Groupoid Factorizations in the Semigroup of Binary Systems
Hiba F. Fayoumi
University of Toledo
2801 Bancroft Street, Toledo, Ohio, 43606, U.S.A.
[email protected]
Abstract.
Let be a groupoid (binary algebra) and denote
the collection of all groupoids defined on . We introduce two methods of
factorization for this binary system under the binary groupoid product
“” in the semigroup . We conclude that a strong
non-idempotent groupoid can be represented as a product of its similar- and signature- derived factors. Moreover, we show that a
groupoid with the orientation property is a product of its orient-
and skew- factors. These unique factorizations can be useful for
various applications in other areas of study. Application to algebras such
as -algebra are widely given throughout this paper.
Algebraic structures play a vital role in mathematical applications such as
information science, network engineering, computer science, cell biology,
etc. This encourages sufficient motivation to study abstract algebraic
concepts and review previously obtained results. One such concept of
interest to many mathematicians over the past two decades or so is that of a
simple yet very interesting notion of a single set with one binary
operation, historically known as magma and more recently referred to as
groupoid. Bruck [8] published the book,“A Survey of
Binary Systems” in which the theory of groupoids, loops,
quasigroups, and several algebraic structures were discussed. Borvka in [7] explained the foundations for the theory of
groupoids, set decompositions and their application to binary systems.
Given a binary operation “” on
a non-empty set , the groupoid is a
generalization of the very well-known structure of a group. H. S. Kim and J.
Neggers in [33] investigated the structure where is the collection of all
binary systems (groupoids or algebras) defined on a non-empty set along
with an associative binary product such that for all , . They recognized that the left-zero-semigroup serves as the
identity of this semigroup. The present author in [11] introduced the
notion of the center in the semigroup , and proved that , if and only
if is locally-zero. Han and Kim in [13] introduced
the notion of hypergroupoids , and showed that
is a supersemigroup of the semigroup via the
identification . They proved that is a -algebra.
In this paper, we investigate the following problem:
Main Problem:
Consider the semigroup . Let the left-zero-semigroup be denoted as . Given a groupoid (binary system) , is it possible to find two groupoid-factors and such that
If so,
Problem 1(Uniqueness).
Are the corresponding groupoid-factors:
(1):
Distinct, i.e., ?
(2):
Unique, i.e., if , is it possible for such that and ?
(3):
Different from , i.e., and ?
(4):
Different from the left-zero-semigroup, i.e., and ?
Problem 2(Derivation).
How do we find the groupoid-factors? Are they:
(1):
Derived (related to, based off of, dependent
on) from: the parent groupoid ?
(2):
Derived from the identity ?
Problem 3(Factorization).
If we use a certain method to find the two groupoid-factors, what is the
nature of this factorization?
(1):
Is it unique?
(2):
When is it commutative?
We begin answering these questions by introducing two methods for factoring
a random groupoid in using the product “”. We will show that both methods result in
unique factorizations (Problem 3.1) of a given groupoid and
hence we answer Problem 1.2 with a definite yes! Section two
provides some definitions and preliminary ideas which are necessary in this
context. We also present a summarized table of “logic” algebras for a clear view. Section three describes - and -factorizations, which comprises the first method (method-1) of
factoring. In fact, method-1 factors a groupoid
by obtaining two derived factors from it (Problem 2.1)
and from the left-zero-semigroup (Problem 2.2), the signature- and similar-factors, respectively. We prove that a
strong groupoid has a commutative method-1 factorization (Problem 3.2). The possibility of this first method is shown to be feasible and
produces non-trivial decompositions (Problem 1.4), however, it
is restricted to non-idempotent groupoids only. Hence, section four
introduces an - and a -factorization, which
constitutes our second method (method-2). We will demonstrate that the
latter method is sufficient for idempotent as well as non-idempotent
groupoids. In addition, an interesting outcome of method-2 is that one of
the factors is not derived from the parent groupoid (Problems 2.1 and 2.2) while the other factor is; we name them
orient- and skew-factors, respectively. We show that a
given groupoid with , for
all in , has a commutative method-2 factorization (Problem 3.2). Section five briefly applies our two methods to some of the
algebras listed in section two; and discusses a promising relationship to
graph theory.
Finally, in our last section we generalize and summarize our findings that
certain groupoids/algebras decompose into distinct groupoids via an operation on the parent groupoid and the left-zero-semigroup
simultaneously, which is a generalization of our first method; or an operation which acts on the parent-groupoid and the
left-zero-semigroup separately, hence resulting in a generalization of our
second method.
Notions of “method”-composite,
“method”-normal,
“factor”-prime and
“partially”-left/right-prime are used to classify and analyze various groupoids as well as other familiar
algebras. For simplicity, the left-zero-semigroup will be denoted as .
2. Preliminaries
A groupoid [8]
consists of a non-empty set together with a binary operation where for all .
A groupoid is strong [33] if and
only if for all ,
(2.1)
A groupoid is idempotent if
for all .
