This paper determines the minimal number of generators needed for the semigroup of all order-preserving partial injections on a finite fence, a specific partial order structure, focusing on odd-sized sets.
Contribution
It provides the exact rank and a minimal generating set for the semigroup of order-preserving partial injections on odd-sized fences, extending previous work to this specific case.
Findings
01
Calculated the rank of the semigroup for odd n
02
Provided a minimal generating set for the semigroup
03
Extended known results to a new class of partial orders
Abstract
A fence is a particular partial order on a (finite) set, close to the linear order. In this paper, we calculate the rank of the semigroup FIn of all order-preserving partial injections on an n-element fence. In particular, we provide a minimal generating set for FIn. In the present paper, n is odd since this problem for even n was already solved by I. Dimitrova and J. Koppitz.
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.
Taxonomy
Topicssemigroups and automata theory
Full text
The rank of the inverse semigroup of partial automorphisms on a finite fence
J. Koppitz and T. Musunthia111This research is partially supported by the
Thailand Research Fund, Grant No. MRG6180296 and Research Fund of
Faculty of Science, Silpakorn University, Grant No. SRF-JRG-2561-08.
Abstract
A fence is a particular partial order on a (finite) set, close to
the linear order. In this paper, we calculate the rank of the semigroup FIn of all order-preserving partial injections on an n-element fence. In particular, we provide a minimal generating set for FIn. In the present paper, n is odd since this problem for
even n was already solved by I. Dimitrova and J. Koppitz.
Let n∈N and denote by PTn the semigroup (under
composition) of all partial transformations on the set n:={1,…,n} of the first n natural numbers. The set In of all partial injections on n forms an inverse subsemigroup
of PTn. For more information about the symmetric inverse
semigroup In, we refer the reader to O. Ganyushkin and
V. Mazorchuk’s book [9].
Let ⪯ be any partial order on n. The pair (n,⪯) can be regarded as a digraph. Let α∈PTn.
Then α is called order-preserving on n with respect
to ⪯ if a⪯b⇒aα⪯bα, for all
a,b∈domα. If α∈In is order-preserving then it is a
partial injective endomorphisms on the digraph (n,⪯). Clearly, the
set IEnd(n,⪯) of all partial injective endomorphisms on (n,⪯) forms a submonoid of In, which has
not to be inverse, in general. A regular element α in IEnd(n,⪯) is characterized by the following property:
[TABLE]
Such regular elements in IEnd(n,⪯) are called partial
automorphisms on (n,⪯). The set PAut(n,⪯) of all strong partial automorphisms on (n,⪯) forms an inverse subsemigroup of IEnd(n,⪯).
A very important particular and natural case occurs when a linear order ≤,
e.g. that one induced by the usual order on the natural numbers, is
considered. The monoid PIOn of all partial order-preserving
injections on (n,≤) has been extensively studied. Basic
information about the monoid of PIOn, one can find in
[7]. In [15], the author considers
generating sets of the semigroup of all partial
injective decreasing maps of (n,≤), a submonoid of PIOn. The maximal subsemigroups of the ideals of some semigroups of partial
injections on (n,≤) were determined by I. Dimitrova and J. Koppitz [3].
In [1], the authors consider distance-preserving
injections on (n,≤). They study the algebraic structure of such semigroups,
e.g. the Green’s relations.
A non-linear order close to a linear order in some sense is the so-called
zig-zag order. The pair (n,⪯) is called zig-zag poset or
fence if
[TABLE]
The definition of the partial order ⪯ is self-explanatory. Observe
that every element in a fence is either minimal or maximal.
If the domain of an α∈PTn is n, i.e.
domα=n, then α is called (full) transformation on
n. The set Tn of all full transformations on n forms a submonoid of PTn. The monoid TFn of all order-preserving transformations within Tn
(with respect to ⪯), i.e. of all endomorphisms on (n,⪯), was first investigated by J.D. Currie and T.I. Visentin in [2] and by
A. Rutkowski [13]. In [2], by using generating functions, the authors calculate
the cardinality of TFn for the case that n is even. On the
other hand, an exact formula for the number of endomorphisms on (n,⪯) for even as well as odd n was given in [13]. Recently, in
[8], the authors determine the rank of TFn. Recall that
the rank of a semigroup S, denoted by rankS, is the minimal size of a
generating set of S,
[TABLE]
In particular, a concrete generating set of TFn of minimal
size is given in [8]. Moreover, the authors characterize the
transformations on n preserving the fence. It is worth
mentioning that several other properties of monoids of order-preserving
transformations of a fence were also studied. In [12, 14], the authors discussed
the regular elements of these monoids. Coregular elements (i.e. elements α with the property α=α3) of these monoids were
determined in [11]. Some relative ranks of the monoid of all partial
transformations preserving an infinite zig-zag order were determined in
[5].
