3.39. A semigroup S is right (left) inverse if and only if S is regular and efe = fe (efe = e f ) for any e, / E(S). Proof Necessity. Suppose S is right inverse. By Lemma 1.3.38 the semigroup S is orthodox and thus regular. Let e,f E(S). Since S is orthodox, fe, efe E(S). Now the equality fe = / ( e / e ) implies ( f e ) C (efe). Since S is right inverse, fe = efe. Sufficiency. Since S is regular each -class of S contains an idempotent by Proposition 1.3.31. Suppose e / , e, f E(S). Then there exist x,y S such that xe = / , yf = e and / =
xe
= fe = efe = ef = yf = e .
This means that any -class of S contains at most one idempotent. Thus S is right inverse.
37
Clifford semigroups and completely regular semigroups

Finally, we introduce two more subclasses of the class of regular semigroups. Definition 3.40. A regular semigroup S is called a Clifford semigroup if E(S) C C(S), i.e. idempotents of S commute with all elements of S. A semigroup S is called completely regular if for every s S there exists G S such that sxs s and sx = xs. In the last case we say that s S has a commuting pseudoinverse. Note that completely regular semigroups are exactly the unions of groups (cf. [PET77] 1.5.1). Moreover, Clifford semigroups are exactly those semigroups which are inverse and completely regular (cf. [HIG92], p. 39). On the next page we collect the results in a table for semigroups (the symbols are explained before Table 1.1 on p. 30).
Semilattices of semigroups
Definition 3.41. A semigroup S is said to be a semilattice groups Sa, a e Y, if 1. Y is a semilattice; 2 S = UaGY 3. SaS C Sa where a is the product of a and in Y. Such a decomposition of a semigroup into its subsemigroups carries a lot of information about the semigroup in the case where the subsemigroups Sa are of some specific type which is better known ("simpler") than the type of S itself. If all SQ are of type T, we say that S is a semilattice of semigroups of type . For more information about semilattices of semigroups see, for example, [HOW76]. Here we present (without proofs) as illustrations of the construction some structure theorems for semigroups which will be used in later chapters. The proofs of the following three theorems can be found, for example, in [HIG92] as Theorems 1.3.10, 1.3.11 and 1.3.9. Theorem 3.42 (Clifford [Cli41]). If a semigroup S is a union of groups, then it is a semilattice of completely simple semigroups. Theorem 3.43. A semigroup S is a Clifford semigroup if and only if it is a semilattice of groups. Theorem 3.44 (Clifford [Cli41], McLean [McL54]). A band is a semilattice of rectangular bands. of its subsemi-
38
regular
orthodox
left inverse
right inverse
inverse
Table 1.2: Regularities
We leave it to the reader to find examples which show that there are no other implications among these classes.
39
Right regular bands

R e m a r k 3.45. Following Petrich [PET73] there exists the tradition to call bands which are right (left) inverse right (left) regular bands and we adopt this tradition. Proposition 3.46. A band is right regular if and only if it is isomorphic semilattice of right zero semigroups. to a
Proof. Necessity. Suppose is a right regular band. By Theorem 1.3.44 we get that is isomorphic to a semilattice of rectangular bands Ea, a G Y, = [ J a e Y Ea. Let e,f G Ea, a G Y. Since we have f ( e f ) = f in the rectangular band Ea, we have (ef) C f . Using right regularity of we obtain ef = /. Hence Ea is a right zero semigroup. Sufficiency. Suppose is a semilattice of right zero semigroups and e, / E. Since ef and fe belong to the same right zero semigroup we have efe = (e/)(/e) = fe and thus is right regular.
Chain and Rees semigroups

We shall mention here some definitions and results without proofs which will be necessary only in one instant at the end of Chapter 5. Nevertheless they may give rise to additional investigations in several other places, although we will not pursue this in detail. Definition 3.47. A semigroup is called a right (left) chain semigroup if all its right (left) congruences form a chain. A semigroup is called a Rees semigroup if every two-sided congruence on S is a Rees congruence. Left (right) Rees semigroups are defined analogously. Construction 3.48. For G R, 0 < < 1 we construct the following two commutative monoids. Q
:=
( { 0 } U [a?, 1 ], ) C (R, ) with multiplication as in R if defined and
< 7 1 < ? 2 = 0 if < 7 i < 7 2 < X for qx,q2 G Q; R := ( { 0 }U]x, 1], ) C (R, ) with multiplication as in R if defined and r i r 2 = 0 if r i r 2 < for ri,r2 G R. Definition 3.49. A monoid S with 0 is called atomic if there exists an atom a G S, i.e. an element a G S, 0, such that ax = xa = 0 for all G S, 1. Remark 3.50. Considering the monoids from Construction 1.3.48 it is clear that Q is atomic with atom but R is not atomic. The same is true for all submonoids of Q and R, respectively.
40
Theorem 3.51 (Schein ([Sch69], Theorem 1)). Let S be a commutative semigroup and let Q,R be as in 1.3.48. Then S is a (left) chain semigroup if and only if one of the following conditions is satisfied: (1) S is a cyclic group of order pn or a group oftypep00 (i.e. S is isomorphic to the multiplicative group of the roots of the polynomials xp 1 in the field C of complex numbers, where is any prime number and eN); (2) S is as in (1) with a zero adjoined; (3) S is a monogenic nil semigroup; (4) S is as in (3) with an identity adjoined; (5) S is an infinite subsemigroup of Q or R for some i ' e l with the additional property that for any y,z G S with y < there exists w G S such that zw = y = wz (such a semigroup will be called order divisible). In either case S can be embedded isomorphically either into Q or into R but not into both and the isomorpism is uniquely defined. Proposition 3.52 (Kozhukhov [Koz81]). Let S be a non-commutative semigroup with more than two elements. Then S is a right chain semigroup if and only if one of the following conditions is satisfied: (1) S = { e, / , u } where es = f s = s and us = u for all s S; (2) S = { e, u, } where es = s, us = u and vs = for all s G S; (3) S { e, a, u } where es = s and as us u for all s G S; (4) S = {e,a,u, v, } where es = s,us = u,vs = for all s G S and a2 = n e, au = , av = u. In [Hot69], Theorems 3.11 and 3.15, Hotzel characterizes left Rees semigroups. If one assumes that a left Rees semigroup S has an identity this characterization gives that S is commutative. Thus there is no need to distinguish between right and left Rees monoids and Hotzel's result turns into the following. Theorem 3.53. A monoid S is Rees monoid if and only if it is a monogenic nil semigroup with an identity adjoined, i. e. a finite subsemigroup of some Q or R from 1.3.48, or fulfills condition (5) of Theorem 1.3.51, i.e. S is an infinite subsemigroup of some Q or R with the additional property that for any y,z G S with y < there exists w G S such that zw = y = wz. Corollary 3.54. Rees monoids are chain monoids.
Comments
In this section we went a little further in our exposition of semigroups and monoids. For more details the reader would have to consider one of several monographs on semigroups, for example, "Fundamentals of semigroups" by
41
J. Howie [HOW95]. We included the items which will be necessary in the sequel. Some of the easy proofs we left to the reader, for some other proofs we referred to the monographs on semigroups. We are aware that listing many concepts and terms for later use may be tiring. To show at least some of the interconnections, we included some tables around the concepts simple and cancellative and around the concepts of regularity. We concluded this section with some material on so-called chain and Rees semigroups where we restricted ourselves to giving definitions and citing results. This will not be essential until the very last theorem of this book. Nevertheless, these concepts may be interesting for constructing additional examples in Chapters 3 and 4 when monoids are discussed all of whose (Rees) factor acts have a certain property. Classes of monoids will be met again under the viewpoint of homological classification, that is in particular in Chapter 4 when we describe internal properties of monoids by properties of their representations, namely their acts. Semigroup properties of concrete endomorphism monoids have been investigated in particular for the various endomorphism monoids of graphs (cf. Definition 1.1.9). W. M. Li [Liw93], for example, directly proves that Send(G) is always regular for finite undirected graphs without loops. He determines explicitly all idempotents in each C- or 7?.-class and the inverses to each element in Send(G) [Liw94c]. In [Liw95] also pseudoinverses are investigated and so are graphs for which these coincide with the inverses inside the monoid of strong endomorphisms. Similarly, completely regular elements are studied in [Liw94c]. In [Liw94a] regular elements among the endomorphisms of a finite undirected graph without loops are characterized. For Green's relations on endomorphism monoids of graphs see also [Fan95c]. In other papers bipartite graphs whose endomorphism monoid is regular [Fan93b], [Wil96], orthodox or inverse [Fan96b] are characterized. Moreover, it can be proved that bipartite graphs are even determined by their endomorphism monoids up to isomorphism [Fan96a].
42
4 Acts over monoids (monoid automata)

Representation of semigroups and monoids by transformations (1.4.1) Acts over semigroups and monoids (1.4.2-1.4.4) Semiautomata (1.4.5) Presentation of finite S-acts (1.4.6) Injective and surjective action (1.4.7) Faithful and strongly faithful acts (1.4.8) Examples of S-acts (1.4.9) Acts over semigroups without identity (1.4.10) Zeros in acts (1.4.11) Partial acts (1.4.12) Subacts, simple acts (1.4.13-1.4.14) Act homomorphisms (1.4.15) Composition of S-homomorphisms (1.4.16) Endomorphism monoids and automorphism groups (1.4.17) Act congruences and factor acts (1.4.18-1.4.19) Rees congruence, kernel congruence, annihilator congruence (1.4.20) Homomorphism Theorem (1.4.21-1.4.22) Semilinear morphisms (1.4.23) Biacts (1.4.24-1.4.25) Bimorphisms (1.4.26) Congruences on biacts (1.4.27-1.4.45) Green's equivalences for biacts (1.4.46-1.4.50)
Representation of semigroups and monoids by transformations

As we have noted in Example 1.2.15(l)(c) the set T(A) of all transformations of a set A forms a monoid under the composition of mappings. If we write mappings on the left we get the product of /, g : A > A by the rule (fg){a) = f(g(a)) for all a G A.
Writing mappings on the right we get the product by the rule a(fg) = (af)g for all a A.
In the first case the monoid (A) will be denoted by Tl(A) and in the second case by Tr(A). Apparently there exists an antiisomorphism between these monoids Tl(A)^V{A), /
1
* f j fg
gf
43
Definition 4.1. Let S be a semigroup, A a set. A semigroup homomorphism : S Tr(A) is called a representation of S by transformations of A. If S is a monoid and is a monoid homomorphism then is called a unitary representation of S by transformations of A. If is an antihomomorphism then is called an antirepresentation of S by transformations of A.
Acts over semigroups and monoids

The idea of representing something by some other object which is better known at least in some respects is quite familiar in mathematics. After the excellent experiences made when representing groups by invertible matrices another important step was the representation of associative rings by endomorphisms of abelian groups. It is well known that every representation of a ring by endomorphisms of an abelian group gives a module over that ring and vice versa. Similarly, representations of semigroups (monoids) by transformations of sets give rise to the notion of acts over semigroups (monoids). Definition 4.2. Let S be a monoid and 0 a set. If we have a mapping : Ax S > A (a, s) as := (, s) such that (a) = and
(b) a(st) (as)t for a A, s,t 6 5", we call A a right S-act or a right act over S and write 5. More informally we often say that defines a right multiplication of elements from A by elements of S. Analogously, we define a left S-act A and write sA. Note that usually we do not specify . For S-acts the following names are also common: S-sets, S-operands, S-polygons, S-systems, transition systems, S-automata. If S is a group or a group with 0 the name vector system has been used by Hoehnke [Hoe65]. The first expositon to acts over semigroups in a monograph can be found in Volume II of Clifford-Preston's "The algebraic Theory of Semigroups" under the name of operand [CL/PR67].
44
R e m a r k 4.3. (1) If S is a semigroup without identity, condition (a) of Definition 1.4.2 is empty. We then speak of a semigroup act As- Condition (a) may be dropped even if S is a monoid. To stress the presence of (a) one sometimes calls As a unitary S-act. (2) If S is a commutative monoid then every left .S-act can be considered as a right S-act. Indeed, if sA is a left ,S-act we may define a right multiplication by elements of S by * s sa for a A, s S. Then a * 1 = la = a for all a A and a * (sis 2 ) a* (s 2 si) = (s 2 si)a = s 2 ( s i a ) = s2(a * si) = (a * si) * s2 . In this situation we can consider A as a S S-biact (see Definition 1.4.24) since for all s i , s 2 S and a A we have (sia) * s 2 s 2 ( s i a ) (s 2 si)a = (sis 2 )a = si(s 2 a) = s i ( a * s 2 ) . (3) Every right S-act As can be interpreted as a left act over the opposite monoid Sop, which has the same elements as S, but multiplication is defined by reversing the factors, i.e. s ot = ts, s,t S. (4) Note that the term "act" has also been used for representations of groupoids (cf. Lex and Wiegandt [Le/Wi81]). Note that many of the properties of the acts considered firmly depend on the existence of the identity in S and condition (a) of the definition. Therefore a big portion of the structure theory developed cannot be carried over to acts over semigroups without identity. In the sequel we shall consider mainly monoids and unitary acts over them. Proposition 4.4. Every unitary (anti-)representation of a monoid S by transr formations in T (A) of a set A turns A into a right (left) S-act. Conversely, for every right (left) unitary S-act As there is an associated (anti-reprer sentation of S by transformations in T (A). Every unitary (anti-)representation of a monoid S by transformations in Tl(A) of a set A turns A into a left (right) S-act. Conversely, for every left (right) unitary S-act sA (As) there is an associated (anti-Representation of S l by transformations in T (A).
45
Proof. If : S > Tr(A) is a unitary representation of a monoid S by transformations of A, define : A x S ^ A by as = (, s) := (). Then has properties (a) and (b) of Definition 1.4.2. Conversely, if As is a right 5-act, i.e. we have : Ax S > A with properties (a) and (b) of Definition 1.4.2, we obtain a unitary representation when defining -.S-* Tr{A) s (, s) : a t> as .
Semiautomata
A semiautomaton, i.e. an automaton without outputs becomes an act over a monoid in a natural way. As usual denote a semiautomaton by a triple (A, X , <5) where A,X are non-empty sets and mapping, A is called the set of states, X the input alphabet and the next state function. If X is a generating set of a monoid S and one has (,') = ((,),') for any a , ,' X then S is called the input monoid of (,,). Proposition 4.5. Semiautomata can be considered as S-acts and S-acts can be considered as semiautomata (with a possibly non-free input monoid). Proof. If (A, X, 5) is a semiautomaton, then obviously A can be viewed as a right X*-act where X * denotes the free monoid generated by the elements of X (cf. Example 1.2.15 ( l ) ( f ) ) , when extending : AxX ^ Ato * : AxX* ^ A by setting *(,') = (<5(,a;),'). Conversely, an 5-act is a semiautomaton with input monoid S which may or may not be free, of Definition 1.4.2 being the next state function. Consequently, we might as well speak of semiautomata instead of S-acts throughout this book.
Presentation of finite 5-acts

Construction 4.6. (a) Following the pattern common for automata and, as well, the idea of Cayley color graphs for groups and semigroups (cf. Remark 1.2.35) we can represent a finite S-act As where A = { ,..., am } and S\{ 1 } with a set of generating elements { x\,..., xn } by a directed graph with colored edges as follows. Take a graph with the vertex set A and colors x\,..., xn, such that (aj,Oj) is an edge of color ^ if aiXk a,j(b) In analogy with groupoids we can present a left 5-act s A by a multiplication table where the elements of S are in the left margin and the elements of A in the top line if S and A are finite. Examples can be found on p. 48.
46
Injective and surjective action

Definition 4.7. We say that an element s 6 S acts injectively on A s if as = a's, a, a' 6 A s , implies a = a'. If every s S acts injectively on As then we say that S acts injectively on AsWe say that an element s S acts surjectively on A s if A s s = {as | a 6 A s } = As- If every s S acts surjectively on A s then we say that S acts surjectively on As-
Faithful and strongly faithful acts

We now define faithful action, which in the language of automata means that different inputs operate differently on at least one state. An action is strongly faithful in this interpretation if different inputs operate differently everywhere. Definition 4.8. We call A s a faithful right 5-act if for s,t e S the equality as at for all A implies s t. We call A s a strongly faithful 5-act if for s,t S the equality as = at for some A implies that s t. It is obvious that every strongly faithful act is faithful. The acts Ss and s S (see Example 1.4.9(1)) are always faithful since 1 5 and they are strongly faithful if S is left or right cancellative, respectively. It is clear from the definitions that if an act contains a faithful subact then it is itself also faithful and if A j , i I, are strongly faithful right 5-acts acts, then ( J i e I Ai is also a strongly faithful act.
Examples of S-acts
Example 4.9. (1) Take any monoid S. Let be a right ideal of S. Since ks e for any k G and we have that is a right S'-act. To stress this we write Ks- In particular, Ss (resp. sS) is a right (resp. left) S-act and even a biact sSs (see definition 1.4.24). If R is a submonoid of S then RSR is an - -biact in the obvious way. (2) If S is the one-element monoid { 1 } , then trivially every non-empty set X is a left and right 5-act. (3) Let (K, + , ) be a field and V a left K-vector (., -)-act, but not a ( K , +)-act. space. Then V is a left
47
(4) Take any monoid S and a non-empty set A. Then A becomes a right S-act by defining as = a for all a G A, s G S. (5) Take a left 5-act s A Then the power set V(A) = { X C A } turns into a left 5"-act by setting
:S x
(6) Concrete examples of left (or right) acts can always be constructed if one considers any structured set A with its endomorphism monoid S (i.e. the set of structure preserving transformations) acting from the left (or from the right). In particular, the set { 1 , . . . , } turns into a left tSn-act in a natural way. We will sometimes use graphs with their endomorphisms or submonoids thereof. Take the graph 1 2 3
P3
from Example 1.1.12 where = { { 1 , 2 } , { 2 , 3 } } . Its automorphism group Aut(P 3 ) is {id, jo} ^ S2 with p( 1) = 3, p(3) = 1 and p(2) = 2. Thus P-s is a left 2-act. The graph from Example 1.1.12 is also an 52-act. Both graphs are, of course, left acts over their respective endomorphism monoids. (7) Using the representation of Construction 1.4.6 for semiautomata we get a representation of semiautomata common in Automata Theory. (8) Let G be a group. There are many natural examples of G-acts, we cite only two. Let be a subgroup of G. Then H\G { Hg | g G G } becomes a right G-act by setting
: (H\G) x G > H\G (Hg,g>)^Hgg'.

The set U(G) { \ a subgroup of G } becomes a right G-act by setting
(,9)=9~19.
(9) We construct all 2-element S-acts where S = { 1 , 0 } is the two-element monoid with zero. Take A = { a, b }. We use a construction analogous to Cayley color graphs (see Remark 1.2.35). We consider the set C = { 0 }
48
of generating elements of S \ { 1 } . Then the possible color graphs have only one color and there are up to isomorphism only two of them:
a where { (a, a), (b, b) };
a where = { (, b), (b, b) }.
This way up to isomorphism there exist exactly two 2-element left 5-acts over S { 1, 0 }, presented by multiplication tables, 1 0 a a a b b b and 1 0 a a b b b b
(10) For a monoid S we consider the power monoid ( 5 ) of all non-empty subsets of S with multiplication of subsets as operation (and identity { 1 } ) . If As is a right S-act over a monoid S then by () we denote the set of all non-empty subsets of A. For A' G () and G (5") we have A'(S X S 2 ) - (A'5I)5 2
A'{ Is } = A',
i.e. (A) is a right r(5)-act, which is called the global overact ia particular, () is a right S-act with the operation A's all A! e (), s ( S. of Asfor
Acts over semigroups without identity

R e m a r k 4 . 1 0 . Let S be a semigroup without 1 and A a right 5-act. Taking S1 we turn A in a unitary right 5 1 -act by setting al = a for all a A. In this way part of the structure theory of acts over semigroups without identity reduces to the structure theory of acts over (different) semigroups with identity, i.e. over certain monoids. Note, that we by no means get all monoids by this procedure. For acts over semigroups see for example [Tal95].
49
Zeros in acts
Definition 4.11. Let A s be a right 5-act. An element G As is called a zero of As (a fixed element, a sink) if 6s for all s G S, i.e. { } is a one-element subact (see Definition 1.4.13). An 5-act can have more than one zero, for example take A s as in Example 1.4.9(4). If the monoid S has a left zero then every element az G A s for a G As is a zero of AsEvery act As can be extended to an 5'-act with zero by taking the disjoint union ASLJ05 where 5 = { } is the one-element act.
Partial acts
Definition 4.12. A set A is called a partial right S-act there exists a subset C A S and a mapping : A (a, s) as (a, st) G P. If (a, s) we say that over a monoid S if
such that (as)t = a(st) if (a, s), (as,t), as is undefined.
By adjoining to a partial act A and defining as whenever (a, s) and, of course, 1 = and 6s = for a G A, s G S, we can transform a partial 5-act A into an S-act { }, if we can preserve associativity (as)t = a(st). Even in the case of a small finite A this may be complicated or impossible if for a A, s,t G S not all three combinations as, (as)i, a(st) are undefined or defined simultaneously. This viewpoint leads to a different theory.
Subacts, simple acts

Definition 4.13. Let A s be an S-act and A! C Ag a non-empty subset. Then A! is called a subact of As if a's G A' for all s G S and a' G A'. Obviously, any right ideal of S is a subact of Ss
50
Definition 4.14. We call .As a simple act if it contains no subacts other than As itself. We call As a -simple act if it contains no subacts other than As and one 1-element subact. Clearly, the one-element act 0 s is simple.
Act homomorphisms
Next we introduce structure preserving mappings for acts. Definition 4.15. Let As, Bs be two right S-acts. A mapping / : As > Bs is called a homomorphism of right S-acts or just an S-homomorphism if / ( a s ) = f(a)s for all a G As, s 6 S.
The set of all S-homomorphisms from As into Bs will be denoted by Hom.(As,Bs) or sometimes by Homs(A,.B).
Let sA, SB be two left S'-acts. A mapping / : sA > sB is called a homomorphism of left S-acts or just an S-homomorphism if (sa)f = s(af) for all a sA, s S.
The set of all S-homomorphisms from gA into s B will be denoted by Hom(sA, s B ) or sometimes by Homs(A, B).
Clearly, the identity mapping id^ : As > As is a homomorphism of right S-acts. The same is true for left S-acts. An S-homomorphism / : As > Bs is called an S-isomorphism if / is bijective. In this case we say that As and Bs are isomorphic and write
As =
Bs.
We feel free to use the categorical terms epimorphism and monomorphism already now for S-acts since, as we shall see in Section 1.6, they coincide with surjective and injective homomorphisms for S-acts. Using the representation of S-acts by color graphs (see Construction 1.4.6), we find that act homomorphisms between two S-acts represented as color graphs are exactly the color preserving graph homomorphisms (cf. Definition 1.1.9). Note that if / : As > Bs is an S-homomorphism then Im / = / ( A s ) is a subact of Bs-
51
Composition of S-homomorphisms
Lemma 4.16. (1) The composition gf of homomomorphisms f : As Bs, g : Bs > Cs of right S-acts is a homomorphism of right S-acts, i.e. gf e H o m ( A s , C s ) . (2) The inverse mapping of a bijective homomorphism f of right S-acts is a homomorphism of right S-acts. Analogous statements are valid for left acts. Proof. (1) Let h = gf,a e As,s e S. Then = g(f(a)s) = h(a)s.
h{as) = (gf){as) = g(f(as)) = (g(f(a))s=((gf)(a))s

Thus h = gf e Hom(As, Cs).
(2) Let / : A s Bs be a bijective homomorphism of right S'-acts. Since for all b e Bs, s e S fif-Hbs)) =bs = f i f - ' m s = f~1(b)s, fif-HQs) i.e. f~l Hom(i?s> -^s)
and / is injective we get that f~l(bs)
Endomorphism monoids and automorphism groups

Definition 4.17. Let A s be an act. An S-homomorphism / : A s A s is called an endomorphism of and a bijective endomorphism of A s is called an automorphism of As- The set Hom(As, A s ) which forms a monoid under composition of mappings is denoted by End(As). The set of all automorphisms of A s which forms a group under the same multiplication is denoted by A u t ( A s ) . They are called the endomorphism monoid and the automorphism group of As, respectively. Sometimesespecially when used as indiceswe use the shorter notation End A and Aut A.
Act congruences and factor acts

Definition 4.18. Let A s be an 5-act. An equivalence relation on A is called an S-act congruence or a congruence on As, if a pa' implies (as)p(a's) for a, a' As, s G S. If X C A s x A s then as before by p(X) we denote the smallest congruence on A s containing X .
52
A congruence is called finitely generated if there exists a finite subset X ^ As x As such that = p(X). A congruence is called monocyclic if it is finitely generated by an element ( , y) As x As and is denoted by p(x, y). Let be a congruence on A s . Define a right multiplication by elements of S on the factor set As/ = { [] | e A } by [a] p s = [as] for every s 6 5". From the property of an act congruence it follows at once that this multiplication is well-defined. A s a result As/ becomes a right 5-act which is called the factor act of As by p. A right factor act of S by a monocyclic right congruence is called a monocyclic right act (compare Proposition 1.5.17). Analogous definitons and notations are used for congruences on left 5-acts. If X Q s A s A then by ( ) we denote the smallest congruence on s A containing X . If S is a monoid then any right (semigroup) congruence on S is an act congruence on SsNote that in Definition 1.4.27 we shall present a slightly more general approach to act congruences. Exercise 4.19. Let be a congruence on an act .As T h e canonical surjection : As a -> As/ [a] epimorphism.
is a homomorphism. It is called a canonical
Rees congruence, kernel congruence, annihilator congruence

Definition 4.20. (1) A n y subact Bs ! As/Bs C As defines the Rees a'. factor congruence act of As pB on A, by setting BsRees
if a, a' 6 or a = and call it the Rees
W e denote the resulting factor act by by the subact is called the
In particular if Ks Q Ss is a right ideal, then Ss/Ks factor act of Ss by the right ideal Ks-
(2) Let / : A s > B s be an S'-homomorphism. Then the kernel equivalence ker / of / defined by a (ker / ) a' if and only if / ( a ) = f{ar) for a, a' As is an act congruence which is called the kernel congruence of /.
53
(3) Let As be an act and a E As- Then by we denote the homomorphism from S s into Ag defined by A a (s) = as for every s 5. The kernel congruence ker Aa on Ss is called the annihilator congruence of a e AsSimilarly, if sA is an act and a G sA then by pa we denote the homomorphism from 5 S into sA defined by pa(s) = sa for every s S. The kernel congruence ker pa on sS is also called the annihilator congruence of e sA. Clearly, A s / B s has a zero which is the class consisting of B s , all other classes are one-element sets. Moreover, any subact B s C As gives rise to a kernel congruence ker where : As > A s / B s is the canonical epimorphism. Conversely, differently from the situation for modules, not every kernel congruence can be described by a subact. This aspect will be resumed in Definition 2.2.48 of partitioning subobjects.
Homomorphism Theorem
As just mentioned and as for semigroups and monoids, we get that homomorphisms cannot be characterized by subacts and therefore we have to use the kernel congruence for the desired characterization and, consequently, for the formulation of T h e o r e m 4 . 2 1 (Homomorphism Theorem for acts). Let f : As > Bs be an S-homomorphism and be a congruence on As such that a a' implies f(a) = f(a'), i.e. < k e r / . Then f : As/p -> Bs with f'([x]p) := f(x), e As, is the unique S-homomorphism such that the following diagram is commutative Bs
As/pIf = k e r / , then f is injective, and if f is surjective, then f is surjective.
Proof. The mapping f'([x]p) = f(x) for any G As makes the diagram commutative by the Homomorphism Theorem 1.1.8 for sets and is obviously an S- homomorphism. Corollary 4 . 2 2 . If f : As > Bs is an epimorphism then Bs = As/ker/.
54
Semilinear morphisms
The concept of semilinearity known from Linear Algebra allows the change of scalar monoids together with a change of acts. Definition 4.23. Let As be a right S-act and let BR be a right R-act, : S > R a monoid homomorphism and a : A a mapping. Then a is called a -semilinear homomorphism if a(as) = a(a)0(s) for a A, s < E S. Here it is often convenient to write mappings as exponents and then the last equality can be written as follows: ( as) a = aas6. If is an isomorphism of monoids and a is bijective and semi linear then a is called a semilinear isomorphism. One also speaks of a semilinear homomorphism (a, 5), which is more appropriate. We use the word semilinear although it is misleading in many respects. It would probably be better to call these pairs of mappings sesquilinear. By this concept we get the possibility to describe a change of the acting monoids (that is the "monoids of coefficents"). This is a special case of heterogeneous algebras (see [Bi/Li70]) and has been used extensively in [WIL98].
Biacts
Here we formalize a situation where different monoids operate from different sides on an act in a compatible way. Definition 4.24. Let S, be monoids, A a left T- act and As a right 5-act. We call A a S-biact and write As if for all t T, s 6 S1, a & A one has (ta)s = t(as). Example 4.25. (1) There are two natural biacts connected with every right S-act As, namely End A-^S) since (f(a))s = f(as) for every / e End(As), s e S, a As, and center of S, since where C(S) is the
(ta)s = (at)s = a(ts) = a(st) = (as)t = t(as) for s 6 5, t C(S) (see Remark 1.4.3(2)). (2) If RA is a left R-act and Bs is a right S-act then the cartesian product RA Bs with the multiplications r(a,b) = (ra,b) and ( a,b)s = (a,bs) for all r G R, a e A, b B, s e S is an R S-biact.
55
(3) For an additional example in the spirit of Example 1.4.9(10) we take an R 5-biact RAS- Then we get a T(R) r(S')-biact ( )() ( ,^ since (R'A')S' = R'(A'S') for all R' CR, A' C A, S' C S. (4) Let R be a submonoid of a monoid S. Then the Rees factor A S/R is an R i?-biact consisting of the elements of S\R together with element 0 corresponding to R (compare Definition 1.1.3) with left and right multiplications ra ra if ra R r * a / < I 0 otherwise , r * 0 = o, and R r ar if ar a* r < otherwise , I 0 0 *r = = 00 for r R and a A = S/R.
Bimorphisms
The operation of two monoids on different sides of an act can also be preserved by suitable mappings. Definition 4.26. Let R,U,S,T be monoids and let As, UBR be biacts. A triple (, , ) will be called a bihomomorphism (biisomorphism) if : > U, : S R are homomorphisms (isomorphisms) of monoids and a :A > is a (bijective) mapping such that ( t a s ) a = tEaas6 for all t T, a e A, s e S. We get back the semilinear morphism of Definition 1.4.23 if we take = ^ i n -
congruences on biacts
Definition 4.27. (1) Let As be a T S- biact over the monoids and S. A relation e (A) on the set A, i.e. C A A, is called S-compatible (with the actions of and S on A) if (a, b) (tas, tbs)
for a l i i e , b e A s e S. An equivalence relation G (A) which is S'-compatible is called a S-congruence on TAs We denote by Con(Âs) the set of all .S-congruences on As-
56
I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories Q t A s defines the Rees congruence p s on A by setG or a a'. We denote the resulting factor act call it the Rees factor biact of TAS by TBSIn { 1 } we obtain the Rees factor act A s / B g .
(2) Any subbiact t B s ting apso! if , ' by TAS/TBS and particular, for =
(3) If |5| = 1, we have a definition of a T-compatible relation and a Incongruence on the left T-act A, respectively. In the particular case of TT we come to a left compatible relation and a left congruence on the monoid T , correspondingly. (4) If |T| = 1, we have a definition of an S-compatible relation and an 5-congruence on the right S*-act A s , respectively. In the particular case of S s we come to a right compatible relation and right congruence on the monoid S , correspondingly. L e m m a 4 . 2 8 . For the S-act As and a relation G B(A) (or G S(A)) we have that is S-compatible on As (or a congruence on As) if and only if is both -compatible on A (or a congruence on A) and S-compatible on Ag (or a congruence on As) Proof Necessity. Suppose that is ^-compatible. Taking s = 1 or t = 1 in the definition, we have that is both T-compatible and 5-compatible. Sufficiency. Suppose that is both T-compatible and 5-compatible and (a, b) G p, t T, s G S. Then ( t a , tb) G by T-compatibility, and therefore ((ta)s, (tb)s) by 5-compatibility. R e m a r k 4 . 2 9 . Recall that an equivalence relation on the monoid S is called a left congruence if (s, s') G implies (us, us') G for all s, s', u G S, and recall that an equivalence relation which is a left congruence and a right congruence, i.e. a congruence of the biact sSs, is called a congruence on S (see Definition
1.2.21).
Exercise 4.30. (1) If { pi I i G / } is a family of 5-congruences on As then P) pt is again a 5-congruence on As(2) For any G B(A) there is a unique smallest 5-congruence on As containing , namely, the intersection of all 5-congruences on A s containing p. D e f i n i t i o n 4 . 3 1 . Let TAS be a biact, G (A). T h e relation p = { (tais,ta2s) is called the S-compatible G A | t G , (, 2 ) G , s S} closure of p.
57
T h e unique smallest 5-congruence on A s containing B { A ) will be
denoted by p # and called the congruence
closure
of p. Then:
Proposition 4.32. Let , B(A) for a biact As(1) c Pc;

(2) ( p ^ - 1 = { p - l Y ; (3) C (4) (pc)<= =
pc C <rc;
pc;
(5) ( p U f f ) c = / ) c U f f c ;
(6) = pc if and, only if is S-compatible.

Proof ( l ) - ( 3 ) are evident.
(4) B y (1), pc C ( p c ) c . Take , 4 ' ) < = ( p c ) c . T h e n a'{ = i'o^s', = t'a'2s' c for some t' T, s' S and (^,^) p . Therefore, a!x ta\s, = ta2S for some t T, s S and (, 02) p. Hence
a" = (t't)ai(ss'),
i.e. (,' 2 ') e p c .
o!{ = {t't)a2(ss'),
t't T, ss' 5 ,
(5) B y (3) we have pc C (pU and a c C ( p U cr) c , and therefore pc U ac C ()-. Conversely, suppose (^,^) < G ( p U a ) c . Then = ta\s, a'2 = ta2s for some t T , s S and (, <12) U . T h a t is, either ( 0 1 , 0 2 ) or ( 0 1 , 0 2 ) , and hence either (a[,a'2) pc or (,,) . Thus, (0^,02) pc U . (6) Let first = p c . T h e n
(,2)
for all t T,
6 =>- (tais,ta2s)
pc =
0 1 , 0 2 A, s S. Thus, is 5-compatible.
Conversly, if is a 5-compatible relation and (^,^) p c then a!x = i a i s , o 2 = ta2s for some t , ( , 2 ) p, s S. Therefore, (,,) = ( i a i s , 2) by 5-compatibility.
L e m m a 4 . 3 3 . Let As be a biact. If the relation B(A) is S-compatible then pn is also S-compatible for any .
Proof. Let (, o 2 ) pn T h e n there exist b\, b2,. , 6 n - i A such t h a t
(,&),(&,&2),
Since is 5-compatible,
,(bn-i,a2)
p.
(ta\s,tbis), (tbis,tb2s),...,
for all t and s S and so ( i o i s , ta2s)
(tbn_is, ta2s)
pn.
58
Now we give a characterization of the congruence closure p # of a relation (A) for a biact As (for the the equivalence closure of a relation see Theorem 1.1.6). In the special case when t A s sSs> we obtain a description of the congruence on S generated by B(S). Proposition 4.34. Let As be a biact and B(A). * = ( Proof. Clearly, C pc C (pc)e. We show now that ( p c ) e Con(T As). Note first that ( p c ) e = , where = pc U {pc)~l U , by Theorem 1.1.6. Suppose (01,02) (p c ) e . Then (,2) for some . By Proposition 1.4.32 (2) and (5) 0 = pc ("1)c UAcA = (pU '1 UAa)c = $c . Then
Hence is 5-compatible and thus is also 5-compatible by Lemma 1.4.33. Therefore we have (talS,ta2s) e r e (pcy
for all t , s S. Thus (pc)e is a congruence on As, containing p. Let now be a congruence on As containing p. Then, by Proposition 1.4.32 (3) and (6), we get Pc C xc = , and therefore, (p c ) e C . Thus, (p c ) e = .
Definition 4 . 3 5 . Let As be a biact and (A) a relation. If a[, a'2 As are such that a[ ta\S and a'2 = ta2s for some t T, s S and either (01,02) or (2,) , then we say that ' is connected with a'2 by an elementary S p-transition, and use the notation ' a2. Now we obtain from Proposition 1.4.34 the following Corollary 4.36. Let B(A) for a biact As, 1,02 A. Then (01,02) if and only if either Oi = 02 or for some there is a sequence = > Z2 > z n = 02
of elementary S p-transitions connecting a\ and 02.
In what follows we shall often use a more explicit version of the previous corollary in the case of \T\ = 1, i.e. in the case of right acts. Recall that p(X) for X C x AS denotes the smallest congruence on AS containing X.
4 Acts over monoids (monoid automata) L e m m a 4 . 3 7 . Let X C As As and = p(X). has apb if and only if either a b or there exist pi,... where, for i = 1,...
59
Then for any a,b G As, one
,pn,qi, ,<?n G -4s, wi,... ,wn e S ,n, (Pi,q%) G X or (qi,Pi) G X, such that
a = piw\ q2W2 = Psw3 ... qnwn = b qxwi = p2W2 qzwz = P4W4 To obtain a useful corollary from this lemma we start with
Definition 4 . 3 8 . (cf. [HOW95], p.63) A submonoid of a monoid S is said to be left unitary if for any G P, s G S we have ps G only if s G P. Corollary 4 . 3 9 (Isbell [IsbTl]). Let be a submonoid of a monoid S. Then is a p-class containinig I 5 , i.e. [l]p, for some right congruence on S, if and only if is a left unitary submonoid. Proof. Necessity. Note first that if is a right congruence on a monoid S then [l]p is a submonoid of S. Indeed, if pi,p2 G P , i.e. lppi and lpp2 then we have 1 pp2 ( p\p 2 ) and thus P\P2 G P , and clearly 1 G P . Now take [l] p for some right congruence on S and G P,ps G P , s G S. Then 1 pps, pi, and therefore 1 (ps) ps, i. e. s G = [l] p . Sufficiency. Consider X = and p(P ) where is a left unitary submonoid of S. Now C [l] p since 1 G P . Let 1 pp, G S, 1. By Lemma 1.4.37 there exist p i , . . . ,pn, ..., qn G P, t u i , . . . , wn G S where {PiiQi) G X for i = 1 , . . . , n, such that l=PiWi q2w2=pzw3 ... qnwn = q\W\ - P2W2 <73^3 = P4W4 Since 1 G we have from 1 p\W\ that w\ G P. Therefore P2W2 qiVJi G and we get w2 G P. Repeating this argument we see that wn G P . Thus = qnwn G P. Hence = [l] p . Proposition 4 . 4 0 . Let G S(A) for a biact Aseh . { (, 2 ) Ax A | (tais,ta2s) Then
G for all t G T, s S }
is the largest congruence on As contained in . Proof. Taking t = 1 and s 1 we see that 6 C . Clearly, 6 is an equivalence. If (01,02) G 6 and t' G T, s ' g S then we have (t(t'a1s')s,t(t'a2s')s) = {(tt')ai(s's), (ii / )a 2 (s / s)) G b . Thus eb G C o n ( T A S ) .
for all t G T, s G S and therefore (t'ais', t'a2s')
60
If G Con(xj4s) and C , then for all , G A it follows from (, 02) G 7 7 that for a l i i G T, s G 5 we have (ta\s,ta2s) G C . Thus (, 02) G 6 , i.e. 6 is the largest congruence on r^-Si contained in . R e m a r k 4 . 4 1 . Let As be a 5"-biact. Then both the set S(A) of all equivalences on A and the set Con(xj4s) of all congruences on the Sbiact As are partially ordered by inclusion as subsets of the poset 13(A) (see Section 1.1). In fact, both posets S(A) and Con(T^4s) are lattices, and if , G Con(rv4s) C S(A) then the meet and the join V coincide in both lattices (Con(T-As), < , A, V) and (S(A), < , , V) , correspondingly. Indeed, if , G S(A), then = pf) (A), while V = ( U a)e is their least upper bound in [A). If , G C o n ^ ^ s ) , then \ = pC\ C o n ( r A s ) , as their least upper bound we have V = [ U { U ) by Proposition 1.4.34 because by Proposition 1.4.32 we have (p U a)c = pc U = U . This means that we may for , G Con(7^,45) unambiguously write and V in {) or in Con(T^Ls) R e m a r k 4 . 4 2 . The lattices {{A), < , A, V) and ( ( ^ 5 ) , < , A, V) are complete lattices with greatest element A A and smallest element ^ . From Corollary 1.1.7 we obtain P r o p o s i t i o n 4.43. Let , G (A) or , G Con(T^4s). Then V = ( ). This means that if a\,a2 G A then (, 02) G pV if and only if for some n G there exist elements 6, 6 2 , . . . , bn- G A such that (,&) G , {h,b2) where Ti G { , }, i = 1 , . . . , n. G T2, . . . , (>_,2) G rn ,
C o r o l l a r y 4 . 4 4 . If , G {A) or , G Con(T^5) are such that = , then V . Proof Since in this case ( ) = = , we get \/ = () = .
R e m a r k 4 . 4 5 . Note property, that is if p' G Con(T-Bs) such i.e. p' P\ (Ax A) = p.
that S-biacts have the congruence extension G C o n ( T A S ) and TAS Q TBS then there exists a that ap'a' if and only if a a' for every , a' G As, Indeed, take ' = U .
Green's equivalences for biacts

Green [Gre51] introduced five equivalences on a semigroup based on the idea of mutual divisibility of elements. These relations play no role in group theory
61
since all of them coincide with the universal equivalence. Generalizing usual expositions for semigroups (see, for example, Definition 1.3.24 and Propositions 1.3.25 and 1.3.26) we consider the beginning of the theory for biacts tAs, having in mind that we have , As and s S s as particular cases. Definition 4.46. Let As be a biact. We define Green's tions on the biact As by the following rules: (, 02) G t if and only if Ta\ = Ta2, (01,02) G TZs if and only if S CL2S -s - IZs', =t^V Tls. TVS (, 02) G tJs if and only if Ta\S = Ta,2S for all ,2 G AsLemma 4.47. In terms of the previous definition we have tL G Con(As) and TZS G Con( T A). Proof. Let (,2) G and s G S. Then Ta\ = Ta2, and therefore T{a\s) = {Ta{)s = (T2)s = T(fl2s), i.e. (, 02s) G The proof for 7Zs is similar. equivalence rela-
The semigroup variant of the following proposition can be found in [LAL79], compare also Proposition 1.3.25. Proposition 4.48. Let As be a biact. If G Con(rA) and C 7Zs, A G Con(^4s) and A C TC, then = . In particular, tC 7Zs IZs 0 Proof. Let (01,02) G , so there exists 03 G A with a\ \ pa2- Since A C TC and C 7Zs, we get Tai Tas, a^S = 02<S. Let tiai = a^s^ 02 and = 303,03 = 02^2 for ti,t^ G T, $2,53 S. Set d 01^3. Then d = 303,53 tâ2- Now 03 pa2 implies (303) (302)1 thus ai pd. Since a\ A03 implies ( a ^ ) A (03.53), we get d\a2- Hence ( ) <22, i.e. C . Analogously we obtain the converse inclusion. Remark 4.49. Since Corollary 1.4.44 that
TT>s
and 7Zs commute by Proposition 1.4.48, we have by = V IZs = t

0
TZs = IZs 0 t>
It is clear, that |T| = 1 implies tJs TZs and |5| = 1 implies tJs = < Apparently C tJs and TZs tJs Hence, since t^s is the smallest equivalence in S{A) containing tC and TZs, one has tT^s Q tJs
62
Proposition 4.50. Let As be a biact over periodic monoids and S. on As we have TT>s = J s
Then
Proof. Suppose that ,2 G A such that (01,02) G t J s i i-e Ta\S = Ta2S. Thus tidiSi = 2, t22S2 for some Si,S2 G S,ti,t2 G T. Then = (t2t1)a1(s1s2) 2 = (tit2)a2(s2si) = (i2ii)V(sis2)2 = (tit2)2a2(s2s1)2 = =
Since and S are periodic monoids we can find m G such that (2^1 ) m is an idempotent by Corollary 1.3.15. Let now c = G A. Then ai = ( i 2 i i ) m a i ( 5 l S 2 r = ( i 2 i i ) m ( i 2 i i ) m a i ( 3 i s 2 ) = (i 2 ii) m ai = ((i2ii) m _ 1 i2)(iiai) = ( ( i 2 i i ) m " 1 i 2 ) c . Therefore, (ai,c) G Moreover, we have csi = tiaisi = a2, and if we choose such that (s 2 si) n is an idempotent, we get c = t\d\ = i i ( i 2 i i ) n + 1 a i ( s i s 2 ) n + 1 =
= {tlt2)n+ld2{s2Sl)2nS2 =
{tit2)n+1(tidlsl)(s2s1)ns2
((t1t2)n+1a2(s2s1)n+l)(s2s1)n-1s2
= 0,2{{s2si)n~1s2) Hence (c,a2) G Tis

and
. = TT^S- Hence TJS T^S1=1
so (, 2 ) G TTIS
5 Decompositions and components

Finitely generated acts and cyclic acts (1.5.1-1.5.4) Examples (1.5.5) Canonical isomorphisms (1.5.6) Indecomposable acts (1.5.7-1.5.9) Unique decomposition (1.5.10) Free acts (1.5.11-1.5.12) Structure of free acts (1.5.13) Construction of free acts (1.5.14) Universal property of free acts (1.5.15) Every act is a factor act of a free act (1.5.16) Cyclic acts are factor acts of Ss (1.5.17-1.5.18) Cyclic free acts (1.5.19) Free principal right ideals (1.5.20-1.5.21) Free factor acts of Ss by right ideals (1.5.22-1.5.23)
63
Cyclic faithful acts (1.5.24-1.5.25) Cyclic simple acts (1.5.26-1.5.28) Finitely presented acts (1.5.29-1.5.30) Completely reducible acts (1.5.31-1.5.34) Homomorphism sets of acts (1.5.35-1.5.46) Comments Here we investigate certain acts which will be used frequently later on. They can also serve as more explicit examples of acts.
Finitely generated acts and cyclic acts

Definition 5.1. A subset U 0 of a right S-act A s is said to be a set of generating elements or a generating set of A s if every element a G A s can be presented as a us for some u G U, s G S. In other words, U is a set of generating elements for As if (U) : |J?Je(J uS = As where uS { us \ s G S }. We say that a right S-act A s is finitely generated if As = (U) for some U, \U\ < 00. We call A s a cyclic S-act if A s = ( { i t } } , where u G A s , and write A s = Then, clearly, A s = uS. (u).
If U is a set of generating elements for As then in general elements from A s can be presented in the form us, u G (7, s S, in many different ways. In particular, A s = (A), i.e. is always a generating set of itself. Remark 5.2. Rees factor acts of Ss by right ideals as defined in Definition 1.4.20 are cyclic acts. Indeed, if Ks is a right ideal of S then Ss/Ks ([1] P K ) Example 5.3. The following example shows that not all cyclic acts are Rees factor acts. Let S = G be a group with a non-trivial subgroup and set A { Hg \ g G G}. Define ( H g ) g ' = H(gg') for any g,g' G. Then A is a right 5-act (cf. Example 1.4.9(8)) which is cyclic since A = ( H ) . Insofar as a group does not contain proper right ideals, A cannot be a Rees factor act of S. Exercise 5.4. Let / : A s Bs be a homomorphism. (1) If As is finitely generated (cyclic), then f(As) is a finitely generated (cyclic) subact of Bs(2) If A s = (U) and g : A s > Bs is also a homomorphism, then f(u) = g(u) for every u G U implies f g. (3) If / is an epimorphism and A s = (U) then Bs = ( f ( U ) ) .
64
Examples
Example 5.5. (1) Obviously, any finite S-act is finitely generated. (2) Let S (N, ), As = \ {1 } with multiplication by natural numbers as operation. Let U be the set of all prime numbers. Then U is a set of generating elements of As- Note that U is the least generating set of As, i.e. As is not finitely generated. (3) For an arbitrary monoid S there always exist acts which are not finitely generated. Indeed, take As Sa, with |/| = oo and Sa = S. (4) For any monoid S the right act Ss is a cyclic act, since Ss IS. If As is an act then for any a As the subset aS { as \ s G S } of As is a cyclic subact of As generated by a. (5) A subact of a cyclic act may not even be finitely generated. For a concrete example take As ^ Ns in (2). (6) Take the monoid S = { 1, o, b } where S = {a, b} is a left zero semigroup. Consider the right S'-act As = { Ii,&, I 2 , I 3 , > 3 } presented by the following multiplication table: 1 Ii l i bi 61 12 12 > 2 62 Is Is h h a bi bi bi b2 b2 h b bi bi b2 b2 bs bz
Then { l i , 1 2 , 1 3 } is a (minimal) set of generating elements such that US = {li,61}, 1 2 5 = {1 2 ,6 1 ,6 2 }, 13S = {l3,b2,b3}. This example will be referred to after Lemma 1.5.9. (7) Consider Q as a right (Z, -)-act with multiplication by integers as operation. Then Qx does not have a minimal set of generating elements.
Canonical isomorphisms
Proposition 5.6. Let S, be monoids and e2 e S. If tBs is a TS-biact then Hom(eS's,t-Bs) is a eSe-biact with the definitions ()() = ()
65
and (t<p)(x) = () for u G eSe, t G , G eSs and G Hom(eS s, s) The mapping f : HornêSs,T-Bs) TBeeSe ^ {) is a biisomorphism. In particular, Hom(Ss, -Bs) = TBS as S-biacts. Moreover, 00(6.95) eSe, and in particular End^s) = S, as monoids. Similarly, if sBT is an S T-biact, then Hom(s5e, SBT) = e s e e i ? T as eSe biacts, H o m ( s S , sBT) = sBT as S biacts and End(g5'e) = eSe, End(sS') = S, both as monoids. Proof. With the given definitions Hom(e5s, $) obviously is a eSe-biact. Clearly, / as indicated is well-defined. It is an eSe-homomorphism since f{ipu) = (ipu)(e) = tp(ue) = ip(eu) = ip{e)u = f(tp)u for all u G eSe using that in this case ue eu and a T-homomorphism since
for all t G T.
Suppose /(</?) = i-e. {) = () for , G Hom(e5's, Bs). Then e s e s = = ?( ) = V ( ) 0() for every s G S and thus = . Hence / is injective. If b G Bs then : eS > Bs with ip(es) = bes is a well-defined S-homomorphism and f((p) be. Hence / is surjective and so a biisomorphism. Taking e 1 one obtains that H o r n ( S S , T B S ) TBS as S-biacts. If = { 1 } and = eS then for , ' G E n d ( e S s ) we get {){') = >(e)<p'(e) = <p(&p'(e)) = ('()) = (')() = f(<p<S)
and since / ( i d e s ) = e, this shows that / is a monoid homomorphism. Hence End(ei>s) = eSe as monoids. Taking e = 1 one obtains that End(65) = 5 as monoids. Similarly one proves the rest.
Indecomposable acts
Definition 5.7. We call an 5-act .As decomposable if there exist two subacts Bs, Cs Q As such that As = BsUCs and BsnCs = 0- In this case As = BsU C s is called a decomposition of As- Otherwise A s is called indecomposable. If we consider S-acts with zero , then we have to replace 0 by { } to define decomposable and indecomposable acts with zero.
66
I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories indecomposable.
P r o p o s i t i o n 5.8. Every cyclic act As = aS, a e As, is Proof.
If aS Bs U Cs then a a l G Bs, say, and then aS C Bs-
L e m m a 5.9. Let Ai C As, i & I, be indecomposable subacts of an act .As such that Hie/ Ai 0. Then U i e / Ai is an indecomposable subact of As-
Proof. Clearly, (Jig/ Ai is a subact of -As- Assume there exists a decomposition U i e / At = Bs0 Cs- Take e f|i e / At with G Bs, say. Then At Bs for all i /. Since Al = A{ (Bs Cs) = (Ai Bs) (A ? Cs) and is indecomposable, it follows that AiC]Cs = 0 for all i I. Thus l j ; e / Ai = Bs, a contradiction. Note that Example 1.5.5(6) is an indecomposable S'-act A s such that A s = I 1 S U I 2 S U I 3 S but | t = i l i S = 0.
Unique decomposition
T h e o r e m 5.10. Every S-act As has a unique decomposition able subacts. into indecompos-
Proof. Take e A s - Then xS is indecomposable by Proposition 1.5.8. Lemma 1.5.9, we get that Ux = Us ^ A s I Us indecomposable and 6 Us }
By
is an indecomposable subact of AsFor A s we get that Ux Uy or Ux Uy = 0. Indeed, 6 Ux Uy implies Ux, Uy C Uz. Thus e Ux C Uz, y e y C Uz, i.e. Uz C Ux Uy. Therefore Ux = Uy = Uz. Denote by A' a representative subset of elements G As with respect to the equivalence relation ~ defined by ~ y if Ux Uy. Then A s = UêA' ^ is the unique decomposition of A s into indecomposable subacts. Note that there is an alternative approach to the proof of the preceding result, using a connectedness relation. Define a relation ~ on an S-act A s for a, be As by a ~ b a = , a\t\ = 2, , antn = b
for some ai G A s , Si, i? G S, i . The connected components are the ^-classes and indecomposable then means connected.
67
Free acts
Free acts are analogs of free modules and so in some sense have properties close to those of vector spaces. For them the unique decomposition becomes simple. Here we choose an elementary approach to free acts. In Section 2.2 we will present the more general categorical approach. Definition 5.11. A set U of generating elements of a right 5-act As is said to be a basis of As if every element a As can be uniquely presented in the form a = us, u U, s S, i.e., if a = u\Si = U2S2, then = U2 and si = 2If an act A5 has a basis U, then it is called a free act or, more precisely, a \U\-free act. In particular, Ss is 1-free with basis { 1 }. Exercise 5.12. (1) If U and V are bases of As then \U\ = \V\. (2) If / : As > B s is an isomorphism and As is free then B s is free. (3) Consider the directed graph G:
Then G is a 1-free End(G)-act with basis {a;} where End(G) = (S2) 1 . If we paste in (cf. Definition 1.1.9) a rigid graph R with vertex set x \ , . . . , x n , > 8, for every arrow in G we obtain an (n l)-free End((?)act with basis ,... ,- (4) Take S = {1,0}. Then S does not have ideals Ks Ss which are free ,5'-acts. (5) Let (No, +) be the monoid of non-negative integers with respect to addition. Then all ideals of (No, +) are free No-acts. (6) Let (N, ) be the monoid of natural numbers with respect to multiplication. Then there exist ideals which are free N-acts and there exist ideals which are not free as N-acts.
Structure of free acts

T h e o r e m 5.13. An S-Act As is free if and only if it is isomorphic to a disjoint w union of acts all of which are isomorphic to Ss, i-e. As Uie/ here Si = Ss for all i I for some non-empty set I.
68
Proof. Let A s be free with basis {xi | i I}. Then XiS is a subact of A s for every i I. Moreover, xtS x3S = 0 for any i,j /, i j. Indeed, if Xir = xjs, r,s G S, then it follows from Definition 1.5.11 that i = Xj. Now define a mapping : XiS > Ss by f(XiS) = s
for any s S. Since Xi belongs to a basis of As, is well-defined. It is obvious that is an isomorphism. Since Ss is free the converse is obvious.
Construction of free acts

Construction 5.14. Let 0 be a set and let F(X) be the set of pressions of the form xs, X, s 6 S, where xs = x's, ' X, 5, s' and only if = ', s = s1. Define ( xs)t = x(st) for any X, s,t e S. this definition F(X) becomes a free right 5-act with basis X. It is clear that F(X) = S where S is a right 5-act with the (x, s)t = (x, st) for all (x,s) 6 S, t S. all ex6 S1, if Under action
Universal property of free acts

The following theorem contains the categorical definition of freeness relative to the category of sets. It also contains the non-additive analog of the principle of linear extension. Theorem 5.15. Let Fs be a free S-act with basis = { Xj \ i I } . If is any mapping from to any S-act As, then there exists a unique homomorphism Fs > As such that \ = Proof. Define -0 : Fs > A s by tp(xis) = ()3. Since is a basis, every element of Fs can be uniquely presented in the form 6 B, s e S. Hence is well-defined. It is obvious that is a homomorphism with ip\ = . By Exercise 1.5.4(2), is uniquely determined.
Every act is a factor act of a free act

The next proposition presents another important property of free acts. Proposition 5.16. For any right S-act As there exists a free right S-act Fs such that As is an epimorphic image of Fs.
69
Proof. For a right 5-act Ag consider the free act F(A)s constructed as in Construction 1.5.14. Consider = id J 4 s . By Theorem 1.5.15 there exists a homomorphism : F(A)s > As such that \ = Since i d ^ is surjective, is an epimorphism.
Cyclic acts are factor acts of Ss

The next proposition, in particular, justifies the notion of a monocyclic act (cf. Definition 1.4.18). Recall that if As is an act and a G As then by we denote the homomorphism from Ss into As defined by a (s) = as for every s G S. Proposition 5.17. Let As = aS be a cyclic act. Then As = Ss/kerAa. An act As is cyclic if and only if there exists a right congruence on S such that Ag = S/p. Proof. Let As = aS for some a G As- The homomorphism Aa : Ss As = aS is obviously an epimorphism. By Corollary 1.4.22 to the Homomorphism Theorem we get that As = aS = S/ker Xa. Clearly, S/p = [l] p 5 is cyclic. Corollary 5.18. Let S be a monoid and G S. Then zS = S/kexXz, Xz G End(5s) denotes the left translation by z. where
Cyclic free acts

In what follows, we give conditions under which cyclic acts, principal right ideals and Rees factor acts by right ideals are free. Later on in Chapter 4 we shall use this to answer so-called homological questions, for example: for which monoids are all cyclic acts free. Proposition 5.19. Let be a right congruence on S. The factor act S/p is free if and only if there exists e 2 = e G S such that = ker Ae and e ( A V) 1, where \e G End(5s) denotes the left translation by e and V is Green's Vrelation. Proof. Necessity. Being cyclic, S/p is indecomposable by Proposition 1.5.8. It follows from Theorem 15.13 that S/p has a basis consisting of one element, say [u]p for u G S. Using Theorem 1.5.15 we get a homomorphism : []5 > Ss with ([]) = 1. Clearly, is an isomorphism.
70
I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories Set : = ([1] ). Then 1 = ([]) = <([1 }pu) = ([1 }p)u = vu .
Set e : = uv. Then e 2 = e. Now V>([e]P) = i>(Mfiv) = ([]) = lv = v = ip([l}p) , Since is a monomorphism, we get [e]p = [l] p . This means ep 1. Since uv = e and ve = vuv = v, we have eCv. Since vu = 1, we have vTZl. Hence eT> 1. Consequently, e ( V) 1. Finally, [ x] p = [i/]p, x,y e S holds if and only if ([]) = ^(Mp), i-e. = vy. Since uv = e and ve v, the equality vx vy holds if and only if ex = ey. This means that = kerA e . Sufficiency. Take e 2 = e S such that e(p A V) 1 and = ker Ae. Prom e VI we get the existence of 5 such that e C and vTZl. This implies ve = v, uv e and vx = 1 for some u,x G S. Prom the first two equalities we get vuv = v. Multiplying from the right by gives vu = 1. Now we show that { [u]p } is a basis of S/p. From 1 pe we get [l] p = [e]p = [uv]p = [u]pv and thus [s]p = [uJpVs in S/p for any s 6 S. This means that \u]p is a generating element of S/p. Suppose now that [u]ps = [u]pt for s,t 6 S. Then (us) (ut) and by assumption eus = eut, i.e. uvus = uvut. Since vu = 1, we have us = ut and multiplying from the left by gives s t. This means that { [u]p } is a basis of S/p.
Free principal right ideals

Proposition 5.20. A principal right ideal zS, S, of S is free if and only if there exists e2 = e G S such that ze = z, eVl and kerA2 < ker Ae. Proof. Necessity. Suppose zS, S, is free. Then, by Corollary 1.5.18, S/ ker A2 is free and Proposition 1.5.19 gives the existence of an idempotent e with the required properties. Sufficiency. Suppose that for 2 e S there exists e 2 = e G S such that ze = z, eVl and kerAz < kerA e . It follows from ze = that e ( k e r A 2 ) l and ker Ae < ker \ z . The last inequality together with the hypothesis ker A2 < kerAe gives ker A2 = kerA e . Now S/ ker 2 and thus zS is free by Proposition 1.5.19. E x a m p l e 5.21. It is obvious that the principal right ideal zS of 5 is a free right S-act if G S is left cancellable. The converse, however, is not true in general. Let S be the bicyclic monoid generated by u, G S (cf. Remark 1.3.13)
71
with u (1,0), = (0,1). Then vu = 1 and e = uv is not left cancellable, but since e VI the principal right ideal eS is a free right .S-act by Proposition 1.5.20. To see that eV 1 check that e = (1,1) and use that (1,1) C (0,1) 7 (0,0).
Free factor acts of Ss by right ideals

P r o p o s i t i o n 5 . 2 2 . Let Ks Ss/Ks is free if
an
be a right ideal
of S.
Then
the Rees factor
act
only if |-Ks| 1
Proof Necessity. Let Ks be a right ideal of S and suppose that Ss/Ks is free. Then it follows from Proposition 1.5.19 that there exists e 2 = e S such that PKS = kerA e and e (3 A P ) 1. If Ks = Ss then Ss/Ks is one-element which implies that |<Ss| = 1 and thus \Ks\ = 1. If Ks is a proper right ideal, i.e. 1 Ks, we get from e 3 1 that e = 1. Now = ker Ae implies that for any k, I Ks we have k = I which means |"s| = 1. Sufficiency. This is obvious since Ss/Ks = Ss and Ss is free.
Corollary 5.23. The one-element act &s is free if and only if S = { 1 } .
Cyclic faithful acts

Recall that an act As is called faithful if for s,t 6 S the equality as = at for all a A implies s = t (see Definition 1.4.8).
P r o p o s i t i o n 5 . 2 4 . Let be a right congruence on a monoid S. The cyclic right act S/p is faithful if and only if does not contain any left congruence on S, As-
Proof. Necessity. Let S/p be faithful. Suppose that 5 is a left congruence on S such that < p. Then there exist s,t G S, s , srt which implies (us)r(ut) for every u S. Hence ( u s ) p ( u t ) or [u]s = [u]t for every u S. But this means that S/ is not faithful. Sufficiency. Suppose that for a right congruence on S the cyclic right act S/p is not faithful. Then there exist s,t S, s t, such that [u]s = [u]t for any u 6 S, i.e. (us) ( ut ). Define a relation on S as follows: UTV <=> upv and (ru) (rv) for any r S.
It is easy to see that r is an equivalence and < p. If UT , u,v S, S, then (pu) (pv) by the definition of and
r(pu) = ((rp)u) ((rp)v) = r(pv)
72
for any r G S again by the definition of r. Hence (pu) (pv). This means that is a left congruence. Clearly, srt. Thus Ag. Corollary 5.25. Let Kg be a right ideal of S. The Rees factor act Ss/Ks is faithful if and only if for any k, I G Ks, k I, there exists s G S such that [sk]PK [sl]PK.
Cyclic simple acts

Recall that an act /1,5 is called simple if it contains no proper subacts (see Definition 1.3.19). It is clear that a simple act must be cyclic. Now we give conditions under which cyclic acts, principal right ideals and Rees factor acts of a monoid by right ideals are simple. Proposition 5.26. Let be a right congruence on a monoid S. right act S/p is simple if and only if [l]p tS 0 for any t G S. The cyclic
Proof. Necessity. Let S/p be simple for a right congruence on S, let : S > S/p be the canonical epimorphism and t S. Then n(tS) is a subact of S/p. Since S/p is simple we have ir(tS) = S/p. Hence there exists u G tS such that n(u) = [1 ] p . Thus u G [l] p and [l] p tS 0. Sufficiency. Let, 7 : S S/p be the canonical epimorphism and let As be 1 a subact of S/p. Let t G (As). By hypothesis there exists s G S such that ts G [l]p. Now [l]p = n(ts) = n(t)s G As. This implies S/p = [1]PS C As. Hence As S/p and S/p is simple. The following two statements are corollaries of the previous proposition. They can also be obtained straightforward from the definition of a simple act. Proposition 5.27. A principal right ideal zS, G S, is a simple right act if and only if G ztS for every t G S. Proposition 5.28. Let Ks be a right ideal of S. The Rees factor act is simple if and only if Ks = S. S/Ks
Finitely presented acts

Definition 5.29. An act As is said to be finitely presented if it is isomorphic to a factor act of a finitely generated free act by a finitely generated congruence. Proposition 5.30 (Normak [Nor77]). Let As be a cyclic act. Then As is finitely presented if and only if it is isomorphic to a factor act of Ss by a finitely generated right congruence on S.
73
Proof. Necessity. For technical reasons we shall also use upper indices in this part of the proof. Let Fs = Si S2 Sn, and let : S > Si be l isomorphisms, set </?j(s) = s for every s S, i = I,... ,n, and let
be a finitely generated congruence on Fg, so that Fs/p is cyclic. Assume that Fs/p = [ w 1 ] ^ for u e S. Let [l l ] p = [ul\pZi, z; 6
1 , . . . , n. Set
S,
{
and
J
X j ,
rrij =
uzmj
Xj
otherwise nj = 1 otherwise
uznj
x/j
for every j = 1 , . . . , k. Consider the right congruence

r
p ( { { s
, t
) , ( s
, t
) , . , ( s
, t
})
on S. We shall prove that Fs/p is isomorphic to a factor act 65/r, dividing the proof into three parts. (a) For every
j = 1,..., k
one has s] p i ] .
[ul]
p
If r r i j 1 then X j = S j . Using the equalities [1 l ] p = phisms , i = 1 , . . . , n , we get in the case -rrij 1 that
[x^\p = [ l ^ X j ] = [1m
j
and isomor-
X j
Wzm^pXj
= [1 ^piuZm-Xj) = [l^pSj = [s)] p . This means that always 3 sj. Since

x"
l j
Analogously one can prove that y"J i j . srt.
py3
we have .sj p i ] ,
(b) If s1 pt1 for some elements s,t e S then
From s1 pt 1 it follows by Lemma 1.4.37 that either s 1 = t 1 and therefore s = t or there exist pi,...,pm, q i , . . . , qm e Fs, w\,..., tt;m G S where for every i = 1 , . . . , n, ( p i , q i ) = (x3, y ] 3 ) or (ft, ft) = ( y 3 , x3) for some j = 1 , . . . ,k, such that
S1 = P1W1 qiWi q2W2 P2W2 = P3W3 q-sw-s = PaWa qmWm = t
l
From the equality s1 = p\w we get that p\ S1 and either pi = x^ 3 or

Pi qi
= =
y3
for some for some and

s
1, . . . , k .
s = = p2w2
Suppose that
S j W i . p2
pi
=
S
x3.
Then
yJJ
X j W i
which means that

y3w
Now from the equality P2 = Xf3'
we get that
n j
and either
or P2 = y,3' for some for some j'
= 1,... ,k and my = rij or
74
rij> = rij. Suppose that P2 = x,3'. Then
= y,3' and from the equality
y^wi = xiJ'W2 we get yjW\ = Xj/W2 Multiplying the last equality from the left by uznj we get the equality t3w\ = sj'W2 Continuing in this manner we come to the sequence of equalities
S =
p'xWi q' W q[wi = p'2w2

2 2
P3W3
q'rr^m
= t
q'sw3 = p'4w4 ...
where for every i = 1 ,.,.,, q[) = ( S j , t j ) or (p , q[) = (t3, Sj) for some j = 1, ..., k which means that s t. (c) Consider the factor act Ss/. Since [l 1 ] p = [u^pZi we have now [1]T = [u]Tz\ which means that Ss/ = [w]T5. Define a mapping / : Ss/ > Fs/p by f([u]Ts) = [^
for every s e S. Suppose [M]TS = [v\Tt for s,t S, i.e. ( u s ) r ( u t ) . Then by Lemma 1.4.37 either us = ut and therefore (u 1 s) (w1^) or there exist p i , . . . ,pm, q\,..., w\,..., Wm e S such that US = PiWx q2W2 = P3W3 QmWm = Ut qiWi - P2W2 q3w3 = p4w4 ... where for every i = 1 , . . . , n , q t ) = ( s j , t 3 ) or (pi,qi) = ( t j , S j ) for some j = 1, , k. Consider elements piwi and qiWi of some column of the above sequence, I = 1 , . . . , m. Since pi = Sj and qi = tj or vice versa for some j = 1, ..., k, it follows from part a) of the proof that \pfwi]p = [q}wi]p. Applying the isomorphism to the above sequence we get uls=p\wi qlw2=plw3 ...q^nwm = u1t q\w 1 = p\w2 q\w3 = p\wA ... Moving from the left to the right in this sequence we get [tt1^ = \p\wi]p = [q\wi]p = ... = [ult]p . This means that / is well-defined. Clearly, / is a surjective homomorphism. Suppose /([u] T s) = f([u]Tt), s,t e S, i.e. [ul]ps = [ul]pt or [(iis) 1 ^ = l [(ut) ]p. It follows from part b) of the proof that []Ts [u]Tt. Hence / is injective and, therefore, an isomorphism. Sufficiency. This is obvious.
Completely reducible acts

Definition 5.31. An act union of simple subacts. is called completely reducible if it is a disjoint
75
The assertions in the next lemma are direct consequences of the definition. L e m m a 5.32. (1) Every simple act is completely reducible.
(2) A cyclic act is completely reducible if and only if it is simple. (3) Every subact of a completely reducible act is completely reducible. Using Proposition 1.5.27 one obtains the following L e m m a 5.33. The act Ss is completely reducible if and only if S is a group. P r o p o s i t i o n 5.34. All right acts over a monoid S are completely reducible if and only if S is a group. Proof. Necessity. Follows from Lemma 1.5.33. Sufficiency. Let S be a group, As an indecomposable S-act. Then As \ aS cannot be a subact of As for a e As- Let b G As \ aS be such that there exist s , < e 5 with as = bt. Then b = ast~l G aS1, a contradiction. So As = aS.
Homomorphism sets of acts

We continue the discussion of homomorphism sets started with Proposition 1.5.6. The sets I and J will be non-empty for the rest of this section. L e m m a 5.35. Let Bs and Aj,j e J, be right S-acts. Then the mapping
f : Horn ( ( j A,,Bs) jeJ

defined by /() =
X je.J ( ; , Bs)
for every e H o m ( ( j j ; Aj, Bs), the cartesian product
where -j =
\Aj, j J, and X denotes
of sets, is a bijection.
L e m m a 5.36. Let As be an indecomposable right S-act and : As > Bs an S-homomorphism. Then </?(v4s) is an indecomposable subact of BsProof. Assume that = B's LJ B'^ C Bs. Then ~1()
As = -1{'3
flg) = -1{'3)
76
where ~1('3) ~1(3) 0 since As is indecomposable. Since is a mapping, this implies that 0 (~1('3) ~{3)) ^ B's Bs which is a contradiction. Lemma 5.37. Let As, Then the mapping i I, be right S-acts where As is indecomposable. | j H o m ( ^ s , B,) iei Bi)
f : Horn ( a s , [ J Bt) iei
defined by /() = where iE I is such that () QBi and 1 Hornig, is such that 1 (a) = () for a As, is a bisection.
Proof. Since Ag is indecomposable, <p(As) is an indecomposable subact of (J- e/ Bi by Lemma 1.5.36. Then there exists a unique i I such that C B%. Definition 5.38. If H o m ( | j j e J Aj, ( J i e I Bi) where Aj,j J, Bi,i I, are right 5-acts and Aj, j J, are indecomposable, then the mapping : J > I with () = i for j J if f(Aj) C Bi is called the index mapping of . Now we obtain from Lemmas 1.5.35 and 1.5.37 the following Proposition 5.39. Let Aj,j J, Bi,i I, be nght S-acts, where Aj,j are indecomposable. Then the mapping / : H o m ( | j A,, U ^ ) jeJ defined by /(</?) = ((pj)jej, iei where j XJ-ej(|jHom(Ai>JBi)) iei Hom(Aj, ^), for every J,
Hom((J- e J Aj, U i e / B i ) , is a bijection. Next we consider right .S-acts whose components are cyclic and generated by idempotents of S. It will turn out later (see Section 3.17) that these acts are projective, and, in particular, free, if all these idempotents are 1 (see Theorem 1.5.13). This representation for I J can be found in [Bul95]. Definition 5.40. If HomflJ < / ejS, |j ieJ eiS) where ef S, e? = ej S for i I, j J, then the mapping : J * (Jiej ei$ ) ~ *Pj(ej) = e<p(j)(P\e3s{ej) for j J, where is the index mapping of , is called the coefficient mapping of . Proposition 5.41. Let ef = e^ S, = ej S for i I, j J. mapping / : Horn ( ( J ejS, |J e , s ) - XjGJ ( ( J e ^ e , ) jeJ defined by /(</>) = (Tp{j))j^j, iei is a bijection. iei Then the
77
Proof. Notice that by Proposition 1.5.8 all eiS,ejS apply Propositions 1.5.39 and 1.5.6
are indecomposable and
Remark 5.42. Since the sets I and J are non-empty we may interpret X j e j ( U i e / eiSej) as a so-called column monomial matrix (cf. [CL/PR67], [Fle74], [Fle75a], [Kna76b]), i.e. a possibly infinite |/| | J|-matrix which contains in each column j exactly one element of the form elseJ for some s G S and some i 6 7. Taking the other elements of each column to be an externally adjoined zero 0 we define a partial addition on S { 0 } b y 0 + s = s + 0 = s for all s G S and 0 + 0 = 0. Now it is straightforward to see that the "usual" matrix multiplication corresponds to composition of mappings " with G H o m ( ( J j 6 J ejS, |J i e i etS) and V Hom(|J i e i e;S, ( J k K ekS) if is also a non-empty set and ejr = e^ G S. For I = J = we this way get a monoid of column monomial matrices isomorphic to E n d ( ( J j e j ejS). We write M\i\(S). Corollary 5.43. Suppose that e2 = e G S and ef e^ G S for i G I. Hom(|JeS, |jei5) = jeJ iei as right eSe-acts. Proof. Apparently, H o m ( U j e J eS, | J i e I e i S ) is a right eSe-act (cf. Proposition 1.5.6) and the bijection from Proposition 1.5.41 is a right e5e-isomorphism using that now ej = e for all j G J. Indeed, for t G eSe we have ${) (<p{j))jejt = (e<p)<P\es{e))jejt = (^]es(t))jej and f(<pt) = (&{j))jej = (e^t(j)(^)|es(e))jGj = ( e ^ ) ^ l e S ( t ) ) j j and ipt(j) = ip(j) for every j G J as <p(ej) G eiS for some i G I if and only if <p(tej) <p(ejt) G eiS again using that ej e for every j G J. Corollary 5.44. Take the right S-acts ( J S j Si = S for all j G J, i G /. Then Horn ( ( J Sjf U^) jeJ iei as right S-acts. and ( J i e /
w
Then
X,eJ(|Jeê) iei
Sj
= Xjej({J iei
Remark 5.45. For I J we have a representation of the endomorphism monoid of a free right S-act F{I)s with |/| generating elements as a monoid of column monomial matrices, cf. Remark 1.5.42. This can be used to prove determinability results (see [Kn/Mi73], [Fle75a]): Let S and be monoids, I,J sets with |/|, |J| > 1. Then the endomorphism monoids E n d ( F ( / ) s ) and E n d ( F ( J ) T ) are isomorphic if and only if |J| = | J\ and S = as monoids.
78
R e m a r k 5 . 4 6 . Consider a monoid S with 0, right S'-acts with a unique zero , and S'-homorriorphisms preserving , cf. Definition 1.5.7. Then in the previous results starting with Lemma 1.5.35 we replace the disjoint union by the "zero disjoint union" Uje!/ A? right 5-acts Aj, that is a union such that Aj A^ = { 0 } for all j, k G J, j k. In Section 2.2 this will (in a more formal setting) be called the amalgamated coproduct of {Aj \ j G ,7} (with amalgamated { # } ) which will turn out to be the coproduct in the category of 5-acts with zero. Then all these results are preserved except that the index mapping of H o m ( U j | j Aj, Uj|/ ^ i ) j e JifipiAj)? {}.
now
is
partial mapping from J to I, defined for
Comments
The first aim of this section was the investigation of possible decomposition of S-'Acts into indecomposable components. Although this is always possible by an easy procedure, the indecomposable components are not really well-structured. The situation becomes more convenient if we consider so-called free acts. They are constructed by the same principle as vector spaces or free modules with the help of a basis. It will turn out in Chapter 3 that in the broader class of so-called projective acts we have an almost as "simple" structure as for free acts. On the way we characterized cyclic acts and finitely presented cyclic acts. Already in the spirit of homological classification of monoids we characterized monoids S over which all right 5-acts are completely reducible, i.e. are disjoint unions of simple acts.
Categories
Basic definitions (1.6.1-1.6.2) Concrete categories, small categories (1.6.3) Subcategories, full subcategories (1.6.4) Categories of S-acts (1.6.5) Other examples of categories (1.6.6) Opposite categories and product categories (1.6.7-1.6.8) Special morphisms, balanced categories (1.6.9-1.6.13) Special morphisms in concrete categories (1.6.14-1.6.16) More on special morphisms (1.6.17) Zero morphisms, initial, terminal and zero objects (1.6.18-1.6.20)
6 Categories
79
Categories have been introduced to get a common language for treating classes of sets, groups, monoids etc. This way in the category of monoids every monoid will become an object; that is, in this category it will play a role similar to the role which elements play in a (structured) set. In addition to objects, we will have to also consider morphism sets in categories. In some sense, morphisms even have priority over objects.
Basic definitions
Definition 6.1. A category C is given by
(1) a class Ob C, whose members are called objects of C; (2) associating a set Morc(^4, B), the morphisms ordered pair (A, B) of objects in C such that from A to B, to every
More (, ) M o r c ( 4 ' , ') = 0 if A' or ' (3) defining composition of morphisms, i.e. for every triple {A, , C) of objects in C , a mapping Morc(A,B) M o r e ( , C) (f,g) such that (a) this composition is associative, i.e. for objects A, , C, D in C and / e M o r c ( A , B ) , g e M o r c { B , C ) , h e M o r c { C , D ) one has (ho g)o f = ho(go f) (b) there exist identities, i.e. for every object A Ob C there exists id^ e More(-<4,-A), the identity morphism of A, such that for every / 6 M o r c ( A ), 6 Ob C , one has / id^ = id of = /. We often use the notation gf instead of gof. The composition of morphisms is also called the multiplication of morphisms and gf is called the product of morphisms / and g. The class of all morphisms of C will be denoted by Mor C . We call A the domain M o r c ( A - S ) and write / :A and the codomain of every element of Morc(A,C) 9 f
or for / e Mor(A, B).
80
For A, B, C, D Ob C the morphisms / 6 M o r ( A , B ) , g 6 M o r ( B , D ) , h e Mor(A, C), k Mor(C, D) can be visualized in the following diagram f
A h C This diagram is called a commutative
D. square if gf = kh.
In the sequel we will consider various diagrams which can be understood as directed (multi-)graphs with objects as vertices and morphisms as edges. Such a diagram will be called commutative if all possible paths between any pair of objects represent the same composition of morphisms. Note that commutative triangles have been used in previous sections. We shall, as usual, write A 6 C instead of A e Ob C and sometimes also Mor (A, ) instead of More ( ). There exists an "object free" definition of a category, where the identity morphism takes over the role of the respective object. For more information see for example 1.12 in [SE/WI79]. R e m a r k 6.2. The definition of a category uses classes of objects. Note that every set is a class. All sets form a class but not a set. Inclusion, intersection, union, cartesian product and indexed families are used for classes as they are used for sets. More information on this topic can be found in Chapter 2 of [HE/ST73] or in Section 2 of [AD/HE/ST90].
Concrete categories, small categories

The next concept draws attention to the fact that in the definition of a category objects do not have to be sets and morphisms do not have to be mappings. Definition 6.3. A category C is called a concrete category if all objects are (structured) sets, morphisms from A to are (structure preserving) mappings from A to B, composition of morphisms is the composition of mappings, and the identities are the identity mappings. A category C is called a small category if Ob C is a set. Note that a discussion of concrete and concretizable categories can be found, for example, in Chapter 3 of [HE/ST73] or Chapter 5 of [AD/HE/ST90],
6 Categories
81
Subcategories, full subcategories

Definition 6.4. A category D is called a subcategory (1) Ob D C Ob C , (2) Mor D (A, ) C More(-A, B) for all A,B Ob D, (3) the composition of the morphisms in D is the restriction of the composition in C. If, in addition, Mor D (A,i?) = M o r C ( A , B ) for all A, e Ob D, then D is called a full subcategory of C. of the category C if
Categories of S-acts
Example 6.5.
Notation
(1)
Objects right 5-acts left S-acts
Morphisms 5-homomorphims
Act - S S - Act for a semigroup or a monoid S Act 0 S S - Act 0 for a semigroup or a monoid S with 0
(2)
right 5-acts left S-acts with unique zero such that = {} for
S- homomor phisms preserving zero
A Act 0 - S
(3)
- Act - S for semigroups or monoids and S Act - S S - Act for a semigroup or a monoid S
S'-biacts
S'-bimorphisms
(4)
right 5-acts left S-acts including 05 or 50, respectively
^-homomorphims
Note that the requirements with respect to 0 and in (2) may be changed. Then most of the categorical constructions investigated in the sequel would turn out different. It will become clear soon that from a categorical viewpoint it may be convenient to have an empty 5-act, i.e. to consider the empty set 0 as an 5-act 0 S or 5 0 as we did in (4). Note that Hom(A s , 0 5 ) = 0 for all As 0.
82
Other examples of categories

E x a m p l e 6.6. Notation (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (6) (7) (8) (9) (10) (11) Set Set R e i Sgr Absgr Mon Abmon Grp Abgrp Rin Rinj R Mod Mod - R for a ring R - Vec for a field - fdVec for a field Graph Objects Sets Sets Semigroups Commutative semigroups Monoids Commutative monoids Groups Abelian groups Rings Rings with 1 left .R-modules right -modules if-vector spaces Finite dimensional K-vector spaces Finite graphs without multiple edges Finite graphs without multiple edges Partially ordered sets Morphisms Mappings Relations Semigroup homomorphisms Semigroup homomorphisms Monoid homomorphisms Monoid homomorphisms Group homomorphisms Group homomorphisms Ring homomorphisms Ring homomorphisms which preserve 1 Homomorphisms of modules K- homomorphisms, i.e. K-linear mappings K- homomorphisms, i.e. /^-linear mappings Graph morphisms, cf. Definition 1.1.9 Strong graph morphisms, cf. Definition 1.1.9 Isotone (i.e. order preserving) mappings
(12) (13) (14)
(15)
Sgraph
(16)
Poset
Note that rings are asumed associative here.
Opposite categories and product categories

Here we give two standard ways to construct new categories from given ones, the first of which is related to contravariant functors and will reappear as a functor itself in Definition 1.7.4.
6 Categories Construction 6.7. (1) C o p , the dual or opposite category to a category C. Objects: objects of C . Morphisms: Mor c p (A, B) = Morc(-B,A) for A, e C. Composition: Mor c p (C,B) x Mor C op(, A) Morcp(C, A) 9 f ,
83
where / G More ( A B) = MorCop {B,A), g M o r c ( B , C ) = Mor c p (C, B )
and go f e Morcp(C, A) = Mor c (^4, C) is formed in C. (2) The product category C D of the categories C and D. Objects: ordered pairs (A, B) with A C, D. Morphisms:
MOVCXD((A, ), {A', B')) = {(f,g)\FE MorC(A, A'),ge Mor D(B, B')}.
Composition: componentwise, i.e. ( f ' , g ' ) (f,g) suitable f,f',g,g'. Analogously multiple product categories are defined.
= (/' /, g' g) for
Remark 6.8. Note that morphisms in Morcp (A, B ) for a concrete category C are not mappings from A to . The construction of the category C o p to a given category C leads to the categorical dualization of concepts, obtained by reversing morphisms ("arrows"). The dual notion is sometimes characterized by the prefix co. For example, product and coproduct, free and cofree.
Special morphisms, balanced categories

The concepts of injective, surjective and bijective mappings require a transfer of the usual notions to morphisms which may not be mappings. This is done here. It turns out that this sometimes leads to new concepts as the transfer is not a "bijective correspondence".
84
Definition 6.9. Consider a morphism A / in a category C. Then (1) / is called a monomorphism cancellable, i.e., if / is left an epimorphism cancellable, i.e., kf = hf ^ k if / is right = h
fk = f h ^ k = h for all k,he Mor(C, A). Then A is called a subobject of B. (2) / is called a bimorphism (3) / is called a coretraction if / is left invertible, i.e., there exists g e Mor(?,A) with gf = id^, written A *> B-, A is called a coref tract of B.
9
for all k,he Mor (B, D). Then is called a factor object of A.
if it is a monomorphism and an epimorphism.
a retraction if / is right invertible, i.e., there exists g G Mor (B, A) with fg = id , writ/ ten A ; is called a re9
tract of A.
(4) / is called an isomorphism, if it is a retraction and a coretraction. In this case we say that A and are isomorphic. Notation: A = B. (5) The category C is called a balanced category morphisms. if bimorphisms are iso-
Note that left and right sides in the definition above are categorically dual concepts according to Remark 1.6.8. Bimorphisms and isomorphisms are categorically dual each to itself, i.e. they are selfdual. Remark 6.10. In act categories we call a monomorphism f : A$ Bs an embedding of As into Bs. If there exists such a monomorphism we say that As can be embedded into Bs or Bs contains (an isomorphic copy o f ) As or Bs is an extension of A5. If As C Bs is a subact, then the restriction (id s )| J 4 s is called the inclusion or the natural embedding of As into BsIn this case we mostly will not use a special symbol for the inclusion but just write Ag C BsProposition 6.11. A right S-act Bs is a retract of a right S-act A f
9
B,
if and only if there exists a subact A's C .A5 and an epimorphism h : As > A's such that Bs = A's and h(a') = a' for every a' A's.
6 Categories
85
Proof. Necessity. Assume Bs is a retract of a right
act As, A
/
9
. Then
fg = idg. Set A's = Im < 7 . Then, clearly, A's is a subact of As and Bs = A's. Define h : As > A's by h(a) = (gf)(a) for every a G As- Then h is an epimorphism. Let a' G A's and b G Bs be such that g(b) = a'. Then h(a') = (gf)(a') = (gf)(g(b)) = (g(fg))(b) = g(b) = a' . Sufficiency. Let Bs be a subact of As such that there exists an epimorphism h : As > Bs with h(b) = b for every b G Bs- Then hi = id s for the natural n embedding : Bs > As- Hence Bs is a retract of As Corollary 6.12. Let e G S be an idempotent. eS is a retract of SsThen the principal right ideal
Proof. The mapping h : Ss > eS defined by h(s) = es for every s G S is an epimorphism such that h(x) = for every G eS. Exercise 6.13. (1) Every coretraction is a monomorphism and every retraction is an epimorphism. (2) Let C in C. Then the following implications are valid: f,g epimorphisms ==> gf epimorphism =i> g epimorphism f,g monomorphisms ==$ gf monomorphism = > / monomorphism.
Special morphisms in concrete categories

Even in concrete categories monomorphisms and coretractions as well as epimorphisms and retractions are different concepts, i.e. are not just injective or surjective mappings. But we have the following Proposition 6.14. If C is a concrete category, then the following are valid for f : A coretraction retraction injective surjective =kmonomorphism epimorphism. implications
Proof. Note that a coretraction i.e. a mapping with a left inverse must be injective and, in turn, an injective mapping / is left cancellable, i.e. different
86
mappings into the domain of / give different products after application of / . Similar arguments work for a retraction / or a surjective mapping / . Proposition 6.15. In Act S and all other act categories from Example 1.6.5 epimorphisms are surjective, monomorphisms are injective and bimorphisms are isomorphisms, i.e. all these categories are balanced. Moreover, in Set monomorphisms are coretractions and epimorphisms are retractions. In sections 2.2 and 2.3 we shall give conditions for a concrete category to have these properties. Example 6.16. In general, monomorphisms are not coretractions. The natural embedding Nn0 > ^0 in Act (No, +) is not left invertible, i.e. it is not a coretraction. In general, epimorphisms are not retractions. The natural epimorphism Zn(, (Z2) n 0 i n A c t (No, +) is not right invertible, i.e. it is not a retraction.
More on special morphisms

Example 6.17. (1) In Proposition 1.6.14 arrows (a) and (d) cannot be reversed: in M o n epimorphisms are not necessarily surjective and injective homomorphisms are not necessarily coretractions. Both categories are not balanced. In M o n the natural embedding
is an injective mapping which is not surjective but it is an epimorphism. Indeed, since any monoid homomorphism g with domain Q is determined by g(z) for all , the equality gf = hf implies g = h. Apparently, / cannot be left invertible as MorMon(Q, Z) = {co } since the image of a group with zero under a monoid homomorphism is a group with zero, i.e. / is not a coretraction. (2) In Proposition 1.6.14 arrows (a) and (c) cannot be reversed: in Graph surjective morphisms are not necessarily retractions and injective morphisms are not necessarily coretractions. Graph is not a balanced category. Consider the natural embedding of vertices of the following graphs, which as a mapping is injective and surjective
6 Categories
87
There exists no graph morphism in the opposite direction. (3) In Graph consider the full subcategory of connected bipartite graphs, i.e. connected graphs whose vertex set can be partitioned into two nonempty subsets such that no edge connects vertices inside these subsets (see Definition 1.1.10). In this category there exist monomorphisms which are not injective. Consider the following mapping which is surjective on vertices
m:X
1 - 2 3 4 2/5
4 with m(x) = m(y) = w, the other vertices are mapped corresponding to numbers. Then m is not injective but a monomorphism. Indeed, consider any connected bipartite graph U with f,g:U > X such that mf = mg. If / g, there exists u e U with f(u) = x, g(u) = y. As all graphs considered are connected, u has a neighbor which must be mapped onto a common neighbor of and y. But this is impossible. Thus f = g, i.e. m is a monomorphism. (4) In Sgraph epimorphisms are retractions, monomorphisms are contractions.
Zero morphisms, initial, terminal and zero objects

The role played by zeros in algebraic structures (cf. Definition 1.2.6) is reflected by morphisms and by objects as follows. Definition 6.18. Let / : A be a morphism in a category C. Then / is called a left zero morphism if fg = fh a right zero morphism if gf = hf for all C C and g,h Mor(C, A), for all D e C and g, h e Mor(, D), a zero morphism zero morphism. if it is a left zero and right
88
An object A < E C is called an initial object if I Mor(A, D) | = 1 for all D e C, a terminal object if |Mor(C,i4)| = 1 for all C e C,
a zero object if it is initial and terminal. Exercise 6 . 1 9 . Let C be a category and let A 6 C. (1) If A is initial, then every / Mor(Z), A) is a right zero morphism and a retraction for all D e C. (2) If A is terminal, then every g Mor(^4, C) is a left zero morphism and a coretraction for all C e C . (3) All initial objects are isomorphic and all terminal objects are isomorphic. (4) If A is a zero object, C,DeC, Mor(C, A) = { g } and Mor(A,>) = { / } then / , g, fg are zero morphisms. In particular, Mor(C, D) 0 for all C,D e C. Example 6.20. (1) In Set the empty set 0 is the initial object and any one-element set is a terminal object. (2) In Sgr the one-element semigroup { 1 } is the terminal object which, however, is not initial since it can be mapped onto an arbitrary idempotent in a given semigroup. (3) In Mon the one-element monoid { 1 } is the only initial, terminal and zero object. (4) In R M o d the zero module is the only initial, terminal and zero object. (5) In A c t S the one-element act 5 is the terminal object. A c t S does not have initial objects since we can always consider a two-element act G,s 0,s in A c t S and therefore any act has at least two 5-morphisms into Os &s- Thus A c t S does not have zero objects. (6) The one-element act 5 is the zero object in Acto S. (7) The empty .S-act is an initial object in Act S.
7 Functors
89
7 Functors
Covariant and contravariant functors (1-7.1) Composition of functors (1.7.2-1.7.3) Inclusion and restriction functors, multifunctors (1.7.4-1.7.5) S-acts as functors (1.7.6) Forgetful and dualizing functors (1.7.7) The Horn -functor in the second variable (1.7.8-1.7.10) The Horn -functor in the first variable (1.7.11-1.7.13) The S-dualizing functor (1.7.14-1.7.15) Horn as a bifunctor (1.7.16-1.7.18) Sx and Xs as S-acts (1.7.19-1.7.20) Mov-functor (1.7.21) Faithful, full, dense, injector, surjector (1.7.22-1.7.23) Preservation and reflection (1.7.24-1.7.28) Projective and injective objects (1.7.29-1.7.30) Generators and cogenerators (1.7.31-1.7.32) Comments Functors are on the level of categories what morphisms are on the level of structured sets. We shall give a brief introduction here and resume the discussion later.
Covariant and contravariant functors

For categories the dualism between homomorphisms and antihomomorphisms (cf. Definition 1.2.23) appears naturally. The technical terms are covariant and contravariant functor. Definition 7.1. Let C and D be categories. Let F : C > D be an assignment of a unique object F(A) G D to each object A G C and a unique morphism F ( / ) in D to each morphism / : A A' in C. Consider the following conditions: (1) F(id^) = id f ( j 4 ) for A G C , we say that F preserves identities.
(2) F ( / 2 / 0 = F(f2)F{h) for / i G M o r c ( ^ i , ^ 2 ) , h M o r c ( ^ 2 , ^ 3 ) , AI,A2,AS G C , we say that F preserves composition.

(2*)
F(/2/I)
= F ( / I ) F ( / 2 ) for f\
G
AI,A2,A3
M o r c ( A 1 , ^ 2 ) , f2 G M o r c ( ^ 2 , ^ 3 ) , C , we say that F reverses composition.

G
If F fulfills (1) and (2), F is called a covariant
functor.
In this case
F(Morc(^l7^2)) C M o r u i F ^ F ^ ) ) .
90
If F fulfills (1) and (2*), F is called a contravariant F(Mor c (A 1 , A2)) C Mor D (F(^ 2 ), We will call F a functor
functor. (F^)).
In this case
whenever it is not necessary to specify its variance.
Composition of functors
Like mappings, functors can also be composed if they are compatible in a suitable way. Definition 7.2. Let C,D, be categories and let F : C - D, G : D -> be functors. Then the composition GF of the functors F and G is defined by (GF)(A) = G(F(A)) and (GF)(f) = G(F(f)) for any A, A' e C, f e More (A, A'). Exercise 7.3. As defined above, GF : C > is a functor. The functor GF is covariant if F and G are both covariant or both contravariant. Otherwise, GF is a contravariant functor.
Inclusion and restriction functors, multifunctors

Definition 7.4. Let C be a subcategory of a category D. The functor ig : C D defined by lg(A) = A for A C and lg(f) f for / Mor c (A, A') C (, A') is called the inclusion functor. Let F : D > be another functor, then Fig restriction of F to the subcategory C. If C = D, then I is called the identical functor : C is called the on C, denoted by Idc-
Note that the inclusion functor is covariant and, consequently, the restriction procedure preserves the variance of F . After having defined product categories in Construction 1.6.7(2) the introduction of multifunctors is not necessary, strictly speaking, but it turns out convenient, nevertheless. Definition 7 .5. Let C, D, be categories and C D the product category of C and D. A functor F : C D > is called a bifunctor. Analogously, multifunctors are defined.
7 Functors
91
S-acts as functors
P r o p o s i t i o n 7.6. (1) Any monoid S can be considered as a one-object category ({ l},^) the object { 1 } and Mors({ 1 }, { 1 }) = { s | s 5 } , composition multiplication in S. with being
(2) Any right S-act As can be viewed as a contravariant functor from the category ( { 1 } , 5 ) into S e t ' , the category of non-empty sets, and vice versa. (3) Any left S-act sA can be viewed as a covariant functor from the category ({ 1 1 , ^ ) into S e t ' , the category of non-empty sets, and vice versa. Proof. (1) is clear. (2) Let first As be an act. Define F : ({1}, S) - S e t ' by F({ 1 }) = A and F(s) : A > A by F ( s ) ( a ) = as for all s S, a A. Since F ( l ) = idA and F(st) = F(t)F(s) for any s , i S we have that F is a contravariant functor. Now let F be a contravariant functor from the category ({ 1 }, S) into the category Set'. Set F ( { 1 } ) = A. Then for any morphism s of the category ({ 1 }, 5), i.e. for any element s of the monoid S we get that F(s) is a tranformation of the set A. Define a right multiplication of the elements of A by the elements of the monoid S by as = F(s)(a) for all a G A, s e S. Now a(st) = F(st)(a) and a l = F(l)(a) = id A (a) = a = (F(t)F{s))(a) - F(t)(F(s)(a)) = F(t)(as) = (as)t A
for all a A, s,t S. This means that A is a right S-act. (3) is analogous to (2).
Forgetful and dualizing functors

D e f i n i t i o n 7.7. (1) Let C be a concrete category. For A C by [A\ Set denote the underlying set of A. For / M o r c ( ^ i , A2), AUA2 C by [/J : L^4iJ -* L^2J denote the mapping in Set underlying / .
92
Now J :C Set defined as indicated is a covariant functor which is called the forgetful functor from C into Set. In particular, we have the forgetful functor Other forgetful functors such as Mon > Sgr, R - Mod Abgrp, C - Vec defined. Vec can also be J : Act S Set.
(2) The procedure which turns a category C to its dual or opposite category C o p (cf. Construction 1.6.7(1)) is a contravariant functor and is called the dualizing or op- functor , we write op : C > Cop.
The Hom-functor in the second variable

We investigate Hom-functors on act categories in some detail here. Nevertheless, this is only the first approach which will be developed continuously. Proposition 7.8. Let S be a monoid and As Act S. H o m ( ^ s , - s ) Act - S ^ Set given by Bs ^ Hom(,4s, s ) 9 Hom{As,g) a As ga ' H.om(As,B's) 3 ga, a Bs Then
for any Bs-, B's Act S is a covariant functor which is called a covariant Kom-functor or a Horn- functor in the second variable. Proof. It is clear that Hom(As, 5) preserves identities. It also preserves composition, since H o r n ( A s , f ' f ) ( a ) = (f'f)a = f'(fa) = (Hom(A 5 , /') Hom(A s , /))(<*)
for all / e Horn (B S ,B' S ), f e Horn(B'S,B%) and 6 Horn (A S ,B S ). Hence Hom(As, 5) is a covariant functor.
7 Functors
93
Proposition 7.9. Let R, S be monoids and let RAS R A c t S be a biact. Then Hom(#As, .Bs) A c t R for Bs A c t S under the right R-action (ar)(a) = a(ra) for all Hom(As, Bs), r R, a RAs, and Hom (fij4s, ~s) : A c t - S > A c t - R is a covariant functor. If RC R Act then Hom(As, RC) 6 S Act under the left (s)(a) = (as) for all s e S, a e RAS, and
H o m ^ A S , R-) : R Act S Act
S-action
is a covariant
functor.
Proof. It is straightforward to show that with the above definition ar Hom (fiv4s, Bs) for a Horn (RAS,BS), r R, a 1 = a, and that a(rr') = (ar)r' for r,r' R. It is clear that HomÂg, ~s) takes 5-homomorphisms to -homomorphisms. Corollary 7.10. For As, Bs A c t S one has Hom(End,4^5, Bs) A c t End(As) and Hom(c(s) As, Bs) A c t C(S), and gets the covariant functors Hom(EndviAs, - s ) : A c t - 5 -> A c t - End(A s ) and Hom( C ( s ) As, - s ) : A c t - 5 Act - C(S) .
Proof. By Example 1.4.25(1) we have that As C(S) - A c t - S and A s End(As) - A c t - S. The rest follows from Proposition 1.7.9.
The Hom-functor in the first variable

Proposition 7.11. Let S be a monoid and Bs A c t S. Hom(s, Bs) : A c t - S - S e t given by As Horn (A s , Bs) Horn 3 f As Then
f-
(f,Bs)
f A'
A'
Horn(A'S,BS) 3
Bs
94
for any As, A's Act S is a contravariant functor which is called a contravariant H o r n - f u n c t o r or a H o m - f u n c t o r in the first variable. Categorically dually to Proposition 1.7.9 and Corollary 1.7.10 we obtain the following two results Proposition 7.12. Let R, S be monoids and let RBS R Act S be a biact. If AS Act S then Hom(As, RBS) R Act under the left R-action ( ra)(a ) = r(a(a)) for all r R, a Hom(As, RBS), a As, and Hom(5, RBS) : Act -S -> RAct
is a contravariant functor. If RC R Act then Hom(^C, RBS) Act S under the right S-action o;s(c) = cc(c)s for all a Hom(.RC, RBS), S S, c ER C, and Hom(ft, RBS) : R - Act -> Act - S is a contravariant functor.
Corollary 7.13. For As, Bs Act S one has Hom(As, End BBS) E n d ( 5 s ) Act <mdHom(A,s, c(S)Bs) C(S) Act, and gets the contravariant functors H o r n ( - s , End BBS) : Act - 5 and Horn(-s, c(S)Bs) : Act - 5 -> C(S) - Act . E n d ( 5 ) - Act
The ^-dualizing functor

Taking R = S and Bs = Ss in Proposition 1.7.12 and using that End(Ss) = S by Proposition 1.5.6, we get the following contravariant functors. Definition 7.14. Let S be a monoid. The functors {-s)* and (s-)* = Horn (s~, sSs) : S - Act - Act - 5 are called dualizing functors. For As Act S one calls s(As)* the Sdual to As or the adjoint to As and (s(As)*)s the double S-dual or the second adjoint of AsRemark 7.15. Taking As = Ss in Corollary 1.7.10 and using that End(5s) = S and Bs = Horn(g5, Bs) by Proposition 1.5.6, and that 5^5 is a biact, we get the covariant functor H o m ( s S s , -s) Act - S Act - S . = Horn(-s, sSs) : Act - S - 5 - Act
7 Functors
95
Horn as a bifunctor
Proposition 7.16. Define H o m ( - s , - 5 ) : (Act - S)op Act - S a
-Bs
Set by
(AS,
BS)
Horn {A S , BS) 3
AS-
(/) 9)'
Horn (f,g)
f gaf
(A's,B's)
Horn (A's,B's)3
gaf,
A's
-B>
where (/, g) G (Act ) Act S, Horn(/, g) G Set and the right diagram is in Act S. Then Hom(5, 5) is a bifunctor which is covariant in both variables. Proposition 7.17. Let R,S,T be monoids and RAS, TBS Hom(flAs ,T BS)R is a R-biact and biacts. Then
Hom(5, - s ) : (R - Act - S) o p ( - Act - S) -4 - Act - R is a bifunctor. In particular, Hom(As,-5) 6 End(-Bs) - Act - End(yls) for AS,BS Act - S. 6
Proof. We only show that H o r n ( R A S , T B S ) - Act - R. We know that Hom(yl 5 , -Bs) G Act R with (ar)(a) = a(ra) by Proposition 1.7.9 and Rom(RAs,TBs) G Act with ()() = i(a(a)) for all a G A, a G Hom(yls, Bs),t G , r G R. Thus (t(ar))(a) = t((ar)(a)) = t(a(ra)) - ( t a ) ( r a ) = ((ia)r)(a)
for all a G A, a G Hom(As, Bs),t eT,r G R. The particular situation is obtained if R = End (As) and = End(s) For convenience we also formulate the left analogue. Proposition 7.18. Let R,S,U be monoids and RAS, RBU biacts. SHOM(#.AS, is a S U-biact and RBU)U Hom(fl, R~) : (R - Act - S) o p {R - Act - U) -> S - Act - U
1 = 1
Then
is a bifunctor. In particular, Hom(A, RB) G End(A) Act E n d ( R B ) for RA, RB G R - Act.
96
Sx and Xs as S-acts
Remark 7.19. Let X be a non-empty set. We use that for S = { 1} the categories A c t S and S Act turn into Set' (see Example 1.4.9). ByProposition 1.7.18 Sx = M a p ( X , S ) = Hom( { 1 } X { 1 } ,
{l}Ss)
G Act S
with right S-action (as)(a;) = (a(x))s for all G Map(X, S), s G S and G X . At the same time, by Proposition 1.7.17, Sx = Map(X, S) = Hom( { 1 } X { 1 } , 5 S { 1 } ) G 5 Act with left S'-action ( S Q ) ( X ) = sa(x) for all s G S, a G Map(X, S) and X. Moreover, Sx is an S 5-biact since ((sia)s 2 )(z) = ((sia)(x))s 2 = (sia(a;))s2 = si(a(x)s 2 ) = si((as 2 )(x)) = (si (as 2 ))(z) for all G X, s\, s2 G 5", G Sx. Thus (sia)s 2 = s i ( a s 2 ) .
Remark 7.20. Again by Proposition 1.7.18, we get for a non-empty set X that X s = Map(S,X) = H o m ( { i } 5 s , { i}X{i}) G S - A c t with left S-action (s)(t) = {ts) for all s G S, G Map(S, X) and t G S. Similarly, by Proposition 1.7.17, X s = Hom( 5 S { 1 } , { i } X { 1 } ) G A c t S with right S-action (s)(t) = (st) for all G M a p ( S , X ) , s G S and t G S. Moreover, X s is an 5 5-biact since ((si)s2)(t) = (si)(s2t) = ((s2t)si) = (s2(ts1)) = (s2)(tSl) = (Sl(s2))(t)
for all t G S, s 1 } s 2 G S, G X s . Thus (si/3)s 2 = si(/3s 2 ).
Mor-functors
Parallel to Propositions 1.7.8, 1.7.11 and 1.7.16 we consider three Mor-functors for an arbitrary category C . Definition 7.21. Let C be a category, let A, G C be objects. Then Morc(, B) : C Set
7 Functors
97
defined as a contravariant Hom-functor in Proposition 1.7.11 is called a contravariant M o r -functor, More (A, - ) : C - + Set defined as a covariant Hom-functor in Proposition 1.7.8 is called a M o r - f u n d o r and M o r c ( - , - ) : C o p x C -> Set covariant
defined as a Hom-bifunctor in Proposition 1.7.16 is called a M o r - f u n c t o r in two variables.
Faithful, full, dense, injector, surjector

The following properties of functors model injective, surjective and bijective mappings. It turns out that for functors these properties can be regarded separately for objects and morphism sets. Definition 7.22. Let C, D be categories. A covariant functor F : C > D is called a faithful functor if the mapping (,) is injective for any A, A' e C. F is called a full functor if the mapping Mo r i ,(F(A),F(A')) embedding. if for every G D there MorD(F(4),F(A'))
MorC(A,A') -
is surjective for any A, A' C. If F is full and faithful then F is also called a full F is called a dense (representative) functor exists A e C such that F(A) is isomorphic to B.
A faithful functor F which is injective with respect to objects, i.e. F(A) = F(A') implies A = A', is called an injector. A full functor F which is surjective with respect to objects, i.e. for every G D there exists A C such that F(A) = B, is called a surjector. E x a m p l e 7.23. (1) The forgetful functor Sgr Set is faithful but not an injector. It is not full, but nevertheless, it is surjective with respect to objects. (2) Let C be a subcategory of D. Then the inclusion functor is full if and only if C is a full subcategory of D.
98
Preservation and reflection

Preservation and reflection of certain properties by functors is a very useful information in the investigation of categories and functors. We shall say that a functor F : C D preserves a given property V of a morphism / in C if F ( f ) in D has also property V and that F reflects the property V if / has property V in C in case that F ( f ) has property V in D . These concepts will be used accordingly for families of morphisms and for objects. On the level of mappings we met this principle in the definition of graph morphisms which preserve edges and strong graph morphisms which preserve and reflect edges (cf. Definition 1.1.9), semigroup homomorphisms which preserve idempotents, group homomorphisms which preserve inverses etc. It is clear that every functor preserves commutative diagrams. Proposition 7.24. Every covariant functor F : C > D preserves retractions, coretractions and therefore isomorphisms. Every contravariant functor takes retractions to coretractions and coretractions to retractions, and thus preserves isomorphisms. Proof. Take F : C > D to be covariant. Let 6 ^(, A') be a retraction, i.e. there exists 7 6 M.oic(A',A) such that = id^'. Then idF(A') = -F(idA') = F(7r)F(7). Similar arguments hold for coretractions and also for contravariant functors. Proposition 7.25. Every faithful covariant functor F : C D reflects monomorphisms, epimorphisms and commutative diagrams. Every faithful contravariant functor takes only epimorphisms to monomorphisms and only monomorphisms to epimorphisms. Proof. Let F : C D be covariant. Consider in C the situation gf = hf. Then F(g)F(f) = F(h)F{f), and if F ( f ) is an epimorphism in D, we get F(g) = F(h) which implies g = h since F is faithful, i.e. / is an epimorphism in C. Similar arguments hold for monomorphisms and also for contravariant functors. Proposition 7.26. Every full and faithful covariant functor F : C > D reflects retractions and coretractions and therefore isomorphisms. Every full and faithful contravariant functor takes only retractions to coretractions, only coretractions to retractions, and therefore reflects isomorphisms. Proof. Let F : C > D to be covariant. Take e Morc(^4, A') and assume that F() 6 Moro(F(^4),F(v4')) is a retraction. Then there exists a right inverse
7 Functors
99
to -() in D which is of the form F(j) with 7 < E Morc(y4', A), using t h a t F is full. Thus F ( i < U 0 = idfr(A') = F ( t t ) F ( 7 ) = F(tt 7). Since F is faithful we get 7 = id/i', i.e. is a retraction in C . Similar arguments hold for coretractions and also for contravariant functors. P r o p o s i t i o n 7.27. A full, faithful and dense covariant functor F : C > D preserves and reflects monomorphisms, epimorphisms, isomorphisms and commutative diagrams. A full, faithful and dense contravariant functor takes exactly epimorphisms to monomorphisms and monomorphisms to epimorphisms. In particular, it preserves and reflects isomorphisms and commutative diagrams. Proof. Let F : C > D to be covariant. Using Propositions 1.7.24 to 1.7.26 it suffices to establish the preservation of monomorphisms and epimorphisms. Suppose t h a t / M o r e (A, A') is a monomorphism and t h a t F(f)g F(f)h in D for g,h M o r o ( X , Since F is dense, there exists an isomorphism k M o r D { F ( B ) , X ) for some C. Since F is full, there exist morphisms p,q Moic(B, A) such that F(p) = gk and F(q) = hk. Thus, F{f)g = F(f)h F(f)gk = F(f)hk => F(f)F(p) = F{f)F{q)=*F(fp)
= F(fq)
Therefore, f p = fq since F is faithful and = q since / is a monomorphism. Hence gk = F(p) F(q) = hk and thus g = h since k is epimorphism. Consequently, F ( f ) is a monomorphism. Similar arguments hold for epimorphisms and also for contravariant functors. P r o p o s i t i o n 7.28. Let C be a category, A, 6 C. The covariant Morfunctor More ( A ) : C > Set preserves monomorphisms. The contravariant Mor-functor c(, B) : C > S e t takes epimorphisms to monomorphisms. Proof. Take a monomorphism g Morc(-Bi, -B2) Suppose M o r e (A, g) (a) = M o r c ( A , p ) ( a ' ) for a , a ' < G M o r c ( ^ 4 , i ) . By Definition 1.7.21 and Proposition 1.7.8 this means that ga = ga' for a , a' G Morc(A, ). Since g is a monomorphism this implies a = a w h i c h proves t h a t Morc(^4,g) is injective, i.e. a monomorphism in Set. The result for Morc(,B) follows analogously. Note t h a t the same results hold for covariant and for contravariant Homfunctors as special cases. Mor-functors which preserve epimorphisms or are faithful will be considered next.
100
Projective and injective objects

