Algebras, Rings and Modules Vol.2

Algebras, Rings and Modules
Mathematics and Its Applications
Managing Editor:
M. HAZEWINKEL
Centre for Mathematics and Computer Science, Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Volume 586
Algebras, Rings and Modules
Volume 2
by
Michiel Hazewinkel
CWI,
Amsterdam, The Netherlands
Nadiya Gubareni
Technical University of Czestochowa,
Poland
and
V.V. Kirichenko
Kiev Taras Shevchenko University,
Kiev, Ukraine
A C.I.P. Catalogue record for this book is available from the Library of Congress.
ISBN 978-1-4020-5141-8 (HB)

ISBN 978-1-4020-5140-1 (e-book)
Published by Springer,
P.O. Box 17, 3300 AA Dordrecht, The Netherlands.
www.springer.com
Printed on acid-free paper
All Rights Reserved

c 2007 Springer
No part of this work may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted
in any form or by any means, electronic, mechanical, photocopying, microfilming, recording
or otherwise, without written permission from the Publisher, with the exception
of any material supplied specifically for the purpose of being entered
and executed on a computer system, for exclusive use by the purchaser of the work.
Table of Contents
Preface . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ix
Chapter 1. Groups and group representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

1.1 Groups and subgroups. Definitions and examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2
1.2 Symmetry. Symmetry groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7
1.3 Quotient groups, homomorphisms and normal subgroups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
1.4 Sylow theorems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
1.5 Solvable and nilpotent groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
1.6 Group rings and group representations. Maschke theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
1.7 Properties of irreducible representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
1.8 Characters of groups. Orthogonality relations and their applications . . . 38
1.9 Modular group representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
1.10 Notes and references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
Chapter 2. Quivers and their representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

2.1 Certain important algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53
2.2 Tensor algebra of a bimodule . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60
2.3 Quivers and path algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
2.4 Representations of quivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
2.5 Dynkin and Euclidean diagrams. Quadratic forms and roots . . . . . . . . . . . 79
2.6 Gabriel theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 93
2.7 K-species. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .99
2.8 Notes and references . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100
Appendix to section 2.5. More about Dynkin and extended

Dynkin (= Eyclidean) diagrams . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 105
Chapter 3. Representations of posets and of finite dimensional

algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 113
3.1 Representations of posets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 114
3.2 Differentiation algorithms for posets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 130
3.3 Representations and modules. The regular representations. . . . . . . . . . . .135
3.4 Algebras of finite representation type . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 140
v
vi TABLE OF CONTENTS
3.5 Roiter theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147

Chapter 4. Frobenius algebras and quasi-Frobenius rings . . . . . . . . . . . 161

4.1 Duality properties . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 161
4.2 Frobenius and symmetric algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164
4.3 Monomial ideals and Nakayama permutations of semiperfect rings . . . . 166
4.4 Quasi-Frobenius algebras . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 169
4.5 Quasi-Frobenius rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 174
4.6 The socle of a module and a ring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 177
4.7 Osofsky theorem for perfect rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 181
4.8 Socles of perfect rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 183
4.9 Semiperfect piecewise domains . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .184
4.10 Duality in Noetherian rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 187
4.11 Semiperfect rings with duality for simple modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 190
4.12 Self-injective rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 193
4.13 Quivers of quasi-Frobenius rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 204
4.14 Symmetric algebras with given quivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 205
4.15 Rejection lemma . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 208
Chapter 5. Right serial rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

5.1 Homological dimensions of right Noetherian rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219
5.2 Structure of right Artinian right serial rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 224
5.3 Quasi-Frobenius right serial rings. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .230
5.4 Right hereditary right serial rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 231
5.5 Semiprime right serial rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 233
5.6 Right serial quivers and trees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 236
5.7 Cartan matrix for a right Artinian right serial ring . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244
Chapter 6. Tiled orders over discrete valuation rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255

6.1 Tiled orders over discrete valuation rings and exponent matrices . . . . . 255
6.2 Duality in tiled orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 270
6.3 Tiled orders and Frobenius rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 276
6.4 Q-equivalent partially ordered sets . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 279
6.5 Indices of tiled orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 287
6.6 Finite Markov chains and reduced exponent matrices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 292
6.7 Finite partially ordered sets, (0,1)-orders and finite Markov chains . . . 296
6.8 Adjacency matrices of admissible quivers without loops . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 301
6.9 Tiled orders and weakly prime rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 305
6.10 Global dimension of tiled orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 313
TABLE OF CONTENTS vii
Chapter 7. Gorenstein matrices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327

7.1 Gorenstein tiled orders. Examples . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327
7.2 Cyclic Gorenstein matrices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 338
7.3 Gorenstein (0,1)-matrices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 346
7.4 Indices of Gorenstein matrices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 356
7.5 d-matrices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 364
7.6 Cayley tables of elementary Abelian 2-groups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 369
7.7 Quasi-Frobenius rings and Gorenstein tiled orders . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 379
Suggestions for further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385
Subject index .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . 389
Name index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397

Preface
This book is the natural continuation of “Algebras, rings and modules. vol.I”.
The main part of it consists of the study of special classes of algebras and rings.
Topics covered include groups, algebras, quivers, partially ordered sets and their
representations, as well as such special rings as quasi-Frobenius and right serial
rings, tiled orders and Gorenstein matrices.
Representation theory is a fundamental tool for studying groups, algebras
and rings by means of linear algebra. Its origins are mostly in the work of
F.G.Frobenius, H.Weil, I.Schur, A.Young, T.Molien about century ago. The re-
sults of the representation theory of finite groups and finite dimensional algebras
play a fundamental role in many recent developments of mathematics and theoret-
ical physics. The physical aspects of this theory concern accounting for and using
the concepts of symmetry which appear in various physical processes.
We start this book with the main results of the theory of groups. For the
convenience of a reader in the beginning of this chapter we recall some basic
concepts and results of group theory which will be necessary for the next chapters
of the book.
Groups are a central object of algebra. The concept of a group is histori-
cally one of the first examples of an abstract algebraic system. Finite groups, in
particular permutation groups, are an increasingly important tool in many areas
of applied mathematics. Examples include coding theory, cryptography, design
theory, combinatorial optimization, quantum computing, and statistics.
In chapter I we give a short introduction to the theory of groups and their rep-
resentations. We consider the representation theory of groups from the module-
theoretical point of view using the main results about rings and modules as
recorded in volume I of this book. This theoretical approach was first used by
E.Noether who established a close connection between the theory of algebras and
the theory of representations. From that point of view the study of the repre-
sentation theory of groups becomes a special case of the study of modules over
rings. In the theory of representations of group a special role is played by the
famous Maschke theorem. Taking into account its great importance we give three
different proofs of this theorem following J.-P.Serre, I.N.Herstein and M.Hall. As
a consequence of the Maschke theorem, the representation theory of groups splits
into two different cases depending on the characteristic of a field k: classical and
modular (following L.E.Dickson). In “classical” representation theory one assumes
that the characteristic of k does not divide the group order |G| (e.g. k can be the
field of complex numbers). In “modular” representation theory one assumes that
the characteristic of k is a prime, dividing |G|. In this case the theory is almost
completely different from the classical case.
ix
x PREFACE
In this book we consider the results belonging to the classical representation

theory of finite groups, such as the characters of groups. We give the basic prop-
erties of irreducible characters and their connection with the ring structure of the
corresponding group algebras.
A central role in the theory of representations of finite dimensional algebras
and rings is played by quivers, which were introduced by P.Gabriel in connection
with problems of representations of finite dimensional algebras in 1972. The main
notions and result concerning the theory of quivers and their representations are
given in chapter 2.
A most remarkable result in the theory of representations of quivers is the
theorem classifying the quivers of finite representation type, which was obtained by
P.Gabriel in 1972. This theorem says that a quiver is of finite representation type
over an algebraically closed field if and only if the underlying diagram obtained
from the quiver by forgetting the orientations of all arrows is a disjoint union of
simple Dynkin diagrams. P.Gabriel also proved that there is a bijection between
the isomorphism classes of indecomposable representations of a quiver Q and the
set of positive roots of the Tits form corresponding to this quiver. A proof of this
theorem is given in section 2.6.
Another proof of this theorem in the general case, for an arbitrary field, us-
ing reflection functors and Coxeter functors has been obtained by I.N.Berstein,
I.M.Gel’fand, and V.A.Ponomarev in 1973. In their work the connection between
indecomposable representations of a quiver of finite type and properties of its Tits
quadratic form is elucidated.
Representations of finite partially ordered sets (posets, in short) play an im-
portant role in representation theory. They were first introduced by L.A.Nazarova
and A.V.Roiter. The first two sections of chapter 3 are devoted to partially ordered
sets and their representations. Here are given the main results of M.M.Kleiner on
representations of posets of finite type and results of L.A.Nazarova on representa-
tions of posets of infinite type. The most important result in this theory was been
obtained by Yu.A.Drozd who showed that there is a trichotomy between finite,
tame and wild representation types for finite posets over an algebraically closed
field.
One of the main problems of representation theory is to obtain information
about the possible structure of indecomposable modules and to describe the iso-
morphism classes of all indecomposable modules. By the famous theorem on tri-
chotomy for finite dimensional algebras over an algebraically closed field, obtained
by Yu.A.Drozd, all such algebras divide into three disjoint classes.
The main results on representations of finitely dimensional algebras are given
in section 3.4. Here we give structure theorems for some special classes of fi-
nite dimensional algebras of finite type, such as hereditary algebras and algebras
with zero square radical, obtained by P.Gabriel in terms of Dynkin diagrams.
Section 3.5 is devoted to the first Brauer-Thrall conjecture, of which a proof has
PREFACE xi
been obtained by A.V.Roiter for the case of finite dimensional algebra over an
arbitrary field.
Chapter 4 is devoted to study of Frobenius algebras and quasi-Frobenius rings.
The class of quasi-Frobenius rings was introduced by T.Nakayama in 1939 as a
generalization of Frobenius algebras. It is one of the most interesting and in-
tensively studied classes of Artinian rings. Frobenius algebras are determined
by the requirement that right and left regular modules are equivalent. And
quasi-Frobenius algebras are defined as algebras for which regular modules are
injective.
We start this chapter with a short study of duality properties for finite dimen-
sional algebras. In section 4.2 there are given equivalent definitions of Frobenius
algebras in terms of bilinear forms and linear functions. There is also a discussion
of symmetric algebras which are a special class of Frobenius algebras. The main
properties of quasi-Frobenius algebras are given in section 4.4.
The starting point in studying quasi-Frobenius rings in this chapter is the
Nakayama definition of them. The key concept in this definition is a permuta-
tion of indecomposable projective modules, which is naturally called Nakayama
permutation.
Quasi-Frobenius rings are also of interest because of the presence of a dual-
ity between the categories of left and right finitely generated modules over them.
The main properties of duality in Noetherian rings are considered in section 4.10.
Semiperfect rings with duality for simple modules are studied in section 4.11.
The equivalent definitions of quasi-Frobenius rings in terms of duality and semi-
injective rings are given 4.12. Quasi-Frobenius rings have many interesting equiv-
alent definitions, in particular, an Artinian ring A is quasi-Frobenius if and only
if A is a ring with duality for simple modules.
One of the most significant results in quasi-Frobenius ring theory is the theorem
of C.Faith and E.A.Walker. This theorem says that a ring A is quasi-Frobenius if
and only if every projective right A-module is injective and conversely.
Quivers of quasi-Frobenius rings are studied in section 4.13. The most impor-
tant result of this section is the Green theorem: the quiver of any quasi-Frobenius
ring is strongly connected. Conversely, for a given strongly connected quiver Q
there is a symmetric algebra A such that Q(A) = Q. Symmetric algebras with
given quivers are studied in section 4.14.
Chapter 5 is devoted to the study of the properties and structure of right serial
rings. Note that a module is called serial if it decomposes into a direct sum of
uniserial submodules, i.e., submodules with linear lattice of submodules. A ring is
called right serial if its right regular module is serial.
We start this chapter with a study of right Noetherian rings from the point of
view of some main properties of their homological dimensions.
In further sections we give the structure of right Artinian right serial rings in
terms of their quivers. We also describe the structure of particular classes of right
serial rings, suchas quasi-Frobenius rings, right hereditary rings, and semiprime
xii PREFACE
rings. In section 5.6 we introduce right serial quivers and trees and give their
description.
The last section of this chapter is devoted to the Cartan determinant conjecture
for right Artinian right serial rings. The main result of this section says that a
right Artinian right serial ring A has its Cartan determinant equal to 1 if and only
if the global dimension of A is finite.
In chapters 6 and 7 the theory of semiprime Noetherian semiperfect semidis-
tributive rings is developed (SP SD-rings). In view of the decomposition theorem
(see theorem 14.5.1, vol.I) it is sufficient to consider prime Noetherian SP SD-
rings, which are called tiled orders.
With any tiled order we can associate a reduced exponent matrix and its quiver.
This quiver Q is called the quiver of that tiled order. It is proved that Q is a simply
laced and strongly connected quiver. In chapter 6 a construction is given which
allows to form a countable set of Frobenius semidistributive rings from a tiled
order. Relations between finite posets and exponent (0,1)-matrices are described
and discussed. In particular, a finite ergodic Markov chain is associated with a
finite poset.
Chapter 7 is devoted to the study of Gorenstein matrices. We say that a
tiled order A is Gorenstein if r.inj.dimA A = 1. In this case r.inj.dimA A =
l.inj.dimA A = 1. Moreover, a tiled order is Gorenstein if and only if it is Morita
equivalent to a reduced tiled order with a Gorenstein exponent matrix.
Each chapter ends with a number of notes and references, some of which have
a bibliographical character and others are of a historical nature.
At the end of the book we give a literature list which can be considered as sug-
gestions for further reading to obtain fuller information concerning other aspects
of the theory of rings and algebras.
In closing, we would like to express our cordial thanks to a number of friends
and colleagues for reading preliminary versions of this text and offering valuable
suggestions which were taken into account in preparing the final version. We
are especially greatly indebted to Yu.A.Drozd, V.M.Bondarenko, S.A.Ovsienko,
M.Dokuchaev, V.Futorny, V.N.Zhuravlev, who made a large number of valu-
able comments, suggestions and corrections which have considerably improved the
book. Of course, any remaining errors are the sole responsibility of the authors.
Finally, we are most grateful to Marina Khibina for help in preparing the
manuscript. Her assistance has been extremely valuable to us.
1. Groups and group representations
Groups are a central subject in algebra. They embody the easiest concept of
symmetry. There are others: Lie algebras (for infinitesimal symmetry) and Hopf
algebras (quantum groups) who combine the two and more (see volume III). Fi-
nite groups, in particular permutation groups, are an increasingly important tool
in many areas of applied mathematics. Examples include coding theory, cryptog-
raphy, design theory, combinatorial optimization, quantum computing.
Representation theory, the art of realizing a group in a concrete way, usually
as a collection of matrices, is a fundamental tool for studying groups by means
of linear algebra. Its origins are mostly in the work of F.G.Frobenius, H.Weil,
I.Schur, A.Young, T.Molien about century ago. The results of the theory of repre-
sentations of finite groups play a fundamental role in many recent developments of
mathematics and theoretical physics. The physical aspects of this theory consist
in accounting for and using the concept of symmetry as present in various physical
processes – though not always obviously so. As understood at present, symme-
try rules physics and an elementary particle is the same thing as an irreducible
representation. This includes quantum physics. There is a seeming mystery here
which is explained by the fact that the representation theory of quantum groups
is virtually the same as that of their classical (Lie group) counterparts.
In this chapter we shall give a short introduction to the theory of groups
and their representations. We shall consider the representation theory of groups
from the module-theoretic point of view using the main results about rings and
modules as described in volume I of this book. This theoretical approach was
first used by E.Noether who established a close connection between the theory of
algebras and the theory of representations. From this point of view the study of
the representation theory of groups becomes a special case of the study of modules
over rings. At the end of this chapter we shall consider the characters of groups.
We shall give the basic properties of irreducible characters and their connection
with the ring structure of group algebras.
For the convenience of a reader in the beginning of this chapter we recall some
basic concepts and results of group theory which will be necessary for the next
chapters of the book.
1
2 ALGEBRAS, RINGS AND MODULES
1.1 GROUPS AND SUBGROUPS. DEFINITIONS AND EXAMPLES

The notion of an abstract group was first formulated by A.L.Cayley (1821-1895)
who used this to identify matrices and quaternions as groups. The first formal
definition of an abstract group in the modern form appeared in 1882. Before, a
group was exclusively a group of permutations of some set (or a group of matrices).
The famous book by Burnside (1905) illustrates this well.
Definition. A group is a nonempty set G together with a given binary

operation ∗ on G satisfying the following axioms:
(1) (a ∗ b) ∗ c = a ∗ (b ∗ c) for all a, b, c ∈ G; (associativity)
(2) there exists an element e ∈ G, called an identity of G, such that a ∗ e =
e ∗ a = a for every a ∈ G;
(3) for each a ∈ G there exists an element a−1 ∈ G, called an inverse of a,
such that a ∗ a−1 = a−1 ∗ a = e.
From the axioms for a group G one can easily obtain the following properties:
(1) the identity element in G is unique;
(2) for each a ∈ G the element a−1 is uniquely determined;
(3) (a−1 )−1 = a for every a ∈ G;
(4) (a ∗ b)−1 = b−1 ∗ a−1 .
A group G is called Abelian (or commutative) if a ∗ b = b ∗ a for all a, b ∈ G.

For some commutative groups it is often convenient to use the additive symbol +
for the operation in a group and write x + y instead of x ∗ y. In this case we call
this group additive. The identity of an additive group G is called the zero and
denoted by 0, and the inverse element of x is called its negative element and
denoted by −x. In this case we write x − y instead of x + (−y). Note that this
notation is almost never used for non-commutative groups.
For writing an operation of a group G we usually use the multiplicative sym-
bol · and write xy rather that x · y. In this case we say that the group G is
multiplicative and denote the identity of G by 1.
If G is a finite set G is called a finite group. The number of elements of a

finite group G is called the order of G and denoted by |G| or o(G) or #G.
Examples 1.1.1.
1. The sets Z, Q, R and C are groups under the operation of addition + with
e = 0 and a−1 = −a for all a. They are additive Abelian groups.
2. The sets Q \ {0}, R \ {0} and C \ {0} are groups under the operation
of multiplication · with e = 1 and a−1 = 1/a for all a. They are multiplicative
Abelian groups. The set Z\{0} with the operation of multiplication · is not a group
because the inverse to n is 1/n, which is not integer if n = 1. The set R+ of all
positive rational numbers is a multiplicative Abelian group under multiplication.
3. The set of all invertible n × n matrices with entries from a field k forms a
group under matrix multiplication. This group is denoted by GLn (k) and called
GROUPS AND GROUP RINGS 3
the general linear group of order n (in dimension n). This group is finite if
and only if k is a finite field.
4. The set of all invertible linear transformations of a vector space V over a
field k forms a group under the operation of composition. This group is denoted
by GL(V, k). If V is an n-dimensional vector space over a field k, i.e., V k n , then
there is a one-to-one correspondence between invertible matrices of order n and
invertible linear transformations of the vector space k n . Thus the group GL(k n , k)
is isomorphic to the group GLn (k).
5. Suppose G is the set of all functions f : [0, 1] → R. Define an addition on
G by (f + g)(t) = f (t) + g(t) for all t ∈ R. Then G is an Abelian group under
(pointwise) addition.
Definition. A non-empty subset H of a group G which itself is a group with

respect to the operation defined on G is called a subgroup.
The following simple statement may be considered as an equivalent definition

of the notion of a subgroup.
Proposition 1.1.1. A subset H of a group G is a subgroup of G if and only

if:
1) H contains the product of any two elements from H;
2) H contains together with any element h the inverse h−1 .
The subset of a group G consisting of the identity element only is clearly a

subgroup; it is called the unit subgroup of G and usually denoted by E. Also, G
is a subgroup of itself. The group G itself and the subgroup E are called improper
subgroups of G, while all others are called proper ones.
One of the central problems in group theory is to determine all proper sub-
groups of a given group.
Examples 1.1.2.
1. Z is a proper subgroup of Q and Q is a proper subgroup of R with the
operation of addition.
2. The set of all even integers is a subgroup of Z under addition.
3. If G = Z under addition, and n ∈ Z, then H = nZ is a subgroup of Z.
Moreover, every subgroup of Z is of this form.
4. Let k be a field. Define
SLn (k) = {A ∈ GLn (k) : det(A) = 1},
which is called the special linear group or the unimodular group. This group
is a proper subgroup of GLn (k).
For finite groups of not to large order it can be convenient to represent the
operation on a group by means of a multiplication table, which is often called
its Cayley table. Such a table is a square array with the rows and columns
labelled by the elements of the group. In this table at the intersection of the i-th
row and the j-th column we write the product of the elements, which are in the i-th
row and the j-th column respectively. It is obvious, that this table is symmetric
with respect to the main diagonal if and only if the group is Abelian. For example,
consider for a group G = {e, a, b, c} the group table:
e a b c
e e a b c
a a e c b
b b c e a
c c b a e
This group is called the Klein 4-group.
In the general case for a group G one can write down a set of generators S
with the property that every element of G can be written as a finite product of
elements of S. Any equation in a group G that the generators satisfy is called a
relation in G. For example, in the previous example the Klein group G has the
relations
a2 = b2 = c2 = e, ab = c, ac = b, bc = a.
Very important examples of non-Abelian groups are groups of transformations

of a set, i.e., bijections from a given set to itself. It is interesting that groups first
arose in mathematics as groups of transformations. And only later groups were
considered as abstract objects independently of groups of transformations. See
also above.
Example 1.1.3.
Symmetric groups. Let A be a nonempty set and let SA be the set of all
bijections from A to itself. If x, y ∈ SA , then their multiplication z = xy is defined
by z(a) = x(y(a)) for an arbitrary a ∈ A. It is easy to see that z ∈ SA , and that
the operation of multiplication of transformations is associative. The identity of
this operation is the identity transformation e of the set A, which is defined by
e(a) = a for all a ∈ A.
Obviously, ex = xe = x for all x ∈ SA . The inverse element to x is defined as
the transformation x−1 for which x−1 (x(a)) = a for all a ∈ A. Clearly, x−1 x =
xx−1 = e. Therefore SA is a group which is called the symmetric group on the
set A.
In the special case, when A = {1, 2, ..., n}, each transformation of A is called a
permutation and the symmetric group on A is called the permutation group
of A. It is also denoted by Sn and called the symmetric group of degree n.
The order of the group Sn is n! The group Sn is non-Abelian for all n ≥ 3.
Example 1.1.4.
Alternating group. Let Sn be a symmetric group, i.e., the group of all
permutations of {1, 2, ..., n}. Let x1 , x2 , ..., xn be independent variables. Consider
the polynomial
Δ= (xi − xk ), (i, k = 1, 2, ..., n).
i<k
For each σ ∈ Sn let σ act on Δ by permuting the variables in the same way; i.e.,
it permutes their indices:

σ(Δ) = (xσ(i) − xσ(k) ), (i, k = 1, 2, ..., n).
i<k
Then
σ(Δ) = ±Δ, for all σ ∈ Sn .
For each σ ∈ Sn let sign(σ) = ε(σ) be defined by

+1 for σ(Δ) = Δ
ε(σ) =
−1 for σ(Δ) = −Δ.
A permutation σ ∈ Sn is called an even permutation if ε(σ) = 1 and an odd

permutation if ε(σ) = −1. A permutation which changes only two indices is
called a transposition and obviously it is odd. Any permutation is a product of
some transpositions. The product of any two even or any two odd permutations is
an even permutation. The product of an even permutation and an odd permutation
is odd.
The inverse to an even permutation is even, and the inverse to an odd permu-
tation is odd. The identity of Sn is an even permutation. Therefore, the set of all
even permutations is a subgroup of Sn . It is called the alternating group and
denoted by An . Note, the set of all odd permutation does not form a group (be-
cause the product of any two odd permutation is even). It is easy to show that the
number of all even permutations is equal to the number of all odd permutations
and so o(An ) = 12 n!
Example 1.1.5.
Let f be any polynomial in n independent variables x1 , x2 , ..., xn . Then
Symf = {σ ∈ Sn : f (xσ(1) , xσ(2) , ..., xσ(n) ) = f (x1 , x2 , ..., xn )}
is a subgroup of the group Sn . In particular, the polynomial f is symmetric if and

only if Symf = Sn .
Example 1.1.6.
Groups in geometry. F.Klein was the first who wrote down the connection
between permutation groups and symmetries of convex polygons. He also posed
the idea that the background of all different geometries is the notion of a group of
transformations. In his famous lecture in 1872 he gave the definition of geometry

as the science that studies the properties of figures invariant under a given group
of transformations.
Let X be a set and let G be a group of transformations of it. A figure F1 ⊂ X
is said to be equivalent (or equal) to a figure F2 ⊂ X with respect to the group
G and will be written F1 ∼ F2 if there is a transformation ϕ ∈ G such that
F2 = ϕ(F1 ). It is easy to verify that this is really an equivalence relation and the
three axioms of this equivalence relation amount to the same as the axioms of a
group of transformations. Using different kinds of groups of transformations we can
build different geometries, such as Euclidean geometry, affine geometry, projective
geometry, Lobachevskian geometry (or hyperbolic geometry) and others.
For example, affine geometry is the geometry in which properties are preserved
by parallel projections from one plane to another. This geometry may be defined
by means of the affine group of any affine space over a field k, which is a set
of all invertible affine transformations from the space into itself. In particular, an
invertible affine transformation of the real space Rn is a map F : Rn → Rn of the
form F (x) = Ax + b, where x ∈ Rn , A ∈ GL(n, R), b ∈ Rn . The affine group
contains the full linear group and the group of translations as subgroups.
Example 1.1.7.
Galois groups. In many examples groups appear in the form of automorphism
groups of various mathematical structures. This is one of the most important ways
of their appearance in algebra. In such a way we can consider Galois groups. Let K
be a finite, separable and normal extension of a field k. The automorphisms of K
leaving the elements of k fixed form a group Gal(K/k) with respect to composition,
called the Galois group of the extension K/k. Let f be a polynomial in x over k
and K be the splitting field of f . The group Gal(K/k) is called the Galois group
of f . One of the main applications of Galois theory is connected with the problem
of the solvability of equations in radicals. Indeed, the main theorem says that
the equation f (x) = 0 is solvable in radicals if and only if the group Gal(K/k) is
solvable (see section 1.5). This is where the terminology “solvable” (for groups)
comes from.
Example 1.1.8.
Homology groups. This kind of groups, considered in section 6.1 (vol.I),
occurs in many areas of mathematics and allow us to study non-algebraic objects
by means of algebraic methods. This is a fundamental method in algebraic
topology. To each topological space X there is associated a family of Abelian
groups H0 (X), H1 (X),..., called the homology groups, while each continuous
mapping f : X → Y defines a family of homomorphisms fn : Hn (X) → Hn (Y ),
n = 0, 1, 2, ....1
1 A homomorphism of groups f : G → H is a map that preserves the unit element and the
multiplication, i.e. f (eG ) = eH and f (xy) = f (x)f (y). It then also preserves inverses, i.e.,
f (x−1 ) = f (x)−1 . See section 1.3.
1.2 SYMMETRY. SYMMETRY GROUPS

Groups were invented as a tool for studying symmetric objects. These can be
objects of any kind at all. One can define a symmetry of an object as a trans-
formation of that object which preserves its essential structure. Then the set of
all symmetries of the object forms a group. The study of symmetry is actually
equivalent to the study of automorphisms of systems, and for this reason group
theory is indispensable in solving such problems.
An important family of examples of groups is the class of groups whose elements
are symmetries of geometric figures. Let E 3 be three dimensional Euclidean space,
that is, the vector space R3 together with the scalar product (x, y)
= x1 y2 +x2 y2 +
x3 y3 for all x, y ∈ R3 . The distance between x and y in R3 is (x − y, x − y).
All transformations of E 3 that preserve distance form a group of transformations
under composition, which is denoted by IsomE 3 . Let F be any geometrical figure
in E 3 . Then the set
SymF = {ϕ ∈ IsomE 3 : ϕ(F ) = F }
forms a subgroup in IsomE 3 . This group is called the symmetry group of the
figure F . If this subgroup is not trivial, the figure F is said to be symmetric, or to
have symmetry. In this case there is a special transformation, such as a rotation
or a reflection such that the figure looks the same after the transformation as it
did before the transformation. These transformations are said to be symmetry
transformations of the corresponding geometrical figure.
This was in fact the approach of E.S.Fedorov (see [Fedorov, 1891], [Fedorov,
1949]) for the problem of classification of regular spatial systems of points, which
is one of the basic problems in crystallography. Crystals possess a great de-
gree of symmetry and therefore the symmetry group of a crystal is an important
characteristic of this crystal. The study of crystallographic groups was started
by E.S.Fedorov, and continued by A.Schoenflies at the end of the 19-th century
[Schoenflies, 1891]. There are only 17 plane crystallographic groups, which were
found directly; there are 230 three-dimensional crystallographic groups, which
could be exhaustively classified only by the use of group theory. This is histori-
cally the first example of the application of group theory to natural science.
Example 1.2.1.
The symmetry group of an equilateral triangle is isomorphic to S3 . The struc-
ture of this group is completely determined by the relations σ 3 = τ 2 = 1 and
στ = τ σ −1 , where σ is the cyclic permutation (1, 2, 3) and τ is the reflection (1, 3).
Labeling the vertices of the triangle as 1, 2 and 3 permits us to identify the
symmetries with permutations of the vertices, and we see that there are three
rotation symmetries (through angles of 0, 2π/3 and 4π/3) corresponding to the
identity permutation, the cycles (1, 2, 3) and (1, 3, 2), and three reflection symme-
tries corresponding to the other three elements of S3 .
Example 1.2.2.
Dihedral groups. For each n ∈ Z+ , n ≥ 3, let Dn be a set of all symmetries
of an n-sided regular polygon. There are n rotation symmetries, through angles
2kπ/n, where k ∈ {0, 1, 2, ..., n − 1}, and there are n reflection symmetries, in the
n lines which are bisectors of the internal angles and/or perpendicular bisectors
of the sides. Therefore |Dn | = 2n. The binary operation on Dn is associative
since composition of functions is associative. The identity of Dn is the identity
symmetry, denoted by 1, and the inverse of s ∈ Dn is the symmetry which reverses
all rigid motions of s.
In Dn we have the relations: σ n = 1, τ 2 = 1 and στ = τ σ −1 , where σ is a
clockwise rotation through 2π n and τ is any reflection. Moreover, one can show
that any other relation between elements of the group Dn may be derived from
these three relations. Thus there is the following presentation of the group Dn :
Dn = {σ, τ : σ n = τ 2 = 1, στ = τ σ −1 }.
Dn is called the dihedral group of order n. Some authors denote this group by
D2n .
The rotation symmetries in the group Dn form a subgroup in it and this group
is called the rotation group of a given n-sided regular polygon. It is immediate
that this subgroup is isomorphic to Zn .
For n = 2 a degenerate “2-sided regular polygon” would be a line segment and
in this case we have the simplest dihedral group
D2 = {σ, τ : σ 2 = τ 2 = 1, στ = τ σ −1 },
which is generated by a rotation σ of 180 degrees and a reflection τ across the

y-axis. D2 is isomorphic to the Klein four-group. For n > 2 the operations of
rotation and reflection in general do not commute and Dn is not Abelian.
Example 1.2.3.
Quasidihedral groups. Quasidihedral groups are groups with similar prop-
erties as dihedral groups. In particular, they often arise as symmetry groups of
regular polygons, such as an octagon. For each n ∈ Z+ , n ≥ 3, the group Q2n has
the following presentation:
n n−1
Qn = {σ, τ : σ 2 = τ 2 = 1, στ = τ σ 2 −1
}.
This group is called the quasidihedral group of order n.
Example 1.2.4.
Generalized quaternion groups. A group is is called the generalized
quaternion group of order n if it has the following presentation
n n−1
Hn = {σ, τ : σ 2 = 1, σ 2 = τ 2 , στ = τ σ −1 }
for some integer n ≥ 2. For n = 2 we obtain
H2 = {σ, τ : σ 4 = 1, σ 2 = τ 2 , στ = τ σ −1 }
which is the usual quaternion group H2 = {1, i, j, k, −1, −i, −j, −k} if one takes,
for instance, σ = i and τ = j (see example 1.1.12, vol.I).
Example 1.2.5.
Orthogonal groups. Let En be a Euclidean space, that is, a real n-
dimensional vector space Rn together with the scalar product (x, y) = x1 y1 +
x2 y2 + ... + xn yn in a given orthonormal basis e1 , e2 , ..., en . The linear transfor-
mations of En , which preserve the scalar product, are called orthogonal. They
form a group O(n) which is called the orthogonal group of En . The elements
of O(n) are orthogonal matrices, i.e.,
O(n) = {X ∈ Mn (R) : XXT = In },
where In is the identity matrix of degree n. The transformations of O(n) which

preserve the orientation of En are called the rotations. They form the group
SO(n). The rotations of the plane E2 are given by the matrices

cos ϕ − sin ϕ
,
sin ϕ cos ϕ
where 0 ≤ ϕ < 2π.
Example 1.2.6
Symmetry in physical laws. Group theory plays a similar role in physics.
The groups of transformations in physics describe symmetries of physical laws,
in particular, symmetry of space-time. Thus, the state of a physical system is
represented in quantum mechanics by a point in an infinite-dimensional vector
space. If the physical system passes from one state into another, its representative
point undergoes some linear transformation. The ideas of symmetry and the theory
of group representations are of prime importance here.
The laws of physics and invariants in mechanics must be preserved under trans-
formations from one inertial coordinate system to another. The corresponding
Galilean transformation of space-time coordinates in Newtonian mechanics has
the following form for (uniform) motion along the x-axis with velocity v:
x = x − vt, y = y; z = z; t = t,
and in the Einstein’s special theory of relativity the Lorentz transformation has
the form for motion along the x-axis with velocity v:
x − vt t − vx/c2
x = , y = y; z = z; t = ,
1 − (v/t)2 1 − (v/t)2
where c is the speed of light.
All Galilean transformations form a group which is called the Galilean group,
and all Lorentz transformations form the Lorentz group. The Lorentz transfor-
mations, named after its discoverer, the Dutch physicist and mathematician Hen-
rik Anton Lorentz (1853-1928), form the basis for the special theory of relativity,
which has been introduced to remove contradictions between the theory of elec-
tromagnetism and classical mechanics. The Lorentz group is the subgroup of the
Poincaré group consisting of all isometries that leave the origin fixed. This group
was been described in the work of H.A.Lorentz and H.Poincaré as the symmetry
group of the Maxwell equations:
1 ∂2u ∂2u ∂2u ∂2u

2 2 = + 2 + 2.
c ∂t ∂x2 ∂y ∂z
1.3 QUOTIENT GROUPS, HOMOMORPHISMS AND NORMAL

SUBGROUPS
Suppose H is a subgroup of a group G with identity e, and a, b ∈ G. We introduce
a binary relation on G. The relation a ∼ b holds if and only if ab−1 ∈ H. This
relation is symmetric, reflexive and transitive. Indeed, a ∼ a, because aa−1 =
e ∈ H. If a ∼ b, i.e., ab−1 ∈ H, then (ab−1 )−1 = ba−1 ∈ H, i.e., b ∼ a. If
a ∼ b and b ∼ c, i.e., ab−1 ∈ H and bc−1 ∈ H, then ac−1 = ab−1 bc−1 ∈ H, i.e.,
a ∼ c. Therefore we have an equivalence relation and G = ∪ Ei is the union of the
i
equivalence classes Ei with respect to this relation. Each such equivalence class
Ei is called a right coset or a right adjacent class of G by H. Suppose Ei is
a right coset and a ∈ Ei . We shall show that Ei = Ha. Indeed, let x ∈ Ei , then
xa−1 ∈ H, and so x ∈ Ha, i.e., Ei ⊆ Ha. If y ∈ Ha, then ya−1 ∈ H, and so
y ∈ Ei . Therefore Ei = Ha. Now we shall show that each set of the form Hb is
a right coset. Indeed, since G = ∪ Ei , b ∈ Ej for some j, i.e., b ∈ Ej . And as
i
proved above we have that Hb = Ej . Since H = He, the subgroup H is also a
right coset. Therefore any element a ∈ G can be considered as a representative of
the right coset Ha.
Suppose G is a finite group of order n and H = {h1 = e, h2 , ..., hm } is a
subgroup of G. Let a ∈ G. Then all elements of a set Ha = {h1 a = a, h2 a, ..., hm a}
are distinct, because hi a = hj a implies hi = hj . Therefore all right cosets contain
the same number of elements which is equal to m.
From the decomposition of the group G into a union of right cosets we obtain
that n = km, where k is a number of right cosets of H in G. Therefore we have
proved the following theorem:
Theorem 1.3.1 (Lagrange theorem). If G is a finite group and H is a

subgroup of G, then the order of H divides the order of G, and |G| = k · |H|, where
k is a number of right cosets of H in G.
For the proof of Lagrange’s theorem we can also introduce another relation
defined by a ∼ b if and only if b−1 a ∈ H. The resulting equivalence classes are
called left cosets. We can show that in this case each equivalence class has the
form aH for some a ∈ G and each set of the form bH is a left coset. The number
of left cosets is also equal to mn , i.e., the number of all right cosets in G. This
common number is called the index of H in G and denoted by |G : H|.
In the case of finite groups from the Lagrange theorem it follows that the index
|G|
of H in G is equal to , that is,
|H|
|G| = |G : H| · |H|.
If a group G is infinite and the number of left (or right) adjacent classes is infinite,
then we say that the index of H in G is infinite.
In general, the sets of right cosets and left cosets may be different. It is inter-
esting to know when these sets are the same. Suppose E is a right coset and a left
coset simultaneously. Then E = Ha = aH for all a ∈ E. If every right coset is a
left coset, then Ha = aH for all a ∈ G. Multiplying the last equality on a−1 we
obtain a−1 Ha = H for all a ∈ G. Subgroups with this property deserve special
attention.
Definition. A subgroup H of a group G is called a normal subgroup (or

invariant subgroup) of G if axa−1 ∈ H for every x ∈ H and every a ∈ G. In
this case we write H G (or G H). A group with no normal proper subgroups
is called simple.
It is easy to show that H is a normal subgroup of G if and only if aHa−1 = H
for every a ∈ G or aH = Ha for every a ∈ G. This last equation yields another
definition of a normal subgroup as one whose left and right cosets are equal.
Examples 1.3.1.
1. For any group G the group G itself and the unit subgroup are normal
subgroups.
2. If G is an Abelian group, then every subgroup of G is normal.
3. Let G = GLn (k) be the set of all square invertible matrices of order n
over a field k and let H = SLn (k) be the subset of elements from GLn (k) with
determinant equal to 1. Then H is a normal group in G.
Suppose G is a group, N is a normal subgroup, and G/N is the collection of all

left cosets aN , a ∈ G. Then (aN ) · (bN ) = (a · b)N is a well-defined multiplication
on G/N , and with this operation, G/N is a group, which is called the quotient
group (also called the factor group) of the group G by the normal subgroup
N . Its identity is N and (aN )−1 = a−1 N . Taking into account that for a normal
subgroup N the set of all left cosets aN coincides with the set of all right cosets
N a, we can also consider G/N as a set of all right cosets N a, a ∈ G with operation
(N a) · (N b) = N (a · b). The order of the quotient group G/N is equal to the index
of the normal subgroup N .
If G and H are groups, then a map f : G → H such that f (ab) = f (a)f (b),
for all a, b ∈ G, is called a group homomorphism. The kernel of f is defined
by Kerf = {a ∈ G : f (a) = ē}, where ē is the identity of H. The image of f is
a set of elements of H of the form f (a), where a ∈ G, that is, Im(f ) = {h ∈ H :
∃a ∈ G, h = f (a)}. It is easy to show that Kerf is a subgroup of G and Imf is a
subgroup of H. If f is injective, i.e., Kerf = 1, f is called a monomorphism. If f
is surjective, i.e., Imf = H, f is called an epimorphism. If f is a bijection, then
f is called an isomorphism. In the case G = H, f is called an automorphism.
Quotient groups play an especially important role in the theory of groups ow-
ing to their connection with homomorphisms of groups. Namely, for any normal
subgroup N the quotient group G/N is an image of the group G. And conversely,
if G is a homomorphic image of a group G, then G is isomorphic to some quotient
group of G.
The mapping π : g → N g is a group epimorphism of G onto G/N , called the

canonical epimorphism or the natural projection.
If ϕ : G → G1 is an arbitrary epimorphism of G onto a group G1 , then there
is an isomorphism ψ of G/Ker(ϕ) onto G1 such that the diagram
π
G G/Ker(ϕ) (1.3.1)
ϕ
ψ
G1
is commutative, i.e., ψπ = ϕ, where π is the natural projection.
At one time groups of permutations were the only groups studied by mathe-
maticians. They are incredibly rich and complex, and they are especially impor-
tant because in fact they give all possible structures of finite groups as shown by
the famous Cayley theorem. This theorem establishes a relationship between the
subgroups of the symmetric group Sn and every finite group of order n.
Theorem 1.3.2 (A.Cayley). Let G be a finite group of order n and let Sn be

the group of all permutations on the set G. Then G is isomorphic to a subgroup
of Sn .
Proof. For any a ∈ G we define fa : G → G by setting fa (g) = g · a. Let

G = {g1 , g2 , ..., gn }. From the cancellation law we have that for a given a ∈ G all
n elements fa (gi ) = gi a = gγi , i = 1, ..., n, are different. This shows that fa is a
bijection from G to G and

1 2 ... n
fa = ∈ Sn .
γ1 γ2 . . . γn
Define a mapping f : G → Sn by setting f (a) = fa for any a ∈ G. From the

associative law in G we have
fab (g) = (ab)g = a(bg) = fa (bg) = fa fb (g)
for any g ∈ G. This shows that fab = fa fb . Therefore f is a group homomorphism,

because f (ab) = fab = fa fb = f (a)f (b).
Since ax = bx implies a = b for any x ∈ G, fa = fb if and only if a = b, i.e., f
is injective and thus G Im(f ) ⊂ Sn is a subgroup of Sn .
As a consequence of this theorem we obtain that the number of all non-

isomorphic groups of given order n is finite, because all these groups are isomorphic
to subgroups of the finite group Sn , which obviously has only a finite number of
subgroups.
Corollary 1.3.3. Any finite group G is a subgroup of GLn (k), where n = |G|
and k is a field.
Proof. This follows from the injection of Sn into GLn (k) given by the following
rule: σ → Aσ , where (Aσ )ij = 1 if σ(j) = i and (Aσ )ij = 0 if σ(j) = i for any
σ ∈ Sn .
Definition. For a group G and an element x ∈ G define the order2 of x to

be the smallest positive integer n such that xn = 1, and denote this integer by |x|.
In this case x is said to be of order n. If no positive power of x is the identity, the
order of x is defined to be infinity and x is said to be of infinite order.
The set-theoretic intersection of any two (or any set of) subgroups of a group G
is a subgroup of G. The intersection of all subgroups of G containing all elements
of a certain non-empty set M ⊂ G is called the subgroup generated by the
set M and is denoted by {M }. If M consists of one element x ∈ G, then H =
{x} = {xi : i ∈ Z} is called the cyclic subgroup generated by the element x. It
is obvious that the order of this subgroup is equal to the order of the element x.
A group that coincides with one of its cyclic subgroups is called a cyclic group.
The cyclic group Cn of order n consists of n elements {1, g, g 2, ..., g n−1 }, where
g n = 1. It is easy to show that any two cyclic groups of the same order n are
isomorphic to each other. If a group G is cyclic and H is a subgroup of G, then
H is also cyclic.
The following statements are simple corollaries from the Lagrange theorem.
Corollary 1.3.4. The order of any element of a group G divides the order
of G.
The proof follows from the Lagrange theorem and the fact that the order of an
element is equal to the order of the cyclic subgroup generated by this element.
2 Mathematics has a dearth of words; so a word like ’order’ is used in many different meanings
Corollary 1.3.5 (Fermat theorem). Let a group G be of order n and let

x ∈ G, then xn = 1.
Proof. Suppose the order of an element x ∈ G is equal to m. Then, by the

Lagrange theorem, n = mk, hence xn = xmk = 1.
Corollary 1.3.6. Any group G of order p, where p is a prime integer, is cyclic.

Therefore, there is exactly one (up to isomorphism) group of order p.
Proof. By corollary 1.3.4, the orders of all elements of a finite group G must
be divisors of the order of this group. Therefore, for any non-trivial element g ∈ G
the cyclic subgroup Gp = {1, g, g 2, ..., g p−1 } coincides with G.
Examples 1.3.2.
1. An element of a group has order 1 if and only if it is the identity.
2. In the additive groups Z, Q, R and C every nonzero element has infinite
order.
3. The group Gn of all rotations of the plane which carry a regular n-sided
polygon to itself, is cyclic of order n with (as one possible) generator g which is a
rotation through 2π/n.
4. The additive group Zn , the ring of integers modulo n, is also a cyclic group,
with generator 1 ∈ Z and the identity element 0 ∈ Z.
5. The set Cn of all complex numbers satisfying the equality xn = 1 with
respect to the usual multiplication is a cyclic group.
6. Let p be a prime number. The set C∞ p of all complex roots of the equality
pn
x = 1 for some n ∈ N forms an infinite Abelian group. This group is isomorphic
to the quotient group Q/Zp , where Zp = { m n ∈ Q | (n, p) = 1}.
In terms of generators and relations this group can be defined by the the
countable set of generators a1 , a2 , . . . , an and relations:
ap1 = 1, apn+1 = an , n = 2, 3, . . .
Note that all proper subgroups of Cp∞ are finite.
7. Let F be a finite field. Then the multiplicative group F ∗ = F \ {0} is cyclic.
In general, the finite subgroups of the multiplicative group of a field are cyclic.
1.4 SYLOW THEOREMS

In this section we prove the famous Sylow theorems, named after the Norwegian
mathematician Ludwig Sylow (1833-1918). These theorems form a partial converse
to the Lagrange theorem, which states that if H is a subgroup of a finite group G,
then the order of H divides the order of G. The Sylow theorems guarantee, for
certain divisors of the order of G, the existence of corresponding subgroups, and
give information about the number of these subgroups.
The main method of proving the Sylow theorems is to use the idea of a group
action on a set. It is an important idea in mathematics which allows to study the
structure of an algebraic object by seeing how it can act on other structures.
Definition. A left group action of a group G on a set X is a mapping

(g, x) → g · x from G × X to X such that
(1) (g1 g2 ) · x = g1 · (g2 · x) for all x ∈ X and g1 , g2 ∈ G;
(2) e · x = x for all x ∈ X, where e is the identity element of G.
The expression g ·x will usually be written simply as gx when there is no danger

of confusing this map with the group operation. Observe that a group action of
G on X can be viewed as a rule for multiplying elements of X by elements of G,
so that the result is another element of X.
Analogously we can define a right group action of a group G on a set X as
a mapping (x, g) → x · g from X × G to X such that
(1) x · (g1 g2 ) = (x · g1 ) · g2 for all x ∈ X and g1 , g2 ∈ G;
(2) x · e = x for all x ∈ X, where e is the identity element of G.
Obviously, there is a correspondence between left actions and right actions,
given by associating the right action x·g with the left action g ·x by the relation: g ·
x := x · g −1 . In our context we shall identify right actions with their corresponding
left actions, and shall speak only of a left action (or for short, actions omitting the
word left).
Let G be a group acting on a set X. Then it is easy to show that the relation
∼ on X defined by
x ∼ y if and only if x = gy for some g ∈ G
is an equivalence relation. To each element x ∈ X we can let correspond the set
Gx = {y ∈ X : y = g · x, g ∈ G},
which is the equivalence class of x under the relation ∼ and it is called the orbit
of x under the action of G.
Obviously, the orbits of any two elements, being equivalence classes, either
coincide or are disjoint. So we have a partition of the set X into disjoint orbits.
If there is only one orbit, which then is the set X, one says that the group
G acts transitively on X. In other words, the group G acts transitively on the
set X if for each two elements x1 , x2 ∈ X there is an element g ∈ G such that
g · x1 = x2 .
Example 1.4.1.
1. For any nonempty set X the symmetric group SX acts on X by σ · x = σ(x),
for all σ ∈ SX , x ∈ X.
2. Let G be any group and let X = G. Define a map from G × X to X by
g · x = gx, for each g ∈ G and x ∈ X, where gx on the right hand side is the
product of g and x in the group G. This gives a group action of G on itself. This
action is called the left regular action of G on itself.
3. The additive group Z acts on itself by z · a = z + a, for all z, a ∈ Z.
The set
StG (x) = {g ∈ G : g · x = x}
is called the stabilizer of an element x ∈ X. It is easy to show that StG (x) is a
subgroup of G.
The set
Fix(g) = {x ∈ X : g · x = x}
is called the set of fixed points of an element g ∈ G.
Proposition 1.4.1. If G is a finite group, then the number of elements of Gx

is equal to the index of StG (x) in the group G, that is,
|Gx| = |G : StG (x)|.
Proof. Let A be a set of all left cosets of G by StG (x). Consider the map
ϕ : Gx → A defined by ϕ(g · x) = gStG (x). It is easy to see that ϕ is a bijection
and so we obtain the statement of the proposition.
Let G be a group. Now we consider a particular example of a group action of

G on itself. We say that G acts on itself by conjugation if g · x = gxg −1 for
all g ∈ G, x ∈ G. It is easy to show that this definition satisfies the two axioms
for a group action.
Definition. Two elements g and h of a group G is called conjugate in G if

there is an element x ∈ G, called the conjugating element, such that g = xhx−1 .
In other words, two elements of G are conjugate in G if and only if they are in
the same orbit of G acting on itself by conjugation. An orbit of G under conjuga-
tion is called a conjugacy class C and (hence) defined as the set of elements of
a group G which can be obtained from a given element of the group G by conju-
gation. Obviously, distinct conjugacy classes are disjoint. Let C1 , C2 , ..., Ck be all
distinct conjugacy classes of a group G. Then we have a partition of the group G:
G = C1 ∪ C2 ∪ ... ∪ Ck
where Ci ∩ Cj = ∅ if i = j.
The idea of a group action of a group G on itself by conjugation can be gener-

alized. If S is any subset of G, for any g ∈ G we define
gSg −1 = {gsg −1 : s ∈ S}.
A group G acts on the set P(G) of all subsets of itself by defining g · S = gSg −1
for any g ∈ G and S ∈ P(G). As above, this defines a group action of G on P(G).
Note that if S is the one element set {s} then g · S is the one element set {gsg −1 }
and so this action of G on all subsets of G may be considered as an extension of

the action of G on itself by conjugation.
Definition. Two subsets S and T of G are said to be conjugate in G if there

is some g ∈ G such that T = gSg −1 .
Now we introduce some important classes of subgroups of an arbitrary group G.
Definition. Let A be any nonempty subset of a group G. Define
CG (A) = {g ∈ G : gag −1 = a for all a ∈ A},
which is called the centralizer of A in G. Since gag −1 = a if and only if ag = ga,

CG (A) is a set of elements of G which commute with every element of A. It is
easy to show that CG (A) is a subgroup of G. In the special case A = G we obtain
CG (G) = {g ∈ G : gx = xg for all x ∈ G} , which is the center of G and denoted
by Cen(G) or Z(G). Obviously, Z(G) is a subgroup of G and (g) Z(CG (g)). If
G is an Abelian group, then Z(G) = G. In the special case when A = {a} we shall
write simply CG (a) instead of CG ({a}). In this case an ∈ CG (a) for all n ∈ Z. In
an Abelian group G, obviously, CG (A) = G, for all subsets A.
Now define another special subgroup of G. Let A be any nonempty subset of

a group G. The set
NG (A) = {g ∈ G : gAg −1 = A}
is called the normalizer of A in G. It is easy to see that NG (A) is a subgroup of G

and CG (A) is a subgroup of NG (A). Note that if g ∈ CG (A), then gag −1 = a ∈ A
for all a ∈ A so CG (A) NG (A). If A = H is a subgroup in G, then H NG (H).
If A = g ∈ G, then CG (g) = NG (g).
Theorem 1.4.2.
1.The number of subgroups of a finite group G which are conjugate to a given
subgroup H is equal to |G : NG (H)|.
2. The number of elements of a group G which are conjugate to a given element
g ∈ G is equal to |G : CG (g)|.
Proof.
1. A group action of a group G on the set M = {xHx−1 : x ∈ G} is given
by conjugation: g · xHx−1 = gxHx−1 g −1 for any g ∈ G. This action is transitive
and StG (H) = NG (H). Then, by proposition 1.4.1, |M | = |G : NG (H)|.
2. This assertion of the proposition follows from the observation that
NG ({g}) = CG (g).
Theorem 1.4.3 (The class equation). Let G be a finite group and let
g1 , g2 , ..., gk be representatives of the distinct conjugacy classes of G not contained
in the center Z(G) of G. Then

k
|G| = |Z(G)| + |G : CG (gi )|.
i=1
Proof. Let G be a finite group and x ∈ G. Notice that the element {x} is a
conjugacy class of size 1 if and only if x ∈ Z(G). Let Z(G) = {z1 = 1, z2 , ..., zm },
and let C1 , C2 , ..., Ck be all distinct conjugacy classes of G not contained in the
center. Let gi be a representative of Ci for each i. Then the full set of conjugacy
classes of G is given by
{z1 }, {z2 }, ..., {zm}, C1 , C2 , ..., Ck .
Since these classes form a partition of G we have

k
|G| = m + |Ci |.
i=1
Then applying theorem 1.4.2 we obtain

k
|G| = |Z(G)| + |G : CG (gi )|.
i=1
Definition. Let G be a group and let p be a prime. A group of order pn for

some n ≥ 1 is called a finite p-group. Subgroups of G which are finite p-groups
are called p-subgroups.
Theorem 1.4.4. The center of a finite p-group G is nontrivial.
Proof. Let G be a finite group. Then, by theorem 1.4.3 (the class equation),

k
|G| = |Z(G)| + |G : CG (gi )|,
i=1
where g1 , g2 , ..., gk are representatives of the distinct non-central conjugacy classes

of G. By definition, CG (gi ) = G so, by the Lagrange theorem, p divides |G :
CG (gi )| for each i. Since |G| = pn , p divides |Z(G)|, hence Z(G) must be nontrivial.
Corollary 1.4.5. If G is a group of order p2 , where p is prime, then G is

Abelian.
Proof. Let G be a group of order p2 , where p is prime, and let Z(G) be its
center. Suppose G is not Abelian, then Z(G) = G. From theorem 1.4.4 it follows
that |Z(G)| = p and |G/Z(G)| = p. Therefore the group G/Z(G) is cyclic. Let
x ∈ G/Z(G). Then xZ(G) is a generator of G/Z(G). So any element g ∈ G can
be written in the form g = xk z, where z ∈ Z(G). But any two elements of this
form commute, so we have a contradiction.
Definition. Let G be a group and let p be a prime.

1. If G is a group of order pn m, where (p, m) = 1, then a subgroup of order pn
is called a Sylow p-subgroup of G.
2. The set of Sylow p-subgroups of G will be denoted by Sylp (G) and the
number of Sylow p-subgroups of G will be denoted by np (G) (or just np when G
is clear from the context).
Theorem 1.4.6 (The first Sylow theorem). Let G be a group of order

pn m, where p is a prime and (p, m) = 1. Then there exists a Sylow p-subgroup of
G, i.e., Sylp (G) = ∅.
Proof. We shall prove this theorem by induction on the order of the group G.
If |G| = 1 then there is no p which divides its order, so the condition is trivial. If
G is an Abelian group, then this theorem immediately follows from the structure
theorem for finite Abelian groups (see, vol.I, theorem 7.8.6).
Suppose G is not Abelian, |G| = pn m > 1, where p is prime, (p, m) = 1, and
suppose the proposition holds for all groups of smaller order. Let Z(G) be the
center of G. Suppose the order of Z(G) is divisible by p. Let |Z(G)| = pr t, where
(p, t) = 1. Since G is not Abelian, |Z(G)| < |G| and, by the inductive hypothesis,
Z(G) has a subgroup H ⊂ Z(G) such that |H| = pr . As a subgroup of the centre
H is normal (or the fact that Z(G) is Abelian), so the quotient group G/H is well-
defined and of order pn−r m. By the induction hypothesis, G/H contains a Sylow
p-group K = P/H of order pn−k . Then the inverse image P = π −1 (K) ⊂ G under
the natural projection π : G → G/H is a subgroup of order |P | = |P : H|·|H| = pn ,
that is, P is a Sylow p-subgroup in G.
Now suppose s = |Z(G)| is not divisible by p. Let C1 , C2 , ..., Ck be all distinct
conjugacy classes of G not contained in the center, and let ni be a number of
elements of Ci , i = 1, 2, .., k. Then |G| = pn m = s + n1 + n2 + ... + nk . Therefore
there exists j such that nj is not divisible by p and |G : CG (gj )| = nj , where gj is
a representative of the class Cj , by theorem 1.4.3. Then |H| = pn t < |G|, where
H = CG (gj ). By the induction hypothesis, arguing as before, there is a subgroup
K ⊂ H ⊂ G such that |K| = pn , that is, K ∈ Sylp (G).
Proposition 1.4.7. Let P , Q be Sylow p-subgroups of G. The intersection

of the normalizer of P with Q is equal to the intersection of these two Sylow p-
subgroups, that is, Q ∩ NG (P ) = Q ∩ P .
Proof. Let G be a group of order pn m, where p is a prime and (p, m) = 1.

Let P and Q be Sylow p-subgroups of G, that is, |P | = |Q| = pn . Consider
R = Q ∩ NG (P ). Obviously, Q ∩ P ⊆ R. In addition, since R ⊆ NG (P ), RP
|R| · |P |
is a group and |RP | = , by the first isomorphism theorem (see theorem
|R ∩ P |
1.3.3, vol.I). Since P is a subgroup of RP , pn divides its order |RP |. But R is a
subgroup of Q, and |P | = pn , so |R| · |P | is a power of p. Then it must be that
|RP | = pn because RP ⊃ P , and therefore P = RP , and so R ⊆ P . Obviously,
R ⊂ Q, so R ⊆ Q ∩ P . Thus R = Q ∩ P .
The following construction will be used in the proof of the second and the third
Sylow theorem.
Given any Sylow p-subgroup P , consider the set of its conjugates Ω. Then
X ∈ Ω if and only if X = xP x−1 for some x ∈ G. Obviously, each X ∈ Ω is a
Sylow p-subgroup of G. Let Q be an arbitrary Sylow p-subgroup of G. We define
a group action of Q on Ω by:
g · X = g · xP x−1 = gxP x−1 g −1 = (gx)P (gx)−1 ,
for all g ∈ Q. Then we can write Ω as a disjoint union of orbits under the group
action of Q on the set Ω:
Ω = Ω1 ∪ Ω2 ∪ ... ∪ Ωr ,
where |Ω| = |Ω1 | + |Ω2 | + ... + |Ωk |. Let Pi be a representative of the orbit Ωi , for
i = 1, 2, ..., r. By proposition 1.4.1, |Ωi | = |Q : StQ (Pi )| = |Q : NQ (Pi )|. Using
proposition 1.4.7, we have
|Ωi | = |Q : Q ∩ Pi |.
If Q = Pi , then we obtain that |Ωi | = |Pi : Pi ∩ Pi | = 1. If Q = Pi , then we obtain
that |Ωi | = |Q : Q ∩ Pi | > 1, and since the index of any subgroup of Q divides Q,
p divides |Ωi |.
Proposition 1.4.8. The number of conjugates of any Sylow p-subgroup of a

finite group G is congruent to 1 modulo p.
Proof. In the construction considered above we take Q = P1 . Then |Ω1 | = 1

and p divides |Ωi | for i = 1. Let t be a number of conjugates of P1 . Since
t = |Ω| = |Ω1 | + |Ω2 | + ... + |Ωk |, we have t = 1 + pk2 + pk3 + ... + pks ≡ 1(modp).
Theorem 1.4.9 (The second Sylow theorem). Any two Sylow p-subgroups
of a finite group G are conjugate.
Proof. Given a Sylow p-subgroup P and any other Sylow p-subgroup Q, con-
sider again the construction considered above. Suppose Q is not conjugate to P ,
Then Q = Pi for each i = 1, 2, ..., s. Therefore p divides |Ωi | for every orbit. If t is
the number of conjugates of P , then t ≡ 0(modp), which contradicts proposition
1.4.8.
Theorem 1.4.10 (The third Sylow theorem). Let G be a group of order

pn m, where p is a prime and (p, m) = 1. The number np of all Sylow p-subgroups
of G is of the form 1 + kp, i.e., np ≡ 1(modp). Further, np = |G : NG (P )| for any

Sylow p-subgroup P , hence np |m.
Proof. Consider again the construction considered above. Since all Sylow p-
subgroups are conjugate, |Ω| is equal to the number np of all Sylow p-subgroups
of G. By proposition 1.4.8, np ≡ 1(modp).
Finally, since all Sylow p-subgroups are conjugate, theorem 1.4.2 shows that
np = |G : NG (P )| for any P ∈ Sylp (G). Since P is a subgroup of NG (P ), pn
divides |NG (P )|, hence np |m.
1.5 SOLVABLE AND NILPOTENT GROUPS

Abelian groups are the simplest class of groups in terms of structure. Two broader
classes than the class of Abelian groups are the classes of nilpotent groups and
solvable groups, the theory of which has also reached a fairly advanced stage.
Recall that a group G is called simple if |G| > 1 and the only normal subgroups
of G are 1 and G.
A normal series of a group G is a chain of subgroups
1 = H0 H1 H2 ... Hs = G
such that Hi is a normal subgroup in Hi+1 for every i = 0, 1, ..., s − 1. The number
s is called the length of the normal series and quotient groups Hi+1 /Hi are called
its factors.
If all factors in a normal series of a group G are simple, the series is called a
composition series.
Since any ring is a group we have the following formulations of the Jordan-
Hölder theorem for groups (see vol.I, theorem 3.2.1):
Theorem 1.5.1 (Jordan-Hölder). If a group G has a composition series,

then every two composition series of G are isomorphic.
If a group G has a composition series, then every normal series of it can be
refined to a composition series.
Definition. A group G is called solvable if it has a normal series with all

factors Abelian.
Example 1.5.1.
The subgroup H of all upper triangular matrices of the group GL(n, C), where
C is the field of complex numbers, is solvable.
Remark 1.5.1. Note that the term ’solvable’ arose in Galois theory and is
connected with the problem of solvability of algebraic equations in radicals. Let
f be a polynomial in x over a field k and K be the (minimal) splitting field of f .
The group Gal(K/k) is called the Galois group of f . The main result of Galois
theory says that the equation f (x) = 0 is solvable in radicals if and only if the
group Gal(K/k) is solvable.
We now give another characterization of solvable groups.

Let G be a group, x, y ∈ G, and let A, B be nonempty subgroups of G. Recall
that the commutator of x, y ∈ G is defined as
[x, y] = x−1 y −1 xy,
and the commutator of A, B is
[A, B] = {[x, y] : x ∈ A, y ∈ B}.
Define also
G = {[x, y] : x, y ∈ G},
which is the subgroup of G generated by commutators of elements from G and
called the commutator subgroup of G.
The basic properties of commutators and the commutator subgroup are given
by the following statement.
Proposition 1.5.2. Let G be a group, x, y ∈ G and let H ⊆ G be a subgroup.

Then
(1) xy = yx[x, y].
(2) H G if and only if [H, G] ⊆ H.
(3) The group G/G is Abelian.
(4) G/G is the largest Abelian quotient group of G in the sense that if H G
and G/H is Abelian, then G ⊆ H. Conversely, if G ⊆ H, then H G and G/H
is Abelian.
Proof.
(1) This is immediate from the definition of [x, y].
(2) By definition, H G if and only if g −1 hg ∈ H for all g ∈ G and all h ∈ H.
For h ∈ H, we have that g −1 hg ∈ H if and only if h−1 g −1 hg ∈ H, so that H G
if and only if [h, g] ∈ H for all h ∈ H and all g ∈ G. Thus, H G if and only if
[H, G] ⊆ H.
(3) Let xG and yG be arbitrary elements of G/G . By the definition of the
group operation in G/G and since [x, y] ∈ G we have
(xG )(yG ) = (xy)G = (yx[x, y])G = (yx)G = (yG )(xG ).
(4) Suppose H G and G/H is Abelian. Then for all x, y ∈ G we have

(xH)(yH) = (yH)(xH), so
H = (xH)−1 (yH)−1 (xH)(yH) = x−1 y −1 xyH = [x, y]H.
Thus [x, y] ∈ H for all x, y ∈ G, so that G ⊆ H.

Conversely, if G ⊆ H, then since G/G is Abelian by (3), every subgroup of
G/G is normal. In particular, H/G G/G . Then, by lemma 1.3.4 and theorem
1.3.5 (see vol.I), it follows that H G and
G/H (G/G )/(H/G )

so that G/H is Abelian.
Definition. For any group G define the following sequence of subgroups in-
ductively:
G(0) = G, G(1) = [G, G] and G(i+1) = [G(i) , G(i) ] for all i ≥ 1.
This series of subgroups is called the derived or commutator series of G.
Theorem 1.5.3. A group G is solvable if and only if G(n) = 1 for some n ≥ 0.
Proof. Assume first that G is solvable and so possesses a normal series
1 = H0 H1 H2 ... Hs = G
such that each quotient group Hi+1 /Hi is Abelian. We prove by induction that
G(i) ⊆ Hs−i . This is true for i = 0, so assume G(i) ⊆ Hs−i . Then
G(i+1) = [G(i) , G(i) ] ⊆ [Hs−i , Hs−i ].
Since Hs−i /Hs−i−1 is Abelian, by proposition 1.5.2(4), [Hs−i , Hs−i ] ⊆ Hs−i−1 .