In this paper, we will denote the semigroup of all partial
automorphisms on (n,⪯) by FIn, i.e. PAut(n,⪯)=FIn. This inverse semigroup was
first studied by I. Dimitrova and J. Koppitz in [4]. The authors described the
Green’s relations on FIn. In fact, they described only the J- relation since the relations L,R, and H are clear because FIn is an inverse semigroup.
Moreover, they show that FIn is generated by the set
[TABLE]
Recall that the rank of a (partial) transformation α (in symbols: rankα) is the size of the range of α (in symbols: imα), i.e. rankα=∣imα∣. For the case that n
is even, it is proved that rankFIn=n+1 and a concrete
generating set of FIn with n+1 elements is given in [4]. On the
other hand, the rank of FIn is still an open problem,
whenever n is odd. We will solve it in the present paper. We will determine
the rank of FIn and give a concrete generating set of FIn
with minimal size in the case that n is odd.
Without loss of generality, let 1≺2≻3≺⋯≻n. Such
fences are also called up-fences. The fence 1≻2≺3≻⋯≺n would be called down-fence. We avoid both notations up-fence and
down-fence. In fact, in order to check a fence is an up-fence or down-fence,
we need that 1 and 2 are comparable with respect to ⪯. Recall
that x,y∈n are comparable with respect to ⪯ if x≺y or x=y or x≻y. Otherwise, x and y are called incomparable. But the restriction that
1 and 2 belong to the fence and are comparable is an unnecessary
restriction for the concept fence since instead of n one could
choose another n-element set or one could define ⪯ on n such that 1 and 2 are incomparable.
But if the fence (n,⪯) is defined as above (it is the most
natural way to do it in that way) then we observe that any x,y∈n are comparable if and only if x∈{y−1,y,y+1}. For general
background on Semigroup Theory and standard notation, we refer the reader to
Howie‘s book [10].
2 Main result
Let us fix now an odd natural number n. Clearly, for U⊆n, the partial identity mapping idU:=idn∣U, i.e. the
identity mapping idn on n restricted to U,
is a partial automorphism on (n,⪯). In
particular, idn∈FIn. There are exactly two
automorphisms in FIn, besides idn the
reflection
[TABLE]
Note that FI1 consists of the identity mapping on {1} and
the empty transformation ∅. Since these both partial
transformations do not generate each other, the rank of FI1
is 2. We suppose now that n≥3. I. Dimitrova and J. Koppitz proved FIm=⟨Jm⟩ for all natural numbers m in [4], which comprises several pages and a few
of lemmas in [4]. For the case that n is odd, one can shorten the proof.
Therefore, and for the sake of completeness, we will give a new proof for
the particular case that n is odd. For this, we define a series of partial transformations of Jn. Let
\alpha_{i}=\left(\begin{array}[]{ccccccc}1&\cdots&i-1&i&i+1&\cdots&n\\
1&\cdots&i-1&&n&\cdots&i+1\end{array}\right) for even i∈{2,…,n−1},
\beta_{2}^{even}=\left(\begin{array}[]{cccccc}1&2&3&4&\cdots&n\\
&1&&4&\cdots&n\end{array}\right)\text{, and }\beta_{n-1}^{even}=\left(\begin{array}[]{cccccc}1&\cdots&n-3&n-2&n-1&n\\
3&\cdots&n-1&&1&\end{array}\right).
In the case n≥5, we define
\alpha_{i,j}=\left(\begin{array}[]{ccccccccccc}1&\cdots&i-1&i&i+1&\cdots&j-1&j&j+1&\cdots&n\\
1&\cdots&i-1&&j-1&\cdots&i+1&&j+1&\cdots&n\end{array}\right) for 2≤i<j≤n−1, where i and j have the same parity,
\alpha_{1,j}=\left(\begin{array}[]{cccccccc}1&2&\cdots&j-1&j&j+1&\cdots&n\\
&j-1&\cdots&2&&j+1&\cdots&n\end{array}\right) and
\alpha_{j,n}=\left(\begin{array}[]{cccccccc}1&\cdots&j-1&j&j+1&\cdots&n-1&n\\
1&\cdots&j-1&&n-1&\cdots&j+1&\end{array}\right) for odd j∈{3,…,n−2}, and
\beta_{i}^{odd}=\left(\begin{array}[]{ccccccccc}1&2&3&\cdots&i&i+1&i+2&\cdots&n\\
i&&1&\cdots&i-2&&i+2&\cdots&n\end{array}\right) and
\beta_{i}^{even}=\left(\begin{array}[]{ccccccccc}1&\cdots&i-2&i-1&i&i+1&i+2&\cdots&n\\
3&\cdots&i&&1&&i+2&\cdots&n\end{array}\right) for even i∈{4,…,n−3}.
Note that βievenβiodd=idn∖{i−1,i+1} for each
even i∈{2,…,n−1}, αiαi=idn∖{i} for each i∈n, and αi,jαi,j=idn∖{i,j} for all i<j∈n
having the same parity. Further, let Parn be the set of all δ∈FIn such that x and xδ have different parity for
some x∈domδ. First, we observe that each δ∈Parn is
generated by elements of FIn∖Parn and {idn}∪{βiodd,βieven:i∈{2,4,…,n−1}}⊆Jn.
