alphaFeedback

WorksMathematics

The Finite Basis Problem for Multiplicatively Idempotent Semirings

AI contributions
  • OpenAI ChatGPT
  • Codex
View details

Abstract

The variety of semirings satisfying x2≈xx^2\approx x is hereditarily finitely based in the signature consisting of addition and multiplication, without designated constants. Multiplication may be noncommutative, and the semirings need not be finite. A subdirect decomposition reduces the proof to the subvarieties defined by 3x≈x3x\approx x and 3x≈2x3x\approx2x. In the latter case, we express each polynomial identity using a common doubled part and isolated word occurrences. Four fixed identities align the first- and last-occurrence words of these occurrences. Induction on their content extracts protected identities. The associated word identities define a band variety, to which the finite basis theorem for bands applies.

Introduction

We ask whether every multiplicatively idempotent semiring has a finite identity basis in the signature {+,⋅}\{+, \cdot\}. A semiring is an algebra (S,+,⋅)(S,+,\cdot) in which addition is associative and commutative, multiplication is associative, and multiplication distributes over addition from both sides. We call a semiring multiplicatively idempotent if it satisfies x2≈xx^2 \approx x, and write MI for the variety of all such semirings. Neither an additive identity nor a multiplicative identity is part of the signature, and we do not assume commutative multiplication. For a positive integer nn, the notation nxnx denotes a sum of nn copies of xx.

An algebra is finitely based if its identities follow from a finite set of identities. A variety is hereditarily finitely based if each of its subvarieties is finitely based. Additively idempotent semirings can be nonfinitely based even when their multiplicative reducts are finitely based; see Jackson, Ren and Zhao [6]. Ren, Yue and Zhou [11] investigate inherent nonfinite basability in the additively idempotent setting.

2020 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 16Y60; Secondary 08B05, 20M07, 03C05.

Key words and phrases. Multiplicatively idempotent semiring, finite identity basis, hereditary finite basability, band, semiring variety.

This work was supported by the Science and Technology Research Program of Chongqing Municipal Education Commission (KJZD-K2024011102) and the Chongqing Natural Science Foundation Innovation and Development Joint Fund (Municipal Education Commission) (CSTB2025NSCQ-LZX0067).

For multiplicatively idempotent semirings, Vechtomov and Petrov [12] proved that MI is locally finite and that, when multiplication is commutative, its members decompose subdirectly into semirings satisfying 3x≈x3x \approx x and 3x≈2x3x \approx2x. We establish this decomposition for noncommutative multiplication as well.

In the commutative setting, Chajda and Länger [2, 3] studied multiplicatively idempotent semirings with designated constants 0 and 1. They obtained a finite basis and polynomial normal forms for the variety generated by the three-element semiring T3T_3 [3]. Its {+,⋅}\{+,\cdot\}-reduct occurs below as an obstruction to the identity 2(x+y)≈x+y2(x+y) \approx x+y. We work with this reduct in the constant-free signature.

Wang and Shao [13 Corollary 3.4] proved hereditary finite basability for the semiring variety determined, for each integer n≥2n \ge2, by

xn≈x,x+(2n−2)xyx≈x.x^n \approx x,\qquad x+(2n-2)xyx \approx x.

At n=2n=2, this theorem applies to the subvariety of MI satisfying x+2xyx≈xx+2xyx \approx x. The reduct of T3T_3 used below fails this absorption identity. This failure shows that the theorem does not cover all of MI.

Every variety of bands is finitely based [4]. The variety of semirings in which both operations are idempotent has 78 subvarieties, all finitely based [5, 8, 10]. These results do not by themselves control the undoubled summands of a semiring polynomial. An arbitrary band can occur as a multiplicative subsemigroup after adjoining an absorbing element and making addition constant. The multiplicative reducts of these semirings need not satisfy a regular-band identity.

We prove the following theorem.

Theorem 1.1. The variety MI is hereditarily finitely based in the signature {+,⋅}\{+,\cdot\}.

Corollary 1.2. Every multiplicatively idempotent semiring has a finite identity basis. Every finite multiplicatively idempotent semiring is finitely based.

The defining axioms give a finite basis for MI itself. Theorem 1.1 asserts finite basability of every subvariety, a conclusion that does not follow from local finiteness.

For the subvariety satisfying 3x≈2x3x \approx2x, we express each polynomial identity using a common doubled part and isolated word occurrences. We apply the theory of doubly idempotent semirings to the doubled part; the isolated word occurrences retain the original band structure. Four fixed identities align their first- and last-occurrence words. Once these words agree, recursive extraction gives an identity of the form

u+2uωu≈v+2vωv,u+2u\omega u \approx v+2v\omega v,

where ω\omega is a fresh variable. The associated word identities form a fully invariant band congruence. The finite basis theorem for bands applies to the resulting band variety.

Preliminaries

We follow the terminology of universal algebra in [1]. For an algebra SS, let Var⁡(S)\operatorname{Var}(S) be the variety generated by SS. For a variety WW, let Id⁡(W)\operatorname{Id}(W) be its identity theory. We take bases for semiring subvarieties relative to the following finite set SR\mathrm{SR}:

x+y≈y+x,(x+y)+z≈x+(y+z),(xy)z≈x(yz),x(y+z)≈xy+xz,(x+y)z≈xz+yz.(1)\begin{aligned} x+y &\approx y+x, & (x+y)+z &\approx x+(y+z), & (xy)z &\approx x(yz),\\ x(y+z) &\approx xy+xz, & (x+y)z &\approx xz+yz. \tag*{(1)} \end{aligned}

We have MI=Mod⁡(SR,x2≈x)\mathrm{MI}=\operatorname{Mod}(\mathrm{SR},x^2\approx x). We write identities with ≈\approx and use equality for literal words and for elements under a fixed evaluation.

Fix a countably infinite alphabet. A word is a nonempty multiplicative word, and c(w)c(w) is its content. Let ℓ(w)\ell(w) and r(w)r(w) denote the first-occurrence word and last-occurrence word of $w: retain, respectively, the first and the last occurrence of each variable in its original left-to-right order. A polynomial is a finite nonempty sum of word occurrences. We count occurrences with multiplicity, so u+uu+u has two occurrences. An occurrence is supported in a set of variables when its content is a subset of that set. Every semiring term expands into such a polynomial. Missing contexts and omitted sums are notation only; we never substitute an empty word or an empty sum for a variable.

Write B\mathrm{B} for the variety of bands, that is, idempotent semigroups, and BX\mathrm{B}X for the free band on a finite nonempty alphabet XX. Every subvariety of B\mathrm{B} has a finite basis [4]. The structure theorem for bands [7] gives the following deletion rule.

Lemma 2.1. Let pp, bb, qq be nonempty words. If c(p)=c(q)c(p)=c(q) and c(b)⊆c(p)c(b)\subseteq c(p), then

B⊨pbq≈pq.\mathrm{B}\models pbq\approx pq.

The identity aba≈aaba\approx a holds in every band whenever c(b)⊆c(a)c(b)\subseteq c(a).

Proof. Every band is a semilattice of rectangular bands. Under an arbitrary evaluation, let PP, BB, QQ be the values of pp, bb, qq. The content assumptions imply that PP, PBPB, QQ belong to the same rectangular component. Since a rectangular band satisfies xyz≈xzxyz\approx xz,

PBQ=P(PB)Q=PQ.PBQ=P(PB)Q=PQ.

Taking p=q=ap=q=a proves the final assertion. □\square

For a word ww involving at least two variables, let s(w)s(w) be its longest prefix whose content is a proper subset of c(w)c(w), and let e(w)e(w) be its longest suffix with proper content. These are actual factors of ww, possibly with repeated variables. If aa is the last letter of ℓ(w)\ell(w) and bb is the first letter of r(w)r(w), then

c(s(w))=c(w)∖{a},c(e(w))=c(w)∖{b}.(2)c(s(w))=c(w)\setminus\{a\},\qquad c(e(w))=c(w)\setminus\{b\}. \tag*{(2)}

Vechtomov and Petrov [12 p. 54 of the Russian original] observed that MI\mathrm{MI} is locally finite. The proof below bounds the number of normal forms used later.

Lemma 2.2. Every finitely generated free band is finite. The variety MI is locally finite.

