Order

, Volume 25, Issue 3, pp 177–194 | Cite as

Word Problem of the Perkins Semigroup via Directed Acyclic Graphs

Article

Abstract

For a word w in an alphabet Γ, the alternation word digraph Alt(w), a certain directed acyclic graph associated with w, is presented as a means to analyze the free spectrum of the Perkins monoid \(\mathbf{B_2^1}\). Let \((f_n^{\mathbf{B_2^1}})\) denote the free spectrum of \(\mathbf{B_2^1}\), let an be the number of distinct alternation word digraphs on words whose alphabet is contained in {x1,..., xn}, and let pn denote the number of distinct labeled posets on {1,..., n}. The word problem for the Perkins semigroup \(\mathbf{B_2^1}\) is solved here in terms of alternation word digraphs: Roughly speaking, two words u and v are equivalent over \(\mathbf{B_2^1}\) if and only if certain alternation graphs associated with u and v are equal. This solution provides the main application, the bounds: \(p_n \leq a_n \leq f_n^{\mathbf{B_2^1}} \leq 2^{n}a_{2n}^2\). A result of the second author in a companion paper states that \((\operatorname{log} \; a_n)\in O(n^3)\), from which it follows that \((\operatorname{log} f_n^{\mathbf{B_2^1}})\in O(n^3)\) as well. Alternation word digraphs are of independent interest combinatorially. It is shown here that the computational complexity problem that has as instance {u,v} where u,v are words of finite length, and question “Is Alt(u) = Alt(v)?”, is co-NP-complete. Additionally, alternation word digraphs are acyclic, and certain of them are natural extensions of posets; each realizer of a finite poset determines an extension by an alternation word digraph.

Keywords

Directed acyclic graph Partially order set Poset Perkins semigroup Free semigroup Word problem Computational complexity \(\mathbf{B_2^1}\) 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Burris, S., Lawrence, J.: The equivalence problem for finite rings. J. Symbol. Comput. 15, 67–71 (1993)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Burris, S., Lawrence, J.: Results on the equivalence problem for finite groups. Alg. Univ. 52(4), 495–500 (2004)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Higman, G.: The orders of relatively free groups. In: Proc. Internat. Conf. Theory of Groups, pp. 153–165. Austral. Nat. Univ. Canberra (1965)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Horvath, G., Lawrence, J., Merai, L., Szabo, C.: The complexity of the equivalence problem for non-solvable groups. Bull. Lond. Math. Soc. 39, 253–260 (2007)CrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    64 Problems in Universal Algebra: workshop notes from A Course In Tame Congruence Theory, Budapest (2001). 2–13 July. http://www.math.u-szeged.hu/confer/algebra/2001/64problems.ps
  6. 6.
    Kearnes, K.A.: Congruence modular varieties with small free spectra. Algebra Universalis 42, 165–181 (1999)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Kisielewicz, A.: Complexity of identity checking for semigroups. Int. J. Algebra Comput. 14, 455–464 (2004)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kitaev, S., Pyatkin, A.: On representable graphs. Automata, Languages and Combinatorics 13, 45–54 (2008). http://www.ru.is/kennarar/sergey/index_files/Papers/repgr.pdf Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Klima, O.: Complexity issues of checking identities in finite monoids. http://www.math.muni.cz/~klima/Math/coNPidcheck.ps
  10. 10.
    Margolis, S.W., Meakin, J.C., Stephen, J.: Free objects in certain varieties of inverse semigroups. Canad. J. Math. 42(6), 1084–1097 (1990)MATHMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Neumann, P.M.: Some indecomposable varieties of groups. Quart J. Math. Oxford 14, 46–58 (1963)MATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Perkins, P.: Bases for equational theories of semigroups. J. Algebra 11, 298–314 (1969)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Reilly, N.R.: Free combinatorial strict inverse semigroups. J. London Math. Soc. (2), 39(1), 102–120 (1989)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Seif, S.: The Perkins Semigroup has Co-NP-complete term-equivalence problem. Int. J. Alg. Comp. (IJAC) 15(2), 317–326 (2005)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Seif, S.: Monoids with sub-log-exponential free spectra. J. Pure and Appl. Algebra 212(5), 1162–1174 (2008)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Seif, S.: Letter-uniform words and their graphs (manuscript)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Seif, S., Szabo, C.: Computational complexity of checking identities in 0-simple semigroups and matrix semigroups over finite fields. Semigroup Forum 72(2), 207–222 (2006)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Seif, S., Wood, J.: Asymptotic growth of free spectra of band monoids. Semigroup Forum 75(1), 77–94 (2007)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Szabo, C., Vertesi, V.: The complexity of the word-problem for finite matrix rings. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 132(12), 3689–3695 (2004)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Szabo, C., Vertesi, V.: The complexity of checking identities for finite matrix rings. Alg.Univ. 51(4), 439–445 (2004)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Volkov, M.: Checking Identities in a finite semigroup may be computationally hard. Studia Logica 78(1–2), 349–356 (2004)MATHCrossRefMathSciNetGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of MathematicsReykjavík UniversityReykjavíkIceland
  2. 2.Mathematics DepartmentUniversity of LouisvilleLouisvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations