Set-theoretical solutions of the pentagon equation on groups
Francesco Catino, Marzia Mazzotta, and Maria Maddalena Miccoli

TL;DR
This paper characterizes set-theoretical solutions to the pentagon equation on groups, providing a complete description for solutions where either the first or second component forms a group, and discusses related open questions.
Contribution
It offers a complete classification of solutions of a specific form on groups, advancing understanding of the algebraic structure of solutions to the pentagon equation.
Findings
Complete description of solutions when one component is a group
Identification of conditions for solutions of the form s(x,y)=(x·y, x* y)
Open questions raised about broader solution classes
Abstract
Let be a set. A set-theoretical solution of the pentagon equation on is a map such that \begin{equation*} s_{23}\, s_{13}\, s_{12}=s_{12}\, s_{23}, \end{equation*} where , and , and is the flip map, i.e., the permutation on given by , for all . In this paper we give a complete description of the set-theoretical solutions of the form when either or is a group; moreover, we raise some questions.
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.
Set-theoretical solutions of the pentagon equation on groups
Francesco CATINO
Marzia MAZZOTTA
Maria Maddalena MICCOLI
Dipartimento di Matematica e Fisica “Ennio De Giorgi”
Università del Salento
Via Provinciale Lecce-Arnesano
73100 Lecce (Italy)
Abstract
Let be a set. A set-theoretical solution of the pentagon equation on is a map such that
[TABLE]
where , and , and is the flip map, i.e., the permutation on given by , for all .
In this paper we give a complete description of the set-theoretical solutions of the form when either or is a group; moreover, we raise some questions.
keywords:
Pentagon equation , set-theoretical solution , group
MSC:
[2010] 16W35 , 20G42 , 81R60
mytitlenotemytitlenotefootnotetext: This work was partially supported by the Dipartimento di Matematica e Fisica “Ennio De Giorgi” - Università del Salento. The authors are members of GNSAGA (INdAM).
1 Introduction
Let be a vector space over a field . A linear map is said to be a solution of the pentagon equation if
[TABLE]
where , and , where is the flip map on , i.e., , for all .
Solutions of the pentagon equation appear in various contexts and with different terminologies. For instance, the canonical element in the Heisenberg double of an arbitrary Hopf algebra satisfies the pentagon equation [5]. If is a Hilbert space, a unitary operator from into itself is said to be multiplicative if it is a solution of the pentagon equation [1]. According to Street [10], fixed a braided monoidal category in the sense of Joyal-Street, an arrow in is said to be a fusion operator if it satisfies the pentagon relation. For more information about relationships between of the pentagon equation and other topics, see the recent paper of Dimakis and Müller-Hoissen [3] along with the references therein.
A set-theoretical solution of the pentagon equation on an arbitrary set is a map which satisfies the “reversed” pentagon equation
[TABLE]
where , and , and is the flip map, i.e., the permutation on given by , for all .
A link between solutions and set-theoretical solutions of the pentagon equation is highlighted in the paper of Kashaev and Reshetikhin [7]. If is a finite set, a field and the vector space of the functions from to , then it is well-known that is isomorphic to . Moreover, for any map one can associate its pull-back , i.e., the linear map given by
[TABLE]
for every . Then, is a solution of the pentagon equation if and only if is a set-theoretical solution of the pentagon equation.
Recently, there have appeared several papers on set-theoretical solutions. See, for example, Zakrzewski [11], Baaj and Skandalis [1, 2], Kashaev and Sergeev [8], Jiang and Liu [4], Kashaev and Reshetikhin [7], and Kashaev [6].
For a map define binary operations and via
[TABLE]
for all . One can easily see that the map is a set-theoretical solution of the pentagon equation if and only if the following conditions hold
- (1)
, 2. (2)
, 3. (3)
,
for all .
As noted by Kashaev and Sergeev [8], under the assumption that is a group, one obtains that the only invertible set-theoretical solution of the pentagon equation on is given by .
In this paper we give a complete description of all set-theoretical solutions of the pentagon equation of the form when either or is a group. Finally, in the last section some questions are raised and partial answers are given to these.