Example 2.1 [12] Let and let for any . Then is a
strong groupoid. To visualize this, let’s consider the associated Cayley
product table for “”. For
simplicity, its partial table is displayed below which shows that for all and for all :
0
1
2
3
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
0
0
0
2
2
1
0
0
0
3
3
2
1
0
0
4
4
3
2
1
0
Hence, the strong or anti-commutative property holds for all .
Example 2.2 [12] Let be the set of all real numbers and let . If we define a binary operation “” on by ,
then the groupoid is not strong, since implies , but .
A groupoid is a left-zero-semigroup if
for all . Similarly, is a right-zero-semigroup if for all . For the theory of semigroups, we
refer to [10, 30].
(ii) for any in , is either a
left-zero-semigroup or a right-zero-semigroup.
Example 2.3 Given a set , let
the binary operation “” be
defined by the following Cayley product table:
0
1
2
0
0
0
2
1
1
1
1
2
0
2
2
Then the binary system is locally-zero
and has the following subtables:
010001111211122202002202
where is a
left-zero-semigroup; is also
a left-zero-semigroup; and is
a right-zero-semigroup.
The notion of the semigroup was introduced by J.
Neggers and H.S. Kim in [33]. Given a non-empty set , let
denote the collection of all groupoids , where is a map. Given elements and of , define a binary product
“” on these groupoids as
follows:
(2.2)
where
(2.3)
for all , . This turns into a semigroup with
identity, the left-zero-semigroup, and an analog of negative one in the
right-zero-semigroup.
The present author [11] showed that a groupoid commutes, relative to the product “”, if and only if any 2-element subset of is a subgroupoid that is either a left-zero-semigroup or
a right-zero-semigroup. Thus, is an element of
the center of the semigroup , defined
as follows:
In turn, several properties were obtained.
Theorem 2.4 [33] The collection of all binary systems (groupoids or algebras)
defined on is a semigroup, i.e., the operation
“” as defined in
general is associative. Furthermore, the left-zero-semigroup is an identity
for this operation.
Proposition 2.5 [33] Let be the right-zero-sermigroup on . Then , the collection of all
strong groupoids on .
Proposition 2.6 [11] The left-zero
semigroup and right-zero semigroup on X are both in .
Corollary 2.7. [11] The collection of all
locally-zero groupoids on forms a subsemigroup of .
Proposition 2.8 [11]Let be a locally-zero groupoid. Then , the
left-zero-semigroup on .
Let be an element of the semigroup , we say that is a unit if and only if there exists an element such that
(2.4)
Subsequently, by Proposition 2.8, a locally-zero-groupoid is a unit in .
The logic-based /-algebras were introduced by Iséki and Imai
in [15] as propositional calculus, but later in [16] developed
into the present notion of / which have since then been
investigated thoroughly by numerous researchers. J. Neggers and H. S. Kim
generalized a -algebra [26] by introducing the notion of a -algebra in [32]. They also introduced -algebras in [2].C. B. Kim and H. S. Kim generalized a -algebra by defining a -algebra in [21].
An algebra of type is a -algebra [2]if for all ,
it satisfies the following axioms:
B1:
,
B2:
, and
B:
.
An algebra of type is a -algebra [21]if for all ,
it satisfies (B1), (B2), and
BG:
.
An algebra of type is a -algebra [36]if for all ,
it satisfies (B2) and:
I:
,
BH:
and implies .
Example 2.9 [36] Let . Define a
binary operation “” on by
the following product table:
0
1
a
b
0
0
0
a
a
1
1
0
a
a
a
a
a
0
0
b
b
a
1
0
Then is a -algebra.
A -algebra is a -algebra [26] if it satisfies the next additional axiom:
K:
for all .
An algebra of type is a -algebra provided that for all , it satisfies (B1), (K) and
(BH).
A -algebra is strong if for all :
d-3′:
implies
Otherwise we consider the -algebra to be exceptional. For more
information on -algebras we refer to [5, 6, 32, 31].
Example 2.10 [32] Let where “” is
defined by the following Cayley table:
0
1
2
3
4
0
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
0
1
2
2
2
0
3
0
3
3
3
2
0
3
4
4
4
1
1
0
Then is a -algebra which is not a -algebra. For details
on -algebras, see [14, 26, 36].
Y. B. Jun, E. H. Roh and H. S. Kim in [18] introduced the notion of
a -algebra which is a generalization of -algebras. There
are many other generalizations of similar algebras. We summarize several
properties which are used as axioms to define each algebraic structure . Let
be an algebra of type , for any :
B1:
,
B2:
,
B:
BG:
BM:
BH:
and ,
BF:
,
BN:
,
BO:
,
BP1:
,
BP2:
,
Q:
,
CO:
,
BZ:
,
K:
,
I:
,
BI:
.
An algebra of type is classified according to a
combination of the above axioms as noted in “Figure
1” below. For instance, is a -algebra [34] if satisfies in (B1) and (BI). For detailed
information on each, please see [2-6, 14-26, 31, 32, 34, 36].
Figure 1. Comparison of Algebras
3. Similar-Signature Factorization
In this section, we present a unique factorization of a given groupoid by
“deriving” two factors from it and from
the left-zero-semigroup simultaneously.
Let be a groupoid of finite order, i.e., . Then is the diagonal function of such that where ,
for all .