Definition 7.29. (1) An object e C is called projective in C if the functor Morc(P, ) preserves epimorphisms, i.e. for every / Morc(P, Y) and every epimorphism e Morc(^, Y) there exists / e M o r c ( P , X ) such that nf = Morc(P,7r)(f) = f.
That is, for every and / as indicated we have a commutative diagram
We say that / can be lifted to X. (2) An object Q C is called injective in C if the functor Morc( ,Q) takes monomorphisms to epimorphisms, i.e. for every g 6 Morc(X, Q) and every monomorphism l G Morc(X, Y) there exists g 6 More (Y,Q) such that gt = Mor c{i,Q)(g) = 9 That is, for every l and g as indicated we have a commutative diagram L
We say that g can be extended Proposition 7.30.
to Y.
(1) Retracts of projective objects in C are
projective.
(2) Retracts of injective objects in C are injective. Proof. We prove (1). Let C be projective and suppose that is a retract of ,
. Then n j = id^ Consider the diagram
7 Functors
101
7 f 9
with epimorphism g and an arbitrary morphism /. Using projectivity of we obtain / such that gfn = /. But then gfn = fnj = / since = idz, i.e. is projective. The proof of (2) is categorically dual to the proof of (1).
Generators and Definition 7.31.
cogenerators
(1) An object G C is called a generator (or a separator) in C if the functor Morc(G, ) is faithful, i.e. if for any X,Y G C and any /,g M o r c ( X , Y) with f g there exists a Motc(G,X) such that fa = M o r C ( G , / ) ( ) M o r c ( G , 3 ) ( a ) = got . f a That is, if f g then one has G X =4 Y with fa ga.
9
(2) An object C C is called a cogenerator (or a coseparator) in C if the functor Morc( ,C) is faithful, i.e. if for any X,Y C and any f,g e M o r c ( ^ , Y) with f g there exists G M o r c ( y , C) such that f = M o r c ( f , C ) ( ) Movc(g,C)() That is, if / g then one has X Proposition 7.32. (1) Let G C be a generator. If G' > G is an epimorphism, then G' is also a generator in C. (2) Let C C be a cogenerator. If C > C' is a monomorphism,, then C' is also a cogenerator in C. = g .
^ C with f g.
102
Comments
We ended this introductory chapter by a first discussion of functors, thereby recalling that a monoid S and an 5'-act can be interpreted as a category and a functor into the category of sets. As examples we gave a quite detailed account of Hom-functors for act categories. This together with certain preservation properties of functors lead to the categorical concepts of projective and injective objects and of generators and cogenerators. Both pairs will be discussed later for act categories in detail. There exist many books on categories and functors which cover many different aspects. We mainly used [HE/ST73], [SE/WI79], [AD/HE/ST90]. Moreover, there exist several monographs which contain parts of this theory as a tool to investigate categories of modules over rings similar to what we are doing here for acts over monoids, see, for example [HI/ST70], [FAI73], [AN/FU74] and [WIS91].
Chapter II
Constructions
1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7.
Products and coproducts Pullbacks and pushouts Free objects and generators Cofree objects and cogenerators Tensor product Wreath products of monoids and acts Wreath product of a monoid with a small category
The constructions in Sections 2.1 through 2.5 are so-called universal constructions. The meaning of "universal" will become clear in the definitions in each case. A general definition of a universal construction will appear in Chapter 5 (Definition 5.1.18) where one can see how the constructions introduced here are universal in the categorical sense.
1 Products and coproducts

Products, product complete categories (2.1.1-2.1.3) Projections and monomorphic families (2.1.4-2.1.6) Product of morphisms (2.1.7) Coproducts, coproduct complete categories (2.1.8-2.1.10) Injections and epimorphic families (2.1.11-2.1.13) Coproduct of morphisms (2.1.14) Products and coproducts in A c t 0 S (2.1.15-2.1.16) Noninjective injections, non-surjective projections (2.1.17) Products and coproducts in other categories (2.1.18) Products in arbitrary categories and products in Set (2.1.19-2.1.20) Coproducts in arbitrary categories and products in Set (2.1.21-2.1.23) Functorial properties / and ] j (2.1.24) Comments
104
II Constructions
Products, product complete categories

We start with a result which, in particular, shows one of the most important properties of the cartesian product of sets. P r o p o s i t i o n 1.1. Let XiejXi be the cartesian product of a family (Xi)ij of right S-acts. Define the projections pi > Xi, i G I, by pj((xi)i<=i) = Xj, j G I, {xi)ii G X i e / X j . Endow this cartesian product with componentwise multiplication by elements of S from the right. Then XilXi G Act S and the projections pi, i G I, become S-homomorphisms. Moreover, for every Qs G A c t S and for every family (qi G Hom(Qs, Xi))i<=i the mapping q : Qs > XieiXi with q(v) = (qi(v))i<=i,v G Q, is the unique S-homomorphism such that piq = qi for all i G I, i.e., the following diagrams are commutative for all i G I, Xi Qs
Proof. Consider X i e j X i with right ,S'-action defined componentwise, that is (Xi)s = (XiS) for any ( Xi)iî XiejXi, s G S. It is clear that XiejXi G A c t S and that all projectons pi are S-homomorphisms. Now consider for G I the diagrams
with q(v) = (qi(v))iej for G Q. Then the diagrams become commutative and q with this property is unique. Moreover, since qi is an S-homomorphism for every z G / , it is clear that q is an S-homomorphism. It turns out that the property considered in the previous proposition is the essence of the definition of products for arbitrary, in particular non-concrete categories. D e f i n i t i o n 1.2. Let C be a category, I a set and (Xi)ij a family of objects in C. A pair (P, (pi)iei) is called a product of the family (Xi)ij in C if (1) G C and pt G Mor c (-P, Xi) for every % G I,
1 Products and coproducts (2) (, ( Pi)iei ) is universal in the following sense:
105
For every Q G C and for every family (ql G Mor^(Q, j there exists exactly one q G M o r c { Q , P ) such that piq = qi for all i G I, i.e., the following diagrams are commutative in C for all i /.
We write <=/^ f r > o r F L e / ^ * ' ^ w e w a n ^ stress the category in which the product is formed, Pi is called the i-th projection, and the morphism anc ^ denoted q is called product induced by {qi )iei with respect to 6/ by (( qi)iei > A category is said to be product complete if for every family (Xi)n=i of objects in C the product exists in C. If Xi = X for a l H G I then we use the notation X for and call this object a power object of X . In the category A c t - 5 1 we get that ^ / = ^ i e i ^ i i by Proposition 2.1.1. We will use the notation Y \ i e I X i for the product of acts to emphazise the categorical meaning of this construction. Note that the product of the empty family of acts is the one-element act 5. Clearly the category A c t S is product complete and so is S e t . P r o p o s i t i o n 1 . 3 . A product of a family of objects is, if it exists, up to isomorphism. determined
Proof. Suppose that both (P, and (Q, (qi)i<=i) are products of the family (Xi)iej in C. Then there exist exactly one q G Morc(<3, P ) such that piq = qt, for every i G / and exactly one G M o r c ( P , Q) such that qtp = pt for every i G /, i.e. the following diagram
106 is commutative. Now we have
II Constructions
PiiQP) = (PiQ)P = QiP = Pi for every i I. But since also Pi id = Pi for every i I uniqueness in Definition 2.1.2 implies qp = idp. Similarly we get pq = idQ. Hence = Q.
Projections and monomorphic families

Projections from the product in concrete categories may not be surjective (cf. Example 2.1.17). But under some additional hypothesis we can show that the projections of the product are always retractions. P r o p o s i t i o n 1.4. Let (P, (pj)j/) be the product of (Xi)i^j in a category C. IfMorc{Xi,Xj) 0 for every i,j I, then all projections Pi are retractions. Proof. Take io 6 I. For the following diagrams take ql(l = idx iQ and choose qi e Morc(Xi(), ) for every i G I, i io, which exist by hypothesis. Then for a l i i G I we have a commutative diagram Xi
Xi 0
with a unique morphism q. Commutativity of the diagram for i = io implies that Pi0 is a retraction. Definition 1.5. Let (pi :Y > Xi)ij be a family of morphisms in C. We call a (Y, (pi)iei) monomorphic family, if for any A C and f,g Morc(>l, Y) such that Pif = Pig, for all i e I, it follows that / = g. In the situation of Definition 1.1.5 it is easy to see that if {W, l) is a subobject of Y then also {ptt)iej is a monomorphic family. Note that (pi)iî being a monomorphic family does not imply that every Pi is a monomorphism, but this property of being monomorphic family can be verbalized as (pi)iei being "simultaneously left cancellable". P r o p o s i t i o n 1.6. Let (P, (pi)iei) morphic family. be a product in C. Then (pi)isi is a mono-
Proof This follows from the uniqueness of the product induced morphism.
107
Product of morphisms
The following will enable us to interpret the product as a multifunctor. Proposition 1.7. Let fi : X[ > Xi be a family of morphisms in C, i I, and let (P, (pi)ii) and (', (p-)i<=/) be the products of (Xi)iej and (Xt')ie/ in C, respectively. Then f = ({fiPi)iei) is the unique morphism, which makes the following diagrams commutative for alii I,
We call f the product
of morphisms
fi, i I, and write f = / h
or
/ =
Proof Consider the product ( , (pi)iei), take qi = fip[ in the defining diagram of the product. Then the induced morphism / = ((fiPi)iei) makes commutative all these diagrams.
Coproducts, coproduct complete categories

We start with a result which, in particular, shows one of the most important properties of the disjoint union of sets. Proposition 1.8. Let I 0 be a set. Let [ J i e I X i be the disjoint union of Xi G Act S, i I, and take the injections Ui : Xi U;e/ defined by Ui = idux. Ixit i I. Then Uie/ ^ e ~~ & an^ the injections Ui, i I, are S-homomorphisms. Moreover, for every Ks A c t S and for every family (ki Hom(Xj, Ks))ii the mapping k : |JieIXi with k(x) = ki(x) for Xi is the unique S-homomorphism such that kui ki for all i I, i.e., the following diagrams are commutative for all i I, k-i Xr
e/
Xi
108
II Constructions
It turns out that the property considered in the previous proposition is the essence of the definition of coproducts for arbitrary, in particular non-concrete categories. The following definition is dual to Definition 2.1.2. Definition 1.9. Let C be a category and (X{)iej a family of objects in C , I a set. A pair ((Ui)i e i,C ) is called a coproduct of ( X i ) i e j in C , if (1) C G C and u{ G M o r c ( ^ i , C) for every i e I, (2) ((ui)ii ,C) is universal in the following sense: For every G C and for every family (ki G M o r c ( X i , K ) ) i e i there exists a unique k G Morc(C, ) such that kui = ki for all i 6 / , i.e., the following diagrams are commutative for all i G I, ki Xi
c. We write J J i e / Xi for C or ] J i e / Xi if we want to stress the category in which the coproduct is formed, Ui is called the i-th injection and the morphism k is called coproduct induced by (ki)i e i with respect to Xi and denoted by [(fci)i e j]. A category is said to be coproduct complete if for every family () j of objects in C the coproduct exists in C. If X i = X for all i I then we use the notation X for Xi and call this object a copower object of X. In the category A c t S we get for I 0 that = U X i by Proposition 2.1.8. We will use the notation U i g j X% for the coproduct of acts to emphasize the categorical meaning of this construction. The category A c t S has coproducts of non-empty families of 5-acts but it is not coproduct complete. The category A c t S is coproduct complete. Proposition 1.10. A coproduct of family of objects, if it exists, is determined up to isomorphism. Proof. Turn around the arrows in the proof of Proposition 2.1.3.
Injections and epimorphic families

The following is dual to Proposition 2.1.4 and so is its proof. In Example 2.1.17 we will give a category where injections to the coproduct are not injective.
109
Proposition 1.11. Let ((wj)j/,C) be the coproduct of (Xi)iei in the category C. IfMoxc(Xi, Xj) 0 for alii, j G I then all injections, are contractions.U Now we formulate the categorical duals to Definition 2.1.5 and Proposition 2.1.6. That is, we state that the family of injections into the coproduct is simultaneously right cancellable. Note that this property does not imply that every Ui is an epimorphism. Definition 1.12. Let (ui : Xi > Y)iei be a family of morphisms in C. We call ((wi)i /,y) an epimorphic family, if for any C, f,g G Morc(^, B) such that fui gui for all i G I, it follows that / = g. Proposition 1.13. Let ((tii)i<=/,C) be a coproduct in C. epimorphic family. Then (iti)ief is an
Coproduct of morphisms
In analogy to Proposition 2.1.7 the following observation will enable us to interpret the formation of the coproduct as a functor. Proposition 1.14. Let fi : Xi X[ be a family of morphisms in C, i I, and let ((tij)ie/,C) and ((t^)^/, C") be the coproducts of (Xi)ij and (X[)iei in C, respectively. Then f = [(u^fi)] is the unique morphism which makes the following diagrams commutative for all i G I, X
Ui
fi
XI
u
c
We call f the coproduct f = Ufi-
a . fit i G I, and write f ]Ji6/ fi or
of morphisms
Proof. Consider the coproduct (( Ui)i e i, C) and take u[fi : Xi C' in the defining diagram of the coproduct. Then the induced morphism / [(i^/i)] makes commutative all these diagrams.
Products and coproducts in Act 0 S

In the category Acto S the coproduct construction differs from the construction in Act S, whereas products coincide.
110
II Constructions
Proposition 1.15. Products in Acto S are as in Act S. the zero of , X, 6 Act 0 - S , iE I. Then \ {#})) {0} if XiS = 9i in Xi, 6s = for s G S, together with the injections Îx^l-} = Vi and t \{) = , i G I, is the coproduct of Xi, i G / , Therefore Act 0 S is product and coproduct complete.
Let { G Xi be with x{s = , Vi such that in Acto _ S.
Proof Obviously \ {<?,})) {} G Act 0 - S. Given k{ : Xi -> K, G Act 0 - S,i G I, define (U(X; \ {0*})) {} - so that k(xi) = ki(xt) for Xi G Xi and k{6) G K. The rest is clear, the coproduct of the empty family now being Qs Remark 1.16. Note that in Act 0 S one has Xi = ja; G J J X l pj(x) for at most one j G / j .
Consequently, ] j Xi C Xi in this category, which is a certain analogy to the category M o d R, cf. Exercise 2.1.18.
Noninjective injections, non-surjective projections

Example 1.17. (1) Take (Z 2 , +, ), (Z 3 , +, ) in Rini. Then Z 2 Z 3 = {0} in Rini. Indeed, for any homomorphisms k\ : Z 2 > R, k2 : Z3 > R into any ring R with identity ki(l% 2 ) ^ ( l z g ) = l. The additive order of l then divides 2 and 3. Consequently \ r 0, i.e. R = {0}. Now for : Z 2 > {0} and U2 : Z 3 > {0} we get that ((ui, w2), {0}) is the coproduct of Z 2 and Z 3 in R i n i . Here the injections u\ and u 2 are not injective. (2) The first projection 0 X in Set is not surjective if 0 as X U 0 = 0.
Products and coproducts in other categories

Exercise 1.18. Let (Xi) i e i be a family of objects in a category considered below. All products are the cartesian products of the underlying sets with componentwise operations and the respective projections. Coproducts are as follows, using the notation of Definition 2.1.9. Mod-it! LLej Xi ix ^ ^ I () 0 f r only finitely many i G /}, the injection Ui has the property pj(ui(xi)) 0 if j i and pi(ui(xi)) Xi where pj
111
denotes the respective projection. This is so-called direct sum of modules. One
has
LLe/ Xi
- I L e / xi>
and
lite/ X i
/ xi
a n d 1 i f
- <
Sgr Ilie/ X i f r e e word semigroup over the set ( J i ; X i with concatenation and reduction inside every Xi, with the natural embeddings kt (cf. Example 1.2.15(l)(f)). Mon LL e / X i is the free word monoid over the set U i 6 J { X i \ l i } with the natural embeddings, taking 1 i = 1 to the empty word 1. (cf. Example 1.2.15(l)(f)). Abmon LIieixi ^ n ^ i I Pi(x) li f r only finitely many i G /}, the injection Ui has the property pj(ui(xi)) = li if j i and Pi(ui(xi)) = Xi, where pj denote the respective projections. One has J j i e 7 Xt C Xi, and i f a n d o n l y i f 1*1 < UieI Xi = I L e / Absgr UieiXi the set of finite words with permutable letters which are the elements of ( J i e I X i with concatenation using commutativity and reduction inside every Xi, with the natural embeddings as injections.
Products in arbitrary categories and products in Set

The following characterization of products in a category C by products of morphism sets in Set can also be interpreted as follows: the (covariant) Morfunctor in the second variable takes products of C to products of Set. Proposition 1.19. Let C be a category. The pair (, (pi)iei) is the product of the family in C, if and only if for every A C the following mapping is bijective
: MorC{A,P) Set il MOTc(A,XZ)
f ^ (Pifhei Proof. Clear from the definition of the product.
The preceding proposition has the following interpretation for Act S. Corollary 1.20. For C = Act - S, Xi G Act - S and an R - S-biact rAs we get that defined as above becomes an isomorphism in Act R and thus
Act-S Act-R
Horn ( 4 s , (
iei
~ JI
H o m
112
II
Constructions
In other words, the covariant Horn -functor

ROUI(rAS, -s) : A c t - S -> A c t R
takes products of Act S to products of Act R. Proof. Use Proposition 1.7.9.
Coproducts in arbitrary categories and products in Set

In analogy to Proposition 2.1.19 we characterize coproducts in C by products of morphism sets in Set. In other words, the (contravariant) Mor-functor in the first variable takes coproducts of C into products in Set, compare also Lemma 1.5.35. Proposition 1.21. Let C be a category. The pair ((Ui)ij, C) is the coproduct of the family (Xi)i / in C, if and only if the following mapping is bijective
Set
: Morc(C,B) -
Morc(X;,B) f ""> {fUi)ii
for any G C. Proof. Dualize the corresponding result of Proposition 2.1.19 as follows ( C o p denotes the opposite category of C): MOTc(UC^,B) = Mor C op(,n C P = nSetMorcp(B,Xi) = n S e t M o r c ( X , , ) , using that apparently /-top X{ = ] j Q i .
Remark 1.22. Formally similar to the preceding we can interpret the result from Lemma 1.5.37 as follows where RAS is an indecomposable R S'-biact: H o m ^ s ^ J J X i ) ) ^
iei
Act- J]
iei
Kom{RAs,Xi)
in Act R using that the disjoint union in Act S is actually the coproduct and that Hom(Â s , 5) : Act S > Act R by Proposition 1.7.9. Note that this is possible since As is indecomposable.
113
Corollary 1.23. For C = A c t - S, X{ e A c t - S, i I, and an R - S biact r B s we get that defined in Proposition 2.1.21 becomes an isomorpism in R Act and thus
R-Act
Hom(]JXi, il
s) ^
il
Hom
(XRBS))
In other words, the contravariant Hom -functor Hom(5, RBS) : Act - S - RAct
takes coproducts of A c t S to products of R A c t . Proof. Use Proposition 1.7.12.
Functorial properties of
and
II
In connection with Proposition 2.1.7 and Proposition 2.1.14 we now interpret products and coproducts as functors which start in suitable product categories. Proposition 1.24. Take I Set and let C be a product complete or a coproduct complete category, respectively. Then
C - C I I
or
^ I I
are covariant multifunctors, where f j j C denotes the \I\-fold product category, all components being C, for any set I. Proof. The statement is clear for objects and uses Proposition 2.1.7 and Proposition 2.1.14 for morphisms, respectively.
Comments
In this section we presented products and coproducts in general and for act categories. Note that the lack of an empty act in A c t S prevents this category from being coproduct complete. We discussed how Hom-functors behave on products and coproducts and identified both products and coproducts as functors. All results are standard.
114
II Constructions
2 Pullbacks and pushouts

Pullbacks, kernel pairs (2.2.1-2.2.2) Properties of kernel pairs (2.2.3-2.2.4) On the existence of pullbacks in Act S (2.2.5-2.2.6) Equalizers and completeness (2.2.7-2.2.9) On the existence of equalizers in Act S (2.2.10-2.2.11) Equalizers and pullbacks (2.2.12-2.2.13) Pushouts (2.2.14-2.2.15) Pushouts exist in Act S (2.2.16) Coequalizers and cocompleteness (2.2.17-2.2.19) Equalizers and monomorphisms, coequalizers and epimorphisms (2.2.20) Coequalizers exist in Act - S (2.2.21-2.2.22) Coequalizers and pushouts (2.2.23) Mor -functors and coequalizers (2.2.24) Amalgamated coproducts (2.2.25-2.2.26) Coamalgamated products (2.2.27-2.2.28) Coamalgams and subdirect products in Act S (2.2.29-2.2.32) Subdirectly irreducible acts (2.2.33-2.2.39) Finitely approximated acts (2.2.40-2.2.43) Subobjects are equalizers, factor objects are coequalizers (2.2.44) Partitioning subobjects (2.2.45-2.3.49) Coequalizers and the Homomorphism Theorem in Act S (2.2.50) Equalizers and coequalizers for groups (2.2.51) Additive, exact and abelian categories (2.2.52) Comments In this section we consider pullbacks and pushouts as a common generalization of products and equalizers on one hand and coproducts and coequalizers on the other. An advantage of this approach is that as special cases we obtain amalgams and coamalgams.
Pullbacks, kernel pairs

Definition 2.1. Consider the following pullback situation in C Xi fl
2 Pullbacks and pushouts T h e pair (, ( , 2 ) ) with pi : > X^ i = 1 , 2 , in C , is called a pullback
115 of
the pair ( / i , / 2 ) if
(1) fiPi = /2P2, and

(2) the following universal property is fulfilled in C:
For any pair ( ( , ^ ) ) with with : > Xi, i = 1 , 2 , and fip[ = /2P2 there exists exactly one morphism : ' > such t h a t pip = p^, i = 1 , 2 , i.e., the following diagram is commutative,
We call pullback induced by (','2) Analogously, we define a multiple pullback (P, (pi)ig/).
The pullback ( , ( p i , p 2 ) ) f the pair ( / , / ) for a morphism / : X Y" is
called a kernel pair of / . Corollary 2.2. 7%e pullback of a pair ( / , /2) 5, if it exists, determined isomorphism. up to
Properties of kernel pairs

For later use we state the following lemmata. L e m m a 2 . 3 . Let C be a category, X,Y <= C and let f G Morc(X,Y). If
(, (, P2)) is the kernel pair of f in C and f = hk where k is an epimorphism and h a monomorphism, then (, (,2)) is also the kernel pair of k.
Proof Since h is a monomorphism, kp\ = kp2 is implied by hkpi = fp\ = fp2 hkp2. If for L C there exist <71, < 7 2 G ( ^ , X) with kqi = kq2, then also / ^ i = /i/cgi = hkq2 = / 2 and from the universal property of the pullback 1=1 ( X , ( p i , p 2 ) ) we get a unique q e M o r C ( L , ") with pxq qi,p2q =
L e m m a 2.4. LetC be a category, X G C, a n d X I I X G C with the projections p' andp". Suppose that every morphism in C can be factorized as ht where t is an
116
II Constructions
epimorphism and h a monomorphism. If (K, (pi,p2)) is a kernel pair of f with f G M o r c ( ^ \ Y), then there exists a subobject ofXTlX with a monomorphism, h : > XXIX such that (, {p'h,p"h)) is also a kernel pair of f . Proof. In the given situation we take the product induced morphism = {(,)) ' > X Ii X. Then pi = ', 2 = "p. Let ht be the factorization
of into an epimorphism t and a monomorphism h in C. We have the diagram
f
with pi = p'ht, p2 = p"ht and fp'ht = fp'p = fp1 = fp2 = fp"p = fp"ht. Using that t is an epimorphism we get fp'h = fp"h. Prom the universal property of the pullback we get t < E Motc(H, K) with p\t = p'h and p2t = p"h. Hence p{tt = p'ht = p'p = pi = 'and similarly p2tt = 2 'Again by the universal property of the pullback we get tt = id^ which means that the epimorphism t is left invertible, i.e. an isomorphism. Consequently, (, (p'h,p"h)) is a kernel pair of / .
On the existence of pullbacks in Act S

We give a construction for pullbacks in Act S. Proposition 2.5.
Consider in Act S a pullback situation h X2 .
117
Then the pullback (Ps . > Pz)) f ( f h f2) exists in A c t S if and only if Ps := {(,2) eXlxX
2
\ fi(xi)
= /2(z2)} 0 ,
where pi is the restriction to Ps of the i-th projection from X 2 onto Xi, i = 1,2. In this case (Ps, (pi,P2)) is the pullback o / ( / i , / 2 ) . The analogous statement is valid for multiple pullbacks in A c t S. Proof. Necessity. Suppose that (Ms, (mi,7712)) is the pullback of ( / i , / 2 ) in A c t - S. Then Ms 0 since 0 ^ Act - S. But Ms implies / i ( m i ( j ) ) = / 2 ( m 2 ( x ) ) , i.e. (mi(x),m2(x)) G Ps. Sufficiency. If Ps 0 then Ps is a subact of X\ X2. Then Ps together with the restrictions of the projections turn the pullback situation into a commutative diagram. If for A c t S homomorphisms p\ : > Xi, i = 1,2, are such that f\p[ = fiP^ then (p[(z),p'2(z)) 6 Ps for every and the mapping : > Ps defined by p(z) = ([(),'2())
is the unique S'-homomorphism such that pip p\, i 1, 2. Hence (Ps, (PI1P2)) is the pullback of (/1, in A c t S. R e m a r k 2.6. In Acto S (as well as in M o d R) pullbacks always exist as always Ps- The same is true for A c t S since in this case 0 belongs to the category.
Equalizers and completeness

Definition 2.7. Consider an equalizer situation ^ Y in C. A pair (E, e) fi with a morphism e : X in C is called an equalizer (or a kernel) of /1 and f2 in C if (1) / i e = / 2 e, and (2) the following universal property is fulfilled in C : For every morphism h : > X with f\h = f2h there exists a unique morphism h : > such that h = eh, i.e., the following diagram is commutative, h -fl
118
II Constructions
We write in this situation (E,e) duced by h. P r o p o s i t i o n 2.8.
= E q ( / i , / 2 ) and call h equalizer
in-
(1) Equalizers are, if they exist, determined
up to
isomorphism.
(2) If (E, e) is an equalizer then e is a monomorphism.
D e f i n i t i o n 2.9. A category is called complete if it is product complete and to every equalizer situation there exists an equalizer.
On the existence of equalizers in Act S

P r o p o s i t i o n 2.10. Consider in A c t S an equalizer situation Xs h Ys-
Then Eq(/].,/2) exists if and only if Es = { X \ fi(x) = f2(x)} 0 In this case Es C Xs with the natural embedding is the equalizer of fi and /2 in A c t - S. Proof. Necessity. Suppose that (Ms, ) = E q ( / i , / 2 ) . 0 A c t - S. But if Ms then fi(m(x)) = f2(m(x)), Sufficiency. Ii Es then Es A c t S and Es (Hs,h) also fulfills f\h = f?h, then actually h(Hs) C h := h in the notation of Definition 2.2.7. Then Ms 0 since i.e. m(x) G Es. is a subact of Xs- If Eg, i.e., we can take
R e m a r k 2.11. The category A c t S is not complete, the categories Acto S and A c t S are complete.
Equalizers and pullbacks

It turns out t h a t equalizers can be constructed using products and pullbacks if they exist. P r o p o s i t i o n 2.12. Take a category C with products, and let fi:X\~*Y and /2 : X2 Y be morphisms. If (E, e) = E q ( / i p ' , /2p") exists then (E, (p'e,p"e)) is the pullback o / ( / i , /2) where p' and p" denote the projections of the product, see the diagram
119
Conversely, if (, (pi,f>2)) is the pullback of the pair (/i,/2) then ( , (( , ))) = Eq(/ip', /2p") where ((Pi,P2)) is product induced, see the following diagram
Proof Take (E,e) = Eq(/ip', f2p") Suppose that f\g\ = f-iQ'i for morphisms gi m. A Xi, i = 1 , 2 . The property of the product X2 provides the morphism g ((^1,52)) A X2 such that f i p ' g f i p " g - Then g :A > E, equalizer induced by g, has the desired properties. Conversely, let (P, ( p i , p 2 ) ) be the pullback of (/1, / 2 ). Then fip'({pi,p2)) = / f2p"{(pi,p2)} since p ((pi,p 2 )) = P"((P1,P2)} Take ( Q , q ) with q : Q " ^ 2 such that f i p ' q = f2P"qThen q : Q P, pullback induced b y (p'q,p"q), is equalizer induced by q. Thus we have (P, ((pi,p2))) = Eq(/ii/,/ 2 p").
120
II Constructions
The above assertion holds in particular for Act S if the respective equalizer exists. Exercise 2.13. Consider /, /2 : X Y in a category C with products.
(1) If ( , (pi,P2)) is a pullback in the following diagram 2

: Pi
X <(idx,/i)>
<(idx,/ 2 )}
XUY
where ((idx,/i)) and ((idx,/ 2 )) are the product induced morphisms, then =p2 and (,) = Eq(/i,/ 2 ) (cf. [HE/ST73] Proposition 21.7). (2) If (P, (pi ,>2)) is a pullback in the following diagram P2 Y X ((/1./2)) YUY
<(idy,idy)>
where {(idy,idy)) and ((/i,/2)} are the product induced morphisms, then (P,p 1) = Eq(/i,/ 2 ) (cf. IIS of [AD/HE/ST90]).
Pushouts
Now we proceed to categorical dualization of pullbacks. Definition 2.14. Consider the following pushout situation in C Yi
fl X
:
J2
121
The pair ((q\,q2), Q) with qi Y% the pair (/i,/ 2 ) if (!) qifi = 92/2, and
Q, i = 1,2, in C, is called a pushout
of
(2) the following universal property is fulfilled in C : For any pair ((q[,q'2),Q') with q[ : Y; -> Qf, i = 1,2, and q[fi = q'2f2 there exists exactly one morphism q : Q Q' such that qqi q[, i = 1,2, i.e., the following diagram is commutative,
We call q pushout induced by (q[,q'2) Analogously, we define multiple pushouts ({qi)iî,Q) The pushout ((<Zi, <72), Q) of a pair (/,/) is called the cokemel
pair of /.
Corollary 2.15. The pushout of a pair (/1, /2), if it exists, is determined up to isomorphism.
Pushouts exist in Act S

In Act S pushouts do always exist, recall that for pullbacks the situation was different (cf. Remark 2.2.6). Proposition 2.16. Consider in Act S a pushout situation Yi h
X s
~ i r
Y 2
Take Qs = {Y\ II Y^)/^ where is the congruence relation on II Y^ generated by all pairs (/i(a;),/ 2 (a;)), G X. Further, take qi = nUi, Ui :Yi > Y\ U.Y2 the
122
II Constructions
injections, the canonical epimorphism onto Qs, i = 1,2. Then ((<?, i/2), <3s) is the pushout of the pair (f\,f2) in Act 5. The analogous statement is valid for multiple pushouts in Act S. Proof. Clearly qi = nut, i = 1,2, are S-homomorphisms and q\f\ = q2f2. If for q[ : Yi Q's, i = 1,2, with q[fi = q'2f2 we define a mapping q -Qs Qs by = i(y) for y e Y*, i 1, 2. Then q is well-defined. Indeed, y y' for y, y' II Y2 means, according to Lemma 1.4.37, that either y = y' or for t/ , say, there exists a sequence of the form y = fl(xi)wi f2{xi)w1 f2{x2)w2 = fl{X3)w3 fi{Xn)wn = 1/' = f1(x2)w2
with x\,...,xn G Xs, wi,... ,wn G S, i G {1,2}. Using that f\ and f2 are 5-homomorphisms and applying q[, i = 1,2, we get Qiiy) = iU/iOziWi)) = <&(f2(xiwi)) = q'l(fl(x2W2)) = ... = qiifriXnWn)) = qi(l/) and thus q is well-defined. Clearly, it is an S-homomorphism and the definition of q implies that it is a unique homomorphism such that qq% = q[, i = 1,2.
Coequalizers and cocompleteness

The categorical dual to equalizers are coequalizers defined as follows. Definition 2.17. Consider a coequalizer situation Y in C. A pair (c, C) with a morphism c : Y > C in C is called a coequalizer /1 and f2 in C if (1) c/i = cf2, and (2) the following universal property is fulfilled in C : For every morphism k : Y > with kf\ = kf2 there exists a unique morphism k : C such that k = kc, i.e., the following diagram is commutative (or a cokemel) of
jr
123
We write in this situation (c,C) = Coeq(/i ,/2) and call k induced by k. Proposition 2.18. (1) Coequalizers, if they exist, are determined up to
coequalizer
isomorphism.
(2) If (c, C) is a coequalizer then c is an epimorphism.
Definition 2.19. A category is called cocomplete if it is coproduct complete and to every coequalizer situation there exists a coequalizer.
Equalizers and monomorphisms, coequalizers and epimorphisms

L e m m a 2.20. Consider in the category C the diagram
D
r
h and (D,d) and (c,C)
= =
.
then (D,d) then (c,C) = =
(1) If c is a monomorphism Eq(c/i,c/2). (2) If d is an epimorphism Coeq (fid,f2d).
Eq(/i,/2), Coeq(/i,/2),
Coequalizers exist in Act S

Now we consider coequalizers of morphism pairs in Act S. f1 Y. Take Si Ysjv where u is the congruence relation generated by the pairs {fi(x), f2(%)) for G Xs- Let : Ys > Ys/ be the canonical epimorphism. Then (, Ys jv) is the coequalizer of f and in A c t S. Proposition 2.21. Consider in Act5" a coequalizer situation X R e m a r k 2.22. The category Act S is not a cocomplete category since it is not coproduct complete. The categories Acto S and A c t S are cocomplete.
Coequalizers and pushouts

In the following exercise we consider the categorical duals to Proposition 2.2.12 and Exercise 2.2.13.
124 Exercise 2.23.
II Constructions
(1) Consider a category C with coproducts, fc : Y > X^ i = 1, 2, morphisms in C. If (c, C) = Coeq (1/1,^2/2), then ((cui, CU2), C) is the pushout of (/1, /2), see the diagram
where ui,u2 denote the injections. Conversely, if ((91,92), Q) is the pushout of the pair (/1, /2)> then ([(9i,92)],Q) = C o e q ( t i i / i , 2 / 2 ) , see the diagram
where U\,U2 again denote the injections. (2) Formulate and prove the categorical duals to Exercise 2.2.13.
125
Mor-functors and coequalizers

Coequalizers in a given category can be characterized by equalizers in Set Proposition 2 . 2 4 . For a diagram f1 Y in a concrete X h conditions are equivalent:
category C the following
(i) (c,C) = C o e q ( / 1 , / 2 ) in C. (ii) (Mor(C, A), Mor(c, A)) = Eq(Mor(/i, A),Mor(f2, AeC. Proof, (i) => (ii). grams: ^4)) in Set for every
We apply the subsequent argument to the following diaMor(/i, A) Mor(X, A) Mor(c, A) Mor (f2,A) Mor(F, A)
Mor(C, A) in Set, and Y fi h
c
in C, where (c, C) C o e q ( / i , / 2 ) and thus c/i = c / 2 . This implies Mor(fuA) Mor(c, A) = Mor(/ 2 , A) Mor(c,A).
Suppose that Mor(/ 1 ( ) Mor(f2, ). For every G we have () Mor(X, A) and thus ()^ = ()}2. Let () G Mor(C, A) be coequalizer induced by () and thus ip(z)c = (). Now define : Mor(C, A) by () = () for every 2 G Z. Then (Mor(c, ))() = () = {) = () for every and thus
126
II
Constructions
Mor(c, ) = . If for : > Mor(C, A) we assume that (Mor(c, )){) {) = () for all , Since () Mor(C, A) it follows that () = () = () for all and thus = . (ii) ==> (i). Consider the diagram Mor(c, ) Mor(C, A) Mor(X, A) Mor (f2,A) in Set. Taking A = C and applying Mor(/i, C) Mor(c, C) and Mor(/ 2 ,C) Mor(c, C) to idc we get c/i = c/ 2 . Now consider g : X > A in C such that gf\ = <7/2. Take the one-element set = {} and set : {} > Mor(X, A) with />() = g in Set. Then by hypothesis there exists : > Mor(C, A) with Mor(c, ) = , that is 0(2;) = . If g := () 6 Mor(C, A) then ^c = Uniqueness of (7 is clear. ^,) I Mor(Y, A)
Amalgamated coproducts
An amalgam of right S'-acts over a monoid may conveniently be thought of as a family {Ai ( Act S | i 1} of right 5-acts intersecting pairwise in a common subact Us, i-e. Ai Aj = Us for i j, i,j I. Then A = (Jie/ a right ,5'-act. (This situation is completely different for amalgams of groups, semigroups, or rings, see, for example, [HOW95], Chapter 8). This intuitive approach justifies a more formal definition which we will first give for arbitrary categories using pushouts. Definition 2.25. Consider a pushout situation in a C, Xi jl U
32
where j i and are monomorphisms. We shall call the pushout ((<71, <72), Q) of j 1 and j2 the amalgamated coproduct or just amalgam of X\ and by the common subobject U, the so-called core of the amalgam, and denote it Xi Uu X2. Analogously defined multiple Lfi^Xi amalgams for are denoted by U,XlEC,iEl.
127
Note that sometimes this special pushout situation itself is called an amalgam, for example [HOW95] or [HOW76], VII. 1, p.217. Then the pushout will be called the amalgamated coproduct. We already know that amalgamated coproducts exist in A c t S since pushouts exist by Proposition 2.2.16. Next we give a direct method to construct an amalgamated coproduct, which simulates the above intuitive approach. P r o p o s i t i o n 2.26.
Consider A with the operation of = S ( X i \ j i ( U defined if if j - ' i x s ) Then by A G A c t S and if e U by
s s
Let
ji
: Us
> '
X i , i =
1,2
( X
be
injective
S-homomorphisms.
) ) U
\ j 2 ( U
) )
(a)
s
G X i \ j i ( U
) , xs
G X i \ j i ( U
) , =
i =
1,2,
() (7) are defined
x e X i \ j i ( U
) , x s e j i ( U s ) , i qi : X i A s ,
l,2.
( ( q \ , <72), A s )
where
i 1,2,
<li(Xi)
for every Xi G X i , is if Us the is
Xi
.1
(Xi) of of X1 As
if if
Xi Xi and and
X i \
j i ( U s )
G j i ( U s ) X2 with y are core Usnot belonging
amalgam a subact
I n particular, to As then U with
elements
{ ( a , x ) \ a ^ U s } U
{ ( a , y ) \ a ^ U s }
( , a , z ) s = \ ( a s > as for every The a G As corresponding \ U s , s G S assertions and
) '
* U s otherwise
G {x, y}. are true for multiple amalgams.
We first show that A is a right 5*-act. It is clear that s, t G S we consider the following cases with i 1 and i 2.
Proof.
* 1
x.
For
(a) G Us implies (x * s) * t = (xs)
* t = (xs)t
x(st)
* (st)
using ()
for (b) X G
5, t X
l
S.
s
\ j i ( U
) ,
XS
\ j
( U
) ,
(xs)t
X i \ j i ( U
imply
G S, u s i n g ().
(x * s) * t = (xs)
*t
) , xs
= (xs)t G
X i \ j ~
1
= x(st)
j i ( U
s
= * (si) for s,t

) , (xs)t
(c)
X i
\ j i ( U j ~
1
j i ( U
(xs) * t =
( ( x s ) t ) =
( x ( s t ) ) =
* (st)
for
s,t
imply (z * s) * t = G 5, using first ( )
and then (7) twice.
128 (d) X e Xi\ji(Us), xseji(Us), t = j^1(xs)t = j~1(x(st)) and again (7).
II Constructions
(xs)t ji(Us) imply (x*s)*t = (ji ^ x s ) ) * = * (st) for s,t G S, using first (7), then ()
This shows that (x * s) * t = * (st) for all A, s,t e S. Note that qi, i 1,2, are well-defined and S-homomorphisms. Moreover, Qiji = Q2h Let pi, g2 and Bs be in A c t S such that giji = <72.72 Define a mapping g : As -> Bs by f gt(a) g(a) < [ gijl(a) if if a eXi\ji(Us),i aeUs. = 1,2
Then g is well-defined since g\j\ 52^2 and it is an 5-homomorphism. It is also clear that gqi = gt for i = 1,2 and that g is unique with this property. Thus, ((qi,q2), As) is the pushout of (ji,j>2) and thus the amalgam of and X2 with core Us Notice that in A c t - S we get Xl X2 = X2.
Coamalgamated products
The idea of coamalgamated product is the categorical dual of the amalgamated coproduct. It will turn out useful on its own in the sequel, especially for the construction of generators. D e f i n i t i o n 2.27. Consider in a category C a pullback situation Xi h X2 h where f\ and f2 are epimorphisms. We shall call the pullback (P, (pi,p2)) of /1 and f2 the coamalgamated product or just the coamalgam of X\ and X2 with the common factor V and denote by Uv X2. Analogously defined multiple coamalgams are denoted by f i l e / XiEC,ieI. P r o p o s i t i o n 2.28. Coamalgams exist in A c t S. If ( X2, (pi,p2)) is the coamalgam of X and X2 with common factor V then pi,p2 are surjective. For = 5 we have Xx X 2 = 2 These statements generalize to multiple coamalgams. y
2 Pullbacks a n d pushouts
129
Proof. Let / : V, f? : 2 V be epimorphisms in A c t S. Clearly, Ps '= {(,2) G X\ x X2 I fi{xi) = 72(^2)} C 1 2 is non-empty since /1 and /2 are surjective, and Ps is a right 5-act. By Proposition 2.2.5 it follows that (Ps, {P11P2)) is the pullback of ( / i , / 2 ) in A c t S, where P\,P2 are the restrictions to P s of the projections from X\ X2, and thus we have the coamalgam of X\ and X2 with common factor V in A c t S. Since for every x\ X\, there exists X2 G X2 with fi(x\) = 72(^2) as fi is surjective, we have that (x\,x2) G Ps for every x\ 6 X\ and some X2 G X2 Thus, the projection pi is surjective. An analogous argument holds for p2
Coamalgams and subdirect products in Act S

We shall define subdirect products and show that coamalgams are subdirect products in A c t S but not every subdirect product is a coamalgam. Definition 2.29. Let C be a concrete category. A subobject W o f a product X2 in C is called a subdirect product of and X2 if Pi(W) = Xi for i = 1,2, where pi are the restrictions to W of the projections from 121 and (12, (j?i,P2)) is called a subdirect decomposition of W. This generalizes to subdirect products of arbitrary sets of objects in C. Proposition 2.30. The coamalgam X2 in A c t 5" is a subdirect product of X\ and X2, but not every subdirect product is of this form. Proof. Since a coamalgam is a pullback, it follows from Proposition 2.2.5 that X\ Ti v X2 is a subact of X\ X2 Moreover, the projections p\ and P2 are surjective by Proposition 2.2.28, i.e., the coamalgam is a subdirect product. To show that the converse is not true in general consider the monoid with zero S = {,,0} where a2 = a. Take X\,X2 G A c t S with = S/p\, X2 = S/p2, where pi,p2 are right congruences on S, p\ identifies a and 1, p2 identifies 0 and a. Then Ps = {(0, ), (, ), (, 1)} C 2 is a subdirect product but not a coamalgamated product, since the only possible common factor object Vs of X\ and X2 is 6 s , but then X\ X2 = X\ 2 according to Proposition 2.2.28, i.e. X2 - Ps Example 2.31. (1) The direct product ^ / Ai of acts {Ai \ i G 1} itself is a subdirect product of {Ai \ i G I}. (2) If all acts Ai are equal to a single act A, then the diagonal in the direct product / A is a subdirect product of {Ai \ i G /}.
130
II Constructions
Remark 2.32. We might have defined an object D to be a subdirect product of the family of objects {Ai \ i G 1} in a category C if for a l i i G I there exists an epimorphism pi : D > Ai such that {pi)iei is a monomorphic family (cf. Definition 2.1.5). This is the essence of Definition 2.2.29. If we consider in Act S an S-act As with non-trivial congruences G Con(As) I i G 1} such that Hie/ Qi A, then As is a subdirect product of the family {/ \ i G I}. Note that Dig/ 6i = Aa means that the natural epimorphisms * : As A/ i form a monomorphic family.
Subdirectly irreducible acts

Definition 2.33. A family of congruences {PI G Con (As) | PI , G 1} on As is called a separating family of congruences if f \ e / Pi = A- An 5-act As is called subdirectly reducible if Con (As) contains a separating family of congruences. In the opposite case, that is if ^ / Pi / â for all sets of congruences pi on with PI A a for all i G I, the act AS is called subdirectly irreducible. It is clear from the definition that two-element acts are subdirectly irreducible. The following result shows how to construct subdirectly irreducible S-acts. Proposition 2.34. Let As be an act and a,b 6 As, b. By p(a,b) we denote a maximal congruence on As such that a and b are not related. Then As/p{a,b) is subdirectly irreducible. If As = aS and there exists a G As, where is a unique zero of As, then aS/p(a,6) is generated by each of its elements [0]. Proof. Note first that the right congruence p(a, b) exists by Zorn's Lemma. Indeed, consider a chain of right congruences , i / , such that a and b are not -related. Then Vi e /p7 is the least upper bound of this chain and does not relate a and b. Thus Zorn's Lemma can be applied. Take H j g j Pj where {pj | j e J } are all non-diagonal act congruences on As/p(a,b). Assume that As/p{a,b) is subdirectly reducible, i.e. = ^ , then in particular p(a, b)-classes [a] and [6] are not -related in As/p(a,b) and thus there exists pj with ([a], []) ^ p3. But since pj A a we consider (As/p{a,b))/pj which gives rise to a congruence p on As strictly containing p(a, b) and (a, b) p which contradicts the maximality of p(a, b). Suppose that G aS and [0] [y] G aS/p(a,0). Now [a] generates aS/p(a,9) and if [] ^ [y]S then the Rees congruence on aS/p(a, ) by [y]S together with p(a, ) generates a congruence on aS not relating a and , contradicting the definition of (,).
131
Example 2.35. (1) Consider the monoid S {,, b} where {a, 6} is a left zero semigroup. Then there are three non-trivial right congruences, namely (1, ), >(1, b) and (, b) which are the monocyclic congruences generated by the respective pair. Since they all relate a and b, we have that p(a,b) = As and thus Ss Ss/p(a,b) is subdirectly irreducible by Proposition 2.2.34. (2) Consider the monoid = {,, > , c, d} where {a, b, c, d} is a right zero semigroup. Maximal right congruences which do not relate a and b are (a, c, d) 2 {b, c, d) = {(a, c), (o, d), (c, d)} U {(c, a), (d, a), {d, c)} U = {(6, c), ( ) , (c, d)} U {(c, b), (d, b), (d, c)} U
3((a,c),(M)) = {(a,c),(6,d)}U{(c,a),(d,&)}uAr 4((, d), (b, c)) = {(a, d), (b, c)} U {(d, a), (c, 6 ) } . Thus TT/QI, i { 1 , . . . ,4}, is subdirectly irreducible by Proposition 2.2.34. Now {03, >4} is a separating family of right congruences on (and so are {1,02, 3, >4}' {01,02,03}, {01,02,04}) Thus TT is subdirectly reducible. (3) [Nor92a] Rees monoid S (cf. Definition 1.3.47) is subdirectly irreducible if and only if it is atomic, i.e. there exists a 0, such that ax = xa = 0 for all S, 1. For the proof of the following result see, for example, [GRA68], the construction of a subdirect decomposition has been described in Remark 2.2.32. T h e o r e m 2.36 (Birkhoff's Theorem for acts). Any non-trivial S-act As is a subdirect product of subdirectly irreducible S-acts of the form As/p(a,b) for a,b As, b (cf Proposition 2.2.34,). Corollary 2.37. A non-trivial S-act As is subdirectly irreducible if and only if As = As/p{a, b) for some a,b As, b. Proof. Necessity. Suppose that a non-trivial subdirectly irreducible S-act As is a subdirect product of subdirectly irreducible S'-acts of the form As/p(a, b) for a,b G As, b. If the kernels of all the restrictions of the projections of the direct product of these acts As/p(a,b) are different from then As would be subdirectly reducible since there intersection is obviously AAs Hence there exist a, b G As, b, such that As = As/p(a,b). Sufficiency. This is Proposition 2.2.34 In the same direction we mention the following results. T h e o r e m 2.38 (Kozhukhov [Koz97], [Koz98a], [Koz98b]). (1) Let S be a semigroup and |5 > 1. Then every non-trivial right act over S is a subdirect product of two-element right acts if and only if S is a semilattice.
132
II Constructions
(2) If |5| = then every subdirectly irreducible right S-act contains not more than 2 n + 1 elements. (3) If S is an infinite cyclic group then all subdirectly irreducible S-acts are finite. Proposition 2.39 (Normak [Nor92a]). A finite Rees monoid S is subdirectly irreducible if and only if there exists a S, 0, such that ax = xa = 0 for all S, 1.
Finitely approximated acts

Definition 2.40. A right 5-act is called finitely approximated if it has a separating family of congruences {gz G Con(Xs) | i e 1} with \Xj% |< oo for all i I. Proposition 2.41. For any monoid S the following conditions are equivalent: (i) All right S-acts are finitely approximated. (ii) All subdirectly irreducible right S-acts are finite.
It is an open problem to characterize monoids S over which all right S-acts are finitely approximated. The next proposition gives a sufficient condition. Proposition 2.42 (Kozhukhov [Koz97]). Let S be a finite monoid. ery right S-act is finitely approximated. Then ev
Remark 2.43. (1) The condition of finiteness of S in Proposition 2.2.42 is not necessary as Theorem 2.2.38 shows. (2) If the monoid S and all its homomorphic images are finitely approximated monoids, then all right .S'-acts are finitely approximated (this condition is not sufficient even in the case of commutative monoids).
Subobjects are equalizers, factor objects are coequalizers

In the next theorem we show that although subobjects are not just kernels of one morphism in A c t S, as for example in M o d i?, a certain analog remains true also for A c t S. That is, every subobject is an equalizer of a pair of morphisms. The situation for factor objects is categorically dual. T h e o r e m 2.44. In A c t S we have: (1) Every monomorphism is the equalizer of its cokernel pair.
(2) Every epimorphism is the coequalizer of its kernel pair.
133
Proof. We prove (1). Let h : Ys > Xs be a monomorphism. Then (( qi,q2),Xs IIfc<y> Xs) with qit i = 1,2, defined as in Proposition 2.2.26 is the pushout of (h,h), i.e. (<71,92) is the cokernel pair of h by Definition 2.2.14. To show that (Ys, h) = Eq(gi,<j2) consider in A c t S the diagram Hs I
92
XsU^Xs
where Hs and / are such that gif = <72/ Then f(Hs) C h(Ys) by the construction in Proposition 2.2.26. Now define a mapping / : H s > Ys by _1 f(a) h (/(o)) for a e Hs- Then / is a well-defined 5-homomorphism and unique with the property / = hf.
Partitioning subobjects
Now we discuss a formal analogue of congruences for not necessarily concrete categories following [Sko69a]. Definition 2.45. Let C be a concrete category with finite products. Let X 6 C, '," the projections of X. A subobject X with a monomorphism d :X > X is called the diagonal of X if p'd = p"d = idx . A morphism r Morc(^" , X) is called the reflection of X if p'r = p" and p"r = p'. The mappings Pij : > for i,j G {1,2,3}, i < j, are called combined projections if p'pij = and p"pl3 = Pj where pi,p2,Pz denote the projections from . Lemma 2.46. The diagonal d and the reflection r exist and are determined uniquely. Moreover, r2 = i d x n x Proof. The diagonal of is ((idx,idx)). For the reflection consider the diagrams XUX XUX
134
II Constructions
where r = ((",')) is product induced with respect to the upper right product, i.e. p'r = p" and p"r = p'. Then p'r2 = p' idxnx and p"r2 = p" idxnx and thus r2 = id^nx as (',") is a monomorphic family. Both the diagonal and the reflection are uniquely determined again because (',") is a monomorphic family. Lemma 2.47. In Act S the diagonal d : Xs XsIIXs is defined by d(x) = (x,x), the reflection r : Xs Xg Xs I l l g is defined by r((x,x')) = (',) for all x,x' G Xs- If the S-homomorphism
PlJ:Xsnxsnxs^XsTiXs
is defined by Pij((x\, X2, 3)) = combined projections.
i < j,
G {1,2,3}, then pij are the
Definition 2.48. An object with a monomorphism k : > XYiX is called a partitioning subobject of X in C if (r) for the diagonal d : X > X there exists : X such that d = km, (s) for the reflection r. XHX-+XT1X rk = km, and there exists m : > such that
(t) for any monomorphism L-^XHXHX in C and m', m" : L > with km' = Pi2@ and km" = there exists fn : L > with km, = pi^Z where ;Pi2,P23>Pi3 are the combined projections. In the category Act S partitioning subobjects are coamalgams as the following theorem shows. Theorem 2.49. (1) Let h : Xs > Ys be an epimorphism in Act S. Then Ks = Xs ny Xs with the natural embedding k into Xs Xs is a partitioning subobject of
xsnxs.
(2) Conversely, let Ks be a partioning subobject of Xs Xs with the natural embedding k : Ks > Xs Xs Then Ks = Xs Xs for some epimorphism h : Xs YsProof. (1) Recall that Xs Xs exists by Proposition 2.2.28. By Proposition 2.2.5 Ks = Xs X s Xs Xs \ h{x) = h(x')} in Act - S. Let k : Ks Xs Xs be the natural embedding. We prove (r), (s), (t) of Definition 2.2.48. (r) Define m : Xs > Ks by m(x) = ( x , x ) for every Xs(.km)(x) = (x,x) = d(x) for every e Xs and thus d = km. Then
135
(s) For the reflection r : Xs Xs Xs Xs we take m : defined by rh((x,x')) = (',) for all x,x' Ks, using that ( ' , ) if ( x , x ' ) Kg. Then rk km. (t) For a monomorphism I : Ls X s X s .Xs in A c t S and homomorphisms m',m" : Ls > -Ks with km' = pi2@, km" = P2'i(, Pij the combined projections, take fn : Ls > Ks defined by m = using that if (\,2),{ 2>) Ks then ( x l 5 x 3 ) G Ks. (2) Let (Ks, k) be a partitioning subobject of Xs X$. Define a relation C Xs Xs by ( x , x ' ) if there exists w Ks with k(w) = (x,x'), , ' Xs We show that is reflexive, symmetric and transitive, i.e. an equivalence relation on XsFor the diagonal d : Xs Xs Xs and for the homomorphism m : Xs Ks which exists by (r) of Definition 2.2.48 we have (,) = d(x) = k(m(x)) and thus (,) for all Xs- Hence is reflexive. Supposing that (,') we obtain m : Ks Ks by (s) such that rk km for the reflection r with r((x,rc')) = (',), cf. Lemma 2.2.47. Thus krh((x,x')) = (',) , i.e. is symmetric. Suppose finally that (x\,x2) and (2,23) for x\,x2,xs Xs- In the notation of (t) from Definition 2.2.48 we take Ls = Xs Xs Xs, the identity morphism, m! = p\2, m" = P23 By (t) we get fn : XsIIXsIIXs > Ks with kfn((x 1,2:2, 3)) = Pi3((î, 3)) = (^1,^3) i-e. x is transitive. Next we show that is an S-act congruence. Take s S and suppose that (,') x for ,' Xs- Then k(w) = (,') for some w Ks- Using that k is an 5-homomorphism, we get k(ws) = k(w)s = (x,x')s = (xs,x's) , that is, is an S-act congruence. Now we set Ys = Xs/x a n d take h : Xs > Xs/x to be the canonical epimorphism. For the subsequent argument consider the following diagram in A c t S Zs
Xs
Xs
Xs/x
= Ys
136
II Constructions
where '," denote the projections of the product. Apparently hp'k = hp"k by definition of h. Suppose we have hki = hk2 for some Zs 6 Act S. Then (ki(z), k2(z)) e X S I I I S for every Zs, that is (ki(z),k2{z)) 6 x. Consequently, there exists w e Ks with k(w) = (ki (z), k2(z)) which is unique as A ; is a monomorphism. Take this w <E Ks and define k : Zs Ks by k(z) = w. Then k is well-defined, an 5-homomorphism with p'kk = k\, p"kk = k2 and unique with this property. Thus ( , k) is the pullback of (h, h), which by Proposition 2.2.28 is isomorphic to X s n y
Coequalizers and the Homomorphism Theorem

Remark 2.50. If we use Theorem 2.2.44 we get another interpretation of the Homomorphism Theorem for ,S'-acts (cf. Theorem 1.4.21). Indeed, take any homomorphism / : Xs Zs and consider a surjective homomorphism : Xs > Ys such that k e ^ C ker / . By Theorem 2.2.44 we get that is the coequalizer of two homomorphisms. Suppose (, Ys) = Coeq(pi, p2) for gl :
As->Xs,i
= 1,2.
Pi As P2 :
Ys
Since ker C ker / we get that fpi = fp2. Now the universal property of the coequalizer gives the existence of a unique homomorphism / : Ys > Zs such that / = / .
Equalizers and coequalizers for groups

Remark 2.51. In Grp factor objects are of the form X/U where U is a normal subgroup of X with natural epimorphism : X > X/U and natural embedding u : U > X. Then (U,u) = Eq (7r, Ci) and (, X/U) = Coeq(u, Ci) where c\ denote homomorphisms onto the identity of X/U, i.e. c\ is the zero homomorphism. Conversely, it can be proved that the normal subgroup of X such that (,/) = Coeq(/i,/2) for f i , f 2 : Y > X in Grp is the subgroup of X 1 generated by the subset {fi(y)(f2(y))~ \y e Y}. For an arbitrary subgroup U of X with injection u we get as in Theorem 2.2.44 that (U,u) = Eq(iii,U2) for the injections ui,u2 : X > 17 X. For u the structure of the group X U X see [SE/WI79] 3.7.8(A) or [HAL59].
137
Under this aspect subgroups are equalizers of a pair of homomorphisms, for normal subgroups one of these homomorphisms is the zero homomorphism.
Additive, exact and abelian categories

Remark 2.52. (1) If in a category C with a zero object the morphism sets form abelian groups (written additively), C is called an additive category if for every triple of objects A,B,C G C the composition of morphisms
MOTc(A,B) MOTc{B,C) MOTc(A,C)
is additive in every variable, i.e. ( + a') = + , ( + ') = + ' for arbitrary a, a' G Morc(j4,5), , ' G Morc(#,C). (Compare for example, [BLY86] or 6.2.1 of [SE/WI79]). (2) Recall for example from 3.9.6 in [SE/WI79] that a category is called an exact category if equalizers and coequalizers exist, if every morphism can be decomposed into an epimorphism followed by a monomorphism, if every monomorphism is the equalizer of a morphism and the zero morphism, and if every epimorphism is the coequalizer of a morphism and the zero morphism. (3) Combining the notions of exactness and additivity, we obtain the important concept of an abelian category. A category C is called an abelian category if it is exact, additive and has finite products (or finite coproducts). For every associative ring R the category Mod R of right i?-modules is abelian. In particular, the category Abgrp of abelian groups is abelian. The opposite of any abelian category is abelian. It is clear that neither Act S nor Acto S are exact categories since not every epimorphism is the coequalizer of a morphism and a zero morphism.
Comments
We defined pullbacks and kernel pairs as special cases and categorically dual pushouts and cokernel pairs and discussed their relations to equalizers and coequalizers, respectively. This led to amalgamated coproducts and to the categorically dual coamalgamated products. The latter turned out to be a subdirect product. Continuing this aspect, we briefly touched subdirect reducibility in Act S, a field about which not too much is known so far. For completeness we also briefly mentioned finitely approximated acts although
138
II Constructions
they will not play any important role in the sequel. Putting up with the fact that in Act S, homomorphisms cannot be described by suitable subobjects, we presented partitioning subobjects of cartesian products as a substitute, a categorical concept we took from Skornjakov [Sko69a]. This can be used also in non-concrete categories which we will do in Section 5.2. Finally we commented on exact and abelian categories.
3 Free objects and generators

The \I\-free object (2.3.1-2.3.3) Free implies projective (2.3.4) Monomorphisms and 1 -free objects (2.3.5) Coproducts of free objects (2.3.6-2.3.7) 1 -free objects in different categories (2.3.8-2.3.9) Functorial properties (2.3.10) Free objects are generators (2.3.11) Abstract characterization of generators (2.3.12-2.3.13) Trace and generator idempotents (2.3.14-2.3.15) Characterization of generators in Act S (2.3.16) Constructions and examples of generators (2.3.17-2.3.20)
The |/|-free object We are now ready to give a more general formulation of freeness which for acts has already appeared in Definition 1 . 5 . 1 1 and Theorem 1 . 5 . 1 5 . Recall that [J denotes the forgetful functor into Set. Definition 3.1. Let C be a concrete category. The object F G C is called a free object in C, if there exist I G Set and a mapping : I > [F\ such that the following universal property is valid. For every I g C and every mapping : I > [XJ there exists exactly one * G MorcfF, X) such that the following diagram in Set I L^J is commutative.
139
W e sometimes write F(I) for F or, more precisely, (, F(I)) and call this pair \I\-free or I-free. In view of Proposition 2 . 3 . 2 , () is called a set of freely generating elements of F or a basis of F, and F is said to be freely generated by {1) or by I. Obviously, this is the categorical formulation of the "principle of linear extension". P r o p o s i t i o n 3.2. Let C be a concrete category. If |/| = |J| for sets I and J, and F(I) and F(J) are |/|- and \ J\-free in C respectively, then F(I) = F(J) in C. The next result has been shown for S A c t already in Proposition 1.5 .16. P r o p o s i t i o n 3.3. If a concrete category C has \I\-free objects for every I Set, then every X C is a surjective image of a free object in C. Proof. Take I = [ ^ J and = epimorphism since is surjective. [id*
J
in Definition
2 . 3 . 1 .
Then * is an
Free implies projective

P r o p o s i t i o n 3.4. Let C be a concrete category with surjective I a set. If F C is \I\-free, then F is projective in C. Proof. epimorphisms,
For any / : F Y in C, we consider the following diagram in Set, I
[F\
L/J
-
\y\,
where
[pj is surjective.
Define the mapping / : / >
[XJ
by f ( i )
lg\~1{[f\o'i(i)) commutative.
for all i 6 /, which is possible since [pj is surjective. Then,
using that F is free, there exists / = /* : F > X in C , making both triangles
140
II Constructions
Note that concrete categories with not necessarily surjective epimorphisms may fail to have the property proved in the previous proposition. Take the category of HausdorfF spaces with continuous mappings. There all discrete objects are free but only the empty space is projective.
Monomorphisms and 1-free objects

The concept of freeness also provides a very convenient criterion for injectivity of monomorphisms. Proposition 3.5. If a concrete category C contains a 1 -free object, then a morphism a in C is a monomorphism if and only if [aJ is injective. Proof. Necessity. Take in C a monomorphism a : A and take a, a' [A\ a a 1 with L J ( ) H K ) We show that a = a . Consider the following diagram in Set: {}
l^J
where () = , '() = ', and (, F({a;})) is 1-free in C . Then there exist morphisms *, '* : F({x}) A in C such that [*\ = and ['*\ = ' a and morphisms (LaJO*. ( L J T : such that L<*J = L(L a JO*J^ and = L(L a J^')*J cr Since = L a J' the uniqueness of the stared = a n d that * = morphisms in Definition 2.3.1 implies that (LaJO* = (L a J')* '* Using that is a monomorphism in C, we get * = '*. Consequently, a = *{{)) = '*(()) = a'. Sufficiency. This follows from Proposition 1.6.14.
Coproducts of free objects

Still on the level of arbitrary concrete categories we can relate freeness to the coproduct. It turns out that coproducts provide a method of construction for arbitrary |/|-free objects starting from 1-free objects. Proposition 3.6. Let C be a concrete category, I a set. Let (ai, F({i})) be 1-free in C for all i e I and suppose that II^JF({i}) with injections Ui, i I, exists in C. Then Uie/ F({i})) is \I\-free in C.
141
Proof. For the subsequent argument consider the following family of diagrams for i / m [ F ( m
Here j i denote the injections of { i } into the set L L g / { i } = I for all i e / . As a first step we get the mapping [[t^Ja,;] in S e t which is coproduct induced with respect to L L e / { i } This mapping makes the inner square commutative and is denoted by /. To prove the universal property of free objects, take any C and any mapping : I > |_XJ. Then the morphism (ji)* such that ~ ! _ ( ? ) * J e x i s t s in C and is unique with this property since -F({i}) is 1-free, for all i I. Now the morphism [(OOie/l i n coproduct induced with respect to the coproduct U i e / F({i}), is unique such that = _[(6/]_/ Thus (/, U S / F({i})) is /-free. R e m a r k 3 . 7 . Note that we can present this result in the concrete category C with coproducts in the form C il
Set
il
For any family of sets {Ij \ j J} this can be generalized so that in C we have C 3&J
Set
jeJ
From Proposition 2.3.6 one regains Theorem 1.5.13 and obtains that every free 5act in the category A c t 0 S of right S-acts with zero is of the form F(I) = (ig/(Si \ {0i})) 6 s where $ = Ss for a suitable index set I.
142
II
Constructions
1-free objects in different categories

Example 3.8. The following examples together with Remark 2.3.7 characterize up to isomorphism |/|-free objects in the respective category for any I 6 Set. (See also chapter 26 of [HE/ST73].) Denote in the following table the freely generating element of the 1-free objects by x. Category Set Act - S, Act 0 - S Mod - R Sgr, Absgr Mon, Abmon Grp, Abgrp Rin 1-free object F({x}) one element set {y} SS
RR
: {} -> F({x}) y is 1 1 leNuo 1 y
(N,+)
(NU0,+)
(Zt+)
(%],+,)' Polynomials in y with constant term 0 (%],+,) Polynomials in y does not exist
Rini Field
The statement for Set is trivial, for Act S it follows according to a remark after Definition 1.5.11, similarly for Acto S. We leave the rest as an exercise. For Rin! cf. 26.2(1) of [HE/ST73], for Field see Example 2.2.5 of [MAN76]. Remark 3.9. There exists a more general way to define a free functor as a left adjoint to some suitable forgetful functor (cf. [MAN76, 2.3], [HE/ST73, p. 275). For our purposes we will use only the forgetful functor into Set. The definition of (left) adjoint functors will follow in Section 5.1 of this book.
143
Functorial properties
As already with regard to the product and the coproduct construction we also interpret the construction of the |/|-free object as a functor. Proposition 3.10. Let Set~ be a subcategory of Set and C a concrete category such that for every I 6 Set~ there exists the |/| free object (a/,F(I)). The assigment F : Set~ > C with I t> F(I) and a i> F(a) (aja)* for every I , j Set~, a : I > J, is a covariant functor which is called a free functor. Moreover, F takes coproducts of Set~ to coproducts of C, i.e. F preserves coproducts. Proof. Let I, J, J' be sets and let a and be mappings as indicated. Using that (aj, F(I)) is |/|-free in C and that ( a j , F(J)) is | J|-free in C , we have the following diagram with commutative squares in Set, a
J Oj
J' Vj'
< 7 / (,)*] F(I)
-F(J) [(aj>a)*\
l(aJ')*\ "F(J')
Thus F(a) = (aj'a)* = ( a j > ) * ( a j a ) * = F(a)F() using uniqueness of the stared morphisms in Definition 2.3.1. It is clear that F(id/) = id^(/). Remark 2.3.7 shows that F preserves coproducts.
Free objects are generators

Now we resume the discussion of generators. Proposition 3.11. Let C be a concrete category. I , then F F(I) is a generator in C. If (, F(I)) is free in C,
Proof
Take X
=} Y with / g in C.
.9
Then there exists G [^J with
L/J(z) LsJO) Take i 1 L-^Jsuch that () = x for a111 e L Since F is |/|-free there exists * : F X in C making commutative the triangle of the following diagram
144
II Constructions
L/J
LsJ \
L^J
Abstract characterization of generators

We continue the categorical characterization of generators (see Definition 1.7.28). In Theorem 2.3.16 we shall consider generators in Act S which gives some more specific properties. Lemma 3.12. Let G G C be a generator in C. If for every X G C there exists X in C such that the injections u\, 112 : X * X II X are different, then Morc{G, ) 0 for all X eC. Proof Since for every X e C the injections Ui : X > X II X, i 1,2, are different, the generator property of G provides a Morc(G, X) such that uia u2a, i.e. M o r c ( G , X ) Proposition 3.13. Take G G C and suppose that (a) C contains arbitrary copowers of G, or (b) C contains arbitrary non-empty copowers of G, and for every X G C there exists X II X and the injections u\, U2 X X II X are different. Then the following properties are equivalent: (i) G is a generator in C. (ii) For every X G C there exists an epimorphism h : ]j
Mor(G,X)
G X. X.
(iii) For every X G C there exists I G Set and an epimorphism h : JJ G I
Proof (i) (ii). Take morphisms /, f^ : X Y, fx , in C. Consider the following family of diagrams in C

a fi = h
145
Ur
a6Mor (G,X) where ua are the injections into
]J G and [(a)] is coproduct induced. a<=Mor(G,X) Note that in the case of hypothesis (a) the the needed copower of G exists anyway, in the case of hypothesis (b) one has Mor(G, ) 0 for all X G C by Lemma 2.3.12 and thus JJ G also exists. aMor(G,X) By (i) there exists a M o r ( G , X ) such that fia /2. Then for the coproduct induced morphisms [(/if*)] a n d [(/20] w e have
/ [ ( ) ]=[ ( / ) ] ? [ ( / ) ] = / [ ( ) ] : ] J 2 2
a6Mor(G,X) This proves that [(a)] is an epimorphism. (ii) (iii) is trivial.
Y.
(iii) (i) Consider /i,/ 2 : X I Set and an epimorphism h : JJ G
Y with f i f2. By (iii) there exist * X. Thus, f\h f2h. Consider the
following family of diagams in C ,
G Ui 1 i g : I
Then there exists j I with fihuj f2huj for huj : G X since otherwise we would have fih = [(f\hui)iei] = [ ( / 2 ^ i ) i 6 / ] = /2h. Thus G is a generator.
Trace and generator idempotents

Before giving a characterization of generators in A c t S we define the trace of one act in another one and generator idempotents in the endomorphism monoid of an act.
146 D e f i n i t i o n 3.14. Let Xs,Ys trYs(Xs)=
II Constructions A c t S. Define the trace of Xs in Ys by (J feUom(Xs,Ys) f(Xs).
Note that if t r y s ( X s ) 0 then t r y s ( X s ) is a subbiact of EndyYs- In particular, for Ys = Ss we get that trg s (X,s) is a two-sided ideal of S. It is clear that t r x s ( S s ) = X s for X s A c t S. Assume that Ys is a retract of Xs, Xs C? Ys, i-e we have 5-homomor7
phisms and 7 such that 77 = idy s . Then JTT G E n d ( X s ) is idempotent. It is clear that in this case t r y s ( X s ) = Ys. For Ys = Ss we have that 7 ( 1 ) is a freely generating element of 7(1)5' C XsD e f i n i t i o n 3.15 [Kn/Mi92]. a generator idempotent An idempotent 2 = e E n d ( X s ) is called
7
if there exist S'-homomorphisms Xs
7 = ids and = .
Ss with
The term generator idempotent is intended to make clear the connection to the retraction involved and reminds to the historical term coming from ring theory "idempotent of rank 1" which was also used in [Kn/Mi92].
Characterization of generators in Act S

T h e o r e m 3.16. For Gs A c t S the following conditions are equivalent: (i) Gs is a generator in A c t S . (ii) The functor Hom(Gs, 5) : A c t S Set is faithful. (iii) Every Xs A c t S is an epimorphic image of UHom(Gs xs) ^S-
(iv) For every Xs 6 A c t S there exists a set I such that Xs is an epimorphic image of U/^s(v) There exists an epimorphism : Gs
Ss
(vi) Ss is a retract of Gs, Gs (vii) t r s s ( G s ) = Ss.
Ss
(viii) There exists 2 = G End(Gs) such that e(Gs) u eG.
uSs = Ss for some
147
Proof, (i) (ii) because (ii) is Definition 1.7.31. The equivalences (i) (iii) (iv) have been proved in Proposition 2.3.13 (in A c t S hypothesis (b) of this proposition is valid). (iv) (v). Consider the epimorphism h : L L 6 / Gi > Ss where Gi = GsSince Ss is indecomposable there exists % I such that h~1(Ss) Q. G{. Then = h\cl ' Gi > Ss is an epimorphism. (v) ==> (vi). Take the epimorphism and consider the following diagram Ss
Since Ss, being free, is also projective by Proposition 2.3.4 there exists 7 : Ss > G s such that 7 = ids, i-e. is a retraction. (vi) = > (vii). Since from (vi) is surjective and Hom(Gs,Ss) clear that t r s s ( G s ) = Ssit is
(vii) = > (viii). Since t r s ( G s ) = Ss there exists H o m ( G s , 5 s ) such that 1 e N(Gs) But then 7T(GS) Ss- Using again the argument of the proof of (v) (vi) we get 7 : Ss > Gs with = idg. Then e : = 7 1 e E n d ( G s ) is an idempotent and since 7 ( 1 ) Gs we get that 7 ( 1 ) = ( 7 ) 7 ( 1 ) e(Gs), i.e. 7 ( 1 ) 5 C E(GS) = J(K(GS)) = 7 ( 5 ) = 7 ( 1 ) 5 . Thus 7 ( 1 )S = E(GS). But since 7 is injective we have that 7 ( 1 ) 5 = Ss- So u : = 7 ( 1 ) generates uS freely. (viii) = > (v) is obvious since s(Gs) = Ss(v) ==> (i). Consider fi : Xs > Ys, i 1,2, fa fa- Then there exists X with fi(x) fa(x) Since Ss is free with basis { 1 } , there exists a homomorphism g : Ss Xs with <7(1) = x. Now for the epimorphism 7 : Gs Ss which exists by (v), we have gn : Gs > ' Xs with fi(gn) fa(g^)
Constructions and examples of generators

P r o p o s i t i o n 3 . 1 7 . Let (-Aj)s, iE I, be a family is a generator file / ^ a 9enera>tr in Act5. of right S-acts one of which product. Then in A c t S and let / Aj be a coamalgamated
Proof. Consider the coamalgam / Ai in A c t S such that A3 for some j I is a generator in A c t S. Then there exists an epimorphism : Aj > Ss by Theorem 2.3.16. Together with the projection pj : flie/ ~ > A? which is
148
II Constructions ' is an
an epimorphism by Proposition 2.2.30, we have that wpj : nie/ ^
epimorphism by Exercise 1.6.13(2). Thus ]/ ^ is a generator in A c t S by Theorem 2.3.16. Proposition 3.18. Let (Gi)s, i I, be a family of generators in Act S. Then any amalgam Uig/(C?i)s is a generator in Act S. Proof. Consider a family of generators (Gi)s, i I, in A c t S and let Uie/ be the amalgam with core Us in A c t S with natural embeddings qi : Gi Gi as in Proposition 2.2.26. By hypothesis there exist retractions ; : Gi > S s for all i e I. By the universal property of the amalgam there exists a unique : ] j S s such that * = *. As * are retractions, there exists 7i : S s Gi with 7^7i ids a n d 7 i ( l ) = Xi Gj. Then for any i / we have that Trqi(xi) = ^7(1) = 1, i.e. is surjective. E x a m p l e 3.19. (1) Applying Proposition 2.3.17, we find that 5 5 5 is a generator in A c t S for any As A c t S since Ss is a generator in A c t S. (2) Applying Proposition 2.3.18, we find that an amalgam of the form JJ^7 Ss, where Us ^ Ss is a right ideal, is a generator in A c t S. (3) If S contains a left zero, then .Sgll^s is a generator for every Ag A c t s' since we can always define an epimorphism onto S s when mapping Ag onto the left zero and Ss identically onto Ss E x a m p l e 3 . 2 0 . The following example gives a category which shows that the implication (i) = > (iii) in Proposition 2.3.13 is no longer valid if has condition (a) only for non-empty copowers or condition (b) except that the injections ui,u2 : X * X are equal. Consider the category whose objects form a poset without infimum and such that |MorK-(X,y)| = 1 if X < Y and M o r * : ( X , y ) = 0 otherwise. Then every object of is a generator in since there do not exist pairs of different morphisms between two objects. But apparently not every object is an epimorphic image of a coproduct of every other object if the respective morphism sets are empty. Moreover, empty copowers do not exist in , since as a poset does not have an infimum and every non-empty copower of X G is isomorphic to X, i.e. the respective injections are equal.
4 Cofree objects and cogenerators
149

The \I\-cofree object (2.4.1-2.4.4) Epimorphisms and 2-cofree objects (2.4.5) Products of cofree objects (2.4.6-2.4.7) \I\-cofree objects in Act - S (2.4.8-2.4.9) \I\-cofree objects in other categories (2.4.10-2.4.11) Functorial properties o/Cof (2.4.12) Cofree objects and cogenerators (2.4.13) Abstract characterization of cogenerators (2.4.14-2.4.15) Cotrace (2.4.16) Characterization of cogenerators in ActS (2.4.17-2.4.18) Constructions and examples of cogenerators (2.4.19-2.4.22) This section is categorically dual to Section 2.3, but it seems convenient to formulate all definitions and results independently. Moreover, at some places the results cannot be obtained directly by categorical dualization, since the categories considered are not selfdual generally. Recall that [J denotes the forgetful functor into Set.
The |J|-cofree object

Definition 4.1. Let C be a concrete category. The object C is called a cofree object in C, if there exist I Set and a mapping : [K\ '- I such that the following universal property is valid. For every C and every mapping : I there exists exactly one * Morc(^, ) such that the following diagram in Set L*J L^J is commutative. We sometimes write Cof(/) or, more precisely, (Cof(I), ) for and say that is I-cofree or \I\-cofree (in view of Proposition 2.4.2). The set I is called a cobasis for K. Obviously, this is a categorical formulation of a "lifting principle".
150
II Constructions
P r o p o s i t i o n 4.2. Let C be a concrete category. If |/| = \J\ for sets I and J, and C o f ( I ) and Cof ( J ) are |/|- and \J\-cofree in C respectively, then C o f ( / ) = C o f ( J ) in C. Note t h a t 1-cofree objects are exactly the terminal objects in a category C . Indeed, using the notation of Definition 2.4.1 we see t h a t for | / | = 1 and for all there exists exactly one : * - I and thus exactly one * : X . It is clear t h a t can be 0-cofree only if [KJ = 0. P r o p o s i t i o n 4.3. If a concrete category C has \I\-cofree objects for every I G Set, then every X G C can be mapped monomorphically into a cofree object.O Dually to Proposition 2.3.4 we have P r o p o s i t i o n 4.4. Let C be a concrete category with infective I a set. If e C is \I\-cofree then is infective in C. monomorphisms,
Epimorphisms and 2-cofree objects

For the analog of Proposition 2.3.5, i.e. a criterion of surjectivity of epimorphisms, we have to use now at least 2-cofree objects. P r o p o s i t i o n 4.5. If a concrete category C contains an \I\-cofree object for |J| > 1, then a morphism a in C is an epimorphism if and only if [aj is surjective. Proof. Necessity. Let {a, b} C / , b, and take any epimorphism a : Y >X in C. Take , ' : [X\ {a, b} such t h a t
ClLImaj = C'lLImaj. C(L*J \ L^ J) = {}, C'(L*J \

a
J) = {b} .
Consequently [aj = C'L J Then there exist morphisms *, '* : Cof (I) and ( C L ^ M C ' L a J ) * : F Cof(J) in C as required in Definition 2.4.1. By the uniqueness of these morphisms we get Ca=(Ca)* = (C'ar=C' As a is an epimorphism in C , * = '* follows. Thus, Im = X, i.e., a is surjective. Sufficiency. This follows from Proposition 1.6.14.
Products of cofree objects

If we wish to categorically dualize Proposition 2.3.6 and Remark 2.3.7 we get into difficulties with 1-cofree objects. But we obtain the following
151
Proposition 4.6. Let C be a concrete category. Let Kj be \Ij\-cofree in C for Ij G Set, j G {1,2}. Then ^ is \ 2] -cofree in C, if the respective product exists in C. Corollary 4.7. Products of cofree objects in a concrete category C are cofree if the respective products exist in C, i.e. in C we have C nCof(/,)-Cof(n^) j'eJ
Set
jeJ
|/|-cofree objects in Act S

Let I 0 be a set. Recall that Is is a right S-act where fs for / G Is, is defined by ( f s ) ( t ) = f(st) for every t S (compare Remark 1.7.20). s S
Proposition 4.8. Let I . The S-act I s with x ( f ) = /(1) for all f e I s is an \I\-cofree object in Act S. Proof. Take X,s Act S and consider the diagram X
L/SJDefine * : - I s by (*(x)(s) = (xs) for s G S, G Xs. Then it is ;r straightforward that C*( ) C* is the unique mapping which makes the diagram commutative and it is an S'-homomorphism. Exercise 4.9. Construct { x , y}s with multiplication tables for (a) S = {1, 0} the 2-element monoid with zero, (b) S = {s, t, 0,1} where st = t2 = t, ts = s2 = s.
|/|-cofree objects in other categories

Example 4.10. In Set I is the |/|-cofree object with id/ = : Cof(/) I for any I G Set. In the categories Grp, Sgr, Absgr, M o n , A b m o n , Rini there are no |/|-cofree objects for |/| > 1.
152
II Constructions
The statement about Set is obvious. For Grp we use that |/| -cofree objects are always cogenerators for \I\ > 1, compare Definition 1.7.31 and Proposition 2.4.13, and that these do not exist in Grp by 1.6.4 of [MAN76]. In the remaining cases |/|-cofree objects do not exist by Proposition 2.4.5 for \I\ > 1, since epimorphisms are not surjective in these categories, cf. Example 1.6.17(1). Remark 4.11. (1) Cofree objects in Act 0 S are of the form IoS = {/ (/ 0 ) S I /(0) = 0} where IQ is a pointed set, i.e. a set with a distinguished element 0, now denotes the forgetful functor from Acto S into the category pointed sets SetoJ of
(2) Cofree R-modules or cofree abelian groups with respect to other forgetful functors can be found, for example in 1.7 and 1.8 of [HI/ST70].
Functorial properties of Cof

Proposition 4.12. Let S e t " be a subcategory of Set and let C be a concrete category such that for every I 6 S e t " there exists the \I\-cofree object (Cof (I), ). The assigment Cof : S e t " > C with I i > Cof (I) and a > > Cof () = (axj)* for every I, J e S e t " , a : I > J is a covariant functor which is called a cofree functor. Moreover, Cof takes products of S e t " to products of C, i.e. Cof preserves products. Proof. This follows from the definition of Cof(/), in analogy to Proposition 2.3.10. The preservation of products is the content of Corollary 2.4.7.
Cofree objects and cogenerators

Proposition 4.13. Let C be a concrete category and let G C be \I\-cofree for |/| > 2. Then is a cogenerator in C. Proof. Take X =t Y with / g in C. Then there exists e [X\ with
L / J ( * ) LffJ(s) Take C : L ^ J - / such that C ( L / J ( ) ) C Q s K * ) ) e / .
153
Since is |/|-cofree, there exists * G Morc(^, K) such that the triangle in the following diagram L*J
L/J
Ye\
\x\
LC*J "
LCof(/)j = \K\ is commutative. This implies * f *g in C . Thus is a cogenerator.
Abstract characterization of cogenerators

Lemma 4.14. Let G C be a cogenerator in C. If for every X C there exists X in C such that the projections pi,p2 ' X * X are different, then M o r c ( X , ) 0 for all X e C. Proposition 4.15. Take G C and suppose that (a) C contains arbitrary powers of , or (b) C contains arbitrary non-empty powers of and for every X e C there exists X such that the projections p\, 2 : X > X are different. Then the following properties are (i) is a cogenerator in C. (ii) For every X C there exists a monomorphism X > . {,) X > . equivalent:
(iii) For every X G C there exist I G Set and a monomorphism
Cotrace
Definition 4.16. Let Xs,Ys G Act S. Define the cotrace p| geHom(Xs,Vs) That is, c o t r X s ( y s ) = ^ ^ ^ , ^ . ' )
e I
of Ys in Xs by
cotrXs(Fs)=
ker . s s | g{x) = g(x')}
n i
Note that cotrx s (ys)s is a subact of X s Xs-
154
II Constructions
Characterization of cogenerators in ActS

Proposition 4.17.
d i f f e r e n t zero If K s G
Act S
is
a cogenerator
then
K s
contains
two
elements.
Proof.
Let 5 e Act S be the one element act. In Act S consider s

U2
Qs 0 s where ui, 2 are the injections of the coproduct. Then by hypothesis there exists a homomorphism : 5II 0 s > Ks with u\ u2, consequently n K s has the two different zeros ( u i ( 9 ) ) and /3( 2 (0)) Theorem 4.18.
(i) Ks
For K s G
Act S
the
f o l l o w i n g c o n d i t i o n s are e q u i v a l e n t :
is a cogenerator
in A c t S .
K s )
(ii) (iii)
(iv)
The
functor
Hom( s,
: ActS
of
Set
is f a i t h f u l .
E v e r y Ys
Act S
G
is a subobject
^,^)
For
every
Ys
Act S
there
exists
a set
such
that
Ys
is a subobject
of
U i
()
For
all
Ys
Act S
the
cotrace
of K s
in
Ys
is t r i v i a l , i . e .
cotry s (Ks)
Proof,
= Ay
(i) (ii) because (ii) is Definition 1.7.31. The equivalences (i) (iii) <==> (iv) have been proved in Proposition 2.4.15 (in A c t S both hypotheses (a) and (b) of this proposition are valid). (i) (v). To prove cotry s (is: s ) =
eKom
p|
{Ys,Ks)
ker =
AY
we show that for any y,y' G Ys, y y', there exists G Hom(Ys,"s) such that ( y ) { y ' ) . But since for such y and y' one has P i ( ( y , y ' ) ) = y y' = P2((y, y')), i-e. pi p2, where pi,p2 are the projections of the product Ys Ys, as desired exists by the definition of the cogenerator. (v) = > (i) Take homomorphisms / i , / 2 : X s ^Si / Then there exists G Xs such that f i { x ) f2(x) Ys- By ( v ) there exists : Ys > Ks with ( f i ( x ) ) ( f ( x ) ) . Thus K s is a cogenerator.
2
5 Tensor products
155
Constructions and examples of cogenerators

P r o p o s i t i o n 4.19. Let (Ai)$, i & I, be a family of right S-acts one of which is a cogenerator in Act S and let be an amalgamated coproduct. s a Then ^ cogenerator in A c t S.
P r o p o s i t i o n 4.20. Let (Ai)s, Then any coamalgam
i I, be a family of cogenerators in A c t S. a cogenerator in A c t S.
E x a m p l e 4.21. From Propositions 2.4.19 and 2.4.20 we get concrete examples when using |/|-cofree 5-acts with \I\ > 2 for the necessary cogenerators in the constructions.
E x a m p l e 4.22. We modify the category from Example 2.3.20 assuming now that the poset of objects of does not have a supremum. Therefore, conditions (a) and (b) of Proposition 2.4.15 are not fulfilled, since all nonempty powers of X are isomorphic to X , the empty power does not exist, it would be the supremum. But every is a cogenerator, since there do not exist pairs of different morphisms between two objects, while not every object is subobject of every other object, for example, if the respective morphism sets are empty. That is, (i) = > (iii) of Proposition 2.4.15 is not valid for this category.
5 Tensor products
Tensor product of acts (2.5.1-2.5.3) Existence of tensor products (2.5.4-2.5.8) Tensor product of homomorphisms (2.5.9-2.5.11) Act-structures on the tensor product (2.5.12) Canonical isomorphisms (2.5.13) Tensor product and coproducts (2.5.14) Tensor functors (2.5.15-2.5.18) Horn -functors and tensor functors (2.5.19-2.5.20) The tensor functors are of as great importance in the theory of acts as they are in the theory of modules. As always they are constructed similar to tensor products in Linear or Multilinear Algebra.
156
II Constructions
Tensor product of acts

Definition 5.1. Let As G Act S, sM G S A c t and Y G Set. A mapping : As x > Y is called S-tensorial or S-balanced if (as, m) = (a, sm) for all a G As, m G s M , s S. Definition 5.2. Let A s G Act - S, S M e S - Act. A set together with an 5-tensorial mapping : As g M is called a tensor product of As and 5 if for every Y G Set every S'-tensorial mapping : As x s M Y factors uniquely through r , i.e., (r, T) fulfills the following universal property: For every Y G Set and every .S'-tensorial mapping : As x s M > Y there exists a unique mapping in Set making the following diagram commutative
. Arguing as in the proof of Proposition 2.1.3 we obtain the following result and therefore we can speak about the tensor product of As and M. Proposition 5.3. Let (, ) and (', ') be two tensor products of As and sM. Then and T' are isomorphic in Set.
Existence of tensor products

Now we give the construction of the tensor product in act categories. Construction 5.4. Let As G Act S, sM G S Act and let be the tensor relation, i.e. the equivalence relation on the set As s M generated by the pairs (( as,m ), (a, sm)) for a G As, m G s M , s G S. We define As s M := (As x sM)/, and a m := [(, )] G As < 8 > sM, a G As, m G s M , and denote the canonical surjection from As x s M onto As < S > s M in Set by r , i.e. ((a, m)) = a <S>m. By Corollary 1.1.7 (a, m) (', ) for a, a' As, m,m' G s M means that there exists a finite sequence of elements in As x sM beginning with (, ) and ending with (a', m') as follows: if (b, n) and (c,p), b,c As,n,p G s M , are two consecutive elements of the sequence then either b cs and sn for some s G S or tp and bt = c for some t G S.
5 Tensor products
157
Since s and t in our sequence may be equal to 1 we may assume without loss of generality that our sequence starts with (a,m) (a, sini) (asi, ni) = for some s\ G S and n\ G and ends with = (', ')
= (a'ifc, nk) (a', tknk)
for some tk G S, nk G s M , k G N. Representing the information contained in the sequences just described in a convenient way we have L e m m a 5.5. Let As G Act S, sM G S Act. Then a < g > m - a' < 8 > m' for a, a' G As and m, m' G s M if and only if there exist s\, , sk, t\, , tk G S, &!,> bk- 1 G As, ni, ,nfc G s ^ i such that
Sini
as = M i b\s2 - b2t2 bk-\sk = a'tk
s2n2
= m = tini = t2n2 tknk
m' =
Definition 5.6. The sequence (*) presented in Lemma 2.5.5 will be called an S-tossing of length k in As s M connecting ( a,m ) and ( a',m '). Proposition 5.7. The set AssM with the canonical surjection : A5 sM > As sM is the tensor product of As and gM. Proof. Take Y G Set and let : As x s M > Y be an S'-tensorial mapping. Define : As sM - by {bn) = (b,n)
for any b G As, G s M . We show that is well-defined. Suppose that a m = a' m' for a, a' G As, m, m' G Sm, that is we have an S-tossing (*) connecting (a, m) and ( a ' , m ' ) . Moving down in (*) we get (,) = {a,sinx) = {asi,n{) = /?(,) = = (a'tk, nk) = (a', tknk) = (a\ m') , i.e. is well-defined. Clearly, = and is the unique mapping with this property. Hence As SM is the tensor product of As and sM.
158
II
Constructions
The following technical result helps to treat tensor products of the form (S/p)s SM where is a right congruence on S. Recall that p(s,t) is the smallest right congruence on S containing (s,t) S x S (see Definition 1.4.18). L e m m a 5 . 8 (Bulman-Fleming and McDowell [Bu/Mc83]). Let S be a monoid, s,t S, p(s,t), sM a left S-act, and ,' m m' or there exist ,..., mn s M , { s , i } for i 1 , . . . , n, such that m = simi s i , . . . , sn, 11,..., tn S, where { s ; , U} sM. Then [l]p m = [l]p m' if and only if either
= s^m?,
... tnmn
= m'
t\m\ S2TO2
t^m^ = s4m4 . . .
Proof. Define a relation r on s M so that m r m ' for m,m' sM if and only if the elements m i , . . . , mn s M , s i , . . . , sn, t\,..., tn S, required in the statement, exist. Clearly, is an equivalence relation on s M . Define a mapping : S/p 5 M > sM/r by
([u]p,m) = [um)T
for every u S, m s M . Suppose ([u]p,m) = ([v]p,m'). Then m = m' and, by Lemma 1.4.37, either
u = or there exist pi,...,pn, qi,...,qn, w1}... ,wn S where {pi,qi} { s , i } for
i 1 , . . . , n, such that
u = piWi q2W2=Psm ...qnwn qiwx = p2w2 q3w3 = p4w4 ...
=v
Multiplying all elements of the sequence above by m we get that [um]T = [vm]T. Hence is well-defined. Since
([u]pr,m) = ([ur]p,m) = [{ur)m\T = [u(rm)]T = ([u]p,rm)
for every u,r S, m s M , we get that is ^-tensorial. Now, by the universal property of tensor products, there exists a mapping : S/p s M > sM/r such that ([u}p <g> m) = [um]T for every u S, m SM. Clearly, is surjective. Suppose that ([u]p <g) m) = ([v]p m') for u,v S, m,m' sM. This means that [um]T = [vm']T. By the definition of r we have elements m i , . . . , m n s M , s i , . . . ,sn, t\,... ,tn S, where {s^, ti} = {s, t) for i = 1 , . . . , n, such that
urn = simi i2^2 = ... tnmn t3ms s^m^ . . . = vm! t\mi = S2TU2
5 Tensor products
159
But then
[it] < S >m = = = = = =
[l] p < g > um = [l] p < g > simi [si]p m i = [ti]p (g) mi [1]P < 8 > timi = [l]p <g) s 2 m 2 [s2]p m2 = [t2}p m 2 [l] p < g > t2m2 = ... = [l]p im [l]p vm' =- [v]p m' .
Thus is injective and so a bijection. Hence, for m, m' sM, we have [l] p < g > m = [l]p m' ^([l]p<8>m) =/3([l] p <g>m') [m]T = [m'] T .
Tensor product of homomorphisms

Definition 5.9. Let / : A s * A's, g : s M > s M ' be 5-homomorphisms and , ' the canonical surjections onto A s C g > s M and A's sM', respectively. The unique mapping ' ( / g) which makes the following diagram commutative As x sM / g A's
SM'
As SM
'(f X g) A '
< g > SM'
will be called the tensor product of the 5-homomorphisms / and g and denoted by f g. Lemma 5.10. Let f : As > A's, g : > s M ' be S-homomorphisms. Then = f(a) < g > #(ra)
(/ g)(am) /or a// a G A s , m SM.
Proposition 5.11. Let As Act - S, S M S - Act. Then: (1) idA idM = id a s s m (2) If f : As > A's and g : s M s M ' are S-epimorphisms then f g is a surjective mapping. (3) I f f : g: SM ^ S M ' , /' : A's -> A's and g' : are S-homomorphisms, then (/' </)(/ 5) = f f gg' : A s
S S
M'
M"
M - > A'i s M " .
160
II Constructions
(4) If f and g are retractions or coretractions or isomorphisms, then this is also the case for f g. Note that in the third case one has (/ g)~l = r
1
g-1 .
We stress that if 5-homomorphisms / and g are monomorphisms then f g is not necessarily an injective mapping. This aspect of tensor products will be discussed in detail in Chapter 3.
Act-structures on the tensor product

In general the tensor product of acts is only a set, but when tensoring biacts the tensor product itself becomes an act. Proposition 5.12. If RAS, S M t are biacts as indicated, then
R(AS
SM)T
- Act -
with r(a ra) = ra m , (a m)t amt for any a e As, sM, r R, t . In particular AS SM End(yls) - Act - End( and As SM C(S) - Act - C(S) where C(S) is the center of S. Proof. Clearly, R(AS sM)T R- Act and R(AS sM)T Act - T. And since r((a m)t) = ra mt = (r(a m))t for any a AS, m s M , r R, t one also gets that R(AS SM)T R - Act - T.
SM)
Canonical isomorphisms
If one tensor factor is the monoid of scalars considered as an act or a left ideal thereof generated by an idempotent, the situation becomes quite specific. Proposition 5.13. For every RAS R Act S and e2 = e S : R(As sSe)eSe RAeeSe a se > ase
for all s S, a A, is an isomorphism of R eSe-biacts.
5 Tensor products
161 of R S-biacts
If e = 1 S we get the canonical isomorphism r{AsSS)s ^ rAs a s > as for all a As, s S.
Proof Since the mapping As x sSe > Ae defined by (a, se) t> ase is obviously tensorial the existence of the mapping follows from the definition of the tensor product. Clealy, is surjective. Suppose t h a t {\ sie) = (2 S2e), i.e. d\S\e a^sê for some , < 2 2 As and si, S2 S. Then < g > Sie = aiSie e a,2S2e e a2 Hence is injective. If t eSe and r R, then (( se)t) { ste) = (ra){ste) = r(ase)t = (( se))t . .
Hence is an isomorphism of R eSebiacts.
Using the second isomorphism from Proposition 2.5.13 we shall often identify elements a s of A s 5 5 with elements as of A s in what follows. It turns out t h a t tensoring of biacts is associative up to isomorphism (cf. Example 5.1.3(3)).
Tensor product and coproducts

The tensor product has a quite favorable relation to the coproduct which we analyze now. P r o p o s i t i o n 5.14. Take sM S A c t and A s = U i e / Ai A c t S with the injections Ui : At > As where Ai, i I, are right S-acts. Then
Set
( i i A 0 s is I
s M
~ i i ( A iei
s M )
with the injections Ui idM, i I. Analogously, if sM = ] J i e J Mi SAct with the injections Ui : Mi > sM where Mi, i I , are left S-acts and As A c t S then
Set
As s ( iei with the injections id^ Ui, i I.
0 - ]l(As iei
sMi)
162
II Constructions
Proof. We shall prove the second isomorphism. For any family of mappings fi-.As
sMi
-> X
define / : As s M X by setting f(a (g> m) = fi{a> ) where m G Mj, t G /. This mapping makes all diagrams
Si
AS
id^
y/f
AS <8> S^
commutative and is apparently unique with this property. Thus As (& s is the coproduct of the sets As s M , i /.
Tensor functors
In the following corollary we collect the results needed to define tensor functors. Corollary 5.15. For As G Act S we have that Ass-'SSM
Act
Set - As sM
A's
SM'
SM'
is a covariant functor and, similarly, for ^M G S Act we have a covariant functor s sM : Act - S Set. I f , moreover, RAS G R Act S, we get a functor
RAs
s-
' S - Act
R - Act.
and if SMT G S Act T we get a functor -s s MT : Act - S Act - .
All these functors preserve coproducts in the sense of Proposition 2.5.14.
5 Tensor products Moreover, we have the bifunctors -5 < g > s - : (Act - S) x (S - A c t ) - Set and
R-S S~T : ( R - Act - S ) X { S - Act - T) - R Act - .
163
Definition 5.16. The functors defined in Corollary 2.5.15 will be called tensor functors. Example 5.17. In general, tensor functors do not preserve products. Indeed, take S = { l , x } with 2 1. Then e because 1,1)
s
(Ss
sS)
( 5 sS)
X {Qs sS) but | ( 6 s s 5 ) x (0 5 <8)s^)| = 1.
{l,x)
in &s(SSUsS)
Exercise 5.18. Tensor functors preserve epimorphisms.
Hom-functors and tensor functors

Here we present a result showing a relationship between Hom-functors and tensor functors which will be resumed under the aspect of adjoint functors in Example 5.1.21(3). Note that if R, S are monoids and RAS, RC acts, then, by Proposition 1.7.9, Hom(#j4s, ftC) is a left 5-act under the definition ( s g ) ( a ) = g(as) for any a RAs, S e S and g G H o m ( ^ 5 , RC). Proposition 5.19. Let R and S be monoids, and let RAS, Then the mapping : Horn ( S B, 5 ( H o m ( J 4 s , RC)) defined by X(f)(ab) for any a e
R
SB, RC be acts.
-> H o r n ( R ( A S
SB),RC)
f(b)(a) is a bisection.
A s , b e sB and f G Hom(5, 5(Hom(A5, RC))
Proof. Since
X(f)(as
6) = f(b)(as)
= (s(f(b))(a)
= ( f ( s b ) ) ( a ) = X(f)(a
sb)
for any s S, is well-defined.
164
II Constructions be such that ( / ) = ( / 2 ) .
Let / i , / 2 G Rom{sB, S(RomR(RAs,RC)) Then for any b G sB and a G
( / ) ( 6 ) = (/ 2 )(&) which means that h(b)(a) = f2(b)(a) for all a G and thus for any 6 G sB one has fi(b) = /2(i>). Hence fi = / 2 and is injective. For < 7 G Hom(J4s < g ) $B, C) define a mapping / : s-B sHom(A5,C) Since for any s G S = (sf(b))(a),
by f(b)(a) = g(a b) for any b G s and G RAS. f(sb)(a)
= g(a <g> sb) = g(as b) = f(b)(as)
then /(s&) = s/(fe) for any b G s-B and s 5, i.e. / is a homomorphism. By definition ( / ) = g. Hence is surjective. Generalizing the previous result to the case of biacts one obtains Corollary 5.20. If we have monoids R,S,T,U and biacts RAs,SBU,RCT then the mapping of Proposition 2.5.19 gives an isomorphism of biacts
UROM(SBU, s ( H o m ( f l y l s , RCT))T)T - c/Hom((As < g > SB)L7, RCT)T .
Similarly, for biacts nAg,sBT,uCj

t /Hom( H A s ,
we get an isomorphism of biacts -> [/Hom( (As SB)T,
t/(Hom( 5 j B T , UCt))s)R
uCT)R
Comments
We introduced the tensor product of acts which will play an important role in many parts to come. The fact that the tensor functor in general does not preserve monomorphisms is the starting point of the long story of flat acts which will be presented in Chapter 3. When using the concept of direct limits which can be transferred to R Sbiacts (see [HOW95]) it can be shown that for an S T-biact 5 the tensor functor S SMT preserves direct limits of R S'-biacts. A suitable factorization of the tensor product can be used to construct the so called free S-extension of : Xs > Yu where U is a submonoid of the monoid S and is an [/-homomorphism (cf. for example [HOW95]). Tensor products exist in many categories and are a widely used tool in many branches of mathematics. Constructions of tensor products of course depend on the concept "tensorial" mapping. It turns out that in the category Graph the appropriate tensor product is the so-called box product of graphs (cf., for example [HAR69] where the name product is used for this construction).
6 Wreath products of monoids and acts
165

Wreath product of monoids over an act (2.6.1-2.6.7) The endomorphism monoid of a free act (2.6.8-2.6.9) Wreath product of acts (2.6.10-2.6.17) The representation of End(F(Xs)) (2.6.18) Cascade composition of automata (2.6.19) The wreath product of monoids is "associative" (2.6.20) The standard wreath product (2.6.21-2.6.22) Algebraic properties of (R wr S| fi A) (2.6.23-2.6.24) Comments The construction of wreath products has proved important in group theory, semigroup theory and automata theory. Already in 1933 Specht [Spe33] considers the wreath product of a monoid with a permutation group (without using the words monoid or semigroup or wreath product), the first to apply this construction was Loewy [Loe27], according to Wells [Wel76]. In this section we present definitions, the relation to endomorphism monoids of free acts and transfer the construction to the so-called wreath product of acts. In the sequel we will meet wreath products of acts in several places, mainly as examples or as exercises.
Wreath product of monoids over an act

Recall from Example 1.2.15(1)(1) that for a monoid S and a non-empty set A the set of all mappings SA from A to 5, with multiplication ( f g ) ( a ) = f(a)g(a) for f,g SA and all a A, forms a monoid. As usual we denote by cs SA, for s S, a mapping which maps all elements of A constantly onto s. Construction 6.1. Let R, S be monoids and RA a left R-act. R SA consider the multiplication defined by (r,f)(p,g) (fP9)(a) = (rp,fpg) . R SA becomes a monoid for r,p R, f,g SA where for a A we set = f(pa)g(a) Proposition 6.2. With the above mulitplication with identity (l,Ci). Proof Let a A, p,q,r R, f,g,h SA. Then = (fpqgqh)(a) , On the set
((fp9)qh)(a)
= (fpg){qa)h(a) = f(pqa)g{qa)h(a)
166 and therefore ((r,f)(p,g)){q,h)
II Constructions
= (rp,fpg)(q,h) = (rpq,fpqgqh) =
= =
(rpq,{fpg)qh) (r,f)(pq,gqh)
(rj)((p,g)(q,h)),
i.e., multiplication in ( R SA) is associative. Since ( r , / ) ( l , C l ) = ( r , / l C l ) = ( r , / ) = ( r , C l / ) = (1 , d ) ( r , / ) for all r G ii, / G S""4, then ( l , c i ) is the identity element of the semigroup RX SA, i.e. R x SA is a monoid with identity (1, ci). Definition 6.3. We denote the above monoid (R wr wreath product of R by S through RA. and call it the
E x a m p l e 6.4. For monoids R, S and an R-act RA it is clear that (RxS,

(RwvS\RA)^ { S , { R
A
if \RA\ = 1,
if || = 1,
if |S| = 1.
Therefore the smallest non-trivial example needs R, S, RA with two elements at least and has 8 elements, the next bigger will have 12 elements. To get a concrete example which will be used later, take the complete graph K2 (cf. Example 1.1.12). Computation shows that (Aut("2) wr A u ^ i ^ U u t k2^2) is isomorphic to the 8-element dihedral group D 4 (see, for example, [HAL59]). L e m m a 6.5. The canonical mapping
(R wr S\RA) R
(r, / ) which is surjective, and the canonical R^{RWT r 1- (r,ci) and
r , mappings S\rA) ,
S ^ ( R wr s i-> (1, c s ) , which are injective, are monoid homomorphisms. Moreover, the canonical mapping RUS (r,s) is a monoid homomorphism. - (R wr 5| .4) , 1^ (r,cs)
6 Wreath products of monoids and acts Proof. Notice that (r,c s )(r',c s /) = (rr',(c e ) r /c S ') = (rr',c s s <) . The rest is clear. L e m m a 6.6. If : S > S' is a monoid homomorphism,
167
then the mapping
(id* wr <5|icU) : (R wr S\RA) (R wr S'\RA) , for which (id* wr i| id A )((r, / ) ) = (r, 5 f ) , r e R , f e S

A
is a monoid homomorphism. Moreover, (id* wr id ) is injective (surjective) (surjective).
if and only if is injective
Proof. First note that f e S'A with the usual composition of mappings. Take WR S\RA). As for every a RA we have (R> /)> (p> <?) (f(pa)g(a)) we get that 5(fpg) (id* wr = (f(pa))6(g(a)) Then = (rp,S{fpg)) wr \ idA)((p,g))) . = W)(paM(g)(a)) ,
= {Sf)p(Sg).
idy4)((r, f)(p,g))
= (id* wr \ idA)({rp, fpg)) = {rp,W)p{Sg)) = = ((id* wr \idA)((r,f)))((idR
(r,Sf)(p,Sg)
Moreover, ( i d * wr < 5 | id^)((l, ci)) = ( M d ) = ( l , c x ) G (R wr S'\RA) . Thus we see that (id* wr id^) is a monoid homomorphism. Finally note that the mapping SA > ( S') A with / i > 5 / is injective (surjective) if and only if : S > S' is injective (surjective). Thus we have that (id* wr idyi) is injective (surjective) if and only if is injective (surjective).
L e m m a 6.7. If a : RA > RA' is a homomorphism of left R-acts, mapping (id* wr ids : (R wr S|*A') (R wr S\RA) , for which (id* wr id s I a ) ( ( r , / ' ) ) = ( r , / ' a ) , r e R, f SA' , (surjective)
then the
is a monoid homomorphism. Moreover, if || > 2, then (id* wr ids |a) is injective only if a is surjective (injective).
if and
168
Proof.
II Constructions
First note that fa G SA with the usual composition of mappings. Since a : RA > RA' is a homomorphism of left R-acts, we have for every a G RA, peR, f',g' G SA' that
( ( f ^ ) a ) ( a ) = U'P9'){*{a)) = f(a(pa))g'(a(a)) = f (pa(a))g'(a(a)) = (f'a)(pa)(g'a)(a) = ((f'a)p(g>a))(a) ,
i.e. ( f ^ ' ) a = (f'a)p(g'a).
Then
}'pg')) f'a)(p,g'a)
(id wr id s I a ) ( ( r , f ) ( p , g ' ) ) = (id f i wr id s \a)((rp,

= (rp, (f'a)p(g'a)) = (r,
= ( ( i d * wr id s |a)((r, / ' ) ) ) ( ( i d H wr i d s |a)((p,g'))) and ( i d wr i d s | a ) ( ( l , c i ) ) = (l,cict) = ( l , c i ) e {R wr S\nA) . Therefore (id wr ids IÔ is a monoid homomorphism. Finally note that if \S\ > 2 then the mapping SA' > SA with /' h-> fa is surjective if and only if a is injective and it is injective if and only if a is surjective.
The endomorphism monoid of a free act

One of the first results in the direction of the following theorem belongs to Hoehnke [Hoe65]. He considered the situation for a monoid S which is a group or a group with zero. Theorem 6.8 (Skornjakov [Sko79]). LetF(X)s A c t - S be free with basis X. Then the monoids (T(X) wr 5 ( ) ^ ) andEnd(F(X)s) are isomorphic where
T(X) = X
x
denotes the full transformation
monoid
of X.
An isomorphism
is given by v((r,f))(xs) for (r, f ) e (T(X) Proof. w r S\nx)X), = r(x)f(x)s
xeX,stS.
It is obvious that X G T(X)~Act. Consider the mapping given in the formulation. Since r G T(X) and f(x) G S for every X one has that r(x)f(x)s G (F(X))s for every s G S. Moreover, is well-defined since X is a basis of (F{X))S. Clearly, w ( ( r , / ) ) G E n d ( F ( X ) S ) . Now for G X and ('r,f),(P,9) e (T(X) wr S\T[x)X) we have
u((r,f)(p,g))(x) = ((, fpg))(x) = (rp){x)(fpg)(x) = u((r, f))(p{x))g{x) (u>{(rtf))u((p,g))){x).
= r(p{x))f{p{x))g{x)
w((r,/))(a>((p,g))(x)) =
6 Wreath products of monoids and acts Thus u((r,f)(p,g)) = u((r, /))((, g)). Moreover,
169
w((l,ci))(x) = l(a;)ci(ic) = i d x ( x ) l 5 = for all X . This shows that is a monoid homomorphism. To prove injectivity of assume that u((r,f)) = u((p,g)), r,p T(X), x f,g S . Then r(x)f(x) = p(x)g(x) for all X. This implies r(x) = p(x) and f(x) = g(x) as F(X)s is free and r(x),p(x) X are elements from the basis. Thus, (r,f) = (p,g). To prove surjectivity of take any End(F(X)s) Then for every X we have () = 's for some ' X and s S, that is defines a mapping r T(X) with r(x) = x' and a mapping / Sx with f(x) = s. Then () = r(x)f(x) and thus = u(r, /). Example 6.9 (Fleischer and Knauer[Fl/Kn88]). Consider the monoid = { l , r , p } where r and are right zeros. Then E n d ( r H f j II ) is not a wreath product of the form (R wr S\RA) with R^T2 = T ( { 1,2}). Indeed, by Proposition 2.1.21 we get an isomorphism of sets End {rH H II HH) = Horn (RHH,RHH U Hh) Hom(if H , rHH U HH) .
As [) = {2) = (f(r)r = r for every Horn ( RHN, RHJI JIHh), we get that ] Hom(rZf//, THH^HH)\ = 2. Since HH is 1-free, we get that | Hom(ii//, rii//II HH)I = 5. Consequently, | End{THH II HH)| = 10. It is clear that these endomorphisms operate on the two components of THH Hh as T2 operates on {1, 2}. Then a representation of End(rii//II//tf) as a monoid (T2 wr S\T2A) is not possible since \{T2 wr >|t2-<4)| = |7^||5|| = 4|5|'| cannot be equal to 10. Moreover, THH will turn out to be a projective generator in A c t which is relatively close to a free act (cf. Section 3.17).
Wreath product of acts

Proposition 6.10 (Knauer, Mikhalev [Kn/Mi88]). Let R,S be monoids and rA R- Act, sB S- Act. Then becomes a left (R wr S\aA)-act if we define (rj)(a,b) for (r,f) (R wr S\RA), (a,b) = eAxB. (a, b) we have = (rpaj(pa)g(a)b) = (r, f)((p,g)(a,b)) (raj(a)b)
Proof. For every (r, /), (p, g) (R wr ((rj)(p,g))(a,b) = {rp,fpg){a,b) = (r,f)(pa,g(a)b)
170 and
II Constructions
(1,ci)(a, b) = (a, lb) = (a, b) . Thus is a left ( R wr S| H A)-act. Definition 6.11. We write RA[sB] for the ( R wr ,S|A)-act RA RA[SB] the wreath product of the R-act RA to the S-act sB.
SB
and call
This notation is taken similar to the notation for the lexicographic product in graph theory (compare Definition 1.1.13). E x a m p l e 6.12. Consider the graphs G and with endomorphism monoids End(G) and End(if). A straightforward calculation shows that G[H] (End(G) wr End(#)| E n d G G) - A c t . For e {End, Aut} we have that (M(G) wr M(#)| M ( G ) G ) can be embedded into M(G[IF]). To show that for example in the case of groups equality does not always hold take (Aut("2) wr Aut(/T2)|Aut A ^ ^ ) from Example 2.6.4 which has 8 elements but Aut(i^2[-^2]) = AutfA^) = <S4 has 24 elements. For Send (cf. Definition 1.1.9) the graph 2 ^ 2 ] is an example where (Send(K 2 ) wr S e n d ( ^ 2 ) | S e n d K 3 K 2 ) Send(tf 2 [K 2 ]) (cf. [Kna87]). Graphs G and for which the group (Aut(G) wr Aut(if)|AUtGG) actually is Aut(G[//]) are characterized by Sabidussi [Sab59]. The corresponding question for endomorphism monoids has been settled by Nummert [Num87b] for Send. For End a partial answer is given by Fan [Fan95b]. L e m m a 6.13. If RA' is a subact of RA then ' is a (R wr S\RA)-subact
of RA[sB].
Proof. For every (r, /) {R wr S|#^4) and (a, b) ' we have (r, f)(a, b) = (ra,f(a)b)eA'xB. Proposition 6.14. Let RA ] J i e / Ai where Aifi I, are left R-acts. Then
iei
L e m m a 6 . 1 5 . If : sB sB' is a homomorphism mapping id^ x : ^,] > RA[SB'}, for which (idAx)(a,b) = (a,(b)), of left S-acts, then the
is a homomorphism of left (R wr S\RA)-acts. Moreover, id^ is a monomorphism (an epimorphism) if and only if is a monomorphism (an epimorphism).
6 Wreath products of monoids and acts Proof. Take : sB sB' a homomorphism of left S-acts. Note that = (id* x)(ra,f(a)b) = (raj(a)(b)) = = = (ra, (f(a)b))
171
(id* x)((rj)(a,b))
(r,f)(a,(b))
{r,f)({idAx)(atb))
for every r R, f SA,a A,b B. So id^ x is a homomorphism of left ( R wr S|ftA)-acts. It is clear that id^ is a monomorphism (an epimorphism) if and only if is a monomorphism (an epimorphism). Proposition 6.16. If rA R Act, SBI S Act, i I, then
RA^SB^JLINAISBI]) IEI IEI
as left (R wr S\RA)-acts.
Recall that semilinear homomorphisms were introduced in Definition 1.4.23. R e m a r k 6.17. If 7 : W > R is a homomorphism of monoids, then every Ract rX can be considered as a W-act setting wx NF(w)x for w W, rX . In this case idx : WX > rX is a 7-semilinear mapping, i.e. idx(wx) = wx = 7(10) i d * ( ) . In particular, using the canonical homomorphism (R wr > R, {r, / ) 1 > r, every R-act rX can be considered as an (R wr S'|A)-act with (r, f)x = rx for rX, r R, f SA. Moreover, the mappings A r-<4[s-B] > , = A and IA,B0 A rA[sB] where bo with = (a, bo) are homomorphisms of (R wr S'|v4)-acts.
The representation of E n d ( F ( X s ) )
The following theorem gives an important example how the construction of wreath products of acts can be used. Theorem 6.18. Let F(X)s semilinear isomorphism Act S be free with basis X. Then we have a
(, ) (T(X) wr S) T (x)X )( T ( X ) X [ SS ]) > End(F(X)S)F(X)S where : (x, S) and is as in Theorem 2.6.7.