Thus G(i+1) ⊆ Hs−i−1 , which completes the induction. Since H0 = 1, we have
G(s) = 1.
Conversely, if G(n) = 1 for some n ≥ 0, proposition 1.5.2(4) shows that if we
take Hi to be G(n−i) then Hi is a normal subgroup of Hi+1 with Abelian quotient,
so the derived series itself satisfies the defining condition for solvability of G. This
completes the proof.
If a group G is solvable, the smallest nonnegative n for which G(n) = 1 is called

the solvable length of G.
Theorem 1.5.4. Let G and K be groups, let H be a subgroup of G and let

ϕ : G → K be a surjective homomorphism.
1. H (i) ⊆ G(i) for all i ≥ 0. In particular, if G is solvable, then so is H, i.e.,
subgroups of solvable groups are solvable.
2. ϕ(G(i) ) = K (i) . In particular, homomorphic images and quotient groups
(which are the same thing) of solvable groups are solvable.
3. Let N be a normal subgroup of G. If both N and G/N are solvable, then so
is G.
Proof.
1. This follows from the observation that since H ⊆ G, by definition of com-
mutator subgroups, [H, H] ⊆ [G, G], that is, H (1) ⊆ G(1) . Then, by induction,
H (i) ⊆ G(i) for all i ≥ 0. In particular, if G(n) = 1 for some n, then also H (n) = 1.
2. Note that, by definition of commutators, ϕ([x, y]) = [ϕ(x), ϕ(y)], so, by

induction, ϕ(G(i) ) ⊆ K (i) . Since ϕ is surjective, every commutator in K is the
image of a commutator in G. Hence again, by induction, we obtain equality for
all i. Again, if G(n) = 1 for some n then K (n) = 1.
3. If G/N and N are solvable of lengths n and m respectively then, by state-
ment 2 of this theorem applied to the natural projection ϕ : G → G/N , we obtain
ϕ(G(n) ) = (G/N )(n) = N , i.e., G(n) ⊆ N . Thus G(n+m) = (Gn )(m) ⊆ N (m) = 1.
Theorem 1.5.3 now implies that G is solvable.
Theorem 1.5.5. Every finite group of order pn , where p is prime, is solvable.
Proof. If G is a finite p-group, then, by theorem 1.4.4, its center Z(G) is not
trivial. Then the quotient group G/Z(G) is again a p-group, whose order is less
then the order of G. We prove this theorem by induction on the order of a group.
Assume that theorem is true for all p-groups with order less then pn . Then, by
induction hypothesis, Z(G) and G/Z(G) are solvable groups. Then, by theorem
1.5.4(3), G is also solvable.
Definition. For any group G define the following subgroups inductively:
Z0 (G) = 1, Z1 (G) = Z(G)
and Zi+1 (G) is the subgroup of G containing Zi (G) such that
Zi+1 (G)/Zi (G) = Z(G/Zi (G)).
The chain of subgroups
Z0 (G) ⊆ Z1 (G) ⊆ Z2 (G) ⊆ ...
is called the upper central series of G.

A group G is called nilpotent if Zm (G) = G for some m ∈ Z. The smallest
such m is called the nilpotency class of G.
Example 1.5.2.
The subgroup H of all upper triangular matrices of the group GL(n, C), where
C is the field of complex numbers, is not nilpotent. But the subgroup N of all
elements of H with 1 on the main diagonal is nilpotent.
Proposition 1.5.6. Let p be a prime and let G be a group of order pm . Then

G is nilpotent of nilpotency class at most m − 1.
Proof. For each i ≥ 0, G/Zi (G) is a p-group, so, by theorem 1.4.4, if

|G/Zi (G)| > 1 then Z(G/Zi (G)) is not trivial. Thus if Zi (G) = 1 then
|Zi+1 (G)| ≥ p|Zi (G)| and so |Zi+1 (G)| ≥ pi+1 . In particular, |Zm (G)| ≥ pm ,
so G = Zm (G). Thus G is nilpotent of nilpotency class ≤ m. The only way G
could be of nilpotence class exactly equal to m would be if |Zi (G)| = pi for all i.
In this case, however, Zm−2 would have index p2 in G, so G/Zm−2 (G) would be
Abelian, by corollary 1.4.5. But then G/Zm−2 (G) would equal its center and so
Zm−1 (G) would equal G, a contradiction. This proves that the nilpotency class of
G is ≤ m − 1.
We now give another equivalent definition of a nilpotent group using the notion
of a lower central series.
Recall that the commutator of two elements x, y in a group G is defined as
[x, y] = x−1 y −1 xy,
and the commutator of two subgroups H and K of G is
[H, K] = {[x, y] : x ∈ H, y ∈ K}.
Definition. For any group G define the following subgroups inductively:
G0 = G, G1 = [G, G] and Gi+1 = [G, Gi ].
The chain of groups

G0 ⊇ G1 ⊇ G2 ⊇ ...
is called the lower central series of G.
It is important to note that although G(0) = G0 and G(1) = G1 , in general it

is not true that G(i) = Gi . The difference is that the definition of the (i + 1)-st
term in the lower central series is the commutator of the i-th term with the whole
group G whereas the (i + 1)-st term in the derived series is the commutator of the
i-th term with itself. Hence G(i) ⊆ Gi for all i and the containment can be proper.
For example, in G = S3 we have G1 = A3 and G2 = [S3 , A3 ] = A3 , whereas
G(2) = [A3 , A3 ] = 1.
Theorem 1.5.7. A group G is nilpotent if and only if Gn = 1 for some n ≥ 0.

More precisely, G is nilpotent of nilpotency class m if and only if m is the smallest
nonnegative integer such that Gm = 1. If G is nilpotent of nilpotency class m then
Zi (G) ⊆ Gm−i−1 ⊆ Zi+1 (G) for all i ∈ {0, 1, 2, ..., m − 1}.
Proof. This is proved by a straightforward induction on the length of the lower

central series.
Corollary 1.5.8. Each nilpotent group is solvable.
Proof. This follows immediately from theorem 1.5.7 taking into account that
G(i) ⊆ Gi for all i.
Thus, we can summarize the results obtained in this section as the following
chain of classes of groups:
(cyclic groups) ⊂ (Abelian groups) ⊂ (nilpotent groups) ⊂
⊂ (solvable groups) ⊂ (all groups)
Proposition 1.5.9. Let G and K be groups, let H be a subgroup of G and let

ϕ : G → K be a surjective homomorphism.
1. H i ⊆ Gi for all i ≥ 0. In particular, if G is nilpotent, then so is H, i.e.,
subgroups of nilpotent groups are nilpotent.
2. ϕ(Gi ) = K i . In particular, homomorphic images and quotient groups of
nilpotent groups are nilpotent.
Proof.
1. This follows from the observation that since H ⊆ G, by definition of commu-
tator subgroups, [H, H] ⊆ [G, G], that is, H 1 ⊆ G1 . Then, by induction, H i ⊆ Gi
for all i ≥ 0. In particular, if Gn = 1 for some n, then also H n = 1. And from
theorem 1.5.7 it follows that H is nilpotent.
2. Note that, by the definition of commutators, ϕ([x, y]) = [ϕ(x), ϕ(y)], so,
by induction, ϕ(Gi ) ⊆ K i . Since ϕ is surjective, every commutator in K is the
image of a commutator in G. Hence again, by induction, we obtain equality for
all i. Again, if Gn = 1 for some n then K n = 1.
1.6 GROUP RINGS AND GROUP REPRESENTATIONS.

MASCHKE THEOREM
The group algebra of a group G over a field k is the associative
algebra over k
whose elements are all possible finite sums of the form αg g, g ∈ G, αg ∈ k,
g∈G
the operations being defined by the formulas:

αg g + βg g = (αg + βg )g,
g∈G g∈G g∈G

( αg g)( βg g) = ( (αx βy )h).
g∈G g∈G h∈G xy=h,x,y∈G
(All sums in these formulas are finite.) This algebra is denoted by kG; the
elements of G form a basis of this algebra; multiplication of basis elements in the
group algebra is induced by the group multiplication. The algebra kG is isomorphic
to the algebra of functions defined on G with values in k which
assume only a finite
number of non-zero values. The function associated to αg g is f : g → αg . In
g∈G
this algebra multiplication is the convolution of such functions. Indeed if f1 , f2
are two functions G → k with finite support their product is given by

f1 f2 (g) = f1 (h)f2 (h−1 g).
h∈G
The same construction can also be considered for the case when k is an asso-
ciative ring. One thus arrives at the concept of the group ring of a group G over
a ring k; if k is commutative and has a unit element, the group algebra is often
called the group algebra of the group over the ring as well.
Note that, by definition of the multiplication, kG is a commutative ring if and
only if G is an Abelian group.
Examples 1.6.1.
1. If G = (g) is a cyclic group of order n and k is a field, then the elements of
kG are of the form

n−1
αi g i .
i=0
The map k[x] → kG which sends x to g k for all k ≥ 0 extends by k-linearity to a

k
surjective ring homomorphism with kernel equal to the ideal generated by xn − 1.

Thus kG k[x]/(xn − 1). This is an isomorphism of k-algebras.
Definition. A k-representation of a group G on a vector space V over a

field k is a group homomorphism T : G → GL(V ), where GL(V ) is a group of all
invertible linear transformations of V over k.
In other words, to define a representation T is to assign to every element g ∈ G
an invertible linear operator T (g) in such a way that T (g1 g2 ) = T (g1 )T (g2 ) for
all g1 , g2 ∈ G. If the k-vectorspace V is finite dimensional, then its dimension
[V : k] is called the dimension (or degree) of the representation T , and the
representation T is called finite dimensional over k.
If T is a monomorphism, the representation is said to be faithful.
We say that two k-representations ϕ : G → GL(V ) and ψ : G → GL(W )
of a group are equivalent (or similar) if there is a k-vector space isomorphism
θ : V → W such that the diagram
θ
V W
ϕ(g) ψ(g)
θ
V W
is commutative for all g ∈ G, that is, θϕ(g) = ψ(g)θ, for all g ∈ G, which is
equivalent to
ψ(g) = θϕ(g)θ−1 .
In the case where V is of finite dimension n it is common to choose a basis for V and
assign to each operator T (g) its matrix Tg in this basis. The correspondence g →
Tg defines a homomorphism of the group G into GL(n, k), the general linear group
of invertible n × n matrices over k, which is called the matrix representation of
the group G corresponding to the representation T . Thus we can define a matrix
representation of a group.
Definition. A matrix representation of degree n of a group G over a field

k is a group homomorphism T : G → GLn (k), where GLn (k) is the general linear
group of invertible n × n matrices over k.
Example 1.6.2.
Consider the cyclic group C3 = {1, u, u2}, where u3 = 1. This group has a
two-dimensional representation ϕ over the field of complex numbers C:

1 0 1 0 2 1 0
ϕ(1) = , ϕ(u) = , ϕ(u ) =
0 1 0 ξ3 0 (ξ3 )2 ,
√
where ξ3 = − 21 + 12 i 3 is a primitive 3-rd root of unity. This representation is
faithful because ϕ is a one-to-one map.
If we choose a new basis of a vector space V , then every matrix Tg transforms

into a new matrix of the form PTg P−1 , where P is the matrix of a transformation
which does not depend on the element g ∈ G. So in matrix terminology we have
the following definition:
Definition. Two matrix representations T : G → GLn (k) and S : G →
GLn (k) are said to be equivalent (or similar) if there is a fixed invertible matrix
P ∈ GLn (k) such that Sg = PTg P−1 for all g ∈ G.
Example 1.6.3.
The cyclic group C3 also has the representation ψ given by the matrices:
⎛ ⎞
ξ3 0
1 0
ϕ(1) = , ϕ(u) = ⎝ 0 1, ϕ(u2 ) = (ξ3 )2 0⎠
0 1
0 1,
which is equivalent to the representation ϕ shown in example 1.6.2.
Remark 1.6.1. The representations considered above are also called linear
representations. Other kinds of representations are permutation representa-
tions. A permutation representation of a group G on a set S is a homomor-
phism from G to the group of all permutations of S. In this book “representation”
usually means “linear representation”.
In this chapter we restrict our attention to finite groups and finite dimensional
representations over a field k.
Examples 1.6.4.
1. Let V be a one-dimensional vector space over a field k. Make V into a
kG-module by letting g · v = v for all g ∈ G and v ∈ V . This module corresponds
to the representation ϕ : G → GL(V ) defined by ϕ(g) = I, for all g ∈ G, where
I is the identity linear transformation. The corresponding matrix representation
is defined by ϕ(g) = 1. This representation of the group G is called the trivial
representation. Thus, the trivial representation has degree 1 and if |G| > 1, it
is not faithful.
2. Consider the representation τ of kG defined by τ (a) = Ta , where Ta (x) =

ax for all x ∈ G and a ∈ G. This representation is called the left regular
representation of kG. In other words, kG is considered as a left module over
itself. If we take the elements of G as a basis of kG, then each g ∈ G permutes
these basis elements: Tg (gi ) = g · gi = ggi = gj . With respect to this basis of kG
the matrix representation of the group element g has 1 in the intersection of the
i-th row and the j-th column, and has zeroes in all other positions. Note that each
nonidentity element of G induces a nonidentity permutation on the basis of kG.
So the left regular representation is always faithful. Analogously one can define
the right regular representation of kG.
3. Consider the symmetric group S3 which has the following matrix two-
dimensional representation based on the correspondence with planar symmetry
operations of an equilateral triangle:
√ √
1 0 1 1
√ − 3 1
√1 3
ϕ(e) = , ϕ(a) = , ϕ(b) =
0 1 2 − 3 −1 2 3 −1,
√ √
−1 0 1
√−1 − 3 1 −1
√ 3
ϕ(c) = , ϕ(d) = , ϕ(f ) =
0 1 2 3 −1 2 − 3 −1.
The matrices ϕ(a), ϕ(b) and ϕ(c) correspond to reflections, while the matrices ϕ(d)
and ϕ(f ) correspond to rotations. These matrices form a faithful two-dimensional
representation of S3 . Take for example the equilateral triangle with corner points
√ √ 2√
(−1, − 31 3), (1, − 1
3 3), (0, 3 3) in E .
2
The group S3 also has the following one-dimensional representations ψ(e) =

ψ(d) = ψ(f ) = 1 and ψ(a) = ψ(b) = ψ(c) = −1, which is the mapping from the
elements of S3 to the determinants of the matrix representation discussed above.
Finally, we have the trivial representation of S3 which is given by σ(e) = σ(a) =
σ(b) = σ(c) = σ(d) = σ(f ) = 1, which is also one-dimensional.
4. Consider the dihedral group Dn which has the presentation:
Dn = {σ, τ : σ n = τ 2 = 1, στ = τ σ −1 }.
If S and T are matrices satisfying the relations Sn = T2 = E and ST = TS−1 ,

then the map σ → S and τ → T extends uniquely to a homomorphism from Dn
to the matrix group generated by S and T, and hence gives a representation of
Dn . An explicit example of matrices S, T ∈ GL2 (R) may be obtained as follows.
Take a regular n-polygon drawn on the x, y plane centered at the origin with the
line y = x as one of its lines of symmetry then the matrix S that rotates the
plane through 2πn radians and the matrix T that reflects the plane about the line
y = x both send this n-polygon onto itself. It follows that these matrices act
as symmetries of the n-polygon and so satisfy the above relations. It is easy to
compute that

cos 2π
n − sin 2π
n 0 1
S= and T =
sin 2π
n cos 2π
n
1 0

cos 2π
n − sin 2π
n 0 1
And so the map σ → and τ →
extends uniquely to
sin 2π
n cos 2π
n
1 0
a representation of Dn into GL2 (R). The matrices S and T have order n and 2
respectively. It is not difficult to check that S and T generate a matrix group of
order 2n so that this representation is faithful.
5. Consider the quaternion group which has the following presentation:
H2 = {i, j : i4 = 1, i2 = j 2 , ij = ji−1 }.
Then we have a representation ϕ : H2 → GL2 (C) defined by

√
−1 √0 0 −1
ϕ(i) = and ϕ(j) =
0 − −1 1 0.
This representation of H2 is faithful.
As was mentioned above the study of k-representations of a group G is equiva-

lent to the study of modules over the group ring kG. Let G be a group and let V be
an n-dimensional vector space over a field k. There is an obvious bijection between
kG-modules and pairs (V, ϕ), where ϕ : G → GL(V ) is a group representation.
Suppose first that ϕ : G → GL(V ) is a group representation. For each g ∈ G,
ϕ(g) is a linear transformation from V to itself. Make V into a kG-module by
defining the action of a ring element on an element of V as follows:

( αg g) · v = αg ϕ(g)(v)
g∈G g∈G

for all αg g ∈ kG, v ∈ V . Then it is easy to show that V becomes a kG-module.
g∈G
Conversely, suppose that we have a kG-module V such that dimk V = n. Since
V is a kG-module, it is a k-module, i.e., it is a vector space over k. Also, for each
g ∈ G we obtain a map ϕ(g) : V → V , defined by ϕ(g)(v) = g · v for all v ∈ V ,
where g ·v is the given action of the ring element g on the element v of V . Since the
elements of k commute with each g ∈ G, it follows, by the axioms for a module,
that for all u, v ∈ V and all α, β ∈ k we have ϕ(g)(αu+βv) = αϕ(g)(u)+βϕ(g)(v),
that is, for each g ∈ G, ϕ(g) is a linear transformation. Furthermore, again by the
axioms for a module, it follows that ϕ(g1 g2 )(v) = (ϕ(g1 )ϕ(g2 ))(v). This proves
that ϕ is a group homomorphism.
Therefore to give a representation ϕ : G → GL(V ) on a vector space V over
k is the same as to give a kG-module V . Under this correspondence we shall say
that the kG-module V affords the representation ϕ of G.
Definition. A k-representation T of a group G is called irreducible if the

kG-module V affording it is irreducible, otherwise it is called reducible. A k-
representation T is called completely reducible if the kG-module V affording
it is completely reducible. (See vol.I for irreducibility and complete reducibility of
modules.)
In matrix terminology, this is equivalent to the following definition.
A matrix representation T of degree n of a group G is reducible if and only
if it is equivalent to a matrix representation S of the form:

(1)
Sg Ug
Sg = (2)
0 Sg
(i)
for all g ∈ G, where Sg are matrix representations of degree ni < n of G; otherwise
it is called reducible.
A matrix representation T of degree n of a group G is completely reducible
if and only if it is equivalent to a matrix representation S of the form:
⎛ (1) ⎞
Sg 0 ... 0
⎜ (2) ⎟
⎜ 0 Sg ... 0 ⎟
Sg = ⎜ ⎟
⎝ ... ... ... ... ⎠
(m)
0 0 . . . Sg
(i)
for all g ∈ G, where the Sg are irreducible matrix representations of degree ni < n
of G (i = 1, 2, ..., m).
Example 1.6.5.
The representations ϕ and ψ of the group C3 considered in examples 1.6.2
and 1.6.3 are completely reducible and are direct sums of two one-dimensional
representations.
We shall prove below a very important classical theorem. Taking into account
its great importance we give three different proofs of it.
Theorem 1.6.1 (H.Maschke). If G is a finite group and the order of G

is not divisible by the characteristic of a field k, then the group algebra kG is
semisimple.
Proof.
1. (A proof according to J.-P.Serre.3 Let M be any kG-module and let X be
an arbitrary kG-submodule of M . Since X is a vector subspace of M , there is a
vector subspace Y0 such that M is a direct sum of these vector subspaces:
M = X ⊕ Y0 .
3 See [Serre, 1967] .
We need only to show that X is also a direct summand of M as a kG-submodule.

Let π0 : M → X be the vector space projection of M onto X along Y0 , that is,
π0 is defined by π0 (x + y) = x for all x ∈ X and y ∈ Y0 .
For each g ∈ G define the map g −1 π0 g : M → X by the formula g −1 π0 g(m) =
−1
g · π0 (g · m) for all m ∈ M .
Since X is a kG-submodule of M and π0 maps M onto X, we have that g −1 π0 g
maps M onto X. Moreover, g −1 π0 g is a k-linear transformation, because g and
g −1 act as k-linear transformations. Since X is a kG-submodule of M , for each
x ∈ X we have
g −1 π0 g(x) = g −1 · π0 (gx) = g −1 · gx = x,
i.e., g −1 π0 g is also a vector space projection of M onto X.
Let n = |G|. Consider n as an element of the field k. It is not zero in k by
hypothesis. Define
1 −1
π= g π0 g.
n
g∈G
Since π is a scalar multiple of a sum of linear transformations from M to X, it is

also a linear transformation from M to X. If x ∈ X, then
1 −1 1
π(x) = g π0 g(x) = (x + ... + x) = x,
n n
g∈G
i.e., π is also a vector space projection of M onto X. We now show that π is a

kG-module homomorphism. For any h ∈ G we have
1 −1 1 −1
π(hm) = g π0 g(hm) = g · π0 (g · hm) =
n n
g∈G g∈G
1 1
= h(h−1 g −1 ) · π0 ((gh)m) = h(r−1 · π0 (rm)) =
n n
g∈G r=gh,g∈G
1 1 −1
= h(r−1 π0 r(m)) = h( r π0 r(m)) = hπ(m),
n n
r=gh,g∈G r∈G
because as g runs over all elements of G, so does r = gh.

This establishes the existence of a kG-module projection π of M onto X. Con-
sider the set of elements Y = Kerπ ⊂ M . Since π is a kG-module homomorphism,
Y is a kG-submodule. If m ∈ X ∩ Y , then m = π(m) whereas by definition of
Y , π(m) = 0. This shows that X ∩ Y = 0. On the other hand, an arbitrary
element m ∈ M can be written in the form: m = π(m) + (m − π(m)). By defini-
tion, π(m) ∈ X. And π(m − π(m)) = π(m) − π(π(m)) = π(m) − π(m) = 0, i.e.,
m − π(m) ∈ Kerπ = Y . This shows that M = X + Y and hence M = X ⊕ Y .
Therefore, any submodule of a kG-module M is a direct summand of it. Then, by
proposition 2.2.4 (vol. I), M is a semisimple kG- module and kG is a semisimple
ring.
2. (A proof according to I.N.Herstein. 4 Let a ∈ kG, and consider the right

regular representation Ta : kG → kG defined by the formula Ta (x) = xa for any
x ∈ kG. It is easy to verify that Ta is a k-linear transformation of the space kG.
Moreover the map ϕ : a → Ta is an isomorphism from the k-algebra kG into the
k-algebra Endk (kG).
We write the transformation Ta by means of its matrix Ta with respect to the
basis consisting of the elements of the group G. Let Sp(Tg ) be the trace of the
matrix Tg . Note that

m for g = 1;
Sp(Tg ) =
0 for g = 1
where m = |G|.
Let R = rad(kG) be the Jacobson radical of kG. Since [kG : k] = m < ∞, i.e.,
kG is a finite dimensional k-algebra, kG is an Artinian algebra. Therefore R is
nilpotent, by proposition 3.5.1 (vol. I). Suppose R = 0, then there is an element
0 = x ∈ R. Let x = α1 g1 + α2 g2 + ... + αm gm .
Without lost of generality, we can assume that α1 = 0. Since R is an ideal in
kG, y = xg1−1 ∈ R and
y = α1 · 1 + α2 h2 + ... + αm hm , (1.6.1)
where hi ∈ G, y = 0, α1 = 0.
Since y ∈ R and R is nilpotent, the element y is nilpotent as well.
Therefore from any course in linear algebra it is well known that the corre-
sponding linear transformation Ty is nilpotent and Sp(Ty ) = 0.
On the other hand from (1.6.1), taking into account the linear properties of
trace, we have
Sp(Ty ) = α1 Sp(T1 ) + αm Sp(Th2 ) + ... + αm Sp(Thm ) = α1 · m = 0.
The obtained contradiction shows that R = 0. Thus kG is an Artinian algebra

with its Jacobson radical equal to zero. Therefore, by theorem 3.5.5 (vol. I), kG
is semisimple.
3. (A proof according to M.Hall.5 Let T : G → GL(n, k) be a reducible

matrix representation of degree n of a group G. Then it is equivalent to a matrix
representation of the form
(1)
Sg Ug
Sg = (2)
0 Sg
(i)
for all g ∈ G, where the Sg form matrix representations of degree ni < n of G.
We want to show that this matrix representation is completely reducible. Since
4 See [Herstein, 1968].
5 See [Hall, 1959].
(1) (2)
Sab = Sa Sb for all a, b ∈ G, we have Uab = Sa Ub + Ua Sb and hence
(2) (2)
Ua = Uab [Sb ]−1 − S(1)
a Ub [Sb ]
−1
.
Then (2) (2)

|G| · Ua = Ua = [Uab [Sb ]−1 − S(1)
a Ub [Sb ]
−1
]=
b∈G b∈G
(2) (2)
= [Uab [Sab ]−1 S(2)
a − S(1)
a Ub [Sb ]
−1
] = QS(2) (1)
a − Sa Q,
b∈G
(2)
where Q = Ug [Sg ]−1 . We denote Q1 = 1 Q, which does not depend on an
g∈G |G|
(2) (1)
element g ∈ G. Then Ua = Q1 Sa − Sa Q1 . Now consider the matrix C given
by:
E1 Q1
C= ,
0 E2
where Ei is the identity matrix of degree ni . Then

−1 E1 −Q1
C = ,
0 E2
and
(1)
−1 Sg 0
C Sg C = (2) ,
0 Sg
that is, S is a completely reducible representation.
Remark 1.6.2. This theorem was proved by H.Maschke in 1898 for finite
groups when the field k has characteristic 0. For fields whose characteristic does
not divide the order of a group G the result was pointed out by L.E.Dickson.
Note, that this theorem is also valid in a more general case, namely when k is a
commutative ring and |G| · 1 is a unit in k, which can be seen from the third proof
of this theorem.
Remark 1.6.3. The converse of the Maschke theorem is also true. Namely, if
the characteristic of a field k does divide |G|, then G possesses finitely generated
kG-modules which are not completely reducible. Specifically, the module kG itself
is not completely reducible. Indeed, let e = g. Since ge = eg = e for each
g∈G
g ∈ G, e spans a one-dimensional ideal I in kG. Since e2 = 0, this ideal is nilpotent.
Since kG is an Artinian ring (as a finite dimensional algebra), its radical rad(kG)
is nilpotent and contains all nilpotent ideals. So I ⊂ rad(kG). Hence rad(kG) = 0
and kG is not semisimple.
As a consequence of the Maschke theorem, the representation theory of groups

splits into two different cases depending on the characteristic of the field k: classical
and modular (following L.E.Dickson). In “classical” representation theory one

assumes that the characteristic of k does not divide the group order |G| (take
e.g. k as the field of complex numbers). In “modular” representation theory one
assumes that the characteristic of k is a prime, dividing |G|. In this case the theory
is almost completely different from the classical case.
In this book we shall generally restrict our attention to finite groups in the
classical case, as this simplifies things and provides a more complete theory.
1.7 PROPERTIES OF IRREDUCIBLE REPRESENTATIONS

As was shown in the previous section any group algebra kG of a finite group G
over a field k with characteristic 0 or characteristic p which does not divide the
order of G is semisimple, by the Maschke theorem. So the theorems giving the
structure of semisimple rings, proved in volume I, give also full descriptions of the
structure of the group algebras kG. We shall state these theorems for this concrete
case explicitly and obtain some corollaries and applications from them.
Definition. A representation is called irreducible, reducible, indecom-

posable or decomposable according to whether the kG-module affording it has
the corresponding property.
The Wedderburn-Artin theorem for an arbitrary semisimple k-algebra A can

be formulated as follows:
Theorem 1.7.1 (Wedderburn-Artin). A k-algebra A is semisimple if and

only if it is isomorphic to a direct product of matrix algebras over division algebras,
i.e.,
A Mn1 (D1 ) × Mn2 (D2 ) × ... × Mns (Ds ), (1.7.1)
where the Di are division algebras over the field k.
If k is an algebraically closed field, then we obtain the following corollary:
Corollary 1.7.2 (Molien). If k is an algebraically closed field, then every

semisimple k-algebra A is isomorphic to a direct product of matrix algebras over
k, i.e.,
A Mn1 (k) × Mn2 (k) × ... × Mns (k). (1.7.2)
If the algebra is commutative we obtain the following statements.
Theorem 1.7.3 (Weierstrass-Dedekind). A commutative algebra is

semisimple if and only if it is isomorphic to a direct product of fields.
Corollary 1.7.4. If k is an algebraically closed field, then every commuta-

tive semisimple k-algebra A is isomorphic to k s , where s is the number of simple
components of A.
From the Maschke theorem and the theory of semisimple algebras and modules
one can easily obtain a number of important results describing the irreducible
representations of a finite group G over an algebraically closed field k, whose
characteristic does not divide |G|.
Corollary 1.7.5. There are only a finite number of irreducible non-equivalent

representations of a finite group G over an algebraically closed field k whose char-
acteristic does not divide |G|, and this number is equal to the dimension of the
center of kG over k.
Theorem 1.7.6. If n1 , n2 , ..., ns are the dimensions of all pairwise non-

isomorphic irreducible representations of the group G over an algebraically closed
field k whose characteristic does not divide |G|, then
n21 + n22 + ... + n2s = n, (1.7.3)
where n = |G|.
Proof. By corollary 1.7.2, kG Mn1 (k) × Mn2 (k) × ... × Mns (k), where
n1 , n2 , ..., ns are the dimensions of all the irreducible representations of the al-
gebra kG, and thus n = |G| = [kG : k] = n21 + n22 + ... + n2s .
Example 1.7.1.
For the symmetric group G = S3 we have that |G| = 6 and we have two
one-dimensional irreducible representations and one two-dimensional irreducible
representation, as described in example 1.6.2 (3). Thus, using (1.7.3), we have

6= n2i = 12 + 12 + 22 .
i
So, theorem 1.7.6 tells us that there are no additional distinct irreducible repre-
sentations of S3 over an algebraically closed field k whose characteristic does not
divide |G|.
Theorem 1.7.7. Each irreducible representation of a finite group G over

an algebraically closed field k whose characteristic does not divide |G| appears in
the right regular representation of kG with multiplicity equal to the degree of that
irreducible representation.
Proof. Let k be an algebraically closed field, and let G be a finite group.

Suppose the order of G is not divisible by the characteristic of the field k. Then,
by the Maschke theorem, kG is semisimple, and, by corollary 1.7.2,
kG Mn1 (k) × Mn2 (k) × ... × Mns (k).
Consider the regular representation of kG, i.e., consider kG as a right kG-module.

Since each Mni (k) decomposes further as a direct sum of ni isomorphic simple
right ideals Mi , and these right ideals give a complete set of isomorphism classes
of irreducible kG-modules, we have the corresponding decomposition of the regular
kG-module kG over an algebraically closed field k :
kG n1 M1 ⊕ n2 M2 ⊕ ... ⊕ ns Ms , (1.7.4)
where ni = [Mi : k].
Theorem 1.7.8. The number of irreducible non-equivalent representations of

a finite group G over an algebraically closed field k whose characteristic does not
divide |G| is finite and is equal to the number of conjugacy classes of the group G.
Proof. By corollary 1.7.5, the number of non-equivalent irreducible represen-

tations of a group G is equal to the dimension of the center of kG. We compute
this dimension in another way using the fact that a group algebra kG has a special
basis.
Let C1 , C2 , ..., Cs be the distinct conjugacy classes of the group G. Then the
group
G is partitioned into these pairwise disjoint conjugacy classes. Let ci =
g, i = 1, 2, ..., s. Note that elements ci , cj have no common terms for i = j.
g∈Ci
Hence they are linearly independent elements of G. Since conjugation by a group
element permutes the elements of each class, hci h−1 = ci , i.e., ci belongs to the
center of kG. We show that the elements c1 , c2 , ..., cs form a basis of the center of
kG.
Let x = αg g, where αg ∈ k, be an element of the center Z(kG). Since
g∈G
hx = xh, i.e., hxh−1 = x for each h ∈ G, there holds

αg g = αg hgh−1 .
g∈G g∈G
This means that the coefficients of g and hgh−1 in the element x are equal. Since
h is arbitrary, every element in the same conjugacy class of a fixed group element
g has the same coefficient in x, hence x can be written as a linear combination of
the ci ’s. Since the ci ’s are linearly independent, they form a basis of the center
Z(kG), that is, dimk Z(kG) = s.
Example 1.7.2.
For the group S3 there are three conjugacy classes: {e}, {a, b, c} and {d, f }.
(See examples 1.6.4(3)). Thus, by theorem 1.7.8, there are three irreducible repre-
sentations which, as we have seen in example 1.7.1, consist of two one-dimensional
representations and one two-dimensional representation.
Corollary 1.7.9. A finite group G is Abelian if and only if all irreducible

representations of G over an algebraically closed field whose characteristic does
not divide |G|, are one-dimensional.
Proof. Indeed, it is sufficient to remark that a group is Abelian if and only

if every conjugacy class consists of a single element and thus that the number
of irreducible non-equivalent representations equals, by theorem 1.7.7, the group
order. Applying theorem 1.7.6, we can see immediately that this is possible only
when all irreducible representations are one-dimensional.
Corollary 1.7.10. If G and H are Abelian groups of the same order and k
is an algebraically closed field whose characteristic does not divide |G|, the group
algebras kG and kH are isomorphic.
1.8 CHARACTERS OF GROUPS. ORTHOGONALITY RELATIONS AND
THEIR APPLICATIONS
This section is an introduction to the theory of characters of groups which is one
of the important methods for the study of groups and their representations. We
shall consider the main properties of characters and their applications to obtain
some important results.
Let V be a vector space over a field k with a basis v1 , v2 , ..., vn , and let ϕ ∈
GL(V ) be a linear transformation with corresponding matrix A = (aij ) on this
basis. The trace of the transformation ϕ is the trace of the matrix A:

n
Sp(ϕ) = Sp(A) = aii .
i=1
From any course on linear algebra it is well known that the trace of the matrix
A does not depend on the choice of a basis v1 , v2 , ..., vn . Indeed, if B = PAP−1
then Sp(B) = Sp(PAP−1 ) = Sp(A). From the definition it follows immediately,
that a trace is a linear function, i.e.,
Sp(ϕ + ψ) = Sp(ϕ) + Sp(ψ)
Sp(αϕ) = αSp(ϕ)
for ϕ, ψ ∈ GL(V ) and α ∈ k.
Definition. Let σ : G → GL(V ) be a linear representation of a finite group

G. The function χσ : G → k, which is defined by the formula
χσ (x) = Sp[σ(x)].
for each x ∈ G, is called the character of the representation σ.
If there is no chance of misunderstanding we shall write simply χ instead

of χσ .
Example 1.8.1.
The character of the representation ϕ of the group C3 considered in example
1.6.2 is given by: χ(1) = 2, χ(u) = 1 + ξ3 , χ(u2 ) = 1 + (ξ3 )2 .
Definition. A character is called irreducible or reducible according to

whether the representation is irreducible or reducible, respectively.
Notice that, by corollary 1.7.5, there is only a finite number of irreducible char-
acters of a finite group G over an algebraically closed field k whose characteristic
does not divide |G|.
The character of the regular representation is called the regular character
and denoted by χreg .
Examples 1.8.2.
1. The character of the trivial representation is the function χ(g) = 1 for all
g ∈ G. This character is called the principal character of G.
2. For representations of degree 1, the character and the representation are
usually identified. Thus for Abelian groups, irreducible representations over an
algebraically closed field and their characters are the same.
Proposition 1.8.1. Let G be a group, and let χϕ be the character of a repre-

sentation ϕ of degree n. Then
1. χϕ (1) = n;
2. Equivalent representations have the same characters, and χϕ (gxg −1 ) =
χϕ (x) for every g, x ∈ G.
Proof.
1. Since dimk V = n, (ϕ(1)) = E is the n× n identity matrix. Thus Sp(ϕ(1)) =
Sp(E) = n, hence χϕ (1) = n.
2. It is well known that Sp(ab) = Sp(ba) for any a, b ∈ GL(V ). Then setting
a = v −1 , b = vu, we obtain that Sp(u) = Sp(vuv −1 ).
So equivalent representations have the same characters. Therefore
χϕ (gxg −1 ) = Sp[ϕ(gxg −1 )] = Sp[ϕ(g)ϕ(x)ϕ(g −1 )] = Sp[ϕ(x)] = χϕ (x) for all
g, x ∈ G.
Proposition 1.8.2. Let χreg be the regular character of a finite group G of

order n. Then for any g ∈ G

n for g = 1
χreg (g) =
0 1
for g =
The proof follows immediately from proposition 1.8.1 and example 1.6.2(2).
Examples 1.8.3.
1. Let ϕ : D2n → GL2 (R) be the explicit matrix representation described in
example 1.6.2(3). If χ is the character of ϕ, then χ(σ) = 2 cos( 2π
n ) and χ(τ ) = 0.
Since ϕ takes the identity of D2n to the 2 × 2 identity matrix, χ(1) = 2.
2. Let ϕ : H2 = Q8 → GL2 (C) be the explicit matrix representation described
in example 1.6.4(5). If χ is the character of ϕ, then χ(i) = 0 and χ(j) = 0. Since
ϕ takes the identity of Q8 to the 2 × 2 identity matrix, χ(1) = 2.
Proposition 1.8.3. The character of a direct sum of representations is the

sum of the characters of the constituents of the direct sum.
Proof. Let ϕ = ϕ1 ⊕ ϕ2 ⊕ ... ⊕ ϕm be a direct sum of representations of a group

G. Then the corresponding matrix representation of ϕ is equivalent to the matrix
representation S of the form:
⎛ (1) ⎞
Sg 0 ... 0
⎜ (2) ⎟
⎜ 0 Sg ... 0 ⎟
Sg = ⎜ ⎟
⎝ ... ... ... ... ⎠
(m)
0 0 . . . Sg
(i)
for all g ∈ G, where Sg are the matrix representations corresponding to repre-
sentations ϕi (i = 1, 2, ..., m).
Therefore
χϕ (g) = Sp[Tg ] = Sp[Sg ] = Sp[S(1) (2) (m)
g ] + Sp[Sg ] + ... + Sp[Sg ] =
= χϕ1 + χϕ2 + ... + χϕm .
Proposition 1.8.4. Let k be an algebraically closed field whose characteristic

does not divide the order of a finite group G. Then any character χ of the group
G has a unique representation in the form:
s
χ= a i χi ,
i=1
where χi is the character afforded by an irreducible kG-module Mi . Moreover, two
representations of the group G are equivalent if and only if they have the same
characters.
Proof. Since kG is a semisimple k-algebra, kG = A1 ×A2 ×...×As , where the Ai

are simple k-algebras. According to this decomposition we have a decomposition
1 = e1 + e2 + ... + es of the identity of the algebra kG into a sum of primitive
central idempotents.
Let M be a kG-module. Let Mi be a simple Ai -module, and let χi be the char-
acter afforded by Mi , i = 1, 2, ..., s. Then we have a corresponding decompositionof
the module M
M a1 M1 ⊕ a2 M2 ⊕ ... ⊕ as Ms , (1.8.1)
where the ai are nonnegative integers indicating the multiplicity of the irreducible
module Mi in the direct sum of the decomposition of M . If χM is the character
afforded by the module M , then, by proposition 1.8.3,
χM = a1 χ1 + a2 χ2 + ... + as χs (1.8.2)
and this decomposition is unique, because the decomposition (1.8.1) is unique, by

the Krull-Schmidt theorem.
Suppose that two representations T and R are equivalent, then the correspond-
ing matrices Tg and Rg are similar for each g ∈ G. Therefore they have the same
traces, hence they have the same characters.
Conversely, let two representations T and R have the same characters. Suppose
the kG-modules M and N correspond to the representations T and R. If χM , χN
are the characters afforded by the modules M and N , respectively, then, by the
proof above, we have decompositions
χM = a1 χ1 + a2 χ2 + ... + as χs
and
χN = b1 χ1 + b2 χ2 + ... + bs χs ,
where the ai , bi are nonnegative integers indicating the multiplicity of the irre-
ducible module Mi in the decompositions of the modules M and N .
If i = j, then ej Mi = 0, i.e., ej acts on Mi trivially, hence χi (ej ) = 0. If
i = j, then ei Mi = Mi , i.e., ei acts on Mi as an identity, hence χi (ei ) = ni ,
where ni = dimk Mi . Therefore χM (ei ) = ai ni and χN (ei ) = bi ni for all i. Since
the characters χM and χN are equal, ai = bi for all i, i.e., M N , and the
representations T and R are equivalent.
Corollary 1.8.5. Let k be an algebraically closed field whose characteristic

does not divide the order of a finite group G. Then

s
χreg = n i χi , (1.8.3)
i=1
where χi is a character afforded by an irreducible kG-module Mi and ni = [Mi : k].
Proof. This follows immediately from proposition 1.8.4 and theorem 1.7.7 (see
equality 1.7.4).
Note that the center Z(kG) has two different natural bases. Let 1 = e1 +
e2 + ... + es be a decomposition of the identity of the algebra kG into a sum of
primitive central idempotents. Since the idempotents e1 , e2 , ..., es are orthogonal
and central, they form a basis of the center Z(kG).
On
the other hand, as we have already pointed out in section 1.7, the elements
ci = g, for i = 1, 2, ..., s, also form a basis of Z(k). Consequently, there are
g∈Ci

s
s
elements αij , βij ∈ k such that ci = αij ej and ei = βij cj ; and the matrices
j=1 j=1
A = (αij ) and B = (βij ) are reciprocal (inverses of each other).
Proposition 1.8.6. Denote by ni the dimension of the irreducible representa-

tion Mi with character χi and denote by hj the number of elements in the conjugacy
class Cj . Then
hi ni
αij = χj (gi ), βij = χi (gj−1 ), (1.8.4)
nj n
where gj ∈ Cj .
Proof. If i = j, then ej Mi = 0, i.e., ej acts trivially on Mi , hence χi (ej ) = 0.

If i = j, then ei Mi = Mi , i.e., ei acts on Mi as an identity, hence χi (ei ) = ni ,
where ni = [Mi : k]. Therefore
s
s
χj (ci ) = χj ( αik ek ) = αik χj (ek ) = nj αij .
k=1 k=1
On the other hand, χj (ci ) = hi χj (gi ), and the formula for the αij follows.
n
In order to compute βij we use corollary 1.8.5, which says that χreg = n i χi .
i=1
From proposition 1.8.1 it follows that χreg (ck g) = 0 if g −1 ∈ Ck and χreg (ck g) = n
if g −1 ∈ Ck , where n = |G|. Therefore, if gj ∈ Cj , then
s
χreg (ei gj−1 ) = χreg ( βik ck gj−1 ) = nβij .
k=1
On the other hand,

s
χreg (ei gj−1 ) = ni χk (ei gj−1 ) = ni χi (gj−1 )
k=1
because χk (ei gj−1 ) = 0 for k = i and χi (ei gj−1 ) = χi (gj−1 ). The formula for the βij
follows.
Taking into account that the matrices A and B are reciprocal, we obtain
immediately the following ”orthogonal relations” for characters, obtained by
F.G.Frobenius.
Theorem 1.8.7 (orthogonality relations). Let k be an algebraically closed

field whose characteristic does not divide the order n of a finite group G. Suppose
that χi is a character of the group G afforded by an irreducible kG-module Mi and

{g1 , g2 , ..., gs } is a set of representatives of all conjugacy classes of G. Then

1
s
−1 0 for i = j,
hk χi (gk )χj (gk ) =
n 1 for i = j;
k=1

1
s
0 for i = j,
χk (gi )χk (gj−1 ) =
n 1/hj for i = j.
k=1
Corollary 1.8.8. A representation T of a finite group G over an algebraically

closed field whose characteristic does not divide the order of G is irreducible if and
only if its character χ satisfies the following equality
1
s
hk χ(gk )χ(gk−1 ) = 1. (1.8.5)
n
k=1
Proof. Decompose the representation T into a sum of irreducible representa-

s
tions. Correspondingly, the character χ can be expressed as χ = mi χi , where
i=1
χ1 , χ2 , ..., χs are irreducible characters. But then
1 1
s s s
hk χ(gk )χ(gk−1 ) = mi mj hk χi (gk )χj (gk−1 ) = m2i ,
n n i,j
k=1 k=1 k=1
and this sum is equal to 1 if and only if χ = χi for some i, i.e., in view of proposition
1.8.4, if and only if T is an irreducible representation.
The theory of characters has the most applications in the case when k = C is
the field of complex numbers. Therefore we restate the most important results in
this case.
Proposition 1.8.9. If χ is any character of an m-dimensional representation

T of a group G over the field of complex numbers C, then for any g ∈ G
1. χ(g) is a sum of roots of 1 in C.
2. χ(g −1 ) = χ(g), where z is the complex conjugate of the number z.
Proof. Since G is a finite group, any element of G is of a finite order. So if

|g| = n for a given element g ∈ G, then g n = 1 and [Tg ]n = E, where T is the
matrix representation corresponding to a representation T , and E is the identity
matrix. Since the minimal polynomial of Tg divides the polynomial xn − 1, which
has distinct roots, it follows that the matrix Tg is similar to the diagonal matrix
diag{ε1 , ε2 , ..., εm } with m-th roots of 1 on the diagonal, i.e., εm
i = 1. Hence
χ(g) = Sp(Tg ) = ε1 + ε2 + ... + εm

and Tg−1 diag{ε−1 −1 −1

1 , ε2 , ..., εm }. Moreover, if ε is a root of 1, then ε
−1
= ε.
Therefore
χ(g −1 ) = Sp(Tg−1 ) = ε−1 −1 −1
1 + ε2 + ... + εm = ε1 + ε2 + ... + εm = χ(g).
Corollary 1.8.10. A representation T of a finite group G over the field of

complex numbers is irreducible if and only if its character χ satisfies the following
equality:
1
s
hk χ(gk ) · χ(gk ) = 1. (1.8.6)
n
k=1
Example 1.8.4.
Consider the representation ϕ of the group S3 considered in example 1.6.2(3).
Since we have three conjugacy classes of this group: {e}, {a, b, c} and {d, f }, so we
have h1 = 1, h2 = 3 and h3 = 2, respectively. The corresponding charactervalues
are χ(e) = 2, χ(a) = 0, χ(d) = −1.
Forming the sum in (1.8.6) and using the fact that |S3 | = 6, we obtain
3
1
hk χ(gk ) · χ(gk ) = 1 × 4 + 3 × 0 + 2 × 1 = 1,
6
k=1
which shows that this representation is irreducible by corollary 1.8.10.
Let k be an algebraically closed field and let χ1 , χ2 , ..., χs be all the irreducible
characters of a finite group G over the field k. Let C1 , C2 , ..., Cs be all the conjugacy
classes of the group G. Write χij = χi (gj ), where gj ∈ Cj . The square matrix
X = (χij ) is called the character table of G over k with conjugacy classes of
elements as the columns and characters as the rows. Character tables are central
to many applications of group theory to physical problems.
If gj ∈ Cj , then χi (gj−1 ) = χij . So using proposition 1.8.9 we can rewrite
theorem 1.8.7 for the case of the field of complex numbers in the following form:
Theorem 1.8.11 (orthogonality relations). Let G be a finite group and let

(χij ) be the character table of the group G over the field of complex numbers C.
Then
1
s
0 for i = j,
hk χik χjk =
n 1 for i = j;
k=1

1
s
0 for i = j,
χki χkj =
n 1/hj for i = j.
k=1
Let ϕ and ψ be complex valued functions on a group G. Set

1
(ϕ, ψ) = ϕ(g)ψ(g).
|G|
g∈G
It is easy to verify that for all α, β ∈ C

1. (αϕ1 + βϕ2 , ψ) = α(ϕ1 , ψ) + β(ϕ2 , ψ);
2. (ϕ, αψ1 + βψ2 ) = α(ϕ, ψ1 ) + β(ϕ, ψ2 );
3. (ϕ, ψ) = (ψ, ϕ);
4. (ϕ, ϕ) > 0 for every ϕ = 0.
This product is called the Hermitian inner product of complex functions
on the group G.
Using this definition, theorem 1.8.11 can be rewritten in the following form:
Theorem 1.8.12. Let G be a finite group, and let χi , i = 1, 2, ..., n, be the

distinct irreducible characters of the group G over the field of complex numbers C.
Then
(χi , χj ) = δij , (1.8.7)
where δij is the Kronecker delta.
The orthogonality relations (1.8.7) show that the rows and columns of a char-
acter table over the field C are orthogonal with respect to the Hermitian inner
products, which allows one to compute character tables more easily. Note, that the
first row of the character table always consists of 1’s, and corresponds to the trivial
representation. Certain properties of a finite group G can be deduced immediately
from its character table:
1. The order of G is given by the sum of (χ(1))2 over the characters in the
table.
2. G is Abelian if and only if χ(1) = 1 for all characters in the table.
3. G is not a simple group if and only if χ(1) = χ(g) for some non-trivial
character χ in the character table and some non-identity element g ∈ G.
Examples 1.8.5.
1. Consider the cyclic group Cn = (g), where g n = 1. This group may be
realized as the rotation group over the angles 2kπ/n over some line. This group
is commutative, therefore, by theorem 1.7.3, each irreducible representation over
the field of complex numbers is one-dimensional. Each such representation has a
character χ such that χ(g) = w ∈ C and χ(g k ) = wk . Since g n = 1, wn = 1, that
is, w = e2πk/n , where k = 0, 1, ..., n−1. Therefore, the n irreducible representations
of the group Cn have the characters χ0 , χ1 , χ2 , ..., χn−1 , defined by the formula
χh (g k ) = e2πihk/n .
For instance, if n = 3, we have the following character table (with w = e2πi/3 ):
C3 1 g g2
χ0 1 1 1
χ1 1 w w2
χ2 1 w2 w
2. Consider the representations of the group S3 over the field of complex

numbers. Since |S3 | = 6 and there are three conjugacy classes of S3 , there are
three irreducible representations whose dimensions, by (1.7.3), must satisfy
n21 + n22 + n23 = 6.
The unique solution of this equation, consisting of positive integers, is n1 = 1,
n2 = 1 and n3 = 2, so there are two one-dimensional and one two-dimensional
irreducible representations.
Then the character table for S3 is:
S3 e {a,b,c} {d,f}
χ1 1 1 1
χ2 1 α β
χ3 2 γ δ
where α, β, γ and δ are quantities that are still to be determined.
The orthogonality relations for the rows of the character table yield:
1 + 3α + 2β = 0,
1 + 3α2 + 2β 2 = 6.
Using the orthogonality relations between the columns of the character table
we obtain:
1 + α + 2γ = 0
1 + β + 2δ = 0.
Using the relations between the elements of the group S3
a2 = e, b2 = e, c2 = e, d2 = f,
we obtain, that α2 = 1 and β 2 = β. Therefore taking into account all these
relations it follows that α = −1, β = 0, γ = 0 and δ = −1. Thus the complete
character table for S3 is given by
S3 e {a,b,c} {d,f}
χ0 1 1 1
χ1 1 -1 1
χ2 2 0 -1
Theorem 1.8.13. Let G be a finite group, and let the χi be all the irreducible
characters of the group G over the field of complex numbers C corresponding to
irreducible representations Mi , i = 1, 2, ..., s. Let M be a linear representation of
G with a character χ. Then

n
χ= (χ, χi )χi , (1.8.8)
i=1

n
(χ, χ) = a2i , (1.8.9.)
i=1
where ai is the number of representations Mi appearing in the direct sum of the
decomposition of M and ai = (χ, χi ).
Proof. Let χi be the irreducible character afforded by a module Mi , i =

1, 2, ..., s and let M be a linear representation of G with a character χ. Then we
have the decomposition of the module M :
M a1 M1 ⊕ a2 M2 ⊕ ... ⊕ as Ms ,
and the corresponding decomposition of the character χ:

n
χ= a i χi .
i=1
Using properties 1 and 2 of the inner product and theorem 1.8.12, we obtain that
ai = (χ, χi ). Now computing the inner product (χ, χ) and using the orthogonality
relations (1.8.7) we obtain (1.8.9).
Definition. For any complex function χ on a finite group G the norm of χ is

(χ, χ)1/2 and will be denoted by ||χ||. From equality (1.8.2) we obtain that

n
||χ|| = ( (ai )2 )1/2 .
i=1
And hence we have:
Corollary 1.8.14. A character has norm 1 if and only if it is irreducible.
1.9 MODULAR GROUP REPRESENTATIONS

The theory of modular representations of finite groups was developed by Richard
Brauer starting in the 1930’s. In the modular theory one fixes a prime p which
divides the order of a group G and studies homomorphisms of the group G into the
group of matrices over a field k of characteristic p. The problem of the description
of modular representations of a finite group G over a field k is the same as the
analogous problem for the Sylow p-subgroups of G.
Theorem 1.9.1 (D.G.Higman).6 Let G be a finite group whose order is

divisible by the characteristic p of a field k. Then the group algebra kG is of finite
representation type if and only if the Sylow p-subgroups of G are cyclic.
The first result on the classification for representations of non-cyclic p-groups

was obtained in 1961. It was the classification for the (2, 2)-group. This prob-
lem is trivially reduced to the well-known problem of a pencil of matrices up to
6 see [Higman, 1954].
similarity. Later it became clear that the problem of the description contains, in
turn, the problem of the classification of a pair linear operators which act on a
finite dimensional vector space (these problems are called wild and the others are
called tame). In particular, it was proved that the problem of a description of
representations of a group (p, p) for p = 2 is wild. So, this problem is wild for
arbitrary non-cyclic groups. If p = 2, the problem is wild for the (2, 4) and (2, 2, 2)
groups. From these results it follows that one can hope to obtain a classification
of modular representations only for p = 2 and for some groups G such that its
quotient groups do not contain the groups (2, 4) and (2, 2, 2). These groups are
exhausted by the following three infinite sets of 2-groups:
1. Dihedral groups
m
Dm = {x, y : x2 = y 2 = 1, yx = xy −1 } (m 1);
2. Quasidihedral groups
m m−1
Qm = {x, y : x2 = y 2 = 1, yx = xy 2 −1
} (m 3);
3. Generalized quaternion groups

m m−1
Hm = {x, y : y 2 = 1, x2 = y 2 , yx = xy −1 } (m 2).
We say that a group G is tame (wild) over a field k if the group algebra kG
is of tame (wild) representation type.7
V.Bondarenko and Yu.A.Drozd proved that a subgroup of finite index of a
tame group (over a field k) is tame (over k). It is easy to see that a generalized
quaternion group Hm is isomorphic to the subgroup of the quasidihedral group
Qm+1 , which is generated by xy and y 2 , so that generalized quaternion groups are
tame over a field with characteristic 2.
Denote by G the commutator subgroup of a group G. The above results can
be formulated in the following invariant form.
Theorem 1.9.2 (V.M.Bondarenko - Yu.A.Drozd). A noncyclic infinite

p-group G is tame over a field k of a characteristic p if and only if (G : G ) ≤ 4.
V.M.Bondarenko and Yu.A.Drozd also proved that a finite group is tame over
a field with a characteristic p > 0 if and only if its p-Sylow subgroup is tame.
This result can be formulated in the following invariant form.
Theorem 1.9.3 (V.M.Bondarenko - Yu.A.Drozd). A finite group G is

tame over a field k of characteristic p if and only if an any Abelian p-subgroup in
G of order more then 4 is cyclic.
7 For more exact definitions see chapter 3.

1.10 NOTES AND REFERENCES

The concept of a group is historically one of the first examples of an abstract
algebraic system. The origins of the idea of a group are encountered in a number
of disciplines, the principal one being the theory of solving algebraic equations by
radicals. Permutations were first employed to satisfy the needs of this theory by
J.L.Lagrange (1771) [Lagrange, 1771] and by A.Vandermonde (1771). The former
paper is of special importance in group theory, since it gives, in terms of poly-
nomials, what is really a decomposition of a symmetric permutation group into
(right) cosets with respect to subgroups. The deep connections between the prop-
erties of permutation groups and those of equations were pointed out by N.H.Abel
(1824) and by E.Galois (1830). E.Galois must be credited with concrete advances
in group theory: the discovery of the role played by normal subgroups in problems
of solvability of equations by radicals, the discovery that the alternating groups
of order n ≥ 5 are simple, etc. Also C.Jordan’s treatise (1870) on permutation
groups played an important role in the systematization and development of this
branch of algebra.
The idea of a group arose in geometry, in an independent manner, at the time
when the then only existing antique geometry had been augmented in the middle
of the nineteenth century by numerous other ’geometries’, and finding relations
between them had become an urgent problem. This question was solved by studies
in projective geometry, which dealt with the behaviour of geometric figures under
various transformations. The stress in these studies gradually shifted to the study
of the transformations themselves and their classification. Such a ’study of geomet-
ric mappings’ was extensively conducted by A.Möbius, who investigated congru-
ence, similarity, affinity, collineation, and, finally, ’elementary types of mappings’
of geometric figures, that is, actually, their topological equivalence. A.L.Cayley
(1854 and later) and other representatives of the English school of the theory of in-
variants gave a more systematic classification of geometries. A.L.Cayley explicitly
used the term ’group’, made systematic use of the multiplication table which now
carries his name, proved that any finite group can be represented by permutations,
and conceived a group as a system which is defined by its generating elements and
defining relations. The final stage in this development was the Erlangen program
of F.Klein (1872), who based the classification of geometries on the concept of a
transformation group.
Number theory is the third source of the concept of a group. As early as 1761
L.Euler, in his study of residues, actually used congruences and their division into
residue classes, which in group-theoretic language means the decomposition of
groups into cosets of subgroups.
The main notions of abstract group theory arose in the 19-th century. Thus,
W.Burnside, writing in 1897, quotes A.Cayley as saying that ’a group is defined by
means of the laws of combination of its symbols’, and goes on to explain why he,
in his own book [Burnside, 1955], does, on the whole, not take that point of view.
L.Kronecker discussed axioms for abstract finite groups in 1870 [Kronecker, 1870],
and the notion of abstract groups was introduced by A.Cayley in three papers
starting in 1849 [Cayley, 1849], [Cayley, 1854a], [Cayley, 1854b], though these
papers received little attention at the time. This had certainly changed by the
1890’s and a discussion of the basic definitions and some basic properties of ab-
stract groups can be found in H.Weber’s influential treatise [Weber, 1899].
Sylow subgroups were introduced by Peter Ludwig Mejdeli Sylow (1833-
1918), a Norwegian mathematician. The Sylow theorems were proved also by
P.L.M.Sylow in 1872 [Sylow, 1872].
The founder of group representation theory was Ferdinand Georg Frobenius
(1849-1917). He discovered the amazing basic properties of irreducible group char-
acters and published them in the 1890’s. His student, Issai Schur, was another
who made many significant early contributions to the subject.
Group algebras were considered by F.G.Frobenius and I.Schur [Schur, 1905]
in connection with the study of group representations, since studying the repre-
sentations of G over a field k is equivalent to studying modules over the group
algebra kG.
H.Maschke is best known today for the Maschke theorem, which he published
in 1899. A special case of his theorem H.Maschke proved in the paper [Maschke,
1898]. The general result appeared in the following year [Maschke, 1899].
In its modern form the theory of group representations owes much to the con-
tributions of Emmy Noether (in the 1920’s), whose work forms the basis of what
is now called “modern algebra”.
Modular representation theory was developed by Richard Brauer.
The problem of dividing the class of group algebras into tame and wild ones
has been completely solved by V.M.Bondarenko and Yu.A.Drozd [Bondarenko,
Drozd, 1977].
[Bondarenko, Drozd, 1977] V. M. Bondarenko, Yu.A. Drozd, Representation type

of finite groups, Zapiski Nauchn. Semin. LOMI, 71 (1977) 24-41. English
transl.: J.Soviet Math., v.20, N.6, 1982, p.2515-25-28.
[Burnside, 1955] W.Burnside, Theory of groups of finite order, Dover reprint,
1955.
[Cayley, 1849] A.Cayley, Note on the theory of permutations, Phil. Mag., v.3,
N.34, 1849, p.527–529.
[Cayley, 1854a] A.Cayley, On the theory of groups as depending on the symbolical
equation θn = 1, Phil. Mag., v.4, N.7, 1854, p.40–47.
[Cayley, 1854b] A.Cayley, On the theory of groups as depending on the symbolical
equation θn = 1. Second part, Phil. Mag., v.4, N.7, 1854, p.408–409.
[Fedorov, 1891] E.S.Fedorov, Symmetry on the plane, Zapiski Imperatorskogo
Sant-Peterburskogo Mineralogicheskogo Obschestva, 1891, v.28(2), p.345–390
(in Russian).
[Fedorov, 1949] E.S.Fedorov, Symmetry and the structure of crystals, Fundamen-
tal papers, Moscow, 1949, p.111-255 (in Russian).
[Hall, 1959] M.Hall, The theory of groups, Macmillan, New York, 1959.
[Herstein, 1968] I.N.Herstein, Noncommutative rings, Carus Mathematical Mono-
graphs, No.15, Mathematical Association of America, 1968.
[Higman, 1954] D.G.Higman, Indecomposable representations at characteristic p,
Duke Math. J., vol.21, 1954, p.377-381.
[Kronecker, 1870] L.Kronecker, Auseinandersetzung einiger Eigenschaften der
Klassenzahl idealer complexer Zahlen, Monatsber Kön. Preuss. Akad.
Wiss., Berlin (1870), p.881-889.
[Lagrange, 1771] J.L.Lagrange, Memoir on the algebraic solution of equations,
1771.
[Maschke, 1898] H.Maschke, Über den arithmetischen Charakter der Coefficienten
der Substitutionen endlicher linearer Substitutionsgruppen, 1898.
[Maschke, 1899] H.Maschke, Beweiss des Satzes, dass diejenigen endlichen lin-
earen Substitutionsgruppen, in welchen einige durchgehends verschwindende
Coefficienten auftreten intransitiv sind, 1899.
[Schoenflies, 1891] A.Schoenflies, Kristallsysteme und Kristallstruktur, Leipzig,
1891.
[Schur, 1905] I.Schur, Sitzungsber. Preuss. Akad. Wiss. 1905, p.406-432.
[Serre, 1967] J.-P.Serre, Represéntations linéaires des groups finis, Hermann,
Paris, 1967.
[Sylow, 1872] P.L.M.Sylow, Théorèmes sur les groupes de substitutions, Math.
Ann., v.5, N.54, 1872, p.584-594.
[Weber, 1899] H.Weber, Lehrbuch der Algebra, II, Vieweg, 1899, Buch 1, Ab-
schnitt 1.
2. Quivers and their representations
This chapter is devoted to the study of quivers and their representations. Quivers
were introduced by P.Gabriel in connection with problems of representations of
finite dimensional algebras in 1972. And from that time on the theory connected
with representations of quivers has developed enormously.
We start this chapter by considering some important algebras, including the
Grassmann algebra and the tensor algebra of a bimodule.
In sections 2.3 and 2.4 the main concepts are given pertaining to quivers, their
representations and path algebras of quivers. The main theorem in this section
says that the path algebra of a quiver over an arbitrary field is hereditary.
Dynkin diagrams and Euclidean diagrams (more often called extended Dynkin
diagrams) and the quadratic forms connected with them are studied in section 2.5.
The most important theorem, due to I.N.Berstein, I.M.Gel’fand, V.A.Ponomarev,
gives the classifications of all graphs from the point of view of their quadratic
forms.
The most remarkable result in the theory of representations of quivers is the
theorem classifying the quivers of finite representation type, which was obtained by
P.Gabriel in 1972. This theorem says that a quiver is of finite representation type
over an algebraically closed field if and only if the underlying diagram obtained
from the quiver by forgetting the orientations of all arrows is a disjoint union of
simple Dynkin diagrams. P.Gabriel also proved that there is a bijection between
set of positive roots of the Tits form corresponding to this quiver. The proof of
this theorem is given in section 2.6.
We end this chapter by studying representations of species, also a concept
introduced by P.Gabriel. The main results of this theory are stated here for
completeness without proofs.
2.1 CERTAIN IMPORTANT ALGEBRAS

Many rings and algebras which occur in the various parts of mathematics and
physics are naturally graded. The most important examples of such algebras are
tensor algebras and their quotient algebras such as the symmetric and exterior
algebras. There are many interesting applications in differential geometry and in
physics of these algebras.
Definition. Let A be a ring. An A-module M is said to be graded if it can

be represented as a direct sum of submodules
∞
M = ⊕ Mn . (2.1.1)
n=∞
53
Of course a module M can admit many different gradings and so a graded

module is really a module together with a specified decomposition (2.1.1).
In sucha graded module M any element x ∈ M can be uniquely written in the

form x = mn , where mn ∈ Mn , and only a finite number of these summands is
n
not equal to zero. An element m ∈ Mn is homogeneous of degree n, and we
write deg (m) = n. The element 0 is called homogeneous of degree n for any n. A
graded module M is called positively graded if Mn = 0 for all n < 0, and it is
called negatively graded if Mn = 0 for all n > 0.
∞
A submodule B of a graded module M is called homogeneous, if B = ⊕ Bn ,
n=∞
where Bn = B ∩ Mn for all n. So, B is a graded module itself. If M is a graded
module and B is homogeneous submodule of it, then we can consider the quotient
∞
module M̄ = M/B which is also a graded module: M̄ = ⊕ M̄n , where
n=∞
M̄n Mn /Bn .
The tensor product of two graded A-modules L and M is again a graded
A-module where the grading is given by the formula:

(L ⊗ M )n = Lp ⊗ Mq .
p+q=n
Therefore deg (l ⊗ m) = deg(l) + deg(m) for all homogeneous l ∈ L and m ∈ M .
Definition. A ring A is called graded if it can be represented as a direct sum

of Abelian additive subgroups An :
∞
A = ⊕ An , (2.1.2)
n=0
such that Ai Aj ⊆ Ai+j for all i, j ≥ 0.

∞
Let I = ⊕ An . Then I is obviously a two-sided ideal of A. Let 1 = a0 +x be a
n=1
decomposition of the identity of A, where a0 ∈ A0 and x ∈ I. Then for all b ∈ An
we have b = 1 · b = a0 b + xb. Comparing the degrees of the elements involved it
follows that b = a0 b (and xb = 0). Similarly b = ba0 , that is, a0 ∈ A0 acts like the
identity on all homogeneous elements of A. In other words, 1 = a0 ∈ A0 . Since
A0 A0 ⊆ A0 , we obtain that A0 is a subring of A with the same identity.
Examples 2.1.1.
1. The polynomial ring A = K[x] over a field K is graded with An = Kxn .
The multiplication in A is defined by xp xq = xp+q , so that indeed deg (xp xq ) =
deg (xp ) + deg (xq ).
2. Let K be a ring, and let {x1 , x2 , . . . , xn } be a set of symbols. Consider
the free left K-module Λ = K(x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ) with as basis the elements 1 and
QUIVERS AND THEIR REPRESENTATIONS 55
all the elements (words) xi , xi1 xi2 , xi1 xi2 xi3 , . . ., xi1 xi2 . . . xin , . . ., where each
ij ∈ {1, 2, . . . , n}. Set Λn = {xi1 xi2 . . . xin }, the K-vectorspace spanned by all
∞
words of length n, then Λ = ⊕ Λn is a graded K-module. In this module we
n=0
introduce a multiplication of basis elements by the rule:
(αxi1 xi2 . . . xin )(βxj1 xj2 . . . xjm ) = αβxi1 xi2 . . . xin xj1 xj2 . . . xjm .
Obviously, if x, y ∈ Λ, then deg (x · y) = deg x + deg y. As a result we ob-

tain a graded ring Λ = Kx1 , x2 , . . . , xn which is called the free associative
K-algebra over K in the indeterminates x1 , . . . , xn . Consider the ideal I of the
ring Λ which is generated by all elements of the form xi xj − xj xi . This ideal is
homogeneous and the quotient ring Λ/I is also a graded ring. This ring is denoted
by K[x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ] and it is called the polynomial ring (ring of polynomials)
in n variables over the ring K.
3. If in the previous example we consider the homogeneous ideal I which is
generated by all elements of the form xi xi and xi xj + xj xi , for all i, j, then we
obtain a quotient ring Λ/I which is denoted by E(x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ) and called the
exterior K-ring in n variables over the ring K.
Definition. An algebra (associative or non-associative) A over a field K is

called graded if it is a graded ring, that is, if it is represented in the form of a
direct sum of subspaces Ai :
∞
A = ⊕ Ai , (2.1.3)
i=0
such that Ai Aj ⊆ Ai+j , and KAi ⊆ Ai for all i, j
Such a representation of A as a sum (2.1.3) is called a graduation (grading).

