On polynomials that are not quite an identity on an associative algebra
Eric Jespers, David Riley, Mayada Shahada

TL;DR
This paper investigates the conditions under which certain subspaces, subalgebras, and ideals generated by polynomial values in an algebra are finite-dimensional, and explores dual problems involving finite-codimensional subspaces, especially for multilinear polynomials.
Contribution
It introduces new results relating finite-dimensionality of polynomial-generated subspaces to that of subalgebras and ideals, and examines duality with finite-codimensional marginal subspaces for multilinear polynomials.
Findings
Finite-dimensionality of the verbal subspace does not necessarily imply the same for the generated subalgebra and ideal.
The paper establishes conditions under which these finite-dimensionality properties are equivalent.
It explores the dual problem involving finite-codimensional marginal subspaces for multilinear polynomials.
Abstract
Let be a polynomial in the free algebra over a field , and let be a -algebra. We denote by , and , respectively, the `verbal' subspace, subalgebra, and ideal, in , generated by the set of all -values in . We begin by studying the following problem: if is finite-dimensional, is it true that and are also finite-dimensional? We then consider the dual to this problem for `marginal' subspaces that are finite-codimensional in . If is multilinear, the marginal subspace, , of in is the set of all elements in such that evaluates to 0 whenever any of the indeterminates in is evaluated to . We conclude by discussing the relationship between the finite-dimensionality of and the finite-codimensionality of .
Peer Reviews
No public reviews on file for this paper yet. If you reviewed it on a platform where reviews are public (OpenReview, ICLR, NeurIPS, ICML), you can paste yours below so the community can read it here.
Videos
No videos yet. Explain this paper in a talk, walkthrough, or lecture? Add one.
On polynomials that are not quite an identity on an associative algebra
Eric Jespers, David Riley and Mayada Shahada
Abstract.
Let be a polynomial in the free algebra over a field , and let be a -algebra. We denote by , and , respectively, the ‘verbal’ subspace, subalgebra, and ideal, in , generated by the set of all -values in . We begin by studying the following problem: if is finite-dimensional, is it true that and are also finite-dimensional? We then consider the dual to this problem for ‘marginal’ subspaces that are finite-codimensional in . If is multilinear, the marginal subspace, , of in is the set of all elements in such that evaluates to 0 whenever any of the indeterminates in is evaluated to . We conclude by discussing the relationship between the finite-dimensionality of and the finite-codimensionality of .
Key words and phrases:
Polynomial identities, verbal subspaces, marginal subspaces, -ideals, -subspaces, group algebras.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 16R99 and 16S34.
The authors acknowledge support from Onderzoeksraad of Vrije Universiteit, Fonds voor Wetenschappelijk Onderzoek (Vlaanderen) and NSERC of Canada.
1. Verbal subspaces, subalgebras and ideals
Throughout this paper, the term ‘algebra’ will be reserved for a not necessarily unital associative algebra over a fixed base field of characteristic . We shall use to indicate its unital hull.
Definition 1.1**.**
Let be an algebra, and let be a polynomial in the free algebra on the set . We shall denote by , and , respectively, the subspace, subalgebra and ideal in generated by the set of all -values in :
**
We shall call the subspace the verbal subspace of generated by , and so forth.
It is not hard to construct examples showing that the obvious inclusions
are sometimes strict:
Example 1.2**.**
- (1)
Let , the algebra of all matrices over , and let . Then , the set of all matrices with trace zero, while . 2. (2)
Let denote the Grassmann algebra of an infinite-dimensional vector space over a field of characteristic , and let . Then , and yet . 3. (3)
Let be the polynomial algebra over a perfect field of characteristic , and let . Then , whereas .
Even though we have just seen that corresponding verbal subspaces, subalgebras and ideals can be distinct, it is still not clear how different they can be. Along this vein, we intend to study the following natural problem:
Problem A**.**
Let be an algebra, and let be a polynomial in .
- (1)
If is finite-dimensional, then under what conditions on and is necessarily finite-dimensional? 2. (2)
If is finite-dimensional, then under what conditions on and is necessarily finite-dimensional? 3. (3)
If is finite-dimensional, then under what conditions on and is necessarily finite-dimensional?