T(X)X[sS}^F(X)s
I> xs
172
II Constructions wr S\T{x)X) = and ( x , s ) 6 t ( x ) X [ s S ] compute = r(x)f(x)s F(X)s-
Proof. For ( r , / ) e (T(X)
( ( r , f ) ( x , s ) ) = ((r{x), f(x)s))
(( > / ) ) M = ((, / ) ) { , s) ,
which shows semilinearity. Bijectivity of follows since X is a basis of
Cascade composition of automata

R e m a r k 6 . 1 9 . If we consider RA as an automaton with input monoid R and g as an automaton with input monoid S , then flAf^] is an automaton with input monoid (R wr S\RA).
In Automata Theory the so-called cascade compositions of automata vary this concept in several ways (see, for example, [ARB68]).
The wreath product of monoids is "associative"

E x e r c i s e 6.20. Let R, S,T be monoids, A G -Act, S-Act.
: (R w r (S w r T\SB)\RA) ((R w r S\RA) w r T\(R
wr
Then
S\RA)(RA[SB]))
defined by
(r, h) > ((r,pih),h),
reR,he(S
wr T\SB)A = p2(h(a))(b)
, and Pi,P2 denote
is an isomorphism of monoids, where h(a,b) the canonical projections from S x T B .
The standard wreath product

D e f i n i t i o n 6 . 2 1 . In the special case where RA = RR one often calls (R wr S\RR) the standard wreath product of R by S and writes R wr S.
173
In fact, all early constructions of the wreath product use this standard wreath product, starting with Specht [Spe33] and . H. Neumann [Neu60], see also [MEL95]. It is immediately clear from the definition that the standard wreath product is not symmetric in R and S, i.e. it is not commutative as an operation on monoids. E x a m p l e 6 . 2 2 . The standard wreath product is not associative as an operation on monoids. Indeed, take three semigroups R,S,T with finite cardinalities \R\ = r, |S| = s, |T| = t. Then |(i? wr (S wr T|s5)| )| = r(sts)r = rsrtsr and r rs I (R wr S\RR) wr T|(i? wr 5|-R)| = rs t which, in general, will be different numbers.
Algebraic properties of ( R wr 5|RA)

Exercise 6.23. Let R and S be monoids and RA A c t . (1) The wreath product ( R wr groups. is a group if and only if R and S are
(2) [Sko79], [Nic83a], [Kn/Mi83] The wreath product (R: wr S\RA) is a regular monoid if and only if S is a regular monoid and for all r G R, f G SA there exists G R such that rpr = and f(a) G f(pra)S for all a G A. (3) [Kos75], [Nic83a], [Kn/Mi85b] The wreath product (fiwr S\RA) is inverse if and only if (a) R and S are inverse, under the condition that ux for all u2 = u G R and G A, or (b) R is inverse and |5 = 1, under the condition that vx ^ for some 2 = G R, G A. (4) [Hun66], [Kn/Mi85a] Let R, S be semigroups, C(R) the center of R and let RA be a left i?-act. Then (r,f) G C((R wr S\RA)) if and only if r G C(R), f(px)s = sf(x) for all G R, G A, s G S, and ra ^ a for some A A implies that 0 G S and SF(A) = 0. (5) [Moo69], [Kn/Mi85a] Let R and S be semigroups and RA a left i?-act. The wreath product (R wr is commutative if and only if
(a) R and S are commutative, in case rx = for all r G R, G A, or
(b) R is commutative, 0 G S and S2 = 0, in case there exist r G R and A with rx .
174
II Constructions
(6) [Fie74], [Kos75], [Kos76], [Kn/Mi80b] Let F(X)S be a free right S-act. Then E n d ( ( F ( X ) ) s ) is a regular monoid if and only if for all I s C Ss with Is = YS and for \Y\ < \X\, there exists w2 = w S with Is = wS. (7) [Kn/Mi80a] A monoid S with 0 is called a left Baer monoid if for all C S one has A n n s ( M ) : { s S \ sM = 0} = Su for some u2 = u S, a left Rickart
|M| = 1.
monoid
if the condition is fulfilled for all C S with
Analogously, the respective right versions are defined [Kna76a]. Let S be a monoid with zero, F(X)s Then the monoid E n d ( F ( X ) S ) is a free right 5-act with basis X.
(a) a left Baer monoid if and only if S is a left Baer monoid, (b) a right Baer monoid if and only if S is a right Baer monoid, (c) a right Rickart monoid if and only if S is a right Rickart monoid, (d) a left Rickart monoid if and only if A n n e s ( M ) Su with u2 u S for all C S with \M\ < \X\. Remark 6.24. Skornjakov in [Sko82a] called a left -act, A an admissible R-act if: (1) \A\>2; (2) rx = for r G R and all A implies r = 1; (3) for every a A there is a unique va R such that vax = a for all A; (4) for all r,r' R and a,b A with a ^ b there exists R with ra = ra and rb = r'b. Note that if \X\ > 1 then j { x ) X is admissible. Indeed, conditions (1), (2) and (3) are evident. If r,r' T(X), x,y , y, then there exists a mapping f : X > X for which r(x) r(x) and r(y) = r'(y), so we have (4). Other examples of admissible acts can be obtained as follows. Let \X\ > 2 be a set, S(X) the symmetric group on 5, C(X) the semigroup of constant mappings, i.e. C(X) {cx \ X}. Then the left (S(X) (JC(X))-act X is admissible It is clear that acts in general are not admissible. The following can be proved [Fle87a]. If RA and R>A' are admissible acts, then (R wr = (R' wr if and only if \A\ = \A'\, R = R' and S = S'. Note that if we use Theorem 2.6.8 this result also implies the determinability result mentioned in Remark 1.5.45 for endomorphism monoids of free acts. In [Fle87b] it is shown that the above isomorphism of the wreath products is induced by isomorphisms between R and R!, S and S', A and A'.
7 The wreath product of a monoid with a small category
175
Comments
Wreath products form a growing field of investigations. We included only some very basic results and some exercises. It becomes a little more complicated to construct wreath products (.R wr if S and RA have zeros such that ( R wr 5|#.A) has a zero. There exist different approaches all with the aim to at least obtain an isomorphic representation of the endomorphism monoid of a free S-act with zero. In [Kn/Mi80a], [Kn/Mi80b], [Kn/Mi80c] some of these possibilities are presented and applied to study annihilator properties and regularity of such wreath products and the theory for monoids with involution. The latter approach leads to a concept of continuous endomorphisms of free >5-acts. An again different approach to wreath products is obtained if one considers order relations on R, S and RA which are extended to the wreath product construction either with cartesian or lexicographic order. Here "order endomorphism monoids" of free ordered 5-acts (cf. [Kn/Mi73]) can be represented as ordered wreath products. Moreover, there exist determinability results (cf. Remark 2.6.24) for endomorphism monoids of ordered and of topological 5*-acts which were defined in this paper. For ordered wreath products idempotence and regularity are investigated in [Kn/Mi83], inverseness in [Kn/Mi85a] and commutativity in [Kn/Mi85b]. For a functorial approach to the wreath product compare [Nor92b]. Wreath products of group acts have also be defined in [ K L / P 0 / R 0 8 8 ] .

A generalization of the wreath product of monoids (2.7.1-2.7.5) The endomorphism monoid of an arbitrary act (2.7.6-2.7.7) Representation of strong endomorphisms of graphs (2.7.8-2.7.9) Generalized act wreath product (2.7.10) Applications to RA[SB], End ysYs, Send GG (2.7.11-2.7.13) Comments
A generalization of the wreath product of monoids

Construction 7.1 (V. Fleischer [Fle86]). Let be a small category and R a monoid such that X Ob R Act. Denote = [j x % y e X Mor K (x,y).
176
II
Constructions
Consider W = {(r,/) | r e R, f Mx, Then for (r, /), (;, ) 6 VF" define ('rj)(p,g) where ( f p g ) ( x ) = f(px)g(x) of morphisms in K . =
f(x) Mor K (x,ra;), X}.
(rp,fpg) is the composition
for any X and f(px)g(x)
Exercise 7.2. With the above multiplication W becomes a monoid with identity (l ,e) where e Mx is such that e(x) ( ,) is the identity morphism idx for any object a; in K . Definition 7.3. The monoid W is called the wreath product of the monoid R with the category and is denoted by R wr K. Construction 7.4. Let R and S be monoids and RA R Act. Define the small category = R,A,S with object set Ob := A. For every A RA we consider the 1-free 5-act aS F({a})s Act S. For a, a' RA we set (,') = Horn (aSs,a'Ss). Proposition 7.5. Let R and S be monoids, RA R Act. Let = K ^s be as in the preceding construction. Then we have an isomorphism, of monoids a : (R wr S\RA) -> R wr (r,/)"(r,/*) where f* is defined by f* {a) : aS -> (ra)S as i (ra)f(a)s
for s S, a RA. Proof. Note first that a is well-defined since {a} is a basis of aSs Clearly, f*(a)ERom(aSs,(ra)Ss). Conversely, for /* : A > , = U a a , g j 4 H o m ( a S s , a ' S s ) and f*(a) Horn (aSs, (ra)Ss) define the mapping a ' : i i w r K ^ ( w r S\RA) (,)-(,/), where f(a) = sa S for a A and f*(a)(a) = (ra)sa. Again, a' is well-defined since { r a } is a basis of ( ra)Ss Then a and a ' are mutually inverse mappings, i.e., a is bijective.
7 The wreath product of a monoid with a small category To show that is a homomorphism of semigroups notice first that
<*((r,f))a((p,g)) = ( r j * ) ( p , g * )= (,()9*)
177
and
a({rp,fPg)) = (rp, ( f p g ) * )
for (r, / ) , ( P,G )
(R
wr
S\RA).
We show that /pV = ( M *
Using the definition of a we get that

{(fpd)* (a))(
a s
) = (rpa){fpg)(a)s
(rpa)f(pa)g(a)s
and ((/ p V)(a))(ae) = (()())( ) =

t(pa)((pa)g(a)s) = (rpa)f(pa)g(a)s
for s S, a A, which was to be proved. Moreover, since a((l,c 1 )) = ( l , c ; ) l with

cl(a) : aS aS
as > als =
as,
we have that c^(a) = id a 5. Hence a is a monoid isomorphism.
The endomorphism monoid of an arbitrary act

Since every endomorphism monoid of a free right S-act can be represented as a wreath product of monoids through an act by Theorem 2.6.8, it can also be represented as a wreath product of a monoid with a small category. Now we can generalize this to endomorphism monoids of arbitrary 5'-acts. Recall that in general those monoids cannot be represented in the standard way as a wreath product of monoids (see Example 2.6.9). Construction 7.6 [Fl/Kn88]. Let 5 be a monoid and Ys Act -S. Consider the decomposition Ys into indecomposable subacts Ys = Uie/ Define the small category = K y s with object set I and
MoTK(i,j)
= Hom(Yi, Yd)
Act -
for i,j I. Define the monoid R as R = { (I) I e End(y s ),>(Vi) C i 1} ,
where now is the index mapping according to Definition 1.5.38. Then R is a submonoid of (I) and I R Act.
178
II
Constructions and
Theorem 7.7 (Fleischer and Knauer [Fl/Kn88]). Let S be a monoid Ys G Act-S. Let = K y s be as in the preceding construction. Then a : End (Ys) > 72 wr > (<^| .) ) 5 an isomorphism of monoids with ip\yt G Hom(Yi, Y ^ ) ) .
Proof. Injectivity of a is obvious. To show surjectivity take (r, /) G R wr K . Assume that G End (Ys) is such that v^lvi = f(i) for all i G I. Then () = (r, /), since /() G ( , ri), and thus, in particular, r = . It is obvious that a preserves multiplication and the identity.
Representation of strong endomorphisms of graphs

Example 7.8 [Kn/Ni89]. Take a simple undirected graph G. Let Send(G) be the monoid of strong endomorphisms of G and let U := Gjv be the canonical strong factor graph of G (cf. Definition 1.1.15 and Remark 1.1.16). Then G = U[(Yu)ueU] is the canonical strong decomposition of G and Yu denotes the equivalence class of u G U with respect to u. Define the small category = g , V by Ob = U and (^, v) = Morget(Y'u) Yv) with composition of morphisms as in Set, u, G U. Then : Send(G) - Aut(C7) wr (,())
where is the permutation of U induced by and : \y : Yu Ypu the corresponding mapping induced by , defines an isomorphism of monoids. Exercise 7.9 [Kn/Ni89]. Let G = U[(Yu)uû] loops such that \U\ < oo. be an undirected graph without
(1) The monoid Send((?) is a regular monoid (see also [Liw93]). (2) Equivalent are: (i) Send(G) is orthodox. (ii) Send(G) is left inverse. (iii) \YU\ < 2 for all (3) Equivalent are: (i) Send(G) is right inverse. ueU.
179
(ii) Send(G) is inverse. (iii) Send(G) = Aut(G). (iv) |YU| = 1 for all u e U . (4) Send(G) is completely regular if and only if Send(G) is orthodox and = 2 implies \Ypu\ = 1 for all Aut({7), id[/.
Generalized act wreath product

Here we generalize the construction of the wreath product of acts over the wreath product of monoids to an act wreath product by a functor over the wreath product of a monoid with a small category. Construction 7.10. Let R be a monoid, a small category such that Ob R A c t . Let be a concrete category, : a covariant functor, which is surjective with respect to objects. Define the generalized act wreath product [ ] over R wr as follows
[]
= {()01) (
(J
a < = ObK
(\0()}
with multiplication (rj)(a,ba) = (ra^(f(a))(ba))
for (r,/) eR wr , ( a A ) e * K [ 0 B ] . Note that f(a) e M o r K ( a , r a ) for ( r , / ) e R wr and thus (/()) ( 0 ( < ) , ()). Consequently, (/())(0) (). Now ] e R wr - A c t since (r,f)((p,ff)(a,ba)) = (r,f)(pa^(g(a))(ba)) = (,(/())((9()))) = {rpaM(pa)g(a))(ba)) = (rpa^({fpg)(a))(ba)) = (rp,fPg)(a,ba) = ((r, f)(p,g))(a,ba) for all (r, /), (p, g) R wr and ( A ) #[] and, moreover, ( l , e ) ( a A ) = (a,0(e(a))(ft a )) = {,(ide)(6a)) for all ( a A ) Exercise 2.7.2. = (a,id^( a )(6 a )) = ( a A ) ,
where ( l , e ) is the identity in R wr according to
180
Applications
II Constructions to
R
A [
B ] ,
ndYSYS,
SendGG
The previous construction will now be applied to the situations where we present RA[SB], EndYsXs a n ( i SendG^ a s generalized act wreath products by specifying the category and the functor . E x a m p l e 7.11. Let R, S be monoids, RA G R A c t , sB G S A c t and = K f l ^ . s a s i n Construction 2.7.4. Define the category as follows:
O b = {SB}, MorB{SB,
SB)
= S
where elements from S are considered as left translations on 5 and composit i o n of morphisms is multiplication in S. Then is a concrete category. Define the functor = ^,, : > such that () sB for all a G A and () = () G S for G Kom(aSs,a'Ss) where () '() (cf. the coefficient mapping from Definition 1.5.40), here aSs and a'Ss are 1-free right 5-acts. It is clear that is a functor. Then in R w r ( [ ] ) we have ( r , / ) ( a , 6 ) = ( r a , 0 ( / ( a ) ) ( 6 ) ) = (ra, 0(/(a))6) = ( r a , 7 f o ) ( ) & )
for ( r , f ) eR wr K , (a, b) G
K[*B].
Consider the act wreath product RA[SB] from Definition 2.6.11. Define a mapping : > ^ K f ^ B ] by ((a,b)) (a,b) which is bijective and thus (, ) : (R wr S | K S ) (R wr is a semilinear isomorphism with a from Proposition 2.7.5. Indeed, from Proposition 2.7.5 we have that a is an isomorphism of monoids.
Take ( r , / ) G (R wr S\RA), (a, b) G RA[SB). Then
( ( , / ) ) ( ( , 6 ) ) = ( r j * ) ( a , b ) = (ra,*(/*(a))&) = (ra,/*(a)(a)b) = (ra,/(a)b) = (r,f)(a,b)
T h e o r e m 7.12. Take Ys A c t S and define the small category = K y s and the monoid R as in Construction 2.7.6, using the decomposition Ys ] J i e / Y{ where Yi are the indecomposable components of Ys in A c t S. Take such that Ob = { y ; | i G I,YS = / * } , M o r B ( l ; , Y j ) = H o m ( Y i , l j ) in A c t S. Then is a concrete category. Take the functor : such that {%) = Yi and {) fori G O b K , G (, j) = ( ^ , ^ ) Define mappings : Yi^ r K [ ^ B ] by iei Vi ^ (i,y%)
181
and
a : End(Ys) R wr
- (, (<p\Y.)ieI) . Then
(, ) : End (y s )^s ( wr ) ( [ ^ ] )
is a semilinear isomorphism of left acts. Proof. Prom Theorem 2.7.7 we have that a is an isomorphism of monoids. Clearly is bijective. Take G End(Ys) and Ys- Then <*{)() = te.MyJte/Xî/i) = (),<(*)) = v(<p(vi))
Example 7.13. Take a simple undirected graph G with its canonical strong decomposition U[(Yu)ueu] according to Remark 1.1.16. Define = g , v as in Example 2.7.8 and take such that Ob = {Yu | u U}, Mor B (F u , Yv) = M o r S e t ( r u , n ) , u, G U. Then is a concrete category. Take the functor : such that <f>(u) = Yu and () = for u O b K , G
( , ) = ( 5 ^ , Y v ) , u,v eU.
Then in A u t ( u ) w r K(Aut(y)K^B]) we have (p, (y>u))(w, vu) = for (p, (<pu)) G Aut(C7) wr and (u,yu) G Au t (U) K[^B]. Define a mapping :G > Aut ( t /)K[ fli B] y >- (u,yu)
(pu,<pu(vu))
where u G U = G\ represents the i^-class of y and yu = y, is the natural bijection according to Remark 1.1.16. Then
(, ) -Send(G) G > Aut(t/) wr
is a semilinear isomorphism where a is taken from Example 2.7.8.
Comments
The study of algebraic properties of wreath products with small categories has been started in [Fl/Kn94a], [Fl/Kn94b]. There the properties PRIT and PRIC were investigated, that is when do the principal right ideals of a monoid form a tree or a chain with respect to inclusion as ordering, and similarly the left versions PLIT and PLIC. Note that P R I T is equivalent to saying that incomparable right ideals are disjoint. In [Fle86] there was obtained a determinability result for R wr which is analogous to the result mentioned in Remark 2.6.24.
182
II Constructions
The presented construction of a wreath product of a monoid with a small category cannot be considered as a special case of the wreath product of two categories introduced by Wells [Wel80] as was pointed out by V. Fleischer [Fle87b]. In [Fle90] commutativity questions for the wreath product of a monoid with a small category are investigated in analogy to the results stated in Exercise 2.6.23(5). In a parallel but somewhat different approach to our Construction 2.7.10 Hion [Hio87] introduced so-called nets of free S-acts over a small category, generalizing also the construction of the wreath product of a monoid with a small category presented here. He uses this to prove a theorem which in turn implies the determinability result just mentioned. In [Hio90] this was generalized further, now to biacts. Similarly as for wreath products of monoids we can for this more general wreath product with a small category consider a situation with zero. This will again give a representation of endomorphism monoids of acts with zero (cf. [Fl/Kn88]).
Chapter III
Classes of acts
1. Injective acts 2. Divisible acts 3. Principally weakly injective acts 4. fg-weakly injective acts 5. Weakly injective acts 6. Absolutely pure acts 7. Cogenerators and overview 8. Torsion free acts 9. Flatness of acts and related properties 10. Principally weakly flat acts 11. Weakly flat acts 12. Flat acts 13. Acts satisfying Condition (P) 14. Acts satisfying Condition (E) 15. Equalizer flat acts 16. Pullback flat acts and overview 17. Projective acts 18. Generators 19. Regular acts and overview
The structure of a monoid corresponds closely to the properties of its (right) acts. In this chapter we shall consider those classes of acts which are most suitable and frequently used in characterization of monoids by properties of their acts, i.e. in homological classification of monoids. As in many categories injective and projective objects play an important role. Almost all concepts in this context are implied by, or imply, either injectivity or projectivity. We begin with injective acts. We do so not only because the class of injective acts was the first class of acts thoroughly investigated but also because the results which will be discussed in the first section will be very useful for the further presentation. After that we shall deal with classes grouped around injectivity starting with larger classes and then passing to
184
III Classes of acts
smaller classes, and then we proceed similarly with properties grouped around projectivity. In spite of the great importance of the concept of projectivity we shall speak about projective acts close to the end of the chapter. We do so only because it allows us to be more economical in our presentation. Nevertheless it will be possible to read the section on projectivity independently referring back only if necessary. It should be mentioned that we have already discussed two very important classes of acts in earlier chapters. These are free and cofree acts which logically could also have been included in this chapter, free being a particular form of projective, cofree of injective. In all cases we start with the definition of the concept and examples. Then we investigate the behaviour of the property considered under well-known constructions (product, coproduct and others). If known we give conditions for (finitely generated, cyclic, Rees factor) acts and (finitely generated, principal) right ideals and also for Ss and the one-element act 5 to have the property considered. In fact, our knowledge in different cases is very different. Note that in this and the following chapters by right (left) Rees factor acts we mean Rees factor acts of the monoid S by right (left) ideals (cf. Definition
1.4.20).
1 Injective acts
Definitions (3.1.1-3.1.4) Cofree acts are injective (3.1.5-3.1.6) Skornjakov-Baer criterion for injectivity (3.1.7-3.1.10) Injective cofree (3.1.11) Injective acts and products (3.1.12) Injective acts and coproducts (3.1.13) Essential extensions (3.1.14-3.1.19) Essential extensions and injectivity (3.1.20-3.1.21) Injective envelopes (3.1.22-3.1.26)
Applications (3.1.27-3.1.28)
Comments
Definitions
Recall from Definition 1.7.29 that an act Qs e Act S is injective in Act S if for any monomorphism L : As > Bs and any homomorphism / : As > Qs there exists a homomorphism / : B s Qs such that f ft,
1 Injective acts As *BS
185
Obviously, this is a definition up to isomorphism, i.e. every object may be replaced by an isomorphic object. Hence we may assume t h a t L is an inclusion and use the definition of injectivity in a slightly different form. L e m m a 1.1. An act Qs is injective if and only if for any act Bs, for any subact As, and for any homomorphism f : As > Qs there exists a homomorphism f : Bs > Qs which extends f , i.e. = f, As
C
Bs
D e f i n i t i o n 1.2. If the condition of Lemma 3.1.1 with respect to the inclusion As C Bs is satisfied then we say t h a t Qs is injective relative to the inclusion As C BsE x e r c i s e 1.3. Let As, B s , C s be acts and L : B s C s a monomorphism. Prove that As is injective relative to if and only if Hom(t, As) is an epimorphism (cf. Definition 1.7.29). L e m m a 1.4. If an injective act Qs is a subact of an act As, then it is a retract of As. Proof. Let an injective act Q s be a subact of an act .Ag. Consider the identity homomorphism idQ s . Since Qs is injective there exists a homomorphism g idQ s : As > Qs extending i d g s . Obviously g is an epimorphism. Hence Qs is a retract of A s by Proposition 1.6.11.
Cofree acts are injective

Recall (see Propositions 2.4.2 and 2.4.8) t h a t any cofree right S'-act is isomorphic to an act of the form Xs = {/ | / : S X} where X is a non-empty set and ( f s ) ( t ) = / ( s i ) for every s,t e S (cf. Remark 1.7.20). Although the statement of the following theorem is a special case of Proposition 2.4.4 we present it here with the proof for acts.
186
III Classes of acts
T h e o r e m 1.5 (Berthiaume [Ber67]). Every cofree act is injective. Proof. Let Bs be an act, A5 a subact, Xs a cofree act for X e Set, 0, and : As > Xs a homomorphism. Let y X be a fixed element. For any b G Bs define a mapping : Bs Xs as follows:
m ( t ) =
h m i ) ^y
ifbteAs otherwise
for any t G S. It follows easily from the definition of ( X s ) s that is a homomorphism. Let a As- Then for any 5 one has at 6 As- Hence Tp{a){t) = <p{at)( 1) = (^())(1) = <p(a){t 1) = <p(a)(t). This means that \
=
act.
Corollary 1.6. Every act can be embedded into an injective
Proof. As for any 0 I Set there exists an |/|-cofree object in A c t - S then by Corollary 2.4.3 every right 5"-act can be mapped monomorphically (i.e. embedded) into a cofree right 5-act. By Theorem 3.1.5 every cofree act is injective. Thus every act can be embedded into an injective act.
SkornjakovBaer criterion for injectivity

We start with the following L e m m a 1.7. Every injective act contains a zero. Proof. Let As be an injective act. Consider the natural embedding of As into As II &s, where 5 = {0} is the one-element right 5-act, and the identity homomorphism id,4 s , As idAs AsSince As is injective by assumption there exists a homomorphism g : As Qs * " As which extends i d ^ s . Now 9{)8 =
9{8)=9().
As U 3
for any s S. This means that g(9) is a zero of As-
1 Injective acts
187
The following criterion for injectivity will be useful in what follows. Note that for injectivity in the case of modules over a ring it is sufficient to require injectivity relative to all inclusions of right ideals into the ring (Baer criterion, see for example [FAI73], p. 157). In Section 3.5 it will become clear that the direct transfer of the Baer criterion from modules gives the bigger class of weakly injective acts. Theorem 1.8 (Skornjakov [Sko69b]). Assume Qs G Act S contains a zero . Then Qs is injective if and only if it is injective relative to all inclusions into cyclic right acts. Proof. Necessity. Obvious. Sufficiency. Let Qs be an act with zero which satisfies the hypothesis. Let Bs be an act, As a subact and f : As ^ Qs & homomorphism. We have to prove that there exists a homomorphism / : Bs > Qs which extends /. Consider := h) |XS is a subact of Bs, As C Xs C Bs , h : Xs > Qs is a homomorphism extending / }.
Define a relation < on as follows: (Xuh) < (X2,h2) XiCX2 and h2\xl=h1.
It is easy to check that < is a partial order on P. For any chain ... < (Xa,ha) < ...,
a G I, in the pair ( ( j X a , h.) where h(xa) = ha(xa) for xa Xa is an upper bound. By Zorn's Lemma there exists a maximal element ( C s , k ) in P. We shall show that Cs Bs. Then, of course, f k extends /. Assume that Cs Bs. Then there exists b G BS\CS. Set Ds = Cs U bS which contains Cs properly. Suppose first that Ds = Cs II bS. Define a mapping k : Ds > Qs as follows: k(c) k(c) for any c C j and k(bs) for any s G S. Then A ; is a homomorphism extending k in contradiction to the maximality of the pair (Cs, k). Suppose now that Hs Cs bS 0 and set k\Hs- As Hs is a subact of the cyclic act bS there exists a homomorphism : bS > Qs extending by hypothesis. Define a mapping I : Ds Qs as follows: 1(c) k(c) for any c G Cs and l(bs) = p(bs) for any s G S. If now G Hs then l(x) = k(x) by the rule for G Cs and l(x) = p(x) p(x) k(x) by the rule for G bS. Hence I is well-defined. Obviously I is a homomorphism extending k, again in contradiction to the maximality of the pair (Cs, k). Exercise 1.9. A right act over a group is injective if and only if it has a zero.
188
III Classes of acts
Example 1.10. Consider the undirected graph G = P3 1

2
from Example 1.1.12 (see also Example 1.4.9(6)). Then Aut GG is injective since 2 is a zero in the Aut(G)-act G, but EndG^ is not injective since it does not have a zero (cf. Lemma 3.1.7).
Injective - cofree
The following is the smallest example of an injective act which is not cofree. Example 1.11. Consider S = { 1 , 0 } . Since there exist only two cyclic right ,5'-acts (compare Example 1.4.9(9)) it follows easily from Theorem 3.1.8 that S s is injective. At the same time it follows from the structure of cofree acts (see Propositions 2.4.2 and 2.4.8) that there exist no cofree acts consisting of two elements.
Injective acts and products

Proposition 1.12. Take (Qs, {Qi)iei) with Qs Ilie/ where Qi, i I, are right S-acts. Then Qs is injective if and only if Qi are injective for all i I. Proof, Necessity. Suppose Qs = i e i Q i injective. From Lemma 3.1.7 we know that Qs contains a zero and thus Qi contains a zero for every i I. Now Qi is a retract of Qs for every i I by Proposition 2.1.4 and thus injective by Proposition 1.7.30(2). Sufficiency. Suppose Qi is injective for every i I. Now let As be a subact of Bs and / : As Qs a homomorphism. Consider for every i I the diagram c Bs
Qs
Qr . Since Qi is injective there exists a homomorphism gi : Bs > Qi such that gi\As Qif By the definition of products there exists a homomorphism
1 Injective acts
189
h : Bs Qs such that gi = qih for all i G I. Now qih\A = 9i\A = Qif- Since (Qi)iei is a monomorphic family by Proposition 2.1.6, this implies h\A s / Hence Q s is injective.
Injective acts and coproducts

As can be seen from the following proposition the behaviour of injectivity with respect to coproducts is more complicated. Recall (see Definition 1.3.18) that a monoid S is called left reversible if sS tS 0 for any s, t S. P r o p o s i t i o n 1.13 (Dorofeeva [Dor73b]). The following statements equivalent for any monoid S: (i) All coproducts of injective right S-acts are injective. (ii) Qs II Qs is injective. (iii) S is left reversible. Proof. The implication (i) => (ii) is obvious. (ii) => (iii). Denote the elements of Qs II Qs by and y and suppose that S is not left reversible. Then there exist principal right ideals Ks and Ls of S such that Ks Ls = 0. Let / : Ks Ls -> Qs Qs be defined by f(k) = x, f(l) y for any k 6 Ks, I G Ls- Since Ss is cyclic, / cannot be extended to Ss. Hence Q s 0 s is not injective, a contradiction. (iii) => (i). Let S be a left reversible monoid and let Qi A c t S, i G / , be injective. By Lemma 3.1.7 every Qi,i G / , contains a zero. Take Qs Ui<=/ Qi Let Bs be a cyclic act, As a subact and / : As Qs a homomorphism. -1 Let : Ss > B s be an epimorphism, K s = (-^s) and r = n\Ks : Ks -> As, Ks r
C
are
5s
Suppose there exist i, j G I, i j, with Im / Qi 0 and Im / Qj 0. Then As is a disjoint union of two subacts by Lemma 1.5.36. Hence K s is also a disjoint union of two right ideals in contradiction with left reversibility of S.
190
III Classes of acts
This implies the existence of i 6 I such that I m / C QI. Since QI is injective by assumption, / can be extended to a homomorphism / : Bs > Qs Thus Qs is injective by Theorem 3.1.8.
Essential extensions
In what follows we shall show that among injective acts containing a given act there exists a minimal one which is uniquely determined up to isomorphism. Below we follow Berthiaume [Ber67]. Definition 1.14. A subact As of Bs is called large in Bs if any homomorphism g : Bs > Cs such that g\As is a monomorphism is itself a monomorphism. We denote this situation by A5 C' Bs- We call an extension Bs of As with the embedding / : As Bs an essential extension of As if Im/ is large in BsFor concrete examples of large subacts see Corollary 3.7.2. L e m m a 1.15. Let As C Bs- Then As Q' Bs if and only if for any congruence on Bs with AB one has P\As A A, where P\AS = (AS AS) Proof. Necessity. Assume As C' Bs and Ag for a congruence on BsThen the canonical epimorphism : B s Bs/ is not a monomorphism. Since Ag is large in B s , we have that 7|yis is not a monomorphism. This implies p\As Aa. Sufficiency. Suppose that / : Bs > Cs is not a monomorphism, that is ker / AB- Then by hypothesis (ker/)|,4s A A and thus /|as is not a monomorphism. L e m m a 1.16. Let As Q A's C Bs. and A's C' Bs. Then As C' Bs if and only if As Q' A's
Proof Necessity. Let As <Z' Bs and let /' : A's > Cs be a homomorphism such that /'I is a monomorphism. Now Cs can be embedded into an injective act Qs by Corollary 3.1.6, and therefore there exists a homomorphism 7 - B s ^ Q s such that T'\A> = f ,
Cs
Qs-
1 Injective acts
191
Since As <' Bs and f'\As = / ' U s is a monomorphism, we get that f is a monomorphism. But then /' = /'U' s is also a monomorphism, i.e. As C' A's. Let now / : B s * Cs be a homomorphism such that /U' s is a monomorphism. Then /Us is also a monomorphism. Since As C' B s , we get that / is a monomorphism. Thus we have A's C' BsSufficiency. Suppose now that As C' A's and A's C' Bs- Let / : Bs Cs be a homomorphism such that /\as is a monomorphism. Since As C' A's and (/U' s )Us = /Us is a monomorphism, it follows that /U' s i s a monomorphism. Using A^ C' B s , we get that / is a monomorphism and thus As Q' Bs L e m m a 1.17. If As C' Bs and As can be embedded into some injective Qs then Bs can be embedded into Qs as well. Proof. Suppose that i4 C' Bs and consider the diagram As Qs where Qs is injective and is an embedding. Since Qs is injective there exists a homomorphism I such that = l. Since As is large in B s we have that I is an embedding. L e m m a 1.18. If Bs As where 7 is the natural embedding and As i.e. As is a proper retract of Bs, then As is not large in Bs
act
C'
Bs
Bs,
Proof. Take b Bs\ As- Now n(b) G As. Since also 7r(6) = ((6)) it follows that is not a monomorphism although ^ is. As usual by a maximal essential extension of an act As we mean an essential extension of As which is not contained properly in any other essential extension of A s . Proposition 1.19. Every right act has a maximal essential extension.
Proof Let As be an arbitrary act and Qs an injective act into which As can be embedded. By Lemma 3.1.17 we may assume that both As and all its essential extensions are subacts of Qs- Let be the set of all essential extensions of As- Consider as a partially ordered set under inclusion. If C Ai C . . . ,
192
III Classes of acts
i G /, is a chain in P , then U i g J A i is an upper bound of this chain which belongs to P . Indeed, let / : (Je/ ^ Cs be a homomorphism such that s a f\As i monomorphism. Let a,b G (J i e I Ai,a b. Then there exists j e I such that a,b Aj. Let fj = /|. Since As C' Aj and f j \ A s / U s the homomorphism fj is a monomorphism. Now
f(a) = fJ(a)^fj(b) = f(b).

Hence / is a monomorphism. This means that |J i e I Ai G P . Now it follows from Zorn's Lemma that there exists a maximal element M s in P . Then M s is a maximal essential extension of A5.
Essential extensions and injectivity

Proposition 1.20. An act is injective if and only if it has no proper essential extension.
Proof Necessity. Suppose Qs is an injective right 5-act and As is its proper
extension, Qs C As, Qs As-
C+ Qs by Lemma 3.1.4 and As 7 cannot be an essential extension of Qs by Lemma 3.1.18. Sufficiency. Let C s be an act which has no proper essential extension. Using Corollary 3.1.6 take an injective act Qs such that Cs Q Qs- If Cs = Qs then there is nothing to prove. If Cs Qs then Cs cannot be large in Qs by hypothesis. Consider the set = { I is a congruence on Qs, cr|c6- = as a partially ordered set under the usual ordering of relations (see Section 1.1). Consider a chain . < Ti < . . . , i I, in P. Then r = (J, tCi Ti is also a congruence which is an upper bound of this chain which belongs to P. Indeed, let x, y Cs with y. Then xtj y for some j G I. Since Tj\c s = A c we have = y. This means that P. Now has a maximal element by Zorn's Lemma. Then Cs = Cs/{p\cs) Qs/pIndeed, suppose / : Qs/p X.s is a homomorphism whose restriction on Cs/{p\cs) is injective. Define a relation on Qs by
Then As
xxy
^ [x]p(kerf)[y]p
for any x, y e Qs- Then is a congruence on Qs such that < and \cs = A c - Hence = which means that / is injective. Since Cs does not have proper essential extensions we have Cs = Qs/pConsider the canonical epimorphism : Qs > Qs/P- Now p\cs A c implies
1 Injective acts
193
7r(c) = c for any c Cs This means that Cs is a retract of Qs- Since Qs is injective, C s is injective by Proposition 1.7.30(2). The previous result and Lemma 3.1.16 imply Corollary 1.21. Every maximal essential extension of an act As is a minimal injective extension of As
Injective envelopes
Definition 1.22. Every minimal injective extension of an act As is called an injective envelope of AsProposition 3.1.19 and Corollary 3.1.21 immediately imply Corollary 1.23. For every right S act there exists an injective envelope.
P r o p o s i t i o n 1.24. Every injective envelope of an act As is isomorphic to any maximal essential extension of AsProof. Let Qs be an injective envelope of an act As and Bs a maximal essential extension of As- Consider the diagram
where L\ : As > Bs and L2 : As Qs ar the embeddings. Since Qs is injective, there exists a homomorphism g : Bs > Qs such that gt\ = 12 Since Li is a monomorphism one gets that 0 | i m t l is a monomorphism. But since Im - C' Bs the homomorphism g is also a monomorphism. Now Im g = Bs and Im < 7 is a minimal injective extension of As by Corollary 3.1.21. Since m I 5 ^ Qs w e get by the definition of an injective envelope that Im<7 = QsHence Qs = Bs. Corollary 1.25. Any two injective envelopes of an act are isomorphic.
Keeping in mind the previous result in what follows we can speak about the injective envelope of an act As which will be denoted by E(As)
194
III Classes of acts
R e m a r k 1.26. It was shown in [Ber67] that the injective envelope of a chain as an act over itself is its Dedekind-MacNeille completion (see, for example [STE75]). In particular, the injective envelope of the chain of extended rational numbers, i.e. the set of rational numbers as a lower semilattice with the greatest and the smallest element adjoined, is the chain of extended real numbers.
Applications
Exercise 1.27 ([Nor92a]). If S is an infinite Rees monoid, then Ss is injective. Exercise 1.28 ([Sho80b]). If S is a finite monogenic semigroup with identity and zero adjoined, then Ss is injective.
Comments
Injective acts were first studied by Berthiaume in [Ber67]. In this paper the existence of injective envelopes in the category Act-5* was proved. In some special cases injective envelopes were characterized, for example, in [A1174], [Bur81] and [Sho87b]. In a special case injective acts are described in [Joh73]. Since by Lemma 3.1.7 every injective act contains a zero, Theorem 3.1.8 due to Skornyakov presents an analogue of the Baer criterion for injectivity for modules (see, for example, [FAI73]). In what follows we shall deal also with different weaker forms of injectivity. Several generalizations of injective acts different from weak injectivity and principal weak injectivity have been investigated by many authors. For instance, quasi-injective acts have been studied by Satyanarayana [Sat76], Lopez and Luedeman [Lo/Lu79] and Ahsan [Ahs87]. An act As is called quasi-injective if for any subact B s of As and any homomorphism / : B s A s there exists an homomorphism / : As > -4s extending / . Quasi-injective envelopes were considered in [Sim80]. We will not deal with quasi-injectivity any further since compared to other concepts, especially with respect to homological classification (Chapter 4), there is much less known. As a generalization to categories Polin [Pol78] found conditions under which injective envelopes exist in the category of functors from a small category into a so-called locally small category.
2 Divisible acts
195
2 Divisible acts
Definitions (3.2.1-3.2.3) General properties (3.2.4) Divisible extension (3.2.5-3.2.10) Divisibility of cyclic acts (3.2.11-3.2.13) Applications to wreath products of acts (3.2.14) Comments In this section we consider a class of acts which generalize divisible abelian groups. Note that in the category A b g r p of abelian groups injective objects are precisely the divisible abelian groups (see, for example, [FAI73]).
Definitions
Definition 2.1. Let s S and a The element a is called divisible by s in As if there exists b As such that bs = a. An act is said to be divisible if Ac A for any left cancellable element c S, i. e. every left cancellable element of S acts surjectively on AsIt is clear from the definition that Ag is divisible if and only if every element of As is divisible by any left cancellable element of S. P r o p o s i t i o n 2.2. For any monoid S the following statements (i) Every right S-act As is divisible. (ii) Ss is divisible. (iii) All left cancellable elements of S are left invertible. are equivalent:
Proof, (i) => (ii) is obvious. (ii) =>- (iii). Suppose Ss is divisible and let c S be a left cancellable element. Then Sc = S. This yields the existence of d S such that dc = 1. (iii) => (i). Let As be any right act and c S any left cancellable element. Then c has a left inverse d S, 1 = dc. Therefore As = Al = Adc = Ac. R e m a r k 2.3. From the previous proposition it follows that in general not all acts are divisible. As an example consider the monoid (N, ). Since all elements are cancellable but only 1 is invertible, N^ cannot be divisible. In some sense, the key example for a divisible left act is the left T(X)~act X for any set X since T{X) is right cancellable if and only if is an surjective mapping. Note that a left act 5 A is said to be divisible if cA = A for any right cancellable element c S.
196
III Classes of acts
General properties
Proposition 2.4. (1) The one-element act s is divisible. (2) Any homomorphic image of a divisible act is divisible. (3) Let Ds = EU/ Di where Di, i I, are right S-acts. Then Ds is divisible if and only if Di is divisible for every i I. (4) Let Ds = LLe/ Di where i I, are right S-acts. Then Ds is divisible if and only if Di is divisible for every i I. Proof. The statements (1), (3) and (4) are clear from the definitions. (2) Suppose / : As B s is an epimorphism and Ag is a divisible act. Let c S be a left cancellable element and b Bs- Since / is surjective there exists a As such that f(a) = b. Since As is divisible there exists a' As such that a = a'c. But then b = f(a) = f(a'c) = f(a')c and thus Bs is a divisible act.
Divisible extension
On the way to the so-called divisible extension D(As) of an act As in Theorem 3.2.9 we follow V. Gould [Gou87d]. Recall (see Definition 1.4.20) that if As is an act and a As then by we denote the homomorphism from S s into As defined by a{s) = as for every s S. Construction 2.5. Let Ag be an arbitrary act, C a subset of S and set = { ( c , a ) G C X i 4 s I ker Ac < kerA a , a is not divisible by c}. If 0, let Fs = F(X) be the free right S-act with the basis X. For
s
= {((c, a)c, a) | (c, a ) e I } C F
x ^ C
(As Fs) x (As Fs)
let p(H) be the congruence on As Fs generated by H. Denote U(C,AS) = { (AsUFs)/p(H) As ifX^0 otherwise.
L e m m a 2.6. If a p(H) b for a,b As then a b.
2 Divisible acts Proof. Suppose a, b elements

G
197 Using Lemma tu...,tneS

1.4.37
As, b, and ap(H)b. yi,...,ynÂsUFs,
take
xi,...,xn,
such that (Xi,yi) G or (yi,X{) G for every i G { 1 , . . . , n } and a = xiti y2t2 = 3i3 yn-ltn-l yntn = b = Xntn 2/1*1 = X2t2
where is minimal. Now from a = x\t\ we get G As. Hence (y\,x\) G H. Then there exists an element (c, d) G X such that y\ = (c, d)c. It follows from the definition of that d = . From y\t\ = x2t2 we get (c,xi)cti = x2t2. Hence x2 G Fs and the definition of imply that there exists (c', d') G X such that x2 = (cr, d')c'. Now (c, x\)ct\ = (c',d)c't2 in the free act Fs- Hence (c,xi) = ( c ' , d ' ) and ct\ = c't2. From the first equality we get c = d and x\ = d!. Hence yi = x2 and ct\ = ct2. Since kerA c < kerA Xl we have x\t\ = x\t2. From x2 = (c,x\)c and (x2, y2) ^ it follows that y2 = . But then y2t2 = x\t2 = x\t\ = a. If 2 this equality implies a b, a contradiction. If > 2 we get a contradiction with the minimality of n. Corollary 2.7. Preserving the notations used in 3.2.5 let 7T:AsUFsÛ(C,AS) be the canonical epimorphism. Then : Ag > (U(C,As))s phism, i.e. U{C,As) is an extension of Asis a monomor
Now we identify a and [a\p(H) f r a n y a As This means that from this moment on we consider as a subact of U(C,As). L e m m a 2.8. Let kerA c < kerA a , c G C, a G As- Then a G A g is divisible by c G C in U(C,As) with notation as in Construction 3.2.5. Proof. If a is not divisible by c in A s then (c, ) X and in U(C, As) we have
a
= [a]p(H) = [(c,a)c\p{H]
= [(c,a)]p{H)c
Note that if c G S is a left cancellable element then ker Ac = As < ker A^ for any element of any right act. Theorem 2.9. Let As be an act, C the set of all left cancellable but not left invertible elements of S. Set Ao = As, Ai = U(C, A j _ i ) for i G and D(AS) = U iei-Ai where I = { 0 } [ J N . Then D(AS) is a divisible right S-act which is called the divisible extension of As-
198
III Classes of acts
Proof. Let d G D(As) Then d <E Ai for some i. Let c e S be a left cancellable but not left invertible element. Then either d is divisible by c in Ai or, by Lemma 3.2.8, d is divisible by c in U(C, A^). Hence D(As) is divisible. The next lemma will be used in Chapter 4. L e m m a 2.10. Let C be a subset of S, As a right S-act and set AQ = As, Ai = U(C,Ai-) for i e N. If a = xt for a G AS, G AN \ - , > 1, t <E S then there exist y G An-i, u,v G S, c G C such that a = yu and cu = vt. Proof. Suppose X = X(C, An-{) and let and = p(H) correspond to this X as in Construction 3.2.5. Then [(c,y)v]p for y An-\, v,c G 5, c 6 C. Hence ap(c,y)vt. It follows from Lemma 3.2.6 and Lemma 1.4.37 that there exist y' An_\, u G S, d G C such that a = y'u, (d,y')du = (c,y)vt in the corresponding free 5-act. The last equality implies d = c, y' = y and cu = vt.
Divisibility of cyclic acts

Next we give conditions under which cyclic acts, principal right ideals or Rees factor acts are divisible. Proposition 2.11. Let be a right congruence on a monoid S. The factor act S/p is divisible if and only if [s]p Sc 0 for any s,c G S, c left cancellable. Proof. Sf is divisible if and only if for any s G S and for any left cancellable c G S there exists t G S such that [s]p = [t}pc. The last equality is equivalent to [s]p = [tc]p or to s p(tc) or to [s]p Sc 0. Corollary 2.12. A right ideal zS, G S, of S is divisible if and only if for any s,c G S, c left cancellable, there exists u G S such that zs = zuc. Proof. Take kerA^ in Proposition 3.2.11.
Corollary 2.13. Let Ks be a proper right ideal of S. Then S/Ks is divisible if and only if Ks Sc $ for any left cancellable c G S and for any s ^ Ks there exists t G S such that s = tc. Proof. Take = 3 in Proposition 3.2.11.
2 Divisible acts
199
Applications to wreath products of acts

Exercise 2.14 [Ki/Kn/Mi89]. A subset Q of a monoid S is called simultaneously right cancellable in S if sq = s'q for every q G Q implies s = s', for s,s' e 5. (1) Let R and S be monoids, RA an act, = (i?wr S | RA) the wreath product of monoids R and S over RA and TC = #J4[S.B] the wreath product of the R-act RA through the S-act SB (cf. Section 2.6). (a) The left T-act TC = RA[SB] is divisible if and only if for every cardinal number m for which there exists r e R which is right cancellable in R, acts surjectively on RA, and is such that |r _ 1 (a)| = M for some a G RA, any simultaneously right cancellable subset {TI | i G I, |/| = m}CS fulfills U i e / txB = B. (b) Let the monoid S be such that the minimal simultaneously right cancellable subsets have only one element. Then TC = RA[SB] is divisible if and only if s is divisible. (2) If S is a group or a group with zero then the condition of (l)(b) is fulfilled and thus the left End(F(X)s)-act F(X) is divisible for every non-empty set X (use Theorem 2.6.18). Note that in category theory the concept corresponding to simultaneously right cancellable is called epi-sink or mono-source depending on the side on which morphisms are written, see for example [HE/ST73] and compare Definition 2.1.12 of epimorphic families.
Comments
Divisible acts were introduced by Feller and Gantos [Fe/Ga69c] where divisibility by elements cancellable from both sides was required. Divisible extensions were introduced by Gould [Gou87d]. Divisible acts were also considered by Dorofeeva in [Dor73a]. Note that in some papers (see, for example [Sat76], [Ah/Kh/Sh/Ta91]) divisibility is considered in a much stronger sense. Namely, an act As is said to be divisible if As = As for every s G S. Clearly, this leads to a much smaller class of acts.
200
III Classes of acts
3 Principally weakly injective acts

Definition and two equivalent conditions (3.3.1-3.3.3) General properties (3.3.4) Principally weakly injective extensions (3.3.5-3.3.6) Principally weakly injective cyclic acts (3.3.7-3.3.10) Divisible - principally weakly injective (3.3.11) Applications to wreath products of acts (3.3.12) Comments
Definition and two equivalent conditions

Definition 3.1. An act As is said to be principally weakly injective is injective relative to embeddings of all principal right ideals into Ssif it
Proposition 3.2. The following statements are equivalent for any act As over a monoid S: (i) Ag is principally weakly injective. (ii) For any s G S and for any homomorphism f : sS As there exists G As such that f(x) = zx for any G sS. (iii) For any s G S, a G As with kerAs < kerA a; one has that a is divisible by s in As, i.e. a = zs for some G AsProof, (i) (ii). Let As be a principally weakly injective act, s G S and / : sS > As a homomorphism. sS C 5s
^S By (i) there exists a homomorphism / : Ss > As which extends / . Let 7 ( 1 ) = z. Then f(x) = f{x) = /( lx) = /(l)x = zx for any G sS. (ii) (iii). Let s e S, a e As be such that kerAs < kerA a . Define a mapping / : sS A s by f(st) = at for any t G S. Then / is a well-defined homomorphism because of kerAs < ker Aa. By (ii) there exists G As such that f(x) = zx for any G sS. In particular, a = f(s) = zs which means that a is divivisible by s in As
201
(iii) => (i). Suppose As satisfies condition (iii) and let f : sS As be a homomorphism. Then for f(s) = a there exists a' As such that a = a's. Define a mapping / : S As by
7 (t) =
a't
for any t S. Then / is a homomorphism extending / . Corollary 3.3. Every principally weakly injective act is divisible.
Proof. Let As be a principally weakly injective act, c S a left cancellable element and a As- Since c is left cancellable we have kerAc = As < kerA a . By Proposition 3.3.2 we get As such that a = zc. Thus As < Ac. Since the converse inclusion is obvious we have As = Ac.
General properties
Proposition 3.4. (1) If Ai, i I, are principally weakly injective subacts of an act As, ( J i e J Ai is a principally weakly injective subact of Asthen
(2) If As = LLe/ Ai where Ai, i El, are right S-acts, then is principally weakly injective if and only if Ai is principally weakly injective for every i I. (3) If Ai, i I, are principally weakly injective right S-acts, then / ^ a principally weakly injective right S-act. Proof. (1) Is clear from the definition. (2) If Ai is principally weakly injective for every i I, then As = U / Ai is principally weakly injective by (1). Conversely, suppose As is principally weakly injective, a Ai and s S is such that kerAs < kerA a . Then, by Proposition 3.3.2, there exists a' As such that a = a's. But then a' Ai and thus Ai is principally weakly injective by Proposition 3.3.2. (3) Is clear from Proposition 3.3.2 and the definition of / Ai
Principally weakly injective extensions

The following construction of principally weakly injective extensions is a generalization of Construction 3.2.5 and is also due to V. Gould [Gou87c].
202
III Classes of acts
Construction 3.5. Let .As be an arbitrary act and let X = X(S,As) = { ( j a ) G 5 As | kerA s < kerA a , a is not divisible by s } . U(S,Ai-1)
Let U(S,As) be as in Construction 3.2.5. Set A0 = As, Ai = /or i G as in Theorem 3.2.9 and set PWI(AS) : = (J i N Then we have the following Theorem 3.6. The right S-act PWI(As) is called the pwi-extension of Asis principally
weakly injective and
Proof. Let d G PWI{AS). Then d G Ai for some i e N. If kerA s < kerA d for some s G S then either d is divisible by s in Ai or d is divisible by s in U(S,Ai) by Lemma 3.2.8. Hence PWI(As) is principally weakly injective by Proposition 3.3.2.
Principally weakly injective cyclic acts

Proposition 3.7. If a principal right ideal zS of a monoid S, G S, is principally weakly injective then is a regular element of S. Proof. Suppose that a principal right ideal zS is principally weakly injective. Take a = s = in Proposition 3.3.2(iii). Then there exists G S such that 2 = (zx)z. Corollary 3.8. Let be a right congruence on a monoid S. The factor act S/p is principally weakly injective if and only if for any s,t G S, for which sx sy, x,y G S, implies (tx) p{ty), there exists u G S such that tpius). Proof. Apply condition (iii) of Proposition 3.3.2 to As = S/p.
Applying Corollary 3.3.8 in the case = ker A2 and in the case we obtain, correspondingly, the following two corollaries. Corollary 3.9. A right ideal zS, G S, of a monoid S is principally weakly injective if and only if for any s,t G 5 for which sx = sy, x,y G S, implies ztx zty, there exists u G S such that zt = zus. Corollary 3.10. Let Ks be a proper right ideal of a monoid S. The act S/Kg is principally weakly injective if and only if for any s,t G S for which sx = sy, x,y G S, implies tx = ty, t Ks, there exists u G S such that t = us.
203
Divisible - principally weakly injective

E x a m p l e 3 . 1 1 . Let S = { , , } be the monoid with zero where X2 = 0 and take = { x , 0 } . Then KS XS is divisible but KS is not principally weakly injective because is not regular (see Proposition 3.3.7).

Exercise 3.12.
(1) [Ki/Ku87] If the wreath product RA[SB] (RWTS\RA) - A c t is principally weakly injective then s B is principally weakly injective. (2) [Ki/Ku87] If RA is principally weakly injective and S acts surjectively on SB then RA[SB] G (RWT S\RA) A c t is principally weakly injective. (3) If S is a group and X a non-empty set then the left E n d ( F ( X )s)-act F(X) is principally weakly injective by (2). Hint: Use the representation as a wreath product from Theorem 2.6.18 and the fact (which will be clear in Ch. 4) that over a regular monoid all acts are principally weakly injective, i.e. T(X)X is principally weakly injective (see also Exercise 3.2.14(2)). (4) Let P 3 and K3 be the graphs from Example 1.1.12. Then P3[K3] 6 (Send(P3) wr A\IT(KS)\SEND P3P3) A c t is principally weakly injective. Hint: Use (2) and regularity of Send(i-3) by Exercise 2.7.9(1) as in (3).
Comments
Principally weakly injective acts were first considered by J . Luedeman, F. McMorris and S.-K. Sim [Lu/Mc/Si78]. In their paper the equivalence of conditions (i) and (ii) of Proposition 3.3.2 was stated. In [Dam69] Damiano introduced the concept of a coflat module, which dualizes the notion of a flat module. Analogously V. Gould [Gou85] called an act As coflat if, given any a G As and s S such that a As, there exist elements h,k 6 S such that sh = sk but ah ak. She proved that A s is coflat if and only if As is principally weakly injective. A characterization of principally weakly injective wreath products A j s ] over the wreath product (Rwr S \ RA) was given by Kaschek [Ka90], which continues the work of Kilp and Kubjas [Ki/Ku87].
204
III Classes of acts
4 fg-weakly injective acts

Definition and general properties (3.4.1-3.4.4) fg-weakly injective right ideals (3.4.5) Principally weakly injective - fg-weakly injective (3.4.6)
Definition and general properties

Definition 4.1. An act A s is called fg-weakly injective if it is injective relative to all embeddings of finitely generated right ideals into SsNote that instead of fg-weakly injective many authors use the term "f-injective". These acts were studied by V. Gould in [Gou85] and [Gou87c]. Proposition 4.2. An act As is fg-weakly injective if and only if for any homomorphism f : Ks > As where Ks C Ss is a finitely generated right ideal there exists an element G As such that f(k) = zk for every k G KsProof. Let Ks be a finitely generated right ideal of S and / : Ks homomorphism, Ks \ AsNecessity. Since As is fg-weakly injective there exists a homomorphism J_\ S As such that J\Ks = f . Set 7 ( 1 ) = z. Then f(k) = f(k) = 7(1*0 = f(l)k = zk for every k G KsSufficiency. Let G As be such that f(k) = zk for every k Ks. Define / : S As by f(s) = zs. Then / is a homomorphism and f(k) = /(1;) = f(l)k zk f(k) for every k e Ks. Proposition 4.3. (1) Any retract of a fg-weakly injective act is fg-weakly injective. (2) If Ai, % G I, are fg-weakly injective right S-acts, then / fg-weakly injective right S-act. is a As a
Ss
Proposition 4.4. The following statements are equivalent for any monoid S: (i) All coproducts of fg-weakly injective S-acts are fg-weakly injective. (ii) 5 II Os is fg-weakly injective. (iii) S is left reversible.
5 Weakly injective acts
205
Proof. The implication (i) (ii) is obvious. (ii) (iii) follows from the proof of (ii) =>- (iii) of Proposition 3.1.13 since the right ideal K s L s used there is finitely generated. (iii) => (i). Repeat the argument of the proof of (iii) => (i) of Proposition 3.1.13 taking Bs = Ss and As a finitely generated right ideal.
fg-weakly injective right ideals

P r o p o s i t i o n 4.5. If a finitely generated right ideal Ks C Ss is fg-weakly injective then Ks is generated by an idempotent. Proof. Let Ks be a fg-weakly injective right ideal of S. By Lemma 3.4.2 there exists an element e e Ks such that id/f s (fc) = ek for every k Ks- In other words we have k = ek for every k G Ks- This means that Ks eS and e is an idempotent.
Principally weakly injective > fg-weakly injective

Obviously, every fg-weakly injective act is principally weakly injective. The next example shows that the converse is not true. E x a m p l e 4.6. Let S {1,0, e, / } be the semilattice where ef = fe 0 and take {e,f, 0}. Then is an ideal of S which is principally weakly injective (as an easy direct checking shows) but cannot be fg-weakly injective by Proposition 3.4.5.
5 Weakly injective acts

Definition and general properties (3.5.1-3.5.4) Weakly injective right ideals (3.5.5) fg-weakly injective - weakly injective (3.5.6) Weakly injective - injective (3.5.7) Comments

Definition 5.1. An act As is called weakly injective to all embeddings of right ideals into Ssif it is injective relative
206
III Classes of acts
The proofs of the statements of this section follow the same patterns as the corresponding proofs of the previous section now considering arbitrary right ideals instead of finitely generated right ideals and therefore proofs will not be reproduced. Lemma 5.2. An act As is weakly injective if and only if for any homomorphisrn f : Ks > As where Ks is a right ideal of S there exists an element a A5 such that f(k) = ak for every k Ks Proposition 5.3.
(1) Any retract of a weakly injective act is weakly injective. (2) If Ai, i I, are weakly injective right S-acts, then injective right S-act. Proposition 5.4. Ai is a weakly
The following statements are equivalent for any monoid S:
(i) All coproducts of weakly injective S-acts are weakly injective. (ii) 5 ]j s is weakly injective. (iii) S is left reversible.
Weakly injective
right
ideals
then
Proposition 5.5. If a right ideal Ks of a monoid S is weakly injective Ks is generated by an idempotent.
fg-weakly injective > weakly injective

Obviously, every weakly injective act is fg-weakly injective. The next example shows that the converse is not true. Example 5.6. Let S = (N, min)e = (N, min) LJ {} where denotes the externally adjoint identity. Then Ks = S\ {} is a right ideal of S. Since Ks is not generated by an idempotent it cannot be weakly injective by Proposition 3.5.5. But at the same time all finitely generated right ideals of S are generated by an idempotent which implies that K s is weakly fg-injective.
Weakly injective - injective

The following example shows that weak injectivity does not imply injectivity.
6 Absolutely pure acts
207
Exercise 5.7. Let S = (N,max). Then Ss is weakly injective but not injective. For the proof of weak injectivity of Ss note that S is a regular principal ideal monoid (see Definition 1.3.23). Since S s does not contain a zero it cannot be injective by Lemma 3.1.7.
Comments
The concept of weak injectivity was introduced by Berthiaume [Ber67]. In [Gou85] V. Gould introduced an infinite sequence of different "injectivities" between principal weak injectivity and weak injectivity. Namely, for any cardinal a greater than 1 an act As is said to be a-injective if it is injective relative to all embeddings of all right ideals with generating sets of smaller cardinality than a into SsIt will turn out in the next section that there exist natural concepts lying between fg-weak injectivity and injectivity and being "parallel" to weak injectivity.

Definitions and general properties (3.6.1-3.6.6) Injective => absolutely pure (3.6.7-3.6.8) Characterizations of absolutely 1 -pure acts (3.6.9-3.6.13) When injetive equals absolutely I-pure (3.6.14) Absolutely 1 -pure => weakly fg-weakly injective (3.6.15-3.6.16) Weakly injective and absolutely pure (3.6.17-3.6.18) Comments
Definitions and general properties

Definition 6.1. Let be an act.
(1) Consider systems consisting of equations of the following three forms xs xt, where s , i S and and y variables, s of equations with written as xs = yt, xs = a
a As and x,y X, where X Set. We call and t coefficients, a a constant and a system constants from As- Systems of equations will be = {S{ = yti I Si,ti S, 1 < % < n}
208
III Classes of acts
etc. If we can map the variables of onto a subset of an act B s such that the equations turn into equalities in B s then any such subset of B s is called a solution of the system in B$. In this case is called solvable in Bs. (2) If has a solution in some act B s containing As then is called a consistent system of equations. (3) A subact As of an act Bs is called pure in Bs if every finite system of equations with constants from Tig which has a solution in B s has a solution in As. An act As is called absolutely pure if every finite consistent system of equations with constants from As has a solution in As(4) A subact As of an act Bs is called 1 -pure in Bs if every finite system of equations in one variable with constants from As which has a solution in Bs has a solution in As- An act As is called absolutely I-pure if every finite consistent system of equations in one variable with constants from has a solution in As- (Equivalently, As is 1-pure in every extension.) The term extension pure would be more appropriate. For historical reasons we stay with absolutely pure. Note that As is absolutely pure if and only if As is pure in every extension. Problem 6.2. Clearly, absolute purity implies absolute l-purity. exist absolutely 1-pure acts which are not absolutely pure? So, in this section we shall distinguish these two concepts. L e m m a 6.3. If an act As is pure (1-pure) then As is absolutely pure (1-pure). in its injective envelope E(As) Does there
Proof. We shall prove the statement for purity. Let i s be a subact of an act B s and let be a finite system of equations in variables x i , x 2 , , x n with constants from As which has a solution &i, 621 > bn in Bs- Since (As) is injective there exists an extension g of id^ s . Consider the diagram As C Bs 9 As C E(AS) .
Clearly, <7(61), #(62),... ,g(bn) is a solution of in (As) Now has a solution in As by hypothesis. Hence As is absolutely pure.
209 ,sn G S
L e m m a 6.4. If an act As is absolutely 1 -pure then for any si,... there exists a G As such that a = as = ... = asn.
Proof. Suppose As is an 1-pure act. Let s i , . . . , sn G S. The injective envelope E(As) of As, being an injective act, contains a zero by Lemma 3.1.7, which is a solution of the system of equations = {xsj = I 1 < i < n} in (As) Since As is absolutely 1-pure has a solution a G As, that is a as = ... = asn. Definition 6.5. We say that a monoid S has local left zeros Si,... ,sn G S there exists s G S such that s = ss = ... = ssn. if for any
The following lemma is now a direct consequence of Lemma 3.6.4. L e m m a 6.6. If Ss is absolutely 1 -pure then S has local left zeros.
Injective => absolutely pure

The following result shows the relationship between injectivity and absolute purity. We begin with another characterization of injective acts. Proposition 6.7 (V. Gould [Gou85]). An act is injective if and only if any consistent system of equations with constants from yls has a solution in As. Proof. Necessity. Let As be injective and let be a consistent system of equations with constants from As- Since is consistent it has a solution in some extension B s of A5. Since Ag is injective it is a retract of B s by Lemma 3.1.4. Hence there exists an epimorphism from Bs onto yls such that () = a for every a G Now it is easy to see that maps a solution in Bs to a solution in AsSufficiency. Let E(As) be the injective envelope of As- If As E{As) then E{AS) = As U ( U c e e c S ) w h e r e C = E(As) \ AS- For c,deC let xc,xd be variables and consider = {x c s = a I s G S, cs = a, c G C, a G As} U {x c s = Xdt I s, t G S, es dt, c,d G C} . Now the set C is a solution of in '(^45). By assumption has a solution {ac I c G C} also in A5. Define a mapping : E{As) > A5 by () = a for
210
III Classes of acts
any a G .As and n(cs) = acs for any c G C and any s G S. Since a = cs for a G As, c G C1 s G S, implies a = acs, and since es = dt for c, d G C, s, G 51, implies a c s = ^, is a well-defined. Clearly, is an epimorphism. Hence As is a retract of an injective act and so by Proposition 1.7.30(2) is injective. Corollary 6.8. Every injective act is absolutely pure.
Characterizations of absolutely 1-pure acts

The next two lemmas explain the relationship between solvability of finite systems of equations in one variable and existence of certain homomorphisms. L e m m a 6.9. Let a G As be a solution of a system of equations = {xs; = xti I Si, ti G S, 1 As defined by s([s]P) = as for any s G S. Proof. Suppose g and are defined as given above and spt for s,t G S. We shall show that as = , i.e. that g is well-defined. If s t then by Lemma 1.4.37 there exist elements ,..., Xp, y\,... i yp, t\,...,tp GS
such that (xk, yk) or ( y k , X k ) for every k G { 1 , . . . ,p} and S = Xiti y2t2 = X3t3 Vih xiti Vp-itp-i Vptp = t = Xptp .
Since is a solution of the system we have axu ayu for every k G { 1 , . . . ,p}. This implies as = at and so g is well-defined. Clearly, g is a homomorphism. L e m m a 6.10. Let = p(H) be the right congruence on S generated by a set = {(si,ii) I Si,U G S, 1 < i < n}. If g : S/p As is a homomorphism then g([l]p) is a solution of the system of equations = {xsi = xti I (Si,U) G H } . Proof. For any equation xsi = xti of the system we have Si ti. Then g([l]p)si = ) = 9([^}) = g{[i]P)u .
Thus <7([l]p) is a solution of .
211
in Bs if and only Bs if f o r and for
Proposition 6.11.
any any g : Ms cyclic finite finitely subset L
subact
Ag
act that for
of
an any
act
Bs
is
1-pure
there
presented of =
M s ,
h o m o m o r p h i s m h : Ms C A s , L . exists a
such h(b)
h ( L ) any b
homomorphism
> As
w i t h g(b)
P r o o f . N e c e s s i t y . Suppose that is 1-pure in Bs and let M s , h and L be as stated in the assumption. By Proposition 1.5.30 we may assume that Ms = S/ where is a finitely generated right congruence on S. If = and L = 0 we can take any a G As and define g by
S([s]p) = as for any s G S . If and L 0, suppose that is generated by {(si,ii) | 1 < i < n} and take L = { [ z i ] , . . . , [ z ] } and aj = h ( [ z j ] ) for Zj e S , j G { l , . . . , r } . Then
p r p p
h([ l ]
S l
([]
) =
h{[U}
) = h ( [ l ]
) U
for any i G { 1 , . . . , n} and

([1 ]p)zj = h d z j l ) = aj
for any j G { 1 , . . . , r } . This means that = {a;Si =

xti \
1 Ag by p( M p) =
as
for any s G S. Then g is a homomorphism by Lemma 3.6.9. Since

9 ( [ z j ]
P
) =
a3
h{\zj\p)
for any j G { 1 , . . . , r } , g coincides with h on L. Finally, if and L = 0 or = and L fy we can argue similarly. S u f f i c i e n c y . Suppose that the given condition holds. Let be a finite system of equations over As in one variable with solution b G Bs- Consider the act S/p, = p ( H ) , where consists of all pairs ( s , t ) , s , i G S, such that {xs = x t } belongs to the system . Define h : S/p > Bs by
H [
s
] p ) =
bs
for any s G S. By Lemma 3.6.9, h is a homomorphism. Now for each equation { x p = a} in we have h(\p] ) = bp = a G AsLet L = {\p]p \ xp = a } . By hypothesis there exists a homomorphism
p
212
III Classes of acts
g : S/p > such that g(\p]p) = h(\p]p) for each \p]p G L. Then g([l]p) is a solution of in As- Indeed, since g{[l}p)p = g(\p]p) = h(\p]p) = a, we see that g([l]p) satisfies any equation {xp a} in . If {xs xt} is an equation from then it is satisfied by <7([l]p) by Lemma 3.6.10. T h e o r e m 6.12 (V. Gould [Gou87a]). The following statements for any act As (i) As is absolutely 1 -pure. (ii) For every Ns Q Ms morphism any s\,... cyclic finitely presented act Ms, every finitely generated subact and every homomorphism f : Ns > As there exists a homog : Ms As such that g is an extension of f . Moreover, for ,sn S there exists a G As such that a = as 1 = ... = asn. are equivalent
Proof, (i) (ii). Let Ms be a cyclic finitely presented act, Ns its finitely generated subact and / : N s > As a homomorphism. Further, let l : As > E(As) be the embedding of As into its injective envelope. Then there exists a homomorphism h : Ms {As) extending i f . Let L be a (finite) set of generating elements of Ns- Now h(L) C As and Proposition 3.6.11 implies the existence of a homomorphism g : Ms > As with g(m) = f(m) for any m G L. Clearly, g is an extension of / . The last statement follows from Lemma 3.6.4. (ii) (i). Let A s be a subact of an act Bs- Let Ms = S/p be a cyclic finitely presented act, h : Ms Bg a homomorphism and L a finite subset of Ms such that h(L) C As. Suppose first that L = 0. If s , let = {(sj,ij) | 1 < i < n} be a set of generating elements of and choose a G A s such that a = as 1 = at\ = ... = asn = atn by (ii). Then is a solution of the system of equations = {xsi = xti I {Si,ti) G H}. If = As, we may take any a G As- By Lemma 3.6.9 we in both cases get a homomorphism g : Ms > As with fif([s]p) = as for any s G S. Now suppose that L = { [ z i ] p , . . . , [zr]p}, ^ G N. Let Ns = [zi]pS U . . . U [zr]pS and let / = h\^s. By hypothesis there exists a homomorphism g : Ms > As such that / = gi where L is the natural embedding of Ns into Ms- For any j G { l , . . . , r } we get 9{[zj]P) = 9^[zj\P) = f([zj]p) = h([zj]p).
It follows from Proposition 3.6.11 that As is 1-pure in Bs-
Corollary 6.13. If all finitely generated subacts of an act As are absolutely 1 -pure then As is absolutely 1-pure.
213
When injective equals absolutely 1-pure

Proposition 6.14. Let S be a monoid with a left zero such all right congruences on S and all right ideals of S are finitely generated. Then a right S-act is absolutely 1 -pure if and only if it is injective. Proof. Follows directly from Theorem 3.6.12 and Theorem 3.1.8.
Absolutely 1-pure
fg-weakly injective
injective.
Proposition 6.15. Every absolutely 1-pure act is fg-weakly
Proof. Let A5 be an absolutely 1-pure act, Ks a finitely generated right ideal of S and / : Ks As a homomorphism. Since Ss is finitely presented it follows from Theorem 3.6.12 that there exists a homomorphism g : Ss extending / . Hence As is fg-weakly injective. Corollary 6.16. If a finitely generated right ideal is absolutely 1-pure then it is generated by an idempotent. Proof Let Ks be an absolutely 1-pure finitely generated right ideal of S. Then K s is fg-weakly injective by Proposition 3.6.15 and so generated by an idempotent by Proposition 3.4.5.
Weakly injective and absolutely pure

Example 6.17. Weak injectivity does not imply absolute 1-purity. Indeed, let S = T1 where = {, y} is the two-element right zero semigroup. Then, checking all homomorphisms from all right ideals of S into Ss we get that Ss is weakly injective. But since S does not have any local left zeros, Ss cannot be absolutely 1-pure by Lemma 3.6.6.
Example 6.18. Absolute purity does not imply weak injectivity. Indeed, let S = (N, min) e = (N, min) {} where denotes the externally adjoined identity. Then Ks = S \ {} is a right ideal of S which is absolutely pure (see Corollary 4.4.4) but K s is not weakly injective (see Example 3.5.6).
214
III Classes of acts
Comments
Absolutely pure acts were first considerd by Normak [Nor80] and then intensively studied by V. Gould [Gou85], [Gou87b]. She introduced absolutely 1-pure acts under the name almost pure acts in [Gou87b]. A right S-act As is called equationally (congruence) compact if every system of equations (congruences) is solvable in As whenever every finite subsystem is solvable in As- Such acts were studied by Normak [Nor94], [Nor97]. In particular it was shown there that a Rees monoid S is congruence compact as a right S-act. Together with Theorem 5.5.26 this implies that monoids having a Morita dual are congruence compact. A similar result for rings can be found in [Anh90].
7 Cogenerators and overview

Recall (see Definition 1.7.31(2)) that an act Cs is said to be a cogenerator in A c t S if for any homomorphisms / , g : As > Bs, f g, of right S'-acts there exists a homomorphism h : Bs > Cs such that hf hg and compare Theorem 2.4.18. Recall also (see Definition 2.2.33) that an act As is called subdirectly irreducible if the intersection of all of its non-diagonal congruences is not the diagonal. Let Ag be an act and a,b , b. Let p(a, b) be a maximal congruence on As such that a and b are not related by p(a,b). Then sA/p(a,b) is a subdirectly irreducible act (see Proposition 2.2.34). Proposition 7.1 (Knauer, Normak [Kn/No90]). Let be a full subcategory of A c t S which contains Ss and is closed under subobjects and factor objects. An act Cs is a cogenerator in if and only if every subdirectly irreducible S-act in can be embedded into CsProof Necessity. Note that every non-trivial subdirectly irreducible S-act can be represented in the form As/p(a, b) for some a, b e As, b, by Corollary 2.2.37. Since [] [6] in As/p{a,b) and the 1-free act Ss is in there exist homomorphisms / i , / 2 : Ss As/p(a,b) with / i ( l ) = [] [6] = / 2 ( 1), i.e. fi f2. As Cs is a cogenerator in there exists a homomorphism h : As/p(a, b) > Cs such that h([a\) h([b}). To show that h is a monomorphism assume that = h([y]) for x,y G 5 with [] [y]. Let be a relation on As defined by upv ^ /i(H) = /i([i>]) for any u,v As, i.e. is induced by the kernel congruence of h and is itself a congruence on As- Since xpy, it follows that p(a,b) is strictly smaller than p. Since p(a, b) is a maximal right congruence such that a and b are not related
215
we have apb. But this means /([]) = /*([&]), a contradiction. Hence h is a monomorphism. Sufficiency. Take Cs Act S such that every subdirectly irreducible 5-act in can be embedded into Cs- If for /, g : Bg As in we have f(b) gib) for some b G Bs then / : Ag Cs fulfills hirf fing where : As > As/p(f(b),g(b)) and h is the embedding into Cs Since one can repeat the argument from the preceding proof in the case of any homomorphism h with the domain As/p(a,b), we have Corollary 7.2. The subact [a]5ll [b]S of As/p(a,b) is large in As/p(a,b).
Recall that an act A s is called 0-simple if it contains no subacts other than A s and the one element subact g (see Definition 1.4.14). Proposition 7.3 (Normak [Nor83]). An S-act Cs is a cogenerator in Act S if and only if Cs contains the injective envelope of every subdirectly irreducible -simple S-act. Proof. Necessity. Let Cs be a cogenerator in Act S and let As be a 0-simple subdirectly irreducible right 5-act. Then A s g, or A s where are different zeros, or |Ag| > 2 and there exists an element a G A s such that A = aS. If As = s then (As) = s which can be embedded into Cs since Cs contains a zero by Proposition 2.4.17. a n d let , : Ag Take As = > (As) be homomorphisms such that where is the injective envelope of As Then there exists a homomorphism 7 : E(As) Cs such that 7 -y. If ker7 AE(As^ then (ker7)|/4s ,4, because E(As) is an essential extension of As- Consequently, 7(^1) = 7(^2)1 contradicting . Hence ker7 = ê(as) a n d 7 is an embedding. Now let As = aS with > 2. Since As is subdirectly irreducible by hypothesis, there exist different elements ,2 Ag such that (01,02) for every proper congruence on As Let s,t 6 S be such that as = and at = a 2. Let , : As * (As) and 7 : (As) > Cs be homomorphisms such that a(a) = as, (a) = at and 7 . Now for every element au G Ag = aS, where u S, we have 7 a(au) = 7(a(a)it) = 7 (as)u = "f(aiu) and 7 (au) = 7 ( ( a ) u ) = 7 (at)u = 7 (a 2 )u. If ker7 AE(AS), then (ker7)| j4s and, consequently, (01,02) ker7 Then 70 (au) -y(ai)u 7(02) = 7 (au) for every u G S, which contradicts 7 . Thus ker7 = AE(AS-), i.e. 7 is an embedding. Sufficiency. Let Cs G Act S contain the injective envelope of every subdirectly irreducible -simple S-act. Let , : Xs > Ys be S-homomorphisms such that , i.e. a(x) () for some G Xs Consider the maximal congruence = p ( a ( x ) , ( ) ) on Ys such that ( a ( x ) , ( x ) ) & and let
216
III Classes of acts
: Ys > Ys/ be the natural epimorphism. Then Ys/ is a subdirectly irreducible act by Proposition 2.2.34. Let Zs C Y/p be a non-zero subact. If (),() (Ys/) \ Zs, or () $,() (Ys/) \Zs, then the Rees congruence on Ys/ by Zs together with generates a congruence on Ys which does not relate a(x) and (x). This contradicts the maximality of p. Therefore we have (),() ZsNow the intersection f]i} Zi Ps of all non-zero subacts Zi of Ys/ is a ^-simple act containing the elements na(x) ir(y). Moreover, Ps is also subdirectly irreducible since conversely any congruence on Ps which separates the elements (),() could be extended to a congruence on Ys/ using the congruence extension property (see Remark 1.4.45) which together with generates a congruence on Ys strictly containing and separating a(x), (). By assumption we have an embedding l : E(Ps) > Cs Consider the commutative diagram Ps 1*2 E(PS) with natural embedding Li and embedding t 2 where exists since E(Ps) is an injective act. From (),() Ps Q Ys/ and () (), we get () () and, consequently, using the injectivity of l, we have () (). Hence : Ys > Cs fulfills () () and therefore Cs is a cogenerator in Act S. Exercise 7.4 [Nor92a]. Let S be an infinite atomic Rees monoid (see Example 2.2.35(3)) and as in Proposition 3.7.1. Then Ss is a cogenerator in . Now we are ready to demonstrate relations between different types of injectivity and connected concepts lying between cofree and divisible. Theorem 7.5. The implications shown in the following table between different injectivity conditions and related conditions are valid and strict.
Proof. The implication |X| cofree => injective follows from Theorem 3.1.5 and is strict by Example 3.1.11. The implication injective => weakly injective is obvious and is strict by Example 3.5.7. The implication weakly injective fg-weakly injective is obvious and is strict by Example 3.5.6. The implication fg-weakly injective principally weakly injective is obvious and is strict by Example 3.4.6. The implication principally weakly injective = divisible follows
Table III. 1: Classes of acts around injective acts |X|-cofree
1*1 > 1
injective cogenerator
injective
cogenerator
absolutely pure
weakly inj
ive
absolutely 1-pure
fg-weakly injective
principally weakly injective
divisible
218
III Classes of acts
from Corollary 3.3.3 and is strict by Example 3.3.11. The implication injective => absolutely pure is Corollary 3.6.8 and is strict by Example 3.6.18 which actually shows that absolutely pure does not imply even weakly injective. The implication absolutely pure => absolutely 1-pure is obvious and its converse is an open problem (see Problem 3.6.2). The implication absolutely 1-pure => fg-weakly injective follows from Proposition 3.6.15 and is strict by Example 3.6.17. Weakly injective does not imply absolutely 1-pure by Example 3.6.17. The implication |X| cofree injective cogenerator for |X| > 1 follows from Proposition 2.4.13. It follows from Proposition 1.7.32(2) that the converse of the last implication is not true. The implication injective cogenerator => cogenerator is obvious. That the converse is not true follows again from Proposition 1.7.32(2). The implication injective cogenerator => injective is obvious and its converse is not true because the one-element act is injective but cannot be a cogenerator by Proposition 2.4.17.
8 Torsion free acts

Definition and general properties (3.8.1-3.8.3) Torsion free cyclic acts (3.8.4) Torsion free monocyclic acts (3.8.5-3.8.9) Torsion free Rees factor acts (3.8.10-3.8.11) Applications to wreath products of acts (3.8.12) Comments In this section we begin to investigate properties of acts connected with projectivity. The weakest of such properties is torsion freeness.

Definition 8.1. An act As is called torsion free if for any x,y As and for any right cancellable element c G S the equality xc = yc implies = y. It is obvious that the condition of the definition is satisfied for any right cancellable element which is right invertible. Proposition 8.2. Let S be a monoid. Then:
(1) The one-element act Ss is torsion free. (2) All right ideals of S are torsion free. (3) If an act is torsion free, then all its subacts are torsion free.
8 Torsion free acts (4) If Ai,i I, are torsion free right S-acts, free. (5) If Ai,i I, are torsion free right S-acts, free. then .As = ] J i e I Ai is then As = iî Ai is
219 torsion torsion
Proof. The statements (1), (2) and (3) are clear from Definition 3.8.1. (4) Suppose Ai,i I, are torsion free right ,9-acts and xc = yc for x,y As = Uie/ Ai where c S is a right cancellable element. The equality xc yc implies the existence of i I such that x, y Ai. Since Ai is torsion free, one has = y. Thus As is torsion free. (5) This is clear from the definitions. R e m a r k 8.3. Although it is clear that there are very many examples of torsion free acts the next example will show that in general not all acts are torsion free. Let S = (N, ) and consider the amalgam (see Definition 2.2.25 and Proposition 2.2.26) As = N U N V { 1 } N . Then (l,ar) (1 ,y) but ( l , z ) 2 = 2 = (l,y)2. Hence Ag is not torsion free. In some sense, the key example for a torsion free left act is the left T(X)-a,ct X for any set X since T{X) is left cancellable if and only if is a injective mapping. Note that an act gA is called torsion free if for any x,y sA and for any left cancellable element c S the equality cx = cy implies = y.
Torsion free cyclic acts

Proposition 8.4. Let be right congruence on S. Then the right act S/p is torsion free if and only if (s, t) implies (sc, tc) for every right cancellable element c S. Proof. Necessity. Suppose that (s,t) ^ and ( s c ) p ( t c ) for s , i , c 5, c right cancellable. This means [s]pc = [t]pc. Since S/p is torsion free this implies [s]p = [i]p or s pt, a contradiction. Sufficiency. Suppose [s]pc = [t]pc for s,t,c S, c right cancellable. This means (sc) p(tc). Now we have by assumption that spt or [s]p = [t\p. Hence S/p is torsion free.
Torsion free monocyclic acts

Now we continue the investigation of so-called monocyclic acts and then describe subclasses thereof with respect to being torsion free. This will be taken up in next sections for other subclasses of monocyclic acts.
220
III Classes of acts
Recall (see Definition 1.4.18) that a right congruence on a monoid S is said to be monocyclic if it is generated by a single pair of elements (s,i), s,t S, and is then denoted by p(s, t). A right factor act of a monoid S by a monocyclic right congruence is called a monocyclic right act (see Definition 1.4.18). For monocyclic acts of the form S/p(wt,t) for w, t G S wc have the following Proposition 8.5. Let S be a monoid, w,t G S and = p(wt,t). Then, for m n any x,y G S, py holds if and only if w = w y for some m,n > 0, where wlx G tS whenever 0 0, where wlx G tS whenever 0 0 as noted above and p, q > 0 such that wpy = wqz and wky G tS whenever 0 < k < and wlz G tS whenever 0 m q+n p (this can be assumed without loss of generality) then w x = w ~ z and if h = 1 , . . . , then using the equality wpy = wqz we get
wq+n-p-hz = wp+n-p-hy = wn-hy e t s
Hence and is a right congruence. Further, suppose xry, x,y G S and let m,n > 0 be again as noted in the definition of r. Note first that if m 0 then ( w m x ) pwm~1x. Indeed, if wrn~lx ts, s G S, then iurai = w(wrn~1x) This implies (wrnx)px. = w(ts) = ((wt)s) (ts) = wm~1x .
Analogously we get (wny) py. But then (wmx) = (wny) y .
Hence r < p. Since obviously (wt) t, this implies r = p.
As direct consequences we give the following two corollaries which will be used later. Corollary 8.6. Let S be a monoid, t G S and = p(t2,t). Then, for any x,y G S, xpy holds if and only if either = y or = tp, y = tq and tmx = tny for some p,q G S and m, G N. Corollary 8.7. Let S be a monoid, w G S and = p(w, 1). Then, for any x,y G S, py holds if and only if wmx wny for some m,n > 0.
8 Torsion free acts
221
Definition 8.8. An element t of a monoid S is called w-regular for w G S if wt t and if for any right cancellable element c G S and any u S, uc G tS implies u p(wt, t) wu. If wt t and t is a regular element then t is w-regular. Indeed, suppose uc ts, s G S. Since t is regular there exists G S such that t txt. Then uc = ts txts = txuc which gives us u = txu. Now u = txu wtxu = wu . T h e o r e m 8.9 (Bulman-Fleming and Normak [Bu/No96]). Let S be a monoid and w,t G S with wt t. The monocyclic act S/p(wt,t) is torsion free if and only if t is w-regular. Proof. Let = p(wt, t). Necessity. Suppose S/p is torsion free and let uc ts for u, c, s G S with c right cancellable. Then uc = tspwts = wuc and so, by Proposition 3.8.5, upwu, and thus t is w-regular. Sufficiency. Suppose t is tu-regular. Assume that (xc) ( yc ) for x, y, c G S and c is right cancellative. By Proposition 3.8.5, wmxc = wnyc for some , > 0, where wlxc G tS whenever 0 < i < m and w^yc G tS whenever 0 < j < n. Since c is right cancellative, wmx = wny. Note that if m 0 then (wrnx) pwrn~1x. Indeed, since wTn~1xc G tS we have wm~lxpw^x. This implies ( w r n x ) p x . Analogously we get ( w n y ) p y . But then (wmx) = (wny) y . Now S/p is torsion free by Proposition 3.8.4.
Torsion free Rees factor acts

Proposition 8.10. Let Ks be a proper right ideal of S. Then S/Ks is torsion free if and only if sc G Ks, s, c G S, c right cancellable, implies s G KsProof. Necessity. Suppose sc G Ks for s, c G S, where c is a right cancellable element. Set = 3 Then [s]pc = [0]p = [0]pc. Since S/Ks is torsion free [s]p = [0]p or s G Ks. Sufficiency. Suppose [s]pc = [ t] p c , s,t,c G S, c a right cancellable element. If [s]pc = [ t] p c = [0]p then sc,tc G Ks and by assumption s,t G Ks which means [s]p = [t]p = [0]p. If [s]pc = \t\pc [0]p then sc = tc. Hence s = t and [s]p = [i]p. This means that S/Ks is torsion free. The equivalence of conditions (ii) and (iii) in the next proposition is due to Bulman-Fleming and Normak [Bu/No96].
222
III Classes of acts Then the following condi-
Proposition 8.11. Let S be a monoid and s e S. tions are equivalent: (i) S/sS is torsion free.
(ii) For t,c G S, c right cancellable, (iii) The monocyclic act S/p(s,s2)
tc G sS implies t G sS. is torsion free.
Proof. The equivalence of conditions (i) and (ii) is a direct consequence of Proposition 3.8.10. (ii) (iii). Set : = p(s,s2). Suppose [x]pc = [y]pc in S/p(s,s2) for 2 x,y,c G S, c a right cancellable element. Then (xc) p(s, s ) (yc) which by Corollary 3.8.6 implies that either xc = yc or xc, yc G sS and there exist m, G such that srnxc = snyc. In the first case we obviously have [x\p = [y\p. In the second case, by assumption, there exist u,v G S such that = su and y = sv. The last two equalities together with s^x = sny which follows from smxc = snyc imply, by Corollary 3.8.6, [x]p = [y]p. (iii) =>- (ii). Set := p(s,s2). Suppose S/p(s,s2) is torsion free and tc = su for t,u,c G sS with c S right cancellable. Then we have tc = su p(s,s2) (s2u) = s{su) = s(tc) = (st)c or [t]c = [si]c. Since S/p(s,s2) is 2 torsion free we have tp(s, s ) ( st ) which implies t sS by Corollary 3.8.6.

Exercise 8.12. (1) [Ki/Kn/Mi89] Let R and S be monoids, RA an act, = (RWI S | RA) the wreath product of monoids R and S over RA and TC = RA[SB] the wreath product of the R-act RA through the 5-act SB. (a) If y C = RA[SB\ is torsion free, then RA and SB are torsion free. (b) Assume anyone of the following conditions is fulfilled:
1. \RA\ = 1,
2. R is left cancellative; 3. sS s'S / 0 for any left cancellable elements s, s' e S1; 4. sB s'B = 0 for any left cancellable elements s s' G S. Then TC ~ RA[SB] is torsion free if and only if RA and SB are torsion free. (2) If S is a group or a group with zero, then the left End(F(X)5)-act F(X) is torsion free for every non-empty set X . Hint: Use the representation as a wreath product according to Theorem 2.6.18.
9 Flatness of acts and related properties
223
Comments
The concept torsion free goes back to Feller and Gantos [Fe/Ga69c] and Knauer and Petrich [Kn/Pe81]. In [Fe/Ga69c] cancellable elements instead of right cancellable elements were used in the definition of torsion free acts. Note that in some papers (see, for example [Sat76]) torsion free is considered in much stronger sense. Namely, an act As is called torsion free if as = bs, a, b e As, s G S, implies a b.
9 Flatness of acts and related properties

Definitions of different types of flatness and general properties (3.9.1-3.9.3) Conditions (BF), (P) and (E) (3.9.4-3.9.5) Comments
Definitions of different types of flatness and general properties

Let As be an act. Recall (see Corollary 2.5.15) that As < 8 > s is a covariant functor from the category S-Act of all left 5-acts to the category Set of all sets. For an act As the functor As < 8 > s~ may, or may not, preserve certain diagrams of morphisms. Corresponding to this general idea various concepts of flatness of acts have been considered. In this section we define some which will be more important later and point out general relationships among them. The whole picture will be obtained in Section 3.16. Definition 9.1. An act As is called pullback flat if the functor As < S > s~ preserves pullbacks. An act As is called equalizer flat if the functor As < 8 > s~ preserves equalizers. An act As is called strongly flat if it is both pullback flat and equalizer flat. An act As is called flat if the functor As < 8 > s~ preserves monomorphisms. An act As is called weakly flat if the functor A s s _ preserves all embeddings of left ideals into S. An act As is called principally weakly flat if the functor As 0 s - preserves all embeddings of principal left ideals into S. L e m m a 9.2. For any act As we have the following strongly flat pullback flat implications:
strongly flat => equalizer flat => flat weakly flat => principally weakly flat
224
III Classes of acts
Proof. Recall that every monomorphism can be considered as an equalizer (see Theorem 2.2.44). Now all implications mentioned above follow immediately from the definitions. Recalling how tensor products of acts and coproducts are related (see Proposition 2.5.14) we get immediately the following L e m m a 9.3. Let As = JJie/î where A, i G I, are right S-acts. Then As is a certain type of flat act from Definition 3.9.1 if and only if Ai is the same type of fiat act for every i G / .
Conditions (BF), (P) and (E)

Definition 9.4. For the investigation of different types of flat acts the following three conditions on an act As play an important role. We visualize either of them by a graph. (BF) If as = a's' and at a't' for a, a' G As, s,s',t,t' G S, then there exist a" G A, u,v G S, such that a a"u, a' = ", us = vs', ut = vt'.
(P) If as a's' for a,a' G As, s,s' G S, then there exist a" G As, u,v G S such that = a"u, a' a"v, us vs' . a
(E) If as = as' for a G As, s, s' G S, then there exist a' G As, u G S such that a = a'u, us = us'. s
U '
a'
*a t
10 Principally weakly flat acts
225
Obviously, Condition (P) follows from Condition (BF). Again, it is a direct consequence of the definitions that the following lemma holds. L e m m a 9.5. Let As where Ai, i 6 I, are right S-acts. Then As has Condition (BF) (resp. (), (E),) if and only if Ai satisfies Condition (BF) (resp. (), (E)) for every i e I.
Comments
The concept of flat acts was introduced by Kilp [Kil70]. The concept of strongly flat acts was introduced by Stenstrm [Ste70] under the name weak flatness. Every strongly flat act is flat and these concepts are different. In the case of modules over a ring, one obtains in both cases the usual concept of flat modules (see, for example, Lambek [LAM66]). The interpolation-type conditions (P) and (E) were also introduced in [Ste70] where it was shown that an act As is strongly flat if and only if it satisfies both conditions (P) and (E). By their own these two conditions were first considered by Normak [Nor87] who investigated relationships among different kinds of flatness and the conditions (P) and (E) leaving open the possibility that pullback flatness and strong flatness coincide. In [Bul91b] Bulman-Fleming, using the interpolation-type condition (BF) for pullback flatness, proved that this in fact is the case. The term weakly flat and the term principally weakly flat in the meaning of the definitions above first appeared in in [Kil83]. A different approach to flatness of acts was considered by M. Delorme [Del69].

General properties (3.10.1-3.10.2) Principally weakly flat => torsion free (3.10.3) Principally weakly flat cyclic acts (3.10.4-3.10.7) Principally weakly flat monocyclic acts (3.10.8-3.10.10) Principally weakly flat Rees factor acts (3.10.11) Principally weakly flat principal right ideals (3.10.12) Torsion free principally weakly flat (3.10.13) The case of left PP monoids (3.10.14-3.10.16) Applications to wreath products of acts (3.10.17)
General properties
Recall (see Definition 3.9.1) that an act As is called principally weakly flat if the functor < g > 5 preserves embeddings of principal left ideals into S.
226
III Classes of acts
In the language of elements this means that if elements a < g > s and a! s for a, a' G As, s e S are equal in the tensor product As 5 5 then they are equal already in the tensor product A s < 8 > sS. L e m m a 10.1. An act As is principally weakly flat if and only if as a's for a, a' A, s S implies s = a' <g> s in the tensor product As <S) sSs. Proof. Note that a <S> s a' s for a, a' A s , s S in the tensor product As sS by Proposition 2.5.13 if and only if as a's. The following three statements are easy consequences of definitions and are therefore presented as an exercise. Exercise 10.2. (1) Ss is principally weakly flat. (2) 5 is principally weakly flat. (3) An act A s is principally weakly flat if and only if as = a's for a, a' G A s , s G S implies the existence of an 5-tossing SiS S2S S3S s tiS t2s
asi = b\ti b\S2 = b2t2 bk-iSk with , . . . ,Sk,ti,... a'tk
s = tkS ,bk-1 6 As.
,i fc S, bi,...
Principally weakly
flat
torsion free
Proposition 10.3. Every principally weakly flat act is torsion free. Proof. Let As be a principally weakly flat act and let ac a'c for a, a' As and for a right cancellable element c G S. Then < g > c = a' 0 c in the tensor product A s sSc by Lemma 3.10.1. Hence we have an ^-tossing (see Exercise 3.10.2(3)) as 1 = b\t\ bis2 = b2t2 bk_isk a'tk S\C = c s2c = tic S3C = t2c c tkc
227
where s i , . . . ,Sk,ti,... ,tk S, bi,... ,bk-1 6 A g . Since c is right cancellable we have si = 1, s 2 = t\, S3 = , 1 = t k . Using the left equalities from the S-tossing we get a = b\t\ b\S2 b2t2 = .. = a'.
Principally weakly flat cyclic acts

W e begin with three lemmas. equivalences. L e m m a 10.4. Let be a right and X a left congruence on S. Then [s]p(g> [] = W]p ['] in S/p < g > S/X for s, t,s',t' Proof. e S if and only if (st) ( V ) (s't'). e S. Recall that the symbol V means the join of
Necessity. Let [ s ] p [ i ] A = [ ' ] P ['] in (S/p)(S/X)
for s,t,s',t'
This means that we have a tossing si["I]A = S 2 [ 2 ]a = 53[3] = ['] = [] [] t2[u2\\ tk[uk]X
[s]psi = ]2 = K-l]pSfc =
[vi]pti [V2\pt2 [s']ptk
where S i , . . . , sk, i i , , tk, u\,... ,Uk, f i , , f f c - i S. Since the right equalities of this tossing correspond to the left congruence and the left equalities to the right congruence we get, when moving downwards in the tossing, that (st) X (ssiui) ( ^ l i i U i ) {V1S2U2) {v2t2U2) X . . . ( s'tkUk) X (s't') .
Hence (st) ( V ) (s't'). Sufficiency. Let ( s i ) ( V X) (s't1) for s,t,s',t' G S. Then there exist u u\, 2 > n S such that (st) U\ X U2 u-s X .. un X (s't') and [s]p
[]
= Mp [ 1 ] = [s]pt < 8 > [ 1 ] A = [st]p < g > [1] = [ui}p [1] = [l] p ui < g > [1]A = [ l ] p U! [1]A = [ l ] p < g > M a = [l]p < 8 > [U2]a = [1]P < 8 > = [l]P [s't'] = [1 }p = [1 ] p s ' < g > ['] = [s']p <8> [t']x s'[t]x
m(S/p)ss(S/X). Recall (see Definition 1.4.20(3)) that if sA is an act and a e we denote the homomorphism from 5 S into 5 A defined by pa(s) - sa
then by pa
228
III Classes of acts
for every s G S. Note that the following lemma is right-left dual to the first statement of Proposition 1.5.17 and the corresponding isomorphism is explicitly shown. Lemma 10.5. Let be an act and a G 5 A <7([t]) = ta for every t G S is an S-isomorphism. Then g : S/kerpa Sa with
Lemma 10.6. Let be a right congruence on S and s G S. Then [v\p <S> s = < 8 > s in (S/p)s < 8 > sSs for u,v G S if and only if u(p\J ker ps) v. Proof. Necessity. Let [w]piS>s = H p s in (S/ p) sSs. Using the isomorphism from Lemma 3.10.5 we get [u]p [1] = Hp [1] in (S/p) gS'/ker ps. Now it follows from Lemma 3.10.4 that u ( V ker ps) v. Sufficiency. Let u ( V ker ps) for u, G S. Hence there exist Z\, 2 2 , . . . , zn G S such that upzi (ker ps) z2p...pzn (kerp s ) .
Then we have in (S/p) sSs the following equalities = [zi]p s = [ l ] p (g) Z\S = [ l ] p z2s = [z2]p s = ... [zn}p s = [l]p zns - [l]p <S)VS = Hp s .
a
Now we give a condition for principal weak flatness of cyclic acts. Proposition 10.7. Let be a right congruence on a monoid S. Then S/p is a principally weakly flat right S-act if and only if (us) (fs), u,v,s G S, implies u(p\/ ker ps) v. Proof. Necessity. Let (us)p(vs) for u,v,s G S. This means that [u]ps = HpS. Since S/p is principally weakly fiat we have by Proposition 3.10.1 that [u\p s = Hp s in (S/p) sSs. Now it follows from Lemma 3.10.6 that u(pV ker ps) v. Sufficiency. Let [w]ps = [v]ps for u,v,s G S. This means that (us)p(vs) which by hypothesis implies u (pVker ps) v. By Lemma 3.10.6 we have [m]ps = Hp s in (S/p) sSs. Hence S/p is principally weakly flat.
Principally weakly flat monocyclic acts

Our next aim is to give a necessary condition for principal weak flatness of monocyclic acts of the form S/p(wt,t), u>,t G S, wt t. To do so we need first the following technical result.
229
L e m m a 1 0 . 8 . If w,t G S, wt G tSt, and wrt = t for some r > 0, then t is a regular element in S. Proof. Suppose wt = txt, G S. Then wkt = (tx)kt for all k > 1. Indeed, this is true for k = 1 by assumption. Suppose the equality holds for k 1. Then wkt = w{wk~lt) Now t = wrt = (tx)rt = w{(tx)k-H) = (wt)(xt)k-1 = (txt)(xt)k-1 = (tx)kt .
G tSt which means that t is regular.
Note that the condition of the following proposition will turn out sufficient even for flatness of monocyclic acts of the form S/p(wt,t), w,t G S, wt t. Proposition 1 0 . 9 (Bulman-Fleming and Normak [Bu/No96]). If w,t G S, wt t, and if S/p(wt,t) is principally weakly flat, then t is a regular element in S. Proof. Set : = p(wt,t) and suppose that the right act S/p is principally weakly flat. Then (wt) (It) implies w(pV ker pt) 1 by Proposition 3.10.7. Set : = (kcr pt) and let be the smallest natural number such that w 1. This means that there exist elements u\,..., un, v\,... , vn ( S such that w = ui vi Vit u2t u2pv2 V21 = Ust ... unp vn Vnt = t .
Proposition 3.8.5 implies now the existence of non-negative integers m,i,pi, 1 0 then vn G tS which together with vnt = t gives t G tSt. We therefore assume p n = 0, and so t vnt = wniriunt = wrn"vn-it. If mn < pn-i mn then w vn-1 G tS which implies t G tSt. We therefore assume > pn-i. Now t = = wTnri~Pn~1wrn,l~1un-it = wTnn-pn-1+mn-1vn-2t
If mn pn-1 + ?ri n _ < Pn-2 we conclude as above that t G tSt, so we therefore assume mn pn-i + m>n-1 > Pn-2 If continuation of this process fails to lead to the conclusion that t is regular, we arrive eventually at the point t = v x t where J27=2(mi t = w^l^-pi)-pi+rniuit = ~ Pi) > Pi)
so
gi n g
o n e ste
P further, we get
where = (i ~ Pi) > 0-
Since t = w^t=i^rni~Pi^>+lt it follows from Lemma 3.10.8 that we get regularity of t if wt G tSt. If mi > 0 then ui G tS and so wt = Uit G tSt as required. Assume mi = 0, so wt = wPlvit = wPiu2t. If pi < m2 the regularity of t follows as above, so let us assume pi > m2. Then wt = wPi-m2wm2u2t = wPl-m2+P2v2t = wpi-m*+p*u3t .
230
III Classes of acts
If pi m2 +p2 < m3 the regularity of t again follows, so let us assume p\ 2 + Vi > m 3 If continuation of this process fails to show that t is regular, we arrive eventually at the point wt = 1 where =( ~ rrin Going one step further, we get wt = ^ ( r e c a l l i n g that pn = 0), where Y =l {pi fn%) > 0. This inequality together with Pi) > 0 gives us ={%) = 0. But then the equality t = w^t=1 (Tni~Pi)+1t implies wt = t, a contradiction to the hypothesis. Corollary 10.10. Lei s S. If S/p(s,s2) a regular element. is principally weakly flat then s is
Principally weakly flat Rees factor acts

T h e o r e m 10.11 (Kilp [Kil83]). Let Ks be a right ideal of S. The right Rees factor act S/Ks is principally weakly fiat if and only if Ks fulfills Condition (LU) for every k G Ks there exists I Ks such that Ik = k. Proof. Since for Ks = S the assertion is obvious we assume that Ks right ideal. Set := 3 Necessity. For a right ideal Ks let the Rees factor act S/ Ks be weakly flat and let k Ks- Then [1 ]pk = [k]pk or, equivalently, Since S/Ks = S/3 is principally weakly flat 1 (PKS Vker PK) k by 3.10.7. Hence there exist Z\,Z2, . ,zn G S such that 1 PKS ZI (kerp fc ) z 2 PKS 3 ZN (ker pk) k . Now we have z\ = 1 and k = z2k. If z2 G Ks we are done. If not, z2 = 1 and k z^k. Again, if 24 G Ks we are done. Continuing in the same way we see that either we have among the elements z\, z2,..., zn an element such that Zi Ks and Zik = k or zn = 1 and kk k. Sufficiency. Denote the class Ks by [0]p. Let [a?]ps = [y]ps for x, y,s S. If = [y]Ps [0]p then xs ys which implies [x]p s = [1 }pX <g> s = [l]p <g> xs = [ljp ys = [1]py < g > a = [y]p s . If [x]ps = [y]ps = [0]p then xs, ys G Ks and by assumption there exist k, I Ks such that kxs = xs and lys = ys. Now [x]p s [1 }px s = [l]p <g> xs = [l]p <g> kxs [1 ]pkx <g> s = [0] p s = [1 ]ply s = [ljp lys = [l]p ys = [1 }py < g > s = [y]p < g >s. Thus [x] s = [y] s in S/Ks sSs and S/Ks Lemma 3.10.1. is principally weakly flat by is a proper principally kpKs ( kk ). Proposition
231
Principally weakly flat principal right ideals

Proposition 10.12. Let S. Then the principal right ideal zS is principally weakly flat if and only if zus = zvs, u,v,s S, implies u (ker Xz V ker ps) v. Proof. Note that zS = S/ kerAz by Proposition 1.5.17 and apply Proposition 3.10.7 taking = ker \ z .
Torsion free - principally weakly flat

Theorem 3.10.11 shows that there are torsion free acts which are not principally weakly flat. Example 10.13. Let S = {1, x, 0} with 2 = 0, and let Ks = { 0 , x } . Then the Rees factor act S/Ks is torsion free but not principally weakly flat.
The case of left monoids

Here we first introduce the classes of right and left monoids which will play an important role in Chapter 4. Definition 10.14. An element s of a monoid S is called left (right) e-cancellable for an idempotent e S if s se (s = es) and kerAs < kerAe (kerp s < kerp e ). A monoid S is called a right (left) monoid if every element s S is left (right) e-cancellable for some idempotent e e S. Lemma 10.15. An element s of a monoid S is left e-cancellable potent e G S if and only if ker As = ker Ae. for an idem
It is clear from the definition that any monoid all of whose elements are either regular or right cancellable is a left P P monoid. In this subsection we start a closer examination of this class of monoids. Several classification results for left P P monoids will be presented in the next chapter. Theorem 10.16 (Bulman-Fleming and McDowell [Bu/Mc90c]). Let S be a left PP monoid. An act As is principally weakly flat if and only if, for every a, a' 6 and s G S, as = a's implies that there exists e E(S) such that es s and ae a'e. Proof. Necessity. Suppose As is principally weakly flat and as = a's, a, a' .As, s S. Then, by Proposition 2.5.13, a s = a' < g > s in A5 sS. Since Ag
232
III Classes of acts
is principally weakly flat the equality a s = a' <g> s holds also in As < S > sSs. Suppose that this equality is realized by a tossing as = b\t\ bis2 = b2t2 bk_isk = a'tk SitilS = s S2U2S = tiu^s S3U3S = t2u2s s = tkuks ,
where s 1 } . . . , sk, , . . . , tk, ui,..., uk 5, i>i,. - -, 1 As Since S is left PP there exists an idempotent e S such that s is right e-cancellable. This means that es = s and siWie = e s2u2e = t\U\e s3u3e = t2u2e e = tkuke . But then ae = a(siUie) = bi(s2u2e) = (a'tk)uke = (asi)uie = (bis2)u2e = a'(tkuke) = {biti)u\e = = (b2t2)u2e = a'e . bi(tiUie) = ...
Sufficiency. Suppose as a's, a, a' As, s S. By assumption there exists an idempotent e S such that es = s and ae = a'e. Then we have as = aes = aeigis = a'e<gis = a'es = as flat.
in the tensor product As < S > sSs. Hence As is principally weakly

Exercise 10.17. (1) [190] Let R and S be monoids, RA an act, = (R wr S \ RA) wreath product of monoids R and S over a A and t C = pA[sB] wreath product of the R-act rA through the 5'-act sB. (a) If the left T-act t C = rA[sB] is principally weakly flat, then and s B are principally weakly flat. the the
r A
(b) If R acts injectively on rA and sB is principally weakly flat, then the left T-act t C = r A [ s B ] is principally weakly flat.
11 Weakly flat acts (2) Consider the graphs P3 and P ^ 1.1.9). Then (cf.
233
Example 1.1.12 and Definition
AutPa^MsendPa^] ^ (Aut(P 3 ) wr Send(P3(1))Isend P
"
Act
is principally weakly flat. Hint: Use (l)(b), Exercise 2.7.9(1) and that all acts over a regular monoid are principally weakly flat (see Theorem 4.6.6).
11 Weakly flat acts

General properties (3.11.1-3.11.2) Principally weakly flat - weakly flat (3.11.3) A characterization of weak flatness (3.11.4) Weakly flat cyclic acts (3.11.5) Weakly flat monocyclic acts (3.11.6) Weakly flat Rees factor acts (3.11.7) Weakly flat principal right ideals (3.11.8) The case of left PP monoids (3.11.9) Applications to wreath products of acts (3.11.10)
General properties
Recall (see Definition 3.9.1) that an act As is called weakly flat if the functor A s s ~ preserves all inclusions of left ideals into S. This means that if elements a s and a' t for a, a' As, s,t sK, where sK is a left ideal of S, are equal in the tensor product As s S then they are equal already in the tensor product As 0 s K . Lemma 11.1. An act As is weakly flat if and only if as = a't for a, a' A, s,t S implies a s = a' < g > in the tensor product As s(Ss U St). Proof. Note that by Proposition 2.5.13 a s = a' < g > t in the tensor product As sS for , a' As, s, t S if and only if as = a't, and that Ss U St is a left ideal of S. The following two statements are easy consequences of definitions. Exercise 11.2. Prove that: (1) Ss is weakly flat, (2) Qs is weakly flat if and only if S is right reversible.
234
III Classes of acts
Principally weakly flat - weakly flat

R e m a r k 1 1 . 3 . Since there exist monoids S which are not right reversible and the one-element act 5 is principally weakly flat for any S we conclude that principal weak flatness does not imply weak flatness. The relationship between these two types of flatness will be clarified in what follows.
A characterization of weak flatness

T h e o r e m 1 1 . 4 (Bulman-Fleming aand McDowell [Bu/Mc90c]). An act As is weakly flat if and only if it is principally weakly flat and satisfies Condition (W) If as = a't for a,a' G As, s,t G S, then there exist a" G As, u G Ss St, such that as = a't = a"u, which we visualize as a
for some s',t' G S . Proof. Necessity. Let as = a't for a, a' G As and s,t G S. Then, by Lemma 3.11.1, a s a' t in the tensor product 5 0 s(Ss U St). This means that we have an 5-tossing as 1 = b\t\ b\S2 = b2t2 bj2Sj= bj-iSj bk-i^k bjitji = bjtj = o,'tk S1U1 = s S2U2 = t\U\ S3U3 = t2u2 SjUj tj- 111j_ Sj+iUj+i = tjUj t = tkuk
where s i , . . . , . . . ,tk e S, u i , . . . , uk e Ss U St, h,..., bk_ 1 G AsIf s St then Condition (W) is satisfied since we can take u = s and a" = a. Otherwise let j be the first index such that u = SjUj G St. Then u e Ss St and as = asii = bit\U\ = bis2u2 = ... = bj-^SjUj = bj-\u .
11 Weakly flat acts
235
Sufficiency. Let as a't for a, a' G As and s, t G S. Since As satisfies Condition (W) there exist a" G As, u G Ss St, such that as a't a"u. Since As is principally weakly flat we get from as a"u that a < g > s a" <S> u in As < S > sSs and hence also in As s(Ss U St). Analogously, a' 0 t = a" u in As <8> s(Ss U St). Hence, s = a' < g > t in As s(Ss U St). By Lemma 3.11.1 we get that As is weakly flat.
Weakly flat cyclic acts

Proposition 11.5. Let be a right congruence on S. Then the right S-act S/p is weakly flat if and only if s p t , s,t S, implies the existence of elements u,v G S such that us = vt, 1 ( V ker ps) u and 1 ( V ker pt) v. Proof. Necessity. Let s p t , s,t S. Then [l] p s = [1 ]pt. Since S/p satisfies Condition (W) there exist elements x,y,w S such that xs = yt and [1 }ps = [1 ]pt [w]pxs = [w]pyt by Theorem 3.11.4. Take u wx and wy. Then us = vt, sp(us), t p ( v t ) . Since S/p is principally weakly flat then by Proposition 3.10.7 we get from sp(us) that 1 ( V kerp s )u and from t p ( v t ) that 1 ( V kerp s ) v. Sufficiency. Let = [y\Pt, x,y S. Then ( x s ) p ( y t ) . Now, by assumption, there exist u,v S such that uxs = v y t , 1 ( V ker pxs) u and 1 (pVkerp?yt) v. Using Lemma 3.10.6 we get from 1 (pVkerp^,) u that [l]pCg>s = [ujpCgizs in (5 , /p)ss5xs and hence in (S'/p)ss(5'sU St). Analogously we get [1 ]Pyt = [v)pyt in {S/p)ss{Ss{JSt). Now we have in {S/p)ss{Ss{jSt) the following equalities [x]p ( g > s = [l]p xs [u]p <S> xs = [1 ]p uxs = [l]p vyt = [t;]p yt= [l]p yt = [y}p t .
Weakly flat monocyclic acts

Proposition 11.6 (Bulman-Fleming and Normak [Bu/No96]). Let S be a monoid, s,t G S, s t and let = p(s,t). If the right factor act S/p is weakly flat, then either s or t is regular. Proof. Assume S/p is weakly flat. By Proposition 3.11.5 there exist u, G S such that us = vt, u(p\J k e r p s ) l , and ( V k e r p ^ l . Let := ker ps, := kerp t , and assume that u and have been chosen so that us vt, uarn 1, rn 1, m,n G No, andTO+ is smallest possible. As s t it is clear that m + > 0.
236
III Classes of acts
Suppose m > 0. Then there exist w,z G S such that upw, ws = zs, and 1. If u = w then zs vt which contradicts the choice of u and since minimality of m + is violated. Hence u w which implies u G sS U tS. Since uam 1, there exist p,q G S such that uam~l pq, qs s. If q and = 1 then u = q and so us s = vt. Thus = p(vt, t), vt t, and so t is regular by Proposition 3.10.9. If q and > 1 then there exist p',q' G S such that uam_2 p' pq', q's = ps. Since q's = qs = s we have uam~1 1, again contradicting the minimality of m + n. If q then q sS U tS. If q sS then qs = s implies the regularity of s. Otherwise, we may assume q tx, S, and so txs s. If m > 0 and, moreover, > 0, then (using r instead of ) we get that either s or t is regular or there exists y S such that syt t. Now s txs = sutxs and so s is regular. Similarly, t is also regular. If > 0 and = 0 then us t, therefore = p(us, s) and s is regular by Proposition 3.10.9. If m = 0 and > 0 a symmetry argument gives us that t is regular.
Weakly flat Rees factor acts

Lemma 11.7. Let Ks be a right ideal of S. If the right Rees factor act SjKs is weakly flat then S is right reversible and Ks satisfies Condition (LU). Proof Let k e Ks. Set = 3 Then [/c]ps = [k]pt for every s,t G S. By Theorem 3.11.4 there exists u G Ss St. Hence S is right reversible. Again by Theorem 3.11.4 S/Ks is principally weakly flat. Now it follows from Proposition 3.10.11 that K s satisfies Condition (LU). It will turn out in Proposition 3.12.17 that the condition in the previous proposition is sufficient even for flatness of the Rees factor considered.
Weakly flat principal right ideals

Corollary 11.8. Let G S. Then the principal right ideal zS is weakly flat if and only if zs = zt, s,t G S, implies the existence of elements u,v G S such that us = vt, 1 (ker ^ V ker ps) u and 1 (ker \ z V ker pt) v. Proof Apply Proposition 3.11.5 for = kerA2, G S.
11 Weakly flat acts
237
The case of left monoids

T h e o r e m 11.9 (Bulman-Fleming aand McDowell [Bu/Mc90c]). Let S be a
left monoid. An act As is weakly flat if and only i f , for every , a' G As and s,t G S ,as = a't implies that there exist c G As, si,ii G S, e, f G E(S) such that es = s, ft = t, ae = csi, a'f = cti and sis = tit.
Proof. Necessity. Suppose As is weakly flat and as = a't, a, a' G As, s,t G S. Then, by Theorem 3.11.4 there exist c G As, u,v S such that us = vt and as = cus. The last equality together with Propositiom 3.10.16 implies the existence of e G E(S) such that es = s and ae = cue. Analogously we get from a't cvt that there exists / G E(S) such that f t = t and a'f = cvf. We may now take si = ue and ii = v f . Sufficiency. Suppose as = a't, a,a' G As, s,t G S. By assumption there exist c G As, si,ti e 5, e, f G E(S) such that es = s, f t = t, ae = csi, a'f = cti and sis tit. Then we have
a< S > s = a< S > es = ae < S > s = csi < S >s c< S > SiS = c tit cti t
Qj x^y GL ^ CL
in As <S> s(Ss U St). Hence As is weakly flat by Lemma 3.11.1.