Proof. Consider a word ww on at most nn variables. Let pp and qq be its shortest full-content prefix and suffix. If these factors are separated, Lemma 2.1 removes the intervening factor. If they overlap, writing p=ahp = ah, q=hbq = hb gives pq=ahhb≈ahb=wpq = ahhb \approx ahb = w. Both cases give w≈pqw \approx pq. Writing p=s(w)ap = s(w)a and q=be(w)q = be(w) and proceeding by induction shows that every word is equivalent to one of length at most

L1=1,Ln=2Ln−1+2=3⋅2n−1−2.L_1 = 1,\qquad L_n = 2L_{n-1} + 2 = 3 \cdot2^{n-1} - 2.

This proves that BXB_X is finite.

In MI we have

2x=(x+x)2=4x.(3)2x = (x + x)^2 = 4x. \tag*{(3)}

Equation (3) reduces every positive coefficient in a polynomial to 1, 2 or 3. Replacing each word by a representative from BXB_X leaves at most 4∣BX∣−14^{|B_X|} - 1 nonempty polynomials with these coefficients, which proves local finiteness. □

This bound counts polynomial representatives; distinct coefficient vectors may define the same term function.

Lemma 2.3. For S∈MIS \in\mathrm{MI}, the maps d(a)=2ad(a) = 2a and r(a)=3ar(a) = 3a are idempotent endomorphisms. Their images are their respective fixed-point sets, and

d(S)∈IB:=MI∩Mod⁡(2x≈x).d(S) \in\mathrm{IB} := \mathrm{MI} \cap\operatorname{Mod}(2x \approx x).

For every W⊆MIW \subseteq\mathrm{MI}, the class of images d(S)d(S), S∈WS \in W, is precisely W∩IBW \cap\mathrm{IB}.

Proof. Additivity follows from commutativity of addition. Equation (3) gives

(2a)(2b)=4ab=2ab,(3a)(3b)=9ab=3ab,(2a)(2b) = 4ab = 2ab,\qquad(3a)(3b) = 9ab = 3ab,

and d2=dd^2 = d, r2=rr^2 = r. The image of an idempotent map is its fixed-point set. Every d(S)d(S) is a homomorphic image of SS and belongs to IB. For S∈W∩IBS \in W \cap\mathrm{IB}, we have d(S)=Sd(S) = S. □

An algebra in IB is called doubly idempotent. We use three results:

  • (i) every subvariety of IB is finitely based;

  • (ii) every multiplicative reduct of a member of IB is a regular band;

  • (iii) in the variety RB of regular bands,

u≈v⟺ℓ(u)=ℓ(v) and r(u)=r(v).(4)u \approx v \quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad\ell(u) = \ell(v)\text{ and }r(u) = r(v). \tag*{(4)}

Here RB=Mod⁡(x2≈x, xyxzx≈xyzx)\mathrm{RB} = \operatorname{Mod}(x^2 \approx x,\, xyxzx \approx xyzx). Statement (i) follows from [5, 8]; see [10 Result 4 and Theorem 7]. Pastijn and Zhao [9, Theorem 2.3] proved (ii), and Polák [10, Result 1] recalls the word criterion in (iii). We include a verification of (ii).

Lemma 2.4. Every member of MI satisfies 2xyxzx≈2xyzx2xyxzx \approx2xyzx.

Proof. In a doubly idempotent semiring, put a≤ba \le b when a+b=ba+b=b. Multiplication is monotone, and (u+v)2=u+v(u+v)^2=u+v implies uv≤u+vuv\le u+v. Multiplying this inequality on the left and right gives

rus=rvs=t⟹ruvs≤t.(5)rus=rvs=t \quad\Longrightarrow\quad ruvs\le t. \tag*{(5)}

Let p=xyxzxp=xyxzx, q=xyzxq=xyzx, and t0=xyzyxzxt_0=xyzyxzx. The following applications of (2.5) use only band identities to simplify their entries:

rruuvvssrus=rvsrus=rvsruvsruvs
xyzxyzyyzzxzxxzxppqq
xyzxyzyyxxzxzxqqt0t_0
xyxyxxzzyzyxzxyzyxzxt0t_0pp

The three rows give q≤pq\le p, t0≤qt_0\le q, and p≤t0p\le t_0, proving p=qp=q. Apply this result to the doubled image in Lemma 2.3.

Structural reductions

Put

R=MI∩Mod⁡(3x≈x),A=MI∩Mod⁡(3x≈2x).\mathrm{R}=\mathrm{MI}\cap\operatorname{Mod}(3x\approx x),\qquad\mathrm{A}=\mathrm{MI}\cap\operatorname{Mod}(3x\approx2x).

Vechtomov and Petrov [12 Proposition 3.1] proved this decomposition for commutative multiplication. We extend it to arbitrary members of MI and to each subvariety.

Proposition 3.1. Every S∈MIS\in\mathrm{MI} has a subdirect embedding

S↪r(S)×S/H+,a⟼(3a,[a]H+),(6)S\hookrightarrow r(S)\times S/H_+,\qquad a\longmapsto(3a,[a]_{H_+}), \tag*{(6)}

where r(S)∈Rr(S)\in\mathrm{R} and S/H+∈AS/H_+\in\mathrm{A}. For every W⊆MI\mathrm{W}\subseteq\mathrm{MI},

W=(W∩R)∨(W∩A).(7)\mathrm{W}=(\mathrm{W}\cap\mathrm{R})\vee(\mathrm{W}\cap\mathrm{A}). \tag*{(7)}

Proof. Define a⪯ba\preceq b if a=ba=b or b=a+ub=a+u for some u∈Su\in S, and let H+H_+ be the symmetric part of this preorder. This is the Green relation of the commutative additive semigroup. Every additive translation and every left or right multiplicative translation preserves ⪯\preceq, by distributivity. This translation invariance makes H+H_+ a semiring congruence. As 3a=2a+a3a=2a+a and 2a=3a+a2a=3a+a, its quotient satisfies 3x≈2x3x\approx2x.

We claim that H+∩ker⁡rH_+\cap\ker r is the equality relation. Suppose aH+baH_+b and a≠ba\ne b. Write b=a+ub=a+u and a=b+va=b+v. Iterating a=a+u+va=a+u+v gives a=a+2u+2va=a+2u+2v. By 4u=2u4u=2u,

a+2u=a+4u+2v=a+2u+2v=a.a+2u=a+4u+2v=a+2u+2v=a.

With c=3uc=3u, we obtain 3c=c3c=c, b=a+cb=a+c, and a=b+ca=b+c. If 3a=3b3a=3b, then 3a+c=3a3a+c=3a. Adding aa gives e+c=ee+c=e, where e=2ae=2a. Put p=acp=ac. Right multiplication by cc yields 2p+c=2p2p+c=2p, and 3p=p3p=p gives p+c=pp+c=p. Expanding the square gives

b=(a+c)2=a+p+ca+c=a+p+ca,b=(a+c)^2=a+p+ca+c=a+p+ca,

which gives b+c=bb+c=b. Since a=b+ca=b+c, this contradicts a≠ba\ne b. This proves the claim and the embedding (3.1). Its two coordinates are surjective homomorphisms. The factors are homomorphic images of SS; applying the decomposition to every member of WW proves (7).

Lemma 3.2. Let VV be finitely based and let V1,V2V_1,V_2 be subvarieties, each defined relative to VV by finitely many identities. Suppose that

W=(W∩V1)∨(W∩V2)for every W⊆V.W = (W \cap V_1) \vee(W \cap V_2) \quad\text{for every } W \subseteq V.

If V1V_1 and V2V_2 are hereditarily finitely based, then so is VV.

Proof. Fix W⊆VW \subseteq V and finite bases Σi\Sigma_i for W∩ViW \cap V_i. Let Θi\Theta_i define ViV_i relative to VV. Since

Id⁡(W)∪Θi⊨Σi,\operatorname{Id}(W) \cup\Theta_i \models\Sigma_i,

finiteness of equational proofs gives a finite Δi⊆Id⁡(W)\Delta_i \subseteq\operatorname{Id}(W) with Id⁡(V)∪Δi∪Θi⊨Σi\operatorname{Id}(V) \cup\Delta_i \cup\Theta_i \models\Sigma_i. Define ZZ by a finite basis of VV together with Δ1∪Δ2\Delta_1 \cup\Delta_2. These identities give W⊆Z⊆VW \subseteq Z \subseteq V and Z∩Vi=W∩ViZ \cap V_i = W \cap V_i for i=1,2i = 1,2. The assumed decomposition, applied to both ZZ and WW, gives Z=WZ = W.

The branch 3x≈x3x \approx x

Let BR\mathrm{BR} be the variety of Boolean rings in the signature {+,⋅}\{+, \cdot\}. The identities SR\mathrm{SR}, x2≈xx^2 \approx x, 2x≈2y2x \approx2y, and 3x≈x3x \approx x define this variety. The common value of 2x2x is the zero element of the ring, although it is not a constant symbol.