2 Basic results
In this section, for the ease of the reader, we fix some notations and terminologies. Furthermore, we put together some available results and examples in the literature of set-theoretical solutions of the pentagon equation, without adding any new results.
Definition 1**.**
Let be a set. A set-theoretical solution of the pentagon equation on is a map such that
[TABLE]
where , and , and is the flip map, i.e., the permutation on given by , for all .
Instead, a set-theoretical solution of the reversed pentagon equation on the set is a map such that
[TABLE]
Hereinafter, by solution we mean a set-theoretical solution of the pentagon equation, whereas by reversed solution we mean a set-theoretical solution of the reversed pentagon equation.
We remark that a map is a solution if and only if is a reversed solution. Moreover, is an invertible solution if and only if is a reversed solution.
Note that the identity map is a solution (and a reversed solution) on , but the flip map is not a solution when .
Here, we give some easy examples of solutions. We point out that some of the solutions are obtained in non-algebraic contexts.
Examples 2**.**
(1) (Kac-Takesaki’s solutions) Let be a group. The maps given by
[TABLE]
for all , are invertible solutions on .
(2) Let be a semigroup and an idempotent endomorphism of . Then, the map given by
[TABLE]
for all , is a solution on . In particular, if is an idempotent element of , then is a solution on .
(3) (Militaru’s solution, [9]) If is a set and are idempotent maps from to itself such that , then the map given by
[TABLE]
for all , is a solution and a reversed solution on .
Let be a group and two subgroups such that and . Then, for every there exists a unique couple such that . Let and be maps such that , for every .
(4) (Zakrzewski’s solution, [11]) The map given by
[TABLE]
for all , is an invertible solution on .
(5) (Baaj-Skandalis’ solution, [2]) The map given by
[TABLE]
for all , is an invertible solution on .
In order to obtain different solutions, we give the classic definition of equivalent solutions below.
Definition 3**.**
Let be two sets, and solutions on and respectively. Then, and are said to be equivalent if there exists a a bijection such that .
As noted above, we remark that is a solution on a set if and only if is also a on . According to the definition of opposite operator of a multiplicative unitary operator given by Baaj and Skandalis [1], we give the following definition for a solution on an arbitrary set.
Definition 4**.**
Let be an invertible solution on a set . The solution on is called the opposite solution of .
Examples 5**.**
If and are Kac-Takesaki’s solutions, then the opposite solutions of and are respectively
and . 2. 2.
Zakrzewski and Baaj-Skandalis’ solutions are opposite of each other.
Baaj and Skandalis [1] introduced the concepts of commutativity and cocommutativity for multiplicative unitary operators defined on a Hilbert space. We translate these definitions for solutions on an arbitrary set.
Definition 6**.**
Let be a set and a solution on . Then, is said to be
commutative if , 2. 2.
cocommutative if .
According to Militaru [9], a reversed solution is commutative [resp. cocommutative] if the solution is commutative [resp. cocommutative]. Furthermore, if is an invertible solution on a set , then is commutative [resp. cocommutative] if and only if is cocommutative [resp. commutative].
Examples 7**.**
Let and be Kac-Takesaki’s solutions. Then, is cocommutative, whereas is commutative. 2. 2.
Militaru’s solutions are both commutative and cocommutative.
3 Description of the solutions on a group
In order to give a complete description of the solutions on a group , we slightly change this notation. We write instead of and instead , for all . Therefore, we give the following characterization for a solution on a set , of which the proof is a routine computation.
Proposition 8**.**
Let be a set, a map and write
,
where , for every . Then, is a solution on if and only if the following conditions hold
[TABLE]
for all . Moreover, s is invertible if and only if for any pair there exists a unique pair such that
, .
Now, we present a useful tool to construct new solutions on a group, by examining its normal subgroups.
Proposition 9**.**
Let be a group, a normal subgroup of , and a system of representatives of such that . If is a map such that , for every , then the map given by
[TABLE]
for all , is a solution on .
Proof.