The elements of subspaces Ai are called homogeneous of order i and we write
deg a = i for a ∈ Ai .
Examples 2.1.2.
Grassmann algebra. An important example of a graded associative algebra
is the Grassmann algebra. An associative algebra with 1 over a field K is called a
Grassmann algebra if it has a system of generators a1 , a2 , . . . , an satisfying the
following equalities:
a2i = 0, ai aj + aj ai = 0, i, j = 1, 2, . . . , n, (2.1.4)
and, moreover, any other identity for these elements is a corollary of the identities
(2.1.2). This algebra is denoted by Γn or Γ(a1 , a2 , . . . , an ). Note that the relations
(2.1.4) are homogeneous and thus generate a homogeneous ideal so that Γn inherits
a grading from K(x1 , . . . , xn ), see example 2.1.1(2) above. If the characteristic of
the field K is unequal to 2 the second group of the equalities (2.1.4) implies the first
froup. The equalities (2.1.4) are the anticommutators of the elements ai and aj .
From the definition of the Grassmann algebra it also follows that Γn has a basis
consisting of 1 and the following elements:
ai , i = 1, 2, . . . , n,
ai aj , i, j = 1, 2, . . . , n, i < j,
ai aj ak , i, j, k = 1, 2, . . . , n, i < j < k,
...............................
a 1 a 2 . . . an .
Thus, any element a ∈ Γn can be written in the form

a= γi1 i2 ...ik ai1 ai2 . . . aik , (2.1.5)
k≥0 i1 <i2 <...<ik
where γi1 i2 ...ik ∈ K.

An element (2.1.5) of the algebra Γn is called even (respectively odd) if for
each nonzero coefficient γi1 i2 ...ik the number k is even (resp. odd). The set of
all even (resp. odd) elements of Γn is denoted by Γ0n (resp. Γ1n ). The set Γ1n
is a vector subspace of Γn and the set Γ0n is a subalgebra in Γn . The following
properties hold:
1) if a, b ∈ Γ1n , then ab, ba and ab − ba ∈ Γ0n ;
2) if a ∈ Γ1n , b ∈ Γ0n , then ab ∈ Γ1n ;
3) Γ = Γ0n ⊕ Γ1n .
Grassmann algebras have some important applications in physics where they
are used to model various concepts related to fermions and supersymmetry.
Tensor algebra. Another important example of graded algebras are the tensor
algebras. Let V be a fixed vector space over a field k, and let T 0 V = k, T 1 V = V ,
∞
T 2 V = V ⊗ V , . . . , T m V = V ⊗ . . . ⊗ V (m copies). Define T(V ) = ⊕ T i V .
i=0
Introduce an associative product on T(V ) defined on homogeneous generators of
T(V ) by the following rule: (v1 ⊗ . . . ⊗ vn )(w1 ⊗ . . . ⊗ wm ) = v1 ⊗ . . . ⊗ vn ⊗ w1 ⊗
. . . ⊗ wm ∈ T n+m V. This makes T(V ) an associative graded algebra with 1. If V is
a finite dimensional algebra, then T(V ) is generated by 1 together with any basis
of V .
The algebra T(V ) is the universal associative algebra in the following sense.
Proposition 2.1.1 (Universal property.) For any associative k-algebra U

with 1 and for any k-linear map ϕ : V → U, there exists a unique homomorphism
of k-algebras ψ : T(V ) → U such that ψ(1) = 1 and such that the following diagram
commutes:
α
V T(V )
ψ
ϕ
where α is the (obvious) inclusion V = T 1 V ⊂ T(V ).
We shall prove this proposition in a more general situation in the next section.
This proposition gives the motivation to introduce the following formal
definition:
Definition. Let V be a vector space over a field k. A tensor algebra on V

is a pair (T, θ), where T is an associative k-algebra with 1, and α : V → T is a
monomorphism of k-vector spaces such that for any associative k-algebra U with
1 and for any k-linear map ϕ : V → U, there exists a unique homomorphism of
k-algebras ψ : T → U such that ψ(1) = 1 and the following diagram commutes:
θ
V T
ψ
ϕ
Then we obtain the following proposition.
Proposition 2.1.2. Let V be a vector space over a field k. Suppose that

(T(V ), α) is as before, then
1. (T(V ), α) is a tensor algebra.
2. If (T, θ) is any other tensor algebra on V , then there is a unique k-algebra
isomorphism σ : T(V ) → T such that σα = θ, i.e., the diagram
α
V T(V )
θ σ
is commutative.
Proof.
1. This follows immediately from proposition 2.1.1.
2. This uniqueness property of a tensor algebra is of the same type as proved
in proposition 4.5.2, vol.I, for the uniqueness of tensor products and therefore its
proof is left to the reader as a simple exercise.
Remark 2.1.1. Note that a tensor algebra over V is the same as a free
algebra on V , i.e., T(V ) kV . If V is a finite dimensional vector space with
basis (x1 , . . . , xn ), then T(V ) kx1 , . . . , xn .
Symmetric algebra. Many quotient algebras of the tensor algebra T(V ) are
of interest. First, there is the symmetric algebra on a given vector space V . Let I
be the two-sided ideal in T(V ) generated by all x ⊗ y − y ⊗ x , where x, y ∈ V . The
quotient algebra S(V ) = T(V )/I is called the symmetric algebra on V . We
write σ : T(V ) → S(V ) for the corresponding canonical map of k-algebras. Since
the generators of I lie in T 2 V , it obvious that I = (I ∩ T 2 V ) ⊕ (I ∩ T 3 V ) ⊕ . . ..
Therefore σ is injective on T 0 V = k and T 1 V = V . Moreover, S(V ) inherits a
∞
grading from T(V ): S(V ) = ⊕ S i V . The effect of factoring out I is universal (in
i=0
the sense of proposition 2.1.1) for linear maps from V into commutative associative
k-algebras with 1. Moreover, if dimk V = n and (x1 , . . . , xn ) is any fixed basis of
V , then S(V ) is canonically isomorphic to the polynomial algebra k[x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ]
over the field k in n variables.
Exterior algebra. Second, we have the exterior algebra of a given vector

space V . Let I be the two-sided ideal in T(V ) generated by all elements of the
form x ⊗ x , where x ∈ V . The quotient algebra Λ(V ) = T(V )/I is called the
exterior algebra on V . We denote by σ : T(V ) → Λ(V ) the corresponding
canonical map of k-algebras. Since the generators of I lie in T 2 V , it obvious that
I = (I ∩T 2 V )⊕(I ∩T 3 V )⊕. . .. Therefore σ is injective on T 0 V = k and T 1 V = V .
∞
Moreover, Λ(V ) inherits a grading from T(V ): Λ(V ) = ⊕ Λi V . We use ∧ as the
i=0
symbol for multiplication in this algebra. The product in Λ(V ) is often called the
exterior product (also known as the Grassmann product, or the wedge product).
It is a generalization of the cross product in the three-dimensional vector algebra.
The exterior product is associative and bilinear. Since σ(T 0 V ) Λ0 V k,
and σ(T 1 V ) Λ1 V V , we can identify Λ0 V with k and Λ1 V with V . Then
elements of the exterior algebra Λ(V ) have the following essential property which
is alternating on V :
v∧v =0
for all vectors v ∈ V which entails
u ∧ v = −v ∧ u
for all u, v ∈ V and
v1 ∧ v2 ∧ · · · ∧ vp = 0
whenever v1 , v2 , . . . , vp ∈ V are linearly dependent.
The exterior algebra is in fact the “most general” algebra with these properties.
This means that all equations that hold in the exterior algebra follow from the
above properties alone. This generality of Λ(V ) is formally expressed by a certain
universal property given below.
Proposition 2.1.3 (Universal property). For any associative k-algebra A

with 1 and any k-linear map ϕ : V → A such that ϕ(v)ϕ(v) = 0 for all v ∈ V , there
exists a unique k-algebra homomorphism f : Λ(V ) → A such that f (v) = ϕ(v) for
all v ∈ V .
Elements of the form v1 ∧ v2 ∧ · · · ∧ vp with v1 , v2 , . . . , vp ∈ V are called

p-vectors. The subspace Λp (V ) is generated by all p-vectors, and sometimes
Λp (V ) is called the p-th exterior power of V .
The exterior product has the important property that the product of a p-vector
and a q-vector is a p + q-vector. Thus the exterior algebra forms a graded algebra
where the grading is given by Λ(V ) = ⊕Λp (V ). These p-vectors have geometric
interpretations: the 2-vector u ∧ v represents the oriented parallelogram with sides
u and v, while the 3-vector u ∧ v ∧ w represents the oriented parallelepiped with
edges u, v, and w.
Let V be an n-dimensional vector space over k with a basis {e1 , e2 , . . . , en }.

Then the set
{ei1 ∧ ei2 ∧ . . . ∧ eip : 1 ≤ i1 < i2 < . ¸. . < ip ≤ n}
is a basis for the p-th exterior power Λp (V ). The reason is the following: given
any wedge product of the form v1 ∧ v2 ∧ . . . ∧ vp , every vector vj can be writ-
ten as a linear combination of the basis vectors ej ; using the bilinearity of the
wedge product, this can be expanded to a linear combination of wedge prod-
ucts of those basis vectors. Any wedge product of elements from {e1 , . . . , en } in
which the same basis vector appears more than once is zero; any wedge product
in which the basis vectors don’t appear in the proper order can be reordered,
changing the sign whenever two basis vectors change places. The resulting co-
efficients of the basis k-vectors in a wedge product of v1 , . . . , vm can be com-
puted as the minors of the matrix that describes the vectors vj in terms of the
basis ej .
Counting the basis elements, we see that the dimension of Λp (V ) is equal to
n!
. In particular, Λp (V ) = {0} for p > n.
p!(n − p)!
So in this case the exterior algebra can be written in the following form:
Λ(V ) = Λ0 (V ) ⊕ Λ1 (V ) ⊕ Λ2 (V ) ⊕ · · · ⊕ Λn (V ),
where Λ0 (V ) = k and Λ1 (V ) = V . Thus in this case Λ(V ) is a finite dimensional

algebra with dimk Λ(V ) = 2n .
It is easy to see that Λ(V ) is isomorphic to the Grassmann algebra Γn (k).
Denote J = Λ1 (V ) ⊕ . . . ⊕ Λn (V ). Since J n+1 = 0, J ⊆ radA. From

Λ(V )/J k it follows that J = radA. Therefore Λ(V ) is a noncommutative
local ring.
Example 2.1.3.
Let V be a vector space with basis {e1 , e2 , e3 , e4 }. Then
Λ0 (V ) = {1}
Λ1 (V ) = {e1 , e2 , e3 , e4 }
Λ2 (V ) = {e1 ∧ e2 , e1 ∧ e3 , e1 ∧ e4 , e2 ∧ e3 , e2 ∧ e4 , e3 ∧ e4 }
Λ3 (V ) = {e1 ∧ e2 ∧ e3 , e1 ∧ e2 ∧ e4 , e1 ∧ e3 ∧ e4 , e2 ∧ e3 ∧ e4 }
Λ4 (V ) = {e1 ∧ e2 ∧ e3 ∧ e4 }
and Λk (V ) = {0}, where k > dimV .
2.2 TENSOR ALGEBRA OF A BIMODULE

In this section we consider a generalization of the construction of a tensor algebra
on a vector space, the tensor algebras of bimodules.
Definition. Let B be a ring, and let V be a bimodule over B. The tensor

∞
algebra of the B-bimodule V is the graded ring T(V ) = TB (V ) = ⊕ V ⊗k , where
k=0
V ⊗0 = B, and V ⊗k = V ⊗B V ⊗(k−1) for k > 0.
The multiplication in T(V ) is induced by the natural isomorphisms V ⊗k ⊗B

⊗m
V V ⊗(k+m) . So that we shall identify V ⊗k ⊗B V ⊗m with V ⊗(k+m) . In future
we shall also identify B with V ⊗0 and V with V ⊗1 .
By construction, T(V ) contains the subring B = V ⊗0 and the B-bimodule
V = V ⊗1 . Moreover, as the following theorem shows, T(V ) is the universal ring
with this property.
Theorem 2.2.1. Let ϕ : B → A be a ring homomorphism, and let f : V → A

be a homomorphism of B-bimodules, where A is considered as a B-bimodule by
means of the homomorphism ϕ. Then there exists a unique ring homomorphism
F : T(V ) → A such that the restrictions of F to B and V coincide with ϕ and f ,
respectively.
Proof. The homomorphism f induces B-bimodule homomorphisms
f ⊗n : V ⊗n → A⊗n .
Moreover, the multiplication in the ring A induces a bimodule homomorphism

A⊗n → A such that the image of a1 ⊗B a2 ⊗B . . . ⊗B an is a1 a2 . . . an . Thus, we
obtain a family of homomorphisms fn : V ⊗n → A such that
f (v1 ⊗B v2 ⊗B . . . ⊗B vn ) = f (v1 )f (v2 ) . . . f (vn ).

It is obvious, that in this way we obtain a ring homomorphism F : T(V ) → A

(where f0 = ϕ and f1 = f ). Moreover, F is unique. This follows from the fact
that T(V ) is generated by the elements of B and V .
∞
Definition. The graded ideal J = J (V ) = ⊕ V ⊗n is called the fundamen-
n=1
tal ideal of T(V ). An ideal I ⊂ T(V ) (not necessarily graded) is called essential
if J 2 ⊃ I ⊃ J m for some m > 2.
Definition. A right Artinian ring A is called a Wedderburn ring if it has

a subring B ⊂ A such that A = B ⊕ R (a direct sum of additive groups), and
R = V ⊕ R2 (a direct sum of bimodules), where R = radA. In this case B A/R
is a semisimple ring and V R/R2 is a finitely generated right B-bimodule.
Theorem 2.2.2. Any Wedderburn ring A with radical R is isomorphic to a

quotient ring of the form TB (V )/I, where B = A/R, V = R/R2 , and I is an
essential ideal in TB (V ).
Conversely, if B is a semisimple Artinian ring, V is a finitely generated right
B-module, then any quotient ring A = TB (V )/I, where I is an essential ideal in
TB (V ), is Wedderburn, moreover, B A/R and V R/R2 , where R = J /I =
radA.
Proof. If A is a Wedderburn ring, then A = B ⊕ R, so A has a subring A1 B.

Hence, it is possible to define a ring monomorphism ϕ : B → A and to consider A
as a B-bimodule. Since we have a direct sum of B-bimodules R = V ⊕ R2 , we have
a B-bimodule monomorphism f : V → A. Therefore, by proposition 2.2.1, there
is a unique homomorphism F : TB (V ) → A which is the identity on B and V .
Let I = Ker(F ). Since F induces an isomorphism T(V )/J 2 A/R2 , we obtain
that I ⊂ J 2 . On the other hand, F (J ) ⊂ R, so F (J n ) ⊂ Rn for any n > 1.
Since A is a right Artinian ring, R is nilpotent. Therefore F (J m ) = 0 for some
m, and so J m ⊂ I. Thus I is an essential ideal in T (V ). Since F (B) = ϕ(B)
and F (V ) = f (V ), any element r ∈ R has the form F (x) + r , where x ∈ J ,
r ∈ R2 . Then any element r ∈ Rm is also of the form: F (x) + r , with x ∈ J m
and r ∈ Rm+1 . Since R is nilpotent, it follows immediately that F (J ) = R, i.e.,
F is an epimorphism, and so A T(V )/I.
The second part of the theorem is obvious.
The next part of this section is devoted to studying the global dimension of
a tensor algebra TB (V ) of a B-bimodule V when V is a projective right (or left)
B-module.
We shall need some additional statements concerning projectivity and injec-
tivity of modules.
Proposition 2.2.3. Let A and B be rings. Assume that M is a right

A-module, N is a right B-module and a left A-module. If M is A-projective and
N is B-projective, then M ⊗A N is B-projective.
Proof. Let X be a right B-module. Since M and N are projective, the functor
HomB (N, X) is exact on X and HomA (M, HomB (N, X)) is exact on X, by propo-
sition 5.1.1, vol.I. Then, by the adjoint isomorphism (proposition 4.6.3, vol.I), the
functor HomB (M ⊗A N, X) is also exact. So, again by proposition 5.1.1, vol.I,
M ⊗A N is B-projective.
Proposition 2.2.4. Let A and B be rings. Assume that M is a right A-module

and a left B-module, and that N is a left B-module. If M is A-projective and N
is B-injective, then HomB (M, N ) is A-injective.
Proof. Let X be a right B-module. Since M is A-projective, M ⊗A X is exact

in X, by proposition 6.3.5, vol.I. Since N is B-injective, HomB (M ⊗A X, N ) is also
exact in X, by proposition 5.2.1, vol.I. Therefore, by the adjoint isomorphism, the
functor HomA (X, HomB (M, N )) is exact on X. So again, by proposition 5.2.1,
vol.I, HomB (M, N ) is A-injective.
Corollary 2.2.5. If S = TB (V ) is the tensor algebra of a bimodule V over

a ring B and V is a projective right B-module, then S is also a projective right
B-module.
Proof. Applying proposition 2.2.3 repeatedly we obtain that V ⊗m is projective

∞
for any m ≥ 1. Therefore S = TB (V ) = ⊕ V ⊗k is also projective, by proposition
k=0
5.1.4, vol.I.
Corollary 2.2.6. Let S = TB (V ) be the tensor algebra of a bimodule V over a

ring B and let V be a projective right B-module. If Q is an injective left S-module,
then Q is also an injective left B-module.
Proof. This follows from proposition 2.2.4 and corollary 2.2.5 taking into ac-
count that B Q HomS (S SB , S Q).
Corollary 2.2.7. Let S = TB (V ) be the tensor algebra of a bimodule V over

a ring B and let V be a projective right B-module. If P is a right projective
S-module, then P is also a projective right B-module.
Proof. This follows from proposition 2.2.3 and corollary 2.2.5 taking into ac-
count that PB P ⊗S SB .
Corollary 2.2.8. Let S = TB (V ) be the tensor algebra of a bimodule V over

a ring B and let V be a projective right B-module. Then
(1) proj. dimS (S ⊗B M ) ≤ proj. dimB M ≤ l.gl. dim B for any left
B-module M ;
(2) inj. dimS HomB (S, M ) ≤ inj. dimB M ≤ r.gl. dim B for any right
B-module M .
Proof.
(1) Let M be a left B-module. Applying the functor S ⊗B ∗ to a projective
resolution of M and taking into account proposition 2.2.3, we obtain a projective
resolution of the S-module S ⊗B M .
(2) Let M be a right B-module. Applying the functor HomB (S, ∗) to an
injective resolution of M and taking into account proposition 2.2.4, we obtain an
injective resolution of the S-module HomB (S, M ).
Taking into account corollaries 2.2.5, 2.2.6, in an analogously way we obtain

the following corollary:
Corollary 2.2.9. For any left S-module N and for any right S-module M we
have:
(1) inj. dimB N ≤ inj. dimS N ;
(2) proj. dimB M ≤ proj. dimS M .
Lemma 2.2.10. If S = TB (V ) and V is a projective right B-module then

there is a canonical exact sequence
f g
0 → S ⊗B V ⊗B S −→ S ⊗B S −→ S → 0 (2.2.1)
where f (s ⊗ b ⊗ s1 ) = sb ⊗ s1 − s ⊗ bs1 and g(s ⊗ s1 ) = ss1 .

n
n
Proof. Suppose g xi ⊗ yi = 0, where xi , yi ∈ S. Then xi yi = 0, and
i=1 i=1
therefore

n
n
n
n
xi ⊗ yi = xi ⊗ yi − xi yi ⊗ 1 = (xi ⊗ 1)(1 ⊗ yi − yi ⊗ 1).
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1
So the set of elements of the form 1 ⊗ x − x ⊗ 1, where x ∈ S generate Kerg.

Since the map d : S → S ⊗B S given by the formula d(x) = 1 ⊗ x − x ⊗ 1 is a
differentiation, Imd is generated by d(x). So Kerg = Imf .

m
m
If u = xi ⊗ vi ⊗ yi ∈ Kerf , where xi , yi ∈ S; vi ∈ V , then xi vi ⊗ yi =
i=1 i=1

m
xi ⊗ vi yi . We shall show that the last equality holds only in the case that
i=1
m
xi ⊗ vi ⊗ yi = 0.
i=1
Indeed, let max {deg(xi )} = p and max {deg(yi )} = q which are the de-
i=1,...,n i=1,...,n
grees of the homogeneous elements x and y, i.e., x ∈ V p and y ∈ V q . Then

m
the homogeneous component of xi vi ⊗ yi of maximal degree has the form
i=1

m
m
xvi ⊗y ∈ V p+1 ⊗V q and the homogeneous component of xi ⊗vi yi of maximal
i=1 i=1

m
degree has the form x ⊗ vi y ∈ V p ⊗ V q+1 . Since (V p+1 ⊗ V q )∩(V p ⊗ V q+1 ) = 0,
i=1

m
m
m
m
we have xi vi ⊗ y i = 0 = xi ⊗ vi y i , i.e., xi vi ⊗ yi = 0 = xi ⊗ vi yi . But
i=1 i=1 i=1 i=1

m
the last equality is equivalent to the equality 0 = xi ⊗ vi ⊗ yi ∈ S ⊗B V ⊗B S.
i=1
Therefore Kerf = 0 and the lemma is proved.
Theorem 2.2.11. Let S = TB (V ) be the tensor algebra of a bimodule V over

a ring B. If V is a projective right (or left) B-module, then:
l.gl. dim B ≤ l.gl. dim S ≤ l.gl. dim B + 1 (2.2.2)

r.gl. dim B ≤ r.gl. dim S ≤ r.gl. dim B + 1 (2.2.3)
Proof. Let M be a left S-module. Applying the functor ∗ ⊗S M to the exact

sequence (2.2.1) and taking into account that TorS1 (S, M ) = 0, we obtain the exact
sequence:
0 → S ⊗B V ⊗B M −→ S ⊗B M −→ M → 0 (2.2.4)
Corollary 2.2.9 implies the following inequalities:
proj. dimS (S ⊗B (V ⊗B M )) ≤ l.gl. dim B (2.2.5)
proj. dimS (S ⊗B M ) ≤ l.gl. dim B (2.2.6)

Applying the functor Ext to the exact sequence (2.2.4) and taking into account
the inequalities (2.2.5)-(2.2.6), we obtain the inequality proj. dim S M ≤ l.gl. dim
B + 1, so that,
l.gl. dim S ≤ l.gl. dim B + 1
Let N be a right S-module. Applying the functor HomS (∗, N ) to the exact
sequence (2.2.1) and taking into account that ExtS1 (S, M ) = 0, we obtain the exact
sequence:
0 → HomS (S, N ) → HomS (S ⊗B S, N ) → HomS (S ⊗B V ⊗B S, N ) → 0 (2.2.7)
Taking into account that

HomS (S, N ) N
HomS (S ⊗B S, N ) HomB (S, HomS (S, N )) HomB (S, N )
HomS (S ⊗B V ⊗B S, N ) HomB (S ⊗B V, HomS (S, N ))
HomB (S ⊗B V, N ) HomB (S, HomB (V, N ))
the sequence (2.2.7) has the form:
0 → N −→ HomB (S, N ) −→ HomB (S, HomB (V, N )) → 0 (2.2.8)
Corollary 2.2.9 implies the following inequalities:
inj. dimS HomB (S, HomB (V, N )) ≤ l.gl. dim B (2.2.9)
inj. dimS HomB (S, N ) ≤ l.gl. dim B (2.2.10)

Applying the functor Ext to the exact sequence (2.2.8) and taking into account
the inequalities (2.2.9)-(2.2.10), we obtain the inequality inj. dimS N ≤ r.gl. dim
B + 1, i.e.,
r.gl. dim S ≤ r.gl. dim B + 1
We shall now prove the right sides of the inequalities (2.2.2)-(2.2.3). To this
end consider the exact split sequence of B-bimodules:
0→J →S→B→0 (2.2.11)
Applying to this sequence the functors ∗ ⊗B M and N ⊗B ∗ we obtain the exact

split sequences of B-modules:
0 → S ⊗B V ⊗B M −→ S ⊗B M −→ M → 0 (2.2.12)
0 → N ⊗B V ⊗B S −→ N ⊗B S −→ N → 0 (2.2.13)
Applying to the sequence (2.2.12) the functor Ext1B (X, ∗)and to the sequence
(2.2.13) the functor Ext1B (∗, X) and taking into account corollaries 2.2.8 and 2.2.9
we obtain that
inj. dimB M ≤ inj. dimB S ⊗B M ≤ l.gl. dim S
proj. dimB N ≤ proj. dimB N ⊗B S ≤ r.gl. dim S

These inequalities mean that
l.gl. dim B ≤ l.gl. dim S
r.gl. dim B ≤ r.gl. dim S

The theorem is proved.
Remark 2.2.1. If B is a semisimple ring and V is a B-bimodule, then in this

case the tensor algebra TB (V ) is a maximal ring in the sense of G.Hochschild
(see [Hochschild, 1947], [Hochschild, 1950]). Since in this case any B-module is
projective, from theorem 2.2.11 we obtain immediately the following statement:
Corollary 2.2.12. A maximal ring is hereditary.

2.2.2. Let I be a finite set and let Ki for i ∈ I be a set of skew fields.
Remark
Let B = Ki and and let V be a B-bimodule. In this case TB (V ) is called a
i∈I
special tensor algebra.
Example 2.2.1.

m
Let k be a field and B = k. For each n ≥ 1 let
i=1
⎛ ⎞
B 0 0 ... 0 0
⎜ . .. ... .. ⎟
⎜ V B .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ . . . . .⎟
Tn = ⎜ . ⎟
⎜ . . . .. ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. . 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝V ⊗n−2 V ⊗n−3 . . . B 0⎠
V ⊗n−1 V ⊗n−2 . . . . . . V B
be the ring with addition and multiplication given by the matrix operations. Then
Tn is a special tensor algebra.
special tensor algebra TB (V ) of a bimodule V over a ring B we

Since for a
have that B = Ki is always a semisimple ring and V is a projective B-module,
i∈I
from theorem 2.2.11 immediately follows:
Corollary 2.2.13. A special tensor algebra is hereditary.
Remark 2.2.3. If the special tensor algebra TB (V ) is finite dimensional over

a field k, then J.P.Jans and T.Nakayama have shown that TB (V ) is a hereditary
Artinian k-algebra [Jans, Nakayama, 1957].
Example 2.2.2.
The special tensor algebra Tn from example 2.2.1 is a finite dimensional hered-
itary Artinian k-algebra.
Remark 2.2.4. If B is a finite dimensional algebra over an algebraically closed

field k, then
B = B1 × B2 × . . . × Bs ,
where Bi Mni (k) and there is a unique simple (Bi , Bj )-bimodule Uij ; moreover,
t
V = ⊕Uijij . Therefore the tensor algebra TB (V ) is uniquely defined by the quiver
Q(B) and the ranks ni . In the important particular case, when all ni = 1, i.e., the
algebra B is basic, TB (V ) coincides with the path algebra kQ of the quiver Q(B).
(See also section 2.3 below.)
Examples 2.2.3.
1. Let k be a field. The algebras
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
k k k k 0 k
A = ⎝0 k k ⎠ and B = ⎝0 k k⎠
0 0 k 0 0 k
are finite dimensional special tensor algebras which correspond to the quivers
• •
• • • and respectively.
•
2. The algebra A = k[[α]], the ring of formal power series in one variable α
over a field k, is an infinite dimensional special tensor algebra which corresponds
to the quiver

α
t
Remark 2.2.5. Using the tensor algebra of a bimodule we can also define
the exterior algebra of a bimodule. Let B be a commutative ring with 1 and
let V be a B-bimodule. Then we can consider the two-sided ideal I which is
spanned by all elements of the form x1 ⊗ x2 ⊗ . . . ⊗ xr , where xi ∈ V and xi = xj
for some i = j. Then Λ(V ) = T(V )/I is called the exterior algebra of the
bimodule V .
2.3 QUIVERS AND PATH ALGEBRAS

The notion of a quiver of a finite dimensional algebra over an algebraically closed
field was introduced by P.Gabriel in 1972 in connection with problems of the
representation theory of finite dimensional algebras.
In this section we shall consider quivers in sense of P.Gabriel. And we shall

assume that k is an algebraically closed field.
Definition. A quiver Q = (V Q, AQ, s, e) is a finite directed graph which

consists of finite sets V Q, AQ and two mappings s, e : AQ → V Q. The elements of
V Q are called vertices (or points), and those of AQ are called arrows. Usually,
the set of vertices V Q will be a set {1, 2, ..., n}. We say that each arrow σ ∈ AQ
starts at the vertex s(σ) and ends at the vertex e(σ). The vertex s(σ) is called
the start (or initial, or source) vertex and the vertex e(σ) is called the end (or
target) vertex of σ. Some examples of quivers are:
• • •

α

t
1 2
• •
A quiver can be given by its adjacency (or incidence) matrix

⎛ ⎞
t11 t12 . . . t1n
⎜ t21 t22 . . . t2n ⎟
⎜ ⎟
[Q] = ⎜ . .. .. .. ⎟ ,
⎝ .. . . . ⎠
tn1 tn2 . . . tnn
where tij is the number of arrows from the vertex i to the vertex j.
Two quivers Q1 and Q2 are called isomorphic if there is a bijective correspon-
dence between their vertices and arrows such that starts and ends of corresponding
arrows map into one other. It is not difficult to see that Q1 Q2 if and only if
the adjacency matrix [Q1 ] can be transformed into the adjacency matrix [Q2 ] by
a simultaneous permutation of rows and columns.
Examples 2.3.1.
1. For the quiver
1 2 3
• α
• •
β
we have V Q = {1, 2, 3} and AQ = {α, β}. We also have s(α) = 1, s(β) = 2,

e(α) = 2 and e(β) = 3.
2. A quiver may have several arrows in the same or in opposite direction. For
example:
1 2
• •
•
3
and
1 2 3
• • •
3. A quiver may also have loops. For example:

t - t
For a quiver Q = (V Q, AQ, s, e) and a field k one defines the path algebra
kQ of Q over k. Recall that a path p of the quiver Q from the vertex i to the
vertex j is a sequence of r arrows σ1 σ2 ...σr such that the start vertex of each arrow
σm coincides with the end vertex of the previous one σm−1 for 1 < m ≤ r, and
moreover, the vertex i is the start vertex of σ1 , while the vertex j is the end vertex
of σr . The number r of arrows is called the length of the path p. For such a
path p we define s(p) = s(σ1 ) = i and e(p) = e(σk ) = j. By convention we also
include into the set of all paths the trivial path εi of length zero which connects
the vertex i with itself without any arrow and we set s(εi ) = e(εi ) = i for each
i ∈ V Q, and, also, for any arrow σ ∈ AQ with start at i and end at j we set
εi σ = σεj = σ. A path, connecting a vertex of a quiver with itself and of length
not equal to zero, is called an oriented cycle.
Definition. The path algebra kQ of a quiver Q over a field k is the (free)

vector space with a k-basis consisting of all paths of Q. Multiplication in kQ is
defined in the obvious way: the product of two paths is given by composition when
possible, and is defined to be 0 otherwise.
Therefore if the path σ1 . . . σm connects i and j and the path σm+1 . . . σn

connects j and k, then the product σ1 . . . σm σm+1 . . . σn connects i with k.
Otherwise, the product of these paths equals 0. Extending the multiplication by
distributivity, we obtain a k-algebra kQ (not necessarily finite dimensional), which
is obviously associative.
Remark 2.3.1. Note that if a quiver Q has an infinitely many vertices, then
kQ has no an identity element. If Q has infinitely many arrows, then kQ is not
finitely generated, and so it is not finite dimensional over k. In future we shall
always assume that V Q is finite and V Q = {1, 2, . . . , n}.
In the algebra kQ the set of trivial paths forms a set of pairwise orthogonal
idempotents, i.e.,
ε2i = εi for all i ∈ V Q
εi εj = 0 for all i, j ∈ V Q such that i = j.
If V Q = {1, 2, . . . , n}, the identity of kQ is the element which is equal to the sum
of all the trivial paths εi of length zero, that is, 1 = ε1 +ε2 +. . .+εn . The elements
ε1 , ε2 , . . ., εn together with the paths of length one generate Q as an algebra. So

kQ is a finitely generated algebra.
The subspace εi A has as basis all paths starting at i, and the subspace Aεj has
as basis all paths ending at j. The subspace εi Aεj has as basis all paths starting
at i and ending at j.
Since {ε1 , ε2 , . . . , εn } is a set of pairwise orthogonal idempotents for A = kQ
with sum equal to 1, we have the following decomposition of A into a direct sum:
A = ε1 A ⊕ ε2 A ⊕ . . . ⊕ εn A.
So each εi A is a projective right A-module. Analogously, each Aεi is a projective

left A-module.
Lemma 2.3.1. Each εi , for i ∈ V Q, is a primitive idempotent, and εi A is an

indecomposable projective right A-module.
Proof. Note that εi Aεi is spanned by all paths that start and end at vertex i.
In fact they form a basis. Also observe that if p is such a path of length r > 0 and
r1 + r2 = r, ri ∈ N ∪ {0} then there are unique paths x, y of lengths r1 and r2 such
that p = xy. They are of course not necessarily in εi Aεi . Let f be a nontrivial
idempotent of εi Aεi and g = e − f where e is the identity of EndA (εi A) = εi Aεi
and suppose f g = gf = 0. Take paths of maximal length x, y occurring with
nonzero coefficient in respectively f and g. Let at least one of them have length
> 0. Then we would have xy = 0 (because x ends at i and y starts at i) and
xy = x y for any other pair (x , y ) of such paths. This contradicts f g = 0 by the
uniqueness of factorization remark above. Hence f or g is a multiple of εi and the
result follows.
Lemma 2.3.2. εi A εj A, for i, j ∈ V Q and i = j.
Proof. By theorem 2.1.2, vol.I, HomA (εi A, εj A) εj Aεi and

HomA (εj A, εi A) εi Aεj . Suppose εi A εj A. Then the inverse isomor-
phisms give elements f ∈ εj Aεi and g ∈ εi Aεj with f g = εj and gf = εi . So
εi ∈ εi Aεj Aεi . Since the subspace εi Aεj Aεi has as basis all the paths passing
through the vertex j and starting and ending at i, and εi is the trivial path for
the vertex i, we have a contradiction.
Examples 2.3.2.
1. Let Q be the quiver
1 2 3
• σ1
• σ2
•,
i.e., V Q = {1, 2, 3}, AQ = {σ1 , σ2 }.

⎛ ⎞
k k k
Then kQ has a basis {ε1 , ε2 , ε3 , σ1 , σ2 , σ1 σ2 } and kQ T3 (k) = ⎝0 k k⎠ ⊂
0 0 k
M3 (k). So the algebra kQ is finite dimensional over k.
2. Let Q be the quiver with one vertex and one loop:

α
t
Then kQ has a basis {ε, α, α2 , . . . , αn , . . .}. Therefore kQ k[x], the polyno-

mial algebra in one variable x. Obviously, this algebra is finitely generated but it
is not finite dimensional.
3. Let Q be the quiver with one vertex and two loops:
α • β
Then kQ has two generators α, β, and a path in kQ is any word in α, β.

Therefore kQ kα, β, the free associative algebra generated by α, β, which is
non-commutative and infinite dimensional over k.
If Q is a quiver with one vertex and n ≥ 2 loops α1 , α2 , . . . , αn , then kQ
kα1 , α2 , . . . , αn , the free associative algebra generated by α1 , α2 , . . . , αn , which
is also non-commutative and infinite dimensional over k.
4. Let Q be the quiver with two vertices and two arrows:
1 α 2
• •
β
i.e., V Q = {1, 2} and AQ = {α, β}. The algebra kQ hasa basis {ε
1 , ε2 , α, β}.
k k ⊕ k
This algebra is isomorphic to the Kronecker algebra1 A = , which is
0 k
four-dimensional over k.
Proposition 2.3.3. The path algebra kQ is finite dimensional over k if and

only if V Q is finite and Q has no oriented cycles.
Proof. If Q contains oriented cycles, then we can construct infinite number of

different paths by walking around that cycle n times, for any n. So in this case
kQ is not finite dimensional (see, examples 2.3.2(2) and 2.3.2(3)). If Q does not
1 See example 2.4.4 below for the reason why this is called the Kronecker algebra
contain oriented cycles, then we have only a finite number2 of paths in Q which
form a basis of kQ over k, so it is finite dimensional.
Remark 2.3.2. A path algebra kQis a special tensor algebra, with B the
commutative semisimple algebra B = k and V = ⊕ k, considered as a
i∈V Q σ∈AQ
k-bimodule via aσa = (ai σaj ), where σ is a path stating at i and ending at j,
that is, s(σ) = i and e(σ) = j and a, a ∈ B with components ai , aj . Therefore
corollary 2.2.13 gives the same statement for any path algebra:
Theorem 2.3.4. The path algebra kQ of a quiver Q over a field k is hereditary.

If A = kQ = TB (V ), where B = k and V = ⊕ k, then, by lemma
i∈V Q σ∈AQ
2.2.10, there is a canonical exact sequence
f g
0 → A ⊗B V ⊗B A −→ A ⊗B A −→ A → 0
where f (a ⊗ v ⊗ a1 ) = av ⊗ a1 − a ⊗ va1 and g(a ⊗ a1 ) = aa1 for any a, a1 ∈ A

and v ∈ V . If X is an A-module, we can apply the functor ∗ ⊗ X to this exact
sequence. As a result we obtain a new exact sequence which we shall also need in
further applications.
Proposition 2.3.5. Let A = kQ. Then for any A-module X there is an exact
sequence:
f g
0→ ⊕ Xs(σ) ⊗ εe(σ) A −→ ⊕ Xi ⊗ εi A −→ X → 0 (2.3.1)
σ∈AQ i∈V Q
where g(x ⊗ a) = xa for a ∈ εi A, x ∈ Xi = Xεi and f (x ⊗ a) = x ⊗ σa − xσ ⊗ a

for a ∈ εe(σ) A and x ∈ Xs(σ) .
Proof. Let A = kQ and let X be a right A-module.

Clearly, gf = 0 and g is surjective. So we need to show only that Kerf = 0
and Kerg ⊆ Imf .
1. We shall show that Kerf = 0. Let u ∈ Kerf . We can write it in the form:

u= xσ,a ⊗ a
σ∈AQ a
where the second sum is over all paths a with s(a) = e(σ) and the elements
xσ,a ∈ Xεs(σ) are almost all equal to 0. Then,

f (u) = (xσ,a ⊗ σa − xσ,a σ ⊗ a).
σ a
2 Because if there are no oriented cycles all vertices in a nontrivial path vi1 . . . vir must be
different.
Let a be a longest path in u with xσ,a = 0 for some σ. Then f (u) involves xσ,a ⊗σa
and nothing can cancel this, so f (u) = 0. A contradiction (as in the proof of lemma
2.3.1).
2. We shall show that Kerg ⊆ Imf . Let u ∈ ⊕ Xi ⊗ εi A. Then one can
i∈V Q
represent it in the form

n
u= xa ⊗ a,
i=1 a
where the second sum is over all paths a starting at i and almost all the xa ∈ Xs(a)
are zero. Define deg(u) to be the length of the longest path a with xa = 0.
Now if a is a nontrivial path with s(a) = i, we can write it as a product a = σa ,
where σ is an arrow starting at i and a is some other path. Then
f (xa ⊗ a ) = xa ⊗ a − xa σ ⊗ a ,
viewing xa ⊗ a as an element of the σ-th component.
We now claim that u + Imf always contains an element of degree 0. Let
deg(u) = d > 0. Consider the element
n
ξ = u − f( xa ⊗ a ),
i=1 a
where the second sum is over all paths a staring at i, and having length equal to
d. Then deg(ξ) < d. Now the claim follows by induction.
We are now ready to prove that Kerg ⊆ Imf . Let u ∈ Kerg, and let u =
u + Imf with deg(u ) = 0. Then
n
n
0 = g(u) = g(u ) = g( xεi ⊗ εi ) = xεi ,
i=1 i=1
n
which belongs to ⊕ Xi . So each term in the final sum must be zero. Thus u = 0.
i=1
Hence u ∈ Imf .
Corollary 2.3.6. If X is an arbitrary kQ-module, then Exti (X, Y ) = 0 for

all Y and i ≥ 2.
Proof. Consider the sequence (2.3.1) constructed in the previous proposition.

The maps f and g are A-modules homomorphisms. By lemma 2.3.1, εi A is a
projective right A-module. Since V ⊗ εi A is isomorphic to the direct sum of dim V
copies of εi A, it is also a projective right A-module, by proposition 5.1.4, vol.I.
Therefore the exact sequence (2.3.1) is a projective resolution of the kQ-module
X.
Remark 2.3.3. The projective resolution (2.3.1) is often called the Ringel
resolution (see [Ringel, 1976]).
Let Q be a quiver and k be a field. An admissible relation is an element of

kQ of the form
m
ci p i ,
i=1
where ci ∈ k for all i and p1 , p2 . . . pm are paths in Q with a common start vertex
and a common end vertex. If m = 1 and c1 = 1 then p is called a zero-relation.
A relation p with m = 2, c1 = 1, c2 = −1 is called a commutative relation.
An admissible ideal is a two-sided ideal in kQ generated by non-zero admissible
relations. If I is an admissible ideal then kQ/I is called an algebra of a quiver
with relations (or bound quiver algebra).
Examples 2.3.3.
1. Let G be the finite group consisting of two elements, and let k be a field.
Then we have kG kQ/(α2 ), where Q is the quiver:

α
t
and I = (α2 ) is an admissible ideal in kQ.

2. Let G = {x, y : x2 = y 2 = 1, xy = yx}. Then kG kQ/(α2 , β 2 , βα − αβ),
where Q is the quiver:
α • β
and I = (α , β , αβ − βα) is an admissible ideal3 .

2 2
⎛ ⎞
k k k
3. Let A = T3 (k) = ⎝0 k k ⎠ ⊂ M3 (k). Then A kQ, where Q is the
0 0 k
quiver:
1 2 3
• • •
2.4 REPRESENTATIONS OF QUIVERS

Definition. Let Q = (V Q, AQ, s, e) be a quiver and let k be a field. A represen-
tation V = (Vx , Vσ ) of Q over k is a family of vector spaces Vx (x ∈ V Q) together
with a family of linear mappings Vσ : Vs(σ) → Ve(σ) (σ ∈ AQ).
We assume that Q is a finite quiver and V Q = {1, 2, . . . , n}. We shall always

consider finite dimensional representations of Q, that is, for every such represen-
tation V we assume that Vi is a finite dimensional vector space over a field k for
all i.
3G is of course the Klein four group (see page 4)
Example 2.4.1.
Consider the quiver
1 2
σ
• •
For every matrix X ∈ Mn×m (k) we can define a representation VX by VX (1) = k m ,
VX (2) = k n and VX (σ) = X.
Definition. Given two representations V, W of a quiver Q, a morphism

f = (fx ) : V → W is given by a family of linear mappings fx : Vx → Wx such that
for each σ ∈ AQ the diagram
fs(σ)
Vs(σ) Ws(σ)
Vσ Wσ
fe(σ)
Ve(σ) We(σ)
commutes, i.e., fs(σ) Wσ = Vσ fe(σ) . If fx is invertible for every x ∈ V Q, then f is

called an isomorphism. We denote the linear space of morphisms from V to W
by HomQ (V, W ). For two morphisms f : V → W and g : W → W1 one can define
the composition of morphisms gf : V → W1 as follows (gf )i = gi fi . Obviously
all finite dimensional representations of a quiver Q over a field k form a category
denoted by Repk (Q), whose objects are finite dimensional representations V and
morphisms are defined as above.
Examples 2.4.2.
1. Consider the quiver considered in example 2.4.1. Suppose we have two
matrices X and Y. When are the quiver representations VX and VY isomorphic?
According to the definition, we must have invertible linear maps f1 : k n → k n and
f2 : k m → k m such that f2 X = Yf1 or equivalently f2 Xf1−1 = Y. In other words,
VX and VY are isomorphic if and only if Y can be obtained from X by changing
the basis in k n and changing the basis in k m .
This is a well known matter and X, Y ∈ Mn×m (k) are equivalent under this
equivalence relation if and only if they have the same rank.
2. Consider the one loop quiver

α
t
For every square matrix X ∈ Mn (k) we can define a quiver representation VX

with VX (1) = k n and VX (α) = X. If X and Y are two n × n matrices, then VX
and VY are isomorphic if and only if there exists a linear map f1 : k n → k n such
that f1 X = Yf1 , or equivalently f1 Xf1−1 = Y. In other words, VX and VY are
isomorphic if and only if the matrices X and Y are conjugate (similar). In this
case the category Repk (Q) can be identified with the category of endomorphisms
of k-vector spaces.
Definition. Let V and W be representations of Q. A representation W is

called a subrepresentation of V if
1. Wi is a subspace of Vi , for every i ∈ V Q.
2. The restriction of Vσ : Vs(σ) → Ve(σ) to We(σ) is equal to Wσ : Ws(σ) →
We(σ) .
In an obvious way we can also introduce the notion of a quotient representation.
Note that every quiver has a representation T with Ti = 0 and Tσ = 0, for all
i ∈ V Q and all σ ∈ AQ. This representation is called the zero representation.
The zero representation and a given representation V itself are called the trivial
subrepresentations of V .
Definition. A nonzero representation V is called irreducible or simple if it

has only trivial subrepresentations.
Example 2.4.3.
Let Q be the quiver:
1 2
σ
• •
We have three irreducible representations: E1 : k 0 , E2 : 0 k and I:
id
k k , which correspond to the indecomposable modules: (k, 0), (0, k) and
(k, k). (Here Ei (j) = k if i = j and Ei (j) = 0 otherwise, Ei (σ) = 0.)
Definition. If V and W are representations of a quiver Q, the direct sum

representation V ⊕ W is defined by
(V ⊕ W )i = Vi ⊕ Wi
for each i ∈ V Q and

(V ⊕ W )σ = (Vσ ⊕ Wσ ),
in other words, (V ⊕ W )σ : Vs(σ) ⊕ Ws(σ) → Ve(σ) ⊕ We(σ) can be represented by
the matrix:

Vσ O
O Wσ
A representation V of Q is called decomposable if it is isomorphic to a direct

sum of non-trivial representations. Otherwise it is called indecomposable.
So the category Repk (Q) contains the zero element, direct sums of elements,
subrepresentations and quotient representations. Thus, Repk (Q) is an additive
category.
Example 2.4.4.
1 α 2
• •
β
Then a representation is given by two (not necessarily square) matrices M, N

and two representations (M, N), (M , N ) are isomorphic if and only if there exist
invertible matrices S and T such that SM = M T, SN = N T. Thus the theory
of the representations of this quiver is the theory of Kronecker pencils of matrices.
Theorem 2.4.1. If Q is a finite quiver, then the category kQ-mod of right

kQ-modules is equivalent to the category Repk (Q) of representations of Q.
Proof. Let V be a representation of Q. Then we can make V = ⊕ Vi into

i∈V Q
a kQ-module as follows. For every i ∈ V Q, εi acts as the projection onto Vi . For
every σ ∈ AQ, σ|Vi = 0 if i = e(σ) and σ|Ve(σ) = Vσ . Since kQ is generated by all
arrows and the εi for all i ∈ V Q, the action for arbitrary path can only be defined
in one way. It is obvious that this indeed defines a kQ-module.
On the other hand, if V is a kQ-module, then we can define a representation
V of Q by Vi = εi V for all i ∈ V Q, and since σ maps εe(σ) V into εs(σ) V , we define
Vσ as the restriction σ : εe(σ) V → εs(σ) V .
Corollary 2.4.2 (Krull-Remak-Schmidt theorem). Every finite dimen-

sional representation V of a quiver Q is isomorphic to a direct sum of indecompos-
able representations. This decomposition is unique up to isomorphism and order
of summands. More precisely, if
V V1 ⊕ V2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Vm W1 ⊕ W2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Wn
with Vi and Wj nonzero and indecomposable, then n = m and there exists a

permutation σ such that for each i, 1 ≤ i ≤ n we have Vi Wσ(i) .
Example 2.4.5.
1 2
σ
• •
Then we have kQ = kε1 ⊕ kε2 ⊕ kσ and we have relations: σε1 = ε2 σ = σ, ε21 = ε1 ,
ε22 = ε2 , ε1 ε2 = ε2 ε1 = 0, ε1 σ = σε2 = 0.
Let V be a finite dimensional representation of a quiver Q with V Q =

{1, 2, . . . , n}. In this case we can define the dimension vector of a representation
V of Q as the vector dim V = (dim Vi )i∈V Q ∈ Nn . Since Vi = V εi = Hom (V, εi A),
we have dim Vi = dim Hom (V, εi A).
For a simply laced quiver Q (without loops and multiply arrows) we define a
bilinear form by
n
< α, β > = αi βi − αs(σ) βe(σ) . (2.4.1)
i=1 σ∈AQ
And we define the Tits quadratic form by
q(α) = < α, α > . (2.4.2)
This is a quadratic form on Zn . We can also define the corresponding symmetric

bilinear form by
(α, β) = < α, β > + < β, α > .
Lemma 2.4.3. Let V, U be finite dimensional representations of a simply laced

quiver Q, A = kQ, and let q be the corresponding quadratic form of Q. Then
dim HomA (V, U ) − dim Ext1A (V, U ) = < dim V, dim U > .
In particular,
dim EndA (V ) − dim Ext1A (V, V ) = q(dim V ).
Proof. Note that if
0 → V1 → V2 → . . . → Vs → 0
is an exact sequence of vector spaces, then

s
(−1)i dim Vi = 0. (2.4.1)
i=1
Let V, U be two finite dimensional representations of a quiver Q. Consider the

Ringel resolution (2.3.1) in the form:
0 → P2 → P1 → V → 0.
We apply to this exact sequence the functor HomA (∗, U ). Since P2 , P1 are projec-
tive, we obtain the following exact sequence:
0 → HomA (V, U ) → HomA (P1 , U ) → HomA (P2 , U ) → Ext1A (V, U ) → 0.
Now applying the equality (2.4.1) to this exact sequence, we obtain:
dim Hom(V, U ) − dim Ext1 (V, U ) = dim Hom(P1 , U ) − dim Hom(P2 , U ).

Since P1 = ⊕ Vi ⊗ εi A and P2 = ⊕ Vs(σ) ⊗ εe(σ) A, we have, by proposi-

i∈V Q σ∈AQ
tion 4.3.4 and proposition 4.6.3, vol.I, Hom(P1 , U ) = ⊕ Hom(Vi ⊗ εi A, U ) =
i∈V Q
⊕ Hom(Vi , Hom(εi A, U )) = ⊕ Hom(Vi , Ui ). Analogously, Hom(P2 , U ) =
i∈V Q i∈V Q
⊕ Hom(Vs(σ) , Ue(σ) ). Considering α = dim V and β = dim U , we obtain:
σ∈AQ

n
< α, β > = αi βi − αs(σ) βe(σ) =
i=1 σ∈AQ
n
= dim ( ⊕ Hom(Vi , Ui )) − dim ( ⊕ Hom(Vs(σ) , Ue(σ) )) =
i=1 σ∈AQ
= dim Hom(V, U ) − dim Ext1 (V, U ).

So it turns out that the difference dim Hom(V, U ) − dim Ext1 (V, U ) depends only
on the entries of the dimension vectors of V and U .
Definition. A finite quiver Q is said to be of finite representation type

(or finite type, in short) if, up to an isomorphism, there are only a finite number
of indecomposable representations of Q. Otherwise it is called of infinite type.
A quiver Q is said to be of tame representation type if there are infinitely
many isomorphism classes of indecomposable representations but these can be
parametrized by a finite set of integers together with a polynomial irreducible over
k; the quiver Q is said to be of wild representation type if for every finite
dimensional algebra E over k there are infinitely many pair-wise non-isomorphic
representations of Q which have E as their endomorphism algebra. These three
classes of quivers are clearly exclusive. They are, as it turns out, also exhaustive.
The main result in the theory of quiver representations is the famous Gabriel
theorem classifying the quivers of finite representation type. It turns out that such
quivers are closely connected with Dynkin diagrams. The next two sections are
devoted to a proof of the Gabriel theorem.
2.5 DYNKIN AND EUCLIDEAN DIAGRAMS. QUADRATIC

FORMS AND ROOTS
In this chapter we consider some of the main properties of the special classes
of graphs which are called Dynkin and Euclidean diagrams (= extended Dynkin
diagrams). They appear in many different parts in mathematics. These diagrams
plays an important role not only in the representation theory of algebras and
quivers but also in classifications of simple Lie algebras, of finite crystallographic
root systems, Coxeter groups, Cohen-Macaulay modules over certain commutative
rings, and others.
The graphs in the following list are the (simply laced) Dynkin diagrams
which are also called simple Dynkin diagrams:
• • • ... • •
An : n≥1
1 2 3 n−1 n
1
•
Dn : • • ... • • n≥4
3 n
•
2
3
•
E6 :
• • • • •
1 2 4 5 6
3
•
E7 :
• • • • • •
1 2 4 5 6 7
3
•
E8 :
• • • • • • •
1 2 4 5 6 7 8
And the following list contains the simple Euclidean diagrams which are sim-
ply laced graphs. These diagrams are also called the extended simple Dynkin
diagrams. The corresponding simple Dynkin diagram is obtained from the ex-
tended Dynkin diagram by dropping the added vertex and associated edges.
•
n :
A n≥1
• • • ... • • •
1 n+1
• •
n :
D • • ... • • n≥4
3 4 n−2 n−1
• •
2 n
6 :
E •
• • • • •
•
7 :
E
• • • • • • •
•
8 :
E
• • • • • • • •
Note that the diagram A 0 has one vertex and one loop, and A
1 has two vertices
joined by two edges.
Let Γ be a finite connected graph without loops with a set of vertices Γ0 =
{1, 2, . . . , n} and a set of natural numbers {tij }, where tij = tji is a number of
edges between the vertex i and the vertex j. Note that Γ may contain multiple
edges.
Define the quadratic form q : Zn → Z by

n
q(α) = α2i − tij αi αj (2.5.1)
i=1
where α = (α1 , α2 , . . . , αn ) ∈ Zn and the last summation is over all edges. It is

easy to see that in the case of a simply laced graph this quadratic form coincides
with the Tits form (2.4.2).
Let (·, ·) be the symmetric bilinear form on Zn defined by

−tij for i = j,
(εi , εj ) =
2 − 2tii for i = j,
where εi is the i-th coordinate vector.

1
It is easy to see that q(α) = (α, α), and (α, β) = q(α + β) − q(α) − q(β).
2
If Q is a quiver and Γ is its underlying graph, then (·, ·) and q are the same
as before. However, the Euler bilinear form < ·, · > depends on the orientation
of Q. We say that a quadratic form q is positive definite if q(α) > 0 for all
0 = α ∈ Zn .
We say that a quadratic form q is positive semi-definite (or nonnegative
definite) if q(α) ≥ 0 for all 0 = α ∈ Zn .
Examples 2.5.1.
1. Let Γ be the graph: • •
Then we have
1 3
q(α) = q(α1 , α2 ) = α21 + α22 − α1 α2 = (α1 − α2 )2 + α22 > 0
2 4
for all α = 0. Hence q is positive definite.
Then we have
q(α) = q(α1 , α2 ) = α21 + α22 − 2α1 α2 = (α1 − α2 )2 ≥ 0
for all α. Hence q is positive semi-definite, but it is not positive definite, since
q(α1 , α2 ) = 0 if α1 = α2 .
Then we have
q(α) = q(α1 , α2 ) = α21 + α22 − 3α1 α2 = (α1 − α2 )2 − α22
Since q(1, 1) = −1 and q(1, −1) = 1, q is not positive semi-definite (nor negative
semi-definite).
The set rad(q) = {α ∈ Zn : (α, β) = 0 for all β ∈ Zn } is called the radical

of q. It is easy to see that α ∈ rad(q) if and only if

(2 − tii )αi = tij αj
j=i
for all i. We say that α ∈ Zn is strict if none of its components is zero.

Let ≤ be the partial ordering on Zn defined by α ≤ β if αi ≤ βi for each
i = 1, 2, . . . , n. Correspondingly we write that β ≥ α if βi − αi ≥ 0 for each i.
Lemma 2.5.1. Suppose Γ is a connected graph and let β ∈ Zn be a nonzero

vector such that β ≥ 0 and β ∈ rad(q). Then β is strict and the form q is positive
semi-definite. For any α ∈ Zn the following conditions are equivalent:
1) q(α) = 0;
2) α ∈ Q β;
3) α ∈ rad(q).
Proof. Since β ∈ rad(q), we have

0 = (εi , β) = (2 − 2tii )βi − tij βj .
j=i

Suppose there exists an i with βi = 0, then tij βj = 0, and since each term in
j=i
this sum is ≥ 0, we have βj = 0 whenever there is an edge connected the vertex
i with the vertex j. Since Γ is connected, it follows that β = 0, a contradiction.
Thus, β is strict. Now,
βi βj αi αj 2 βj 2 βi 2
tij − = tij αi − tij (αi αj ) + tij α =
i<j
2 βi βj i<j
2βi i<j i<j
2βj j
βj 2
= tij α − tij (αi αj ) =
2βi i i<j
i=j
1 2
= (2 − 2tii )βi αi − tij (αi αj ) = α2i − tij (αi αj ) = q(α).
i
2βi i<j i i≤j
α
Hence q is positive semi-definite. If q(α) = 0, then αi = j whenever there is
βi βj
an edge connected the vertex i with the vertex j. Since Γ is connected, it follows
that α ∈ Q β. But that implies that α ∈ rad(q), since β ∈ rad(q), by assumption.
Finally, if α ∈ rad(q), then q(α) = 0. This completes the proof.
For all extended Dynkin diagrams we can give the corresponding graphs where
each vertex i is marked by the value δi , where δ = (δ1 , . . . , δn ) > 0 is strict. Here
δ is the unique vector such that radQ = Zδ, see lemma 2.5.1.
1
•
n :
A n≥1
• • • ... • • •
1 1 1 1 1 1
1 1
• •
n :
D • • ... • • n≥4
2 2 2 2
• •
1 1
6 :
E
2
• • • • •
1 2 3 2 1
2
•
7 :
E
• • • • • • •
1 2 3 4 3 2 1
3
•
8 :
E
• • • • • • • •
2 4 6 5 4 3 2 1
The following main theorem gives the classifications of all graphs from the
point of view of their quadratic forms.
Theorem 2.5.2. Suppose Γ is a connected simply laced graph (i.e. a graph

without loops and multiply edges) and q is its quadratic form.
(1) q is positive definite if and only if Γ is one of the simple Dynkin diagrams
An , Dn , E6 , E7 or E8 .
(2) q is positive semi-definite if and only if Γ is a one of the extended Dynkin
diagram Ãn , D̃n , Ẽ6 , Ẽ7 or Ẽ8 ; moreover, rad(q) = Zδ, where δ is the vector
indicated by the numbers in the graphs above.
(3) Otherwise, there is a vector α ≥ 0 with q(α) < 0 and (α, εi ) ≤ 0 for all i.
Proof. The full proof of this theorem can be found in [Bourbaki, 1968]. We
give here only the proof of the necessary part of this theorem.
(2) Suppose that Γ is a simple Euclidean diagram. First we need to verify that
n
the vector δ = δi εi belongs to rad(q). We have (δ, εi ) = δj tij +2δi −2δi tii = 0
i=1 i=j
for each i. Then q is positive semi-definite and rad(q) = Q δ ∩ Zn , by lemma 2.5.1.
Since one of the δj ’s is 1, we have rad(q) = Q δ ∩ Zn = Zδ.
(1) Suppose Γ is a simple Dynkin diagram. We can add one more vertex to this
graph to obtain a simple Euclidean diagram Γ̃. Note that q|Γ is the restriction to
Zn of the quadratic form q|Γ̃ . By lemma 2.5.1, if q(α) = 0 for a nonzero α ∈ Zm ,
then α ∈ Zδ, hence α is strict. So q is strictly positive on all the α’s in Zn coming
from Γ, so q is positive definite on Γ.
(3) Suppose that Γ is neither a simple Euclidean diagram nor a simple Dynkin
diagram. Then Γ has a subgraph Γ which is Euclidean, with a radical vector δ.
If all vertices of Γ are in Γ , we can take α = δ. If there is a vertex i of Γ which
is not in Γ and which is connected with Γ by any edge, we can take α = 2δ + εi .
It is now easy to check that q(α) < 0 and (α, εi ) ≤ 0 for all i.
Example 2.5.2.
Let Q be a quiver with underlying Dynkin diagram An . For all r, s ∈ N with
1 r < s n let Vr,s (i) = k for r i s and Vr,s (j) = 0 for j < r or j > s.
For σ ∈ AQ we set Vr,s (σ) = I if σ joints two points in {i : r i s} and
Vr,s (σ) = 0 otherwise. Then Vr,s is an indecomposable representation of Q and all
indecomposable representations of Q are isomorphic to one of these (see [Gabriel,
1972], [Dlab, Ringel, 1976]).
Example 2.5.3.
Consider the quiver Q5 :
1 2 3 4 5
• • • • •
•
0
with the vertices numbered as indicated. This quiver is wild. We show that any
finite dimensional k-algebra A is the algebra of all endomorphisms of some finite
dimensional representation V of the quiver Q5 . First consider the quiver Q4 ,
which is obtained from Q5 , by removing the vertex 5 and the arrow incident with
it. We now construct a representation U of Q4 with dim(U ) = 2n + 1, n = 1, 2, . . .
such that the endomorphism algebra of U is k. Let E be an n + 1-dimensional k-
vector space with a basis e1 , . . . , en+1 and let F be an n-dimensional vector space
with a basis f1 , . . . , fn . We set U (0) = E ⊕ F , U (1) = E ⊕ 0, U (2) = 0 ⊕ F ,
U (3) = {(λ(f ), f ) : f ∈ F }, U (4) = {(δ(f ), f ) : f ∈ F } , where λ, δ : F → E are
defined by λ(fi ) = ei , δ(fi ) = ei+1 . The maps associated to the arrows are the
natural inclusions. Then an endomorphism of U is given by an endomorphism α
of U (0) = E ⊕ F , which preserves the subspaces U (1), . . . , U (4). One can easily
check that this means that α is a multiplication by an element of k, i.e., one finds
End(U ) = k. Now let A be any finite dimensional algebra over k and let a1 , . . . , am
be a set of generators of A (as a k-module). Let a0 = 1 and assume that m is even,
m 2. Let U be the representation of Q4 constructed above with dim(U ) = m+1.
We now define a representation V of Q5 by V (0) = A ⊗k U (0), V (i) = A ⊗k U (i)

m
for i = 1, 2, 3, 4, V (5) = { aai ⊗ ei : a ∈ A}, where e0 , . . . , em is a basis of
i=0
U (0). An endomorphism of V is an endomorphism of V (0) which preserves the
five subspaces V (j) for j = 1, . . . , 5. Since End(U ) = k, an endomorphism of
V (0) which preserves V (1),. . .,V (4) is necessarily of the form φ ⊗ 1 where φ is a

m
m
k-vector space endomorphism of A. Now (φ ⊗ 1)( aai ⊗ ei ) = φ(aai ) ⊗ ei .
i=0 i=0
Therefore if φ ⊗ 1 also preserves V (5), then for all a ∈ A there exists b(a) such that

m m
φ(aai ) ⊗ ei = b(a)ai . Now 1 ⊗ e0 , . . . , 1 ⊗ em is a basis for A ⊗k U (0) as a
i=0 i=0
module over A, hence φ(aai ) = b(a)ai for all i. Taking i = 0 we find φ(a) = b(a).
Hence we have that φ(aai ) = φ(a)ai for all a ∈ A and all i .
Let c = φ(1), then φ(ai ) = cai for all i. So φ is given by multiplication by
c ∈ A. This shows that End(V ) = A.
Definition. Suppose Γ is either a simple Euclidean or a simple Dynkin dia-

gram. The following set
Δ = {0 = α ∈ Zn : q(α) ≤ 1}
is called the set of roots of the quadratic form q of Γ. A root α is called real if
q(α) = 1 and it is called imaginary if q(α) = 0.
Note that each εi is a root. These roots are called the simple roots. If Γ is
a simple Dynkin diagram, then there are no imaginary roots for this graph. If Γ
is a Euclidean diagram, then its imaginary roots are the integer vectors which are
multiples of δ, by lemma 2.5.1.
Lemma 2.5.3.
1. If α ∈ Δ and β ∈ rad(q), then −α and α + β are roots.
2. Every root is positive or negative.
3. If Γ is a simple Euclidean diagram, then (Δ ∪ {0})/Zδ is a finite subset of
Zm /Zδ.
4. If Γ is a simple Dynkin diagram, then Δ is finite.
Proof.
1. We have q(β ± α) = q(β) + q(α) ± (β, α) = q(α) ≤ 1.
2. Write α = α+ − α− , where α+ , α− ≥ 0 and have disjoint support. Then
obviously, (α+ , α− ) ≤ 0, so
1 ≥ q(α) = q(α+ ) + q(α− ) − (α+ , α− ) ≥ q(α+ ) + q(α− ).
Since q is positive semi-definite, one of q(α+ ) or q(α− ) must be zero, i.e., one of
them is an imaginary root. Since each imaginary root is strict, the other of these
roots must be zero.
3. Choose an i with δi = 1. If α is a root with αi = 0, then δ − α and δ + α are
also roots by the condition (1). Since their i-th component is 1, they are positive
roots, so −δ ≤ α ≤ δ. Therefore
S = {α ∈ Δ : αi = 0} ⊆ {α ∈ Zn : −δ ≤ α ≤ δ}
which is finite. Now if β ∈ Δ ∪ {0}, then β − βi δ belongs to this finite set S.