Exercise 11.10. (1) [Kil90] Let R, S be monoids, r A an i?-act and SB an S-act. Suppose that R acts injectively on r A . If rA[sB] is principally weakly flat as a left (R wr S | rA)-act then SB is weakly flat. (2) Consider the graph P^1^. Then g e n d p (i) which is principally weakly flat as mentioned in Exercise 3.10.17(2), does not fulfill Condition (W). Hint: Use that the two non-bijective mappings in Send(P 3 (1) ) ^ T2 fix the middle vertex of P . ^ but generate different one-element right ideals.
238
III Classes of acts
12 Flat acts
General properties (3.12.1-3.12.2) Character acts (3.12.3-3.12.5) Flatness and injectivity (3.12.6) Sufficient conditions for flatness (3.12.7-3.12.8) Flat cyclic acts (3.12.9-3.12.11) Flat monocyclic acts (3.12.12-3.12.16) Flat Rees factor acts (3.12.17) Flat principal right ideals (3.12.18) On flat amalgamated coproducts (3.12.19) Weakly flat flat (3.12.20)
General properties
Recall (see Definition 3.9.1) t h a t an act Ag is called flat if the functor A s s preserves monomorphisms. The following lemma will be often used when checking flatness of acts. L e m m a 12.1. An act As is flat if and only if the functor As s~ preserves all inclusions of left S-acts, i.e. if sN is a subact of sM and elements a m, and a'm' for a, a' G A5, m, m' G siV are equal in the tensor product AssM then they are equal already in the tensor product Ag <8> sN. Proof. Necessity. This is obvious. Sufficiency. Let / : siV > 5 be a monomorphism. Assume that n i , o>2 TI2 As sN be such that (idA <8>/)( < 8 > n i ) = (id^ <8>/)(a2 < g > n2) . Then f(a 1) = a2 / ( a 2 ) in A s g M . It follows from hypothesis that / ( ) a2 f(a2) already in A s I m / . Let g : I m / > giV be a homomorphism such that gf = idjv- Then m = (id A ( p / ) ) ( a 1 n i ) = (id A 0 g ) ( ( i d A / ) ( n : ) ) = (idA g)((id A 0 f ) ( a 2 n2)) = (id A {gf)){a2 n2) =a2n2 Thus id a 0 / is an injective mapping. Therefore, As is flat.
The following three statements are easy consequences of the definitions. E x e r c i s e 12.2. Prove that: (1) Ss is flat. (2) s is flat if and only if S is right reversible.
12 Flat acts
239
(3) An act As is flat if and only if for any left 5-act M the equality of the elements a <S> m and a' m' for a, a' m,m' s M in the tensor product As s M implies their equality already in the tensor product AsasOSmUSW).
Character acts
Our next aim is to show that for flatness it is sufficient for the respective tensor functor to preserve all monomorphisms into cyclic acts. To reach this goal it will be useful to investigate relationships between injectivity and flatness. For this the so-called character acts play an important role. D e f i n i t i o n 12.3. Let S be a monoid, As an act, 2 = {0,1} the left E-act for = {1} and s ( 2 ^ ) = H o m ^ A s , ^ 2) the left 5-act where for any 2A and for any s S the mapping sip is defined by (s<^)(a) = <p(as) for any a AsThe left 5-act 2A is called the character act of As and denoted by sA*. Let / : Ag > Bs be a homomorphism. Set r := Hom(/,2) : H o m ( B s , E2) - Hom{EAs, homomorphism
E2)
and call f* : sB* sA* the character Recall that f*(ip)(a) Proposition 1.7.11). L e m m a 12.4. = ip(f(a))
of / . (cf.
for any : Bs 2 and a As
(1) The mapping f* : sB* sA* defined above for a homomorphism Bs is a homomorphism of left acts. (2) A homomorphism f : Ag > Bs is a monomorphism sB* > sA* is an epimorphism. Proof. (1) Suppose a As, s S and : Bs > 2. Then {()){) and thus r w ^ ( r w ) , = (^)(/()) = iP(f(a)s) = ^(f(as)) = {f*{ip))(as) =
f :
if and only if f* :
(8())()
i.e. f* is a homomorphism. (2) Necessity. Note that since e2 is, as every non-empty set, injective in Set, the contravariant Hom-functor Hom( , #2) takes injective mappings into surjective mappings and thus by (1) monomorphisms to epimorphisms.
240
III Classes of acts
Sufficiency. Let / * be an epimorphism and let a,a2 G As be such that / ( ) = f(a2) Suppose that a2 and take G A* so that ^>() v ? ( a 2) Then there exists G sB* such that f*(tp) = . Now {) = (())( a contradiction. The following useful lemma is a special case of Proposition 2.5.19. L e m m a 12.5. Let As and sM be acts. Then the mapping -.Rom(sM,2A) defined by
X(f)(am)
1) = V ( / ( a i ) ) = < K / M ) = (/* ( V ) ) M = v(o 2 ) ,
2{AssM)
f(m)(a)
a
for any a
As,
s M and f
(-, 2 )
is a bijection.
Flatness and injectivity

T h e o r e m 12.6 (Dorofeeva [Dor73a]). Let As be an act. The functor As <8>s preserves the monomorphism l : 5 T V sM if and only if 2A is injective relative to the monomorphism l. Proof. The functor Ass preserves the monomorphism t : s N > 5 M means that the mapping id^ < g > t: < g > s > As s M is injective. This is the case by Lemma 3.12.4(2) if and only if Hom(id 4
l,2
a
) :
is surjective. Since 2A is injective relative to l if and only if the mapping Hom(t, 2a) : Uom(sM,2A) Hom(sN,2A) is an epimorphism, we have to A show that Hom(id,4 2 ) is an epimorphism if and only if Hom(t, 2A) is an epimorphism. Let X:Hom(sM,2A) ^2{AssM^ and : Hom(,siV, 2A) * be the bijections from Lemma 3.12.5.
12 Flat acts Consider the diagram Horn(sM,2a) X

2
241
(6 ,2 ) ^
Kom(sN,2A)
(AssM)
!J
Let Hom(t,2" 4 ) be an epimorphism and k G 2ÂssN\ Since is a bijection there exists exactly one / G Horn (siV, sA*) such that tp(f) = k. Since Hom(t, 2A) is an epimorphism, there exists g G Hom(5M, 2A) such that Hom(t,2 A )(g) = f . But then Hom(idA 6 , 2 ) ( ( 5 ) ) ) ( ) = = = = (X(g))((idA t)(an)) ( x ( 5 ) ) ( a t ( n ) ) = (^(t(n)))(a) (((Hom(t, 2 A ))(g))(n))(a) = (/(n))(a) (4>(f))(a ) = k(a < g > n)
for all a G As sN. This means that Hom(id^ , 2 )(()) = k . Hence Hom(idA 6, 2a) is an epimorphism. Now let Hom(id^ 6,2 A ) be an epimorphism, and / G Horn (sN,sA*). Then ip{f) G ( A s s N ) * and there exists I G (AssM)* such that (id^ l )*(1) = ip(f). Since is a bijection there exists exactly one g G Hom(sM, sA*) such that x(g) I. Since for any a G As and G siV ((Hom(6, 2' 4 )( ? ))())() = = = = = (g(i(n)))(a) = (X(g))(a t (n)) {x{g)){{idAL){an)) ((i<U0*(x(s)))(an) ((id A t)*(Z))(a n) (V(/))(on) = (/(n))(a),
one has Hom(6, 2i4)(<?) = / . Hence Hom(<., 2^) is an epimorphism.
Sufficient conditions for flatness

Now we apply the relationship between flatness and injectivity to obtain a sufficient condition for flatness similar to the Baer-Skornjakov criterion of injectivity (see Theorem 3.1.8). Proposition 12.7 (V. Fleischer [Fle82]). Let As be an act. If the functor As s preserves all embeddings of left S-acts into cyclic acts, then As is flat
242
III Classes of acts
Proof. Assume the functor As s~ preserves all embeddings of left S-acts into cyclic acts. By Theorem 3.12.6 we get that 2A is injective relative to all embeddings of left 5-acts into cyclic acts. It is easy to see that for any s G S the mapping cs G 2A for which c3(a) = s for any a G A is a zero of s^4* Now it follows from Theorem 3.1.8 that 2A is injective. Applying once more Theorem 3.12.6 one gets that As is flat. Corollary 12.8. If an act As is flat relative to all embeddings of all left S-acts with at most two generating elements into cyclic acts, then As is flat. Proof. Consider any inclusion 5 C SC where sC is a cyclic act. Let m i = 2 < 8 > TO2 in A s ( g > sC for 01,2 G As, 7711,7712 G s M . By assumption m i = 2 < 8 > >2 in As s(>i>rai U Srri2). Since Sm 1 U Sm2 C 5 M one has m 1 = a2 <S> rn>2 also in As sM. Hence the functor As s~ preserves all embeddings into cyclic acts. Then A s is flat by Proposition 3.12.7.
Flat cyclic acts

After the preparations made so far we are ready to present conditions under which cyclic acts, and in particular monocyclic acts, Rees factor acts and principal right ideals are flat. N o t a t i o n 12.9. If is a left congruence on a monoid S and s S then by sX we denote the left congruence on S defined by (sA) y (xs) A ( ys )
for x,y G S. If is a right congruence on a monoid S and s G S then by ps we denote the right congruence on S defined by x{ps)y for x,y G S. The following easy generalization of Lemma 3.10.5 will be useful. (sx)p(sy)
12 Flat acts L e m m a 12.10. Let X be a left congruence on S and let t S.
243 Then g :
S/(tX)
> S[]A
with
^([]) =
wMA
for
anV
u S is an isomorphism.
T h e o r e m 12.11 ( V . Fleischer [Fle80a]). Let be a right congruence on S. Then the right S-act S/p is flat if and only if for any left congruence X on S it follows from s ( V ) t, s,t e S, that there exist u,v S such that (us) X (vt), 1 ( p V sX) u and 1 ( V ) v. Proof. Necessity. Suppose the cyclic right S-act S/p is flat and s ( V A) t for s, G S where A is a left congruence on S. Then, since s i ( V A) l i we get from Lemma 3.10.4 that [s] p [1] = [l] p < S > [t}\ and hence [ l ] p < g > [s]\ = [ l ] p < g > [] in {S/p)ss{S/A). Since S/p is flat, [ 1 ] p [ S ] A = [ 1 ] [ ] in the tensor product (S/p)s s ( [ s ] U S[t]). This means that we have an S-tossing ["] = s2[u2]x = ^ = = = [] ti[wi]A t2[u2] A tj-i[Wj_i]A tj[Uj]x
[1] [vi]pS2 [vj-2]pSj-l [Vj-^pSj
= =
[vi]Pti [v2)pt2
= [Vj-i]ptj-i = [Vj]ptj [1 \ptk
5j + i[Uj + i]a
[vk-i ]pSfc = where si,... ,sk,ti,... ,tk,
[] = tk[uk] A G S.
, -, uk u i , . . . ,vk-i
If [s]A G S[t]A M A = [1 ]P [] [l]p < g > [] in (S/p)s (S/p)s < S > s(S/tX). satisfied for u 1.
then take G S such that [s]x = [] . Now [ l ] p < g > in (S/p)s s(S/A). Since S/p is flat, [ l ] p < g > [] = sS[t]A, or, by Lemma 3.12.10, [ l ] p < g > [v]x = [ l ] p < g > [1] in Then 1 ( V ( ) ) by Lemma 3.10.4 and our condition is
If [S]A & S[t]A let j be the first index such that SJ[UJ]A G S[t]\. Then SjÎa G S[t]\. Let u, G S be such that Vj-\Sj[uj]\ = u[s]a = [] Then (us)X{vt). Using our tossing one gets []p [s]x = [l]p [] = [l]p <8> = [l]p [] = [l}pv[t}x
in the tensor product (S/p)s O s ( 5 [ s ] |J S[t]). Since S/p is a flat right S-act we get equalities [ l ] p [s]x = [ l ] p u[s]\ in the tensor product (S/p)s <S> S ( S [ S ] A ) and [l] p [] = [1]P [] in the tensor product ( S / p ) s s ( S [ i ] A ) . By Lemma 3.12.10 this means that we have equalities [ l ] p < g > [1} = [l] p < g > [it] in the tensor product (S/p)s <S> s{S/{sX)) and [1][1] = [1] in the tensor product (S/P)s < 8 > s(S/(tX)), correspondingly. N o w we have by Lemma 3.10.4 that 1 ( V sA) u and 1 ( V ) v. Sufficiency. Let A be any left congruence on S and let [X] P <8>[S]A = [y]P [] for , y,s,t G S. Then ( x s ) ( V A) ( y t ) by Lemma 3.10.4. Now, by assumption,
244
III Classes of acts
there exist u,v G S such that (itzs) (vyt), 1 ( V (xs)X) u and 1 ( V (yt)X) v. Using Lemma 3.10.4 we get from 1 ( V (:rs)A) that [l] p [1] = [l] p < S > Ma in s(5/((s)A)). Hence by Lemma 3.12.10 we have [l] p < g > [xs] = [l] p < g > u[xs]a in (S/p)s<S>s(S[xs]x). Analogously we obtain [l]p[yt]\ = [l] p [?/] in {S/p)s s(S[yt]x). Now we have in {S/p)s s(S[s]\ U S[t]a) the following equalities [x]p<8>[s]a = [1]<8>[] = [ 1 ] ] = [1] [^] = [1 ]P[yt]x Hence (S/p)s is flat. = []
Flat monocyclic acts

L e m m a 12.12. Let e be an idempotent in a monoid S, let be any left congruence on S, and set := p(we, e), w G S. Suppose m <n and (wlz) (ewlz) for some G S and for all m < i < n. Then y (wmz) implies 1 ( V yX) {wn~rn) for any y G S. Proof. From y X (wmz) (ewmz) X (ey) we obtain 1 (yA) e. This implies that w (yX) (we). Now 1 (yA) e (we) (yX) w. Hence we have 1 ( V yX) w. If nm= 1 we are done. Otherwise, from (wy) X (wrn+1 z) X(ewm+1 z) X(ewy) we get w (yX) (ew) p(wew) (yX)w2, and so w(pVyX)w2. Together with 2 1 ( V yA) w this implies 1 ( V yA) w . Continuing in this manner we eventually get 1 ( V yA) ( w n - m ) . L e m m a 12.13. Let and X be right and left congruences, respectively, on a monoid S. Let x,y,z G S. Then 1 ( V (xy)) implies i ( p V yA) (zx). Proof. By assumption
Ipso
(s0xy) X(s1xy) for some so,... ,sn. xp(s0x) ((s0x)y) Then
Sips 2
...
Sn_ip.Sn
(snxy)X(zxy)
X((six)y)
(s1x)p(s2x)
...
(sn-ix)
p(snx)
((snx)y)
X ((zx)y)
which implies ( V yA) zx.
Proposition 12.14 (Bulman-Fleming and Normak [Bu/No96]). Let S be a monoid. For e2 = e G S and w G S the right S-act S/p(we,e) is flat. Proof. Set : = p(we,e).
12 Flat acts
245
We shall use the criterion of Theorem 3.12.11. Let be any left congruence on S and set := A. By induction on > 0 we will show that srnt l r l for some s,t S implies (w s) X(w t) for some l,r > 0, where w ( V sX) 1, wr ( V tX) 1, and wl (sA), (ew^s),^ ( t X ) ( e w j t ) if 0 0, and let srn+1t. Then there l r exist x,y S such that s r " py Xt. By hypothesis, (w s) X (w x) for some l,r > 0, where (wls)X(ewls) (0 0, where wlx,w:'y eS whenever 0 m. In this case, (wls) A (w r x) = wT-mwmx = (wr~mwpy) A (wr~m+pt).
We already know wl ( V sA) 1 and ( w l s ) A ( ew l s ) for all i, 0 < i < I. Prom t X ( wy ) and wly G eS (0 < i < p) (the last obviously implying ( w l y ) A ( e w l y ) (0 < i < p)) we obtain 1 (pViA) wp from Lemma 3.12.12. From ( w p t ) A ( w p y ) = wmx and (wlx) X (ewlx) (m < i < r) we obtain, again from Lemma 3.12.12, that 1 { V {wpt)A) wr~rn, which by Lemma 3.12.13 gives wp ( V tX) wr~m+p. r rn+p Thus 1 {py tX) w ~ , as desired. If 0 < j < r - m + and if 0 < j < then (wH) X (w^y) eS, whereas if p < j < r m + p then wH = (wJ~pwpt) A (w3~pwpy) = ( w j ~ p + T n x ) A ( e w j ~ p + T n x ) since 0 < j - p + m<r. Case 2: r = m. In this case (wls) X(wpt) and as above 1 ( V sX)wl, (w s)X(ewis) (0 < i < I), and l(p VtX)wp. Moreover, if 0 < j < then (wjt) X(wjy) e eS. Case 3: r < m. In this case, (wl+m~rs) X (wmx) = (wpy) X (wpt). As above, 1 ( V ) wp and (wlt) X(ewlt) (0 < i < p). Since sX(ws) and (wls)X(ewls) (0 < i < I) we have 1 ( V sX)wl by Lemma 3.12.12. Now, (wls)X(wrx) and wlx e eS (r < i < m), so again Lemma 3.12.12 gives 1 (p\/{wls) X)wm-r, implying wl ( V ) wm~r+1, using Lemma 3.12.13. It follows that 1 ( V sX) wl+rn~r, as required. Suppose now that 0 < j < I + m r. If 0 < j < I we have (uP s) A (ew^ s) while if / < j < I + m r we get yjis = (wi~lwls) X (w^~l+rx) eS, since j I + r < m.
i
Corollary 12.15. Let S be a monoid and w,t S. If t is regular, then the right S-act S/p(wt,t) is flat. Proof. Let txt = t for S and let e = tx. Then e is an idempotent and for any right congruence r on S (wt) rt Hence p(wt, t) = p(we, e). O(we) e .
246
III Classes of acts
T h e o r e m 12.16 (ulman-Fleming and Normak [Bu/No96]). Let w,t < E S where wt / t and set := p(wt,t). Then the following statements are equivalent: (i) S/p is a flat right S-act. S-act. S-act.
(ii) S/p is a weakly flat right
(iii) S/p is a principally weakly flat right (iv) The element t is regular in S.
Proof. Implications (i) => (ii) and (ii) => (iii) are obvious. Implication (iii) => (iv) is Proposition 3.10.9 and implication (iv) (i) is Corollary 3.12.15.
Flat Rees factor acts

T h e o r e m 12.17 (Kilp [Kil83]). Let Ks lowing statements are equivalent: (i) S/Ks (ii) S/Kg is a flat right S-act. S-act. be a right ideal of S. Then the fol-
is a weakly flat right
(iii) S is a right reversible monoid and Ks satisfies Condition (LU). Proof, (i) => (ii) is obvious, (ii) (iii) is Lemma 3.11.7. (iii) => (i). We shall show that p x s satisfies the condition of Theorem 3.12.11. Let be any left congruence of S and let s {3 v ) t, s,t S. This means that there exist z\, z2,..., zn e S such that
STi Zi r 2 z2 r 3 ... r n zn Tn+it
where Tj = 5 or r^ = for % = 1 , 2 , . . . , + 1. Assume that = and that the sequence above is the shortest possible. If sXt then the condition of Theorem 3.12.11 is satisfied for u = = 1. Otherwise our sequence is of the following form: sXzi PKs z2Xt.
By Condition (LU) there exist h,l2 G Ks such that l\Z\ = z\ and l2z2 = z2. Now from sAzi we get (hs) () or (Zis)Azi. Hence sX(lis). Analogously we get tX(l2t). Since S is right reversible there exist u\,u2 S such that i s = u2t. Let u j\U\, j\u2. Then (us)X(vt), or Hence ( S / K s ) s is 1 (sA V pKs) u, 1 (tX V pKs) . fiat. l(sA) li PKs U, \{tX)l2p
KsV
12 Flat acts
247
Flat principal right ideals

Corollary 1 2 . 1 8 . Let S be a monoid and S. Then the principal right ideal zS is flat if and only if for any left congruence X on S from s(kerA 2 V X)t, s,t G S, it follows that there exist u,v S such that (us) X (vt), 1 (ker Xz VsA) u and 1 (ker Xz V tX) v. Proof Use Theorem 3.12.11 for = kerA 2 , e S.
On flat amalgamated coproducts

For the definition of amalgamated coproducts see Definition 2.2.25 and Proposition 2.2.26. Proposition 1 2 . 1 9 (Bulman-Fleming [Bul92]). Let Ks be any proper ideal of a monoid S. Then the following statements are equivalent: (i) S I I * 5 S is a flat right S-act. (ii) S (iii) S UKs S is a weakly flat right S is a principally Condition S-act. S-act. right
weakly flat right (LU).
(iv) Ks satisfies
Proof. (i)=> (ii) and (ii)=> (iii) are obvious. (iii)=> (iv). Suppose S I I K s S is principally weakly flat and k e Ks- Since ( 1 , x ) k = (1, y)k in S we have ( 1 , x ) k = ( l , y ) f c m (SUKs S)ssSk. Then there exists an 5'-tossing (l,a;)si = (ri,wi)ti (ri,ii)s 2 = (r2 ,w2)t2 (rk-uwk-i)sn = (1 ,y)trl s-[Uik = k s2u2k = t\U\k s3u3k = t2u2k k = tnunk S. Then
where si,..., sn,ti,... ,tn,ui,... ,un S, (r\,wi),..., (rn_1,wn-i)eSUKs Let m be the smallest index such that r m s m _). = r-m+itm+i Ks. rmSm+iUm+1 Ks and k = SiUik = r\t\Uik = r\s2u2k = r2sû^k = ... = rmsm+iurn+ik and thus K s satisfies Condition (LU). = r2t2u2k = (rrnsm+iurn+i)k
248
III Classes of acts
(iv)=> (i). Let 5 M be any act. Assume am = a'm' in (SUKs S)ssM Ks for , a' S JI S, m,m' sikf. We have to show that the same equality Ks holds also in ( S U S)s s(Sm U Sm'). Since (1 ,x)S = S = (1 ,y)S we may without loss of generality consider the case in which a = (s,x), a' = (t,y), s, t S \ . Since (s, x) m = (t, y) < g > m' in ( S S ) s 5 there exists an S'-tossing (s,x)si = (ri,w;i)ii (ri,wi)2 = {r2,w2)t2 (r p _i,w;p_i)sp = (i,y)t p sini = m s2n2 = s3n3 = t2nu2 m' = i p n p
where s i , . . . .. ,tp e S, (,),..., (r p _i, wp-i) e (S 1 11^ 5). Let 9 be the smallest index such that rqsq+\ = rq+itq+i By assumption there exists s such that rqsq+1 = r g + 1 i i + i = /rgSq+1. Now we have sm = ssini = = riS2ri2 = r2i2n2 = r2s3n3 = ... = rqsq+1nq+1 r p ttpTiip tfH/ and so Ism = sm = tm' = Itm'. Hence we have (s, x) <g> m = (1, x)s <g) m = (l,x) <S> sm = (1, ) Ism (1, x)l ( g > sm = I (g) sm = I tm' = {l,y)l tm' = (1 ,y) ltm' = (1 ,y)tm' = (1 ,y)tm' = (t,y)m' . in (S UKs S)s s{Sm U Sm') and so S UKs S is flat.
Weakly flat flat

E x a m p l e 12.20 (V. Fleischer [Fle82]). Let Si = {e}, S2 = { f } be one-element monoids, S3 = (x), S4 = (y) infinite monogenic semigroups and Si II 2 II S3 II S4 the coproduct of the semigroups Si, S2, S3 and S4 (see Exercise 2.1.18). Let be the minimal right congruence on S = T 1 such that ep(xe) and / (yf). We show first that S/p is weakly flat. Suppose that [z\ps = [w]pt for s,t,z,w,E S, i.e. ( z s ) p ( w t ) . Then either zs = wt or, say, zs = eu and wt = xeu for some u S or zs = fv and wt = yfv for some S. If zs = wt then [z]p s = [w}p t in {S/p)s s(Ss U St). If zs = eu and wt = xeu we get in ( S / p ) s s(Ss U St) that [z]p s = [l]p < g > zs = [l]p eeu = [e]p eu = [xe]p eu = [l]p xeu = [l]p wt= [w]p t . Thus S/p is weakly flat by Lemma 3.11.1.
13 Acts satisfying Condition (P)
249
Now we show that S/p is not flat. Let = A ( e , / ) be the left monocyclic congruence on S generated by the pair ( e , / ) . Then in (S/p)s s(S/\) we have the following equalities [1]P M a = [xe]p < 8 > [1]A = [e]p [1] = [1]P [e]x = [l]p [/] = [f]p [1] = [yf]p [1] = [l]p [yf] Assume that S/p is a flat act. Then [l]p < g > [xe)\ = [l] p < 8 > [yf}\ in (S/p)s <8> s^fare^ U 5[m/]a) Hence we get an 5-tossing [1] = [v^pti [vk-i}pSk = [1 ]Ptk Si[ui]x s2[u2]x = [are] = []
[yf ]a = tk[uk]
where s l 5 . . . , s f c > i i , . . . ,tk,v1,... ,vk-i e S and [wi] A ,..., [uk]x < E 5[xe] A U S[uf}x. From [m}x G 5[] U S[yf}\ we get [wi]A = 2[xe]A, e S, or [] = w[i//]A, w e S. Hence [xe]\ = Siz[xe]A or [xe]\ = Due to the definition of the first equality [xe]\ = Siz[xe]\ implies si = = 1 and [xe]\ = siw[yf]\ is impossible. Thus [u^x = [xe]x, [1] = [] and vx = tY = 1. So we can shorten our .S-tossing and finally we obtain [xe\\ = [ yf]\ Since xe yf implies y, e / , we have xe yf and, therefore, by the left-right dual of Lemma 1.4.37, there exist pi,... ,p n , q\,..., qn, wi,..., wn G S where {Pi, Qi} = / } for = 1 , . . . , n, such that xe = wipi wiqi w2q2 w2P2 = w3p3 W3Q3 = ... wnqn WAP4 = yf
Since xe = W\p\ implies Wi = and = e, xf = w2p2 implies w2 = and P2 = f 1 a n d so on, we get that = y, a contradiction. This shows that S/p cannot be a flat right S-act.

General properties (3.13.1) Condition (P) => flat (3.13.2-3.13.3) Cyclic acts satisfying Condition (P) (3.13.4-3.13.7) Monocyclic acts satisfying Condition (P) (3.13.8) Rees factor acts satisfying Condition (P) (3.13.9) Principal right ideals satisfying Condition (P) (3.13.10) Flat Condition (P) (3.13.11) Condition (P) and right reversibility (3.13.12-3.13.13) Finitely generated acts satisfying Condition (P) (3.13.14) Condition (P) and pullbacks (3.13.15-3.13.16)
250
III Classes of acts
General properties
Recall (see Definition 3.9.4) that an act As satisfies Condition (P) if as a's' for a, a1 G As, s,s' G S, implies the existence of a" G As, u,v G S such that a = a"u, a' = a"v, us vs'. The following statements are easy consequences of the definition and we present them as exercises. Exercise 13.1. Prove that: (1) Any retract of any act satisfying Condition (P) satifies Condition (P). (2) If {Bi I i G / } is a chain of subacts of an act As and every Bi, i G I, satisfies Condition (P) then (Ji<=/ satisfies Condition (P).
Condition (P) => flat

Lemma 13.2. If an act As satisfies Condition (P) and a m = a' < g > m' in As s M for SM G S - Act, a, a' G As, m, m! Gs then there exist a" G and u,v G S such that a = a"u, a' = a", um = vm!. Proof Suppose that am = a'm' asi = b\t\ bis2 = b2t2 b2S3 = b3t3 bk-iSk = a'tk in As s M is realized by an S'-tossing sini = m S2U2 = t\n\ s3n3 = t2n2 s4n4 = t3n3 m' = tknk
of length k, for some k > 2, where s i , . . . , Sk, t\,..., tk G S, bi,..., bk~\ G As, ni, ,nk G SM. Since bis2 = b2t2 and satisfies Condition (P) there exist c G As, u',vf G S such that &i = cu', b2 = cv' and u's2 = v't2. Now we have (u'ti)ni Hence as 1 = c{u'ti) c(v's3) = b3t3 bk-isk = a'tk sini = m (v's3)n3 = (/) S4TI4 = t3n3 m! = tknk = u'(tini) = u'(s2n2) = (u's2)n2 = (v't2)n2 = v'(t2n2) = v'(s3n3) = (v's3)n3 .
13 Acts satisfying Condition (P) is an S-tossing of length k 1 realizing a m = a' m' in As s M . process may be repeated until an S-tossing SlTil = TO s2n2 = t\n\ m' = t2n2
251 The
as = Mi bis2 = a't2
of length 2 is obtained. Since asi = b\t\ and As satisfies Condition ( P ) there exist G S" such that a = iii, bi = av\ and u\Si = v\t\. Now (2) = ( v\)s 2 = bis2 = a't2. Since (>2) = a't>2 and As satisfies Condition ( P ) there exist a" G As, u2,v G S such that a = a"u2, a' = a" and u2(vis2) = vt2. Set u := u2uiThen a"u = a"{u2u\) = (a"u2)u\ = ui = a and um = iu2u\ )m = (^^^-) = u2(uiSi)ni = u2(viti)ni = u2vi(tini) = u2vi(s2n2) = {u2vis2)n2 = (vt2)n2 v(t2n2) = m' .
Proposition 13.3. Every act satisfying Condition (P) is flat. Proof. Suppose As satisfies Condition ( P ) . Let 5 be a subact of 5 M and let an a'n'
in As s M for , a' i s , , ' siV. Then there exist a" e As, u,v G S such that = a"u, ' = a" and = ' by Lemma 3.13.2. Now we have an in As sN. = a"u = a" un = a" im' = Hence is flat. n' = a'n'
Cyclic acts satisfying Condition ( P )

Theorem 13.4. Let be a right congruence on S. Then the right S-act S/p satisfies condition (P) if and only ifxpy implies the existence ofu,vS such that 1 pupv and ux vy. Proof Necessity. Suppose the right S-act S/p satisfies ( P ) for a gruence on S and let xpy for 1,1/6 S. Then [l]px [1 }py and ( P ) implies the existence of u',v',z G S such that [l] p = [z]pu' = u'x = v'y. Now for u = zu' and = zv' we have 1 pupv and ux = right conCondition [z\pv' and vy.
252
III Classes of acts
Sufficiency. Suppose [rc]ps = [y]pt for x,y,s,t S. Then (xs) p(yt) and by assumption we have elements u,v G S such that 1 pup and u(xs) = v(yt). Now [x]p = [\\px = [1 u]px = [l]p(wai), [y\p = [1 }py = [1 v]py = [1 ]p(vy) and (wa;)s = ( vy)t. Hence the right 5"-act S/p satisfies Condition (P). Corollary 13.5. The S-act Ss satisfies Proof. Note that Ss = S/As for = As take u = 1. Condition (P).
and in the situation of Theorem 3.13.4 we may If the right S-act S/p
Corollary 13.6. Let be a right congruence on S. satisfies Condition (P) and 1(1]^| = 1 then As-
Proof. Note that in the situation of Theorem 3.13.4 we get that |[l]p| = 1 implies u = = 1. Corollary 13.7. The one-element if S is right reversible. act Ss satisfies Condition (P) if and only
Proof. Note that for 5 = S/S the condition of Theorem 3.13.4 means that for any x,y S there exist u,v S such that ux = vy. But this is exactly right reversibility of S.
Monocyclic acts satisfying Condition (P)

T h e o r e m 13.8 (Bulman-Fleming and Normak [Bu/No96]). Let S be a monoid, w,t S and wt t. Then the following statements are equivalent: (i) The right S-act S/p(wt,t) satisfies Condition (P).
(ii) t is right invertible or tC (wt) It 1. (iii) p(wt,t) = p(y, 1) for some y e S.
Proof. Set = p(wt,t). (i) (ii). Assume S/p satisfies Condition (P). By Theorem 3.13.4 there exist u,v S such that uwt = vt and uplpv. Assume that t is not right invertible, so 1 ^ tS. Case 1. u = 1. We have wt = vt where pi, 1. By Proposition 3.8.5 wmv = wnl for some m,n > 0, where wlv,w:> G tS whenever 0 0. Let wm~lv = tx where S. Then wtx = w^v 1 = vtx and so wm = wm(vtx) =
253
(wmv)tx tx. But now we have 1 = wmv = txv G tS, a contradiction. Thus, Case 1 cannot occur. Case 2. wrnu = wnl 0 < j < n. Let wrn~1u tx = uwtx required. = 1. We have uwt = t,upl, u 1. By Proposition 3.8.5, for some m,n > 0, where wtu,w:i G whenever 0 0. tx where G S. Then wtx = 1, and so (wt)Hl. Moreover, = u, and so txwt uwt - t. Thus tC(wt) and tC(wt)TZl as
Case 3. it, 1. We have uwt = vt where uplpv. Applying Proposition 3.8.5 to both up 1 and pi, and using the fact that 1 ^ tS we have w;"1 = 1 = wnv for some m,n > 0 where wlu, w^v e tS whenever 0 < i < TO, 0 < j < n. IfTO= n, then the equality uwt vt implies wt = t, a contradiction. IfTO , letting wm~1u = tx, e S", we have wtx = 1 and so () 1. If m < then = wnvt = wn~rnwrnuwt = wn~mwt. Thus we obtain n rn n m n n m Tn ix w ~ wtx w ~ and hence 1 = w v = w ~ w v = txwmv e 5, a contradiction. Finally, if TO > then t = wnvt = wnuwt and so wrn~nt = wmuwt = wt. Because wrn~n~1wtx = wtx and wtx = 1, we have 1 then tu - 1 G 5 exists and so wtx = 1 implies ixt = 1. Thus txwt = t, and so tC (wt) TZ 1 as desired. IfTO = 1, then t wnuwt = wrn~1uwt txwt, as above. (ii) = > (iii). If t is right invertible, i.e. there exists S such that tx 1, then for any right congruence r on S (wt) rt
WT
1.
Hence in this case p(w, 1). If tC(wt) 1Z1, i.e. there exists S such that wtz = 1 and tzwt = t then for any right congruence on S (wt) t (tz) 1 .
Hence in this case = p(tz, 1). (iii) (i). Suppose = p(z, 1), S, and py, x,y G S. From Corollary 3.8.7 we have that there exist to, > 0 such that 2 m x = zny. It follows from 1 that zm pip zn. Hence the right S-act S/p satisfies Condition (P).
Rees factor acts satisfying Condition ( P )

For Rees factor acts we get from Corollaries 3.13.5 and 3.13.6 the following Proposition 13.9. Let Ks be a proper right ideal of a monoid S. Then the right Rees factor act S/Ks satisfies Condition (P) if and only if |s| = 1.
254
III Classes of acts
Principal right ideals satisfying Condition ( P )

Proposition 13.10. Let S be a monoid and G S. Then the principal right ideal zS satisfies Condition (P) if and only if zx = zy, x,y G S, implies the existence ofu,vES such that ux = vy and = zu = zv. Proof For S apply Theorem 3.13.4 with = kerA^.
Flat Condition ( P )
E x a m p l e 13.11. Let S = { l , e , 0 } where e 2 = e, Ks = { e , 0 } . Then the right S-act S/Ks is flat by Theorem 3.12.17 but does not satisfy Condition (P) by Proposition 3.13.9.
Condition ( P ) and right reversibility

In Proposition 3.13.7 we pointed at a relationship between Condition (P) and right reversibility. We shall show some more relations in the following two lemmas which will be applied in the next chapter. L e m m a 13.12. Let R C S be a right reversible submonoid and let be the relation on S defined by spt if there exist p,q G R such that ps qt. Then : (1) The relation is a right congruence. (P).
(2) The right S-act S/p satisfies Condition
Proof. (1) It is clear that is compatible with right multiplication by elements of S. Obviously the relation is reflexive and symmetric. Suppose spt and tpu. Then there exist p,q,pi,q\ G R such that ps qt and p\t = q\u. Let r, ri G R be such that rq = r\p\. Then ( rp)s = (rq)t (ripi)t = (r\qi)u. This means that is transitive. (2) Suppose s pt. Then there exist p,q 6 R such that ps = qt. Since pi = 1 and I, R one has 1 pp. Analogously one obtains 1 pq. Hence the right S-act S/p satisfies Condition (P) by Theorem 3.13.4. L e m m a 13.13. Let be a right congruence on S such that the right S-act S/p satisfies Condition (P) and let R = [l]p. Then R is a right reversible submonoid of S. Proof Obviously, R is a submonoid of S. Let p,q G R. Then pq and by Theorem 3.13.4 there exist u,v G S such that lpu, lpv and up = vq. It follows from lpu and 1 that u,v G R. This means that R is right reversible.
13 Acts satisfying Condition ( P )
255
Finitely generated acts satisfying Condition ( P )

Proposition 13.14. Let As be a finitely generated S-act. If As satisfies dition (P) then As is a coproduct of cyclic subacts. Con-
Proof. Suppose As is finitely generated and satisfies Condition (P). Take a minimal set ai,..., an of generating elements of Ag . Then As = (J=i Suppose aiS ajS / 0 for some i,j G { 1 , 2 , . . . , n}. Then a^s = ajs' for some s,s' 6 S. Since Ay satisfies Condition (P) there exist a' G As, u,v G S such that ai a'u, aj = a'v. Thus we can replace ai and aj by a' in the set of generating elements and we get a smaller set of generating elements, a a contradiction. Hence Ag = =
Condition (P) and pullbacks

By Corollary 2.2.2 the pullback of a pair of homomorphisms of left acts is, if it exists, determined up to isomorphism. If we have in 5- Act (or in Set) the pullback diagram sP P2 sN we may assume that
SP
SM
f sQ
(PI)
= {(m, n) e s M SN | f(m) = g(n)},
and pi and p2 are restrictions to s of the projections from s M U. s onto sM and siV, respectively (cf. Proposition 2.2.5). Let now As be an act. Tensoring the pullback diagram (PI) one gets the commutative diagram As0sP id a <S>P2 As sN id^ P\ As sM id 4 ^ As SQ id A g
256
III Classes of acts
For the pullback (P' ,(p[,p'2)) Proposition 2.2.5 that P' = {{am,a'
of id^f
and
we may assume by = a' #(n)}
n) e (As SM) x (As sN) \ a f(m)
and pi' and >2' are the restrictions of the projections. Now it follows from the definition of pullbacks that there exists a unique mapping : As s P P ' such that the following diagram is commutative,
L e m m a 13.15. The mapping in Diagram (P2) is given by ( (m, )) = (a m,a n) for any a 6 As and (m, ) sPProof. Let { (, )) (a' m', a!' n") for some a', a" n' e siV. From [ = id^ pi we get a'm' = ))) = ([)((, )) = (id^ pi)(a(m, ' G s M , n)) = am.
Similarly, a" ' = a and thus ( (m, )) = (a < 8 > m, a n).
Now we are ready to prove a result which shows a relationship between Condition (P) and tensoring pullbacks. Theorem 13.16. An act As satisfies Condition (P) if and only if for every pullback Diagram (PI) in S-Act the mapping from Diagram (P2) is surjective. Proof Necessity. Suppose As satisfies Condition (P). Consider the pullback diagram (PI) in 5-act. We have to show that from Diagram (P2) is surjective. Take any ( m, a' n ) P ' . Then by definition of P ' from Diagram (P2) f(m) = a' g(n)
14 Acts satisfying Condition (E)
257
in As s R Since As satisfies Condition (P) it follows from Lemma 3.13.2 that there exist elements a" As, u,v e S such that a a"u, a' = a" and uf(m) = vg(n). But then f(um) = g(vn) and thus ( u m , v n ) e sP Using Lemma 3.13.15 we get now (" (um,vn)) = (a" um, a" vn) = (a"um, a"vn) (am, a! n).
Hence is surjective. Sufficiency. Let as = a's' for a, a' As, s,s' S and in the situation of Diagram ( P I ) choose M = sN = sQ = sS, f(x) = xs, g(x) xs' for every S. Then by hypothesis the mapping in the following diagram
As
id A g
As
is surjective. Since (a , ' 1) G P' there exists a" (u,v) e As sP such that {" (u, )) = ( 1, a' 1). Now it follows from Lemma 3.13.15 that a" u = a 1 and a" = a' 1 in As sS which implies a = a"u and a' a"v. Moreover, ( u,v ) sP implies us vs'. Hence As satisfies Condition (P).

General properties (3.14.1-3.14.3) Condition () principal weak flatness (3.14.4-3.14.5) Condition () Condition (E) (3.14.6) Cyclic acts satisfying Condition (E) (3.14.7-3.14.8) Monocyclic acts satisfying Condition (E) (3.14.9) Rees factor acts satisfying Condition (E) (3.14.10) Principal right ideals satisfying Condition (E) (3.14.11-3.14.12) Condition (E) and left collapsibility (3.14.13-3.14.14)
258
III Classes of acts
General properties
Recall (see Definition 3.9.4) that an act As satisfies Condition (E) if as = as' for a As, s, s' S, implies that there exist a' G As, u S such that a = a'u, us us'. In what follows we shall make use of the following Definition 14.1. A monoid S is called left collapsible there exists u G S such that us = ut. Example 14.2. (1) Any monoid S containing a left zero is left collapsible. (2) The monoid (N, max) is left collapsible. The following statements are easy consequences of definitions and we present them as exercises. E x e r c i s e 1 4 . 3 . Prove that: (1) Any retract of an act satisfying Condition (E) satifies Condition (E). (2) If all cyclic subacts of an act As satisfy Condition (E) then As satisfies Condition (E). (3) Let As be an act satisfying Condition (E) and B s be a subact of AsThen the amalgam As I I B As satifies Condition (E). (4) Gs satisfies Condition (E) if and only if S is left collapsible. (5) S s satisfies Condition (E). if for any s , t S
Condition () - principally weakly flat

The next results will show that Condition (E) stands rather apart from all kinds of flatness and Condition (P). We begin with an example showing that Condition (E) does not imply principal weak flatness. E x a m p l e 14.4. Let S = (N, ) be the monoid of natural numbers with multiplication and let An = N H ^ ^ N = {(1, ;)}(\{1}){(1, y)} (see Proposition 2.2.26). Then Afi satisfies Condition (E) but is not principally weakly flat. Indeed, since N^ satisfies Condition (E), satisfies Condition (E) (see Exercise 3.14.3). In we have (l,a;)2 = 2 = (l,y)2. This means that ( l , : r ) 2 = (l,y)<8>2
14 Acts satisfying Condition ( E )
259
in < g > nN. If An is principally weakly flat then we have (1, ) 2 = (1, y) < g >2 in A^ But this is impossible because ( , ) can be presented in Afq in the form (l,ar) = as for e An and s G only if a ( l , x ) and s = 1, and and 2 can be presented in 2N in the form 2 = tu for t and u 2N only if t = 1 and u = 2. Since Condition ( P ) implies flatness which, of course, implies principal weak flatness we get the following Corollary 14.5. Condition (E) does not imply Condition (P).
Condition ( ) ^ Condition (E)

The following example together with Corollary 3.14.5 implies that Conditions ( P ) and (E) are independent. Example 14.6. Let S be a non-trivial group. Then 0 s is flat and satisfies Condition ( P ) but does not satisfy Condition (E). Indeed, since S is right reversible 5 satisfies ( P ) by Corollary 3.13.7. But since a non-trivial group is not left collapsible then 5 can not satisfy Condition (E) (see Exercise 3.14.3(4)).
Cyclic acts satisfying Condition (E)

Although in general Condition (E) does not imply Condition (P), for cyclic acts we have the following Proposition 14.7. If a cyclic act satisfies Condition (E) then it satisfies also Condition (P). Proof. Let be a right congruence on S and let [t]ps = [ t'] p s' for some s,s',t,t' 6 S. Then we have [l] p ts = [1 ]pt's'. Since S/p satisfies Condition (E) there exist elements u,z G S such that [l] p = [z]pu and uts = ut's'. Now we have [t]p = [z]put, [t']p = \z\put' and ( ut)s = (ut')s'. Hence the right 5-act S/p satisfies Condition (P). Proposition 14.8. Let be a right congruence on S. Then the right S-act S/p satisfies Condition (E) if and only ifxpy for x,y S implies the existence of u S such that 1 pu and ux = uy. Proof. Necessity. Let the right S-act S/p satisfy Condition (E) and suppose that py for x,y e S. This means that [l] p x = [1 }py. It follows from Condition
260
III Classes of acts
() that there exist u',v' G S such that [l] p = [u']pv', i. e. 1 p(u'v'), and v'x = v'y. Now for u = u'v' we have 1 pu and ux = uy. Sufficiency. Let [x] p s = for some x,s,s' G S. Then (xs) p(xs'). By assumption there exist u G S such that 1 pu and u(xs) = u(xs'), i.e. (ux)s = (ux)s'. From 1 pu or [l] p = [u]p we get [x]p = [l] p (wx). Hence the right 5'-act S/p satisfies Condition (E).
Monocyclic acts satisfying Condition (E)

Recall (see Definition 1.3.16) that a semigroup S is called aperiodic if for every s e S there exists G such that sn = s n + 1 . P r o p o s i t i o n 14.9 (Bulman-Fleming and Normak [Bu/No96]). Let S be a monoid, w,t G S, wt t. The right factor act S/p(wt,t) satisfies Condition (E) if and only if w is aperiodic and t is right invertible. Proof. Set p(wt,t). Necessity. Assume the right 5-act S/p satisfies Condition (E). By Proposition 3.14.8 there exists u G S such that 1 pu and uwt = ut. Since wt t, u 1. By Proposition 3.8.5, wmu = wn 1 for some m,n> 0, where w%u G tS whenever 0 0 and so 1 = w G tS, showing that t is right invertible. As in the proof of (ii) (iii) of Theorem 3.13.8 we get that = p(w, 1). Since w pi there exists G 5 such that 1 and vw = by Proposition 3.14.8. Now w 1 implies 1 and it follows from Corollary 3.8.7 that wpv = wq for some p, q > 0. Then wq+1 = wqw = wpvw = wpv = wq . Thus w is aperiodic. Sufficiency. Suppose w is aperiodic and t is right invertible. Then, as above, p(w, 1). Assume xpy, x,y G S. Now wpx = wqy for some p, q > 0 by Corollary 3.8.7. Since w is aperiodic there exists G such that Then wnx = wny and, since clearly wn 1, the right S-act S/p wn+1 _ satisfies Condition (E) by Proposition 3.14.8. The condition of the previous proposition is, as it will be seen in Section 3.17, sufficient even for projectivity of monocyclic acts of the form S/p(wt,t), w,t G S, wt t.
261
Rees factor acts satisfying Condition ( E )

For Rees factor acts we get from Propositions 3.14.7 and 3.13.9 and Exercise 3.14.3(5) the following Proposition 1 4 . 1 0 . Let Ks the right Rees factor act S/Ks be a proper right ideal of of a monoid satisfies Condition (E) if and only if S. Then | = 1.
Principal right ideals satisfying Condition ( E )

Proposition 1 4 . 1 1 . Let S be a monoid and G S. Then the principal right ideal zS satisfies Condition (E) if and only if zx = zy, x,y G S, implies the existence of u G S such that ux = uy and = zu. Proof. For S apply Proposition 3.14.8 with kerA 2 . Corollary 1 4 . 1 2 . Let e 2 = e G S. Then eS satisfies Condition (E).
Condition (E) and left collapsibility

In Exercise 3.14.3 we pointed at a relationship between Condition (E) and left collapsibility. We shall show some more relations in the following two lemmas which will be applied in the next chapter, compare also Lemmas 3.13.12 and 3.13.13. L e m m a 1 4 . 1 3 . Let R C S be a left collapsible submonoid and let be the relation on S defined by s pt if there exist G R such that ps = pt. Then: (1) The relation is a right congruence. Condition (E).
(2) The right S-act S/p satisfies
Proof. (1) The relation is obviously compatible with multiplication by elements of S from the right, reflexive and symmetric. Suppose spt and tpu. Then there exist p,q G R such that ps = pt and qt = qu. Let r G R be such that rp = rq. Then ( rp)s = (rq)u. This means that is transitive. (2) Suppose spt. Then there exist u G R such that us = ut. By assumption there exists G R such that vu = vl. Now one has 1 pu. Hence the right S-act S/p satisfies Condition (E) by Proposition 3.14.8. L e m m a 1 4 . 1 4 . Let be a right congruence on S such that the right S-act S/p satisfies Condition (E). Then R = [l]p is a left collapsible submonoid of S.
262
III Classes of acts
Proof. Obviously, R is a submonoid of S. Let p,q R. Then ppq and by Proposition 3.14.8 there exists u S such that 1 pu and up = uq. It follows from 1 pu that u R. This means that R is left collapsible.
15 Equalizer flat acts

General properties (3.15.1-3.15.2) Equalizer flat = Condition (E) (3.15.3) Condition () - equalizer flat (3.15.4) Condition () equalizer flat (3.15.5) Equalizer flat Condition (P) (3.15.6-3.15.7) () () => equalizer flat (3.15.8) A criterion for equalizer flatness (3.15.9) Equalizer flat cyclic acts (3.15.10)
General properties
Recall (see Definition 3.9.1) that an act As is called equalizer flat if the functor A(gi5- preserves equalizers. By Corollary 2.2.8 the equalizer of a pair of homomorphisms of left acts is, if it exists, determined up to isomorphism. If we have in S-Act (or in Set) the equalizer diagram
SE SM
/
9
SN
then we may assume that

SE
= {m SM I f(m) =
g{m)},
and is the natural embedding of s E into s M (cf. Proposition 2.2.10). The following assertions are easy consequences of definitions and we present them as exercises. Exercise 15.1. Prove that: (1) Any retract of an equalizer flat act is equalizer flat. (2) The S-act Ss is equalizer flat. Remark 15.2. As it was shown in Lemma 3.9.2 every equalizer flat act is flat.
263
Equalizer
flat
Condition ( E )
Proposition 15.3. Every equalizerflatact satisfies Condition (E). Proof. Let As be equalizer flat and let as = as' for a As, s,s' S. Due to Lemmas 3.9.3 and 3.9.5 we assume without loss of generality that As is indecomposable. Consider the left S-act sS LI and homomorphisms / , g : ^ sSU s& defined by sSUsQ f(9) = g(0) = , f(x) = xs, g(x) = xs'
for every S. Set = { 0 } U {x S \ xs = x s ' } and let t : -> s 5 II 5 be the natural embedding. Then sE sSUs&
/
9
sSUse
is an equalizer diagram. After tensoring this diagram by As and using Proposition 2.5.13, i.e. identifying elements a s and as for a and s S, and noting that 0 5 is one-element, we get mappings / and g in Set as follows
7
9
where = { 0 } , J () = g(9) = , J(b) = bs , and g(b) = bs' for any b As. Taking E' = { 0 } u { 6 A5 | bs = bs'} and denoting by l' the natural embedding of E' into A5 II 5 we get an equalizer diagram in Set E'
7
9
: .
Since /(idyi <S> t) = ^(id^ l) there exists a mapping : A5 < g > sE > E' such that the following diagram is commutative,
As
sE
Since by assumption as = as', we have a E ' . The fact that A5 is equalizer flat means that the mapping in the above diagram is a bijection. Hence there
264
III Classes of acts
exists a' u e A j s E such that (a' <g>u) = a. Now a = (')(a' u) = (id^ i){a! u) = a! u = a'u. Since u G sE we have us = us'.
Condition () equalizer flat

L e m m a 15.4. Condition (E) does not imply equalizer flatness.
Proof. If Condition (E) would imply equalizer flatness then it would imply also flatness by Remark 3.15.2 and thus also principal weak flatness which contradicts Example 3.14.4.
Condition () - equalizer flat

L e m m a 15.5. Condition (P) does not imply equalizer flatness.
Proof. If Condition (P) would imply eqalizer flatness then it would imply also Condition (E) by Proposition 3.15.3 which contradicts Example 3.14.6.
Equalizer flat - Condition (P)

The proof of the following proposition is similar to that of Proposition 3.15.9 and is left to the reader as an exercise. P r o p o s i t i o n 15.6 (Normak [Nor87]). All acts over S = {1,0} are equalizer flat. E x a m p l e 15.7. Equalizer flatness does not imply Conditon (P). Indeed, let S = {1,0} and As = Ss { 0 } Ss. Then As is equalizer flat by Proposition 3.15.6. But since by construction As is not a coproduct of cyclic acts, As does not satisfy Condition (P) by Proposition 3.13.14.
() ()
equalizer flat
As a next step in investigating relationships between different types of flatness and related conditions, we show that Conditions (E) and (P) together imply equalizer flatness.
265
Theorem 15.8. If an act As satisfies both Condition (E) and Condition (P) then As is equalizer flat. Proof. Suppose an act As satisfies both Conditions (E) and (P). Take an equalizer diagram
SE
SM
/
9
SN
in S-Act where gE = {m 5 M | f(m) = g(m)} ding. Consider in Set the equalizer diagram / E' ASSM~ id Af
and t is the natural embed-
: As id a g
SN
for id / and id^ g where E' = {a m\ a f(m) the inclusion. Since obviously
= a g(m)}
and 1' is
(idA f) (id^ l) = (id^ < g > g) (id^ l) there exists a unique mapping such that the following diagram is commutative, , E' / id^ i AssE Now ip(ae) = ae for any ae G sE. Since As satisfies Condition (P), it is flat by Proposition 3.13.3. Hence id^ t is injective. But then is also injective. It remains to show that is surjective. Take any element am from E ' . Then a( g > f(m) = a g(m). Since As satisfies Condition (P) there exist elements As, ui,vy 6 S such that a = aiUi = a\V\ and wi/(m) = v\g(m) by Lemma 3.13.2. Since As satisfies Condition (E) the equality a\U\ = a\V\ implies the existence of elements ' ( As and U2 S such that = a'u2 and U2U1 = U2V1. Set u = U2U\. Then am = a'u = ' um AssM idAg idAf : ASN .
266 and f(um)
III Classes of acts
= uf(m) = (ti2i)/(m) = = u2{v1g(m)) = (u2vi)g(m)
u2{uif(m)) = ug(m) = g(um) .
Hence urn sE and am
= a' um As sE.
A criterion for equalizer flatness

Note that a specialisation of the necessity part of the following Proposition with M s = Ss gives Proposition 3.15.3. P r o p o s i t i o n 15.9 (Bentz and Bulman-Fleming [Be/Bu99]). Let S be a monoid. An act As is equalizer flat if and only if As is flat and for every left S-act sM, and for every a As,m,m' s M , the equality am = am' in As sM implies a = a'u and um = um' for some a' As,u S. Proof Necessity. Let >15 be equalizer flat. Then As is flat by Lemma 3.9.2. Let M be any left S-act, and let a As,m,m' be elements for which <8) m = a m' in As sM. Consider the equalizer diagram sE
5S
SM
in S Act, where f(s) = sm and g(s) = sm' for each s S, and l is the inclusion. As As is equalizer flat, we have the equalizer diagram id ^ As sE AssSidA g in Set. Since (id^ f)(a 1) = am = am' = (id^ g)(a 1), it follows that a 1 belongs to vis s E , and so a 1 = a' u in A5 s S for some a' Ag and u E. Thus, um = um', and using the canonical isomorphism between As sS and As, it follows that a = a'u. Sufficiency. Let sE
SM
id
A f
! As gM
SN
be an equalizer diagram in S Act. Letting E ' be the equalizer in the diagram

/ ID A
f \ AS
SN
E'
ASSMZ
16 Pullback flat acts and overview
267 =
in Set, we must show that the mapping : AssE > E' defined by () a e for a A, e 6 is a bijection. In the commutative diagram idA f As < g > SM idA ZAS sN,
flatness of implies that the mapping idyt t is injective. From this, injectivity of follows. To see that is surjective, let a m be any element of ', so /(to) = a g(m) in As < g > 5. By assumption, there exist elements a' e As and u S such that a'u = a and uf(m) = ug(m). Then f(um) = g(um) so that um G sE = {sM \ f(x) = g(x)} Hence (a' <S> um) = a' um a'u m = a m. Therefore is surjective.
Equalizer flat cyclic acts

Here we show that for cyclic acts equalizer flatness and Condition (E) coincide. Proposition 15.10. Let be a right congruence on S. Then the right S/p is equalizer flat if and only if S/ satisfies Condition (E). S-act
Proof. Necessity. Equalizer flatness implies Condition (E) by Proposition 3.15.3. Sufficiency. Suppose S/p satisfies Condition (E). Then S/p satisfies Condition (P) by Proposition 3.14.7. Now S/p is equalizer flat by Theorem 3.15.8.

General properties (3.16.1) Pullback flat Condition (P) (3.16.2) Characterization of pullback flat acts (3.16.3) Pullback flat equalizer flat (3.16.4) Strongly flat = pullback flat (3.16.5) Pullback flat Condition (E) for cyclic acts (3.16.6) Overview (3.16.7-3.16.8) Applications to wreath products of acts (3.16.9) Comments
268
III Classes of acts
General properties
Recall (see Definition 3.9.1) that an act As is called pullback flat if the functor As s~ preserves pullbacks. An act As is called strongly flat if it is both pullback flat and equalizer flat. The following assertions are easy consequences of the definition of pullback flatness and we present them as exercises. Exercise 16.1. Prove that: (1) Any retract of a pullback flat act is pullback flat. (2) The S-act Ss is pullback flat.
Pullback
flat
Condition (P)
(P).
L e m m a 16.2. Pullback flat acts satisfy Condition
Proof. As a direct consequence of the definition we have that an act As is pullback flat if and only if the mappings described in Lemma 3.13.15 are always bijections. From Theorem 3.13.16 we know that As satisfies Condition (P) if and only if these mappings are surjections. Hence pullback flatness implies Condition (P).
Characterization of pullback flat acts

Recall (see Definition 3.9.4) that an act As is said to satisfy Condition (BF) if as = a's' and at a't' for a, a' As, s,s',t,tf S imply the existence of a" G A, u,v S, such that a a"u, a' = a"v, us vsut vt'. T h e o r e m 16.3 (ulman-Fleming [Bul91b]). The following equivalent for any act A5: (i) yls is pullback flat. (ii) The diagram Ass(sSnsS) ce A = w a A assertions are
C0
269
where a(a (it, v)) = au, {a ( u , )) for all a As and u,v S is a pullback diagram in Set. (iii) As satisfies Condition (BF).
(iv) .As satisfies both Condition (P) and Condition (E). Proof. Since all properties considered in this theorem behave equally well relative to taking coproducts (see Lemmas 3.9.3 and 3.9.5) we may without loss of generality assume that As is indecomposable, (i) (ii). It is clear that Pi Pi
\
sSUsS
Ce
sS
C0
is the pullback diagram in S A c t where p\ and p2 are the projections. Since A s is pullback flat, the diagram id A Pi
As
(sSUsS) id a P2 As sS
As sS idA c e As
?
id a < g ) cq
is a pullback diagram in Set. Applying the canonical isomorphism A s s S = As (cf. Proposition 2.5.13) we obtain the pullback diagram in Set, ce .
A s{S S)
ce
(ii) => (iii). Let as a's' and at = a't' for , ' As and s,s',t,t' Now
G S.
270 AUA
III Classes of acts Pi A C0 Ce
P2
where p\ and 2 are the projections, is obviously a pullback diagram in Set. By assumption the mapping : A5 (sS sS) > A with ( C g > ( , y)) = (ax, ay) for any G As and x, y G S is a bijection. In particular, is injective. From as = a's' and at = a't' it follows that p ( a ( s , t ) ) = (' Since is injective this implies that a (s, t) = a' (s',t'). Being pullback flat, As satisfies Condition (P) by Lemma 3.16.2. Hence, by Lemma 3.13.2, there exist u,v G S and a" As such that a a"u,af a" and u(s,t) v(s',t'). The last equality implies us = vs' and ut = vt'. Hence As satisfies Condition (BF). (iii) (iv). It is obvious that Condition (BF) implies Condition (P). Now suppose as = as' for G A5 and s, s' G S. Applying Condition (BF) to the equalities as = as' and as' = as we get a' e Ag, u,v G S such that = a'u, a = a'v, us = vs', us' = vs . (s',t')).
Applying now Condition (BF) to the equalities a = a'u and a a'v we get a" G As, t,w G S such that a = a"t, a a"w, t wu, t = wv .
Then a = a"t and ts = wus wvs' ts, i.e. we have Condition (E). (iv) = (iii). Suppose as a's', at = a't' for a,a' G As and s,s',t,t' G S. Since As satisfies Condition (P) the first equality implies the existence of a" G As, u,v G S such that a = a"u, a' = a"v, us = vs'. Now we get from the second equality that a"(ut) = a"(vt'). Since satisfies Condition (E) this implies the existence of G A$,z G S such that a" z and z(ut) = z(vt'). Now a = a(zu), a' a(zv) and ( zu)s = z(us) = z(vs') = (zv)s', (zu)t z(ut) = z(vt') (zv)t'. Hence As satisfies Condition (BF). (iii) = (i). Suppose As satisfies Condition (BF). Consider any pullback diagram
271
sP P2 sN
Pi
sM
f
sQ
in S Act with sP {(m,n) G \ f{m) g(n)} and restrictions pi,p2

of the projections. We have to prove that the mapping in the diagram
id a P2
AssN
in Set is a bijection. Recall that here
id^ <g)g
AssQ
' = {(a < g > m, a' n) G ( A s s M ) x ( A s sN) \ a f(m) = a' #(n)}

and pi and p < 2 are the restrictions of the projections. As < 8 > sP P ' is, by Lemma 3.13.15, given by
{ (m, n)) = (a m,a ) .
Recall also that :
Since Condition (BF) implies Condition (P) the mapping is surjective by Theorem 3.13.16. To show injectivity of suppose now that
(! (m1, ')) = ( (m, n))
for a, a' G As and ( m , n ) , ( m ' , n ' ) G s-P. This means that am = a' m' and an a'n'. Since As satisfies Condition (P), the two last equalities imply, by Lemma 3.13.2, the existence of elements a 1,0,2 G As, U\,U2,V\,V2 G S such
that a = ciiUi, a' aiVi, i 1,2, and U\m v\m', U2n = V2T1'.
Applying now Condition (BF) to the equalities a\U\ = 02^2 and a\V\ 02^2 we get elements a" G As, u,v G S such that
a\ a"u, 2 = a"v, uui VU2, uv 1 = W2
272 Now
III Classes of acts
a (, n) = a\U\ (, ) = a"uu\ ( , ) a" <S> ( uuim , uu\n) = a" (uuim,vu2n) = a" (uvim', W2n') = a"uv (',') a\V\ (m',n') ' (',') . Hence < / ? is injective.
Pullback
flat
equalizer flat
Corollary 16.4. Pullback flat acts are equalizer flat. Proof. Let As be pullback flat. Then, by Theorem 3.16.3, As satisfies both Condition (P) and Condition (E) and is thus equalizer flat by Theorem 3.15.8.
Strongly flat = pullback flat

Corollary 16.5 (Bulman-Fleming [Bul91b]). Strong flatness coincide. flatness and pullback
Proof. Follows from Theorem 3.16.3 and the definition of strong
flatness.
Pullback flat = Condition (E) for cyclic acts

Proposition 16.6. Let be a right congruence on S. Then the right S-act S/p is pullback flat if and only if S/ satisfies Condition (E). Proof. Necessity. Let S/p be pullback flat. Then S/p is equalizer flat by Corollary 3.16.4 and hence satisfies Condition (E) by Proposition 3.15.3. Sufficiency. Suppose S/p satisfies Condition (E). Then S/p satisfies Condition (P) by Proposition 3.14.7 and is pullback flat by Theorem 3.16.3.
Overview
Now we are ready to demonstrate relations between different types of flatness and connected conditions lying between pullback flatness and flatness. Below we abbreviate the different types of flatness as follows: SF strong flatness P F pullback flatness EF equalizer flatness F flatness
273 implications
Theorem 16.7. For cyclic acts there exist the following strict between different flatness conditions and related conditions: SF = P F = (BF) = E F = (E) (P) F.
Proof. The equalities follow from Corollary 3.16.5 and Proposition 3.16.6. The first implication follows from Proposition 3.14.7 and is strict by Example 3.14.6. The implication (P) F follows by Proposition 3.13.3 and is strict by Example 3.13.11. Theorem 16.8. There exist the following strict implications flatness conditions and related conditions P F = SF = (BF) between different
Proof. Implication P F => E F follows from Corollary 3.16.4 and is strict by Example 3.15.7. Implication E F (E) follows from Proposition 3.15.3 and is strict by Lemma 3.15.4. Implication E F F follows from Lemma 3.9.2 and is strict by Example 3.14.6. Implication P F (P) follows from Proposition 3.16.3 and is strict by Example 3.14.6. Finally, implication (P) F follows from Proposition 3.13.3 and is strict by Example 3.13.11.

Exercise 16.9 ([Nor82]). Let R, S be monoids, RA and acts. fl-A[s] is strongly flat if and only if r A and sB are strongly flat and (a) S is right collapsible, or Then
274
III Classes of acts
(b) for all s i , s 2 G S there exist V\,V2 G S such that s i ^ i = S2V2 and for all 7*1 > G R, a G A with = 7*20 there exists r & R such that r\r = r2r and rA = { a } , or (c) for all ,2 G RA, r 1,7*2 G i? with r i a i = 2<2 there exist 1,1/2 G R such that r\U\ = 7*2^2 and = { 0 4 } , U2A { 0 2 } .
Comments
A monoid is called strongly left coherent if any product of strongly flat right Sacts is strongly flat (Bulman-Fleming [Bul91a], compare also V. Gould [Gou92] for a characterization of such monoids). There are several open questions connected with this concept, for example whether strongly left coherent monoids must be right cancellative.
17
Projective acts
General properties (3.17.1-3.17.2) Projective free (3.17.3) Conditions for projectivity (3.17.4) Projective => strongly flat (3.17.5) Strongly flat projective (3.17.6) Structure of projective acts (3.17.7-3.17.8) Characterizations of cyclic projective acts (3.17.9-3.17.12) Monocyclic projective acts (3.17.13-3.17.14) Projective Rees factor acts (3.17.15) Projective principal right ideals (3.17.16) Free idempotent-generated principal right ideals (3.17.17) Projective covers (3.17.18-3.17.21) Projective cover of cyclic acts (3.17.22-3.17.23) A necessary condition for projective covers (3.17.24) Right perfect monoids (3.17.25-3.17.26) Projective wreath products of acts (3.17.27) Applications to wreath products of acts (3.17.28-3.17.29) Comments
General properties
Recall (see Definition 1.7.29(1)) that an act P5 G A c t S is projective if for any epimorphism : As > B s and any homomorphism : Pg ^ B s there
17 Projective acts
275
exists a homomorphism : P$ > As such that = ,
Ps
Proposition 17.1. Let Pi, i G I, be right S-acts. Then Ps = iei Pi ^ projective if and only if Pi is projective for every i G I. Proof. Necessity. Take i G I and consider in Act S a diagram
As
where is an epimorphism and a homomorphism. Let ' : As 6 s > Bs 5 be defined by '() = , tt ' U s = and ' : Ps Bs &s by for '\ = , '() = any pe Ps, p < .
Ps
'
As 0 s
Bs 0 s
Since Ps is projective there exists a homomorhism ' : Ps > As II Os such that ' = ''. Then '(Pi) C and = '\ ' Pi ^ s is a homomorphism for which = . Thus Pi is projective. Sufficiency. This is left to the reader as an exercise. Proposition 17.2. (1) Any retract of any projective act is (2) The right S-act Ss is projective. (3) The principal right ideal eS of a monoid S is a projective right S-act any idempotent e G S. for projective.
(4) The one-element act &s is a projective right S-act if and only if S contains a left zero.
276
III Classes of acts
Proof. (1) This follows from Proposition 1.7.30(1). (2) This follows from Proposition 2.3.4 since Ss is a free right S-act. (3) This follows from (2) and (1) together with Corollary 1.6.12. (4). Suppose ^ is projective and consider the epimorphism : Ss > &s Then there exists a homomorphism id@s : &s Ss such that = ids Now () is a left zero of S. The converse follows from (3).
Projective - free
Recall that free acts are projective (see Proposition 2.3.4). The following example shows that the converse is not true. Example 17.3. Let S, S { 1 } , be a monoid containing a left zero element. Then the one-element S-act &s is projective by Proposition 3.17.2(4) but not free.
Conditions for projectivity

We continue with an important necessary and sufficient condition for projectivity which is the closest we can get to the situation for modules where projective modules are exactly direct summands of free modules. Proposition 17.4. An act Ps is projective if and only if Ps is a retract of a free S-act. Proof. Necessity. Let Ps be projective. Take an epimorphism from a free S-act Fs to Ps which exists by Proposition 1.5.16. Consider the diagram Ps
idp
Fs
-Ps
Since Ps is projective there exists 7 = id : Ps Fs such that 7 = idp s . But this means exactly that P5 is a retract of Fs with retraction . Sufficiency. By Proposition 2.3.4, using that epimorphisms are surjective in Act S, any free act is projective and by Proposition 3.17.2(1) any retract of any projective act is projective.
17 Projective acts
277
Projective
strongly flat
Proposition 17.5. A projective act is strongly flat. Proof. The right S-act Ss is pullback flat (i.e. strongly flat) by Exercise 3.16.1(2). Any free act is a coproduct of acts isomorphic to Ss by Theorem 1.5.13 and therefore is strongly flat by Lemma 3.9.3. A projective act is a retract of a free act by Proposition 3.17.4 and therefore strongly flat by Exercise 3.16.1(1).
Strongly flat > projective

Example 17.6. Let S = (N,max). Then s is strongly flat by Theorem 3.16.7 and Exercise 3.14.3(4) since S is left collapsible but it is not projective by Proposition 3.17.2(4) since S does not contain a left zero.
Structure of projective acts

Proposition 17.7. Any indecomposable projective right S-act Ps is cyclic and there exists e2 = e G S such that Ps = eSsProof. By Proposition 3.17.4 we have a retraction : > Ps with contraction 7 , i.e. = idp s , for a free right .S-act Fs = LLe/ Fi, Fi = Ss for all i G /. Now -f(Ps) Fj for some j G / by Lemma 1.5.36. Then Tr(Fj) = Ps since is surjective and thus Ps (1) 5 as we may assume that F j = S. Since 7 is a monomorphism, Ps = I m 7 = 7(7(1))5. Set e := 77r(l) G S. Then e 2 = 77r(l)e = ^yn(e) = ^^() = 77r(l) = e and thus Ps = eSs with e2 = e G S.
Now we are ready to formulate a theorem which reveals the structure of an arbitrary projective act. Theorem 17.8 (Knauer [Kna72b]). An act Ps G Act S is projective if and only if Ps = LL e / Pi where Pi = eiS for idempotents ej G S, i G /. Proof Necessity. Let Ps be projective. Then Ps ] J ( 6 / Pi where Pt are indecomposable by Theorem 1.5.10. Now every Pi is projective by Proposition 3.17.1, and we have Pi = for some idempotents e, e 5 by Proposition 3.17.7.
278
III Classes of acts
Sufficiency. B y Proposition 3.17.2(3) any principal right ideal eS where e G S is an idempotent is projective. B y Proposition 3.17.1 any coproduct of projective acts is projective.
Characterizations of cyclic projective acts

Note the duality of condition (v) in the following result with condition (vi) from the characterization of generators in Theorem 2.3.16. C o r o l l a r y 1 7 . 9 . Let be a right congruence tions are equivalent: (i) S/p is a projective right S-act. e S. on S. Then the following asser-
(ii) S/p = eS for some (iii) There (iv) There (v) S/p
idempotent
exists an idempotent exists an idempotent is a retract of S.
e G S such that 1 pe and < kerA e . e G S such that = ker A e .
Proof (i) => (ii). Suppose S/p is projective. B y Proposition 3.17.7 there exists an idempotent e G S such that eS = S/p. (ii) => (iii). Let e G S be an idempotent, : eS S/p an isomorphism and let u,v G S be such that ip(e) = [it] and ip(ev) = [1]. Now from ip(e) = [it] = [l]it = <p(ev)u = {) we get e = evu. Since ee = e we have [v\e = [it]. Set now t = uev. Then [1] = ip(e)v = [tt]i> = [ue]v = [uev] = [t]. Hence 1 pt. Since t2 (uev)(uev) = u(evu)ev = ueev = uev t, t is an idempotent. Let xpy, x,y G S. Then [a:] = [y] or [l]x = [1 }y which yields {) = or () = (p(evy). Since is injective, evx evy. Then tx = uevx = uevy ty. Hence < kerA t . (iii) => (iv). Let e G S be an idempotent such that 1 pe and < kerA e . Suppose that x(ker Xe)y, x,y G S. Then in S/p we have [x] = [l]x = [e]x = [ex] = [ey] = [e]y = [1 }y = [y] . Hence = ker A e . (iv) => (v). Let e G S be an idempotent such that = kerA e . By the left-right dual of Lemma 3.10.5 we get that S/p = S/ ker Ae is isomorphic to eS and this is a retract of Sg by Corollary 1.6.12. (v) => (i). This is a part of Proposition 3.17.4. The following proposition will be useful for regular acts in Section 3.19 and leads to so-called projective coordinates in analogy to module theory (see, for example, [COH66]). This concept will be used in Sections 5.3 and 5.4.
17 Projective acts
279
Proposition 17.10. Let As be an act and a G As- The cyclic right act aS is projective if and only if there exists a homomorphism f : aS > Ss such that af(a) = a. Proof. Recall first that aS = S/ ker by the left-right dual of Lemma 3.10.5. Necessity. Suppose that the cyclic subact aSs = S/kevXa is projective. Then by Corollary 3.17.9 there exists an idempotent e G S such that kerA a = kerA e . Since ee = el the previous equality implies ae = a. Define now / : aS > Ss by f(as) = es for every s S which is correctly defined since kerA a = kerA e . Then / is a homomorphism for which af(a) = ae = a. Sufficiency. Let / : aS > Ss be a homomorphism such that a = af(a) and set e = f(a). Then e = f(a) = f(af(a)) = f(a)f(a) = ee.
Now kerA a = ker Ae since ax = ay, x,y G S, implies ex = f(a)x = f(ax) = f(ay) = f(a)y = ey . If on the other hand ex = ey, x,y G S, then ax af(a)x = aex = aey = af(a)y = ay .
Therefore 5ykerA a is projective by Corollary 3.17.9. Hence aS is projective. Definition 17.11. Let Ps be a right S-act. A pair (p, f)ePsX Hom(Ps, Ss) such that pf(x) = for all G Ps is said to be projective coordinates of PsIt is clear that a cyclic projective S'-act Ps has projective coordinates
(e,j)
if Ps = eS and Ss
Ps is a retract, see Corollary 3.17.9. Note that projective

7
coordinates of a cyclic projective act are not uniquely determined. Using the notion of projective coordinates Proposition 3.17.10 can be reformulated as Proposition 17.12 (Knauer and Mikhalev [Kn/Mi92]). The right S-act is cyclic projective if and only if Ps has projective coordinates. Ps
Monocyclic projective acts

Our next aim is to show that the condition of Proposition 3.14.9 is sufficient for monocyclic acts of the form S/p(wt,t) with w,t G 5, wt t, to be projective. First we need the following lemma which was proved already in [Ste70]. We present here an elementary proof.
280
III Classes of acts strongly flat
L e m m a 17.13 (Bulman-Fleming, Normak [Bu/No96]). Every monocyclic act is projective.
Proof. Let s,t S and let = p(s,t). Assume the right 5-act S/p is strongly flat. If s t then S/p = Ss is projective by Proposition 3.17.2. So suppose that s t. Since for cyclic acts strong flatness and property (E) coincide, it follows from Proposition 3.14.8 that there exists u S such that us = ut and up 1. Now s t implies u 1. Then, by Lemma 1.4.37, there exist Pi, , , , ,qn, wi,...,wn 6 S where { p ; , ^ } = {s,i} for i = , . , . , , such that u = piwi q2w2 = pzw-i qnWn = 1 qiWi = p2w2 qzW'i = p4w4 ... Since upi = uqi, i = 1 , . . . , n, we have u2 = up\Wi = uqiWi = up2w2 = uq2w2 = ... = uqnwn = u .
Thus, u is an idempotent. Next let x,y G S, y and xpy. Then, by Lemma 1.4.37, there exist pi,... ,pn,qi, ,qn, wi,...,wn e S where {pi,qi} = {s,i} for i = , . , . , , such that = piwi q2w2 = qnwn = V qiWi = P2W2 qzw3 = p 4 w A ... Now ux =- up\W\ = uqiW\ = up2w2 = uq2w2 = ... = uqnwn Thus, the right S-act S/p is projective by Corollary 3.17.9. P r o p o s i t i o n 17.14. Let S be a monoid, w,t S, wt t and let Then the following statements are equivalent: (i) The right factor act S/p is projective. (ii) The right factor act S/p satisfies Condition (E). (iii) The element w is aperiodic and t is right invertible. = uy . p(wt,t).
Proof. The equivalence of (i) and (ii) follows from Theorem 3.16.7, Proposition 3.17.5 and Lemma 3.17.13. The equivalence of (ii) and (iii) is Proposition 3.14.9.
Projective Rees factor acts

For the sake of completeness we give the following statement which is a direct consequence of the fact that projectivity implies Condition (P) and Proposition 3.13.9. It can be proved directly using Corollary 3.17.9.
17 Projective acts
281
Proposition 17.15 Let Ks be a proper right ideal of S. Then the right Rees factor act S/Ks is projective if and only if |is| = 1.
Projective principal right ideals

Before formulating necessary and sufficient conditions for projectivity of principal right ideals we recall (see Definition 3.10.14) that an element G S is said to be left e-cancellable for an idempotent e G S if = ze and zx = zy, x,y G S, implies ex = ey. Proposition 17.16. Let G S. Then the principal right ideal zS is projective if and only if is left e-cancellable for some idempotent e G S. Proof. Necessity. Suppose the right 5-act zS is projective. Then, by the dual of Lemma 3.10.5 we get that the right 5-act S/ker \z is projective. Hence by Corollary 3.17.9 there exists an idempotent e G S such that l(kerA 2 )e and kerA^ < ker Ae. Prom 1 Xz e we get = ze. Thus, 2 is left e-cancellable. Sufficiency. Let 2 G S be left e-cancellable for an idempotent e G S. Then the mapping / : zSs > eSs defined by f(zs) = es for every s G S is an S-isomorphism. Thus zS is projective by Proposition 3.17.2(3).
Free idempotent-generated principal right ideals

We turn to free right ideals as a special case of projectivity and characterize idempotents which generate free principal right ideals. Proposition 17.17. Let e G S be an idempotent. ideal eS is a free right S-act if and only if e V 1. Then the principal right
Proof. Necessity. Suppose the right ideal eS is a free right S-act for an idempotent e G S. Since eSs is cyclic there exists s G S such that {es} is a basis of eS. Hence there exists t G S such that (es)t = e. This implies es TZ e. Multiplying the equality (es)t = e on the right by es we obtain that ( es)(tes ) = (es)l. Since es is a basis this gives us t(es) = 1 which implies es C 1. Thus we have eVl. Sufficiency. Suppose that e G S is an idempotent such that e T> 1. Then there exists s G S such that e 7 s and s C 1. Now e 7 s imlies that there exist u,v G S such that e = su and s = ev. Thus we have e = ( ev)u which means that ev is a generating element of eS. Since s = ev C 1 there exists S such that zev = 1. The last equality gives us = y whenever (ev)x = {ev)y for x,y G S. Hence {ev} is a basis of eS and thus eS is free.
282
III Classes of acts
Projective covers
In Section 3.1 we defined and investigated properties of injective envelopes of acts. It turned out that injective envelopes always exist and are determined uniquely up to isomorphism. Here we define the categorically dual notion which will be called projective cover. It turns out (as for modules over rings) that contrary to the case of injective envelopes, projective covers of acts do not always exist. We give a description of monoids over which all acts have projective covers. We shall follow the ideas of Isbell [Isb71]. Recall (see Definition 1.4.38 and Corollary 1.4.39) that a submonoid of a monoid S is called a left unitary submonoid if pq for , q S implies q , and that a submonoid of S is a left unitary submonoid of S if and only if is the class of 1 for some right congruence on S. We start with defining the categorical dual of essential extension (cf. Definition 3.1.14). D e f i n i t i o n 17.18. An act Bs is called a cover of an act if there exists an epimorphism / : B s > As such that for any proper subact C s of B s the restriction f\cs ' Cs > As is not an epimorphism. An epimorphism with this property is called a coessential epimorphism. A cover Bs of an act As is called a projective cover of As if Bs is a projective act. L e m m a 17.19. Any cover of a cyclic act is also a cyclic act. Proof. Suppose Bs is a cover of a cyclic act As aS and / : Bs As is a coessential epimorphism. Let b Bs be such that f(b) = a. Then f\bs : bS > As is an epimorphism. Hence bS cannot be a proper subact of BsThus Bs = bS is a cyclic act. Our next aim is to get the categorical dual version of Proposition 3.1.24. P r o p o s i t i o n 17.20. Let Pi and be projective right S-acts and fi : Pi i = 1,2, coessential epimorphisms. Then there exists an isomorphism h:P1->P2 such that /1 = /2/i, i.e. Pi
is a commutative
diagram.
17 Projective acts Proof. There exists a homomorphism g : P2 > Pi such that /2 = P2 fig,
283
since P2 is projective. Therefore, fi(lmg) = I m / 2 = Since /1 : Pi > As is coessential, g is an epimorphism. Now there exists a homomorphism h : > such that gh = idp t , i.e.
is a commutative diagram, since P\ is projective. Clearly, h is a monomorphism. Now f2h = ( f l 9 ) h = h(gh) = h id P l = /1. Again, since /2(Im/i) = I m / i = As and f i P2 > is coessential, is an epimorphism. Thus h is an isomorphism. Corollary 17.21. If an act As has a projective cover Ps then Ps is determined uniquely up to isomorphism.
Projective cover of cyclic acts

Proposition 17.22. Let be a right congruence on a monoid S. The cyclic right S-act S/p has a projective cover if and only if the submonoid R [l]p contains a minimal right ideal generated by an idempotent. Proof. Necessity. Suppose the cyclic act S/p has the projective cover P5 and f : Ps ^ S/p is a coessential epimorphism. Then P5 is a cyclic act by Lemma 3.17.19. By Theorem 3.17.8 we may assume that eS where e S is an idempotent. Since / is an epimorphism there exists u G S such that f(e)u = [l] p , and therefore f(eu) [l] p . Since / : eSs S/p is a coessential epimorphism we have euS = eS. Consider the diagram
284
III Classes of acts
euS id euS 9 Ss - euS where g : Ss euS is an epimorphism defined by g(s) = eus for any s S. Since euS = eS = Ps is projective there exists a homomorphism h : euS > Ss such that gh = id e s. Clearly, h is a monomorphism. Now from eu = ide us(eu) = ( gh)(eu) = g(h(eu)) = we get that h(eu) is an idempotent and [l] p = /(eu) = f(eu)h(eu) = [1 }ph(eu) = [h(eu)]p . euh(eu)
Set e' h(eu) and R = [l] p . Then e' G R and R is a left unitary submonoid of S by Corollary 1.4.39. Let k : euS e'S be the isomorphism obtained from h by restricting the range of h, and set f = fk~l : e'Ss > S/p, which is also a coessential epimorphism. Now assume that e'R is not a minimal right ideal of R. Then there exists r R such that e'rR e'R. Since R is a left unitary submonoid we have e'rS e'S. But since f'(e'r) - (fk-îe'r) = /(fc-êV)) = [l] P r = [r]p = [l]pr , = f{k~\e')r) = f((eu)r) = f(eu)r
f\e'rS ' e'rS S/p is also an epimorphism, and we have a contradiction. Hence e'R is a minimal right ideal of R. Sufficiency. Suppose the submonoid [l] p = R contains a minimal right ideal eR generated by an idempotent e e S. Then eS is a cyclic projective right act by Proposition 3.17.2(3). Define a mapping / : eS > S/p by / ( e s ) - [s]p for every s G S. If es = et, s,t S, then one gets from 1 pe that sp(es) and tp(et), thus spt. Hence, / is well-defined. Clearly, / is an epimorphism. Now assume that for some s S for which esS eS one has / ( e s ) = [l] p . Then [s]p = [l] p which implies s R. If now esR eR then e esS which implies eS = esS, a contradiction. Hence esR is a right ideal of R properly contained in eR, again a contradiction. Thus eSs is the projective cover of S/p.
17 Projective acts
285
Corollary 17.23. The one-element act 0s has a projective cover if and only if S contains a minimal right ideal generated by an idempotent. It is clear now that there exist (cyclic) acts which do not have projective covers.
A necessary condition for projective covers

Proposition 17.24. If an act As is the union of an infinite, strictly chain of cyclic subacts then As does not have a projective cover. Proof. Suppose As = UneN a n S
an
ascending
a\S C o^S C . . . C anS C . . . , where all inclusions are strict, is an ascending chain of cyclic subacts of As and assume that As has the projective cover Ps with coessential epimorphism / : Ps > As. Now Ps L L e / Pi where Pi = for some idempotents e^ S, i e I, by Theorem 3.17.8. But if \I\ > 1 and / ( P , ) C anS for some e then f\ps\pi is still an epimorphism and thus Ps cannot be a cover for As- Finally, if |/| = 1 then the image of / lies in one of the subacts anS and thus / cannot even be an epimorphism.
Right perfect monoids

Definition 17.25. A monoid S is called right perfect has a projective cover. if every right S-act
Theorem 17.26 (Isbell [Isb71]). A monoid S is right perfect if and only if S satisfies the following two conditions: (A) Every right S-act satisfies the ascending chain condition for cyclic (D) Every left unitary submonoid an idempotent. subacts. by of S has a minimal right ideal generated
Proof. For the concept of a left unitary submonoid recall Definition 1.4.38. Necessity. Suppose S is right perfect. Condition (A) is now a consequence of Proposition 3.17.24. Since by Corollary 1.4.39 every left unitary submonoid of S is the class of 1 for some right congruence on S, Proposition 3.17.22 implies Condition (D). Sufficiency. Since S satisfies Condition (D), all cyclic right S-acts have projective covers by Proposition 3.17.22. Let As be an arbitrary act. Consider the set of all cyclic subacts of As under inclusion. Since S satisfies Condition (A) this partially ordered set satisfies the hypothesis of Zorn's Lemma. Hence As contains maximal cyclic subacts and
286
III Classes of acts
can be considered as the union of its pairwise different maximal cyclic subacts ( ^ i ) s = a,iS, di As, i I, As = U i e / ( ^ i ) 5 Let ( P i ) s be the projective cover of (Ai)s for every i I and fi : (Pi)s (-Ai)s the corresponding coessential epimorphism. Consider an act P s ] J l t / ( P , ) s and the mapping / : Ps > As with f(p) = fi(p) for {Pi)sNow Ps is projective by Proposition 3.17.1. Clearly, / is an epimorphism. Assume that the epimorphism / : P s A s is not coessential. Then there exists a proper subact P's of Ps such that f\p's is an epimorphism. Now there exists j e / such that ( P j ) s = P's (Pj)s is a proper subact of (Pj)sSince f\p' is an epimorphism there exists p' P's such that f(p') dj. Since f j : > { A j ) s is a coessential epimorphism, p' ( P k ) s for some k /, k j. But then aj = f(p') = fk(p') (Ak)s which implies (A,-) s = djS C (Ak)s and therefore, since is a maximal cyclic subact of As, (Aj)s = (Ak)s, a contradiction. Hence P s is the projective cover of As- Thus, 5 is a perfect monoid.
Projective wreath products of acts

In this section we characterize projective wreath products of acts. Let R and S be monoids, RA E R-Act, SB A c t , and let (R wr S I ^ A ) be the wreath product of R and S through RA, RA[SB] the wreath product of acts RA and s B (see Section 2.6). T h e o r e m 17.27 (Normak [Nor82]). The left (R wr S\RA)-act RA[SB} is projective if and only if the left R-act RA is projective, the left S-act SB is projective and either (a) the monoid S contains a right zero, or (b) RA = Rv, 2 R, and there exists VQ R with = VQRv. Proof Necessity. Suppose that the left (R wr S|A)-act RA[SB] is projective. First we show that s B is projective. For a given epimorphism : s Y sX and a homomorphism : s B > s X we consider the following diagram in (R wr S|fli4)-Act
RA[SB}
id^ id,4 7 RA[SY}
17 Projective acts
287
where id^ and id a xtt are homomorphisms of left (R wr 5|A)-acts by Lemma 2.6.15. Moreover, id^ x is an epimorphism, and therefore by hypothesis there exists a homomorphism : RA[SB] i4[sF] such that id^ = (id^ ). Fix a0 G A and define : sB sY by setting x(ao,b) = (a 0 , x(b)) for be B. If s e S then (a 0 ,x(s6))
= x(a0,sb)
= ((1 ,c e )(a 0 ,ft))
= ( l , c s ) x ( a 0 , 6 ) = ( l , c s ) ( a 0 , x ( b ) ) = ( 0 ,()) and therefore is a homomorphism of left S'-acts. Since (a 0 ,7 rx(b)) = (idyi X7r)(a0, *(&)) = (icU )( 0 ,>)
= (idA xip)(a0,b) = (a0,ip(b))
for every b G sB we have = , and thus, sB is a projective S-act. Now we show that RA is a projective R-act. From Theorem 3.17.8 we have that sB = L L e / Sbi, bi G sB, and Sbi is isomorphic to a idempotent-generated left ideal of S for every i G I. By Proposition 2.6.16 and Theorem 3.17.8 it follows that the (R wr S|/;y4)-acts /^[gS'&j], G I, are projective. Take an epimorphism : RM > RN and a homomorphism : RA > RN. Fix an index k G I. By Remark 2.6.17 we know that RA, RN and RM are left (R wr 5|^4)-acts. Consider the following diagram
RA
LA,bk
RM
RN
288
III Classes of acts
where ^ , sbfc) = a for a RA, S S and LA,BK(A) (a>^fc) f r a RA (see Remark 2.6.17). Note that iA,bk is a mapping but not a homomorphism. By projectivity of RA[Sbk] there exists an ( R wr S|A)-homomorphism : RA[Sbk] > RM with = . Set : = TiA,bk Since () = (TiA,bk)(ra) = r(ra,bk) = r{(r,cx)(a,bk)) = (r,ci)r(a,6 f c ) = rr(a,bk) = r(TtA,bk(a)) = for any r R, a RA, we get that is an R-homomorphism. Thus RA is a projective left i?-act.
()
Clearly, .
Next we show the properties (a) and (b). From Theorem 3.17.8 we have that RA = U ? eJRj, a,j RA, and Raj is isomorphic to an idempotent-generated left ideal of R for every j J. Let I J. By Proposition 2.6.14, we get that a/fsSfc] is an (R wr act which is projective since it is a component of a projective coproduct (cf. Proposition 3.17.1) and it is obviously cyclic. Therefore, by Corollary 3.17.9, it follows that RRai[sSbk] = {R wr S\RA)(e,f0) in (R wr S\rA) - A c t where (e,/o)2 = (e,/o)G(i?wr S\RA). Consider the two possible cases. (a): \J\ > 1. Let a RA. We show that fo(a) is a right zero of the monoid S. Indeed, for any sq S consider / SA such that 1, if Rai sq , if A \ Rai . Then for r R and s S we have (1 ,f)(rai,sbk) = (rat, f(rai))sbk) = (rai,sbk).
Since RRai[sSbk] = (R wr S\RA)(e, fo) as (R wr S , |A)-acts the last equality implies ( l , / ) ( e , / 0 ) = ( e , / 0 ) . Hence f0(a) = f(ea)f0(a) for all a RA. If a RA \ Rai, this gives fo(a) sofo(a). Thus, fo{a) is a right zero of the monoid S, i.e. we have (a) in this case. (): \J\ 1. From Corollary 3.17.9 we have RA = Rv, where v2 = R, and again we use that there exists an isomorphism : RRv[sSbk] > (R wr S\RA)(e, fo) for some idempotent (e, fo) (R wr S\A). Set <p(v,bk) (r,f)(e,f0), where ( r , / ) (R wr S\A). Note that if r' R, fx, fi SA are such that fx(v) = f2(v) then fx{repv)f(epv)f0(pv) for all pv Rv. Indeed, in this case (r',fx)(v,bk) = (r'v, fx(v)bk) = (r'v, f2(v)bk) = (r', f2)(v,bk) . = f2(repv)f(epv)f0(pv)
17 Projective acts
289
Since is an isomorphism we get that ( /i)(r, /)(e, /o) = (r', 6,) = {(>, /i)(v, &*)) J = <p({r ,f2){v,bk)) = (r,if2)<p(v,bk)
= (r ',/2 )(r ,/)(e,/ 0 ).
Now if for all -R one has repu = t> then ( r e ) R v = v, as required, that is we have (b) with VQ = re in this case. But if there exists po e R with repov , then for s 6 S1 we choose / i , / 2 G SA such that fx(v) = f2{v), fi(rep0v) = 1, f2(rep0v) = s. Now sf(ep0v)fo(p0v) = f2(rep0v)f(ep0v)fo(pov) = fi{rep0v)f(ep0v)fo(pov) = f(epov)f0(p0v) ,
i.e. / (epov) fo(pov) is a right zero of the monoid S, i.e. we have again (a). Sufficiency. Let RA and sB be projective right acts. Then A = L L e / Rvi, vf = Vi R, i / , and 5 = J J j e J S u j , = uj e S, j e J, by Theorem 3.17.8. It is sufficient to show that each act Rvi[Suj] is projective as an (R wr S'|/jv4)-act and use Propositions 2.6.14 and 2.6.16. Set vi = v, u. s A First suppose that S contains a right zero z. For s S let f G S be such that
for any RA. Define a mapping :
[S'tt] > (R wr fsu)
fu)
by
<p(rv, su) = (rv,
for all r e R,s e S. Then ( v , f u ) is an idempotent. If ( p,g) G (R wr then (f((p,g)(rv,su)) = (prv, f9(rv^su) (p, g)(rv, fsu), i.e. is a homomorphism of left (R wr 5|yl)-acts. It is clear, that is bijective. Therefore RRV [SU] is a projective left (R wr S\RA)-act. Now suppose that S does not contain a right zero and use (b). Consider : RRV[SU] > (RWT <51 /jA)(v, cu), where (p(rv,su) = (rv,scu). Compute tp((r,f){v,u)) = <p((rv,f(v)u)) = ( r v , f ( v ) c u ) = (rv,cf{v)u) and (r, f)ip((v,u)) = ( r v , f v c u ) . For arbitrary r'v e Rv we get (fvcu)(r'v) = f(vr'v)u f(voRvr'v)u = f(voRv)u = f(v)u and thus is an (R wr homomorphism. Clearly is bijective. Since ( v , c u ) is an idempotent we have that RRV[SSU] is projective in ( R wr Act.