For S∈RS \in\mathrm{R} and e∈d(S)e \in d(S), the set

Ge={a∈S:2a=e}G_e = \{a \in S : 2a = e\}

is a subsemiring. Its addition is a group of exponent at most two, with identity element ee, since a+e=3a=aa + e = 3a = a and a+a=ea + a = e. Distributivity and multiplicative idempotence make it a Boolean ring. Its multiplication is commutative: expanding (a+b)2=a+b(a + b)^2 = a + b and cancelling in the additive group gives ab+ba=eab + ba = e and ab=baab = ba.

Lemma 3.3. Let p,q∈S∈Rp,q \in S \in\mathrm{R} and e∈d(S)e \in d(S) satisfy pqp=ppqp = p, qpq=qqpq = q, and $2p + e = 2q + e = e$. Then p+e=q+ep + e = q + e.

Proof. Both p^=p+e\hat{p} = p + e and q^=q+e\hat{q} = q + e belong to GeG_e, since $2e = eand$2p+e=2q+e=eand \$2p + e = 2q + e = e. Expand (p+e)(q+e)(p+e)(p + e)(q + e)(p + e). The term containing no ee is pqp=ppqp = p.

Let tt be any remaining product term. The factor ee gives $2t = t$. Replacing any factor pp or qq in this term by 2p2p or 2q2q leaves its value unchanged. All its factors belong to d(S)d(S) and are at most ee in the additive order, because $2p + e = 2q + e = e$. Monotonicity of multiplication on d(S)d(S) gives t≤e3=et \leq e^3 = e. Since the expansion contains the term e3=ee^3 = e itself, the sum of all terms containing ee is exactly ee, and

p^q^p^=p+e=p^.\hat{p}\hat{q}\hat{p} = p + e = \hat{p}.

The same argument gives q^p^q^=q^\hat{q}\hat{p}\hat{q} = \hat{q}. In the Boolean ring GeG_e, commutativity and idempotence of multiplication make both left sides equal p^q^\hat{p}\hat{q}. This proves p^=q^\hat{p} = \hat{q}.

For a polynomial PP, define π(P)\pi(P) to be the set of nonempty contents occurring an odd number of times among its word occurrences. In Boolean rings, a word depends only on its content, and distinct square-free polynomials over the two-element Boolean ring define distinct functions. This uniqueness gives the criterion

BR⊨P≈Q⟺π(P)=π(Q).(8)\mathrm{BR} \models P \approx Q \Longleftrightarrow\pi(P) = \pi(Q). \tag*{(8)}

The empty parity set records a zero value; it does not denote an empty sum term.

Proposition 3.4. The variety R\mathrm{R} is hereditarily finitely based. More precisely, if S∈R∖IBS \in\mathrm{R} \setminus\mathrm{IB}, then

Var⁡(S)=Var⁡(d(S))∨BR.(9)\operatorname{Var}(S) = \operatorname{Var}(d(S)) \vee\mathrm{BR}. \tag*{(9)}

Proof. Choose a≠2aa \ne2a. The set {2a,a}\{2a, a\} is a two-element Boolean ring reduct. This subsemiring gives BR⊆Var⁡(S)\mathrm{BR} \subseteq\operatorname{Var}(S). The algebra d(S)d(S) is a homomorphic image of SS. To prove the reverse inclusion, suppose P≈QP \approx Q holds in both d(S)d(S) and BR\mathrm{BR}. Under any evaluation in SS, put e=2P=2Qe = 2P = 2Q. Each word value ww occurring in either polynomial satisfies 2w+e=e2w + e = e. Replacing it by w+ew + e leaves the value of its polynomial unchanged, because P+e=PP + e = P and Q+e=QQ + e = Q. All new summands lie in GeG_e. Words with the same content agree there by Lemmas 2.1 and 3.3; their sum depends only on content parity. Equation (3.3) gives P=QP = Q and proves (3.4).

Every subvariety of R\mathrm{R} is either a subvariety U\mathrm{U} of IB\mathrm{IB} or U∨BR\mathrm{U} \vee\mathrm{BR} for such a U\mathrm{U}. Subvarieties of the first kind are finitely based by the finite basis theorem for IB\mathrm{IB} [5, 8]. For the second kind, choose a finite relative basis ΣU\Sigma_{\mathrm{U}} in IB\mathrm{IB}. The identities

SR,x2≈x,3x≈x,{2P≈2Q:(P≈Q)∈ΣU}\mathrm{SR},\quad x^2 \approx x,\quad3x \approx x,\quad\{2P \approx2Q : (P \approx Q) \in\Sigma_{\mathrm{U}}\}

define U∨BR\mathrm{U} \vee\mathrm{BR}: their models have doubled image in U\mathrm{U}, and (3.4) gives the required inclusion. The reverse inclusion follows by evaluation. □

The branch in which every sum is idempotent

Put

J=A∩Mod⁡(2(x+y)≈x+y),K0=MI∩Mod⁡(x+y≈z+t).\mathrm{J} = \mathrm{A} \cap\operatorname{Mod}(2(x+y) \approx x+y),\qquad \mathrm{K}_0 = \mathrm{MI} \cap\operatorname{Mod}(x+y \approx z+t).

The latter is the variety of constant-addition band semirings. The common sum is a multiplicative absorbing element, by distributivity. Every term containing addition has that same value.

Lemma 3.5. The variety K0\mathrm{K}_0 is hereditarily finitely based.

Proof. Let C⊆K0\mathrm{C} \subseteq\mathrm{K}_0 be nontrivial, and let U\mathrm{U} be the band variety generated by its multiplicative reducts. Choose a finite band basis for U\mathrm{U}. Together with the axioms of K0\mathrm{K}_0 it defines C\mathrm{C}: identities between words are precisely those of U\mathrm{U}, and identities between terms containing addition hold because both sides have the common sum as their value. No identity between a word and a term containing addition can hold in a nontrivial member, since assigning all variables a nonabsorbing element separates them. The identity x≈yx \approx y defines the trivial variety. □

Proposition 3.6. The variety J\mathbf{J} is hereditarily finitely based.

Proof. For S∈JS \in\mathbf{J}, let D=d(S)D=d(S). Every sum belongs to DD, and DD is a multiplicative ideal since 2(es)=(2e)s=es2(es)=(2e)s=es and 2(se)=s(2e)=se2(se)=s(2e)=se for e∈De \in D. The relation ρD\rho_D which collapses DD to one class and leaves other elements separate is a semiring congruence. Its quotient has constant addition. The map

S⟶d(S)×S/ρD,s⟼(2s,[s]ρD)S \longrightarrow d(S) \times S/\rho_D,\qquad s \longmapsto(2s,[s]_{\rho_D})

is a subdirect embedding: the first coordinate separates any two elements in the collapsed class, and the second separates any pair not both in DD. Applying this embedding to every W⊆JW \subseteq\mathbf{J} gives

W=(W∩IB)∨(W∩K0).W=(W\cap\mathrm{IB})\vee(W\cap\mathbf{K}_0).

Apply Lemma 3.2, Lemma 3.5, and the hereditary finite basability of IB\mathrm{IB}. □\square

Absorption and polynomial normal forms

For the subvarieties of A\mathbf{A} outside J\mathbf{J}, we need normal forms for polynomial identities. The additive identity 3x≈2x3x\approx2x lets us remove absorbed summands one at a time without cancellation.

Lemma 4.1. The following assertions hold in A\mathbf{A}.

(i) If s+a+b=ss+a+b=s, then s+a=ss+a=s and s+b=ss+b=s.

(ii) The identity x+y+xy≈x+yx+y+xy\approx x+y holds.

(iii) For each element ss, the set Is={a:s+a=s}I_s=\{a:s+a=s\} is closed under addition and multiplication. If a∈Isa\in I_s, then sa,as∈Issa,as\in I_s.

Proof. If s+a+b=ss+a+b=s, iteration gives s+2a+2b=ss+2a+2b=s, and

s+a=s+3a+2b=s+2a+2b=s.s+a=s+3a+2b=s+2a+2b=s.

This proves (i). Expanding (x+y)2=x+y(x+y)^2=x+y gives

x+y+xy+yx=x+y,x+y+xy+yx=x+y,

and (i) gives (ii). For (iii), associativity gives additive closure. If a,b∈Isa,b\in I_s, then

s=(s+a)(s+b)=s+sb+as+ab,s=(s+a)(s+b)=s+sb+as+ab,

and (i) gives ab∈Isab\in I_s. Multiplying s+a=ss+a=s on either side by ss proves the remaining assertions. □\square

Substituting y=xy=x in assertion (ii) gives 3x≈2x3x\approx2x. This substitution proves that the absorption identity characterizes A\mathbf{A} inside MI\mathbf{MI}.

