4.3. Term algebras

Synonymous terms

In any draft, xy (the minimal congruence relation, from 4.2) is the condition for the terms with roots x and y to be synonymous, i.e. taking the same value f(x) = f(y) for any interpretation f of the draft in a partial algebra.

Terms in different drafts D, E with the same variables, can be so compared by interpreting ≃ in their coproduct DV E. Equivalently, for any morphisms f∈MorL,V(D,F), g∈MorL,V(E,F) to a functional draft F,

xD, ∀yE, xyf(x) = g(y).

This equivalence comes from !: MorL,V(DV E, F) ⇌ MorL,V(D,F) × MorL,V(E,F) and that, as explained in 4.2, ≃ is the preimage of = by any variables-preserving morphism to a functional draft. Then,

h∈MorL,V(D,E), ∀x,yD, h(x) ≃ x ∧ (xyh(x) ≃ h(y))

because ≃Eh ∈ MorL,V(D, ⤓E).
Thus ∀x,yD, the meaning of xy is the same for any sub-drafts of D which x and y are respectively considered elements of, such as the terms Tx and Ty (using h∈MorL,V(TxV Ty, D)).

The category of all terms synonymous to a given term (i.e. terms with synonymous roots, and with the same variables), has final objects which are the functional ones. In particular, any two synonymous functional terms are related by a unique isomorphism.
Proof: the results from 4.2 easily imply that for any two synonymous terms D, D', if D is functional then the natural morphism from it to the condensate of their coproduct is an isomorphism.∎

Term algebras

For any set given set V, a V-ary L-term algebra is an L-system equivalently described as:
  1. An algebraic L-draft D where VD = V;
  2. An injective L-algebra D generated by V where V ∩ Im φD = ∅ (thus D\Im φD = V);
  3. A final L-draft in the sense of variables-preserving morphisms MorL,V ;
  4. An L-algebra with basis V in the category of L-algebras.
As any draft, it is qualified as ground if V = ∅, i.e. (by definition 2.) a ground L-term algebra is an algebra both minimal and injective, and thus also bijective; 4. means it is an initial L-algebra.
Intuitively, a V-ary L-term algebra T represents the set of all V-ary operation symbols possibly defined by L-terms ; any V-ary sL has a copy sT(IdV) ∈ T.

Proof of equivalence. Already 1. ⇔ 2. ⇒ (3. ∧ 4.).
Proof of 3. ⇒ 1. : any final L-draft D is

Let us prove 4. ⇒ 2. after reduction to the ground case by replacing variables by constants (replacing L by LV).
Any initial L-algebra (EE) is : According to the last formula of 3.4, for any f∈MorL(D,E) where D is an L-term algebra with basis V and E is an L-algebra, we have Im f = 〈f[V]〉L.
Thus for any AE, if there exists an L-term algebra with basis A (this hypothesis can be dispensed of with more work) then 〈AL is the set of values in E of all L-terms with variables in A.

Term algebras in injective algebras

In any injective L-algebra (EE), the subalgebra 〈VL generated by any VE \ Im φE, is a term algebra. So, the existence of an injective L-algebra implies that of a ground L-term algebra.

For any f∈MorL(K,E) from a ground draft K to an injective system E, the system Im f is both injective and minimal, i.e. a ground draft. As with any morphism, if K is serial then Im f is serial; if E is functional then Im f is functional. Thus, if K is a ground term algebra and E is an injective partial algebra then Im f is a ground term algebra, and thus f is injective (by essential uniqueness of initial or final objects).

Precisely to distinguish statements and their respective ranges of validity, Some more complicated statements can be obtained in non-ground cases by applying the above to the language LV.

Particular languages

If L has no constant then ∅ is a ground L-term algebra and the only ground L-draft.
If L only has constants, then ground L-term algebras are the copies of L.
If L only has symbols with arity 0 or 1 then every L-term is functional. This will be deduced below.

Long composition

In any draft D over a language of function symbols, lDOD.
For any xD, the subsystem H = ≤(x) of D has a structure of L-draft where the role of VH is played by {x}.
Proof. Then, G = TxHD is a sub-draft with VG = VTx.
Therefore (D = Tr) ⇒ (rHG = D).
So, the order on any term Tr over a language of function symbols is total, and Tr is essentially the formal composite of both terms Tx and H for any xTr.
It is easy to conclude that Tr is functional with a single used variable; and from this, that any two synomymous terms are related by a unique isomorphism.
Conversely, denoting S a function symbol, any functional unary {S}-draft is totally ordered, and more precisely either a term or a unary term algebra. The proof is essentially the same as above, replacing the role of S by that of its transpose (it does use the injectivity of S to ensure the needed antisymmetry of the generated preorder).

Trajectories by transformation sets

For any set of transformations LEE, seen as a set of function symbols interpreted in E,

xE, 〈{x}〉L = {f(x)|f∈〈L{Id,⚬}}
XE, 〈XL = ⋃f∈〈L{Id,⚬} f[X] = ⋃xX 〈{x}〉L

The left equality can be written A = K where A = 〈XL, M = 〈L{Id,⚬} and K = {f(x) | (f,x)∈M×X}; the right equality is directly deducible from it (or from the fact unions preserve stability among subsets of systems with languages of function symbols). As will be clarified below, both A and K mean the set of values of all composites of any number of functions in L, applied to any xX.
Proof of AK Proof of KA

Free modules

For a given L-equational system S = (V,K,b), a free b-module is an object with a basis in the category of algebraic b-modules, or b-algebras to say in short. Then its basis is generating (for the same reason as the above case of categories of algebras, since any L-stable subset of a b-module is a b-module).
Both conditions (algebra and b-module) might be formally unified by switching to an equational system whose modules are the algebraic b-modules (except that the condition to be algebraic on constant symbols, requires a separate formalization to rule out empty modules : either by simply requiring non-emptiness, or putting constant symbols in a nullary equational system to express their algebraicity as a separate module condition).
Generalizations to categories of partial algebras and/or to structured V, would be possible but more complicated and not useful for our needs.

Any V-ary L-term algebra E allows to construct a free b-module with basis V, as the quotient E/S defined in 4.2, if only it is regular (if it isn't, then no object in that category can have more than one element).
Let us start describing an important particular case.

Free monoids

A free monoid is a monoid with a basis in the category of monoids.

Any unary L-term algebra M (if it exists) is an egg in the category of L-algebras, thus (as seen in 3.11) a monoid acting on all L-algebras with MorL ⊂ MorM.

If L is a language of function symbols and M is a unary L-term algebra then L is a basis of M in the category of monoids.
Proof:

Conversely, if L is a basis of a monoid M in the category of monoids, then M is a unary L-term algebra, using L as a language of function symbols.
Proof: Note: since 〈L{e,•} = M, we have MorL = MorM.

Intuitively, free monoids are made of all finite strings (i.e. tuples) of symbols from a given set, with concatenation in the role of composition. We shall formalize this in the next section (4.4).

(Old French text)


Set theory and foundations of mathematics
1. First foundations of mathematics
2. Set theory
3. Algebra 1
4. Arithmetic and first-order foundations
4.1. Algebraic terms
4.2. Quotient systems
4.3. Term algebras
4.4. Integers and recursion
4.5. Presburger Arithmetic
4.6. Finiteness
4.7. Countability and Completeness
4.8. More recursion tools
4.9. Non-standard models of Arithmetic
4.10. Developing theories : definitions
4.11. Constructions
4.A. The Berry paradox
5. Second-order foundations
6. Foundations of Geometry