On the growth of algebras, semigroups, and hereditary languages
Jason Bell, Efim Zelmanov

TL;DR
This paper characterizes the possible asymptotic growth functions of semigroups, hereditary languages, and algebras, providing a comprehensive understanding of their growth behaviors.
Contribution
It identifies the set of all functions that can serve as growth functions for these algebraic structures, up to asymptotic equivalence.
Findings
Characterization of growth functions for semigroups
Characterization of growth functions for hereditary languages
Characterization of growth functions for algebras
Abstract
We determine the possible functions that can occur, up to asymptotic equivalence, as growth functions of semigroups, hereditary languages, and algebras.
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 the growth of algebras, semigroups, and hereditary languages
Jason Bell
Jason Bell
University of Waterloo
Department of Pure Mathematics
200 University Avenue West
Waterloo, Ontario N2L 3G1
Canada
and
Efim Zelmanov
University of California, San Diego
Department of Mathematics
9500 Gilman Dr.
La Jolla, CA 92093
Abstract.
We determine the possible functions that can occur, up to asymptotic equivalence, as growth functions of semigroups, hereditary languages, and algebras.
Key words and phrases:
Growth, associative algebras, Gelfand-Kirillov dimension, asymptotic equivalence
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification:
16P90, 20M25
The first-named author was partially supported by NSERC grant RGPIN-2016-03632.
1. Introduction
Let be a semigroup generated by a finite subset . Consider the function , defined to be the number of distinct elements in . Then is a weakly increasing function and this is called the growth function of with respect to the generating set . If is another finite generating subset then since and for some , we get the inequalities
[TABLE]
In light of this fact, it is more natural to only consider functions up to asymptotic equivalence.
Given two weakly increasing functions , we say that is asymptotically greater than or equal to (written or ), if there is a positive integer such that for all . If and then we say that the functions and are asymptotically equivalent (). If and are finite generating subsets of then . Thus, regardless of choice of generating set for , the growth function lies in a fixed equivalence class and hence we may speak unambiguously of the growth function of .
Let be a finite alphabet, let be the set of all words in , and let . The hereditary language is defined as the set of all words in that do not contain subwords lying in . The function that counts all words in of length is called the growth function of (see [GS81, Gri95]). The language can be identified with the set of all nonzero elements in the monomial semigroup with zero .
For algebras, one can produce analogous functions as follows. If is a finitely generated algebra over a field and is a finite-dimensional -vector space that generates as a -algebra, then one can produce a function , where is the subspace of formed by taking the span of all -fold products of in , with . As above, for any two finite-dimensional generating subspaces and of the algebra , we have .
A basic question in the theories of the above classes is: which functions can be realized as growth functions? We start with the following two necessary conditions for a growth function :
- (i)
it is weakly increasing; 2. (ii)
it is submultiplicative, i.e., for all .
In the case of groups, Gromov’s work [Gro81], combined with works of Bass [Ba72] and Guivarc’h [Gui73], shows that a polynomially bounded growth function is asymptotically equivalent to for some nonnegative integer . Grigorchuk [Gri83] gave the first example of a group whose growth is superpolynomial but subexponential. An important conjecture of Grigorchuk is that there are no groups whose growth is superpolynomial but bounded above by for some . Grigorchuk [Gri89] proved this conjecture in the case of residually- groups.
Let be the positive root of the equation
[TABLE]
and let . Bartholdi and Erschler [BE14] showed that if a function with
[TABLE]
satisfies conditions (i) and (ii) above, along with some additional conditions, then is asymptotically equivalent to the growth function of a group.
Let’s now shift to algebras over fields. Bergman [Ber78] (see also [KL00, Theorem 2.5]) proved that if the growth function of an algebra grows super-linearly then its growth must be at least quadratic. Examples of Borho and Kraft [BK76] show that for any one can find a growth function of an algebra (in fact, even of a hereditary language) that is asymptotically equivalent to .