Exercise 17.28. (1) The act ? ( ) is a projective cyclic act.
290 (2) Prove that the graph
III Classes of acts
is projective with two indecomposable components as a left act over its endomorphism monoid. Pasting in a rigid graph (see Definition 1.1.9) for every edge the number of components rizes corresponding to the number of vertices of the rigid graph. (3) The free right S-act F(X)s is a projective End ( F ( X ) ^) - act but in general not a free left End(F(X)s)-act (use (1) and condition (b) of Theorem 3.17.27). (4) The undirected graphs and K ^ from Example 1.1.12 are 1-free as left acts over their endomorphism monoids. Then is a cyclic ] projective (End(K 2 ) wr End{K^ )\End K2K2)-a,ct (use Theorem 3.17.27) which is not free. R e m a r k 17.29. Using Theorem 2.7.12 we can represent the endomorphism monoid of a projective right 5-act as a generalized wreath product of a monoid with a small category. One can prove the following [Fl/Kn88]: Let S,S' be monoids and let ] j i e r e i S G Act S, e^S' ( Act S' where ei,e[ are idempotents in S and S', respectively. Then the endomorphism monoids E n d ( J i e / e i S ) and E n d ( J J i e i , 5') are isomorphic if and onlyif\I\ = \If\ and the monoids eiSei and e!{Se\ are isomorphic upto bijection of indices. A better result which would give an isomorphism between S and S' is in general not possible as the following example shows. Let S and S' be disjoint left zero semigroups with identities 1 and 1' adjoined and \S\ |5'|. Then End(I] i e / ez5) ^ End(lJ.. 6/ ejS") if 1' for all i I, but S and S' are not isomorphic.
Comments
Generalizations of projective acts different from those discussed in this book can be considered. For instance, quasi-projective acts have been studied by Ahsan and Saifullah [Ah/Sa89]. An act Ag is called quasi-projective if for any epimorphism : Bg and any homomorphism / : As B s there exists an homomorphism g . As > As such that f ng. In analogy with weak injectivity various concepts of weak projectivities have been introduced by Knauer and Oltmanns [Kn/0199]. For example an 5-act is
18 Generators
291
called weakly projective if it is projective with respect to epimorphisms of the form S > Sj where is a right congruence on S. The investigation of products of projective S1-acts has been started by Bulman-Fleming [Bul91a]. Recall from comments to Section 3.16 that a monoid S is called strongly left coherent if any product of strongly flat right 5'-acts is strongly flat. The following was stated in [Bul91a]. It is evident that if S is both right perfect and strongly left coherent then all products of projective right .S-acts are projective. In the ring situation the converse is also true (see [Cha60]). In our case strong left coherence by itself is necessary but not sufficient for product preservation of right projectivity, while right perfectness is not necessary an example of the latter is (N, ). Monoids S are characterized over which all products of projective right S'-acts are projective. Modifications of right perfect monoids are obtained as follows: Every cyclic right S-act has a projective cover if and only if Condition (D) from Theorem 3.17.26 is valid (see [Isb71] and [Fou76]). Every principal right ideal of S has a projective cover if and only if for every s S the monoid of right identities of s contains a minimal right ideal generated by an idempotent. Such monoids were called right ideal perfect (see [Kna83]).
18 Generators
Generator => faithful (3.18.1) Cyclic generators (3.18.2-3.18.4) General properties of projective generators (3.18.5) Cyclic projective generators (3.18.6-3.18.11) Generator - projective (3.18.12) Retracts and a canonical isomorphism (3.18.13-3.18.15) Generators, cyclic projectives and endomorphism monoids (3.18.16-3.18.18) Some converses (3.18.19-3.18.20) Recall (see Definition 1.7.31(1)) that an act G s is a generator in the category Act-S if for any distinct homomorphisms , : X s - Ys there exists a homomorphism / : Gs > Xs such that af f . Generators have already been characterized in Theorem 2.3.16 for act categories. Now we add some more results, in particular, on cyclic generators, projective generators and cyclic projective generators. Moreover, we investigate the duality between generators and cyclic projectives which becomes evident when passing to acts over their endomorphism monoids.
292
III Classes of acts
It will turn out in Section 5.3 on Morita equivalence that cyclic projective generators play an equally important role in act categories as finitely generated projective generators (so-called progenerators) play in module categories.
Generator = faithful
Recall (see Definition 1.4.8) that an act As is called faithful if for s,t S the equality as = at for all a A implies s = t. Note that the converse of the following proposition is not true in general as Example 3.18.20 will show. Proposition 18.1. Every generator in Act S is faithful. Proof. Let Gs be a generator in Act S. Then Ss is a retract of Gs by Theorem 2.3.16. Hence Gs contains a subact isomorphic to Ss- Since Ss is faithful, so is Gs
Cyclic generators
Proposition 18.2. Let be a right congruence on S. statements are equivalent: (i) S/p is a generator in Act -S. (ii) There exists an element in S such that and < kerA. (iii) There exists an idempotent e S such that eVl and < kerAeProof (i) => (ii). Let S/p be a generator in Act -5. By Theorem 2.3.16 there exists an epimorphism : S/p * Ss, i.e = Ss- Let = ([1] ). This means that vS = S from which we get that vTZl. Let now xpy for x,y S. Then [x]p = [y)p and vx = ([]) = {[y] p ) = vy. This means that < kerA^. (ii) (iii). Suppose the existence of S such that vTZl and < kerA. Then there exists u S such that vu = 1. Take e = uv. Then e is the required idempotent. (iii) (ii). Let e S be an idempotent such that eVl and < ker Ae. Now there exists S such that eCv and vlZl. Then ve = which together with < ker Ae implies < ker A^. (ii) => (i). Let S be such that vTZl and < ker A. Define : S/ > Ss by 7r([ar]p) = vx for any S. Since < kerAj;, is a well-defined homomorphism. Since is right invertible, vS = S and hence is an epimorphism. Thus S/p is a generator by Theorem 2.3.16. Then the following
18 Generators
293
Corollary 18.3. If there exists a right congruence on a monoid S such that ^ and S/p is a generator in A c t S then S contains the bicyclic monoid as a submonoid. Proof. Let S/p be a generator in A c t S . Then by Proposition 3.18.2 there exists an element in S such that and < kerA^. Hence there exists u e S such that vu 1. If also uv 1 then < kerA implies = . Hence uv vu and the bicyclic monoid ( u, v) is a submonoid of S (cf. Remark 1.3.13). For principal right ideals one obtains from Proposition 3.18.2 the following Corollary 18.4. Let e S. Then the the principal right ideal zS is a generator in A c t S if and only if there exists an idempotent e e S such that eT> 1 and ker Xz < ker Ae.
General properties of projective generators

Proposition 18.5. An act Ps is a projective generator if and only if Ps = WieI Pi where every Pi, i e I, is a cyclic projective act and at least one Pj, j e I, is a generator. Proof. Necessity. Let Ps be a projective generator and let Pi, i e I, be its indecomposable components. Then
iei
by Theorem 1.5.10. By Proposition 3.17.1 every Pi, i e i , is projective and by Proposition 3.17.7 cyclic. Since Ps is a generator there exists an epimorphism 7 : Ps Ss by Theorem 2.3.16. Take j e I such that () = 1 for some Pj. Then also \p. is an epimorphism from Pj onto Ss Using once more Theorem 2.3.16 we get that P j is a generator. Sufficiency. Suppose all Pi, i e i , are projective acts and P j for some j e l , is a generator. Then Ps is projective by Proposition 3.17.1. By Theorem 2.3.16 there exists an epimorphism 7Tj : Pj Ss- By Corollary 3.17.9 every Pi:i e I, is isomorphic to some right ideal of S. For any % j let * be an isomorphism from Pi to the corresponding right ideal. Now the coproduct induced = [(*)^/] also is an epimorphism from Ps to Ss- Thus Ps is a generator by Theorem 2.3.16. Note that in the above proposition different from Proposition 2.3.18 we do not have to require that all components are generators since we know that all
294
III Classes of acts
are projective. It follows from the above proposition that for further understanding of the structure of projective generators one has to find out what cyclic projective generators look like.
Cyclic projective generators

Proposition 18.6. Let be a right congruence statements are equivalent: (i) S/p is a projective generator in A c t - S . vTZl and on S. Then the following
(ii) There exist elements = ker Ae < ker .
e, S such that e is an idempotent,
(iii) There exist idempotents
e, f S such that fD 1 and = ker Ae < ker A/. other.
(iv) Ss and S/ are retracts of each
(v) S/p = eS for some e 2 = e 6 S with e j l . Proof, (v) (i). Let : S/p > eS be an isomorphism for some e2 e S with e j 1. Then S/p is projective by Corollary 3.17.9. Now e j 1 gives us elements u,v S such that veu = 1. Define : eS > Ss by (es) = ves for every s S. Clearly, is a correctly defined homomorphism, and since ir(eu) = veu = 1, is an epimorphism. Then : 5/ > 5 s is also an epimorphism and thus S/p is a generator by Theorem 2.3.16. For all other implications use Proposition 3.18.2 together with Corollary 3.17.9, compare also Lemma 3.10.15. Proposition 18.7. Let Ks be a right ideal of S. Then the Rees factor S/Ks is a projective generator in Act S if and only if = 1. Proof. Use Proposition 3.17.15. Proposition 18.8. Let S. Then the following conditions (i) The cyclic act zS is a projective (ii) There exist idempotents and ker Ae < ker A/. generator in A c t S. fDl and are equivalent: act
e, f S such that is left e-cancellable, e S such that is left e-cancellable
(iii) There exists an idempotent e j 1.
(iv) zS = eS for some e 2 = e S with e j 1.
18 Generators
295
Proof, (i) <= (ii). Use Proposition 3.18.4 together with Proposition 3.17.16. (ii) =*> (iii). From kerA e < kerA/ and ee = e l we get f e = f . Now fT> 1 implies f J 1. This means that there exist x,y e S such that xfy = 1. But then (xf)ey = 1. Hence ej7"l. (iii) (iv). The element G S is left e-cancellable if and only if the mapping / : zS eS with f{zs) = es for all s S is an isomorphism. (iv) = > (i). This is (v) => (i) in Proposition 3.18.6 if we take = ker \ z . P r o p o s i t i o n 1 8 . 9 . All cyclic projective to Ss in any of the following cases. (1) Every right invertible of infinite simple. element generators in A c t S are isomorphic
in S is left invertible of one
or vice
versa.
(2) All elements (3) S is right (4) S is (5) S is a
order in S are powers
element.
commutative. group. zero. adjoined.
(6) S is a group with (7) The identity
of S is externally
Proof. Let S/p = eS be a cyclic projective generator for e2 e S. Then e j 1 by Proposition 3.18.6, that is there exist u,v S such that veu 1. We may assume that ve and eu = u. (1) By hypothesis is also left invertible or u is also right invertible and thus e = 1 follows. (2) We may assume that the elements u and both are of infinite order since if we suppose that vm+r = vm for some m, r G we obtain 1 = vmum = _ yr _ y r - j e v jg a j g o ^ i n v ertible and we have (1). But u and vm+rum cannot be powers of one element w. Otherwise vu = 1 would imly uv = 1 and we again have (1). (3) If S is right simple, i.e. S has no non-trivial right ideals, we get eS = Ss, and thus 1 = es = e(es) = e. (4), (5), (6), (7) obviously imply (1). So in any case we get eS = Ss The following two examples appeared in [Kna72b], Example 3.18.10 is due to . M. Schein. E x a m p l e 1 8 . 1 0 . Consider the real interval [0,1] C R. For G [0,1] denote by ix : [0, x] > [0, x] the identical mapping. Set ' . [0, i ] y^2y [0,1] and t : [0,1] [, ]
296
III Classes of acts
Let S be the monoid of injective mappings generated by , I' and the set { \ 6 [ f ) l ] } ) composition of the mappings being taken on the ever possible intervals. Now i z S is a cyclic projective generator in Act S with i z J since i s is an idempotent and
4
I ' t z l
4
If we had an isomorphism isS = Ss then by Proposition 1.5.6 the monoids S and i3Si3 would be isomorphic. So we show that S izSiz. Indeed, 4 4 4 4 it can be seen that every idempotent of S is of the form ix for < | or 4 < < 1. Therefore, all idempotents of S different from the identity form a chain under natural order which contains no supremum. But the idempotents of 3 Si34 are i3 and ix S with ~ < h. Thus i\ is the supremum of the 4 4 ^ 2 chain of idempotents different from the identity is in i3 Si3. This proves that 4 4 4 5 i3 Si 3, since monoid isomorphisms have to preserve chains of idempotents 4 4 as the natural order is defined using multiplication. Example 18.11 ([KNA71], [Kna72b]). Let S be the monoid generated by the elements e,k',k and the relations e2 = e, ek = k, k'k 1. Then eS is a cyclic projective generator in Act S. It will be shown in Example 5.3.20 that eS and Ss are not isomorphic as 5-acts.
Generators - projective
Example 18.12. Not all generators are projective. Indeed, let Ks be a right ideal of S such that Ks is not projective. Then Ss K s is a generator but not a projective object in the category Act-i*.
Retracts and a canonical isomorphism

Next we collect some results on the correspondence between generators, cyclic projectives and endomorphism monoids (compare, for example, [Lue80]). Theorem 18.13. Let Xs be a retract of Ys, i.e. Ys
Xs with = idx in
7
Act S. Then there exists a canonical isomorphism of monoids : E n d ( X s ) - End(E n< iyHorn(X5, Ys)) - where = with a G End(Xs), G Horn(Xg, Y5). Proof. It is clear that () = is a left End(ys)-homomorphism. Since (') = > = aaa' = {)' = (())(') = (9()?(')) for all a e
18 Generators
297
Hom(Xg, Ys) we have that is a homomorphism of semigroups and obviously also of monoids. To get the inverse mapping of consider ' : E n d ( E n d y H o m ( X s , Y s )) End(Xs) -> {), where is written on the right of its argument 7, Hom(Xs, Ys), and thus () E n d ( X s ) Then '() = '() = () = = a for all a e E n d ( X 5 ) and ('()) = (('())) = ^) = (7>) = () = () = for all Kom(Xs, Ys), e E n d ( E n d y H o m ( X s , y s ) ) , i.e., is bijective. Now we specify the preceding result to generators and to cyclic projectives. Corollary 18.14. Let Ss be a retract of Ys, i.e. let Ys : S - End(EndyY) s -> 5 is an isomorphism of monoids. be a generator. Then
Proof. Take Xs = Ss in Theorem 3.18.13 and use Proposition 1.5.6. Recall that S{X*S) = End(Xs,Ss). be cyclic
Corollary 18.15. Let Xs be a retract of S, i.e. let Xs Then : E n d ( X s ) -> E n d ( s ( ^ s ) ) a is an isomorphism of monoids.
projective.
Proof. Take Ys = Ss in Theorem 3.18.13 and use Proposition 1.5.6.
Generators, cyclic projectives and endomorphism monoids

We collect what is known on the relations of retracts in A c t S and, on the other side, on generators or cyclic projectives in act categories over endomorphism monoids. For some of these results compare, for example, [Lue80]. For the rest of this section we follow [Kn/Mi92].
298
III Classes of acts Act S. Then
T h e o r e m 18.16. Let S be a monoid, Xs,Ys
7 (1) Let Ys be a retract of Xs, i.e. let Xs C+ Ys7
(a) Hom(F s ,^s)Endy is generator in A c t End(y"s), i.e. Horn(y 5 ,X s ) E ndr c? End(y s ), (b) End Hom(A"5, Ys) is a generator in End(Ys) Act, i.e.
EndYRom(Xs,Ys)Ênd(Ys).
7 T
(2) Let Xs be a retract of Ys, i.e. Ys C+ Xs7
Then
(a) Hom(Y5, Xs)EndY is cyclic projective in Act End(ys), i.e. End(F s ) c 5 H o m ( y s , X s ) E n d y , (b) EndY Hom(X5,y5) is cyclic projective in End(y"s) Act, i.e. End(Ys) Q e-n EndYHom(Xs,Ys).
Proof. For (l)(a) and (2)(a) apply the covariant Hom-functor Hom(ys, 5) which preserves retractions by Proposition 1.7.24 and use Proposition 1.7.8. For (l)(b) and (2)(b) apply the contravariant Hom-functor Hom( s,Ys) which takes retractions to coretractions by Proposition 1.7.24 and use Proposition 1.7.11. Corollary 18.17. (1) Let Ys be cyclic projective in Act S, i.e. S
7
Ys- Then
(a) (yÊnd is a generator in Act End(y5), (b) End is a generator in End(y5) Act. (2) Let Ys be a generator in Act S, i.e. Ys C+ S.
7
7
Then
18 Generators (a) (Ys)EndV is cyclic projective in A c t End(Ys), (b) Endy Y is cyclic projective in End(Ys) A c t . Proof. Set X s = Ss in Theorem 3.18.16. Corollary 18.18.
299
(1) Let Xs be a generator in Act S, i.e. Xs generator in S Act.
Ss1
Then s(Xs)
is
(2) Let Xs be cyclic projective in Act S, i.e. Ss C+ Xs7 cyclic projective in S Act. Proof. Set Ys = Ss in Theorem 3.18.16.
Then s{Xs)
^s
Some converses
Next we see that the converses to (l)(b) and (2)(b) of Corollary 3.18.17 also hold, we formulate both inclusions in the following theorem. For a module theoretic analogue compare, for example, 18.8 in [WIS91]. T h e o r e m 18.19. For Ys A c t S suppose the monoids S and Endend yÔ are canonically isomorphic with isomorphism such that y(s) = ys for all s e S, y eYs. (1) If End End (Ys) A c t is a generator then Ys is cyclic projective in A c t - S. (2) If End y Y End(Ys) A c t is cyclic projective then Ys is a generator in A c t - S. Proof. (1) Apply the analog of Theorem 3.18.16(2)(b) for left End(Y s )-acts and use Proposition 1.5.6. (2) Apply the analog of Theorem 3.18.16(l)(b) for left End(Y s )-acts and use Proposition 1.5.6. E x a m p l e 18.20. As announced along with Proposition 3.18.1 we give an example of an S-act Ys which is not a generator but still faithful and, moreover, has the property that the canonical mapping : S E n d e n d ) is an isomorphism. This shows that the converse of Corollary 3.18.14 is not true. We shall show that EndyY is not cyclic projective which with Corollary 3.18.17 implies that Ys is not a generator.
300
III Classes of acts
Consider the monid S = {1, si, S2, S3} with commutative multiplication 1 1 Si s2 S3 Sl Si Si Si Si S2 S2 Sl S2 Sl 3 3 Sl Sl S3
1 Si S2 S3
Consider Ys = {si,s2,s3} ^ Ss- Then Y5 is faithful. Moreover, (1) Ys is not a generator since |Y| < |5|; (2) E n d ( l s ) = S which can be seen by an easy calculation; (3) End(, ) = S which follows from (2) and commutativity. Indeed, s Y =End Y is not cyclic, which can be seen by inspection, and not projective since it is not a disjoint union of cyclics.
19 Regular acts and overview

Definition and general properties (3.19.1-3.19.4) Regular cyclic acts (3.19.5-3.19.7) On the existence of regular acts (3.19.8-3.19.11) Connection with (von Neumann) regularity (3.19.12) Strongly faithful and regular (3.19.13-3.19.14) Applications to wreath products of acts (3.19.15) Comments Overview

Definition 19.1 [Tra85]. Let As be a right act over a monoid S. We call a G As an act-regular element if there exists a homomorphism / : aS > S such that af(a) a, and As is called a regular act if every a As is an act-regular element. P r o p o s i t i o n 19.2 (Knauer, Mikhalev [Kn/Mi88]). The following for a As are equivalent: (i) The element a is an act-regular element. conditions
19 Regular acts and overview (ii) There exists an idempotent e G S such that ae = a and as at
301 implies
es = et for any s, t G S. Then we call { a , e } a regular pair in As(iii) The right ideal aS is a projective right S-act.
Proof, (i) => (ii). Suppose a G As is an act-regular element, i.e. there exists a homomorphism / : aS > S such that af(a) = a. Set e = / ( a ) . Then e = f(a) and ae af(a) f(at) = et. a. = f(af(a)) = / ( a ) / ( a ) = e2 Then es f{as) =
Suppose as = at for s, t G S.
(ii) => (iii). Obviously, the mapping / : aS > eS defined by f(as) es for every s G S is an isomorphism and eS is projective by Proposition 3.17.2. (iii) => (i). A s aS is projective there exists, by Proposition 3.17.10 an idempotent e G S and an isomorphism / : aS eS such that / ( a ) = e.
C o r o l l a r y 19.3. An act As is a regular act if and only if for any a G Ag the cyclic subact aS is projective. Exercise 19.4. (1) If A s is a regular act and B s is a subact of A s , then B s is a regular act. (2) If A{,i G I, are regular right S-acts, then ]J. i / Ai is a regular act.
a regular
(3) If Ai, i G I, are regular subacts of As, then (Jie/ ^
subact.
(4) 5 is a regular act if and only if S contains a left zero. (5) [Kn/Mi88] Let X be a set with |X| > 2. Then T ( X ) X is a regular act, whose regular pairs are exactly {x,cx} for G X.
Regular cyclic acts

Recall (see Notation 3.12.9) that if is a right congruence on S and s G S then ps is a right congruence defined by x(ps)y (sx)p(sy) for any x,y G S. P r o p o s i t i o n 19.5. Let be a right congruence on a monoid S. The right cyclic S-act S/p is a regular act if and only if for every s G S there exists an idempotent e G S such that ps = kerA e . Proof Necessity. Let S/p be a regular act and s G S. Then the cyclic subact [s] p 5 is projective by Corollary 3.19.3. Since by the left-right dual of Lemma
302
III
Classes of acts
3.12.10 we have [ s] p S = S/ps, there exists an idempotent e G S such that ps = kerA e by Corollary 3.17.9. Sufficiency. Let [sjp^ = S/ps, s G S, be an arbitrary cyclic subact of S/p. Since by assumption there exists an idempotent e G S such that ps ker Ae we have that [sjp.5 is projective by Corollary 3.17.9. Hence S/p is a regular S'-act by Corollary 3.19.3. Proposition 19.6. Let Ks be a proper right ideal of S. The Rees factor act S/Ks is a regular act if and only if \Ks\ 1 and all principal right ideals of S are projective. Proof. Let S/Ks be a regular act for a right ideal Ks of S. Then S/Ks is projective by Corollary 3.19.3. Hence |iis| = 1 by Proposition 3.17.15. The rest follows immediately from Corollary 3.19.3. Proposition 19.7. A principal right ideal zS, G S, is a regular act if and only if for every t G S there exists an idempotent e S such that zt is e-cancellable. Proof. Use Proposition 3.17.16 and Proposition 3.19.5.
On the existence of regular acts

Let A s be an act which has regular subacts. By Exercise 3.19.4(3) the union of all regular subacts is also regular. Definition 19.8. The union of all regular subacts of an act A s is denoted by R(As) and called the regular core of AsL e m m a 19.9. Let S be a monoid. If there exist regular right S-acts then there exist regular principal right ideals generated by idempotents. Proof. Suppose A s is a regular act. Then for any a G A s the subact aS is a regular act by Exercise 3.19.4(1) and projective by Corollary 3.19.3. Hence by Theorem 3.17.9 there exists an idempotent e G S such that aS = eS. Example 19.10. There exist monoids over which no right act is regular. Indeed, let S = G ( J T , where G is a group with at least two elements, is a semigroup without idempotents and gt tg t for any g G G, t G T. Suppose there exists a regular right 5-act. Then, by Lemma 3.19.9, there exists a regular principal right ideal generated by an idempotent. Now Ss is a regular act, since the only idempotent in S is 1. By Proposition 3.19.7 every element
303
of S has to be left 1-cancellable i.e. left cancellable. But this is not true for elements from T. The following proposition provides examples of regular acts with two generating elements if we start with a monoid over which regular acts exist. Proposition 19.11. Let eS be a regular right ideal of S, e = e2, u e S and Ks C S a right ideal such that Ks C euS, Ks euS. Then As = euS UKs euS is a regular act. Proof. As Ag ( e u , x ) S Ks ( eu,y)S (see Proposition 2.2.26) and ( e u , x ) S L J Ks and (eu, y)S Ks are subacts of As isomorphic to euS, As is regular by Exercise 3.19.4, (1) and (3).
Connection with (von N e u m a n n ) regularity

Proposition 19.12. Any (von Neumann) regular monoid S is a regular right (left) S-act but the converse is not true. Proof. If S is (von Neumann) regular then all principal right ideals are generated by idempotents by Proposition 1.3.31 and hence are projective by Proposition 3.17.16. Thus Ss is regular by Corollary 3.19.3. On the other hand, let S be a left cancellative monoid which is not a group. Then all principal right ideals of S are free and hence projective. Then Ss is a regular right S-act by Corollary 3.19.3 without being a regular monoid.
Strongly faithful and regular

Recall (see Definition 1.4.8) that an act As is called faithful if as = at for every a e As implies that s = t. An act As is called strongly faithful if as at for some a As implies that s t. Proposition 19.13. Every strongly faithful act is a regular act. Proof. If As is a strongly faithful act then for any a As the mapping / : aS > S defined by f(as) s for any s 6 S is a well-defined homomorphism for which af(a) = af(al) al = a. Example 19.14. Regular does not imply strongly faithful.
304
III Classes of acts
Indeed, use that s is a regular act if and only if S contains a left zero by Exercise 3.19.4(4). Obviously, 5 is strongly faithful if and only if \S\ 1. In [Tra85] it was proved that a regular left 5"-act is strongly faithful if and only if S is right cancellative.

Exercise 19.15. (1) [Kn/Mi88] The wreath product RA[SB] regular act if and only if (a) RA, s B are left regular acts and
(b) if for some regular pair { a , e } , a G RA, e G R there exists x0 G RA with exo a then S contains a right zero.
G (RWR S\RA) - Act is a left
(2) [Kn/Mi88] The End(F(X) s )-act F(X)S if s S is a left regular act.
is a left regular act if and only
(3) The left (End(if 2 ) wr End(^ 1 ) )| E n d ^ 2 J Fi 2 )-act K 2 [ K ^ ] from Exercise 3 . 1 7 . 2 8 ( 4 ) is a regular act with the property that for every G K2\K^] there exists exactly one idempotent e such that {x, e} is a regular pair.
Comments
In module theory different definitions of a regular module have appeared. For Ware [War71] a regular module is projective such that all its cyclic submodules are direct summands. A bigger class of regular modules has been defined by Zelmanowitz [Zel72] and again a bigger class by Fieldhouse [Fie72]. One important question there is whether the endomorphism ring of a regular module is a regular ring. We used the definition introduced by Tran [Tra85], which is similar to the one of Zelmanowitz. In [Kn/Mi88] act-inverse elements and inverse acts were defined as actregular elements and regular acts where the homomorphism of Definition 3 . 1 9 . 1 is unique, or equivalently, for every G AS there exists a unique e 2 = e G S such that {a, e} is a regular pair. It is then possible to obtain results similar to those formulated in Exercise 3 . 1 9 . 1 5 now for inverse acts.
Table III.2: Overview free
projective generator
strongly faithful
projective generator P F = SF = (BF) faithful regular
weakly flat
principally weakly flat
torsion free
Chapter IV
Homological classification of monoids
1. Principal weak injectivity 2. On fg-weak injectivity 3. Weak injectivity 4. Absolute purity 5. Injectivity and overview 6. Torsion freeness and principal weak flatness 7. Weak flatness 8. Flatness 9. Condition (P) 10. Strong flatness 11. Projectivity 12. Projective generators 13. Freeness and overview 14. Regularity of acts The first results characterizing monoids by properties of their acts were obtained by L. A. Skornjakov [Sko69b] and by . H. Feller and R. L. Gantos [Fe/Ga69a], [Fe/Ga69b], [Fe/Ga69c], all published 30 years before this book. In the first of these papers Skornjakov described monoids all right acts over which are injective. Feller and Gantos did the same in special cases. Afterwards these now so-called right absolutely injective monoids were investigated by several authors. After Skornjakov and in accordance with the theory of rings and modules the collection of results characterizing monoids by properties of their acts, such as injectivity, projectivity, flatness etc. is called homological classification of monoids.
1 Principal weak injectivity
307

Right almost regular monoids (4.1.1-4.1.4) When divisible implies principally weakly injective (4.1.5) When all acts are principally weakly injective (4.1.6) On principally weak self-injectivity (4.1.7-4.1.9) In this section we characterize monoids over which all divisible right acts are principally weakly injective and monoids over which all right acts are principally weakly injective. Recall that in Chapter 3 we characterized monoids over which all right acts are divisible (Proposition 3.2.2) as monoids in which all left cancellable elements are left invertible. To characterize monoids over which all divisible right acts are principally weakly injective we introduce a class of monoids lying strictly between the class of regular monoids and the class of right PP-monoids (see Definition 3.10.14).
Right almost regular monoids

Definition 1.1. [Gou85] An element s G S is called right almost regular if there exist elements r, r\,..., r n , s i , . . . , sn G S and left cancellable elements c\,..., cn G S such that S = CiSi r 2 s i = c2s2
rn-lSn-2
Cnl^nl 1 CnSn S = srsn . regular
If all elements of S are almost regular then S is called a right almost monoid. Exercise 1.2. (1) Every regular monoid is right almost regular.
(2) Every left cancellative monoid is right almost regular. In particular, (Nq, +) and (N, ) are right almost regular but not regular. (3) If all left cancellable elements of a right almost regular monoid S are left invertible then S is regular. In particular, this is the case if S is finite. Recall (see Definition 3.10.14) that an element s of a monoid S is called left e-cancellable for an idempotent e G S if s = se and ker Xs < kerA e , i.e. st = st', t,t' S implies et = et'. A monoid S is called a right monoid if every element s G S is left e-cancellable for some idempotent e G S.
308
IV Homological classification of monoids regular monoid is a
Proposition 1.3 (Laan [LAA95]). Every right almost right PP monoid.
Proof. Let S be a right almost regular monoid and s G 5 . Then there exist elements r, r\,..., r n , S i , . . . , sn S and left cancellable elements c\,..., c n S such that r\s = ciSi r2Si = c2s2 TnlSn2 = ^nl^n1 ^ C n S n s - srsn . From the first and the last equality we get Cjs = r i s r s n = cis\rs 7l . Since c is left cancellable, = S\rsn. Using this, from the second and the last equality we get S2 = S2rsn. Continuing in this manner we obtain sn = snrsn, and hence rsn is an idempotent. Now let sx = sy. Then r\sx = r\sy or cis^x = C\S\y and hence s\X = S\y. Continuing in this manner we get snx = sny, which implies ( r s n ) x = (rsn)y. Thus S is a right monoid. The converse of the proposition above is not true. E x a m p l e 1.4. Let = {}* be the 1-free monoid and let S T1. Then S is right (check, or use Theorem 4.11.16), but it cannot be right almost regular, because the only left cancellable element is 1 and hence almost regularity for S means regularity by Exercise 4.1.2. However, S is not a regular monoid.
W h e n divisible implies principally weakly injective

In the proof of necessity of the following theorem we use Construction 3.2.5 for principal right ideals and for the set C of all left cancellable but not left invertible elements of the monoid under consideration. By Theorem 3.2.9 this gives the divisible extension of the considered principal right ideals. In the proof we use notations from Construction 3.2.5 and Theorem 3.2.9. T h e o r e m 1.5 (Gould [Gou85]). All divisible weakly injective if and only if S is right almost right S-acts regular. are principally
Proof. Necessity. Suppose that all divisible right ,S-acts are principally weakly injective. Let s e S be an arbitrary element and let D(sS) be the divisible extension of sS obtained by Theorem 3.2.9. Now D(sS) is divisible and hence, by assumption, principally weakly injective. Thus the inclusion l : sS > D(sS)
309 Then
can be extended to a homomorphism g : Ss s = ) = 9(s)

=
D(sS). g(l)s
and g{\) G (sS)n for some non-negative integer n. If = 0 then g( 1) G sS and thus s = g(l)s G sSs. Hence s is regular and thus right almost regular. Assume now that > 1. It follows from Lemma 3.2.10 that there exist y\ G (sS)n-1 c i , r i , s i G S, c\ left cancellable, such that s = y\Si and ciSi = r i s . If 1 then Lemma 3.2.10 gives elements y2 G (s5') n _ 2 , C2,r2,S2 G S1, C2 left cancellable, such that s = 1/2S2 and C2S2 = ^2^1 After times applying Lemma 3.2.10 we get elements si,..., sn, r\,..., r n , c\,..., cn G S, c i , . . . , cn left cancellable, such that r i s = C1S1 r2si = c2s2 ^nl^n2 Cn\Sn\ ^ 1 C n S n and s = ynsn with yn G (s<S)o = sS. Hence there exists r G S such that yn = sr and so s is right almost regular. Sufficiency. Assume that S is a right almost regular monoid. Let As be a divisible act and let / : sS > be a homomorphism. Since s is a right almost regular element there exist elements r, r\,..., r n , s i , . . . , sn G S and left cancellable elements c\,..., cn G S such that ris = C1S1 r2si = c2s2 fnl^n2 CnlSn1 fn^n 1 Cn^n s srsn . Now f(s) = f(srsn) f(s) = (aicn)sn = f(sr)sn . = a i c n . Hence Since As is divisible there exists a\ G Ag such that f(sr)
= (cnsn) = ai(rnsn_i) = (airn)sn_i . a2Cn-\.
Again by the divisibility of As there exists a2 G As such that a\rn = Hence
f(s) = ( a 2 c n _ i ) s n _ i = a 2 ( c n _ i s n _ i ) = a 2 ( r n _ i s n _ 2 ) = ( a 2 r n _ i ) s n _ 2 . Continuing in this manner we get f(s) = an(cisi) = an(r1s) = (anry)s .
Now it follows from Proposition 3.3.2 that As is principally weakly injective.D
310
IV Homological classification of monoids
When all acts are principally weakly injective

Theorem 1.6. The following statements are equivalent for any monoid S:
(i) All right S-acts are principally weakly injective. (ii) All right ideals of S are principally weakly injective. (iii) All finitely generated right ideals of S are principally weakly (iv) All principal right ideals of S are principally weakly (v) S is regular. Proof. Implications (i) = > (ii), (ii) = > (iii) and (iii) =>- (iv) are obvious. (iv) = - (v). Let s S. By assumption the principal right ideal sS is principally weakly injective. Now s is a regular element by Proposition 3.3.7. (v) (i). Let As be an arbitrary S-act, s 6 S and / : sS > As a homomorphism. By assumption s is regular. Thus sS = eS for an idempotent e S by Proposition 1.3.31. Let : S > sS be a homomorphism defined by () = et for any 6 5 and let g = /. Then g is an extension of /. Hence Ag is principally weakly injective. injective. injective.
On principally weak self-injectivity

Definition 1.7. A monoid S is said to be right (principally weakly, fgweakly, weakly) self-injective if Ss is (principally weakly, fg-weakly, weakly) injective. As follows from Theorem 4.1.6 any regular monoid is right principally weakly self-injective. The next proposition shows that in some cases right principally weak self-injectivity implies regularity. Recall (see Definition 1.4.20) that if As is an act and a e As then by we denote the homomorphism from Ss into As defined by A 0 (s) = as for every s G S. Proposition 1.8. Every right principally weakly self-injective right monoid is regular.
2 On fg-weak injectivity
311
Proof. Let S be a right principally weakly self-inj ective right PP monoid and let s G S. By Definition 3.10.14 there exists an idempotent e G 5 such that se = s and ker As < ker A e . Since Ss is principally weakly injective Proposition 3.3.2 implies the existence of G S such that e = xs. But then s = sxs and thus S is regular. The next exercise implies that there exist non-regular right principally weakly self-injective monoids. Exercise 1.9. Let S T1 where is a zero semigroup, i.e. xy 0 for every x,y G T. Prove that S is right principally weakly self-injective if and only if \T\ < 2.
Idempotent fg-weakly self-injective monoids (4.2.1-4.2.7) Right inverse fg-weakly self-injective monoids (4.2.8-4.2.15) When principally weakly injective implies fg-weakly injective (4.2.16) When all acts are fg-weakly injective (4.2.17)
Idempotent fg-weakly self-injective monoids

Recall (see Definition 4.1.7) that a monoid S is said to be right fg-weakly self-injective if Ss is fg-weakly injective. Here we characterize right fg-weakly self-injective idempotent monoids and right fg-weakly self-injective right inverse monoids. Recall that a semigroup S is called right inverse if for every element s 6 S there exists a unique e G E(S) such that sCe (see Definition 1.3.37). By Lemma 1.3.39 a semigroup S is right inverse if and only if S is regular and e/e = fe for any e, / G E(S). According to Remark 1.3.45 right inverse bands are called right regular. Hence a band is right regular if e/e = f e for any e, / G E. Proposition 2.1 (Peva [Pae87b]). Any right fg-weakly self-injective tent monoid is right regular. idempo-
Proof. Suppose is a right fg-weakly self-injective idempotent monoid and let e, / be such that eC f . Define a mapping : eE (J fE > by fx ex if eE if G fE.
312
Since eC f , we have ef = e, fe = f and so it is clear that is a well-defined homomorphism. By Proposition 3.4.2 there exists such that () = zx for any eE\J fE. Then Since () = f and ip(f) = e we have ze = / and zf = e. e = zf = z(ze) = z2e = ze = f so that is a right inverse monoid and thus right regular. Using Proposition 1.3.46 the following corollary can be obtained. Corollary 2.2. Any right fg-weakly self-injective morphic to a semilattice of right zero semigroups. idempotent monoid is iso
Recall (see Definition 1.3.2) that on the set E(S) of all idempotents of a monoid S we have a "natural ordering" defined by e < / if and only if ef = e = fe. L e m m a 2.3 (Peva [Pae87b]). Let be a right regular idempotent monoid, a right ideal of and : > a homomorphism. Then () < e for 2 any e Ke and . Proof. Using right regularity of for e Ke we get e<p(e) = <p(e)e<p(e) = {2){) = <p{e)ip(e) = <p(e) . From the other hand, tp(e)e () and so tp{e) < e for any e G Ke- N O W ip2(e) = (()) = ({)) = {){) = {) for any e e and thus 2 = . L e m m a 2.4. Let be a right regular idempotent monoid, 0 a set, and { ( e a , / a ) I fa < e Q , a G } a subset of . KE = U a e r and only if for any , . Then there exists a homomorphism from the right ideal Ee defined by { X) faX for any a , e E, if fa^ = feae
313
Proof. Necessity. Let defined as given be a homomorphism from the right ideal = U Q er ^ - Then, using right regularity of E, we get fae0 = {) = <p(eeae) = ^(e/3)(eae/3) = feae a G , x,y G
for any , G . Sufficiency. Let be defined as given. Suppose eax = eay, E. Since fa < ea we have fax = fay and so ip(eax) = </?(eay). Now suppose eax = ey, ,/3 6 , x,y G . Then eax = eeax and = ey = eaey
<p(eax) = <p(ea(eax)) = fa(eax) = fa{eaey) = (faea)e0y = (fae)y = (feae)y = f(eaey) = f(ey) = <p{e(ey)) = <p{ey) .
Hence, is well-defined. Clearly, is a homomorphism.
Theorem 2.5 (Peva [Pae92]). An idempotent monoid is right fg-weakly self-injective if and only if is right regular and for any finite set of pairs {(e,/t) I fx < e, i e {l,...,n}}
with the property fcej = fjeiej for all i,j 6 { 1 , . . . ,n}, there exists such that zei = fi for any i G { 1 , . . . , n } . Proof. Necessity. Suppose that is an idempotent right fg-weakly self-injective monoid. Then is right regular by Proposition 4.2.1. Suppose a set {(ei,fi) | fi < e^, i { 1 , . . . , n } } is such that fcej f j e i e j for all i,j G { 1 , . . . , n } . By Lemma 4.2.4 there is a homomorphism : e\E U . . . U enE > Ee defined by {) = fix for any i G { , . , . , } , G E. Then by Proposition 3.4.2 there exists an element such that () = zei for any i G { 1 , . . . ,n}. Now fi = zei. Sufficiency. Let = e\E U . . . U enE for e i , . . . , e n G be a right ideal of E, let : Ke Ee be a homomorphism and set () = fi for any i G { l , . . . , n } . Then fi < ei for any i G { , . , . , } by Lemma 4.2.3 and fi^j = f j e i e j by Lemma 4.2.4. By assumption there exists G such that zei = fi and thus () = for any G Kg. Hence is fg-weakly injective by Proposition 3.4.2. Lemma 2.6. If an idempotent monoid is right fg-weakly self-injective satisfies Condition then
314
(FQ) if fxie = Xie for e,f,Xi EE, i G {1,... , n}, then there exists G such that zxi = Xi for any iE { 1 , . . . , } and ze = fe. Proof. Suppose that the idempotent monoid is fg-weakly self-injective and e, f,Xi G , i { 1 , . . . , }, are such that /aê = aê. Since is right regular Xie = f x i e = (fe)xie and (fe)xi = fxiexi = xiexi for i G { 1 , . . . , n}. Then the set of pairs {(xi,xi)}\j{(e, fe)}, i G { l , . . . , n } , satisfies the condition of Lemma 4.2.4 and so there exists a homomorphism : xiEU.. .U xnEUeE > such that () = Xi for any i G { 1 , . . . , n } and <,(e) = fe By Lemma 3.4.2 there exists such that zxi = Xi for any i G { 1 , . . . , n} and ze = fe. T h e o r e m 2.7 (Peva [Pae92]). A semilattice is (right) fg-weakly self-injective if and only if satisfies Condition (FQ). Proof. Necessity. This follows from Lemma 4.2.6. Sufficiency. Let = eE U . . . U enE for e\,..., and : KE E E a homomorphism. Put fi = Then fi < ei and fi^-j fjî^j
en
be a right ideal of for any i G { 1 , . . . , n}.
f j f j e,
for any i,j G {1,... ,n}, using Lemma 4.2.4 and commutativity. Thus we have fifjî fi ( f j ) fx ( ft f-j ) fx j fjî
for any i,j G { l , . . . , n } . By Condition (FQ) for any i G { 1 , , } there exists Zi G such that z t f j = f j for any j G { 1 , . . . ,n} and zxet = With = z\ ... zn we have z&i = fi for any i G { 1 , . . . , n}. Hence () = for any G and EE is fg-weakly injective by Proposition 3.4.2.
Right inverse fg-weakly self-injective monoids

To describe fg-weakly self-injective right inverse monoids we have to make some preparations. Recall that V(x) denotes the set of all inverse elements of an element G S (cf. Definition 1.3.27). Recall also that a right inverse monoid is orthodox by Lemma 1.3.38 and that E(S) denotes the set of all idempotents of a monoid S. Definition 2.8. A subset of a monoid S is called compatible (right compatible) subset in S if y'x,xy' G E(S), (xy' G E(S)) for any x,y G and any y' G V(y). L e m m a 2.9. Let S be a right inverse monoid. A subset C S is a right compatible subset in S if and only if for any x,y G there exists y' G V(y) such that xy' G E(S).
315
Proof. Necessity. This is obvious. Sufficiency. Let C S be a subset such that for each pair of elements x,y G there exists y' G V(y) so that xy' G E(S). Let y" G V(y) be an arbitrary element. Since Sy = Sy'y Sy"y and S is right inverse we have y'y = y"y. Since S is orthodox by Lemma 1.3.38, we obtain xy" = x(y"yy") = x(y"y)y" = x(y'y)y" = (xy')(yy") e E(S).
L e m m a 2.10. Let S be a right inverse monoid. If C S is a right compatible subset in S then Ms is a right compatible subset in S for any s G S. Proof. Suppose x,y M, s e S and x' G V(x),y' G V(y),s' G V(s). Since S is orthodox, s'y' G V(ys) by Proposition 1.3.33. Hence yss'y' G E(S). Using right regularity of S we obtain (xs)(s'y') = xss'(y'yy') = x{ss'y'y)y' = x{y'yss'y'y)y' = xy'{yss'y') G E(S) . compatible
Now Ms is a right compatible subset in S by Lemma 4.2.9. L e m m a 2.11. If S is a right inverse monoid and C S is a right subset in S then xCy for any x,y G if and only if = y.
Proof. Necessity. Suppose x,y G M,xCy, y' G V(y). Since is a congruence we have (xy') C(yy'). As is a right compatible subset xy' G E(S). Since S is right inverse we obtain xy' = yy' and so xy'y From the other hand, since Cy C (y'y), the equality xy'y = holds. x = y. Sufficiency. This is obvious.
right in S, y. Thus
L e m m a 2.12. If S is a right fg-weakly self-injective right inverse monoid then for any finite right compatible subset in S there exists w G S such that wx'x for any G M , x' G V(x). Proof. Choose x' G V(x) for every G and let Ks = { JX M x ' S Define a mapping : Ks > Ss by ('s) = XX s for any s G S. Suppose x's = y't = z, x, y G M. Then x'xz = y'yz and thus xz (xx'x)z = x(x'xz) x(y'yz) xy'(yz) . Similarly one obtains the equality yz = yx'(xz). So we have (yz) C (xz). Now is a right compatible subset in S by Lemma 4.2.10 and it follows from
316
Lemma 4.2.11 that yz = xz. Hence is well-defined. Clearly is a homomorphism. Since S is right fg-weakly self-injective there exists w S such that ip(u) = wu for any u Ks- By the definition of we have = xx'x = (') = wx'x for any and ' V(x).
Lemma 2.13. Let S be a right inverse monoid, Ks a right ideal of S, : Ks > Ss a, homomorphism, and (Ks) = E(S) Ks- Then <^(E(Ks)) is a right compatible subset in S. Proof. Let = <p(E(Ks)), ip(e) = s and <p(f) = t. Then s,t and let e, f E(KS) = s'(e)e s' se be such that
s's = s'ip(e) = sV(e2)
for any s' V(s). Since S is right inverse we get s'se = es'se and, using that S is also orthodox, s's s'se = es'se = e(s'se) = e(s's) and so y(s's) = (p(es's) = v?(e)s's = ss's = s . Similarly we get (f(t't) = t for any t' V(t). Now, using that ts',st' E(S) by Lemma 4.2.9 and that S is orthodox, we obtain st' = ip(s's)t' = <p(s's)t'tt' = ^(s'si't)*' = (p(t'ts'st't)t' = <p((t't)s'st') = <p(t't)(s'st') - t(s'st') = (ts')(st') E(S) . Hence is a right compatible subset in S. E(Ks)
Theorem 2.14 (Peva [Pae92]). Let S be a right inverse monoid. Then S is a right fg-weakly self-injective if and only if = E(S) is right fg-weakly selfinjective and for any finite right compatible subset in S there exists w S such that = wx'x for any , ' V(x). Proof. Necessity. Assume that S is right fg-weakly self-injective. Let = UiLi ei,..., en , be a right ideal of and H o r n ( K e , E e ) . Set Ls = U L i eiS- Clearly, Ls is a finitely generated right ideal of S and Ls Define a mapping ' : Ls > S by <p'(eis) = <p(ei)s
317
for every s G S and i { 1 , . . . , n}. Suppose ejS ekt for j, k {1, 2 , . . . , n) and s,t S. Then ejS = ekejS and for s' V(s) we have <p'(ejs) (^(ej)s = <^(ej)(ss')s = ip(ej(ss'))s (p(ekej(ss'))s = (p(ek)(ej(ss'))s = (p(ek)ejs = <p(ek)ekt = <p(ekek)t = <p(ek)t = <p'(ekt) which proves t h a t ' is well-defined. Clearly, ' H o m ( L s , Ss) Since S is right fg-weakly self-injective there exists S such that '() zx for every Ls by Proposition 3.4.2. Let e KE Q LS- Since ze = '{) () we have t h a t ze V(ze). On the other hand, since S is orthodox, ez' V(ze) for every ' V(z) by Proposition 1.3.33 and, since ze is an idempotent, ez' is an idempotent, again by Proposition 1.3.33. Since S is right inverse we get ze (ze)(ez')(ze) = e(z'z)e = z' ze
for every ' V(z). Set = z'z for some ' V(z). Then <p'(e) z*e for every e . Thus is right fg-weakly injective. The rest follows from Lemma 4.2.12. Sufficiency. Recall first t h a t since S is a right inverse monoid it is regular by Lemma 1.3.39 and thus every principal right ideal of S is generated by an idempotent as follows from Proposition 1.3.31. e Let Ks = = i> > e n E, be a right ideal of S and : Ks > Ss a homomorphism. Using that S is orthodox by Lemma 1.3.38, we get t h a t (Ks) \ Ks is a right ideal of E. Define a mapping * : (Ks) > by <() = (())'()
for any e (Ks) where (())' (()). Since () C (())'() and S is right inverse, * is well-defined. Let e E(KS) and f E. Using t h a t /(<p(e))' 6 V(ip(e)f) by Proposition 1.3.33 we obtain V*(ef) = (<p(ef)Y<p(ef) = {<p{e)fY<p(e)f=(f(<p(e))')<p(e)f = f(<p(e))'<p(e)f = (v>(e))V(e)/ = V*(e)/ .
Hence * is an homomorphism of right E-acts. Since is right fg-weakly self-injective there exists such t h a t (())'() = *() = ze for any e (Ks) by Proposition 3.4.2. Then (p(E(Ks)) is a right compatible subset in S by Lemma 4.2.13 and so is its finite subset {(\),..., ()}. By assumption there exists w S such t h a t if(ei) = w(ip(ei))'ip(ei) for any ej, % { l , . . . , n } . Let = e^s Ks, { 1 , . . . , }. Since Ks implies ' (Ks) for any ' V(x) we obtain () = <p(eis) = (,) = w ^ e ^ ' i p ^ s w<p*(ei)s wze{S (wz)x .
318
Hence S is right fg-weakly self-injective by Proposition 3.4.2.
The following example shows that if a right fg-weakly injective monoid S is not right inverse then its submonoid = E(S) is not necessarily right fg-weakly injective. Example 2.15. Consider the monoid S = {1 ,z,e,f} table 1 2 e / 1 e 1 e 1 e with the multiplication
e e
/ / / / /
e e
It is easy to check that 5" is a right fg-weakly injective monoid but E(S) { l , e , / } is not as it is not right regular.
When principally weakly injective implies fg-weakly injective

Construction 3.2.5 as it is presented in this book can be generalized further and one can obtain the following result for the proof of which we refer to the original paper. Theorem 2.16 (V. Gould [Gou87c]). All principally weakly injective right acts over a monoid S are fg-weakly injective if and only if all finitely generated right ideals of S are principal.
W h e n all acts are fg-weakly injective

Theorem 2.17. The following statements are equivalent for any monoid S: (i) All right S-acts are fg-weakly injective. injective. injective.
(ii) All right ideals of S are fg-weakly
(iii) AU finitely generated right ideals of S are fg-weakly
(iv) S is a regular monoid all of whose finitely generated right ideals are principal. Proof. Implications (i) => (ii) and (ii) => (iii) are obvious.
3 Weak injectivity
319
(iii) => (iv). Let K s be a finitely generated right ideal of S. By assumption K s is fg-weakly injective. By Proposition 3.4.5 we have that K s is generated by an idempotent. In particular, all principal right ideals of S are generated by idempotents and it follows from Proposition 1.3.31 that S is regular. (iv) => (i). Since S is regular, all right S'-acts are principally weakly injective by Theorem 4.1.6. But since all finitely generated right ideals of S are principal, fg-weak injectivity for right 5-acts coincides with principal weak injectivity. Thus all right S'-acts are fg-weakly injective.
3 Weak injectivity
On idempotent and right inverse weakly self-injective monoids (4.3.1-4.3.4) When fg-weakly injective implies weakly injective (4.3.5-4.3.6) When all right acts are weakly injective (4.3.7)
On idempotent and right inverse weakly self-injective monoids

We start with investigating idempotent monoids. Note first that as a direct consequence of Proposition 4.2.1 and Corollary 4.2.2 together with the obvious fact that any weakly injective act is fg-weakly injective every right weakly self-injective idempotent monoid is right regular and hence isomorphic to a semilattice of right zero semigroups. The following two results can be proved repeating arguments used in the proofs of Theorem 4.2.5 and Lemma 4.2.6 for arbitrary right ideals instead of finitely generated ones. T h e o r e m 3.1. An idempotent monoid is right weakly self-injective only if is right regular and for any set of pairs {(ea,fa) if faep = feaep for any . I fa <ea, }} , if and
for all , , then there exists such that zea = fa monoid is right weakly self-injective then
L e m m a 3.2. If an idempotent satisfies the Condition
(Q) tf fxae = xa.ei G , , then there exists such that zxa xa for any and ze = fe.
320
Recall that V(x) denotes the set of all inverse elements of an element S. Lemma 3.3. Let S be a right inverse monoid and KE a right ideal of = E(S). Then K* = {x S I xx KE for any is a right ideal of S, KE C K* and for any E-homomorphism the mapping * : * > Ss defined by *{) = () S-homomorphism. : KE EE
for any * and for any ' V{x) is an
Proof Let be a right ideal of and let K' be as defined above. * and s S then since S is orthodox by Lemma 1.3.38 and (xs)(xs)' , we have for any (xs)' V(zs) (xs)(xs)r (xx'x)s(xs)' = (xx/)(xs)(xs)f KE
Hence xs * and * is a right ideal of S. Since every inverse of any e E(S) is an idempotent by Proposition 1.3.33, we have C * . Assume * : * > S is defined by *() {') for any * and for any ' V(x). xx" xx' we have (') = {"xx')x Suppose '," V{x). = {") . Since xx' =
= (")'
Hence * is well-defined. Suppose *, ' V{x), s S. Then we have for (xs)' V(xs) <p*(xs) </?(o;s(xs)/)xs = (p((xx'x)s(xs)')xs (' = ip(xx')(xs(xs)'xs) = (f(xx')xs (fi*(x)s , so that * is an S-homomorphism. (xs(xs)'))xs
Proposition 3.4 (Peva [Pae87b]). The submonoid = E(S) of a right weakly self-injective right inverse monoid S is right weakly self-injective. Proof Let KE be a right ideal of = E(S) homomorphism. Then, by Lemma 4.3.3, and let : KE * EE be a
* = { S I xx' KE for any ' V(x)} .
3 Weak injectivity is a right ideal of S and the mapping * : * > Ss defined by *() = {')
321
for any * and for any x' 6 V(x) is an S-homomorphism. Since S is right weakly self-injective, there exists e S such that * () zx for any K* by Lemma 3.5.2. Let z' V(z) and take z* = z'z. Clearly, E. Suppose e e KE C K*. Then ez' V(ze) by Proposition 1.3.33. Using right regularity of (see Remark 1.3.45) we obtain z*e = ze = ez'ze = (ze)(ez')(ze) Then <p(e) = <p(ee)e = *{) ze = z*e and thus is right weakly self-injective by Lemma 3.5.2. = ze .
W h e n fg-weakly injective implies weakly injective

Definition 3.5. A monoid S is called right noetherian are finitely generated. if all its right ideals
It is easy to understand that a monoid S is right noetherian if and only if it satisfies the ascending chain condition for right ideals, i.e. for every ascending chain KiCK2<^...^KnC Kn+1 C . . . of its right ideals there exists such that Kn = Kn+\ ... . Using again a generalization of Construction 3.2.5 one can obtain the following result for the proof of which we refer to the original paper. Theorem 3.6 (V. Gould [Gou87c]). All fg-weakly injective right acts over a monoid S are weakly injective if and only if S is right noetherian.
When all right acts are weakly injective

Theorem 3.7. The following statements are equivalent for any monoid (i) All right S-acts are weakly injective. (ii) All right ideals of S are weakly injective. (iii) S is a regular principal right ideal monoid. S:
322
Proof. Implication (i) => (ii) is obvious. (ii) => (iii). Let K s C 5 be an arbitrary right ideal. By assumption K s is weakly injective. Then K s is generated by an idempotent by Proposition 3.5.5. Hence S is a principal right ideal monoid. In particular, all principal right ideals of S are generated by idempotents and it follows from Proposition 1.3.31 that S is regular. (iii) = (i). Since S is regular, all right ,5'-acts are principally weakly injective by Theorem 4.1.6. But since all right ideals of S are principal, weak injectivity for right S'-acts coincides with principal weak injectivity. Thus all right S'-acts are weakly injective.
4 Absolute purity
Recall that an act As is called absolutely pure if every finite consistent system of equations with constants from As has a solution in As (see Definition 3.6.1). Definition 4.1. A monoid S is called right absolutely acts are absolutely pure. pure if all right S'-
We say that a monoid S has local left zeros if for any s i , . . . , sn G S there exists s G S such that s = ssi = ... = ssn (see Definition 3.6.5). Recall also that an act As is called absolutely 1-pure if every finite consistent system of equations in one variable with constants from As has a solution in As (see Definition 3.6.1). Absolute purity implies absolute 1-purity. It is not known whether the converse implication holds (cf. Problem 3.6.2). Definition 4.2 [Sko69b]. An idempotent e G S is called right special (right fg-special) if for any (finitely generated) right congruence of S there exists an element k G eS such that (1) (ke)pe, u,v e S, implies (ku)p(kv).
(2) upv,
Note that all central idempotents of a monoid are right special. Indeed, in this case one can take k = e. The converse is not true. It is easy to check that all idempotents of the bicyclic monoid are right special. T h e o r e m 4.3 (V. Gould [Gou87b]). The following statements for any monoid S: (i) All right S-acts are absolutely 1-pure. are equivalent
4 Absolute purity (ii) S is right absolutely pure.
323
(iii) S has local left zeros and every finitely generated erated by a right fg-special idempotent.
right ideal of S is gen-
Proof, (i) = > (ii). Suppose that all right acts are absolutely 1-pure. Let be a natural number and assume as induction hypothesis that for any act Ag every finite consistent system of equations over As, in no more than variables, has a solution in As- Clearly the assumption is true for 1. Let As be an act and let be a finite consistent system of equations with constants from As in variables , . . . , + Since is consistent, has a solution { & i , . . . , 6 n + i } i n some act B s , As C Bs- Consider the act C s = As u biS U U bnS. Then Cs is absolutely 1-pure by (i) and As C Cs C Bs. From we construct a new system ' of equations by taking only those equations in which x n +i appears and replacing in these equations each x ^ i + 1, by bi. Then ' is a finite system of equations with constants from Cs in one variable. Since ' has a solution bn+ in Bs, we have that ' is consistent. Since Cs is absolutely 1-pure, ' has a solution c n + i in Cs- Thus ..., bn,cn+} is a solution of in CsIf c n +1 As then let " be the system of equations obtained from when replacing xn+i by cn+1. Then " has variables, constants from As and solution {b\,..., bn} in Bs- By induction hypothesis, " has a solution { , . . . ,an) in As- Then { a i , . . . } is a solution of in AsOtherwise, c n + i G biS'lJ . . . ( J ^ S 1 . Without loss of generality we may suppose that cn+1 = bns, s G S. In this case let " be the system of equations obtained from when replacing xn+\ by xns. Then " has variables, constants from As and solution { 6 i , . . . , bn} in Cs- By induction hypothesis, " has a solution { , . . . , a n } in As and then { , . . . , a n , a n s } is a solution of in AsThe result follows by induction hypothesis. (ii) = > (iii). Suppose S is a right absolutely pure monoid. Then S has local left zeros by Lemma 3.6.6 and every finitely generated right ideal Ks of S is generated by an idempotent e S by Corollary 3.6.16, i.e. Ks = eS. We prove that e is right /^-special. Set p(H) for a finite subset = {(ci, d\), , (cn, dn)} of S S. Consider the diagram K/p c S/p
E{K/p)
. is a
where E(K/p) is the injective envelope of K/p and g : S/p > E(K/p) homomorphism extending id^/p. Then the equalities
324

[e]p = g([ l]p)d = 9([l]p)cn = S([l],)e 5([l]p)di g([l]p)dn
hold in E(K/p).
This means that the system of equations [e]p =

xc\ = xe xdi
xCrj xd'
has a solution y([l] p ) in E(K/p). Since K/p is absolutely pure by assumption, this system of equations also has a solution in K/p. Hence there exists k G Ks such that
=
[k]pe [*]pdi [k]pdn .
[k]pci [k]pcn
= =
The first of these equalities means (fee) pe. Suppose that upv, u, G S. Then either u = and so (kit) p(kv) or there exist t i , . . . , n , xu...,x n, yi ..., yn G S with {x^yi) or ( y { ,Xi) G for % = 1 , . . . , n, such that (cf. Lemma 1.4.37)
U = Xiti y2t2 = X3t3
yti = x2t2
yzh
= V .
= xaU
and Now
Vntn
[ku]p = [k\pu = [k]p(x liO = m = [k}p(yiti) = [k}p(y2t2) = [k}p(x2t2) = ... -
h mpx2)t2
([k]pyi)ti = ([k\py2)t2 [kv]p
= [k]p{yntn)
= [k]pv =
which means that ( ku) (kv). Hence e is a right fg-special idempotent. (iii) => (i). We shall use Theorem 3.6.12 to show that an arbitrary right S- act As is 1-pure. Suppose M s is a cyclic finitely presented act, Ns a finitely generated subact of M s and / : Ns > ^ s a homomorphism. By Proposition 1.5.30 we may assume that Ms = S/ for some finitely generated right congruence on S. Then Ns = [l]pKs for some finitely generated right ideal Ks of S. By (iii), Ks is generated by a right fg-special idempotent e. Let k G Ks be an element satisfying the conditions of Definition 4.4.2. Define a mapping g : Ms As by
9([s]p) = /MP)
for every s S . Suppose [s]p = [t]p, s,t G S, i.e. spt. Then (ks)p(kt), i.e. [ks]p = [kt]p. Hence g is well-defined. Clearly, g is a homomorphism. Suppose
4 Absolute purity [s]p G Ns, i-e. s G Ks = eS. Then, using that ( ke ) pe we get 9([s}P) = f([ks]p) = f([k}ps) = = fmPe)s) f([k}p(es)) = f([ke]ps) = f([e]ps) = f([s]p) .
325
Hence g extends / . Let s i , . . . , sn G S. Since S has local left zeros there exists u G S such that u = us = ... = usn. Putting a = bu for some b G As we have a as = ... = asn. Now As is absolutely 1-pure by Theorem 3.6.12. Since every central idempotent of a monoid is right fg-special we obtain Corollary 4.4 (Normak [Nor80]). Let S be a monoid whose idempotents are central. Then S is right absolutely pure if and only if S has local left zeros and every finitely generated right ideal of S is generated by an idempotent. The investigation of right absolutely pure monoids was started by Normak [Nor80] who described absolutely pure monoids with central idempotents. The first characterization of right absolutely pure monoids in general situation was given by V. Gould in [Gou85]. This result was developed further in [Gou87b] where Theorem 4.4.3 was proved. In [Gou90] V. Gould described right absolutely pure monoids on which Green's -relation is a right congruence. She was able to do this not using right congruences in the condition. In [Gou91] it was proved that if S is a right absolutely pure monoid and / : S > is a homomorphism onto a monoid then is also a right absolutely pure monoid. Moreover, it was proved there that 7 is a right congruence on every right absolutely pure monoid. This made it possible to obtain the following characterization for the proof of which we refer to the original paper. In the formulation we make use of the following notation. For a right ideal Ks of S and a G S put Ka = {s G S I as G Ks} . Obviously, Ka is either empty or a right ideal of S. Note that Ka = S if and only if G KsT h e o r e m 4.5 (V. Gould [Gou91]). A monoid S is a right absolutely pure monoid if and only if S has local left zeros and satisfies Condition (*) For any right ideals Ks,Ls of S where Ks C Ls and Ks is finitely generated, and any finite subset G of (S\Ls)2 with La = Lf, for all ( a,b ) G G, there exists an element s G Ks such that given any (a, b) G G, there is an idempotent generator f of Ks such that a'fa = b' fb for all ( a,b ) G G and for all a' G V{a), b' G V(b). Moreover, it is shown in [Gou91] that any right absolutely pure monoid can be embedded into a 0-simple right absolutely pure monoid.
326
5 Injectivity and overview

On right self-injectivity (4.5.1-4.5.5) When principally weakly injective implies injective When all right ideals are injective (4.5.10-4.5.12) When all right acts are injective (4.5.13-4.5.14) Comments Overview (4.5.6-4.5.9)
On right self-injectivity
L e m m a 5.1. Let S be a monoid, Ks its right ideal and q S. For s S put Ks = {u S \ su Ks} .
Ks is either empty or a right ideal of S, and Ks = S if and only if s KsDefine a relation p(K, q) on S by s p(K, q)t Then p(K,q) Ks = Kt and qsu = qtu for all u Ks .
is a right congruence on S. and Let Kt. can
Proof. Clearly, Ks is either empty or a right ideal of S, and Ks = S if only if s Ks- It is also clear t h a t = p(K, q) is an equivalence relation. s,t,x S, spt and u Ksx. Then s(xu) = (sx)u Ks- Hence xu Ks = This implies ( t x ) u = t(xu) Ks Thus u Ktx. Hence Ksx C Ktx. One prove similarly t h a t Ktx C Ksx. Hence Ktx = Ksx. If u Ksx then xu Ks. Hence s t implies q(sx)u = qs(xu) qt(xu) q(tx)u , which gives us (sx) (tar). L e m m a 5.2. Let Ks be a right ideal of S and q,z S. a Ks then p(K, q) p(K, z).
If qa = za for all
Proof. Let s p(K, q) t, s, t S. If u Ks = Kt then su, tu Ks and qsu = qtu. Hence zsu = qsu = qtu = ztu so that sp(K,z)t. Hence p(K,q) < p(K,z) and similarly p(K,z) < p(K,q).
Recall t h a t a monoid S is called right self-injective if the act Ss is injective.
327
Theorem 5.3 (Peva [Pae87a]). A monoidS is right self-injective if and only if S contains a left zero and for all right ideals Ks of S and all homomorphisms f H o r n ( K s , S s ) there exists an element q S such that f(a) = qa for all a Ks and s p(K, q) t, s, t S, implies qs = qt. Proof. Necessity. Suppose S is right self-injective. Then S contains a left zero by Lemma 3.1.7. Let Ks be a right ideal of S and / : Ks Ss a homomorphism. Since S is weakly right self-injective there exists S such that f(a) = za for all a Ks by Lemma 3.5.2. Now let = p(K,z) (cf. Lemma 4.5.1) and let : S > S/p be the canonical epimorphism. Then n(Ks) is a subact of S/p. Define a mapping g : (Ks) S by g([a]p) = za for all a Ks- Suppose [a]p [b]p TT(KS). It follows from the definition of that zau = zbu for any u KA = Kb and KA S since a 6 Ks- Taking u = 1 we get za = zb. Hence g is well-defined. Clearly, g is a homomorphism. Since Ss is injective there exists an extension h : S/p > Ss of g. Let q = /i([l] p ). Then we have qa = /([1]) = h([l]pa) = h([a]p) = #([a] p ) = za for a e Ks- Hence / ( a ) = qa for any a KsAssume sp(K,q)t, s,t S. By Lemma 4.5.2 we have p(K,q) and thus qs = h([l}p)s = h([l]ps) = h([s}p) = h(lt}p) = h([l}pt) = h([l}p)t = qt. Sufficiency. Since S contains a left zero it suffices show that Ss is injective relative to all inclusions into let Bs = pS, Bs, be a cyclic act, Cs its subact homomorphism. Further, let Ks = {s < E 5' | ps Cs} ideal of S. It is easy to check that Cs = pKsDefine a mapping : Ks Ss by {) = f(Pa) for any Ks- Clearly, is a well-defined homomorphism. By assumption there exists q S such that f(pa) = () = qa for any a Ks and s p(K, q) t, s, t S, implies qs = qt. Now define a mapping g : pS > Ss by g{ps) - qs = p(K,z)
by Theorem 3.1.8 to cyclic right acts. So and f : Cs ^ Ss a Clearly, Ks is a right
328
for any s e S. Suppose ps = pt, s,t G S. If u e Ks then ptu = psu G Cs, and, by the definition of Ks, tu Ks, so that u Kt. Hence Ks C Kt. The converse inclusion can be proved similarly. Thus Ks = Kt. Now if u Ks = Kt then su,tu Ks and qsu = f(psu) = f(ptu) = qtu .
This means that s p(K, q) t. By assumption we have the equality qs = qt. This gives us g(ps) = g(pt). Hence g is a well-defined homomorphism. Finally, g{pa) = qa = f{pa) for every a Ks- Thus g is an extension of / and Ss is injective by Theorem 3.1.8. Corollary 5.4. A right weakly self-injective monoid S is right self-injective if and only if S contains a left zero and among the elements G S existing for a right ideal Ks and a homomorphism f : Ks > Ss, by Lemma 3.5.2 there exists q S such that s p(K, q) t, s,t S, implies qs = qt. The following example shows that the element q from Theorem 4.5.3 is not unique. E x a m p l e 5.5 [Pae85]. Let S be a semilattice with 1 and 0 given by the following multiplication table where 1 and 0 are not shown a a d c d 9 f 9 b d b f d e f 9 c c f c f 0 d d d f d 9 f 9 e 9 e 0 9 e 0 9 f f f f f 0 9 9 9 0 9 9 0 9
a b c d e f 9
/
0
/
0
Let Ks = { f , g , 0}. Clearly Ks is an ideal of S. Let : Ks ^ Ss be defined by () = for any 6 Ks- Now we have () = 1 = ax = bx = dx for all a e Ks- By Lemma 4.5.2 p(K, 1) = p(K, a) = p(K, b) = p(K, d) . It is easy to check that p(K, 1) = 5 . Hence any of the elements l,a,b, d 6 S may be taken in the role of q of the previous theorem.
329
When principally weakly injective implies injective

Definition 5.6. For any right congruence on a monoid S let Ann/(p) = {s e S \ y implies sx = sy} . Then Ann/(p) is empty or is a left ideal of S, the left annihilator ideal of p.
Definition 5.7. For right congruences , on a monoid S and t e S let if xpy and sx sy , then there exist h,k S with sx = th, h k, tk = sy Definition 5.8. Let s,t 6 S. Then an n-link from s to t in S consists of -tuples = (pi, ,p n ), Q = r = ( n , ,*") Sn with r n = t and Pis = <?iTi, pi+iri = qi+\ri+i (1 < i < - 1) . For the proof of the next theorem we refer the reader to the original paper. T h e o r e m 5.9 (V. Gould [Gou87c]). All principally weakly injective right Sacts are injective if and only if S is a principal right ideal monoid with a left zero and satisfies Condition (G) For any element s of S and any right congruence on S, there exist elements t,x S and right congruences TQ = , , , on S such that there is an n-link from s to t satisfying ker Xqi < Ti, pi Ann(r,_i, (1 < i < n), (sxt) s and h rn k if and only if (sxh) (sxk).
When all right ideals are injective

T h e o r e m 5.10. The following statements are equivalent for any monoid S: (i) All principal right ideals of S are injective. (ii) S is a regular right self-injective monoid.
Proof, (i) (ii). Since any injective act is principally weakly injective the regularity of S follows from Theorem 4.1.6. As Ss is one of the principal right ideals, S is right self-injective. (ii) => (i). Let s S. Since S is regular sS = eS for an idempotent e S by Proposition 1.3.31. Hence sS is a retract of an injective act Ss by Corollary 1.6.12 and thus injective by Proposition 1.7.30.
330
IV Homological classification of monoids are equivalent for any monoid S:
T h e o r e m 5.11. The following statements
(i) All finitely generated right ideals of S are injective. (ii) S is a regular right self-injective ideals are principal. monoid whose finitely generated right
Proof, (i) (ii). Regularity and right self-injectivity of S follow from the previous theorem. Now let Ks be an arbitrary finitely generated right ideal of S. By assumption K s is injective and thus fg-weakly injective. Hence K s is principal by Proposition 3.4.5. (ii) => (i). Let Ks C S be a finitely generated right ideal of S. By assumption, Ks is a principal right ideal. Since S is regular self-injective, Ks is injective by Theorem 4.5.10. T h e o r e m 5.12. The following statements (i) All right ideals of S are injective. (ii) S is a regular right self-injective principal right ideal monoid. Proof, (i) => (ii). Regularity and right self-injectivity of S follow from Theorem 4.5.10. Now let Ks be an arbitrary right ideal of S. By assumption Ks is injective and thus weakly injective. Hence K s is principal by Proposition 3.5.5 (ii) => (i). Let Ks C S be a right ideal of S. By assumption, Ks is a principal right ideal. Since S is regular self-injective, Ks is injective by Theorem 4.5.10. are equivalent for any monoid S:
W h e n all right acts are injective

Recall that an idempotent e e S is called right special if for any right congruence of 5 there exists an element k eS such that ( ke ) pe and upv, u,v e S, implies (ku) p(kv) (see Definition 4.4.2). T h e o r e m 5.13 (Skornjakov [Sko69b]). All right acts over a monoid S are injective if and only if S contains zero and is a regular principal right ideal monoid all idempotents of which are special. Proof. Necessity. If all right S-acts are injective then all right ideals of S are injective and it follows from Theorem 4.5.12 that S is a regular right selfinjective principal right ideal monoid.
331
Since Ss is injective S contains a left zero by Lemma 3.1.7. But since S is a principal right ideal monoid there can be only one left zero which then is the zero of S. Now let e be an arbitrary idempotent of S and an arbitrary right congruence on S. Denote As Ss/ and let : Ss > A s be the natural surjection. Denote n(eS) by Bs and consider the diagram eS C C As = Ss/p
Bs By assumption, Bs is injective. Hence there exists an extension g : As > B s of id. Let k G eS be such that iv(k) = (gn)( 1). Then n(ke) = n{k)e = ({gn)(l))e = (gn)(le) = {gn)(e) = g(n(e)) = () .
Hence (fee) e. Now let xpy,
x,y S. This means () n(k)x ((g7r)(l))x
7 v(y). Then = (gn)(x) = 7(k)y = n(ky) .
n(kx)
= (p7r)(y) = (W(l))i/
Hence ( k x ) ( k y ) and thus e is a special idempotent. Sufficiency. Let A s be an act. Since S contains the zero contains a zero. To prove that A s is injective it suffices by Theorem 3.1.8 to show that A s is injective relative to all inclusions of right acts into cyclic acts. So let B s be a cyclic act, C s its subact and / : Cs A s a homomomorphism. W e show that / can be extended to a homomorphism from B s into A s Since B s is a cyclic act there exists an epimorphism : S s > Bsr :
-1
Let
(Cs) > C s be the restriction of .
c
Cs
Ss
Bs
Since 7 r - 1 ( C s ) is a right ideal of S, there exists, by assumption, a special idempotent e S such that such that 7 r - 1 ( C s ) = eS. Let = ker7r. Then there exists k G eS such that ( k e ) p e and s p i , s , i g 5 , implies (ks)p(kt).
332
Define a mapping h : Bs > As by h(n(s)) = r(ks) for any s G S. Suppose 7r(s) = (), s,t G S. Then spt and thus Hence r(ks) = r(kt) and h is well defined. Since for any t S we have (h(n(s)))t = (r(ks))t = r(kst) = h(n(st)) = h(n(s)t) , (ks)p(kt).
h is a homomorphism. Let c G Cs be an arbitrary element. Since r is obviously an epimorphism c = r(eu) (eu) for some u G S. Since e is a right special idempotent, ( ke ) pe. This means that ( k e ) 7r(e), i.e. r(fce) = r(e). Now we have h(c) h(-K(eu)) = r(keu) = r{ke{eu)) = r(ke)(eu) = r(e)(eu) = r(e(eu)) Hence is injective. = r(eu) = c .
Investigating regular principal right ideal monoids more closely one can come to the following characterization of right absolutely injective monoids, i.e. monoids over which all right acts are injective, not using right congruences. For the proof we refer to the original paper. Recall that for a right ideal Ks of S and a G S Ka = {s G S I as G i f s } . T h e o r e m 5.14 (Fountain [Fou74]). S is right absolutely injective if and only if S contains a zero and satisfies the following Condition (RAI) Every right ideal Ks of S has an idempotent generating element e such that, for all a, b G S \ Ks, Ka & implies that a'ea = b'eb for all a' G V(a),b' G V(b).
Comments
Right self-injectivity is investigated by several authors. In many papers this is done in the context of semigroups. Johnson and McMorris described selfinjective semilattices [Jo/Mc72a] and weakly self-injective semilattices [Jo/Mc73]. Schein [Sch76] described inverse semigroups over which all right acts are injective (weakly injective) and also right self-injective inverse semigroups. Shoji [Sho80b] showed that every full transformation monoid on a set with mappings written on the left side is right self-injective. Thus a right selfinjective regular monoid is not necessarily right inverse. In [Sho82b] and [Sho83] Shoji found several necessary conditions for self-injectivity of right inverse semigroups. In [Sho84] it was proved that if a regular semigroup satisfying the min-
5 Injectivity a n d overview
333
imal condition on right ideals is right self-injective then S is an inverse semigroup. In this context see also [Sho79b], [Sho80a], [Sho80c], [Sho80d], [Sho82a] and [Sho92]. Peva [Pae87a], [Pae87a] characterized right self-injective right inverse semigroups.
Overview
We summarize in two tables the results concerning the classification of monoids by divisibility, principal weak injectivity, fg-weak injectivity, weak injectivity and injectivity of their right acts. A given cell in the body of the tables describes the class of monoids over which all right acts having the property defined by the row index also have the (stronger) property defined by the column index. Numbers below refer to the corresponding theorem. A cell is empty if we do not know a "nice" description of it. By the latter we mean a description which does not refer to properties of acts. In this sense the characterizations using self-injectivity is actually not "nice". But in these cases this seems to be the best one can obtain. It is clear that the diagonal cells in Table IV.2 are in a sense the most importantthey pertain to properties that are "adjacent" in strength, and in principle, knowing exact descriptions of these classes would permit the rest of the table to be completed. Abbreviations used in b o t h tables: Inj: injective WI: weakly injective FGWI: fg-weakly injective PWI: principally weakly injective D: divisible LCLI: monoids in which all left cancellable elements are left invertible REG: regular monoids REGFP: regular monoids all of whose finitely generated right ideals are principal REGPRI: regular principal right ideal monoids
334
IV Homological classification of monoids Table IV. 1: Classification by properties of right ideals Inj REGSI 4.5.10 REGSIFP 4.5.11 REGSIPRI 4.5.12 WI FGWI PWI REG 4.1.6 REG 4.1.6 REG 4.1.6 D LCLI 3.2.2 LCLI 3.2.2 LCLI 3.2.2
PRI FGRI RI
REGPRI 4.3.7
REGFP 4.2.17 REGFP 4.2.17
Abbreviations: PRI: all principal right ideals FGRI: all finitely generated right ideals RI: all right ideals REGSI: regular right self-injective monoids REGSIFP: regular right self-injective monoids all of whose finitely generated right ideals are principal REGSIPRI: regular right self-injective principal right ideal monoids Table IV.2: Classification by properties of right acts Inj WI FGWI PWI D All REGPRIZIS 4.5.134 REGPRI 4.3.7 REGFP 4.2.17 RNO 4.3.6 FP 4.2.16 RAR 4.1.5 REG 4.1.6 WI FGWI PWI D
LCLI 3.2.2
Abbreviations: FP: monoids whose all finitely generated right ideals are principal RAR: right almost regular monoids RNO: right noetherian monoids REGPRIZIS: regular principal right ideal monoids containing zero in which all idempotents are right special
6 Torsion freeness and principal weak flatness
335

When When When When all right acts are torsion free (4.6.1-4.6.2) torsion free implies principally weakly flat (4.6.3-4.6.5) all right acts are principally weakly flat (4.6.6) Condition (E) implies pricipally weakly flat (4.6.7)
In this section we start presenting classification results connected with properties grouped around projectivity.
W h e n all right acts are torsion free

T h e o r e m 6 . 1 . For any monoid S the following statements (i) All right S-acts are torsion free. (ii) All cyclic right S-acts are torsion free. (iii) All monocyclic right S-acts are torsion free. (iv) All monocyclic right S-acts of the form S/p(s,s2), free. (v) All right Rees factor acts of S are torsion free. (vi) All right Rees factor acts of S of the form S/sS , s e S, are torsion free. s S, are torsion are equivalent:
(vii) Every right cancellable element of S is right invertible. Proof. Implications (i) (ii), (ii) => (iii), (iii) (iv), (ii) (v) and (v) => (vi) are obvious. Conditions (iv) and (vi) are equivalent by Proposition 3.8.11. (vi) =>- (vii). Let c G S be a right cancellable element. By assumption, the Rees factor act S/cS is torsion free. Since 1 c cS, Proposition 3.8.11 implies 1 cS. Hence c is right invertible. (vii) => (i). Suppose As is a right act and ac a'c for a right cancellable element c S and a, a' G As- Since by assumption c is right invertible we have a = a'. Hence As is torsion free. Note that (i) (vii) in [Kna83]. (vii) of Theorem 4.6.1 was shown in [Kn/Pe81] and (ii)
336 Exercise 6.2.
(1) If all right cofree acts over a monoid S are torsion free then all right S-acts are torsion free. (2) [Liu93] If all right ^-acts satifying Condition (E) are torsion free then all right S-acts are torsion free.
W h e n torsion free implies principally weakly flat

Recall (see Definition 3.8.8) that an element t of a monoid S is ^-regular for w S if wt t and if for any right cancellable element c S and any u S, uc tS implies u p(wt, t) wu. Proposition 6.3 (Bulman-Fleming and Normak [Bu/No96]). If all torsion free monocyclic acts S/p(wt,t), w,t S, wt t, are principally weakly flat then every w-regular element of S is regular, for each w S. Proof. Suppose that t S is tu-regular for w S. Then S/p(wt,t) is torsion free by Proposition 3.8.9. Thus S/p(wt,t) is principally weakly flat and it follows from Proposition 3.10.9 that t is regular. It will turn out in Theorm 4.8.4 that the condition of the previous proposition is sufficient even for flatness of monocyclic acts of the considered form. Proposition 6.4. If all right torsion free Rees factor acts of a monoid S of the form S/sS, s S, are principally weakly flat then for any element s S either s is regular, or satisfies Condition (tcu) there exist a right cancellable that t sS and tc su. element c S and elements t,u S such
Proof. Suppose that Condition (tcu) is not satisfied. Then by Proposition 3.8.10 the Rees factor act S/sS is torsion free. Thus S/sS is principally weakly flat by assumption. By Theorem 3.10.11 the right ideal sS satisfies Condition (LU), i.e. there exists j sS such that js s. Let j sx for S. Then s = js = sxs. Hence s is a regular element. Left-right dually to Definition 4.1.1 an element s of a monoid S is called left almost regular if there exist elements r, r i , . . . , r m , s i , . . . , sm S and right cancellable elements c\,..., c m S such that
337
SiCi = sri s2c2 = sir2 SmCm $ lfm S SfjiVS. If all elements of S are left almost regular then S is called left almost regular. Since by Theorem 4.1.5 all divisible right acts are principally weakly injective if and only if S is right almost regular, the following result may be considered as one more evidence of duality between the properties of acts grouped around projectivity and those grouped around injectivity. Theorem 6.5 (Laan [Laa99b]). For any monoid S the following are equivalent: (i) All torsion free right S-acts are principally weakly flat. weakly flat. statements
(ii) All torsion free cyclic right S-acts are principally
(iii) All torsion free right Rees factor acts of S are principally weakly flat. (iv) S is a left almost regular monoid. Proof. Implications (i) => (ii) and (ii) => (iii) are obvious. (iii) => (iv). Take an element s G S. Let K(s) be the subset of S consisting rm, si,..., sm_i G S of all elements G S for which there exist elements r\,..., and right cancellable elements c\,..., c m S such that sici - sr s2c2 = s\r2
tCm
SmlT-m
We see that s e K(s) and so K(s) is non-empty since t = s has the required property for m = 1 and c\ = r \ = 1. Let I be the right ideal of S generated by the set K(s), i. e. I = Ut<=ff(s) We show that the right Rees factor act S/I is torsion free. Suppose that s'c e I for some s' G S and right cancellable c G S. Then s'c G tS for some t K(s), hence we get r\,..., rm, r m + i , s i , . . . , s m _ G S and right cancellable elements c\,..., C m G S such that sici = sr\ s2c2 -- sir2 tCm Smlfm s'c trm+l-
338
This means that s' K(s) and so s' 6 I. Thus S/I is torsion free by Proposition 3.8.10. Then S/I is principally weakly flat by (iii). Hence by Theorem 3.10.11 for s e I we can find tr / , where t "(s), S, such that trs s. Now the last equality together with the fact that t K{s) yields that s is left almost regular. (iv) (i). Let free act. Let as = there exist elements c i , . . . , Cm S such S be left almost regular. Assume that As is a torsion a's for a, a' S. Since s is left almost regular, r, 7*1,..., r m , s i , . . . , sm S and right cancellable elements that sici = sr1 s2c2 = sir2 ^mQi ^m-l^m Using the first equality we get asiCi = asr\ = a'sr = a's\Ci. Because As is torsion free we get asi = a'si. Analogously we get as2 = a's2, . . . , asm = a ' s m . Then, clearly, asmr = a ' s m r . Now we have a s = a smrs aSmT s = a'smr s = a' < g > s m r s = ' s in the tensor product A5 s S s which by Lemma 3.10.1 means that As is principally weakly flat.
When all right acts are principally weakly flat

Recall that, in the case of rings and modules, all right (left) modules over a ring are flat if and only if the ring is regular (see, for example, [LAM66]). The next theorem shows that principally weakly flat acts are a suitable counterpart of flat modules. T h e o r e m 6.6. For any monoid S the following statements (i) All right S-acts are principally weakly flat. weakly flat. weakly flat. principally are equivalent:
(ii) All cyclic right S-acts are principally (iii) All monocyclic (iv) All monocyclic weakly flat.
right S-acts are principally
right S-acts of the form S/p(s, s2), s G S, are acts of S are principally weakly flat. , s S, are
(v) All right Rees factor (vi) All right Rees factor weakly flat. (vii) S is a regular
acts of S of the form S/sS
principally
monoid.
7 Weak flatness Proof. Implications (i) => (ii), (ii) => (iii), (iii) (vi) are obvious. (iv), (ii)
339 (v) and () =>
(iv) (vii). Let s e S. Then S/p(s,s2) is principally weakly flat by assumption and s is a regular element by Corollary 3.10.10. (vi) => (vii). Since every principally weakly flat act is torsion free (see Proposition 3.10.3) it follows by assumption and Theorem 4.6.1 that every right cancellable element of S is right invertible. If all right Rees factor acts of S are principally weakly flat then all torsion free right Rees factor acts are principally weakly flat and hence for any s S one of the conditions of Proposition 4.6.4 has to be satisfied. Since every right cancellable element is right invertible Condition (tcu) is not fulfilled. Hence s is a regular element. (vii) => (i). Let As be an act and as = a's for a,a' As, s G S. Since S is regular there exists such that sxs s. Now we have in < g > sSs the following equalities a< g >s = a< g > sxs = as xs = a's xs = a' sxs = a' < g >s and Ag is principally weakly flat by Lemma 3.10.1.
Note that (vi) (vii) of Theorem 4.6.6 was contained implicitly in [Kil70]. The results connected with monocyclic acts are from [Bu/No96].
When Condition (E) implies principally weakly flat

Proposition 6.7 (Liu [Liu93]). Let S be a monoid. If all right S-acts satisfying Condition (E) are principally weakly flat then S is a regular monoid. Proof. Let s S. If sS = S then s is obviously regular. Assume that sS S. Then the amalgam S H s S S satisfies Condition (E) by Exercise 3.14.3(3). By assumption S II s S S is principally weakly flat and it follows from Proposition 3.12.19 that there exists j G sS such that js = s which implies that s is a regular element.
7 Weak flatness
When principally weakly flat implies weakly flat (4.7.1) When torsion free implies weakly flat (4.7.2) When all right acts are weakly flat (4.7.3-4.7.10)
340
W h e n principally weakly flat implies weakly flat

Recall that by Theorem 3.12.17 weak flatness for Rees factor acts coincides with flatness. T h e o r e m 7.1 (Kilp [183]). All principally weakly flat right Rees factor of a monoid S are weakly flat if and only if S is right reversible. acts
Proof. Necessity. By Exercise 3.10.2(2) the one-element right act 5 = Ss/Sg is principally weakly flat and thus weakly flat by assumption. Then S is right reversible by Exercise 3.11.2(2). Sufficiency. Suppose S is right reversible. Let S/Ks for a right ideal Ks be principally weakly flat. Then Kg satisfies Condition (LU) by Theorem 3.10.11 and S/Ks is weakly flat by Theorem 3.12.17.
W h e n torsion free implies weakly flat

The previous theorem together with Theorem 4.6.5 implies T h e o r e m 7.2. All torsion free right Rees factor acts of a monoid S are weakly flat if and only if S is a right reversible left almost regular monoid.
When all right acts are weakly flat

Prom Theorem 4.7.1 and Theorem 4.6.6 one obtains the following T h e o r e m 7.3. AU right Rees factor acts of a monoid S are weakly flat if and only if S is a right reversible regular monoid. Definition 7.4. A monoid S is called weakly right (left) absolutely flat if all right (left) 5-acts are weakly flat, and weakly absolutely flat if it is both weakly right absolutely flat and weakly left absolutely flat. In the proof of the next theorem we follow Bulman-Fleming and McDowell [Bu/Mc90c]. T h e o r e m 7.5 (Fleischer [Fle82]). For any monoid S the following are equivalent: (i) S is weakly right absolutely flat. statements
(ii) All finitely generated right S-acts are weakly flat. (iii) All cyclic right S-acts are weakly flat.
7 Weak flatness (iv) All monocyclic right S-acts are weakly flat. Condition
341
(v) S is regular and satisfies (R)
for any elements s,t G S there exists w G Ss St such that w p(s,t) In the next section we also need the left-right dual Condition
s.
(L)
for any elements s,t S there exists w G sS tS such that w X (s, t) s. (iv) are obvious.
Proof. Implications (i) = > (ii), (ii) = > (iii) and (iii)
(iv)=>- (v). Regularity of S follows from Theorem 4.6.6. Let s,t G S and = p(s, t). Then spt and since S/p is weakly flat by assumption, Proposition 3.11.5 implies the existence of elements u,v G S such that us = vt, 1 (pVker ps) u and 1 (pVker pt) v. Since 1 (pVker ps) u there exist elements hi, , kn ,h, ,ln S such that s = kis , ki pl\ ,l\s k2S , k2 ph , , lns = us Then s kis lis = k2S I2S plns us . Hence spw where w = us = vt Ss St, i.e. we have (R). (v) => (iii). Let be any right congruence on S. We shall show that S/p is weakly flat. Suppose spt , s,t G S. Set r := p(s,t). By assumption there exist u,v S such that us = vt and STW where w = us = vt. Since S is regular S/ is principally weakly flat by Theorem 4.6.6. Hence s (us) implies 1 (r V ker ps) u by Proposition 3.10.7. Analogously from tr (vt) we get 1 (r V kerp t ) v. Since < p, one has 1 ( V ker ps) u and 1 ( V ker pt) v. Hence S/ is weakly flat by Proposition 3.11.5. (iii) (i). Let As be any ,5-act and let as = a't, a, a' G As, s,t S. Since statements (iii) and (v) are already proved equivalent, S is a regular monoid. Let s' and t' be elements inverse to s and t, respectively. Then b(s's) = b(t't) where b = as = a't. Since bS is weakly flat by (iii), we have b(g> s's = b<g> t't in bSs s(Ss's U St't). Then of course as < g > s's = a't < g > t't in As <8> s(Ss's U St't). But now we have a s = a ss's = as s's = a't t't = a' tt't = a' t in As s(Ss U St). Hence A5 is weakly flat by Lemma 3.11.1.
Now we shall consider the special case of idempotent monoids. Recall that an idempotent monoid S is called left regular if st = sts for any s,t G S (see Remark 1.3.45).
342
Proposition 7.6 (Bulman-Fleming and McDowell [Bu/Mc90c]). Let S be an idempotent monoid. Then S is weakly right absolutely flat if and only if S is left regular. Proof. Necessity. Assume S is weakly right absolutely flat. As an idempotent monoid 5 is a semilattice of rectangular bands Sa, a I, by Theorem 1.3.44. By the left-right dual of Proposition 1.3.46 we need to show that each Sa, a I, is a left zero band. Let x, y Sa where I. Now S satisfies Condition (R) by Theorem 4.7.5. Hence there exist elements u,v S such that ux = vy and xp(ux) where = p(x,y). By Lemma 1.4.37 either ux or there exist elements ui, ,un, xi,yi, ,Xn,yn e S such that {xuVi} = {x,y} (1 < i < n) for which = xiui y2u2 = X3U3 .. ynun = vy yiui = x2u2 yûz = x 4 it 4 In the first case xy = xvy = xux = xx = x. In the second case, since {xi,yi} = {x,y} each of the n + 1 elements in the sequence above, and in particular, vy belongs to Sa. But then xy = x(vy)y = xvy = xux = as required. Sufficiency. Assume that S is a left regular band. Let s,t S. Then = sts = st Ss St and sp(s,t)t imply (st) p(s,t)t or zp(s,t)t. Hence S satisfies Condition (R). Then S is weakly right absolutely flat by Theorem 4.7.5. Recall from the case of rings and modules that all right (left) modules over a ring are flat if and only if the ring is regular. The following corollary shows that the situation with monoids and acts is entirely different. Corollary 7.7 (Kilp [Kil70]). There exist weakly right absolutely flat monoids which are not weakly left absolutely flat. Proof. Let S = T1 where is a left zero semigroup with |T| > 2. Then S is left regular and thus weakly right absolutely flat by Proposition 4.7.6. But since S is not left reversible, S is not weakly left absolutely flat by the left-right dual of Theorem 4.7.3. Exercise 7.8 [Bu/Mc/Re90]. If L denotes the set of all left ideals of a monoid S, then S is called right h-reductive if for all sK L and for all a, b sK, b, there exists sK such that bx. Prove that a weakly right absolutely flat monoid is right L -reductive. In the proof of the next result we follow Bulman-Fleming, McDowell and Renshaw [Bu/Mc/Re90].
7 Weak flatness
343
P r o p o s i t i o n 7.9 (Shoji [Sho87a]). Let X be a non-empty set and T{X) its full transformation monoid. If T{X) is weakly right absolutely flat then X is finite. Proof. Let X be any infinite set. Take partitions {Xi | i Z} and {Yi | i Z} of X such that (a) XiCYiU Yi+i, Yi C U and
(b) , Yl+1 0 , Xt Yl 0 for all G Z. (For example, one can take any surjective mapping : > and let Xl = ~ ({2, 2i + 1}), Yi = 1, 2i}) for each i Z.) Fix Xi Xi, yi Yi for each i and define f,g T(X) by f(x) = Xi if Xi and g(x) = yi if Yl . Our definitions of / and g imply ker / V ker g = S x S. Since for any h,k T(X) one obviously has ker h < ker (kh), the kernel of any element from T(X)fC\T(X)g is S S. This implies that T(X)fC\T(X)g consists exactly of all constant mappings on X . Suppose that T(X) is weakly right absolutely flat. By Theorem 4.7.5 there exists w T(X)fnT(X)g such that / p(f, g) w. Since w is a constant mapping, we have | ImK;| = 1 and w f . Hence by Lemma 1.4.37 there exist ..., wn, Pi, ,, 9i, ,qn T{X) where {pi,qz} = { f , g } for i = 1 , . . . , n, such that / = pitui q2w2 = Pzw3 w Ql l = P2W2 QzWz = P4W4 and qnwn = w . Now I Im pi 11 = | I m / | = 00 implies that w 1 has values in infinitely many subsets Xi (or Yi, depending whether p\ f or pi = g). It follows from the definition of the partitions that then w\ has values also in infinitely many subsets Yi (or Xi, correspodingly). Hence | Im q\W\| 00. Continuing in this manner we get \ lmqnwn\ = 00. Thus |Imu>| = 00, a contradiction. Hence X is finite. Now we consider monoids S = (M(G, ,,))1 where M(G,A,B,P) is a Rees matrix semigroup with zero with sandwich matrix (see Example 1.2.15(1)(j)). Note that the mapping : A + G can be considered as a \B\ \A\ matrix with elements in G. It is easy to understand that ( i(G, , ,))1 is a regular monoid if and only if there is at least one nonzero element in each row and each column of the sandwich matrix P . We will denote by s(P) (the support of P) the |B| \A\ matrix obtained by replacing all of the non-zero entries by the symbol 1.
344
Proposition 7 . 1 0 (Bulman-Fleming and McDowell [Bu/Mc83]). If S = (Ai(G, , , P))1 is weakly right absolutely flat then no two rows of the support s(P) of are identical. Proof. Suppose that s(P) has two identical rows. This means that there exist 61,>2 B, bi 02, such that for every a G A we have P(bi,a) = 0 if and only if P(b2,a) = 0. Let c G A and set = (c, l,&i) and y = (c, 1 ,62) Note that Sxil Sy = {0}. Let = p(x, y). We shall show that S/p is not weakly flat. Assume that S/p is weakly flat. Now [l]px = [1 ]py implies [1] = in S/p s (Sx U Sy). This means, by Lemma 2.5.8, that either x = y or there exist z,... ,zn G Sx U Sy, s\,... ,sn, t\,...,tn where { s j , U } = { x , y } for i = 1 , . . . , n , such that = S1Z1
t\Z\
G S,
t2z2 = s3zz
= S2Z2 t^Zz = S4Z4
... tnzn = y
...
Now the equality = siZi implies zi G Sx. Using the assumption on the support of we get from siî 0 that t\Z\ 0. Further, equality t\Z\ = S222 implies 22 G Sx. Since s2z2 0, we have 2^2 0. Continuing in this manner we get y = tnzn & Sx, a contradiction.
8 Flatness
When weakly flat implies flat (4.8.1-4.8.3) When torsion free implies flat (4.8.4) When Condition (E) implies flat (4.8.5) When all right acts are flat (4.8.6-4.8.11) When all acts are flat (4.8.12-4.8.17) Comments On some related results
When weakly flat implies flat

Here we present a sufficient condition for weak flatness to imply flatness. This will be applied to obtain the result of [Fle82] that a monoid which is weakly absolutely flat is already absolutely flat (see Definition 4.8.6). For the definition of left monoids see Definition 3.10.14.
8 Flatness
345
T h e o r e m 8.1 (Bulman-Fleming and McDowell [Bu/Mc90c]). Let S be a monoid. If S is left and satisfies for all e, / G E(S) there Condition exists G eS fS on sS flat. such that A(e, / ) e, by e and f where
( I/)
A(e, / ) is the monocyclic then every weakly flat
congruence right S-act is
generated
In what follows we also need the left-right dual Condition (R/) for all e, / G E(S) there exists SeC\ Sf such that p(e, / ) e.
Proof. Let As be a weakly flat right 5-act and 5 a left 5-act. Assume am a' m' in As 5 M for a, a' G As, m, m' G 5 M and suppose that the equality a m = a' m' in As 5 is realized by a tossing Sirii =
as 1 = b\s2 bi-lSi bk-lSk = = = Ml b2t2 Mi a'ifc S2U2 = s3ri3 Si++ = = =
m
t\Ui 22 tini ifcÂ:
of length k, where si, , Sk,h,

SM.
,tk
G S, bi, ,bk-1
G As,
nx, ,nk
By Theorem 3.11.9, for each i G {1, , & } there exist Cj G As, S, ei,fi G E(S) such that
&iSi bi-iei = CiXi, fiti bifi ti = cly1
x%,y% G
(1) (2)
%iSi = Viti (Here we take bo = a and bk = a'.) there exist qi,ri G S such that
(3)
By Condition (L/) for any i G {1, , A; 1}
el+i qi = f i n and e I + i A ( e 1 + i , / , ) e 1 + i g t . Since e l + i k e r P s . + i n . + i f l , we have A ( e i + i , / i ) ker Ps and thus we obtain e , + i S ; + i 7 i i + i = eîqiSiînî or n

St+irii+i = ei+lqiSi+lni+i
(4) <
(5)
for any i G {1, , k 1}.
346
Recall that we have to show that the equality < g > m = a' < g > m' holds in <4s s(Sm U Sm'). We shall do this by induction on k. If k = 1 then asi = a't\ SiWi = m m! = ,
where s i , i i G S, b\ G As, G s M . Now it follows from (3) that Vim' = yi{tini) = {yih)ni = (a;isi)ni = xi(sini) = m
and the equality m = a' m' in As <S> s M is realized by the tossing = m y\w! m ' = /im'
ae = cxyx = a'fx in As < 8 > s(Sm U Sm').
Assume now that for tossings of length less than k our statement is true. Note that if k > 2 then for any i G {1, , k 1} we have CiiVifiTi) = Ci + x(xi + xe i+ xqi) and (yifiri)(si+xni+x) = (xieiqi-x)(sini) . (7) Indeed, using equalities (2) and (4) one gets CiiyifiTi) = (ciy^fiU = ( b i f i ) f i r i = b^fî) = = (biei+x)(ei+1qi) = (ci+xxi+x)(ei+xqi) and, using equalities (4), (5) and (3), (yifiri){si+ini+1) = yi(firiSi+xni+x) = yi(si+xni+x) = ViiUrii) = (yiti)ni = (xiSi)rii = Xi(eiqi^xsini) = (Xieigi-1)(sini) . bi(ei+1qi) = Ci+x(xi+xei+xqi) (6)
Moreover, = (yxfirx)(s2n2) and vkt'km' = (uks'kXk-itk-i)nk (9) Indeed, using again equalities (3), (4) and (5), we get xxm = = yxtxnx = yxs2n2 = (yifirx)(s2n2) The equality (9) can be proved analogously. . (8)
8 Flatness
347
Now it follows from equalities (9), (6) and (7) that the following is a tossing of length k 1 realizing the equality ci X\m = ck ykm' in < 8 > sM: ci(t/i/iri)=c 2 (x2e29i) {yifiri){s2n2)=xim (y2hr2){s2,n2,) = (x2e2qi)(s2n2)
Ct(yifiri)=c l + i(x i + ie l + iqi) (y i + 1/ i + 1 r i + 1 )(5^+2^+2)^Zi+iej+iqiHsi+ini+i) By inductive assumption the equality Ci Cfc ykm' holds also in Finally, < g > s{Sx\m U Sykm') a
(8) m
and hence also in As s(Sm U Sm').
a e\m ae 1 m = c\X\ m = Ci m = C f c (g) ykm' = ckyk < g > m' = '/fc rn' = a' jkm! a' m! flat.
in As s(Sm U Sm') and thus A5 is
Corollary 8.2. If a monoid S is weakly lefl absolutely flat then every weakly flat right S-act is flat. Proof. Assume S is weakly left absolutely flat. Then S is regular and satisfies Condition (L) by the left-right dual of Theorem 4.7.5. Since every regular monoid is left and Condition (L) implies Condition (L/), then every weakly flat right S-act is flat by Theorem 4.8.1. Corollary 8.3. If a monoid S is left PP and its idempotents regular band then every weakly flat right S-act is flat. form a right
Proof. By assumtion E(S) satisfies the identity xyx = yx (see Remark 1.3.45). To verify Condition (L') suppose e, / E(S). Then = f e f = ef e eS fS and ef A(e, / ) e. Thus, every weakly flat right S-act is flat.
W h e n torsion free implies flat

Here we have the following result for monocyclic acts. For the definition of a .'-regular regular element see Definition 3.8.8. T h e o r e m 8.4 (Bulman-Fleming and Normak [Bu/No96]). For the following statements are equivalent: (i) All torsion free monocyclic are flat. acts of the form S/p(wt,t), a monoidS t,
w,t G S, w
348
(ii) All torsion free monocyclic acts of the form S/p(wt,t), are weakly flat. (iii) All torsion free monocyclic acts of the form S/p(wt,t), are principally weakly flat.
w,t G 5, w t, w,t G S, w t,
(iv) Every w-regular element of S is regular, for each w G S. Proof. Implications (i) = > (ii) and (ii) => (iii) are obvious, (iii) = > (iv) is Proposition 4.6.3. (iv) (i). Assume S/p(wt,t), w,t G S, w t, is torsion free. Then t is w-regular by Theorem 3.8.9. By hypothesis, t is regular. Now S/p(wt, t) is flat by Corollary 3.12.15.
When Condition (E) implies flat

T h e o r e m 8 . 5 (Liu [Liu93]). For any monoid S the following statements are equivalent: (i) All right S-acts satisfying Condition (E) are flat. (ii) All right S-acts satisfying Condition (E) are weakly flat. (iii) All right S-acts satisfying Condition (E) are principally weakly flat. (iv) S is a regular monoid. Proof, (i) => (ii) and (ii) (iii) are obvious, (iii) = > (iv) is Proposition 4.6.7.
(iv) =>- (i). Let As be a right .S'-act and s M a left 5-act. Assume that a m a' m' in As s M for a, a' G m, m' sM. We have to show that the same equality holds also in As s(Sm U Sm'). Suppose that the equality a m = a' ' in As s M is realized by a tossing siUi = m as\ = b\ti S2TI2 hm hs2 b2t2 s3n3 = t2n2 bk-iSk = a'tk m' = t^nk G
of length fc, where su , sk, h, , tk G S, i, - - , 6fc-i e -4s, nu---,nk SM. If k = 1 then we have as 1 = a!t\ s\n\ m m' - t\ni .
8 Flatness
349
Since S is regular the equality as = a'ti implies a'ti = a'tis[si for s'j G V(s i). Since A s satisfies C o n d i t i o n (E) by assumption, there exist a" G As and u G S such t h a t a! = a"u and ut\ utis[si. From the last equality we obtain
um' utini = utis[sini utis^m. T h u s we get m' s[m a'm'
a m = a sis^m a" utxs\m i n As s{SmUSm').
= as 1 <g> s'-^m a"ut\ = a" um' = a"u
Suppose t h a t k > 2 and t h a t the required equality holds whenever we have a tossing of length less than k. From as\ = b\t\ we o b t a i n equalities
M i bit s[ si f o r s^ 6 V(s 1) a n d asi = asit[ti f o r t[ 6 V{t{). Since As
satisfies C o n d i t i o n (E) there exist c,d 6 As and u,v e S such t h a t bi = cu, uti = utis[si, a = dv. Therefore, we have two new tossings: the tossing
vsini dvs\ = cuti = vm utini
US2TI2 =
of length 1 and the tossing US2TI2 =

cus2 = = b2t2 s3n3 =
utini
t2n2
a'tk
m! = t^n^
of length k 1. Notice t h a t utini = utis\sini = utis[m G Sm and t h a t our tossing of length 1 realizes the equality d vm c < g > US2U2 in 5 M . B y inductive hypothesis we have then d vm = c < g > US2TI2 in As s(Svm U Sus2U2) and hence in < g > s{Sm U S'm'), because US2U2 = utini G Sm. T h e tossing of length k 1 realizes the equality c < g > utini = a' TO' in As < g ) sM. B y inductive hypothesis we have then c <g> utini = a' m' in
^ s s{Sutini U Sm') a n d h e n c e i n A s s(Sm U Sm').
N o w we have
am dv m d vm c us2U2 = c utini a' m!
in A s s{Sm
U Sm').
W h e n all right acts are flat

Definition 8.6. A monoid is said t o be right right absolutely flat and left absolutely flat. (left) absolutely flat if all
right (left) acts over it are fiat and it is said t o b e absolutely flat if it is b o t h
350
L e m m a 8 . 7 (Kilp [Kil81]). Let S and be monoids and : S > be a surjective homomorphism. If S is right absolutely flat then is right absolutely flat. Proof. Let At be a right T-act, 7- a left T-act and its subact. Assume that a < g > m = a' < g > m' in At for , a' G At, m, m' G . We have to show that the same equality holds also in At . Suppose that the equality = a' m' in At < 8 > is realized by a tossing t\ri\ = m t2U2 - u-\_n\ m' = UkUk
at\ = b\U\ bk-itk = a'uk
of length k, where ti, , tk, 1, , uk G T, 61, AT, ,nk TM. Define as = aip(s) and sm = <p(s)m for any a G AT, m , s S. Then At, tM and become right and left .S-acts, respectively, and sTV is obviously a subact of 5 M . Let Xi,yi G S, i G {1, , & } , be chosen such that ( ) = ti and (f(yi) = Ui. Substituting elements ti by Xi and Ui by yi we obtain a tossing realizing the equality a <S> m = a' m' in As < 8 > s M . By assumption is flat and we have the equality a < g > m = a' < g > m' in A5 < 8 > gJV. Suppose that this equality is realized by a tossing x\n 1 = m ax 1 = 612/1 = Z/i = '/fc m' = 2/fc^fc
of length /c, where xu , xkt yu , yk G 5, 61, - - , &fc-i G As, nir--,nk G sN. Substituting now elements x^ by () and Ui by <p(yi) we obtain a tossing realizing the equality am = a' m' in At t N . Hence is right absolutely flat. L e m m a 8 . 8 (Kilp [Kil81]). Let S1 where is a monoid. absolutely flat then is right absolutely flat. If S is right
Proof. Let At be a right T-act, a left T-act and j-N its subact. Assume that a < g > m = a' < g > m' in At for a, a' G At, m,m' G We have to show that the same equality holds also in At .
8 Flatness
351
Suppose that the equality a = a' m' in AT is realized by a tossing = at = biUi t2n2 = uirii bk-itk a'uk m' = uknk G , ni, ,nk G
of length k, where ii, ,tk,ui, TM.