Example 1.3**.**
Let be any prime number, let , and let be the group algebra of an infinite elementary Abelian -group over a field of characteristic . Then is 1-dimensional while is infinite-dimensional.
In light of the preceding example, it is reasonable to restrict our attention in parts (2) and (3) in Problem A to polynomials that are linear in at least one indeterminate in the case when the characteristic is positive. Before revising our formulation of Problem A, we introduce some additional notation in order to simplify the exposition.
Definition 1.4**.**
Let be any polynomial in the free algebra .
- (1)
We shall say that is algebraically concise if, for all algebras , is finite-dimensional whenever is finite-dimensional. 2. (2)
We shall say that is ideally concise if, for all algebras , is finite-dimensional whenever is finite-dimensional.
It seems plausible to the authors that the following two problems implicit within Problem A have positive solutions. These questions form the primary focus of our first area of inquiry. By a slight abuse of notation, we shall refer to them in the sequel by their original labels.
- A(1):
Is every polynomial in algebraically concise? 2. A(2):
Is every polynomial in ideally concise provided either or and in linear in at least one indeterminate?
We claim first that, unlike the case when the characteristic is positive, restricting our attention to multilinear polynomials in the case when the characteristic is zero is not actually a restriction at all. Indeed, this assertion is direct consequence of the following proposition.
Proposition 1.5**.**
Let be a field of characteristic zero. Then a polynomial in is algebraically concise (respectively, ideally concise) if and only if each of its multilinear consequences is algebraically concise (respectively, ideally concise).
Before proving Proposition 1.5, we first reduce to the case of homogeneous polynomials. Recall that a polynomial is called homogeneous whenever the degree of each indeterminate appearing in does not vary among the monomials in .
Proposition 1.6**.**
Let be a field of arbitrary characteristic, and suppose that is any polynomial in with the property that , where is the maximum degree of any indeterminate appearing in . Then a polynomial in is algebraically concise (respectively, ideally concise) if and only if each of its homogenous components is algebraically concise (respectively, ideally concise).
The proofs of Propositions 1.5 and 1.6 will be carried out in Section 2.
Our most complete result is a partial solution to Problem A(1):
Theorem 1.7**.**
Let be any polynomial in the free algebra over a field , and let be the maximum degree of an indeterminate appearing in .
- (1)
If , then is algebraically concise. 2. (2)
If and is homogeneous, then is algebraically concise.
In particular, if either is infinite or is finite and is multilinear, then is algebraically concise.
The following is a direct consequence of Theorem 1.7 and Example 1.3.
Corollary 1.8**.**
Let be any field of positive characteristic . Then is algebraically concise but not ideally concise.
The following interesting special cases of Problem A(1) remain open for (small) finite base fields.
- •
Are all polynomials of the form algebraically concise?
- •
Are all Engel polynomials algebraically concise?
We shall refer to (left-justified) multilinear Lie monomials of the form as being simple of length . Multilinear Lie monomials formed by arbitrary bracketing are called outer Lie commutators. The sequence of derived series commutators are defined recursively by and, for each ,
Our proof of Theorem 1.7 depends on the following partial solution to Problem A(2):
Theorem 1.9**.**
Let be any polynomial in the free algebra . Then the polynomial defined by
[TABLE]
is ideally concise.
The following examples are noteworthy special cases of Theorem 1.9.
Corollary 1.10**.**
Let be any base field, and let be a positive integer. Then the following statements hold.
- (1)
The simple Lie commutator is ideally concise. 2. (2)
The outer Lie commutator is ideally concise. In particular, the Lie centre-by-metabelian polynomial is ideally concise.
Recall that the standard polynomial of degree is given by
where denotes the symmetric group of degree . We remark that Theorem 1.9 leaves open the following interesting special cases of Problem A(2).
- •
Are all the standard polynomials ideally concise?
- •
Are the derived series commutators, starting with the Lie metabelian commutator , ideally concise? Are all outer Lie commutators ideally concise?
- •
Are all Engel polynomials ideally concise?
The proofs of Theorems 1.7 and 1.9 will be carried out in Section 2. We will also provide there a complete positive solution to our original Problem A(2) in the special case when is a group algebra.