Example 3.1 Let and be a -algebra and an idempotent algebra, respectively.
Then and ; or and
for all .
Two binary systems and are said to be similar if they have the same diagonal function, that is, .
Two binary systems and are said to be signature if
(i) when and
(ii) for all .
Let be a groupoid. Derive groupoids and from and , simultaneously, such that for all ,
(3.1)
The groupoids and are
said to be the signature- and the similar-factors of , respectively, denoted by
and . The product “” is associative but not commutative. Hence, for , we may have a -factorization such that
(3.2)
or an -factorization such that
(3.3)
By the equations in 3.1, it follows that for any given
groupoid ,
(1)
is similar to
while is similar to ; and
(2)
is signature with while is signature with .
Proposition 3.2The similar-factor of a groupoid
is strong.
Proof. Given , let .
(i)
If , then .
(ii)
If and for any . Then and . Thus, , a contradiction.
Therefore, is strong.
Example 3.3 Let be the -algebra defined in Example 2.9. In accordance with equation 3.1, derive its signature- and similar- factors and , respectively. Let groupoids and be given. We obtain:
0
1
a
b
0
0
0
a
a
1
1
1
a
a
a
a
a
a
0
b
b
a
1
b
and
0
1
a
b
0
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
1
a
a
a
0
a
b
b
b
b
0
It remains to verify that and/or . This will be discussed in more detail in the next section.
However, there is a very interesting fact in this example: the two factors
are distinct from each other, their parent groupoid, and the
left-zero-semigroup. In summary:
This is important since it is not always the case that all three
distinctions hold as the following example demonstrates.
Example 3.4 Let where “” is
defined by the following Cayley table:
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
2
2
2
0
Then is a -algebra. Derive its
signature- and similar-factors and , respectively, in accordance to the equations in 3.1. Let
and , hence:
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
and
0
1
2
0
0
0
0
1
1
0
1
2
2
2
0
Here we observe immediately that the similar-factor is equal to and the
signature-factor is equal to . Thus this decomposition is basically a trivial
factorization, i.e.,
and
3.1. -Factorization
In this subsection, we explore a -factorization of a given groupoid in . In the next subsection,
a -factorization is considered, where the order of the product of the
two factors is “reversed”. We emphasize
that such factorization is unique and not necessarily reversible. Then, we
classify a given groupoid as - and/or-composite, -composite or -normal; and as signature- or similar-prime.
Example 3.1.1 Let be the set of all integers and let “” be the usual subtraction on . Then is a -algebra since it satisfies axioms B1, B2 and BH as seen from its partial table below:
-2
-1
0
1
2
3
4
-2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
-6
-1
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
-5
0
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
-4
1
4
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
-3
2
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
-2
3
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
-1
4
7
6
5
4
3
2
1
0
Define two binary operations “” and “” on such that for all ,
Then it is easy to check that and and . Thus we have a -factorization of
A groupoid is said to be signature-primeif , and
is said to be similar-prime if . Alternatively, if is
neither signature- nor similar-prime, then is said to be
(1) UA-composite if ;
(2) -composite if .
Consequently, is said to be -composite
if both and hold.
Example 3.1.2 Let where the product “” is defined by the following Cayley table:
0
1
2
3
4
0
3
2
2
1
1
1
1
3
3
2
3
2
3
3
0
3
0
3
1
0
1
1
2
4
1
1
2
4
2
If we derive its signature- and similar- factors
and as in (3.1), then we have their product as follows:
We can clearly conclude that since and hence such a groupoid does not have a -factorization. Moreover, is not a strong groupoid since . In
turn, we have the next theorem.
Theorem 3.1.3A strong groupoid has a -factorization.
Proof. Let , the
collection of all strong groupoids defined on , and let where and . Then for all . It follows that when ;
and , when .
Next, we show that . Given , if
, then . Assume , we claim that is not possible:
(i) If , then .
Since is strong, we obtain , a contradiction.
(ii) If , then , since .
Therefore , since . This proves
that .
Corollary 3.1.4The factorization in Theorem
3.1.3 is unique.
Proof. Let be a strong groupoid with a -factorization such that
where and . Let where and . For any , we have , and when . Hence . Similarly, if , then .
When , we have , proving that .
Example 3.1.5 [32] Consider the -algebra from Example 2.10. Observe that is a strong -algebra. Let and , such that and are its
derived signature- and similar-factors, respectively, as
in . Next, verify that :
Indeed we can see that for any . For instance:
Moreover, since and ,
then is -composite.
3.2. -Factorization
In this subsection we reverse the order of the signature- and
similar-factors of any groupoid in . We conclude that an arbitrary groupoid will always have an -factorization. However, this
factorization might be trivial and hence the groupoid is either noted as
signature- or similar-prime. Otherwise, if the
decomposition is not trivial, we say the groupoid is -composite.
Example 3.2.1 Let be the
strong -algebra defined in Examples 2.10 and 3.1.5 in which we determined
that is -composite. Similarly, we can take
the product of and as follows:
By routine checking of for any , we conclude that has an -factorization. Moreover, we can see that this
particular groupoid has both, a non-trivial - and -factorization.
Therefore, is -composite.