4. Embed Γ into the corresponding Euclidean diagram Γ̃ by adding a vertex i

with δi = 1. We can now view a root α of Γ as a root of Γ̃ with αi = 0. So the
result follows from (3).
In the general case when Q is not necessarily a simply laced quiver the right
corresponding quadratic form associated to the quiver is defined differently.
Let Γ be a finite graph without orientation with a set of vertices Γ0 =

{1, 2, . . . , n} and a finite set of edges Γ1 . We say that (Γ, d) is a valued graph if
Γ1 is provided with non-negative integers dij for all i, j which are the endpoints
of an edge. These integers define a function d : Γ0 × Γ0 → N, where we write
d(i, j) = dij , and are required to satisfy the following properties:
1) dii = 0 for all i ∈ Γ0 ;
2) dij = 0 if and only if dji = 0;
3) there exists natural numbers fi ∈ N such that dij fj = dji fi 4 .
If dij = 0 then this is depicted

(dij ,dji )
• •
i j
If dij = dji = 1 we simply write
• •
i j
All Dynkin diagrams (in addition to the simple Dynkin diagrams drawn
above) are represented in the form of valued graphs by the following list:
(1,2)
Bn : • • • ... • • • n≥2
1 2 3 n−2 n−1 n
(2,1)
Cn : • • • ... • • • n≥3
1 2 3 n−2 n−1 n
(1,2)
F4 : • • • •
1 2 3 4
4 Associate to the valued graph (Γ, d) the generalized Cartan matrix A = (a ), a
ij ii = 2,
aij = −dij if i and j are connected by an edge (and are different) and aij = 0 if there is no edge
between i and j. Then condition 3 is equivalent to symmetrizability (on the right) of the GCM
A meaning that there is a diagonal integer matrix F such that AF is symmetric. As is easily
proved this is equivalent to symmetrizability on the left, meaning that there is a diagonal integer
matrix F such that F A is symmetric.
(1,3)
G2 : • •
1 2
And the valued graphs in the following list are all the Euclidean diagrams
(or extended Dynkin diagrams)5 , in addition to the simple Euclidean diagrams
which were presented above:
(1,2) (2,1)
n :
B • • • ... • • • n≥2
1 2 3 n−1 n n+1
(2,1) (1,2)
n :
C • • • ... • • • n≥3
1 2 3 n−1 n n+1
11 :
A (1,4)
• •
12 :
A (2,2)
• •
(1,2) (1,2)
n :
BC • • • ... • • • n≥2
1 2 3 n−1 n n+1
n+1
•
n : (1,2)
BD • • • ... • •
1 2 3 n−2 n−1
•
n
n+1
•
n : (2,1)
CD • • • ... • •
1 2 3 n−2 n−1
•
n
5 It is worth noting that the extra vertex in an extended Dynkin diagram is so placed that
omitting any vertex (and the edges involving this vertex) leaves as residue a disjoint union of
Dynkin diagrams; see e.g. [Wan, 1991] page 35.
F41 : • • •
(1,2)
• •
F42 : • • •
(2,1)
• •
21 :
G (1,3)
• • •
22 :
G (3,1)
• • •
These are the notations from [Dlab-Ringel, 1976]. In books on Kac-Moody alge-
bras and quantum groups such as [Kac, 1985], [Wan, 1991], [Hong-Kang, 2002] a
l = A(1) , BC
different notation is used; e.g. A 2l = A(2) , CD
2l−1 = A(2)
l 2l 2l−1
For all these graphs here are the corresponding graphs where each vertex i is
marked by the value δi , where the strict vector δ = (δ1 , . . . , δn ) > 0 generates the
radical.
n : • • • ... • • •
B n≥2
1 1 1 1 1 1
n : • • • ... • • •
C n≥3
1 2 2 2 2 1
11 : • •
A
2 1
12 : • •
A
1 1
n : • • • ... • • 1
BC n≥2
2 2 2 2 2 1
1
•
n :
B • • • ... • •
2 2 2 2 2
•
1
1
•
n :
CD • • • ... • •
1 2 2 2 2
•
1
• • • • •
F41 :
1 2 3 2 1
• • • • •
F42 :
1 2 3 4 2
21 : • • •
G
1 2 1
22 : • • •
G
1 2 3
If (Γ, d) is a valued graph and x, y ∈ Zn then the Dlab-Ringel-Ovsienko-

Roiter quadratic form of (Γ, d) is defined in the following way67 :

q(x) = fi x2i − dij fj xi xj (2.5.2)
i∈Γ0 i<j
If Q is a quiver and x, y ∈ Zn then the non-symmetric bilinear form of Q is

defined as follows:

q̃(x, y) = fi xi yi − dij fj xi yj (2.5.3)
i∈Q0 i→j
This bilinear form was independently introduced by C.M.Ringel (see [Ringel,

1976] and [Dlab-Ringel, 1976]) and S.A.Ovsienko and A.V.Roiter (see [Ovsienko,
1977a]).
In the case when Γ is a simply laced graph these forms coincide with the Tits
quadratic form (2.4.2) and the bilinear form (2.4.1).
The notions of positive definiteness and nonnegative definiteness are of course

as above.
6 Here it is customary to take the fi minimal, i.e. so that their greatest common divisor is 1.
7 Note that this is the quadratic form associated to the symmetrized generalized Cartan ma-
trix AF .
Examples 2.5.4.
1. Let (Γ, d) be the valued graph:
(1,2)
B3 : • • •
1 2 3
For this graph d12 = 1, d21 = 2, d23 = d32 = 1. Therefore from the requirement
dij fj = dji fi we obtain that f1 = 1, f2 = f3 = 2. Then the quadratic form has
the following form:
q(x) = x21 + 2x22 + 2x23 − 2x1 x2 − 2x2 x3 = (x1 − x2 )2 + (x2 − x3 )2 + x23
and so it is positive definite.

2. Let (Γ, d) be the valued graph:
(2,1)
C3 : • • •
1 2 3
For this graph d12 = 2, d21 = 1, d23 = d32 = 1. Therefore from requirement
dij fj = dji fi we obtain that f1 = 2, f2 = f3 = 1. Then the quadratic form has
the following form:
1 1 1
q(x) = 2x21 + x22 + x23 − 2x1 x2 − x2 x3 = 2(x1 − x2 )2 + ( x2 − x3 )2 + x22
2 2 4
and so it is positive definite.
11 :
3. Let (Γ, d) be the valued graph: A (1,4)
• •
For this graph d12 = 1, d21 = 4. Therefore from the requirement dij fj = dji fi
we obtain that f1 = 4, f2 = 1. Then the quadratic form has the following form:
q(x) = 4x21 + x22 − 4x1 x2 = (2x1 − x2 )2 ≥ 0
and so it is nonnegative definite.

12 :
4. Let (Γ, d) be the valued graph: A (2,2)
• •
For this graph d12 = d21 = 2. Therefore from the requirement dij fj = dji fi we
obtain that f1 = f2 = 1. Then the quadratic form has the following form:
q(x) = x21 + x22 − 2x1 x2 = (x1 − x2 )2 ≥ 0
and so it is nonnegative definite.
The following theorem gives the characterization of all valued graphs from the
point of view their quadratic forms:
Theorem 2.5.4. Suppose Γ is a connected valued graph with quadratic form

q. Then
(1) Γ is a Dynkin diagram if and only if q is positive definite.

(2) Γ is an extended Dynkin diagram if and only if q is positive semi-definite.
The full proof of this theorem can be found in [Dlab, Ringel, 1976].
Remark 2.5.1. The non-symmetric bilinear form q̃ given by (2.5.3) has the
following important property for the representations of a quiver Q (in the case of
Dynkin diagrams):
q̃(dim V, dim U ) = dim HomA (V, U ) − dim Ext1A (V, U ) (2.5.4)
where V , U are indecomposable representations of Q, and dim V , dim U means

the vector dimensions.
Remark 2.5.2. A valued graph on the plane (which is a Dynkin diagram or

a Euclidean diagram) is often drawn in some another way. Instead of
(dij ,dji )
• •
i j
we connect the vertex i with the vertex j by tij edges, where tij satisfies the
following conditions. If dij dji ≤ 4 then tij = max{dij , dji }. In this case and when
dij < dji , all these tij edges are marked together by one an arrow in the direction
from j to i8 . For example,
(3,1)
• • is drawn as • •
1 2 1 2
and
• • •
B3 :
1 2 3
If dij = dji = 2, we draw this graph as follows: Ã12 : • •
Finally edges labeled by (1, 1) we draw by one edge: • •
Conversely, each such a graph we can transform into a valued graph in the
following way. If we have a marked multiply arrow with tij edges in the direction
from j to i then we put dij = 1 and dji = tij . Otherwise we put dij = dji = tij .
8 This is the convention that makes things come out right when one starts with the lists from
[Dlab-Ringel, 1976]. In [Wan, 1991], [Kac, 1985] and [Hong-Kang, 2002] and other books on
Kac-Moody algebras and quantum groups another convention is used; viz. there is an arrow
towards i iff dij ≥ 2 Applied to the list above this switches the B and C diagrams.
Remark 2.5.3. It is often convenient to describe a finite valued graph (Γ, d),
where Γ0 = {1, 2, . . . , n} in the terms of an associated matrix C = (cij ), called the
Cartan matrix. By definition, cii = 2, and cij = −dij . For example, if (Γ, d) is
(1,2)
F4 : • • • •
1 2 3 4
then the Cartan matrix of F4 is of the form
⎛ ⎞
2 −1 0 0
⎜−1 2 −2 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 −1 2 −1⎠
0 0 −1 2
2.6 GABRIEL THEOREM

A basic result in the theory of quiver representations is the famous Gabriel theorem
classifying the quivers Q of finite representation type. The proof of this theorem
given here is due to J.Tits, P.Gabriel, C.M.Ringel and W.Crawley-Boevey (see
[Ringel, 1982], [Crawley-Boevey]).
Theorem 2.6.1 (P.Gabriel).9 A connected quiver Q is of a finite type if and

only if the underlying undirected graph Q of Q (obtained from Q by deleting the
orientation of the arrows) is a Dynkin diagram of the form An , Dn , E6 , E7 , E8 . The
number of isomorphism classes of indecomposable representations of Q is finite if
and only if the corresponding quadratic form qQ is positive definite. In this case
the map
V → dim V
sets up a bijection between the isomorphism classes of indecomposable represen-
tations V of Q and the set of positive roots of the underlying Dynkin diagram of
V.
We shall prove this theorem for the case when k is an algebraically closed field.
To prove this theorem we need a little bit of algebraic geometry.
Let AN be affine N -space, whose points are just the N -tuples from the
field k. The coordinate ring k[AN ] of functions on AN is the polynomial ring
k[x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ], where xi is the i-th coordinate function. This space is endowed
with the Zariski topology, whose set of closed subsets coincides with the sets
of common zeros of the ideals in k[x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ]. A closed set in AN is called
an affine variety. A subset U in AN is called locally closed if it is open in
its closure U. A non-empty locally closed subset U is called irreducible if every
non-empty open subset of U is dense in U . The affine space AN itself is irreducible.
9 See [Gabriel, 1972], [Berstein, Gel’fand, Ponomarev, 1973].
The dimension of a non-empty locally closed subset U is
sup{n : there exist irreducible subsets : Z0 ⊂ Z1 ⊂ . . . ⊂ Zn closed in U }.
We have the following simple properties of dimensions:

1) dim U = dim U ;
2) if W = U ∪ V then dim W = max{dim U, dim V };
3) dim AN = N .
An algebraic group is an affine variety G endowed with a multiplication

ν : G × G → G and an inverse i : G → G which are morphisms of affine varieties
and which satisfy the usual group axioms, see chapter 1.
Example 2.6.1.
The linear group GLn (k) of all n × n invertible matrices over k is an algebraic
group. This group is defined by the non-vanishing of the determinant and so it is
2
open in Mn (k) An and is an irreducible affine variety of dimension n2 . To see
2
this consider An +1 with coordinates xij , i, j = 1, . . . , n and z and consider the
zeros of the polynomial z det(xij ) − 1. These are in obvious bijection with GLn (k).
An action of an algebraic group G on an affine variety X is defined in the usual

sense. There are the following properties connected with this notion:
1) the orbits of G in X are irreducible and locally closed;
2) if O is an orbit, its boundary O \ O is a union of orbits of dimensions strictly
smaller than dim O;
3) the stabilizer Gx of a point x ∈ O is a closed subgroup in G, and dim O =
dim G − dim Gx .
Note that Homk (k s , k t ) is just the space of all t × s matrices over k. So we

can identify it with the affine variety Ats . Thus it is an irreducible affine variety
of dimension ts.
Let Q be a quiver and A = kQ. Suppose α ∈ Nn is a fixed dimension vector.

Define
Rep(α) = Homk (k αs(σ) , k αe(σ) ).
σ∈AQ
is isomorphic to the irreducible affine variety A of dimension r =

r
This
αs(σ) αe(σ) .
σ∈AQ
Given a point x ∈ Rep (α), define a representation R(x) of Q in the following
way: R(x)i = k αi for i = 1, 2, . . . , n and R(x)σ is a linear map with matrix xσ for
σ ∈ AQ.
n
Define GL(α) = GL(αi , k). This is an algebraic group of dimension s =
i=1

n
α2i which is open in As .
i=1
Define an action of GL(α) on Rep (α) by means of conjugation:
(gx)σ = ge(σ) xσ gs(σ)
for g ∈ GL(α) and x ∈ Rep (α).
Lemma 2.6.2.
1. There is a bijection V → OV between the set of isomorphism classes of
indecomposable representations V of dimension α and the set of GL(α)-orbits on
Rep (α), where OV = {x ∈ Rep (α) : R(x) V }.
2. GL(α)x AutA (R(x)).
Proof. Let V be a representation of dimension α. Then choosing a basis in

each Vi allows us to identify each Vi with the vector space k αi and each Vσ with
a map from k αs(σ) to k αe(σ) . The action of GL(α) on Rep(α) corresponds to a
different choice of bases.
Lemma 2.6.3. Let V be a representation of dimension α. Then
dim Rep (α) − dim OV = dim EndA (V ) − q(α) = dim Ext1A (V, V ).
Proof. Let V ∈ R(x), then
dim GL(α) − dim OV = dim GL(α)x .
By lemma 2.6.2, GL(α)x AutA (V ). Since AutA (V ) is an open subset in

EndA (V ), it has the same dimension. Hence, by lemma 2.4.3, we obtain:

n
dim Rep (α) − dim OV = αs(σ) αe(σ) − α2i + dim EndA (V ) =
σ∈AQ i=1
= dim EndA (V ) − q(α) = dim Ext1A (V, V ).
Corollary 2.6.4. If α = 0 and q(α) < 0, then there are infinitely many orbits
in Rep (α), i.e., infinitely many non-isomorphic representations of dimension α.
Corollary 2.6.5. Let V be a representation of dimension α. Then OV is open

in Rep (α) if and only if Ext1A (V, V ) = 0, i.e., V has no self-extensions.
Proof. A proper closed subvariety of an irreducible variety has strictly smaller

dimension. Since orbits are open in their closure and Rep(α) is irreducible, OV
is open if and only if OV = Rep(α) which is the case if and only if dim OV =
dim Rep(α) which holds if and only if dim Ext1A (V, V ) = 0.
Corollary 2.6.6. There is at most one representation of Q of dimension α

(up to isomorphism) without self-extensions.
Proof. It is known that any two non-empty open subvarieties inside an irre-
ducible variety intersect. Suppose OX = OY are open. Since orbits are disjoint,
OX ⊂ Rep (α)\OY , and so OX ⊂ Rep (α)\OY , which contradicts the irreducibility
of Rep (α).
Lemma 2.6.7. If
0→U →V →W →0 (2.6.1)
is a non-split exact sequence, then OU⊕W ⊂ OV \ OV .
Proof. For each vertex i we identify Ui with a subspace of Vi . Choose a basis

of Ui and extend it to a basis of Vi . Then V R(x) with a corresponding matrix
of the form:
xσ = uσ sσ 0 wσ ,
where
U R(u), W R(w). For 0 = λ ∈ k define gλ ∈ GL(α) by (gλ )σ =
λ 0
. Then
0 1

λuσ λsσ
(gλ x)σ = .
0 wσ

uσ 0
So the closure of OV contains the point with matrices , which
0 wσ
corresponds to U ⊕ W . Hence OU⊕W ⊂ O.
Applying the functor Hom(∗, U ) to (2.6.2), we obtain an exact sequence:
0 → Hom(W, U ) → Hom(V, U ) → Hom(U, U ) −→ Ext1 (W, U ).

f
So applying the equality (2.4.1) to this exact sequence, one obtains
dim Hom(W, U ) − dim Hom(V, U ) + dim Hom(U, U ) − dim Im(f ) = 0.
Since f (1) = 0, dim Hom(V, U ) = dim Hom(U ⊕ W, U ), and hence X U ⊕ W .

Therefore, OU⊕W ⊂ OV \ OV .
Corollary 2.6.8. If OX is an orbit of maximal dimension and X = U ⊕ V ,

then Ext1 (V, U ) = 0.
Proof. Suppose there is a non-split exact extension 0 → U → V → W → 0,

then, by lemma 2.6.7, OX ⊂ OV \ OV . But that means dim OX < dim OV , which
contradicts the maximality of dim OX .
Corollary 2.6.9. If OV is closed, then V is semisimple.
Proof. Let U be a submodule of V , and W = V /U . We need to show that the

extension is split. If not, then, by lemma 2.6.7, OU⊕W ⊂ O V \ OV . But OV is
closed, so its boundary is empty. A contradiction.
To prove the sufficiency part of the Gabriel theorem we need the following
lemma.
Lemma 2.6.10. Let V be an indecomposable module and dim End(V ) > 1.

Then there is a proper indecomposable submodule U ⊂ V with dim Ext1 (U, U ) > 0.
Proof. Since V is indecomposable, E = End(V ) is a local ring by the Fitting

lemma. Therefore E/rad E is a simple module. Since k is an algebraically closed
field, the Schur lemma shows that E/rad E EndE (E/rad E) is one dimensional.
Hence the assumption that dim End(V ) > 1 means exactly that rad E = 0. Let
θ ∈ E be an element such that Im θ has minimal dimension. Since E is finite
dimensional, rad E is nilpotent. Therefore θ2 = 0.
Write I = Im θ. Since E is a local ring we have a decomposition K = Ker θ =
K1 ⊕ K2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Kr into a direct sum of indecomposable modules. Since θ2 = 0,
I ⊂ K. Choose j so that the composite α of the inclusion I → K and the
projection πj : K → Kj are nonzero. Note that α : I → Kj is injective. Indeed,
the composite
X → I → Kj → X
has image Im α, hence dim (Im α) > dim (I), by the minimality assumption.
Now we claim that Ext1 (I, Kj ) = 0. Once we have established that, the lemma
follows by applying Hom(∗, Kj ) to 0 → I → Kj → Q → 0, and using the fact that
Ext2 vanishes gives Ext1 (I, Kj ) → Ext1 (Kj , Kj ) → 0, hence Ext1 (Kj , Kj ) = 0
and we can take U = Kj .
To prove the claim, suppose on the contrary that Ext1 (I, Kj ) = 0. Consider
the pushout of the short exact sequence
0→K→V →I→0
along πj , which gives an exact sequence
0 → Kj → Y → I → 0.
If this splits, then Kj has a complement C in Y . But then the inverse image of C
is a complement to Kj in V , hence Kj is a summand of V . This contradicts the
assumption that V is indecomposable.
Corollary 2.6.11. Let V be an indecomposable module and dim End(V ) > 1.

Then there is an indecomposable submodule U ⊂ V with dim End(U ) = 1 and
dim Ext1 (U, U ) > 0, hence q(dim U ) ≤ 0.
Proof. Apply lemma 2.6.10. If EndU = k, repeat. Since all modules are finite
dimensional, the process must terminate.
Proof of theorem 2.6.1.

1. Necessity. Let Q be a quiver of finite type. Then, by the Krull-
Remak-Schmidt theorem, there are a finite number of orbits in Rep (α) for each
dimension α. Then, by corollary 2.6.4, the associated quadratic form q is positive

definite. Thus, by theorem 2.5.2, the underlying graph of Q is a Dynkin diagram.
2. Sufficiency. Suppose Q is a quiver whose underlying graph is a Dynkin
diagram. So, by theorem 2.5.2, the associated quadratic form q is positive def-
inite. Therefore, by corollary 2.6.11, every indecomposable module V satisfies
dim End(V ) = 1 and dim Ext1 (V, V ) = 0. Therefore, if V is an indecompos-
able module with dimension vector α, then q(α) = q(dim V ) = dim End(V ) −
dim Ext1 (V, V ) = 1, i.e., α is a positive root of the root system Δ. If V , U are two
indecomposable modules with dimension vector α, then, by lemma 2.6.3, V U .
We need to show that for any positive root α of the root system Δ there is at
least one indecomposable module of dimension α. Let OV be an orbit of maximal
dimension in Rep (α). If V is indecomposable, then we are done. Otherwise,
V = U ⊕ W . Then Ext1 (W, U ) = Ext1 (U, V ) = 0, by corollary 2.6.8, hence
(dim W, dim U ) ≥ 0. In this case,
1 = q(dim V ) = q(dim W + dim U ) = q(dim W ) + q(dim U ) + (dim U, dim W ) ≥ 2,
a contradiction.
Remark 2.6.1. The Gabriel theorem has also been proved in the more gen-
eral case when k is an arbitrary field. In this case I.N.Bernstein, I.M.Gel’fand,
V.A.Ponomarev proved that if Q is a Dynkin diagram then it has finite repre-
sentation type (see, [Berstein, Gel’fand, Ponomarev, 1973]). Their proof uses the
Weyl group and Coxeter functors.
Theorem 2.6.12. A quiver Q is of finite (resp. tame) type if and only its
quadratic form is positive definite (resp. semipositive definite).
Remark 2.6.2. The Gabriel theorem was generalized to arbitrary quivers

by V.Kac [Kac, 1980a]. V.Kac proved that indecomposable representations occur
precisely in those dimension vectors that are roots of the so-called Kac-Moody Lie
algebra associated to a given graph. In particular, these dimension vectors do not
depend on the orientation of the arrows in a quiver Q.
Theorem 2.6.13 (V.Kac). Let Q be a quiver and α > 0 be a dimension

vector. Then there is an indecomposable representation of dimension α if and only
if α is a root. If α is a real root, there is a unique indecomposable representation of
dimension α; if α is an imaginary root, there are infinitely many indecomposable
representations of dimension α.
Remark 2.6.3. L.A.Nazarova and P.Donovan, M.R.Freislich described inde-

pendently the quivers of tame representation type over an algebraically closed field
(see, [Nazarova, 1973], [Donovan, Freislich, 1973]):
Theorem 2.6.14. Let k be an algebraically closed field and let Q be a con-

nected quiver without oriented cycles. Then Q is of a tame type if and only if the
underlying undirected graph Q of Q (obtained from Q by deleting the orientation

of the arrows) is a Euclidean diagram of the form Ān , D̄n , Ē6 , Ē7 , Ē8 .
In the general case, if k is an arbitrary field, the result was treated by V.Dlab
and C.M.Ringel (see [Dlab, Ringel, 1976]).
2.7 K-SPECIES
In this section we consider the notion of k-species introduced by P.Gabriel (see
[Gabriel, 1973]). Let k be a fixed field and let I be a finite set. A species
L = (Ki , i Mj )i,j∈I is a finite family (Ki )i∈I of skew fields together with a family
(i Mj )i,j∈I of (Ki , Kj )-bimodules. We say that (Ki , i Mj )i,j∈I is a k-species if
all Ki are finite dimensional and central over a common commutative subfield k
which acts centrally on i Mj , i.e., λm = mλ for all λ ∈ k and all m ∈ i Mj . We
also assume that each bimodule i Mj is a finite dimensional vector space over k.
It is a k-quiver if moreover Ki = k for each i. We shall consider species without
oriented cycles and loops, i.e., we shall consider the case where i Mi = 0, and if
i Mj = 0, then j Mi = 0.
The diagram of a species (Ki , i Mj )i,j∈I is defined in the following way:
1) the set of vertices is the finite set I;
2) the vertex j connects with the vertex i by tij arrows, where
tij = dimKi (i Mj ) × dim(i Mj )Kj .
If i Mj = 0 and dimKj (j Mi ) > dim(j Mi )Ki , then we denote this by the following
• •
arrow: (here tij = 3). (The number of horizontal lines in the “arrows”
j i
is tij .)
Definition. An L-representation (Vi , j ϕi ) of a species L = (Ki , i Mj )i,j∈I is

a family of right Ki -modules Vi and Kj -morphisms:
j ϕi : Vi ⊗Ki i Mj −→ Vj
for each i, j ∈ I. The category of L-representations Rep L, is the category

whose objects are L-representations and whose morphisms are defined as follows.
Let V = (Vi , j ϕi ) and W = (Wi , j ψi ) be two L-representations. An L-morphism
Ψ : V → W from V to W is a set of Ki -linear maps αi : Vi → Wi such that the
following diagram commutes
j ϕi
Vi ⊗Ki i Mj Vj (2.7.1)
αi ⊗1 αj
j ψi
Wi ⊗Ki i Mj Wj
Two representations (Vi , j ϕi ) and (Wi , j ψi ) are called equivalent if there is a

set of isomorphisms (αi ) from Ki -module Vi to Ki -module Wi such that for each
i ∈ I the diagram (2.7.1) is commutative.
A representation (Vi , j ϕi ) is called indecomposable, if there are no nonzero
sets of subspaces (Vi ) and (Vi ) such that Vi = Vi ⊕ Vi and j ϕi = j ϕi ⊕ j ϕi ,
where

We can define the direct sum of L-representations in the obvious way.
Let di = dim(Vi )Ki be a dimension of Vi as a vector space over Ki . By the di-

mension of a representation
(Vi , j ϕi ) we shall mean the vector d = (d1 , d2 , . . . , dn ).
We set d0 = dim(Vi )Ki . The representation (Vi , j ϕi ) is called finite dimen-
i∈I
sional if d0 < ∞.
A species (Ki , i Mj )i,j∈I is called of finite type, if the number of indecompos-
able non-isomorphic finite dimensional representations is finite.
In the case when all Ki = F , where F is a fixed skew field, and F (i Mj )F =

(F FF )tij , P.Gabriel has characterized k-species of finite type (see [Gabriel, 1972]).
This result was extended by V.Dlab and C.M.Ringel to the case where L is an
arbitrary k-species (see [Dlab, Ringel, 1973], [Dlab, Ringel, 1974]), [Dlab, Ringel,
1975]).
Theorem 2.7.1 (V.Dlab, C.M.Ringel). A k-species is of finite type if and

only if its diagram is a finite disjoint union of Dynkin diagrams.

The exterior algebra was invented by Hermann Grassmann (1809 - 1877) in his
most important work [Grassmann, 1844]. In this book he developed the idea of
an algebra in which the symbols representing geometric entities such as points,
lines and planes, are manipulated using certain rules. He represented subspaces
of a space by coordinates leading to points in an algebraic manifold now called
the Grassmannian. Unfortunately, Grassmann’s methods were not understood and
adopted at the time. It is only because of the work of Elie Cartan that they became
used in studying differential forms and their application to analysis, geometry and
physics. In physics differential forms are elements of the Grassmann algebra over
the dual vector space. They are used everywhere from elementary mechanics to
Hamiltonian mechanics and field theory.
The notion of a tensor algebra as a “maximal ring” was first considered by
G.Hochschild (see [Hochschild, 1947], [Hochschild, 1950]). In 1957 in the paper
[Eilenberg, 1957], S.Eilenberg, A.Rosenberg and D.Zelinsky showed that for any
ring R, the global dimension of the polynomial ring R[x1 , x2 , . . . , xn ] is equal to
n+gl.dimR. In the paper [Hochschild, 1958] G.Hochschild proved that the global
dimension of a free ring over R on any set of letters is equal to 1+gl.dimR. This
theorem was generalized by Yu.V.Roganov for a tensor algebra of a bimodule which
is one-sided projective (see [Roganov, 1975]). In the proof of theorem 2.2.11 we
follow this paper.
In 1972 in the paper [Gabriel, 1972] P.Gabriel introduced quivers in connection
with the classification of finite dimensional algebras of finite type. In this paper he
gave a full description of quivers of finite representation type over an algebraically
closed field (theorem 2.6.1). P.Gabriel also proved that there is a bijection between
set of positive roots of the Tits form corresponding to this quiver.
Another proof of this theorem in the general case, for an arbitrary field, using
reflection functors and Coxeter functors has been given in the paper [Berstein,
Gel’fand, Ponomarev, 1973]. This paper also contains the connection between
indecomposable representations of a quiver of finite type and properties of the
Tits quadratic form (theorem 2.5.2).
The Gabriel theorem was generalized by V.Kac (see [Kac, 1980a], [Kac, 1980b]),
who proved that indecomposable representations occur in dimension vectors that
are roots of the so-called Kac-Moody Lie algebra associated to a given graph. In
particular, these dimension vectors do not depend on the orientation of the arrows
in the quiver Q.
The terms “tame type” and “wild type” were introduced by P.Donovan and
M.R.Freislich in their paper [Donovan, Freislich, 1972] in analogy with the separa-
tion of animals into tame and wild ones. In the same paper they first conjectured
that any finite dimensional algebra is either tame or wild.
Tame quivers in terms of extended Dynkin diagrams were classified by
L.A.Nazarova in [Nazarova, 1973] and by P.Donovan and M.R.Freislich in
[Donovan, Freislich, 1973].
The representation type of factor algebras of path algebras has been discussed
by E.Green, who gave some useful algorithms for studying representations of path
algebras (see [Green, 1975]).
The theory of species was first considered by P.Gabriel in [Gabriel, 1973]. Note
that in fact species and their connections with the representations of algebras were
already considered in the papers of T.Yoshii (see [Yoshii, 1956]; [Yoshii, 1957a];
[Yoshii, 1957b]. Later the results of P.Gabriel on representations of species were
generalized by V.Dlab and C.M.Ringel (see [Dlab, Ringel, 1974]; [Dlab, Ringel,
1975]; [Dlab, Ringel, 1976]; [Ringel, 1976].
Representations of quivers with relations were considered by P.Donovan
and M.Freislich [Donovan, Freislich, 1979], S.Ovsienko [Ovsienko, 1977],
C-M.Ringel [Ringel, 1975], [Ringel, 1980], V.Yu.Romanovskij, A.S.Shkabara, and
A.G.Zavadskij, (see [Romanovskij, Shkabara, 1976]; [Shkabara, 1978a], [Shkabara,
1978b]; [Zavadskij, Shkabara, 1976].
More references on the history of algebras and their representations can be

found in [Gustafson, 1982].
[Berstein, Gel’fand, Ponomarev, 1973] I.N.Berstein, I.M.Gel’fand,

V.A.Ponomarev, Coxeter functors and Gabriel’s theorem, Usp. Mat.
Nauk, vol.28, N.2, 1973, p.19-33 (in Russian); English translation: Russian
Math. Surveys, v.28, No.2, 1973, p.17-32.
[Bourbaki, 1968] N.Bourbaki, Croups et algèbres de Lie, Chaptires 4,5,6. Paris,
Hermann, 1968.
[Crawley-Boevey] W.Crawley-Boevey, Lectures on Representations of Quivers.
In: < http://www.amsta.leeds.ac.uk/ pmtwc/quivlecs.pdf >.
[Dlab, Ringel, 1973] V.Dlab and C.M.Ringel, On algebras of finite representation
type, Carleton Math. Lecture Notes, N.2, Carleton Univ., Ottawa, 1973,
160pp.
[Dlab, Ringel, 1974] V.Dlab and C.M.Ringel, Representations of graphs and al-
gebras, Carleton Math. Lecture Notes, N.8, Carleton Univ., Ottawa, 1974,
N.8, 85p.
type, J. Algebra, 1975, v.33, N.2, p.306-394.
[Dlab, Ringel, 1976] V.Dlab, C.M.Ringel, Indecomposable representations of
graphs and algebras, Memoirs Amer. Math. Soc., vol.173, 1976.
[Donovan, Freislich, 1972] P.Donovan and M.R.Freislich, Some evidence for an
extension of the Brauer-Thrall conjecture, Sonderforschungsbereich Theor.
Math., v.40, 1972, p.24-26.
[Donovan, Freislich, 1973] P.Donovan, M.R.Freislich, The representation theory
of finite graphs and associated algebras, Carleton Math. Lecture Notes, No.5,
Carleton Univ., Ottawa, 1973, 83p.
[Donovan, Freislich, 1979] P.Donovan and M.Freislich, Indecomposable represen-
tations of certain commutative quivers, Bull. Austral. Math. Soc., v.20,
1979, p.17-34.
[Eilenberg, 1957] S.Eilenberg, A.Rosenberg and D.Zelinsky, On the dimension of
modules and algebras, VIII, Nagoya Math. J., v.12, 1957, p.71-93.
[Gabriel, 1972] P.Gabriel, Unzerlegbare Darstellungen I, Manuscripta Math., v.6,
1972, p.71-103.
[Gabriel, 1973] P.Gabriel, Indecomposable represenations II, Instit. Naz. Alta
Mat., Symp. Math., 1973, v.11, p.81-104.
[Grassmann, 1844] H.Grassmann, Die lineale Ausdehnungslehre, ein neuer Zweig
der Mathematik, Teubner, 1844.
[Green, 1975] E.Green, The representation theory of tensor algebras, J. Algebra,
v.34, 1975, p.135-171.
[Gustafson, 1982] W.H.Gustafson, The history of algebras and their representa-
tions, Lecture Notes Math., v.944, 1982, p.1-28.
[Hochschild, 1947] G.Hochschild, The structure of algebras with nonzero radical,

Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., vol.53, 1947, p.369-377.
[Hochschild, 1950] G.Hochschild, Note on maximal algebras, Proc. Amer. Math.
Soc., v.1, 1950, p.11-14.
[Hochschild, 1958] G.Hochschild, Note on relative homological dimension, Nagaya
Math. J., v.13, 1958, p.89-94.
[Hong, Kang, 2002] Jin Hong, Seok-Jin Kang, Introduction to quantum groups
and crystal bases, American Mathematical Society, 2002.
[Jans, Nakayama, 1957] J.P.Jans and T.Nakayama, On the dimension of modules
and algebras, VII, Nagoya Math. J., vol.11, 1957, p.67-76.
[Kac,1980a] V.Kac, Infinite root systems, representations of graphs and invariant
theory, Invent. Math., v.56, 1980, p.57-92.
[Kac, 1980b] V.Kac, Some remarks on representations of quivers and infinite root
systems, Carleton Math. Lecture Notes, v.25, 1980, p.1301-1317.
[Kac, 1985] V.Kac, Infinite dimensional Lie algebras, Cambridge Univ. Press,
1985.
[Nazarova, 1973] L.A.Nazarova, Representations of quivers of infinite type, Izv.
Akad. Nauk SSSR, Ser.Mat., vol.37, 1973, p.752-791 (in Russian); English
translation: Math. USSR Izv., vol.7, 1973, p.749-792.
[Ovsienko, 1977] S.A.Ovsienko, The representations of quivers with relations,
Matrix problems, Kiev, 1977, p.88-103 (in Russian).
[Ovsienko, 1977a] S.A.Ovsienko, A.V.Roiter, Bilinear forms and categories of
representations, Matrix problems, Kiev, 1977, p.71-80 (in Russian).
[Ringel, 1975] C.Ringel, The representation type of local algebras, Springer LNM,
v.488, 1975, p.282-305.
[Ringel, 1976] C.M.Ringel, Representations of K-species and bimodules, J. Alge-
bra, v.41, 1976, p.269-302.
[Ringel, 1980] C.Ringel, Tame algebras (On algorithms for solving vector space
problems II), Carleton Math. Lecture Notes, v.25, 1980, p.1-32.
[Ringel, 1982] C.Ringel, Four papers in linear algebra. In: I.M.Gelfand a.o (eds),
Representation theory, London Math. Soc., 1982, 141-156.
[Roganov, 1975] Yu.V.Roganov, The dimension of a tensor algebra of a projective
bimodule, Mat. Zam., v.18, No.6, 1975, p.895-902.
[Romanovskij, Shkabara, 1976] V.Romanovskij and A.S.Shkabara, The represen-
tation of diagrams with one relation, Mat. Sbornik, Kiev, 1976, p.282-285
(in Russian).
[Shkabara, 1978a] A.Shkabara, Quivers with relations and DGC, In: Representa-
tions of quivers with relations, Preprint 78.43, Kiev, Institute of Mathematics
AN USSR, 1978, p.3-41 (in Russian).
[Shkabara, 1978b] A.S.Shkabara, Commutative quivers of tame type I, Preprint
78.42, Kiev, Institute of Mathematics AN USSR, 1978, 56p. (in Russian).
[Wan, 1991] Zhe-Xian Wan, Introduction to Kac-Moody algebra, World Scientific,
1991.
[Yoshii, 1956] T.Yoshii, Notes on algebras of bounded representation type, Proc.

Japan Acad., v.32, 1956, p.441-445.
[Yoshii, 1957a] T.Yoshii, On algebras of bounded representation type, Osaka
Math. J., v.8, 1956, p.51-105; Supplements and corrections; ibib., v.9, 1957,
p.67-85.
[Yoshii, 1957b] T.Yoshii, On the indecomposable representations of algebras, Ann.
Math., v.66, 1957, p.418-429.
[Zavadskij, Shkabara, 1976] A.G.Zavadskij, A.S.Shkabara, Commutative quivers
and matrix algebras of finite type, Preprint 76.3, Kiev, Institute of Mathe-
matics AN USSR, 1976, 52p. (in Russian).
APPENDIX. MORE ON DYNKIN DIAGRAMS 105
APPENDIX TO SECTION 2.5. MORE ABOUT DYNKIN AND EXTENDED

DYNKIN (= EYCLIDEAN) DIAGRAMS
Recall (following [1]) that a valued graph is a graph with each edge marked by an
ordered pair of positive integers. In loc.cit. no loops are allowed, but actually for
the tame and finite representation type cases this makes little difference: just the
inclusion of one tame case, viz. the one vertex one loop graph.
By convention for an edge with value (1,1) the value indicator is omitted. Thus
for example one has the valued diagram
(1,2)
B4 : • • • •
1 2 3 4
which is in fact the diagram denoted by B4 in [1] and, using a convention explained
below, C4 in [12], [18] and [19] (and most other recent books and papers treating
of these matters (especially those dealing with Kac-Moody algebras and quantum
groups).
There is a further convention, induced, we feel, by both a sense of historical
continuity and nostalgia, that replaces labels with low numbers by an arrow no-
tation. It runs as follows. If the label (dij , dji ) of the edge between vertex i and
vertex j is such that dij dji ≤ 4 then there are max{(dij , dji )} edges between i and
j and there is an arrow towards i (resp. j) if and only if dij > 1 (resp. dji > 1).
Using this convention the valued graph above is denoted1
• • • •
C4 :
1 2 3 4
Here are some further examples
(2,2) • •
• • =
(3,1) = • •
• •
Edges with a label (dij , dji ) with dij dji > 4 are left as is. Note that from a dia-
gram with arrow notation the corresponding labeled graph is uniquely recoverable.
Given an arbitrary complex matrix A = (aij ) there is an associated interesting

(usually infinite dimensional) Lie algebra g(A), see e.g. [12, 19]. Two such matrices
1 Recall that this convention is different from the one in the main text (section 2.5); whence
the switch between B and C.
are said to be equivalent if one can be obtained from the other by simultaneous
permutation of rows and columns.
The direct sum of two matrices A1 and A2 is the matrix

A1 0
0 A2
A matrix is called indecomposable if it is not equivalent to a direct sum with

both A1 , A2 nonzero.
In the real case, i.e. all aij are real, and assuming
(KM1) A is indecomposable
(KM2) aij = 0 if and only if aji = 0
(KM3) aij ≤ 0 for all i = j
there is a trichotomy due to E.B.Vinberg [17]:
- finite: det(A) = 0; there exists a vector u > 0 such that Au > 0; Au ≥ 0
implies u > 0 or u = 0.
- affine: corank(A) =1; there exists a u > 0 such that Au = 0; Au ≥ 0 implies
u = 0.
-indeterminate: there exists a u > 0 such that Au < 0; Av ≥ 0 and v ≥ 0
imply v = 0.
Here for a vector u = (u1 , u2 , . . . , un ), u > 0 means ui > 0 for all i and u ≥ 0
means ui ≥ 0 for all i.
A really deep and fascinating theory with applications to both other areas of
mathematics (e.g. the monstrous moonshine conjectures, algebraic combinatorics,
...) and physics (e.g. quantum field theory, string theory) has only been developed
(so far) for the integral case with moreover aii = 2 for all i.
Definition. A generalized Cartan matrix is an integer entry square matrix

satisfying (KM1)-(KM3) and
(KM4) aii = 2 for all i.
In this case the trichotomy mentioned above works out as
- finite: A is positive definite, i.e. all principal minors are positive.
- affine: A is semi-positive definite, i.e. det(A) = 0 and all principal minors
are positive.
- indeterminate: all other cases.
There is a natural and rather obvious bijection between valued graphs and gener-
alized Cartan matrices. To a valued graph with edge labels (dij , dji ) associate the
generalized Cartan matrix A = aij with aii = 2, aij = −dij if i and j are connected
and aij = 0 if i and j are not connected. In this correspondence connectedness of
the valued graph is the same as indecomposability of the matrix.
As it turns out the finite type generalized Cartan matrices A have as associated
Lie algebras the classical simple finite dimensional Lie algebras with the Dynkin
diagrams An , Bn , Cn , Dn , E6 , E7 , E8 , F4 , G2 as depicted just below lemma 2.5.1.
Nothing much new here. The affine case gives the infinite dimensional affine (or
Eyclidean) Lie algebras introduced independently and practically simultaneously
by Kac and Moody [11, 14, 15]. These are extraordinary rich in theory and
applications.
The corresponding extended Dynkin diagrams, also called Eyclidean diagrams
or affine diagrams, are listed in section 2.5 above just below the list of Dynkin
diagrams.
It may seem at first sight remarkable that finiteness of the Lie algebra asso-
ciated to a generalized Cartan matrix should correspond exactly to finite repre-
sentation type of the corresponding quiver, and that affineness of the Lie algebra
associated to a generalized Cartan matrix should correspond precisely to tame
representation type of the associated quiver 2
However, admitting some fairly deep theory in the two cases this is entirely
clear.
Whether a connected valued graph (quiver) Γ is finite, tame, wild represen-
tation type is ruled by the Dlab-Ringel-Ovsienko-Roiter quadratic form
of it. This quadratic form is defined as follows. It is assumed that the col-
lections of integers dij from the labels is (right) symmetrizable; meaning that
there are positive integers fi such that dij fj = dji fi . This is the same as saying
that the generalized Cartan matrix associated to the valued graph is (right) sym-
metrizable (which in turn is the same as being left symmetrizable (as is easy
to prove)). This symmetrizability condition is not much of a restriction be-
cause a generalized Cartan matrix of finite or affine type is always symmetrizable,
see [12, 18].
Then the Dlab-Ringel-Ovsienko-Roiter quadratic form of Γ is

n
qΓ (x) = 2fi x2i − dij fj xi xj
i=1 i=j
i.e. it is the quadratic form associated to the symmetric matrix C(Γ)F , where
C(Γ) is the generalized Cartan matrix associated to Γ and F is the diagonal
matrix F = diag(f1 , f2 , . . . , fn ). In terms of this quadratic form a quiver Γ is of
finite, tame, or wild representation type according to whether the quadratic form
is positive definite, positive semi-definite, or indefinite 3 4 .
2 The
diagrams in the lists correspond bijectively. However, the labels assigned to them in [1]
22 in [1] correspond respectively to A(2) , E (2) ,
n , F42 , G
and [12, 18, 19] differ. For instance, BC 6
(3)
D4 in [12, 18, 19]. It is the latter notation that is now mostly used.
3 It
cannot be negative semi-definite because the diagonal elements are positive.
4 Recall that the quadratic form of a symmetric matrix is positive definite (resp. positive
semi-definite) if and only if all principal minors of the matrix are positive (resp. all proper
principal minors are positive and matrix is singular). This does not necessarily hold for matrices
On the other hand the finiteness, affineness, or indefiniteness of the general-

ized Cartan matrix C(Γ) is determined by whether the principal minors of it are
positive, zero or negative. But if F is a diagonal matrix with positive diagonal
elements then a principal minor of C(Γ) is positive, negative, or zero, if and only
if the same is true for the corresponding principal minor of C(Γ)F .
So things fit. In fact the relations between quiver and species representations
and Lie algebras go much deeper. See [4,5,6].
It is an almost trivial matter to incorporate loops in the Dlab-Ringel analysis

of [1]. Let (Γ, d) be a connected valued graph with dii loops at vertex i. The
appropriate quadratic form is now

n
qΓ (x) = (2 − 2dii )fi x2i − dij fj xi xj
i=1 i=j
and this adds just one more semi-positive definite case, viz the graph of one vertex
with one loop which can be appropriately denoted A 0 (in the kind of notation
from [1]).
There is, or has been, a sort of rueful pessimism about doing something in
the case of wild quivers and wild representation type in general. This is not quite
justified as is evidenced for example by the remarkable results of Kac on dimensions
vectors, very nicely explained in [13].
Also, on a much more modest level, a great deal can sometimes be said in
specific cases. For instance the quivers

t - t

t -
t

t -
t - t
and their representations are of great importance in linear control and systems
theory and a great deal is known about (the moduli space of) their representations,
see [8,10].
⎛ ⎞
2 −1 0 0
⎜ −2 2 −1 0 ⎟
that are not symmetric. Consider for instance the matrix ⎜
⎝ 0
⎟ which is the
−1 2 −2⎠
0 0 −1 2
(1)
semi-positive definite Cartan matrix of C3 (in the notation of [12]). The quadratic form of this
matrix is 2x21 + 2x22 + 2x23 + 2x24 − 3x1 x2 − 2x2 x3 − 3x2 x4 which is indefinite.
Let S be a finite set and let M = (mst )s,t∈S be a symmetric matrix such that
mss = 1 and mst ∈ {2, 3, 4, . . .}∪{∞} for s = t. Such a matrix is called a Coxeter
matrix. Now let W be a group with S as a subset. Then the pair (W, S) is called
a Coxeter system and W is called a Coxeter group if W has a presentation
with elements from S as generators and the relations
(st)mst = 1 for all s, t ∈ S with mst = ∞ (1)
In particular s2 = 1 making W a group generated reflections 5 . The Coxeter graph

associated to a Coxeter system has |S| vertices and two vertices are joined by an
edge iff mst ≥ 3 and labeled with that number with the number 3 usually omitted
by convention. Then the finite Coxeter groups are classified by “Dynkin diagrams”
An , Bn , Dn , E6 , E7 , E8 , F4 , H3 , H4 , I2 (m) (2)
Most of these groups 6 turn up as the Weyl groups of the simple Lie algebras
with the corresponding labels. The correspondence between the Cartan matrix
defining the simple Lie algebra and the Coxeter matrix is according to the following
table
ast ats 0 1 2 3
mst 2 3 4 6
Note that G2 = I2 (6). Note also that the simple Lie algebras Bn , Cn give
the same (abstract) Coxeter group explaining that Cn is missing from the list (2)
above.
Similarly the extended Dynkin diagram give rise to affine Weyl groups which
are infinite Coxeter groups. This time there are no extra diagrams like the I2 (m),
m = 6 and H3 , H4 in the list (2).
See [5] and references quoted there for a great deal more on all this. The
subject of reflection groups is a very large one with applications to and/or links
with many parts of mathematics.
There are many more areas where Dynkin diagrams turn up, e.g. singularity
theory. This happens so often that V.I.Arnol’d posed it as a Hilbert type problem
(problem VIII in [16]). Here is the precise formulation:
The A-D-E classifications. The Coxeter-Dynkin graphs Ak , Dk , Ek appear in
many independent classification theorems. For instance
(a) classification of Platonic solids (or finite orthogonal groups) in Eyclidean
3-space.
5 As stated they are just elements of order 2 (involutions). It turns out it is indeed possible
to realize W as a group of geometric reflections in some real vector space.

6 Precisely those that satisfy the socalled “crystallographic condition”.
(b) classification of the categories of linear spaces and maps7 ; Gabriel, Gel’fand-
Ponomarev, Roiter-Nazarova, see Séminaire Bourbaki, exposé 444, 1974.
(c) classification of the singularities of algebraic hypersurfaces with a definite
intersection form of the neighboring smooth fibre, Tjurina.
(d) classification of the critical points of functions having no moduli (see
Séminaire Bourbaki, exposé 443, 1974).
(e) classification of the Coxeter groups generated by reflections, or of Weyl
groups with roots of equal length.
The problem is to find the common origin of all the A − D − E classification
theorems and to substitute a priori proofs for the a posteriori verification of the
parallelism of the classifications.
For an introductioon to the ADE problem see [9].

A fair selection of papers related to the ADE problem is mentioned in
<http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/week230.html>. It is also worth the trouble
in this connection to look at week62, week63, week64, week65.
The list of Arnol’d by no means exhaust the areas of mathematics where Dynkin
diagrams turn up. Some others areas are represented by the papers [2,3,20]. Here
one also finds some more different notations for Dynkin diagrams, both symbol-
ically and pictorially. Perhaps the most surprising of these papers (to us) is [3].
The numbers game is a one person game played on a finite simple graph with cer-
tain “amplitudes” assigned to its edges and an initial assignment of real numbers
to its nodes. The moves use the amplitudes to modify the node numbers. The
paper shows that if certain finiteness requirements are to be met one again finds
the Dynkin diagrams.
References
[1] Vlastimil Dlab and Claus Michael Ringel, Indecomposable representations of

graphs and algebras, Amer. Math. Soc., 173(1976).
[2] Armand Borel, Robert Friedam, John W.Morgan, Almost commuting elements
in compact Lie groups, arXiv: math.GR/9907007.
[3] Robert G.Donnelly, The numbers game, geometric representations of Coxeter
groups, and Dynkin diagram classification results, arXiv: math.CO/0610702.
[4] Peter Gabriel, Unzerlegbare Darstellungen I, Manuscripta Math., 6(1972),
71-103.
[5] Peter Gabriel, Indecomposable represenations II, In: Symposia Mathematica
INDAM, 11(1973), 81-104.
[6] Peter Gabriel, Andrei V.Roiter, Representations of finite dimensional algebras,
Springer, 2-nd edition, 1997.
[7] Meinolf Geck, Gunter Malle, Reflection groups. In: Michiel Hazewinkel (ed.),
Handbook of Algebra, vol.4, Elsevier, 2006, 337-383.
7 I.e. representations of quivers.
[8] Michiel Hazewinkel, (Fine) moduli spaces, for linear systems: what they are
and what they are good for. In: C.Byrnes and C.F.Martin (ed.), Geometric
methods for the theory of linear systems, Reidel, 1980, 125-193.
[9] M.Hazewinkel, W.Hesseling, D.Siersma, F.D.Veldkamp, The ubiquity of
Coxeter-Dynkin diagrams. An introduction to the A-D-E problem, Nieuw
Archief voor Wiskunde (3) 25 (1977), 257-307.
[10] Michiel Hazewinkel, Clyde F.Martin, Representations of the symmetric
groups, the specialization order, Schubert cells, and systems, Enseignement
Math. 29 (1983), 53-87.
[11] V.G.Kac, Simple irreducible graded Lie algebras of finite grouth, Izv. Acad.
Nauk SSSR (ser. mat) 32 (1968), 1923-1967.
[12] Victor G.Kac, Infinite dimensional Lie algebras, Cambridge Univ. Press,
1985.
[13] H.Kraft, Chr.Riedtmann, Geometry of representations of quivers. In:
P.Webb(ed.), Representations of algebras. Proceedings of the 1985 Durham
symposium, Cambridge Univ. Press, 1986, 109-145.
[14] R.V.Moody, A new class of Lie algebras, J. of Algebra 10(1968), 211-230.
[15] R.V.Moody, Euclidian Lie algebras, Canad. J. Math. 21(1969), 1432-1454.
[16] Problems of present day mathematics. In: F.E.Browder (ed.) Mathemati-
cal developments arising from Hilbert’s problems, American Mathematical
Society, 1976, 35-80.
[17] E.B.Vinberg, Discrete linear groups generated by reflections, Izv. Acad. Nauk
SSSR (ser.mat.) 35(1971), 1072-1112.
[18] Minoru Wakimoto, Lectures on infinite dimensional Lie algebra, World Sci-
entific, 2001
[19] Zhe-Xian Wan, Introduction to Kac-Moody algebra, World Scientific, 1991.
[20] Eric Zaslow, Dynkin diagrams of CP 1 orbifolds, arXiv: hep-th/9304130.
3. Representations of posets and of finite dimensional
algebras
In the theory of representations one tries to study a given object by means of
homomorphisms to another object which is in some way more concrete and easier
to understand. Such objects in the theory of finite dimensional algebras are endo-
morphisms of some finite dimensional vector space over a field k. Another, slightly
different, but related, point of view is that one attempts to realize an abstract ob-
ject in terms of more concrete things such as matrices. Whence the terminology
“representation”.
There exist different approaches to the representation theory of algebras. In
this chapter we consider only the part of representation theory connected with the
representations of partially ordered sets and Gabriel quivers. This chapter is more
of an informative character and it may be considered as a brief survey of those
well-known results of this theory which will be needed in this book. Therefore
most statements are made here for completeness without proofs.
Representations of finite partially ordered sets (posets, in short) play an im-
portant role in representation theory. They were first introduced by L.A.Nazarova
and A.V.Roiter. The first two sections of this chapter are devoted to partially
ordered sets and their representations. Here there are given the main results
of M.M.Kleiner on representations of posets of finite type and the results of
L.A.Nazarova on representations of posets of infinite type. The most important
result in this theory was been obtained by Yu.A.Drozd who showed that there is
a trichotomy between finite, tame and wild representation types for finite posets
over an algebraically closed field.
One of the main problems of representation theory is to obtain information
about the possible structure of indecomposable modules and to describe the iso-
morphism classes of all indecomposable modules. By the famous trichotomy the-
orem for finite dimensional algebras over an algebraically closed field, obtained by
Yu.A.Drozd, all such algebras are divided into three disjoint classes.
The main results on representations of finitely dimensional algebras are given
in section 3.4. Here we give the structure theorems for some special classes of finite
dimensional algebras of finite type, such as hereditary algebras and algebras with
zero square radical, obtained by P.Gabriel in terms of Dynkin diagrams. Section
3.5 is devoted to the first Brauer-Thrall conjecture, settled by A.V.Roiter for the
case of a finite dimensional algebra over an arbitrary field.
Unless otherwise stated, in this chapter we always suppose that all algebras
considered are associative finite dimensional with 1.
113
3.1 REPRESENTATIONS OF POSETS

The representation theory of partially ordered sets plays a prominent role in the
representation theory of finite-dimensional algebras.
Let P = (S, ) be a finite poset. Since every partial ordering on a finite set
can be extended to a total ordering, we can suppose that S = {1, 2, ..., m} and
i ≺ j ⇒ i < j.
Definition. Let P = (S, ), where S = {1, 2, ..., m}, be a finite partially
ordered set (or poset, in short). A representation of P over a field k or a
P-space is a set of finite dimensional k-spaces V = (V0 ; Vi : i ∈ S) such that
Vi ⊂ V0 for all i ∈ S and Vi ⊂ Vj precisely when i j in P. Such an object
is called a P-space. Let V = (V0 ; Vi : i ∈ S) and W = (W0 ; Wi : i ∈ S) be
two P-spaces. A morphism f : V → W is a k-linear transformation V0 → W0
such that f (Vi ) ⊂ Wi for all i ∈ S. The direct sum of V and W is V ⊕ W with
(V ⊕ W )0 = V0 ⊕ W0 and (V ⊕ W )i = Vi ⊕ Wi for all i ∈ S. A nonzero P-space is
said to be indecomposable if it cannot be written as a direct sum of two nonzero
P-spaces.
Therefore P-spaces over a fixed field k form an additive category, which is
denoted by Rep (P, k). Every P-space is a uniquely determined as a direct sum of
indecomposable P-spaces, by a corollary of the Krull-Schmidt theorem (see, vol.I,
p. 242). This theorem can be written in the following form:
Theorem 3.1.1. Every representation of a poset decomposes into a direct

sum of indecomposable representations uniquely, up to isomorphism and order of
summands.
From this theorem it follows that all representations in Rep (P, k) are uniquely
determined by the indecomposable ones. The set of all isomorphism classes of
indecomposable representations in Rep (P, k) shall be written as Ind (P, k).
Definition. A partially ordered set P is called subspace-finite (or of fi-

nite representation type) over a field k if Ind (P, k) is finite, i.e., there are
only a finite number of non-isomorphic indecomposable P-spaces. And P is
called subspace-infinite (or of infinite representation type) over a field k
if Ind (P, k) is infinite.
Representations of posets were first introduced and considered by L.A.Nazarova

and A.V.Roiter [Nazarova, Roiter, 1972]. Every representation of Rep (P, k) can
be given in terms of the language of matrices.
Definition. Let P = (S, ) be a finite poset, and let S = {1, 2, ..., m}. A
representation of P over a field k is an arbitrary matrix
REPRESENTATIONS OF POSETS AND ALGEBRAS 115
A= A1 A2 ... Am
with entries in k partitioned horizontally into m (vertical) blocks (also called

strips).
Here the columns of a block Ai are formed by the coordinates (with respect
to a chosen basis
in V0 ) of any minimal system of generators of Vi modulo its
subspace V̄i = Vi .
j≺i
Let B be another (matrix) representation of a poset P = (S, ):
B= B1 B2 ... Bm
Definition. A representation A is isomorphic to a representation B of a

poset P = (S, ) if A can be reduced to B by the following transformations:
(a) elementary transformations of rows of the whole matrix A;
(b) elementary transformations of columns within each vertical strip Ai ;
(c) additions of columns of a strip Ai to columns of a strip Aj if i ≺ j in P.
Notice that by a sequence of transformations (b) and (c) we can add an arbi-
trary linear combination of columns of Ai to a column of Aj if i ≺ j in P.
Definition. The direct sum of two representations A and B is the repre-

sentation A ⊕ B which is equal to:
..
A1 O A2 O . Am O
A ⊕ B=
..
O B1 O B2 . O Bm
For a representation V of a poset P = (S, ), where S = {1, 2, . . . , m}, we

define its dimension vector as d = dimV = (d0 , d1 , . . . , dm ) with coordinates d0 =
dim V0 , di = dim Vi /V̄i . For a matrix representation A there is analogously the
coordinate vector
cdn(A) = (s1 , s2 , . . . , sm , sm+1 ) ∈ Nm+1 ,
where si is the number of nonzero columns in the strip Ai for i ∈ S, and sm+1 is
the number of nonzero rows in A.
A matrix representation A is called exact (following the terminology of
M.Kleiner) if it is indecomposable and all coordinates of the vector cdn(A) are
nonzero.
In order to visualize a poset S we shall use its Hasse diagram: the elements of
S will be represented by points on the plane and the relation ≺ is always thought
of as going upwards along the edges drawn. Moreover, we join the point i with the
point j if and only if i ≺ j and there is no t ∈ S such that i ≺ t ≺ j. For example,
for the poset P = (S, ), with S = {a1 , a2 , a3 } and the sole relation a2 ≺ a3 we
have the picture:
• a3
a1 • • a2
Theorem 3.1.2 (M.Kleiner). A finite partially ordered set P is of finite

representation type if and only if P does not contain as a full subposet any poset
from the following list:
(1, 1, 1, 1) : • • • •
• •
• • •
(2, 2, 2) : (1, 3, 3) : • •
• • •
• • •
•
• • •
•
• • •
(N, 4) : (1, 2, 5) : •
•
• •
•
• • •
Here the n-element chain (1 ≺ 2 ≺ ... ≺ n) is denoted (n), and the disjoint
union (direct sum) of (n1 ), . . . , (ns ) is written (n1 , . . . , ns ). The symbol N denotes
the following 4-element poset {a1 ≺ a2 a3 ≺ a4 }, and (N, n) stands for the
disjoint union of N and the chain (n).
The posets in the list of the Kleiner theorem will be called the critical sub-
posets.
A characterization of all exact representations of a finite-representation poset
was obtained by M.M.Kleiner [Kleiner, 1972b]. We present here a complete list
of all 41 indecomposable exact matrix representations of Kleiner’s list with some
corrections. As was mentioned in the paper [Arnold, Richman, 1992] five represen-
tations from Kleiner’s list: (IX3 ), (IX9 ), (X2 ), (X8 ), and (XI) are decomposable.
We replaced these representations by the right indecomposable ones, and the nu-
meration remains unchanged.
Theorem 3.1.3 (M.Kleiner). A finite partially ordered set P of finite type
is exact if and only if it has one of the following forms:
• c1 a1 • • c1
a a b a b c
I ; II ; III ; IV a b ;V b ;
• • • • • •
• • • c2 a 2 • • • c2
a 1 b 1 c1 a1 • • c1 a1 • • c1
• • •
VI ; VII • c2 ; VIII a2 • • c2 ;
• • • b b
a 2 b 2 c2 a 2 • • • c3 • a3 • • c3
• c1
• c1
• c2
IX a1 • • b1 • c2 ; X ;
a1 • • c3
a2 • • b2 • c3 b
a2 • • • c4
a1 • • b 1 • c1
a1 • • c1
a2 • • b 2 • c2
XI a2 • • b1 • c2 ; XII ;
• c3
a3 • • b2 • c3
• c4
• c1
• c2
XIII .
b1 • • a 1 • c3
b2 • • a 2 • c4
All distinct (up to similarity) exact indecomposable matrix representations of the

posets listed above are the following. (Here they are written in the matrix form
(Ai , Bi , Ci ), where Ai , Bi , Ci are the matrix blocks in the matrix representations
of the posets corresponding to the points ai , bi , ci , respectively.)
If P = I, then A = (1). (I)

If P = II, then A = B = (1). (II)
If P =III, thenA = B = C = (1); (III1 )
1 0
A = 11, C = . (III2 )
0, B = 1
If P = IV, then

1 1 1 0
A = ,B = , C1 = , C2 = . (IV)
0 1 0 1
If P = V, then
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 0 0
A1 = ⎝1⎠ , A2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ B = ⎝1⎠ , C1 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ (V1 )
0 0, 1 0, 1;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 1 0 0
A1 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ A2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ B = ⎝0 1 ⎠ C1 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ (V2 )
0, 0, 1 0, 0, 1;