A three-element obstruction

Let T\mathsf{T} be the three-element semiring with the following tables:

+esf·esf
eeeeeeef
seessesf
fesfffff

Table 4.1.

The symbols ee, ss, ff are element names. The tables give T∈A∖J\mathsf{T} \in\mathcal{A} \setminus\mathcal{J}. Chajda and Länger introduced the semiring T3\mathsf{T}_3 in [2 Definition 4.1] and studied it in [3]; T\mathsf{T} is its {+,⋅}\{+,\cdot\}-reduct. In the notation T3={0,a,1}\mathsf{T}_3 = \{0,a,1\} of [3], the following map is an isomorphism:

e⟼a,s⟼1,f⟼0.e \longmapsto a,\qquad s \longmapsto1,\qquad f \longmapsto0.

The symbols in these images name elements of the cited algebra; they do not add constants to the present signature.

Proposition 4.2. Every S∈A∖JS \in\mathcal{A} \setminus\mathcal{J} contains a subsemiring isomorphic to T\mathsf{T}. A subvariety of A\mathcal{A} which does not contain T\mathsf{T} is finitely based.

Proof. Choose a,b∈Sa,b \in S with s=a+b≠2ss = a+b \ne2s, and put

e=2s,f=2ab+2ba+2aba+2bab.e = 2s,\qquad f = 2ab + 2ba + 2aba + 2bab.

By Lemma 4.1, ss absorbs abab and baba and their products abaaba and babbab. These absorptions give s+f=ss+f=s. Expansion using band identities gives

sf=2(ab+aba+aba+ab+bab+ba+ba+bab)=f,sf = 2(ab + aba + aba + ab + bab + ba + ba + bab) = f,
fs=2(aba+ab+ba+bab+aba+ab+ba+bab)=f.fs = 2(aba + ab + ba + bab + aba + ab + ba + bab) = f.

We have es=se=ees = se = e, ef=fe=fef = fe = f, s+e=es+e=e, e+f=ee+f=e, and 2f=f2f=f. Since s≠2ss \ne2s, it is distinct from ee and ff. If e=fe=f, the equations s+f=ss+f=s and s+e=es+e=e imply s=es=e, a contradiction. The resulting tables on {e,s,f}\{e,s,f\} are (4.1). The final assertion follows from Proposition 3.6. □

In T\mathsf{T}, taking x=y=sx=y=s gives x+2xyx=3s=e≠sx+2xyx=3s=e \ne s. This evaluation proves that the absorption identity required in [13] at n=2n=2 does not follow from multiplicative idempotence.

For a polynomial PP on a finite alphabet XX and a subset D⊆XD \subseteq X, define

νP(D)=min⁡(2,#{occurrences w in P:c(w)⊆D}).(10)\nu_P(D)=\min\left(2,\#\{ \text{occurrences }w\text{ in }P:c(w)\subseteq D\}\right). \tag*{(10)}

An occurrence uu in PP is isolated if νP(c(u))=1\nu_P(c(u))=1. We call its content an isolated content of PP and denote the set of these contents by I(P)\mathcal{I}(P). To distinguish reduced polynomials, Chajda and Länger [3 Theorem 4.1] used assignments to 0 and 1. The evaluations below adapt those assignments to the constant-free signature. The truncated count records how many occurrences have content in a given set, up to a maximum of two, for a possibly noncommutative polynomial.

Lemma 4.3. If T⊨P≈QT \models P \approx Q, then νP(D)=νQ(D)\nu_P(D) = \nu_Q(D) for every D⊆c(P)∪c(Q)D \subseteq c(P) \cup c(Q). In this case I(P)=I(Q)\mathcal{I}(P) = \mathcal{I}(Q), and for each common isolated content DD, the unique occurrences supported in DD have content exactly DD.

Proof. Assign the variables in DD the value ss and all remaining variables the value ff. A word takes the value ss exactly when its content is contained in DD; otherwise its value is ff. A polynomial takes the value ff, ss, or ee according as the number of such occurrences is 0, 1, or at least 2. This proves equality of the functions ν\nu.

If uu is isolated in PP with content DD, there is exactly one occurrence vv of QQ supported in DD. Put E=c(v)E = c(v). The equality νQ(E)=1\nu_Q(E) = 1 gives an occurrence of PP supported in EE. This occurrence must be uu, since E⊆DE \subseteq D, giving D⊆ED \subseteq E. The two inclusions give E=DE = D. The symmetric argument completes the proof. □\square

Lifting doubled absorption

Lemma 4.4. Let PP be a polynomial and qq a word. Suppose PP has two distinct occurrences uu, vv with c(u),c(v)⊆c(q)c(u), c(v) \subseteq c(q). Relative to the axioms of A, the identity

2P+2q≈2P(11)2P + 2q \approx2P \tag*{(11)}

implies P+q≈PP + q \approx P.

Proof. Put p=uvp = uv. The two actual occurrences and Lemma 4.1(ii) give P+p≈PP + p \approx P. The absorption set of PP contains 2p2p, pPpP, PpPp, and their doubles. Multiply (11) on the left and on the right by pp to get

2pP+2pq≈2pP,2Pp+2qp≈2Pp.2pP + 2pq \approx2pP,\qquad2Pp + 2qp \approx2Pp.

Adding PP shows that PP absorbs 2pq2pq and 2qp2qp, and Lemma 4.1(i) separates one copy of each. Multiplicative closure of IPI_P shows that PP absorbs

(qp)(pq)=qpq≈q,(qp)(pq) = qpq \approx q,

where the last identity follows from Lemma 2.1. This equational derivation applies in every subvariety of A. □\square

The two occurrences in Lemma 4.4 may be equal as words, but both copies must already be present. We cannot duplicate a single isolated occurrence.

Let V⊆BV \subseteq\mathbb{B} and let PP be a polynomial on a fixed finite alphabet XX. Choose one word representative for each element of BXB_X and put

DV(P)={q∈BX:νP(c(q))=2,V⊨P+q≈P}.(12)D_V(P) = \{q \in B_X : \nu_P(c(q)) = 2,\quad V \models P + q \approx P\}. \tag*{(12)}

Content and the absorption condition are independent of the representatives.

Proposition 4.5. Suppose Z⊆AZ \subseteq A and d(S)∈Vd(S) \in V for every S∈ZS \in Z. If PP has at least two occurrences, then DV(P)D_V(P) is nonempty and, in ZZ,

P≈CP+∑D∈I(P)uD,CP=∑q∈DV(P)2q,(13)P \approx C_P + \sum_{D \in\mathcal{I}(P)} u_D,\qquad C_P = \sum_{q \in D_V(P)} 2q, \tag*{(13)}

where uDu_D is the unique isolated occurrence with content DD. If there are no isolated occurrences, we write only CPC_P.

If P≈QP \approx Q holds in a variety W⊆A\mathcal{W} \subseteq\mathcal{A} containing T\mathbf{T}, and V=W∩IB\mathcal{V} = \mathcal{W} \cap\mathsf{IB}, then, using the same ambient alphabet, the two sets in (4.4) coincide. We may use the same doubled polynomial CC for PP and QQ.

Proof. For q∈DV(P)q \in D_{\mathcal{V}}(P), the doubled image condition implies Z⊨2P+2q≈2P\mathcal{Z} \models2P + 2q \approx2P. Lemma 4.4 gives P+q≈PP + q \approx P and P+2q≈PP + 2q \approx P. Each nonisolated occurrence ww of PP belongs to DV(P)D_{\mathcal{V}}(P): its count is 2, and PP absorbs it in every additively idempotent semiring. We add all the doubled summands and remove each nonisolated original occurrence using w+2w≈2ww + 2w \approx2w. This proves (4.5).

To prove nonemptiness, take the product of all the word occurrences of PP. In a doubly idempotent semiring, PP absorbs every occurrence and their product by Lemma 4.1. The product contains the content of every occurrence; its count is 2. It lies in (4.4).

For the final assertion, Lemma 4.3 gives νP=νQ\nu_P = \nu_Q and common isolated contents. Since V⊨P≈Q\mathcal{V} \models P \approx Q, the absorption conditions in (4.4) agree. □

Adding the doubled words in (4.5) preserves νP\nu_P and all isolated contents: if q∈DV(P)q \in D_{\mathcal{V}}(P) and c(q)⊆Ec(q) \subseteq E, then νP(E)=2\nu_P(E) = 2 already.