We close this section by reframing Problem A(2) within the context of polynomial identity theory.
Definition 1.11**.**
Let be an algebra, and let be any polynomial in . If , for all in , then is called a polynomial identity on . Polynomial identities are called PIs for short. It is customary to denote by the set of all PIs on . If is nontrivial, then is called a PI-algebra. If is finite-dimensional, we shall say that is almost a polynomial identity on ; we shall denote by the set of all such polynomials . Clearly, .
As a consequence of the following lemma, we may assume that every algebra in Problem A is an infinite-dimensional PI-algebra.
Lemma 1.12**.**
Let be an algebra. If there exists a nonzero polynomial such that is almost a PI for , then is a PI-algebra. In other words, if then .
Proof. Suppose that . Then the antisymmetry of the standard polynomial , together with the linear dependence of any -many -values in , forces to satisfy the nontrivial multilinear polynomial identity , where is defined by
.
A subspace of the free algebra is called a -subspace whenever it is closed under the algebra endomorphisms of the free algebra. The notion of -subspace extends to arbitrary algebras in the obvious way. The terminology is also applied to subalgebras and ideals; for example, is clearly a -ideal of the free algebra, for every algebra . The proof of our next observation is straightforward and thus omitted.
Lemma 1.13**.**
Let be an algebra. Then the following statements hold.
- (1)
, and are -subspaces of , for each . 2. (2)
* is a -subalgebra of .* 3. (3)
* is a -ideal of if and only if, for every , is finite-dimensional.*
As a consequence of part (3) of Lemma 1.13, the characteristic zero case of Problem A(2) is precisely equivalent to:
- •
Is a -ideal of , for every algebra ?
In Section 3, we shall introduce marginal subspaces, which are a kind of dual notion to verbal subspaces, and then study the relationship between marginal subspaces, subalgebras and ideals. Finally, in Section 4, we will discuss the relationship between verbal and marginal spaces.
All the problems that we propose to study, together with the terminology we use, were inspired by Philip Hall’s seminal work on verbal and marginal subgroups beginning in 1940 (see [2] for his collected works). These problems stimulated a broad stream of deep and interesting research in group theory that remains highly active today. In particular, Hall conjectured that every word in the free group is concise. Although many partial positive solutions of this conjecture have been since proved, the conjecture in its most general form was eventually refuted by Ivanov in 1989 (see [3]).
Ian Stewart made a study of the natural Lie-theoretic analogue of Hall’s conjecture in [8]. Given the relative complexity of the corresponding problems in the categories of groups and associative algebras, Stewart proved the following surprisingly strong result (Corollary 3.2 in [8]): if is an infinite field, is a Lie algebra over , and is any polynomial in the free Lie algebra over , then is a characteristic ideal in . As a trivial consequence of this remarkable fact, in the category of Lie algebras (over an infinite field), every polynomial is ideally concise.
2. Proof of Section 1 results
The same argument used to prove Corollary 2.2 in [9] when applied to (associative) algebras over ‘sufficiently large’ fields yields the following lemma.
Lemma 2.1**.**
Let be a field, and suppose that is any polynomial in with the property that , where is the maximum degree of any indeterminate appearing in . If is the homogeneous decomposition of , then, for every algebra , we have
[TABLE]
Recall that every algebra can be viewed as a Lie algebra via its Lie bracket . The following lemma is well-known and straightforward to verify.
Lemma 2.2**.**
The following identities hold for all algebras .
- (1)
Adjoint maps are derivations; in other words, for all ,
[TABLE] 2. (2)
The semi-Jacobi identity holds; namely, for all ,
[TABLE]
The following result will play a key role throughout this section.
Theorem 2.3**.**
Let be any polynomial in the free algebra , let be the maximum degree of any indeterminate appearing in , and let be an algebra. If either or and is homogeneous, then is closed under derivations, so that is a Lie ideal of . In particular, if either is infinite or is multilinear, then is a Lie ideal of .