Smoktunowicz and Bartholdi [SB14] proved that an arbitrary submultiplicative increasing function is asymptotically equivalent to a growth function of an algebra. Greenfeld [Gre17] showed that if a function lies in the segment
[TABLE]
for some and satisfies (i), (ii), along with some additional conditions, then is asymptotically equivalent to the growth function of a finitely generated simple algebra.
It is clear that the class of growth functions of hereditary languages lies in the class of growth functions of semigroups, which, in turn, lies in the class of growth functions of algebras. In fact, all these three classes coincide.
Given a map , let , , be the (discrete) derivative of . Our main result completely characterizes the functions that can occur as the growth functions of algebras, semigroups, and hereditary languages.
Theorem 1.1**.**
A growth function of an algebra is asymptotically equivalent to a constant function, a linear function, or a weakly increasing function with the following properties:
- (i)
* for all ;* 2. (ii)
* for and .*
Conversely, if is either a constant function, a linear function, or a weakly increasing function with the above properties then it is asymptotically equivalent to the growth function of a hereditary language. In particular, this gives a complete characterization of the functions that can occur as the growth function of an algebra, a semigroup, and of a hereditary language.
One can interpret this theorem as saying that other than the necessary condition for and , which is related to submultiplicativity, the only additional constraints required for being realizable as a growth function of an algebra are those coming from the gap theorems of Bergman and the elementary “gap” that one cannot have strictly sublinear growth that is not constant.
The outline of this paper is as follows. In §2, we show that the conditions given in the statement of Theorem 1.1 are indeed necessary to be the growth function of an algebra with super-linear growth. In §3, we introduce a combinatorial sequence, which will play a fundamental role in our construction, and we study its basic asymptotic properties. In §4, we use the results of §3 to show that any function having the above properties in Theorem 1.1 is indeed asymptotically equivalent to the growth function of a hereditary language.
2. An additional property of growth functions
In this section, we look at growth functions of finitely generated associative algebras and show that they must satisfy certain inequalities. Given a function , we can construct a global counting function, , defined by . In general, throughout the paper, when working with maps from to we will generally use lowercase roman letters for the map and the corresponding uppercase roman letter for the global counting function. Our main result of this section is the following equivalence.
Proposition 2.1**.**
Let be a field and let be a finitely generated -algebra and let be a finite-dimensional -vector space that contains and that generates as a -algebra. If and for then for , .
Proof.
We may assume that and that is the image of the space
[TABLE]
in . We impose a degree lexicographic order on words over the alphabet by declaring that . Then every nonzero element has an initial monomial, which we denote , which is the maximum of all words that occur in with nonzero coefficient. In particular, there is some nonzero such that , where is a linear combination of words that are degree lexicographically less than . We let denote the ideal generated by elements as ranges over the nonzero elements of , and we let denote the monomial algebra . Then it is straightforward consequence of the fact that we are using a degree lexicographic order and the theory of Gröbner-Shirshov bases (see, for example, [BC14]) that if is the image of the space in then , the dimension of , is equal to the dimension of , and, moreover, this is precisely the number of words over the alphabet of length at most that do not have any word in as a subword. Hence is precisely the number of words over the alphabet of length exactly that do not have any word in as a subword. In particular, growth functions can be completely understood in terms of monoid algebras of finitely generated monoids.
Notice that if we have a monoid on generators and we let denote the number of distinct nonzero words of length in then we must have for all . To see this, observe that to a nonzero word of length over the alphabet , it has a prefix of length and a suffix of length , and notice that is completely determined by , , and , since . Thus we obtain the result . The result follows. ∎
3. The function and preliminary estimates
In this section, we introduce a combinatorial function , which enumerates certain collections of monomials, and we prove basic asymptotic results concerning this function, which we collect in a series of lemmas.