L e t A = ATU{9A}, =
,uk G T, b\, ,bk-1

=
TNU{9M}
TMU{9M},
a n d define = ,
= 0A,Ora = 9M,S6M = for all a G AT, m G s e S. Then >1, and become right and left S-acts, respectively, and is obviously a subact of M. Since is a submonoid of S, AT C A and C M, we have a a' m' in As gM. By assumption A5 is flat and we have the equality a m a' m' in Ag 5 N. Suppose that this equality is realized by a tossing Sini = m asi = b\U\ s2n2 u\rii bis2 = b2u2 s3n3 = 22
9aS
bk-isk
= a'uk
m' =
uknk
oHength k, where si, , sk, , , uk G S, h, ,bk-1 G As, , ,nk G sN. Now it follows from the first equality that si G and n\ G riV, from the second that u\ G and b\ G AT, and so on. Hence our tossing is actually a tossing for T-acts which means that we have the equality am = a'm' in AT and thus is right absolutely flat. Theorem 8.9 (Kilp [K1I8I]). Let S be a union of groups. If S is right absolutely flat then S is is a semilattice of left groups. Proof. Let S be a right absolutely flat monoid which is a union of groups. Then S is a semilattice of completely simple semigroups Ri, i G I, by Theorem 1.3.42. Let first i G I be the smallest element in I. Then Ri is isomorphic to a Rees matrix semigroup without zero by Theorem 1.3.20. Let Ri =M(G,A,B,P) = { ( a , g, b) \ a e A, g e G,b e } .
Using the multiplication rule in M(G, ,,) one easily obtains that for a fixed b G the set Kb = { ( a , g , b ) I G A,g G G} is a minimal left ideal of Ri and also of S. Since for bi,b2 G , bi b2, 2 = 0 it follows from right reversibility of S that \B\ = 1. Now, using
352
again the multiplication rule in A4(G, , , ), one obtains that for all s,t Ri there exists a unique u Ri such that us = t. Hence Ri is a left group (see Definition 1.3.22). If i / is an element which is not the smallest in I then consider the set J {j I I j < i or j is not comparable with i} and let { J j e J Rr Clearly, is an ideal of S. Consider the Rees factor monoid S = S/K S/ (see Lemma 1.2.22). The monoid S is right absolutely flat by Lemma 4.8.7. Let S = T. Then is a submonoid of S which is right absolutely flat by Lemma 4.8.8. Clearly, is a semilattice of completeley simple semigroups in which Ri is the lowest component. Now we can repeat the argument used above to obtain that Ri is a left group. T h e o r e m 8.10 (Bulman-Fleming and McDowell [Bu/Mc83]). Let S = 1 where A4(G,A,B,P) is a regular Rees matrix semigroup with zero with sandwich matrix P. Then the following statements are equivalent: (i) All right S-acts are flat. (ii) All right S-acts are weakly flat. (iii) No two rows of the support s(P) of are Proof. Implication (i) (ii) is obvious, (ii) identical. (iii) is Proposition 4.7.10.
(iii) (i). Note first that (*) if x,y S are such that 1, Sx % Sy then Sx Sy = { 0 } and there exists A4(G, , , P) such that xz = and yz = 0. Indeed, in this case 0 and y 1 and if = ( a ' , g , b i ) and y = (",.,>2), choose a A such that P(b\,a) 0 and P(b2,a) = 0. Then 1 (, ((>,)) ,&i) has the required properties. If {a\g,b\) and y = 0, choose a A such that P(bi,a) 0. Again = (, ((&, ) ) - 1 , &i) has the required properties. Let As be a right 5-act and 5 a left 5-act. Assume that am a'm' in As < S > s M for , ' As, m,m' sM. We have to show that the same equality holds also in As < E > s(Sm U Sm'). First suppose that the equality a <g> m = a' m' in sM is realized by a tossing
S1TI1 = TO
= a'ti
m! =
tini
of length k = 1, where s\,ti S, ni s M . If si = 1 or 1 = 1 then our tossing stays inside Ag (Sm U Sm'). If t\ Ssi, i.e. t\ = us\ for some u S, then TO' = us-^ni = izsis^sini = tis[m
8 Flatness and the tossing as = a't\ si^ra) = m m' = ii(s / 1 m)
353
implies the equality a < g > m a' < g >TO'in As s(Sm U Sm'). Similarly we come to the same conclusion if si Sti. Finally, if if , e M{G,A,B,P) are such that s1,ti 0, Ssx % Stx then there exists Ai(G, , , P) such that s\z = s\ and t\z 0 by (*). In this case asi = as\z a't\z = a' 0 = aO = at\ and the tossing as\ = ' a'O = a't\ si (im) = m O(iim') = 0 (s^m) ml = (i^m')
implies the equality a < g > m a' < g > m' in As < g > 5 ( 5 m U Sm'). Assume now that new tossings implying required equalities may be found for all tossings of length strictly less than k >2. Suppose that the equality a m = a' m' in As s M is realized by a tossing sini = m as\ = b\t\ s2n2 = t]n\ biS2 = b2t2 S3TI3 t2n2 bk-2Sk-\ bk-iSk bk-itk-i = a'tk sknk = m' = tk-iUk- tknk ,W f ce
of length k > 2, where si, ,Sk,ti,,tk SM. If ti = 1 then
S, b\, , bk-1 As, ,
a{sls2) bk-2Sk-\ bk~\Sk
= b2t2 bk-\tk-l = a'tk
(sis 2 )n 2 = m 3^3 = t2n2 SkUk = ifc-iUfc-i m ' = i fc n fc
is a tossing of length k1 joining (a,TO)to (a', m'), and the inductive hypothesis gives the result. Similarly we reach the same situation if Sk = 1If Sti C Ssi (and this includes the possibility si = 1), i. e. us 1 = t\ for u S, then \ usin\ urn. Now (a,TO)is joined to (bi,um) by a tossing of length 1 and ( b \ , u m ) is joined to ( a ' , m ' ) by a tossing of length k 1. By inductive hypothesis, there exist tossings joining them in As (SmU Sum) and A5 (Sum U Sm'), correspondingly. Splicing these tossings together we get a
354
tossing joining (a,TO)to (a', to') in As x ( S m U Sm'). Hence a to = a' to' in As s(Sm U Sm'). Similarly we reach the same situation if Ssk C StkNow only the case where t\ 1, Sk 1, Sti % Ss\ and Ssk 2 Stk remains to be discussed. Using (*) we get (as in discussing the case k = 1) that aO = as = b\ti = friO and bk-10 - bk-iSk = a'tk = a'O . These equalities give us (using the left-side equalities in our tossing) that aO a'O. Now the tossing
. S I ^ M ) = TO
asi = a'O a'O = a'tk
0(t'km) = O(sim) m1 = tk(t'km')
implies the equality < g >TO= a' to' in As s(Sm U Sm').
The necessity part of the following result has been proved in Proposition 4.7.9. For the proof of sufficiency we refer the reader to the original paper. Theorem 8.11 (Shoji [Sho87a]). Let X be a non-empty set andT(X) the monoid of all its transformations. Then T(X) is right absolutely flat if and only if X is finite.
W h e n all acts are flat

The next theorem which can be considerd as a corollary of Theorem 4.8.1 shows that absolute flatness and weak absolute flatness coincide. Theorem 8.12 (V. Fleischer [Fle82]). For any monoid S the following statements are equivalent: (i) S is absolutely flat. (ii) S is weakly absolutely flat . (iii) S is regular and satisfies the conditions (R) and (L). Proof, (i) => (ii) is obvious. (ii) (iii). Since an absolutely flat monoid is both right and left absolutely weakly flat the equivalence of the conditions (ii) and (iii) follows from Theorem 4.7.5 and its left-right dual.
8 Flatness
355
(iii) => (i). Suppose that S is a regular monoid satisfying the conditions (R) and (L). Since being regular S is a P P monoid and since conditions (R) and (L) imply (R') and (L'), respectively, every weakly flat act over S is flat by Theorem 4.8.1 and its left-right dual. Now we shall introduce a proper subclass of the class of all right reversible regular monoids and show that every monoid from this class is absolutely flat. Definition 8 . 1 3 . for every s,t S (respectively ws = strongly right and A monoid S is called strongly right (left) reversible if there exists w S such that sw = s and tw Ss St s and wt sS tS), and strongly reversible if it is both left reversible.
L e m m a 8 . 1 4 . Every strongly right reversible monoid is regular. Proof. Let s S. By assumption there exists w S such that sw = s and w Ss (we take t = 1 in the definition of strong right reversibility). Let w = us ,u S. Then s sw = sus. Not every right reversible regular monoid is strongly right reversible. Indeed, it was shown in [Bu/Mc87] that the regular monoid S= (M(G, , , ) ) 1 where A = = { 1 , 2 } , G = {1}, P ( l , l ) = P{ 1,2) = P{2,1) = 1 and P ( l , 2 ) = 0 is not strongly right reversible. Proposition 8 . 1 5 (Bulman-Fleming and McDowell [Bu/Mc88]). Every strongly reversible monoid is absolutely flat. Proof. Let s,t S and let = p(s,t). By assumption there exists w S such that sw = s and tw Ss St. Then from s pt one gets (sw) (tw) or s (tw). This means that S satisfies Condition (R). Analogously one can prove that S satisfies Condition (L). Now it follows from Theorem 4.8.12 that S is absolutely flat. The following theorem was first proved by Fleischer [Fle82] and, independently, by Bulman-Fleming and McDowell [Bu/Mc83]. Afterwards various different proofs of this result were published. T h e o r e m 8.16 (Fleischer; Bulman-Fleming and McDowell). Every monoid is absolutely fiat. inverse
Proof. Let S be an inverse monoid and let s,t S. Then for ss's = s and tt't t we get t(s's) = t(s's)(t't) SsDSt. Hence S is strongly right reversible. Analogously one can prove that S is strongly left reversible and hence strongly reversible. Then S is absolutely flat by Proposition 4.8.15.
356
In the proof of the next theorem we need the following results on von Neumann regular rings, i.e. rings whose multiplicative semigroup is regular (see, for example, [G0079]). (1) Every left (right) principal ideal of a von Neumann regular ring is generated by an idempotent. (2) Every intersection of two principal left (right) ideals of a von Neumann regular ring is a principal left (right) ideal. (3) Every finitely generated left (right) ideal of a von Neumann regular ring is a principal left (right) ideal. Note that propertise (2) and (3) are not satisfied for regular monoids in general. T h e o r e m 8 . 1 7 (Shoji [Sho93]). Let R be a von Neumann regular ring. the monoid S = (R, -)1 is absolutely flat. Then
Proof. We shall show first that S is strongly left reversible. Let x,y G S. We have to show that there exists & S such that zx = and zy G xS yS. If = 1 then we may take 2 = 1. If G R and y = 1 then by (1) there exists an idempotent e G R such that xS = eR. Now ex = and ey = e G xS yS. Hence we may take e. Now we assume that x,y G R. Again by (1), there exist idempotents e, / G R such that xS = eR and yS = fR. By (2) and (1) there exists an idempotent fi G R such that xS yS = f\R. Set / 2 = f f i f - Since f f\ = / i , we have f l = (/ - / ) ( / - f l f ) = f
2
- f f l f - f l f f + f l f f l f= f - f l f =
f2.
Thus, f2 is an idempotent. Assume er = fir' for r, r' G R. Then er = her = h(/ - hf)r' = {hf - hf)r' = Or' = 0 .
Hence eR f2R = 0. By (3) and (1) there exists an idempotent h G R such that xR + yR = hR. Since eR + f2R = xS + yS D hR, there exist s , i G R such that es + f2t = h. Then e he ese+f2te. Since eRf]f2R 0, the latter implies e = ese. Hence es is an idempotent and esR = xS. Similarly we get f2 = hf2 = esf2 + f2tf2 which implies esf2 = 0 Now we may take 2 = es. Indeed, zx (es)(ex) = (ese)x ex = and zy = (es)(fy) = ( e s ^ f j + f2)y = {es){hf)y = (es)(efi)fy = ( ( e s e ) / i ) / y = { e f j f y = h(fy) G xS yS .
Hence S is strongly left reversible. By symmetry, S is strongly right reversible and thus absolutely flat by Proposition 4.8.15.
8 Flatness
357
Comments
The problem of characterizing right absolutely flat monoids was posed by Skornjakov in 1968. More precisely, he asked whether the right absolutely flat monoids are exactly the regular monoids, i.e. whether the situation here is similar to the case when rings and modules over them are considered. The investigation of right absolutely flat monoids was started by Kilp in [Kil70]. In this paper the following results were proved. (a) If all right Rees factor acts of S of the form S/sS , s S, are principally weakly flat then S is regular. (Implication (vi) => (vii) of Theorem 4.6.6). (b) A right cancellative monoid is right absolutely flat if and only if it is a group. (c) If 5 is weakly flat then S is right reversible (Exercise 3.11.2(2)). (d) If a monoid is left absolutely injective then it is right absolutely flat. (e) A commutative principal ideal monoid with zero is absolutely flat if and only if it is regular. (f) A monoid S = Tl where is a left group containing idempotents is right absolutely flat. (g) There exist right absolutely flat monoids which are not left absolutely flat. These results made it clear that the situation with right absolutely flat monoids is very much different from that of right absolutely flat rings. Kilp [Kil72] proved the following. (h) If for any finite subset of a monoid S there exists a right absolutely flat submonoid containing this subset then S is right absolutely flat. (j) The following conditions are equivalent for any commutative monoid S : (i) S is absolutely flat. (ii) All finitely generated 5*-acts are flat. (iii) All cyclic S'-acts are flat. (iv) All Rees factor acts of S are flat. (v) 5" is a regular monoid. (k) Any regular monoid with central idempotents (i.e. a semilattice of groups) is absolutely flat. V. Fleischer [Fle80a] found a condition under which a cyclic right act is flat (Theorem 3.12.11). This condition was afterwards fruitfully used in many papers where (right) absolutely flat monoids had been investigated. Kilp [Kil81] proved Lemma 4.8.7, Lemma 4.8.8 and Theorem 4.8.9. A direct corollary of the last-mentioned theorem is that right absolutely flat band is left regular. This theorem and the results of [Kil72] imply also that a union of
358
groups S is absolutely flat if and only if S is a semilattice of groups and that a band S is absolutely flat if and only if S is a semilattice. A description of monoids over which all right acts are weakly flat (Theorem 4.7.5) and a general characterization of absolutely flat monoids (Theorem 4.8.12) was found by V. Fleischer in [Fle82]. As a corollary of these results he proved that a monoid S with commuting idempotents is absolutely flat if and only if S is an inverse monoid. S. ulman-Fleming and K. McDowell started in [Bu/Mc83] their long series of investigations connected with (right) absolute flatness. They proved independently that every inverse monoid is absolutely flat (Theorem 4.8.16). Some results in [Bu/Mc83] are presented in the context of semigroups. They proved Theorem 4.8.10 and presented an example of an absolutely flat non-inverse semigroup. ulman-Fleming and McDowell [Bu/Mc85a] characterized right absolutely flat generalized inverse semigroups by a condition on the subsemigroup of all idempotents. Kilp [Kil85a] generalized some of Bulman-Fleming and McDowell's results on Rees matrix semigroups. Bulman-Fleming and McDowell [Bu/Mc87] investigated right absolutely flat bands in more detail. In [Bu/Mc88] they gave a new, more direct proof of Theorem 4.8.12. As a new application of this theorem they proved that the multiplicative monoid of any semisimple Artinian ring is absolutely flat and pointed at the following facts. (1) There exists an absolutely flat monoid which is neither strongly left nor strongly right reversible. (m) There exists a strongly left reversible regular monoid which is not left absolutely flat. (n) The conjunction of conditions (R) and (L) does not imply regularity. Shoji [Sho88] proved Theorem 4.8.11. Later Bulman-Fleming, McDowell and J. Renshaw [Bu/Mc/Re90] simplified the "only if" part o f t h a t proof. By Theorem 4.7.5 a monoid S is weakly right absolutely flat if and only if every cyclic right S-act is weakly flat. This mirrors the result from ring theory that a ring is right absolutely flat if and only if all cyclic right modules over it are flat. It was shown in [Bu/Mc/Re90] that for right absolute flatness of monoids the corresponding statement is false. Bulman-Fleming and McDowell [Bu/Mc90c] examine some situations in which weakly flat acts are flat and prove the following: (p) If S is semigroup (with 0) which is the union of its (O-)minimal left ideals then every weakly flat right 5'1-act is flat. (q) If S is a commutative monoid then every weakly flat cyclic S'-act is flat. (r) If S is a commutative monoid whose principal ideals form a chain then every weakly flat 5-act is flat.
8 Flatness
359
Bulman Fleming and V. Gould [Bu/Go90] proved that S is right absolutely flat if and only if all finitely presented right S-acts are flat. Shoji [Sho93] proved that the multiplicative monoid of any von Neumann regular ring is absolutely flat (Theorem 4.8.17).
On some related results

Now we will touch very briefly the following two related topics. Basing on the fact that any monoid S can be considered as a one-object category and a right S-act can be considered as a functor from this category to the category of all sets (cf. Proposition 1.7.6) some results concerning different flatnesses of acts can be generalized to the case of categories and functors. Some of possible generalizations were considered by . B. Kacov (Katsov). We mention here his papers [Kac76] and [Kac78] only as examples (see also his more recent papers [Kac97a] and [Kac97b]). The connection with semigroup amalgams is probably the most important link of the theory of flat acts with pure semigroup theory. The theory of amalgamation in semigroups was first extensively studied by J. M. Howie (see [HOW76]). Recall that a semigroup S is called an amalgamation base if for any semigroups and U containing 5 as a subsemigroup, the amalgam [T, U; S] can be embedded into a semigroup. . E. Hall [Hal78] investigated relationships betweeen so-called representation extension properties and amalgamations for semigroups. Before formulating the main result of this paper we need the following definition which will be given here in the form used in [Bu/Mc84], An embedding S > of monoids has Representation Extension Property if for every right 5-act As the natural mapping As > As s T is an embedding. An embedding S * of monoids has Free Representation Extension Property if for every embedding As > Bs of right 5"-acts the induced mapping As < S > sT > Bs < 8 > ST is an embedding. A monoid S is said to have either of the above properties (or their left-right duals) if all embeddings S > have the corresponding property. These properties are denoted by (REP) and ( F R E P ) , respectively, and the dual properties are denoted by ( R E P ) O P and ( F R E P ) O P , respectively. Hall [Hal78] proved that if a monoid S has both (REP) and (FREP) then it is an amalgamation base. Bulman-Fleming and McDowell [Bu/Mc84] investigated the relationship between absolutely flat monoids and amalgamation bases. They began with the following two results. (s) A monoid S is right (respectively left) absolutely flat if and only if it has (FREP)P (resp. (FREP)).
360
(t) If a monoid S has ( F R E P ) (respectively ( FREP ) P ) then it has ( R E P ) P (resp. {REP)). These results imply the main result of [Bu/Mc84] stating that every absolutely flat monoid is an amalgamation base. An alternative proof of this theorem may be also found in [Fli90]. Prom the more close analysis of Rees matrix semigroups presented in [Bu/Mc84] it becomes clear that not every amalgamation base is absolutely flat. In [Hal78] and [How81] inverse semigroups were shown to be amalgamation bases. It is clear now that this result is a corollary of Theorem 4.8.16. Later the relationship between flatness and amalgamation in semigroups has been considered in many papers. We point to papers [Ren86a], [Ren86b], [Ren91] by Renshaw and [Sho90a], [Sho93] by Shoji only as examples. Note that [Kil94] is a survey on (right) absolutely flat monoids.
9 Condition (P)
When flat implies Condition (P) (4.9.1-4.9.6) When principally weakly flat implies Condition (P) (4.9.7) When torsion free implies Condition (P) (4.9.8) When all right acts satisfy Condition (P) (4.9.9-4.9.10) Comments
W h e n flat implies Condition (P)

We start with monocyclic acts. T h e o r e m 9.1 (Bulman-Fleming and Normak [Bu/No96]). For any monoid S the following statements are equivalent: (i) All weakly flat monocyclic right acts satisfy Condition (P). (ii) All flat monocyclic right acts satisfy Condition (P). (iii) Every idempotent of S different from 1 is a right zero. Proof. Implication (i) => (ii) is obvious. (ii) => (iii). Let e,s S, e an idempotent, e 1. Then the monocyclic act S/p(ese,e) is flat by Proposition 3.12.14. By assumption, S/p(ese,e) satisfies Condition (P). Suppose ese e. Then either e is right invertible or e C (ese) TZ 1 by Theorem 3.13.8. Since e 1 the first is impossible. Hence there exists
9 Condition ()
361
S such that esex = 1, which again means that e is right invertible. Thus ese = e. Now se is an idempotent and the monocyclic act S/p(se,e) is flat by Proposition 3.12.14. By assumption, S/p(se, e) satisfies Condition (P). Suppose se e. Then eC(se)TZl by Theorem 3.13.7. Hence there exists y S such that sey = 1, which implies se = 1, a contradiction. Thus se = e and so e is a right zero of S. (iii) => (i). Assume every idempotent of S different from 1 is a right zero, and suppose that S/p is weakly flat for = p{s,t), s,t S, s t. By Proposition 3.11.6 we may assume that s is regular. Suppose that s = ss's, s' S. If ss' 1 or s's 1 then s is a right zero by (iii). Since S/p is weakly flat, there exist u,v S such that us = vt by Proposition 3.11.5. Then s = vt and = p(vt, t). Now t is regular by Proposition 3.10.9. Suppose t = tt't, t' S. If tt' 1 or t't 1 then t is also a right zero element and S/p cannot be weakly flat by Proposition 3.11.5. Thus, tt' = 1 = t't and so = p(st', 1). Hence S/p satisfies Condition (P) by Theorem 3.13.8. If ss' = 1 = s's then = p(l, ts'). Hence S/p satisfies Condition (P), again by Theorem 3.13.8. For Rees factor acts we have the following T h e o r e m 9 . 2 . For any monoid S the following (i) All flat right Rees factor statements are (P). li^sl > 2 , of S equivalent:
acts of S satisfy Condition
(ii) S is not right reversible or no proper satisfies Condition (LU).
right ideal Ks,
(iii) (a) S is not right reversible or (b) S contains (1 and, may-be, 0) and satisfies Condition (ALU) elements S does not contain any infinite
at most two
idempotents distinct
sequence
of pairwise
Si, S2, , S{, . . .
where s^+is^ = Si for any iE. . Proof (i) ^ (ii). By Exercise 3.12.2(2) and by Corollary 3.13.7 the oneelement right S-act is both flat and satisfies Condition (P) if and only if S is right reversible. By Proposition 3.13.9 the Rees factor act S/Ks by a proper right ideal Ks satisfies Condition (P) if and only if |-RTs| = 1 and S/Ks is flat if and only if K s satisfies Condition (LU) by Theorem 3.12.17. (ii) (iii). Suppose S is right reversible and 1 e2 = e S. Since e is a left identity for any element from the right ideal e^, this right ideal satisfies Condition (LU) and it follows from (ii) that |5 = 1. Hence e is a left zero. Moreover, e is the only left zero of S and therefore the zero. Indeed, otherwise
362
the subset consisting of all left zeros would be a proper right ideal satisfying Condition (LU) containing more than one element. Suppose S contains an infinite sequence of pairwise distinct elements Sij S2 j j where Si+iSj = s^ for any i G N. Let K s = Ui<ENs*'-' Then, again, Kg is a non-trivial right ideal satisfying Condition (LU) since every element of it has a left identity in Ks- But this contradicts (ii). (iii) = > (ii). Suppose condition (ii) is not satisfied. Then S is right reversible and there exists a proper right ideal K s satisfying Condition (LU), |"s| > 2. Then for 0 si Ks there exists s2 Ks such that S2S1 = si. Clearly S2 0 and there exists S3 K s such that S3 52 = S2 Proceeding we get a sequence of non-zero elements Si, S2, .. , Si, ... where s^+isi = s t for any i e N. If elements in this sequence are pairwise distinct Condition (ALU) in (iii) is not satisfied. Otherwise there exist k,l EN, I > k, such that s; = Sfc. Now SfcS^ = sisk = s;s;_ 1 . . . Sfc+iSfc = Sk and Sk is an idempotent different from 1 and 0. Hence the other part of (iii)(b) is not satisfied. Proposition 9.3 (Bulman-Fleming [Bul92]). If all flat finitely generated S-acts satisfy Condition (P) then E(S) = {1}. right
Proof. Suppose e E(S) and e 1. Then Ks = eS is a proper right ideal of S and i S U ^ S is an act with two generating elements which is flat by Proposition 3.12.19. By assumption SUKs S satisfies Condition (P). Then SUKs S has to be a coproduct of cyclic acts by Proposition 3.13.14, a contradiction. The following result shows that the condition E(S) = { 1 } is insufficient for all flat right S'-acts to satisfy Condition (P). Proposition 9.4 (Bulman-Fleming and Kilp [Bu/Ki97]). Take the commutative monoid S = {xq,xi,X2, | Xi+iXi = Xi = X{Xt+1, i = 0 , 1 , . . . ) U { 1 } . Then E(S) = { 1 } and there exists a proper (right) ideal Ks of S such that the Rees factor act S/Ks is flat but does not satisfy Condition (P). Proof. Observe that 5 = { x f | i > 0 , n > l } U { l } , with x^xf equal to ? if i < j, and equal to if = j. All ideals of S are principal except for Ks = 5 \ { 1 } . Since k Ksk for every k Ks, Ks is an ideal for which is flat but does not satisfy Condition (P). S/Ks
Golchin and Renshaw [Go/Re97] conjectured that all (weakly) flat cyclic S'acts have property (P) if and only if S = CON, where C is the right cancellative
9 Condition ()
363
submonoid of S, is either empty or consists of right nil elements of 5, and for every a e C,b e N, b belongs to Sab. Recall (see Definition 1.3.17) t h a t an element s of a semigroup S is called nil if there exists e such t h a t s n = 0 and right nil if there exists G such t h a t sn is a right zero of S. The next proposition shows that even commutative monoids over which all weakly flat acts satisfy Condition (P) do not necessarily have the form conjectured in [Go/Re97]. P r o p o s i t i o n 9.5 (Bulman-Fleming and Kilp [Bu/Ki97]).
(x,y flat I xy S-act = has = yx) that U {1} are (P). is commutative cancellable with nor exactly nil. contains elements neither The one Moreover, monoid idempotent, every S = and weakly
property
It is easily seen t h a t S = {xm | m e N} U {yn | e N} U {1}, where xmyn = xm = ynxrn for all m,n e N. Every element of (y) U {1} and no element of (x) is a cancellable element of S. Let Ag be a weakly flat right 5-act, and suppose as = a't for some a, a' G As, s,t e S. If s = 1 then a = a't,ar = a' 1, and ts = It give the desired conclusion, while if t = 1 a similar argument can be given. Henceforth we assume that s and t are different from 1. Because A s is weakly flat, we know from Lemma 3.11.1 t h a t the pairs (a, s) and (a', t) are connected by a tossing
Proof. a a2t2 = = aiSi
Oiii = 22
a3s3
SiS = 122
s2z2 = t2z-s
of length n, where Si, ti e S, ai As, 1 1 then a shorter tossing connecting (a, s) to (a', t) can be found. The proof is divided into three cases. Case 1: s = yk, t = yl (1 < k <l)
In this case, Zi = yk> (ki > k) for 2 < i < n. Because yk is right cancellable, we find that the shorter tossing a a2s2ytk2 k a2t2 = a3s3 ^n^n
S2yk2
kyk sny ,k n
t 2 yk 0
&
tny
serves in place of the original one.
364
IV Homological classification of monoids 1)
Case 2: s = yk, t = xl (k,l>
If z2 = yk then si = t\ since y is cancellable and we have the shorter tossing a2S2 a2t2 = a3s3 O'n^n s2yk = t2z3
Sn^n tnX{ .
If z2 = xl. The equality sis = t\z2 in this case becomes S\yk = t\x\ and so necessarily s\ = xp for some > 1. The facts that xp = xpyk and xl = xlyk can now be used to obtain the shorter tossing a = a2s2z2 a2t2 = a3s3 ^n^n The case s = xk, Case 3: s = xk, t = 1 (1 < k < I) s2z2yk = t2z3
SnZn tnX .
t = yl can be handled similarly.
Now the original tossing has the form Pi a a\x\ aiy> = 2 a2y2 = a3xf
a
xf ^ XPnXkn
= =
ylxk2 y2xk3
nVnln
a>
- ynXl
where a; G As, Ui,Xi G {x, y}, mi,Pi > 0, ki > k for all i, and > 1. If m\ 0 or p2 = 0 the tossing can be immediately shortened, so we assume m\,p2 > 1. If yi and x2 are not both equal to then the results of Case 1 and Case 2 (applied to the equality a^y1 2) yield a" G As and u,v G S such that = a"u, a2 ", and uy1 . We may now write the shorter tossing a = a ux\ a " v y = a3xf anymi k 2
// Pi
ux\lxk xPnxkn
vy2xk*
a'
= ynxl .
Finally, we are left with the situation in which y\ = x2 x; from x\1xk = x x' and the facts that mi > 1 and k2 > k, we conclude that = x. Now, = aixPl = a1xrni+k2~k = a2xP2+k2~k and x^+k^-kxk = y2xk\ The shorter tossing a = a2xP2+k2~k a2y2 = a3xf xp^~kxk = y2xk* anyn finishes the proof. - a' x%lxkn = ynxl
9 Condition ()
365
Exercise 9.6 [Bu/Mc90a], Prove that a monoid S is right cancellative if and only if S is a left monoid and every flat right 5-act satisfies Condition (P).
W h e n principally weakly flat implies Condition (P)

From Theorems 4.9.2 and 4.7.1 one obtains the following T h e o r e m 9.7. For any monoid S the following statements (i) All principally (P) (ii) S is right reversible and no proper right ideal Ks, |"s| > 2 , of S satisfies Condition (LU). (iii) S is right reversible, contains at most two idempotents 0) and satisfies Condition (ALU) elements (1 and, may-be, are equivalent: Condition
weakly flat right Rees factor acts of S satisfy
S does not contain any infinite sequence of pairwise Si, S2, . . , Si,. . .
distinct
where Si+iSi s, for any i G N.
W h e n torsion free implies Condition (P)

T h e o r e m 9.8. All torsion free right Rees factor acts of a monoid S satisfy Condition (P) if and only if S is either a right reversible right cancellative monoid or a right cancellative monoid with a zero adjoined. Proof Necessity. Assume that all torsion free right Rees factor acts of a monoid S satisfy Condition (P). Then all torsion free right Rees factor acts of a monoid S are weakly flat and S is a right reversible left almost regular monoid by Theorem 4.7.2. Then S is left by the left-right dual of Proposition 4.1.3. As all principally weakly flat right Rees factor acts of S satisfy Condition (P), S contains at most two idempotents (1 and, may-be, 0) by Theorem 4.9.7. Suppose 0 s e S. Since S is left there exists an idempotent e G S such that es s and xs = ys, x,y 6 S, implies xe ye. Since s 0, one has e = 1. This implies that s is right cancellable. Sufficiency. Suppose S is is either a right reversible right cancellative monoid or a right cancellative monoid with a zero adjoined. Let K s be a right ideal of S. If Ks = S or Ks {0} then S/Ks is torsion free and satisfies Condition (P). If Ks S and Ks {0} then there exists an element c 6 Ks
366
such that c is right cancellable but not right invertible. Then 1 c = Oc but 1 0 and so S/Ks cannot be torsion free.
W h e n all right acts satisfy Condition (P)

The equivalence of conditions (i) and (iii) in the following theorem was proved in [Liu94]. T h e o r e m 9.9. For any monoid S the following statements (i) All cyclic right S-acts satisfy Condition (P). (ii) All monocyclic right S-acts satisfy Condition (P). are equivalent:
(iii) All right Rees factor acts of S satisfy Condition (P). (iv) S is a group or a group with a zero adjoined. Proof. Implications (i) => (ii) and (i) => (iii) are obvious. (ii) => (iv). Assume that all monocyclic right S-acts satisfy Condition (P). Then they are weakly flat and thus S is a regular monoid satisfying Condition (R). If all monocyclic right S-acts satisfy Condition (P) then all flat monocyclic right S-acts satisfy Condition (P) and thus all idempotents of S different from 1 are right zeros. But since Condition (R) implies right reversibility, S can contain at most one right zero which then is the zero. Suppose 0 s S. Since S is regular there exists t S such that sts = s. Now st = ts = 1 which implies that S is a group or a group with a zero adjoined. (iii) => (iv). Assume that all Rees factor acts of S satisfy Condition (P). Then all torsion free Rees factor acts of S satisfy Condition (P) and S is either a right cancellative monoid or a right cancellative monoid with a zero adjoined by Theorem 4.9.8. But since all Rees factor acts of S satisfy Condition (P) all Rees factor acts of S are torsion free and every right cancellable element of S is right invertible by Theorem 4.6.1. This implies that S is a group or a group with a zero adjoined. (iv) (i). Let S be a group and a right congruence on S. Suppose s pt, s,t S. Take u = 1 and = s i - 1 . Then up 1, pi and us = s = = vt. Thus S/p satisfies Condition (P) by Theorem 3.13.4. Now let S = G where G is a group and a right congruence on S. Suppose spt, s,t S. We have again to show that there exist u,v S such that up 1, pi and us = vt. If s t = 0 then we can take u = = 1. If t 0 we can repeat the argument used above in the case of groups. T h e o r e m 9.10 (Normak [Nor87]). All right S-acts and only if S is a group. satisfy Condition (P) if
10 Strong flatness
367
Proof. Necessity. Since over a group with a zero adjoined there exist finitely generated right acts which are not coproducts of cyclic acts it follows from Proposition 3.13.14 that all right acts over a group with a zero cannot satisfy Condition (P). Sufficiency. Follows from Theorem 4.9.9 since by Proposition 1.5.34 all right acts over a group are coproducts of cyclic right acts.
Comments
Liu [Liu94] showed that, under the additional hypothesis that S is left PP, all flat cyclic right 5-acts have property (P) if and only if S is either a right cancellative monoid, or a right cancellative monoid with zero adjoined. Assuming existence of a regular left 5-act, Liu demonstrated that the condition E(S) = {1} is necessary and sufficient for all flat cyclic right 5-acts to have property (P). Laan [Laa99a] found necessary and sufficient conditions under which all weakly injective (injective, cofree) acts satisfy Condition (P).
10 Strong
flatness
When Condition (P) implies strongly flat (4.10.1-4.10.2) When flat implies strongly flat (4.10.3-4.10.5) When principally weakly flat implies strongly flat (4.10.6) When torsion free implies strongly flat (4.10.7-4.10.8) When all right acts are strongly flat (4.10.9-4.10.11) Comments Since by Proposition 3.14.7 for cyclic acts Condition (E) implies strong flatness in all formulations of this section which concern cyclic acts only that is in all formulations except 3.10.2(i) and 3.10.5, the words are strongly flat may be replaced by satisfy Condition (E).
When Condition (P) implies strongly flat

We start with Rees factor acts. Since by Proposition 3.13.9 and Proposition 3.14.10 Rees factor acts by proper right ideals are strongly flat if and only if they satisfy Condition (P) we obtain from Corollary 3.13.7 and Exercise 3.14.3(4) the following
368
Theorem 10.1. All right Rees factor acts of a monoid S satisfying Condition (P) are strongly flat if and only if S is not right reversible or S is left collapsible. The equivalence of conditions (ii), (iii) and (v) of the following theorem was shown in [Bul92] and the equivalence of conditions (ii) and (iv) in [Ki/La99]. Theorem 10.2. For any monoid S the following statements (i) All finitely generated S-acts satisfying Condition (ii) All cyclic right S-acts satisfying Condition (iii) All monocyclic are equivalent:
(P) are strongly flat.
(P) are strongly flat. (P) are strongly flat.
right S-acts satisfying Condition of S is left
(iv) Every right reversible submonoid (v) S is aperiodic.
collapsible.
Proof. Implications (i)
(ii) and (ii) => (iii) are obvious.
(ii) => (iv). Let C S be a right reversible submonoid of S and let be the right congruence on S defined by s pt if there exist p,q G such that ps = qt. By Lemma 3.13.12 the cyclic act S/p satisfies Condition (P). Since for any p e P one has 1 = pi, pi and thus C [l] p . Suppose s,t G P. By right reversibility of there exist p,q e such that ps = qt. By assumption, S/p is strongly flat and thus satisfies Condition (E). Then [l] p is left collapsible by Lemma 3.14.14. Hence there exists r [l] p such that rp = rq. Now, since 1 prp rq there exist u,v such that u = ul = vrp = vrq. But then us vrps vrqt ut and thus is left collapsible. (iv) (v). Let s S and = {1, s, s 2 , s3, }. Then is obviously right reversible. By assumption it must be left collapsible. Hence for elements 1, s there exists a non-negative integer such that s n l = sns or sn sn+1. Thus S is aperiodic. (iii) = > (v). Let s e S and set = /o(l,s). Then S/p satisfies Condition (P) by Theorem 3.13.8. By assumption, S/p is strongly flat. Hence it satisfies Condition (E) and consequently s pi implies the existence of u S such that us = u and up 1, by Lemma 3.14.8. Now, by Corollary 3.8.9 there exist m,n> 0 such that smu = But then 8 n + 1 = (s m )s = S and thus S is aperiodic. (v) (ii). Suppose S is aperiodic. Assume that S/p satisfies Condition (P) for a right congruence on S. Then = [l] p is right reversible by Lemma 3.13.13. Hence for p,q there exist u,v G such that up = vq. Since S is
m
M - SÛ = Sn
10 Strong flatness
369
aperiodic there exist , such that um = e and vn = f are idempotents with eu e and fv f . Right reversibility of implies the existence of u\,v\ G such that u\e V\f. Then we have (uxe)p = (uxeu)p = (uie){up) = (vxf){vq) = {v\fv)q = (vif)q = (uie)q .
This means that is left collapsible. Since S/p satisfies Condition (P), for spt, s,t G S, there exist U\,V\ G such that U\S = v\t. Since is left collapsible there exists such that zui zv\. Now w = zui pi and ws = wt. Thus S/p satisfies Condition (E) by Lemma 3.14.8 and consequently is strongly flat.
W h e n flat implies strongly flat

Starting with Rees factor acts we have from Theorems 4.9.2 and 4.10.1 the following Theorem 10.3. For any monoid S the following statements (i) All flat right Rees factor acts of S are strongly flat. or |s| > 2, of S are equivalent:
(ii) (a) S is not right reversible
(b) S is left collapsible and no proper right ideal Ks, satisfies Condition (LU). (iii) (a) S is not right reversible or
(b) S is left collapsible, contains at most two idempotents 0) and satisfies Condition (ALU).
(1 and,
may-be,
For monocyclic right acts we present a necessary condition which, as will be seen in the next section, is sufficient even for all cyclic weakly flat acts to be projective. Proposition 10.4 (Bulman-Fleming and Normak [Bu/No95]). If monocyclic right S-acts are strongly flat then S is right nil. all flat
Proof. Assume that all flat monocyclic right S'-acts are strongly flat. Then all monocyclic right S-acts satisfying Condition (P) are strongly flat and thus S is aperiodic by Theorem 4.10.2. Hence for every s 6 S there exists 6 such that sn is an idempotent. Since from Theorem 4.9.1 it follows that every idempotent of S different from 1 is a right-zero element, we get that S is right nil. The following result shows how far flatness and strong flatness stand from each other.
370
T h e o r e m 1 0 . 5 (Kilp and Knauer [Ki/Kn86]). All flat right S acts are strongly flat if and only if S {1}. Proof. Assume all flat right 5-acts are strongly flat. Then S is right nil by Proposition 4.10.4. If there exist elements in S different from 1 then there exist also idempotents different from 1. Let 1 e e S be such an idempotent. Then the amalgam 5 n e S S is flat by Proposition 3.12.19 but cannot be strongly flat because it is not a coproduct of cyclic acts (see Proposition 3.13.14). Hence 5 = {1}.
W h e n principally weakly flat implies strongly flat

Prom Theorems 4.10.3 and 4.9.7 one obtains the following T h e o r e m 1 0 . 6 . All principally weakly flat right Rees factor acts of S are strongly flat if and only if S is left collapsible and no proper right ideal Ks, \KS\ >2, of S satisfies Condition (LU).
W h e n torsion free implies strongly flat

Prom Theorems 4.9.8 and 4.10.6 one obtains for Rees factor acts the following T h e o r e m 1 0 . 7 . All torsion free right Rees factor strongly flat if and only if S is either a left collapsible or a right cancellative monoid with a zero adjoined. For monocyclic right acts we have the following L e m m a 10.8. If all torsion free monocyclic right S-acts are strongly flat then all monocyclic right S-acts are strongly flat. Proof. Assume all torsion free monocyclic right /S-acts are strongly flat. Then all monocyclic right .S-acts satisfying Condition (P) are strongly flat and S is aperiodic by Theorem 4.10.2. Hence the only right cancellable element of S is 1. But then, by Theorem 4.6.1, all right S acts are torsion free. acts of a monoid S are right cancellative monoid
W h e n all right acts are strongly flat

From Theorems 4.10.7 and 4.9.9, noting that a group is left collapsible if and only if it is one-element, one obtains the following
10 Strong flatness
371
Proposition 1 0 . 9 . If all right Rees factor acts of S are strongly flat then S is one-element or a group with a zero adjoined. For monocyclic acts we present a necessary condition which will turn out in the next section to be sufficient even for all cyclic acts to be projective. Proposition 1 0 . 1 0 . If all monocyclic { 1 } or S = { 1 , 0 } . right S-acts are strongly flat then S =
Proof. Assume that all monocyclic right 5-acts are strongly flat. Then S is right nil by Proposition 4.10.4. Suppose that 1 t S is not a right zero. Then there exists w e S such that wt t. By assumption, S/p(wt, t) is strongly flat. Hence t is right invertible by Proposition 3.14.9. Thus, t = 1, a contradiction. Hence all elements of S different from 1 are right zeros. Suppose that there are two different right zeros and y. Then S/p(x, y) has to be strongly flat by assumption. But this is impossible, because S is not right reversible.
Comments
For right reversible monoids Proposition 4.10.4 was proved in [Kil85b]. Recall that an act As is called equalizer flat if the functor As s preserves equalizers (see Definition 3.9.1). Strong flatness implies equalizer flatness by Lemma 3.9.2 and equalizer flatness implies Condition (E) by Proposition 3.15.3. Not many classification results using equlizer flatness are known. Bentz and Bulman-Fleming [Be/Bu99] give some new results connecting condition (E) and equalizer flatness, concentrating on situations in which the two coincide. They prove that if S is an inverse monoid, the full transformation monoid of a finite set (with operation symbols written to the right of their arguments), a right group with 1 adjoined, or the multiplicative monoid of a (von Neumann) regular ring, then every right 5-act that satisfies condition (E) is equalizer flat. Descriptions of monoids over which every right act satisfying Condition (E) is equalizer flat are given for the completely simple and completely 0-simple semigroups (with 1 adjoined). In [Ki/Kn92] the following was proved. If a monoid S contains a left zero then all generators in A c t S are equalizer flat if and only if S = { 1 } or {1,0}
372
11 Projectivity
When strongly flat implies projective (4.11.1-4.11.6) When Condition (P) implies projective (4.11.7-4.11.8) When flat implies projective (4.11.9-4.11.10) When principally weakly flat implies projective (4.11.11) When torsion free implies projective (4.11.12) When all right acts are projective (4.11.13-4.11.14) When right ideals are projective (4.11.15-4.11.20) Applications to endomorphism monoids of acts (4.11.21-4.11.25) Comments
W h e n strongly fiat implies projective

Since by Propositions 3.16.6, 3.14.10 and 3.17.15 Rees factor acts by proper right ideals are strongly flat if and only if they are projective we obtain from Exercise 3.14.3(4) and Proposition 3.17.2(4) the following T h e o r e m 11.1. All strongly flat right Rees factor acts of S are projective if and only if S is not left collapsible or S contains a left zero. T h e o r e m 11.2 (Kilp [Kil96a]). For any monoid S the following are equivalent: (i) All finitely generated strongly flat acts are projective. (ii) All cyclic strongly flat acts are projective. (iii) S satisfies (K) Condition statements
Every left collapsible submonoid of S contains a left zero.
Proof. Since both finitely generated strongly flat and finitely generated projective acts are coproducts of cyclic acts the conditions (i) and (ii) are equivalent. (ii) => (iii). Let C S be a left collapsible submonoid. By Lemma 3.14.13 using also Proposition 3.16.6 there exists a right congruence on S defined by s t if and only if there exist p,q G such that ps = qt, and S/ is strongly flat. By assumption S/p is projective. By Corollary 3.17.9 there exists an idempotent e 6 S such that 1 pe, and spt implies es = et for all s,t 6 S. Since 1 pe there exist p,q 6 such that = qe. Since 1 for any we have e = ex for all elements P. Now for an arbitrary r we have pr = (qe)r = q(er) = qe = . Hence is a left zero of and thus S satisfies Condition (K).
11 Projectivity
373
(iii)=> (ii). Let be a right congruence on S such that S/p is stronglyflat and let = [l] p . Then is a left collapsible sub monoid of S by Lemma 3.14.14. By assumption there exists a left zero, say e, in P . Of course, e is an idempotent and 1 pe. Suppose spt for s,t G S. It follows from Lemma 3.14.8 that there exists u G S such that 1 pu and us = ut. Since 1 pu we have u G and es = (eu)s = e(us) = e(ut) = (eu)t = et . Hence S/p is projective by Corollary 3.17.9.
Recall that a monoid S is right perfect if every right S-act has a projective cover (see Definition 3.17.25). It was shown in Theorem 3.17.26 that a monoid is right perfect if and only if it satisfies the Conditions (A) and (D) below. (A) Every right S*-act satisfies the ascending chain condition for cyclic subacts. (D) Every left unitary subsemigroup of S has a minimal right ideal generated by an idempotent. Lemma 11.3. If S satisfies Condition (A), then every right S-act Condition (P) is a coproduct of cyclic right S-acts. satisfying
Proof. Let As be an indecomposable act which satisfies Condition (P). Suppose that As is not cyclic. Let a As- Then aS ^ As- Since As is indecomposable, there exist b G A\aS and s,t G S such that as = bt. Now, by Condition (P) there exist u,v G S and c G As such that a = cu and b = cv. Hence aS C cS. Moreover, aS cS. Indeed, otherwise c = aw for some w G S which implies b G aS. But this means that it is possible to construct an infinite ascending chain of cyclic subacts of As. For the proofs of the two following results we refer the reader to the original paper by Fountain [Fou76]. Proposition 11.4. If S satisfies Condition (D), then every strongly flat cyclic right S-act is projective. Theorem 11.5. Let S be a monoid. All strongly flat right S-acts are projective if and only if S is right perfect. The following theorem presents one more characterization of right perfect monoids. Theorem 11.6 (Kilp [Kil96b]). A monoid S is right perfect if and only if S satisfies the Conditions (A) and (K).
374
Proof. Necessity. Suppose S is right perfect. Then S satisfies Condition (A) by Theorem 3.17.26, and Condition (K) by Theorems 4.11.5 and 4.11.2. Sufficiency. Suppose S satisfies the Conditions (A) and (K). Let Ag be a strongly flat act. Then As satisfies Condition (P) and thus is a coproduct of strongly flat cyclic ,5-acts by Lemma 4.11.3 which are projective by Theorem 4.11.2 since S satisfies Condition (K). Hence As is projective.
W h e n Condition (P) implies projective

From Theorems 4.11.1 and 4.10.1 one obtains the following T h e o r e m 11.7. All right Rees factor acts of S satisfying Condition (P) are projective if and only if S is not right reversible or S contains a left zero. From Theorems 4.11.2 and 4.10.2 one obtains the following T h e o r e m 11.8. For any monoid S the following statements are equivalent.
(i) All finitely generated S-acts satisfying Condition (P) are projective. (ii) All cyclic right S-acts satisfying Condition (P) are projective. (iv) Every right reversible submonoid of S contains a left zero.
W h e n flat implies projective

From Theorems 4.11.7 and 4.10.3 one obtains the following T h e o r e m 11.9. All flat right Rees factor acts of S projective if and only if S is not right reversible or S contains a zero and no proper right ideal Ks, \KS\ > 2 , of S satisfies Condition (LU). Recall that for monocyclic acts strong flatness and projectivity coincide (see Lemma 3.17.13). T h e o r e m 11.10 (ulman-Fleming and Normak [Bu/No95]). For any monoid S the following statements are equivalent: (i) All weakly flat cyclic right S-acts are projective. (ii) All flat cyclic right S-acts are projective. (iii) All weakly flat cyclic right S-acts are strongly flat. (iv) All flat cyclic right S-acts are strongly flat.
11 Projectivity () All weakly flat monocyclic right S-acts are (vi) All flat monocyclic right S-acts are (vii) S is right nil. projective.
375
projective.
Proof. Implications (i) = > (ii), (ii) = > (iv), (i) => (iii), (iii) = > (iv), (iii) = > (v), (iv) (vi) and () = - (vi) are obvious, (vi) (vii) is Proposition 4.10.4. (vii) (iii). Suppose that for a right congruence on S the cyclic act S/p is weakly flat and s pt, s,t G S. Since for cyclic acts strong flatness coincides with Condition (E) we have to show, by Lemma 3.14.8, that there exists u G S such that us ut and up 1. Since S/p is weakly flat there exist u',v' G S such that u's = v't, ! ( V kerp s ) 1 and ' ( V kerp t ) 1 by Proposition 3.11.5. Let m,n G No be smallest integers such that u! ( ker p s ) m 1 and ' ( ker pt)n 1 (cf. Corollary 1.1.7). We examine the possible cases. Case 1: 0. In this case ! = 1 and we have s = v't and v' (pokerpt)n 1. If also = 0 then ' 1 and we can take u 1. If > 0 then ' ( ker pt)n~l x py kerp t l for some x,y G S. Suppose y 1. Then yt = t and since S is right nil there exists k G such that yk is a right zero. Now ykt t which implies that t is also a right zero. Then, again, s = t and we can take u = 1. If y = 1 then pi and, by minimality of , 1. Since S is right nil there exists I G such that xl is a right zero. Then 1 1 which implies xlsps and xltpt and thus xlspxlt. Now by Proposition 3.11.5 there exist u",v" G S such that u"xls v"xlt. Since xl is a right zero this implies xls = xlt. Now we can take u = xl. Case 2: = 0. This follows by symmetry from Case 1. Case 3: m > 0 and > 0. In this case we have u's = v't and u' ( kerp s ) m _ 1 pw ker ps 1 ' ( ker pt) n _ 1 py ker pt 1
for some 2, w,x,y G S.
If w 1 and y 1 then (as in situation y 1 in Case 1) we obtain that both s and t are right zeros. This implies s = t and we can take u = 1. If y = 1 then (as in situation y = 1 in Case 1) we obtain that 1 1 and xl is a right zero. Then we can take u = xl. (iii) (i). Suppose that for a right congruence on 5 the cyclic act S/p is weakly flat and spt, s,t G S, s t. Then S/p is strongly flat by (iii). Hence there exists u G S such that us = ut and up 1, thus u 1. We already know that (iii) (vii) and thus there exists k G such that uk is a right zero. Thus k k u s = u t and up 1. All the right zeros uk appearing in this way (for different s, t) are p-related (to 1, hence to each other). Since S/p is strongly flat any two of such right zeros can be made equal by multiplication to some element from
376
S from the left side. This implies that all such right zeros are equal. That is there exists an idempotent e 5 such that e pi and es = et whenever spt. Now S/p is projective by Corollary 3.17.9.
When principally weakly flat implies projective

From Theorems 4.11.9 and 4.10.6 one obtains the following T h e o r e m 11.11. AU principally weakly flat right Rees factor acts of S are projective if and only if S contains a zero and no proper right ideal Ks, | Ks | > 2, of S satisfies Condition (LU).
When torsion free implies projective

Prom Theorems 4.11.11 and 4.10.7 one obtains the following T h e o r e m 11.12. All torsion free right Rees factor acts of S are projective if and only if S = {1} or S is a right cancellative monoid with a zero adjoined.
When all right acts are projective

T h e o r e m 11.13. For any monoid S the following statements are equivalent: (i) All right Rees factor acts of S are projective. (ii) All right Rees factor acts of S are strongly flat. (iii) S is one-element or a group with a zero adjoined. Proof, (i) =>- (ii) is obvious, (ii) => (iii) is Proposition 4.10.9. (iii) => (i) follows from Theorem 4.11.12 since all right acts over a group with a zero adjoined are torsion free. T h e o r e m 11.14. For any monoid S the following statements are equivalent: (i) All cyclic right S-acts are projective. (ii) All torsion free cyclic right S-acts are projective. (iii) All cyclic right S-acts are strongly flat. (iv) All torsion free cyclic right S-acts are strongly flat.
11 Projectivity () All monocyclic right S-acts are projective. (vi) All torsion free monocyclic right S-acts are projective. (vii) S = { 1} or S= {1,0}.
377
Proof. Implications (i) (ii), (ii) (vi), (i) (iii), (iii) => (iv) and (i) => (v) are obvious. Since for monocyclic acts strong flatness and projectivity coincide, (v) (vi) is Lemma 4.10.8. By the same reason (iv) (vi) becomes obvious and (vi) (vii) is Proposition 4.10.10. (vii) (i). Every cyclic act over S = {1,0} is either one-element and then projective because S contains zero, or isomorphic to Ss and then even free.
When right ideals are projective

Recall that an element s of a monoid S is called left e-cancellable for an idempotent e G S if s = se and st st', t,t' G S implies et = et'. A monoid S is called a right PP monoid if every element s G S is left e-cancellable for some idempotent e G S (see Definition 3.10.14). From Proposition 3.17.16 one obtains the following Theorem 11.15. All principal right ideals of a monoid S are projective if and only if S is a right monoid. In the following theorem we give a characterizarion of right P P monoids in an important special case. Theorem 11.16 (Fountain [Fou77b]). A monoid S is a right monoid with central idempotents if and only if S is a semilattice of left cancellative monoids. Proof. Necessity. Let S be a right PP monoid with central idempotents and let
Se = {a G S I a is left e-cancellable} .
Since any element of S is left e-cancellable for some idempotent e G S by w ere Theorem 4.11.15 we have S = U e e h the set of idempotents of S. Suppose e, / G and a G Se(l S f . Then a = ae and a = a f . From a ae and left /-cancellability of we get f = fe. Analogously from a = af and left e-cancellability of we get e = e f . Since idempotents commute e = / follows. Hence ^ = ^ eeE Now let e,f G E, a G Se ,b G Sf. Then a = ae, b = bf and ( a b ) ( e f ) = aebf = ab. Moreover, if ( ab)s = (ab)t, s,t G S then a(bs) = a(bt) and
378
left e-cancellability of a implies e(bs) = e(bt) = b(es) = b(et). Now left / cancellability of b implies f(es) = f{et) = (e/)s = ( e f ) t . This means that ab S e f . Analogously one gets ba Sej. Hence for any e the subset Se is a submonoid of S with identity e and S is a semilattice of the submonoids Se, e e E . Finally suppose that ca = cb for some elements a,b,c Se, e . By left e-cancellability of c we have then ea = eb or a = b. Hence Se is left cancellative for any e E. Sufficiency. Let S be a semilattice of left cancellative monoids Sa, I, let ea be the identity of Sa and c S an arbitrary element. Take c S 7 , 7 I. Then ce 7 = c. Suppose ca = cb for a Sa, b S, , I. Let I be such that ca S$. Then e7ea = e 7 e^ = eg. Since (ce<5)(e7a) = cega = caes = ca = cb = cbe$ = ce$b = (ces)(e7b) , where ce^, e 7 a, e7b S$ and since by assumption Sg is left cancellative, one obtains e 7 a = e7b. Hence S is a right monoid. For finitely generated and arbitrary right ideals we present some results without proofs. Similarly to the case of rings we use the following Definition 11.17. A monoid S is called right (semi-)hereditary ely generated) right ideals of S are projective. if all (finit-
Theorem 11.18 (Kilp [KIL71], Dorofeeva [Dor72]). A monoid S is right semihereditary if and only if S is right PP and all its incomparable principal right ideals are disjoint. Theorem 11.19 (Kilp [KIL71], Dorofeeva [Dor72]). A monoid S is right hereditary if and only if S is right semihereditary and satisfies the ascending chain condition for right ideals. Theorem 11.20 (Dorofeeva [Dor72]). For a monoid S the following conditions are equivalent: (i) S is right (semi-)hereditary.
(ii) All factor acts of (fg-)weakly injective right S-acts are (fg-)weakly injective. (iii) All factor acts of injective right S-acts are (fg-)weakly injective.
Applications to endomorphism monoids of acts

Without proofs we give some results connecting hereditarity of endomorphism monoids of free, projective and also injective 5'-acts to hereditarity of S itself.
11 Projectivity
379
As usual they may be considered as advanced exercises and stimula for further studies. Moreover, the results can be used to construct (semi-)hereditary or right/left monoids as endomorphism monoids. Theorem 11.21 (Fleischer and Knauer [Fl/Kn96]). Let F(I)S Act - S be \I\-free for a non-empty set. The monoid End (F(I)s) is left if and only if the intersection of any two (any ) left annihilator congruences on S is a left annihilator congruence corresponding to an idempotent of S where 2 < |/| is finite (where < |/| and I is infinite). There are many examples of monoids which fulfill the condition of this theorem, for example take right cancellative monoids or left zero semigroups with identity adjoined, which fulfill the condition in a trivial way. Theorem 11.22 (Normak [Nor90]). Let Qs Act - S be mjective. The monoid End(Qs) is left PP if and only if all factor acts of Qs are injective.O Theorem 11.23 (Normak [Nor90]). //End(Qs) is a left monoid for every injective act Qs Act S then S is right hereditary. These two results show parallels to ring theory (cf. for example [Len70]). Theorem 11.24 (Normak [Nor90]; Fleischer and Knauer [Fl/Kn96]). For monoid S the following conditions are equivalent: (i) S is right (semi-)hereditary. a
(ii) End(Ps) is right PP for every (finitely generated) projective act Ps. (iii) End(F^) is right PP for every (finitely generated) free act Fs. (iv) End(Fs) is right for at least one free act Fs with infinite basis (finite basis with at least two elements). The asymmetry between left and right in Theorems 4.11.21 and 4.11.24 disappears if instead of P P we consider hereditarity. Theorem 11.25 ([Kn/No91], [Fl/Kn94b]). For a monoid S, for a non-empty set I with |/| > 1 and for ef ei S, i I, the following conditions are equivalent: (i) Principal left ideals o / E n d ( ] j eiS1) form a tree with respect to inclusion. (ii) Principal right ideals o / E n d d J e ^ ) form a tree with respect to inclusion. (iii) End(JJeiS') is left semihereditary.
(iv) End(JJejS') is right semihereditary.
380
(v) End(JJejS') is left (vi) End(]J etS) is right (vii) | / | = 2 and eiSei
hereditary. hereditary. and e2Se2 are isomorphic groups.
Comments
Another characterization of monoids over which all cyclic strongly flat right S-acts are projective, different from Theorem 4.11.2, was given in [Kna83]. There it was proved that a monoid S has this property if and only if S satisfies the following two conditions: ( F P i ) for all go> <7i> S with qiqi-i = qi, i = 1 , 2 . . . , there exists a natural number m such that qmQi Qm for allz = 0 , 1 , . . . , and (FP2) for any set of idempotents of S with the property that for e i , . . . , en, /1,-j/m ^ there exists / such that f e \...en = f fx . fm the subsemigroup of S generated by contains a left zero. Note that in analogy to Condition (ALU) first mentioned in Theorem 4.9.2 the Condition ( F P i ) could be called (ARU) since it is an ascending chain condition for right units. In [Kna83] examples of monoids were given showing that Conditions ( F P i ) and (FP2) are independent. It was shown also that the bicyclic monoid fulfills neither ( F P i ) nor (FP2) and that a left zero semigroup with an identity adjoined obviously fulfills both. The investigation of perfect monoids was initiated by Isbell [Isb71], who proved that a monoid is right perfect if and only if it satisfies Conditions (A) and (D) or, equivalently, Conditions (A) and (M^) where (ML) denotes the minimum condition for principal left ideals for S (see Theorem 3.17.26). Using results from [Isb71] Fountain [Fou76] proved that a monoid is right perfect if and only if all strongly flat right acts over it are projective (Theorem 4.11.5). Note that the necessity of this statement was extended to categories by Isbell [Isb76]. Theorem 4.11.6 is a new description of perfect monoids in the sense that Condition (K) used here is weaker than Conditions () and (D). Both of them imply Condition (K) but the converse implications are not true. Indeed, let S be a free monoid with one generating element. Then S satisfies Condition (K) but neither Condition (M^) nor Condition (D). For commutative monoids a characterization of monoids as semilattices of cancellative monoids was given by Kilp [Kil73]. The notion of right P P monoids was generalized to semigroups by Fountain [Fou82]. Semigroups with the analogous property are called right abundant.
12 Projective generators
381
A right abundant semigroup is called right adequate (see [Fou79]) if the set of all its idempotents is a subsemilattice. These semigroups have been studied in numerous papers. Commutative cancellative semihereditary and hereditary monoids are called Prfer monoids and Dedekind monoids, respectively. They have been studied in [Dor72] and [Do/Ma/Sa75a], [Do/Ma/Sa75b].
Generators (4.12.1-4.12.4) When projective implies generator (4.12.5) When strongly flat implies projective generator (4.12.6-4.12.7) When Condition ( P ) implies projective generator (4.12.8)
Generators
For principal right ideals one obtains from Corollary 3.18.4 the following Proposition 12.1. All principal right ideals of a monoid S are generators in Act S if and only if for every S there exists an idempotent e 5 such that eV\ and kerA^ < kerA e . For arbitrary right ideals we have a result in one direction Theorem 12.2 ([Ki/Kn/Mi94]). If S is a simple monoid then all right ideals of S are generators in Act S. Proof. Let Ks be any right ideal of S. Let As : Ks > S for any s G S be defined by A s (k) = sk for any k <G Kg- Obviously all mappings As are homomorphisms of right Sacts. Let J |J s e 5 ImA s . Then J = SKs is a two-sided ideal of S and thus J S since S is simple. Hence there exists t e S such that 1 e Im A t . But then \t : Ks > S is an epimorphism and Ks is a generator in Act 5" by Theorem 2.3.16. It will follow from the next proposition that for a large class of monoids the sufficient condition of the previous theorem is also necessary. For this we need a lemma which presents the condition of Corollary 3.18.4 in more detail.
382 Lemma zS is a zx = zy, and if
1 2 . 3 . Let S be a monoid and S. If the principal right ideal generator in A c t S there exist u,v S such that vu = I, and x,y S, implies vx = vy. Moreover, zu is a left cancellable element is not left cancellable then zv is not left cancellable.
Proof. Since zS is a generator in A c t S there exists an epimorphism / : zS > Ss by Theorem 2.3.16. Let u S be such that f(zu) = 1 and let f(z) = v. Then vu f(z)u = f(zu) ~ 1. Suppose zx zy, x,y S. Then vx = f(z)x = f(zx) = f(zy) - f(z)y = vy .
If (zu)x (zu)y, x,y S, then = f(zu)x = f((zu)x) = f((zu)y) = f{zu)y = y .
Hence zu is a left cancellable element. If is not left cancellable then zv clearly is not left cancellable. Proposition 12.4. Let S be a non-left cancellative the identity and = S \ J\. Assume that either (1) consists only of left cancellable elements, monoid, or or J\ the J-class
of
(2) consists only of non-left cancellable (3) contains an element of finite Then all right ideals of S are generators monoid. order.
elements,
in A c t S if and only if S is a simple
Proof Necessity. Suppose S is not a simple monoid but all right ideals of S are generators in A c t S. Note that S \ J\ is an ideal of S. We show in all three cases that 0 leads to a contradiction. (1) Since S is not left cancellative there exists a non-left cancellable element S. Let u,v S be the elements corresponding to according to Lemma 4.12.3. Then uv 1. Indeed, from uv = 1 we would get that zx = zy, x,y 5 , implies = y, hence would be left cancellable. Now let t . By (1) the element tv is left cancellable and from vu = 1 we get zvuv = zv which implies uv = 1, a contradiction. (2) Let and let u and be the elements corresponding to 2 according to Lemma 4.12.3. Then zu and zu is left cancellable by Lemma 4.12.3, a contradiction.
383
(3) Let s G be an element of finite order. Then there exists a natural number such t h a t sn G is an idempotent. Let now u and be the elements corresponding to 2 according to Lemma 4.12.3. Then it, G J\. By Lemma 4 .12.3 we get from zl zz the equality vl = vz which implies G K, a contradiction. Hence S is a simple monoid. Sufficiency. This follows from Theorem 4.12.2.
When projective implies generator

T h e o r e m 12.5. For any monoid S the following statements (i) All projective right S-acts are generators in A c t S. (ii) All projective cyclic right S-acts are generators in A c t S. (iii) All projective monocyclic right S-acts are generators in A c t S. are equivalent:
(iv) All projective principal right ideals of S are generators in A c t S. (v) e J 1 for every idempotent Proof Implications (i) e G S. (iv) are obvious.
(ii), (ii) =i> (iii) and (ii)
(iii) (iv). Using Corollary 3 . 1 7 . 9 it is sufficient to show that every principal right ideal of S generated by an idempotent is a generator in A c t S. But if e G S is an idempotent one easily obtains from Corollary 3.8.7 that for = p(e, 1) the mapping : S/ > eS, defined by
</1) =
E S
for every s G S, is an isomorphism of right S-acts. As S/p is a generator in A c t S by assumption, eS is a generator in A c t S as well. (iv) (i). This is part of Proposition 3.18.6 since every projective right act is a coproduct of cyclic right acts isomorphic to principal right ideals generated by idempotents. (iv) (v). Let e G S be an idempotent. Then the right ideal eS is projective and thus a generator in A c t S by assumption. Then there exist u,v G S such that vu 1 and ex ~ ey, x,y G S, always implies vx = vy by Lemma 4.12.3. In particular, since ee = e l then ve = v. Now veu = vu = 1 which implies e j 1. (v) (iv). Let zS for G S be a projective right ideal. Then zS = eS by Corollary 3.17.9. By assumption e j l . Then Proposition 3.18.8 implies t h a t zS is a generator in A c t S.
384
W h e n strongly flat implies projective generator

It will turn out in the following section that the condition of the next proposition is sufficient even for freeness of all strongly flat cyclic acts. Proposition 12.6. Let S be a monoid. If all strongly flat cyclic right S-acts are projective generators in Act S then S satisfies Condition (T) the only left collapsible submonoid of S is the one-element submonoid. Proof By hypothesis all strongly flat cyclic .S-acts are projective. Hence by Theorem 4.11.2 every left collapsible submonoid of S contains a left zero. Let 1 e G S be an idempotent. Then eS is projective and hence, by hypothesis, a generator in Act S. Now S contains the bicyclic monoid as a submonoid by Corollary 3.18.3. Let be the set of all idempotents of B. Then is a left collapsible submonoid of S not containing a left zero, a contradiction. Hence the only idempotent of S is 1. Now let be a left collapsible submonoid of S and its left zero. Then is an idempotent and hence = 1. But this means that |P| = 1. It will turn out in the following section that the condition of the next proposition is sufficient even for freeness of all strongly flat acts (see Theorem 4.13.6). For Condition (A) see Theorem 3.17.26. Proposition 12.7. Let S be a monoid. If all strongly flat right S-acts are projective generators in A c t S then S satisfies Conditions (A) and (T) . Proof By hypothesis all strongly flat right .S-acts are projective generators in A c t S. Then all strongly flat right .S-acts are projective. Hence S is right perfect by Theorem 4.11.5 and thus satisfies (A) by Theorem 3.17.26 or Theorem 4.11.6. Since by hypothesis all strongly flat cyclic right .S-acts are projective generators in A c t S, S satisfies Condition (T) by Proposition 4.12.6.
W h e n Condition ( P ) implies projective generator

T h e o r e m 12.8. For any monoid S the following statements (i) All right S-acts satisfying Condition (P) are free. (ii) All right S-acts A c t - S. satisfying Condition (P) are projective generators in are equivalent:
(iii) All cyclic right S-acts satisfying Condition (P) are free.
13 Freeness and overview
385
(iv) All cyclic right S-acts satisfying Condition ( P ) are projective generators in Act S. (v) All monocyclic right S-acts satisfying Condition ( P ) are free. (vi) All monocyclic right S-acts satisfying Condition ( P ) are projective generators in Act S. (vii) S = {1}. Proof. Implications (i) => (ii), (ii) (iv), (iv) => (vi), (i) => (iii), (iii) => (v), (v) (vi) and (vii) = > (i) are obvious. (vi) => (vii). By hypothesis all monocyclic right .S-acts satisfying Condition ( P ) are projective generators in Act S. Then all projective monocyclic right 5-acts are generators in Act S and thus e J 1 for every idempotent e S by Theorem 4.12.5. By (vi) all monocyclic right 5-acts satisfying Condition ( P ) are projective and thus every right reversible submonoid of S contains a left zero by Theorem 4.11.8. Let 1 e S be an idempotent. Then eS = S/p{e,l) is projective and hence, by hypothesis, a generator in Act S. Now S contains the bicyclic monoid as a submonoid by Corollary 3.18.3. Let be the set of all idempotents of B. Then is a right reversible submonoid of S not containing a left zero, a contradiction. Hence the only idempotent of S is 1. Let s G S. Since S is aperiodic by Theorem 4.10.2 there exists 6 such that sn sn+1. Then sn is an idempotent. Hence sn = 1. Now the equality sn = s n+l y i e l d s S = 1 Thug g = n

When cyclic projective generator implies free (4.13.1) When projective implies free (4.13.2-4.13.4) When strongly flat implies free (4.13.5-4.13.7) When Condition (P) implies free (4.13.8) When principally weakly flat implies free (4.13.9-4.13.10) Overview
When cyclic projective generator implies free

Here we present the result for cyclic acts. The general case will be settled in the next subsection.
386
T h e o r e m 13.1. For any monoid S the following statements (i) All cyclic projective generators in A c t S are free.
are equivalent.
(ii) All monocyclic projective generators in A c t S are free. (iii) All principal right ideals which are projective generators in A c t S are free. (iv) e J 1 implies e V 1 for every idempotent e G S. Proof, (i) = (ii) is obvious. (ii) =r (iii). Let the principal right ideal zS for G 5 be a projective generator in A c t S. Then zS = eS for some idempotent e S by Proposition 3.18.8. But since eS = S/p(e, 1) and the latter is free by assumption, zS is also free. (iii) => (iv). Suppose e J 1 for an idempotent e S. Then the principal right ideal eS is a projective generator in A c t S by Proposition 3.18.8. By assumption, eS is free. Now it follows from Proposition 3.17.17 that e V 1. (iv) => (i). Let As be a cyclic projective generator in A c t S. As a cyclic projective act As is isomorphic to a principal right ideal generated by an idempotent. Suppose = eS for an idempotent e S, Then e J 1 by Proposition 3.18.8. By hypothesis e V 1. But then eS and thus As is free by Proposition 3.17.17.
W h e n projective implies free

Since by Proposition 3.17.15 the Rees factor act by a proper right ideal is projective if and only if this right ideal is one-element and by Proposition 3.17.2 the one-element right act is projective if and only if the monoid contains a left zero, we obtain the following T h e o r e m 13.2. All projective right Rees factor acts of S are free if and only if S does not contain a left zero or S = {1}. T h e o r e m 13.3. For any monoid S the following statements (i) All projective right S-acts are free. (ii) All projective generators in A c t S are free. (iii) All cyclic projective right S-acts are free. (iv) All monocyclic projective right S-acts are free. are equivalent.
387
(v) All projective principal right ideals are free. (vi) e V 1 for every idempotent e G S. Proof. Implications (i) => (ii), (i) => (iii) and (iii) => (iv) are obvious. (v) => (iii) since a cyclic projective right S-act is by Theorem 3.17.8 isomorphic to a principal right ideal generated by an idempotent. (iii) =>- (i) since every projective right S-act is by Theorem 3.17.8 isomorphic to a coproduct of cyclic projective 5-acts. (ii) => (v). Since every projective principal right ideal is by Theorem 3.17.8 isomorphic to a principal right ideal generated by an idempotent it suffices to show that for every idempotent e S the right ideal eS is free. Let = Ss U eS. By Proposition 3.18.5, As is a projective generator in A c t S. By hypothesis As is free which implies that eS is free. (v) => (vi). Let e e S be an idempotent. Then the principal right ideal eS is projective and hence free by assumption and thus e V 1 by Proposition 3.17.17. (vi) => (). As in the proof of implication (ii) => (v) we have to show that the right ideal eS is free for every idempotent e G S. Since e X > 1 by assumption this follows from Proposition 3.17.17. (iv) => (v). Let the principal right ideal zS be projective. Then zS = eS for some idempotent e S by Corollary 3.17.9. But since eS = S/p(e, 1) and the latter is free by assumption, zS is also free. E x a m p l e 13.4. The bicyclic monoid is an example of a monoid over which all projective right acts are free. Indeed, if u and are the generators of such that vu = 1 then all idempotents of have the form ukvk for k G NQ which obviously implies that all of them are D-related to 1. Examples 3.18.10 and 3.18.11 give monoids such that all projective right acts are generators but not free. All cyclic projective generators over a periodic monoid are free but not all projective acts are generators (cf. Proposition 1.3.26 and Theorem 4.13.1).
W h e n strongly flat implies free

Since by Proposition 3.14.10 the Rees factor act by a proper right ideal K s is strongly flat if and only if this |-K"s| = 1 and s is strongly flat if and only if the monoid is left collapsible by Exercise 3.14.3, we obtain T h e o r e m 13.5. All strongly flat right Rees factor acts of S are free if and only if S is not left collapsible or S = {1}.
388
For cyclic acts we have the following T h e o r e m 13.6 (Kilp [Kil96a]). For any monoid S the following are equivalent: (i) All strongly flat cyclic right S-acts are free. (ii) All strongly flat cyclic right S-acts are projective (iii) S satisfies Condition (T). (iii) is Proposition 4.12.6. generators in A c t S. statements
Proof, (i) = > (ii) is obvious, (ii)
(iii) => (i). Let be a right congruence on S such that S/p is strongly flat and let s pt for s, t S. Then there exists u G S such that 1 pu and us = ut. Now u [l] p which is a left collapsible submonoid of S by Lemma 3.14.14. By assumption |[l]p| = 1. Then u = 1 and s = t. Hence S/p = Ss The general case is presented in T h e o r e m 13.7 (Kilp [Kil96b]). For any monoid S the following are equivalent. (i) All strongly flat right S-acts are free. (ii) All strongly flat right S-acts are projective (iii) S satisfies conditions (iv) S is a group. Proof, (i) = > (ii) is obvious, (ii) = > (iii) is Proposition 4.12.7. (iii) = > (iv). Suppose S satisfies conditions (A) and (T). Then S obviously satisfies Conditions (A) and (K) and is thus right perfect by Theorem 4.11.6. Hence S satisfies Condition (D) by Theorem 3.17.26. It follows from Condition (T) that the only idempotent of S is the identity of S. Indeed, any other idempotent together with the identity would give us a non-trivial left collapsible submonoid of S which contradicts (T). By Condition (D), S as a right unitary subsemigroup of itself has a minimal right ideal generated by an idempotent. Since the only idempotent of S is the identity this implies that S is a group. (iv) = > (i). Since every right act over a group is a coproduct of cyclic subacts by Proposition 1.5.34 and every group obviously satisfies Condition (T), all strongly flat right acts over a group are free by Theorem 4.13.6. (A) and (T). generators in A c t S. statements
389
W h e n Condition (P) implies free

Since by Theorem 3.12.17 the Rees factor act of a monoid S by a right ideal Ks is flat if and only if S is right reversible and Ks satisfies Condition (LU), and s is flat if and only if S is right reversible by Exercise 3.12.2, we obtain T h e o r e m 13.8. For any monoid S the following statements are equivalent:
(i) All right Rees factor acts of S satisfying Condition (P) are free. (ii) All flat right Rees factor acts of S are free. (iii) S is not right reversible or S = {1}.
W h e n principally weakly flat implies free

Since for any monoid S the Rees factor act Ss/Ss = Qs is torsion free one has are equivalent:
T h e o r e m 13.9. For any monoid S the following statements
(i) All principally weakly flat right Rees factor acts of S are free. (ii) All torsion free S-acts are free. (iii) All torsion free right Rees factor acts of S are free. (iv) S = {1}. Exercise 13.10 ([Ki/Kn92]). Prove equivalence of the following conditions: (i) All generators in A c t S are free. (ii) All generators in A c t S are projective. (iii) All generators in A c t S are strongly flat. (iv) All generators in A c t S satisfy Condition (P). (v) S is a group.
Overview
Now we summarize in four tables the results concerning the classification of monoids by properties starting with torsion freeness and ending with freeness.
390
A given cell in the body of the table describes the class of monoids over which all right acts having the property defined by the row index also have the (stronger) property defined by the column index. Numbers below refer to the corresponding theorem. It is clear that the diagonal cells are in a sense the most importantthey pertain to properties that are "adjacent" in strength, and in principle, knowing exact descriptions of these classes would permit the rest of the table to be completed. A cell is empty if we do not know a "nice" description of it. By the latter we mean a description which does not refer to properties of acts. In this sense the haracterizations using Condition (A) which is a condition on subacts is not "nice". But in these cases this seems to be the best one can obtain. Abbreviations used in all tables: PG: projective generator Proj: projective SF: strongly flat PWF: principally weakly flat TF: torsion free RCRI: monoids in which all right cancellable elements are right invertible. REG: regular monoids GR: groups GRZ: groups with a zero adjoined
Table IV.3: Classification by properties of Rees factor acts Free Proj SF Flat PWF TF (P) NCLZ,{1} 4.13.2 NLC,{1} NLC,CLZ 4.11.1 4.13.5 NRR,{1} NRR,CLZ NRR,LC 4.13.8 4.11.7 4.10.1 NRR,{1} NRR.NLUCZ NRR,LCNLU NRR,NLU 4.11.9 4.9.2 4.10.3 NLUCZ RR LCNLU RRNLU {1} 4.11.11 4.13.9 4.10.6 4.9.7 4.7.1 {1},RCZ LCRC,RCZ RC,RCZ RRLAR LAR {1} 4.7.2 4.6.5 4.11.12 4.10.7 4.9.8 {1},GRZ {1},GRZ GR, GRZ RRREG REG RCRI {1} 4.11.13 4.9.9 4.7.3 4.6.6 4.6.1
Proj SF (P) Flat PWF TF All
391
Abbreviations: LAR: left almost regular monoids RR: right reversible monoids RRLAR: right reversible left almost regular monoids RRREG: right reversible regular monoids NRR: not right reversible monoids NLU: monoids in which no non-trivial right ideal satisfies Condition (LU) RRNLU: right reversible monoids in which no non-trivial right ideal satisfies Condition (LU) RC: right cancellative monoids RCZ: right cancellative monoids with a zero adjoined LC: left collapsible monoids LCNLU: left collapsible monoids in which no non-trivial right ideal satisfies Condition (LU) LCRC: left collapsible right cancellative monoids NLC: not left collapsible monoids CLZ: monoids containing a left zero NLUCZ: monoids containing zero in which no non-trivial right ideal satisfies Condition (LU) NCLZ: monoids not containing a left zero
Table IV.4: Classification by properties of monocyclic right acts Free J ^ V 4.13.1 eVl 4.13.3 {1} {1} {1} {1} {1} {1} PG Proj
(P)
Flat
WF
PWF
TF
PG Proj
(P)
Flat WF PWF TF All
ejl 4.12.5 {1} 4.12.8 {1} {1} {1} {1} {1}
APER 4.10.2 RN 4.11.10 RN
IRZ 4.9.1 IRZ
{1},{1,0} 4.11.14 {1},{1,0} GR,GRZ 4.9.9
REGA(R) REG RCRI 4.7.5 4.6.6 4.6.1
392 Abbreviations:
(R): monoids S in which for any elements s,t G S there exists w Ss St such that w p(s, t) s IRZ: monoids in which every idempotent different from 1 is a right-zero element APER: aperiodic monoids RN: right nil monoids e j 1: monoids in which all idempotents are j7"-related to 1 J = T>: monoids in which all idempotents which are /-related to 1 are D-related to 1 eVl: monoids in which all idempotents are -related to 1 Table IV.5: Classification by properties of cyclic right acts Free PG J Proj SF (P) Flat WF PWF TF All
=>v
PG
Proj
SF
(P)
Flat
WF
PWF TF
4.13.1 eVl ejl 4.13.3 4.12.5 (T) (T) (K) 4.13.5 4.11.2 {1} {1} RRLZ 4.12.8 4.11.8 RN {1} {1} {1} {1} {1} {1} {1} {1} RN
APER 4.10.2 RN 4.11.10 RN
{1} {1},{1,0} {1},{1, 0} 4.11.14 {1} {!}){!) 0} {1},{1,0} GR,GRZ 4.9.9
LAR 4.6.5 REGA(R) REG RCRI 4.7.5 4.6.6 4.6.1
Abbreviations: LAR: left almost regular monoids (R): monoids S in which for any elements s,t S there exists w Ss St such that w p(s, t) s APER: aperiodic monoids RN: right nil monoids (K): monoids in which every left collapsible submonoid contains a left zero
393
(RRLZ): monoids in which every right reversible submonoid contains a left zero ( T ) : monoids in which the only left collapsible submonoid is { 1 } ej 1: monoids in which all idempotents are j7"-related to 1 J V\ monoids in which all idempotents which are j7"-related to 1 are P-related to 1 eVl: monoids in which all idempotents are P-related to 1
Table IV.6: Classification by properties of (all) right acts Free PG Proj SF (P) Flat WF PWF TF All eVl 4.13.3 eVl GR {1} {1} {1} {1} {1} {1} PG Proj SF (P) Flat WF PWF TF
ej 1 4.12.5 ()() GR 4.13.7 4.11.6 {1} 4.12.8 {1} {1} {1} {1} {1}
{1} {1} {1} {1} {1}
{1} 4.10.5 {1} {1} {1} {1} GR 4.9.10 LAR 4.6.5 R E G A ( R ) REG RIRC 4.7.5 4.6.6 4.6.1
Abbreviations: L A R : left almost regular monoids (R): monoids S in which for any elements s,t G S there exists w < E Ss St such that w p(s, t) s (A): monoids over which every right act satisfies the ascending chain condition for cyclic subacts (K): monoids in which every left collapsible submonoid contains a left zero eJV. monoids in which all idempotents are j7-related to 1 J T>: monoids in which all idempotents which are J-related to 1 are D-related to 1 eDl: monoids in which all idempotents are V-related to 1
394
14 Regularity of acts
When When When When projective implies regular (4.14.1) strongly flat implies regular (4.14.2) weakly flat implies regular (4.14.3) principally weakly flat implies regular (4.14.4)
W h e n projective implies regular

T h e o r e m 14.1 (Kilp and Knauer [Ki/Kn87b]). For any monoid S the following statements are equivalent: (i) All projective right S-acts are regular. (ii) All projective generators in A c t S are regular. (iii) All free right S-acts are regular. (iv) S is a right PP Proof. Implications (i) monoid. (ii) and (ii) => (iii) are obvious.
(iii) => (iv). Being a free act, Ss is regular by hypothesis. Then all cyclic subacts of Ss, i-e. principal right ideals of S, are projective by Corollary 3.19.3. Now S is a right monoid by Theorem 4.11.15. (iv) => (i). Suppose S is a right monoid. Then all its principal right ideals are projective by Theorem 4.11.15 and Ss is regular by Corollary 3.19.3. Now it follows from Exercise 3.19.4(2) that every free right act, as a coproduct of acts isomorphic to Ss, is regular and every projective S'-act, as a subact of some free act, is also regular by Exercise 3.19.4(1).
W h e n strongly flat implies regular

The following theorem (in a slightly different formulation) was proved by Wang and Liu [Li98/Wa], T h e o r e m 14.2. All strongly flat right S-acts are regular if and only if S is a right PP monoid and its every left collapsible submonoid consisting of idempotents contains a left zero. Proof. Necessity. Suppose all strongly flat right 5-acts are regular. Then Ss is regular which implies that S is a right PP monoid (cf. Corollary 3.19.3).
14 Regularity of acts
395
Moreover, all cyclic strongly flat right 5-acts, being regular by assumption, are projective. Hence S satisfies Condition (K) by Theorem 4.11.2. Let be a left collapsible submonoid of S consisting of idempotents. Condition (K) implies that contains a left zero. Sufficiency. Let As be a strongly flat act. By Corollary 3.19.3 we have to show that all cyclic subacts of As are projective. Let a As- Suppose as = at, s,t S. Since As is strongly flat it satisfies Condition (E) there exist u S and a' As such that a = a'u and us = ut. Since S is right PP there exists an idempotent e S such that u ue and es = et. Let = {e E(S) I ae = a} . Then is a submonoid of S consisting of idempotents. Let e, f . Then ae a f . Repeating the argument of the previous paragraph for s = e and t = f one can find and element g such that ge = g f . This means that is left collapsible. By assumption there exists a left zero 2 in T. Now it is easy to check that the mapping : aS zS defined by (as) = zs for every s S is an isomorphism of right S-acts. Thus aS is projective.
W h e n weakly flat implies regular

T h e o r e m 14.3 (Liu [Liu96b]). For any monoid S the following statements equivalent: (i) All weakly flat right S-acts are regular. (ii) All flat right S-acts are regular. (iii) Every element of S different from 1 is a right zero. Proof, (i) (ii) is obvious. are
(ii) (iii). If all flat right 5-acts are regular then all monocyclic flat acts are regular and therefore (being projective by Corollary 3.19.3) strongly flat. Hence S is right nil by Theorem 4.11.10. Suppose 1 s S. Let be the smallest natural number such that sn is a right zero. The principal right ideal sS, being a cyclic subact of the flat (and thus regular) act Ss, is projective. Hence there exists an idempotent e S such that s se and, since s s n _ 1 = ssn, we have the equality e s n _ 1 = esn. Necessarily e / 1 and thus e is a right zero. Then s = se = e is a right zero. (iii) (i). Let As be a weakly flat act. By Corollary 3.19.3 we have to show that all cyclic subacts of As are projective.
396
Let a e As. Suppose as = at, s,t & S. Then there exist u,v S such that us = vt by Proposition 3.11.5. If s, t 1 this implies s = t. In particular, there exists at most one 1 s S such that as = a. If there is such an element s S then the mapping : aS sS defined by () = st for every t G S is an isomorphism of right S-acts. Since s is an idempotent aS is projective. If as a for any 1 s S then the mapping : aS > S defined by = s for every s G S is an isomorphism of right S-acts. Thus aS is projective.
When principally weakly flat implies regular

T h e o r e m 14.4 (Kilp and Knauer [Ki/Kn87b]). For any monoidS ing statements are equivalent: (i) All right S-acts are regular. (ii) All torsion free right S-acts are regular. (iii) All principally weakly flat right S-acts are regular. (iv) 5 = {1} or S = {1,0}. Proof. Implications (i) => (ii) and (ii) =>- (iii) are obvious. (iii) => (iv). If all principally weakly flat right S-acts are regular then all weakly flat right S'-acts are regular and all elements of S different from 1 are right zeros by Theorem 4.14.3. I f 5 " ^ { l } then 5 \ { 1 } is a right ideal of S which satisfies Condition (LU). Hence the Rees factor act S/(S \ {1}) is principally weakly flat by Theorem 3.10.11 and thus regular by assumption. Being cyclic, S/{S\ {1}) is projective. This implies | S \ {1}| = 1 by Proposition 3.17.15. Hence S contains only one right zero which then is the zero. (iv) = * > (i). IfS" = {1} or S {1,0} then all cyclic S acts are projective by Theorem 4.11.14. Hence all right S-acts are regular by Corollary 3.19.3. Some results from "the other side" like: All regular right S-acts are free if and only if S is a group can be found, for example, in [Ki/Kn87b]. the follow-
Chapter V
Equivalence and Duality
1. 2. 3. 4. 5.
Adjoint functors Categories equivalent to Act S Morita equivalence of monoids Endomorphism monoids of generators On Morita duality
As we interpret acts over a monoid S as representations of the monoid S, the question "How precise is this representation?" seems natural. In particular, we ask: is a monoid S determined by its category Act SI Now, as in module theory, we shall formalize this with the help of category equivalence. That means: if two categories Act and Act S are equivalent, what can be said about the monoids and S and how to describe all such equivalences? Two such monoids are called Morita equivalent monoids. And, as for rings, there exist non-isomorphic Morita equivalent monoids, although they are "closer" to each other than Morita equivalent rings. This question can be considered as the "first" question in homological classification theory of monoids. We shall clearify this question for monoids in Section 5.3. Before that we collect some material on adjoint functors mainly with respect to act categories and we characterize act categories abstractly. Afterwards we present the state of art for Gabriel-Popescu-type theorems and describe relations between endomorphism monoids of generators. We end with Morita duality for monoids.
398
V Equivalence and Duality
1 Adjoint functors
Natural transformations (5.1.1) Natural equivalence (5.1.2) Examples of natural equivalences (5.1.3) Detection of naturally equivalent functors with generators (5.1.4) G-free, F-cofree and representable functors (5.1.5-5.1.7) Left-right adjoint covariant functors (5.1.8-5.1.10) Adjoint contravariant functors (5.1.11-5.1.12) Right-right adjoint contravariant functors (5.1.13-5.1.14) Left-left adjoint contravariant functors (5.1.15-5.1.16) Comparison of adjointnesses (5.1.17) Le-right adjointness and universal constructions (5.1.18) Product and coproduct functors (5.1.19) Free and cofree functors into act categories (5.1.20) Horn- and tensor functors on act categories (5.1.21) Contravariant right-right adjoint Horn -functors (5.1.22-5.1.23) Horn- and tensor functors in two variables (5.1.24) Invariant properties of left-right adjoint functors (5.1.25-5.1.26) Preservation of (co-)generators (5.1.27-5.1.28) Invariant properties o/Hom- and tensor functors (5.1.29) (Dually) equivalent categories, (dual) equivalence functors (5.1.30) Equivalence and adjointness (5.1.31-5.1.32) Characterization of equivalence functors (5.1.33) Preservation properties of equivalence functors (5.1.34-5.1.35) We collect some material on well-known categorical results about natural transformations of functors, adjoint situations for functors, natural equivalences of functors and equivalences and dual equivalences of categories. We mainly used [HE/ST73], [SE/WI79] and [BLY86]. We shall give applications to act categories and sometimes to other categories.
Natural transformations
The following concept formalizes "morphisms between functors". It turns out helpful to analyze Horn-functors and tensor functors, and leads to the equivalence of categories. Definition 1.1. Let C,D be categories and FI,F2 : C > D covariant functors. A family = ( A)AeC of morphisms in D indexed by the objects of C is called a natural transformation of the functor Fj_ into the functor F 2 , written : Fi > F 2 , if
1 Adjoint functors (1) M o r ( F i ( A ) , F2(A)) for all A C and

(2) the condition of naturality F is fulfilled, i.e.
2
399
(f)
,F
(f),
that is, the diagram

Fi(A) Fi(f) Fi(A') ' A FM) F2(f) F2{A>)
is commutative for all A,A' C, f Morc(A,-4') If Fi and F2 are contravariant functors, then the condition of naturality changes to
AF1(f) =F2(f)A/.
In a similar way functors in several variables which are covariant in some variables and contravariant in the other variables can be treated.
Natural equivalence
The following concept models "isomorphisms between functors", it defines an equivalence relation. Definition 1.2. Let F\,F2 :C D be functors. A natural transformation
equivalence
functors.
: Fi > F2 is called a natural

a r e called naturally equivalent
if are isomorphisms in D for

W e w r i t e Fi = F2.
all A C. If there exists a natural equivalence : Fi > F2 then Fi and F2
Examples of natural equivalences

E x a m p l e 1.3. (1) Let be a field and let Vec be the category of vector spaces over . Consider the covariant functors Fi = I d ^ _ V e c : - Vec -> - Vec , F 2 = H o m ( x H o m ( t f - , KB), KB) : - Vec - - Vec . Then there exists a natural transformation :Id^_yec Hom(^Hom(x-,
KB),KB)
400
defined by : (( KB), t-> () : Hom(K-i4, KB)

KB)
~^ ^ ()() = ()
for A G - Vec, and G , G Hom(/<;A, kB). (2) Let be a field and let fdVec be the category of finite dimensional vector spaces over K. Consider Fi, F2, as in (1) where now . Then the natural transformation ^
: Id /c -fdVec
Hom(KHom(K-, )> )
),
with
: A
A** := ((,
for A G fdVec is a natural equivalence. Indeed, using the dimension argument we get that a is an isomorphism for fdVec. Note that there is no natural equivalence between Id /4 -_f ( jY ec and Horn (if, KK) although KA = Horn (KA, KK) for all KAeK - fdVec. (3) The tensor product of biacts is associative up to natural equivalence. If we have three acts As, sMt,tC as indicated, we can form the tensor products (A s ( 8 > SM)T < g > TC and As < g > s(MT < 8 > TC) . Then a : (As sM)T <g>T C -> As s ( M T TC) (a m) <S> c > a < g > ( c) c G tC, is a bijective mapping.
for all a G As, rn G sMT,
Using oc we can obtain a natural equivalence of the functors (-ss-)rrand ~s s(~t <8> t~)
from (Act - S) (S - Act - ) (T - Act) into Set.
Detection of naturally equivalent functors with generators

In Section 1.7 we considered preservation and reflection properties of functors. According to this we say, for example, that a covariant functor F : C > D preserves products in case that ( F ( P ) , ( F ( p i ) ) i e i ) is the product of F(Xi)iî in D if ( , (pi)iei) is the product of (Xi)iei in C.
1 Adjoint functors
401
Similarly we shall use expressions as F reflects ... and F takes .. .in ..., also with respect to categorical objects like generators, cogenerators etc. or with respect to other constructions. The following result turns out very helpful since it allows detecting naturally equivalent functors in certain cases only by investigating them on a generator. Proposition 1.4. Let C, D be categories such that every epimorphism is the coequalizer of a pair of morphisms. Let F2 : C > D be covariant functors which preserve coequalizers and coproducts (contravariant functors which take coequalizers and coproducts to equalizers and products, respectively) and let = {A)Aec Fi F2 be a natural transformation. Suppose that there exists a generator U C such that (a) ] J j U exists in C for any I 6 Set or
(b) ]J 7 U exists in C for any set I 0 and for every X 6 C there exists I U I where the injections U\, U2 : X > X II X are different. Then, if equivalence. Fi(U) > F2(U) is an isomorphism in D, is a natural
Proof. Consider the case where F\ and F2 are covariant. By Proposition 2.3.13 for every A e C there exists an epimorphism
UÂ
for some set I and, by hypothesis, there exist morphisms

f TT x ^ H 9
in C such that (A,e) an epimorphism
Coeq(/, g). Again by Proposition 2.3.13 there exists U j U^X
for some set J which implies that (A,e) = Coeq(/e', ge') by Lemma 2.2.20. As -Fi and F2 preserve coproducts and coequalizers, we get coequalizers in the rows of the following diagram XT
i piw Y
I II J J
Fi(fe) 1
= F (ge')
T T
Fife)
I F2(ge>)
i a F2(A).
F2(U)
= 4 TTf2(/) F^>e)
402
Using the properties of the natural transformation and of the coproduct we see that the diagram is commutative. Since the rows represent coequalizers, is the only morphism making the right square commutative. As is an isomorphism, J j j and JJ 7 are isomorphisms, too. Using inverses of isomorphisms \\j and \Jj one obtains the inverse morphism of aHence a is an isomorphism and thus is a natural equivalence. If the functors F\ and F2 are contravariant, all arrows in the rows of the preceding diagram will be reversed and ] j will be replaced by The category fdVec fulfills the conditions of Proposition 5.1.4 since here products and coproducts coincide (cf. Exercise 2.1.18 for M o d R) and therefore preservation of coproducts by the functor Hom(Hom(x , ) , ) is clear by Proposition 2.1.21. Preservation of coequalizers follows since they are epimorphisms which are always retractions in Vec. These are preserved by any covariant functor by Proposition 1.7.24. The role of U is played by K .
G-free, F-cofree and representable functors

Compare the bellow Definition to Definitions 2.3.1 and 2.4.1 where now the role of the forgetful functor is taken by G or F , respectively.
Definition 1.5. Let C, D be categories and F : C > D, G : D > C covariant functors. Take A e C, V e D and : A > G(V) in C. The pair (, V) is called G-free over A if for all D and for all : A > G(B) in C there exists a unique * : V > in D, such that
G(B)
G(V)
is commutative. Take e D, W e C and : F(W) in D. The pair (W,eB) is called F- cofree over if for all A C and for all : F(A) > in D there exists a unique * : A > W in C such that
1 Adjoint functors -^ e F(W) is commutative. F(A) /F(C*)
403
Definition 1.6. A covariant functor / / : ) > Set is called representable by an object D if and Mor D(Z, ) are naturally equivalent functors,
i.e. = MOTJ)(Z, ).
Proposition 1.7. Let G : D > C be a covariant functor A C, D: (1) Let ()<=> : Morc(^4, G()) > Mor>(Z, ) be a natural equivalence. Then ( a, ) is G-free over A where =^1 (idz) (())] = for M o r c ( A , G ( B ) ) , D e D. (2) Let A G(Z) be such that {],) is G-free over A. Then = () : Morc(A,G(-)) M o r c ( Z , - ) , with B() = * /(*) = for M o r c ( A G(B)), e D, is a natural equivalence. In other words, {,) representable by . is G-free over A if and only if Morc(A,G()) is
Proof. (1). Let = ^B)BD MOTc(A,G(-)) > MOTd(Z,~) be a natural equivalence. Then for every 6 D we have an isomorphism :
M o r C { A , G ( B ) ) ->
For Morc(A,G{B)) set * := () and define := {) G Morc(yl, G(Z)). It remains to show that (*) = Consider the diagram
M o r C(A,G(Z))
MOTd(Z,B).
MOTd(Z,Z)
G(D o Morc(i4,G(S)) is
a
MOTd(Z,B)
which is commutative since = ^B)BZD idz E (, ) we get = (0(*)1())
natural transformation. For
= id = * = ()
Since is bijective, we have 0(*) = , and moreover, that * is unique with this property.
404
(2). Let ( ,) be G-free over A e C. Then for every e D and e M o r c ( A G(B)) there exists a unique * < Mor c (Z, ) such that (*) = . Hence we have a well-defined and injective mapping :Movc(A,G{B)) - Morc(Z,B)
But is also surjective since for i? G Moro{Z,B) we have that G(d)r]A = G({G(^^ a )*) va where (0 ())* ' > and thus, by uniqueness of the stared morphism we get that (G(i9)r]a)* where 0() ' A > G(B), i.e. (0()) = . It remains to show that = ( b)bD is a natural transformation. Take g : ' in D and consider the diagram Mor
C(A,G{B))
M o r D ( Z , B) (go-)
(G(g) -) Mor
C(A,G(B'))
'
Motd{Z,B')
. {B'{G(g))(0
For e M o r c ( A , G ( B ) we compare = * and (G(g)0* They are equal since from the diagram G(B) G(g) G(B')
Va
G(Z) we see that G(gi*) = G{{G{g)i)*) and thus gC of the stared morphism. by the uniqueness
Left-right adjoint covariant functors

First we consider the general situation in categories. The key idea is that certain pairs of functors can replace each other inside Mor-functors and this gives the foundation of so called "relative homological algebra".
1 Adjoint functors
405
Definition 1.8. Let C, D be categories and F : C D, G : D C covariant functors. Call F left adjoint to G and G right adjoint to F and write F G if there exists a natural equivalence : MorD(F(~), - ) ^ M o r c ( - G ( - ) ) . for the bifunctors M o r D ( F ( - ) , - ) , M o r c ( - , < ? ( - ) ) : Cop One calls an adjoining Call = right unit (counit) G MOTd{FG{B),B) Recall that , : M o r D ( F ( A ) , B ) -> M o r c ( A G{B)) D Set
equivalence of the functors F and G. for A e C and = { B ) b ^ d the

B) )
the left unit (unit) of the adjoining equivalence where of the adjoining equivalence where B'-=^C\B) for E D.
:= ^ i F ( j 4 ) ( i d F ( j 4 ) ) G M o r c ( A GF(A))
are bijections in Set for all A G C o p , G D if is a natural equivalence. Theorem 1.9. Consider covariant functors F : C D, G : D C. Equivalent are: (i) F G, that is there exists a natural equivalence : Morc(- G(-)) MOTD(F(),)
_H-
(ii) There exists a natural transformation = (r}A)Aec ' Idc every A G C the pair (a, F(A)) is G-free over A.
GF and for
(iii) There exists a natural transformation (B)B<ED ' FG Idp and for every G D the pair (G(B),b) is F-cofree over B. Proof (i) (ii). The hypothesis implies that M o r o ( F ( > l ) , )
More (^4, G()) is a natural equivalence of covariant functors in one variable for every A G C. From Proposition 5.1.7 we get that (, F(A)) is G-free over A where now VA = ^ , F ( A ) ( i d F ( A ) ) and G{u~a]b{^))ilA = for G M o r D ( F ( A ) , G ( B ) ) . It remains to show that is a natural transformation, i.e. A f A' rfXTis commutative for every A,A'eC,f:A^ 2d. GF(A) GF(f) GF(A') A'.
406
We use that is a natural transformation. First commutativity of the diagram Mor D (F(A),
F ( f ) o
F ( A ) )
Ua
>f{a\
M O T
( A ,
G F ( A ) )
G F ( f )
M O T
( F ( A ) , F ( A ' ) )
- * U O T C ( A , G F ( A ' ) ) , ( ' )
implies that
u
A
, F ( A > ) ( F ( f ) ) =
G F ( f )
o u
( i d
G F ( f )
This together with commutativity of the diagram

M o r
( F ( A ' ) , F ( A ' ) )
' ^
' )
M O T
( A ' , G F ( A ' ) )
( - o F ( f ) )
( ~ o f )
M O V
( F ( A ) , F ( A ' ) )
, >
Morc(A
G F ( A ' ) )
implies
G F ( f ) V A = = ^ A , F ( A ' ) ( F ( f ) ) = u
A
F ( f ) )
<
t F
> ) ( i d
A / )
)o f
, /
as needed. (ii) (i). Since ( , ( ) ) is G-free over A for every A e C w e get from Proposition 5.1.7 that : Mor>(F(A), - ) > More ( A G(-)) is a natural equivalence of covariant functors in one variable, where UJA,B(,*) = =
G ^ * )
f o r
a l l
a n d
M O T D ( F ( A ) ,
B ) .
It remains to show that U-^B ' M O natural. For this we use that = ( ) we have the commutative diagram
A
T D ( F ( ) , B )
A
< = c
> Morc(, G ( B ) ) is also is natural, i.e. for every / : A ' > A
V A
G F ( A )
G F ( f )
VA>
G F ( A ' )
1 Adjoint functors that is a} = G F ( f ) i S O we have to show that M o r D ( F ( A ) , ) oF(f)

Motd(F(A'),B)
'
407
More(^4,
G(B)) of
A1,
Mor
C(A',G(B))
is commutative. Take * Motd(F(A),B). '))
Then = G{?F(f))VA, = G(C)vAf = = G{C)G{F(f))VA, uAtB{C)f
which was to be proved. Now it is clear that satisfies the condition of naturality whith respect to both variables. The equivalence (i) (iii) can be proved analogously. Corollary 1.10. Let F, F' : C > D and G,G' : D C be covariant functors with F G. Then F' G if and only if F = F' are naturally equivalent functors and F G' if and only if G = G' are naturally equivalent functors. Proof. We outline the proof of the statement for F and F'. Necessity. Suppose that F G and F' G. By Theorem 5.1.9 we have natural transformations (a)a^c ' Idc - * GF and (rfA)Aec ' I d c GF' such that ( ] A , F ( A ) ) and ( , F'(A)) are G-free over A. That is, in particular, for F'(A) e D and ' : A GF'(A) there exists a unique : F(A) F'(A) such that ('). Analogously, we get = G(ifAWAThen ' = ( ) ( \ ) ' and uniqueness of the stared morphism implies that = analogously = idjr(^). Thus () : F{A) > F'(A) is an isomorphism in D for all A C . Naturality of '* (rfA)Aec follows as
{)
a n
and
d {v'a)aeC
are n a t u r a l . H e n c e F =
F'.
Sufficiency. Suppose now that F G with adjoining equivalence where , Motd(F(A),B) -> M o r c ( A , G ( ) ) and that F = F' with natural equivalence where a F(A) F'(A) for A C , D. Now define '
: MorD{F'(A),B) l
MorC(A,G(B)) ('). BeD is a natural equiv
A straightforward calculation shows that {' b)aec, alence.
408
Adjoint contravariant functors

Although we can reduce the investigation of contravariant functors to that of covariant functors as the following lemma shows, it is sometimes helpful to have the explicit formulations of certain properties in both cases.
F
L e m m a 1.11. A pair of contravariant functors C^D

G
determines two pairs
of covariant
functors FP :Cop C ^ D , Dop ,

op
G :D
Cop C .
and op :C ^ D^
Gop : Dop -> D
Remark 1.12. If
G
are contravariant functors then :CxD^Set
MorD(-2,F(-i)), Morc(-i,G(-2)) are functors contravariant in both variables and
MorD(F(-i), - 2 ) , Morc(G(-2), - i ) : C x D
Set
are functors covariant in both variables where the index 1 means that objects from C are eligible, the index 2 means that objects from D are eligible. This will give rise to the definition of right-right-adjointness and left-left adjointness, respectively, for contravariant functors.
F
Note that for covariant functors C ^ D we get the functors

G
Morc(-i,G(-2)) Mor(-2,F(-i)) Morc(G(-2), - i ) Morc ( F ( - i ) , - 2 )
:CopxD - Set op :C D Set op :C D Set :Cop xD^ Set .
and therefore, it is not possible to define right-right or left-left adjointness for covariant functors.
Right-right adjoint contravariant functors

In analogy to the left-right situation in Definition 5.1.8 we define right-right adjointness for contravariant functors (cf. also [FRE64] and [MLA71]).
1 Adjoint functors Definition 1.13. Let C,D be categories and C^D

G F
409 contravariant functors. which we denote Set
Call F and G right-right adjoint contravariant by {F.G}, if the bifunctors
functors,
MorD(-2,F(-i)), Morc(-i,G(-2)) : C D -
are naturally equivalent as functors contravariant in both variables, where means that objects from the first category C are inserted and 2 means that objects from the second category D are inserted. Remark 1.14. Consider contravariant functors F : C > D, G : D > C. The following statements are equivalent: (i) {F.G}, that is, there exists an adjoining equivalence : Mor)( 2 ,F()) Morc(-i,G(-2)).
(ii) There exists a natural transformation = ( 9 7 A ) A E C ' Idc ^ GF and for every A e C the pair faA,opF(A)) is G op -free over A. (iii) There exists a natural transformation = (B)BGD ' Idr> > FG and for p op every e D the pair (G" (), B) is F-cofree over B. In this situation is called an adjoining equivalence for {F.G}.
Left-left adjoint contravariant functors

Definition 1.15. Let C, D be categories and
F G
contravariant functors.
Call F and G left-left adjoint contravariant functors, denoted by {F.G} H, if the bifunctors Mord(F(-i), -2), Morc(G(-2), -1) : C x D Set are naturally equivalent as functors covariant in both variables where means that objects from the first category C are inserted and 2 means that objects from the second category D are inserted. Remark 1.16. Consider contravariant functors F : C > D, G : D > C. The following statements are equivalent: (i) {F.G} H, that is, there exists an adjoining equivalence w : MorD(F(-i), - 2 ) Morc(G(-2), -).
(ii) There exists a natural transformation = (a)Ate ' GF > Idc and for every A e C the pair (, Fop(A)) is opG-free over A.
410
(iii) There exists a natural transformation = {)& FG > Id and for every 6 D the pair ( o p G ( B ) , e B ) is F o p -cofree over B. In this situation is called an adjoining equivalence for {F.G} H.
Comparison of adjointnesses
Left-left and right-right adjointnesses can formally be treated simultaneously when using the op-functor, cf. Lemma 5.1.11 and also 27.9 of [HE/ST73] and 4.6.3 of [SE/WI79]. Proposition 1.17. Let C, D be categories and C tors. The statements equivalent: (i) (iv)
{F.G} F
G
D two contravariant
func-
(i)-(iii) are equivalent and the statements (ii) (v)

op
(iv)-(vi) are
{F.G}, H,
F GOP,
(iii) (vi)
OP
G Fop
F ,
GOP OPF .
Proof. Using the definition of opF Gop means that in the notation of Theorem 5.1.9 for all A E C, e D, we have
MorDoP(PF(A),B) Morc(A,GOP(B)),
which is equivalent to saying, again in the notation of Theorem 5.1.9, that

MorD(B, since Mor D o P ( O P F ( A ) , B) = M o r c ( A , G ( J 5 ) ) , i.e. {F.G}. F(A)) = MOTc(A,G(B)) and , MorC(A,GOP(B)) =
UOTd(B,F(A))
Similarly
OP
G FOP means that

M o r c p ( o p G ( ) , A) MorD(B,FOP(A))
or, equivalently,
Morc(A,G()) ^ MorD(B,F(A)) ,
i.e. { F . G } . A similar argument holds for { F . G } .
Left-right adjointness and universal constructions

We take the chance to give a precise formulation of what is usually called a universal construction.
1 Adjoint functors
411
Note that the families of pairs ( , ) and (W,EB) from Definition 5.1.5. are families of universal maps for A C and D respectively, in the terminology used for example in Chapter 26 of [HE/ST73]. Definition 1.18. Let C, D be categories and G : D > C, F : C D covariant functors. If we have F HG, then F together with the left unit : ldc is called a left universal with the right unit is called a right universal construction GF with respect to G, and G together
: FG > Id construction with respect to F.
As we will see from the examples starting with 5.1.19 products, coproducts, tensor products, the free and the cofree constructions can be interpreted in this way. For a similar interpretation of equalizers, pullbacks, coequalizers and pushouts see [MLA71].
Product and coproduct functors

Example 1.19. Let C be a concrete category. (1) The product functor (see Proposition 2.1.24)
is right adjoint to the diagonal functor defined as follows
Ar-.C^C1 A -> (A), where / is a set, C a product complete category, C1 the product category and () is the /-tuple of copies of A, cf. Construction 1.6.7(2). If f e Mor(A, J 4 / ) then / ( / ) G Mor c /((A)/, (A')i) denotes the /-tuple of copies of / . Then ,
This way with the respective right unit is a right universal construction with respect to the functor / . As illustration we consider the case / = {1,2}. Note that /() = (A, A). Define UA,{xltx2) MorC{i,2} ((A, A), (Xi,X 2 )) Mor c (A, X2)
412
by UA,{X1,X2)((fl,f2)) = <(/l, / 2 where ((/i,/2)) denotes the product induced morphism. For morphisms / : A and gi : Xi > Yi, i = 1,2, in C consider the diagram MorC{i,2} ((A, A), (X1,X2)) {91,92) 0 0
Mor C (A, Xx X2) (51 02 ) O - o / (, 2 ) . and 12, respectively.
(/,/)
Mor c { 1 , 2 } ((,),(Yi,y 2 )) Let pi and p[, i 1,2, be the projections of 2 Then for ( / i , / 2 ) : {A, A) (Xi,X 2 ) we have
(^b,(Y1;y2) ((#1,52) - (/, /)))((/, / 2 )) = ((51/1/^2/2/)) and ((^1 02) O - O f)tA^xltx2))((fi, But since Pi((Si 52) <(/,/ 2 )> / ) = <(/,/ 2 )> / = ftPi((/l,/2)) 0 / = 0 t / i / for i = 1, 2 by Proposition 2.1.7, we get from uniqueness of the product induced morphism that (91 02) ((,/2)) / = ((iA/,02/2/)) f2)) = (gi 02) <(/l,/2 /
Thus the diagram above is commutative. This means that : Morc{i,2) ( { 1 , 2 } (-), ( - , - ) ) Morc(-, - - )
is a natural transformation. It follows from the definition of the product that all ua,(Xi,x2)i ^ C , ( X i , X 2 ) G C*1'2*, are isomorphisms. Hence is a natural equivalence and thus { 1 2 } { 2} (2) Dually to (1) we obtain that the coproduct functor (see Proposition 2.1.24) II = c - c I (.Xi)ii ^ iei
1 Adjoint functors
413
is left adjoint to the diagonal functor (see (1)) , : C C1 A ~ (A), , where I is a set, C a coproduct complete category, C1 the product category, Ar(A) and / ( / ) as in (1). Then
This way with the respective left unit is a left universal construction with respect to the functor / . Indeed, = (u(X.).eIiA) with U(Xi)ieI,A M o r c / i i X i J i g / , ^ ) / ) -> M o r c d J i e / ^ ' ^ ) (fi)iei ^ [(/.)/] is an adjoining equivalence where [(/i)igj] denotes the coproduct induced morphism for fi : Xl A, i I. (3) There is a different way of obtaining a left-right adjoint situation involving the coproduct of copies of one factor A C (cf. [SE/WI79] Exercise 4.5.12(G)). Consider the covariant functor, Copow^ : Set C I ~Y[A, the so-called copower functor, where JJ 7 A denotes the coproduct in C with injections (i)i<=/, and for Mors e t(-f>^) we set Copow / l (^) := [(^(i) )*<=/] More(11/ A, U j A) where u^ : A > J J j A and is induced by the coproduct ] \ j A. Comparision with the covariant Mor-functor More(^4, -) : C shows that Copow^ More (A, -) . Indeed, = (t^) with : More - ,() - Mor S e t(/, M o r c ( ^ , X)) Set ,
414
is an adjoining equivalence where ^{){) = aui for X G C , I G Set, a G Morc(U/ A, X). This way CopowA with the respective left unit is a left universal construction with respect to the functor Morc(^4, ) (4) The formal analogue of (3) for the product functor provides a right-right adjoint situation of contravariant functors as follows (cf. [SE/WI79], Exercise 4.6.5(B)). For A C define the contravariant functor PowA : Set 7 ~ C
4
the so-called power functor, where Y[j A denotes te product in C with the projections (p;)i<=/ and for G MorSet(I,J) we set Pow^(^) : = {{())) G M o r c ( r i j A , / A ) where : A A and (( ^)) ) is induced by the product / A. Comparison with the contravariant Mor-functor M o r c ( - , 4 ) : C - f Set shows that {PowA . M o r c ( - , -A)} Indeed, = { u j x j ) with , ! : More (x, J ^ 4 ) ^ Mor S e t(/, M o r c ( X , A)) ^ ojXJ{)
is an adjoining equivalence where ()() = Pi for X G C , I G Set, eMorc(X,UiA). We will rediscover this functor as Example 5.1.22(3).
Free and cofree functors into act categories

E x a m p l e 1 . 2 0 . Let S be a monoid. (1) The free functor. The free functor (cf. Definition 2.3.1, Proposition 2.3.10 and also Construction 1.5.14) F(-)s S e t - A c t - S I ~ F(I)S and the forgetful functor L-sJ : Act - S ^ Set As ^ [As\ =
1 Adjoint functors
415
are left-right adjoint covariant functors, that is
Indeed, = (uj t A s ) where u; / i A s : H o r n ( F ( I ) S , A S ) - Mor S e t(/, [AS\) > Let J cr jr is an adjoining equivalence with / : I > F(I)s from Definition 2.3.1. This way F()s with the respective left unit is a left universal construction with respect to the forgetful functor sj Comparision with Example 5.1.19(3) shows that F()s is the copower functor Copow 5 : Set > Act S. (2) The cofree functor. The cofree functor (cf. Definition 2.4.1 and also Proposition 2.4.12) C o f ( - ) s : Set Act - S
I / s = Cof{I) s and the forgetful functor [ - s j : Act - S Set ,
are left-right adjoint covariant functors: L-sJ Cof()s Indeed, = (u>As,r) where AS, : Morset(L^sJ,I) Hom(>ls, C o f ( / ) s )
is an adjoining equivalence with * from Definition 2.4.1. This way Cof()s with the respective right unit is a right universal construction with respect to the forgetful functor [sj.
Horn- and tensor functors on act categories

Example 1.21. Let R,S,T be monoids. (1) Take SBT S Act T. The covariant functors -s sBT : Act - S Act -
416
and
H o r n ( S B T , ~) : A c t > Act - S
are left-right adjoint, that is

-5 < g > 5 T Hom(sT, - )
Indeed,
(U>A,C)
with -> Hom(A s , H o m ( s 5 T , C T ) s ) > ( )

b -> ( a b )
, Hom(A s < g > SBT,CT)
for A s e Act S, CT A c t T, is an adjoining equivalence. This way Horn(S-BT> T) with the respective right unit is a right universal construction with respect to 5 SBT(2) If we consider S = = {1} in (1) then Act - S and Act - are Set, where the tensor product coincides with the product and the adjointness from (1) turns into
Set
-J]AHMorSet(A,-) for any A e Set. (3) Similarly to (1) we find for RAS 6 R A c t that the covariant functors RAs s - S - Act > R - Act and
HOM(FLAS,FI -) : R - A c t > S - Act
are left-right adjoint, that is

R
AS < g > S- H o m ( A s , R - ) .
Here
(U>B,C)
with
R
UBIC
: H o m ( f l A s SB,
( a
C)
->
H o m ( s 5 , s Hom( As,
' b ^ a ( i> b ) ( a
C))
< g >
b )
->
b )
<g> 6 )
for every SB 6 S Act, RC G R Act, is an adjoining equivalence. Recall that OJB,C is inverse to in Proposition 2.5.19 for a given A. Comparison of U>B,C with A,C in (1) shows that we have a particular variant of a general result in Set (cf. [SCH70]): Mor S e t (A B, Morset (A, Mor S e t (B, Mor S e t (B, Mor S e t ( A, C)).
1 Adjoint functors (4) In the case where R S = we get from (3) and from (1) that and s A s s - Hom(sAs, s~) -s Hom(sAs,-s) .
417
Contravariant right-right adjoint Hom-functors

Example 1.22. Let S,T be monoids, SCT S - Act - T. (1) The contravariant Hom-functors H o m ( s - , sCT) H o m ( - T , SCT) : S - A c t - Act - : Act - S - Act
are right-right adjoint contravariant functors, that is { H o m ( s - , sCT) H o m ( - T , SCT)} Here =

(UJA,B)
with
, B.om(BT ,B.om(sA, sCT)T) b^(b) a^{b)(a)

is an adjoining equivalence.
> Hom(5 A, s Rom(BT, ' b^ > ()() (b)(a) = '{a){b)
sCT))
(2) It is clear that for a commutative monoid S the functor H o m ( g - , 5C5) is right-right adjoint with itself, which is similar to the situation of Example 5.1.3(2) for ( - , KB) : - Vec - - Vec. (3) Now we recall Example 5.1.19 (4). If in (1) we take S = T = {1}, we have S A c t = A c t = Set. The functor Hora({ 1 }_, (i}C) turns into Powe for C G Set and we get H{Powc.MorSet(-,C)} . Remark 1.23. Examples of other categories with right-right adjoint contravariant functors can be found, for example in 4.6 of [SE/WI79]. Note that (trivially) { H o m ( s - , SCT)Hom(-T, s^r)} ^
if Hom(5 , SCT) and Hom(, sC*T) are dual equivalence functors (cf. Definition 5.1.30 and Proposition 5.1.31). We do not have a genuine example of left-left adjoint contravariant functors in act categories. Examples of left-left adjoint contravariant functors for topological categories can be found in 4.6.6(C) of [SE/WI79].
418
Horn- and tensor functors in two variables

Example 1.24. To treat the tensor- and Horn-functors in two variables, it is convenient to consider natural equivalence of the following pairs of functors in three variables. For the properties of the Hom-functor on biacts compare Propositions 1.7.17 and 1.7.18. (1) Let R,S,T be monoids. The functors t ) r i u H o m ( - S i t / H o m ( s - T , U-T)s)R
Hom(R-s < g > s )
(.R - Act - S) {S - Act - ) (U - Act - T)
U - Act - R
which are contravariant in the first two variables and covariant in the third, are naturally equivalent with the adjoininig equivalence = (UJA,B,C),
UA,B,C
: Hom(As sBT, UCT)R () ( b)
- H o m ( A s ,
Horn(SBT,
UCt)S)R-
' *>() b > ( b) ,

VCT
for RAs e R-Act-S, 6 S-Act-, SBT in Act - , ' in Act - S. SBT, Analogously, the functors
6 U-Act-T,
a e rAs,
be
H o m ( R - s <g>s - U , R-T)T,
Hom(s-t/,
sHom(fl-s,
R~T)T)T
(R - Act - S) {S - Act - U) x (R - Act - T) are naturally equivalent (cf. Corollary 2.5.20). (2) Let S be a commutative monoid. The tensor functor -s s-
U - Act -
(Act - S) (S - Act) -> S - Act As x SB - As sB
with the respective left unit is a left universal construction with respect to the functor (Act - S) (S - Act) S A : S - Act
SY
^ Ys x sY ,
accordingly for homomorphisms, i.e. ( - S & S - ) sA . Here = (UJAXB,Y) with , H o r n ( S A S SB,SY) -> M o r ( A c t _ 5 ) x ( s _ A c t ) ( A s SB,YS h-v , x sY)
is an adjoining equivalence for As x sB G (Act 5") x (S Act), sY S Act, where : Ag s B > A5 <g) s B is the canonical S'-tensorial mapping.
1 Adjoint functors
419
Invariant properties of left-right adjoint functors

The proof of the next theorem copies the proof of Theorem 8.5 in [BLY86], which proves the categorical dual and also contains the converse assertion. T h e o r e m 1.25.
coproducts Proof. and F LetCT^-D G coequalizers. be covariant functors. If F G, then F preserves
If F G, then for every A 6 C we know that (a,F(A)) is G-free over A and for every D we know that (G(D), sb) is F-cofree over by Theorem 5.1.8. Apply the subsequent argument to the following diagram
F{Ar)
F { M ) i e i ] )
where Ai G C, i / G Set, Ui the canonical injections into the coproduct Take e D and & : F(Ai) > for every % I . Since ( G ( B ) , e B ) is F-cofree over B, there exists a unique g* : Al > G(B) such that gt = S F ( g * ) . Then the coproduct induced morphism [(<7*)ie/] is unique making the lower triangle commutative, using again that ( G ( B ) , b ) is F-cofree. This proves that ((F{ui))i(zi, Ai)) is the coproduct of F ( A i ) i e j in D. Consider Ai
/
9
A2
h*
G(B)
C ,
F { C )
420
to show that F preserves coequalizers for (c, C) = Coeq (/, g) in C.