0 1 1 1 0
A1 = A2 = ,B = C1 = C2 = (V3 )
1, 0 1, 0, 1.
If P = VI, then
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 1 0
A1 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ A2 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ B1 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ (VI)
0, 1, 0,
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0
B2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ C1 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠
0, 0, 1.
If P = VII, then
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 1 0 0 1
⎜1⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜1 1⎟
⎜ ⎟
A1 = ⎝ ⎠ A2 = ⎝ ⎜ ⎟ B = ⎝⎜ ⎟ (VII1 )
0 0 0⎠ 0 1⎠
0, 0 1, 1 0,
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ C3 = ⎝ 1 ⎠
0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 1 1
⎜0 1 ⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜1 0⎟
A1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝0 0 ⎠ A2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ B = ⎝0
⎜ ⎟, (VII2 )
1⎠
0 0, 1, 1 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ C3 = ⎝ 1 ⎠
0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 1
⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜1 1⎟
A1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
⎝ 0 ⎠ A2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ B = ⎝0 1⎠,
⎟ (VII3 )
0, 1, 1 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ C3 = ⎝ 1 ⎠
0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 1 1
A1 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ A2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ B = ⎝1⎠, (VII4 )
0, 0, 1
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0
C1 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ C3 = ⎝ 0 ⎠
0, 0, 1;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 1
A1 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ A2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ B = ⎝0 1 ⎠ (VII5 )
0, 0, 1 0,
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0
C1 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ C3 = ⎝ 0 ⎠
0, 0, 1.
If P = VIII, then
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 1 0 0 1
⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜1 1 ⎟
A1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
⎝ 0 ⎠ A2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ A3 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ B = ⎝0 1 ⎠
⎟ (VIII)
0, 0, 1, 1 0,
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ C3 = ⎝ 1 ⎠
0, 0, 0.
If P =⎛IX,⎞then ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 1 0 1 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1 0 ⎟ ⎜1 1 ⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
A1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 ⎟ A2 = ⎜0 0 ⎟ B1 = ⎜0 1 ⎟ B2 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ (IX1 )
⎝0⎠ ⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝1 0 ⎠ ⎝0⎠
0, 1 0, 0 0, 1,
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
⎜ 0 ⎟ C2 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ C3 = ⎜1 0 ⎟
⎟
⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0 1 ⎠
0, 0, 0 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 1 1 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1 0 ⎟ ⎜0 1 ⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
A1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 ⎟ A2 = ⎜0 0 ⎟ B1 = ⎜1 1 ⎟ B2 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ (IX2 )
⎝0⎠ ⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝0 1 ⎠ ⎝0⎠
0, 1 0, 0 0, 1,
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1 0 ⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 ⎟ C2 = ⎜0 1 ⎟ C3 = ⎜ 0 ⎟
⎝0⎠ ⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝1⎠
0, 0 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 1 0 0
⎜1⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0 1 ⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
A1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 ⎟ A2 = ⎜1 0 ⎟ B1 = ⎜1 0 ⎟ B2 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ (IX3 )
⎝0⎠ ⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝1 1 ⎠ ⎝1⎠
0, 0 1, 0 0, 1,
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 1
⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜1 0 ⎟ C2 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ C3 = ⎜ 0 ⎟
⎝0 1 ⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠
0 0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 1 0 0 1 0
⎜1⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜1 1 ⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
A1 =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 ⎟ A2 = ⎜0 0 ⎟ B1 = ⎜0 1 ⎟ B2 = ⎜ 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟ (IX4 )
⎝0⎠ ⎝0 1 ⎠ ⎝1 0 ⎠ ⎝0⎠
0, 1 0, 0 0, 1,
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
C1 =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 ⎟ C2 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ C3 = ⎜ 1 ⎟
⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠
0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 1 ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
⎜0⎟ ⎜1 0 ⎟ 1 1 0
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜0 1 ⎟ ⎜0⎟
A1 =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜1⎟ A2 = ⎜0 0⎟ B1 = ⎝1 0 ⎠ B2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠
⎜ ⎟ (IX5 )
⎝0⎠ ⎝1 0 ⎠
0 0, 1,
, ,
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟
C1 =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝0⎠ , C2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ C3 = ⎝ 1 ⎠
0 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 1 1 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1 0 ⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟
A1 =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 1 ⎠ A2 = ⎝0 0 ⎠ B1 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ B2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ (IX6 )
0, 1 0, 0, 1,
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟
C1 =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ C3 = ⎝ 1 ⎠
0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 1 0 1 0
⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜1 1⎟ ⎜0⎟
A1 =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 ⎠ A2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ B1 = ⎝1 0⎠ , B2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠
0, 1, 0 0 1,
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟
C1 =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ C3 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ (IX7 )
0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 0
⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟
A1 ⎜ ⎜
= ⎝ ⎠ A2 = ⎝ ⎠ B1 = ⎝ ⎠ B2 = ⎝ ⎟
⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎟ ⎜ , (IX8 )
0 0 1 0⎠
0, 1, 0, 1
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟
C1 =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ C3 = ⎝ 1 ⎠
0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 1
10
A1 = A2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ B1 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ B2 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ (IX9 )
0,
1, 0, 1,
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 1
C1 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ C3 = ⎝ 0 ⎠
1, 0, 0.
If P = X, then
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 1 0 0 1 1
⎜1 0 ⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0 0 1⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜0 1 ⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0 1 0⎟
⎜
A1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟,
0 0 ⎟ A2 = ⎜0 0 ⎟ B = ⎜1 0 1⎟
(X1 )
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝0 1 0⎠
0 0, 0 1, 1 0 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0 0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0 0⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ C2 = ⎜ ⎟ C3 = ⎜
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎟
⎜ 0 ⎟ C4 =⎜
⎜1
⎟
0
⎜ ⎟ 0
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ 0⎟⎟
⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0 1⎠
0, 0, 0, 0 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 1 0 0 1 0
⎜1 0 ⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0 1 1⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜0 1 ⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0 0 1⎟
⎜
A1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
A2 = ⎜ ⎟ B=⎜ ⎟, (X2 )
⎟ ⎟ ⎜1 0 1⎟
⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝0 1 0⎠
0 0 0 1, 0 0 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜0⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ C2 = ⎜ ⎟ C3 = ⎜1 0 ⎟ C4 =⎜ ⎟
⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0 1 ⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝0⎠
0, 0, 0 0, 1;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 1 0
⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0 0⎟ ⎜0 0 1⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜1 0 ⎟ ⎜ 0⎟ ⎜ 1⎟
A1 = ⎜ ⎟ A2 = ⎜0 ⎟ B = ⎜1 0 ⎟, (X3 )
⎜0 1 ⎟ ⎜0 0⎟ ⎟ ⎜0 1 1⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎜ ⎟
⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝1 0 ⎠ ⎝0 1 0⎠
0 0, 0 1, 1 0 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 1
⎜0⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜0⎟ ⎜1 0 ⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ C2 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
0 0 1 ⎟ C3 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ C4 = ⎜ 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝1⎠ ⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠
0, 0 0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 1 0 0 1 0
⎜1 0 ⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜0 1 ⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0 0 1 ⎟
⎜
A1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎟ A2 = ⎜0 0 ⎟ B = ⎜1 0 1 ⎟ (X4 )
⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝0 1 0 ⎠
0 0, 0 1, 1 0 0,
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0 0
⎜0 1 ⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ C2 = ⎜ ⎟ C3 = ⎜ ⎟ C4 = ⎜
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎟
⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝1⎠
0 0, 0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0 1 0 1
⎜0 1 ⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0 0 1 ⎟
⎜
A1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎟ A2 = ⎜0 0 ⎟ B = ⎜0 1 0⎟, (X5 )
⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝1 0 ⎠ ⎝0 1 0 ⎠
0 0, 0 1, 1 0 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ C2 = ⎜ ⎟ C3 = ⎜ ⎟ C4 = ⎜
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜1⎟
⎟
⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠
0, 0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 1 0 0 1 0
⎜1 0 ⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜
A1 = ⎜0 1 ⎟ A2 = ⎜0 0 ⎟ B = ⎜
⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜0 0 1⎟,
⎟ (X6 )
⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝1 0 1 ⎠
0 0, 0 1, 1 0 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 ⎟ C2 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ C3 = ⎜ 1 ⎟ C4 = ⎜ 0 ⎟
⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝1⎠
0, 0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 1 0 0 1 0
⎜1⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0 0 1⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
A1 = ⎜ 0
⎜ ⎟
⎟ A2 = ⎜0 0 ⎟ B = ⎜0 1 1⎟,
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ (X7 )
⎝0⎠ ⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝1 0 1⎠
0, 0 1, 1 0 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 ⎟ C2 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ C3 = ⎜ 1 ⎟ C4 = ⎜ 0 ⎟
⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝1⎠
0, 0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 1 1
⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜1 0 1⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
A1 = ⎜1 0 ⎟ A2 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ B = ⎜ ⎜1 0 0⎟,
⎟ (X8 )
⎝0 1 ⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0 1 0⎠
0 0, 1, 0 0 1
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 1
⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 ⎟ C2 = ⎜ 1 ⎟ C3 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ C4 = ⎜ 0 ⎟
⎝1⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠
0, 0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 1 0 0 1
⎜1 0 ⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 1 ⎟ ⎜ 0 0 ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
A1 = ⎜ ⎟ A2 = ⎜ ⎟ B = ⎜1 0 ⎟, (X9 )
⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝0 1 ⎠
0 0, 0 1, 1 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 ⎟ C2 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ C3 = ⎜ 1 ⎟ C4 = ⎜ 0 ⎟
⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝1⎠
0, 0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 1 0 0 1
⎜1⎟ ⎜0 0 ⎟ ⎜1 1⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
A1 = ⎜ 0
⎜ ⎟
⎟ A2 = ⎜0 0 ⎟ B = ⎜0 1⎟,
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ (X10 )
⎝0⎠ ⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝1 0⎠
0, 0 1, 1 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 ⎟ C2 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ C3 = ⎜ 1 ⎟ C4 = ⎜ 0 ⎟
⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝1⎠
0, 0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0 1
⎜0 1 ⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜1 0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
A1 =⎜
⎜ 0 0 ⎟ A2 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ B = ⎜1 1⎟,
⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ (X11 )
⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0 1⎠
0 0, 1, 1 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
C1 =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 ⎟ C2 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ C3 = ⎜ 1 ⎟ C4 = ⎜ 0 ⎟
⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝1⎠
0, 0, 0, 0;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 1 0 0 1
⎜0⎟ ⎜0 1 ⎟ ⎜1 0⎟
A1 =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
⎝ 1 ⎠ A2 = ⎝0 0 ⎠ B = ⎝1 1⎠,
⎟ (X12 )
0, 0 0, 1 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟
C1 =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ C3 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ C4 = ⎝ 0 ⎠
0, 0, 0, 1;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 1 0 1
⎜1 0 ⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜1 1⎟
A1 =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
⎝0 1 ⎠ A2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ B = ⎝1 0⎠,
⎟ (X13 )
0 0, 0, 1 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟
C1 =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ C3 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ C4 = ⎝ 0 ⎠
0, 0, 0, 1;
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 1 0 1
⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜1 0 ⎟
A1 =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
⎝ 0 ⎠ A2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ B = ⎝1 1⎠,
⎟ (X14 )
0, 0, 1 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟
C1 =⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ C3 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ C4 = ⎝ 0 ⎠
0, 0, 0, 1.
If P = XI, then
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 1 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜1⎟
A1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 ⎠ A2 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ A3 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ B1 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ B2 = ⎝1⎠, (XI)
0, 0, 1, 0, 1
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 1
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 1 ⎠ C2 = ⎝ 0 ⎠ C3 = ⎝ 0 ⎠
0, 0, 0.
If P = XII, then
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 1 1 0 1 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜0 1 ⎟ ⎜1 0 ⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
A1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 ⎟ A2 = ⎜1 0 ⎟ B1 = ⎜0 0 ⎟ B2 = ⎜0⎟,
⎜ ⎟ (XII)
⎝0⎠ ⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝1 0 ⎠ ⎝0⎠
0, 0 1, 0 0, 1
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
C1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 ⎟ C2 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ C3 = ⎜ 1 ⎟ C3 = ⎜ 0 ⎟
⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝1⎠
0, 0, 0, 0.
If P = XIII, then
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 1 1 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1 0 ⎟ ⎜0 1 ⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
A1 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 ⎟ A2 = ⎜0 0 ⎟ B1 = ⎜1 1 ⎟ B2 = ⎜0⎟,
⎜ ⎟ (XIII)
⎝0⎠ ⎝0 0 ⎠ ⎝0 1 ⎠ ⎝0⎠
0, 1 0, 0 0, 1
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0
⎜0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜0⎟ ⎜0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
C1 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ C2 = ⎜ 0 ⎟ C3 = ⎜ 1 ⎟ C3 = ⎜
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜0⎟
⎟
⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝0⎠ ⎝1⎠
0, 0, 0, 0.
Example 3.1.1.
In this example we show in what way one can obtain the vector representations
of posets from the list above.
Consider the exact indecomposable matrix representation (V2 ) of the poset
a1 • • c1
P =V: b from the list above:
a 2 • • • c2
⎛ ⎞
⎛ ⎞ 1 ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 ⎜0 ⎟ 1 1 0 0
A1 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ A2 = ⎜ ⎝0 ⎠
⎟ B = ⎝0 1 ⎠ C1 = ⎝ 1 ⎠ C2 = ⎝0⎠
0, 1 0, 0, 1
,
Then the corresponding matrix representation can be written as the following
matrix partitioned horizontally into 5 vertical blocks:
0 1 1 1 0 0
A= 1 0 0 1 1 0
0 0 1 0 0 1
The corresponding vector representation V = {V0 , Va1 , Va2 , Vb , Vc1 , Vc2 } over
a field k can be obtained in the following way. Since the number of rows of the
matrix A is equal to 3, dimk V0 = 3. ⎛Therefore
⎞ V⎛
0 =⎞{e1 , e2 , ⎛
e3 }⎞is a vector space
1 0 0
spanned by the basis elements e1 = ⎝0⎠, e2 = ⎝1⎠, e3 = ⎝0⎠. Since a2 a1
0 0 1
in P, Va2 ⊂ Va1 and so Va2 = {e1 }, Va1 = {e1 , e2 }. Since c2 c1 in P and
a1 , c2 are incomparable in⎛P,⎞Vc2 ⊂ ⎛ V⎞c1 , and so Vc2 = {e3 }, Vc1 = {e2 , e3 },
1 1
Vb = {e1 + e3 , e1 + e2 } = k ⎝0⎠ + k ⎝1⎠.
1 0
For a finite poset P = (S, ) of size m one introduces the rational Tits
quadratic form qP : Qm+1 → Q defined by:

m+1 m
qP = x2i + xi xj − ( xi )xm+1 .
i=1 i≺j≤m i=1
The rational Tits quadratic form qP is called weakly positive if qP (x) > 0 for any
nonzero vector x = (x1 , x2 , . . . , xm+1 ) ∈ Qm+1 with x1 , x2 , . . . , xm+1 ≥ 0. And
this form is called weakly non-negative, if qP (x) ≥ 0 for any nonzero vector
x = (x1 , x2 , . . . , xm+1 ) ∈ Qm+1 with x1 , x2 , . . . , xm+1 ≥ 0.
Examples 3.1.2.
• 2
1. Let P be the poset . The corresponding rational Tits quadratic
• 1
form
qP = x21 + x22 + x23 + x1 x2 − (x1 + x2 )x3
is weakly positive since
1 1 1
qP = (x1 + x2 )2 + (x1 − x3 )2 + (x2 − x3 )2 > 0
2 2 2
for any nonzero vector (x1 , x2 , x3 ).

2. Let P be the poset • • • • . The corresponding rational Tits
quadratic form
qP = x21 + x22 + x23 + x24 + x25 − (x1 + x2 + x3 + x4 )x5

is weakly non-negative since
1 1 1 1
qP = (x1 − x5 )2 + (x2 − x5 )2 + (x3 − x5 )2 + (x4 − x5 )2 ≥ 0
2 2 2 2
for any nonzero vector (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 , x5 ).
The following result of Yu.A.Drozd gives a characterization of finite posets of

finite type using the Tits quadratic form:
Theorem 3.1.4 (Yu.A.Drozd). Let P = (S, ) be a finite poset over a field

k with rational Tits quadratic form qP . Then
1. The poset P is of finite representation type if and only if qP is weakly
positive.
2. If P is a finite poset of finite representation type and V is (a matrix of ) an
indecomposable P-space with cdn(V) = (s1 , s2 , . . . , sm , sm+1 ), then qP (cdn(V)) =
1, sj ≤ 6 for j = 1, 2, . . . , m + 1 and End(V) = k.
3. If P is a finite poset of finite representation type, and V and W are inde-
composable P-spaces, then V W if and only if cdn(V) = cdn(W).
As in the case of representations of quivers, for finite posets one can also
introduce the notions of tame representation type and wild representation type.
Let P = (S, ), where S = {1, 2, ..., m}, be a finite poset. And let V = (V0 ; Vi :
i ∈ S) be a representation of P over a field k. As already said, the dimension
vector d = dimV = (d0 , d1 , . . . , dm ) with coordinates d0 = dim V0 , di = dim Vi /V̄i
m
is called the dimension of the representation V . Write ω(V ) = d0 + di .
i=1
Definition. We say that a poset P is of tame representation type over

a field k, if for any natural number n there exists a finite set of representations
Mn ⊂ Rep(P, k[x]) such that any V ∈ Ind(P, k) with ω(V ) ≤ n has the form
S ⊗ B, where S ∈ Mn and B is a finite dimensional k[x]-module.
Definition. We say that a poset P is of wild representation type over a

field k, if there exists a representation S of P over the free algebra kx, y such
that for any two non-isomorphic and indecomposable finite dimensional kx, y-
modules B1 and B2 the representations S ⊗ B1 and S ⊗ B2 are indecomposable
and non-isomorphic over k.
The fundamental result due to Yu.A.Drozd says that there is a trichotomy

between finite, tame and wild representation type for finite posets over an alge-
braically closed field k:
Theorem 3.1.5 (Yu.A.Drozd). If k is an algebraically closed field and P is

a finite poset it is of finite, tame or wild representation type and these types are
mutually exclusive.
The following famous theorem gives a characterization of a wild partially or-

dered sets.
Theorem 3.1.6 (L.A.Nazarova). Let P be a poset of infinite representation

type over an algebraically closed field k with the rational Tits quadratic form qP .
Then the following conditions are equivalent:
1. The poset P is of tame representation type.
2. The poset P is not of wild representation type.
3. The quadratic form qP is weakly non-negative.
4. The poset P does not contain as a full subposet any poset from the following
list:
N1 = (1, 1, 1, 1, 1) : • • • • •
• • • •
N2 = (1, 1, 1, 2) :
•
• •
• • •
• •
N3 = (2, 2, 3) : • • • N4 = (1, 3, 4) :
• • •
•
•
•
• • •
•
• • •
•
N5 = (N, 5) : • N6 = (1, 2, 6) :
•
•
• •
•
• • •
Remark 3.1.1. This theorem was proved by L.A.Nazarova [Nazarova, 1975]

and independently by P.Donovan, M.R.Freislich [Donovan, M.R.Freislich, 1974].
3.2 DIFFERENTIATION ALGORITHMS FOR POSETS

The results characterizing posets of finite representation type and posets of wild
type were obtained by M.M.Kleiner and L.A.Nazarova using methods developed
by L.A.Nazarova and V.A.Roiter in their paper [Nazarova, Roiter, 1972]. An
important role in these methods is played by a differentiation algorithm for posets.
In 1977 A.G.Zavadskij in his paper [Zavadskij, 1977] introduced another differen-
tiation algorithm for computing representations of posets. Since both these algo-
rithms are of great importance and are used in various applications we shall give
them, but without proof.
Definition. The width w(P) of a poset P = (S, ) is a maximal number of

pairwise incomparable elements in P, i.e. the maximal length of an antichain.
A poset P is called a chain if any two of its elements are comparible.
Examples 3.2.1.
1. The posets (2,2,2), (1,3,3), (N,4), (1,2,5) in theorem 3.1.2 have width equal
to 3, whereas the poset (1,1,1,1) has width equal to 4.
2. A poset P is of width one if and only if P is a chain.
Lemma 3.2.1. If the width w(P) of a poset P is greater than or equal to four,
then P is of infinite representation type.
Proof. Suppose that w(P) ≥ 4. Then P contains a full subposet R consisting

of four incomparable elements. It is sufficient to show that R is a poset of infinite
type over a field k. For this purpose we note that for any λ ∈ k the matrix
representation
J(n, λ) E E O
A(n,λ) =
E E O E
with cdn(A(n,λ) ) = (n, n, n, n, 2n) is an indecomposable representation of R, where

E is the identity matrix in Mn (k) and J(n, λ) is a Jordan block of size n × n.
From this lemma it follows that a poset of finite representation type has
width ≤ 3.
For a poset P = (S, ) and x ∈ S we define the upper and lower cone of x:
xΔ = {y ∈ S : x y}
x∇ = {y ∈ S : y x}
Definition. Let P = (S, ) and T = (T, ) be any two (disjoint) posets. The
cardinal sum P ∪ T or (P, T ) of P and T is the set of all s ∈ S and t ∈ T with
a relation such that s s1 and t t1 (s, s1 ∈ S; t, t1 ∈ T ) have unchanged
meanings and there are no other relations in P ∪ T .
Definition. Let P = (S, ) be a poset and let a ∈ S be a maximal element

such that
w(P \ a∇ ) ≤ 2.
We define a new poset
∂a P = {P \ a} ∪ {(p, q) : p, q, a are incomparable in P}.
The order relation in ∂a P is defined by keeping the relation between elements

of P and by the following formulas:
(1) i (p, q) if and only if i p or i q;
(2) (p, q) i if and only if p i and q i;
(3) (p, q) (p1 , q1 ) if and only if for any x ∈ {p, q} there is y ∈ {p1 , q1 } such
that x y.
It is clear that ∂a P becomes a poset which is called the differential of P
with respect to the maximal element a ∈ P.
Remark 3.2.1. Note that a maximal element with property w(P \ a∇ ) ≤ 2

does not always exist for any poset. For example, the poset P : • • • •
has no such maximal element. However for any poset P of width ≤ 3 each maximal
element a ∈ P has this property, i.e., w(P \ a∇ ) ≤ 2.
Theorem 3.2.2. Suppose that P is a finite poset, w(P) ≤ 3 and a ∈ P is a

maximal element. Then the posets P and ∂a P have the same representation type
(i.e., both are either of finite representation type or of infinite representation type).
The following result shows that the differentiation procedure is an algorithm

for determining matrix representations of posets.
Theorem 3.2.3. A poset P is of finite representation type if and only if

w(P) ≤ 3 and the differentiation procedure reduces P in finitely many steps to the
empty poset.
Remark 3.2.2. Note that the differentiation procedure described above

does not depend on the choice of a sequence of maximal elements (see [Gabriel,
1972/1973]).
The differentiation procedure with respect to a maximal element, which is often

called the reduction algorithm of Nazarova-Roiter, is always applicable to
posets of width at most three.
We shall now describe the differentiation procedure for posets due to

V.Zavadskij. This two-point differentiation algorithm can be applied to posets in
more general situations in comparison with the reduction algorithm of Nazarova-
Roiter.
Definition. Let P = (S, ) be a poset, and a, b ∈ S. A pair (a, b) is called

suitable if a ≺ b, a = b and the subposet
Pba = P \ (aΔ ∪ b∇ )
of P is either empty or is a chain. We call (a, b) irreducible if there is no relation

b ≺ j and i ≺ a with i, j ∈ Pba .
Remark 3.2.3. A suitable pair of elements does not always exist for any poset.

For example, the poset P : • • • • has no such suitable pair of elements.
If a poset contains no suitable pair of elements it is called non-differential.
Example 3.2.2.
Consider the poset P of the following form:
b • •
• • a
which width equal to 3. Here b is a maximal element of P and a is a minimal

element in P \ b∇ . Here (a, b) is a suitable pair.
Definition. Let (a, b) be a suitable pair of elements in a finite poset P =

(S, ), and let Pba = C = {c1 ≺ c2 ≺ . . . ≺ cn } be a chain or the empty set. We
define a new poset
δ(a,b) P = b∇ + C − + C + + aΔ
according to the following rules:
(1) If C is not empty replace C by two chains C + = {c+ + +
1 ≺ c2 ≺ . . . ≺ cn }
− − + −
and C − = {c1 ≺ c2 ≺ . . . ≺ c− n } such that c i and c i satisfy the same relations
as ci in P for i = 1, 2, . . . , n. If C is empty C + = C − is empty as well. The partial
ordering on aΔ and b∇ is as in P.
(2) Add new relations, namely a ≺ b, a ≺ c+ − −
1 , cn ≺ b and ci ≺ ci for
+
i = 1, 2, ..., n.
(3) If during the second step we get elements x, y with x ≺ y and y ≺ x, then
we identify them in δ(a,b) P.
The poset δ(a,b) P will be called the differential of P with respect to a

suitable pair (a, b) in P.
Example 3.2.3.
Let P be of the following form:
a2 • b • c •
a1 •
Then δ(a1 ,b) P has the form:
a2 b c+
a1 c−
Remark 3.2.4. If C is the empty set, then δ(a,b) P = (S1 , 1 ), where 1 is

the same as in P with a new added relation a ≺1 b. If there is a relation b ≺ a
then we identify a and b in S, otherwise S1 = S.
Remark 3.2.5. The poset δ(a,b) P was defined by A.G.Zavadskij and

V.V.Kirichenko in the particular case when |C| ≤ 1 [Zavadskij, Kirichenko, 1977].
In the general case this definition was introduced by A.G.Zavadskij in his paper
[Zavadskij, 1977].
Definition. We say that a poset P is N∗ -free if P contains as a full subposet

any poset of the form N1 , N2 , N3 , N4 , N5 and N6 from the list of theorem 3.1.6.
Any poset which is a cardinal sum of one-pointed posets and posets of the form
(1,1) is called a garland.
A disjoint union decomposition P = P + C + P is called a splitting decom-
position of P if
(1) The subset C is either empty or a chain.
(2) x ≺ y for all x ∈ P and all x ∈ P .
For the study of indecomposable representations of posets of tame type by

using the differentiation procedure with respect to a suitable pair the most impor-
tant statements are the following (see [Nazarova, Zavadskij, 1977], [Bondarenko,
Nazarova, Zavadskij, 1979]):
Proposition 3.2.4. If (a.b) is an irreducible suitable pair in the poset P and

P is N∗ -free, then the derived poset δ(a,b) P is also N∗ -free.
Proposition 3.2.5. Any exact non-differential poset which does not contain
as a full subposet any poset of the form N1 = (1, 1, 1, 1, 1) and N2 = (1, 1, 1, 2) is
a sum of two garlands.
Theorem 3.2.6. Suppose P is an N∗ -free poset and w(P) ≥ 2.

(1) If P has no nontrivial splitting decomposition and P does not contain as a
full subposet any poset of the following form:
• •
NZ :
• • • •
then either P = (1, 1, 1, 1) or there is an irreducible suitable pair (a, b) in P.

(2) If (a, b) is a suitable pair in P and P does not contain as a full subposet
any poset of the form N Z then δ(a,b) P also does not contain a subposet of the
form N Z.
Remarks 3.2.5. From results of the paper [Nazarova, Roiter, 1973] it follows
that all posets which are a sum of two garlands are of tame type.
For a given suitable pair (a, b) of elements of a poset P define a map
δ(a,b) : Rep(P, k) → Rep(δ(a,b) P, k)
as follows. Let C = Pba = {c1 ≺ c2 ≺ . . . ≺ cn }, and let V = (V0 ; Vi : i ∈ P)

be a P-space. Choose a k-subspace U ⊆ Va such that Va + Vb = U ⊕ Vb and set
δ(a,b) (V ) = W = (W0 ; Wi : i ∈ δ(a,b) P), where
(i) W0 = V0 /U ;
(ii) Wc+ = (Va + Vci )/U for i = 1, 2, . . . , n;
i
(iii) Wc− = ((Vb ∩ Vci ) + U )/U for i = 1, 2, . . . , n;
i
(iv) Wj = (Vj + U )/U for j ∈ (aΔ ∪ b∇ ).
We call δ(a,b) a differentiation map with respect to the suitable pair
(a, b).
It can be shown that the definition of δ(a,b) (V ) does not depend of the choice
of U and so we have a well defined map.
The following fundamental result gives the main tool in the study of indecom-
posable representations of posets of finite type and posets of tame type.
Theorem 3.2.7 (A.G.Zavadskij). Let P be a finite poset with a suitable pair

(a, b), and let Pba = C = {c1 ≺ c2 ≺ . . . ≺ cn } be a chain or an empty set. Then
the differentiation map δ(a,b) , defined above, has the following properties:
(i) δ(a,b) (V ⊕ V ) δ(a,b) (V ) ⊕ δ(a,b) (V );
(ii) Suppose V is an indecomposable representation of P. Then δ(a,b) (V ) = 0
if and only if V is isomorphic to one of the P-spaces Pa , P(a,ci ) , i = 1, 2, . . . , n,
where Pa is the induced representation of the one-element subset {a}, P(a,ci ) is the
induced representation of the two-element subset {a, ci } so that P(a,ci ) = Pa + Pci .
If δ(a,b) (V ) = 0 then it is indecomposable.
(iii) The mapping δ(a,b) : Rep(P, k) → Rep(δ(a,b) P, k) yields a mapping corre-

spondence δ(a,b) : Ind(P, k) → Ind(δ(a,b) P, k).
(iv) |Ind(P, k)| = |Ind(δ(a,b) P, k)| + 1 + n.
As an immediate consequence of this theorem we have the following result:
Corollary 3.2.7. A poset P is of finite representation type if and only if the

derived poset δ(a,b) P is of finite type.
3.3 REPRESENTATIONS AND MODULES. THE REGULAR

REPRESENTATIONS
Let k be a field, and let A be an associative finite dimensional k-algebra with 1,
where k is an arbitrary field.
Definition. A representation of a k-algebra A is an algebra homomorphism

T : A → Endk (V ), where V is a k-vector space.
In other words, to define a representation T is to assign to every element a ∈ A
a linear operator T (a) in such a way that
T (a + b) = T (a) + T (b)
T (αa) = αT (a)
T (ab) = T (a)T (b)
T (1) = E (the identity operator)
for arbitrary a, b ∈ A, α ∈ k.
The action of the operators T (a) on V is written on the right, i.e. T (a) : V →
V , v → vT (a).
If the vector space V is finite dimensional over k, then its dimension is called
the dimension (or degree) of the representation T . Obviously, the image of a
representation T forms a subalgebra in Endk (V ). If T is a monomorphism, then
this subalgebra is isomorphic to the algebra A. In this case the representation T
is called faithful.
Let T : A → Endk (V ) and S : A → Endk (W ) be two representations of a

k-algebra A. A morphism from the representation T to the representation S is
a linear k-vector map ϕ : V → W such that the diagram
ϕ
V W
T (x) S(x)
ϕ
V W
is commutative for all x ∈ A, that is, ϕT (x) = S(x)ϕ, for all x ∈ A.

If ϕ is an invertible morphism, then it is called an isomorphism of repre-

sentations. Two representations T and S are called isomorphic if there is an
isomorphism ϕ from the representation T to the representation S, and in this case
we have
S(x) = ϕT (x)ϕ−1 . (3.3.1)
Theorem 3.3.1 (A.L.Cayley). Every finite dimensional algebra admits a

faithful representation. In other words, every algebra is isomorphic to a subalgebra
of an algebra of linear operators.
Proof. From the axioms for algebras it follows that for every a ∈ A the map
T (a) : x → xa, x ∈ A, is a linear operator on the space A. Moreover, T (a + b) =
T (a) + T (b), T (αa) = αT (a), T (ab) = T (a)T (b) and T (1) = E (the identity
operator). Thus, T is a representation of the algebra A. If a = b, then 1 · a = 1 · b.
This shows that the operators T (a) and T (b) are distinct and T is a faithful
representation, as required.
The representation constructed in the proof of Cayley’s theorem is called (right)

regular. The dimension of the regular representation equals the dimension of the
algebra.
If the dimension of a representation T is equal to n, then one may choose a
basis (e1 , e2 , ..., en ) in the space V and assign to each operator T (a) ∈ Endk (V )
its matrix Ta = (aij ) in this basis so that

n
T ej = aij ei , aij ∈ k.
i=1
Obviously, the correspondence a → Ta is a homomorphism from the algebra A to

the matrix algebra Mn (k). Such a homomorphism is called a matrix represen-
tation of A.
If one chooses bases in the vector spaces V and W , and Tx , Sx are the matrices
of the linear operators Tx and Sx in these bases, the condition (3.3.1) can be
rewritten in the following equivalent form:
Sx = PTx P−1 , (3.3.2)
where P ∈ GL(n, k) does not depend on the element x ∈ A.
A subrepresentation of a representation T is given by a subspace W of V

which is T (a)-invariant for all a ∈ A. In this case one can construct a representa-
tion on V /W , called the quotient representation.
Given a representation T : A → Endk (V ) of A, there is the dual (or contra-
gredient) representation T ∗ : Aop → Endk (V ∗ ) of the opposite algebra Aop of
A (this is the algebra on the underlying vector space of A with multiplication ∗
defined by a ∗ b = ba). By definition, vT ∗ (a)(ϕ) = ϕ(vT (a)) for a ∈ Aop = A,

v ∈ V , ϕ ∈ V ∗ = Homk (V, k).
There is a close connection between the representations of an algebra A and its

modules. For any representation of A we can construct a right module over this
algebra, and, vice versa, for any right module we can construct a representation.
Let T : A → Endk (V ) be a representation of an algebra A. Define va = vT (a)
for v ∈ V , a ∈ A. From the definition of a representation it follows immediately
that, in this way, V becomes a right A-module. We say that this module corre-
sponds to the representation T . On the other hand, for any right A-module we
can construct a representation of A. Indeed, if M is a right A-module, then for a
fixed a ∈ A, the map T (a) : m → ma is a linear transformation in M . Assigning
to every a ∈ A the operator T (a) we obtain a representation of the algebra A
corresponding to the module M .
Given two representations T1 : A → Endk (V1 ) and T2 : A → Endk (V2 ), a
mapping f : T1 → T2 is a linear transformation f : V1 → V2 satisfying f (vT1 (a)) =
f (v)T2 (a) for v ∈ V , a ∈ A, or, rewritten, f (va) = f (v)a; hence it is an A-module
homomorphism. Thus, the category of all representations of A is equivalent to the
category of all right A-modules.
To left A-modules there correspond the dual representations of the algebra A.
In particular, by considering the algebra A as a left module over itself, we obtain
the concept of the regular left module and the regular dual representation.
If Ti : A → Endk (Vi ) is a family of representations, their direct sum is the
representation T : A → Endk (V ), where V = ⊕ Vi is a direct sum of vector spaces
i
and T (A)|Vi = Ti (x) for all x ∈ A. The category of all representations is an
additive Abelian category.
Definition. A representation of A is said to be simple (or irreducible)

provided it is nonzero and the only proper subrepresentation is the zero
representation.
By choosing a suitable basis of a vector space V all matrices of a reducible

representation T in this basis have the form:
(1)
Tx Ux
Tx = (2)
0 Tx
(i)
for all x ∈ A, where the Tx are square matrices of degree ni < n, where n =
dimk V .
The Schur lemma (see proposition 2.2.1, vol.I) says that the endomorphism
ring of a simple representation is a division ring.
Definition. A representation T of a k-algebra A is said to be indecom-

posable if its corresponding right A-module is indecomposable. In other words,
a representation T is indecomposable if it cannot be written as a direct sum of
nonzero representations. Otherwise it is called decomposable.
A simple module is obviously indecomposable. But an arbitrary indecompos-

able module may have proper submodules.
Definition. A representation T of a k-algebra A is said to be completely

reducible if it is a direct sum of irreducible representations.
By choosing a suitable basis of a vector space V all matrices of a completely

reducible representation T in this basis have the form:
⎛ (1) ⎞
Tx 0 ··· 0
⎜ (2) ⎟
⎜ 0 Tx ··· 0 ⎟
⎜
Tx = ⎜ . .. ⎟
.. .. ⎟
⎝ .. . . . ⎠
(m)
0 0 ··· Tx
(i)
for all g ∈ G, where the Tx form irreducible square matrix representations of
degree ni < n, where n = dimk V , i = 1, 2, ..., m.
Any finite dimensional module over an algebra A can be uniquely written
(up to isomorphism) in the form of a direct sum of indecomposable modules by
the Krull-Remak-Schmidt theorem. This means that for many questions one can
restrict attention to the consideration of indecomposable modules.
Let A be a finite dimensional k-algebra, and let V be a finite dimensional right
A-module. We construct a category C(V ) whose objects are the submodules of
tensor products of the form U ⊗k V , the U being finite dimensional vector spaces;
a morphism from an object X ⊂ U ⊗k V to an object Y ⊂ W ⊗k V is a linear
mapping φ : U → W such that (φ ⊗ 1)(X) ⊂ Y . The problem of classifying the
objects of C(V ) up to isomorphism is, by definition, a linear matrix problem.
The following considerations and constructions serve to reformulate such a
linear matrix problem as a representation theoretic problem. Clearly, the module
V may be assumed faithful (by replacing, if needed, the algebra A with its quotient
algebra A/(Ker(A → Endk (V ))) ). Thus A is identified with a subalgebra of
E = Endk V . Let O be a discrete valuation ring with field of residues k, and let π
be a prime element of O. Consider an O-lattice L (i.e., a free O-module) of rank
n = dim V . If Γ = EndO L, then Γ/πΓ E, and L/πL V as an E-module. Let
Λ stand for the preimage of the subalgebra A ⊂ E in Γ, and consider the category
Rep(Λ) of representations of Λ (over O); that is, of Λ-modules that are O-lattices.
Every such module M can be naturally embedded into the Γ-module M Γ which is
a representation of Γ. But every Γ-module is of the form F ⊗O L, where F is some
O-lattice, and every Γ-homomorphism F ⊗O L → G ⊗O L is of the form f ⊗ 1,
where f : F → G is a homomorphism of O-modules, and f is an isomorphism if

and only if f¯ : U → W is an isomorphism, where U = F/πF and W = G/πG.
Since Λ ⊃ πΓ, it follows that M ⊃ πM Γ. Set M̄ = M/πM Γ. This is an
A-submodule of M Γ = M Γ/πM Γ. Let g : M → N be a homomorphism of
Λ-representations. This can be extended to a Γ-homomorphism gΓ : M Γ → N Γ,
where if M Γ = F ⊗O L, N Γ = G ⊗O L and gΓ = f ⊗ 1. Then g, gΓ and f
are all isomorphisms if one of them is. Moreover, if U = F/πF , W = G/πG and
f¯ : U → W is the homomorphism induced by f , then M Γ = U ⊗k V , N Γ = W ⊗k V
and (f¯ ⊗ 1)(M̄ ) ⊂ N̄ .
We note that an A-submodule X ⊂ U ⊗k V is of the form M̄ if and only if
XE = U ⊗k V . However, for every X ⊂ U ⊗k V , XE is a direct summand of
U ⊗k V ; that is, U = U1 ⊕ U2 , where X ⊂ U1 ⊗k V and XE = U1 ⊗k V . Therefore
an object X ⊂ U ⊗k V in C(V ) is the direct sum of the object X ⊂ U1 ⊗k V and
an object Y ⊂ U2 ⊗k V . The second summand is isomorphic with Om , where O
is the object in C(V ) determined by the zero submodule of V , and m = dim U2 .
These arguments yield the following statement:
Theorem 3.3.2. Let M and N be representations of Λ, let g : M → N be

a homomorphism, and suppose that M Γ = F ⊗O L, N Γ = G ⊗O L, U = F/πF ,
W = G/πG and gΓ = f ⊗ 1, where f : F → G and f¯ : U → W is the mapping
induced by f . Setting Ψ(M ) = M̄ ⊂ U ⊗k V and Ψ(g) = f¯, we obtain a functor
Ψ : Rep(Λ) → C(V ). Here Ψ(M ) Ψ(N ) if and only if M N . Every object of
C(V ) is isomorphic to a Ψ(M ) ⊕ Om for some M ∈ Rep(Λ).
Thus the classification of representations of Λ is equivalent to the given linear

matrix problem.
In conclusion we show that this scheme includes the representations of a poset
S; that is, homomorphisms of S into the lattice of subspaces of a finite-dimensional
space U . For this purpose construct the algebra A = A(S) with basis {aij : i, j ∈
S; i j} and multiplication table aij akl = δjk ail , and the A-module V = V (S)
with basis {vi : i ∈ S} and the operator action given by νi akj = δij νk , where δij
is the Kronecker delta symbol. If X is an A-submodule of U ⊗k V , then associating
i ∈ S with the subspace Xi = {u ∈ U : u ⊗ νi ∈ X} gives a representation of S
in U . Conversely, if i → Xi is a representation of S in U , then X = i xi ⊗ νi
is a submodule of U ⊗k V . If S = {1, . . . , n}, then A can be identified with the
subalgebra of Mn (k) spanned by the basis {eij : i, j ∈ S; i j} (here the eij
are the matrix units). Then the corresponding ring Λ = Λ(S) is a subring of
Mn (O) with O-basis {dij eij : i, j ∈ S}, where dij = 1 for i j and dij = π
otherwise. The representations of Λ(S) over O are classified up to isomorphism
by the representations of the poset S.
Remarks 3.3.1.
1) The classification of the representations of an arbitrary O-order Λ such that
Γ ⊃ Λ ⊃ πΓ for some maximal order Γ can be reduced in a similar fashion to a
matrix problem (though not necessarily to a linear one). If Λ ⊃ πΓ we obtain such

a problem but not over k this time, but over the quotient ring O/π k O.
2) Replacing the submodule X ⊂ U ⊗k V by its projective cover P , or
more exactly by the corresponding homomorphism P → U ⊗k V , we obtain
an interpretation of the linear matrix problem in terms of V -matrices (see
[Drozd, 1972]). For posets this gives essentially the original matrix treatment of
L.A.Nazarova and A.V.Roiter (see [Nazarova, Roiter, 1972]).
3.4 ALGEBRAS OF FINITE REPRESENTATION TYPE

One of the main problems in the theory of representations is to get information
about the structure of indecomposable modules. And, if possible, to obtain the
complete description of all indecomposable modules up to isomorphism. All alge-
bras are divided in different types of representation classes. As was conjectured
by P.Donovan and M.Freislich and established by Yu.A.Drozd, for the case of an
algebraically closed field k, there are only three different representation classes:
finite, tame and wild representation type.
Definition. A k-algebra A is said to be of finite representation type

(or finite type, in short) if A has only a finite number of non-isomorphic finite
dimensional indecomposable representations up to isomorphism. Otherwise A is
said to be of infinite representation type.
Examples 3.4.1.
1. Every indecomposable representation of a finite dimensional semisimple
algebra is equivalent to a direct summand of the regular representation, by the
Wedderburn theorem. Hence, every finite dimensional semisimple algebra is an
algebra of finite representation type.
2. A k-algebra k[x]/(xn ) is an algebra of finite representation type.
3. The algebra A = {1, r, s : r2 = s2 = rs = sr = 0} is an algebra of infinite
representation type.
4. The k-algebra k[x, y]/(xn , y m ), for n, m ≥ 2, is an algebra of infinite repre-
sentation type.
5. The group algebra KG of a finite group G over a field K of characteristic
p > 0 has finite type if and only if the p-Sylow subgroup of G is cyclic.
6. Any serial algebra is of finite type.
A main invariant in the theory of representations is the length of a module

which is defined as the length of its composition series. Recall that a module
has finite length if and only if it is both Artinian and Noetherian. Such modules
are called finite length modules. It is obvious that any finite length module is
a direct sum of indecomposable modules of finite length. And by the Fitting
lemma the endomorphism ring of any indecomposable module of finite length is a
local ring. Then, by the Krull-Schmidt theorem (see theorem 10.4.11, vol.I), the
decomposition of a finite length module into indecomposable modules is unique
up to isomorphism.
Definition. We say that a ring A is of bounded representation type if

there is a bound on the lengths of indecomposable A-modules. Otherwise it is said
to be of unbounded representation type.
We say that a ring A has a strongly unbounded representation type,
if there is an infinite sequence d1 < d2 < . . . such that A has infinitely many
indecomposable modules for each length di .
Theorem 3.4.1 (The first Brauer-Thrall conjecture). If the number

of indecomposable modules of length 1 is finite, then bounded representation type
implies finite representation type.
This conjecture was proved by A.V.Roiter in 1968 [Roiter, 1968] for a finite
dimensional algebra A over an arbitrary field.
And it was generalized by M.Auslander for Artinian algebras [Auslander, 1971],
[Auslander, 1974a], [Auslander, 1974b].
Theorem 3.4.2 (M.Auslander). An Artinian algebra A is of finite repre-

sentation type if and only if there is a bound on the lengths of the indecomposable
A-modules.
A stronger version of the Brauer-Thrall conjecture is the following statement:
(The second Brauer-Thrall conjecture). If a finite dimensional algebra

A has infinite representation type, then it is of strongly unbounded representation
type.
So far this stronger conjecture has been proved for a finite dimensional algebra
over an algebraically closed field k by R.Bautista [Bautista, 1985] and K.Bongartz
[Bongartz, 1985]:
Theorem 3.4.3. If a finite dimensional algebra A over an algebraically closed

field k is not of finite representation type, there are infinitely many dimensions
for which the number of isomorphism classes of indecomposable finite dimensional
A-modules is infinite.
All k-algebras of infinite type are further divided into algebras of wild rep-
resentation type and algebras of tame representation type.
Definition. An algebra A said to be of tame representation type (or a

tame algebra, in short) if it is of infinite type but all families of indecomposable
representations are 1-parametric. In other words, for any r there are (A, k[x])-
bimodules M1 , . . . , Mn (where the natural number n may depend on r), which are
finitely generated and free over k[x] such that any indecomposable A-module of
dimension r is isomorphic to some Mi ⊗ k[x]/(x − λ).
An algebra A is said to be of wild representation type (or a wild alge-
bra, in short) if there is an (A, kx, y)-bimodule M which is finitely generated
and free over kx, y and such that the functor M ⊗kx,y ∗ sends non-isomorphic
finite dimensional kx, y-modules to non-isomorphic A-modules. In this case the
category of all finite-dimensional A-modules includes the classification problem for
pairs of square matrices up to simultaneous equivalence.
Yu.A.Drozd proved that for an algebraically closed field k there is a trichotomy

between finite, tame and wild representation type for finite dimensional algebras
[Drozd, 1980]:
Theorem 3.4.4 (Yu.A.Drozd). Let A be a finite dimensional algebra over

an algebraically closed field. Then A is of finite, tame or wild representation type.
Examples 3.4.2.
1. The Kronecker algebra

k k⊕k
A=
0 k
where k is a field, is a four-dimensional algebra, which is of infinite representation

type. The problem of the classification of all indecomposable modules over this
algebra is equivalent to the classification of the indecomposable matrix pencils.
This problem was considered by K.Weierstrass and then solved by L.Kronecker in
1890. This algebra is of tame type.
2. Let G = {x, y : x2 = y 2 = 1, xy = yx} be the Klein 4-group, and let k be
a field. Then the group algebra kG is of wild representation type.
In the representation theory of associative algebras it is important to obtain

necessary and sufficient conditions for a given algebra to be of finite, tame or wild
type. Another important problem is to describe all indecomposable representations
in the finite and tame cases. These problems have still not been solved in the
general case.
A full description of algebras of finite or tame type and their representations
has been obtained only for some particular classes of algebras, for example, for
hereditary algebras and algebras in which the square of the radical equals zero.
Taking into account theorems 2.4.1 and 2.3.4 we have the following statement.
Theorem 3.4.5. If Q is a quiver of finite representation type, then the path

algebra kQ is an Artinian hereditary algebra of finite type.
With any finite dimensional algebra A over a field k one can associate its
Gabriel quiver Q(A) (see section 11.1, vol.I).
Let P1 , ..., Ps be all pairwise nonisomorphic principal right A-modules. Write
Ri = Pi R (i = 1, ..., s) and Vi = Ri /Ri R where R is the radical. Since Vi is a
s t
semisimple module, Vi = ⊕ Uj ij , where the Uj = Pj /Rj are simple modules. This
j=1
s t
is equivalent to the isomorphism P (Ri ) ⊕ Pj ij . To each module Pi assign a
j=1
vertex i and join the vertex i with the vertex j by tij arrows. The thus constructed
graph is called the quiver of A in the sense of P.Gabriel and denoted by Q(A).
For any finite quiver Q = (V Q, AQ, s, e) we can construct a bipartite
quiver Qb = (V Qb , AQb , s1 , e1 ) in the following way. Let V Q = {1, 2, ..., s},
AQ = {σ1 , σ2 , ..., σk }. Then V Qb = {1, 2, ..., s, b(1), b(2), ..., b(s)} and AQb =
{τ1 , τ2 , ..., τk }, such that for any σj ∈ AQ we have s1 (τj ) = s(σj ) and e1 (τj ) =
b(e(σj )). In other words, in the quiver Qb from the vertex i to the vertex b(j) go
tij arrows if and only if in the quiver Q from the vertex i to the vertex j go tij
arrows. As before, denote by Q the undirected graph which is obtained from Q
by deleting the orientation of all arrows.
Example 3.4.3.
Let k be a field and ⎛ ⎞
k 0 k
A = ⎝0 k k⎠
0 0 k
Then ⎛ ⎞
0 0 k
R = rad A = ⎝0 0 k⎠
0 0 0

and so R2 = 0.The right principal modules are P1 = k 0 k , P2 = 0 k k ,
P3 = 0 0 k , while the simple
right modules
are the Ui Pi /Pi R for i = 1, 2, 3.
Therefore P1 R = 0 0 k U3 , P2 R = 0 0 k U3 , P3 R = 0. Thus the
quiver Qb (A) has the following form:
1 2 3
• •
• • •
b1 b2 b3
If A is a finite dimensional algebra over an algebraically closed field k with zero

square radical and with associated quiver Q, then an explicit connection between
the category modr (A) and the category Rep Qb (A) was established by P.Gabriel.
He has proved the following theorem:
Theorem 3.4.6 (P.Gabriel). Let A be a finite dimensional algebra over an

algebraically closed field k with zero square radical and quiver Q. Then A is of
finite type if and only if the quiver Qb (A) is of finite type.
Proof. We shall give only a short sketch of the proof. Let A be a finite
dimensional algebra over an algebraically closed field k with Jacobson radical R
and R2 = 0. First we construct the Grassmann category G(A) of the algebra

A. The objects of G(A) are triples (X, Y, f ), where X, Y are A/R-modules, and
f : X ⊗A/R R → Y is a A/R-epimorphism. A morphism (X, Y, f ) → (X1 , Y1 , f1 )
is a pair (ϕ, ψ), where ϕ : X → X1 , ψ : Y → Y1 are A/R-homomorphisms such
that f1 (ϕ ⊗ 1R ) = ψf . Next construct the functor F : modr A → G(A) given
by F (M ) = (M/M R, M R, f ), where f : (M/M R) ⊗A/R R → M R is induced by
m ⊗ r → mr for any right finite dimensional A-module M . Then it can be proved
that this functor induces a one-to-one correspondence between the isomorphism
classes of indecomposable objects in modr A and G(A).
Let P1 , ..., Ps be all pairwise nonisomorphic principal right A-modules, Ri =
Pi R (i = 1, ..., s), Vi = Ri /Ri R, and let the Uj = Pj /Rj be the simple modules.
s
Since Vi is a semisimple module, Vi = ⊕ Uj ij . Since R2 = 0, Ri Vi and so
t
j=1
s t
R ⊕ Uj ij .
i,j=1
Let T = (X, Y, f ) ∈ G(A). Since X, Y are A/R-modules, we can write X =
U1m1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Usms and Y = U1k1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Usks . Then the map f : X ⊗A/R R → Y
k
induces tij k-homomorphisms Uimi → Uj j .
Therefore this construction yields a fully faithful functor F from the category
G(A) to the category of k-representations of A. It is easy to see that indecompos-
able objects of G(A) turn into (again) indecomposable representations of A.
Taking into account theorem 3.4.6 and theorem 2.6.1, we obtain the following
theorem:
Theorem 3.4.7 (P.Gabriel). Let A be a finite dimensional algebra over an

algebraically closed field k with zero square radical and quiver Q. Then A is of
finite type if and only if Qb is a finite disjoint union of Dynkin diagrams of the
form An , Dn , E6 , E7 , E8 .
This theorem has been generalized to the case of arbitrary fields.

With any finite dimensional algebra k-algebra A we can associate a k-species.
Let B be the basic algebra of A. Then B/radB K1 ⊕ K2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Kn , where
the Ki are skew fields for i = 1, . . . n which are finite dimensional over k. We can
n
write radB/(radB)2 = ⊕ i Mj , where the i Mj are Ki -Kj -bimodules. This yields
i,j=1
the k-species LA = (Ki , i Mj )i,j∈I .
Given a k-species (Ki , i Mj )i,j∈I , define its separated diagram as follows.
The finite set I × {0, 1} is the set of all vertices, and there are tij = dimKi (i Mj ) ×
dim(i Mj )Kj edges between (i, 0) and (j, 1).
Moreover, there is a (multiple) arrow provided dimKi (i Mj ) <

dim(i Mj )Kj , which connects (i, 0) with (j, 1) and contains tij edges. Note that
there are no edges between (i, 0) and (j, 0), nor between (i, 1) and (j, 1).
Theorem 3.4.8. Let A be a finite dimensional k-algebra A over an arbitrary

field k with (radA)2 = 0. Then A is of finite type if and only if the diagram of its
k-species is a finite disjoint union of Dynkin diagrams.
Remark 3.4.1. This theorem was proved by P.Gabriel in the case when the k-
species LA = (Ki , i Mj )i,j∈I has the property that all Ki are equal to a fixed skew
field F and F (i Mj )F = (F FF )nij for some natural number nij . Also P.Gabriel has
shown that the structure of a k-algebra A of finite type with (radA)2 = 0 can be
recovered from the known results in the case when k is a perfect field [Gabriel,
1972], [Gabriel, 1973]. In its general form for arbitrary fields k theorem 3.4.8 was
proved by V.Dlab and C.M.Ringel [Dlab, Ringel, 1973], [Dlab, Ringel, 1975].
With any species L = (Ki , i Mj )i,j∈I one can associate the special tensor alge-
bra of a bimodule
of the following form T(L) = TB (M ) = B ⊕ M ⊕ M ⊗B M ⊕ . . .,
where B = Ki and M = ⊕ i Mj .
i∈I i,j∈I
Theorem 3.4.9 (V.Dlab, C.M.Ringel). Let L be a k-species. Then the

category Rep L of all representations of L and the category modr T(L) of all right
T(L)-modules are equivalent.
Proof. Let X be a right T(L)-module. Then it can be considered as a right B-

module, because B is a subring of T(L). Let e1 , . . . , en be the set of all primitive
idempotents of B and 1 = e1 + . . . + en . Then X decomposes uniquely into a
n
direct sum X = ⊕ Xi , where Xi = Xei are right Ki -modules and Xi Kj = 0 for
i=1
i = j. Since M is a B-bimodule the multiplication of XB gives rise to a right
B-map ϕ : X ⊗B M → X. Since Xi ⊗Kj j Ms = 0 for i = j, the map ϕ given
n
by ϕ : ⊕ (Xi ⊗B i Mj ) → ⊕ Xi is determined by the family of Kj -linear maps
i=1 i=1
j ϕi : Xi ⊗ B i M j
= Xi ⊗ Ki i M j → Xj .
Now a functor R : modr T(L) → Rep L is defined as follows: for any right
T(L)-module X we set R(X) = (Xi , j ϕi ). Remark, that the right T(L)-module
structure on X is uniquely determined by the map ϕ and so by the family of
morphisms {j ϕi }.
Let X, Y be two right T(L)-modules and let α : X → Y be a T(L)-
homomorphism. Let R(X) = (Xi , j ϕi ) and R(Y ) = (Yi , j ψi ). Since α is also
a B-homomorphism, α(Xi ) ⊆ Yi and it is determined by the family of restrictions
αi : Xi → Yi . Set R(α) = {αi }. Since α is a T(L)-homomorphism, we have that
j ψi (αi ⊗ 1) = αj · j ϕi , i.e., {αi } is a map in Rep L.
Conversely, let (Xi , j ϕi ) ∈ Rep L. Define a functor P : Rep L → modr T(L)
n
as follows: P (Xi , j ϕi ) = X, where X = ⊕ Xi and the ring B = ⊕ Ki operates on
i i
X via the projection B → Ki . Then the scalar multiplication by M (n) on X is

defined inductively by ϕ(n) : X ⊗B M (n) → X with
n n
ϕ(1) = ⊕ j ϕi : X ⊗B M = ⊕ (Xi ⊗B i Mj ) =
i,j=1 i,j=1
n n
= ⊕ (Xi ⊗Ki i Mj ) → ⊕ Xi = X
i,j=1 i=1
and
ϕ(n) ⊗1 ϕ
ϕ(n+1) = ϕ(ϕ(n) ⊗ 1) : X ⊗B M (n+1) = (X ⊗B M (n) ) ⊗B M → X ⊗B M → X
n n
If {αi } : (Xi , j ϕi ) → (Yi , j ψi ) is in Rep L, then α = ⊕ αi : X = ⊕ Xi → Y =
i=1 i=1
n
⊕ Yn is a right T(L)-map and so we can set P ({αi }) = α.
i=1
It is easy to verify that R and P are mutually inverse equivalences of categories,
as required.
Remark 3.4.2. Theorem 3.4.9 was proved by V.Dlab and C.M.Ringel (see
[Dlab, Ringel, 1973], [Dlab, Ringel, 1975]. A different version of this theorem was
obtained by E.L.Green [Green, 1975].
From theorem 3.4.9 the following theorem follows immediately.
Theorem 3.4.10.1 Let L be a k-species. The special tensor algebra T(L) is

of finite representation type is and only if the k-species L is of finite type.
Let L be a k-species. From corollary 2.2.13 it follows that the special tensor
algebra T(L) is hereditary. It was shown that the converse is also true for the case
of finite type.
Theorem 3.4.11. A finite dimensional k-algebra A is a hereditary algebra of

finite type if and only if A is Morita equivalent to a tensor algebra T(L), where L
is a k-species of finite type.
Remark 3.4.3. This theorem first was proved by P.Gabriel2 for the case of
an algebraically closed field k and then was proved by V.Dlab, C.M.Ringel for an
arbitrary field k.3
Theorem 3.4.12.4 Let A be a finite dimensional hereditary k-algebra with

associated k-species L. Then A is of finite type if and only if the diagram of L is
a finite disjoint union of Dynkin diagrams.
These theorems have been generalized to the case of Artinian algebras.

1 see [Dlab, Ringel, 1975].
2 see [Gabriel, 1972], [Gabriel, 1973]
Definition. Let R be a commutative Artinian ring. An R-algebra A is a ring

together with a ring morphism ϕ : R → A such that Im(ϕ) ⊆ Cen(A). In other
words we can assume that ra = ar for each r ∈ R and a ∈ A.
We say that A is an Artinian R-algebra, or Artinian algebra, in short, if
A is finitely generated as an R-module.
Important examples of Artinian algebras are finite dimensional algebras over
a field.
Applying theorem 2.7.1, V.Dlab and C.M.Ringel proved the following theorems
which give a full description of hereditary Artinian algebras of finite type.
Theorem 3.4.13. A hereditary Artinian algebra A is of finite type if and only

if A is Morita equivalent to a tensor algebra T (Ω), where Ω is a k-species of finite
type.
Theorem 3.4.14. Let A be a hereditary Artinian algebra with quiver Q. Then

A is of finite type if and only if the underlying graph Q is a finite disjoint union
of Dynkin diagrams.
More generally questions concerning finite dimensional algebras over alge-

braically closed fields are treated by considering quivers with relations.
3.5 ROITER THEOREM

In this section we shall give the proof of the first Brauer-Thrall conjecture for finite
dimensional algebras over arbitrary fields following A.V.Roiter.
Theorem 3.5.1 (The first Brauer-Thrall conjecture). If a finite dimen-

sional k-algebra A (where k is an arbitrary field) is of infinite representation type,
then it has indecomposable modules of arbitrary large dimensions.
Throughout this section Λ denotes a fixed finite dimensional algebra over a

field k.
Definition. Let A and B be Λ-modules. We say that A divides5 B, and

write A|B, if A · Hom (A, B) = B, where

A · Hom (A, B) = Im ϕ.
ϕ∈Hom (A,B)
It is easy to see that if A and B are Noetherian modules then A|B if and only
if there is an integer n such that there is an exact sequence A(n) → B → 0.
Definition. A decomposition A = A1 ⊕A2 ⊕. . .⊕An is called normal if Ai |Aj

5 The relation “|” defined here is reflexive and transitive but it is not symmetric just as in the
case of the usual relation of divisibility of integers.
for i < j. A module A which cannot be decomposed into a nontrivial normal direct
sum is called normally indecomposable.
It is obvious that any Noetherian module A can be decomposed into a direct
sum A = A ⊕ A , where A is normally indecomposable and A |A.
Proposition 3.5.2. Let Λ be a finite dimensional algebra over a field k, let B

be a finitely generated Λ-module, and let A be a normally indecomposable quotient
ϕ
module of it. If A|B, then the exact sequence B → A → 0 splits (where ϕ is the
quotient map).
Proof. Let U = HomΛ (A, A), which is a finite dimensional k-algebra. Set
T = HomΛ (A, B)ϕ. Obviously, T is a left ideal of U and AT = A. Let R = rad Λ
be the radical of Λ. Write U = U/R and T = (T + R)/R. Then T is a left ideal
in U and T = eU , where e is an idempotent of T . Let e ∈ T be an idempotent
corresponding to the idempotent e. Then T ⊆ eU + R, A = AT = AeU + AR.
Therefore, by the Nakayama lemma, A = AeU . Since A = Ime ⊕ Kere, Ime|A.
By assumption, A is normally indecomposable, so Ime = A, i.e., e is an identity
of U = Hom(A, A). Since e ∈ T = Hom(A, B)ϕ, e = ψϕ, where ψ ∈ Hom(A, B).
ϕ
So, by proposition 4.2.1, vol.I, the exact sequence B → A → 0 splits.
The following statement is obvious:
Lemma 3.5.3. Let

ϕ
B −→ A → 0 (3.5.1)
be an exact sequence, and let X be an arbitrary module. Consider
ϕ
B ⊕ X −→ A ⊕ X → 0 (3.5.2)
which is also an exact sequence, where (b, x)ϕ = (bϕ, x). Then the sequence (3.5.1)
splits if and only the sequence (3.5.2) splits.
In what follows in this section we shall assume that all modules are finitely
generated over a finite dimensional k-algebra Λ. Each such module A obviously
has finite length which is denoted by l(A).
Denote by M the set of all indecomposable Λ-modules. We shall construct in

M a sequence of subsets M1 , M1 , . . ., Mi ,Mi , . . . in the following way. M1 =
{A ∈ M : l(A) = 1}. Assuming that M1 , . . .,Mk have been constructed, define
Mk by setting A ∈ Mk if and only if
1) A ∈ M;
k
2) A ∈ ∪ Mi ;
i=1
k
3) any proper indecomposable quotient module of A is contained in ∪ Mi .
i=1
Then we set
Mk+1 = {A ∈ Mk : l(A) = max l(B)}.
B∈Mk
k
Since Mk ∩ ∪ Mi = ∅, and Mk+1 ⊂ Mk , it is obvious that Mi ∩ Mj = ∅ for
i=1
i = j.
Lemma 3.5.4. Mi = ∅ for only finitely many i.
Proof. Since the lengths of all modules from M are bounded it is sufficient to
show that modules with a fixed length k can be in only a finite number of Mi .
We shall prove this by induction on k. For k = 1 this statement is trivial because
∞ s
all modules of length 1 are in M1 and only in M1 . Set R = ∪ Mi , Rs = ∪ Mi .
i=1 i=1
Assume that for j ≤ k the modules of length j belong only to a finite number
of Mi . Then there is a number s such that for any A ∈ Rs its length l(A) ≥ k.
Suppose that A ∈ Rs and l(A) = k + 1. If C is a proper indecomposable quotient
module of A, then C ∈ R, since otherwise A ∈ Mi for any i, and so A ∈ R. Since
s
l(C) < l(A) = k + 1, C ∈ ∪ Mi . Therefore A ∈ Ms , and it is obvious that
i=1
A ∈ Mi for all i ≥ s. So if B is any other module such that B ∈ Mt for t > s and
l(b) = k + 1 then also A ∈ Mt , i.e., all modules from Rs , whose length is equal to
k + 1, belong to not more than one set Mi .
k
Lemma 3.5.5. If A ∈ M and A ∈ ∪ Mi , then there is a quotient module B
i=1
of A which is contained in Mk .
k
Proof. If all indecomposable quotient modules of A belong to ∪ Mi , then
i=1
we can take B = A. Otherwise we choose a quotient module A1 ∈ M such that
k
A1 ∈ ∪ Mi . If A1 ∈ Mk then take A1 = B. If A1 ∈ Mk , consider a quotient
i=1
k
module A2 ∈ M such that A2 ∈ ∪ Mi , and so on. From the ascending chain
i=1
condition it now follows that in a finite number of steps we find a quotient module
which belongs to Mk .
n
Lemma 3.5.6. There is an integer n such that ∪ Mi = M.
i=1
Proof. By lemma 3.5.4, there exists an integer n such that Mi = ∅ for i > n.
n
If ∪ Mi = M, then, by lemma 3.5.5, Mn = ∅, and so Mn+1 = ∅.
i=1
Proposition 3.5.7. If Λ is a finite dimensional algebra of bounded represen-

tation type, then there is a function f : mod-Λ → N such that:
1) from the existence of a non-split exact sequence

s
⊕ Bi → A → 0,
i=1
where the B1 , . . . , Bs , A are indecomposable modules, it follows that f (A) <

max f (Bi );
i=1,2,...,s
2) f (A) = f (B) implies l(A) = l(B);
3) there is an integer n such that f (A) ≤ n for any indecomposable module A.
Proof. From the construction of the sets Mi and lemma 3.5.6 it follows that
for any indecomposable module A ∈ M there exists a unique integer i such that
A ∈ Mi . We set f (A) = i. From lemma 3.5.6 it follows that the function f satisfies
condition 3), the fulfillment of condition 2) follows from the construction of the
sets Mk+1 . So it remains to verify condition 1).
Let there be a non-split exit sequence
s
⊕ Bi → A → 0, (3.5.3)
i=1
where the B1 , . . ., Bs , A are indecomposable modules. Let k = max f (Bi ). We

i=1,2,...,s
need to show that f (A) < k. We shall this prove by induction on k. For k = 1 the
statement is obvious, because in this case all Bi are irreducible and the sequence
3.5.3 can not be non-split.
Suppose that for all j < k the statement is proved. We represent the module
B = B1 ⊕ B2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Bs in the form B = B ⊕ B , where B is normally inde-
composable and B |B. Renumbering the Bi if needed and taking into account the
r
Krull-Schmidt theorem we may assume that B = ⊕ Bi , where r ≤ s. Since B |B
i=1
and B|A, we obtain that B |A. So there exists an exact sequence
ϕ
B (m) −→ A → 0. (3.5.4)
If this sequence would be split, then, by the Krull-Schmidt theorem, A Bi for

some i. Consider the sequence
B ⊕ A −→ A ⊕ X → 0,
where X = B1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Bi−1 ⊕ Bi+1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Br , which is split, by proposition

3.5.2. Then, by lemma 3.5.3, the sequence 3.5.3 is also split. If f (Bi ) < k for all
i = 1, 2, . . . , r, then the required inequality f (A) < k follows from the inductive
assumption. We can assume that f (Bi ) = k for i ≤ q ≤ r and f (Bi ) < k
for q < i ≤ r. Also B |B. Renumbering the Bi and taking into account the
Krull-Schmidt theorem we find that there exists a (proper or improper) quotient
module C of the module A that is in Mk−1 . Since B |A and A|C, it follows that
B |C, i.e., there is a set of homomorphisms ϕij : Bi → C, i = 1, . . . , q such that

Imϕij = C. Since C ∈ Mk−1 , l(Bi ) > l(C) for i = 1, . . . , q. Therefore for
i,j
1 ≤ i ≤ q and for any ϕij we have that either 1) Imϕij is a proper quotient
module or 2) Imϕij = C Bi .
If for all i (1 ≤ i ≤ q) we have the first case, then from the construction of
f it follows that the values of f on all direct summands of Imϕij are not more
than k − 1. Since f (Bi ) ≤ k − 1 for q < i ≤ r, we then obtain that D|C, where
r
D= ⊕Imϕij ⊕ ⊕Bi and the values of f on all indecomposable direct
i,j i=q+1
summands of D are not more than k−1. Taking an exact sequence D(n) → C → 0,
we see that either this sequence splits and then f (C) ≤ k −1, by the Krull-Schmidt
theorem, or this sequence is not split and then f (C) < k − 1, by the induction
assumption. In the both cases we have a contradiction with C ∈ Mk−1 .
Now consider the second case when C Bi for some i, where 1 ≤ i ≤ r. In
this case we consider the exact sequence:
A −→ C → 0. (3.5.5)
We also construct the sequence
A ⊕ X −→ C ⊕ X → 0,
where X = B1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Bi−1 ⊕ Bi+1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Br , which is split, by proposition 3.5.2.