Lemma 2.1**.**
Let δ∈Parn. Then there are β∈FIn∖Parn and l1,…,lp,r1…,rp∈{idn}∪{βiodd,βieven:i∈{2,4,…,n−1}}
with δ=l1⋯lpβr1⋯rp.
Proof.
Let x∈domδ such that x and xδ have different parity. If
x is odd then xδ is even, where xδ−1,xδ+1∈/imδ. Let β:=idnδβxδeven. Then it is easy
to verify that ∣{w∈domδ:w and wδ have different parity}∣>∣{w∈domβ:w and wβ have different parity}∣ and ββxδodd=δβxδevenβxδodd=δ since imδ⊆domβxδeven. If x is even then xδ is odd and x−1,x+1∈/domδ. In this case, let β:=βxoddδidn
and we observe that ∣{w∈domδ:w and wδ have different parity}∣>∣{w∈domβ:w and wβ have different parity}∣, where βxevenβ=βxevenβxoddδ=δ since imβxodd⊇domδ. Now, we can consider β instead of δ. Since the domain of δ is finite, we obtain successively after p steps l1,…,lp,r1…,rp∈{idn}∪{βiodd,βieven:i∈{2,4,…,n−1}} and a β∈FIn∖Parn such that δ=l1⋯lpβr1⋯rp.
∎
The following fact will be used frequently without to refer it.
If U is a convex subset of the domain of a δ∈FIn then
Uδ={xδ:x∈U} is also a convex set. Next, we show that any δ∈FIn∖Jn with a
convex domain can be generated by elements of Jn and a
transformation β∈FIn with rankβ>rankδ.
Lemma 2.2**.**
Let δ∈FIn∖Jn. If domδ is a convex
set then there are β∈FIn with rankβ=rankδ+1 and α∈Jn such that δ=αβ.
Proof.
Suppose that domδ is a convex set.
Since both intervals domδ and imδ have a lenght less than or equal
n−3, there are x,w∈nˉ such that w−1,w,w+1∈{0,1,…,n,n+1}∖domδ and x−1,x,x+1∈{0,1,…,n,n+1}∖imδ. We define a
transformation β by
[TABLE]
Clearly, β∈FIn with rankβ=rankδ+1 and δ=idn∖{w}β.
∎
We note that the empty set is convex. So, the empty
transformation ∅ is a product of two transformations with rank ≥1. Now, we can prove the following proposition, which is a particular case of
Theorem 3.15 in [4] for n is odd.
Proposition 2.3**.**
FIn* is generated by Jn.*
Proof.
Let 3≤r≤n and suppose that β∈⟨Jn⟩ for all β∈FIn with rankβ>n−r. Let now δ∈FIn with rankδ=n−r. By
Lemma 2.1, we can restrict us to the case δ∈FIn∖Parn. Now, we choose x∈n∖domδ
in the following way: There is z<x such that w∈/domδ for all w<z and {z,…,x−1}⊆domδ. Clearly, if domδ={r+1,…,n} then such x exists. Note, by Lemma 2.2, we can skip
the case that domδ={r+1,…,n}.
Now, we will show that one can restrict oneself to the case that wδ>{z,…,x−1}δ for all w∈domδ∖{z,…,x−1} and (x−2)δ<(x−1)δ, whenever x−2∈domδ. For this let {r1<⋯<rs} be a convex interval in domδ with r1−1,rs+1∈{0,1,…,n,n+1}∖domδ such that wδ>{r1,…,rs}δ for all w∈domδ∖{r1,…,rs}. Suppose that x−1∈/{r1,…,rs}, i.e. r1>2. If rs is
odd then we define σ:=γnαn−rsγnδ, where δ=γnαn−rsγnγnαn−rsγnδ and α0=γn. If rs is even and r1 is odd then we
define σ:=αr1−1δγn, where δ=αr1−1αr1−1δγnγn. If both r1
and rs are even and p:=max{zδ,…,(x−1)δ} is odd
then we define σ:=δγnαn−pγn, where δ=δγnαn−pγnγnαn−pγn. If all r1, rs, and p are even then 1∈/imδ and we define
σ:=δα1,p+1, where δ=δα1,p+1α1,p+1. Hence, δ is the product of σ and transformations in Jn. Straightforward calculations show
that there are z<x∈n such that {z,…,x−1}⊆domσ is a convex set and x,w∈/domσ for all w<z, where wσ>{z,…,x−1}σ for all w∈domσ∖{z,…,x−1}. Suppose that x−2∈domσ with (x~−2)σ>(x~−1)σ. If z is odd then we define υ:=σγnαn−zδγn, where σ=σγnαn−zδγnγnαn−zδγn. If z is even and x−1 is odd then we define υ:=γnαn−x+1γnσ, where σ=γnαn−x+1γnγnαn−x+1γnσ. If both z and x−1 are even then we
define υ:=αz−1,xσ, where σ=αz−1,xαz−1,xσ. Hence, σ is the product of υ and
transformations in Jn. Simple calculations show that there are z<x∈n such that {z,…,x−1}⊆domυ is a convex set and x,w∈/domυ for all w<z, where wυ>{z,…,x−1}υ for all w∈domυ∖{z,…,x−1} and (x−2)υ<(x−1)υ, whenever x−2∈domν. This proves the desired restriction.