F ( c ) F ( f ) = F ( c f ) = F(cg) = F(c)F(g).
Then
Suppose moreover, that h F ( f ) = hF(g) in D. As (G(B), ) is F-cofree over , there exists a unique h* : Ai > G(B) in C such that h = e F(h*) in D. Then e F ( h * f ) = e F ( h * ) F ( f ) = h F ( f ) = hF(g) = e F(h*g). Because of the uniqueness of the stared morphisms we deduce that h*g = h* f in C. Using that (c, C) is a coequalizer, there exists a unique h' such that h'c = h*. Then F(h*) = F{h')F(c) and thus e F{h') is unique with h = e F ( h ' ) F ( c ) . This proves that (F(c), F(C)) = Coeq(F(f),F{g)).
B B B B B B
For right-right adjointness we obtain

F
T h e o r e m 1.26.
and G take
Let
C^-D
be
contravariant and
functors. to
If
{F.G},
then
G
coproducts to products coequalizers equalizers.
Preservation of (co-)generators
For the following two proposition compare, for example, 31.11 of [HE/ST73] and its dual.
F
Proposition 1.27.
erator, faithful. let (r)u,F(U)) F{U) Then
Let
C ^ D
be over
covariant U with
functors, U
let
C
and
be let
a G
genbe
G
be G-free D is a * GF(U) generator.
f Proof.
Take
=4 ' in
9
and assume that
f k
gk
for all
: F(U)
B.
We show that this implies / = g. Since {, F(U)) is G-free over U, for all k : U * G(B) there exists a unique k : F(U) 6 D such that * x .* * / k = G(k ). By assumption we get fk = gk for all such k . Thus
G { f ) G { t ) = G { f t ) = G(gk*) = G(g)G(k*)
and consequently
G(f)k = G(f)G(k*)Vu = G(g)G(k*)Vu = G(g)k
for all k : U > G(B). Since U e C is a generator, this implies G(f) = G(g) and using that G is faithful, we get / = g.
1 Adjoint functors
421
Proposition 1.28. Let C^D

G
be covariant functors where F G.
If G is If F is
faithful, then F(U) is a generator in D if U is a generator in C. faithful, then G(C) is a cogenerator in C if C is a cogenerator in D.
Invariant properties of Horn- and tensor-functors

The following preservation and reflection properties of Horn and < g > are essential for Morita Theory. They are based on the two types of adjointnesses. Theorem 1.29. (1) The covariant Horn -functor H o m ^ s , s) Act S Act E n d ^ g ) preserves products, equalizers and monomorphisms. If As is projective, then Hom(^45,5) preserves also epimorphisms. (2) The tensor functor 5 5 : S Act End(As) Act preserves coproducts, coequalizers and epimorphisms. (3) The contravariant Horn -functor Hom( s>Bs) ' Act S > End(i?s) Act takes coproducts to products, coequalizers to equalizers, and epimorphisms to monomorphisms. If Bg is injective, then Horn(5, Bs) takes also monomorphisms to epimorphisms. Proof. We use that A s s ~ ^ Hom(.As, 5). The statements about products, equalizers, coproducts and coequalizers follow by Theorem 5.1.25, its categorical dual and Theorem 5.1.26. Moreover, we use that in Act S monomorphisms are equalizers and epimorphisms are coequalizers by Theorem 2.2.44, which are preserved, or taken to the categorical dual, respectively, as we have just seen. Using that equalizers are monomorphisms by Proposition 2.2.8 and coequalizers are epimorphisms by Proposition 2.2.18, we have proved the respective statements. The statements about projectives and injectives follow from Definition 1.7.29.
(Dually) equivalent categories, (dual) equivalence functors

We now proceed to define equivalence of categories which is a reasonable concept to imitate isomorphic structures on the level of categories. Note that the terms equivalence functor, defined here, and natural equivalence of functors defined in 5.1.2 describe quite different concepts.
422
Definition 1.30. Let F : C D be a covariant functor. We call F an equivalence (functor) if there exists a covariant functor G : D > C such that one has naturally equivalent functors FG = Id and GF = Idc- In this case we call C and D equivalent categories and write C ~ D. Let F : D C be a contravariant functor. We call F a dual equivalence (functor) if there exists a contravariant functor G : D > C such that one has naturally equivalent functors FG = Id^ and GF = Idc In this case we call C and D dually equivalent categories and write C ~ D. In these cases we call F and G mutually inverse equivalence functors or mutually inverse dual equivalence functors, respectively. Then we also say that the pair of functors C categories or a dual equivalence of
F
G
D constitutes categories.
an equivalence
of
Equivalence and adjointness

Proposition 1.31. If a pair of covariant functors alence of categories, then F~\G If a pair of contravariant categories, then and G F . a dual equivalence of
F
G
constitutes an equiv-
functors F and G constitutes H{F.G} and {F.G} .
Proof. We give the proof for the case of covariant functors. Suppose that FG = Id with natural equivalence : FG Idp and Idc GF with natural equivalence : Idc GF. To prove F G define for A E C, G D, e Mor D(F(A), B) ,() = 0() e More ( A G(B)).
Then it turns out that SF(a) = ^1() for a G Morc(A, G(B)), compare Theorem 5.1.9. Moreover, : MorD(F(), ) > Morc( , G()) is a natural tansformation since is natural and similar for - 1 since is natural. Indeed, consider for / : A' > A in C , g : ' in D the diagram
MOTd(F(A),B)
UA'B
Mo
Tc{A,G(B))
(go-oF(f))
MorD{F(A%B>)
, ,
(G(g)
MorC(A',G(B')) .
o-of)
1 Adjoint functors Take e M o r 0 ( F ( A ) , B), then
423
which
G(g)uA,B()f = G(g)G()VAf = G(g)VAf and uA,,B,(gF(f)) = G(gF{f))VA. = G(g)GF(f) are equal since / = GF(f)> as is a natural transformation.
C ^ D
G F
R e m a r k 1 . 3 2 . We give an example for a pair of covariant functors
such that F G and G F but C and D are not equivalent categories (cf. 19.12(6) in [AD/HE/ST90]). This shows that the converses of Proposition 5.1.31 are not true in general. One converse holds, for example, if G is a forgetful functor into Set (cf. 19H of [AD/HE/ST90]). Choose the category C such that { 0 } is its only object, M o r c ( { 0 } , { 0 } ) = { i d { 0 } } and choose the category D such that D has a zero object (cf. Definition 1.6.18). Take F ( { 0 } ) = and G{B) = { 0 } for all e D. Then it is straightforward that : Idc * GF with ^ : { 0 } > { 0 } is a natural transformation. So we have F -\G. On the other side ' : Id^ > FG with ' : > is also a natural transformation for all D and (77'b,G(B)) = (', { 0 } ) is F-free over B. So we also have G F, but obviously C and D are not equivalent in general. We have, however, GF = Idc trivially, since C has only one object and one morphism. To show that GF = Idc does not imply G F, we can modify this example such that is an initial object in D which is not terminal. Then still GF = IdcBut if we take e D such that there exist ,2 : F ( { 0 } ) = , 2, then there is still only one * : { 0 } = G(B) > { 0 } and thus there cannot exist an ' such that the diagram
e = F({
FG(B) =
is commutative for i = 1 and i = 2.
Characterization of equivalence functors

We first quote a very useful characterization of equivalence functors and then we list some of the most important properties of equivalence functors.
424
T h e o r e m 1.33. The (contravariant) covariant functor F : C > D is an equivalence (a dual equivalence) if and only if it is dense, full and faithful. Proof. We consider the covariant case. Necessity. From the hypothesis we get a functor G : D > C such that GF = I d c and FG = Id & with natural equivalence : I d c > GF. To show that F is faithful suppose that / , g : A > A' in C are such that F ( f ) = F(g). Then we have the commutative diagram
Va
VA
GF(A)
A!
GF(A') A'
A'
A' ,
in which a = GF(f) = GF(g). It follows that f = a >g which implies / = g since is, in particular, left cancellable. Thus F is faithful. Similarly we show that G is faithful. To show that F is dense observe that for every e D we have FG(B) = i d D ( B ) = B, i.e. A := G(B) is such that F{A) ^ B. Finally, to show that F is full consider g : F(A) > F(A'). If we define / = rj^}G{g^ a , then we have the commutative diagram
GF(A)
GF(A)
G(g)
GF(f)
GF(A') A'
A'
A>
GF(A')
Consequently, G(g)rqA = GF{f)riA which implies G(g) = GF(f) since a is, in particular, right cancellable. Using that G is also faithful we get g = F(f). Sufficiency. Suppose that F : C > D is full, faithful and dense. Thus for every e D there exists A C with = F(A). Choose one such object and denote it by G(B). Consequently, for every e D we have G(B) < E C such that FG(B) = B. Now choose for every e D an isomorphism FG(B) B. For every morphism g : > ' in D we then have e-B}geB FG(B) -> FG(B') .
1 Adjoint functors
425 : G(B) > G(B')
Since F is full and faithful, there is a unique morphism G(g) such that F G ( g ) = ewiges-
We now observe that G : D * C so defined is a functor. In fact F G ( i d ) = 1 id = idFG() Fid G(B) a n d so, since F is faithful, G(id) = i d ^ s ) . Moreover, if g : ' and h : B' - f ", then
F G ( h g ) = e-B),hgeB = ^, he B , ~} ge
B
= F G ( h ) F G ( g ) = F ( G ( h ) G ( g ) ) G ( g ) .
and so, again since F is faithful, G(hg) = G ( h ) functor. It now follows from the commutative diagram
Thus,
is indeed a
F G ( B )
F G ( g )
F G ( B ' )
>
'
and the fact that each is an isomorphism, that FG = Id^. We now establish a natural equivalence : Idc > G F . For this purpose : F G F ( A ) > we observe that for every A 6 C we have an isomorphism F ( A ) . Then " ^ : F { A ) F G F ( A ) and so, since F is full and faithful, there is a unique morphism A ' A > G F ( A ) such that F r ^ = ~^ Moreover, by Proposition 1.7.26 we know that F , being faithful, reflects isomorphisms, i.e., we get that A is an isomorphism. We thus have, for every morphism / :A > A', the commutative diagram
F { A )
F { j l A )
F G F ( A )
F ( f )
F G F ( f )
F ( A ' )
F(VA>)
F G F ( A ' )
Since F , being faithful, reflects commutative diagrams by Proposition 1.7.26, we deduce that
426
GF(A) GF(f)
f
A'
A'
GF(A')
is commutative. Since each a is an isomorphism we have GF = Id -
Preservation properties of equivalence functors

P r o p o s i t i o n 1.34. Consider C^D
G
such that FG = Id^ and GF = Idc are is projective (injective), thenF(P) e D
naturally equivalent functors. IfPaC is projective (injective).
Proof. We prove the projective case. For the subsequent argument consider the diagram in D F(P) f '
where h is an epimorphism, , B' and / arbitrary. In C we obtain GF(P) (G(f))' G(B)
G(f)
G(h) G(B')
where G(h) is an epimorphism by Proposition 1.7.27 and therefore (G(f))' exists making the diagram commutative since is projective by hypothesis and GF(P) = because of GF = Idc- Applying F to this diagram, we can lift / in the first diagram to ^ FG(B) using FG = Id D . The proof for the injective case is analogous.
2 Categories equivalent to A c t S
427
Corollary 1.35. Covariant equivalence functors preserve monomorphisms, epimorphisms, projectives, injectives, generators, cogenerators, products, equalizers, coproducts, coequalizers. Contravariant equivalence functors take monomorphisms to epimorphisms, products to coproducts, equalizers to coequalizers, projectives to injectives, generators to cogenerators, and vice versa. Proof. The statements about monomorphisms and epimorphisms were proved in Proposition 1.7.27, the statements for faithful, full and dense functors and hence for equivalence functors follow by Theorem 5.1.33. The statements about generators are in Proposition 5.1.27 and analogously for contravariant functors in Proposition 5.1.28. The rest comes from Theorems 5.1.25 and 5.1.26.
2 Categories equivalent to Act S

Categories Categories equivalent to a full subcategory of A c t S (5.2.1-5.2.2) equivalent to bfAct S (5.2.3-5.2.10)
Categories equivalent to a full subcategory of Act S

T h e o r e m 2.1. Let C be a category with the following properties:
(1) There exists a projective generator U C such that C contains all coproducts ] j i e I U i , Ui = U, I Set, 7 ^ 0 , and for every morphism f : U Ilie/ ^ there exist unique IQ G I and fi0 : U > Ui0 such that f Ui0fi0, where U{ ,i e I, denote the injections into the coproduct. (2) For every morphism g in C the pullback of the pair (g,g) exists in C. (3) Every epimorphism g is the coequalizer of the pullback of (g,g), (P, (pi,p2)) is the pullback of (g,g), then g = Coeq(pi,p2). Then F()s = Morc(i/, ) : C > A c t S is a full and faithful where S = Mor C (U, U). i.e. if
functor
Note that Skornjakov called U with property (1) a selfindecomposable projective generator. Note further that epimorphisms with property (3) are also called regular epimorphisms (cf. 16.13 of [HE/ST73]). It will turn out in Theorem 5.4.8 that Morc(A ) is full and faithful for C = A c t S already if U is just a generator.
428
Proof. Clearly, Motc{U, X) is a right 5"-act for every X C. We have to show that the functor F is faithful and full, i.e. induces bijections between the sets M o r c ( X , ^ ) a n d H o r n { F ( X ) S , F{Y)S) for all X,Y C.
Since U is a generator in C , the functor F is faithful by Definition 1.7.31. To prove that F is a full functor take tiom(F(X)s, F(Y)s). First we use that U is a generator in C which by Proposition 2.3.13 provides an epimorphism g :G > X in C where G = ] J i e / Ut, Ui = U, for % I and I Set. For every injection ttj, i I, we see that <p(gui) Morc(fA Y) = F(Y). Take the coproduct induced morphism g = [>(<?Mi)ie/] M o r c ( G , F ) . There exists the pullback (P,(pi,p2)) of the pair (g,g) by (2). Using again Proposition 2.3.13, we get an epimorphism h : > where
U
3
e j U j , Uj
U for all j
J a n d a suitable J S e t .
For t h e subsequent
argument we consider now the following diagram

1I
U = Uj
= I I u3 j&J
\
7
Pi
G =
\\Ui
\
P2
where Uj denote the injections. By (1) for every j J and / = pi hu3 there exist I and f':U*U such that pihuj = u^ f , and similarly, for every j 6 J and / = P2huj there exist i" I and / " : U U such that P2huj = Ui>> f". Using that ^) gui for all i I,gpi gp2 and that is an Shomomorphism and that /', f" S we get
i' gpihuj = gui'f = = ip(gui>)}' = <p(gui> f ) = = ip{gui)f" ip{gpihuj) = gu^ f" = gp2huj
ip{gp2huj)
= (p(guif")
for all j J. Since Uj, j J, is an epimorphic family by Proposition 2.1.13, we get gpih gp2h and thus gpi gp2 since h is an epimorphism. For g Coeq(pi,p2) by (3), let g : X Y be coequalizer induced by g. Then 99 = 9Now take any / F(X) M o r c ( U , X ) . Since U is projective and g is an epimorphism, there exists / ,c(U, G) with / = gf. Using (1) we get
429
/ = Ui fio for some iq G I and fio G Morc(t/, U) = S. Thus we have

F(g) ( / ) =gf
u
= gg]
= g j = 0Uip7o = (P{gUiJl0) = >(<//) = <fi(f) .
= f{9 io)fi(,
Consequently, we have that = F(g), i.e. F maps the set Morc(-X", V) onto Hom(F(X) s , i.e. F is a full functor. Corollary 2.2. In the situation of the preceding theorem the category C is equivalent to a full subcategory of Act S.
Categories equivalent to Act S

Theorem 2.3 (Skornjakov [Sko69a]). A category C is equivalent to the category Act S for some monoid S if and only if C has the following properties: (1) There exists a projective generator U e C such that C contains all coproducts Uie/ Ui, Ui = U, I G Set, I and for every morphism f : U > ]jieIUi there exist unique io G I and fi0 : U > Ui0 such that f = Ui0fi0, where Ui ,i G I, denote the injections into the coproduct. (2) For every morphism g in C the kernel pair of g exists in C. (3) Every epimorphism g is the coequalizer of the pullback of (g,g), i.e., if (, (pi,p2)) is the kernel pair of g, then g = Coeq(pi,p2) (4) Every morphism g in C can be factorized as g = kf where k is a monomorphism and f an epimorphism. (5) C has finite products. (6) If (K, k) is a partitioning subobject of X for X G C, then (K,(p'k,p"k)) is the kernel pair of some morphism, where '," denote the projections of X. If C has properties (l)-(6) then F(-) := Mor c (i/, - ) : C > Act - S is a full, faithful and dense functor where S = Morc(^, U). Proof. Necessity. Note that in Act S we have property (1) for Us = Ss, property (2) by Proposition 2.2.5, property (3) by Theorem 2.2.44, property (4) by the Homomorphism Theorem 1.4.21, property (5) since Act S is product complete and property (6) by Theorem 2.2.49 and Proposition 2.2.28. Before we proceed to sufficiency we need some auxiliary results.
430
L e m m a 2.4. Let U be a projective generator of a category C, S = Morc(7, U) and F()s = c{U,) : C > A c t S. Then a morphism g in C is a monomorphism or an epimorphism if and only if F(g) has the respective property in A c t S. Proof. F( )s preserves epimorphisms since U is projective (cf. Definition 1.7.29). Every covariant Mor-functor preserves monomorphisms by Proposition 1.7.27. Since U is a generator, F()s is faithful by Definition 1.7.31 and thus reflects epimorphisms and monomorphisms by Proposition 1.7.25. L e m m a 2.5. Let C be a category with property (1) of Theorem 5.2.3 and U, F and S as given there. Every I-free right S-act S is an epimorphic image of F(G)s where G Hie/ Ui, Ui U for all i G I, with injections Ui : U > G. Proof. By (1) we get that for every / G F(G)s = Morc(/, G) there exists a unique io I such that / Ui0fi0 for some fi0 G Morc(i/, U) S. Define F(G)s by Ui S f^vl0(fl{))
where now Vi,i G I, denote the injections into ] J 7 S. Clearly, is an Shomomorphism. Moreover, is surjective since every G J j j S can be uniquely expressed as = Vi0(s) and then <p{ultis) = vM)s = x. Thus is an epimorphism. L e m m a 2.6. Let C be a category with (1), (2), (3) and (4) as in Theorem 5.2.3 and U, F and S as given there. Take X C, Es G A c t S and suppose that 7 : Es > F(X)s is a monomorphism. Then: (a) There exist G C , a monomorphism k : > X and an : F(K)S Es such that = F(k). isomorphism
(b) For G C and a monomorphism h : X with F(h) for some G Horn (F(H)s, Es), there exists a monomorphism h' G M o r c { H , K ) such that kh' h where k corresponds to 7 as in (a). Proof, (a) Since Es is an epimorphic image of some free S'-act by Proposition 2.3.3 we get from Lemma 5.2.5 that for some G = Uie/ Ui* Ui = U for all i G / , I G Set, there exists an epimorphism : F(G)s Es- Since F()s is full by Theorem 5.2.1 we get for a monomorphism 7 : Es > F(X)s that 7 = F(g) for some g : G > X. By (4) we find an epimorphism / : G > and a monomorphism k : X such that g = k f . Using Lemma 5.2.4 we get a monomorphism F(k) and an epimorphism F ( f ) in the following commutative diagram
431
with = (k) where : I m 7 > Es is the restriction of the relation 7 - 1 . Since is an epimorphism and Im F ( k ) = Im F(g) = Im 7, & is an epimorphism. As both F ( k ) and are injective, is an 5-isomorphism. It is clear that 7<? = F ( k ) . (b) Take now (H C , h : ^ X a monomorphism and F(h) = for some G H o m ( F ( i i ) 5 , E s ) . Considering ~ and using that F is a full functor we
get b! G M o r c { H , K ) with F ( h ' ) = ~-. Now = = F{h)
F { k t i ) = F ( k ) F { h ' ) = -
and thus kh' h since F is faithful.
Take C with properties ( l ) - ( 5 ) of Theorem 5.2.3 and U , F and S as given there. If W j ^ j X j is a product in C with projections pj and J 7 j e j F ( X j ) 5 is the product in A c t S with projections Wj, then there exists an isomorphism : Y [ j e J F ( X j ) s such that F ( p j ) 6 , for all j e J .
Lemma 2.7.
then ,(/) G F(X3)S = M o r C ( U , X 3 ) . Set X := ( ( 7 r j ( / ) ) j e j ) F(X) = MOTC(U,X) the product induced morphism. Then P j 5 ( f ) = 1 T j ( f ) for all j G J . Let f,g G U j e J F ( X j ) s be such that 6(f) = 5(g). Then , ( / ) = P j S ( f ) = PjS(g) 7 T j ( g ) for all j 6 J and since p3, j G J, is a monomorphic family, f g follows. Thus <5 is injective. Let G F ( X ) S = M o r C ( U , X ) , then = 5(f) where / = { ( p j i p ) j e j ) . Thus is surjective. For any s G S MOTC(U,U) we have PJ(fs) = ITJ(fs) ITJ(f)s = P j ( f ) s for all j G J and// G Y [ j e J F ( X j ) s , which shows that is also an 5-homomorphism. The equality F (p3) = 3 for all j J follows from the corresponding definitions.
FE YIJEJNXJH,
: =
Proof.
If
UJEJXI
AND
S(F)
432
L e m m a 2.8. Let C be a category with properties (l)-(5) of Theorem 5.2.3 and U, F and S as given there, let G = LLe/ Ui, Ui = U for all i 6 I, and let : F(G)s > As be an epimorphism. Take (, k) and the isomorphism : F(K)s > Es from Lemma 5.2.6. Then (K,k) is a partitioning subobject of G G (recall Definition 2.2.48) such that F(k) = where (Es, 7) = Eq(s7r', "), ', " the projections of F(G)sU F(G)s in A c t S, and from Lemma 5.2.7. Proof. For the subsequent argument consider the following diagram F(L)S F(m') F{K) F(G)sUF(G)s^ F(G)i F(G)S
F(GUG)s^j F(r) Let (Es, 7) = ( ' , " ) which exists in A c t S by Proposition 2.2.12. Consider Es ^ F(G)SU.F(G)S ^ F(GUG)S where S is the isomorphism from Lemma 5.2.7. Then is a monomorphism. According to Lemma 5.2.6(a) we get C, a monomorphism k : GUG and an isomorphims : F(K)s Es such that = F(k). We show that ( , k) is a partitioning suboject oi GUG. By Lemma 2.2.46 there exists a monomorphism d : G > G G such that p'd p"d idc where '," are the projections of the product, i.e. d is the diagonal of G G. By Lemma 5.2.7 we get 7v^~1F(d) = F(p')F(d) = F(p'd) = F(p"d) = "5~XF{0) .
Using that ( E s , j ) (', "), we get G H o r n ( F ( G ) s , Es) equalizer induced by <5-1F(<i) with 5 _ 1 F ( d ) = . Thus F(d) = . By Lemma 5.2.6(b) we get that (G, d) is a subobject of ( , k), fulfilling condition (r) of a partitioning subobject in Definition 2.2.48. Let now r be a reflection in G G, i.e. r e MorC(G TIG, GUG) with p'r p" and p"r p'. Using the formulas ' 1 = F(p') and " F(p") from Lemma 5.2.7 we get 7'<^()<5 = F(p'r)5 = F{p")S = "
433
and similarly "
lF(r)S
= '. Consequently, = {")~ F{r)5^.
{')~{) Let G H o m ( s , . Therefore, F{rk)
be equalizer induced by 0 _ 1 F ( r ) 5 j then <5_1F(r)<57 =
= F(r)F{k)
= '^^^
= .
Now rk : > GTIG is a monomorphism since r is a monomorphism by Lemma 2.2.46. Then F(rk) = {^) for the monomorphism 7 : Es - F(GTIG) and Lemma 5.2.6 implies that there exists k' G M o r c ( K , K ) with rk = kkf. This proves condition (s) of a partitioning subobject. It remains to prove condition (t). Let ( L , ) be a subobject of G G G satisfying the conditions p\2 = km', p 2 3 = km" where Pij are the combined projections, i.e. p'pij Pi and p"pij = P j for ^ G M o r c ( G G G, G G), i,j G { 1 , 2 , 3 } , i < j, Pi are the projections of G I I G I I G and m ' , m " G MOTc{L,K). Denote by 1 ,7 2 , 3 the projections of F(G)s F ( G ) S I I F(G)s and denote by ^ the corresponding combined projections in analogy to ptJ. Lemma 5.2.7 gives the following isomorphism now denoted by : F(G)S F(G)S F(G)S -> F(G G G)s
Then m = F{Pl for i G { 1 , 2 , 3 } . For i " 1 Lemma 5.2.7 gives that ''1 = F(p') and thus n'S~1F(p12) = F{p'p\2) = F{P\) using the property of combined projections, and similarly for " and p". Hence ' ~ 1 ( 2 ) = F ( p i ) 0 = . Analogously we find that " ~ { 2 ) = 72. Thus i _ 1 F ( p i 2 ) i = \2 using uniqueness of the product induced homomorphism of F(G)sY\F(G)sSimilarly we get 5 _ 1 F ( p 2 3 ) 5 = 23 and 5 _ 1 F(pi 3 )<5 3 . Moreover, for every a G F(L) 7 r 1 2 ( r 1 F ( ) ( a ) ) = -'FipuiV'm^)) = ( ^ F ^ F ^ a ) l = ^~ F(pl2l))(a) = (-^(^'))() = (5"1F(fc)F(m'))(a) = ( ^ 1 ^ F ( m , ) ) ( a ) = (#F(m'))(a) and thus 2(~1 F{)) = tfF(m') and similarly 23(~1 F{)) = $F(m"). Since F() is a monomorphism and Es is a partitioning subobject of F(G)TIF(G) by Theorem 2.2.49 together with Proposition 2.2.28, the existence of a morphism : F(L) > Es such that 3(<5 F{)) = is granted by Definition 2.2.48. Using that <S _ 1 F(pi 3 )i = 3 we have '1 F{pi3)F{) = , i.e. F(pi3t) = = ~ = F{k)dUsing that F is a full functor by Theorem 5.2.1, we obtain a morphism t G Morc(L, K) with F() = . Hence F(pi3) F(kl). Using that F is faithful again by Theorem 5.2.1, we get that Pi2, = k. This proves condition (t) of a partitioning subobject.
434
L e m m a 2.9. Let C be a category with properties (l)-(5) of Theorem 5.2.3 and U,F and S as given there. If (K,(k' ,k")) is the kernel pair of g in C, then (.F{K), (F{k'),F(k"))) is the kernel pair of F(g) in A c t - S. Proof. Consider g M o r c ( ^ , Y) and denote the natural projections of F(X)s by ',". Then Es = {(, b) e F(X)S F(X)S \ F{g)(a) = F(g)(b)} F(X)s
with natural embedding 7 : Es * F(X)s F(X)s is the equalizer of (.F(g)nF(g)n") existing by Proposition 2.2.10. Let (K, (k', k")) be the kernel pair of g. Using Lemma 2.2.4 we can take a subobject C X with embedding h and an isomorphism t : > such that p'ht = k', p"ht = k" and (H,(p'h,p"h)) is also the kernel pair of g. Let : F{X)SUF(X)S F(XnX)s be the isomorphism from Lemma 5.2.7. Now using also that gp'h = gp"h we get F(gy5-lF{h) = F{g)F{p')58~lF{h) = F(gp'h) 1 = F{gp"h) = F(g)n"~ F(h) . From the equalizer property of Es we obtain H o r n ( F ( H ) s , Es) equalizer induced by 6~lF(h) and thus S~1F(h) = Now F(h) and consequently are monomorphisms by Lemma 5.2.4. The following diagram illustrates the situation we have established
For qeEsC F(X)sIlF(X)s denote '() = a and "() = b. Then F(g)(a) = ga by definition of F and since F(g)(a) = F(g)(b) we have ga gb. Then,
2 Categories equivalent to Act S using that ( , ( p'h,p"h )) is the kernel pair of g, there exists c e Motc(U,H) F(H)s such that a = k't~lc = p'htt~lc = p'hc and, similarly, b = p"hc:
435 =
Consequently, q = ((p'he,p"he)) = ~ F(h)(c) = 7^(c) = (c). Hence is surjective onto Es and thus is an isomorphism in A c t S. By Lemma 5.2.7, and again using 5~1F(h) = 7, we compute tt'7 = F(p')S^F(t)
= F(p'ht) = Fife') and similarly ir"^F(t) = F(k"). Now by Proposition 2.2.12 we get that ( F s , ('^, "7)) is the kernel pair of F(g). Using that and F ( t ) are isomorphisms (F(K), (F(k'),F(k"))) is also the kernel pair of F(g). Now we are ready to prove the sufficiency part of Theorem 5.2.3. Proof. Sufficiency. In view of Theorem 5.2.1 it remains to show that F is a dense functor, i.e. for every As A c t S there exists X G C such that F(X)s = As. Take As A c t S. Using that As is an epimorphic image of some free right S-act / ^ by Proposition 2.3.3 together with Lemma 5.2.5 we obtain an epimorphism : F(G)s > As where G = LL6/ Ui, Ui U for i 6 I. Consider the product F(G)s F(G)s with projections ', ", and take (Es, 7) = ^',"). Take the isomorphism : F(G)SUF(G)S F(GJlG)s from Lemma 5.2.7. For we get a monomorphism k : > G G and an isomorphism : F(K)s > Es such that = F[k) from Lemma 5.2.6 where (K, k) is a partitioning subobject of G G by Lemma 5.2.8.
436
V Equivalence a n d Duality
Let p' and p" be the projections of the product in C. Consider the diagrams k GUG G and F(K). F(k) F(G G)s X ' il
Es 1 F(G)s F(G)s E(G)t
F(G)
F(g) F(X)S
By condition (6) we get that (K,(p'k,p"k)) is the kernel pair of some g Morc^G,X). By Lemma 2.2.3 and condition (4) we can assume that g is an epimorphism. Then F(g) is an epimorphism by Lemma 5.2.4 and (F(K), {F(p'k), F(p"k))) is the kernel pair of F(g) by Lemma 5.2.9. Using Lemma 5.2.7 we compute F(p'k) = F(p')F(k) = F(p')671? = ' and, similarly, F(p"k) = Using that is an isomorphism, we get that (Es, (', 7"7)) is also the kernel pair of F(g). By Proposition 2.2.12 we have that (Es, ('7, "y)) is the kernel pair of . Since condition (3) holds in Act S we have (, As) = Coeq(n/'y,n"^) and (F(g),F(X)s) = Coeq(7r'7,"). Hence F(X)s = As by Proposition 2.2.18. This proves that F is a dense functor. In analogy to Theorem 5.2.3 Skornjakov [Sko69a] characterized the category Set' of all non-empty sets replacing "projective generator" in property (1) by the requirement that U is a terminal object in C and, similarly, he characterized the category Set of all sets. Other characterizations of categories equivalent to Act S were given by Davis [Dav70] and by Banaschewski [Ban72],
3 Morita equivalence of monoids
437

The biact
s
F(Ss)T
(5.3.1)
Covariant functors and the tensor product (5.3.2-5.3.3) Morita equivalent monoids (5.3.4-5.3.5) Morita equivalences and equivalence functors (5.3.6-5.3.7) Morita equivalences and Morita contexts (5.3.8-5.3.11) Morita equivalences elementary conditions (5.3.12-5.3.14) Morita triples (5.3.15-5.3.18) Non-isomorphic Morita equivalent monoids (5.3.19-5.3.26) Ideal structure of Morita equivalent monoids (5.3.27) Equivalent subcategories (5.3.28-5.3.32) Morita subcategories (5.3.33-5.3.36) Comments In a certain sense Morita equivalence is the global aspect of homological classification of monoids since it contains the question to which extent a monoid S is determined by the entire category Act S.
The biact
SF(Ss)T
Let S and be monoids. We show here that the image of a monoid S under a covariant functor F : Act S > Act always gives an S T-biact. Lemma 3.1. Let F : Act S > Act be a covariant functor. F(Ss) G S Act with the multiplication sv := for G F(Ss),
Proof.
Then
F(Xs)(v)
s G S and Xs Hom(5s, Ss) with Xs(x) = sx for every G S.

G A c t - and F(XS) : F(SS)T F{Ss)TSince
Clearly, F(Ss)T
A s ' s ( l ) = s's = AS/(AS(1)) we have AS'S = AS'AS as Ss is free in Act S. Now e'M = F(Xs,)(F(Xs)(v)) = F(\a,\a)(v) Thus F(Ss) = = F(Xa,s)(v) (F(Xs')F(Xs))(v) = (s's)v .
e S - Act. Finally, since s{vt) = F(Xs){vt) = F(Xs)(v)t = (sv)t
for s e S, t e T, we get that F(Ss)
is an S - T-biact.
438
Covariant functors and the tensor product

The next theorem (an analogue of the Watts-Gabriel Theorem, see, for example [COH66]) shows that certain covariant functors can be substituted by a suitable tensor functor. We start with Proposition 3.2. Let F : Act S > A c t be a covariant functor which preserves coproducts and coequalizers. Then we have the natural equivalence F(-s) = -s sF(S)T.
Proof. We define a natural transformation
e:-ssF(S)T^F(-s)T .8 SF(S)T
F(Xs)T
F(Xx)(V)
for Xs A c t - S, , sF(S)T, and A^ H o m ( 5 s , X s ) defined by Xx{s) = xs for X and s S. Then F(Xx) H o r n ( F ( S ) T , F(X)T). Using Lemma 5.3.1 F(Xxs)(v) = F(XxXs)(v) = F(Xx)(F(Xs)(v))
S,
F(Xx)(sv)
SF(S)T,
and thus 6X(xsv) = for all s implies that is well-defined. Clearly, is a T-homomorphism. Now let f H o m ( X s , X ^ ) . Since
Xs and
which
A/(*)(l) = /(x) = A r ( l )
we have XF(X) = FXX for every XS- As (F(f)0x)(x <g> ) = F(f)F(Xx)(v) = = F(Xf{x}){v) = (ex,(f
SF(S)T
F(fXx)(v) i d F ( 5 ) ) ) ( x )
for all
XS
and
we get that the diagram ^ F(XS) F(f) t>X' ^ F(X'S) ,
sF(S) f <8> idF(S) X's sF(S)
is commutative. Hence is a natural transformation.
439
Recall that A c t S has coproducts of any nonempty family of S-acts, for every act Xs the injections into the coproduct Xs II Xs are different, every epimorphism is the coequalizer of a pair of morphisms by Theorem 2.2.44 and that Ss is a generator in A c t S by Proposition 2.3.11. Moreover, -s sF{S)T H o m ( 5 F ( S ) T , - T ) (cf. Example 5.1.21(1)) and - s sF{S)T preserves coproducts and coequalizers by the left variant of Theorem 5.1.29(2). From Proposition 2.5.13 we get that 6S : SS SF(S)T F(S)T is an isomorphism in Act -T. Now is a natural equivalence by Proposition 5.1.4 since Ss is a generator in Act S. T h e o r e m 3.3. Let F : Act S Act be a covariant functor. are: (i) F G for some functor G : Act > A c t - S. (ii) F preserves coproducts and coequalizers.
(iii) F = S SF(S)T-
Equivalent
Proof, (i) (ii). This is Theorem 5.1.25. (ii) => (iii) by Proposition 5.3.2. (iii) => (i). Set G := Hom(F(S) T , ~T)S- Then by Example 5.1.21(1) we have that - s s F(S)T G and thus F H G by Corollary 5.1.10.
Morita equivalent monoids

Definition 3.4. The monoids S and are called Morita equivalent monoids if Act S and Act are equivalent categories, we write S ~T. This definition is in analogy to the definition of Morita equivalent rings which goes back to the idea of K. Morita. He then used the term categoryisomorphism [Mor58], [Mor61]. We prove how an equivalence functor F : A c t S > A c t relates the monoids S and . T h e o r e m 3.5. Let F : A c t S > Act be an equivalence functor. Then there exists a cyclic projective generator Ps G Act S such that F{Ps) = in Act . Proof. By Definition 5.1.30 there exists G : A c t > A c t S such that FG = I d A c t _ T and GF = I d A c t - s By Corollary 5.1.35 we get that Ps := G(T) is projective in Act 5, since is projective in A c t by Proposition 2.3.4. Moreover, P s is indecomposable, since any decomposition of P s into a coproduct would be preserved by F by Corollary 5.1.35 and would give a
440
decomposition of G A c t T, which does not exist since is cyclic and thus indecomposable by Proposition 1.5.8. Hence Ps is cyclic by Lemma 3.17.7. Finally, Ps is a generator in A c t S since is a generator in A c t by Proposition 2.3.11 and G preserves this property by Corollary 5.1.35.
Morita equivalences and equivalence functors

T h e o r e m 3.6. Two monoids S and are Morita equivalent if and only if there exist biacts s Q t , t P s such that s Q t t P s sSs and t P s s Q t as biacts. In this case F(s) = s sQt ant ^ G ( ~ t ) = ~ <S>tPs are mutually inverse equivalence functors. Proof. Necessity. Let A c t S
F G
A c t be equivalence functors. Then by
Theorem 5.3.5 there exists a cyclic projective generator Ps < E A c t S such that F ( P s ) t Tt as right T-acts. Analogously, there exists a cyclic projective generator Q A c t with G{Qx)s = Ss- Then, using Lemma 5.3.1, we get that t G ( T t ) s t G F ( P s ) s ^ T P S and, similarly, s F ( S s ) T = S F G ( Q t ) t =
sQt-
Since equivalence functors preserve coproducts and coequalizers by Corollary 5.1.35 we can apply Theorem 5.3.3 and get
sQt < 8 > t P s = sQt tG{Tt)s ^
sG(QT)s
SSs
as S S-biacts and, similarly, tPs sQt TV as T-biacts. Sufficiency. Suppose that for biacts sQt and tPs we have sSs
sQt t P s Set F ( - )
s
=
T
~s
sQt
A c t
~ S
Act -
and G ( - )
- tPs
FG(Bt)
A c t - - A c t - S. Then
= (BT
T
) sQT
= B
s Q t ) -
BT
for all BT e A c t - and, similarly, GF(AS) = As for all As A c t - S. These isomorphisms establish the natural equivalences FG = IdAct- and GF = IdAct-s Thus S ~T. Corollary 3.7. Let A c t S ^ A c t T be equivalence functors.
G F
Then there
and
exist biacts s Q t i t P s suc-h that F(~s) = s sQt G() ~ tPs Hom(5QT, ) In particular, t P s and G is representable by sQtMoreover,
H o r n ( t P s , S s ) t and G{TT)s = TPS = Hom(sQT,
Horn(tPs>~s)
F is reprensentable
F ( S s ) t sQt
by
TT)S.
Proof. Take T P S = TG(T)S and SQT = sF(S)T. By Theorem 5.3.3 we get F = ~s < 8 > sQt which is right adjoint to ~ s by Theorem 5.3.6. Since
441
Hom(7-P 5 , 5) is also right adjoint to t t P s by Example 5.1.21(1), Corollary 5.1.10 implies 5 < g > sQt H o m (r-Ps> s)> see also Definition 5.1.6.
Morita equivalences and Morita contexts

Definition 3.8. Given two monoids 5, and biacts s--, t B s , assume that we have two biact homomorphisms sAT tBs > sSs : tBs < g ) s-A-t *
:
<g>
written corespondingly as !) (a,b) b a 1> [b, a] such that [b,a]b' = b(a,b') a'[b,a] = (a',b)a (a) ()
for a, a' A, b, b' B. Then ( S , T, s t B s , , ) is called a Morita context (see, for example, [COH66] or [Ami71] for rings and [BAR78] for monoids). An example of a Morita context can be obtained by starting from any act Ps. Let = End(Ps). Then Ps is a - S-biact by Example 1.4.25(1) and we have the S T-biact s(Ps)t ~ Horn( tPs > sSs) by Proposition 1.7.17 and Definition 1.7.14. From Proposition 1.5.6 we get for e 2 = e G S that Ps = eSs which will give ^ eSe and s(Ps)t = sSeeSe. Now, going back to the general case, there is a natural mapping : S(PS)T PS SSS given by evaluation r(fp) for all peP,fes(Ps)T To obtain : TPS < 8 > 5(PJ)T = {f,p) = m
we define [p, / ] G = E n d ( P s ) by
\pj}p'=p{f,p') for all p' G Ps and set ( / ) = [p, /], G Ps, f G s(Ps)t Obviously, is a well-defined mapping, both r and are biact homomorphisms and the rule (a) holds by definition of . Moreover, for g G s ( P ) T one has (g\pJW) = (9,\pJ]p') = (g,p{f,p' = fapHM ((g,p)f,p')
for all p' G P, hence g\p, f } = {g,p)f,
i.e. () holds.
442
Definition 3.9. For any P5 Act S we call (S,T,s(PS)T,TPS> ,) = (5, End(Ps),sHom(P5,1S,5)EndPs, ^,,), context
where r and are defined as in the previous consideration, the Morita derived from Ps.
L e m m a 3.10. Let (S,T, sA-, ,,) be a Morita context. If is surjective, then it is an isomorphism, and similarly for r. Let (S,T, s(Ps)T, ,,) be the Morita context derived from an act Ps. Then Ps is a cyclic projective generator in A c t S if and only if : TPS <S> s{Ps)t ~> tTt is surjective. Proof By hypothesis (& <8>) = [&, ] = 1 for some bi <g) TBs S^-T Suppose [6, a] = (6 < g > ) = (6' < g > ') = [&', '], then b 0 a = (b )[6, ] = b a[6i, ai] = b<S> (a, &i)ai = &(a, 61} ai = [b, a]61 and also b' 0 a' = [b',a']bi < g > . The equality [b,a] = ,a'\ now implies that b a = b' < 8 > a' and thus is also injective. If Ps is cyclic projective then it has projective coordinates by Proposition 3.17.12 , i.e. there exists (p, f ) 6 P s x H o m ( P s , Ss) such that pf{p') = p' for all p' e Ps. This we can write as [p, f]p' = p(f,p'} = p' by ( a ) using the definition of ( , ) from the Morita context derived from Ps. That means that \p, f ] is the identity in = End(Ps). This is to say the biact homomorphism
=[,] TPSS(PS)T TTT
is surjective. Note that all steps of the above argument can be reversed.
Theorem 3.11. Let S be a monoid, Ps an act and the monoid from the Morita context (S,T, s(Ps)j>, tPs, ) derived from Ps- Then S ~T if and only if Ps is a cyclic projective generator in A c t S. Proof. Take Ps A c t - S and let (S,T,s(Ps)T, ^ , , ) be the Morita context derived from P5. Necessity. If S ~ then = Honi(Ps,P,g) and we have the equivalence functor Hom(Ps, 5) : A c t S > A c t by Corollary 5.3.7 with inverse functor G such that Ps = G(TT). But then P5 is a cyclic projective generator in A c t S since TV has these properties in A c t T , using Corollary 5.1.35. Sufficiency. Suppose that Ps is a cyclic projective generator in A c t S. a n isomorphism. By Lemma 5.3.10 we get that : J-Ps S(PS)T Using that t r s s ( P s ) = U / < E T ( P | ) = S by Theorem 2.3.16, since P 5 is a generator, and observing that I m r = t r 5 s ( P s ) we have that r is surjective. Therefore, is also an isomorphism by Lemma 5.3.10 and thus S{PS)TTPS sSs as biacts. Now the result follows from Theorem 5.3.6.
443
Morita equivalences elementary conditions

The next step provides a construction of a monoid Morita equivalent monoid to a given monoid. Recall that an act is a cyclic projective generator in A c t S if and only if it is isomorphic to eS where e G S is an idempotent such that e j 1, i.e. S SeS (cf. Proposition 3.18.6). Note that e J 1 for an idempotent e G S if and only if there exist , ' G S such that e = , i'e = ' and ' = 1. Proposition 3.12. Let e,,' G S be such that e2 e, e = , i'e = ' and t = l. Then S ~ eSe. Proof. Consider the covariant Hom-functor Hom( E n d ( e S ) eS' s , -s) : Act - S > A c t - End(eSs)
By Proposition 1.5.6 we get End(eS') = eSe as monoids and also Hom(e5s, Ms) = Me 6 A c t eSe with isomorphism () = a(e) for a e Hom(e5>5, Ms) and i>~l(me) with /3(e) = me for m G Ms and G Hom(e5' s , Ms) Now consider the functor F : Act - S A c t - eSe Ms ^ Meese where F(MS) = ^(Hom(e5 s , M s ) ) , F(f) = V H o m ( E n d ( e S ) e 5 S ) Z ) ^ " 1 for / G Horn (Ns,Ms), and prove that F is faithful, full and dense. Then by Theorem 5.1.33 we have that F is an equivalence functor. As e j 1 by hypothesis, we get by Proposition 3.18.6 that eS is a generator in A c t S and by Theorem 2.3.16 that Hom5(e5', 5) : A c t S > Set is faithful and so is F : A c t S A c t eSe. Now for Ns, Ms G A c t - S consider g G H o m e S e ( F ( i V s ) e S e , F(Ms)eSe) = Horn e se{Ne e S e,Me e S e ) and define
/ : Ns
Ms ^ g(n') G Me c
where ' = 1, e = , 'e = ' by hypothesis. Then / G Hom(iV s , Ms) since f{ns) = g(ns') = g(n's') = g{n'es'e) = g(n')es'e = g(n')es = g(n'e)s = g(n')s = f(n)s
for G N, s G S.
Moreover, F(f) F(f)(ne)
g since f))
= ( V ' H o m ( E n d ( e S ) e 5 s , / ) V ' " 1 ) ( n e ) = {Hom(End(eS)e5s, = 1>(f) = (f)(e) = me)) = f(ne) = g(ne') = g(ne'e) = g(ne)e'e = g{ne)
444
for all ne e Ne where e H o r n ( e S s , N s ) is such that (e) = ne. Hence F ( f ) = g and thus F is a full functor. To show that F is dense, take Nese Act eSe. Then, by Proposition 2.5.13, F(NeSe < 8 > eSeeS) = ( N e S e eSe&S)e = NeSe < 8 > eSeSe ^ NeSe. Note that the characterizing condition (ii) in the next theorem has also been formulated by B. Banaschewski [Ban72]. Condition (iii) is the original condition in [Kna72a], [Kna72b]. Theorem 3.13. Let S and be monoids. Equivalent are: (i) S and are Morita equivalent monoids, S ~T.
(ii) = eSe for some e2 e S such that there exist ,' S with e = , 'e = ', '=!. (iii) = eSe for some e 2 = e S such that there exist k,k' S with ek k and k'k = 1.
F
Proof, (i) => (ii). Let S ~T, i.e. there exist equivalence functors Act Act - T. By Corollary 5.3.7 we get G(-T) = -T<8> TG{T)S where G(T)S cyclic projective generator by Theorem 5.3.5, i.e. G(T)s eSs with e 2 = and e j 1 by Proposition 3.18.6. Moreover, F(~s) = HomieS's, 5). Hom(e5, eS) S eSe by Proposition 1.5.6 and F(PS) = F(eS) = we eSe ^ T. (ii) => (i) is Proposition 5.3.6. (ii) (iii) is trivial. (iii) => (ii). Take = k, ' = k'e. is a eGS Since have
We observe that this characterization differs despite of all similarity from Morita equivalence for rings (see, for example, [AN/FU74]). Here we have cyclic whereas there one has finitely generated projective generators playing the key role. This gives raise to many differences. First of all, there are fewer non-isomorphic Morita equivalent monoids than rings. In particular, a monoid S cannot be Morita equivalent to the endomorphism monoid of a free 5-act not isomorphic to SsCorollary 3.14. The monoids listed in Proposition 3.18.9 are determined by their act-categories up to isomorphism. Proof In all these cases all cyclic projective generators in Act S are isomorphic to Ss- This can also be proved using the properties of e, k, k'.
445
Morita triples
Definition 3.15. Let 5 be a monoid and e, k', k G S. We shall call (e, k', k) a Morita triple of e in S if e2 = e, ek = k and k'k = 1. Let (ei,k[,ki) and (e2, k'2, 2) be two Morita triples in S. Then e\ and 2 will be called equivalent Morita idempotents in 5" if e\S = e2S and denoted by e\ e<iIn [Kna72b] such idempotents in a Morita triple were called equivalent cyclically generating elements. If we have a Morita equivalence then we always get a Morita triple and vice versa by Theorem 5.3.13. Lemma 3.16. For e\ e\ G S, e 2 = e2 G S one has e\se2 if o,nd only if there exist v,w G S with e\ vw and 2 = wv. Proof. Necessity. Let e\ se2 with an isomorphism : e\Ss > &2Ss We set 1 l w (&) and : ~ {2) Then e\ ~ ) = ip~ (e2w) = ip~1(e2)w = vw and analogously 2 = wv. Sufficiency. Let e\ = vw, 2 = wv for v,w G S. Define ip{e\s) e2ws and ip'(e2s) = e\vs for all s G S. Then ip(e\s) e2ws wvws we\S and 0'(e2s) = e\vs = ve2s which implies that both and ' are well-defined. Clearly, they both are S'-homomorphisms. Finally, iîp'fas) ip(eivs) 2wvs = e|s = e2s for all s G S and thus ' = ide2s- Similarly we get ' = id e i s. Thus is an S1-isomorphism. Proposition 3.17. Let (e,k',k) ii,..., in-1 G { 0 , 1 } one has 1 S (kk'e), and eS(kek'e), eese and (kk'e) eSe (kek'e) eSe (knek'ellk'ei2 ein~lk'e). e (knek'ellk'e12 eln~lk'e) . Moreover, (kk'e, ek'e, k2k'e) is a Morita triple in eSe, (kek'e) eSe (knek'en k'e12 el'k'e) 1 be a Morita triple in S. Then for all > I, (knk'eix k'e12 e k ' e )
Proof. In the first case take w = k and k'e, for > 1 take w kn and = k'e11 k'e12 eln~1k'e. In the second case take w k and ek'e, for > 1 take w = kn and = ek'e11 k'e12 eln~lk'e. Now we apply this Proposition to show that for Morita equivalent monoids S and eSe we can regain S from eSe by the same construction which led from S to eSe.
446
Corollary 3.18. Suppose that S ~ with = eSe and Morita triple (e, k', k). Then kk'eSs Ss as right S-acts and S = kk'eSekk'e as monoids. Proof. By Proposition 5.3.17 we get the first assertion which then together with Proposition 1.5.6 implies kk'eSkk'e = End (kk'eSs) = E n d ( S s ) = S.
Non-isomorphic Morita equivalent monoids

Here we present examples of non-isomorphic Morita equivalent monoids. Example 3 . 1 9 ([Kna72b]). Reconsider Example 3.18.10 that is take the real interval [0,1] C R. For [0,1] denote by ix : [0, x\ > [0, x] the identical mapping. Set e : [0, i] [0,1] and I : [0,1] , ]
Let S be the monoid of injective mappings generated by I, (! and the elements of the set {ix\x 1]}, composition of the mappings being taken on the ever possible intervals. Now apparently (i3,',) is a Morita triple for S, i.e. S -i^Si* but S i3.Si3 as we have seen in Example 3.18.10. 4 4 Note that S and i^Sii are inverse monoids, but both do not fulfill the ascending chain condition ior principal right ideals. Example 3.20 ([Kna72b]). Reconsider Example 3.18.11, that is let S be the monoid generated by the elements e, k', k and the relations e 2 = e, ek = k, k'k = 1. Then it is clear that S and it can be shown that S and eSe are neither isomorphic nor anti-isomorphic. Note that here k e k . A complete proof is contained in [KNA71]. A different proof for S - eSe is given in [Ba/Ro80]. Both proofs are based on the unique representation of elements of S in the form kmeiok'eilk'ei2 ein-1k'ein
with , > 0, io, ,in {0,1}, indicating in particular, that k' appears times. Idempotents have a representation with m n. Following [Ba/Ro80] we define an equivalence relation for idempotents by a ~ if and only if = and = a. The equivalence classes in S are {1}, {e}, {kk', kk'e}, {kek', kek'e}, {k2k/2, k2k'2e, k2k'ek', k2k'ek'e} etc., i.e. they have the cardinals 1,1,2,2,4,4,8,8,16,16,. ..Exactly those idempotents which have e as the last factor belong to eSe. Consequently, there these equivalence classes have the cardinalities 1,1,1,2,2,4,4,... Since these two sequences
447
are different, the monoids S and eSe are not isomorphic as the equivalence relation is defined using multiplication. Note that S and eSe fulfill the ascending (but not the descending) chain condition for principal right ideals. Both are not left inverse monoids since k2k'2ekek'ek2k'2e = k2k'2e k2k'ek'e = k2k'2ekek'e, but right inverse. E x a m p l e 3.21 ([Kna72b]; [Ba/Ro80]). Now we apply the method of construction from Example 5.3.20 using (ii) of Theorem 5.3.13. Let S be the monoid generated by e,', and the relations e 2 = e, e , 'e ', ' 1. Then again S ~ eSe. But now it turns out that S = eSe although eSs SsTo prove this note first that it is clear by Lemma 5.3.16 that eSs - Ss since ' 1 but ' e and there are no other decompositions of 1. We construct an isomorphism of monoids / : S > eSe by setting / ( e ) = ', f() = e and f(') = e'. Using that the elements of S have a unique representation of the form mel'n with ig {0,1} and m , n > 0 and that the elements of eSe have a unique representation of the form mel'n with io = l i f n = m = 0 and io G {0,1} if m > 0 or > 0 we find that / is a well defined surjective and injective homomorphism of semigroups. Moreover, /(1) = f (')/() e'e e. Thus, we have an isomorphism of the monoids S and eSe in this case. E x a m p l e 3.22 ([Ba/Ro80]). Generalizing Example 5.3.20 consider the monoid S generated by e i , . . . , e n , k, k' with the relations enk = k, k'k = 1, e ^ = e m ax{ij} Then the monoids 5, e-\.Sei, ..., enSen are Morita equivalent but not isomorphic. R e m a r k 3.23. Examples 5.3.22 and thus also Example 5.3.20 can be modelled using partial transformations of = { 1 , 2 , . . . } , see also [Ban72]. Take , set N n = {, + 1 , . . . } C and consider the submonoid of the monoid of all partial transformations VT(N) of generated by the mappings e{ : k : m k' :2 + 1 m ' I m -. n m + n, > m ,
i < . Then enk = k, k'k id^j, elej = emax{ij}. Moreover, kk' = idNn is idempotent and k'ei k'. Consequently, we have eiTei ~ for a l H , i < . The situation of Example 5.3.20 is obtained for = 1. E x a m p l e 3.24 ([Ba/Ro80]). Generalizing Example 5.3.21 in a form analogous to Example 5.3.22 we consider a monoid S generated by e i , . . . , e n , , ' with
448
the relations en , i't 1, e^tj = f'en = Then S is Morita equivalent to itself by exactly + 1 not naturally equivalent equivalence functors. E x a m p l e 3 . 2 5 ([Kna76b]). For a set I 0 let (ei,k[,ki) be Morita triples in a monoid S with i 6 I. Then ( ] J i e / p e i , LL<=/Pfc'> L L e / P O is a Morita triple in E n c ^ J j j Ss) where pi : X{S > XiS is defined by pei{xi) Xiei, Xi denotes the z-th basis element of ] j 7 Ss, and similarly for p^ and pkt Consequently, End(]j5s) ~ np
I iel
e i
End(USs)]Jp
I il
e i
Note t h a t in the language of column monomial matrix monoids (see Remark 1.5.42), we get for c = \I\ that
Mc(S)~eMc(S)s
where G MC(S) is the matrix which contains e^ as the z-th diagonal entry. For | / | = 2 and a Morita triple (e, k', k) in S we get, for example, M2(S)
,
(Q )M2(S )( Q where 0 denotes the externally adjoined zero. Note t h a t in this case ( ( o ? ) . ( o ' ? M 5 ? ) ) a n d ((o ! ) > ( ' J ) > ( ! 5)) a r e two possible Morita triples. E x a m p l e 3 . 2 6 ([Be/Kn/Mi94]). We present two von Neumann regular Morita equivalent rings R and S such that their multiplicative monoids (R, ) and (S, ) are Morita equivalent but not isomorphic. Note t h a t this cannot be expected in general, since a ring R is always Morita equivalent to the ring of matrices over R but their multiplicative monoids are not equivalent if > 1. As in Example 6.13 of [GOO79] we consider fields G C F such that 2 < d i m G ( F ) < oo, e. g. C C. Let Vp be an infinite dimensional vector space over F and set Q = End(Vp), J = {x G Q I dim^(o;F) < oo}. Let VQ be an infinite dimensional vector space over G and set = End(VG), = { G I d i m e (;V) < oo}. Note that Q is a subring of H. By the Structure Theorem of 9 in [JAC64], J is the socle of the ring Q, any nonzero ideal of Q contains J and the ring J is simple. The same is valid for the ring and its ideal K. We set R Q + C H. It was shown in Example 6.13 of [G0079] that R is a regular ring with a nonzero idempotent e2 = e R such that: (a) RR = RR (eRn)n for some > 1, but the module RR is not isomorphic to Rr (eRR)k for k = 1, 2 , . . . , - 1; (b) (RR)71 = (RR eRR)n for some > 1, but the module (i?) fc is not isomorphic to (RR ei?) fc for k = 1 , . . . , 1;
449
(c) if S = End(i?fl0ei?), then for some > 1 the matrix rings Mat(nxn, R) and Mat(n , S) are isomorphic, but the ring Mat(A; k,R) is not isomorphic to Mat(fc k, S) for k = 1, 2 , . . . , 1 (in particular the ring R is not isomorphic to S). Here denotes the coproduct in the category of right R-modules. We show that these rings R and S are exactly those we are looking for. Recall that a ring A is said to be a ring with unique addition (UA-ring) if for every ring each monoid isomorphism a : (A, ) > ( , ) is an isomorphism of rings. We claim that R is a UA-ring. Since R is a regular ring, it is enough to show that R has no nonzero abelian regular ideal (see Theorem 5.3 of [Mik88]). Let I be a nonzero regular ideal of R. Consider first the case when I Q 0. Then I C\Q contains the ideal J as mentioned above. But the ring J contains a non-central idempotent. Hence the ring I is not abelian. Assume now that I Q = 0. Since R = Q + K, we get I C . As it was noted above, is a simple ring. So I = K . But then I contains a non-central idempotent, i.e. it is not abelian. Hence the ring R has no nonzero abelian regular ideal and thus R is a UA-ring. Since the rings R and S are not isomorphic, the monoids (R, ) and ( S , ) are not isomorphic. Using (a) we get R = B2 . . . BN, where A = RR and = eRR for all = 1, 2 , . . . , . Let : R > and : R > A be the projections of right R-modules. We set u (1) and = (1). It is clear that = . Since (1) , we have (it) = u. From the other side, u = (u) ir{lu) = (1) = u2, i.e. u2 = u. Analogously v2 v. Moreover, uv (1) = 7r(li>) = () = , i.e. uv = v. It is clear that A (R) = (1 )R R. Since AR = RR, from Chapter 3.4, Proposition 3 of [LAM66] we infer that there exist elements x,y R such that xy = 1, yx = v. This means that xvy x(yx)y (xy)(xy) 1, i.e. xvy = 1. Therefore (.xu){vy) = x(uv)y = xvy 1 and the -act uR is a cyclic projective generator by Proposition 3.18.6 and (u,vy,xu) forms a Morita triple for the monoid R. Endomorphisms of the i?-act uR are given by left multiplication by elements of the monoid uRu. At the same time we have that the following rings are isomorphic: uRu = End(it-R) = End(i? ei?) = S. Therefore, the endomorphism monoid of the R-act uR is isomorphic to the monoid (5, ). Thus the monoids (R, ) and (5, ) are Morita equivalent by Theorem 5.3.13, but are not isomorphic as noted before.
Ideal structure of Morita equivalent monoids

Proposition 3.27. Let S,T be Morita equivalent monoids. (1) The semilattices of two-sided ideals of S andT, order isomorphic. Then are ordered by inclusion,
450
(2) The centers C(S) andCiT)
are isomorphic monoids.
(3) The monoid S fulfills the ascending (descending) chain condition for principal right ideals if and only if does. (4) The monoid S is a right perfect monoid if and only if has this property. Proof. (1) Let sAs C sSs be a two-sided ideal. Since Ps Act S is projective tensoring with Ps preserves monomorphisms (cf. Definition 3.9.1, Theorem 3.16.7, Proposition 3.17.5), that is T(PS < S > T(PS<8> SSS) is a subbiact, F : A c t S > Act an equivalence functor and = F(Ps). Thus
TF{PS
< g > SAS)
= T(PS
< g > SF(Ss)T
F(P
SSS)
= T(PS)T
Repetition of this argument provides the order isomorphism. (2) We may assume S = End (Se e s e ) and regard C(S) as a submonoid of C(eSe) = C(End(eSs)) On the other hand we can consider C(T) as a submonoid of the center of End(5e e S e ) = S. Then C(S) = C(T). (3) The ascending chain condition for principal right ideals (ACC) for Ss implies (ACC) for eSs Ps- Using the equivalence functor F : Act S > Act - we get (ACC) for F(PS) = TT. (4) Projective covers (cf. Definition 3.17.18) are preserved by equivalence functors. Remark that (2) of the previous proposition can also be proved by first showing that the set of natural transformations of the identity functor on Act 5 is a monoid isomorphic to S. We note that properties of a monoid S shared by every monoid Morita equivalent to S are called Morita invariants. Thus Properties (3) and (4) of the previous proposition are Morita invariants.
Equivalent subcategories
Lemma 3.28. Let S,T be monoids and let F : A c t S > Act be an equivalence functor. Let C C Act S, D C Act T be full subcategories such that D is the image of C under F and for every D 6 D there exists C C with F(C) = D. Then C and D are equivalent categories. Proof. As F is faithful, its restriction to C is also faithful. Since F is full and C and D are full subcategories, the restriction of F to C is also a full functor to D. By hypothesis the restriction of F to C is also a dense functor to D. Lemma 3.29. Let S be a monoid, I a nonempty set and J j 7 Ss a free right S-act. Let G End(JJ 7 Ss) be an idempotent. Then ^(IJ^ Ss) IIjgj e j'S's for J C I, and e? = e, S.
451
Proof. Take 2 = 6 EnddJj Ss) and let (xi)iei be a basis of Ss- Then e(xi) = Xe(i)s(i), for the notion of index and coefficient mappings and compare Definitions 1.5.38 and 1.5.40. Thus, 2() = e(i) and I2(i) = () e S is an idempotent. Consequently, () = () = for alii I, s S and this way e(IJj Ss) LL/ej ejSs with J = () and ej = = e(i). Let S be a monoid. For any cardinal c > 0 we denote by c P r o j S the full subcategory of Act S consisting of projective right S"-acts generated by not more than c elements. Recall that this category up to isomophism consists of the objects U j e j e j S f r e j = e j e 5 and \ J\ < c. Proposition 3.30. Let S be a monoid and \I\ = c. Then Ss an I-free right S-act, with
H o m ( l ] S s , - s ) : c - P r o j - S ^ 1 - P r o j - End ( ] J S s ) is an equivalence functor. Proof. Consider the functor F = Hom( End
JJ5U/ Ss,
~s)
' Act S
Act E n d d J j ^ g ) . We show that the image under F of the full subcategory c P r o j S of Act S lies in the category 1 P r o j End(]J 7 Ss) If Ps c P r o j S there exists an epimorphism : ]J / Ss > Ps which is preserved by F since Jj7 Ss in particular is projective in Act S by Definition 1.7.29. That is, F(tt) : EnddJ; SS) HOMLLJJ Ss,Ps) is an epimorphism in Act - End(U / Ss). Consequently, Hom(]J/ Ss, Ps) G Act - End(]J/ Ss) is cyclic. Being projective, Ps is a retract of ]J 7 Ss by Proposition 3.17.4. Since any covariant functor preserves retractions by Propostion 1.7.24, we have that Hom(JJj Ss,Ps) is a retract of a 1-free EnddJj Ss)-act and hence 1-projective. It remains to show that F is an equivalence functor. We use Theorem 5.1.33 and show first that F is dense. By Corollary 3.17.9 an arbitrary 1-projective right End(]J / Ss)-act is isomorphic to E n d ( ] j i Ss) G l P r o j E n d ( ] j / Ss) for some 2 = E n d ( [ ] i Ss). Take Ps = e f l j j Ss). By Lemma 5.3.29 we get that Ps = LL e / e/ Ss which implies that Ps is c-projective. This provides an isomorphism Hom(]J / Ss, Ps) 'End(]J / Ss) as End(]J / Ss)-acts. Secondly, F = Hom( End j j 5 U / Ss, s) is faithful since JJ/S's, being a generator in Act S and belonging to cProjS, is a generator in c Proj S. Thirdly, we show that F is full. Take : Hom^JJj Ss, -Ps)End(]J s) Hom(]J J Ss, Qs)End(JJs) Since Ps is c-projective it is a retract of there exist : JJ7 Ss Ps and 7 : Ps Ss, i.e. Ss such that = idp s . Let
452
/ = (). Then / Horn {P s ,Qs) and F(f)(a) = Hom(UiSs,f){<*) = Hom(IJ 7 = (()7)() = ?()(7()) = (^) = () Hence F(f) = . ()7)()
for every a e Hom(U/ Ss,Ps)
Corollary 3.31. If | / | = c > 1 then coproducts in 1 P r o j E n d ^ J j Ss) do not coincide with coproducts in Act EnddJj Ss) Proof. Take the coproduct JJ 7 Ss in c P r o j S. Since an equivalence functor preserves coproducts, End(U/ S s ) E n d ( ] j S s ) = Hom(H7 Ss, U/ 5 5 ) E n d ( j j i Ss) is a non-trivial coproduct in 1 Proj End ([J / Ss) but it is an indecomposable object in Act - End(U 7 Ss). Proposition 3.32. Let Act S and Act T be equivalent categories. c P r o j S and c P r o j are equivalent for any cardinal c. Proof. Let F : Act S
F G
Then
Act be equivalence functors.
Any Ps
c - P r o j - S is isomorphic to U j J ejS, e? = ej e S, \J\ < c. Then F(PS) = Hjej F(ejS) where F(ejS) is indecomposable projective in Act T. Thus F{P) c P r o j T. Using the inverse functor G, we get that for every D e c - P r o j - there exists C G c - P r o j - S with F(C) = D. Now c P r o j and c P r o j S are equivalent categories by Lemma 5.3.28.
Morita subcategories
We show next that already the so-called Morita subcategories M s and M t of Act S and Act determine the Morita equivalence of S and completely. These categories play also an important role for Morita duality. The rest of the section follows [Kn/No90]. Definition 3.33. For a monoid S denote by Ms the minimal full subcategory of Act S containing Ss and being closed under subacts and factor acts. We call Ms the Morita subcategory of Act S. Lemma 3.34. Every object in Ms is isomorphic to a subact of a cyclic S-act. Proof. By the congruence extension property of Act S (see Remark 1.4.45), every factor act of a subact of a cyclic act is isomorphic to a subact of a cyclic act.
453
in
Proposition 3.35.
Proof.
Generators
in Ms
are
generators
Act
S.
Let Gs Ms be a generator in MsIf \S\ = 1 then Ms {S} and thus everything is clear. If S is a non-trivial group, let u S. Define , : Ss Ss in Ms by a ( l ) = u, (1) = v. As Gs is a generator in Ms, there exists : Gs > Ss with . As 5 is a group, is surjective. Then Gs is a generator in A c t - S by Theorem 2.3.16. If S is not a group, let iV s C S be the maximal right ideal of S consisting of all right non-invertible elements. Consider the Rees factor act S/Ns with natural epimorphsim : S * S/Ns and the zero homomorphism : Ss > S/Ns As Gs is a generator in Ms, there exists s e <{Gs) Q Ss such that which implies that there exists s p(Gs) which is right invertible. Consequently, <-p{Gs) = Ss, i.e. is surjective and thus Gs is a generator in A c t - S by Theorem 2.3.16.
Theorem 3.36.
their Proof. Morita
The
monoids Ms
S and
and
are are
Morita
equivalent
if and
only
if
subcategories
equivalent.
Let S ~T. By Theorem 5.2.5 there exists a cyclic projective generator Ps in A c t S and thus in Ms such that = End(Ps). Moreover, by Corollary 5.3.7 the equivalence functor is naturally equivalent to Hom(Ps, 5) :
Necessity.
Act -
Act - T.
To show that H o r n ( P s , ~ s ) ' Ms is an equivalence functor, too, we show first that it takes MS to For this we show that H o n ^ P ^ S s ) is a cyclic T-act and thus Hom(Ps, SS) G MT by Lemma 5.3.34. Let Horn(Ps,Ss) and : P s S s an epimorphism of the generator Ps onto S s by Theorem 2.3.16. Using projectivity of Ps, we get : Ps > Ps such that = . Hence Hom(Ps, Ss) is cyclic, generated by . Since Hom(Ps', S) preserves subacts and, as P5 is projective, also factor acts by Definition 1.7.29(1), the image of M s belongs to As Hom(Ps, Ps) = and Hom(Ps, s) reflects subacts and factor acts as it is faithful (cf. Proposition 1.7.25), we get all objects of MT up to isomorphism. Sufficiency. Let F : MS > , G : > MS be equivalence functors and set F(Ss) = QT Using Corollary 5.1.35 we get that QT is a projective generator in M r since S s is a projective generator in M s and by Proposition 5.3.34 also a generator in A c t T. Thus there exists an epimorphism 7 : QT > TT by Theorem 2.3.16 such that is a retract of QT- Then G(TT) is a retract of G(QT) = GF(Ss) = S and hence projective and cyclic by Corollary 3.17.9. Again by Corollary 5.1.35 we get that G(TT) is a generator in MS- Then G(TT) is also a generator in A c t S by Proposition 5.3.35. Consequently G(TT)s = eS for e2 = e e S with e j 1 by Proposition 3.18.8. Since F is a full and faithful functor, as FG = I d M t , we have
454
H o r n ( G ( T T ) s , G{TT)S) ^ H o r n ( F G { T T ) T , FG(TT)T) ^ End(T T ) and thus eSe ^ End(eS) ^ E n d ( G ( T T ) s ) ^ E n d ( F ( G ( T T ) s ) T ) = End(T T ) ^ T. Thus S and eSe = are Morita equivalent monoids by Proposition 5.3.12.
Comments
It can be proved ([Kna76b]) for \I\,\J\ > 1 that E n d ( ] J / Ss) ^ E n d ( H j TT) if and only if \I\ = | J | and S ~ . V. Fleischer ([Fle87a]) obtained this as a corollary of the corresponding result for the Morita equivalence of wreath products of monoids through acts, compare Section 2.6. Luedeman investigates when so-called McMorris quotient semigroups (cf. [Wei80]) are Morita equivalent for Morita equivalent monoids [Lue80]. Talwar ([Tal95], [Tal96a], [Tal96b]) studied Morita equivalence for semigroups without identity parallel with the analogous question for rings (see for example [An/Ma87] and [Abr83]). Here the natural mapping Ss sM SM defined by s <g> m i sm is not necessarily injective and H o r n ( s S s , s M ) and s M need not be isomorphic 5-acts. To put up with this one considers semigroups S with local units, that is, such that for all s 5 there exist idempotents es,sf G S with ess = s = s s f . Now take the full subcategory S U A c t of unitary left S-acts, i.e. acts s M such that SM = M. An object sM e S U A c t is called a fixed object of the functor S s H o m ^ S , g) if Ss H o m e s ' , s M ) = s M by s<gi<p sip, all such objects form a full subcategory denoted by S F x A c t of S U A c t . Two semigroups R and S with local units are called Morita equivalent semigroups if R F x A c t and S F x A c t are equivalent categories. It turns out that sM S U A c t belongs to S F x A c t if and only if Ss <S> sM = SM. We quote the following two results [Tal95]: Let S be a semigroup with local units. A unitary S-act sP is projective and indecomposable if and only if sP Se for some e2 = e G S. Moreover all projectives are coproducts of these. A semigroup S with local units is Morita equivalent to a monoid if and only if there exists e 2 = e e S such that S = SeS. If this is the case then S is Morita equivalent to the monoid eSe. This implies our result on Morita equivalent monoids (Theorem 5.3.13). For semigroups with zero Talwar proves [Tal95]: A regular semigroup S with zero is bisimple if S is Morita equivalent to a regular bisimple monoid with zero. A regular semigroup S with zero is completely 0-simple if and only if S is Morita equivalent to a group with zero. So a semigroup S is a (Rees) matrix semigroup with entries from a group G if and only if S is Morita equivalent to G U 0. This result is similar to the fact that a ring is Morita equivalent to a finite matrix ring over itself.
4 Endomorphism monoids of generators
455
Another approach to Morita theory of semigroups with local units on the basis of a generalization of the Watts-Gabriel Theorem (cf. Theorem 5.3.3) to these semigroups was presented by V. Neklioudova [Nek97a], [NEK99]. Lindner [LIN73] generalized the results on Morita equivalence for rings and for monoids to categories of functors. Polin [Pol74a], [Pol74b] characterized equivalent categories of functors from small categories to the category of sets. For both generalizations keep in mind that 5'-acts can be considered as functors from the one-object category into the category of sets (cf. Proposition 1.7.6). Elkins and Zilber [1/76] define Morita equivalence of small categories via operator categories, characterize Morita equivalence intrinsically and describe a construction of all small categories Morita equivalent to a given one. Dukarm [Duk88] gives a syntactical characterization of all algebraic theories which are Morita equivalent to a given algebraic theory. This implies our Theorem 5.3.13 as a special case and also the corresponding result for rings.

Idempotents
Generators and their endomorphism monoids (5.4.2-5.4.7) Generators and full embeddings (5.4.8) Induced isomorphisms of endomorphism monoids of generators (5.4.9-5.4.10)
All types of "induced" are different (5.4.11) Generator induced (5.4.12-5.4.13) Morita induced (5.4.14-5.4.15) Semilinearily induced (5.4.16-5.4.17) One of the classical problems (following R. Baer [BAE52]) is the determinability of a monoid S by the endomorphism monoid of a certain 5-act. Starting point was as for modules the consideration of the endomorphism monoid of a free act [Kn/Mi73], [Fle75a]. There exist several results with generalizations to wreath products [Fle90], to endomorphism monoids of projective acts and, again generalizing, to wreath products of a monoid with a small category [Fl/Kn88]. Here we consider endomorphism monoids of generators, in particular we get the Gabriel-Popescu Theorem for acts. This section is based on [Kn/Mi92], I d e m p o t e n t s in End(Xs) For
in E n d ( X s ) (5.4.1)
Proposition 4 . 1 . Take u = u2, = 2 e E n d ( X s ) for Xs A c t S.
A End(Xs) we have an isomorphism of uAu vAv-biacts,

uAuUAVvAv
uAu
vAv
456 In particular we get (a) (b)
UAUU-AA
Hom(v(Xs)s, Hom(-Xs,
Xs)VAV
U(XS)S)A
as right vAv-acts;
Q>s
LEFT
UAU
uAu-acts;
(c) uAu = E n d ( u ( X s ) s ) as
monoids.
Proof. For an element a G E n d ( X s ) = A we map uav G uAv onto (uav)\v^x^ G H o r n ( v ( X s ) s , u ( X s ) s ) Conversely, we map / G Hom (i ;(Xs )s> u(Xs)s) onto ufv = u(ufv)v G uAv. Since u and are idempotents, these mappings are inverse to each other. It is clear that they are isomorphisms. The particular cases are obtained as follows: (a) for u = i d x , (b) for = i d x , (c) for u = v.
Generators and their endomorphism monoids

N o t a t i o n 4 . 2 . Let Ms be a generator in A c t S with Ms C+ Ss, = ids.
7
Set e = 77 End(Ms), then e 2 = e. Set m 0 = 7(1) l(Ss) = e(Ms) A = End (Ms). For G Ae, t G eAe, y G eA, m G Ms we define a : AAeeAe : eAe
:eA^
and
> AMS by xa = x(m0) , S by ts = (( 0 )) ,

S(Ms)*a = s Horn ( M s , Ss)A by y = ny .
These and similar mappings will be written as exponents to their arguments. L e m m a 4 . 3 . With Notation 5.4.2 we have (1) The mapping <5 is an isomorphism of monoids. (2) The triple (idyi,o;,(5) : AAeAe > AMS is a biisomorphism.
Proof. Recall that Xx denotes the left translation by in the suitable context. (1) Define ' : 5 > eAe by s6' = j\sn for all s G S. Then for every t G eAe we get for every TO G Ms that (ts)s' (m) = 7tSn(m) = 7 ( (())) = (((0))()) = ((0))() = et(mo)n(m) = (7(1))(77) = ((())) = te(m) = t(m) , i.e., ' = ideAe. Moreover, (s'5')'5 = (J\sTT)6 = (7 8 (?7)) = 5 7(1) = s for every s G S, i.e. ' = ids This proves that 5 is bijective. For ti,t2 G eAe we compute t{4 = 7(*())(2()) = ((0)(2(0))) = = (-/(2())) = 7rti(ei2(mo)) = ^ti(t2(m0)) nti(^(l)n(t2(mQ))) = (tit2)s .
457
Thus ( t ^ ) 6 = t{t2, i.e. 5 is also a homomorphism. (2) Define a' : aM > Ae by ma = Xmn G Ae for m G Ms- Then for every G Ae we get for every that (.xa)a\z) = (x(m0))a'{z) = (A l ( T n o ) ^(2) = {){) = ({0))() = (()) = (7(1)()) = (^)() ~ xe(z) = () ,
i.e., ' = \dAe Moreover, ( m a ' ) a = (Am7r)a = ( \ m w ) ( m 0 ) = A m (xra 0 ) = (77(1)) = A m (l) = m, for every m G Ms, i.e. a'a = idM This proves that a is bijective. Finally, for a G A, G Ae, t G eAe, we get ( axt) a = (axi)(mo) = (ax)(i(mo)) = a(x(77r(i(mo)))) = ((7( 5 ))) = a(a;(7(l))t i ) = a(x(m0)ts) = a(x(m 0 ))i 5 = aidAxats . So, altogether, (^,,) is a biisomorphism.
For the term trace recall Definition 2.3.14 and for the term generator idempotent Definition 2.3.15. Proposition 4.4. Let S be a monoid. (1) Let Ms be a generator in Act S with a generator idempotent n e e G End(Ms) = A. Then for the trace of vAeeAe i* Ae we have treAc(yAeeAe) eAvAe for all 2 = G A. (2) Let e 2 = e G S for a monoid S. Then Seese is a generator in A c t eSe.
Proof. (1) Using first Lemma 5.4.3 and then Proposition 5.4.1 we get eAe Horn (vAe e A e , eAecAe)vAv = eA e Horn (v(M s ), = eAeeEnd(Ms)vvAv e(Ms))vAv = eAv .
Thus treAe(vAeeAe) = Hom(vAeeAe,eAeeAe)(vAe) = eAvvAe = eAvAe. (2) Using Proposition 1.5.6 and taking Ms = S s and = 1 we get from (1) that t r e s e ( 5 e e s e ) = eSe, which implies that Sese A c t eSe is a generator by Theorem 2.3.16. L e m m a 4.5. With Notation 5.4.2 we have: (1) The mapping is bijective. (2) The triple (, ,id a) eAeAA s{Mg)A (3) For G Ae, y G eA one has yi3xa (yx)s. is a biisomorphism.
458
Proof. (1) Define ' : S(M) eA by f' = 7 / for all / G s(M$). Then (y) = 7 y = 7 Try = ey = y for every y G eA, i.e. ' = ideA- Moreover, ( f ' ) = ( 7 f ) = 7 / = / for all / 6 S ( M ) , i.e. ' = id M *. Thus is bijective. (2) We use that ( / a ) ( m ) = / ( a ( m ) ) for / 6 s ( M ) , a e 4 , m M s . Then for y G eA, t G eAe we calculate (tya)(m) = w(tya)(m) = 7ri(y(a(ra))) = ((77/(?7,))) = irt^(ya(m)) = Kt(m0y (a(m))) = 7r(i(m 0 ))(2/^(a(m))) = ts ((y a)(m)) = tsyaidA(m) for all m G M 5 ,
i.e. ( t y a ) = tsyaldA. Thus (5, /?, id.yi) is a biisomorphism. 5 (3) We have (t/x)" = 7r(t/o:)(rao) = 7n/(:r(rao)) = Tryxa = yxa.
P r o p o s i t i o n 4.6. Let Ms be a generator. Set A = End(Ms) and let e G A be any generator idempotent, A i.e. e = 77, Ms C+ Ss, = ids- Take w2 = w G 7 77ien the following conditions are equivalent: is cyclic is cyclic = wAw. (ii). Using the biisomorphism . (id^.a.) AAe eAe projective, projective,
(i) w(Ms) (ii) wAeej4e (iii) wAeAew Proof, (i)
from Lemma 5.4.3 we obtain the semilinear isomorphism wAeeAe w(Ms).
(ii) (iii). Since wAeeAe A c t eAe is cyclic projective, by Proposition 3.17.12 there exist projective coordinates (p, / ) of wAeeAe with G wAe = Hom(eAe e /i e , wAeeAe)> / Hom(u;AeeAej eAew such that pf(x) = for all G wAe. Since = wx for all G wAe, we have pf = w which means that w G ( u A e ) ( e A e w ) = wAeAew. Thus, uAu; C (wAeAew)Aw C wAeAew, wAw D wAeAew is obvious. (iii) (ii). Since wAw = (wAe)(eAew), we have w = pf for some G wAe and / G eAew. This means that for all G wAe we have p f x = wx = x. Thus (p, / ) are projective coordinates of wAeeAe and wAe e A e A c t eAe is cyclic projective by Proposition 3.17.12. Corollary 4.7. Let Ms be a generator and w2 = w G A = End (Ms) the following conditions are equivalent: Then
459
(i) w(Ms)
is cyclic
projective. e G A we have that wAeeAe is cyclic pro-
(ii) For each generator idempotent jective. (iii) There exists a generator projective.
idempotent
e G A such that wAeeAe
is cyclic
(iv) For each generator idempotent
e G A we have that wAeAew e A such that wAeAew
= =
wAw. wAw.
(v) There exists a generator idempotent
Proof, (i) => (ii) and (i) =>- (iv) by Proposition 5.4.6. It is clear t h a t (ii) => (iii) and (iv) => (v). Again by Proposition 5.4.6 we have (iii) => (i) and (v) (i).
Generators and full embeddings

The next statement is a non-additive analog of the so-called Gabriel-Popescu Theorem on full embeddings (see, for example, 4.24 of [FAI76]) which was announced in Section 5.2 along with Theorem 5.2.1. Recall that a full and faithful functor is called a full embedding. T h e o r e m 4.8 ([Kn/Mi92]). Let S be a monoid and Us G A c t - S. Then Us is a generator in A c t S if and only if the functor hu = Horn(17s, ~s) : A c t - 5 is full and faithful, that is, for any Xs,Ys Act - End(Us) mapping (Ys)Endu)
G A c t S the (Xs)End , hU
h : H o r n ( X s , Y s ) - Kom(hu with h(f)(a) bijection. = f a for all f
e Hom(Xs)^s)
and a G Hom([/g,X,s) is a
Proof. Necessity. Let Us be a generator in A c t S. Then the functor H o r n ( U s , ~ s ) ' A c t S > Set is faithful by Definition 1.7.31, thus h is injective. To show surjectivity of h, take k : hu(Xs)Endu f : Xs ^ Ys by f ( x ) = k(Xx7r)(u0)
uq
hu(Ys), Define where Us 5
e Ys for G Xs,
Ss,
77 = ids and
= 7 ( 1 ) . Recall t h a t Xx : Ss > Xs with A x (s) = xs, s G S.
460
First we show that / G Hon^Xs, Ys). For s e S consider As : Ss > Ss with A s (l) = s. Then A^ = AXAS and 7 5 G End(Us), therefore f(xs) = = = = for G X, s G S. Now we show that h(f) = k. Note that (h(f)(a))(u) for a : Us > Xs,
u
k(XxsTv)(u0) = k(XxXsn)(u0) = k(Xx(%j)Xsn)(u0) ^()(3))(0) = (k(Xxn))(jXs7r)(u0) (;( ))7 8 7(1) = (k(Xxn)h(s) = ^())(1)8 k(Xxn)(u0s) = (k(XxTT))(u0)s = f(x)s
= (fa)(u)
f(a(u))
G Us, and ( )( 0 ) = (7(1)) = u
with Xu : Ss > Us and aXun = AQ(u)7r. Then k{a)(u) = ()()( 0 ) = (fc(a)( u 7r))(u 0 ) = = fc(AQ(u)7r)(o) = f(a(u)) k(aXun)(u0)
for all u G Us- Thus, h(f)(a) k(a) for all a G Horn (Us, Xs) and therefore h(f) = k. Sufficiency. Let hu = Hom(t/ s , - s ) : A c t - S A c t - E n d ( U s ) be full and faithful. Then, using only faithfulness, Us is a generator in Act S by Definition 1.7.31.
Induced isomorphisms of endomorphism monoids of generators

Now we characterize isomorphisms between endomorphism monoids of generators which are induced by full and faithful functors (i.e. full embeddings), Morita equivalences or semilinear isomorphism, thereby generalizing various known results. Definition 4.9. Let S and be monoids, let Ms and be acts and A = End (Ms), = End () their endomorphism monoids. Denote hu = Hom(J7s, -s) for Us G Act - S. (1) We say that an isomorphism of monoids : End (Ais) ~ ~ > End(iVr) is induced by the generator Us G Act S or generator induced if (a) ^ End (Us) and
461
(b) there exists an isomorphism : hu(Ms)r = Horn (TUS, MS)T NT in Act - such that ( ^ ( ) ( ; ) ) = () for all e hU(MS), a e A, corresponding to the following diagram:
hu(Ms) In this case one also says that A is induced by the full and faithful functor or by the full embedding hu. (2) We say that the isomorphism of monoids : End (Ms) End(iV<r) is Morita induced if it is induced by a cyclic projective generator UsNote that in this case S ~ = End(t/s). (3) We say that the isomorphism of monoids : End(Ms) > () is semilinearily induced if there exists a semilinear isomorphism (, ) : Ms > NT where ; : > is a bijection and : S > is an isomorphism of monoids, '.(ms) = a(m)S(s) for m G Ms, s S, such that aA aaa"1 for all a A, i.e.
is commutative. Lemma 4.10. Let S and be monoids, Ms and NT acts and A = End(Ms), = End (NT) their endomorphism monoids. Denote by hu = Hom(i/s, s) the covariant Horn -functor for Us Act S. Suppose that an isomorphism of monoids A : A > is induced by the generator Us Act S. Then hu(e(Ms)Y~ =eA(NT)for every idempotent e A. Proof As A is induced by hu there exists an isomorphism : hu(Ms) in Act - such that = (hu()) and thus ~' = hu(a) G hu (Ms) and a e A. Let e Abe any idempotent. Then ())-1 = (eA(hu(Ms)YY~1 = hu(e)Rom(Us,Ms) = hu(e)hu(Ms) = H o r n ( U s , e ( M s ) ) = hu(e(Ms)) NT for all
462
The fourth equality follows from definition of hu(e) since for all / Hom(C/s, Ms) one has hu(e)f e f . Indeed, / H o m ( / s , M s ) implies ef H o r n ( U s , e ( M s ) ) and conversely, g H o r n ( U s , e ( M s ) ) means that g(u) e(Ms) for every u Us, that is g(u) = e(m) for some m Ms and thus g(u) = e(g(u)) since e is an idempotent. Consequently, g hu(e) Hom(i7s, Ms) = Horn (Us,e(Ms)) = hu(e(Ms)).
All types of "induced" are different

Example 4.11. First we provide examples which show that the introduced concepts are all different. That is, there exist isomorphisms of monoids : End (Mg) - End(iVr) (1) which are not generator induced, (2) which are generator induced but not Morita induced, i.e. not induced by a cyclic projective generator, (3) which are Morita induced but not semilinearily induced. Indeed, to see (1) let be a monoid, take NT = TT U. TT and Ms = S = End (TV ) . Then E n d ( M s ) = End(T T ) where is the canonical isomorphism from Proposition 1.5.6 and Act and Ms Act S are generators by Example 2.3.19. Now let = {0,1} be the two-element monoid with zero 0, and write T U T = {0,1,0', 1'}. For any generator Us Act S we
have Us
7
Ss where w = End(iZs) is a generator idempotent. Consider
Co S = End({0,1,0', 1'}) the constant mapping onto 0, which is a left zero in S. Thus, 7 (c0) is a zero in Us and therefore c7(Co) is a left zero in End (Us) and similarly for c ( , ) . N o w c ( , ) c ( ) since 7 is injective. So we have at least three different elements id(/,c 7 ( Co ), c7(Cq,) in End(f/,s). Consequently |End(t/s)| > |T|, i.e. is not generator induced since (a) of Definition 5.4.9(1) is not fulfilled. (2) Take now S {0,1} the two-element monoid with zero. Consider Ms Ss Qs with the one-element act 5. Then Ms is a generator by Example 2.3.19 which is even projective but not cyclic. Let = End (Ms) and -, then Act is also a generator. Consider the generator Us = Ms with
7 C q 7 C o 7 C o
= hM : E n d ( M s ) s
End(hM(Ms)T)
H ( f l O - )
where then E n d ( h M ( M s ) r ) = End(T T ) = TT. Apparently is an isomorphism of monoids which is induced by the generator M5, where = idTT in (b) of
463
Definition 5.4.9(1). Since the monoids S and both are finite and |T| |5|, they cannot be Morita equivalent by Corollary 5.3.14. Thus, is not Morita induced. (3) Each of the Examples 5.3.19 and 5.3.20 gives two non-isomorphic monoids S and with = E n d ( U s ) , Us = iSs, i2 = i G S, S = SiS, i.e., Us is a cyclic projective generator and hu therefore gives a Morita equivalence. Now take Ms = Us and NT = hu(Ms) = TT. Then Ms and NT are both generators and we get that the isomorphism of monoids = hu : End(Mg) > End(iVr) is induced by the Morita equivalence hu but not by a semilinear isomorphism of Ms and since S .
Generator induced
Now we characterize situations where a monoid isomorphism between endomorphism monoids of generators is generator induced. T h e o r e m 4.12 ([Kn/Mi92]). Let Ms A c t -S and A c t - be generators, A = End(Ms) and End(iVr) their endomorphism monoids. Assume there exists an isomorphism of monoids A : A . Then the following conditions are equivalent. (i) For every generator idempotent projective in A c t . e e A one has that eA(Nr) is cyclic eABuBueA
(ii) For any two generator idempotents e 6 A and u G one has = eABeA. (iii) For every generator idempotent u G one has that uA~l(Ms) erator in A c t S. (iv) There exists a generator idempotent projective in A c t T. (v) There exist two generator eABuBueA = eABeA. e G A such that eA(Nr)
is a gen-
is cyclic
idempotents
e G A and u G such that

1
(vi) There exists a generator idempotent generator in A c t S.
u G such that uA
(Ms)
is a
(vii) The isomorphism A is induced by a generator Us in A c t S with Us = v(Ms), = uA where u G is a generator idempotent. Proof, (i) (ii) and (iv) (i) by Corollary 5.4.7. (i) = S > (iv), (ii) => (v), (iii) (vi) are trivial.
464
(ii) => (iii). Let u be a generator idempotent and take = uA 1. Now (ii) gives eABuBeA = eABeA with an arbitrary generator idempotent e A which implies that eAvAe = eAe. Since trEAe(vAe) = eAvAe by Proposition 5.4.4, we get trEAe(vAe) eAe and therefore vAe Act eAe is a generator by Theorem 2.3.16. Consider now the biisomorphism AAe e A C AMs from Lemma 5.4.3. Its restriction to vAe e Ae gives a semilinear isomorphism from vAeeAe onto v(Ms) = uA (Ms). Thus uA (Ms) is also a generator in Act - S. (v) => (vi). Analogously. (vi) BBUuBU (vii). Take uA
(id B , , )
. B y Lemma 5.4.3 we get the biisomorphism

*
BNT and the monoid isomorphisms
uBu <=t vAv .