Then, by lemma 3.5.3, the sequence 3.5.5 is also split. A contradiction.
Lemma 3.5.8. Let M1 , . . . , Mt , B be a set of modules. There exists an integer

N such that for any exact sequence
(nt )
0 → B −→ X −→ M1n1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Mt → 0 (ni ≥ 0)
it follows from l(X) > N that X = Y ⊕ Mi for some i and some Y .
Proof. The group Ext(Mi , B) is a finite dimensional vector space over k. Sup-
pose its dimension is equal to si . If ni > si then there is a module Mi which is a
direct summand of X. Therefore it is sufficient to take

t
N= si l(Mi ) + l(B).
i=1
Proof of theorem 3.5.1. Assume the contrary. Consider the function f on

the set of all indecomposable representations of an algebra A, which satisfies the
conditions of proposition 3.5.7. We set Mi = {A ∈ M : f (A) = i}. The
set M1 is finite, because any finite dimensional algebra has a finite number of
n
modules of length 1. On the other hand, ∪ Mi = M (for some n). Therefore
i=1
there is an integer k such that the Mi are finite for i < k, and Mk is infinite. We
denote by M the set of modules of whose all indecomposable direct summands

k−1
are contained in ∪ Mi . We now show that if A, B are submodules in C, and
i=1
A, B ∈ M, then the submodule D = A + B ∈ M as well. Indeed, in this case
(A ⊕ B) | D. Decomposing A, B, D into direct sums we obtain exact sequences of
the form X → Di → 0, where all indecomposable direct summands of the module
k−1
X are contained in ∪ Mi , where the Di are the indecomposable direct summands
i=1
of D. For those i, for which this sequence is split, from the Krull-Schmidt theorem
we obtain that f (Di ) ≤ k − 1; and for those i, for which this sequence is not
split, from property 1) of the function f it follows that f (Di ) < k − 1. Thus,
D ∈ M, and so any module A has a submodule U (A) ∈ M which contains any
other submodule belonging to M.
We decompose the set Mk into the classes by considering A, B ∈ Mk to belong
to the same class if U (A) U (B). Taking into account that the lengths of all
modules from Mk are equal, the lengths of all possible U (A) are bounded, and as
M contains only a finite number of indecomposable modules, we obtain that Mk
decomposes into a finite number of classes. Therefore there is a class T containing
an infinite number of modules.
m
Let A1 , . . . , Am be a distinct modules from T. Consider A = ⊕Ai and write
i=1
Ui = U (Ai ). By definition, Ui Uj for i, j = 1, . . . , m. Let ϕi : Um → Ui be
one of these isomorphisms. Consider the submodule U = {(u1 , . . . , um ) : ui ∈
Ui , and ui = ϕ(um )} in A. Let V = A/U . We shall show that there is an integer
m0 such that V is indecomposable for any m > m0 .
Let V = V1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Vs . It is obvious that A | V | Vj for 1 ≤ j ≤ s. Therefore
taking into account property 1) of the function f and the Krull-Schmidt theorem,
we conclude that either there is a Vj Ai or f (Vj ) < k for all j. In the second
k−1
case, since ∪ Mi is a finite set, we can choose an integer m0 such that Vi is a
i=1
direct summand of A for m > m0 , by lemma 3.5.8 (where for M1 , . . . , Mt one
k−1
takes ∪ Mi , for B one takes U , and for X one takes A). This contradicts the
i=1
Krull-Schmidt theorem.
This takes care of the first case, i.e., there is a Vj Ai for m > m0 . Suppose
V = A1 ⊕ Y . Denote by ϕ the epimorphism A → V , by ψ the projection V → A1 ,
and set α = ϕψ, which is the homomorphism A → A1 , and denote by αi the
restriction of α to Ai ⊂ A. We shall show that α1 is an isomorphism, Indeed,
otherwise all Im αi are proper quotient modules of Ai , and so all direct summands
k−1
of Im αi belong to ∪ Mi and their direct sum cannot divide A1 .
i=1
Thus, α1 is an isomorphism. We set T = A2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Am , β = α2 + . . . + αm :
T → A1 . Consider the submodule T = {t − tβα−1 1 : t ∈ T } in A. We now
show that T contains U . Indeed, to start with, obviously A = A1 ⊕ T . On the
other hand, T α = 0. Take an arbitrary element u ∈ U . Let u = u1 + u2 , where
u1 ∈ A1 , u2 ∈ T . Applying the homomorphism α = ϕψ to the element u we

see that uα = 0, u2 α = 0, and so u1 α = 0. Since u1 α = u1 α1 and α1 is an
isomorphism, u1 = 0, i.e., u ∈ T . Taking into account that T = {t − tβ1−1 }
and U = {(u1 , . . . , um ) : ui ∈ Ui , ui = ϕi (um )} ⊂ T , where Ui = U (Ai ) is a
submodule of Ai (U1 U2 . . . Um , and ϕi : Ui → Um is an isomorphism), we
conclude that U1 ⊆ Im β ⊆ A1 , and the homomorphism β : A2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Am → A1
maps the module U = {(u2 , . . . , um ) | ui ∈ Ui , ui = ϕi (um )} onto U1 . We shall

m
show that Im β = U1 . Indeed, Im β = Im αi . Each Im αi (i = q) is a proper
i=2
quotient module of Ai . Therefore Im β is a module belonging to M, and, by
construction, U1 is a maximal submodule of the module A1 belonging to M.
Denote by γ the natural mapping of U onto U ⊂ T , which we can consider as
a homomorphism γ : U → T . Then we obtain two homomorphisms β : T → U
and γ : U → T , where β is an epimorphism and γ is a monomorphism, and
γβ ∈ Hom (U, U ) is an isomorphism (since β maps U onto U1 ). Therefore U is
a direct summand of T = A2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Am , which contradicts the Krull-Schmidt
theorem.

The basic problems studied in the representation theory of associative algebras are
that of obtaining necessary and sufficient conditions for an algebra to belong to one
of the types: finite, tame or wild, as well as that of classifying the indecomposable
representations in the finite and tame cases. In the general case these problems
have not been solved.
Representations of partially ordered sets were first introduced by L.A.Nazarova
and A.V.Roiter in 1972 [Nazarova, Roiter, 1973]. In this paper they gave the al-
gorithm which allows to check whether a given poset is of finite type. Using
this algorithm M.M.Kleiner in 1972 characterized posets of finite type [Kleiner,
1972]. Moreover M.M.Kleiner classified all the indecomposable P -spaces of finite
type. He also found that the dimensions of all such indecomposable P -spaces
are bounded by 6 [Kleiner, 1972b]. In 1975 L.A.Nazarova characterized posets of
infinite type (see [Nazarova, 1975], [Nazarova, 1974]). These results were indepen-
dently also obtained by P.Donovan, M.R.Freislich (see [Donovan, Freislich, 1974]).
The algorithm of Nazarova-Roiter works only for posets of width at most three.
In 1977 A.G.Zavadskij has proposed the new differentiation algorithm for comput-
ing representations of posets [Zavadskij, 1977]. This algorithm has been used to
give a new proof for the characterizations of poset of tame type (see [Nazarova,
Zavadskij, 1977]). O.Kerner showed that this algorithm is quite useful also in the
case of finite representation type. He has used this algorithm to give a new proof
of Kleiner’s theorem (see [Kerner, 1981]).
Theorem 3.1.4 was proved by Yu.A.Drozd [Drozd, 1974].
More results on posets of tame type one can found also in the following papers:
[Nazarova, Roiter, 1983]; [Bondarenko, Zavadskij, 1991]; [Bondarenko, Zavadskij,

1992]; [Kleiner, 1988].
The fundamental monograph of D.Simson [Simson, 1992] is devoted to the
theory of representations of posets.
The connections between Abelian groups and representations of finite partially
ordered sets were studied by D.M.Arnold, S.Brenner, M.C.R.Butler, M.Dugas,
E.L.Lady, H.Krause, C.Ringel, C.Vinsonhaler and others. D.M.Arnold and
M.Dugas obtained interesting results concerning the representations of posets over
discrete valuation rings and their connections with Butler groups (see [Arnold,
Dugas, 1997]; [Arnold, Dugas, 1999]. Most of these results are presented in the
monograph of A.D.Arnold [Arnold, 2000].
Theorem 3.3.2 was proved by Yu.A.Drozd, A.G.Zavadskij and V.V.Kirichenko
in the paper [Drozd, Zavadskij, Kirichenko, 1974].
In 1940 T.Nakayama in the paper [Nakayama, 1940] first posed the problem
of finding algebras of unbounded representation type. In 1941 R.Brauer in his
abstract [Brauer, 1941] asserted that he had found some sufficient conditions for an
algebra to have infinite representation type. Several years later, in 1947, R.Thrall
in his note [Thrall, 1941] also asserted that he had found sufficient conditions for
an algebra to have infinite representation type formulated in terms of the Cartan
matrices of factors of the algebra by powers of its radical. Unfortunately these
results have never been published in detail.
In 1954, D.G.Higman showed that a group algebra over a field of characteristic
p > 0 is of finite type if and only if a p-Sylow subgroup is cyclic, and of unbounded
type otherwise (see [Higman, 1954]).
In 1957 J.Jans in the paper [Jans, 1957] has given conditions under which a
finite dimensional algebra has infinitely many indecomposable representations of
degree d for infinitely many d (i.e., strongly unbounded type). He also gave the
first published announcement of the Brauer-Thrall conjectures:
(1) if the degrees of the indecomposable representations of A are bounded
(bounded type) then the number of inequivalent indecomposable representations
is finite (finite type);
(2) over an infinite field, the lack of a bound for the degrees of the indecom-
posable representations (unbounded type) implies that the algebra has strongly un-
bounded type.
That the first conjecture is true for finite dimensional algebra with zero square
radical over an algebraically closed field was shown by T.Yoshii [Yoshii, 1956].
In 1956 T.Yoshii attempted to give necessary and sufficient assumption for
an algebra with zero square radical to be of unbounded type (see [Yoshii, 1956],
[Yoshii, 1957]). Unfortunately these results of T.Yoshii had an error, which was
discovered independently by P.Gabriel and S.A.Krugljak. They also independently
published a correct solution of this problem (see [Gabriel, 1972]; [Krugljak, 1972]).
In 1968 the first Brauer-Thrall conjecture (theorem 3.5.1) was proved by
A.V.Roiter for finite dimensional algebras over an arbitrary field and for Artin
algebras (see [Roiter, 1968]) using a remarkably simple argument. The proof of
this theorem “marks the beginning of the new representation theory of finite di-
mensional algebras”, as C.M.Ringel wrote in his paper [Ringel, 2004].
The first Brauer-Thrall conjecture in a more general form (in particular, for
Artinian algebras and one-sided Artinian rings) was proved by M.Auslander (see
[Auslander, 1974a], [Auslander, 1974b]). In these papers M.Auslander proved
that if C is a skeletally small Abelian category with only a finite number of non-
isomorphic simple objects and such that each object has finite composition length,
then C has only a finite number of indecomposable objects if and only if C satisfies
the following conditions:
(1) C has a.c.c. on chains of indecomposable objects;
fi
(2) if {Mi −→ Mi−1 }i∈N is a sequence of epimorphisms, then there is an n
such that for i ≥ n, fi is an isomorphism.
M.Auslander also constructed a one-to-one correspondence between isomor-
phism classes of Artin algebras of finite type and isomorphism classes of Artin
algebras of global dimension at most two and dominant dimension at least two
(see [Auslander, 1971]). The generalizations of these results to Artinian rings were
given by M.Auslander and H.Tachikawa (see [Auslander, 1974b], [Auslander, 1975]
and [Tachikawa, 1973]).
The first Brauer-Thrall conjecture for arbitrary algebras (not necessarily finite
dimensional) was studied by A.D.Bell and K.R.Goodearl. We say that a k-algebra
A is of right bounded finite dimensional representation type if it has an
upper bound on the k-dimensions of the finite dimensional indecomposable right
A-modules. They showed that if a k-algebra A is either finitely generated as a
k-algebra, or Noetherian as a ring, then bounded finite dimensional type implies
that A has only finitely many isomorphism classes of finite dimensional indecom-
posable modules (see [Bell, Goodearl, 1995]).
The classification of hereditary finite dimensional k-algebras and algebras with
zero square radical of finite representation type were obtained by P.Gabriel in the
case when the corresponding k-species has the property that all Ki are equal to
a fixed skew field F and F (i Mj )F = (F FF )nij for some natural nij (see [Gabriel,
1972]; [Gabriel, 1972/1973], [Gabriel, 1973], [Gabriel, 1974]). In the general case
these theorems were proved by V.Dlab, C.M.Ringel (see [Dlab, Ringel, 1975] and
[Dlab, Ringel, 1976]).
The description of hereditary finite dimension algebras of tame type and wild
type was obtained by V.Dlab and C.M.Ringel (see [Dlab, Ringel, 1976], [Ringel,
1976], [Ringel, 1978]).
In 1980 Yu.A.Drozd proved his famous theorem which says that for an
algebraically closed field k there is a trichotomy between finite, tame and wild
representation type for finite dimensional algebras (see [Drozd, 1980]).
For more references see [Gustafson, 1982].
[Arnold, 2000] D.M.Arnold, Abelian Groups and Representations of Finite Par-

tially Ordered Sets, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2000.
[Arnold, Dugas, 1997] D.M.Arnold and M.Dugas, Representations type of finite
rank Butler groups, Colloquium Math., v.74, 1997, p.299-320.
[Arnold, Dugas, 1999] D.M.Arnold and M.Dugas, Finite rank Butler groups with
small typset, In: Abelian Groups and Modules, Birkhäuser, Boston, 1999,
p.107-120.
[Arnold, Richman, 1992] David M. Arnold and Fred Richman, Field-independent
representations of partially ordered sets, Forum Mathematicum, v.4, 1992,
p.349 - 357.
[Auslander, 1971] M.Auslander, Representation dimension of Artin algebra,
Queen Mary College Mathematics Notes, London, 1971.
[Auslander, 1974a] M.Auslander, Representation theory of Artin algebras I, Com-
mun. Algebra, v.1, N.4, 1974, p.177-268.
[Auslander, 1974b] M.Auslander, Representation theory of Artin algebras II,
Commun. Algebra, v.1, N.4, 1974, p.269-310.
[Auslander, 1975] M.Auslander, Almost split sequences I, In: Springer Lecture
Notes in Math., v.488, 1975, p.1-8.
[Bautista, 1985] R.Bautista, On algebras of strongly unbounded representation
type, Comment. Math. Helv., v.60, 1985, p.392-399.
[Bell, Goodearl, 1995] A.D.Bell and K.R.Goodearl, Algebras of bounded fi-
nite dimensional representation type, Glasgow Math. J., v.37, 1995,
p.289-302.
[Bondarenko, Nazarova, Zavadskij, 1979] V.M.Bondarenko, L.A.Nazarova,
A.G.Zavadskij, On representations of tame partially ordered sets, In: Repre-
sentations and Quadratic forms, Inst. Mat. Acad. Nauk USSR, Kiev, 1979,
p.75-106 (in Russian).
[Bondarenko, Zavadskij, 1991] V.M.Bondarenko, A.G.Zavadskij, Posets with an
equivalence relation of tame type and of finite growth, Canad. Math. Soc.
Conf. Proc., 11, 1991, p.67-88.
[Bondarenko, Zavadskij, 1992] V.M.Bondarenko, A.G.Zavadskij, Tame posets
with equivalence relation, Contem. Math., 131, part 2, 1992, p.237-251.
[Bongartz, 1985] K.Bongartz K., Indecomposable modules are standard, Com-
ment. Math. Helv., v.60, 1985, p.400-410.
[Brauer, 1941] R. Brauer, On the indecomposable representations of algebras,
Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., v.47, 1941, p.684.
type, Carleton Math. Lecture Notes, N.2, Carleton Univ., Ottawa, 1973,
160pp.
[Dlab, Ringel, 1974] V.Dlab and C.M.Ringel, Representations of graphs and
algebras, Carleton Math. Lecture Notes, N.8, Carleton Univ., Ottawa, 1974,
N.8, 85p.
type, J. Algebra, 1975, v.33, N.2, p.306-394.
[Dlab, Ringel, 1976] V.Dlab, C.M.Ringel, Indecomposable representations of

graphs and algebras, Memoirs Amer. Math. Soc., vol.173, 1976.
of finite graphs and associated algebras, Carleton Math. Lecture Notes, No.5,
Carleton Univ., Ottawa, 1973, 83p.
of finite graphs and associative algebras, Carleton Univ., 1974.
[Donovan, Freislich, 1979] P.Donovan and M.Freislich, Indecomposable represen-
tations of certain commutative quivers, Bull. Austral. Math. Soc., v.20,
1979, p.17-34.
[Drozd, 1972] Yu.A.Drozd, Matrix problems and categories of matrices, Zap.
Nauch. Sem. LOMI, v.28, 1972, p.144-153.
[Drozd, 1974] Yu.A.Drozd, Coxeter transformations and representations of posets,
Funkt. Anal. Prilozh., v.8, 1974, p.34-42; English transl.: Funct. Anal.
Appl., v.8, 1974, p.219-225.
[Drozd, Zavadskij, Kirichenko, 1974] Yu.A.Drozd, A.G.Zavadskij and
V.V.Kirichenko, Matrix problems and integral representations, Izv. Akad.
Nauk SSSR, Ser Mat., Tom 38 (1974), N2 (in Russian); English transl. Math
USSR Izvestija, vol. 8 (1974), N2, p.298-300.
[Drozd, 1980] Yu.A.Drozd, Tame and wild problems, In: V.Dlab and P.Gabriel
(eds.): Representation Theory II, Lecture Notes in Math., v.832, Springer,
1980, p.242-258.
[Gabriel, 1972] P.Gabriel, Unzerlegbare Darstellungen I, Manuscripta Math., v.6
(1972), p.71-103.
[Gabriel, 1972/1973] P.Gabriel, Réprésentations indécomposables des ensembles
ordonnés, Sém. Dubreil, v.13, 1972/1973, p.1301-1304.
[Gabriel, 1973] P.Gabriel, Indecomposable represenations. II, Ist. Naz. Alta
Mat., Symposia Mathematica, v.11, Academic Press, London, New York,
1973, p.81-104.
[Gabriel, 1974] P.Gabriel, Representations indecomposables, Sém. Bourbaki, Ex-
posé 444, 1974, In: Springer Lecture Notes in Math., v.431, 1975, p.143-169.
[Green, 1975] E.Green, The representation theory of tensor algebras, J. Algebra,
v.34, 1975, p.135-171.
[Gustafson, 1982] W.H.Gustafson, The history of algebras and their representa-
tions, Lecture Notes in Math., v.944, 1982, p.1-28.
[Higman, 1954] D.G.Higman, Indecomposable representations at characteristic p,
Duke Math. J., v.21, 1954, p.377-381.
[Jans, 1957] J.Jans, On the indecomposable representations of algebras, Ann.
Math., v.66, 1957, p.418-429.
[Kerner, 1981] O.Kerner, Partially ordered sets of finite representation type, Com-
munications in Algebra, v.9, N.8, 1981, p.783-809.
[Kleiner, 1972a] M.M.Kleiner, Partially ordered sets of finite type, Zapiski Nauch.
Semin. LOMI, v.28, 1972, p.32-41; English transl. J. Soviet. Math., v.3,
1975, p.607-615.
[Kleiner, 1972b] M.M.Kleiner, On the exact representations of partially ordered
sets of finite type, Zapiski Nauch. Semin. LOMI, vol.28, 1972, p.42-59;
English transl.: J. Soviet. Math., v.3, 1975, p.616-628.
[Kleiner, 1988] M.M.Kleiner, Pairs of partially ordered sets of tame representation
type, Linear Algebra Appl., v.104, 1988, p.103-115.
[Krugljak, 1972] S.A.Krugljak, Representations of algebras with zero square rad-
ical, Zap. Nauchn. Sem. LOMI, v.28, 1972, p.60-68; English transl. J.
Soviet Math., v.3, N.5, 1975.
[Nakayama, 1940] T.Nakayama, Note on uni-serial and generalized uni-serial
rings, Proc. Imperial Acad. Japan, v.16, 1940, p.285-289.
[Nazarova, Roiter, 1972] L.A.Nazarova, A.V.Roiter, Representations of partially
ordered sets, Zap. Nauchn. Sem. LOMI, v.28, 1972, p.5-31 (in Russian);
English transl. J. Soviet Math., vol.3, 1975, p.585-606.
[Nazarova, 1974] L.A.Nazarova, Partially ordered sets of infinite type, In: Lecture
Notes in Math., Springer-Verlag, v.488, 1974, p.244-252.
[Nazarova, 1975] L.A.Nazarova, Representations of partially ordered sets of infi-
nite type, Izv. Akad. Nauk SSR, Ser. Mat., v.39, 1975, p.963-991.
[Nazarova, Roiter, 1973] L.A.Nazarova, A.V.Roiter, On a problem of
I.M.Gel’fand, Funk. Anal i Prilozhen., v.7, No.2, 1973, p.54-69 (in Russian).
[Nazarova, Roiter, 1983] L.A.Nazarova, A.V.Roiter, Representations and forms of
weakly completed partially ordered sets, In: Linear algebra and the theory of
representations, Akad. Nauk Ukrain. SSR, Inst. Mat., Kiev, 1983, p.19–54
(in Russian).
[Nazarova, Zavadskij, 1977] L.A.Nazarova, A.G.Zavadskij, Partially ordered sets
of tame type, In: Matrix problems, Kiev, 1977, 122–143.
[Nazarova, Zavadskij, 1977] L.A.Nazarova, A.G.Zavadskij, Partially ordered sets
of finite growth, Funkts. Anal. Prilozh., v.16, 1982, p.72-73 (in Russian),
English transl.: Funct. Anal. Appl., v.16, 1982, p.135–137.
[Ringel, 2004] C.M.Ringel, Foundation of the representation theory of Artin alge-
bras, using the Gabriel-Roiter Measure. In: José A.de la Peña (ed.), Trends
in the representation theory of algebras and related topics, Contemporary
Mathematics 406, Americal Mathematical Society, 2006, 105–135.
And also in: Masahisa Sato (ed.), Proceedings of the 36th symposium on ring
theory, Vol.2, 2004, 1–19.
[Ringel, 1976] C.M.Ringel, Representations of K-species and bimodules, J. Alge-
bra, v.41, 1976, p.269–302.
[Ringel, 1980] C.Ringel, Tame algebras (On algorithms for solving vector space
problems II), Carleton Math. Lecture Notes, v.25, 1980, p.1–32.
[Ringel, 1978] C.M.Ringel, Finite dimensional hereditary algebras of wild repre-
sentation type, Math. Z., v.161, 1978, p.235–255.
[Roiter, 1968] A.V.Roiter, Unbounded dimensionality of indecomposable repre-
sentations of an algebra with an infinite number of indecomposable repre-
sentations, Math. USSR Izv., v.2, N.6, 1968, p.1223–1230.
[Simson, 1992] D.Simson, Linear representations of partially ordered sets and

vector space categories, Algebra, Logic and Applic. v.4, Gordon and Breach
Science Publishers, 1992.
[Tachikawa, 1973] H.Tachikawa, On quasi-Frobenius rings and their generaliza-
tions, In: Springer Lecture Notes in Math., v.351, 1973.
[Thrall, 1941] R.Thrall, On ahdir algebras, Bull. Amer. Math. Soc., v.47, 1941,
p.684.
[Yoshii, 1956] T.Yoshii, Notes on algebras of bounded representation type, Proc.
Japan Acad., v.32, 1956, p.441–445.
[Yoshii, 1957a] T.Yoshii, On algebras of bounded representation type, Osaka
Math. J., v.8, 1956, p.51-105; Supplements and corrections; ibib., v.9, 1957,
p.67-85.
[Yoshii, 1957b] T.Yoshii, On the indecomposable representations of algebras, Ann.
Math., v.66, 1957, p.418-429.
[Zavadskij, 1977] A.G.Zavadskij, A differentiation with respect to a pair of points,
Matrix problems, Kiev, 1977, p.115-121 (in Russian).
[Zavadskij, Kirichenko, 1977] A.G.Zavadskij and V.V.Kirichenko, Semimaximal
rings of finite type, Mat. Sbornik, vol.103, 1977, p.100-116 (in Russian).
4. Frobenius algebras and quasi-Frobenius rings
This chapter is devoted to the study of Frobenius algebras and quasi-Frobenius
rings. The class of quasi-Frobenius rings was introduced by T.Nakayama in 1939
as a generalization of Frobenius algebras. It is one of the most interesting and
intensively studied classes of Artinian rings. Frobenius algebras are determined by
the requirement that the right and left regular modules are equivalent. And quasi-
Frobenius algebras are defined as algebras whose regular modules are injective.
We start this chapter with a short study of duality properties for finite dimen-
sional algebras. In section 4.2 there are given equivalent definitions of Frobenius
algebras in terms of bilinear forms and linear functions. There also symmetric
algebras are studied who are a special class of Frobenius algebras. The main
properties of quasi-Frobenius algebras are given in section 4.4.
The starting point in studying quasi-Frobenius rings in this chapter is the
Nakayama definition of them. The key concept in this definition is a permutation
of indecomposable projective modules. It is natural to call such a permutation a
Nakayama permutation.
Quasi-Frobenius rings are also of interest because of the presence of a dual-
ity between the categories of left and right finitely generated modules over them.
The main properties of duality in Noetherian rings are considered in section 4.10.
Semiperfect rings with duality for simple modules are studied in section 4.11.
The equivalent definitions of quasi-Frobenius rings in terms of duality and semi-
injective rings are given in section 4.12. Quasi-Frobenius rings have many inter-
esting equivalent definitions, in particular, an Artinian ring A is quasi-Frobenius
if and only if A is a ring with duality for simple modules.
One of the most significant results of quasi-Frobenius rings is the theorem of
C.Faith and E.A.Walker. This theorem says that a ring A is quasi-Frobenius if
and only if every projective right A-module is injective and conversely.
Quivers of quasi-Frobenius rings are studied in section 4.13. The most impor-
tant result of this section is the Green theorem: the quiver of any quasi-Frobenius
ring is strongly connected. Conversely, for a given strongly connected quiver Q
there is a symmetric algebra A such that Q(A) = Q. Symmetric algebras with
given quivers are studied in section 4.14.
4.1 DUALITY PROPERTIES

Let A be a finite dimensional algebra over a field k. We shall establish a dual-
ity between the category modr A of right finite dimensional A-modules and the
category modl A of left finite dimensional A-modules.
161
Let M ∈ modr A. Denote by M ∗ = Homk (M, k) the conjugate (linear dual)

space which is the vector space of linear functionals on M . Then M ∗ is naturally
a left A-module. Indeed, for ϕ ∈ M ∗ and a ∈ A we define aϕ by the formula
(aϕ)(m) = ϕ(ma), where m ∈ M . It is easy to verify that M ∗ is a finite di-
mensional left A-module, i.e., M ∗ ∈ modl A. The module M ∗ is called the dual
of M .
Analogously, if M ∈ modl A, then the conjugate space M ∗ is a finite dimen-
sional right A-module, i.e., M ∗ ∈ modr A.
Obviously, dimk M ∗ = dimk M and M ∗∗ M as A-modules. Every linear
map ϕ : M → N induces a conjugate map ϕ∗ : N ∗ → M ∗∗ defined by (ϕ∗ f )(m) =
f (ϕm).
We can check readily that if ϕ is an A-homomorphism, so is ϕ∗ . Moreover,
(ϕψ)∗ = ψ ∗ ϕ∗ and 1∗ = 1.
Hence, assigning to every right A-module M the left A-module M ∗ and to
every homomorphism ϕ the homomorphism ϕ∗ we obtain a contravariant ex-
act functor ∗ from modr A to modl A. Analogously, we have a contravariant ex-
act functor ∗ from modl A to modr A. We shall call these functors the duality
functors.
Proposition 4.1.1. There is a bijective correspondence between submodules

of M and those of M ∗ , reversing the inclusion.
Proof. Let N ⊂ M be a submodule of M . Then it defines a natural epimor-

phism π : M → M/N , and thus a monomorphism π ∗ : (M/N )∗ → M ∗ , that is, a
left submodule of M ∗ . This submodule has a simple interpretation: it coincides
with the “orthogonal complement” N ⊥ = {ϕ ∈ M ∗ : ϕ(N ) = 0}. Moreover,
M ∗ /N ⊥ N ∗ .
It is easy to verify that the correspondence N → N ⊥ satisfies the following
conditions:
(1) for N1 ⊂ N2 we have N2⊥ ⊂ N1⊥ ;
(2) (N1 + N2 )⊥ = N1⊥ ∩ N2⊥ and (N1 ∩ N2 )⊥ = N1⊥ + N2⊥ ;
(3) N ⊥⊥ = N .
A correspondence satisfying these conditions is called an anti-isomorphism

of lattices.
Proposition 4.1.2. A right A-module U is simple if and only if the left A-

module U ∗ is simple.
Proof. Since U U ∗∗ , it is sufficient to show that if U is not simple, then U ∗

is not simple as well. Let N ⊂ U be a non-trivial submodule of U . Consider the
exact sequence:
0 → N → U → U/N → 0.
FROBENIUS ALGEBRAS AND QUASI-FROBENIUS RINGS 163
Applying the exact duality functor ∗ = Hom(−, k) to this sequence, we obtain

the exact sequence
0 → (U/N )∗ → U ∗ → N ∗ → 0,
where both (U/N )∗ and N ∗ are nonzero modules. So U ∗ is not simple. Conse-
quently, the modules U and U ∗ are simple simultaneously.
Remark 4.1.1. Taking into account the dual definitions of projective and
injective modules, it is easy to see that any indecomposable left injective A-module
Q is equal to a P ∗ = Homk (P, k), where P is a principal right A-module.
Remark 4.1.2. By the annihilation lemma (see vol.I, p.265), for any simple
right A-module U there exists a unique canonical idempotent f ∈ A such that
U f = U . By the definition of U ∗ , we have U f = U if and only if f U ∗ = U ∗ .
Remark 4.1.3. Let M be a finite dimensional module over a finite dimensional

algebra A with radical R. Then rad M = M R, by proposition 5.1.8, vol.I.
Recall that the socle of a right A-module M , which is denoted by socM , is

the sum of all simple right submodules of M . If there are no such submodules,
then socM = 0.
Proposition 4.1.3. For any finitely generated right A-module M we have that
(radM )⊥ is the socle of M ∗ and soc M ∗ (M/rad M )∗ .
Proof. Since, by definition, radM is the intersection of all maximal submodules

of M , the statement follows from proposition 4.1.1.
Obviously, a finite dimensional algebra is an Artinian ring and consequently it

is a semiperfect ring. Therefore applying the duality functor ∗ = Hom (−, k) to
theorem 10.4.10, vol.I, i.e., by “inverting all arrows”, we immediately obtain the
following statement:
Theorem 4.1.4. Any indecomposable injective module Q over a finite dimen-

sional algebra A is finite dimensional; it is the injective hull of a simple A-module
and has exactly one simple submodule soc Q. There is a one to one correspon-
dence between the mutually nonisomorphic indecomposable injective A-modules
Q1 , . . . , Qs and the mutually nonisomorphic simple A-modules U1 , . . . , Us which
is given by the following correspondences:
Qi → soc Qi = Ui
and
Ui → E(Ui ),
where E(Ui ) is the injective hull of Ui .
4.2 FROBENIUS AND SYMMETRIC ALGEBRAS

Definition. A finite dimensional k-algebra A is called Frobenius if the right
modules AA and (A A)∗ are isomorphic.
If an algebra A is Frobenius then the left modules A A and (AA )∗ are also
isomorphic.
Taking remark 4.1.1 into account, it follows that if A is a Frobenius algebra,
then the right module (A A)∗ is injective. Analogously, the left module (AA )∗ is
injective.
Theorem 4.2.1. Let A be a finite dimensional k-algebra. The following state-

ments are equivalent:
(1) A is a Frobenius algebra;
(2) there exists a non-degenerate bilinear form f : A × A → k which is asso-
ciative, i.e., f (ab, c) = f (a, bc) for all a, b, c ∈ A;
(3) there exists a linear function σ : A → k such that the kernel of σ contains
neither left nor right ideals.
Proof.
(1) ⇒ (2). Let the left A-modules A A and (AA )∗ be isomorphic and let
Θ : A A → (AA )∗
be an isomorphism. Then Θ(ab) = aΘ(b) for all a, b ∈ A. So Θ(ab)x =

(aΘ(b))x = Θ(b)xa, where x ∈ A.
Define a bilinear form f : A × A → k by the formula f (x, y) = Θ(y)x.
We shall show that f (x, y) is non-degenerate. Assume f (x, y) = 0 for all
x ∈ A. Then Θ(y) = 0, and so y = 0 since Θ is an isomorphism.
Let e1 , . . . , en be a basis of A, x = x1 e1 + . . . xn en and y = y1 e1 + . . . yn en ,
x = (x1 , . . . , xn ) and y = (y1 , . . . , yn ), G = (f (ei , ej )). Obviously,
f (x, y) = xGy T ,
where ⎛ ⎞
y1
⎜ ⎟
yT = ⎝ ... ⎠ .
yn
The implication
f (x, y) = 0 for all x ∈ A ⇒ y = 0
is equivalent to the implication
G y T = 0 ⇒ y T = 0.
So det G = 0 and xG = 0 implies x = 0. Consequently, if f (x, y) = 0 for

all y ∈ A, then x = 0. Therefore the bilinear form f (x, y) is non-degenerate.
We have f (xy, z) = Θ(z)xy and f (x, yz) = Θ(yz)x = Θ(z)xy. Consequently,
f (xy, z) = f (x, yz).
and (1) ⇒ (2) is proved.

(2) ⇒ (1). Let f : A × A → k be an associative non-degenerate bilinear form.
Define a map Θ : A A → (AA )∗ by the formula Θ(y)x = f (x, y), where x, y ∈ A.
Since f (x, y) is an associative non-degenerate form, Θ is an A-isomorphism.
(2) ⇒ (3). Define a linear function σ : A → k by the formula σ(x) = f (x, 1),
where x ∈ A.
Let I = Aa1 + . . . + Aan be a left ideal in A and σ(I) = 0. Consequently,
σ(Aai ) = 0 for i = 1, . . . , n and there is a nonzero left ideal I contained in Ker σ
if and only if there exists an a = 0, a ∈ A such that σ(Aa) = 0. If σ(Aa) = 0,
then f (Aa, 1) = f (A, a) = 0 and a = 0. Analogously, f (aA, 1) = 0 implies
a = 0. So Ker σ contains neither left nor right ideals.
(3) ⇒ (2). Let σ be a linear function as in condition (3). It is easy to verify
that the bilinear form f (x, y) = σ(xy) satisfies condition (2). The theorem is
proved.
Definition. A finite dimensional k-algebra A is called symmetric if there

exists a non-degenerate associative bilinear form f : A×A → k which is symmetric,
i.e.,
f (a, b) = f (b, a)
for all a, b, c ∈ A.
From theorem 4.2.1 there immediately follows the following equivalent defini-
tion of a symmetric algebra.
Proposition 4.2.2. A finite dimensional k-algebra A is symmetric if and only

if there exists a linear function σ : A → k such that Ker σ contains neither left nor
right ideals and ab − ba ∈ Ker σ for all a, b ∈ A.
Obviously, each symmetric algebra is Frobenius. And any commutative Frobe-

nius k-algebra is a symmetric algebra. One of the most important examples of
symmetric algebras is given by the following statement.
Theorem 4.2.3. Let A = kG be the group algebra of a finite group G over a

field k. Then A is a symmetric algebra.
Proof. Define the linear function σ : A → k on the k-algebra A = kG by the

formula
σ( αg g) = α1 ,
g∈G
where 1 is the identity of G. Assume Kerσ I. Then for any

contains a right ideal −1
a ∈ I we have σ(aA) = 0 and a = αg g. Obviously, σ(ag1 ) = αg1 = 0
g∈G
for all g1 ∈ G. So a = 0, i.e., I = 0. Analogously, Ker σ does not contain any
nonzero left ideal.

Let a = αg g and b = βg g, then σ(ab) = αg βh = 1 and
g∈G g∈G gh=1
σ(ba) = βh αg . So σ(ab − ba) = 0. Thus A is a symmetric algebra, by
gh=1
proposition 4.2.2.
4.3 MONOMIAL IDEALS AND NAKAYAMA PERMUTATIONS

OF SEMIPERFECT RINGS
Let 1 = f1 + . . . + fs be a canonical decomposition of the identity of a semiperfect
ring A with Jacobson radical R. Then AA = f1 A ⊕ . . . ⊕ fs A (resp. A A =
Af1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Afs ), where fi A = Pini (resp. Afi = Qni i ), for i = 1, . . . , s, is called
the canonical decomposition of a ring A into a direct sum of its principal
right (left) A-modules. Let Aij = fi Afj (i, j = 1, . . . , s). The two-sided Peirce
decomposition of the ring A
⎛ ⎞
A11 A12 . . . A1s
⎜A21 A22 . . . A2s ⎟
⎜ ⎟
A = ⎜ . .. .. .. ⎟ (4.3.1)
⎝ .. . . . ⎠
As1 As2 . . . Ass
is called a canonical two-sided Peirce decomposition of A.
From theorem 11.1.7, vol.I, it follows that every other canonical Peirce decom-
position of A can be obtained from (4.3.1) by a simultaneous permutation of rows
and columns and a replacement of all the Peirce components Aij by aAij a−1 for
some invertible element a ∈ A.
Let 1 = e1 + . . . + en be a decomposition of 1 into a sum of pairwise orthogonal
idempotents. By an ideal we shall mean here a two-sided ideal. For any ideal
I of A the Abelian group ei Iej (i, j = 1, . . . , n) obviously lies in I, and I =
n
Iij is a decomposition of I into a direct sum of Abelian subgroups. Such a
i,j=1
decomposition is called the two-sided Peirce decomposition of I corresponding
to 1 = e1 + . . . + en . It has the following matrix form:
⎛ ⎞
I11 I12 · · · I1n
⎜ I21 I22 · · · I2n ⎟
⎜ ⎟
I=⎜ . .. .. .. ⎟
⎝ .. . . . ⎠
In1 In2 ··· Inn
n
If J = ⊕ Jij is also an ideal, then
i,j=1
⎛ ⎞
I11 + J11 I12 + J12 ··· I1n + J1n
⎜ I21 + J21 I22 + J22 ··· I2n + J2n ⎟
⎜ ⎟
I+J =⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟,
⎝ . . . . ⎠
In1 + Jn1 In2 + Jn2 ··· Inn + Jnn
and each Peirce component (IJ )ij of the product IJ is given by

n
(IJ )ij = Iik Jkj (i, j = 1, . . . , n),
k=1
so that addition and multiplication of elements from I and J can be done by

addition and multiplication of the corresponding matrices.
Let A be a semiperfect ring and let 1 = f1 +. . .+fs be a canonical decomposition
of 1 ∈ A into a sum of pairwise orthogonal idempotents (see vol.I, p.265). Then
s
I = Iij with Iij = fi Ifj (i, j = 1, . . . , s) is called the canonical two-
i,j=1
sided Peirce decomposition of I. From theorem 11.1.7, vol.I, it follows that
one canonical Peirce decomposition of I can be obtained from another one by a
simultaneous permutation of rows and columns and the replacement of each Peirce
component Iij by aIij a−1 , where a ∈ A.
Definition. An ideal I of a semiperfect ring A will be called monomial if

each row and each column of a canonical two-sided Peirce decomposition of I
contains exactly one nonzero Peirce component.
If I is a monomial ideal, then there exists a permutation ν of {1, . . . , s} such

that Iiν(i) = 0. Clearly, ν is uniquely determined up to conjugation by an element
from the symmetric group on s letters. We denote such a permutation by ν(I).
Lemma 4.3.1. Let A be a semiperfect ring. If I is a monomial ideal of A

then each canonical two-sided Peirce component of I is an ideal of A.
Proof. Let 1 = f1 + . . . + fs be a canonical decomposition of 1 ∈ A into a

s
sum of pairwise orthogonal idempotents. Write ν = ν(I), then I = ⊕ fi Ifν(i) .
i=1
Obviously, fi Ifν(i) fk Afl = 0 if k = ν(i). Moreover, fi Ifν(i) fν(i) Afl ⊆ fi Ifl which
is nonzero if and only if l = ν(i), since I is monomial. Similarly, fk Afl fi Ifν(i) = 0
if and only if k = l = i. It follows that fi Ifν(i) is an ideal of A for each i = 1, . . . , n.
Let AA = P1n1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Psns (resp. A A = Qn1 1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Qns s ) be the canonical

decomposition of a semiperfect ring A into a direct sum of right (left) principal
modules.
Let M be a right A-module and N be a left A-module. We set top M = M/M R
and top N = N/RN . Since Pi is a principle right A-module, top Pi is a simple right
module, and analogously, top Qi is a simple left module for i = 1, . . . , s. We denote

by soc M (resp. soc N ) the largest semisimple right (resp. left) submodule of M
(resp. N ).
Example 4.3.1.
Let A = Tn (D) be a ring of all upper-triangular matrices over a division ring
D. Let P1 = e11 A, . . . , Pn = enn A and A P1 = Ae11 , . . . , A Pn = Aenn . Let
Zr = soc AA and Zl = socA A. Obviously Zr = A Pn = Un ⊕ . . . ⊕ Un , where

n times
Un = Pn is a simple right A-module and Zl = P1 = V1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ V1 , where V1 = A P1

n times
is a simple left A-module. Thus Zr ∩ Zl = e11 Aenn is a two-sided ideal. Obviously,
(Zl ∩ Zr )A = Un and A (Zl ∩ Zr ) = V1 . Moreover, dimD Zr = dimD Zl = n.
Definition. We say that a semiperfect ring A admits a Nakayama permu-

tation ν(A) : i → ν(i) of {1, . . . , s} if the following conditions are satisfied:
(np1) soc Pk = top Pν(k) ,
(np2) soc Qν(k) = top Qk .
Let A be a semiperfect ring, which admits a Nakayama permutation ν(A).

By condition (np1), the socle of every principal module is simple and, moreover,
two principal modules with isomorphic socles have to be isomorphic, by theorem
10.4.10, vol.I. By condition (np2), the socles of the principal left modules are also
simple.
Theorem 4.3.2. Let A be a semiperfect ring such that the socles of all principal
right A-modules and of all principal left A-modules are simple. Suppose further-
more, that if the socles of two principal right A-modules P and P are isomorphic
then P ∼ = P . Then A satisfies the following conditions:
(i) soc AA = soc A A = Z and Z is a monomial ideal;
(ii) the ring A admits a Nakayama permutation ν = ν(A) with ν(A) = ν(Z).
Proof. Let 1 = f1 + . . . + fs be a canonical decomposition of 1 ∈ A into

a sum of pairwise orthogonal idempotents and fi A = Pini (i = 1, . . . , s). Set
Zr = socAA and Zl = soc A A. The equality A A = Af1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Afs implies
that Zl = soc Af1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ soc Afs and Zl fi = soc Afi for all i = 1, . . . s. Similarly,
Zr = soc f1 A⊕. . .⊕soc fs A and fj Zr = soc fj A (j = 1, . . . s). From our hypothesis
it follows that soc P1 , . . . , soc Ps is a permutation of the simple modules U1 =
top P1 , . . . , Us = top Ps .
We write e ∈ fi if there is a decomposition fi = e1 + . . . + eni into a sum
of pairwise orthogonal local idempotents and e = ej for some j ∈ {1, . . . , ni }.
For a fixed i = 1, . . . , s and each local idempotent e ∈ fi , we obtain, by the
annihilation lemma, that Zr e = 0. Then Zr e must contain socAe, since socAe is
simple. Hence Zl fi = soc Afi ⊆ Zr fi for all i = 1, . . . , s, which yields Zl ⊆ Zr .
Similarly, fj Zr ⊆ fj Zl (j = 1, . . . , s), which implies that Zr ⊆ Zl . Consequently,

Zr = Zl .
Since Zr ∼ n1
= Uν(1) ⊕ . . . ⊕ Uν(s)
ns
, then, by the annihilation lemma of simple mod-
s
ules, Zr has the following two-sided Peirce decomposition: Zr = i=1 fi Zr fν(i) .
Thus Z = Zr = Zl is a monomial ideal and ν(Z) is a Nakayama permutation of A.
Recall the notions of right and left annihilators (see vol.I, p.219). Let S be a
subset in a ring A. Then r.annA (S) = {x ∈ A : Sx = 0} and l.annA (S) = {x ∈ A :
xS = 0}. We shall write r(S) instead of r.annA (S) and l(S) instead of l.annA (S).
Proposition 4.3.3. Let A be a semiperfect ring. Then soc(AA ) coincides with

the left annihilator l(R) of R = rad A, whereas soc(A A) coincides with the right
annihilator r(R). In particular, soc(A A) and soc(AA ) are two-sided ideals.
Proof. If U is a simple right A-module, then, obviously, U R = 0 and,

consequently, soc(AA ) ⊆ l(R). On the other hand, the equality l(R)R = 0 implies
that l(R) is a semisimple right A-module, so it must be contained in the right socle
of A, hence, l(R) = soc(AA ). Similarly, r(R) = soc(A A). The statement is proved.
4.4 QUASI-FROBENIUS ALGEBRAS

In this section we shall consider an important class of algebras first introduced
by T.Nakayama. These algebras are a generalization of the Frobenius algebras
considered in section 4.2.
Definition. A finite dimensional algebra A over a field k is called quasi-

Frobenius if the regular right module AA is injective. For short, we shall call it
a QF-algebra.
This condition is equivalent to the fact that any projective right A-module is
injective.
Remark 4.4.1. From the duality properties it is easy to see that AA is injective
if and only if A A is injective. So, the definition of quasi-Frobenius algebras is right
and left symmetric.
Examples 4.4.1.
1. Any Frobenius algebra is quasi-Frobenius, since in this case AA (A A)∗ is
injective.
2. Any group algebra kG of a finite group G over a field k is quasi-Frobenius,
by theorem 4.2.3.
Let AA = P1n1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Psns (A A = Qn1 1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Qns s ) be a decomposition of the

right (left) regular A-module into a direct sum of non-isomorphic principal right
(left) A-modules.
By remark 4.1.1, any indecomposable right injective A-module has the form
Q∗i = Homk (Qi , k) for some i = 1, . . . , s. By theorem 4.1.4, the modules
Q∗1 , . . . , Q∗s are all pairwise non-isomorphic indecomposable injective A-modules.

If A is a Frobenius algebra, then A∗A P1n1 ⊕. . .⊕Psns . If A is a quasi-Frobenius
algebra, then A∗A P1m1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Psms , but in general ni = mi for i = 1, . . . , s.
Recall that a finite dimensional algebra A over a field k is called basic if the
quotient algebra Ā = A/R is a direct product of division algebras. It is equivalent
to the fact that if AA = P1 ⊕ P2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Ps is a decomposition of AA into a direct
sum of principal modules, then Pi Pj for i = j (i, j = 1, . . . , s).
The fact that the definition of quasi-Frobenius algebra has been given in terms
of module categories implies the following proposition.
Proposition 4.4.1. Every finite dimensional algebra Morita equivalent to a

quasi-Frobenius algebra is quasi-Frobenius.
In particular, every quasi-Frobenius algebra is Morita-equivalent to a Frobenius
algebra (namely, to its basic algebra).
Theorem 4.4.2. The following conditions for a finite dimensional algebra A

are equivalent:
(1) A is quasi-Frobenius;
(2) A admits a Nakayama permutation.
Proof. Without loss of generality, we may assume that A is basic. Let AA =

P1 ⊕ P2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Ps (A A = Q1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Qs ) be a canonical decomposition of the
right (resp. left) regular A-module AA (resp. A A) into a direct sum of non-
isomorphic principal right (left) A-modules, and let 1 = f1 + f2 + . . . + fn be the
corresponding decomposition of the identity of A into a sum of pairwise orthogonal
local idempotents.
Any indecomposable right injective A-module has the form Q∗i = Homk (Qi , k)
for some i = 1, . . . , s. By theorem 4.1.4, the modules Q∗1 , . . . , Q∗s are all pairwise
non-isomorphic indecomposable injective A-modules.
(1) ⇒ (2). Suppose that A is quasi-Frobenius, then there exists a permutation
ν on {1, 2, . . . , s} such that
Pi Q∗ν(i) , . . . , Ps Q∗ν(s) (4.4.1)
Then, taking into account proposition 4.1.3, we have

∗
soc Pi soc Q∗ν(i) Qν(i) /RQν(i) .
We shall show that ∗

Qν(i) /RQν(i) Uν(i) ,
where Ui = Pi /Pi R and Vi = Qi /RQi . Really that, by the annihilation lemma,
fi Vi = 0. Then, by remark 4.1.2, Vi fi = 0, as well. So, by the annihilation lemma
Vi∗ Ui . Thus,
soc Pi Uν(i) = top Pν(i) .
Since A A is also injective by remark 4.4.1, all principal left A-modules

Q1 , . . . , Qs have pairwise non-isomorphic simple socles, as well. Then, by the-
orem 2.3.2, we obtain that a quasi-Frobenius algebra A admits the Nakayama
permutation ν(A) : i → ν(i) of {1, . . . , s}.
(2) ⇒ (1). Suppose that a finite dimensional algebra A admits a Nakayama
permutation. Let E(P1 ), . . . , E(Ps ) be injective hulls of the principal right A-
modules P1 , . . . , Ps respectively. Then, E(P1 ), . . . , E(Ps ) are indecomposable and
pairwise non-isomorphic. Obviously, dim E(Pi ) ≥ dim Pi for i = 1, . . . , s. By
remark 4.1.1, we have E(Pi ) = Q∗ν(i) for i = 1, . . . , s.
Suppose there exists a number j (a ≤ j ≤ s) such that dim E(Pj ) > dim Pj .
Since dim Qi = dim Q∗i ,

s
s
s
dim A = dim Qi = dim E(Pi ) > dim Pi = dim A.
i=1 i=1 i=1
This contradiction proves that Pi = E(Pi ) for i = 1, . . . , s and A is quasi-

Frobenius.
Remark 4.4.2. It is easy to see that a quasi-Frobenius algebra is Frobenius

if and only if nν(i) = ni for all i = 1, . . . , s.
Theorem 4.4.3. An algebra A is quasi-Frobenius if and only if the socle

of each principal A-module is simple, and for any non-isomorphic principal A-
modules P1 and P2 , soc P1 soc P2 .
Proof. If A is a quasi-Frobenius algebra then, by theorem 4.4.2, A admits a

Nakayama permutation. So it is enough to prove the sufficiency of the theorem.
Without loss of generality, we may assume that A is basic. Then AA = P1 ⊕. . .⊕Ps
and A A = Q1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Qs , where the P1 , . . . , Ps are pairwise non-isomorphic right
principal modules and the Q1 , . . . , Qs are pairwise non-isomorphic left princi-
pal modules. Let A∗ = Q∗1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Q∗s . By remarks 4.1.1, 4.1.2 and theorem
4.1.4, all the soc Q∗1 , . . . , soc Q∗s are the pairwise non-isomorphic simple A-modules
U1 , . . . , Us . By condition of the theorem, the map ν(A) : i → ν(i) of the set
{1, . . . , s} such that soc Pk = top Pν(k) is a transposition. By proposition 5.3.7,
vol.I injective hulls E(Uν(k) ) and E(Pk ) of Uν(k) and Uk , respectively, coincide.
As above, if there exists a number j (1 ≤ j ≤ s), such that dim E(Pj ) > dim Pj ,
then
s s
dim A = dim E(Pi ) > dim Pi = dim A.
i=1 i=1
This contradiction proves that Pi = E(Pi ) for i = 1, . . . , s and therefore A is

Frobenius.
Theorem 4.4.4. A Nakayama permutation ν(A) of a symmetric k-algebra A

is the identity permutation.
Proof. Let AA = P1n1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Psns be a canonical decomposition of A into a

direct sum of right principal modules and let 1 = f1 + . . . + fs be a canonical
decomposition of the identity of A. By theorem 4.3.2, soc AA = soc A A = Z and
Z is a monomial ideal with ν(Z) = ν(A). Suppose that ν(A) is not the identity
permutation. Then there are i = j such that fi Zfj = 0 and fi Zfj is a two-sided
ideal.
Since A is a symmetric algebra, by proposition 4.2.2 there exists a linear
function σ : A → k such that Kerσ contains neither left nor right ideals and
ab − ba ∈ Ker σ for all a, b ∈ A.
Consider fi Zfj , which is a two-sided ideal by lemma 4.3.1. Let z ∈ Z and
z = 0. We have σ(fi zfj ) = σ(fi zfj · fj ) = σ(fj · fi zfj ) = σ(0) = 0. So fi Zfj = 0
and we have a contradiction. Consequently, for any i = 1, . . . , s it must be the
case that fi Zfi = 0 and ν(Z) = ν(A) = E is the identity permutation.
Definition. A quasi-Frobenius algebra A is called weakly symmetric if the

Nakayama permutation ν(A) of A is the identity permutation.
Theorem 4.4.5. Let A be a weakly symmetric algebra. Then A is Frobenius

and every algebra C Morita equivalent to A is also Frobenius. Conversely, if
every finite dimensional algebra C Morita equivalent to a Frobenius algebra A is
Frobenius, then A is a weakly symmetric algebra.
Proof. By theorem 4.4.2 and remark 4.4.2, every QF -algebra with identity
Nakayama permutation is automatically Frobenius. Clearly, every algebra which
is Morita equivalent to a Frobenius algebra with identity Nakayama permutation
is Frobenius.
Let A be a Frobenius algebra and let ν(A) be not the identity. Then we can
assume that soc P1 = top P2 . Let A = P1n1 ⊕ P2n2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Psns be a canonical
decomposition of A into a direct sum of non-isomorphic principal A-modules. From
the definition of a Frobenius algebra it follows that n2 = n1 . Set P = P12 ⊕ P2 ⊕
. . . ⊕ Ps . Then C = EndA P is a QF -algebra, ν(A) = ν(C), the multiplicity of
the first principal C-module is 2 and does not coincide with the multiplicity of the
second principal C-module. Therefore, C is not Frobenius.
Definition. A local serial (=uniserial) algebra is called a Köthe algebra.
Proposition 4.4.6. A Köthe algebra is Frobenius.
Proof. This immediately follows from theorem 4.4.2.
Examples 4.4.2.
(a) Let G = { g } be a cyclic group of order 4, and let k = F2 be the field of
two elements, A = kG.
Set r = 1 + g. Then R = rA is the Jacobson radical of A, and the elements
1, r, r2 , r3 form a basis of A, i.e., A is a Köthe algebra of length 4.
(b) Let G = { a } × { b } be the Klein four-group, i.e., a2 = 1 and b2 = 1;

k = F2 , A = kG. Set r1 = 1 + a, r2 = 1 + b. Then r1 r2 = 1 + a + b + ab,
and R = {αr1 + βr2 + γr1 r2 : α, β, γ ∈ k} is the Jacobson radical of A,
R2 = {δr1 r2 : δ ∈ k}. For every r ∈ R we have r2 = 0.
(c) We set A∗ = Homk (A, k) for a finite dimensional algebra A over a field
k. Let A be the four-dimensional algebra over k = F2 with basis 1, σ1 , σ2 , σ12
such that σ12 = σ22 and σ1 σ2 = σ2 σ1 = 0. Let ψ ∈ A∗ , ψ(σ12 ) = 1 and
ψ(1) = ψ(σ1 ) = ψ(σ2 ) = 0. Then the multiplication table for the basis elements
1, σ1 , σ2 , σ12 is the following
1 σ1 σ2 σ12
1 1 σ1 σ2 σ12
σ1 σ1 σ12 0 0
σ2 σ2 0 σ12 0
σ12 σ12 0 0 0
Therefore the matrix B of the bilinear form f (x, y) = ψ(x · y) in the basis
1, σ1 , σ2 , σ12 is
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 1
⎜0 1 0 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝0 0 1 0⎠
1 0 0 0
and A is a symmetric algebra.
(m)
(d) Let Hs (O) = Hs (O)/Rm , where O = k[[x]] is the ring of formal power
(m)
series over a field k. A k-algebra Hs (O) is a Frobenius algebra, which is not
1
symmetric for m ≡ 1(mod s).
It is easy to see that the algebras given in examples 4.4.2(b) and 4.4.2(c) are
non-isomorphic. Indeed, in case (b) x2 = 0 for all x ∈ R, on the other hand, in
case (c) this does not hold.
We have the following strict inclusions:2
(group algebras)⊂ (symmetric algebras)⊂
⊂ (Frobenius algebras)⊂ (quasi-Frobenius algebras).
The algebra from example 4.4.2(c) is an example of a symmetric algebra which
is not a group algebra, and so the first inclusion is strict.
Example 4.4.2(d) shows that the second inclusion is strict. From theorem 4.4.4
it follows that the third inclusion is also strict.
Example 4.4.3.
In conclusion we give an example of a semidistributive weakly symmetric al-
gebra A over the field k = F2 = {0, 1}. This algebra is a quotient algebra of the
1 see
example 4.5.1.
2 see
C.W.Curtis, I.Reiner, Methods of Representation Theory I,II. John Wiley and Sons,
New York, 1990, §66.
path algebra kQ of the quiver with adjacency matrix

0 1
[Q] = .
1 1
An admissible ideal J of kQ is generated by the following paths: σ21 σ12 = 0,

σ12 r2 = 0, r2 σ21 = 0, r2m = 0, m ≥ 2. Here σ12 is the arrow from 1 to 2 and r2
is the loop at 2 and paths are read from left to right (as before).
Let A = kQ/I. A basis of the first principal module P1 is: e1 , σ12 , σ12 σ21 .
A basis of the second principal module P2 is: e2 , σ21 , r2 , r22 , . . . , r2m−1 , for m ≥
2. So, dim A = m + 4 and this finite dimensional algebra contains 2m+4 elements.
Obviously, soc P1 = U1 and soc P2 = U2 , i.e., the algebra A is weakly symmetric.
Suppose that A is a symmetric algebra. By the definition of a symmetric
algebra, there exists a linear function σ : A → k such that Ker σ contains neither
left nor right ideals and σ(ab) = σ(ba) for all a, b ∈ A.
Obviously, J = {0, σ12 σ21 } is a right ideal in A consisting of two elements.
Then σ(σ21 σ12 ) = σ(σ12 σ21 ) = 0 and σ(J ) = 0. This contradiction proves that
A is not symmetric. Note that l(P1 ) = 3 and l(P2 ) = m + 1. So, l(P2 ) may be
arbitrarily large. (Here l(M ) denotes the length of a module M , i.e., the length
of a composition series.)
4.5 QUASI-FROBENIUS RINGS

Let P1 , . . . , Ps be the non-isomorphic principal right A-modules and let Q1 , . . . , Qs
be the non-isomorphic principal left A-modules of a two-sided Artinian ring A.
And let AA = P1n1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Psns (resp. A A = Qn1 1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Qns s ) be a decomposition
of the right (left) regular A-module into a direct sum of principal right (left) A-
modules.
Definition. A two-sided Artinian ring A is called quasi-Frobenius (abbre-

viated, a QF -ring), if A admits a Nakayama permutation ν(A) of {1, 2, . . . , s}.
A quasi-Frobenius ring A is called Frobenius, if nν(i) = ni for all i = 1, . . . , s.
Clearly, ν is determined up to conjugation in the symmetric group on s letters,

and conjugations correspond to renumberings of the principal modules P1 , . . . , Ps .
We now construct some examples of quasi-Frobenius rings. Recall that a local

ring O with unique nonzero maximal right ideal M is called a discrete valuation
ring, if it has no zero divisors, the right ideals of O form the unique chain:
O ⊃ M ⊃ M2 ⊃ . . . ⊃ Mn ⊃ . . . ,
and, moreover, this chain is also the unique chain of left ideals of A. Then,
obviously, O is Noetherian, but not Artinian, all powers of M are distinct and
! ∞
k=1 M = 0. Moreover, M is principal as a right (left) ideal.
k
Example 4.5.1.
Denote by Hs (O) the ring of all s × s matrices of the following form:
⎛ ⎞
O O ... O O
⎜ .. .. ⎟
⎜M O . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. ⎟ .
H = Hs (O) = ⎜ ... ..
.
..
.
..
. .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ . .. ⎟
⎝ .. . O O⎠
M M ... M O
It is easy to see that the radical R of Hs (O) is

⎛ ⎞
M O ... ... O
⎜ .. .. ⎟
⎜M M . . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. ⎟ .
R = ⎜ ... ..
.
..
.
..
. . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ . .. .. ⎟
⎝ .. . . O⎠
M M ... M M
and
⎛ ⎞
M M O O
... ...
⎜ .. .... ⎟
⎜M M . . ⎟
.
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
..
2 ⎜ . . . . ⎟
.
R =⎜ . ⎟.
⎜ . .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ .. . . O⎟.
⎜ ⎟
⎝M M ... M M⎠
M2 M ... ... M M
The principal right modules of H are the “row-ideals” of H and the submodules
of each of them form a chain. In particular, the submodules of the “first-row-ideal”
form the following chain:
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
O O ··· O M O ··· O
⎜0 0 ··· 0⎟ ⎜0 0 ··· 0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟ ⊃ ⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟ ⊃ ··· ⊃
⎝. . . .⎠ ⎝ . . . .⎠
0 0 ··· 0 0 0 ··· 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
M ··· M O M M ··· M
⎜ 0 ··· 0 0⎟ ⎜0 0 ··· 0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⊃⎜ . . .. .. ⎟ ⊃ ⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟ .
⎝ .. .. . .⎠ ⎝ . . . . ⎠
0 ··· 0 0 0 0 ··· 0
It is easy to see that each other row-ideal of H is isomorphic to a submodule of

the above module. In a similar way, the principal left H-modules are the column-
ideals, whose submodules form corresponding chains. Thus, H is a serial ring.
Let P1 , . . . , Ps be the principal right modules of the quotient ring A = Hs (O)/R2
and let Q1 , . . . , Qs be the principal left A-modules numbered in a such way that
Pi = eii A, Qi = Aeii , (i = 1, . . . , s), where eij denotes the elementary s × s matrix
whose (i, j)-th entry is 1 while all other entries are zero. Then the submodules of
every Pi and Qi form finite chains, and a direct verification shows that
soc P1 ∼
= top P2 , soc P2 ∼
= top P3 , . . . , soc Ps ∼
= top P1
and
top Q1 ∼
= soc Q2 , top Q2 ∼
= soc Q3 , . . . , top Qs ∼
= soc Q1 .
Moreover, each of these modules is a one-dimensional vector space over O/M.

Hence, A is a quasi-Frobenius ring with Nakayama permutation (1, 2, . . . , s).
More generally, the quotient ring A = Hs (O)/Rm (m ≥ 2) is a quasi-Frobenius

ring with Nakayama permutation (1, 2, . . . , s)m−1 . It follows, in particular, that
A has the identity permutation as Nakayama permutation if and only if m ≡
1(mod s).
Example 4.5.2.
Let B2,s be the ring of 2s × 2s matrices of the form:

H R
B2,s = ,
R H
where H = Hs (O) as in the previous example.

R R
It is easy to see that, the Jacobson radical of B2,s is .
R R
Consider the ideal

Rs Rs+1
J = .
Rs+1 Rs
A direct verification shows that the quotient ring A = B2,s /J is a semidis-

tributive quasi-Frobenius ring with Nakayama permutation
ν = (1, s + 1)(2, s + 2) . . . (s, 2s).
Remark 4.5.1. It can be verified that B2,s /J is semidistributive.
The following theorem follows immediately from theorem 4.3.2.

Theorem 4.5.1. Let A be a quasi-Frobenius ring. Then soc(A A) = soc(AA ).

Moreover, Z = soc(A A) is a monomial ideal and ν(Z) coincides with the
Nakayama permutation ν(A) of A.
The definition of quasi-Frobenius rings in terms of permutations, given in this

section, is due to T.Nakayama [Nakayama, 1939]. There are numerous other equiv-
alent definitions of a quasi-Frobenius ring. One of the equivalent definition of a
QF-ring is given in the following theorem, which is a generalization of theorem
4.4.3 for quasi-Frobenius algebras.
Theorem 4.5.2. Let A be a two-sided Artinian ring. Then A is a QF -ring if

and only if the following conditions hold:
1) the socle of any principal A-module is simple.
2) if P1 and P2 are non-isomorphic principal A-modules then soc P1 soc P2 .
Proof. Let A be a quasi-Frobenius ring. Then A admits a Nakayama

permutation, and so, by condition (np1) of the definition, the socle of any principal
A-module P is simple. Moreover, if P1 P2 then soc P1 soc P2 .
Conversely, suppose all conditions of the theorem hold. From these conditions
it follows that soc P1 , . . . , soc Ps describe a permutation ν of the simple modules
U1 = top P1 , . . . , Us = top Ps . So, we have soc Pk = top Pν(k) , that is, condition
(np1) holds. By theorem 4.3.2, soc AA = socA A = Z is a monomial ideal with a
s
permutation ν such that Z = fk Zfν(k) . Therefore, by the annihilation lemma,
k=1
we have soc Qnν(k)
k
= soc Afν(k) = Vknk , where the Vk are left simple A-modules.
So we have soc Qν(k) = top Qk , that is, the condition (np2) holds as well. Thus,
A is a quasi-Frobenius ring. The theorem is proved.
Some other equivalent definitions of QF-rings in terms of self-injective rings

and duality will be given at the end of this chapter.
4.6 THE SOCLE OF A MODULE AND A RING

In this section we shall study in detail the main properties of socles of modules
and rings.
Recall the basic definitions (see vol. I, p. 129).
Definition. Let M be a right A-module. The socle of M , denoted by soc (M ),

is the sum of all simple right submodules of M . If there are no such submodules,
then soc (M ) = 0.
If M = AA , then soc (AA ) is the sum of all minimal right ideals of A and it is
a right ideal of A. Analogously, soc (A A) is a left ideal in A.
For a semisimple module M we have soc (M ) = M .
Since a homomorphic image of a simple module is a simple module or zero, for

any A-homomorphism ϕ : M → N of A-modules M , N we have that ϕ(soc (M )) ⊆
soc (N ).
Let A be a ring with Jacobson radical R.
Proposition 4.6.1. If M is a semisimple A-module, then M R = 0.
Proof. Let M be a simple nonzero right A-module. Obviously, M = mA for

all nonzero m ∈ M . If M R = M , then, by the Nakayama lemma, M = 0. This
contradiction shows that M R = 0. The general case follows from proposition
3.4.3, vol.I. The proposition is proved.
Recall that a ring A is called semilocal if Ā = A/R is a right Artinian ring

(see vol. I, p.228).
By theorem 3.5.5, vol.I, we obtain that Ā is semisimple (i.e., AA and A A are
right and left semisimple modules respectively).
The next proposition is a generalization of proposition 4.3.3.
Proposition 4.6.2. Let A be a semilocal ring with Jacobson radical R. Then

soc(AA ) coincides with the left annihilator l(R), whereas soc(A A) coincides with
the right annihilator r(R). In particular, soc(A A) and soc(AA ) are two-sided
ideals.
Proof. If M is a semisimple right A-module, then, M R = 0, by proposi-

tion 4.6.1, and consequently soc(AA ) ⊆ l(R). On the other hand, the equality
l(R)R = 0 implies that l(R) is a right Ā-module and, by theorem 2.2.5, vol.I, l(R)
is a semisimple module, so it must be contained in the right socle of A, hence,
l(R) = soc(AA ). Similarly, r(R) = soc(A A). The proposition is proved.
Example 4.6.1.
Let A = Tn (D) be the ring of upper triangular matrices of degree n over a
division ring D. Obviously, soc A A is the “first row ideal” of Tn (D) and soc AA
is the “last column ideal” of Tn (D). Therefore soc A A = V1n and soc AA = Unn ,
where Ui (resp. Vi ) is a right (resp. left) simple A-module (i = 1, 2, . . . , n). For
n ≥ 2 soc A A = soc AA . Obviously, dim D (soc A A) = dim D (soc AA ) = n.
Example 4.6.2.
Let k be a field and B = Bn (k) be the subalgebra of Mn (k) of matrices of the
following form:
⎛ ⎞
a11 0 0 ... 0 0
⎜ a21 a 0 ... 0 0 ⎟
⎜ 22 ⎟
⎜ a31 0 a33 ... 0 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. ..⎟.
⎜ . . . . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝an−1,1 0 0 . . . an−1,n−1 0 ⎠
an1 0 0 ... 0 ann
Obviously,
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 ... 0
"⎜ a21 0 0 . . . 0⎟ #
⎜ ⎟
⎜ . . . 0⎟
R = rad(B) = ⎜ a31 0 0 ⎟ .
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎝ . . . . .⎠
an1 0 0 ... 0
It is easy to see that
⎛ ⎞
" a11 0 ... 0 #
⎜ a21 0 . . . 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
l(R) = soc BB = ⎜ . .. . . .. ⎟
⎝ .. . . .⎠
an1 0 ... 0
and
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 ... 0
"⎜ a21 a22 0 ... 0 ⎟#
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
r(R) = soc B B = ⎜ a31 0 a33 ... 0 ⎟ .
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎝ . . . . . ⎠
an1 0 0 . . . ann
Consequently, soc BB = U1n and soc B B = V22 ⊕. . .⊕Vn2 . We have dim k (soc BB ) =
n and dim k (soc B B) = 2n − 2, where Ui (resp. Vi ) is a right (resp. left) simple
B-module (i = 1, 2, . . . , n).
Example 4.6.3.
Here we give an example of a right Noetherian serial ring A for which soc AA =
U2 ⊕ U2 , and soc A A = 0.
Let Q be the field of rational numbers, p be a prime integer, Z(p) = {m/n ∈
Q : (n, p) = 1}. Set

Z(p) Q
A= .
0 Q

pZ(p) Q
It is clear that R = radA = and P1 = (Z(p) , Q), P2 = (0, Q).
0 0
The left principal A-modules are:

Z(p) Q
Q1 = , Q2 = .
0 Q
Since A is serial, if the socle of a principal left (or right) module P is nonzero,
then soc P has to be simple.
Obviously, P1 R = (pZ(p) , Q) and P2 R = 0. The submodules of P1 are

P1 Rj (j = 1, 2, . . .) and (0, Q). The last module is isomorphic to U2 . Hence
soc AA = U2 ⊕ U2 = U22 .
pZ(p) Q
In the left case RQ1 = and RQ2 = . It is clear that the socles
0 0
of these modules are zero. Thus, soc A A = 0.
Example 4.6.4.
Let Q∞ be the following countable directed graph:
1 2 3 ... n n+1
• • • ... • • ...
So, the set of vertices V Q∞ is the set of all natural integers N and the set of
arrows AQ∞ = {σk,k+1 : k ∈ N}. For all i < j, where (i, j) ∈ N × N, there is a
path pij = σi,i+1 . . . σj−1,j . Let k be a field and consider kQ∞ . This is an infinite
dimensional k-algebra with the following basis:
{εi , i ∈ N; pij , i < j, i, j ∈ N}.