Absorption of words with full content

We use Polák’s description of IB\mathsf{IB} [10] to test absorption of full-content words. For a polynomial RR on XX, a letter a∈Xa \in X, and E⊆XE \subseteq X, put

ρR(a,E)=1(14)\rho_R(a,E)=1 \tag*{(14)}

if some occurrence ww of RR contains aa and all letters preceding the first aa in ww lie in EE. This condition is monotone in EE. For i∈{0,1,2}i \in\{0,1,2\}, we call a repetition-free word a1⋯aka_1 \cdots a_k left admissible at level ii for RR under the following conditions:

  • (0) there is no restriction;

  • (1) if k>0k > 0, the letter a1a_1 is the first letter of some occurrence of RR;

  • (2) ρR(aj,{a1,…,aj−1})=1\rho_R(a_j,\{a_1,\ldots,a_{j-1}\})=1 for every jj.

The empty sequence is admissible at each level. Reversing all the words defines right admissibility. The empty sequence belongs to this combinatorial definition and does not introduce a semiring term.

Lemma 4.6. For each V⊆IB\mathcal{V} \subseteq\mathsf{IB}, there are λ,μ∈{0,1,2}\lambda,\mu\in\{0,1,2\} with the following property. If c(R)=c(g)=Xc(R)=c(g)=X, then

V⊨R+g≈R(15)\mathcal{V} \models R+g\approx R \tag*{(15)}

if and only if ℓ(g)\ell(g) is left admissible at level λ\lambda and rev⁡(r(g))\operatorname{rev}(r(g)) is left admissible at level μ\mu for the reversed polynomial rev⁡(R)\operatorname{rev}(R).

Proof. By [10 Result 4], every subvariety of IB\mathsf{IB} is generated by a subset of the eleven algebras

L,R,D,M,M0,B,C,L0,R0,B0,C0L,R,D,M,M^{0},B,C,L^{0},R^{0},B^{0},C^{0}

in that paper. The algebras LL and RR have two-element chain addition and left-zero or right-zero multiplication; DD is the two-element distributive lattice; and MM has both operations equal to chain join. The algebra BB is a two-element left-zero band with an identity element adjoined, ordered as a<1<ba<1<b, and CC is its right-zero dual. Addition is join. The superscript 00 adjoins an element which is an additive identity and a multiplicative zero. These descriptions specify elements, without adding constants to the signature.

Polák’s absorption tests [10 Result 3] say that LL tests the first letter and RR the last letter. The algebra BB tests, for every set YY of deleted letters, whether the first letter of gg after deleting YY is the first letter of some occurrence of RR after the same deletion; CC gives the reverse test. For DD, MM, M0M^{0}, the condition c(g)=c(R)=X\mathrm{c}(g)=\mathrm{c}(R)=X satisfies the absorption tests. The test for an extension by 00 restricts RR to occurrences supported in c(g)\mathrm{c}(g), which here retains all occurrences. The algebras LL, L0L^{0} impose left level 1; BB, B0B^{0} impose left level 2; their duals impose the corresponding right levels.

To identify the test for BB with level 2, write ℓ(g)=a1⋯an\ell(g)=a_{1}\cdots a_{n}. Necessity follows by deleting {a1,…,aj−1}\{a_{1},\ldots,a_{j-1}\} for each jj. For sufficiency, let Y⊊XY\subsetneq X be any proper subset and let aja_{j} be the first letter of gg outside YY. Its predecessors in ℓ(g)\ell(g) lie in YY. Monotonicity in (14) supplies an occurrence of RR whose first surviving letter is aja_{j}. Deleting all of XX gives equal empty words. Take the strongest left and right requirements among the chosen generators. These determine λ,μ\lambda,\mu and prove the lemma, including the trivial variety, for which both levels can be 0.

Lemma 4.7. At any of the three levels, every prefix of an admissible repetition-free word is admissible. If pp and qq are left admissible, then ℓ(pq)\ell(pq) is left admissible. Each ℓ(w)\ell(w), for an occurrence ww of RR, is left admissible at every level. The analogous statements hold on the right.

Proof. At level 2, a letter of qq absent from pp has at least the same predecessor set in ℓ(pq)\ell(pq) as it had in qq. Monotonicity of (14) preserves its admissibility. Prefix closure and the assertion for an occurrence follow from the definition. At level 0 there is no restriction; at level 1 the only condition concerns the initial letter.

Protected identities and recursive extraction

The normal forms leave isolated word occurrences that the doubled part does not determine. To compare them, we introduce protected identities. The next results apply to arbitrary subvarieties of ML\mathrm{ML} and do not require the additive identity 3x≈2x3x\approx2x.

Definition 5.1. For W⊆MLW\subseteq\mathrm{ML}, define a relation GW\mathcal{G}_{W} on nonempty words by

u=GWv⟺W⊨u+2ωuω≈v+2ωvω,(16)u =_{\mathcal{G}_{W}} v \quad\Longleftrightarrow\quad W \models u+2\omega u\omega\approx v+2\omega v\omega, \tag*{(16)}

where ω\omega is a variable not occurring in u,vu,v. We call the displayed semiring identity the protected identity associated with u≈vu\approx v.

Lemma 5.2. The relation GW\mathcal{G}_W is a fully invariant semigroup congruence containing the band identities. It is the identity theory of a band variety and has a finite relative band basis.

Proof. Reflexivity and symmetry follow from equality. For transitivity, use the same fresh variable for the intermediate word. Before applying a nonempty word substitution to (5.1), rename ω\omega to avoid all substitution images; the substituted identity has the same protected form.

For nonempty contexts p,qp,q, replace ω\omega in (5.1) by qωpq\omega p and multiply on the left by pp and on the right by qq. The result is

puq+2(puq)ω(puq)≈pvq+2(pvq)ω(pvq).puq + 2(puq)\omega(puq) \approx pvq + 2(pvq)\omega(pvq).

If only the left context is present, use ω↦ωp\omega\mapsto\omega p; if only the right context is present, use ω↦qω\omega\mapsto q\omega. None of these substitutions uses an empty word. They establish full invariance and compatibility with contexts. Substituting either side of a band identity into a word or its doubled summand preserves equality, so every band identity belongs to the relation. The finite basis theorem for bands gives the finite relative basis. □\square

The relation GW\mathcal{G}_W is a theory of word identities; ++ occurs only in its definition. We call it the protected band theory of W.

Lemma 5.3. Suppose W ⊨P≈Q\models P \approx Q and that each side has precisely one occurrence supported in a nonempty set DD. Let these occurrences be u,vu,v, each with content DD, and suppose

ℓ(u)=ℓ(v),r(u)=r(v).(17)\ell(u) = \ell(v), \qquad r(u) = r(v). \tag*{(17)}

If ∣D∣≥2|D| \ge2, put L=s(u)L = s(u), R=e(u)R = e(u), and t=LvRt = LvR. Then u≡GWtu \equiv_{\mathcal{G}_W} t.

Proof. Let h=uωuh = u\omega u. In P≈QP \approx Q, replace every variable outside DD by 2h2h and keep all variables of DD fixed. Multiply the result on the left by LL and on the right by RR, and add 2h2h to both sides. The isolated occurrences become LuR≈uLuR \approx u and LvR=tLvR = t, since LL and RR are an actual prefix and suffix of uu.

Every other occurrence contains a variable outside DD. After distribution, it gives 2jLw′R2^j Lw'R for some j≥1j \ge1, where w′w' contains a full copy of hh. By (2.3) its coefficient is 2. The prefix LL contains all letters of DD except the last letter of ℓ(u)\ell(u). That last letter appears before ω\omega in the first copy of hh. Dually, RR fixes the last-occurrence word. These prefix and suffix conditions give

ℓ(Lw′R)=ℓ(u)ω,r(Lw′R)=ωr(u).\ell(Lw'R) = \ell(u)\omega, \qquad r(Lw'R) = \omega r(u).

By (2.4) and Lemma 2.4, each such doubled word equals 2h2h. The added 2h2h absorbs all these copies, and the resulting identity is

u+2h≈t+2h.u + 2h \approx t + 2h.