Given natural numbers and with , we let denote the collection of monomials of length of the form in which with along with the monomial . We find it convenient to introduce the following notation: given a power series , with a ring, we let denote the coefficient of in . Then the cardinality of the set of elements in with occurrences of , , is
[TABLE]
and so
[TABLE]
which is
[TABLE]
Observe that
[TABLE]
Let
[TABLE]
Then we see that
[TABLE]
Convention 3.1**.**
We take to be the set when .
Now we have the following straightforward estimates.
Lemma 3.2**.**
For nonnegative integers and with and , we have
[TABLE]
Proof.
We have shown that , where is the coefficient of in . Combinatorially, is just enumerating the number of words of degree in the free monoid generated by , where has degree and has degree . In particular, considering concatenation of two words of degree shows that
[TABLE]
and by considering appending to the set of words of degree gives
[TABLE]
Thus
[TABLE]
By the Cauchy-Schwarz inequality we have
[TABLE]
where the last step follows from the fact that and . The result follows. ∎
Lemma 3.3**.**
Let and be natural numbers with and . If , then
[TABLE]
Proof.
Notice that if , then is at least the number of monomials of the form with and with , which is since and . Thus we may assume without loss of generality that . In this case, it is straightforward to compute that . Thus if then we must have and so . Now contains the set of monomials of the form with and , which has size , which is greater than or equal to , since . Thus
[TABLE]
in this case, and the result follows. ∎
Lemma 3.4**.**
Let be a nonnegative integer. If then whenever . In addition, whenever .
Proof.
The fact that whenever is immediate, so we may consider the first statement and let . We have shown that , where is the coefficient of in . Combinatorially, is just enumerating the number of words of degree in the free monoid generated by , where has degree and has degree . Similarly, is the number of words of degree in the monoid generated by where has degree . Notice that there is an injection from the set of words in the monoid generated by of degree into the set of words in the monoid generated by of degree given by replacing all copies of by and then appending the necessary number of ’s at the end to make the degree equal to . Thus . Hence if then we have
[TABLE]
In particular, this holds whenever .
∎
Lemma 3.5**.**
Let and be natural numbers with . Then for all .
Proof.
If , then if we use Lemma 3.2, we see that
[TABLE]
for . If then by Lemma 3.3, using the fact that , we have
[TABLE]
Now there are two cases. First, if , then , and so using Lemma 3.3, we see
[TABLE]
for . If then by Lemma 3.2 we have
[TABLE]
for . The result follows. ∎
Lemma 3.6**.**
Let and be natural numbers with . For we have .
Proof.
We prove this by induction on . By Lemma 3.5, we have and so repeatedly applying Lemma 3.2 gives
[TABLE]
But now using the fact that gives
[TABLE]
Since for , we get the result. ∎
Lemma 3.7**.**
Let and be natural numbers. Then
[TABLE]
whenever .
Proof.
We prove this by induction on . When , we see that the claim holds when by Lemma 3.6. Now suppose that the desired inequality holds for for and consider the case when and . Then using Lemma 3.5, Lemma 3.2, and the induction hypothesis, we have
[TABLE]
The result now follows by induction. ∎
4. A general construction and proof of Theorem 1.1
In this section we give a construction that allows us to prove Theorem 1.1. Specifically, we let be a sequence with the following properties:
- (1)
for ; 2. (2)
for all .
Then we show that if is the global counting function of , that is,
[TABLE]
then there is a hereditary language whose growth function is asymptotically equivalent to . To do this, we need one remark.
Remark 4.1*.*
Item (1) implies that for .
Proof.
Notice that (1) gives that . Now by (1), and so by induction, we see and so
[TABLE]
as required. ∎
Then we show that there is a graded -algebra with and generated in degree such that
[TABLE]
(We recall that here represents asymptotic equivalence and not the usual “asymptotic to” in analysis.) It will be clear from the construction that is a semigroup algebra of a monomial semigroup and therefore corresponds to a hereditary language.