Without loss of generality, we can assume that zδ∈{1,2}. Otherwise, we consider the transformation \widehat{\delta}:=\delta\left(\begin{array}[]{cccc}3&4&\cdots&n\\
1&2&\cdots&n-2\end{array}\right)^{\left\lfloor\frac{z\delta-1}{2}\right\rfloor}, where \delta=\widehat{\delta}\left(\begin{array}[]{cccc}1&2&\cdots&n-2\\
3&4&\cdots&n\end{array}\right)^{\left\lfloor\frac{z\delta-1}{2}\right\rfloor} and zδ∈{1,2}. We put now
[TABLE]
Since x∈/domδ and wδ>(x−1)δ for all w∈domδ∖{z,…,x−1}, either a+1∈/imδ or domδ
is a convex set. In the latter case, by Lemma 2.2, there are β∈FIn with rankβ=rankδ+1 and α∈Jn such that δ=αβ.
Since β∈⟨Jn⟩ by the inductive assumption, we obtain δ=αβ∈⟨Jn⟩. So, we have to
consider the case a+1∈/imδ, where either x+1∈domδ or
x+1∈/domδ.
Suppose that x+1∈domδ. If (x+1)δ=a+2 then we define a partial
transformation β1 by
[TABLE]
Clearly, β1∈FIn with rankβ1>n−r. We have
δ=αaβ1∈⟨Jn⟩. Now, we
show that there is δ∈FIn with wδ=wδ for w∈domδ∩{1,…,x−1} and (x+1)δ=a+2 such that δ∈⟨Jn,δ⟩. If it is the case then we have δ∈⟨Jn⟩ since δ∈⟨Jn⟩ by the previous considerations.
Suppose that a+2∈imδ. Then there is y∈domδ with yδ=a+2. Since wδ≤a for all w∈domδ with w<x, we
conclude that y≥x+1. If y+1∈/domδ then we put β2:=αx,y+1, whenever y<n and β2:=αx,
whenever y=n. Clearly, β2∈FIn. Then δ=β2β2δ, where wβ2δ=wδ for w∈domδ∩{1,…,x−1} and (x+1)β2δ=a+2. Now, we consider the case that y+1∈domδ. This provides (y+1)δ=a+3 and y−1∈/domδ since a+1∈/imδ. If y−1 is even then δ=αy−1αy−1δ, where wαy−1δ=wδ for w∈domδ∩{1,…,x−1}, nαy−1δ=a+2, and n+1∈/dom(αy−1δ) (which provides a previous case). If y−1 is odd
and there is an odd u>y+1 with u∈/domδ then we have δ=αy−1,uαy−1,uδ, where wαy−1,uδ=wδ for w∈domδ∩{1,…,x−1}, (u−1)αy−1,uδ=a+2, and u∈/dom(αy−1,uδ) (which provides
a previous case). Let now y−1 be odd and let each u∈n∖domδ with u>y+1 be even. Then we observe that w−1,w+1∈{y,…,n}δ, for each even w∈{y,…,n}δ. Hence,
there is an odd k∈{y,…,n}δ with k+1∈/{y,…,n}δ. Because (x+1)δ (>yδ) is even,
this implies the existence of an even u<y with u∈/domδ.
If u>x then we have δ=αuαuδ, where wαuδ=wδ for w∈domδ∩{1,…,u−1}
with u>x and (n−y+1)αwδ=a+2, where (n−y+1+1)∈/dom(αuδ). We have again a previous case. Finally, we have to
consider the case u<x. In particular, 1,2∈/domδ. We have α2γnγnα2δ=δ, where wγnα2δ=(w+2)δ, for all w∈{1,…,n−2} with w+2∈domδ. Then (y−2)γnα2δ=a+1, y−3 is odd and n∈/dom(γnα2δ), i.e. γnα2δ is a previous case.
Admit now a+2∈/imδ. If (x+1)δ+1∈/imδ then we
have δ=δαa+1,(x+1)δ+1αa+1,(x+1)δ+1, where wδαa+1,(x+1)δ+1=wδ, for w∈domδ∩{1,…,x−1}, and (x+1)δαa+1,(x+1)δ+1=a+2. Suppose now that (x+1)δ+1∈imδ, i.e. (x+1)δ−1∈/imδ.