Remark 3.2.2 Note that does not imply that is -composite. It simply implies that the factors of commute. This motivates the next definition.
A groupoid is said to be -normalif it admits a - and an -factorization, i.e., if
(i) , and
(ii) .
Theorem 3.2.3Any given groupoid has an -factorization, i.e., if , then
Proof. Let and let where and . Then for all . It follows that
when , and
when . Given , if , then . Assume , then . This proves that .
Corollary 3.2.4The factorization in Theorem
3.2.3 is unique.
Proof. The proof is similar to that of Corollary 3.1.4.
Corollary 3.2.5 A strong groupoid is -normal.
Proof. The proof follows directly from Theorems 3.1.3,
3.2.3 and the definition.
Example 3.2.6 Let be the cyclic group of order 3. Observe
that has an -factorization but
fails to have a -factorization. Take and such
that:
Routine checking of the product gives :
But, the product does not give :
Therefore, is not -normal, it is simply -composite.
Proposition 3.2.7 Any signature- or similar-prime
groupoid is -normal.
Proof. The proof is straightforward and we omit it.
Proposition 3.2.8 The right-zero-semigroup on is similar-prime.
Proof. Let be the
right-zero-semigroup on . Then for all . Let and , thus
Hence for all , .
Example 3.2.9 Let be the right-zero-semigroup on . Its Cayley table together with its associated signature-similar-product tables, respectively, are:
Therefore, the right-zero-semigroup of order 3 is similar-prime since its similar-factor is , i.e., the left-zero-semigroup for .
Proposition 3.2.10 A non-locally-zero strong
groupoid is -composite.
Proof. Let , then for any . Meaning, cannot be the left- nor the
right-zero-semigroup on . By Proposition 3.2.5, is -normal. Let and
, then
Hence, for all , and . Therefore, is -composite.
3.3. Factoring and
Let be the collection of all strong groupoids on a
non-empty set . Consider a groupoid , we classify the signature- and similar-factors of as -composite, signature- or similar-prime. We conclude that
and are similar- and signature-prime, respectively.
Theorem 3.3.1 The signature-factor of a strong
groupoid is similar-prime, and the similar-factor is signature-prime.
Proof. Let . Suppose that
and . Let and , then “” and “” are
defined as:
Hence , and
therefore is similar-prime. Similarly,
if we let and , then “” and “” are defined as:
Therefore, ,
and hence is signature-prime.
Corollary 3.3.2.Let be any groupoid and let and . If has a -factorization, i.e., if then
Proof. This follows immediately from the previous
theorem. In fact, suppose has a -factorization, then
Corollary 3.3.3.Let be a groupoid and let and . If has a -factorization then
Proof. The proof is very similar to that of the previous
Corollary.
Corollary 3.3.4. Let be a strong groupoid and let and , then
Proof. This is a direct result of
Theorem 3.1.3 and the previous two Corollaries.
As a final observation, a groupoid is similar-prime if it is
similar to the left-zero-semigroup or a locally-zero-groupoid, in other
words, if it is idempotent. Hence, we need another method of factorization
for idempotent groupoids.
4. Orient-Skew Factorization
We say a groupoid has the orientation
property OP [33] if for all .
Moreover, has the twisted orientation
property TOP if implies for all . In this
section, we introduce a unique factorization which can be applied to
groupoids with OP. This type of groupoids has proven to be useful in
graph theory, where in a directed graph can mean there is a path
from vertex to vertex , i.e. ; while can
mean there is no path from to , i.e. . In fact, if is the directed graph on vertex set
and , then is a simple graph [1]. For more details on
groupoids associated with directed and simple graphs we refer to [1, 35].
Example 4.1 Let and
be a linearly ordered set. Define a binary operation “” on such that:
Then the binary system has the
orientation property.
Example 4.2 Let . Define a
binary operation “” on by
the following table:
Then has the twisted orientation
property.
We consider three functions to represent operations on the main diagonal and
on the anti-diagonal of the associated Cayley table of a binary operation on
a finite set.
Let be a groupoid of finite order and binary operation
“”, i.e., and . Then for all , , , and , we call:
diag-1:
the anti-diagonal function of such that , defined by
diag-2:
the reverse-diagonal function of such that , defined by
diag-3:
the skew-diagonal function of such that , defined by
Example 4.3 Consider the groupoid where “” is given by the following table:
0
1
2
3
0
0
1
0
3
1
1
1
1
0
2
2
2
2
3
3
0
3
2
3
Observe that and the main diagonal .
For instance, . Also, the anti-diagonal . For example, . Moreover, the reverse of the diagonal is . For instance, . So the
skew-diagonal defined here is the reverse of the anti-diagonal, hence, . For example, .
Given these definitions, we can derive the orient-factor
of a groupoid from , such that all its elements
are the same as those of the left-zero-semigroup except elements belonging
to the anti-diagonal, which we construct from the skew-diagonal of . Similarly, the skew-factor is derived from the parent groupoid by letting its anti-diagonal be that of
the skew-diagonal of the parent groupoid, otherwise all other elements are
kept the same as the parent groupoid.