Much related is the infinite dimensional k-algebra Ω with basis
{ 1; pij , i, j ∈ N, i < j}
with 1 as the unit element and pij prs = δjr pis , where δjr is the Kroneker delta.
Obviously, a basis of the Jacobson radical R = rad(Ω) is {pij : i < j}.
. σn−1,n is nonzero for any n ∈ N.
The product σ12 σ23 . .
Let w ∈ Ω and w = αij pij . Let s(w) = min {i}. If a, b ∈ R and
i,j ∃j with αij =0
ab = 0, then s(ab) < s(b). So, if s(a1 ) = m then am+1 am . . . a2 a1 = 0 for any
am+1 , . . . , a2 ∈ R. Therefore, Ω is right perfect, but not left perfect.

n
Obviously, soc ΩΩ = 0 and soc Ω Ω = { α1k p1k : for any n ∈ N}. Thus, the
k=1
set {p12 , p13 , . . . , p1n , . . .} is a basis of soc Ω Ω.
Example 4.6.5.
Here we give an example of a commutative local semiprimary ring A whose
socle is simple, but A is not Artinian.
Let k[x1 , x2 , . . . , xn , . . .] be the polynomial ring over a field k in a countable
number of variables and let J be the ideal of k[x1 , x2 , . . . , xn , . . .] generated by
the elements: x21 , x22 , . . . , x2n , . . . and x1 x2 − xi xj for i = j. Consider the quotient
ring A = k[x1 , x2 , . . . , xn , . . .]/J. Let π : k[x1 , x2 , . . . , xn , . . .] → A be the natural
epimorphism. Denote π(x1 x2 ) by a0 . The images of 1, x1 , x2 , . . . , . . . , xn , . . . in A
will be denoted by the same symbols.
Now π(xi xj xk ) = 0 for all i, j, k. Indeed if i = j, then π(x2i xk ) = π(x2i )π(xk ) =
0. This follows from x2i = 0. And if i = j then π(xi xj xk ) = π(x1 x2 xk ) which is
zero if k ∈ {1, 2} and which is equal to π(x1 x1 x2 ) = 0 for k ≥ 3.
Obviously the square (resp. third power) of any element of the form r =
α1 x1 + . . . + αm xm + α0 a0 is a sum of monomials of degree 2 (resp. 3). So r3 = 0
in A for all such r. It immediately follows that the Jacobson radical R of A is the
infinite dimensional vector space with basis a0 , x1 , x2 , . . . , xn , . . .. Therefore the
Loewy series of A is:
A ⊃ R ⊃ R2 ⊃ 0,
where R2 = soc A is the simple A-module generated by a0 .
4.7 OSOFSKY THEOREM FOR PERFECT RINGS

The following lemma is a generalization of the Nakayama lemma for perfect rings.
Lemma 4.7.1. Let R be the Jacobson radical of a right (or left) perfect ring A.
Suppose, that X + R2 = R for some right (or left) ideal X in R. Then X = R.
The proof follows from theorem 10.5.1, vol.I.
Remark 4.7.1. Let R be as above. If Rm = 0, then Rm+1 = Rm .
Let {An : n = 0, 1, . . .} be a countable family of finite sets, and let F be

a family of functions {fn : An → P(An+1 )} (here P(X) is the power set of X).
Consider the pair ({An }, F ). A path in this pair is a set of elements {am } such
that a0 ∈ A0 , and am ∈ fm−1 (am−1 ) for m ≥ 1.
The following lemma is known as the König graph theorem.
Lemma 4.7.2. If the pair (({An }), F ) has arbitrarily long paths, then it has
a path of infinite length.
Proof. We call an ∈ An “good” if there are paths of arbitrary length con-

taining an . Obviously, there is a good element a0 ∈ A0 . If every element of the
finite set f0 (a0 ) is not good, then there is an upper bound on the lengths of paths
through each of these elements, and hence the maximum of these upper bounds
plus 1 is an upper bound on the length of a path through a0 . This contradicts the
assumption that a0 is good. We conclude that some element of f0 (a0 ) is good.
Now assume an is good. As above we conclude that some element of fn (an ) is
good. We then obtain an infinite path by selecting a0 ∈ A0 as a good element in
A0 and an as a good element in fn−1 (an−1 ), by induction.
Theorem 4.7.3 (B.Osofsky). Let A be a right (or left) perfect ring with
Jacobson radical R. Then A is a right Artinian if and only if the right quiver
Q(A) of A is defined, i.e., the quotient ring A/R2 is right Artinian.
Proof. Obviously, A/R2 is right Artinian if and only if W = R/R2 is a finitely

generated right A-module.
Obviously, if A is a right Artinian ring, then the right quiver Q(A) is defined.
Conversely, suppose that A/R2 is a right Artinian ring. Let W = R/R2 . We

n
have W = r̄i A, where r̄i = f (ri ) for some ri ∈ R and f : R → W is the natural
i=1
epimorphism. By lemma 4.7.2, we have:

n
R= ri A. (4.7.1)
i=1

n
Obviously, any element from R2 has the following form: ri rj aij and
i,j=1

n
R2 = ri rj A. (4.7.2)
i,j=1
Consequently,

Rk = ri1 ri2 . . . rik A. (4.7.3)
Write S = (r1 , . . . , rn ). Let An consist of all products ri0 · · · rin = 0. Consider
fn (ri0 · · · rin ) = {rk ri0 · · · rin = 0; ri0 · · · rin rt = 0 : rk ∈ S and rt ∈ S},
which is a subset of An+1 .

By the König graph theorem, there is an integer m such that each product of
m ri s is zero. Consequently, every product ri1 · · · rim equals zero. From formula
(4.7.3) it follows that Rm = 0. Let t be the smallest integer such that Rt = 0. We
have the following Loewy series for A:
A ⊃ R ⊃ R2 ⊃ . . . ⊃ Rt−1 ⊃ 0.
By remark 4.7.1, all inclusions in this Loewy series are strict and all Rk are
finitely generated A-modules. Obviously, the Rk /Rk+1 are semisimple and finitely
generated for k = 1, . . . , t − 1. Therefore A has a composition series and A is a
right Artinian ring. The theorem is proved.
Corollary 4.7.4. A semidistributive right (or left) perfect ring A is right (or
left) Artinian.
The proof follows from theorem 14.1.6, vol.I, and the Osofsky theorem.
Proposition 4.7.5. Let R be the Jacobson radical and let P r(A) be the prime
radical of a ring A. If A is a one-sided perfect ring then P r(A) = R.
The proof follows from the following assertion: any element r ∈ R of a one-sided
perfect ring is strongly nilpotent.
4.8 SOCLES OF PERFECT RINGS

Definition. A ring A is called left (resp. right) socular if every nonzero left
(resp. right) A-module has a nonzero socle. A ring which is right and left socular
is called socular.
Let A be a right socular ring, and let M be a right A-module. We define

inductively: M0 = 0, M1 = soc M , if α is not a limit ordinal Mα+1 is the right
A-module such that Mα+1 /M $α is the socle of the right module M/Mα , and, if α
is a limiting ordinal, Mα = Mβ . Since A is right socular there is an ordinal γ
β<α
such that M = Mγ .
The resulting ascending chain of submodules of M
M0 ⊂ M1 ⊂ . . . ⊂ Mα ⊂ . . .
is called the transfinite ascending Loewy series.
Proposition 4.8.1. The following conditions are equivalent for a ring A:

(1) A is right socular;
(2) for any right A-module M there exists a transfinite ascending Loewy series.
The proof is obvious.
Theorem 4.8.2 (H.Bass). The following conditions are equivalent:

(1) a ring A is right (resp. left) perfect;
(2) a ring A is semilocal and left (resp. right) socular.
Proof.
(1) ⇒ (2). Let A be a right (or left) perfect ring with Jacobson radical R.
Then A is semilocal, by theorem 10.5.3, lemma 10.4.9 and theorem 10.4.8, vol.I.
Let M be a left A-module and suppose that soc M = 0. If RM = 0 then M
is semisimple, by theorem 2.2.5, vol.I. Therefore, there exists r1 ∈ R such that
r1 M = 0. Let r1 m = 0. Consider Am ⊃ Ar1 m. If Ar1 m is not semisimple,
then there exists r2 such that r2 r1 · m = 0. Continuing this process we obtain a
sequence {rk } of elements of R such that rn · rn−1 . . . r1 = 0 for any n ∈ N. This
contradiction proves (1) ⇒ (2).
(2) ⇒ (1). Let 0 ⊃ R1 ⊃ . . . ⊃ Rα ⊃ . . . ⊃ Rδ = R be the transfinite ascending
Loewy series of R. Therefore, if r ∈ R, we can define h(r) to be the least $ α such
that r ∈ Rα . Note that h(r) can never be a limiting ordinal since if r ∈ Rβ ,
β<α
then r ∈ Rβ for some β < α. Thus, if r ∈ R we can write h(r) = β + 1 for some
β. Since Rβ ⊃ R · Rβ+1 , we have h(b · r) < h(r) for any b ∈ R and h(r) = 0 for
r = 0.
Suppose we have a sequence {rn } of elements of R. Then if rn rn−1 . . . r1 = 0
for all n the sequence {h(rn rn−1 . . . r1 )} is a countable strongly decreasing chain
of ordinals from a totally ordered ascending set of ordinals with a unique least
element. This is impossible. The theorem is proved.
The following proposition follows immediately from theorem 4.8.2.
Proposition 4.8.3. For a semilocal ring A the following conditions are

equivalent:
(i) A is socular;
(ii) A is perfect.
In particular, if A is perfect, then soc A A = 0 and soc AA = 0.
4.9 SEMIPERFECT PIECEWISE DOMAINS

Let AA = P1n1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Psns be a decomposition of a semiperfect ring A into a direct
sum of principal right A-modules.
Recall that a semiperfect ring A is called a piecewise domain if every nonzero

homomorphism between indecomposable projective A-modules is a monomor-
phism.
Piecewise domains coincide with l-hereditary rings A, that is, rings such
that every local one-sided ideal of A is projective. From theorem 10.7.9, vol.I, we
immediately obtain the following lemma:
Lemma 4.9.1. A semihereditary and semiperfect ring A is a piecewise domain.
Proposition 4.9.2. A local piecewise domain A is a domain. In particu-

lar, if A is a piecewise domain, then for any local idempotent e ∈ A, eAe is a
domain.
Corollary 4.9.3. The prime radical P r(A) of a piecewise domain A is nilpo-

tent.
Proof. Let e be a local idempotent. By proposition 4.9.2, the ring eAe is a do-
main. By proposition 11.2.9 and corollary 11.2.7, vol.I, we have that P r(eAe) = 0.
By theorem 11.4.1, vol.I, P r(A) is nilpotent.
From corollary 11.8.7, vol.I, and corollary 4.9.3 we obtain the following theo-
rem.
Theorem 4.9.4. A semiperfect piecewise domain can be uniquely decomposed

into a finite direct product of indecomposable rings A1 , . . . , Am with connected
prime quivers P Q(Ai ), i = 1, . . . , m.
Theorem 4.9.5. The prime quiver P Q(A) of a semiperfect piecewise domain

A is an acyclic simply laced quiver. Conversely, for every acyclic simply laced
quiver Γ there is a finite dimensional hereditary k-algebra A such that P Q(A) =

Q(A) = Γ (for any field k).
Proof. We may assume that the piecewise domain A is reduced. Let

⎛ ⎞
A1 A12 . . . A1t
⎜A21 A2 . . . A2t ⎟
⎜ ⎟
A=⎜ . .. .. .. ⎟
⎝ .. . . . ⎠
At1 At2 ... At
be a two-sided Peirce decomposition so that
⎛ ⎞
P r(A1 ) A12 ... A1t
⎜ A21 P r(A 2) ... A2t ⎟
⎜ ⎟
P r(A) = ⎜ . . .. .. ⎟
⎝ .. .. . . ⎠
At1 At2 . . . P r(At )
and Ā = A/P r(A) = Ā1 × . . . × Āt , where A¯k = Ak /P r(Ak ) for k = 1, . . . , t.
Such a Peirce decomposition exists by proposition 11.7.1, vol.I. By proposition
4.9.2, for every local idempotent e ∈ A the ring eAe is a domain and therefore
a prime ring. Consider the set ēĀē. This set coincides with the set of cosets
{eae + P r(A) : a ∈ A} which is identified with the set eae + P r(A)/P r(A). By
theorem 1.3.3, vol.I, we have
(eAe + P r(A))/P r(A) eAe/(eAe ∩ P r(A)) = eAe/eP r(A)e.
The set eAe coincides with the prime radical of the ring eAe, by proposition 11.2.9,
vol.I. But eAe is a domain, so P r(eAe) = 0 and ēĀē = eAe. By theorem 14.4.6,
vol.I, the ring Ā is a direct product of prime rings. So, all the rings Āi are prime.
We shall show that P r(A1 ) = 0, . . . , P r(At ) = 0.
First we assume that Ā = A/P r(A) is prime. Let 1 = e1 + . . . + es be a
decomposition of 1 ∈ A into a sum of mutually orthogonal local idempotents and
%
s
P r(A) = I = ep Ieq .
p,q=1
As above ep Iep = 0 for p = 1, . . . , s. If ep Ieq = 0 then ep Ieq · eq Aep ⊂ ep Iep = 0.

Consequently, eq Aep = 0. By proposition 9.2.13, vol.I, the ring Bpq = (ēp +
ēq Ā(ēp + ēq ) must be prime, but if ēp Āēq = 0 then ēp Āēq is a nilpotent ideal in
Bpq . Therefore, ēp Āēq = 0 for p = q; p, q = 1, . . . , s. This contradicts the fact that
Ā is prime. So, P r(A1 ) = 0, . . . , P r(At ) = 0 and the rings A1 , . . . , At are prime.
Returning to the general case. Let 1 = g1 +. . .+gt be a decomposition of 1 ∈ A
into a sum of mutually orthogonal idempotents such that Aij = gi Agj for i = j and
Ai = gi Agi (i, j = 1, . . . , t). We may assume that A12 = 0. Let g1 = e1 + . . . + em
and g2 = hm+1 +. . . hm+k be the decompositions of g1 and g2 into a sum of pairwise
orthogonal local idempotents. We shall show that ei Ahj = 0 for i = 1, . . . , m and

j = 1, . . . , k. Since the rings A1 and A2 are prime, there are sets of elements
aαβ ∈ eα Aeβ (aαβ = 0 for α, β = 1, . . . , m) and bγδ ∈ hγ Ahδ (bγδ = 0 for γ, δ =
1, . . . , k). From the inequality A12 = 0 it follows that there is a nonzero element
a12 ∈ A12 such that a12 = ep0 a12 hq0 . The product app0 a12 bq0 q is nonzero in the
piecewise domain A. Consequently, ei Ahj = 0 for i = 1, . . . , m and j = 1, . . . , k.
We shall show that P Q(A) is an acyclic quiver. From the equalities P r(A1 ) =
0, . . . , P r(At ) = 0 it follows that P Q(A) has no loops. Suppose that P Q(A)
contains an oriented cycle
1 2 r−1 r
• • ... • •
where r > 1. Obviously, A12 = 0, . . . , Ar−1r = 0 and Ar1 = 0. Therefore, the

product A12 . . . Ar−1r Ar1 = 0. This is a contradiction with P r(A1 ) = 0.
Now we shall prove the converse assertion. Let Γ be a cyclic simply laced
quiver and k be a field. By proposition 2.3.3 and theorem 2.3.4, the path algebra
A = kΓ is hereditary and finite dimensional. Moreover, Q(A) = P Q(A) = Γ. The
theorem is proved.
It follows from theorem 11.8.6, vol.I, that a semiperfect piecewise domain A

has the following kind of two-sided Peirce decomposition:
⎛ ⎞
A1 A12 . . . A1t
⎜0 A2 . . . A2t ⎟
⎜ ⎟
A=⎜ . .. .. .. ⎟ , (4.9.1)
⎝ .. . . . ⎠
0 0 . . . At
where the A1 , . . . , At are prime rings and the prime radical has the following form:
⎛ ⎞
0 A12 . . . A1t
⎜0 0 . . . A2t ⎟
⎜ ⎟
P r(A) = ⎜ . . .. .. ⎟ . (4.9.2)
⎝ .. .. . . ⎠
0 0 ... 0
Consequently, Ā = A/P r(A) = A1 × . . . × At .
Corollary 4.9.6. A semiperfect piecewise domain A considered as an Abelian

group is a direct sum of the ring A0 Ā and P r(A): A = A0 ⊕ P r(A).
Corollary 4.9.7. Let t be the number of vertices in the prime quiver P Q(A)
of a semiperfect piecewise domain A. Then (P r(A))t = 0.
The proof follows from formula (4.9.2).
In conclusion there is the following theorem.

Theorem 4.9.8. Let A be a right hereditary semiperfect ring. Then the fol-
lowing conditions are equivalent:
(a) A contains a monomial ideal;
(b) A is isomorphic to a finite direct product of rings of the form Mnk (B),
where all the Bk are local right hereditary domains.
Moreover, if the ring A is semidistributive, then all the rings Bi are either
division rings or discrete valuation rings.
Proof.
(b) ⇒ (a). Obvious.
(a) ⇒ (b). Let A be an indecomposable ring. From lemma 4.9.1 it fol-
lows that A is a piecewise domain. Every semiperfect piecewise domain has a
triangular Peirce decomposition (see formula (4.9.1)). So A is a prime right
hereditary semiperfect ring. Since A contains a monomial ideal, A = P n and
A Mn (EndA P ), where B = EndA P is a local right hereditary domain.
If a ring A is semidistributive, then B is a right Noetherian right hereditary
local semidistributive domain. By proposition 14.4.10 and corollary 14.4.11, vol.I,
B is either a division ring or a discrete valuation ring.
Corollary 4.9.9. Let A be a right Artinian and right hereditary ring with a
monomial ideal. Then A is semisimple.
4.10 DUALITY IN NOETHERIAN RINGS

The theme of this section is again duality theory, as in section 4.1. But there is an
important difference. In section 4.1 the duality function was Homk (∗, k) where k
is the underlying field of a k-algebra A; here the duality functors are HomA (∗, A A)
and HomA (∗, AA ).
Let M be a right A-module and let
M ∗ = HomA (M, AA ). (4.10.1)
Obviously, this is an additive group and it can be considered as a left A-module
if we define aϕ by the formula (aϕ)(m) = ϕ(ma), where a ∈ A, ϕ ∈ M ∗ , m ∈ M .
This left A-module is called dual to the right A-module M . Analogously, for any
left A-module N we can define the dual module
N ∗ = HomA (N, A A),
which is a right A-module, if we set (ψa)(x) = ψ(x)a for a ∈ A, ψ ∈ N ∗ , x ∈ N .
Obviously, isomorphic modules have isomorphic duals.
Let f : N → M be a homomorphism of right A-modules. Then we may define
a map f ∗ : M ∗ → N ∗ by the formula f ∗ (ϕ) = ϕf for ϕ ∈ M ∗ . It is easy to
show that f ∗ is an A-homomorphism of left A-modules. This homomorphism f ∗
is called dual to f .
Let F be a free A-module with a finite free basis f1 , f2 , . . . , fn . Define an A-

homomorphism ϕi : F → A by ϕi (fj ) = δij for i, j = 1, 2, . . . , n, where δij is the
Kronecker symbol. Then ϕi ∈ F ∗ . It is easy to show that F ∗ is a free A-module
with a free basis ϕ1 , . . . , ϕn . This basis is called dual to the basis f1 , f2 , . . . , fn .
Lemma 4.10.1. Let P be a finitely generated projective module. Then the

dual module P ∗ is also a finitely generated projective A-module.
Proof. Let P be a finitely generated module generated by elements x1 , . . . xn

and let F be a free module with a free basis f1 , f2 , . . . , fn . Then there is an
epimorphism π : F → P with π(fi ) = xi for i = 1, . . . , n. Since P is projective,
there is a homomorphism σ : P → F such that πσ = 1P . Consequently, σ ∗ π ∗ =
(πσ)∗ = 1P ∗ . Therefore P ∗ is a direct summand of a free module F ∗ which is free
with a finite basis of n elements. So P ∗ is a finitely generated projective module.
Lemma 4.10.2. Let A be a right Noetherian ring. Then the dual to any
finitely generated left A-module is also finitely generated.
Proof. Let M be a finitely generated left A-module. Then there is an exact

sequence 0 → N → F → M → 0 with F a free module with a finite basis. Applying
the duality functor HomA (∗, A) we obtain that M ∗ is a submodule of F ∗ . Since
F ∗ is a free right A-module with a finite basis and A is a right Noetherian ring,
M ∗ is a finitely generated A-module, by corollary 3.1.13, vol.I.
Let M be a right A-module with dual module M ∗ . Then M ∗ itself has a dual
module M ∗∗ . Suppose m ∈ M and f ∈ M ∗ = HomA (M, A). Define a mapping
ϕm : M ∗ → A
by ϕm (f ) = f (m). Obviously,
ϕm (f1 + f2 ) = ϕm (f1 ) + ϕm (f2 ).
For any a ∈ A we have ϕm (af ) = af (m) = aϕm (f ). Thus ϕm is an

A-homomorphism, i.e., ϕm ∈ M ∗∗ . Consider the mapping
δM : M → M ∗∗ (4.10.2)
defined by δM (m)(f ) = f (m) for m ∈ M and f ∈ M ∗ . It is easy to verify that δM

is an A-homomorphism.
Definition. A module M is called reflexive if δM is an isomorphism. And it

is called semi-reflexive if δM is a monomorphism.
Note that any finite dimensional vector space as a module over its field k is
reflexive; on the other hand an infinite dimensional vector space over a field k is
never reflexive.3
Lemma 4.10.3. Any submodule of semi-reflexive module is semi-reflexive and

any direct summand of a reflexive module is reflexive.
Proof. Suppose M is a semi-reflexive A-module and N is a submodule of M .

Let i : N → M be the inclusion mapping. Then the following diagram
δ
N
N −→ N ∗∗
↓i ↓ i∗∗
δ
M M
−→ M ∗∗
is commutative. Since i and δM are monomorphisms, δN is also a monomorphism.

Therefore N is semi-reflexive.
Let N be a direct summand of a reflexive module M . Then there are an
inclusion mapping i : N → M and an epimorphism π : M → N such that πi = 1N .
Then π ∗∗ i∗∗ = (πi)∗∗ = 1N ∗∗ is an epimorphism. The following diagram
δ
M
M −→ M ∗∗
↓π ↓ π ∗∗
δ
M N
−→ N ∗∗
is commutative. Since δM is an isomorphism and π ∗∗ is an epimorphism, δN is also

an epimorphism. But from the first part of this lemma δN is a monomorphism.
So δN is an isomorphism, i.e., N is reflexive.
Proposition 4.10.4. Each finitely generated projective module is reflexive. In

particular, a free module with finite free basis is reflexive.
Proof. Let F be a free module with finite free basis f1 , f2 , . . . , fn and let
ϕ1 , ϕ2 , . . . , ϕn be the free basis of F ∗ dual to f1 , f2 , . . . , fn . Let ψ1 , ψ2 , . . . , ψn be
a basis of F ∗∗ dual to the basis ϕ1 , ϕ2 , . . . , ϕn . Then δF (fi ) and ψi both belong
to HomA (F ∗ , A) and
δF (fi )(ϕj ) = ϕj (fi ) = δji = ψi (ϕj ).
This implies that δF (fi ) = ψi and that δF is an isomorphism, i.e., F is reflexive.

Let P be a finitely generated projective module. Then P is a direct summand
of a free module with a finite basis. Hence P is reflexive by lemma 4.10.3.
3 In general the matter of reflexivity of a module is a delicate matter involving higher set
theory. For free Abelian groups (as modules over Z) the answer is as follows: A free Abelian
group is reflexive if and only if its cardinality is non-ω-measurable. In particular a countable
free Abelian group is reflexive. See P.C.Eklof, A.H.Mekler, Almost free modules. Set-theoretic
methods, North Holland, 1990 for this and much more.
Lemma 4.10.5. The dual of an arbitrary module is semi-reflexive. The dual

of a reflexive module is reflexive.
Proof. Let M be A-module. If we apply the duality functor to the A-

homomorphism δM : M → M ∗∗ we obtain an A-homomorphism δM
∗
: M ∗∗∗ → M ∗ .
Then it is easy to show that
∗
δM δM ∗ = 1 M ∗ . (4.10.3)
From this equality it follows that δM ∗ is a monomorphism, so M ∗ is semi-reflexive.
∗
If M is reflexive, then δM is an isomorphism, and so is δM . But then from (4.10.3)
∗ −1 ∗
δM ∗ = (δM ) is also an isomorphism, i.e., M is reflexive.
Lemma 4.10.6. Let A be a right Noetherian ring. Then any finitely generated
submodule of a free module with a finite basis is semi-reflexive.
Proof. This follows from proposition 4.10.4 and lemma 4.10.3.
4.11 SEMIPERFECT RINGS WITH DUALITY FOR SIMPLE MODULES

Lemma 4.11.1. Let U (resp. V ) be a simple right (resp. left) A-module. Then
A has a right (resp. left) ideal isomorphic to U (resp.V ) if and only if U ∗ = 0 (resp.
V ∗ = 0).
Proof. This follows immediately from the Schur lemma.
Definition. We say that A is a ring with duality for simple modules

(shortly, a DSM -ring) if for each simple right A-module U the dual module U ∗
is simple and the same also holds for simple left A-modules.
Theorem 4.11.2. Let A be a semiperfect semiprime ring, then soc AA

(soc A A) is nonzero if and only if A Mn1 (D1 ) × . . . × Mns (Ds ), where the
D1 , . . . , Ds are division rings, i.e., A is a semisimple Artinian ring.
Proof. Let A be a semiperfect semiprime ring with Jacobson radical R. If A is a

semisimple ring, then R = 0. Then, by proposition 4.3.3, soc AA = l(R) = A = 0.
Conversely, suppose soc AA = 0. If the Jacobson radical R of a ring A equals
zero, then, by lemma 10.4.9 and theorem 10.4.8, vol.I, A is a semisimple Artinian
ring.
Suppose R = 0. Let AA = P1n1 ⊕ P2n2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Psns be a decomposition of A into
a direct sum of principal right A-modules and let 1 = f1 + f2 + . . . + fs be the
corresponding canonical decomposition of 1 ∈ A, i.e., fi A = Pini (i = 1, 2, . . . , s).
Suppose A contains a simple projective module, say P1 = eA, where f1 = e+g and
e2 = e, eg = ge = 0. Denote h = f2 + . . . + fs and X = f1 Ah. Obviously, X is a
nonzero two-sided ideal and X 2 = 0. Since A is a semiprime ring, this contradiction
shows that A doesn’t contain simple projective modules and so soc AA ⊂ R. By
proposition 4.12.1, soc AA = l(R) is a two-sided ideal in A. Let 1 = e1 + . . . + en
be a decomposition of the identity of A into a sum of pairwise orthogonal local
idempotents. Then for any ei we have ei l(R) ⊆ ei A, where ei A is a principal right

A-module. If there exists a number i such that ei l(R) = ei A, then ei A is a simple
projective module, and this case has been considered above. So we can assume
that ei l(R) ⊆ ei R for all ei ∈ A, and then l(R) ⊆ R. Since l(R)R = 0, we have
l(R)2 = 0 and so l(R) = 0 = soc AA , since A is semiprime. This contradiction
shows that R = 0.
For soc A A the statement is proved analogously. The theorem is proved.
Proposition 4.11.3. Let A be a semiperfect ring with duality for simple mod-
ules, and let P be a simple projective A-module. Then A = Mn1 (D) × A2 , where
D = EndA P . Conversely, if A = Mn1 (D), where D is a division ring, then
U ∗ = V and V ∗ = U , where U is the unique simple right A-module and V is the
unique simple left A-module.
Proof. Let P1 = eA, where e is a local idempotent of A. Then obviously

Ae ⊂ P1∗ . Therefore the left simple A-module P1∗ = V1 coincides with Ae. Let
A = P1n1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Psns be a canonical decomposition of A into a sum of principal A-
modules and let 1 = f1 + f2 + . . . + fs be a corresponding canonical decomposition
of 1 ∈ A, i.e., fi A = Pini (i = 1, 2, . . . , s).
Set P = P2n2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Psns . Clearly HomA (P , P1n1 ) = 0. Suppose, that
HomA (P1n1 , P ) = 0. Then there exists a canonical idempotent fi such that
fi af1 = 0 and i = 1. Obviously, fi af1 ⊂ (f1 A)∗ = V1n1 . Since f1 Af1 = 0, for the
simple left A-module V1 we have f1 V1 = V1 and fi V1 = V1 which contradicts the
annihilation lemma. Hence HomA (P1n1 , P ) = 0 and A = Mn1 (EndP1 ) × A2 .
The converse statement is obvious.
Definition. The following conditions will be called the Nakayama condi-

tions for a semiperfect ring A:
(α) the socles of the principal right and left A-modules are simple;
(β) principal modules with isomorphic socles are isomorphic.
Lemma 4.11.4. Let A be a semiperfect ring A with Jacobson radical R, let

P = eA be an indecomposable projective A-module, and let U = P/P R be a simple
module. Then the dual A-module U ∗ is isomorphic to l(R)e, i.e., U ∗ soc AA · e.
Proof. Let U = eA/eR and ϕ ∈ U ∗ . Write z = ϕ(e + eR). Obviously, z = ze

and for all p ∈ eA we have
ϕ(p + eR) = ϕ(ep + eR) = zp.

Moreover, for r ∈ R we have zr = ϕ(e+eR)r = ϕ(er +eR) = 0. Consequently, z ∈
l(R)∩Ae = l(R)e and every ϕ ∈ U ∗ has the form: ϕ = ϕz , where ϕz (p+eR) = zp.
Conversely, for every z ∈ l(R)e define ϕz ∈ U ∗ by the formula: ϕz (p+eR) = zp.

Obviously, the map: z → ϕz is an isomorphism of the left A-module l(R)e to U ∗ .
The lemma is proved.
Observe that the dual of a right A-module eAeJ is isomorphic to the left A-
module l(J)e.
Theorem 4.11.5. Let A be a semiperfect ring. Then the following are

equivalent:
(1) A is a ring with duality for simple modules;
(2) A admits a Nakayama permutation ν(A);
(3) A satisfies the Nakayama conditions.
Moreover, from (1), (2), (3) it follows that soc (AA ) = soc (A A) = Z and Z
is a monomial ideal.
Proof. Obviously, we can suppose that a ring A is reduced and indecomposable.

Therefore, every local idempotent is canonical.
Then AA = P1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Ps and A A = Q1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Qs , where P1 , . . . , Ps are
pairwise non-isomorphic right principal modules and Q1 , . . . , Qs are pairwise non-
isomorphic left principal modules. Let R be the Jacobson radical of A. We set
Ui = Pi /Pi R and Vi = Qi /RQi (i = 1, . . . , s). By proposition 11.1.1, vol.I,
U1 , . . . , Us (resp. V1 , . . . , Vs ) are all right (resp. left) simple A-modules.
(1) ⇒ (2). Let Zr = soc AA and Zl = soc A A. Since A is semiperfect,
Zr = l(R) and Zl = r(R). By lemma 4.11.1, Zr contains at least one copy of each
simple A-module Ui , i = 1, . . . , s and Zl contains at least one copy of each simple
left A-module Vi , i = 1, . . . , s.
Therefore, by the annihilation lemma for simple modules, for each canonical
idempotent ek ∈ A we have Zr ek = 0 and ek Zl = 0.
By lemma 4.11.4, the module Vi∗ , which is dual to Vi = Aei /Rei , has the form:
Vi = ei r(R) = ei Zl . By assumption, Vi∗ is simple.
∗
Thus ei Zl ⊂ ei Zr for i = 1, . . . , s. Therefore Zl ⊂ Zr . By symmetry, Zr ⊂ Zl

which implies Zl = Zr = Z.
Suppose now that the right module ei Z is simple and isomorphic to Uν(i) .
Then ei Z = ei Zeν(i) . Similarly Zν(i) is a simple left A-module, and, consequently,
it coincides with Vi , as ei Zeν(i) = 0.
s
Therefore Z = ⊕ ei Zeν(i) is a monomial ideal with ν(Z) = ν(A) and Z is
i=1
determined by Vi∗ = Uν(i) .
The equivalence of (2) and (3) is obvious.
(2) ⇒ (1). We show that Zr = Zl . For each local idempotent ei we have
ei Zl = 0 and ei Zl ⊃ ei Zr . Therefore Zl ⊃ Zr . Symmetrically Zr ⊃ Zl . Hence,
Zr = Zl = Z, and ei Z = Zeν(i) = ei Zeν(i) , and, by theorem 4.3.2, Vi∗ = ei Z =
∗
Uν(i) , and Uν(i) = Zeν(i) = Vi for i = 1, . . . , s.
As a corollary of this theorem we obtain another equivalent definition of a

quasi-Frobenius ring.
Theorem 4.11.6. The following conditions are equivalent for an Artinian

ring A:
(1) A is a quasi-Frobenius ring;
(2) A is a ring with duality for simple modules.
4.12 SELF-INJECTIVE RINGS

For any ring A the right regular module AA is free and so it is a projective module.
But in the general case AA is not injective.
Definition. A ring A is called right self-injective if the right regular module

AA is injective. A left self-injective ring is defined analogously.
Examples 4.12.1.
1. Each Frobenius algebra and each quasi-Frobenius algebra is a self-injective
ring.
2. The ring of integers Z is not self-injective.
3. The ring Z/nZ, for n > 0 is self-injective.
4. A semisimple Artinian ring is right and left self-injective.
In general, a ring may be right self-injective without being left self-injective.

One example of such a ring has been constructed by B.Osofsky4.
Examples 4.12.2.
Let T = { ai xi : ai ∈ K} where α ⊂ Q≥0 and the exponent set α is such
i∈α
that each lower limit point is in α (i.e., every subset of α has a smallest element
(in α)). There is a (nondiscrete) valuation on T obtained by

v( ai xi ) = smallest j in α with aj = 0.
i∈α
Let R = T /U1 , Y = T /V1 , where U1 = {f ∈ T : v(f ) > 1}, V1 = {f ∈ T :

v(f ) ≥ 1}. And let J = {x ∈ R : v(x) > 0}, S = {x ∈ R : v(x) = 1}. Then R is
a self-injective ring and Y is an injective R-module as well as a self-injective ring.
And the ring
R J
A=
Y Y

S S
is a right self-injective and not a left self-injective ring with soc(A A) =
0 0
which is essential in A A.
4 see [Osofsky, 1984]
The next statement gives connections between a self-injective ring and annihi-
lators of its ideals.
Proposition 4.12.1. If a ring A is right self-injective, then it satisfies the

following conditions
(1) for any right ideals H1 , H2
l(H1 ∩ H2 ) = l(H1 ) + l(H2 ) (4.12.1)
(2) for any finitely generated left ideal H
l(r(H)) = H. (4.12.2)
Proof. For all right ideals H1 , H2 of A, obviously, always l(H1 ) + l(H2 ) ⊂

l(H1 ∩ H2 ). Let x ∈ l(H1 ∩ H2 ). Consider the map ϕ : H1 + H2 → A defined by
ϕ(a + b) = xb for a ∈ H1 and b ∈ H2 . This is well-defined because x ∈ l(H1 ∩ H2 ).
It is easy to show that ϕ is an A-homomorphism. Since AA is injective, by the
Baer criterion (see proposition 5.2.4, vol.I), there is a y ∈ A such that ϕ(a + b) =
y(a+b) = xb for all a ∈ H1 and b ∈ H2 . In particular, 0 = ϕ(a) = ya for all a ∈ H1 ,
that is, y ∈ l(H1 ). For all b ∈ H2 we have ϕ(b) = yb = xb, so z = x − y ∈ l(H2 ).
Therefore x = y + z ∈ l(H1 ) + l(H2 ). Thus, l(H1 ∩ H2 ) ⊂ l(H1 ) + l(H2 ), and hence
l(H1 ∩ H2 ) = l(H1 ) + l(H2 ).
Let H be a finitely generated left ideal of A. Then there are elements
h1 , h2 , . . . , hn such that H = Ah1 + Ah2 + . . . + Ahn . It is easy to see that

n &n
r(H) = r Ahi = r(Ahi ).
i=1 i=1
Applying (4.12.1), we obtain that

n
l(r(H)) = l(r(Ahi )).
i=1
Therefore it needs only to be shown that l(r(Ax)) = Ax for any x ∈ A.

Obviously, Ax ⊂ l(r(Ax)). Let y ∈ l(r(Ax)). Then r(x) ⊂ r(y) and therefore
the map ψ : xA → A, which is given by ψ(xa) = ya, is an A-homomorphism.
Since AA is injective, by the Baer criterion, there is an element z ∈ A such that
ψ(xa) = zxa. Therefore zx = y, i.e., y ∈ Ax. Thus, l(r(Ax)) ⊂ Ax, and so
l(r(Ax)) = Ax.
Recall that a ring A is called an FDI-ring if there exists a decomposition of

the identity 1 ∈ A into a finite sum 1 = e1 + . . . + en of pairwise orthogonal
primitive idempotents ei (see vol.I, p.56). Typical examples of FDI-rings are one-
sided Noetherian rings and semiperfect rings.
Lemma 4.12.2. The endomorphism ring of every indecomposable injective

module is local.
Proof. Let Q be an indecomposable injective right A-module, and let ϕ ∈

EndA Q. Observe that Ker ϕ ∩ Ker (1 − ϕ) = 0. Indeed, let a ∈ Ker ϕ ∩ Ker (1 − ϕ).
Then ϕ(a) = 0 and a−ϕ(a) = 0, so a = 0. Suppose Ker ϕ = 0 and Ker (1−ϕ) = 0.
Let E(Ker ϕ) be an injective hull of Ker ϕ and let E(Ker (1 − ϕ)) be an injective
hull of Ker (1 − ϕ). There is an exact sequence
0 → Ker ϕ ⊕ Ker (1 − ϕ) → Q
Since Q is injective, Q = Q1 ⊕ Q2 , where Q1 E(Ker ϕ ⊕ Ker (1 − ϕ)),
by proposition 5.3.6, vol.I. Since Q is indecomposable, Q Q1 . Thus Q
E(Ker ϕ ⊕ Ker (1 − ϕ)) E(Ker ϕ) ⊕ E(Ker (1 − ϕ)), by the same proposition.
Since E(Ker ϕ) = 0 and E(Ker (1 − ϕ)) = 0, we obtain a contradiction. Therefore
Ker ϕ = 0 or Ker (1 − ϕ) = 0. We may assume that Ker ϕ = 0. Consider Im ϕ. If
Im ϕ = Q, then, by proposition 5.3.6, vol.I, Q = Q1 ⊕Q2 , where Q1 E(Im ϕ), i.e.,
Q is decomposable. Therefore Im ϕ = Q, and consequently, ϕ is an isomorphism.
If Ker (1 − ϕ) = 0, then analogously we can show that 1 − ϕ is an isomorphism.
So either ϕ or 1 − ϕ is invertible and EndA Q is local.
Theorem 4.12.3. A right (left) self-injective FDI-ring A is semiperfect.
Proof. Let e be a primitive idempotent of A. The right projective module eA

is indecomposable and injective. So EndA eA eAe is local, by lemma 4.12.2, and
A EndAA is semiperfect by theorem 10.3.8, vol. I.
Corollary 4.12.4. If a ring A is right (resp. left) Noetherian and right (resp.
left) self-injective then soc (A A) = 0 (resp. soc (AA ) = 0).
Proof. By theorem 4.12.3, A is semiperfect. Let R be the Jacobson radical of

A. By proposition 4.3.3, r(R) = soc (A A). If r(R) = 0 then l(r(R)) = A. But, by
the property (2) of proposition 4.12.1, l(r(R)) = R. Therefore, soc (A A) = 0.
Proposition 4.12.5. Suppose a ring A satisfies properties (1) and (2) of

proposition 4.12.1. Then for any finitely generated right ideal I of A and each
f ∈ HomA (I, A) there is an element x ∈ A such that f (a) = xa for all a ∈ A.
Proof. We shall prove this statement by induction on the number n of genera-

tors of a finitely generated right ideal I of A.
Suppose n = 1. Then I = xA. Take a homomorphism ϕ : I → A. Since
xa = 0 implies ϕ(xa) = 0 = ϕ(x)a, we have r(x) ⊂ r(ϕ(x)). Hence r(Ax) ⊂
r(Aϕ(x)). Then, by (4.12.2), we obtain that Aϕ(x) = l(r(Aϕ(x))) ⊂ l(r(Ax)) =
Ax. Therefore there is an element b ∈ A such that ϕ(x) = bx and so ϕ(xa) =
ϕ(x)a = bxa, as required. .
Suppose the statement is true for all finitely generated right ideals with n

n+1
generators. Let a right ideal I have n + 1 generators, i.e., I = xi A. Take
i=1
a homomorphism ϕ : I → A. By the induction hypothesis, there are elements

b1 , b2 ∈ A such that

n
n
ϕ xi ai = b1 xi
i=1 i=1
and
ϕ(xn+1 an+1 ) = b2 xn+1 an+1 .
Taking into account (4.12.1) we have

n
n
b1 − b2 ∈ l xi A ∩ xn+1 A = l xi A + l(xn+1 A).
i=1 i=1

n
So there are elements y ∈ l( xi A) and z ∈ l(xn+1 A) such that b1 − b2 = y − z.
i=1
Set b = b1 − y = b2 − z. Then
n+1

n
ϕ xi ai = ϕ xi ai + ϕ(xn+1 an+1 ) =
i=1 i=1

n
n+1
= (b1 − y) xi ai + (b2 − z)xn+1 an+1 = b xi ai ,
i=1 i=1
as required.
Theorem 4.12.6. Let A be a right Noetherian ring. Then A is right self-

injective if and only if it satisfies properties (1) and (2) of proposition 4.12.1.
Proof. Since A is right Noetherian, each of its right ideals is finitely generated.
Taking into account the Baer criterion we obtain the statement as a corollary of
propositions 4.12.1 and 4.12.5.
Theorem 4.12.7 (J.Levitzki). If A is a right Noetherian ring, then each of

its one-sided nil-ideals is nilpotent.
Proof. Since A is a right Noetherian ring, A has a maximal two-sided nilpotent

ideal N . Let B = A/N . Then 0 is the only nilpotent ideal in B. We shall show
that 0 is also the only left nil-ideal in B.
Suppose there is a nonzero left nil-ideal I in B. Since B is a right Noetherian
ring, the set of right annihilators rB (x), where 0 = x ∈ I, has a maximal element,
say rB (y). Let b ∈ B with by = 0. Since I is a nil-ideal, there is n > 0 such
that (by)n+1 = 0 and (by)n = 0. Obviously, rB (y) ⊂ rB (by) ⊂ rB ((by)n ), so by
maximality rB (by) = rB ((by)n ). Thus yby = 0. Therefore (ByB)2 = 0 and y = 0.
This contradiction shows that 0 is the only left nil-ideal in B.
Thus if L is a left nil-ideal in A, then (L + N )/N = 0 ∈ A/N and L ⊆ N , i.e.,

N contains every right nil-ideal of A. Let x ∈ A, and let Ax be a left nil-ideal.
Then for any a ∈ A we have (ax)n = 0. Therefore (xa)n+1 = 0 and so the right
ideal xA is also a nil-ideal. Thus N also contains every right nil-ideal of A. Since
N is nilpotent, every one-sided nil-ideal is nilpotent.
Corollary 4.12.8. Let A be a right Noetherian ring. If A/R is semisimple

and R is a nil-ideal, then A is right Artinian.
Proof. From theorem 4.12.7, R is nilpotent. So A is a right Noetherian semipri-

mary ring. By corollary 3.7.2, vol.I, A is right Artinian.
Corollary 4.12.9. If A is a right Noetherian and right perfect ring, then A is

right Artinian.
Proof. Since A is a right perfect ring, A/R is semisimple and R is right T -

nilpotent, and so R is a right nil-ideal. By corollary 4.12.8, A is right Artinian.
Lemma 4.12.10. If A is a right Noetherian and right self-injective ring, then

it is a two-sided Artinian ring.
Proof. Since A is right self-injective ring, l(r(L)) = L for all left finitely
generated ideals L of A, by proposition 4.12.1. This condition implies that if we
have some infinite descending sequence of left finitely generated ideals
L1 ⊃ L2 ⊃ . . . ⊃ Ln ⊃ . . .
then we have also an infinite ascending sequence of right ideals
r(L1 ) ⊂ r(L2 ) ⊂ . . . ⊂ r(Ln ) ⊂ . . .
Since A is right Noetherian the last sequence must stabilize and so A satisfies
the d.c.c. for all finitely generated left ideals and, in particular, for all principal
left ideals. From theorem 10.5.5, vol.I, it follows that A is a right perfect ring.
Therefore A/R is semisimple and R = radA is right T -nilpotent. By corollary
4.12.9 and theorem 4.12.7, A is a right Artinian ring and R is nilpotent. Now
we shall show that A is also a left Noetherian ring. As we have shown above A
satisfies the d.c.c. for all finitely generated left ideals. Suppose there is a left ideal
L in A which is not finitely generated. Then for every finitely generated left ideal
H ⊂ L there is a finitely generated ideal H1 such that H ⊂ H1 ⊂ L. Then we can
build by induction an infinite strictly ascending chain of finitely generated ideals
of A. This contradiction shows that A is a left Noetherian ring. Since A/R is
semisimple and R is nilpotent, A is left Artinian, by corollary 4.12.8. Thus, A is
a two-sided Artinian.
Lemma 4.12.11. If A is a right Noetherian ring which satisfies the conditions

(1) and (2) of proposition 4.12.1, then it is a two-sided Artinian and right self-
injective ring.
Proof. Since A is a right Noetherian ring, any of its right ideals is finitely
generated. Then from proposition 4.12.5 and the Baer criterion it follows that A
is a right self-injective ring. And so, by lemma 4.12.10, A is two-sided Artinian.
Lemma 4.12.12. If A is a right (resp. left) Noetherian ring and r(l(I)) = I

(resp. l(r(I)) = I)) for all two-sided ideals I, then rad(A) is nilpotent.
Proof. Suppose A is a right Noetherian ring and r(l(I)) = I for all two-sided
ideals I of A. Let R = radA. Consider the descending chain of ideals
R ⊇ R2 ⊇ R3 ⊇ . . .
and the corresponding ascending chain of annihilators:
l(R) ⊆ l(R2 ) ⊆ l(R3 ) ⊆ . . .
Since A is right Noetherian, the last chain is finite, i.e., there is an integer n such
that l(Rn ) = l(Rn+1 ). Hence Rn = r(l(Rn )) = r(l(Rn+1 )) = Rn+1 . Since A is
right Noetherian, Rn is a right finitely generated ideal, and, by the Nakayama
lemma (lemma 3.4.11, vol.I), Rn = 0.
Lemma 4.12.13. Let A be a right Noetherian and right self-injective ring.

Then any indecomposable right A-module can be embedded in the right regular
module AA .
Proof. By lemma 4.12.10, A is a two-sided Artinian ring. Therefore any A-

module M contains a simple A-module. Suppose M contains a simple A-module U .
By theorem 4.8.2, A is a socular ring. In particular, soc (A A) = 0 and soc (AA ) = 0.
Then, by lemma 4.11.4, U ∗ = 0, as well. Therefore, by lemma 4.11.1, A has a
right ideal isomorphic to U , i.e., we have a monomorphism ϕ : U → AA . This
means that we have the diagram of the form:
ψ
0 −→ U −→ M
↓ϕ
AA
with the top row exact. Since A is self-injective, this diagram can be completed
to a commutative diagram
ψ
0 −→ U −→ M
h
↓ϕ
AA
Since M is indecomposable, h is a monomorphism.

Theorem 4.12.14. For any ring A the following conditions are equivalent:
(1) A is a right Noetherian and right self-injective ring.
(2) A is two-sided Artinian and satisfies the following double annihilator
conditions:
(2a) r(l(H)) = H for any right ideal H
(2b) l(r(L)) = L for any left ideal L.
Proof.
2) ⇒ 1) Since A is a two-sided Artinian ring, it is also two-sided Noetherian
by theorem 3.5.6, vol.I.
Let H1 , H2 be right ideals of A. Then from condition (2a) it follows that
r(l(H1 ) + l(H2 )) = r(l(H1 )) ∩ r(l(H2 )) = H1 ∩ H2 .
Taking left annihilators we obtain that
l(H1 ) + l(H2 ) = l(H1 ∩ H2 ).
Therefore, by theorem 4.12.6, A is right self-injective.

1) ⇒ 2) Suppose A is a right Noetherian and right self-injective ring. Then any
of its right ideals of is finitely generated, and so, by proposition 4.12.1, l(r(L)) = L
for any left ideal L and r(H1 ∩ H2 ) = r(H1 + H2 ) for any right ideals H1 , H2 of
A. We must only show that r(l(H)) = H for any right ideal of A. Obviously,
r(l(H)) ⊆ H. Suppose r(l(H)) = H. Let M = r(l(H))/H be a right A-module
and consider f ∈ HomA (M, AA ). We may view f as a homomorphism r(l(H)) →
AA vanishing on H. Since AA is injective, this homomorphism, by the Baer
criterion, is given by left multiplication by some y ∈ A. But yH = 0 implies
yx = 0 for any x ∈ r(l(H)), so f = 0. Therefore HomA (M, AA ) = 0. We shall
show that in this case M = 0.
By lemma 4.12.10, A is a two-sided Artinian ring. Suppose M is a decom-
n n
posable A-module and M = ⊕ Mi , then HomA (M, AA ) = ⊕ HomA (Mi , AA ), by
i i
proposition 4.3.4, vol.I. Therefore we can assume that M is an indecomposable
module. But in this case, by lemma 4.12.13, from HomA (M, AA ) = 0 it follows
that M = 0. Thus, r(l(H)) = H for any right ideal H.
Remark 4.12.1. Since condition 2) of theorem 4.12.14 is left-right symmetric,

the theorem implies the same for condition 1). Therefore we can rewrite this
theorem in the following symmetric form:
Theorem 4.12.14*. For any ring A the following conditions are equivalent:
1) A is right Noetherian and right self-injective.
2) A is left Noetherian and left self-injective.
3) A is Artinian and satisfies the following double annihilator conditions:

Remark 4.12.2. Note that in the case if A is neither left Noetherian nor right
Noetherian self-injectivity is not necessarily left-right symmetric. For example,
the endomorphism ring of any infinitely generated free left module over a quasi-
Frobenius k-algebra is left self-injective but not right self-injective (see [Osofsky,
1966], [Sandomerski, 1970]. On the other hand there are right and left self-injective
ring which are not Artinian (see [Goodearl, 1974]).
In section 4.11 we have introduced rings with duality for simple modules (DSM-
rings). By theorem 4.11.5, any quasi-Frobenius ring is a DSM-ring. Now we shall
show that any two-sided Artinian DSM-ring satisfies the two double annihilator
conditions.
Proposition 4.12.15. Let A be a two-sided Artinian DSM-ring. Then

r(l(H)) = H for any right ideal H and l(r(L)) = L for any left ideal L.
Lemma 4.12.16. Let K ⊆ L be right ideals in a ring A and let (L/K)∗ be a

simple left A-module. Then l(K)/l(L) is either zero or isomorphic to (L/K)∗ .
Proof. We can define a map f : l(K) → (L/K)∗ by the formula f (x)(y + K) =

xy for x ∈ l(K) and y ∈ L. This is well-defined because x ∈ l(K). It is easy to
see that f is a homomorphism of left modules and that Kerf = l(L). Therefore
l(K)/l(L) is isomorphic to a submodule of the left simple module (L/K)∗ . The
lemma is proved.
Proof of proposition 4.12.15. Consider any composition series of AA :
0 = K0 ⊆ K1 ⊆ . . . ⊆ Kn = A (4.12.3)
By assumption, each (Ki+1 /Ki )∗ is simple. So, by lemma 4.12.16,
l(Ki )/l(Ki+1 ) is either zero or simple.
Thus
0 = l(Kn ) ⊆ . . . ⊆ l(Ki ) ⊆ l(K0 ) = A (4.12.4)
is a series of submodules with either simple or zero factors.
Consequently, length(A A) ≤ length(AA ). By symmetry we have length(AA ) ≤
length(A A). Therefore l(Ki ) = l(Ki+1 ) for i = 0, . . . , n. Applying the right
annihilator to (4.12.4) we obtain that 0 = r(l(K0 )) ⊆ . . . ⊆ r(l(Ki )) ⊆ . . . ⊆
r(l(Kn )) = A is also a composition series for AA . Obviously, Ki ⊆ r(l(Ki )) and
Ki = r(l(Ki )). Any right ideal H may be a member of a composition series so
we have proved the double annihilator property for right ideals. By symmetry the
same hold for left ideals. The proposition is proved.
The following statement gives equivalent definitions of QF-rings.
Theorem 4.12.17 (S.Eilenberg, T.Nakayama). For each ring A the fol-

lowing conditions are equivalent:
1) A is a quasi-Frobenius ring;
2) A is two-sided Artinian and satisfies the following double annihilator condi-
tions:
3) A is right Noetherian and right self-injective.
4) A is left Noetherian and left self-injective.
Proof. The conditions (2), (3) and (4) are equivalent by theorem 4.12.14*. So
assume that A is two-sided Artinian and right and left self-injective. Let P be a
principal right A-module. Then it contains a simple right A-module U . Since P
is a direct summand of AA and A is self-injective, P is injective as well. So P is
an indecomposable injective A-module, and then from proposition 5.3.6, vol.I, it
follows that P E(U ). So U is an essential simple module in P , therefore U =
soc P . If P and P are principal indecomposable A-modules then their injectivity
implies that soc P soc P if and only if P P . Thus, every simple right A-
module is isomorphic to the socle of some right indecomposable injective module.
Analogously, if Q and Q are left principal indecomposable then soc Q and soc Q
are simple and A is quasi-Frobenius, by theorem 4.5.2.
Let A be a quasi-Frobenius ring. Then A is a DSM-ring and, by proposition
4.12.15, A satisfies the two double annihilator conditions, i.e., we proved (1) ⇒ (2).
Therefore the theorem is proved.
Lemma 4.12.18. Let A be a right Noetherian ring. Then any injective right
A-module M is a direct sum of indecomposable injective submodules.
Proof. Let A be a right Noetherian ring. We first show that any injective right
A-module Q contains an indecomposable injective submodule. Let x ∈ Q. Then
it suffices to consider the case when Q is an injective hull of xA, i.e., Q = E(xA).
Since A is right Noetherian, xA cannot contain an infinite direct sum. Since Q is
an essential extension of xA, Q also cannot contain an infinite direct sum as well.
Hence it follows that Q contains an indecomposable injective submodule.
Let M be an injective right A-module. Consider a set of all indecomposable
injective submodule of M whose sum is direct. By Zorn’s lemma, there exists such
a set {Mi : i ∈ I} which is maximal. From theorem 5.2.12, vol.I, it follows that
⊕ Mi is an injective module, and so M = X ⊕ ⊕ Mi , where X is some submodule
i i
of M , by propositions 5.2.2 and 5.3.6, vol.I. Since M is injective, X is injective as
well, and it contains an indecomposable injective submodule. From the maximality
of ⊕ Mi it follows that X = 0. So M = ⊕ Mi as required.
i i
Theorem 4.12.19 (C.Faith, E.A.Walker). The following conditions are

equivalent:
1) A is a quasi-Frobenius ring;
2) a right (or left) A-module M is projective if and only if it is injective.
Proof.
1) ⇒ 2) Let A be a quasi-Frobenius ring, then, by theorem 4.12.16, A is right
and left self-injective. So every free module is injective. Hence every projective
module is injective as well.
Conversely, suppose M is an injective module. Since A is a Noetherian ring, by
lemma 4.12.17, M ⊕ Mi , where the Mi are indecomposable injective modules.
i
By lemma 4.12.13, Mi may be embedded in the injective module AA . Therefore
Mi is projective, and so is M .
2) ⇒ 1) Conversely, since A itself is projective, we obtain that AA is injective.
Since any direct sum of projective modules is projective, by proposition 5.1.4,
vol.I, and any projective module is injective, any direct sum of injective module
is injective. Then, by theorem 5.2.12, vol.I, A is right Noetherian. Therefore, by
theorem 4.12.17, A is quasi-Frobenius.
Corollary 4.12.20 (M.Auslander). Let A be a quasi-Frobenius ring. Then

gl. dim A = 0 or gl. dim A = ∞
Proof. Suppose that l.gl. dim A = n < ∞. Let M be a left A-module

such that l.gl. dimA (M ) = n. Then there exists a left A-module X such that
ExtnA (M, X) = 0 and Extn+1
A (M, N ) = 0 for any left A-module N . Consider an
exact sequence
0→Y →F →X→0
where F is a free A-module. Then ExtnA (M, F ) = 0 since F is a left free module
and A is quasi-Frobenius, and hence by theorem 4.12.19 F is injective. Since
HomA (∗, Q) is an exact functor for any injective A-module Q, we conclude that
n = 0, and so M is projective. In this case A is a semisimple ring, by proposition
6.6.6, vol.I.
In section 4.10 we have studied reflexive modules. The following theorem gives
a characterization of finitely generated modules over quasi-Frobenius rings.
Theorem 4.12.21. Let A be a quasi-Frobenius ring. Then

1) all finitely generated A-modules are reflexive.
2) a right (left) A-module M is finitely generated if and only if M ∗ is finitely
generated.
To prove this theorem we need the following lemma.
Lemma 4.12.22. Let A be a quasi-Frobenius ring. Then any finitely generated

semi-reflexive A-module is reflexive.
Proof. Let M be a finitely generated semi-reflexive A-module. Consider an

exact sequence
ϕ
0 → N → F −→ M → 0
where F is a free A-module with a finite free basis. Since A is right and left self-
injective, by applying two times the duality functor we obtain an exact sequence:
ϕ∗∗
0 → N ∗∗ → F ∗∗ −→ M ∗∗ → 0
Consider the commutative diagram:

δ
F
F −→ F ∗∗
↓ϕ ↓ ϕ∗∗
δ
M M
−→ M ∗∗
Here δF is an isomorphism by proposition 4.10.4, and δM is a monomorphism, by

assumption. Then M δM (M ) = Im ϕ∗∗ = M ∗∗ and Coker δM = 0. Therefore
δM is an isomorphism, i.e., M is reflexive.
Proof of theorem 4.12.21. (1) Let M be a right finitely generated A-module.

Then there exists an exact sequence
ϕ
0 → N → F −→ M → 0
where F is a free A-module with a finite free basis, i.e., F = An , and N is a

submodule of F . Then F is a reflexive modules, by proposition 4.10.4. Since A is
Noetherian, N is a finitely generated A-module, as well. Then N is a semi-reflexive
module, by lemma 4.10.6. And, by lemma 4.12.22, N is also reflexive.
Since A is right self-injective, the duality functor HomA (∗, AA ) is exact from
modr A to modl A. And analogously, the duality functor HomA (∗, A A) is also exact.
Consider the commutative diagram with exact rows:
0 −→ N −→ F −→ M −→ 0
↓ δN ↓ δF ↓ δM
0 −→ N ∗∗ −→ F ∗∗ −→ M ∗∗ −→ 0
Since δN and δF are isomorphisms, δM is also an isomorphism, by corollary 4.2.6,

vol.I, i.e., M is reflexive.
(2) Let M be a finitely generated right A-module. Since A is a two-sided
Noetherian ring, M ∗ is also a finitely generated module by lemma 4.10.2.
Conversely, let M ∗ be a finitely generated left A-module. Then by the above,
M ∗∗ is also a finitely generated module. Consider an injective hull E(M ). By
theorem 14.12.19, E(M ) is projective, so it embeds into a free module F . So we
have a chain of inclusions M ⊆ E(M ) ⊆ F , which says that HomA (M, AA ) = 0
for any M = 0. This means that δM : M → M ∗∗ is a monomorphism. Since M ∗∗
is finitely generated and A is a Noetherian ring, M is also a finitely generated

A-module.
4.13 QUIVERS OF QUASI-FROBENIUS RINGS

Let Q be a quiver, let i and j be two points of Q and let σij be an arrow from i
to j. A path xij is called simple if all its points i1 , i2 , . . . , ir are different except
maybe the first and last one. If in addition i = j then xij is called a simple cycle.
Denote Q(i) = {j ∈ Q : there exists a path xij from i to j}.
Let Q = Q(A) be the quiver of a two-sided Artinian ring A. We introduce a
notion of a “maximal path” in Q connected with properties of the Jacobson radical
R of A. We can assume that A is basic, since Q(A) = Q(B) for any ring B which
is Morita equivalent to A. Let A = P1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Ps and let 1 = e1 + . . . + es be a
corresponding decomposition of 1 ∈ A, i.e., ei A = Pi (1 = 1, . . . , s). Let σij be an
t
arrow of the quiver Q(A). This means that there is a direct summand Pj ij = 0 in
s t
the decomposition P (Pi R) = ⊕ Pj ij and that there is a nonzero homomorphism
j=1
ϕji : Pj → Pi which is given by the restriction of a homomorphism P (Pi R) → Pi R
t
onto one of the direct summands Pj ij .
So each arrow σij of the quiver Q(A) of the ring A naturally corresponds to
a homomorphism ϕji : Pj → Pi and every path xij = σii1 σi1 i2 . . . σir j naturally
corresponds to a homomorphism Φji : Pj → Pi where Φji = ϕjir ϕir ir−1 . . . ϕi1 i .
A path xij is called maximal if Φji = 0 but ϕkj Φji = 0 , where ϕkj corresponds
to an arrow σjk . In this case j is called the end of the maximal path xij with
start at i.
Since HomA (Pj , Pi ) ei Aej , an arrow σij naturally corresponds to an element
aij = ei aej = 0 and xij = σii1 σi1 i2 . . . σir j naturally corresponds to an element
cij = aii1 ai1 i2 . . . air j . Suppose that the path xij is maximal. Consider the right
ideal cij A. Since xij is maximal, cij AR = 0, i.e., cij Aej = 0 and cij Aek = 0 for
m
k = j. By the annihilation lemma, cij A Uj j , where mj > 0.
Let A be a QF -ring. From theorem 4.5.2 it follows that the map i → π(i)
which sends every vertex i of Q(A) to the end of a maximal path with start at i is
a permutation. This permutation coincides with a Nakayama permutation of A.
Clearly, the permutation i → π(i) satisfies the following conditions:
(α): for any σij either π(i) = j or π(i) ∈ Q(j);
(β): for any vertex k of Q and any vertex i ∈ Q(k), we have π(i) ∈ Q(k).
Lemma 4.13.1. Suppose that there is a permutation on the set of vertices of

a connected quiver Q satisfying the conditions (α) and (β). Then the quiver Q is
strongly connected.
Proof. Assume that Q is not strongly connected. Then there exist vertices k
and l such that there is no path from k to l. Hence l ∈ Q(k). Let T be the set of ver-
tices of Q that do not belong to Q(k). Since Q is connected, there exists i ∈ T and
an arrow σij such that j ∈ Q(k). Clearly, Q(j) ⊂ Q(k). Let Q(k) = {1, 2, . . . , m}.
Then from the property (β) it follows that Q(k) = {π(1), π(2), . . . , π(m)} and (α)
implies that π(i) ∈ Q(k). But i ∈ T and so i ∈ Q(k) and some vertex from Q(k)
is mapped to π(i). The obtained contradiction completes the proof of the lemma.
The main result of this section is the following theorem.
Theorem 4.13.2 (E.L.Green). The quiver of an indecomposable quasi-

Frobenius ring is strongly connected.
Proof. Since all rings Morita equivalent to a QF -ring are QF -rings, we can
assume that the quasi-Frobenius ring A is basic. Since a QF -ring is a two-sided
Artinian ring, we can consider its quiver Q. Then the proof of this theorem
follows from lemma 4.13.1.
4.14 SYMMETRIC ALGEBRAS WITH GIVEN QUIVERS

It is easy to prove the following lemma. The proof is left to the reader.
Lemma 4.14.1. Let Q be a connected quiver with at least one arrow. The
following statements are equivalent:
(i) Q is strongly connected;
(ii) there is a cycle c = (σ1 , . . . , σm ) such that every arrow σ of Q occurs as
some σi .
Recall the definition of a path algebra (see vol. I, section 11.3).