If (x+1)δ is even then a+2 is even and we put β3:=αa+2. If (x+1)δ is odd then we put β3:=α(x+1)δ−1. Clearly, β3∈FIn, δ=δβ3β3, where wδβ3=wδ for w∈domδ∩{1,…,x−1}, and a+2∈/imδβ3. Since (x+1)δ−1∈/imδ, we can conclude that (x+1)δβ3+1∈/imδβ3 (the previous case for δβ3).
We finish the proof with the case that x+1∈/domδ. If a+2∈/imδ we define a partial transformation β4 by
[TABLE]
It is easy to verify that β4∈FIn. Then we have δ=idn∖{x}β4. Suppose that there is y∈domδ with yδ=a+2. We can assume that y+1∈/domδ.
Otherwise, y−1∈/domδ and there is i∈{0,1} such that x+i
is even and δ=αx+iαx+iδ, where wαx+iδ=wδ for w∈domδ∩{1,…,x−1}. In
particular, we have (n−y+x+i+1)αx+iδ=a+2 and (n−y+x+i+2)∈/dom(αx+iδ). Here we have a previous case (for αx+iδ). Having y+1∈/domδ, we obtain δ=αx,y+1αx,y+1δ, where wαx,y+1δ=wδ
for 1≤w≤x and (x+1)αx,y+1δ=a+2, a previous case
for the transformation αx,y+1δ.
Altogether, we have shown that there is δ∈FIn with wδ=wδ for w∈domδ∩{1,…,x−1} and (x+1)δ=a+2 such that δ∈⟨Jn,δ⟩. Consequently, we have shown that
FIn⊆⟨Jn⟩.
∎
Now, we construct a generating set of FIn of minimal size.
By Proposition 2.3 and since no element in Jn
can be generated by elements which not belong to Jn, we have to find a
generating set of Jn of minimal size. For this, we define G3:={γ3,α1,α2,β2odd,β2even} and Gn:={γn}∪{αi:i∈{1,,…,2n+1} is odd}∪{αi:i∈{2,4,…,n−3}}∪{βiodd,βieven:i∈{2,…,2n+1} is even}∪{αi,j:i,j∈n are odd with 4≤j−i<n−1, i≤n−j+1}, whenever n≥5.
Lemma 2.4**.**
Let δ∈Jn∩Parn. Then there is
exactly one x∈domδ such that x and xδ have different
parity. In particular, it holds xδ∈{1,n} or x∈{1,n}.
Proof.
Since δ∈Parn, there is an x∈domδ such that x
and xδ have different parity. Assume that x is even and xδ∈/{1,n}. Then x−1,x+1∈/domδ and xδ−1,xδ+1∈/imδ. Hence, since rankδ≥n−2, there is
only one y∈domδ such that y and yδ have different
parity, namely x. So, we have 2n+1−2 odd elements in the domain
of δ, which have to be mapped to 2n+1−1 odd elements in
the image of δ, a contradiction. By the same argumentation, we
obtain that x is unique with x∈{1,n}, whenever xδ is even.
∎
Lemma 2.5**.**
Let δ∈Jn. Then δ∈⟨Gn⟩.
Proof.
If rankδ=n then δ=γn∈Gn or δ=idn=γnγn.
Let now rankδ=n−1. Then there is i∈n∖domδ. We observe that imδ=domδ or imδ=(domδ)γn.
If i≤n−3 is even then δ=αi∈Gn or δ=αi2 or δ=αiγn or δ=αi2γn or
\delta=\left(\begin{array}[]{ccccccc}1&\cdots&i-1&i&i+1&\cdots&n\\
i-1&\cdots&1&&i+1&\cdots&n\end{array}\right)=\gamma_{n}\alpha_{n-i+1}\gamma_{n} or δ=γnαn−i+1 or
\delta=\left(\begin{array}[]{ccccccc}1&\cdots&i-1&i&i+1&\cdots&n\\
i-1&\cdots&1&&n&\cdots&i+1\end{array}\right)=\gamma_{n}\alpha_{n-i+1}\gamma_{n}\alpha_{i} or δ=γnαn−i+1γnαiγn.
If i=n−1 then δ=γnα2 or δ=γnα2γn or δ=γnα22 or δ=γnα22γn.
If i is odd and i≤2n+1 then δ=αi∈Gn
or δ=αiγn and if i>2n+1 then δ=γnαn−i+1 or δ=γnαn−i+1γn, where −i<−2n+1, i.e. n−i+1<2n+1.
Now, we consider the case rankδ=n−2 and δ∈/Parn. Then
there are i,j∈n∖domδ with i<j. Let both i
and j be odd. If 4≤j−i<n−1 and i≤n−j+1 then δ=αi,j∈Gn or δ=αi,jγn. Suppose now that j−i=n−1, i.e. i=1 and j=n.
Here, we obtain δ=α1,n=γnα1αn or δ=α1,n2=α1αn.