Let be a groupoid. Let denote
the main diagonal of . Derive groupoids and from and
, respectively, as follows:
For all ,
(4.1)
,
and
(i) ,
(ii) ;
otherwise.
Groupoids and are said to
be the orient- and skew-factor of ,
respectively, denoted by and . As previously mentioned, the product “” is not commutative. Hence, for , we may have an -factorization such that
(4.2)
or a -factorization such that
(4.3)
Proposition 4.4 The orient-factor of a given
groupoid is locally-zero.
Proof. Given , let . Then, , i.e. , and for all
except when . In fact, for any in , is either a left-zero-semigroup or a
right-zero-semigroup. Moreover, for all which
implies that is locally-zero.
Corollary 4.5 The orient-factor of a given
groupoid is a unit in .
Proof. This follows immediately from Propositions 2.8 and
4.4.
Example 4.6 Let . Define a binary
operation “” by the following
table:
Then, clearly is a group. Derive its
orient-factor as in 4.1 to obtain:
Hence, is locally-zero.
4.1. -Factorization
In this subsection, we explore an -factorization of any groupoid in , i.e., into its orient-
and skew-factors, respectively. The next subsection discusses a -factorization where the product of the two factors is “reversed”. Then, we classify
as - and/or-composite, -composite or -normal; and as orient- or skew-prime.
A groupoid is bi-diagonal if its
anti-diagonal is symmetric, meaning if .
Example 4.1.1. Let be a linearly ordered set. Consider groupoid where for all . Define two binary operations on such that:
Then clearly is an -factorization of , where and . Moreover, is bi-diagonal.
A groupoid is said to be orient-primeif , and
is said to be skew-prime if . Alternatively, if is
neither orient- nor skew-prime, then is said to be
(1) -composite if ;
(2) -composite if .
Consequently, is said to be -composite
if both and hold.
Just as with -factorization, not every groupoid will have a -factorization. But it is possible to derive an -factorization
of any given groupoid.
Theorem 4.1.2Any given groupoid has an -factorization, i.e., if , then
Proof. Let such
that and are defined as in 4.1. Let where and . Then for all . It follows that
(i)
If and .
(ii)
If , then if , and for then . Otherwise, ,
and .
Next, we show that . Given ,
(i)
If .
(ii)
If , then if then and . If then .
Thus, for all . This proves that .
Corollary 4.1.3The factorization in Theorem
4.1.2 is unique.
Proof. Let with
an -factorization such that where and . Let where and . For any , we have , and when . Hence . Similarly, if , then .
When , we have , proving
that .
Example 4.1.4 [32] Consider the groupoid where
“” is defined by the following
Cayley table:
1
2
3
4
1
1
1
3
1
2
2
2
3
2
3
1
2
3
4
4
4
4
3
4
By deriving its orient- and skew-factors and ,
respectively, and by letting and shows
that .
Indeed, has an -factorization:
Also, since , then is -composite.
4.2. -Factorization
In this subsection, we reverse the product of the orient- and
skew-factors of a given groupoid . We find that an arbitrary groupoid admits a -factorization if it has the orientation property.
Example 4.2.1 Consider the groupoid defined as in
Example 4.1.4:
1
2
3
4
1
1
1
3
1
2
2
2
3
2
3
1
2
3
4
4
4
4
3
4
Through routine calculations, we find that admits a -factorization since In addition, .
A groupoid is said to be -normalif it admits an - and a -factorization, i.e., if
(i) and
(ii) .
Theorem 4.2.3A groupoid with the orientation property has a -factorization.
Proof. Let .
Define where and . Then for all . It follows that
(i)
If then and
(ii)
If the two cases arise: if and then and
which also . Otherwise, and
Next, we show that . Given ,
(i)
If then .
(ii)
If then . If , then . If , then .
Thus for all . This proves that .
Corollary 4.2.4The factorization in Theorem
4.2.3 is unique.
Proof. The proof is very similar to that of Corollary
4.1.3 so we omit it.
Proposition 4.2.5A groupoid with the orientation
property is -normal.
Proof. The result follows from Theorems 4.1.2, 4.2.3 and
the definition.
Example 4.2.6 Let be defined
as in Example 4.2.1 where we determined that
admits an -factorization. It can be verified that ,
which shows that admits a -factorization as
well. Therefore, is -normal in . Additionally, implies that is -composite.
4.3. Factoring and
In this subsection, the orient- and skew-factors of are factored to deduce that
is skew-prime while is binary-equivalent to .
Let and be groupoids
in . We say that is binary-equivalent to if there exists such that
(i) ; and
(ii) .
Theorem 4.3.1 Given a groupoid with the orientation property. Its orient-factor is
skew-prime, and its skew-factor is binary-equivalent to .
Proof. Let . Suppose that
and . Then by Theorem
4.1.2 . Let and then for : (i), (ii) ,
otherwise; and for : (i) , (ii) , otherwise. Hence,
and is skew-prime.
Similarly, if we let
and , then for : (i), (ii) , otherwise; and for : (i) , (ii) , otherwise. Thus,
and the final result follows.