Proof. If is infinite, it follows from Theorem 3.1 in [8] that is closed under derivations of . Since part (1) of Lemma 2.2 says that adjoint maps are associative derivations, it follows that is a Lie ideal in . In the case when is finite and , applying Lemma 2.1 allows us to assume that is homogeneous. The result now follows just as before, but this time using Lemma 3.4 in [8] in place of Theorem 3.1 in [8].
Lemma 2.4**.**
Let be any subspace decomposition of a Lie ideal of an (associative) algebra . Then the following statements hold:
- (1)
The unital subalgebra of generated by is precisely , where each is the subalgebra of generated by . 2. (2)
The (two-sided) ideal in generated by is .
Proof. First notice that, if and , then . Thus, longer products of homogeneous elements can be reordered modulo shorter products. Part (1) now follows by an induction on the length of the products. To prove Part (2), we need only observe that , for all and .
In order to deduce Proposition 1.6 from our preliminary results, suppose that is sufficiently large (as described in its hypothesis) for a given (non-homogeneous) polynomial with homogeneous decomposition . Then, by Lemma 2.1 and Theorem 2.3, is a Lie ideal of that coincides precisely with the vector space sum of the Lie ideals . Consequently, Lemma 2.4 implies the following:
Proposition 2.5**.**
Let be a field, and suppose that is any polynomial in with the property that , where is the maximum degree of any indeterminate appearing in . If is the homogeneous decomposition of , then, for every algebra , we have
- (1)
; 2. (2)
; and, 3. (3)
.
Proposition 1.6 is a straightforward consequence of Proposition 2.5.
Proposition 1.6 allows us to assume that is homogeneous in Proposition 1.5. Applying the process of multilinearization to the homogeneous polynomial shows that
[TABLE]
where is a finite set of multilinear consequences of with the same total degree as . When the characteristic is zero, a simple Vandermonde argument shows that this inclusion can be taken to be an equality. Theorem 2.3 and Lemma 2.4 now proves Proposition 1.5.
The following result is a constructive version of Theorem 1.9.
Theorem 2.6**.**
Let be any polynomial in , let be the maximum degree of any indeterminate appearing in , and suppose that is an algebra such that is finite, where the polynomial is defined by
**
Then
**
In the case when either or and is homogeneous, this bound can be sharpened to
.
In particular, the sharper bound holds when is infinite or is multilinear.
Proof. We can choose a basis of such that each basis element has the form for some evaluation of in . Denote by the centralizer of in . Then, for each , (consider the kernel of the linear map ). Hence, , where
.
Thus, there exist such that .
We claim that . Indeed, by part (1) of Lemma 2.2, for each and , we have
[TABLE]
Similarly, . Therefore,
[TABLE]
so that .
We can improve this bound somewhat in the case when or and is homogeneous. Indeed, in this case, Theorem 2.3 informs us that is a Lie ideal of . By the same reasoning, is also a Lie ideal. Consequently, we have
[TABLE]
so that .
Theorem 1.7 is a direct consequence of the following constructive result.
Theorem 2.7**.**
Let be any polynomial in with homogeneous components , and let , where is the minimum degree of any indeterminate appearing in . Suppose that either or and is homogeneous, where is the maximum degree of any indeterminate appearing in , and suppose that is an algebra such that is finite. Then
[TABLE]
In particular, in the case when is multilinear, the following bound holds:
[TABLE]
Proof. Suppose that either or and is homogeneous, and set . Then, according to Lemma 2.1 and Theorem 2.3,
[TABLE]
is a Lie ideal of . Let be a basis of chosen with the property that each lies in , for some . Since is a Lie ideal of , we have , so that . Thus, by Theorem 2.6, we may replace by to assume that is a polynomial identity satisfied by ; in other words, we may assume that is contained in the centre of . It follows that
,
for each and .
We claim that
[TABLE]
where each , not every is zero, and at most one . Clearly the righthand subspace is contained in the lefthand subspace. To prove the reverse inclusion, it suffices to show that every product of the form
[TABLE]
where each and , lies in the righthand side.
Observe first that, if and , then, by the division algorithm, , where and . Thus,
[TABLE]
Consider now the case when , where . Let be such that . Then, by the division algorithm, , where and . Therefore, as shown above,
[TABLE]
This proves the claim in this case.