If 2=j−i<n−1, i.e. i+2=j then \delta=\left(\begin{array}[]{ccccccccc}1&\cdots&i-1&i&i+1&i+2&i+3&\cdots&n\\
1&\cdots&i-1&&i+1&&i+3&\cdots&n\end{array}\right)=\alpha_{i}\alpha_{i+2} or \delta=\left(\begin{array}[]{ccccccccc}1&\cdots&i-1&i&i+1&i+2&i+3&\cdots&n\\
n&\cdots&n-i+2&&n-i&&n-i-2&\cdots&1\end{array}\right)=\alpha_{i}\alpha_{i+2}\gamma_{n}. Suppose now i>n−j+1. Then
we put r:=n−j+1 and s:=n−i+1. We observe that r=n−j+1<i=n−(n−i+1)+1=n−s+1 and δ=γnαr,s.γn.
Admit now that i is even or j is even. The following is not
hard to verify. If i is even and j is odd then δ∈{αi,αi2,γnαn−i+1γn,αiγn,αi2γn,γnαn−i+1,γnαn−i+1γnαi,γnαn−i+1γnαiγn}{αj,αjγn}. If i is odd and j is even then we obtain δ∈⟨Gn⟩, dually. If both i and j are even then we have αi,j=αiαj−iαi and δ∈Γ1Γ2{γn,idn}, where Γ1={idn,αj}{idn,αi,j}{idn,γnαn−i+1γn} and Γ2={αi2αj2,αiαj2,αi2,γnαn−j+1γn}.
Now, we consider the case rankδ=n−2 and δ∈Parn. By Lemma 2.4,
there is exactly one x∈domδ such that x and xδ have different
parity and either x is even and xδ∈{1,n} or x∈{1,n}.
Hence, there is an
even a∈n such that δ=βaodd or \delta=\left(\begin{array}[]{ccccccccc}1&2&3&\cdots&n-a+1&n-a+2&n-a+3&\cdots&n\\
a&&n&\cdots&a+2&&a-2&\cdots&1\end{array}\right)=\alpha_{2}\beta_{a}^{odd} or δ=βaeven or \delta=\left(\begin{array}[]{ccccccccc}1&\cdots&a-2&a-1&a&a+1&a+2&\cdots&n\\
n&&n-a+3&&1&&n-a+1&\cdots&3\end{array}\right)=\beta_{a}^{even}\alpha_{2}. Suppose that a>2n+1. Then
we have βaodd=α2βn−a+1oddγn and βaeven=γnβn−a+1evenα2, where n−a+1<n−(2n+1)+1=2n+1.
∎
Lemma 2.5 shows ⟨Jn⟩=⟨Gn⟩. Thus, Proposition 2.3 provides that Gn is a
generating set for FIn.
Corollary 2.6**.**
FIn=⟨Gn⟩.
It remains to show that Gn is a generating set of minimal size.
It is useful to classify the partial injections in FIn
with rank n−1. For 1≤i≤2n+1, let Ri:={α∈FIn:domα=n∖{i} or domα=n∖{n−i+1}}. Clearly, ⋃{Ri:1≤i≤2n+1}={α∈FIn:rankα=n−1}. Moreover,
any generating set of FIn contains elements form each Ri,
1≤i≤2n+1, as the following lemma will show.
Lemma 2.7**.**
Let G⊆FIn with FIn=⟨G⟩. Then G∩Ri=∅ for all i∈{1,2,…,2n+1}.
Proof.
Assume there is an i∈{1,2,…,2n+1} with G∩Ri=∅. Then αi∈/G and there are g1,…,gs∈G∖{idnˉ} such that αi=g1⋯gs,
where gkgk+1=idnˉ for 1≤k<s. This implies rankg1=n,
i.e. g1=γn, or g1∈Ri. The latter one is not
possible. But g1=γn provides rankg2=n, i.e. g2=γn, and thus g1g2=idnˉ, or g2∈Ri. Both are not
possible.
∎
Now, we are able to state the minimal size of a generating set of FIn. It will coincide with the size of Gn, which gives us the rank
of FIn.
Proposition 2.8**.**
Let G be a generating set for FIn. Then ∣G∣≥5 if n=3 and ∣G∣≥2n−5+⌊4n+6⌋⌊4n+7⌋ if n≥5.
Proof.
Since γn and idn=γnγn are the only
transformations in FIn with rank n, we can conclude that we
have at least one transformation with rank n in G, namely γn.