In order to prove that is a solution, we shall prove only (3) of 8, since conditions (1) and (2) are straightforward. By hypothesis, if , since is a normal subgroup of , it follows that . Now, we compare
[TABLE]
and
.
Note that
and . Thus,
.
Hence, since also , we get
.
Analogously, one can prove that and are elements of and so they shall be equal. Hence, .
Therefore, is a solution on . ∎
Thus, a lot of examples of solutions on groups may be obtained using the 9 above. Some very easy examples of solutions on the symmetric groups are the following.
Example 10**.**
Let , the symmetric group of order , the alternating group of degree , and a system of representatives of , where is a transposition of . Then, the map given by
for every , satisfies the hypothesis of Proposition 9. Therefore, the map given by is a solution on .
Now, we want to show that all the solutions on a group are obtained as in 9. For this purpose, we need to start by proving several lemmas, in which, for every , interesting properties of the map are studied and, in particular, of the map . Indeed, if is a solution on a group , by condition (2) in 8, we get
[TABLE]
for all .
Lemma 11**.**
Let be a solution on a group . Then, the following conditions hold
, 2. 2.
, 3. 3.
,
for every .
Proof.
The statements easily follow by conditions (1)-(3) in 8. Indeed, by (2), we obtain and so , for every . Moreover, by condition (3), we obtain . Finally, by (2), we get
.
Therefore, . ∎
Remark 12**.**
In general, we observe that is not a homomorphism.
For example, let be the cyclic group of order and the map given by
, , , , , .
Considering (4), we have that , for all , and then one can see that is a solution on . But, for instance, , whereas . Therefore, is not a homomorphism.
In spite of that, we are able to show the following result.
Lemma 13**.**
Let be a solution on a group . Then, the subset of
,
is a normal subgroup of , called the kernel of .
Proof.
If , by (2) in 8, we have that
[TABLE]
Furthermore, . Indeed, by 2. in Lemma 11, we get
and, since is idempotent, we obtain
.
Hence, is in . Moreover, if , then and so, by 2. in Lemma 11, we have
.
Therefore, is in and so is a subgroup of .
Finally, we prove that is normal, that means , for every and . To this end, we observe that
[TABLE]
Indeed, by (3) in 8 and by 1. in Lemma 11, we get
.
Moreover,
[TABLE]
because .
Now, by (3) in 8 and condition (6) above, we obtain
[TABLE]
and, since by 3. in Lemma 11, we obtain
[TABLE]
Therefore, is a normal subgroup of . ∎
In the following result, we prove some interesting properties of the kernel of a solution on a group .
Lemma 14**.**
Let be a solution on a group and the kernel of . Then, the following conditions
, 2. 2.
, 3. 3.
,
hold, for all and for every .
Proof.
Let and .
Considering (5) we have that , and by condition (6) in Lemma 13, we get
2. 2.
By (2) in 8 and condition (6) in Lemma 13, we have
. 3. 3.
Finally, we show that . But, since , we have to prove that
.
By condition 2. in Lemma 11, we compute
[TABLE]
Therefore, is in .
∎
Now, we are able to prove the main result of this paper, in which we prove the converse of 9.
Theorem 15**.**
Let be a group, a normal subgroup of , and a system of representatives of such that . If is a map such that , for every , then the map given by
[TABLE]
*for all , is a solution on .
Conversely, if is a solution on , then there exists a normal subgroup of such that is a system of representatives of , , , for every , and*
[TABLE]
for all .
Proof.
The first part is proved in 9. Now, let be a solution on . In order to prove the converse, we recall that by condition (4)
[TABLE]
for all . Moreover, let be the kernel of , that is a normal subgroup of , as we proved in Lemma 13. Then, is a system of representatives of that contains . Indeed, by 1. Lemma 11. Furthermore, by 3. in Lemma 14, we have that
,
for every . Now, if is another element of , since , we get . It follows that there exists such that . Hence, by 1. in Lemma 14, . So, is a system of representatives of and , for every . ∎
As an immediate consequence of 15, if is a simple group, the only solutions on are and . Furthermore, as Kashaev and Sergeev observed in [8], if is an invertible map, the only solution on is given by . We give another proof of this fact, by using 15.