We can now assume that at least two exponents in the monomial are positive with one at least . By commutativity, we may assume and . Let be such that . Then, as shown above,
[TABLE]
for some . Therefore,
[TABLE]
Repeating this sort of argument shows that
[TABLE]
where each , as required.
It follows from the claim that
[TABLE]
as required. The rest now follows from Theorem 2.6.
The proof of Theorem 2.7 also yields the following result that may be interesting in its own right.
Corollary 2.8**.**
If is an algebra and is a multilinear polynomial, then
[TABLE]
where
Problem A is settled in the case of group algebras by the following result.
Theorem 2.9**.**
Let be the group algebra of an infinite group over a field of characteristic , and let be a polynomial over with the property that is almost a PI for . If either or and is linear in at least one indeterminate, then is an actual polynomial identity for (so that are finite-dimensional).
The authors are indebted to Donald Passman for sharing with them the following greatly simplified proof of Theorem 2.9.
Proof. We can assume that is linear in the last indeterminate, . Let be arbitrary elements in . Then
[TABLE]
for some fixed elements in . Since is finite-dimensional, there are only finitely many group elements in its support. It follows that there are only finitely many elements in such that is nontrivial. Let be the complement of these elements in , so that
[TABLE]
for all . By Lemma 4.2.3(iv) in [5], is clearly very large in , where ‘very large’ is as defined in the paragraph preceding the statement of the lemma. Consequently, by Lemma 4.2.4 in [5], , for all in . Since were arbitrary, this means is actually a polynomial identity for .
Because Engel polynomials are linear in one indeterminate, we have the following interesting consequence of Theorem 2.9.
Corollary 2.10**.**
Let be the group algebra of an infinite group over an arbitrary field of characteristic . If
**
is almost a polynomial identity for , then it is an actual polynomial identity for .
We remark that group algebras satisfying nontrivial polynomial identities were characterized (in terms of the group structure of ) by Isaacs and Passman (see Section 5.3 in [5]), while group algebras satisfying an Engel identity were later characterized by Sehgal (see Section V.6 in [7]).
3. Marginal subspaces, subalgebras and ideals
In this section, we study the natural dual to a verbal subspace.
Definition 3.1**.**
Let be any algebra, and let be any polynomial in the free algebra .
- (1)
We shall call an element with the property that
,
for all choices of in , , and , an eradicator of in . The set of all eradicators of in forms a subspace of that we shall call the marginal subspace of with respect to . 2. (2)
We shall denote by and (respectively) the largest subalgebra and ideal of contained in , which we shall call the marginal subalgebra and marginal ideal of with respect to .
In the case when the polynomial is multilinear, it is easy to see that, eradicates in if and only if
,
for all choices of in and .
We intend to study certain relationships between our various notions of marginal subspaces. The following examples are either well-known or straightforward to verify.
Example 3.2**.**
Let be an algebra, and let be a positive integer.
- (1)
If is commutative and is a multilinear polynomial, then clearly . 2. (2)
If , then , where and, for each , is given by
,
the two-sided annihilator of the algebra . 3. (3)
If , then , the centre of , while . For example, let be the Grassmann algebra of an infinite-dimensional vector space over a field of characteristic . Then and . 4. (4)
If , then , where denotes the term of the ascending central series of when viewed as a Lie algebra. 5. (5)
Let be the standard polynomial of degree , and let be the Grassmann algebra over an infinite-dimensional vector space over a field of characteristic zero. Then , while .
Notice that, in each example, ; in other words, is a subalgebra of . In this section, we shall address the following problem, which is helpful to think of as a kind of dual to Problem A in Section 1.
Problem B**.**
Let be an algebra, and let be a polynomial in .
- (1)
Under what conditions on and is a subalgebra of ? Is this always true? 2. (2)
If is finite-dimensional, under what conditions on and is necessarily finite-dimensional? Is this always true? 3. (3)
If is finite-dimensional, under what conditions on and is necessarily finite-dimensional? Is this always true? 4. (4)
If is finite-dimensional, under what conditions on and is necessarily finite-dimensional? Is this always true?