We remark that we may assume without loss of generality that and . We now recursively define a weakly increasing sequence of natural numbers , a subset of the natural numbers, a function whose global counting function is bounded above by , and a sequence of positive integers . We pick so that the relevant inequalities from the statements of the lemmas in the preceding section hold for . Let for , let for , we let for , and we declare that contains no elements of size less than . Letting denote the global counting function of , we see that for , as for all .
Now suppose that , , and have been defined for for some in such a way that . Then we take to be the smallest natural number in such that
[TABLE]
Notice that , and thus exists. If , we declare that ; otherwise, .
We now define . If , then since , there is some smallest such that
[TABLE]
We let denote this smallest value of . We observe that since
[TABLE]
and since . Alternatively, if , then we let be the smallest
[TABLE]
such that . Again, since
[TABLE]
we have that exists.
We make the important remark that
[TABLE]
Finally, we take
[TABLE]
Observe that
[TABLE]
and
[TABLE]
Furthermore, since , we see that
[TABLE]
For our purposes, we may assume that , since if is eventually equal to a constant , then grows exponentially in , and so we get that is asymptotically equivalent to in this case. The function is asymptotically equivalent to the growth of the free monoid on two generators, and so we are done in this case. Then by definition
[TABLE]
and as we have just remarked, we may assume without loss of generality that is infinite.
Now we are ready to construct our algebra. We first let denote the collection of words that do not occur as a subword of a word in the union
[TABLE]
Then we let denote the elements
[TABLE]
Then we take to be the two-sided ideal of generated by all words not in the union of and let . We observe that since is weakly increasing and since subwords of length of are in . Similarly, if then and , and so subwords of length of are contained ; if, on the other hand, , then subwords of are contained in , since in this case. Hence we see that is closed under the process of taking subwords, and so the dimension of the homogeneous component of of degree is simply the number of words of length in .
In particular, by construction, the dimension of the homogeneous piece of of degree is equal to ; that is,
[TABLE]
and by construction
[TABLE]
and is the growth function of the hereditary language constructed above.
We now make the following remark. We define
[TABLE]
Lemma 4.2**.**
For we have the inequality
[TABLE]
Proof.
For we have by definition of and that
[TABLE]
and the same inequality holds for when by Equation (4.1.2) Notice that a word in either begins with an or a and if we have a we must have at least copies of immediately afterwards and so
[TABLE]
is less than or equal to
[TABLE]
Combining this fact with Equation (4.2.1), we see that we have the inequality
[TABLE]
whenever or when but . ∎
We also need a key technical lemma for our analysis.
Lemma 4.3**.**
Let be a natural number such that and suppose that for and that, moreover, for every we have either or . Then .
Proof.
Suppose towards a contradiction that this is not the case. Let denote the elements in . Then since is a weakly increasing sequence that must jump at each of , we see that for . Moreover, since for and , we see that
[TABLE]
for , whenever , where we take and .
By Lemma 4.2, since each is in , we have
[TABLE]
for . Now if there is some such that and then by Lemma 3.4, we have
[TABLE]
and so we see
[TABLE]
a contradiction.
Thus we may assume that we have whenever . In particular, if is such that and we take , then we have and . Consequently, for , we have
[TABLE]
By assumption, we have
[TABLE]
and so simplifying this inequality yields
[TABLE]
whenever for . We note that it holds trivially when , and so the inequality in fact holds for .
We now telescope and see
[TABLE]
Hence we must have that
[TABLE]
But this now gives that and so if we take and apply Lemma 4.2, we see
[TABLE]
But and , since . Thus consists of the words on and of length with at most one since . Consequently, . But now by construction for all and so
[TABLE]
a contradiction. This completes the proof. ∎
We now show that and are asymptotically equivalent. Since , it suffices to show that asymptotically dominates .
Theorem 4.4**.**
For all sufficiently large we have .
Proof.