Lemma 2.7 provides that there are at least ⌈4n⌉ transformations in G∩⋃{Ri:1≤i≤2n+1, i is odd}, where ⌈4n⌉={m∈{1,…,2n+1}:m is odd}. Moreover, there is at least one element in G∩R2, by Lemma 2.7. If n=3 then we have at least ⌈4n⌉+1=2
elements in G with rank n−1. Suppose that n≥5. If 2n+1 is
even then there is at least one element in G∩R2n+1, by
Lemma 2.7, too. If n=5 then we have at least ⌈4n⌉+1=⌈4n⌉+2n−3 elements
in G with rank n−1. If n=7 then we have at least ⌈4n⌉+1+1=⌈4n⌉+2n−3
elements in G with rank n−1. Let now n≥9. We consider the case
that i∈{4,…,2n−1} is even. Assume that ∣G∩Ri∣≤1. It is easy to verify that ∣Ri∣=16, but on the other hand, for any α∈Ri, we
have ∣⟨α,FIn∖Ri⟩∩Ri∣≤8, because ⟨α,FIn∖Ri⟩∩Ri⊆{αi,αi2,αiγn,αi2γn,γnαi,γnαi2,γnαiγn,γnαi2γn}. This implies that Ri⟨G⟩, a contradiction. If 2n+1 is even then 4n−7={m∈{4,…,2n−1}:m is even}, i.e. we have at least 1+1+2(4n−7)=2n−3 elements in G∩⋃{Ri:1≤i≤2n+1, i is even}. If 2n+1
is odd then 4n−5={m∈{4,…,2n−1}:m is even}, i.e. we have at least 1+2(4n−5)=2n−3 elements in G∩⋃{Ri:1≤i≤2n+1, i is even}. Altogether, we have at least ⌈4n⌉+2n−3 elements in G with rank n−1,
whenever n≥5.
Assume that ∣G∩Parn∣<2⌊4n+1⌋, where ⌊4n+1⌋={m∈{2,…,2n+1}:m is even}. Note, there exists exactly one x∈domα with x and
xα have different parity, whenever α∈Jn∩Parn, by
Lemma 2.4. This
provides that there is an even j∈{2,…,2n+1} such that jα,(n−j+1)α∈/{1,n} for all α∈G or 1α,nα∈/{j,n−j+1} for all α∈G.
Suppose that 1α,nα∈/{j,n−j+1} for all α∈G.
In particular, this implies that βjodd∈/G. Hence, there
are g1,…,gs∈G∖{idnˉ} such that βjodd=g1⋯gs. Since 1βjodd and 1 have
different parity, we conclude that there is k∈{1,…,s} such that
gk∈Parn. Without loss of generality, we can assume that gr∈/Parn for k<r≤s. By Lemma 2.4, then there is an even m∈n such that 1gk=m or ngk=m. Since 1gk,ngk∈/{j,n−j+1}, we conclude that m∈/{j,n−j+1}. Note that imβjodd=n∖{j−1,j+1}. If k=s then imβjodd=im(g1⋯gs)=imgk=n∖{m−1,m+1}=n∖{j−1,j+1}, a contradiction. If k<s then we put
[TABLE]
If g=idn then we get a contradiction by the previous arguments. If g=γn then imβjodd=im(g1⋯gkg)={n−m,n−m+2}=n∖{j−1,j+1} since m=n−j+1, a contradiction. If rankg=n−1 then img=n∖{j−1} or img=n∖{j+1}. First, we consider the case img=n∖{j−1}. Since j−1 is odd, we can conclude that
g∈{αj−1,γnαj−1}. Suppose that g=αj−1. Since rankg1⋯gkg=rankgk=n−2, we have imgk⊆domg. This implies j−1∈{m−1,m+1}. Because of j=m, we have j−1=m+1. This provides m−1=j−3, i.e. j−3∈/imgk=im(g1⋯gk)=im(g1⋯gkαj−1)=im(g1⋯gkg), a contradiction. Suppose that g=γnαj−1.
Clearly, domg=n∖{n−j+2}. Then imgk⊆domg
provides n−j+2∈{m−1,m+1}. But n−j+1=m gives n−j+2=m−1. Hence,
m+1=n−j+4 and we obtain j−3=(n−j+4)γnαj−1. Thus j−3∈/im(g1⋯gkg), a contradiction. Dually, we can treat the
case img=n∖{j+1}. If rankg=n−2 then img=n∖{j−1,j+1}. Since both j−1 and j+1 are odd, we can conclude
that domg=n∖{j−1,j+1} or domg=n∖{n−j,n−j+2}, since g=αj−1αj+1 or g=γnαj−1αj+1. But because of m=n−j+1 and m=j, we have m−1=n−j
and m−1=j−1, respectively. This implies imgk={m−1,m+1}=domg, a contradiction.
Suppose that jα,(n−j+1)α∈/{1,n} for all α∈G.
Then we conclude dually that there are δ1,…,δt∈G∖{idnˉ} such that βjeven=δ1⋯δt but domδ1⋯δt=domβjeven,
i.e. we obtain a contradiction, too.