Problems B(2) and B(3) are, in fact, equivalent since Problem B(4) has a positive solution (in full generality) by the following result of Lee and Liu:
Theorem 3.3**.**
([4])*
Let be an algebra over a field , and let be a subalgebra of such that . Then there exists an ideal of contained in such that .*
Consequently, if is finite-codimensional in , then so is . This means that any positive solution to Problem B(1) is also a positive solution to the other parts of Problem B.
Definition 3.4**.**
Let be a polynomial in the free algebra over .
- (1)
We shall say that is marginally a PI on an algebra whenever is finite-dimensional. 2. (2)
We shall call marginally concise if, for all algebras , is finite-dimensional whenever is finite-dimensional. 3. (3)
We shall call marginally perfect if, for all algebras , is a subalgebra of .
Observe that is a PI on precisely when . Also notice that, due to Theorem 3.3, there is no need to distinguish between being ‘marginally algebraically concise’ and ‘marginally ideally concise’.
We intend to demonstrate below that certain classes of polynomials are marginally concise by showing that they are marginally perfect. Along these lines, the following corollary of a result of Stewart is worthy of mention in its own right.
Proposition 3.5**.**
Let be an algebra, let be a polynomial in the free algebra over , and suppose that either or is multilinear. Then is invariant under all derivations of ; in particular, is a Lie ideal of .
Proof. According to Proposition 5.1 in [8], is invariant under all derivations of . Part (1) of Lemma 2.2 says that adjoint maps are (associative) derivations.
Lemma 3.6**.**
The following statements hold in the free -algebra on the set .
- (1)
For each integer ,
[TABLE] 2. (2)
.
Proof. Part (1) follows easily from the Jacobi identity and induction. Part (2) follows from the semi-Jacobi identity (part (2) of Lemma 2.2).
Our next result provides the first of three partial solutions to Problem B(1). In its proof, we shall use to denote a generic evaluation of a polynomial . Recall that we refer to a left-justified Lie commutator of the form as being simple of length .
Theorem 3.7**.**
Suppose that is a multilinear polynomial of the form
,
where each polynomial is a simple Lie commutator of length at least one. Then is marginally perfect. In particular, simple Lie commutators are marginally perfect.
Proof. Let be any algebra, and let .We need to show that eradicates in , so that is a subalgebra of . Note first that any indeterminate involved in the multilinear polynomial must fall in exactly one . We divide the proof into two cases:
Case (1): Suppose that has length 1. Evaluating by (and the remaining indeterminates with arbitrary elements from ) yields:
[TABLE]
since is also an evaluation of and eradicates in . Repeating this argument allows us to shift all the way to the right. Consequently, , in this first case.
Case (2): Suppose that falls in , where . Then part (1) of Lemma 3.6 allows us to assume that . Thus, when we evaluate by , part (2) of Lemma 3.6 yields
.
It now follows that , as required.
Definition 3.8**.**
We shall call a multilinear polynomial distinctly proper whenever it can be written in the form
,
where is multilinear and each polynomial is a simple Lie commutator of length at least .
Theorem 3.9**.**
Distinctly proper polynomials are marginally perfect. In particular, derived series commutators are marginally perfect.
Proof. Suppose is a distinctly proper polynomial. Then
,
where each is a simple Lie commutator of length at least . Let be elements in . We need to prove that evaluates to zero whenever some is evaluated to . Notice that must fall in exactly one , where . Part (1) of Lemma 3.6 and the multilinearity of allows us to assume that starts with the indeterminate ; that is, . Thus, when we evaluate by , part (2) of Lemma 3.6 yields
.
It now follows from the multilinearity of that evaluates to zero, as required.
Theorem 3.10**.**
If is distinctly proper, then is marginally perfect. In particular, all outer Lie commutators of the form are marginally perfect.
Proof. Let be an algebra, and that suppose that eradicate . If we evaluate to , where , then we obtain , exactly as in the proof of Theorem 3.9. If we evaluate to , then
[TABLE]
by part (1) of Lemma 2.2.
The following interesting special cases of Problem B remain open.
- •
Are all outer Lie commutators marginally perfect or concise?
- •
Are all Engel polynomials marginally perfect or concise?
- •
Are all standard polynomials marginally perfect or concise?