The word t=LvRt = LvR has the same first- and last-occurrence words as uu. The prefix LL supplies their common proper first-occurrence prefix, RR supplies their common proper last-occurrence suffix, and vv supplies the missing letters

in the required order. These matching orders give 2tωt≈2h2t\omega_t \approx2h, which turns the last displayed identity into the protected identity for u,tu,t. □

Theorem 5.4 (Recursive extraction). Let W⊆MIW \subseteq\mathrm{MI} and W⊨P≈QW \models P \approx Q. Suppose each side has exactly one occurrence supported in DD, these occurrences u,vu,v have content DD, and (5.2) holds. Then

W⊨u+2uωu≈v+2vωv.(18)W \models u + 2u\omega_u \approx v + 2v\omega_v. \tag*{(18)}

Proof. We induct on k=∣D∣k = \lvert D\rvert. If k=1k = 1, both words are positive powers of the same variable and agree in every band. Suppose k≥2k \ge2 and assume the result for smaller contents. Write

ℓ(u)=ℓ(v)=a1⋯ak,r(u)=r(v)=b1⋯bk.\ell(u) = \ell(v) = a_1 \cdots a_k,\qquad r(u) = r(v) = b_1 \cdots b_k.

Set L=s(u)L = s(u), R=e(u)R = e(u), S=s(v)S = s(v), and F=e(v)F = e(v). Lemma 5.3 gives

u≡GWLvR.(19)u \equiv_{G_W} LvR. \tag*{(19)}

We show that Lv≡GWvLv \equiv_{G_W} v and vR≡GWvvR \equiv_{G_W} v.

Choose d∈D∖{ak}d \in D \setminus\{a_k\} and let α\alpha replace aka_k by dd, fixing all other variables, including those outside DD. The transformed isolated words have common content E=D∖{ak}E = D \setminus\{a_k\}. Every other occurrence still contains a variable outside DD and outside EE. To obtain the first-occurrence word after this identification, apply α\alpha to the former first-occurrence word and retain the first occurrence of each resulting letter. The analogous procedure, retaining last occurrences, gives the last-occurrence word. Both procedures preserve the equalities in (5.2). Since ∣E∣=k−1\lvert E\rvert= k - 1, the induction hypothesis applies and gives

uα≡GWvα.(20)u\alpha\equiv_{G_W} v\alpha. \tag*{(20)}

The substitution fixes LL and SS, both of content EE. The word uαu\alpha begins with LL, the word vαv\alpha begins with SS, and both use only letters of EE. Lemma 2.1 gives

(uα)S≈LS,(vα)S≈S.(u\alpha)S \approx LS,\qquad(v\alpha)S \approx S.

Multiplying (5.5) on the right by SS within the congruence yields LS≡GWSLS \equiv_{G_W} S. Write v=Sv1v = Sv_1, where v1v_1 is its actual nonempty remaining suffix, and append v1v_1. We obtain

Lv≡GWv.(21)Lv \equiv_{G_W} v. \tag*{(21)}

For the dual argument, identify b1b_1 with any other letter of DD, fixing all outside variables; call this substitution β\beta. The induction hypothesis gives uβ≡GWvβu\beta\equiv_{G_W} v\beta. The substitution fixes RR, FF, which have content D∖{b1}D \setminus\{b_1\}. Left multiplication by FF and Lemma 2.1 give

F(uβ)≈FR,F(vβ)≈F.F(u\beta) \approx FR,\qquad F(v\beta) \approx F.

We obtain FR≡GWFFR \equiv_{G_W} F. Prepend the actual nonempty prefix v0v_0 in v=v0Fv = v_0F to get

vR≡GWv.(22)vR \equiv_{G_W} v. \tag*{(22)}

Combining (19)–(22) in the congruence gives

u≡GWLvR≡GWvR≡GWv.u \equiv_{\mathcal{G}_W} LvR \equiv_{\mathcal{G}_W} vR \equiv_{\mathcal{G}_W} v.

The induction preserves isolation by identifying variables only within the isolated content. It derives a protected identity without cancelling the doubled part of the original polynomial.

Four identities for occurrence-order alignment

Let Π\Pi be the set of the six permutations of y,z,wy,z,w. Define

Ch=∑π∈Π2πyz,Cj=∑π∈Π2xπzyx.(23)C_h=\sum_{\pi\in\Pi}2\pi yz,\qquad C_j=\sum_{\pi\in\Pi}2x\pi zyx. \tag*{(23)}

We call the words in these doubled sums guard words and the sums guard polynomials. They occur in the following two guarded identities:

(Hℓ)yz+Ch≈zyz+Ch,(24)(H_\ell)\qquad yz+C_h\approx zyz+C_h, \tag*{(24)}
(Jℓ)xyxzxyx+Cj≈xzxyx+Cj.(25)(J_\ell)\qquad xyxzxyx+C_j\approx xzxyx+C_j. \tag*{(25)}

Reversing each multiplicative word gives the guarded identities (Hr)(H_r) and (Jr)(J_r). The four guarded identities involve at most four variables. Every guard polynomial in (23) has exactly six displayed doubled summands.

Lemma 6.1. Let T∈W⊆A\mathbf{T}\in W\subseteq A, and suppose W⊨P≈QW\models P\approx Q. For a common isolated content DD, let u,vu,v be its occurrences on the two sides.

(i) If u,vu,v have different first letters, then W⊨(Hℓ)W\models(H_\ell).

(ii) If they have the same first letter but different first-occurrence words, then W⊨(Jℓ)W\models(J_\ell).

The corresponding assertions for last occurrences give (Hr)(H_r) and (Jr)(J_r).

Proof. For (i), let aa be the first letter of vv. Replace aa by zz, every other letter of DD by yy, and every outside letter by ww. Multiply the identity on the right by yzyz. Both isolated occurrences have content {y,z}\{y,z\}; one begins with yy, the other with zz. A word over two generators in a band is determined by its content and its first and last letters. Deleting consecutive repeated letters leaves alternating words, and those of length at least four reduce using (yz)2≈yz(yz)^2\approx yz and (zy)2≈zy(zy)^2\approx zy. The two isolated occurrences become yzyz and zyzzyz.

Each other occurrence contains an outside letter and, after multiplication by yzyz, has content {y,z,w}\{y,z,w\}. It is nonisolated: the isolated occurrence and this occurrence both have support in that content. Equation (3) shows that the doubled transformed polynomial absorbs the double of this occurrence. Lemma 4.4 permits replacing the occurrence by its double. Its last-occurrence word is wyzwyz. By (4), its double is one of the six terms 2πyz2\pi yz in ChC_h. Adding ChC_h to the transformed identity absorbs all these doubled terms on both sides and yields (6.2). For (ii), let p0p_0 be the longest common prefix of ℓ(u)\ell(u) and ℓ(v)\ell(v), and let aa be the next letter in ℓ(v)\ell(v). Put D0=c(p0)D_0=c(p_0). Replace letters of D0D_0 by xx, the letter aa by Z=xzxZ=xzx, all other letters of DD by Y=xyxY=xyx, and all outside letters by W=xwxW=xwx. Multiply on the left by xx and on the right by ZYZY.

The values x,Y,Z,Wx,Y,Z,W lie in the local band xSxxSx, with identity element xx. Here xx is a nonempty term, not a constant symbol. After we omit this local identity from the calculation, the two isolated occurrences are words over Y,ZY,Z; one begins with YY, the other with ZZ, and both contain both letters. Appending ZYZY gives the values YZYYZY and ZYZY. In the original variables, these are the undoubled words in (25).

Every remaining occurrence has full content {x,y,z,w}\{x,y,z,w\}, first letter xx, and last-occurrence word wzyxwzyx. We double it by applying Lemma 4.4 to the isolated occurrence and this occurrence. Each doubled word is one of 2xπzyx2x\pi zyx. Adding CjC_j yields (25). Reversal gives the dual assertions. □

Lemma 6.2. Let V⊆IB\mathrm{V} \subseteq\mathrm{IB}, let RR have full content XX, and let u,vu,v be occurrences of RR with the same content D⊊XD \subsetneq X. Choose a word gg with c(g)=Xc(g)=X and V⊨R+g≈R\mathrm{V} \models R+g \approx R.

  1. If aa is the first letter of vv, instantiate (Hℓ)(H_{\ell}) by y=uy=u, z=az=a, w=gw=g, and multiply it on the right by uu. Its undoubled words reduce to uu and auau. Each of its six guard words has content XX and is absorbed by RR in V\mathrm{V}.

  1. Suppose ℓ(u),ℓ(v)\ell(u),\ell(v) have a common nonempty prefix p0p_0, and aa is the next letter of ℓ(v)\ell(v) after p0p_0. Choose an actual prefix pp of uu with c(p)=c(p0)c(p)=c(p_0) and ℓ(p)=p0\ell(p)=p_0. Instantiate (Jℓ)(J_{\ell}) by x=px=p, y=uy=u, z=az=a, w=gw=g, and multiply on the right by uu. Its undoubled words reduce to uu and paupau. Each of its six guard words has content XX and is absorbed by RR in V\mathrm{V}.

