A Positive Representation Result For Distributive Semilattices
The proof of the negative solution for CLP shows that the problem of representing distributive semilattices by compact congruences of lattices already appears for congruence lattices of semilattices. The question whether the structure of partially ordered set would cause similar problems is answered by the following result.
Theorem (Wehrung 2008). For any distributive (∨,0)-semilattice S, there are a (∧,0)-semilattice P and a map μ : P × P → S such that the following conditions hold:
(1) x ≤ y implies that μ(x,y)=0, for all x, y in P.
(2) μ(x,z) ≤ μ(x,y) ∨ μ(y,z), for all x, y, z in P.
(3) For all x ≥ y in P and all α, β in S such that μ(x,y) ≤ α ∨ β, there are a positive integer n and elements x=z0 ≥ z1 ≥ ... ≥ z2n=y such that μ(zi,zi+1) ≤ α (resp., μ(zi,zi+1) ≤ β) whenever i < 2n is even (resp., odd).
(4) S is generated, as a join-semilattice, by all the elements of the form μ(x,0), for x in P.
Furthermore, if S has a largest element, then P can be assumed to be a lattice with a largest element.
It is not hard to verify that conditions (1)–(4) above imply the distributivity of S, so the result above gives a characterization of distributivity for (∨,0)-semilattices.
Read more about this topic: Congruence Lattice Problem
Famous quotes containing the words positive and/or result:
“Blessed be the inventor of photography! I set him above even the inventor of chloroform! It has given more positive pleasure to poor suffering humanity than anything else that has “cast up” in my time or is like to—this art by which even the “poor” can possess themselves of tolerable likenesses of their absent dear ones. And mustn’t it be acting favourably on the morality of the country?”
—Jane Welsh Carlyle (1801–1866)
“It is not the simple statement of facts that ushers in freedom; it is the constant repetition of them that has this liberating effect. Tolerance is the result not of enlightenment, but of boredom.”
—Quentin Crisp (b. 1908)