A
Now consider Us (Ms) which, by assumption, is a generator in Act S. By Proposition 5.4.1 we get A Hom(v(Ms), Ms) = AAV and End (Us) = E n d ( v ( M s ) ) = vAv. Thus, using , we get (a) of Definition 5.4.9(1), that is End(f/ 5 ) ^ T. Consider hu(Ms)T = AAVvAv ^ BBUUBU ^ BNT and take = for (b) of Definition 5.4.9(1). Then, indeed, is a T-homomorphism and for all and a 6 A we have hu(a)x = ax. Therefore, using that is a monoid homomorphism with AA for A A and that a: is a left -homomorphism, we get condition (b) of Definition 5.4.9(1), namely (hu(a)x)Aa = ((ax)A)a = (aAxA)a = aA(xA)a = aAxAa.
Thus, is induced by the generator Us(vii) (i). By assumption hu induces the isomorphism A, i.e. there exists an isomorphism hu(Ms) ^ NT in Act - such that = (hu()) for all hu(Ms) and a A. Then (eA(NT))a = H o r n ( U s , e ( M s ) ) for any idempotent e A by Lemma 5.4.10. If e A is a generator idempotent, (viii) of Theorem 2.3.16 gives that e(Ms) = Ss and thus Hom([/ s , e(Ms)) = s{Us)T. As, by assumption, Us is a generator, (C/Êndt/ ^ Act End(J /s) is cyclic projective by Corollary 3.18.17 and ^ End (U s ) by (a) of Definition 5.4.9(1), i.e. (()) is cyclic projective. Thus eA(Nr) is cyclic projective. Corollary 4.13. Let Ms, be generators and, also cyclic projective. Then every isomorphism of monoids A : End (Ms) > End(iVr) is generator induced. Proof. For the generator Ms Act S let e be a generator idempotent. As is cyclic projective and a generator, eA(Nr) is also cyclic projective. Hence condition (iv) of Theorem 5.4.12 is satisfied. Using (vii) of Theorem 5.4.12, we get that A is generator induced.
465
Morita induced
Theorem 4.14 ([Kn/Mi92]). LetMs G A c t - 5 and G A c t - T be generators, A = End(Ms) and = End () their endomorphism monoids. Assume, there exists an isomorphism of monoids A : End(Ms) > End () Then the following conditions are equivalent: (i) For every generator idempotent e A one has that eA(NT) is a cyclic projective generator in Act . (ii) For any two generator idempotents e A and u G one has that eA(Nr) and uA (Ms) are cyclic projective in Act and Act S, respectively. (iii) For any two generator idempotents e G A and u G one has that eA(Nr) and uA (Ms) are generators in Act and Act S, respectively. (iv) There exists a generator idempotent e G A such that eA(Nr) projective generator in Act T. is a cyclic
(v) There exist generator idempotents e G A and u G such that eA(Nr) and uA (Ms) are cyclic projective in Act and Act S, respectively. (vi) There exist generator idempotents e G A and u G such that eA(Nr) and uA (Ms) are generators in Act and Act S, respectively. (vii) The isomorphism A is Morita induced by a cyclic projective generator Us v(Ms) in Act S, = uA , u G a generator idempotent.
Proof, (i) -o (ii). The assertion that eA(Nr) is a generator for all e is equivalent to the assertion that uA (Ms) is cyclic projective for all u by equivalence of (i) and (iii) for A - 1 in Theorem 5.4.12. The rest is trivial. (ii) (iii). The argument from (i) -o (ii) now applies to () and
Ua~\Ms).
(iv) (v) and (iv) (vi) can be proved analogously. (ii) ^ (vi) is obtained from the equivalence of (iii) and (vi) in Theorem 5.4.12 applied to A and A - 1 . (iii) => (vii). We use the implication (iii) = > (i) in Theorem 5.4.12 for A - 1 A and get that u (Ms) is cyclic projective in A c t S for all u since eA(NT) is a generator in A c t and thus, by assumption, uA (Ms) is a cyclic projectiver generator in A c t S for all u. Thus, by (vii) in Theorem 5.4.12 we have that the isomorphism A is then induced by the cyclic projective generator Us = Ua~\Ms). (vii) (i). For every generator idempotent e G A we have that eA(NT) is cyclic projective in A c t by the implication (vii) (i) in Theorem 5.4.12. Since eA(NT) = hu(e(Ms)) by Lemma 5.4.11 and e(Ms) = Ss by (viii) of
466
V Equivalence and Duality is
Theorem 2.3.16 using that hu is an equivalence functor, we get that eA(Nr) also a generator in Act T.
The next result is parallel with Bolla's result [Bol84] for modules which are progenerators. Corollary 4.15. Let Ms and be cyclic projective generators. Then every isomorphism of monoids A : End(Ms) End () is Morita induced. Proof. By Corollary 5.4.13 we get that A is induced by a generator Us uA (Ms) with generator idempotent u (). By assumption, Ms is cyclic projective, therefore Us is also cyclic projective by Theorem 5.4.12. Thus, is Morita induced.
Semilinearily induced
T h e o r e m 4.16 ([Kn/Mi92]). Let Ms A c t - S and NT e A c t - T be generators, A = End(Ms) and = () their endomorphism monoids. Assume that A : End(Mg) End(JVr) is an isomorphism of monoids. Then the following conditions are equivalent: (i) For every generator idempotent e G End(Ms) one has that () cyclic free (i.e. eA(NT) = TT). (ii) There exists a generator idempotent e End(Ms') such that () cyclic free (i.e. () = ). (iii) is induced by semilinear isomorphism between Ms and Proof, (i) (ii). This is trivial. (ii) => (iii). This follows from Lemma 5.4.3 by composition:
AMS
is is
(iii) (i). If the isomorphism A is induced by a semilinear isomorphism (a, 5) : Ms NT, i.e. aA = a a a T 1 for all a 6 A, then e A ( N T ) = a(e(Ms)) = a(moS) = a(mo)T, where m is a freely generating element of e(M$) Ss, e End(M,g) a generator idempotent. This, in particular, implies that a(mo) is a freely generating element of () as a(mo)ii = a(mo)t2 for ,2 implies TOo<5_1(ii) = - 1 (2) which in turn implies 5 - 1 ( i ) = <5_1(i2) and therefore = t? Consequently, () is cyclic free. Remark 4.17. It can be shown that for non-cyclic free acts MS,NT every isomorphism of monoids A : End(Ms) > End(A^) is semilinearily induced (cf.
5 On Morita duality
467
[Kn/Mi73], [Fle75a], [Fle90]). The proof uses that all generator idempotents form the greatest two-sided ideal in End(Ms) which is the disjoint union of right ideals generated by idempotents (see [Fle75a]). One of these idempotents is the e above. Thus eA(Nr) is free cyclic. The situation where every isomorphism between endomorphism monoids of free modules over rings is induced by a semilinear transformation is completely different (see [Mik89]). It is an open problem under which conditions on Us the functor hu will be dense without necessarily being full and faithful.
5 On Morita duality
The biact sF{S)T (5.5.1) Contravariant equivalence functors are Hom-functors (5.5.2) Properties of Morita subcategories (5.5.3-5.5.4) Dual equivalence of Morita subcategories (5.5.5) Morita dual monoids, reflexive acts (5.5.6-5.5.9) Abstract characterization of Morita duality (5.5.10-5.5.13) Coproducts and products are not reflexive (5.5.14-5.5.19) Finite monoids with Morita dual are selfdual (5.5.20-5.5.22) Application to fields and endomorphism monoids (5.5.23-5.5.24) Monoids with Morita-dual are chain monoids (5.5.25) Characterization of monoids with Morita dual (5.5.26-5.5.27) We first recall the situation for rings. The rings S and with identities are called Morita dual if there exists a contravariant equivalence between full subcategories of left S'-modules and of right T-modules, which contain s S and Tt respectively, and are closed under submodules, factor modules and finite coproducts ([COH66], [AN/FU74]). If S and are monoids, we also select suitable subcategories of 5" Act and Act to get a reasonable theory of Morita duality. We shall consider the full minimal subcategories siVf C 5 - Act and C Act such that they contain 5S and respectively and are closed under subacts and factor acts, i.e. the Morita subcategories (cf. Definition 5.3.33). It will turn out that there does not exist a Morita duality if we would require the subcategories considered to be closed with respect to finite coproducts or products. The restriction to cyclic acts is similar to the situation when we proceed from Morita equivalence of rings (using a finitely generated projective generator) to Morita equivalence of monoids (using a cyclic projective generator). We proved in Lemma 5.3.34 that every object in M s is isomorphic to a subact of a cyclic S-act.
468
V. Neklioudova [NEK99] studied Morita duality for semigroups with local units. She obtained an abstract characterization of duality of these semigroups comparable to Theorem 5.5.10. Compare [Anh90] for an analogous result about Morita dual rings with local units.
The biact
sF(sS)T
The following observation is the contravariant analogue to Lemma 5.3.1. L e m m a 5.1. Let F : S Act A c t T be a contravariant functor. F(sS) e S - A c t with the multiplication sv := F(qs)(v) Then
for F(S), S S and 3 Homes', $S) with gs(x) = for every S. Analogously, if G : A c t S A c t is a contravariant functor, then G(TT) e S - A c t - T. Proof. Clearly, F(sS) 6 A c t - and F(gs) : F(sS)T F(sS)T. Since s 1S r e e 1 f?s's(l) = 's = 0s(i?s '(l)) we have gs>s = qsQs' as f in S Act. Using that F is contravariant, we get s'M = s'F(gs)(v) = F(gs<)F(s)(v) = F{8ga.)(v) = = (s's)v . = (sv)t
Thus F(sS) G S - Act. Finally, since s(vt) = F(gs)(vt) = F(gs)(v)t for t and s S we have that F(sS) is an S T-biact.
Contravariant equivalence functors are Hom-functors

The following is a variant of Proposition 5.3.2 formulated for contravariant equivalence functors. Recall from Proposition 5.1.31 that contravariant mutually inverse equivalence functors F and G are right-right and left-left adjoint to each other. P r o p o s i t i o n 5.2 ([Kn/No90]). Let A and be full subcategories of S A c t and A c t containing sS andTr respectively. If A and are dually equivalent categories with contravariant mutually inverse equivalence functors A ^ thenG ondHom( , sF(sS)t) urally equivalent functors. Proof. We define
o,s well as F and Hom(s, sF(sS)t) o,re natHorn (,
F B, G
: sG(~t)
: sG(BT)
sF(S)t) by
sF(S)T)
s Hom(r,
:=
F(qX)
5 On Morita duality
469
for BT e , X e sG{BT) and \ sS > sG(BT) with sgx = sx, s e S. Then F{gx) : FG(BT) ** BT -> F(S)T and is well-defined. a To show that {)^ is natural equivalence, we first show that is a homomorphism in S A c t . Indeed, with Lemma 5.5.1 for every Bj 6 we get s(:) = F(QS)F(QX)
= F(QXQS) = F(gsx)
= ( sx)tp B
Next we show that is a bijection for every BT 6 using that F, being an equivalence functor, is faithful (see Theorem 5.1.33). Now for any V ^ and any A and thus F(gx) F(gy). Therefore is injective. Take e s H o m ( T , sF(sS)T). Then G(ip) : sGF(sS) = sS ^ sG(BT) and therefore = for some 2 e G(BT) since SS is 1-free. Thus = F(gz), i.e. is also surjective. Finally, we show that is a natural transformation, i.e. we have to prove commutativity of the following diagram for all , B' T e B , j G Hom(I?^, ) : G(BT) G(g) G(B'T) Hom(^, Hom(y, F(SS)T) Kom(g,F(sS)) F(sS)T) = (-og)
i.e. we have H o r n ( g , F ( s S ) ) ( x ( p B ) = F(Gx)g and (G(g)(x))tpB' = F(Qg^x)) for all G(BT) and have to prove equality of these two expressions. Using that g = FG(g) we get F{Qx)g = F{QX)F{G{g)) = F{G{g)gx). Now we have
the two mappings {9){) , G(G)X : SS sG(B'T) for G(BT) Since
c(s)(i)(l) = G(g)(x) = G(g)(ex( 1)), we have that QG(g){x) = G(g)ex. Consequently, F(GG(G)(X)) = F(G(g)GX) = F(Gx)g, i.e. the diagram is commutative. The statement for F and Horn (s~, SF(SS)T) follows according to Exercise 5.1.22(1) together with Remark 5.1.23 and Proposition 5.1.31.
Properties of Morita subcategories

We collect some further properties of the subcategory gJVf. Proposition 5.3 ([Kn/No90]). Let s M be the Morita subcategory of S A c t from Definition 5.3.33. Then: (1) Epimorphisms (2) Monomorphisms in sM in sM are surjective. are injective. are cyclic.
(3) Injective objects in sM
470
(4) Injective objects in s M which contain are injective in S Act. (5) An S-act sC G sM is a cogenerator in sM if and only if every subdirectly irreducible S-act is isomorphic to a subact of sC. (6) Let S be a monoid with zero, let 5C G siW be an injective cogenerator in sM and let sA C gB in S A c t . Then for any b G B\A there exists a homomorphism : sB sC in sM such that {sA) = {0} but (b) where is a zero of sC. (7) Let S be a monoid with zero and let sC G sM be an injective cogenerator in sM. If s G S A c t and b' b G sB, then there exists a homomorphism : sB > sC such that {b') (b). Proof. (1) If a homomorphism : s-A si? in sM" is not surjective, we consider the Rees factor act s B / e ( s A ) which, by hypothesis on gJVf, is also an object of s M and has at least two elements. Then we take the zero homomorphism and the canonical epimorphism: : sB > sB je(sA). Now = but and thus is not an epimorphism. (2) As the 1-free object s S belongs to sM", Proposition 2.3.5 gives the statement. (3) Let sB G s M be injective. By Lemma 5.3.34 we have that sB is a subact of some cyclic Sz G S Act. By injectivity then sB is a retract of Sz by Lemma 3.1.4 and hence cyclic. (4) This follows from Theorem 3.1.8. (5) This follows from Proposition 3.7.1. (6) Take b G B\A and set SD := {SbUA)/sA the Rees factor act. Then sD C Sb and thus sD G sM. Consider the zero homomorphism : sD > sD and idc> : 5Z) > s D in 5JW. As 5 C is a cogenerator in 5JW, there exists : SD C in with id D . Thus S(b) . Since 0 G S we get S SM G sC and as 5 C is injective in sM, it is injective in S A c t by (4). Thus we can extend < 5 to : s(BU A)/SA > 5 C has the SC. Then = : sB required property, where : s B > s(-BU^4)/sv4 is the canonical epimorphism. (7) Note that s C is injective in 5 Act by (4) since 0 G S and thus G sC. If Sbf U Sb sM, then there exists a homomorphism ' : Sb'Li Sb > 5 C such that 'ib) '(b') since 5 C G siVi is a cogenerator. Now can be taken as an extension of ' to sB existing by injectivity of 5C. If Sb' U Sb ^ giW then and hence (6) can be applied to Sb' C SB. SB % Sb' and b G sB\Sb' Remark 5.4. For sB,sC G S A c t , G sC and A5 C Bs a subact, we define the orthogonol complement A1- in sB with respect to as A1- = { G Hom(5^, sC) I {sA) = {0}}. Property (6) of Proposition 5.5.3 then means that every subact A s of any 5 has an orthogonal complement with respect to s C if s C is an injective cogenerator in 5JW.
5 On Morita duality
471
Dual equivalence of Morita subcategories

Now we show that sM is the appropriate subcategory to study Morita duality. Proposition 5.5. Let F : sM MT be a contravariant equivalence functor. Then SCT '= SF(SS)T S Act is a cyclic injective cogenerator with in Moreover, End(Cr) and S are isomorphic monoids. Proof. Note that SCT e S - A c t - with Lemma 5.5.1. As sS < E sM is a projective generator, we get by Corollary 5.1.35 that CT = F(SS)T is an injective cogenerator in . Then CT is cyclic by Proposition 5.5.3(3). Next we show that Ct Since obviously , take 5A e s-M such that F(sA) = using that F , in particular, is a dense functor by Theorem 5.1.33. Take any : sS -* SA in SM. Then : F ( S A ) -> F(sS) = CT in MT and thus C CTMoreover, E n d ( C T ) = H o r n ( F ( S S ) T , F(SS)T) = GF(SS) ^ S for G(-T) 4 = Hom( , F(S)T) ' MT SM according to Proposition 5.5.2, using that F is an equivalence functor.
Morita dual monoids, reflexive acts

Definition 5.6. We call two monoids S and Morita dual monoids or we say that S has a Morita dual if the categories sM and MT are dually equivalent categories. Proposition 5.7. Let S and be Morita dual monoids. Then a monoid U is Morita dual to S if and only ifT~U, i.e. a Morita dual is determined up to Morita equivalence. Proof. Use Theorem 5.3.36, compose the respective equivalence functors.
At the end of the section it will turn out that pairs of monoids S and are Morita dual to each other only if S = and moreover S has a very specific structure. Definition 5.8. Let SCT ESA c t - and SA G
SM.
(1) We call ( s ,4*) T = Hom( s ^, SCt)T (2) Consider the canonical mapping
A SA
E A c t - the SCT-dual
of
S Hom(Hom(iJ4, SCt)T
S(M*)T)
A 1aa for a e A^.
472
If A is an isomorphism of left 5-acts then If A is injective then 5 A is called
4 is called sCV-re/ieccwe.
sCr-torsionless.
If A is surjective then 5 A is called SCT~ dense. (3) If H o m ( s - , sSs) sM > Ms is a contravariant equivalence functor, then S will be called selfdual. In this case sS is sSs~reflexive.
P r o p o s i t i o n 5 . 9 . Let S,T be monoids with zero and let 5C7- e S A c t be an injective cogenerator in sM and in MT such that E n d ( C T ) S and E n d ^ C ) = as monoids. If sB sM is SCT-reflexive, then every subact and every factor act of sB is also sCr-feflexive. Proof. Here we use the notation L* = Hom(t, s C T ) : ( S B * ) T (SA*)T for l : sA s B and write homomorphisms from the right. Consider sA C SB with embedding 1. Proposition 5.5.3(7) implies that the canonical mapping a ' > is always injective. It remains to show that a is surjective. Since S contains 0 and 5 C is cyclic by Proposition 5.5.3(3), sC contains exactly one one-element subact 5 C SC. Injectivity of s C in S A c t is obtained by Proposition 5.5.3(4) which implies that t* : ( B * ) T > (*) is surjective by Theorem 5.1.29(3), which in turn implies that L** : s(A**) > s(B**) is injective again by Theorem 5 .1 .29(3). By hypothesis, s(B**) = SB, so for a G s(A**) there exists exactly one b e sB such that at** = hips- If 6 sA, we have a preimage for a e s(A**). So assume b B\A. By Proposition 5.5.3(6) which we can apply since 0 6 S, there exists e ( B * ) T with sA = s e C SCT, but b . Thus {at**) = at, = . On the other hand we have (at**) = {h'~P) = b . This contradiction proves the assumption b B\A wrong, i.e. we have shown that a is also surjective and thus bijective. Consequently, sA. is 5C7-reflexive. Consider now a factor act 5/I of QB with surjection . Then * is injective and as 5 C is injective in S Act, we get that ** : s(B**) > s(^4**) is surjective, both by Theorem 5.1.29(3). That means, for a G s(.A**) there exists b e s(B**) such that a = bn** = (frV)71"** f r some b' sB since is an isomorphism by hypothesis. Moreover, (bV)71"** = ( / ) ^ , i.e. A is surjective. It remains to show that a is also injective. Take a\ a 2 6 s A By Proposition 5.5.3(7) there exists : gA > 5 C such that \ 2/3. This together with (a,itpA) = cti, i = 1,2, implies that {) {,2) and 1=1 thus 0,2 a-
Abstract characterization of Morita duality

T h e o r e m 5 . 1 0 ([Kn/No90]). Monoids and only if S and are Morita dual monoids if
5 On Morita duality
473
(a) there exists SCT S Act which is cyclic injective in S Act and in Act T, and a cogenerator in s and , has exactly one one-element subact, and
(b) S = E n d ( C T ) and = E n d ( s C ) as monoids, and
(c) S and contain zero. In particular, all objects of sM and are sCr-reflexive.
Proof. Necessity. Let F : S M ^ MT and G : MT > Ms be mutually inverse contravariant equivalence functors. By Proposition 5.5.5 we get that SCT = F(sS) in MT is a cyclic injective cogenerator with a zero and that End(C;r) S as monoids. Proposition 5.5.3(4) implies that CT is injective in A c t T. By Proposition 5.5.2 one has G(TT) Hom(7y, SCT) and thus SG(TT) = SCT as left S-acts by Proposition 1.5.6. Again by Proposition 5.5.5 we have that SCT in sM is a cyclic injective cogenerator with a zero and that End (sC) = T as monoids. Proposition 5.5.3(4) implies that gC is injective in S A c t . Now SCT contains 5 G SM and as subacts and GF(sQ) = ,<?. This implies that SCT has only one one-element subact since otherwise |Hom(50,s CT)\ > 1 and then |Hom(Hom (se,s CT)T,S C t | > 1 contradicting to GF{SQ) ^ s 0 where F(s~) = H o m ( s - , sCT), and G(-T) = Hom( , SCT) This proves (a) and (b). Since as we have seen $ C T has one one-element subact, we get that S and both have a two-sided zero, which proves (c). Sufficiency. We show that H o m ( s - , SCT) : sM > A c t - and Hom( -T,
SCT)
: MT
S - Act
constitute a contravariant equivalence of the categories gAi" and First we prove that these functors actually go into Mr and siW, respectively. With Proposition 1.5.6 we have (S*)T = Horn(55, sCt)T = sCT e MT .
By Lemma 5.3.33, all objects of 5JW are isomorphic to subacts of cyclic Sacts. Therefore we consider some cyclic Sa G 5/. Then there exists an epimorphism of S onto Sa. Using contravariance, this implies (()*) (S*)T = CT MT, i.e. {{Sa)*)T e MT. Take SA C Sa in SM. Injectivity of 1 sC in 5 A c t implies that the canonical homomorphism ((5)*) > (*) is surjective by Theorem 5.1.29(3). Hence (A*)T is a factor act of ( ( 5 ) * ) G MT and thus (A*)T G MT. This proves that H o m ( s - , s CT) s M MTAnalogously we get that Hom( T , S G T ) ' MT sM. Now using the hypothesis we get an isomorphism of left i'-acts
5(S**)
= sHom(Hom(s5,
S C T ) T , SCT)
S H o m ( s C T , SCT)
SS
474
i.e. S is sC-r-reflexive. It is clear that this canonical isomorphism is in particular a natural transformation. This together with the corresponding result for M y means that .s'iVf and MT are dually equivalent, i.e. S and are Morita dual monoids. In particular, sCT-reflexivity of S gives that all objects of j M are gCVreflexive by Proposition 5.5.9. Corollary 5.11. Let 5C5 be a biact. The monoid S is gCs-dual to itself if and only if it contains zero and End(sC) = End(Cs) = S, sCs is cyclic injective in Act S and S Act, and a cogenerator in Ms and giVf. Corollary 5.12. The monoid S is selfdual if and only if it is injective in Act S and S Act and a cogenerator in Ms and j M . Corollary 5.13. The cogenerator SCT in sM and MT from Theorem 5.5.10, neither is a cogenerator in S Act nor in Act T. Proof. Suppose sCj is a cogenerator in S Act, then gCx contains two different zeros by Proposition 2.4.17 which contradicts Theorem 5.5.10.
Coproducts and products are not reflexive

We show now that the categories 5 and M T cannot be enlarged such that they contain (finite) coproducts or products and still can be dually equivalent. We prove this by showing that finite coproducts and finite products are not 56V-reflexive if we start with a dual equivalence funtor Horrig , s'CV), see Theorem 5.5.10. Lemma 5.14. Let S, T, SCT be as in Theorem 5.5.10. If sX S Act is SCT-reflexive, then 5X is indecomposable. Proof. Let e S - Act be sCr-reflexive. Take e s(X**) and G End(Cr) = S such that for all a e (*) and c 6 CT one has (<*) = = n(c). Then for every G s(X**) we get = and thus s(X**) is indecomposable and so is SX = s(X**) Proposition 5.15. Let S, T, SCT be as in Theorem 5.5.10. sX II s ^ is not SCT-reflexive for any gX, sY S Act. The coproduct
We show that -amalgamated coproducts cannot be sCV-reflexive either. For the construction of amalgamated coproducts recall Proposition 2.2.26. Lemma 5.16. Let S, T, SCT be as in Theorem 5.5.10. Let sX, sY 5 Act be cyclic and nonzero with exactly one zero and such that they are generated by
5 On Morita duality
475
each of their nonzero elements. Then S contains more than one element and the amalgamated coproduct sX sY in S A c t is not sCt-reflexive. Proof. Note first that H o m ( s X n 5 y , SC) = H o m ( 5 X I I e SY, SC) since SX, sY and s C have exactly one zero. With the left-right dual of Corollary 2.1.23 we get an isomorphism of right T-acts Hom(sX II SY, sC)T = H o m ( s X , SC)T H o m ( s y , SC)T
Using that s X and s Y are cyclic we obtain embeddings H o m ( s X , sCt)t C t and H o m ^ y , sCt)t Cr
with Proposition 1.5.6. Assume that sX H s ^ is sCr-reflexive. sin ^sHom(Hom(sine sY, sC)T,sCT) ^ 5 H o m ( H o m ( s X , sC)TUôm{sY, SC)T,SCT)
Consequently, there exist two generating elements , s Hom(Hom(sX, SC)T Hom(sy, SC)T, SCT). This will be led to a contradiction. Take two nonzero T-homomorphisms 7 : H o m ( s X , sC)t Ct, : H o m ^ y , s C ) t > Ct
which exist since |5"|, |C| > 1 and both contain zeros. Consider 7 J : Hom(sX, defined by
SC)T
Hom(sy,
SC)T
CT
7(Cl,C2)=7(Cl),
J(Cl,C2) = (C2)
for (Ci,C 2 ) e H o m ( s X , SC)T Hom( s F, SC)T Then 7 = s i say, for some si S = E n d ( C r ) and as well a = S27 for some s2 S as now 7 sX and therefore 7 also generates sX by hypothesis. Now a S27 implies that (,2) = 82(,2) = s2j(9) = for every 2 H o m ^ y , sC). Hence Sa and thus = s-$ and therefore also = S 4 < 5 for some 3,54 S. The latter again implies (,) for every H o r n ( S X , SC). Consider : ( H o m ( s X , SCt)T defined by x(Ci) 0) 7(0)1 (,2) = (2). ) U ( H o m ( s y , SCt)T) CT
476
Here (Hom(sX, 5 ( 7 ) ) ( ( 5 , SCT)T) can be considered as a subact o f H o m ( 5 X , s C ) T n H o m ( s y , sC)t Using injectivity of Ct in Act T, we can extend to
: H o m ( S X , SC)T H o m ( S Y , SC)T -> CT.
Consequently,
x(0,C2)ând (,)
for some Ci G H o r n ( S X , SC)T, C2 e H o m ( 5 r , SC)T Therefore, there cannot exist a factorization of through a or through /?, which is the desired contradiction.
P r o p o s i t i o n 5 . 1 7 . Let S, T, SCT be as in Theorem 5.5.10. No ated coproduct is SCT -reflexive. -amalgam-
Proof. Let 5X, sY 6 S Act, with unique zeros and with more than one
element, i.e. , ^ . Let (,) and (,) be maximal
congruences on Sx and Sy which do not identify and y with the respective zero (compare Proposition 2.2.34). Then Sx/g(x, ) and Sy/g(y, ) are generated by any of their nonzero elements. By Lemma 5.5.16 the -amalgamated coproduct
/{,) Sy/6(y,0) is not 5 C T - r e f l e x i v e Since /(,)
e
Sy/g{y,e)
is a subact of sX/{z> ) I I ) which is a factor act of sX sY, the latter cannot be SCT M-reflexive, using Proposition 5.5.9. Now we show that finite products cannot be sCV-reflexiv. P r o p o s i t i o n 5.18. Let S, T, SCT be as in Theorem 5.5.10 and let sX, sY
S A c t be nonzero. Then sX sY is not sCt-reflexive.
Proof. Take ^ e , ^y eY. The -amalgamated coproduct SxUSy = (Sx ) U ( Sy) C SX sY is not s C T -reflexive by Proposition 5.5.15. Consequently, s X s Y is not sC^-reflexive by Proposition 5.5.9. Remark 5.19. As we see from Proposition 5.5.15 and Proposition 5.5.18, we could not have chosen M and to be closed under finite products and coproducts. As a consequence the entire categories S Act and Act cannot be dually equivalent. A result of B. Osofski says that for a bimodule SUT which defines a Morita duality for rings no infinite coproduct of nonzero left S-modules is [/-reflexive (cf. 4.24.7 of [AN/FU74]). Taking into account the differences in the definitions of subcategories which admit Morita duality for rings and for monoids, our observation on coproducts becomes "natural".
5 On Morita duality
477
Finite monoids with Morita dual are selfdual

L e m m a 5.20. Let S, T, SCT be as in Theorem, 5.5.10. If S and are Morita dual monoids and SCT is finite, then \SCT\ = |5| = |T|. Proof. It suffices to show |sCr| = |5 As 5C s M is cyclic, we have 5C = S/ for some left congruence on S. Hence |s(7| < |5 Since S = End(CV) and CT is cyclic, we have \S\ = |End(CV)| < |CV| which proves equality. Proposition 5.21. If S is a finite monoid with Morita dual , then = S, that is, S is selfdual. Proof. We have gC = Sjo for some left congruence on S since 5C Ms is cyclic. Therefore Lemma 5.5.20 and finiteness imply that 5C = s S . Then = E n d ( s S ) = S follows with Theorem 5.5.10. It will turn out in Corollary 5.5.27 that the following example already contains all finite monoids with Morita dual. Example 5.22. For any k N0 consider the finite commutative nil monoid Sk = {V I s 1, su sv if and only if u, > k}. Then Sk is selfdual and in particular Morita dual to itself, and Sk has no other Morita duals. Indeed, by Exercise 3.1.28 we get that sS is injective in S Act. Using Corollary 5.5.12 and commutativity of S it suffices to show that s$> is a cogenerator in sM. Let Sz e S Act be cyclic. Then there exists a minimal m e N0 with s m+1 ,z = smz and Sz = {z, sz,..., smz} ^ ..., sk~\sk} = Ssk~m c s.
Hence s S contains isomorphically every object of s M , i.e., s S is a cogenerator in s M by Proposition 3.7.1. Then by Theorem 5.5.10 and Proposition 5.5.21, we get that S is selfdual. Moreover, S has no other Morita duals since they would be Morita equivalent to S by Corollary 5.5.7 which in the finite case means that they are isomorphic by Corollary 5.3.14.
Application to fields and endomorphism monoids

The following proposition shows in particular that the multiplicative monoid of a ring with Morita duality in general does not have a Morita dual monoid. As an example consider a finite field with more than two elements. Proposition 5.23. The multiplicative monoid of a field has a Morita dual if and only if \K\ 2.
478
Proof. Sufficiency. Follows from Example 5.5.22 for k = 1. Necessity. If (K, ) has a Morita dual monoid, there exists a cyclic left K-act KC which is a cogenerator in giVf by Theorem 5.5.10. Consider the congruence on which identifies all invertible elements of K. Then, ja has two elements and therefore it is subdirectly irreducible. Thus / C KC by Proposition 5.5.3(5). As KC is cyclic, every nonzero element of KC generates KC. Therefore, / C KC implies \KC\ = 2. Then \K\ = 2 by Lemma 5.5.20.
Note that the endomorphism ring End( RP) of a finitely generated projective left module RP over the ring R with a Morita dual has itself a Morita dual ring. This is different for acts as the following example shows. Example 5.24. Consider S = {1}. Then S is selfdual, but E n d ( S I I S ) does not have a Morita dual monoid. Indeed, the monoid S is clearly selfdual (cf. also Example 5.5.22 for k = 0), now \S II S\ = 2 and End(5 II S) = T2 is the transformation monoid of 2 elements which does not contain a two-sided zero, i.e. cannot have a Morita dual by Theorem 5.5.10.
Monoids with Morita-dual are chain monoids

For the remainder of the section we follow [Nor92a]. Recall Definition 1.3.47 for chain semigroups and Proposition 1.3.51. Proposition 5.25. A monoid S which has a Morita dual monoid is a commutative chain semigroup. Proof. Let S be a monoid with a Morita dual and mutually inverse dual equivalence functors F : SM MT, G : > s M . Take two left congruences , %2 on S with natural epimorphisms : S S/x\, 2 : S > S/x2 Then F(S/X\)T and F(S/X2)T are subacts of F(S)T by Corollary 5.1.35 since F is a contravariant equivalence functor. As objects of MT they both contain zero. Suppose that F(S/x) F(S/x2)t = Ut F(S/x 1), say. Using that MT is closed under sub- and factor acts we get that
(FIS/X,) U F{S/X2))/U - (F(S/x1)/U) IIe (F(S/x2)/U)
is a factor act of a subact of F(SS)T and therefore belongs to -p. Consequently, it is gCr-reflexive by Theorem 5.5.10. Using the indicated isomorphism this contradicts to Proposition 5.5.16. So, assume that there exists a monomorphism
: F ( S / x l ) F(S/X2)
5 On Morita duality which makes the following diagram in FM F(5/xi)
479
F(S/K2)
commutative. Applying G this turns in the category giVi into
5 , /X 2
with epimorphism G(i). Thus C yc\ by the Homomorphism Theorem 1.4.21, i.e. S is a left chain monoid. Now S must be commutative since noncommutative left chain semigroups do not contain both 0 and 1 (cf. Proposition 1.3.52) which, however, is necessary in our case.
Characterization of monoids with Morita dual

For the characterization of all monoids with Morita dual we use some results which have only been presented as exercises or as theorems without proofs. Recall from Theorem 1.3.51 that a totally ordered monoid S is called an orderdivisible monoid if for any G S with < y there exists S such that yz = zy. Recall from Definition 1.3.49 that a monoid S with 0 is called atomic if there exists an atom a G S, 0, that is a is such that ax xa 0 for all 1 e S. T h e o r e m 5 . 2 6 ([Nor92a]). For a monoid S the following (i) S has a Morita dual. is an atomic order-divisible submonoid of Q from are equivalent:
(ii) S up to isomorphism Construction 1.3.48. (iii) S is selfdual.
(iv) S is left and right self-injective
and a cogenerator
in sM are Rees
and
Ms-
(v) S is an atomic monoid all of whose congruences
congruences.
480
(vi) S is a commutative atomic monoid with trivial group of units such that all congruences form a chain.
Proof, (i) =7> (ii). As S has a Morita dual monoid with respect to some SCT, we get by Proposition 5.5.25 that S is a commutative chain monoid which was described in Theorem 1.3.51. By Theorem 5.5.10 it is clear that S is not a non-trivial group since S contains zero. If S GUO is a non-trivial group with zero, consider the Rees factor monoid S/G which has exactly two elements and therefore is subdirectly irreducible by Proposition 2.2.34. Then S/G C SC up to isomorphism by Theorem 5.5.10 and Proposition 5.5.3(5). Since in the present case every cyclic ,5'-act is generated by all of its nonzero elements, we have that up to isomorphism s C is generated by the nonzero element of S/G, i.e. S/G = sC. Now \S\ \sCT\ by Lemma 5.5.20 since S/G is finite. Hence S = { 0 , 1 } . Now by Theorem 1.3.51 we get that S is isomorphic to an order-divisible submonoid of either Q or R from Construction 1.3.48 if S is infinite or S is a monogenic nil semigroup with identity adjoined which, however, is also a submonoid of R and Q as was noted in Proposition 1.3.52. The same holds for T. As now is a Rees monoid by Proposition 1.3.52 and CT is a cyclic act, we have CT / for some ideal of with 1' CT corresponding to 1 G T. Consider on the congruence given by the ideal of non-invertible elements N. Since has a trivial group of units, we get |T/N\ = 2. Thus {0, a} = T/N is subdirectly irreducible and by Theorem 5.5.10 and Proposition 5.5.3(5) we again get { 0 , } = / = { 0 , } ^ {,'} C CT, say. Then a't = 0 for all
t e T, t 1.
To show that S E n d ( C T ) is atomic, define / E n d ( C T ) by /(1') = a', /(c) = for c CT, C 1'. Now / is well-defined since 1' is a generating element of CT and then / is an atom in End(CT). Indeed, if g G End(Ct),P idc, then <7(1') c V and thus fg . Moreover, gf(c) = if c V and, supposing that a! = l't for some G T , one has gf{V) = g{a') = ^ ( l ' i ) = g(l')t = ct = . Thus also gf 0. Therefore / is an atom and consequently S is atomic. This implies that S is a submonoid of Q, since R is not atomic (see Remark 1.3.50). (ii) (iii). 5 is a Rees monoid by Theorem 1.3.53 which by (ii) is atomic. If S is infinite, Exercise 3.1.27 gives that sS is injective in S A c t and by Exercise 3.7.4 that sS is a cogenerator in s M . Commutativity and Corollary 5.5.12 give (iii). If S is finite, it is monogenic by Theorem 1.3.53 and Example 5.5.22 gives (iii). (iii) (i). This is trivial. (iii) (iv). This is Corollary 5.5.12.
5 On Morita duality
481
(ii) (). This is Theorem 1.3.53, noting that the monoid R mentioned there is not atomic, see Remark 1.3.50. (ii) (vi). This is clear from the proof of (i) (ii) and the structure of chain monoid according to Theorem 1.3.51. Corollary 5.27. A finite monoid has a Morita dual if and only if it is a monogenic nil semigroup with identity adjoined. Proof. By Theorem 5.5.26(ii) we find that a finite atomic order-divisible submonoid of Q is indeed a monogenic nil semigroup with identity adjoined since it is generated by some y 6 [x, 1[. Sufficiency is Example 5.5.22.
Bibliography
[Abr83] [AD/HE/ST90] [Ahs87] [Ahs90]
G. D. Abrams. Morita equivalence for rings with local units. Comm. Algebra, 11:801-837, 1983. J. Adamek, H. Herrlich, and G. Strecker. Abstract and Concrete Categories. John Wiley, New York, 1990. J. Ahsan. Monoids characterized by their quasi-injective ^-systems. Semigroup Forum, 36:285-292, 1987. J. Ahsan. Hereditary and cohereditary 5-sets. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 878:11-16, 1990.
[Ah/Kh/Sh/Ta91] J. Ahsan, M. F. Khan, M. Shabir, and M. Takahashi. Characterizations of monoids by p-injective and normal Ssystems. Kobe J. Math., 8:173-190, 1991. [Ah/Sa89] [A1174] [A1176] [ALM94] [Ami71] [AN/FU74] [Anh90] [An/Ma87] J. Ahsan and K. Saifullah. Completely quasi-projective monoids. Semigroup Forum, 38:123-126, 1989. M. D. Allouch. Monoides de fractions et enveloppe injective d'un monoide. C. R. Acad. Sei. Paris, 279:833-836, 1974. M. D. Allouch. R-ensembles de fractions. C. R. Acad. Sei. Paris, 100:97-112, 1976. J. Almeida. Finite Semigroups and Universal World Scientific, Singapore, 1994. Algebra.
S. A. Amitsur. Rings of quotients and Morita contexts. J. Algebra, 17:273-298, 1971. F. W. Anderson and K. R. Fuller. Rings and Categories of Modules. Springer, New York, 1974. P. N. Anh. Morita duality for commutative rings. Algebra, 18:1781-1788, 1990. Comm.
P. N. Anh and L. Marki. Morita equivalence for rings without identity. Tsukuba J. Math., 11:1-16, 1987.
484 [AR/MA75]
Bibliography
M. A. Arbib and E. G. Manes. Arrows, Structures and Functors. The categorical Imperative. Academic Press, San Diego et al., 1975. M. A. Arbib (Ed.). Algebraic theory of machines, languages and semigroups. Academic Press, New York, 1968. R. Baer. Linear Algebra and Projective Geometry. demic Press, New York, 1952. Aca-
[ARB68] [BAE52] [Ban72] [ an 74] [BAR78] [Ba/Ro80] [Be/Kn/Mi94]
B. Banaschewski. Functors into categories of M-sets. Abh. Mathem. Seminar Univ. Hamburg, 38:49-64, 1972. B. Banaschewski. Equational compactness of G-sets. Canad. Math. Bull., 17:11-18, 1974. J. M. Barja. Theoremas de Morita para triples en categorias cerradas. Alxebra 20. Univ. Santiago, 1978. J. M. Barja P. and G. Rodeja F. Morita equivalence of monoids. Semigroup Forum, 19:101-106, 1980. . I. Beidar, U. Knauer, and . V. Mikhalev. An example of two von regular Neumann regular rings with nonisomorphic Morita equivalent multiplicative semigroups. Semigroup Forum, 48:381-383, 1994. . I. Beidar and . V. Mikhalev. Additive extension of derivations of multiplicative semigroups. In Mechanics and Appl. Mathematics, Tula, pages 112-114, 1988. . I. Beidar, . V. Mikhalev, and G. E. Puninski. Logical aspects of the theory of rings and modules. Fund, i Prikl. Matem., 1:1-62, 1995. W. Bentz and S. Bulman-Fleming. On equalizer-flat acts. Semigroup Forum, 58:5-16, 1999. J. Berman. On the congruence lattices of unary algebras. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 36:34-38, 1972. P. Berthiaume. The injective envelope of ^-sets. Math. Bull., 10:261-273, 1967. G. Birkhoff. Subdirect unions in universal algebra. Amer. Math. Soc, 50:764-768, 1944. Canad. Bull.
[Be/Mi88]
[Be/Mi/Pu95]
[Be/Bu99]
[Ber72] [Ber67] [Bir44] [Bi/Li70]
G. Birkhoff and J. D. Lipson. Heterogeneous algebras. J. Combin. Th., 8:115-133, 1970.
Bibliography [BLY86] [BL/JA72] . S. Blyth. Categories. Longman, London, 1986. T. S. Blyth and M. F. Janowitz. Residuation amon, Oxford, 1972.
485
Theory. Perg-
[Bol84]
M. L. Bolla. Isomorphism between endomorphism rings of progenerators. J. Algebra, 87:261-281, 1984. M. L. Bolla. Isomorphism between infinite matrix rings. Linear Algebra and Appl, 69:239-247, 1985. M. Bttcher and U. Knauer. Endomorphism spectra of graphs. Discrete Math., 109:45-57, 1992. G. M. Brodskij. Algebraic automata theory. Jaroslavl, 1988. R. Bruck. A Survey of Binary Systems. 1958. L. Budach and H. J. Hoehnke. Automaten Akademie Verlag, Berlin, 1975. Springer, Berlin,
[Bol85] [Bo/Kn92]
[BRO88] [BRU58]
[BU/H075]
und
Funktoren.
[Bul74]
S. Bulman-Fleming. A note on equationally compact algebras. Algebra Universalis, 4:41-43, 1974. S. Bulman-Fleming. Products of projective S-systems. Comm. Algebra, 19:951-964, 1991. S. Bulman-Fleming. Pullback-flat acts are strongly flat. Canad. Math. Bull, 34:456-461, 1991. S. Bulman-Fleming. Flat and strongly flat S-sy stems. Comm. Algebra, 20:2553-2567, 1992. S. Bulman-Fleming. Regularity and products of idempotents in endomorphism monoids of projective acts. Mathematika, 42:354-367, 1995. S. Bulman-Fleming and J. Fountain. Products of idempotent endomorphisms of free acts of infinite rank. Monatsh. Math., 124:1-16, 1997. S. Bulman-Fleming and V. Gould. On left absolutely flat monoids. Semigroup Forum, 41:55-59, 1990. S. Bulman-Fleming and M. Kilp. Flatness properties of acts: some examples. Semigroup Forum, 55:167-176, 1997.
[Bul91a]
[Bul91b]
[Bul92]
[Bul95]
[Bu/Fo97]
[Bu/Go90]
[Bu/Ki97]
486 [Bu/Mc83] [Bu/Mc84]
Bibliography
S. Bulman-Fleming and K. McDowell. Absolutely flat semigroups. Pacific J. Math., 107:319-333, 1983. S. Bulman-Fleming and K. McDowell. Flatness and amalgamation in semigroups. Semigroup Forum, 29:337-342, 1984. S. Bulman-Fleming and K. McDowell. Left absolutely flat generalized inverse semigroups. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 94:553-561, 1985. S. Bulman-Fleming and K. McDowell. Representation extension properties of normal bands. Semigroup Forum, 31:257 264, 1985. S. Bulman-Fleming and K. McDowell. On left absolutely flat bands. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 101:613-618, 1987. S. Bulman-Fleming and K. McDowell. On V. Fleischer's characterization of absolutely flat monoids. Algebra Universalis, 25:394-399, 1988. S. Bulman-Fleming and K. McDowell. A characterization of left cancellative monoids by flatness properties. Semigroup Forum, 40:109-112, 1990. S. Bulman-Fleming and K. McDowell. Coherent monoids. In J. Almeida et al., editor, Lattices, Semigroups and Universal Algebra. Plenum Press, . Y, 1990. S. Bulman-Fleming and K. McDowell. Monoids over which all weakly flat acts are flat. Proc. Edinburgh Math. Soc., 33:287-298, 1990. S. Bulman-Fleming, K. McDowell, and J. Renshaw. Some observations on left absolutely flat monoids. Semigroup Forum, 41:165-171, 1990. S. Bulman-Fleming and P. Normak. Monoids over which are all flat cyclic right acts are strongly flat. Semigroup Forum, 50:233-241, 1995. S. Bulman-Fleming and P. Normak. Flatness properties of monocyclic acts. Monatsh. Math., 122: 307-323, 1996. W. D. Burgess. The injective hull of -sets, S a semilattice of groups. Semigroup Forum, 23:241-246, 1981.
[Bu/Mc85a]
[Bu/Mc85b]
[Bu/Mc87] [Bu/Mc88]
[Bu/Mc90a]
[Bu/Mc90b]
[Bu/Mc90c]
[Bu/Mc/Re90]
[Bu/No95]
[Bu/No96] [Bur81]
Bibliography
487
[CA/HI/K083]
J. H. Carruth, J. A. Hildebrandt, and R. J. Koch. The Theory of Topological Semigroups, volume 1. Marcel Dekker, New York, 1983. J. H. Carruth, J. A. Hildebrandt, and R. J. Koch. The Theory of Topological Semigroups, volume 2. Marcel Dekker, New York, 1986. S. U. Chase. Direct products of modules. Math. Soc., 97:457-473, 1960. Trans. Amer.
[CA/HI/K086]
[Cha60]
[CU41]
A. H. Clifford. Semigroups admitting relative inverses. Ann. of Math., 42:1037-1049, 1941. A. H. Clifford and G. B. Preston. The Algebraic Theory of Semigroups. Mathematical Surveys 7, Vol. 1. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, 1961. A. H. Clifford and G. B. Preston. The Algebraic Theory of Semigroups. Mathematical Surveys 7, Vol. 2. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, 1967. P. M. Cohn. Morita equivalence and duality. Lecture Notes. Queen Mary College, London, 1966. R. Cornish. Antimorphic Action, categories of Algebraic Structures with Involutions or Anti-Endomorphisms. Heldermann, Berlin, 1986. R. F. Damiano. Coflat rings and modules. Pacific J. math., 81:349-369, 1969. R. Davis. Universal coalgebra and categories of transition systems. Math. Systems Theory, 4:91-95, 1970. R. A. Dean and R. H. Oehmke. Idempotent semigroups with distributive right congruence lattices. Pacific J. Math., 14:1187-1209, 1964. M. Delorme. Sur la platitude des demi-groupes de fractions. C. R. Acad. Sei. Paris, 269:630-632, 1969. M. Delorme. Sur les D-systemes libres. C. R. Acad. Sei. Paris, 271:1041-1044, 1970. P. Deussen. Halbgruppen und Automaten. Heidelberg, 1971. Springer, Berlin,
[CL/PR61]
[CL/PR67]
[COH66]
[COR86]
[Dam69]
[Dav70]
[De/Oe64]
[Del69]
[Del70]
[DEU71]
488 [DI/DU89] [Dor72] [Dor 73a]
Bibliography W. Dicks and M. J. Dunwoody. Groups acting on graphs. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1989. M. P. Dorofeeva. Hereditary and semihereditary monoids. Semigroup Forum, 4:301-311, 1972. M. P. Dorofeeva. Injective and flat acts over hereditary monoids. Vestnik Moskov. Univ., 1:47-51, 1973 (in Russian) . M. P. Dorofeeva. On some properties of the category of acts. Dep. at VINITI, N.5662-73, 1973 (in Russian). M. P. Dorofeeva, V. L. Mannepalli, and M. Satyanarayana. Piifer and Dedekind monoids. Semigroup Forum, 9:294-309, 1975. M. P. Dorofeeva, V. L. Mannepalli, and M. Satyanarayana. Pfer and Dedekind monoids II. Semigroup Forum, 11:102 114, 1975. P. Dubreil. Contribution a la theorie des demi-groupes. Mem. Acad. Sei. France, (2)63:52pp., 1941. J . J . Dukarm. Morita equivalence of algebraic theories. Coll. Math., 55:11-17, 1988. F. Eckstein. Semigroup methods in ring theory. J. Algebra, 12:177-190, 1969. D. P. Egorova. Unary algebras with congruence lattices of special type. In Research in Algebra, Saratov, pages 3-19, 1977 (in Russian). D. P. Egorova. The lattice of congruences of unary algebras. In Ordered sets and lattices, Saratov, pages 11-44, 1978 (in Russian). D. P. Egorova and L. A. Skornjakov. On the congruences lattice of a unary algebra. In Ordered sets and lattices, Saratov, pages 28-40, 1976 (in Russian). D. P. Egorova and L. A. Skornjakov. Cascade closure of monogenic monoids. Math. Seminar Notes, 7:45-48, 1979. S. Eilenberg. Automata, Languages, Machines, volume A. Academic Press, New York, 1974.
[Dor 73b] [Do/Ma/Sa75a]
[Do/Ma/Sa75b]
[Dub41] [Duk88] [Eck69] [Ego77]
[Ego78]
[Eg/Sk76]
[Eg/Sk79] [EIL74]
Bibliography [EIL76] [1/76] [FAI73] [FAI76] [FAN93a] [Fan93b]
489
S. Eilenberg. Automata, Languages, and Machines. Vol. B. Academic Press, New York, San Francisco, London, 1976. B. Elkins and J. A. Zilber. Categories of action and Morita equivalence. Rocky Mountain J. Math., 6:199-225, 1976. C. Faith. Algebra: Rings, Springer, Berlin, 1973. Modules and Categories I.
C. Faith. Algebra: Rings, Modules and Categories. II. Ring Theory. Springer, Berlin et al., 1976. S. Fan. Endomorphism monoids of graphs. Lanzhou Univ. Doctor. Th., Lanzhou, 1993. S. H. Fan. On End-regular bipartite graphs. In Proc. Spring School and Int. Conf. on Comb, and Graphs, pages 117-130. World Scientific, Singapore, 1993. S. H. Fan. Endomorphism semigroups of graphs. I. E-S unretractive graphs. J. Lanzhou Univ., 30:25-27, 1994 (in Chinese). S. H. Fan. Unretractive lexicographic products of graphs. Pure and Appl. Math., 10:149-153, 1994 (in Chinese). S. H. Fan. Bipartite graphs and their endomorphism type. In Combinatorics and Graph Theory, pages 232-246. World Scientific, Singapore, 1995. S. H. Fan. Endomorphism monoids of lexicographic products of two graphs. Acta Math. Sinica, 38:248-252, 1995. S. H. Fan. Greens relations on endomorphism monoids of graphs. J. Jinan Univ., 16:248-252, 1995. S. H. Fan. Bipartite graphs and their endomorphism monoids. J. Graph Th., 23:49-52, 1996. S. H. Fan. On End-regular graphs. Discrete Math., 159:95102, 1996. . H. Feller. On a class of right hereditary semigroups. Canad. Math. Bull., 17:667-670, 1975. . H. Feller and R. L. Gantos. Completely injective semigroups with central idempotents. Glasgow Math. J., 10:1620, 1969.
[Fan94a]
[Fan94b] [Fan95a]
[Fan95b] [Fan95c] [Fan96a] [Fan96b]
[Fel75] [Fe/Ga69a]
490 [Fe/Ga69b] [Fe/Ga69c] [Fe/Ga71]
Bibliography
. . Feller and R. L. Gantos. Completely injective semigroups. Pacific J. Math., 31:359-366, 1969. . H. Feller and R. L. Gantos. Indecomposable and injective ^-systems with zero. Math. Nachr., 41:37-48, 1969. . . Feller and R. L. Gantos. Completely right injective semigroups that are unions of groups. Glasgow Math. J., 12:43-49, 1971. D. J. Fieldhous. Regular modules. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 32:49-51, 1972. I. Fleischer. Absolutely flat monoids are amalgamation bases. C. R. Math. Rep. Acad. Sei. Canada, 12:17-20, 1990. V. Fleischer. On endomorphisms of free acts. Toimetised, 336:189-205, 1974 (in Russian). Tartu Ul.
[Fie72] [F90] [Fle74] [Fle75a]
V. Fleischer. Definability of a free act by its endomorphism semigroup. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 366:27-40, 1975 (in Russian) . V. Fleischer. On homological classification of semirings. Tartu I. Toimetised, 366:27-40, 1975 (in Russian). V. Fleischer. -rings over which all acts are ,-free. Tartu I. Toimetised, 390:56-83, 1976 (in Russian). V. Fleischer. Flat relative to diagram acts. In Summaries of the conference Theoretical and Applied Problems of Mathematics, Tartu, 1980, pages 17-19, 1980 (in Russian). V. Fleischer. Completely flat monoids. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 610:38-52, 1982 (in Russian). V. Fleischer. On wreath products of monoids by categories. Izv. Akad. Nauk Est. SSR, Fiz., Mat., 35:237-243, 1986 (in Russian). V. Fleischer. Isomorphism and Morita-equivalence of wreath products of monoids. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 764:136-145, 1987 (in Russian). V. Fleischer. Isomorphisms of wreath products of monoids. I. Semigroup Forum, 35:163-174, 1987. V. Fleischer. Isomorphisms of wreath products of monoids. II. Semigroup Forum, 37:215-224, 1988.
[Fle75b] [Fle76] [Fle80a]
[Fle82] [Fle86]
[Fle87a]
[Fle87b] [Fle88a]
Bibliography [Fle90]
491
V. Fleischer. Isomorphism of wreath products of monoids with categories. Tartu I. Toimetised, 878:153-162, 1990. V. Fleischer. Center and commutativity for wreath products of mon oids with categories. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 953:8394, 1992. V. Fleischer and U. Knauer. Endomorphism monoids of acts are wreath products of monoids with small categories. In H. Jrgensen, G. Lallement, and H. J. Weinert, editors, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 1320, pages 84-96. Springer, Berlin et al., 1988. V. Fleischer and U. Knauer. Wreath products of monoids with small categories whose principal one-sided ideals form chains. SEA Bull. Math., 18:63-72, 1994. V. Fleischer and U. Knauer. Wreath products of monoids with small categories whose principal one-sided ideals form trees. J. Algebra, 170:69-100, 1994. V. Fleischer and U. Knauer. Right and left P P endomorphism monoids of free right acts. In J. Almeida, G. M. S. Gomes, and P. V. Silva, editors, Semigroups, Automata, Languages, pages 101-110. World Scientific, Singapore, 1996. T. S. Fofanova. Acts over distributive lattices. Sib. Mat. J., 11:1195-1199, 1971 (in Russian). T. S. Fofanova. Injectivity of acts over Boolean algebras. Sib. Mat. J., 13:452-458, 1972 (in Russian). T. S. Fofanova. On injective acts over chains. Math. Slovaca, 28:21-32, 1978 (in Russian). J. Fountain. Completely right injective semigroups. Proc. London Math. Soc., 28:28-44, 1974. J. Fountain. Perfect semigroups. Soc., 2:87-93, 1976. Proc. Edinburgh Math.
[Fle92]
[Fl/Kn88]
[Fl/Kn94a]
[Fl/Kn94b]
[Fl/Kn96]
[Fof71]
[Fof72]
[Fof78]
[Fou74]
[Fou76]
[Fou77a]
J. Fountain. A class of right PP monoids. Quart. J. Math. Oxford, 28:285-300, 1977. J. Fountain. Right P P monoids with central idempotents. Semigroup Forum, 13:229-237, 1977.
[Fou77b]
492 [Fou77c] [Fou79] [Fou82] [Fou85]
Bibliography J. Fountain. Semilattices of groups with distributive congruence lattice. Semigroup Forum, 14:81-91, 1977. J. Fountain. Adequate semigroups. Proc. Edinburgh Math. Soc., 22:113-125S, 1979. J. Fountain. Abundant semigroups. Proc. London Soc., 44:103-129, 1982. Math.
J. Fountain. Semigroups of quotients. In Proc. of the 1984 Marquette Conf. on Semigroups, pages 17-28. Marquette University, 1985. J. Fountain. Semigroups of quotients. In Seminario, pages 1-12. Centro de Algebra, Lisboa, 1990. J. Fountain. Maximal orders in semigroups. In J. Almeida, G. M. S. Gomes, and P. V. Silva, editors, Semigroups, Automata and Languages, pages 111-124. World Scientific, Singapore, 1996. J. B. Fountain and P. Lockley. Semilattices of groups with distributive congruence lattice. Semigroup Forum, 14:8191, 1977. P. Freyd. Abelian Categories. Harper and Row, New York et al., 1964. R. Frucht. Herstellung von Graphen mit vorgegebener abstrakter Gruppe. Compositio Math., 6:239-250, 1938. S. Ginsberg. Algebraic and Automata Theoretic Properties of Formal Languages. North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1975. A. Ginzburg. Algebraic Theory of Automata. Press, New York, 1969. Academic
[Fou90] [Fou96]
[Fo/Lo77]
[FRE64]
[Fru38] [GIN75] [GIN69] [Giv66]
Y. Giveon. Transparent categories and categories of transition systems. In Proc. Conference on categorical algebra, La Jolla 1965, pages 317-330. Springer, Berlin, 1966. Y. Giveon. Categories and semimodules:the categorical structural properties of transition systems. Math. Systems Theory, 1:67-79, 1967. L. M. Gluskin. On endomorphisms of moduls. In Algebra and Math. Logic, Kiev, pages 3-20, 1966.
[Giv67]
[Glu66]
Bibliography
493
[Go/Re97]
A. Golchin and J. Renshaw. Periodic monoids over which all flat cyclic right acts satisfy condition (P). Semigroup Forum, 54:261-263, 1997. K. R. Goodearl. Von Neumann don et al., 1979. V. D. Goppa. Introduction Nauka, Moscow, 1995. regular rings. Pitman, Lon-
[G0079]
[GOP95]
to algebraic information
theory.
[Go/We85]
Z. Goseki and H. J. Weinert. On P-injective hulls of S-sets. Semigroup Forum, 31:281-295, 1985. V. A. R. Gould. Representable epimorphisms of monoids. Composito Math., 29:213-222, 1974. V. A. R. Gould. The characterization of monoids by properties of their S-systems. Semigroup Forum, 32:251-265, 1985. V. A. R. Gould. Axiomatisability problems for 5-systems. J. London Math. Soc., 35:193-201, 1987. V. A. R. Gould. Completely right pure monoids. Proc. Roy. Irish Acad. Sect A, 87:73-82, 1987. V. A. R. Gould. Coperfect monoids. Glasg. Math. J., 29:7388, 1987. V. A. R. Gould. Divisible 5-systems and R-modules. Edinburgh Math. Soc., II, 30:187-200, 1987. V. A. R. Gould. Model companions of 5-systems. J. Math. Oxford, 38:189-211, 1987. Proc.
[Gou74]
[Gou85]
[Gou87a]
[Gou87b]
[Gou87c]
[Gou87d]
[Gou87e]
Quart.
[Gou90]
V. A. R. Gould. Completely right pure monoids on which TL is a right congruence. Math. Proc. Cambridge Phil. Soc., 107:275-285, 1990. V. A. R. Gould. Completely right pure monoids: the general case. Mathematika, 38:77-88, 1991. V. A. R. Gould. Coherent monoids. J. Austral. Math. Soc. (Series A), 53:166-182, 1992. G. Grtzer. Universal algebra. D. Van Nostrand, Princeton et al., 1968.
[Gou91]
[Gou92]
[GRA68]
494 [Gre51]
Bibliography
J. A. Green. On the structure of semigroups. Ann. of Math., 54:163-172, 1951. A. Grigoryan. Morita contexts and monoids of endomorphisms of acts over monoids. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 640:3 12, 1983 (in Russian). P. A. Grillet. Semigroups. An Introduction to the Structure Theory. Marcel Dekker, New York, 1995. M. Hall. The theory of groups. Macmillan, New York, 1959. . E. Hall. Representation extension and amalgamation for semigroups. Quart. J. Math. Oxford, 29:309 334, 1978. F. Harary. Graph theory. Addison-Wesley, Reading, 1969. Z. Hedrlin and A. Pultr. On rigid undirected graphs. Canad. J. Math., 18:1237-1242, 1966. P. Hell. Rigid undirected graphs with given number of vertices. Comment. Math. Univ. Carolinae, 9:51-59, 1968. P. Hell. Full embeddings into some categories of graphs. Algebra Universalis, 2:129-141, 1972. P. Hell. On some strongly rigid families of graphs and the full embeddings they induce. Algebra Universalis, 4:108126, 1974. P. Hell. On some independence results in graph theory. In D. Cornell and E. Mendelsohn, editors, Proc. Conf. Algebraic Aspects of Combinatorics, pages 89-122. Utilitas Math. Publ., 1975. P. Hell. On some strongly rigid families of graphs and the full embeddings they induce. Algebra Universalis, 4:108126, 1979. H. Herrlich and G. Strecker. Category Theory. Allyn and Bacon, Boston, 1973. P. M. Higgins. Techniques of Semigroup Theory. Oxford Univ. Press, Oxford et al., 1992. B. Hille. Functional Analysis and Semigroups. 1948. New York,
[Gri83]
[GRI95]
[HAL59] [Hal78] [HAR69] [He/Pu66]
[Hel68]
[Hel72]
[Hel74]
[Hel75]
[Hel79]
[HE/ST73]
[HIG92]
[HIL48]
Bibliography
495
[HI/PH57]
. Hille and R. S. Philipps. Functional Analysis and Semigroups. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, 1957. P. J. Hilton and U. Stammbach. A Course in Homological Algebra. Springer, New York, 1970. Jr. C. V. Hinkle. The extended centralizer of an S-set. Pacific J. Math., 53:163-170, 1974. J. Hion. On nets of free polygons over a category and their category of homomorphisms. Beitrge zur Algebra und Geometrie, 24:51-74, 1987. J. Hion. On two-sided wreath product of categories. I. Toimetised, 878:163-177, 1990. Tartu
[HI/ST70]
[Hin74]
[Hio87]
[Hio90]
[Hoe63]
H.-J. Hoehnke. Zur Strukturtheorie der Halbgruppen. Math. Nachr., 26:1-13, 1963. H. J. Hoehnke. Uber Antiautomorphismen und volutorische primitive Halbgruppen. Czech. Math. 15(90):50-63, 1965. inJ.,
[Hoe65]
[Hoe66]
H.-J. Hoehnke. Structure of semigroups. Canad. J. Math., 18:449 491, 1966. . . Hofman and P. S. Mostert. Semigroups. Columbus, 1966. Elements of Compact
[H0/M066]
[HOL82]
W. M. L. Holcombe. Algebraic Automata bridge University Press, Cambridge, 1982.
Theory.
Cam-
[Hot69]
E. Hotzel. Halbgruppen mit ausschlielich Reeschen Linkskongruenzen. Math. ., 112:300-320, 1969. E. Hotzel. On semigroups with maximal conditions. group Forum, 11:337-362, 1975/76. Semi-
[Hot75]
[Hot78]
E. Hotzel. Maximal and minimal conditions in semigroups. Groupe Etude Algebre Univ. P. et . Curie, 1:1975-1976, 1978. E. Hotzel. Dual D-operands and the Rees theorem. Colloq. Math. Soc. J. Bolyai, 20:247-275, 1979. E. Hotzel. On finiteness conditions in semigroups. J. Algebra, 60:352-370, 1979.
[Hot79a]
[Hot79b]
496 [HOW76]
Bibliography
J. M. Howie. An Introduction demic Press, London, 1976.
to Semigroup
Theory. Aca-
[How81]
J. M. Howie. Epimorphisms and amalgamations: a survey of recent progress (revised edition). University of St. Andrews Mathematical Institute Preprints, 1981. J. M. Howie. Automata Press, Oxford, 1991. and Languages. Oxford University
[H0W91]
[How93]
J. M. Howie. Amalgamations: a survey. In A. Cherubini C. Bonzini and C. Tibiletti, editors, Semigroups. Algebraic Theory and Applications to Formal Languages and Codes, pages 125 132. World Scientific, Singapore, 1993. J. M. Howie. Fundamentals of semigroup theory. University Press, Oxford, 1995. Oxford
[HOW95]
[Hun66]
R. P. Hunter. Some results on wreath products of semigroups. Bull. Soc. Math. Belg., 18:3-16, 1966. J. R. Isbell. Epimorphisms and dominions. In Proc. Conference on categorical algebra, La Jolla 1965, pages 232-246. Springer, Berlin, 1966. J. R. Isbell. Perfect monoids. Semigroup Forum, 2:95-118, 1971. J. R. Isbell. Beatific semigroups. J. Algebra, 23:228-238, 1972. J. R. Isbell. Perfect categories. Proc. Edinburgh Math. Soc., 2:95-97, 1976. N. Jacobson. Structure of rings. Amer. Math. Soc. Colloquium Publications, 37, Providence, 1964. R. K. Jain. On Dedekind monoids. 24:91-92, 1982. Semigroup Forum,
[Isb66]
[Isb71]
[Isb72]
[Isb76]
[JAC64]
[Jai82]
[JE/LE89]
C. U. Jensen and H. Lenzing. Model theoretic algebra. Gordon and Breach, Amsterdam, 1989. C. S. Johnson. A characterization of injective ^-systems over a semilattice. J. Natur. Sei and Math., 13:239-241, 1973.
[Joh73]
Bibliography
497
[Jo/Mc72a]
C. S. Johnson and F. R. McMorris. Completely cyclic injective semilattices. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 36:385-388, 1972. C. S. Johnson and F. R. McMorris. Injective hulls of certain S-systems over a semilattice. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 32:371 375, 1972. C. S. Johnson and F. R. McMorris. Weakly self-injective semilattices. Semigroup Forum, 6:3-11, 1973. C. S. Johnson and F. R. McMorris. Retractions and Sendomorphisms. Semigroup Forum, 9:84-87, 1974/75. A. M. Lopez Jr. and J. Luedeman. Quasi-injective Ssystems and their 5-endomorphism semigroups. Czechoslovak Math. J., 29(104):97-104, 1979. R. Juhasz. Systems of equations over semigroups. Acta Sei. Math. Szeged, 31(3-4):253-257, 1970. H. Jrgensen, F. Migliorini, and J. Szep. Akademiai Kiado, Budapest, 1991. . B. Kacov. On flat functors. Mat. Zametki, 1976 (in Russian). Semigroups. 19:577-586, J.,
[Jo/Mc72b]
[Jo/Mc73] [Jo/Mc74/75] [Lo/Lu79]
[Juh70] [JU/MI/SZ91] [Kac76] [Kac78] [Kac82] [Kac87] [Kan58] [Ka90]
. B. Kacov. Tensor products of functors. Sib. Mat. 19:318-327, 1978 (in Russian).
. B. Kacov. On the categoricity of the theory of polygons. Vestnik Moskov. Univ., page 104, 1982 (in Russian). . B. Kacov. Categoricity of the theory of acts. Mat. Nauk, 42(3): 187, 1987. D. N. Kan. Adjoint functors. 87:294-329, 1958. Trans. Amer. Math. Uspehi Soc.,
R. Kaschek. A characterization of the principally weakly injectivity of the wreath product of acts. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 878:53-58, 1990. . B. Katsov. Model theory of functors: Axiomatizable problems. J. Pure Appl. Algebra, 119:285 296, 1997. . B. Katsov. Tensor products and injective envelopes of semimodules over additively regular semirings. Algebra Colloquium, 4:121-131, 1997.
[Kac97a] [Kac97b]
498
Bibliography
[Ker97]
. Kerber. Endliche Strukturen, ihre Theorie, ihre Konstruktion und Anwendungen. Jber. d. Dt. Math.-Verein., 99:181-195, 1997. M. Kilp. On flat acts. 1970 (in Russian). Tartu l. Toimetised, 253:66-72,
[Kil70] [KIL71] [Kil72]
M. Kilp. On homological classification of monoids. Dissertation, Moscow (in Russian), 1971. M. Kilp. On homological classification of monoids. Mat. J., 13:578-586, 1972 (in Russian). Sib.
[Kil73] [Kil74]
M. Kilp. Commutative monoids all of whose principal ideals are projective. Semigroup Forum, 6:334-339, 1973. M. Kilp. On homological classification of monoids by properties of their left ideals. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 336:178-188, 1974. M. Kilp. On left completely flat monoids which are unions of groups. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 556:33-37, 1981 (in Russian). M. Kilp. Characterization of monoids by properties of their left Rees factors. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 640:29-37, 1983 (in Russian). M. Kilp. On completely flat monoids. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 700:32 37, 1985. M. Kilp. Strong flatness of flat cyclic left acts. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 700:38-41, 1985. M. Kilp. Wreath products of acts over monoids. III. Principally weakly flat acts. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 878:59-66, 1990. M. Kilp. On absolutely flat monoids. In P. Higgins, editor, Transformation Semigroups. University of Essex, 1994. M. Kilp. On monoids all strongly flat cyclic right acts over which are projective. Semigroup Forum, 52:241-245, 1996. M. Kilp. Perfect monoids revisited. 53:225-229, 1996. Semigroup Forum,
[Kil81] [Kil83]
[Kil85a] [Kil85b] [Kil90]
[Kil94] [Kil96a] [Kil96b]
[Ki/Kn86]
M. Kilp and U. Knauer. On free, projective, and strongly flat acts. Arch. Math., 47:17-23, 1986.
Bibliography
499
[Ki/Kn87a]
M. Kilp and U. Knauer. Characterization of monoids by properties of faithful and strongly faithful acts. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 1987. M. Kilp and U. Knauer. Characterization of monoids by properties of regular acts. J. Pure Appl. Algebra, 46:217231, 1987. M. Kilp and U. Knauer. Characterization of monoids by properties of generators. Comm. Algebra, 20:1841-1856, 1992. M. Kilp, U. Knauer, and . V. Mikhalev. Wreath products of acts over monoids. II. Torsion free and divisible acts. J. Pure Appl. Algebra, 58:19-27, 1989. M. Kilp, U. Knauer, and . V. Mikhalev. On monoids in which right ideals are generators. In P. Higgins, editor, Transformation Semigroups, pages 56-59. University of Essex, 1994. M. Kilp, U. Knauer, . V. Mikhalev, and L. A. Skornjakov. Acts over monoids. A bibliographical survey of publications 1975-1981. BIS, Oldenburg, 1982. M. Kilp and A. Kubjas. Wreath products of acts over monoids. III. Principally weakly injective acts. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 764:49-52, 1987. M. Kilp and V. Laan. On flatness properties of cyclic acts. Comm. Algebra, 1999. E. W. Kiss, L. Marki, P. Prhle, and W. Tholen. Categorical algebraic properties. Compendium on amalgamation congruence, extension, epimorphisms, residual smallness and injectivity. Studia Sei. Hungarica, 18:79-141, 1983. M. Klin, R. Pschel, and K. Rosenbaum. Angewandte gebra. Vieweg, Braunschweig et al., 1988. Al-
[Ki/Kn87b]
[Ki/Kn92]
[Ki/Kn/Mi89]
[Ki/Kn/Mi94]
[KI/KN/MI82]
[Ki/Ku87]
[Ki/La99] [Ki/Ma/Pr83]
[KL/P0/R088] [KNA71] [Kna72a] [Kna72b]
U. Knauer. Morita quivalenz von Halbgruppen. Dissertation, Bielefeld, 1971. U. Knauer. Morita equivalence of semigroups. Uspehi Mat. Nauk, 27:173-174, 1972. (in Russian). U. Knauer. Projectivity of acts and Morita equivalence of monoids. Semigroup Forum, 3:359-370, 1972.
500 [Kna76a]
Bibliography U. Knauer. A note on Baer monoids. Semigroup 13:143-148, 1976. U. Knauer. Column monomial matrix monoids. Nachr., 74:135-141, 1976. U. Knauer. Endomorphism monoids of free acts. Moskov. Univ., 6:81, 1978 (in Russian). Forum,
[Kna76b]
Math.
[Kna78]
Vestnik
[Kna80]
U. Knauer. Zur Entwicklung der algebraischen Theorie der Halbgruppen. Simon Stevin, 54:165-177, 1980. U. Knauer. Characterization of monoids by properties of finitely generated right acts and their right ideals. In . H. Hofmann, H. Jrgensen, and H. J. Weinert, editors, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 998. Recent Developments in the Algebraic, Analytical and Topological Theory of Semigroups, pages 310-332. Springer, Berlin et al., 1983. U. Knauer. Unretractive and S-unretractive joins and lexicographic products of graphs. J. Graph. Th., ll(3):429-440, 1987. U. Knauer. Endomorphisms of graphs. II. Various unretractive graphs. Arch. Math., 55:193-203, 1990. U. Knauer. Endomorphism types of trees. In M. Ito, editor, Words, languages and Combinatorics, pages 273-287. World Scientific, Singapore, 1992. U. Knauer. Endomorphism types of bipartite graphs. In M. Ito and H. Jrgensen, editors, Words, languages and combinatorics II., pages 234-251. World Scientific, Singapore, 1994. U. Knauer and . V. Mikhalev. Endomorphism monoids of acts over monoids. Semigroup Forum, 6:50-58, 1973. U. Knauer and . V. Mikhalev. Endomorphism monoids of free acts and 0-wreath products of monoids. I. Annihilator properties. Semigroup Forum, 19:177-187, 1980. U. Knauer and . V. Mikhalev. Endomorphism monoids of free acts and 0-wreath products of monoids. II. Regularity. Semigroup Forum, 19:189-198, 1980.
[Kna83]
[Kna87]
[Kna90]
[Kna92]
[Kna94]
[Kn/Mi73]
[Kn/Mi80a]
[Kn/Mi80b]
Bibliography
501
[Kn/Mi80c]
U. Knauer and . V. Mikhalev. Endomorphism monoids of free acts and 0-wreath products of monoids. III. Standard involution and continuous endomorphisms. Semigroup Forum, 19:355 369, 1980. U. Knauer and . V. Mikhalev. Wreath products of ordered semigroups. I. General properties, idempotent and regular Cartesian ordered isotone wreath products. Semigroup Forum, 28:331-350, 1983. U. Knauer and . V. Mikhalev. Center and commutativity for wreath products of ordered semigroups. Arch. Math., 44:397-402, 1985. U. Knauer and . V. Mikhalev. Wreath products of ordered semigroups. II. Inverse ordered wreath products. Semigroup Forum, 31:181-191, 1985. U. Knauer and . V. Mikhalev. Wreath products of acts over monoids. I. Regular and inverse acts. J. Pure Appl. Algebra, 51:251-260, 1988. U. Knauer and . V. Mikhalev. Endomorphism monoids of generators in the category of acts over monoids. In J. M. Howie, W. D. Munn, and H. J. Weinert, editors, Semigroups and Applications, pages 132-151. World Scientific, Singapore, 1992. U. Knauer, . V. Mikhalev, and L. I. Mikhaleva. Antiisomorphisms of operator semigroups of p-adic Banach spaces. In Proc. of the 2nd Math. Conf. of Moscow State Social Univ., pages 69-71. Moscow, 1994. U. Knauer and M. Nieporte. Endomorphisms of graphs. I. The monoid of strong endomorphisms. Arch. Math., 52:607614, 1989. U. Knauer and P. Normak. Morita duality for monoids. Semigroup Forum, 40:39-57, 1990. U. Knauer and P. Normak. Hereditary endomorphism monoids of projective acts. Manuscripta math., 70:133-143, 1991. U. Knauer and H. Oltmanns. Weak projectivities for Sacts. In K. Denecke, H.-J. Vogel, editors, General Algebra and Discrete Mathematics Proc. Conference, Potsdam 1998, pages 143 159. Shaker, Aachen, 1999.
[Kn/Mi83]
[Kn/Mi85a]
[Kn/Mi85b]
[Kn/Mi88]
[Kn/Mi92]
[Kn/Mi/Mi94]
[Kn/Ni89]
[Kn/No90] [Kn/No91]
[Kn/0199]
502 [Kn/Pe81]
Bibliography
U. Knauer and M. Petrich. Characterization of monoids by torsion-free, flat, projective, and free acts. Arch. Math., 36:289-294, 1981. J. Koschelev. Wreath product and equations in semigroups. Semigroup Forum, 11:1-13, 1975 (in Russian). J. Koschelev. Regularity and idempotency of the wreath product of semigroups. Sovremennaja Algebra, 4:97-106, 1976 (in Russian). I. B. Kozhukhov. On semigroups with minimal or maximal condition on left congruences. Semigroup Forum, 21:337 350, 1980. I. B. Kozhukhov. Left chain semigroups. Semigroup 22:1-8, 1981. Forum,
[Kos75] [Kos76]
[Koz80]
[Koz81] [Koz97] [Koz98a]
I. B. Kozhukhov. One characteristical property of semilattices. Comm. Algebra, 25:2569-2577, 1997. I. B. Kozhukhov. Finiteness conditions for subdirectly irreducible acts and modules. Fundamental and Appl. Math., 4:1-5, 1998 (in Russian). I. B. Kozhukhov. Semigroups over which all acts are residually finite. Fundamental and Appl. Math., 4:1335-1344, 1998 (in Russian). M. Krasner and L. A. Kaluzhnin. Produit complet des groupes de permutations et le problem d'extension des groupes, I. Acta Sei. Math. Szeged, 13:208-230, 1950. K. B. Krohn, R. Mateosian, and J. L. Rhodes. Methods of the algebraic theory of machines, I. Decomposition theorem for generalized machines; properties preserved under series and parallel composition of machines. J. Comput. System. Sei, 1:55-85, 1967. . B. Krohn and J. L. Rhodes. Algebraic theory of machines. In Math, theory of automata, pages 341-384. Polytechnic Press, New York, 1963. . B. Krohn and J. L. Rhodes. Algebraic theory of machines, I. Prime decomposition theorems for finite semigroups and machines. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 116:450464, 1965.
[Koz98b]
[Kr/Ka50]
[Kr/Ma/Rh67]
[Kr/Rh63]
[Kr/Rh65]
Bibliography
503
[Kuz80]
V. A. Kuzicheva. The axiomatizibility of the class of weakly injective acts over monoids and semirings. In Theoretical and Applied Problems of Mathematics, pages 23-25, 1980. V. Laan. On homological classification of monoids. Master Thesis (in Estonian), Tartu, 1995. V. Laan. On classification of monoids by properties of cofree acts. Semigroup Forum, 59:79 92, 1999. V. Laan. When torsion free acts are principally weakly flat. Semigroup Forum, to appear, 1999. G. Lallement. Semigroups and Combinatorial John Wiley, New York, 1979. J. Lambek. Lectures on rings and modules. Waltham, Mass. et al., 1966. Applications. Blaisdell,
[LAA95] [Laa99a] [Laa99b] [LAL79] [LAM66] [La/Ta82] [Len70] [Lex84] [Le/Wi81] [Liw93] [Liw94a] [Liw94b] [Liw94c] [Liw95] [Lie91]
W. A. Lampe and W. Taylor. Simple algebras on varieties. Algebra Universalis, 14:36-43, 1982. H. Lenzing. Halberbliche Endomorphismenringe. Math. Z., 118:219-240, 1970. W. Lex. Zur Vollreduzibilitt von Halbautomaten. Bayreuther Math. Sehr., 16:123-141, 1984. W. Lex and R. Wiegandt. Torsion theory for acts. Sei. Math. Hung., 16:263-280, 1981. Studia
W. M. Li. Greens relations on the strong endomorphism monoid of a graph. Semigroup Forum, 47:209-214, 1993. W. M. Li. A regular endomorphism monoid of a graph and its inverses. Mathematika, 41:189-198, 1994. W. M. Li. Completely regular strong endomorphisms of a graph. J. Nanjing Univ., 30:199-208, 1994. W. M. Li. The monoid of strong endomorphisms of a graph. Semigroup Forum, 49:143-149, 1994. W. M. Li. Inverses and pseudoinverses of strong endomorphisms of a graph. Acta Math. Sinica, 11:372-380, 1995. S. Lie. Die Grundlagen fr die Theorie der unendlichen kontinuierlichen Transformationsgruppen I und II. Leipzig. Berichte, 3:316-352, 353-393, 1891.
504 [LIN73]
Bibliography
H. Lindner. Morita quivalenz von Kategorien ber einer geschlossenen Kategorie. Dissertation, Dsseldorf, 1973. Zhongkui Liu. A characterization of regular monoids by flatness of left acts. Semigroup Forum, 46:85-89, 1993. Zhongkui Liu. Characterization of monoids by condition (P) of cyclic left acts. Semigroup Forum, 49:31-39, 1994. Zhongkui Liu. On left perfect monoids. Acta Math. Sinica, 38:817-823, 1995 (in Chinese). Zhongkui Liu. Strongly faithful right S'-acts. (Wuhan), 15:429-435, 1995 (in Chinese). J. Math.
[Liu93]
[Liu94]
[Liu95a]
[Liu95b]
[Liu96a]
Zhongkui Liu. Characterization of inverse and left inverse semigroups by their S' 1 -acts. Northeast. Math. J., 12:395401, 1996. Zhongkui Liu. Monoids over which all flat left acts are regular. J. Pure Appl. Algebra, 111:199-203, 1996. Zhongkui Liu and Ning Wang. Monoids over which all strongly flat left acts are regular. Comm. Algebra, 26(6): 1863 1866, 1996. Zhongkui Liu and Yongbao Yang. Characterization of monoids by condition (P) of cyclic left acts. Comm. Algebra, 22:2861-2875, 1994. E. S. Ljapin. Semigroups. Nauka, Moscow, 1960 (in Russian, English tranlation, Providence, 1963, 1968, 1974). A. Loewy. Uber abstrakt definierte Transmutationssysteme oder Mischgruppen. J. f . Math., 157:239-254, 1927. J. Luedeman. Closure operations and semigroups of quotients. Commentat. Math. Univ. Carolinae, 20:529-537, 1979. J. Luedeman. Morita equivalent semigroups of quotients. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 80:219-222, 1980. J. Luedeman. Completely cyclic projective s-systems. In Semigroups. Proc. Conf., Oberwolfach 1978. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 855., pages 49-54. Springer, Berlin, 1981.
[Liu96b]
[Li98/Wa]
[Li/Ya94]
[LJA60]
[Loe27]
[Lue79]
[Lue80]
[Lue81]
Bibliography
505
[Lue83]
J. Luedeman. Torsion theories and semigroups of quotients. In Recent developments in the algebraic, analytical, and topological theory of semigroups. Proc. Conf., Oberwolf ach 1981. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 998., pages 350-373. Springer, Berlin, 1983. J. Luedeman, F. McMorris, and S.-K. Sim. Semigroups for which every totally irreducible 5-system is injective. Comment. Math. Univ. Carolinae, 19:27-35, 1978. S. MacLane. Categories for the Working Springer, New York et al., 1971. E. G. Manes. Algebraic Theories. al., 1976. Mathematician.
[Lu/Mc/Si78]
[MLA71]
[MAN76]
Springer, New York et
[Ma/Sa74]
V. L. Mannepalli and M. Satyanarayana. Monoids of Dedekind type. Semigroup Forum, 9:18-27, 1974. D. McLean. Idempotent semigroups. Amer. Math. 61:110-113, 1954. F. R. McMorris. Vital injective 5-systems. Math. 47:121-125, 1970. Monthly,
[McL54]
[McM70]
Nachr.,
[MEL95]
J. D. P. Meldrum. Wreath Products of Groups and Semigroups. Longman, 1995. . V. Mikhalev. Isomorphisms of the endomorphism semigroups of modules, ., II. Algebra i Logika, 5:59 67, 1966. 6:35-47, 1967 (in Russian). . V. Mikhalev. Orthogonally complete many-sorted sysytems. Doklady Akad. Nauk SSSR, 289(6):1304-1308, 1986 (in Russian). . V. Mikhalev. Multiplicative classification of rings. Mat. Sb., 135:210-224, 1988 (in Russian). . V. Mikhalev. Isomorphisms of endomorphism rings of modules close to free modules. Moscow Univ. Math. Bull., Sect. 1, Mathematics, Mechanics, pages 20-27, 1989. . V. Mikhalev. Isomorphisms and anti-isomorphisms of endomorphism rings of modules. In Y. Fong, U. Knauer, and . V. Mikhalev, editors, Proc. of Moscow-Tainan Workshop in Algebra, pages 69-122. Walter de Gruyter, 1996.
[Mik66]
[Mik86]
[Mik88]
[Mik89]
[Mik96]
506 [Mol83] [Moo69] [Mor58]
Bibliography
V. A. Molchanov. Semigroups of mappings on graphs. Semigroup Forum, 6:155-199, 1983. R. Moors. Note sur le 'wreath product' de deux demigroups. Bull. Soc. Roy. Sei. Liege, 38:116-124, 1969. K. Morita. Duality of modules and its applications to the theory of rings with minimum condition. Sei. Rep. Tokyo Daigaku Sect. A, 6:83-142, 1958. K. Morita. Category-isomorphism and endomorphism rings of modules. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 103:451-469, 1961. K. Morita. Adjoint pairs of functors and Frobenius extensions. Sei. Rep. Tokyo Daigaku Sect. A, 9:40-71, 1965. B.J. Mller. Morita duality - a survey. CISM Courses and Lectures, 287:395-414, 1984. T. G. Mustafin. Stability of the thery of acts. Tr. Inst. Mat. Sib. Otd. Acad. Nauk SSSR, 8:92-108, 1988 (in Russian). T. G. Mustafin. Description of commutative monoids over which all acts are w-stable. Algebra i Logika, 28:371-381, 1989 (in Russian). V. V. Neklioudova. Acts over semigroups with systems of local units. Fundamental and Appl. Math., 3:876-902, 1997 (in Russian). V. V. Neklioudova. Morita-equivalence of monoids and category equivalence of fuzzy acts. Fundamental and Appl. Math., 3:179-194, 1997 (in Russian). V. V. Neklioudova. Categories of acts over semigroups with systems of local units. Dissertation, Moscow (in Russian), 1999. C. F. Nelius. Ringe mit eindeutiger Addition. Dissertation, Paderborn, 1974. . . Neumann. Embedding theorems for semigroups. J. London Math. Soc., 35:184-192, 1960. W. R. Nico. Some finiteness conditions on indecomposable operands. Semigroup Forum, 5:145-153, 1972. W. R. Nico. A study of operands in terms of maximal generalized orbits. Semigroup Forum, 6:69-74, 1973.
[61] [Mor65] [Mul84] [Mus88] [Mus89]
[Nek97a]
[Nek97b]
[NEK99]
[NEL74] [Neu60] [Nic72] [Nic73]
Bibliography
507
[Nic74] [Nic75] [Nic77] [Nic78] [Nic83a] [Nic83b] [Nor77] [Nor80] [Nor81] [Nor82] [Nor83] [Nor87] [Nor90] [Nor92a] [Nor92b] [Nor93]
W. R. Nico. A study of operands in terms of maximal generalized orbits. J. Algebra, 30:473-484, 1974. W. R. Nico. Height of operands over monoids satisfying the DCC on orbits. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc, 48:313-320, 1975. W. R. Nico. Monoids which act cyclically on their sets of left congruences. Arch. Math., 28:1-6, 1977. W. R. Nico. A classsification of indecomposable S-sets. J. Algebra, 54:260-272, 1978. W. R. Nico. On the regularity of semidirect products. Algebra, 80:29-36, 1983. W. R. Nico. Wreath products and extensions. Houston Math., 9:71-99, 1983. J. J.
P. Normak. On Noetherian and finitely presented acts. Tartu I. Toimetised, 431:37-46, 1977 (in Russian). P. Normak. Purity in the category of M-sets. Forum, 20:157-170, 1980. Semigroup Tartu
P. Normak. Analogies of QF-rings for monoids. I. I. Toimetised, 556:38-46, 1981 (in Russian).
P. Normak. Strong flatness and projectivity of the wreath products of acts. In Abelevye Gruppy i Moduli. Tomsk, 1982. P. Normak. Analogies of quasi-Frobenius rings for monoids. II. Tartu 171. Toimetised, 640:38-47, 1983 (in Russian). P. Normak. On equalizer-flat and pullback-flat acts. Semigroup Forum, 36:293-313, 1987. P. Normak. PP endomorphism monoids of acts. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 878:83-90, 1990. P. Normak. The structure of Morita dual monoids. group Forum, 45:205-213, 1992. P. Normak. Wreath product functor of acts. Toimetised, 953:29-46, 1992. Semi-
Tartu Ul.
P. Normak. Cogenerator acts. In A. Cherubini C. Bonzini and C. Tibiletti, editors, Semigroups. Algebraic Theory and Applications to Formal Languages and Codes, pages 191198. World Scientific, Singapore, 1993.
508 [Nor94]
Bibliography
P. Normak. Topological S- acts. Preliminaries and problems. In P. Higgins, editor, Transformation Semigroups, pages 60-69. University of Essex, 1994. P. Normak. Congruence compact acts. Semigroup 55:299-308, 1997. Forum,
[Nor97]
[Num87a]
U. Nummert. Endomorphism monoids of boolean products of graphs. Tartu I. Toimetised, 764:57-66, 1987. U. Nummert. On the monoid of strong endomorphisms of wreath products of graphs. Mat. Zametki, 41:844-853, 1987. J. Okninski. York, 1991. Semigroup Algebras. Marcel Dekker, New
[Num87b]
[OKN91]
[Ore31]
O. Ore. Linear equations in non-commutative fields. Ann. of Math., 32:463-477, 1931. . V. Ovchinnikova. Complete classes of regular acts with finite number of idempotents. Sib. Mat. J., 36:381-384, 1995. A. B. Paalman-de Miranda. Topological Semigroups. terdam, 1964. Ams-
[Ovc95]
[PAA64]
[Pae85]
H. Peva. Self-injectivity of right inverse semigroups the subsemigroup of idempotents of which is a finite chain of 7Zclasses. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 700:50-59, 1985 (in Russian). H. Peva. On right self-injective semigroups. Toimetised, 764:74-80, 1987 (in Russian). Tartu Ul.
[Pae87a]
[Pae87b]
H. Peva. Right weakly self-injective right inverse semigroups. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 764:81-97, 1987 (in Russian). H. Peva. On right weakly f-self-injective regular semigroups. Transactions of Tallinn Technical University, 733:77-84, 1992. B. Pareigis. Categories and Functors. Academic Press, New York, 1970. B. Pareigis. Non-additive ring and module theory. I. General theory of monoids. Puhl. Math. Debrecen, 24:189-204, 1977.
[Pae92]
[PAR70]
[Par 77a]
Bibliography [Par 77b]
509
B. Pareigis. Non-additve ring and module theory. II. Ccategories, C-functors and C-morphisms. Publ. Math. Debrecen, 24:351-361, 1977. B. Pareigis. Non-additive ring and module theory. III. Morita equivalence. Publ. Math. Debrecen, 25:177-186, 1978. B. Pareigis. Non-additive ring and module theory. IV. The Brauer group of a symmetric monoidal category. Preprint, 1979. B. Pareigis. Non-additive ring and module theory. V. Projective and coflat objects. Preprint, 1980. B. Pareigis. A non-commutative non-cocommutative Hopf algebra in "nature". J. Algebra, 70:356-374, 1981. B. Pareigis. Morita equivalence of module categories with tensor products. Comm. Algebra, 9:1455-1477, 1981. M. Petrich. Topics in Semigroups. Pennsylvania State University, Pennsylvania, 1967. M. Petrich. The translational hull of a completely 0-simple semigroup. Glasgow Math. J., 9:1-11, 1968. M. Petrich. Dense extensions of completely 0-simple semigroups, I. J. reine und angew. Math., 258:103-125, 1973. M. Petrich. Dense extensions of completely 0-simple semigroups, II. J. reine und angew. Math., 259:109-131, 1973. M. Petrich. Introduction Ohio, 1973. to semigroups. Merill, Columbus,
[Par 78]
[Par 79]
[Par80]
[Par81a] [Par 8 lb] [PET67] [Pet68] [Pet 73a] [Pet 73b] [PET73] [PET77] [PET84] [PIN86] [Pol74a]
M. Petrich. Lectures in Semigroups. John Wiley, New York, 1977. M. Petrich. Inverse Semigroups. 1984. J.-E. Pin. Varieties of formal Plenum Press, London, 1986. John Wiley, New York, languages and monoids.
S. V. Polin. Morita-equivalence and Jacobson-Rees theorem for rings and monoids in closed categories. Dokl. AN SSSR, 218:32-34, 1974 (in Russian).
510 [Pol74b] [Pol74c] [Pol78] [PRE88] [Pre54] [PU/TR80]
Bibliography
S. V. Polin. Morita-equivalent categories. Vestnik Univ., pages 41-45, 1974 (in Russian).
Moskov.
S.V. Polin. To homological classification of small categories. Mat. Sb., 93:381-404, 1974 (in Russian). S. V. Polin. Injective hulls in functor categories. Issled., 48:69-79, 1978 (in Russian). M. Prest. Model Theory and Modules. Press, 1988. Mat.
Cambridge Univ.
G. B. Preston. Representation of inverse semigroups. London Math. Soc., 29:411-419, 1954.
J.
A. Pultr and V. Trnkova. Combinatorial, algebraic and topological representation of groups, semigroups and categories. Prague, 1980. M. S. Putcha. Linear Algebraic Monoids. versity Press, Cambridge, 1988. Cambridge Uni-
[PUT88] [Ra/Re/Th79]
S. A. Rankin, C. M. Reis, and G. Therrien. Right subdirectly irreducible semigroups. Pacific J. Math, 85:403-412, 1979. L. Redei. Theorie der endlich erzeugbaren Halbgruppen. Teubner, Leipzig, 1963. D. Rees. On semi-groups. 36:387-400, 1940. kommutativen Soc.,
[RED63] [Ree40] [Ren86a] [Ren86b] [Ren86c] [Ren91]
Proc. Cambridge Phil.
J. Renshaw. Extension and amalgamation in monoids and semigroups. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3), 52:119-141, 1986. J. Renshaw. Extension and amalgamation in rings. Proc. Roy. Soc. Edinburgh, 102A:103-115, 1986. J. Renshaw. Flatness and amalgamation in monoids. London Math. Soc. (2), 33:73-88, 1986. J. Renshaw. Perfect amalgamation basis. 141:78-92, 1991. J. J.
Algebra,
[Rho91]
J. L. Rhodes. Monoids acting on trees: elliptic and wreath products and the holonomy theorem for arbitrary monoids. In Monoids and semigroups appl., pages 371-392. World Scientific, Singapore, 1991.
Bibliography
511
[Sab59]
G. Sabidussi. The composition of graphs. Duke Math. J., 26:693-696, 1959. G. Sabidussi. 1961. Graph derivatives. Math. Z., 76:395-401,
[Sab61]
[SAL88]
V. N. Salij. Universal algebra and automata. versity, Saratov, 1988.
Saratov Uni-
[Sat76]
M. Satyanarayana. Quasi- and weakly-injective S-sy stems. Math. Nachr., 71:183-190, 1976. . . Schein. Embedding semigroups in generalized groups. Mat. 56., 55:379-400, 1961 (in Russian). . M. Schein. Representation of semigroups by means of binary relations. Mat. Sb., 60:293-303, 1963 (in Russian). . M. Schein. O-rings and LA-rings. Izv. Vyssh. Zaved., Mat., 2(51):111-122, 1966 (in Russian). Uchebn.
[Sch61]
[Sch63]
[Sch66]
[Sch69]
. M. Schein. Commutative semigroups where congruences form a chain. Bulletin de l'Academie Polonaise de Sciences, Serie des Sciences Math., Astr. et Phys., 17:523-527, 1969. . M. Schein. Injective monars over inverse semigroups. In Algebraic theory of semigroups. Szeged. Colloq. Math. Soc. Janos Bolyai, 20(1976), pages 519-544, 1976. H. Schubert. Kategorien. Springer, Berlin, 1970. Czechosl. Math. J.,
[Sch76]
[SCH70] [Sha60]
S. Schwarz. On dual semigroups. 10:201-230, 1960.
[SE/WI79]
Z. Semadeni and A. Wiweger. Einfhrung in die Theorie der Kategorien und Funktoren. Teubner, Leipzig, 1979. (Translation from Polish, Warsaw 1972 and 1977). A. C. Shershin. Introduction to Topological University Press of Florida, Miami, 1979. Semigroups.
[SHE79]
[SH/OV96]
L. N. Shevrin and A. J. Ovsyannikov. Semigroups and Their Subsemigroup Lattices. Kluwer, Dordrecht et. al, 1996. K. Shoji. Self-injective non-singular semigroups. In Proc. 3rd Sympos. Semigroups, Kansai, Kobe/Japan 1979 (1980), pages 69-78, 1979.
[Sho79b]
512
Bibliography
[Sho80a] [Sho80b]
. Shoji. Completely right injective semigroups. Japonica, 24:609-615, 1980.
Math.
K. Shoji. Injective hulls of certain right reductive semigroups as right S-systems. Mem. Fac. Sei., Shimane Univ., 14:25-34, 1980. K. Shoji. On right self-injective regular semigroups. In Semigroup theory and its related fields. Proc. 4th Symp. on Semigroups, Yamaguchi (1980), pages 80-85, 1980. K. Shoji. Right self-injective semigroups are absolutely closed. Mem. Fac. Sei. Shimane Univ., 14:35-39, 1980. K. Shoji. Note on self-injective non-singular semigroups. Semigroup Forum, 24:189-194, 1982. K. Shoji. On right self-injective regular semigroups. Semigroup Forum, 25:51-71, 1982. K. Shoji. On right self-injective regular semigroups, II. J. Austral. Math. Soc. ser. A, 34:182-198, 1983. K. Shoji. On self-injective semigroups satisfying the minimal conditions. Semigroup Forum, 28:47-60, 1984. K. Shoji. Absolute flatness of the full transformation semigroups. In Semigroups, Proc. 11th Symp. Kyoto/Japan 1987 (1981% pages 35-37, 1987. K. Shoji. Completions and injective hulls of E1-reflexive inverse semigroups. Semigroup Forum, 36:55-68, 1987. K. Shoji. Absolute flatness of the full transformation semigroups. J. Algebra, 118:477-486, 1988. K. Shoji. Amalgamation basis for semigroups. Math. Japonica, 35:473-483, 1990. K. Shoji. Bands and semigroup amalgamation bases. In M. Yamada and H. Tominaga, editors, Proceedings of the International Symposium on the Semigroup Theory and its Related Fields, Ritsumeikan University, Kyoto, Japan, 1990, pages 205-211, 1990. K. Shoji. On right self-injective, right non-singular semigroups. Memoirs of the Faculty of Science, Shimane University, 26:43-53, 1992.
[Sho80c]
[Sho80d] [Sho82a] [Sho82b] [Sho83] [Sho84] [Sho87a]
[Sho87b] [Sho88] [Sho90a] [Sho90b]
[Sho92]
Bibliography
513
[Sho93] [SHY91] [Sil85] [Sim78] [Sim80] [Sim83] [Sko67] [Sko69a] [Sko69b]
. Shoji. On multiplicative semigroups of von Neumann regular rings. Proc. Japan. Acad., 69:209-210, 1993. H. J. Shyr. Free monoids and languages. National ChungHsing University, Taichung, Taiwan, 1991. S. Sild. Right regular Rees matrix semigroups. Tartu Ul. Toimetised, 700:80-82, 1985. S. Sim. Free and projective ^-systems with zero. Math., 11:35-37, 1978. S. Sim. Quasi-injective hull of 5-systems. Abstracts Math. Soc., 1:167, 1980. S. Sim. Coproduct of weakly injective S-systems. Malaysian Math., 6(2):47-48, 1983. Nanta Amer. Bull.
L. A. Skornjakov. Homological classification of rings. Matem. Vesnik, 4:415-434, 1967 (in Russian). L. A. Skornjakov. Characterization of a category of acts. Mat. sb., 80:492-502, 1969 (in Russian). L. A. Skornjakov. On homological classification of monoids. Sib. Math. J., 10:1139 1143, 1969 (in Russian), correction ibid. 12(1971) 689. L. A. Skornjakov. Complements in the congruence lattice of a polygon over a commutative monoid. In Lattice Theory, Szeged (Hungary), 1974, pages 395-412, 1976. L. A. Skornjakov. Axiomatizability of a class of injective polygons. Trudy Sem. I.G. Petrovskii, 4:233-239, 1978. L. A. Skornjakov. Regularity of the wreath product of monoids. Semigroup Forum, 18:83-86, 1979. L. A. Skornjakov. General view on representation of monoids. Algebra i Logika, 20:571-574, 1981 (in Russian). L. A. Skornjakov. On the representation of monoids by multivalent mappings. In Algebra, Work Collect, dedicated to O. Yu. Schmidt, Moskva (1982), pages 151-157. Moskva, 1982 (in Russian). L. A. Skornjakov. On the wreath product of monoids. In Universal algebra and applications, Semester 1978, Banach Center Publ. 9, pages 181-185, 1982.
[Sko76]
[Sko78] [Sko79] [Sko81] [Sko82a]
[Sko82c]
514 [Sko84]
Bibliography L. A. Skornjakov. Injective objects in categories of representations of monoids. Mat. Zametki, 36:159-171, 1984 (in Russian). L. A. Skornjakov. On the injectivity of ordered left acts over monoids. Vestnik Moskov. Univ. Ser. I Mat. Mekh., 17-19, 1986 (in Russian). L. A. Skornjakov. The congruence lattice as an act over the endomorphism monoid. In Universal algebra, Colloq. Szeged/Hung. 1985, Colloq. Math. Soc. Janos Bolyai, 43:469-496, 1986. W. Specht. Eine Verallgemeinerung der Permutationsgruppen. Math. Z., 37:221-241, 1933. B. Stenstrm. Flatness and localization over monoids. Math. Nachr., 48:315-334, 1970. . Stenstrm. Rings of quotients. Springer, Berlin, 1975. A. A. Stepanova. Axiomatizibility and completeness of some classes of S-acts. Algebra i Logika, 30:583-594, 1991 (in Russian). A. A. Stepanova. Axiomatizibility and model completeness of the class of regular acts. Sib. Mat. J., 35:181-193, 1994 (in Russian). R. R. Stoll. Representations of finite simple semigroups. Duke Math. J., 11:251-265, 1944. M. G. Stone. Endomorphism action on congruences. Periodica Math. Hung., 25:153-160, 1992. A. K. Suschkewitsch. Uber die Darstellung nicht umkehrbarer Gruppen mittels der verallgemeinten Substitutionen. Math. Sb., 33:371-374, 1926. . K. Suschkewitsch. Uber die endlichen Gruppen ohne das Gesetz der eindeutigen Umkehrbarkeit. Math. Ann., 99:30-50, 1928. . K. Suschkewitsch. Theory of generalized groups. Kharkov, 1937 (in Russian). S. Talwar. Morita equivalence for semigroups. J. Austral. Math. Soc. SerA, 59:28-60, 1995.
[Sko86a]
[Sko86b]
[Spe33] [Ste70] [STE75] [Ste91]
[Ste94]
[Sto44] [Sto92] [Sus26]
[Sus28]
[SUS37] [Tal95]
Bibliography
515
[Tal96a]
S. Talwar. Strong Morita equivalence and a generalization of the Rees theorem. J. Algebra, 181:371-393, 1996. S. Talwar. Strong Morita equivalence and the synthesis theorem. Int. J. Alg. and Comp., 6:123-141, 1996. . Tamara. Japanese). Theory of Semigroups. Tokyo, 1972 (in
[Tal96b]
[TAM72]
[Tra85]
Lam Hach Tran. Characterizations of monoids by regular acts. Period. Math. Hung., 16:273-279, 1985. E. J. Jr. Tully. Representation of a semigroup by transformations acting transitively on a set. Amer. J. Math., 83:533 541, 1961. P. S. Venkatesan. Right (left) inverse semigroups. J. Algebra, 31:209-217, 1974. V. V. Wagner. Generalized groups. Dokl. Akad. Nauk 84:1119 1122, 1952. SSR,
[Tul61]
[Ven74]
[Wag52]
[Wag53]
V. V. Wagner. Theory of generalized heaps and generalized groups. Mat. Sb., 32:545-632, 1953 (in Russian). V. V. Wagner. Representations of ordered semigroups. Mat. Sb., 38:203-240, 1956 (in Russian), English transl.: Amer. Math. Soc. Transl. (2) 36:295-336, 1964. V. V. Wagner. The foundations of differential geometry and modern algebra. In Proceedings of the 4-th All Union Mathematical congress, pages 17-29. Leningrad, 1963 (in Russian). R. Ware. Endomorphism rings of projective modules. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., 155:233-256, 1971. R. J. Warne. Orthogroups and generalizations. In M. Yamada and H. Tominaga, editors, Proc. of the Intern. Symposium on Semigroup Theory, Kyoto, 1990, pages 233-241, 1990. R. J. Warne. Super quasi-adequate semigroups. J. Math., 22:299-312, 1991. Tamkang
[Wag56]
[Wag63]
[War71]
[War90]
[War91]
[Wei80]
H. J. Weinert. On S-sets and semigroups of quotients. Semigroup Forum, 19:1-78, 1980.
516 [Wel76] [Wel80] [Wie88] [Wil96] [WIL98] [WIS91]
Bibliography
C. Wells. Some applications of the wreath product construction. Amer. Math. Monthly, 83:317-338, 1976. C. Wells. A Krohn-Rhodes theorem for categories. J. Algebra, 64:37-45, 1980. W. Wiegandt. On splitting torsion theories of acts. Contrib. General Alg., 6:311-316, 1988. E. Wilkeit. Graphs with regular endomorphism monoid. Arch. Math., 66:344-352, 1996. E. Wilkeit. Algebraische Darstellung von Petrinetzen. versitt Oldenburg, Oldenburg, 1998. Uni-
R. Wisbauer. Foundation of Module and Ring Theory. Gordon and Breach, Philadelphia et al. 1991. (Translation from German, Mnchen, 1988). Weimin Xue. Rings with Morita Duality. Lecture Notes in Mathematics, 1523. Springer, Berlin et al., 1992. M. Yamada. Introduction to Semigroups. Tokyo, 1976 (in Japanese). J. Zelmanowitz. Regular modules. Soc., 163:341-355, 1972. Trans. Amer. Math.
[Xue92] [YAM76] [Zel72]
Index of symbols
No Q R C 1*1
V{X)
dom ran
B(X)
Map(X,Y)
T{X) S{X)
Cy
VT(X) x Pi {xi)iel (X,<) A{y\yeY} a Ab V{y\yeY} aVb i^lXi
Vx
PK
{) pe
2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 5 5 5 5
P(A) p(a)
[a\P
[a] ()
-1 p\x> or <* P pl p
ker</? End(G) Send(G)

Kn
p(l) 3
Is s"1
rn x+ X*
gcd
M(G, (Mat S Zr S(X)
x
, ,
n
P)
(K),)
6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 7 7 7 7 8 9 9 10 10 10 11 11 15 15 17 17 17 17 18 18 18 18 18 18
518
Index of symbols
<Sn 1
s
S
s
s
(A) ker Im
C(S) E(S)
CS(R) M(m, r) (u,v) sCt sKt sjt sHt sVt V{s) Tr(A) T\A) sA
S
op
Os Horn (A s , Bs) Horns {A, B) H o m ( 5 A SB) Hom s (A, ) End (As) Aut(As) End A Aut A PW
()
As/Bs kerf
Pa
As Con(T^s)
18 19 19 19 19 19 21 21 25 25 25 28 28 31 31 31 31 31 33 42 42 43 44 49 50 50 50 50 51 51 51 51 51 52 52 52 53 53 54 55
tAS/TBS
C
# (U) (u) V
M\I\{S)
Ob c Mor c ( A , B ) Mor C Act - S S- A c t Act0 - S S - Act0 T-Act-S A c t -S S - Act Set SetRei Sgr Absgr Mon Abmon Grp Abgrp Rin Rini R Mod Mod R - Vec - fdVec Graph Sgraph Poset
C
op
CxD V c?
56 56 57 59 63 63 76 76 77 79 79 79 81 81 81 81 81 81 81 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 82 83 83 84 84
Index of symbols
2
519 113 113 113 118 123 126 126 128 128 130 139 146 149 153 156 156 159 160 162 162 162 162 163 163 165 166 167 167 172 176 179 193 197 202 207 239 239 242 242
Id c
Set'
c J D
_OP
L/J L-J
Hom(As, - s ) Hom(As,-5) Hom(-s, Bs) H o r n (f,Bs) H o r n (~s,rBs) H o r n {r-,rBs) (s)* (s-r s(Asy (s(Asyys Hom(s, -s) H o r n (f,g) Hom(-, R-) Sx Xs
Morc(, B) More(^4, - ) Morc(-,-) Hom(J4s,/i-)
=/ Xi fei Xi ((Qi)tei) 6/ fi Ufr i e / Xi Ufel X^ UiX

IIi e /
90 90 91 91 91 92 92 92 92 93 93 93 93 94 94 94 94 94 94 95 95 95 96 96 96 97 97 105 105 105 105 107 107 108 108 108 108 108 109 109
Ih
/C Eq(/i,/2) Coeq(/i,/2)
Xi Uu X2
nLx> p(a,b) F(I) tr Ys(Xs) Cof (/) cotrXs(ys) As sM a<S>m f9 r(As C M), Ass~
-sOsM rAs s-
MT S~T
R ~S
(.fP9)
(R wr
Rwr S R wr
(idfl wr < 5 1 id^) (id wr ids I a)
Xi IliG/ fi II
PWI(As) = {xs^ = yti I Si,U S, 1 F 2 Fi = F2 F -\G {F.G}
Index of symbols 272 272 272 272 326 329 343 398 399 405 409 {F.G} Copow^ Pow/i C ~D C ~D MT (a,b) [ib,a} (S,T,sAT,TBs,T,) ei e 2 c - Proj - S
S
409 413 414 422 422 439 441 441 441 445 451
Index
A -injective 207 abelian category 137 abelian semigroup 25 absolutely 1-pure 208 absolutely flat 349 absolutely pure 208 act 44 304 act-inverse elements act-regular 300 acts injectively 46 acts surjectively 46 additive category 137 adjoining equivalence 405, 409, 410 adjoint 94 adjunction of an identity 19 admissible R- act 174 almost pure 214 17 alphabet 126 amalgam amalgamation base 359 amalgamated coproduct 126 annihilator congruence 53 antihomomorphism of 21 semigroups 43 antirepresentation 3 antisymmetric relation aperiodic 29 ascending chain condition for right ideals 321 associative 15 atom 39 atomic 39 automorphism 21, 51 automorphism group 51
balanced category band basis bicyclic monoid bifunctor bihomomorphism biisomorphism bijection bijective mapping bimorphism binary relation bipartite
84 25 22, 67, 139 18 90 55 55 3 3 84 2 10
C cancellable 30 cancellative 30 52 canonical epimorphism canonical strong decomposition 13 canonical strong factor graph 12 canonical surjection 6., 21 cartesian product 4 cartesian product of a family 4 categorical dualization of concepts 83 category 79 category of pointed sets 152 Cayley color graph 24 center 25 centralizer 25 chain 4 character act 239 character homomorphism 239 class with respect to 6 Clifford semigroup 37 coamalgam 128
522 coamalgamated product 128 cobasis 149 cocomplete 123 codomain 79 coefficient 207 coefficient mapping 76 coequalizer 122 coequalizer induced 123 coequalizer situation 122 coessential epimorphism 282 coflat 203 cofree 402 cofree functor 152 cofree object 149 cogenerator 101 cokernel 122 cokernel pair 121 colored edge 10 colored graph 9 coloring 9 colors of the edges 10 column monomial matrix 77 combined projections 133 commutative 25, 80 commutative square 80 commuting pseudoinverse 37 compatible relation 56 compatible subset 314 complement 3 complete category 118 complete graph 10 complete lattice 5 complete lower semilattice 4 4 complete upper semilattice completely disconnected graph 10 completely reducible 74 completely regular 37 completely simple 29 composition 6 composition of functors 90 concrete category 80 Condition (ALU) 361 Condition (A) 285
Index Condition (BF) 224 Condition (D) 285 Condition (E) 224 Condition (FQ) 314 Condition (G) 329 Condition (K) 372 Condition (LU) 230 Condition (L/) 345 Condition (L) 341 condition of naturality 399 Condition (P) 224 Condition (Q) 319 Condition (RAI) 332 Condition (R/) 345 Condition (R) 341 Condition (tcu) 336 Condition (T) 384 Condition (W) 234 congruence 51, 55 congruence closure 57 congruence compact 214 congruence extension property 60 connected 10 consistent system of equations 208 constant 207 constant mapping 3 contravariant functor 90 94 contravariant Hom-functor contravariant Mor-functor 97 converse relation 6 copower functor 413 copower object 108 coproduct 108 coproduct complete 108 coproduct induced 108 coproduct of morphisms 109 core of the amalgam 126 coretract 84 coretraction 84 coseparator 101 cotrace 153 covariant 92 covariant functor 89
Index
523 equalizer situation equationally compact equivalence equivalence closure equivalence functor equivalence generetad by equivalence relation equivalent categories equivalent Morita idempotents essential extension exact category extends extension extension of morphisms 117 214 5 5, 7 422 5 5 422 445 190 137 3 84 100
covariant Mor-functor cover cyclic 5-act cyclic semigroup
97 282 63 20
D (5-semilinear homomorphism 54 decomposable 65 decomposition 65 dense 472 dense (representative) functor 97 diagonal 133 diagonal functor 411 diagonal relation 5 diagram 80 directed colored multigraph 10 directed graph 9 direct limit 164 divisible act 195 divisible by 195 divisible extension 197 domain 2, 4, 79 double S-dual 94 dual equivalence of categories 422 dualizing 92 dualizing functors 94 dual 471 dual category 83 dual equivalence functor 422 dually equivalent categories 422 edge embedding empty mapping empty word endomorphism endomorphism monoid epimorphic family epimorphism equalizer equalizer flat equalizer induced
9 84 4 17 21, 51 51 109 84 117 223 118
F factor act 52 factor object 84 factor semigroup 20 factor set 6 faithful 46 faithful functor 97 fg-weakly injective 204 fg-weakly self-injective 310 finitely approximated 132 finitely generated 52, 63 finitely presented 72 fixed element 49 fixed object of the functor 454 flat 223 forgetful functor 92 free 22, 402 free act 67 free functor 143 free monoid 17 free object 138 Free Representation Extension Property 359 free semigroup with the basis 17 free .S-extension 164 free word monoid 17 free word semigroup over the set 17
524 freely generated 139 freely generating elements 139 full embedding 97 full functor 97 full permutation group 18 full subcategory 81 full transformation monoid 17 functor 90, 92 G generalized act wreath product 179 generalized lexicographic product 12 generated by 5 generated subsemigroup 19 generating element 20 generating elements 19 , 63 generating set 63 generator 101 generator idempotent 146 generator induced 460 global overact 48 graph homomorphism 9 graph isomorphism 9 greatest lower bound 4 Green's equivalence relations on a biact 61 Green's relations 31 group 16 group of the idempotent 26 groupoid 14 height 26 Hom-functor in the first variable 94 Hom-functor in the second variable 92 homomorphism of left S-acts 50 homomorphism of right 5-acts 50 Homomorphism Theorem for acts 53 Homomorphism Theorem for sets 8
Index I 7-cofree 149 |/|-cofree 149 /-free 139 |/|-free 139 -th injection 108 -th projection 105 ideal 20 idempotent 25 idempotent semigroup 25 identical functor 90 identity 15 identity mapping 3 identity morphism 79 inclusion 84 inclusion functor 90 indecomposable 65 index 26 index mapping 76 induced by a full and faithful functor 461 induced by a full embedding 461 induced by a generator 460 initial object 88 injective 100 injective act 184 injective envelope 193 injective mapping 3 injective relative to the inclusion 185 injector 97 input alphabet 45 input monoid 45 inverse 15, 33 inverse relation 6 inverse semigroup 35 inverse acts 304 invertible 15 isomorphic 21, 50, 84 isomorphism 21, 84 J join
Index kernel kernel congruence kernel congruence of the homomorphism kernel equivalence kernel pair
525 left unitary submonoid 59 left universal construction with respect to 411 left zero 15 left zero morphism 87 left zero semigroup 19 left-left adjoint contravariant functors 409 11 lexicographic product lifting of morphisms 100 linearly ordered set 4 link 329 local left zero 209 loop 9 lower bound 4 lower semilattice 4 mapping maximal element meet minimal condition minimal element monocyclic monocyclic right act monogenic monoid monoid homomorphism monomorphic family monomorphism Mor-functor in two variables Morita context Morita context derived from Morita dual Morita dual monoids Morita equivalent monoids Morita equivalent semigroups Morita induced Morita invariant Morita subcategory Morita triple of e in S morphism multifunctor
8, 117 52 21 8 115
L large 190 Latin squares 16 lattice 5 lattice of relations 5 least upper bound 4 left monoid 231 left S- act 43 left absolutely flat 349 left adjoint 405 left almost regular 336, 337 left annihilator ideal 329 left Baer monoid 174 left cancellable 30 left cancellative 30 left chain semigroup 39 left collapsible 258 left compatible relation 56 left congruence 20 left group 30 left ideal 20 left identity 15 left inverse 15, 36 left invertible 15 left Rees congruence 20 left Rees semigroup 39 left regular band 39 left reversible 29 left Rickart monoid 174 left semisimple semigroup 29 left simple 29 left total relation 3 left unique relation 3 left (uniquely) solvable 30 left unit 405
3 4 4 4 4 52 52 20 16 20 106 84 97 441 442 471 471 439 454 461 450 452 445 79 90
526 multiple amalgam 126 multiple coamalgam 128 multiple product category 83 multiple pullback 115 multiple pushout 121 multiplication 14 multiplication of morphisms 79 multiplication table 14, 45 mutually inverse dual equivalence functors 422 mutually inverse equivalence functors 422 natural embedding 84 natural equivalence 399 natural partial ordering 25 natural transformation 398 naturally equivalent functors 399 neighbor 9 (von Neumann) regular element 33 (von Neumann) regular semigroup 33 neutral element 15 next state function 45 nil 29 nilpotent 29 object opposite category opposite monoid order order divisible ordering orthodox orthogonol complement
Index partitioning subobject paste in path connecting period periodic permutations poset power functor power object power set preserves a given property preserves composition preserves identities preserves products principal ideal principal left ideal principal right ideal principal (right, left) ideal semigroup principally injective principally self-injective principally weakly flat product product category product complete product induced product of morphisms product of subsets product of the family projective projective coordinates projective cover pseudoinverse pullback flat pullback induced pullback of the pair pullback situation pure pushout induced pushout of the pair pushout situation pwi-extension 134 10 10 26 29 3 4 414 105 2 98 89 89 400 30 30 30 30 200 310 223 79 83 105 105 107 14 104 100 279 282 33 223 115 115 114 208 121 121 120 202
79 83 44
26
40 4 34 470
partial mapping partial ordering partial right S-act partially ordered set partition
4 4 49 4 6
Index
527 right adjoint 405 right almost regular 307 right almost regular monoid 307 right cancellable 30 right cancellative 30 right compatible relation 56 right compatible subset 314 right congruence 20 right fg-special 322 right group 30 right hereditary 378 right ideal 20 right identity 15 right inverse 15, 36 right invertible 15 right multiplication 43 right nil 29 right nilpotent 29 right noetherian 321 right Ore condition 29 right perfect 285 right Rees congruence 20 right Rees semigroup 39 right regular band 39 right reversible 29 right self-injective 310 right semihereditary 378 right semisimple semigroup 29 right simple 29 right special 322 right total relation 3 right unique relation 3 right (uniquely) solvable semigroup 30 right unit 405 right universal construction with respect to 411 right zero morphism 87 right zero semigroup 19 right zero 15 right-right adjoint contravariant functors 409 rigid 9
Q
quasi-inj ective quasi-pro j ective 194 290
R range 2 rectangular band 25 Rees congruence 52 Rees equivalence 5 Rees factor 52 Rees factor biact 56 Rees matrix semigroup 18 Rees semigroup 39 reflection 133 reflects the property 98 reflexive 472 reflexive relation 3 regular 221 regular act 300 regular core 302 regular epimorphisms 427 regular pair 301 regular Rees matrix semigroup 18 relation 2,6 representable by an object 403 representation 43 Representation Extension Property 359 residue class group 18 restriction 3, 6, 90 retract 84 retraction 84 reverses composition 89 right absolutely injective monoids 332 right e-cancellable 231 right ideal perfect 291 right L -reductive 342 right monoid 231 right S- act 43 right absolutely flat 349 right absolutely pure 322 right act 43
528 s S- act congruence S-automata S-balanced S-dual S-homomorphism ^-isomorphism S'-operands 5'-polygons ^-sets 5"-systems S'-tensorial S7-tossing second adjoint selfdual semiautomaton semigroup semigroup act semigroup homomorphism semilattice of semigroups semilattice of subsemigroups semilinear isomorphism semilinearily induced semisimple separating family of congruences separator set of states simple act simple graph simple semigroup simultaneously right cancellable sink small category solution solvable standard wreath product strong graph homomorphism strongly faithful strongly flat strongly left coherent strongly left reversible
Index strongly reversible strongly right reversible subact subcategory of the category subdirect decomposition subdirect product subdirectly irreducible subdirectly reducible submonoid subobject subsemigroup support surjective mapping surjector symmetric relation system of equations - S-biact 5-compatible closure tensor functor tensor product 156, tensor relation terminal object torsion free torsionless total ordering total relation trace transformation transition systems transitive closure transitive relation two-sided congruence two-sided ideal two-sided Rees congruence type p 355 355 49 81 129 129 130 130 19 84 19 343 3 97 3 207
51 43 156 94 50 50 43 43 43 43 156 157 94 472 45 16 44 20 37 37 54 461 29 130 101 45 50 9 29 199 49 80 208 208 172 9 46 223 274 355
54 56 163 159 156 88 218 472 4 5 146 3 43 7 3 20 20 20 40
U undirected colored multigraph 10 undirected graph 9 unitary left 5-acts 454 unitary representation 43
Index
529 weakly projective weakly right absolutely flat weakly self-injective well-ordered with local units wreath product 166, 170, zero zero morphism zero object zero semigroup Zorn's Lemma 291 340 310 4 454 176
unitary 5-act upper semilattice V variable vector system vertex
44 4 207 43 10 340 223 200, 205 flat 340
weakly absolutely flat weakly flat weakly injective weakly left absolutely
15, 49 87 88 19 5

Monoids, Acts and Categories.

Caricato da

Informazioni sul documento

Copyright

Formati disponibili

Condividi questo documento

Condividi o incorpora il documento

Opzioni di condivisione

Hai trovato utile questo documento?

Questo contenuto è inappropriato?

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

Monoids, Acts and Categories.

Caricato da

Copyright:

Formati disponibili

de Gruyter Expositions in Mathematics 29

de Gruyter Expositions in Mathematics

Monoids, Acts and Categories

Mati Kilp Ulrich Knauer Alexander V. Mikhalev

Bibliography Index of symbols Index

About this book

Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories

1 Sets and relations

I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories

1 Sets and relations

I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories

1 Sets and relations

Equivalence relations and partitions

I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories

Inverse relation, restriction and composition

o r = { (, ) G X x I there exists y G X with y and y pz},

1 Sets and relations

Transitive and equivalence closure

Lemma 1.5. If B(X), (B(X),<) containing p. Proof. If (x,y),(y,z) (y, ) pn and

then there exist m , such that (x,y) pm,

I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories

Kernel equivalence and Homomorphism Theorem for sets

1 Sets and relations

I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories

where = { { 1,2 }, { 2,3 } }, Aut(P 3 ) = S2, permuting 1 and 3,

and End ( i f ) contains the additional elements / 1 2 y 2 2 3 3 J' / 1 2 ^ 3 2 3 3 / '

Consider the path P ^ with one loop at the middle vertex

Send (P 3 ( 1 ) ) contains the elements of A u t ( P g ^ ) and / 1 2 V 1 2 3 \ 1

and End(P3^) contains the elements of S e n d ( 1 ' ) and /I 2 2 2 3 \ / 1 3 ' I 2 2 2 3 \

Lexicographic products of graphs

I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories

Example 1.14. Take P3 from Example 1.1.12 and K2, then

Strong factor graphs

2 Groupoids, semigroups and monoids

2 Groupoids, semigroups and monoids

I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories

Groupoids and multiplication tables

Identities and zeros in groupoids

Then e " = e'e" = e'.

Semigroups and monoids

I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories

Examples of groupoids, semigroups, monoids and groups

(a) (Z, - ) where (21,22)

2 Groupoids, semigroups and monoids

with composition of mappings, i.e.

If |X| = < oo we will use the notation Tn instead of (T(X),

into a semigroup. This semigroup X+

is called the free

be the free semigroup with the basis X. Then X* = X+ U

{ } is called the free

z r = { [0], [ 1 ] , . . . , [r - 1] } , [x] = {ueZ\u-x and [x] + [y] = [x + y}.

If |X| = < oo we will use the notation Sn instead of (<S(X), o).

2 Groupoids, semigroups and monoids

Adjunction of identities and zeros in semigroups

Subsemigroups, generating sets and ideals

I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories

Congruences and factor semigroups

2 Groupoids, semigroups and monoids

I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories

2 Groupoids, semigroups and monoids

with a basis X is isomorphic to

Cay ley's Theorem for semigroups

for G S1. Clearly, As e T(SJ). A s ,Aj G T. Then (A s A t )(x) = Xs(Xt(x))

I Elementary properties of monoids, acts and categories