Example 4.3.2 Consider the locally-zero groupoid
where “” is defined by the
following Cayley table:
0
1
2
3
4
5
0
0
1
0
0
4
0
1
0
1
2
3
1
5
2
2
1
2
3
4
2
3
3
1
2
3
3
3
4
0
4
2
4
4
4
5
5
1
5
5
5
5
Since has the orientation property,
then is -normal by Proposition 4.2.5.
Factoring its orient- and skew-factors and into their respective orient- and
skew-factors, ,
and , , is observed
through their respective product tables:
0
1
2
3
4
5
0
0
0
0
0
0
5
1
1
1
1
1
4
1
2
2
2
2
3
2
2
3
3
3
2
3
3
3
4
4
1
4
4
4
4
5
0
5
5
5
5
5
0
1
2
3
4
5
0
0
1
0
0
4
5
1
0
1
2
3
4
5
2
2
1
2
2
4
2
3
3
1
3
3
3
3
4
0
1
2
4
4
4
5
0
1
5
5
5
5
Indeed, and . This clearly shows the results of Theorem 4.3.1.
Theorem 4.3.3 The right-zero-semigroup on X is -composite.
Proof. Let be the
right-zero-semigroup on . Suppose that and . By applying Proposition 4.2.5, is -normal.
Thus, .
Consider : (i), (ii) , otherwise; and for : (i) ,
(ii) , otherwise. Since neither one of the factors is
the left-zero-semigroup for , is -composite.
Example 4.3.4 Let be the
right-zero-semigroup as in Example 3.2.9 where . Let and , we can check that
is in fact - and -composite. Hence, is -composite:
Moreover, its orient-factor has
the following subtables:
which implies that is
locally-zero.
Given two distinct groupoids and in . Suppose that and . Let be a groupoid such that . Then is said to be:
(i) partially-right-prime, -prime, if ;
(ii) partially-left-prime, -prime, if .
Whence and behave like right- and left-identities
respectively. Here, and could be either , , , or any other factor of . The
next proposition demonstrates one such case.
Proposition 4.3.5A bi-diagonal groupoid is
partially-left-prime.
Proof. Given a bi-diagonal groupoid , then its skew-factor since and otherwise. Meanwhile, its orient-factor is not affected by the bi-diagonal property.
By Theorem 4.1.2, has an -factorization,
Therefore, is a left-identity in and the result follows.
Example 4.3.6 Consider the group as defined in Example 4.5. Then clearly is bi-diagonal. Recall its orient-factor and derive its skew-factor to obtain:
and
Then and
therefore the group is -prime.
5. Application
Recall some of the algebras described in “Figure 1” of Section 2.
We shall say an algebra of type is a
strong -algebra if it satisfies (B1) and equation 2.1. Meaning, if for all ,
(i) ,
(ii) implies .
A groupoid is semi-neutral if for all ,
(i) ,
(ii) .
A -algebra is semi-neutral if for , for all
A normal/composite groupoid is semi-normal (resp., semi-composite) if
only one of its factors is semi-neutral.
Proposition 5.1 A semi-neutral groupoid is
signature-prime and -composite.
Proof. Let be the
semi-neutral groupoid on . Then for all and . Let
and , its signature- and similar-factors, respectively. Deriving them
according to 3.1 gives:
Hence for all , .
By Theorem 4.1.2, has an -factorization. Let and ,
its orient- and skew-factors, respectively. Deriving them
according to 4.1 gives: for : (i), (ii) , otherwise; and for : (i) , (ii) , otherwise.
Thus, and .
Corollary 5.2A semi-neutral groupoid is
semi-normal.
Proof. This is a direct result of Proposition 5.1 and the
definition of a semi-normal groupoid.
Proposition 5.3The product of semi-neutral
groupoids is semi-neutral.
Proof. Consider semi-netural groupoids and . Let such that
. Then, . If .. It follows that and therefore is semi-neutral.
Proposition 5.4The similar-factor of a -algebra is semi-neutral.
Proof. Let be a -algebra. Consider the -factorization . Let and , its signature- and
similar-factors, respectively. Deriving them according to 3.1 gives:
Clearly, is semi-neutral.
Corollary 5.5A strong -algebra is
semi-normal.
Proof. This is a direct result of Corollary 3.2.5,
Proposition 5.4 and the definition of a semi-normal algebra.
Corollary 5.6A strong -algebra is semi-composite if it is not
semi-neutral, i.e., if for all .
Proof. Let be a strong -algebra. Let and , its signature- and similar-factors respectively. Deriving them
according to 3.1. Assume that . Then
for all . Thus, which makes it signature-prime and not -composite.
Example 5.7 Let be a strong -algebra of order
3 where “” is defined by the
following Cayley table:
012000011012220
Let and . Its .-factorization is:
Therefore, is
signature-prime and -normal. Moreover, as defined is semi-neutral. Next, derive its orient- and skew-factors and , respectively. Let and . We have the following product:
Hence, implies that is -composite.
Example 5.8 Let be a strong -algebra of order 3 where
“” is given by the following
Cayley table:
012002111022210
Let and . Its .-factorization is:
Since and is semi-neutral, we can conclude that is semi-composite.
