arXiv++ Combinatorics

We recall the concept of the dimension of a finite poset $P$, and the longstanding conjecture that for all finite nonempty posets $P$ and $Q$, $\dim(P\times Q)\geq\dim(P)+\dim(Q)-2.$ We then note two other plausible inequalities, either of which would imply that one. In the final section, writing $P\preccurlyeq P'$ if, for all $Q,$ $\dim(P\times Q)\leq\dim(P'\times Q),$ and writing $P\approx P'$ if $P\preccurlyeq P'$ and $P'\preccurlyeq P,$ we note some results and questions concerning these relations.

For $P$ a poset, the dimension of $P$ is defined to be the least cardinal $κ$ such that $P$ is embeddable in a direct product of $κ$ totally ordered sets. We study the behavior of this function on finite-dimensional (not necessarily finite) posets. In general, the dimension dim($P$ x $Q$) of a product of two posets can be smaller than dim($P$) + dim($Q$), though no cases are known where the discrepancy is greater than 2. We obtain a result that gives upper bounds on the dimensions of certain products of posets, including cases where the discrepancy 2 is achieved. But the paper is mainly devoted to stating questions, old and new, about dimensions of product posets, noting implications among their possible answers, and introducing some related concepts that might be helpful in tackling these questions.

F. Wehrung has asked: Given a family $\mathcal{C}$ of subsets of a set $Ω$, under what conditions will there exist a total ordering on $Ω$ under which every member of $\mathcal{C}$ is convex? <p> Note that if $A$ and $B$ are nondisjoint convex subsets of a totally ordered set, neither of which contains the other, then $A\cup B$, $A\cap B$, and $A\setminus B$ are also convex. So let $\mathcal{C}$ be an arbitrary set of subsets of a set $Ω$, and form its closure $\mathcal{P}$ under forming, whenever $A$ and $B$ are nondisjoint and neither contains the other, the sets $A\cup B$, $A\cap B$, and $A\setminus B$. We determine the form $\mathcal{P}$ can take when $\mathcal{C}$, and hence $\mathcal{P}$, is finite, and for this case get necessary and sufficient conditions for there to exist an ordering of $Ω$ of the desired sort. From this we obtain a condition which works without the finiteness hypothesis. <p> We establish bounds on the cardinality of the subset $\mathcal{P}$ generated as above by an $n$-element set $\mathcal{C}$. <p> We note connections with the theory of <i>interval graphs</i> and <i>hypergraphs</i>, which lead to other ways of answering Wehrung's question.

The Boolean ring $B$ of measurable subsets of the unit interval, modulo sets of measure zero, has proper radical ideals (e.g., $\{0\})$ that are closed under the natural metric, but has no prime ideals closed under that metric; hence closed radical ideals are not, in general, intersections of closed prime ideals. Moreover, $B$ is known to be complete in its metric. Together, these facts answer a question posed by J.Gleason. From this example, rings of arbitrary characteristic with the corresponding properties are obtained. The result that $B$ is complete in its metric is generalized to show that if $L$ is a lattice given with a metric satisfying identically either the inequality $d(x\vee y,\,x\vee z)\leq d(y,z)$ or the inequality $d(x\wedge y,\,x\wedge z)\leq d(y,z),$ and if in $L$ every increasing Cauchy sequence converges and every decreasing Cauchy sequence converges, then every Cauchy sequence in $L$ converges; i.e., $L$ is complete as a metric space. We show by example that if the above inequalities are replaced by the weaker conditions $d(x,\,x\vee y)\leq d(x,y),$ respectively $d(x,\,x\wedge y)\leq d(x,y),$ the completeness conclusion can fail. We end with two open questions.

In section 1 we consider a 3-tuple $S=(|S|,\preccurlyeq,E)$ where $|S|$ is a finite set, $\preccurlyeq$ a partial ordering on $|S|,$ and $E$ a set of unordered pairs of distinct members of $|S|,$ and study, as a function of $n\geq 0,$ the number of maps $\varphi:|S|\to\{1,\dots,n\}$ which are both isotone with respect to the ordering $\preccurlyeq,$ and have the property that $\varphi(x)\neq \varphi(y)$ whenever $\{x,y\}\in E.$ We prove a number-theoretic result about this function, and use it in section 7 to recover a ring-theoretic identity of G. P. Hochschild. In section 2 we generalize a result of R. Stanley on the sign-imbalance of posets in which the lengths of all maximal chains have the same parity. In sections 3-6 we study the linearization-count and sign-imbalance of a lexicographic sum of $n$ finite posets $P_i$ $(1\leq i\leq n)$ over an $n$-element poset $P_0.$ We note how to compute these values from the corresponding counts for the given posets $P_i,$ and for a lexicographic sum over $P_0$ of chains of lengths $\mathrm{card}(P_i).$ This makes the behavior of lexicographic sums of chains over a finite poset $P_0$ of interest, and we obtain some general results on the linearization-count and sign-imbalance of these objects.

Vaughan Pratt has introduced objects consisting of pairs $(A,W)$ where $A$ is a set and $W$ a set of subsets of $A,$ such that (i) $W$ contains $\emptyset$ and $A,$ (ii) if $C$ is a subset of $A\times A$ such that for every $a\in A,$ both $\{b\mid (a,b)\in C\}$ and $\{b\mid (b,a)\in C\}$ are members of $W$ (a "crossword" with all "rows" and "columns" in $W),$ then $\{b\mid (b,b)\in C\}$ (the "diagonal word") also belongs to $W,$ and (iii) for all distinct $a,b\in A,$ the set $W$ has an element which contains $a$ but not $b.$ He has asked whether for every $A,$ the only such $W$ is the set of all subsets of $A.$ We answer that question in the negative. We also obtain several positive results, in particular, a positive answer to the above question if $W$ is closed under complementation. We obtain partial results on whether there can exist counterexamples to Pratt's question with $W$ countable.

For P a poset or lattice, let Id(P) denote the poset, respectively, lattice, of upward directed downsets in P, including the empty set, and let id(P)=Id(P)-\{\emptyset\}. This note obtains various results to the effect that Id(P) is always, and id(P) often, "essentially larger" than P. In the first vein, we find that a poset P admits no "<"-respecting map (and so in particular, no one-to-one isotone map) from Id(P) into P, and, going the other way, that an upper semilattice S admits no semilattice homomorphism from any subsemilattice of itself onto Id(S). The slightly smaller object id(P) is known to be isomorphic to P if and only if P has ascending chain condition. This result is strengthened to say that the only posets P_0 such that for every natural number n there exists a poset P_n with id^n(P_n)\cong P_0 are those having ascending chain condition. On the other hand, a wide class of cases is noted here where id(P) is embeddable in P. Counterexamples are given to many variants of the results proved.