On the ``three subobjects lemma and its higher-order generalisations

DOI10.1016/J.JALGEBRA.2019.10.049MaRDI QIDQ2285291zbMATH OpenOpenAlexWikidataFDO

Authors Cyrille Sandry Simeu, Tim Van der Linden

Publication date 8 January 2020

Published in Journal of Algebra (Search for Journal in Brave)

Full work available at URL https://arxiv.org/abs/1904.00161

algebraically coherent category cross-effect Higgins commutator nilpotency semi-abelian

Solvable, nilpotent (super)algebras (17B30) Abelian categories, Grothendieck categories (18E10) Protomodular categories, semi-abelian categories, Mal'tsev categories (18E13) Nonabelian homological algebra (category-theoretic aspects) (18G50) Nilpotent groups (20F18) Cohomology of groups (20J06)

Abstract: We solve a problem mentioned in an article of Berger and Bourn: we prove that in the context of an algebraically coherent semi-abelian category, two natural definitions of the lower central series coincide. In a first, "standard" approach, nilpotency is defined as in group theory via nested binary commutators of the form

[[X, X], X]

. In a second approach, higher Higgins commutators of the form

[X, X, X]

are used to define nilpotent objects. The two are known to be different in general; for instance, in the context of loops, the definition of Bruck is of the former kind, while the commutator-associator filtration of Mostovoy and his co-authors is of the latter type. Another example, in the context of Moufang loops, is given in Berger and Bourn's paper. In this article, we show that the two streams of development agree in any algebraically coherent semi-abelian category. Such are, for instance, all Orzech categories of interest. Our proof of this result is based on a higher-order version of the Three Subobjects Lemma of Cigoli-Gray-Van der Linden, which extends the classical Three Subgroups Lemma from group theory to categorical algebra. It says that any

n

-fold Higgins commutator

[K_{1}, d o t s, K_{n}]

of normal subobjects

K_{i}

of an object

X

may be decomposed into a join of nested binary commutators.

Review text

In Categorical Algebra, there are several ways of defining a commutator of subobjects. One was introduced by \textit{P. J. Higgins} [Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3) 6, 366--416 (1956; Zbl 0073.01704)] which defined an \(n\)-fold commutator, \([K_1,\dots, K_n]\leq X\) for \(K_i\), \(i=1,\ldots, n\), subobjects of an object, \(X\). (Note that this definition is not generated simply by nesting commutators of two subobjects.) The context of that definition is that of varieties of \(\Omega\)-groups. These are pointed varieties of universal algebras, whose defining operations and relations include those of the theory of groups. This definition can be extended to the context of semi-abelian categories in the sense of Janedlidze-Márki-Tholen. Other notions in this sort of categorical setting can be derived from work by Smith, Huq, and others. These different notions of commutator do not in general agree and so can lead to different notions of nilpotent object. The Three Subobjects Lemma of the title of this article, in the case of groups, says that, if \(K\), \(L\), \(M\) are normal subgroups of a group, \(X\), then \[ [[L,M],K]\leq [[K,L],M]\vee[[M,K],L]\leq X. \] There is, also, an identification of the middle term, \([[K,L],M]\vee[[M,K],L]\), with Higgins' ternary commutator, \([K,L,M]\). This lemma has been generalised, in [\textit{A. S. Cigoli} et al., Theory Appl. Categ. 30, 1864--1905 (2015; Zbl 1366.18005)], to give a `Three Subobjects Lemma' in any algebraically coherent semi-abelian category (which term will not be recalled in this review). This class of categories includes those of groups, Lie algebras, crossed modules, cocommutative Hopf algebras over a field of characteristic zero, and all Orzech categories of interest (see [\textit{G. Orzech}, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 2, 287--314 (1972; Zbl 0251.18016); ibid. 2, 315--340 (1972; Zbl 0251.18017)]). In general, there are two natural generalisations of the lower central series to a universal or categorical algebra context. In the first, one uses nested binary commutators of some type and in the second, one has Higgins' \(n\)-ary commutators. This paper looks at \(n\)-ary commutators for \(n\geq 3\), and asks whether there is a \(n\)-fold subobject lemma, at least in an algebraically coherent semi-abelian category. Such a lemma is proved and this shows that in such a category, Higgins commutators, \([K_1,\dots, K_n]\), can be decomposed as a join of nested binary commutators. These results imply that in this context, the two definitions of lower central series coincide.

Recommendations

Cites work

Cited in

(5)

This page was built for publication: On the ``three subobjects lemma and its higher-order generalisations

Report a bug (only for logged in users!)Click here to report a bug for this page (MaRDI item Q2285291)