P.J. Allen, H.S. Kim and Neggers in [4] introduced the notion of
Smarandache disjointness in algebras. Two groupoids (algebras)
and are said to be Smarandache disjoint if we add some axioms of
an algebra to an algebra , then the
algebra becomes a trivial algebra, i.e., .
Proposition 5.9 The class of abelian groupoids
and the class of -normal groupoids are Smarandache
disjoint.
Proof. Let , the
collection of all abelian groupoids defined on . Suppose that and . By Theorem
3.2.3, admits an -factorization. Consider , then for ,
If ,
Hence, admits a -factorization only
if
This means that is -normal if it is either
the left- or right-zero-semigroup. Since both such groupoids are not
abelian, then must only have one element and the conclusion follows.
Suppose that in we consider all those groupoids with
the orientation property. Thus, as a consequence. If
and both have the orientation property, then for we have the possibilities: and , so that . It follows that if denotes this
collection of groupoids, then is a subsemigroup [33] of .
In a sequence of papers Nebeský ([27], [28], [29])
associated with graphs groupoids with various properties
and conversely. He defined a travel groupoid as a
groupoid satisfying the axioms: and
implies . If one adds these two laws to the orientation property, then is an OP-travel-groupoid. In this case implies , i.e., implies , i.e., the digraph is a
(simple) graph if , with . Also, if , then implies is impossible, whence and , so that is a complete (simple) graph.
In a recent paper, Ahn, Kim and Neggers [1] related graphs with
binary systems in the center of . Given an element of , say , they constructed a graph, by
letting and , the edge set of , such that , and . Thus,
if , then as well and
they identify as an undirected edge of . Then
they concluded that if is the
left-zero-semigroup, then is the complete graph on . Also,
if is the right-zero-semigroup, then is the null graph on , since .
Example 5.10 Let and
consider the simple graph on :
Then the associated groupoid table with binary operation
“” is:
a
b
c
d
a
a
a
c
d
b
b
b
b
b
c
a
c
c
d
d
a
d
c
d
By applying Proposition 4.2.5 to , we
have the product of and given by their respective tables:
We can visualize this product with the associated graphs of
groupoids and :
Thus, any simple graph constructed in this manner can be decomposed into two
or more other factors with the binary product “”. This fact is further illustrated in the next
example.
Example 5.11 Let be the locally-zero groupoid
defined as in Example 4.3.2. Then its associated graph decomposes into its
factors and :
6. Generalization and Summary
In this final note, we discuss two generalizations which can serve as
grounds for future exploration of groupoid factorizations or algebra
decompositions via the groupoid product “”.
6.1. -type-Factorization
Let be a groupoid operation that interchanges elements of any two
given groupoids and produces two other (possibly identical) groupoids. Given
groupoid and the
left-zero-semigroup as , define . A -type-factorizationof gives a pair of groupoid factors as follows:
where and , the left- and right--factors of , respectively, such that the maps and are
defined as and .
Let and , then can be represented as a product of the groupoid pair, i.e.,
thus rendering as:
(i) -prime, if or ; or
(ii) -normal if ; or
(iii) -composite if is -normal but not -prime.
An example of this -type-factorization is our first method of similar-signature-factorization where
and
The in that case switched the diagonal of the parent groupoid with that of the left-zero-semigroup, , to obtain the signature- and similar-factors and ,
respectively. Hence, the signature- and similar-factors of
a groupoid are -type-factors.
6.2. -type-Factorization
Let be a groupoid operation that manipulates elements of any given
pair of groupoid in the same fashion. Given groupoid and the left-zero-semigroup as , define . A -type-factorization of is given
as follows:
where and
and such
that the map ,
the left- and right--factorsof , respectively. Let and , then could factor into
a product of the groupoid pair, i.e.,
Once again rendering as:
(i) -prime, if or ; or
(ii) -normal if ; or
(iii) -composite if is -normal but not -prime.
An example of this -type-factorization is our second method of
orient-skew-factorization where and . The (indeed, ) in that scenario reversed the
anti-diagonal of a given groupoid. Hence, applying to the
left-zero-semigroup and to the parent groupoid results in the orient- and skew-factors and ,
respectively. In conclusion, the orient- and skew-factors
of a groupoid are -type-factors.
6.3. Summary
The goal of this paper was to gain more insight about the dynamics of binary
systems, namely groupoids or algebras equipped with a single binary
operation. We have shown that a strong groupoid can be represented as a
“composite” groupoid of its similar- and signature- derived factors. Moreover, we concluded
that an idempotent groupoid with the orientation property, can be decomposed
into a product of its orient- and skew- factors. An
application into the fields of logic-algebras and graph theory were briefly
introduced. We found that a semi-neutral -algebra is signature-prime, -composite and semi-normal. Meanwhile, a
strong -algebra is then semi-composite if it is not semi-neutral. We finished our note with generalizations of our two methods in
hopes that other factorizations can be discovered in the near future. It may
be interesting to find other conditions for a groupoid to have such
decompositions. As a final reminder, factorization can be useful in various
applications such as algebraic cryptography and DNA code theory. We intend
to extend our investigation in the future to hypergroupoid, semigroups as
well as determine other factorizations and explore their applications.
7. Acknowledgment
The author is grateful to J. Neggers, H.S. Kim, C. Odenthal and the referee
for their valuable suggestions and help.