4. Corresponding verbal and marginal subspaces
Hall raised the following question relating corresponding verbal and marginal subgroups: Let be a word in the free group such that the marginal subgroup, , of a group has finite index in . Does it follow that the corresponding verbal subgroup, , is finite? He was inspired by a well-known result of Baer ([1]), which asserts that, for all positive integers , if is a group such that is finite, then the term of the lower central series of is also finite. Thus, Hall’s question has positive solution when is the group commutator . Hall proved that the converse of his question has a negative solution, in general, by constructing counterexamples to the converse of Baer’s theorem. See [2] for the original discussion of all these facts.
Stewart proved the following result in [8], which can be considered as a positive solution to the algebra-theoretic analogue of Hall’s problem. His proof works for all nonassociative algebras , not just associative algebras.
Theorem 4.1**.**
Let be an algebra, and suppose that is a polynomial with the property that is finite-dimensional. Then is also finite-dimensional. In other words, if is marginally a PI on then is almost a PI on .
It is natural then to ask whether the converse of Theorem 4.1 holds:
Problem C**.**
Let be an algebra, and let be a polynomial in the free -algebra. If is finite-dimensional, under what conditions on and is necessarily finite-dimensional? Is this always true?
For example, consider the case when is residually finite-dimensional and is any polynomial such that is finite-dimensional. Then there exists an ideal of finite-codimension in such that . It follows that , so that is finite-dimensional. This proves:
Proposition 4.2**.**
Let be a polynomial in the free -algebra, and suppose that is a residually finite-dimensional algebra such that is finite-dimensional. Then is finite-dimensional, too.
However, the following construction taken from [6] shows that Problem C has a negative solution for general algebras , even for ‘nice’ polynomials . Recall that the lower central series of , when viewed as a Lie algebra, is defined by and , for all .
Example 4.3**.**
(see Section 7 in [6])* Let be any simple field extension of a base field , and let be a vector space over with basis , for some fixed positive integer . Now let denote the (non-unital) Grassmann-like -algebra generated by subject to the relations*
,
for all . Notice that these relations imply that except when ; thus, in the case when , we impose the additional relations , for each . It is easy to see that has a -basis consisting of all the monomials of the form
,
where and . Clearly and . By induction, we also have
* (see Example 3.2),*
for each .
Now let be the algebra formed by identifying the elements corresponding to in each copy of the direct sum of countably many copies of . Then the following statements hold.
- (1)
If , then is a commutative -algebra with the property that
,
and yet
**
is infinite-dimensional. 2. (2)
If is a primitive root of unity whose order exceeds , then has the properties that
[TABLE]
and yet
[TABLE]
is infinite-dimensional.
Notice that Example 4.3 shows that the converse of Theorem 4.1 fails for both associative and Lie algebras. In closing, we remark that it remains conceivable that Problem C has a positive solution whenever is finitely generated.
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] R. Baer, ‘Endlichkeitskriterien fur Kommutator-gruppen’, Math. Ann. 124 (1952) 161-177.
- 2[2] P. Hall, The collected works of Philip Hall. Compiled and with a preface by K. W. Gruenberg and J. E. Roseblade. With an obituary by Roseblade. Oxford Science Publications. The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New York, 1988.
- 3[3] S.V. Ivanov, ‘P. Hall’s conjecture on the finiteness of verbal subgroups’, Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved. 325 (1989) 60-70.
- 4[4] T.K. Lee and K.S. Liu, ‘Algebras with a finite-dimensional maximal subalgebra’, Comm. Algebra 33 (2005) 339-342.
- 5[5] D.S. Passman, ‘The algebraic structure of group rings’. Pure and Applied Mathematics. Wiley-Interscience [John Wiley & Sons], New York-London-Sydney, 1977.
- 6[6] D. Riley and M. Shahada, ‘Relationships between the canonical ascending and descending central series of ideals of an associative algebra’, Comm. Algebra 45 (2017), no. 5, 1969-1982.
- 7[7] S.K. Sehgal, ‘Topics in Group Rings’, Marcel Dekker, New York, 1978.
- 8[8] I. Stewart, ‘Verbal and marginal properties of non-associative algebras’, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 28 (1974) 129-140.