Corollary 16**.**
Let be a group and an invertible solution on . Then, holds, for every .
Proof.
By 15, if is the kernel of , then , for all . Hence, there exists such that , for all and, by 2. in Lemma 11, we get
.
Then, since is injective, , for every . Therefore, , for every . ∎
4 Some comments and questions
In this section we raise some natural questions about set-theoretical solutions of pentagon equation.
The first natural question is to describe all the solutions when is a group. Here, for convenience, we set , for all .
Proposition 17**.**
Let be a group. Then, is a solution on if and only if is an elementary abelian -group and holds, for all .
Proof.
Assuming that is a solution on , we obtain , for all , and so this implies
[TABLE]
Furthermore, and, by (7), this equality becomes
.
In particular, if , we get . In addition, from the associativity law of , we have
.
Hence, , for all . Therefore, is an elementary abelian -group and , for all .
Conversely, if we have
[TABLE]
and thus is a solution on . ∎
As we noted above, Militaru’s solutions are also reversed solutions. We can also build other solutions of this type, but we are not able to describe them all. Here, we characterize only the solutions on groups that are also reversed solutions. In particular, if is an elementary abelian -group, it is easy to check that the solution on is also reversed. Instead, by 15, in the case is a group, we can prove the following result.
Proposition 18**.**
Let be a group and a solution on . Then, is a reversed solution on if and only if is an elementary abelian -group and holds, for every .
Proof.
First, suppose is both a solution and a reversed solution on . Moreover, let be the kernel of . Then, by 15, , for all . Hence, requiring that is also a reversed solution, we get , for all and for some . In particular, if and , then . So, is an elementary abelian -group and holds, for all .
Conversely, we suppose is an elementary abelian -group. Then, is a solution on and
[TABLE]
Therefore, is also a reversed solution on . ∎
Finally, we are still not able to characterize solutions on a set that are both commutative and cocommutative. We completely describe this type of solutions in the specific case when either or is a group. Indeed, in the first case, if is an elementary abelian -group, the solution is both commutative and cocommutative; whereas if is a group, we give the following result.
Proposition 19**.**
Let be a group and a solution on . Then, is both commutative and cocommutative if and only if is abelian and holds, for every .
Proof.
Suppose the solution is both commutative and cocommutative. Then, since is commutative, is abelian; moreover, since is cocommutative, holds, for all .
Conversely, if is abelian, the solution is trivially both commutative and cocommutative. ∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[1] S. Baaj, G. Skandalis, Unitaries multiplicatifs et dualité pour le produits croisés de C*-algèbres , Ann. Sci. Éc. Norm. Sup. 26 (4) (1993), 425–488.
- 2[2] S. Baaj, G. Skandalis, Transformations pentagonales , C. R. Acad. Sci. Paris, Sér. I 327 , Série I (1998), 623–628.
- 3[3] A. Dimakis, F. Müller-Hoissen, Simplex and Polygon Equations , SIGMA Symmetry Integrability Geom. Methods Appl. 11 (2015), Paper 042, 49.
- 4[4] L. Jiang, M. Liu, On set-theoretical solution of the pentagon equation , Adv. Math. (China) 34 (3) (2005), 331–337.
- 5[5] R.M. Kashaev, The Heisenberg double and the pentagon relation , Algebra i Analiz 8 (4) (1996), 63–74.
- 6[6] R.M. Kashaev, Fully noncommutative discrete Liouville equation , RIMS Kôkyûroku Bessatsu, B 28 , 89–98, I Res. Inst. Math. Sci. (RIMS), Kyoto, 2011.
- 7[7] R.M. Kashaev, N. Reshetikhin, Symmetrically Factorizable Groups and Set-theoretical Solutions of the Pentagon Equation , Contemp. Math. 433 (2007), 267–279.
- 8[8] R.M. Kashaev, S.M. Sergeev, On Pentagon, Ten-Term and Tetrahedrom Relations , Commun. Math. Phys. 1995 (1998), 309–319.