This research did not receive any specific grant from funding agencies in
the public, commercial, or not-for-profit sectors.
References
[1] Ahn, S.S.; Kim, H.S.; Neggers, J. A method to
identify simple graphs by special binary systems, Symmetry 10 (2018), 297.
[2] Allen, P. J.; Kim, H. S.; Neggers, J. On -algebras, Mat. Vesnik 54 (2002), no. 1-2, 21–29.
[3] Allen, P. J.; Kim, H. S.; Neggers, J. -algebras
and groups, Sci. Math. Jpn. 59 (2004), no. 1, 23–29.
[4] Allen, P. J.; Kim, H. S.; Neggers, J. Smarandache
disjoint in -algebras, Sci. Math. Jpn. 61 (2005),
no. 3, 447–449.
[5] Allen, P. J.; Kim, H. S.; Neggers, J. On companion -algebras, Math. Slovaca 57 (2007), 93-106.
[6] Allen, P. J.; Kim, H. S.; Neggers, J. Deformations
of -algebras, Bull. Korean Math. Soc. 48 (2011),
315-324.
[7] Borvka, O. Foundations of the
theory of groupoids and groups, John Wiley & Sons, New York, 1976.
[8] Bruck, R. H. A Survey of Binary Systems,
Springer-Verlag, New York, 1958.
[9] Cho, J. R.; Kim, H. S. On -algebras and
quasigroups, Quasigroups and Related Systems, 8 (2001), 1-6.
[10] Clifford, A. H.; Preston, G. B. The algebraic theory
of semigroups, American Mathematical Soc. Providence, 1961.
[11] Fayoumi, H. F. Locally-zero groupoids and the center
of , Comm. Korean Math. Soc. 26 (2011), 163-168.
[12] Han, J. S.; Kim, H. S.; Neggers, J. Strong and
ordinary -algebras, J. Multiple-Valued Logic and Soft Computing
16 (2010), 331-339.
[13] Han, J. S.; Kim, H. S.; Neggers, J. The
hypergroupoid semigroups as generalizations of the groupoid semigroups,
Journal of Applied Math. 2012 (2012), Article ID 717698, 8 pages.
[14] Iorgulescu, A. Algebras of logic as -algebras, Editura ASE, Bucharest, 2008.
[15] Iséki, K; Tanaka, S. An introduction to theory of
-algebras, Math. Japonica 23 (1978), 1-26.
[16] Iséki, K. On -algebras, Math.
Seminar Notes 8 (1980), 125-130.
[17] Iséki, K; Kim, H. S; Neggers, J. On -algebras, Sci. Math. Jpn. 63 (2006), 413-419.
[18] Jun, Y. B.; Roh, E. H.; Kim, H. S. On -algebras, Sci. Math. 1 (1998), 347-354.
[19] Kim, C. B; Kim, H. S. On -algebras,
Kyungpook Math. J. 53 (2013), 175-184.
[20] Kim, C. B; Kim, H. S. On -algebras,
Sci. Math. Jpn. 63 (2006), 421-427.
[21] Kim, C. B; Kim, H. S. On -algebras,
Demonstratio Math. 41 (2008), 497-505.
[22] Kim, C. B; Kim, H. S. On -algebras,
Math. Slovaca 62 (2012), 855-864.
[23] Kim, H. S; Kim, Y. H. On -algebras,
Sci. Math. Jpn. 67 (2007), 113–116.
[24] Kim, H. S; Kim, Y. H; Neggers, J. Coxeters and
pre-Coxeter algebras in Smarandache setting, Honam Math. J. 26 (2004), 471-481.
[25] M. Kondo, On the class of -algebras,
Int. Math. & Math. J. Sci. 49 (2004), 2629-2639.
[26] Meng, J.; Jun, Y. B. -algebras,
Kyungmoon Sa, Seoul, 1994.
[27] Nebeský, L. An algebraic characterization of
geodetic graphs, Czech. Math. J. 48 (1998), 701-710.
[28] Nebeský, L. A tree as a finite nonempty set with
a binary operation, Math. Bohem 125 (2000), 455-458.
[29] Nebeský, L. Travel groupoids, Czech. Math. J.
56 (2006), 659-675.
[30] Neggers, J.; Kim, H. S. Modular posets and semigroups, Semigroup Forum 53 (1996), 57-62.
[31] Neggers, J.; Kim, H. S. On-algebras,
Math. Slovaca 49 (1999), 19-26.
[32] Neggers, J.; Jun, Y. B.; Kim, H. S. On-ideals in -algebras, Math. Slovaca 49 (1999), 243-251.
[33] Neggers, J.; Kim, H. S. The semigroups of binary
systems and some perspectives, Bull. Korean Math. Soc. 45 (2008),
651-661.
[34] Saeid, A. B.; Kim, H. S.; Rezaei, A. On -algebras, An. St. Univ. Ovidius Constanta 25 (2017), no. 1,
177–194.
[35] West, D. B. Introduction to graph theory, Prentice
Hall, Upper Saddle River, 2001.
[36] Yisheng, H. -algebras, Science Press, Beijing, 2006.