We may assume that since otherwise and are both asymptotically equivalent to . We now assume that is sufficiently large that and we divide the proof into two cases.
Case I. There is some . If there is some such that , then by Lemma 4.2, Equation (4.1.8), and the equalities and , we see
[TABLE]
Thus we may assume without loss of generality that whenever , we have . Observe, we can say even more when : in this case, we have and this is bounded above by whenever . Hence we may assume, in addition, that if that we have .
We are assuming that there is some , and by the above remark, we may also assume that , and that whenever . Thus by Lemma 4.3 we have and so we obtain the result in this case.
Case II. is empty. Since contains we then have is necessarily empty. In this case we pick the largest with . Since is infinite, for large enough we will have that and we will be able to apply the lemmas from the preceding section.
Then if the we have for . Then we pick the largest such that . Then by maximality of we have and so .
Now we have by Lemma 3.7 that
[TABLE]
where the last inequality follows from Equation (4.1.6).
Now we recall that for for by Remark 4.1. Then
[TABLE]
for so
[TABLE]
So
[TABLE]
Now by construction, so we have and we have and so we see
[TABLE]
We also have and so by Equations (4.4.1) and (4.4.2) we have
[TABLE]
Then applying Lemma 3.6, we have
[TABLE]
and so in particular . Hence we have
[TABLE]
and so we see that is asymptotically dominated by .
This completes the proof. ∎
An immediate corollary of Theorem 4.4 and the construction given before this theorem is the following result.
Corollary 4.5**.**
Let be a sequence with the following properties:
- (1)
* for ;* 2. (2)
* for all .*
Then the global counting function of is asymptotically equivalent to the growth function of a hereditary language.
We are now able to complete the proof of our main result.
Proof of Theorem 1.1.
The fact that the growth function of an algebra is either eventually constant or linear or satisfies conditions (i) and (ii) in the statement of the theorem follows from Bergman’s gap theorem [Ber78] and Proposition 2.1. It is well-known that every constant function and the function are asymptotically equivalent to growth functions of hereditary languages (for example, the function is asymptotically equivalent to the growth function of the hereditary language , the free monoid on a single-letter alphabet; the constant function is asymptotically equivalent to the growth function of the hereditary language corresponding to a finite semigroup). Hence it suffices to consider the case when satisfies conditions (i) and (ii), and so Corollary 4.5 gives that there is a hereditary language whose growth function is equivalent to in this case. The result follows. ∎
The reference list from the paper itself. Each links out to its DOI / PubMed record.
- 1[BE 14] L. Bartholdi and A. Erschler, Groups of given intermediate word growth. Ann. Inst. Fourier (Grenoble) 64 (2014), no. 5, 2003–2036.
- 2[Ba 72] H. Bass, The degree of polynomial growth of finitely generated nilpotent groups. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 25 (1972), 603–614.
- 3[Ber 78] G. M. Bergman, A note on growth functions of algebras and semigroups, University of California, Berkeley, 1978, unpublished notes.
- 4[BC 14] L. A. Bokut, and Y. Chen, Grobner-Shirshov bases and their calculation. Bull. Math. Sci. 4 (2014), 325–395.
- 5[BK 76] W. Borho and H. Kraft, Über die Gelfand-Kirillov-Dimension. Math. Ann. 220 (1976), no. 1, 1–24.
- 6[Gre 17] B. Greenfeld, Growth of monomial algebras, simple rings and free subalgebras. J. Algebra 489 (2017), 427–434.
- 7[Gri 83] R. I. Grigorchuk, On the Milnor problem of group growth. Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR 271 (1983), no. 1, 30–33.
- 8[Gri 89] R. I. Grigorchuk, On the Hilbert-Poincaré series of graded algebras that are associated with groups. Mat. Sb. 180 (1989), no. 2, 207–225, 304; translation in Math. USSR-Sb. 66 (1990), no. 1, 211–229.