Suppose that n≥5. By straightforward combinatorial calculations, one
obtains that there are exactly ⌊4n⌋⌊4n+2⌋−1 pairs (i,j) of odd numbers i,j∈n with 4≤j−i<n−1 and i≤n−j+1. Assume that
there are less than ⌊4n⌋⌊4n+2⌋−1 elements in G∖Parn with rank n−2. Note that for odd numbers i,j∈n with 4≤j−i<n−1
and i≤n−j+1, it holds 4≤(n−i+1)−(n−j+1)<n−1 but (n−j+1)>n−(n−i+1)+1, whenever i=n−j+1. In particular, i=n−j+1
implies j=n−i+1. This justifies the existence of a pair (i,j) of odd
numbers i,j∈n with 4≤j−i<n−1 and i≤n−j+1 such
that domα=n∖{i,j} and domα=n∖{n−i+1,n−j+1} for all α∈G. In particular, αi,j∈/G and there are h1,…,hu∈G∖{idnˉ} such that αi,j=h1⋯hu. Note that each α∈FIn with domα=n∖{υ} for some odd υ∈n is either
order-preserving or order-reversing. Assume that rankhq≥n−1 for all q∈{1,…,u}.
Since αi,j is neither order-preserving nor order-reversing, there
is an even v∈n with v∈/dom(h1⋯hu), a
contradiction. This implies the existence of a k∈{1,…,u} with rankhk=n−2. Without loss of generality, we can assume that rankhq≥n−1 for 1≤q<k. In particular, an odd number is missing in domhq, for q∈{1,…,k}. Let domhk={s,t}. Since hk∈G, we have {s,t}={i,j} as well as {s,t}={n−i+1,n−j+1}, i.e. {n−s+1,n−t+1}={i,j}. Clearly, domhq⊆imhq−1 for 1≤q≤k. Therefore and since hq is
order-preserving or order-reversing for 1≤q<k, there is h∈{idn,γn} such that h1⋯hk−1hk=hhk. Hence, dom(h1⋯hk)={s,t} or dom(h1⋯hk)={n−s+1,n−t+1}.
Since rank(h1⋯hk)=2=rank(h1⋯hu), we can conclude
that domαi,j=dom(h1⋯hu)=dom(h1⋯hk)={i,j}, a contradiction.
Altogether, we have shown that ∣G∣≥1+2+2⌊43+1⌋=5 if n=3 and
∣G∣≥1+⌈4n⌉+2n−3+2⌊4n+1⌋+⌊4n⌋⌊4n+2⌋−1, whenever n≥5.
It is easy to verify that ⌈4n⌉+2⌊4n+1⌋=n−⌊4n⌋ and n−⌊4n⌋+⌊4n⌋⌊4n+2⌋=⌊4n+6⌋⌊4n+7⌋−1. Hence, ∣G∣≥⌊4n+6⌋⌊4n+7⌋−1+2n−3=2n−5+⌊4n+6⌋⌊4n+7⌋, whenever n≥5.
∎
It is easy to calculate that ∣Gn∣=1+⌈4n⌉+2n−3+2⌊4n+1⌋+⌊4n⌋⌊4n+2⌋−1=2n−5+⌊4n+6⌋⌊4n+7⌋, whenever n≥5, and ∣G3∣=5. So, we get the following corollary.
Corollary 2.9**.**
rankFI3=5* and rankFIn=2n−5+⌊4n+6⌋⌊4n+7⌋, whenever n≥5.*
Acknowledgement
The second author was supported by the Thailand Research Fund, Grant No. MRG6180296 and Research Fund
of Faculty of Science, Silpakorn University, Grant No. SRF-JRG-2561-08 through a visiting researcher fellowship.
Bibliography15
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
1[1] F. Al-Kharousi, R. Kehinde and A. Umar, On the Semigroup of Partial Isometries of a Finite Chain. Communications in Algebra 44(2), 639-647 (2010)
2[2] J.D. Currie and T.I. Visentin, The number of order-preserving maps of fences and crowns. Order 8, 133–142 (1991)
3[3] I. Dimitrova and J. Koppitz, The maximal subsemigroups of the ideals of some semigroups of partial injections. Discussiones Mathematicae - General Algebra and Applications 29(2), 153-167 (2009)
4[4] I. Dimitrova and J. Koppitz, On the semigroup of all partial fence preserving injections on a finite set. J. Algebra Appl. 16(11), 1750223 (2017)
5[5] I. Dimitrova, J. Koppitz and L. Lohapan, Generating sets of semigroups of partial transformations preserving a zig-zag order on ℕ ℕ \mathbb{N} , International Journal of Pure and Applied Mathematics 17(2), 279-289 (2017)
6[6] V.H. Fernandes, The Monoid of All Injective Order Preserving Partial Transformations on a Finite Chain. Semigroup Forum 62(2), 178-204 (2001)
7[7] V.H. Fernandes, G.M.S. Gomes and M.M. Jesus, Presentations for some monoids of partial transformations on a finite chain. Communications in Algebra 33(2), 587-604 (2005)
8[8] V.H. Fernandes, J. Koppitz and T. Musunthia, The Rank of the Semigroup of All Order-Preserving Transformations on a Finite Fence. Bull. Malays. Math. Sci. Soc. https://doi.org/10.1007/s 40840-017-0598-1 (2017)