In (ii), such a prefix pp exists whenever p0p_0 is a proper common prefix of the first-occurrence words. The dual assertions hold for right insertion.

Proof. For (i), Lemma 2.1 and band idempotence give

uau≈u,auau≈au.uau \approx u,\qquad auau \approx au.

For (ii), the actual prefix relation gives pu≈upu \approx u. Substitution and right multiplication by uu give the two undoubled words

pupapupu≈u,papupu≈pau.pupapupu \approx u,\qquad papupu \approx pau.

For the first reduction, simplify pu≈upu \approx u repeatedly and use upau≈uupau \approx u since c(pa)⊆c(u)c(pa) \subseteq c(u). The second reduction follows by successive uses of pu≈upu \approx u.

To check absorption of the guard words, apply Lemma 4.6. In (i), their first-occurrence words come from the six orders of u,a,gu,a,g after deleting repetitions. In (ii), they come from

puag,puga,paug,pagu,pgua,pgau.(26)puag,\quad puga,\quad paug,\quad pagu,\quad pgua,\quad pgau. \tag*{(26)}

The first-occurrence words of uu and are ℓ(u)\ell(u) and aa. Lemma 4.7 gives admissibility of ℓ(pau)\ell(pau) and permits completing each prefix with the admissible full word ℓ(g)\ell(g). Placing gg earlier in the concatenation also preserves admissibility. This verifies all six words in (26) and the six words in (i).

All six guard words in either case have the same last-occurrence word: delete the letters of DD from r(g)r(g) and append r(u)r(u). A full copy of uu follows every occurrence of gg, while all other inserted factors have content in DD. After reversal, retaining first occurrences in the concatenation rev⁡(u)rev⁡(g)\operatorname{rev}(u)\operatorname{rev}(g) gives the corresponding first-occurrence word. The right-hand version of Lemma 4.7 proves its admissibility. The factor gg supplies full content. Lemma 4.6 proves absorption of every guard word. □

Here pp must be an actual prefix of uu. Its repetition-free first-occurrence word need not satisfy pu≈upu \approx u in an arbitrary band.

Lemma 6.3. Under the assumptions of Lemma 6.2, both uguugu and vgvvgv have content XX and are absorbed by RR in VV.

Proof. Deleting repetitions from ℓ(u)ℓ(g)\ell(u)\ell(g) gives the first-occurrence word of uguugu. The same operation on ℓ(rev⁡(u))ℓ(rev⁡(g))\ell(\operatorname{rev}(u))\ell(\operatorname{rev}(g)) gives its reversed last-occurrence word. Apply Lemmas 4.7 and 4.6. Replacing uu by vv gives the proof for vgvvgv. □

Finite bases and the main theorem

For a word identity σ=(s≈t)\sigma=(s\approx t) write

σ♯:s+2sωs≈t+2tωt,\sigma^{\sharp}: \quad s+2s\omega s\approx t+2t\omega t,

where ω\omega is fresh. For a polynomial identity τ=(P≈Q)\tau=(P\approx Q) write 2τ2\tau for 2P≈2Q2P\approx2Q. These are abbreviations for identities in the original two-operation signature.

Theorem 7.1. Let T∈W⊆A\mathbf{T}\in\mathbf{W}\subseteq\mathbf{A}. Let U\mathbf{U} be the band variety generated by the multiplicative reducts of members of W\mathbf{W}, and put V=W∩IB\mathbf{V}=\mathbf{W}\cap\mathbf{IB}. Choose finite relative bases

  • ΣU\Sigma_U for U\mathbf{U} inside the variety of bands;

  • ΣV\Sigma_V for V\mathbf{V} inside IB\mathbf{IB};

  • ΣG\Sigma_{\mathcal{G}} for the band theory GW\mathcal{G}_{\mathbf{W}}.

Let ΓW\Gamma_{\mathbf{W}} consist of those members of {Hℓ,Jℓ,Hr,Jr}\{H_{\ell},J_{\ell},H_r,J_r\} that hold in W\mathbf{W}. A finite identity basis for W\mathbf{W} is

SR∪{x2≈x, 3x≈2x}∪ΣU∪{2τ:τ∈ΣV}∪ΓW∪{σ♯:σ∈ΣG}.(27)\mathrm{SR}\cup\{x^2\approx x,\ 3x\approx2x\}\cup\Sigma_U\cup\{2\tau:\tau\in\Sigma_V\} \cup\Gamma_{\mathbf{W}}\cup\{\sigma^{\sharp}:\sigma\in\Sigma_{\mathcal{G}}\}. \tag*{(27)}

Proof. The finite bases exist by the finite basis theorems for bands [4] and IB\mathbf{IB} [5, 8], and by Lemma 5.2. Every identity in (7.1) holds in W\mathbf{W}. Let Z\mathbf{Z} be the variety they define. These identities give W⊆Z⊆A\mathbf{W}\subseteq\mathbf{Z}\subseteq\mathbf{A}. To prove the reverse inclusion, we derive every identity of W\mathbf{W} in Z\mathbf{Z}. Every doubled image of a member of ZZ belongs to VV. Since dd is a homomorphism, evaluating PP at doubled elements gives 2P2P at the original elements. The identities 2ΣV2\Sigma_V imply P≈QP \approx Q on each doubled image whenever 2P≈2Q2P \approx2Q occurs in the basis. The protected identities in the basis give

GW⊆GZ.(28)\mathcal{G}_W \subseteq\mathcal{G}_Z. \tag*{(28)}

By Lemma 5.2, GZ\mathcal{G}_Z is a fully invariant band theory. It contains ΣG\Sigma_G because their protected versions occur in (27), and contains the band theory they generate.

Assume W⊨P≈QW \models P \approx Q and expand both terms as polynomials. Put X=c(P)∪c(Q)X = \mathrm{c}(P) \cup\mathrm{c}(Q). By Lemma 4.3, their count functions and isolated contents agree. If νP(X)=1\nu_P(X) = 1, both sides are single words, and their identity follows from ΣU\Sigma_U. It remains to consider polynomials with at least two occurrences on each side.

The common doubled part. Let

D=DV(P)=DV(Q),C=∑q∈D2q.\mathcal{D} = \mathcal{D}_V(P) = \mathcal{D}_V(Q), \qquad C = \sum_{q \in\mathcal{D}} 2q.

By Proposition 4.5, the following identities hold in ZZ:

P≈C+∑D∈IuD,Q≈C+∑D∈IvD,(29)P \approx C + \sum_{D \in\mathcal{I}} u_D, \qquad Q \approx C + \sum_{D \in\mathcal{I}} v_D, \tag*{(29)}

where I\mathcal{I} is the common set of isolated contents. The polynomial CC is nonempty. Every isolated content is proper in XX, since otherwise all occurrences of its side would be supported in it.

Keep CC fixed. Starting from the first expression in (29), apply only transformations described below that we have already proved in ZZ, and call the resulting polynomial P0P_0. Let Q0Q_0 remain the second expression. The identity P0≈Q0P_0 \approx Q_0 holds in WW, since W⊆ZW \subseteq Z and the original identity holds in WW. Put R=P0+Q0R = P_0 + Q_0. In VV we have R≈P≈QR \approx P \approx Q. If a word hh has content XX and V⊨R+h≈RV \models R + h \approx R, then

h∈D,C+2h≈C.(30)h \in\mathcal{D}, \qquad C + 2h \approx C. \tag*{(30)}

For the first statement, use the chosen free-band representative: νP(X)=2\nu_P(X) = 2, and V⊨R≈PV \models R \approx P gives the absorption condition in (12). For the second, let h‾\overline{h} be the representative of hh in BXB_X. The sum CC contains 2h‾2\overline{h}, and h≈h‾h \approx\overline{h} holds in every band. Adding 2h2h changes 2h‾2\overline{h} to 4h‾4\overline{h}, which equals 2h‾2\overline{h}. This coefficient reduction proves C+2h≈CC + 2h \approx C in ZZ using its semiring and band identities. The absorption test in VV identifies a summand already in CC; this argument does not assume P0≈Q0P_0 \approx Q_0 in ZZ.

To choose gg, multiply all word occurrences of RR. The resulting word has content XX, and RR absorbs it in VV because it absorbs every factor and their product. The content remains XX at every stage: CC contains the word obtained initially by multiplying all occurrences of PP and QQ, using $V \models P \approx Q.

