2011
DOI: 10.1016/j.jpaa.2011.03.017
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Generators and relations for subsemigroups via boundaries in Cayley graphs

Abstract: a b s t r a c tGiven a finitely generated semigroup S and subsemigroup T of S, we define the notion of the boundary of T in S which, intuitively, describes the position of T inside the left and right Cayley graphs of S. We prove that if S is finitely generated and T has a finite boundary in S then T is finitely generated. We also prove that if S is finitely presented and T has a finite boundary in S then T is finitely presented. Several corollaries and examples are given.

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2021
2021
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
3
2

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Next we claim that U is actually generated by {π M (s l ) : l ∈ L}. This is proved by a very similar argument to the one in the previous paragraph, starting from the fact that {s l : l ∈ L} is a generating set for H, expressing the generators red(r ij ) in terms of the s l , and using (7). Furthermore, the generators {π M (s l ) : l ∈ L} satisfy the relations r ′ i = 1.…”
Section: Makanin-style Presentation Theorems For Special Inverse Monoidsmentioning
confidence: 59%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Next we claim that U is actually generated by {π M (s l ) : l ∈ L}. This is proved by a very similar argument to the one in the previous paragraph, starting from the fact that {s l : l ∈ L} is a generating set for H, expressing the generators red(r ij ) in terms of the s l , and using (7). Furthermore, the generators {π M (s l ) : l ∈ L} satisfy the relations r ′ i = 1.…”
Section: Makanin-style Presentation Theorems For Special Inverse Monoidsmentioning
confidence: 59%
“…The fact that finite presentability is inherited by submonoids with ideal complement is well know e.g. it is a corollary of [7,Theorem B]. Therefore K Q * T W is finitely presented which implies that K Q and T W are both finitely presented being retracts of K Q * T W .…”
Section: A Constructionmentioning
confidence: 90%
“…) is finitely presented, then by part (iv), it follows that V Q,W is finitely presented since its complement is an ideal. The fact that finite presentability is inherited by submonoids with ideal complement is well-known, for example, it is a corollary of [8,Theorem B]. Therefore, K Q * T W is finitely presented, which implies that K Q and T W are both finitely presented, being retracts of K Q * T W .…”
Section: The Constructionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…e.g. [28,44,20,21]). Even answering the question of what a "virtually free" monoid should be is hence already a non-trivial task.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%