Alignment of the first-occurrence words. Fix a common isolated content DD and write u,vu,v for its current occurrences in P0,Q0P_0,Q_0. Suppose their first-occurrence words differ. If their first letters differ, Lemma 6.1 shows that Hℓ∈ΓWH_{\ell}\in\Gamma_W. Apply it as in Lemma 6.2(i), with aa the first letter of vv. Its undoubled words are u,auu,au. The polynomial RR absorbs each instantiated guard word, and each has content XX. By (30), the instantiated guard polynomial, say C′C', satisfies C+C′≈CC+C'\approx C. The guarded identity gives, in ZZ,

C+u≈C+C′+u≈C+C′+au≈C+au.C+u\approx C+C'+u\approx C+C'+au\approx C+au.

We add the other isolated summands to both sides.

If the first letters agree, let p0p_0 be the longest common proper prefix of ℓ(u),ℓ(v)\ell(u),\ell(v), and let aa be the next target letter from ℓ(v)\ell(v). Lemma 6.1 gives Jℓ∈ΓWJ_{\ell}\in\Gamma_W. Choose an actual prefix pp as in Lemma 6.2(ii). That lemma and (30) allow the same calculation to replace C+uC+u by C+pauC+pau in ZZ.

Each replacement lengthens the common first-occurrence prefix with vv. It preserves content DD and the last-occurrence word, since the former word uu remains as a suffix. No occurrence in the fixed doubled part is supported in an isolated DD: a word q∈Dq\in D with c(q)⊆Dc(q)\subseteq D would give νP(D)=2\nu_P(D)=2. The replacement preserves isolation. Since the current identity P0≈Q0P_0\approx Q_0 still holds in WW, every guarded identity needed at the next step belongs to the selected set ΓW\Gamma_W. After finitely many steps the first-occurrence words agree.

Alignment of the last-occurrence words. Apply the reverse argument, using Hr,JrH_r,J_r. These replacements leave the whole current word as a prefix and preserve the first-occurrence word just obtained. After finitely many steps the resulting word u∗u^* satisfies

ℓ(u∗)=ℓ(v),r(u∗)=r(v).(31)\ell(u^*)=\ell(v),\qquad r(u^*)=r(v). \tag*{(31)}

These transformations hold in ZZ and retain the same CC.

Replacement of the remaining word. The current identity P0≈Q0P_0\approx Q_0 holds in WW, and its occurrences u∗,vu^*,v remain isolated with content DD. Theorem 5.4 and (31) imply u∗≡ΓWvu^*\equiv_{\Gamma_W}v. By (28), the protected identity

u∗+2u∗ωu∗≈v+2vωvu^*+2u^*\omega u^*\approx v+2v\omega v

holds in ZZ. Choose an absorbed full-content word gg for the current RR. Lemma 6.3 and (30) show that CC absorbs both 2u∗gu∗2u^*gu^* and 2vgv2vgv. Substituting ω=g\omega=g and adding CC yields

C+u∗≈C+u∗+2u∗gu∗≈C+v+2vgv≈C+v.C+u^*\approx C+u^*+2u^*gu^*\approx C+v+2vgv\approx C+v.

This replaces the isolated occurrence without changing CC or the other isolated contents.

Repeating this replacement for each of the finitely many D∈ID\in\mathcal{I} makes the expressions in (29) identical; if I\mathcal{I} is empty, both already equal CC. The completed derivation proves Z⊨P≈QZ\models P\approx Q, giving Id⁡(W)⊆Id⁡(Z)\operatorname{Id}(W)\subseteq\operatorname{Id}(Z) and Z=WZ=W.

Corollary 7.2. The variety A\mathcal{A} is hereditarily finitely based.

Proof. A subvariety containing TT has the finite basis in Theorem 7.1. A subvariety not containing TT is contained in JJ by Proposition 4.2, and is finitely based by Proposition 3.6. □

Proof of Theorem 1.1. The varieties RR and AA are hereditarily finitely based by Proposition 3.4 and Corollary 7.2. One identity defines each relative to MI\mathrm{MI}. Proposition 3.1 gives the required decomposition for every subvariety of MI\mathrm{MI}. Lemma 3.2 proves that MI\mathrm{MI} is hereditarily finitely based. Corollary 1.2 follows by applying this conclusion to Var⁡(S)\operatorname{Var}(S). □

An algebra generating a locally finite variety is called inherently nonfinitely based if it belongs to no finitely based locally finite variety of the same signature. The next corollary follows from the local finiteness of MI\mathrm{MI} in Lemma 2.2, independently of Theorem 1.1.

Corollary 7.3. No multiplicatively idempotent semiring is inherently nonfinitely based in the constant-free signature {+,⋅}\{+, \cdot\}.

Proof. The defining axioms give a finite basis for MI\mathrm{MI}, which is locally finite by Lemma 2.2. Every multiplicatively idempotent semiring belongs to a finitely based locally finite variety of the same signature. □

Remark 7.4. Theorem 1.1 proves that every subvariety of MI\mathrm{MI} has a finite identity basis. The construction in (7.1) uses bases for the multiplicative band theory, the doubled image and the protected band theory, together with a subset of four fixed guarded identities. The auxiliary bases depend on the chosen subvariety. The proof gives no uniform bound on the number of variables, does not supply individual bases for every subvariety, and does not describe the full subvariety lattice of MI\mathrm{MI}.

Declaration of AI use

The authors used OpenAI ChatGPT and Codex for exploratory mathematical checks, manuscript organization, and language editing. They reviewed and edited the resulting content and take full responsibility for this article. School of Mathematical Sciences, Chongqing University of Technology, Chongqing 400054, P.R. China

Email address: [email protected]

School of Mathematical Sciences, Chongqing University of Technology, Chongqing 400054, P.R. China

Email address: [email protected]

References

  1. [1]Burris, S., Sankappanavar, H.P.: A Course in Universal Algebra. Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 78. Springer-Verlag, New York (1981)
  2. [2]Chajda, I., Länger, H.: Subdirectly irreducible commutative multiplicatively idempotent semirings. Algebra Universalis 76, 327–337 (2016). doi:10.1007/s00012-016-0403-2DOI
  3. [3]Chajda, I., Länger, H.: On a variety of commutative multiplicatively idempotent semirings. Semigroup Forum 94, 610–617 (2017). doi:10.1007/s00233-016-9786-9DOI
  4. [4]Gerhard, J.A., Petrich, M.: Varieties of bands revisited. Proc. London Math. Soc. (3) 58(2), 323–350 (1989). doi:10.1112/plms/s3-58.2.323DOI
  5. [5]Ghosh, S., Pastijn, F., Zhao, X.Z.: Varieties generated by ordered bands I. Order 22(2), 109–128 (2005). doi:10.1007/s11083-005-9011-zDOI
  6. [6]Jackson, M., Ren, M.M., Zhao, X.Z.: Nonfinitely based ai-semirings with finitely based semigroup reducts. J. Algebra 611, 211–245 (2022). doi:10.1016/j.jalgebra.2022.07.042DOI
  7. [7]McLean, D.: Idempotent semigroups. Amer. Math. Monthly 61(2), 110–113 (1954). doi:10.2307/2307797DOI
  8. [8]Pastijn, F.: Varieties generated by ordered bands II. Order 22(2), 129–143 (2005). doi:10.1007/s11083-005-9013-xDOI
  9. [10]Polák, L.: Small conjunctive varieties of regular languages. Acta Cybernetica 17(4), 825–841 (2006)
  10. [11]Ren, M.M., Yue, M.Y., Zhou, Y.L.: Inherently nonfinitely based additively idempotent semirings. Preprint, arXiv:2609.27641v1 (2026)arxiv.org/abs/2609.27641
  11. [12]Vechtomov, E.M., Petrov, A.A.: Multiplicatively idempotent semirings. Fundam. Prikl. Mat. 18(4), 41–70 (2013) (in Russian); English translation: J. Math. Sci. 206(6), 634–653 (2015). doi:10.1007/s10958-015-2346-6
  12. [13]Wang, A.A., Shao, Y.: On a semiring variety satisfying xⁿ ≈ x. Publ. Math. Debrecen 93(1–2), 73–86 (2018). doi:10.5486/PMD.2018.8022DOI

Paper details

vlnc:W_r4wcyr96
v1 · latestHistory (1)

published · Fresh — added to the Hub within the last 30 days

added ·

Usage

views · 0

downloads · 0

A view counts once per browser per day, a download each time the PDF is requested.

CC BY 4.0

Original source

  • Mathematics

OpenAI ChatGPT, Codex · View statement →

Looking for related papers…
Contents