Given a quiver Q = (V Q, AQ, s, e) and a field k, the path algebra kQ of
Q over k is the (free) vector space with a k-basis consisting of all paths of Q.
Multiplication in kQ is defined in an obviously way: if the path σ1 . . . σm connects
the vertex i ∈ V Q with the vertex j ∈ V Q and the path σm+1 . . . σn connects the
vertex j with the vertex k ∈ V Q, then the product σ1 . . . σm σm+1 . . . σn connects
the vertex i with the vertex k. Otherwise, the product of these paths equals 0.
By convention, we shall consider that the path εi of length zero connects the
vertex i ∈ V Q with itself without any arrow.
The identity of this algebra kQ is the sum of all paths εi for i ∈ V Q of length
zero. Extending the multiplication by the distributivity, we obtain a k-algebra
(non necessarily finite dimensional).
Note that kQ is finite dimensional if and only if Q is finite and has no cyclic
path. Moreover, in this case kQ is a basic split algebra.
Let Q = (V Q, AQ, s, e) be a quiver, where V Q = {1, 2, . . . , n}. Let B0 =
{ε1 , . . . , εn }, B1 = AQ, B2 = {all paths of Q of length 2}, . . ., Bm = {all paths
$
∞
of Q of length m}, . . ., B = Bi . Obviously, B is a k-basis of Ω = kQ. Denote
i=0
by J the two-sided ideal in Ω = kQ with k-basis B \ B0 . This ideal is called the
fundamental ideal of a path algebra kQ (see section 2.2).
For a given k-linear map μ : Ω → k we set S = {b ∈ B : μ(b) = 0} and

I(μ) = {w ∈ Ω : μ(ΩwΩ) = 0}.
Lemma 4.14.2. Let μ : Ω → k be a k-linear map. Then

(a) I(μ) is the largest two-sided ideal contained in Ker μ;
(b) S is a finite set if and only if J m ⊂ I(μ) for some m.
Proof. (a) Obviously, I(μ) is a two-sided ideal. Let L be a two-sided ideal in

Ω and L ⊂ Ker μ. Then μ(Ω x Ω) = 0 for all x ∈ L. Consequently, x ∈ I(μ) and
property (a) is proved.
(b) Let S be a finite set. Therefore, there exists an m such that μ(b) = 0 for
$
∞
all b ∈ Bi . Hence, if w ∈ J m then μ(w) = 0 and J m ⊆ Ker μ. Moreover,
i=m
ΩwΩ ⊆ J m for all w ∈ J m and J m ⊆ I(μ). Conversely, if J m ⊂ I(μ), then
$
∞ $
m−1
μ(b) = 0 for all b ∈ Bi . Consequently, if μ(b) = 0 then b ∈ Bi and as
i=m i=0
$
m−1
Bi is finite it follows that S is finite.
i=0
Definition. Let μ be as above (with corresponding S). We say that (S, μ) is

a Frobenius system if the following conditions hold:
(fs1) S is a finite set;
(fs2) for all w ∈ Ω, wΩ ⊂ Ker μ if and only if Ωw ⊂ Ker μ.
Theorem 4.14.3. If Ω = kQ is the path algebra of a quiver Q over a field k

and (S, μ) is a Frobenius system then Ω/I(μ) is a Frobenius algebra.
Proof. Suppose that (S, μ) is a Frobenius system. Since S is a finite set, by

lemma 4.14.2, we have J m ⊆ I(μ) for some integer m. Thus A = Ω/I(μ) is
a finite-dimensional k-algebra. Since I(μ) ⊂ Ker μ, the linear map μ : Ω → k
induces a linear map μ̄ : A → k. By theorem 4.2.1, it suffices to show that Ker μ̄
contains neither left nor right ideals.
Let b be a left ideal of A and b ⊆ Ker μ̄. Consider the commutative diagram
μ
Ω k
ϕ
μ̄
A
where ϕ is the canonical ring surjection. Let C = ϕ−1 (b). Then C is a left ideal in
Ω and C ⊆ Ker μ. Obviously, C ⊃ I(μ). We shall show that CΩ ⊆ I(μ).
Let w ∈ C. Then Ωw ⊆ C ⊆ Ker μ. By definition of the Frobenius system
(S, μ), we have wΩ ⊆ Ker μ. Therefore, CΩ ⊆ I(μ) and ϕ(C) = 0 = ϕϕ−1 (b) = b.
A similar proof shows that if b is a right ideal in A and b ⊆ Ker μ̄ then b = 0.
Therefore, A is a Frobenius algebra, by theorem 4.2.1.
Definition. We say that a subset S of B is cyclic if there is a cycle c =

(σ1 , . . . , σm ) such that
(1) every arrow in AQ occurs as some σs ;
(2) if f ∈ B then

c, or
f ∈S ⇔ f =
(σj , . . . , σm , σ1 , . . . , σj−1 ) for some j = 2, . . . , m.
Note that S is a finite set.
Define a set map: μ : B → k by the formula

1 if and only if f ∈ S
μ(f ) = (4.14.1)
0 otherwise
Extend this map to a k-linear map Ω → k by “linearity”, i.e., for w ∈ Ω, w =

n
α1 b1 + . . . + αn bn we set μ(w) = αi μ(bi ).
i=1
Proposition 4.14.4. Let Q be a quiver with basis B of its path algebra. If S

is a cyclic subset of B and μ is the k-linear map defined by (4.14.1), then (S, μ)
is a Frobenius system.
Proof. Clearly, S is a finite set, so condition (fs1) holds.

Since S is cyclic, it follows that f · g ∈ S ⇔ g · f ∈ S for all f, g ∈ B. This
implies
μ(f · g) = 0 ⇔ μ(g · f ) = 0 (4.14.2)
for all f, g ∈ B.
Since μ is the identity on S and 0 on B \ S, we see that the linearity of μ and
(4.14.2) imply
μ(w · w ) = μ(w · w) (4.14.3)
for all w, w ∈ Ω.
Property (fs2) easily follows from (4.14.3) and we conclude that (S, μ) is a
Frobenius system.
Theorem 4.14.5. Let Q be a strongly connected quiver. Then for any field k
there is a symmetric k-algebra A such that Q = Q(A).
Proof. If Q is a point, then k is a symmetric algebra and Q(k) is a point. We

may assume that Q is a strongly connected quiver with at least one arrow. By
lemma 4.14.1, there is a cyclic subset S of B and a k-linear map: μ : kQ → k,
such that (S, μ) is a Frobenius system. By theorem 4.14.3, the quotient k-algebra
A = Ω/I(μ), where Ω = kQ, is Frobenius. Let μ̄ : A → k be the linear map
induced by μ. From equality (4.14.3) we have μ̄(a · a ) = μ̄(a · a) for all a, a ∈ A.
By the definition of a symmetric algebra, it follows that A is a symmetric k-algebra.
Obviously, J m+1 ⊂ I(μ).
It remains to show that Q(A) = Q. It is sufficiently to show that I(μ) ⊂ J 2 .

Let t ∈ Ω \ J 2 . We shall show that t ∈ I(μ).
As t ∈ Ω \ J 2 , it is of the form

n
t = αi εi + ασ σ + βi h i ,
i=1 σ∈AQ i∈V Q
where hi ∈ B ∩ J 2 and αi , ασ , βi ∈ k with at least one αi or ασ unequal to zero.

First assume there exists i ∈ V Q such that αi = 0. We may assume that
α1 = 0. There is an f ∈ S such that ε1 f = f . It is easy to see that
μ(tf − α1 ε1 f ) = 0.
μ(tf ) = α1= 0 and t ∈ I(μ). Consequently we can assume that
So,
t = ασ σ + βi hi . Let ασ = 0 for some σ. We can assume that
σ∈AQ i∈V Q
c = (σ, σ2 , . . . , σm ) is a cycle. Let f ∗ = σ2 . . . σm and f = σ1 . . . σm . Obviously,

μ(tf ∗ ) = ασ + α τ μ(τ σ2 . . . σm ),
τ =σ
where τ σ2 . . . σm ∈ B. The number of times which σ occurs in (τ, σ2 , . . . , σm ) is

one less than the number of times which σ occurs in c. Thus (τ, σ2 , . . . , σm ) is not
a reordering of c and we conclude that μ(τ σ2 . . . σm ) = 0 for τ = σ.
So, μ(t · f ∗ ) = ασ = 0 and t ∈ I(μ). Consequently, I(μ) ⊆ J 2 and Q(A) = Q.
4.15 REJECTION LEMMA

Through this section A denotes a two-sided Artinian ring.
Suppose A is an Artinian ring and M a right A-module. Let End(M ) denote
the ring of endomorphisms of M . It is natural to view M as a left End(M )-
module. Denote the ring of endomorphisms of the End(M )-module M by A(M ).
The ring AM = A/ann M is a subring of A(M ) where the embedding is induced
by A → EndEnd(M) (M ), a → (m → ma).
Proposition 4.15.1. For any A-module M there exists a monomorphism

AM → M n for some n.
Proof. Let us view M as a left End(M )-module. there exists an exact sequence
End(M )J End(M )I M 0.
Apply to this sequence the left exact functor HomEnd(M) (∗, M ). We obtain
0 A(M ) MI ;
consequently,
ϕ
0 AM MI .
We now show that AM can be embedded in a direct sum of a finite number of
copies of M . Let ϕi , i ∈ I, denote!the projection of ϕ on the i-th coordinate of
M I . Since ϕ is a monomorphism, Ker ϕi = 0. Since the ring AM is Artinian,
i∈I
!
n
there exist i1 , . . . , in such that Ker ϕik = 0. Therefore, AM can be embedded
i∈I
in M n .
Definition. A module over an Artinian ring is called bijective if it is both

projective and injective. We shall prove the following lemma.
Lemma 4.15.2 (Rejection Lemma). Suppose M is an indecomposable bi-

jective module over an Artinian ring A. There exists a proper quotient ring A1 of
A such that every indecomposable A-module except M is an A1 -module.
!
Proof. Let I = ann N , where N ranges over all indecomposable A-modules
except M . Since A is an Artinian ring, there exists a finite set of indecomposable
!
t
modules N1 , . . . , Nt such that I = ann Ni , where Ni M (i = 1, . . . , t). Let
i=1

t
Y = Ni . Obviously, ann Y = I. Let A1 = A/I. Clearly, every indecomposable
i=1
A-module except M is an A1 -module. If M is also an A1 -module, then A1 = AY =
A. By proposition 4.15.1, we have in this case a monomorphism A → Y m , from
which we obtain a monomorphism ψ : M → Y m . Since M is an indecomposable
bijective module, it has exactly one minimal submodule (see proposition 5.3.6,
vol.I). Therefore, if each projection ψi of M on Ni has nonzero kernel, then ψ is
not monomorphism. Consequently, there exists a monomorphism M → Ni , from
which we obtain that M Ni , since M is injective and Ni is indecomposable.
This contradiction proves the lemma.
We denote the quotient ring A1 by A − (M ). We say that A1 is obtained from

A by rejecting the indecomposable bijective module M .
Lemma 4.15.3. Let M be an indecomposable bijective A-module, let M1 be

its unique maximal submodule, and let M2 be its unique minimal submodule; let
A1 = A − (M ). Then M/M2 is a projective A1 -module and M1 is an injective
A1 -module.
Proof. We shall show that any diagram of A1 -modules
i
0 N N
α
M1
where i is a monomorphism, can be extended to a commutative diagram by a

suitable morphism N → M1 . Let us view this diagram as a diagram of A-modules.
Then there exists a homomorphism β : N → M such that α = βi. We shall show
that Im β ⊂ M1 . Suppose this is not so. Then Im β = M . Since M is projective,
we obtain N M ⊕ X, which contradicts the fact that N is an A1 -module.
Write M̄ = M/M2 . We shall show that any diagram of A1 -modules
M̄
ψ
π
N N 0
where π is an epimorphism, can be extended to a commutative diagram. Consider

the following diagram
π1
0 M2 M M̄ 0
ψ
π
N N 0
By the projectivity of M we obtain that there exists h : M → N such that

πh = ψπ1 . If Ker h = 0, then N = M ⊕ X. This contradicts the fact that N is
an A1 -module. So Ker h ⊇ M2 and h induces a homomorphism h̄ : M̄ → N such
that π h̄ = ψ. The lemma is proved.
Proposition 4.15.4. Let A be an Artinian ring and P a simple bijective A-

module. Then A A1 ×A2 , where A1 is a simple Artinian ring and A−(P ) A2 .
Proof. Suppose M is an arbitrary A-module and that ϕ : M → P is a nonzero

homomorphism. Since P is simple, it follows that ϕ is an epimorphism; hence
M = P ⊕ X. If ψ : P → M is a nonzero homomorphism, then, since P is simple,
it is a monomorphism; and since P is injective, M = P ⊕ Y .
Let AA = P s ⊕ P , where P does not occur in a direct decomposition of P .
Then it follows from what was said above that Hom (P s , P ) = Hom (P , P s ) = 0
and A A1 × A2 , where A1 End(P s ) Ms (End(P )), where End(P ) is a
division ring, and A2 End(P ). Obviously, A − (P ) A2 .
Now we shall give a characterization of primary indecomposable serial Artinian

rings. For the definitions and other results see vol.I, p. 316.
Theorem 4.15.5. For a two-sided indecomposable Artinian ring A the follow-

ing two conditions are equivalent:
a) A Mn (B), where B is a local uniserial ring;
b) A is quasi-Frobenius and A has a minimal (by inclusion) two-sided ideal I
such that A/I is also quasi-Frobenius.
Proof. (a)⇒(b). Denote By M the Jacobson radical of B and by R the

Jacobson radical of A = Mn (B). Let Mt = o and Mt+1 = 0. Then A ⊃ R ⊃
. . . ⊃ Rt ⊃ 0 is the unique series of two-sided ideals in A. Consequently, by
definition of quasi-Frobenius and Frobenius rings, we obtain that A is a Frobenius
ring and Rt is a minimal (by inclusion) two-sided ideal such that A/Rt is also
Frobenius.
To prove the reverse implication, we shall need the following simple lemma.
Lemma 4.15.6. Let I be a minimal two-sided ideal of a quasi-Frobenius ring

A. Then there is a principal A-module P such that every indecomposable A-module
different from P is an A/I-module.
Proof. Clearly there is a principal A-module P which is not an A/I-module. It

follows from lemma 4.15.2 that there is a proper quotient ring A1 = A − (P ) of A
such that every indecomposable A-module, except P itself, is an A1 -module. Since
A/I is clearly an A1 -module, it follows from the minimality of I that A1 = A/I.
Proof. b)⇒ a). Let A = P1n1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Psns be a decomposition of A into a

direct sum of principal A-modules. We can assume without loss of generality that
A/I = A1 = A − (P1 ). Let U denote the unique minimal submodule of P1 . By
lemma 14.5.3, the A1 -modules P̄1 = P1 /U and P1 R are both projective.
It is clear that P1 R and P̄1 are indecomposable. Since A1 is quasi-Frobenius,
it follows that P1 R is a principal A1 -module. By the definition of quasi-Frobenius
rings, U cannot be minimal submodule of any of the Pi (i = 2, . . . , s), and so
P1 R/P1 R2 P1 /P1 R U1 . Since P1 has a finite length, it follows easily from
this that P1 has a unique composition series whose simple factors are all isomorphic
to U1 .
Writing P = P2n2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Psns , we claim that
HomA (P1n1 , P ) = HomA (P , P1n1 ) = 0

for which it is sufficient to prove that
HomA (P1 , Pj ) = HomA (Pj , P1 ) = 0

for j = 2, . . . , s. If HomA (P1 , Pj ) = 0, then Pj has a minimal submod-
ule isomorphic to U1 , contrary to the definition of quasi-Frobenius rings. If
HomA (Pj , P1 ) = 0, then the composition series of P1 has a simple factor iso-
morphic to Uj , and this is a contradiction. Since A is indecomposable as a ring,
it follows that A = P1n1 . Arguing in just the same way for left modules, we find
that A is uniserial. This completes the proof of theorem 4.15.5.
Proposition 4.15.7. If A is a quasi-Frobenius ring with zero square radical,

then A is a generalized uniserial ring, i.e., a serial Artinian ring.
In conclusion we note without proof the following theorem.
Theorem 4.15.8.5 The following conditions are equivalent for an Artinian

ring A:
(a) A is serial;
(b) any quotient ring of A (including A itself ) has a nontrivial bijective module.

Quasi-Frobenius rings and algebras were introduced by Tadasi Nakayama as a
generalization of Frobenius algebras (see [Nakayama, 1939], [Nakayama, 1941]).
F.G.Frobenius in his paper [Frobenius, 1903] studied the special class of algebras
for which the left and right regular representations are equivalent. He also gave
necessary and sufficient condition for this equivalence. A most important example
of these algebras are group algebras. R.Brauer and C.Nesbitt (see [Brauer, Nesbitt,
1937], [Nesbitt, 1938]) pointed out the importance of these algebras and named
them Frobenius algebras. They proved, in particular, the equivalence of conditions
(1), (3) of theorem 4.2.1.
The main properties and the structure of quasi-Frobenius rings and alge-
bras were established by T.Nakayama and M.Ikeda (see [Nakayama, Ikeda, 1950],
[Ikeda, Nakayama, 1954], [Ikeda, 1952]).
The key concept in the classical definition of quasi-Frobenius rings, given by
T. Nakayama, is a permutation of indecomposable projective modules, which is
naturally called a Nakayama permutation (see [Müller, 1974], [Oshiro, Rim,
1997], [Yousif, 1997]).
Since T.Nakayama introduced the notion of a QF-ring, quasi-Frobenius rings
have been extensively studied. One of the most significant results on quasi-
Frobenius rings was obtained by C. Faith and E. A. Walker in the paper [Faith,
Walker, 1967]. It establishes the equivalence of the following conditions on ring A:
(1) A is quasi-Frobenius; (2) each injective right A-module is projective; (3) each
injective left A-module is projective. Another of their main results, obtained also
in this paper, says that a ring A is quasi-Frobenius if and only if left (or right)
A-modules always embed in free A-modules.
Still another equivalent definition of a quasi-Frobenius ring which says that an
5 see [Kirichenko, 1976].
Artinian ring A is quasi-Frobenius if and only if A is a ring with duality for simple
modules was proved by C.Curtis, J.Reiner [Curtis, Reiner, 1962].
B.Osofsky proved in the paper [Osofsky, 1966a] the following equivalent defi-
nition for QF-rings: A is a QF-ring if and only if A is right (left) perfect and right
and left semi-injective.
It is well known that if A is a QF-ring, then the ring Mn (A), the ring of n × n
matrices over A, and AG, the group ring over A for any finite group G, are both
QF-rings. The construction of QF-rings in the general case has been studied by
T.A.Hannula in the paper [Hannula, 1973].
In section 4.5, which is devoted to duality in Noetherian rings, we follow to a
considerable extent the book by D.G.Northcott [Northcott, 1973].
Rings with duality for simple modules were considered in [Dieudonné, 1958]
and in [Morita, Tachikawa, 1956]. These rings were also studied in [Curtis, Reiner,
1962]. M.A.Dokuchaev and V.V.Kirichenko studied semiperfect rings with duality
for simple modules (see [Dokuchaev, Kirichenko, 2002]. For an equivalent formula-
tion of the Osofsky theorem see the paper [Osofsky, 1966a]. In this paper she also
gave the following equivalent definition for QF-rings: a ring A is quasi-Frobenius
if and only if A is right (left) perfect and right and left semi-injective.
The notion of a symmetric algebra was introduced by R.Brauer and C.Nesbitt
(see [Brauer, Nesbitt, 1937], [Nesbitt, 1938]). The properties of symmetric alge-
bras were studied by T.Nakayama [Nakayama, 1939]. The structure of symmetric
algebras was studied by H.Kupisch (see [Kupisch, 1965] and [Kupisch, 1970]).
Cohomological dimension of Frobenius algebras and quasi-Frobenius rings
has been considered in the paper of S.Eilenberg and T.Nakayama [Eilenberg,
Nakayama, 1955]. In this paper they proved that for Frobenius algebras the
cohomological dimension is either 0 or ∞. They also proved that for right or
left Noetherian rings the notions “quasi-Frobenius ring” and “left self-injective
ring” are equivalent. In our proof of this theorem (theorem 4.12.17 in this chap-
ter) we follow to a considerable extent F.Kasch [Kasch, 1982]. For left Noetherian
rings which are left self-injective Eilenberg and Nakayama proved that their left
global dimension is either 0 or ∞. Corollary 4.12.20 in this chapter, which states
that the global dimension of a quasi-Frobenius ring is equal to 0 or ∞, was proved
by M.Auslander in his paper [Auslander, 1955].
Piecewise domains were first considered by R.Gordon, L.W.Small in [Gordon,
Small, 1972].
Theorem 4.9.5 was proved in [Kirichenko, 1993].
Theorem 4.13.2 and theorem 4.14.5 first were proved by E.Green in the paper
[Green, 1978].
The classification of quasi-Frobenius algebras of finite representation type in
terms of Dynkin diagrams was obtained by C.Riedtmann (see [Riedtmann, 1980a]):
Theorem (C.Riedtmann). Let A be a quasi-Frobenius algebra of finite rep-

resentation type over an algebraically closed field. Then the quiver Qb of A is a
disjoint union of Dynkin diagrams.
Quasi-Frobenius algebras of finite representation type were also studied by

H.Kupisch (see [Kupisch, 1975], [Kupisch, 1965] and [Kupisch, 1970]. All self-
injective algebras of finite representation type were been classified in the papers:
[Bretscher, 1982], [Hughes, Waschbüsch, 1983], [Riedtmann, 1980b], [Riedtmann,
1983], [Waschbüsch, 1981].
And quasi-Frobenius algebras of infinite representation type were studied by
I.Assen, A.Skowroński, J.Nehring, (see [Assen, 1988], [Nehring, 1989], [Nehring,
Skowroński, 1989], [Skowroński, 1989] and K.Erdmann (see [Erdmann, 1990],[Erd-
mann, 1992]).
Generalizations of quasi-Frobenius algebras were proposed by R.M.Thrall

[Thrall, 1948] who introduced three kinds of algebras called QF-1, QF-2 and QF-3
algebras. These algebras were intensively studied by K.Morita (see, for example,
[Morita, 1958], [Morita, 1969]), by B.J.Müller (see, for example, [Müller, 1974])
and by others.
Quasi-Frobenius rings appear in different branches of mathematics, for ex-
ample in number theory, algebraic geometry and combinatorics, in topology and
geometry. Finite Frobenius rings have many important applications in coding the-
ory (see, for example, [Dinh, 2004a], [Dinh, 2004b], [Greferath, 2004], [Greferath,
O’Sullivan, 2004], [Wood, 1999], [Wood, 1999]).
[Assen, 1988] I.Assen, J.Nehring, A.Skowroński, Algebras with cyclic-finite de-

rived categories, Math. Ann., v.280, 1988, p.441-463.
[Auslander, 1955] M.Auslander, On the dimension of modules and algebras (III)
(Global dimension), Nagoya Math. J., v.9, 1955, p.67-77.
[Brauer, Nesbitt, 1937] R.Brauer, C.Nesbitt, On the regular representations of
algebras, Proc. Nat. Acad. Sci., v.23, 1937, p.236-240.
[Bretscher, 1982] O.Bretscher. C.Läser, C.Riedtmann, Selfinjective and simply
connected algebras, Manuscripta Math., v.36, 1982, p.253-307.
[Curtis, Reiner, 1962] C.Curtis, J.Reiner, Representation theory of finite groups
and associative algebras, John Wiley and Sons, 1962.
[Dieudonné, 1958] J.Dieudonné, Remarks on quasi-Frobenius rings, Illinois J.
Math., v.2, 1958, p.346-354.
[Dinh, 2004a] H.Dinh, S.R.Lopez-Permouth, On the equivalence of codes over
finite rings, Appl. Algebra Engrg. Comm. Comput., v.15, 2004, N.1,
p.37-50.
[Dinh, 2004b] H.Dinh, S.R.Lopez-Permouth, On the equivalence of codes over
rings and modules, Finite Fields Appl., v.10, 2004, N.4, p. 615-625.
[Dokuchaev, Kirichenko, 2002] M.A.Dokuchaev, V.V.Kirichenko, Quasi-
Frobenius rings and Nakayama permutations of semi-perfect rings, Ukr.
Math. J., v. 54, N 7, 2002, p. 919-930.
[Eilenberg, Nakayama, 1955] S.Eilenberg, T.Nakayama, On dimensions of mod-

ules and algebras, II (Frobenius algebras and quasi-Frobenius rings), Nagoya
Math. J., v.9, 1955, p.1-16.
[Erdmann, 1990] K.Erdmann, Blocks of Tame Representation Type and Related
Algebras, Springer Lecture Notes in Math., v.1428, Springer, Berlin, 1990.
[Erdmann, 1992] K.Erdmann, A.Skowroński, On Auslander-Reiten components
of blocks and self-injective biserial algebras, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.,
v.330, 1992, p.169-189.
[Faith, Walker, 1967] C.Faith, E.A.Walker, Direct-sum representations of injec-
tive modules, J. Algebra, v.5, 1967, p.203-221.
[Frobenius, 1903] G.Frobenius, Theorie der hyperkomplexen Gröβen I,II, Berlin
Ber., 1903, p.504-538, p.634-645.
[Goodearl, 1974] K.R.Goodearl, Simple self-injective rings need not be Artinian,
Comm. Algebra, v.2, 1974, p.83-89.
[Gordon, Small, 1972] R.Gordon, L.W.Small, Piecewise domains, J. Algebra, v.
23, 1972, p.553-564.
[Green, 1978] Edward L.Green, Frobenius algebras and their quivers, Can. J.
Math., v.30, N 5, 1978, p. 1029-1044.
[Greferath, 2004] M.Greferath, A.Nechaev, R.Wisbauer, Finite quasi-Frobenius
modules and linear codes, J. Algebra Appl., v.3, No.3, 2004, p.247-272.
[Greferath, O’Sullivan, 2004] M.Greferath, M.E.O’Sullivan, On bounds for codes
over Frobenius rings under homogeneous weights, Discrete Math., v.289,
2004, p.1-3, p.11-24.
[Hannula, 1973] T.A.Hannula, On the construction of Quasi-Frobenius Rings, J.
Algebra, v.25, 1973, p.403-414.
[Hughes, Waschbüsch, 1983] D.Hughes, J.Waschbüsch, Trivial extensions of tilted
algebras, Proc. London Math. Soc., v.46, 1983, p.347-364.
[Ikeda, 1952] M.Ikeda, A characterization of Quasi-Frobenius Rings, Osaka Math.
J., v.4, No.2, 1952, p.203-209.
[Ikeda, Nakayama, 1954] M.Ikeda, T.Nakayama, On some characteristic proper-
ties of Quasi-Frobenius and regular rings, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., v.5,
1954, p.15-19.
[Kasch, 1982] H.Kasch, Modules and Rings, London Mathematical Society Mono-
graphs, v.17, Academic Press, 1982.
[Kirichenko, 1976] V.V.Kirichenko, Generalized uniserial rings, Mat. Sbornik,
v.99 (141), N4, 1976 (in Russian); English translation: Math. USSR Sbornik,
v.28, N4, 1976, pp. 501-520.
[Kirichenko, 1993] V.V.Kirichenko, Samir Valio, Yu.V.Yaremenko, Semiperfect
rings and their quivers, Infinite Groups and Related Topics, Kiev, Inst.
Math. NAS Ukraine, 1993, p.438-456 (in Russian).
[Kupisch, 1965] H.Kupisch, Symmetrische Algebren mit endlich vielen unzerleg-
baren Darstellungen, I, J. Reine Angew. Math., v.219, 1965, p.1-25.
[Kupisch, 1970] H.Kupisch, Symmetrische Algebren mit endlich vielen unzerleg-

baren Darstellungen, II, J. Reine Angew. Math., v.245, 1970, p.1-13.
[Kupisch, 1975] H.Kupisch, Quasi-Frobenius algebras of finite representation
type, Springer Lecture Notes in Math., v.488, Springer, Berlin, 1975, p.184-
200.
[Morita, Tachikawa, 1956] K.Morita, H.Tachikawa, Character modules, submod-
ules of a free module, and quasi-Frobenius rings, Math. Z., v.65, 1956,
p.414-428.
[Morita, 1958] K.Morita, Duality for modules and its applications of the theory of
rings with minimum condition, Sci. Rep. Tokyo Kyoiki Daigaku Soc., A6,
1958, p.83-142.
[Morita, 1969] K.Morita, Duality in QF-3 rings, Math. Z., v.108, 1969, p.237-252.
[Müller, 1974] B.Müller, The structure of quasi-Frobenius rings, Can. J. Math.,
v.26, 1974, p.1141-1151.
[Nakayama, 1939] T.Nakayama, On Frobenius algebra, I, Ann. Math., v.40, 1939,
p.611-633.
[Nakayama, 1941] T.Nakayama, On Frobeniusean algebras, II, Ann. Math.,
v.42(1), 1941, p.1-21.
[Nakayama, Ikeda, 1950] T.Nakayama, M.Ikeda, Supplementary Remarks on
Frobeniusean algebras II, Osaka Math. J., v.2, No.1, 1950, p.7-12.
[Nehring, 1989] J.Nehring, Polynomial growth trivial extensions of non-simply
connected algebras, Bull. Polish Acad. Sci., v.9/10, 1989.
[Nehring, Skowroński, 1989] J.Nehring, A.Skowroński, Polynomial growth trivial
extensions of simply connected algebras, Fund. Math., v.132, 1989,
p.117-134.
[Nesbitt, 1938] C.Nesbitt, On the regular representations of algebras, Ann. Math.,
v.39, 1938, p.634-658.
[Northcott, 1973] D.G.Northcott, A first course of homological algebra, Cam-
bridge University Press, 1973.
[Oshiro, Rim, 1997] K.Oshiro, S.Rim, On QF -rings with cyclic Nakayama per-
mutations, Osaka J. Math., v.34, 1997, p.1-19.
[Osofsky, 1966a] B.L.Osofsky, A generalization of quasi-Frobenius rings,
J. Algebra, v.4, 1966, p. 373-387.
[Osofsky, 1966b] B.L.Osofsky, Cyclic injective modules of full linear rings, Proc.
Amer. Math. Soc., v.17, 1966, p.247-253.
[Osofsky, 1984] B.Osofsky, A semiperfect one-sided injective ring, Communica-
tions in Algebra, v.12(16), 1984, p.2037-2041.
[Riedtmann, 1980a] C.Riedtmann, Algebren, Darstellungsköcher,
Überlagerungegen und zurück, Comment. Math. Helv., v.55, 1980,
p.199-224.
[Riedtmann, 1980b] C.Riedtmann, Representation-finite selfinjective algebras of
type An , In: Representation Theory II, Lecture Notes in Math., v.831,
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1980, p.449-520.
[Riedtmann, 1983] C.Riedtmann, Representation-finite selfinjective algebras of

type Dn , Compositio Math., v.49, 1983, p.231-282.
[Sandomerski, 1970] F.L.Sandomerski, Some examples of right self-injective rings
which are not left self-injective, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., v.26, 1970,
p.244-245.
[Skowroński, 1989] A.Skowroński, Selfinjective algebras of polynomial growth,
Math. Ann., v.285, 1989, p.177-199.
[Thrall, 1948] R.M.Thrall, Some generalizations of quasi-Frobenius algebras,
Trans. Amer. Math.Soc., v.64, 1948, p.173-183.
[Waschbüsch, 1981] J.Waschbüsch, Symmetrische Algebren vom endlichen Mod-
ultyp, J. Reine Angew. Math., v.321, 1981, p.78-98.
[Wood, 1999] J.A.Wood, Duality for modules over finite rings and applications
to coding theory, Amer. J. Math., v.121, N.3, 1999, p.555-575.
[Yousif, 1997] M.Yousif, Rings and Nakayama permutations, Communications in
Algebra, v.25(12), 1997, p.3787-3795.
5. Right serial rings
This chapter is devoted to the study of properties and structures of right serial
rings. Note that a module is called serial if it decomposes into a direct sum of
uniserial submodules, i.e., submodules whose lattice of submodules is linear. A
ring is called right serial if its right regular module is serial.
This chapter starts with the study of right Noetherian rings from the point of
view of some main properties of their homological dimensions.
In the following sections we give the structure of right Artinian right serial
rings in terms of their quivers. We also describe the structure of particular classes
of right serial rings, such as quasi-Frobenius rings, right hereditary rings, and
semiprime rings. In section 5.6 we introduce right serial quivers and trees and give
their description.
The last section of this chapter is devoted to the Cartan determinant conjec-
ture for right Artinian right serial rings. The main result of this section says that
a right Artinian right serial ring A has Cartan determinant equal to 1 if and only
if the global dimension of A is finite.
5.1 HOMOLOGICAL DIMENSIONS OF RIGHT NOETHERIAN RINGS

In section 6, vol.I, we introduced the main notions of homological dimensions
and considered some of their properties for various kinds of rings. In this section
we shall introduce the notion of flat dimension and consider some properties of
homological dimensions for right Noetherian rings.
Proposition 5.1.1. Let A be a right Noetherian ring, and let X be a finitely

generated right A-module. Then proj.dimA X ≤ n if and only if Extn+1
A (X, Y ) = 0
for any right finitely generated A-module Y .
Proof. The necessity of this statement follows from proposition 6.5.4, vol.I.
To prove sufficiency we consider an exact sequence
0 → M → P → X, (5.1.1)
where P is a projective finitely generated A-module. Since A is a right Noetherian

ring, M is a finitely generated A-module. Suppose n = 0. Then Ext1A (X, M ) = 0,
and therefore the map HomA (X, P ) → HomA (X, X) is surjective. So the exact
sequence (5.1.1) is split, and thus X is projective, i.e., proj.dimA X = 0.
Now assume that n > 0 and the statement holds for n−1. Then proj.dimA M ≤
n − 1, since ExtnA (M, Y ) Extn+1
A (X, Y ) = 0. Then, by proposition 6.5.1, vol.I,
proj.dimA X = proj.dimA M + 1 ≤ n.
219
Lemma 5.1.2 (O.Villamayor). Let 0 → X → F → P → 0 be an exact

sequence of right A-modules, where F is free with a basis {ei : i ∈ I}. If P is a
flat module, then for every x ∈ X there is a θ ∈ HomA (F, X) with θ(x) = x.
Proof. F is a free module with a basis {ei : i ∈ I}, and P is flat. For
a given x ∈ X we have x = a1 ei1 + a2 ei2 + . . . + am eim , where ai ∈ A. Let
I = a1 A + a2 A + . . . + am A. Since P is flat, we have x ∈ X ∩ F I = XI, by
proposition5.4.12, vol.I. Therefore
x = xj ∈ X and cj ∈ I. Now
xj cj , where
each cj = ai bij , so that x = ai xi , where xi = xj bij . Define θ : F → X by
i i j
θ(eik ) = xk , while θ sends all the other basis elements of F into 0. Then

θ(x) = θ( ak eik ) = ak θ(eik ) = ak xk = x.
k k k
As was shown earlier (see corollary 5.4.5, vol.I), every projective module is flat.
The converse to this statement is not true in general. The following statement gives
an example of a case where a flat module is always projective.
Proposition 5.1.3. If A is a right Noetherian ring, then every finitely gener-

ated flat right A-module is projective.
Proof. Suppose P is a finitely generated flat right A-module. Then there is an

exact sequence:
α
0 → X −→ F → P −→ 0,
where F is a finitely generated free A-module. Since A is a right Noetherian ring,
X is a finitely generated submodule of the free module F . By lemma 5.1.2, there
is a map θ : F → X with θα = 1X , so the sequence splits and P is projective since
it is a direct summand of the free module F .
In chapter 4, vol. I, we considered the projective and injective dimensions of

modules. There are also other dimensions associated to modules.
Definition. A right A-module X has flat dimension n and we write

w.dimA X = n if there is an exact sequence
0 −→ Fn −→ Pn−1 −→ . . . −→ P1 −→ P0 −→ X −→ 0, (5.1.2)
where Fn is flat, all Pi are projective and there is no shorter such sequence.
We set w.dimA M = ∞ if there is no n with w.dimA X ≤ n.
Lemma 5.1.4. Let

2 d 1 d π
. . . −→ P2 −→ P1 −→ P0 −→ X −→ 0 (5.1.3)
be a projective resolution of an A-module X. Then for all left A-modules Y and

n+1 (X, Y ) Tor1 (Ker dn−1 , Y ).
all n TorA A
RIGHT SERIAL RINGS 221
Proof. Since TorA n+1 (X, Y ) can be computed by using the projective
resolution (5.1.3) of X and TorA n (Ker d0 , Y ) can be computed by using the as-
sociated projective resolution of Ker d0 (where d0 = π):
. . . −→ Pk −→ Pk−1 −→ . . . −→ P1 −→ Ker d0 −→ 0,
n+1 (X, Y ) Torn (Ker d0 , Y ).

it follows that TorA A
Iterating this argument we
obtain:
n+1 (X, Y ) Torn (Ker d0 , Y ) Torn−1 (Ker d1 , Y ) ... Tor1 (Ker dn−1 , Y )
TorA A A A
Proposition 5.1.5. The following conditions are equivalent for a right A-

module X:
1) w.dimA X ≤ n;
k (X, Y ) = 0 for all left A-modules Y and all k ≥ n + 1;
2) TorA
3) TorA
n+1 (X, Y ) = 0 for all left A-modules Y ;
4) Ker dn−1 is a flat A-module for any projective resolution of X.
Proof.
1) ⇒ 2) and 2) ⇒ 3) are trivial.
3) ⇒ 4). Consider a projective resolution of X
d
2 1 d π
. . . −→ P2 −→ P1 −→ P0 −→ X −→ 0
By lemma 5.1.4, TorA

n+1 (X, Y ) TorA
1 (Ker dn−1 , Y ), therefore
TorA
1 (Ker dn−1 , Y ) = 0 for all Y . Then, by proposition 6.3.7, vol.I, Ker dn−1 is
flat.
4) ⇒ 1). Consider a projective resolution of X. Then we have an exact sequence
0 −→ Ker dn−1 −→ Pn−1 −→ ... −→ P1 −→ P0 −→ X −→ 0
with projective modules P0 , P1 ,..., Pn−1 , and a flat module Ker dn−1 . Hence
w.dimA X ≤ n.
Definition. If A is a ring, then its right weak global dimension, abbrevi-

ated as r.w.gl.dim, is defined as follows:
r.w.gl.dim A = sup{w.dimA M : M ∈ modr A}
Analogously we can introduce the left weak global dimension of A:
l.w.gl.dim A = sup {w.dimA M : M ∈ modl A}
Theorem 5.1.5 immediately implies:

Corollary 5.1.6. r.w.gl.dim A ≤ n if and only if TorA

n+1 (X, Y ) = 0 for all
right A-modules X and all left A-modules Y .
Theorem 5.1.7. For any ring A r.w.gl.dim A = l.w.gl.dim A.
Proof. This follows immediately from corollary 5.1.6 and its analog for
l.w.gl.dim A.
Definition. The common value of r.w.gl.dim A and l.w.gl.dim A is called the

weak dimension of a ring A and it is written as w.gl.dim A.
Theorem 5.1.8. For any ring A w.gl.dim A ≤ min {r.gl.dim A, l.gl.dim A}.
Proof. Let X be a right A-module, then any projective resolution of A

has a projective (n − 1)-st kernel, which is obviously flat. So w.gl.dimA X ≤
r.proj.dimA X and w.gl.dim A ≤ r.gl.dim A. Analogously we obtain that
w.gl.dim A ≤ r.gl.dim A.
Proposition 5.1.9. For any ring A,
w.gl.dim A = sup {r.w.dimA (A/I) : I is a right ideal of A} =
= sup {l.w.dimA (A/I) : I is a left ideal of A}
Proof. First observe that a right A-module B is flat if and only if

TorA1 (A/I, B) = 0 for all right ideals I (see proposition 6.3.9, vol.I). If
sup{r.w.dimA (A/I)} = ∞, we are done. Therefore we can assume that
r. w.dimA (A/I) ≤ n for all right ideals I. We shall prove that r.w.dimA (A/I) ≤
n for each left A-module B. Thus assuming TorA n+1 (A/I, B) = 0 for every right
ideal I, we must show that TorA n+1 (X, B) = 0 for every right A-module X. Con-
sider a projective resolution of B with n-th kernel Ker dn−1 . If TorA n+1 (A/I, B) =
A
0, then Tor1 (A/I, Ker dn−1 ) = 0, by lemma 5.1.4. So Ker dn−1 is flat, by proposi-
tion 6.3.9, vol.I. Hence, for every module X, TorA 1 (X, Ker dn−1 ) = 0. Using lemma
5.1.4 again, we obtain that TorA n+1 (X, B) = 0.
In the same way we can prove the second equality.
We shall also show that there holds an analogous statement for projective
global dimension for an arbitrary ring.
The following statements are dual to corresponding statements on projective
modules over arbitrary rings as given in section 6.5, vol.I.
Proposition 5.1.10. Let M be a right A-module.

(1) M is injective if and only if ExtiA (N, M ) = 0 for all i > 0 and all right
A-modules N .
(2) Let
0 d 1 d
0 → M → Q0 −→ Q1 −→ Q2 −→ . . .
be an injective resolution of the right A-module M . Then for any right A-module N
1
A (N, M ) ExtA (N, Im dn−1 )
Extn+1
(3) inj.dimA M ≤ n if and only if ExtiA (N, M ) = 0 for all i > n and all right
A-modules N .
Theorem 5.1.11 (M.Auslander). Let A be an arbitrary ring and M be

a right A-module. Then inj.dim A M ≤ n if and only if Extn+1
A (A/I, M ) = 0 for
any right ideal I of A.
A (A/I, M ) = 0 for any right ideal I in A. Consider an exact

Proof. Let Extn+1
sequence
0 → M → Q0 → Q1 → . . . → Qn−1 → N → 0
with the Qi injective (i = 1, 2, . . . , n − 1). By proposition 5.1.10(2),
1 1
Extn+1
A (A/I, M ) ExtA (A/I, N ). Therefore ExtA (A/I, N ) = 0 and N is an
injective A-module, by the Baer criterion. Therefore inj.dim A M ≤ n.
Conversely, if inj.dimA M ≤ n then, by proposition 5.1.10(3),
Extn+1
A (A/I, M ) = 0. The theorem is proved.
Corollary 5.1.12. A right A-module B is injective if and only if

Ext1A (A/I, B) = 0 for all right ideals of A.
Theorem 5.1.13 (M.Auslander). For any ring A,

r.gl.dim A = sup {r.proj.dimA (A/I) : I is a right ideal of A}.
Proof. If sup {r.proj.dimA (A/I)} = ∞, we are done. Therefore we can as-
sume that r.proj.dimA (A/I) ≤ n for all right ideals I. We shall prove that
r.inj.dimA (A/I) ≤ n for each right A-module B. Then the theorem will follow
from theorem 6.5.5, vol.I. Thus assuming Extn+1
A (A/I, B) = 0 for every right ideal
I, we must show that Extn+1 A (X, B) = 0 for every right A-module X. Consider
an injective resolution of B with n-th image Im dn−1 .
1
If Extn+1
A (A/I, B) = 0, then ExtA (A/I, Im dn−1 ) = 0, by lemma 6.5.7,
vol.I. So Im dn−1 is injective, by lemma 5.1.12. Hence, for every module
X, Ext1A (X, Im dn−1 ) = 0. Using lemma 6.5.7, vol.I, again, we obtain that
Extn+1
A (X, B) = 0.
Remark 5.1.1. Thus, propositions 5.1.9 and 5.1.13 say that to compute the
global dimension and weak dimension of a ring, it suffices to know the dimensions
of the cyclic modules, and, in particular, the dimensions of finitely generated
modules. In the general case the weak dimension and global dimension of a ring
are distinct things, but for a right Noetherian ring they are the same, as we shall
show below.
Proposition 5.1.14. If A is a right Noetherian ring, then w.dimA X =

r.proj.dimA X for any finitely generated right A-module X.
Proof. Let X be a finitely generated right A-module, where A is a right Noethe-

rian ring. Since w.dimA X ≤ r.proj.dimA X always holds, we need only show that
w.dimA X ≥ r.proj.dimA X, i.e., if TorA n+1 (X, Y ) = 0 for all left A-modules Y ,
then Extn+1
A (X, B) = 0 for all right A-modules B.
Since A is right Noetherian, there is a projective resolution of X in which every
term is a finitely generated A-module. Indeed, since X is finitely generated, there
is an exact sequence
0 → K0 → P0 → X → 0,
where P0 is a finitely generated free module. Since A is right Noetherian, K0 is
finitely generated as well. So we can also form an exact sequence
0 → K1 → P1 → K0 → 0,
where P1 a finitely generated free module. The usual iteration gives a pro-
jective resolution in which each Pi is a finitely generated free module. Since
TorAn+1 (X, Y ) = 0 for all left A-modules Y , we have Tor1 (Ker dn−1 , Y ) =
TorAn+1 (X, Y ) = 0 for all B. Therefore, by proposition 6.3.7, vol.I, Ker dn−1 is
flat. Thus Ker dn−1 is a finitely generated flat right A-module. Then, by propo-
sition 5.1.3, Ker dn−1 is projective. Therefore Ext1A (Ker dn−1 , B) = 0 for all right
A-modules B, hence Extn+1 A (X, B) = 0, by lemma 6.5.3, vol.I.
Theorem 5.1.15. If A is a right Noetherian ring, then
w.gl.dim A = r.gl.dim A.
Similarly, if A is a left Noetherian ring, then
w.gl.dim A = l.gl.dim A.
Proof. This follows from propositions 5.1.9, 5.1.13 and 5.1.14.

As a simple corollary from theorem 5.1.15 we obtain a famous result which was
proved by M.Auslander (see [Auslander, 1955]).
Theorem 5.1.16 (M.Auslander). If A is a two-sided Noetherian ring, then
r.gl.dim A = l.gl.dim A.
5.2 STRUCTURE OF RIGHT ARTINIAN RIGHT SERIAL RINGS

Recall that a right A-module is called serial if it is decomposes into a direct sum
of uniserial modules, that is, modules possessing a linear lattice of submodules. A
ring A is said to be right serial if it is a right serial module over itself. Analogously
one can define left serial rings. A ring which is both a right and left serial ring is
called a serial ring.
Remark 5.2.1. T.Nakayama [Nakayama, 1941] has studied Artinian serial

rings and he called them generalized uniserial rings. I.Murase proved a number of
structure theorem for these rings and described most of them in terms of quasi-
matrix rings over division rings (see [Murase, 1963a], [Murase, 1963b], [Murase,
1964]). Serial non-Artinian rings were studied and described by R.B.Warfield and
V.V.Kirichenko. In particular, they gave a full description of the structure of serial
Noetherian rings. Most of these results are described in chapters 12, 13 of vol.I of
this book.
Let A be a right Artinian ring with Jacobson radical R. Then for this ring
we can define the right quiver Q(A) of A (see chapter 11, vol.I). Recall the defini-
tion. Let P1 , P2 , . . . , Pn be all pairwise non-isomorphic principal right A-modules.
Consider the projective cover of Ri = Pi R (i = 1, ..., s), which we shall denote by
s t
P (Ri ). Let P (Ri ) = ⊕ Pj ij . We assign to the principal modules P1 , . . . , Ps the
j=1
vertices 1, . . . , s in the plane and join the vertex i with the vertex j by tij arrows.
The so constructed graph is called the right quiver of the ring A and denoted by
Q(A). From the definition of a projective cover it follows that Q(A) = Q(A/R2 ).
Theorem 11.1.9, vol.I, gives us that if A is a right Artinian ring then the
following conditions are equivalent:
1) A is an indecomposable ring;
2) A/R2 is an indecomposable ring;
3) the quiver of A is connected.
By theorem 10.3.7, vol.I, a right serial ring is semiperfect. And, by proposition

12.1.1, vol.I, a right serial ring with nilpotent Jacobson radical is right Artinian.
So we can define the right quiver Q(A) of a right serial ring A with Jacobson
radical R by the formula Q(A) = Q(A/R2 ). For short, we shall call it the quiver
of A. A vertex i of a quiver Q will be called an end vertex (or target vertex),
if there are no arrow that starts at this vertex.
Remark 5.2.2. If a ring A is left Artinian we can analogously construct the left
quiver Q (A). Note that there is a bijection between the right principal A-modules
and the left principal A-modules which is given by a mapping ϕ : Pi → Pi∗ , where
ϕ(Pi ) = HomA (Pi , A), and, moreover, HomA (Pj , Pi ) HomA (Pi∗ , Pj∗ ). Therefore
if we have an arrow from the vertex i to the vertex j in the quiver Q(A), then there
is an arrow from the vertex j to the vertex i in the quiver Q (A). In particular,
both quivers are connected or disconnected simultaneously.
If A is a finite dimensional algebra over an algebraically closed field k, then
the number of arrows from the vertex i to the vertex j in the quiver Q(A) is equal
to the number of arrows from the vertex j to the vertex i in the quiver Q (A).
However, this is not true in general.
In this section we shall study the structure of right Artinian right serial rings
in terms of quivers. If a right Artinian ring A is right serial, then every one of its
right principal module is uniserial, i.e., the lattice of its submodules is linear.
Theorem 5.2.1. A ring A is right serial if and only if each vertex of the
quiver Q(A) is the start of at most one arrow.
Proof. Let A be a right serial ring with Jacobson radical R, and let
P1 , P2 , . . . , Pn be all pairwise nonisomorphic principal right A-modules. Then
Ri = Pi R = 0 or Ri R is a unique maximal submodule in Ri . In the first case
there is no arrow which starts at the vertex i, and in the second case Ri /Ri R is a
simple module, i.e., there is exactly one arrow which starts at the vertex i.
Conversely, suppose that each vertex of a quiver Q(A) is the start of at most
one arrow. Then for any i ∈ V Q we have either Ri = 0 or Ri R is the unique
maximal submodule in Ri . We shall show by induction on k that if Pi Rk = 0,
then Pi Rk+1 is a unique maximal submodule in Pi Rk . For k = 1 the statement
is true. Suppose the statement is true for k − 1, i.e., Pi Rk is the unique maximal
submodule in Pi Rk−1 . Then Pi Rk is a quotient module of Ri and it has exactly
one maximal submodule which is Pi Rk+1 . This equivalent to the fact that Pi is a
uniserial module.
Example 5.2.1.
A ring with quiver
•
• • • •
or
•
• • •
•
is right serial.
Taking into account remark 5.2.2 we have the analogous theorem for left serial
rings:
Theorem 5.2.1*. A ring A is left serial if and only if each vertex of the quiver
Q(A) is the end of at most one arrow.
Example 5.2.2.
A ring with the quiver
• • • •
or
•
• • • •
•
is left serial.
Corollary 5.2.2. A ring A is right (left) serial if and only if A/R2 is right
(left) serial.
Corollary 5.2.3. An indecomposable ring A is right serial if and only if the

quiver Q(A) is a tree with a single end vertex or it contains only one cycle, and
each arrow that does not form part of the cycle is oriented towards it.
Example 5.2.3.
A ring with quiver
•
•
•
• • • or • • •
•
•
is an indecomposable right serial ring.
Corollary 5.2.3*. An indecomposable ring A is left serial if and only if the

quiver Q(A) is a tree with a single start vertex or it contains only one cycle, and
each arrow not part of the cycle is oriented away from it.
Remark 5.2.3. From corollary 5.2.3 and corollary 5.2.3* it follows that the
quiver of an indecomposable serial ring is a cycle or a chain. In this case all
division rings entering into the Wedderburn-Artin decomposition of the ring A/R
are isomorphic. If A is a finite dimensional algebra over a field k these conditions
are also sufficient for A to be a serial ring. The following example shows that this
is not true in general.
Example 5.2.2.
Consider the set A of all matrices of the form

f (x2 ) g(x)
0 h(x),
where the f, g, h are arbitrary rational functions over a field k. Then A forms an
infinite dimensional algebra for which the conditions above hold, but this algebra
is not serial.
Definition. Let B be a semisimple Artinian ring. A B-bimodule V is called

right serial if eV is a simple B-bimodule for any minimal idempotent e ∈ B.
(Note that it is sufficient to verify this for minimal idempotents from a fixed
decomposition of the identity of B.)
Corollary 5.2.4. Let B = A/R and V = R/R2 . Then the ring A is right
serial if and only if the B-bimodule V is right serial.
Theorem 5.2.5. If V is a right bimodule over a semisimple Artinian ring

B, and I is an essential ideal in the tensor algebra TB (V ), then the quotient ring
TB (V )/I is right serial. Moreover, any Wedderburn right serial ring is of this
form.
Proof. The proof follows immediately from corollary 5.2.4 and theorem 2.2.2.
Fix a semisimple Artinian ring B and a right serial B-bimodule V . We shall

describe the essential ideals in T = TB (V ). Let U1 , . . . , Us be all pairwise non-
isomorphic simple B-modules; and let e1 , ..., es be idempotents in B such that
Ui ei B. Let Ti = ei T, let J be the fundamental ideal of TB (V ) and let
l(X) denote the length of a B-module X. For any ideal I ⊂ T, Qi = Ti I is a
submodule in Ti ; moreover, I is an essential ideal if and only if Ti J 2 ⊃ Qi ⊃ Ti J n
for some n, i.e., l(Pi /Qi ) = li < ∞, and if Ti J = 0 (which is equivalent to the
inequality V ⊗li = 0), then li ≥ 2. From theorem 5.2.5 it follows that Ti /Ti J n is a
uniserial module, and therefore Qi is uniquely defined by the number li such that
Q i = T i J li .
Let B U1n1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Usns , then T T1n1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Tsns . Therefore the right ideal
I = Qn1 1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Qns s is defined by giving Qi (or what is the same the number
li ). We shall determine for which conditions on li the ideal I is a two-sided ideal.
Let Vi = V ⊗li . If li = 1, then Vi is a simple B-module, that is, there is a unique
number j such that Vi Uj . This is the unique number such that in the quiver
Q = Q(T/J 2 ) there is an arrow from i to j.
Since J = V T, we have Ti I = Vi T Pj and Ti I 2 = Vi Vj T. Continuing this
process we have that
Qi = Vi1 Vi2 . . . Vil T,
where l = li , and i = i1 , i2 , . . . , il is the unique set of indexes such that there is an
arrow from ik to ik+1 in the quiver Q. Hence it follows that BI = I and we only
need to know when V I ⊂ I. Obviously, this is true if and only if Vi0 Vi1 . . . Vil ⊂ Qj
for any index i0 such that Vi0 Ui , that is, there is an arrow from i0 to i. Since
Qj = Vi0 Vi1 . . . Vim −1 T, where m = li0 , our inclusion is equivalent to the inequality
li0 − 1 ≥ li . Thus, we have proved the following statement.
Proposition 5.2.6. Let B be a semisimple Artinian ring, let V be a right

serial B-bimodule, and let Q = Q(T(V )/J 2 ).
An essential ideal I ⊂ T(V ) is uniquely defined by a set of numbers {l1 , . . . , ls }

such that li = 1 if the vertex i is an end vertex in Q, and 2 ≤ li ≤ lj + 1 if there
is an arrow from the vertex i to the vertex j where s is the number of vertices of
the quiver Q, that is, the number of simple summands of B.
Suppose that A = T(V )/I T(V1 )/I1 , where V1 is a right serial bimodule
over a semisimple Artinian ring B1 , and I1 is an essential ideal in T(V1 ). Then
B A/R B1 and V R/R2 V1 (where R = radA). Moreover, if π :
T(V ) → A and π1 : T(V1 ) → A are the natural epimorphisms onto the quotient
rings, then there are unique isomorphisms ϕ : B → B1 and f : V → V1 such
that π(b) ≡ π1 ϕ(b)(mod R) and π(v) ≡ π1 f (v)(mod R2 ). Hence it follows that
ϕ and f are compatible, that is, f (bv) = ϕ(b)f (v), f (vb) = f (v)ϕ(b) for any
b ∈ B and v ∈ V . Besides, if U1 , . . . , Us are the simple B-modules, and U1 , . . . , Us
are the simple B1 -modules, while T1 , ..., Ts and T1 , . . . , Ts are the corresponding
components of T(V ) and T(V1 ); li = l(Ti /Ti I); li = l(Ti /Ti I); then li = li if
ϕ(Ui ) Ui . (Obviously, li = li = l(Pi ), where Pi = π(Ti ) π1 (Ti )).
Conversely, if ϕ : B → B1 and f : V → V1 are compatible isomorphisms, they
induce a ring isomorphism F : T(V ) → T(V1 ) and an isomorphism of quivers:
σ : Q → Q1 , where Q = Q(T(V )/J 2 ), Q1 = Q(T(V1 )/J12 ). Let I be an essential
ideal in T(V ) defined by the set of numbers {l1 , . . . , ls }. Then I1 = F (I) is an
essential ideal in T (V1 ) defined by the set of numbers {l1 , . . . , ls }, where li = lj
if σ(j) = i. This analysis together with theorem 5.2.5 gives a full description of
Wedderburn right serial rings.
Theorem 5.2.7. A right serial Wedderburn ring A is uniquely defined by a

tuple (B; V ; l1 , . . . , ls ), where B = A/R is a semisimple Artinian ring; V = R/R2
is a right serial B-bimodule; li = l(Pi ) is a integer function on the quiver Q(A) =
Q(T(V )/J 2 ), and, moreover, li = 1 if the vertex i is an end vertex of Q(A), and
2 ≤ li ≤ lj + 1, if there is an arrow from the vertex i to the vertex j.
The tuples (B; V ; l1 , . . . , ls ) and (B1 ; V1 ; l1 , . . . , ls ) define isomorphic rings if
and only if there is a pair of compatible isomorphisms ϕ : B → B1 and f : V → V1
such that li = lj if i = σ(j), where σ is the mapping of quivers σ : Q(T(V )/J 2 ) →
Q1 (T(V1 )/J12 ) induced by a pair of isomorphisms (ϕ, f ).
Remark 5.2.4. Let A be a finite dimensional algebra over an algebraically

closed field k. Then B = B1 × B2 × . . . × Bs , where Bi Mni (k), and there is
t
a unique simple Bi -Bj -bimodule Uij , moreover, V = ⊕Uijij . Thus B and V are
defined by a quiver Q(A) and a set of multipliers {n1 , . . . , ns }. Therefore a finite
dimensional right serial k-algebra is defined by a tuple {Q; n1 , . . . , ns ; l1 , . . . , ls },
where Q is a quiver whose connected components satisfy corollary 5.2.3; li = 1 if
the vertex i is an end vertex of Q(A), and 2 ≤ li ≤ lj + 1, if there is an arrow from
the vertex i to the vertex j.
Two tuples {Q; n1 , . . . , ns ; l1 , . . . , ls } and {Q1 ; n1 , . . . , ns ; l1 , . . . , ls } define
isomorphic algebras if and only if there is an isomorphism of quivers σ : Q → Q1
such that if σ(j) = i then li = lj and ni = nj .
5.3 QUASI-FROBENIUS RIGHT SERIAL RINGS

Recall that a ring A is quasi-Frobenius if A is an injective module over itself by
theorem 4.12.17.
Proposition 5.3.1. A right serial quasi-Frobenius ring is left serial, and

therefore it is serial.
Proof. This follows from the fact that in this case the functor HomA (∗, A) is
exact and it establishes a duality of categories of right and left finite generated
A-modules by theorem 4.12.21.
Theorem 5.3.2. An Artinian right serial ring A is quasi-Frobenius if and

only if
1. Q(A) Q (A) and both are a disjoint union of cycles;
2. l1 = . . . = ls , where li = l(Pi ).
Proof. Let A be an Artinian right serial ring A. Without loss of generality

we can assume that A is an indecomposable ring. Suppose A is a quasi-Frobenius
ring, then, by proposition 5.3.1, it is a serial ring. Therefore, by theorem 12.1.12,
vol.I, the quiver Q(A) of A is a cycle or a chain. Thus, by theorem 4.13.2, Q(A)
is a cycle. Since A is quasi-Frobenius, all principal modules Pi are projective
and injective simultaneously. Therefore any epimorphism ϕ : Pj → Ri , where
Ri = radPi , is not a monomorphism. Thus,
lj = l(Pj ) > l(Ri ) = l(Pi ) − 1,
i.e., lj ≥ li . Taking into account that Q(A) is a cycle, we obtain
l1 ≤ l2 ≤ . . . ≤ ls ≤ l1 ,
so all li are equal.

Conversely, let A be a right Artinian and right serial ring, and suppose that
conditions 1 and 2 of the theorem both hold. Let P = Pi be a principal right
A-module, and let Mk be its unique submodule such that l(P/Mk ) = k (clearly,
Mk = P Rk , where R = radA). For convenience, we write Ps+1 = P1 , Ps+2 = P2 ,
etc. Then P (M1 ) Pi+1 and thus M2 is an epimorphic image of Ri+1 ; whence
P (M2 ) Pi+2 . In general, P (Mk ) Pi+k for Mk = 0. In particular, socP =
Ml−1 and thus P (socPi ) = Pi+l−1 . It is clear that the modules Pi+l−1 are non-
isomorphic for i = 1, 2, . . . , s. Therefore the socle of a principal right A-module Pi
is simple and for Pi Pj , socPi socPj . By theorem 4.5.2, A is a quasi-Frobenius
ring, as required.
Remark 5.3.1. For finite dimensional algebras instead of an isomorphism

Q(A) Q (A) it is sufficient to require that A/R Mn1 (D1 ) × . . . × Mns (Ds ). In
general this property follows from condition 1, but not conversely.
Remark 5.3.2. Let k be an algebraically closed field. Then a finite dimen-

sional quasi-Frobenius right serial k-algebra A is defined by a tuple
{Q; m; n1 , . . . , ns },
where Q is a disjoint union of cycles. Moreover, if V is the bimodule defined by
{Q; m; n1 , . . . , ns }, then A T(V )/J m .
5.4 RIGHT HEREDITARY RIGHT SERIAL RINGS

Recall that a ring A is called right (resp. left) hereditary if each right (resp.
left) ideal is projective. If a ring A is both right and left hereditary, we say that
A is a hereditary ring. In section 5.5, vol.I, we have studied some properties of
right hereditary rings. The main properties of right hereditary rings that follow
from theorem 5.5.6, vol.I and propositions 6.5.5 and 6.6.6, vol.I, can be formulated
as the following two statements:
Theorem 5.4.1. Let A be a right hereditary ring. Then

1. proj.dimA M ≤ 1 for any right A-module M .
2. ExtnA (X, Y ) = 0 for all right A-modules X, Y and all n ≥ 2.
Theorem 5.4.2. The following conditions are equivalent for a ring A

1. A is is a right hereditary ring.
2. Any submodule of a right projective A-module is projective.
3. r.gl.dim A ≤ 1.
Proposition 5.4.3. Let A be a quasi-Frobenius ring. Then A is right heredi-

tary if and only if A is semisimple.
Proof. Since A is a right hereditary ring, r.gl.dim A ≤ 1, by proposition 6.6.6,

vol.I. Since A is a quasi-Frobenius ring, gl.dim A = 0 or gl.dim A = ∞, by corollary
4.12.20. Since each quasi-Frobenius ring is a two-sided Artinian ring, we have
r.gl.dim A = l.gl.dim A, by the Auslander theorem 5.1.16. Therefore, gl.dim A = 0,
i.e., A is semisimple.
The converse statement is trivial.
Recall that an indecomposable projective right module over a semiperfect ring

A is called a principal right module. Note that any right Artinian ring is right
Noetherian and semiperfect.
Proposition 5.4.4. Let A be a right Artinian ring. Then the following con-
ditions are equivalent for the ring A:
1) A is a right hereditary ring;

2) every submodule of a projective right A-module is projective;
3) every submodule of a principal right A-module is projective;
4) rad A is a projective right A-module.
Proof.
1) ⇐⇒ 2). This follows from theorem 5.5.6, vol.I.
2) ⇒ 3) is trivial.
3) ⇒ 4). Let A = P1 ⊕ P2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Pn be the decomposition of the right regular
module AA into a direct sum of principal right A-modules. Then, by proposition
3.4.3, vol.I, rad A = R1 ⊕ R2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Rn , where Ri is the radical of Pi . Since all
the Pi are projective, rad A is projective as well.
4) ⇒ 1). Let R = rad A be a projective right A-module, i.e., r.proj.dimA R = 0.
Consider the exact sequence 0 → R → A → A/R → 0. Then, by proposition
6.5.1, vol.I, r.proj.dimA (A/R) = r.proj.dimA (R) + 1 = 1. We shall show that
r.gl.dim A ≤ r.proj.dimA (A/R) = 1, which means, by proposition 6.6.6, vol.I,
that A is right hereditary. Since A/R is a semisimple A-module, it is a direct sum
of simple modules. So,
1 = r.proj.dimA (A/R) = max{r.proj.dimA (S) : S is a simple A-module}
Therefore r.proj.dimA S ≤ 1 for each simple A-module S. We shall prove by

induction on l(X) that for any finitely generated right A -module X
r.proj.dimA X ≤ 1. If l(X) = 0 we are done. Suppose that l(X) = m > 0 and
r.proj.dimA Y ≤ 1 for any finitely generated A-module Y with l(Y ) < m. Since X
is finitely generated, there is an exact sequence 0 → S → X → X → 0, where S
is a simple A-module and X X/S is finitely generated. Then l(X ) < m and so
r.proj.dimA X ≤ 1. Then r.proj.dimA X ≤ max{r.proj.dimA S, r.proj.dimA X } ≤
1. Therefore, by theorem 5.1.13, r.gl.dim A ≤ 1, hence A is right hereditary.
Proposition 5.4.5. If a right serial ring A is right hereditary, then the quiver
Q(A) does not contain oriented cycles.
Proof. Let Q = Q(A) be the quiver of a right hereditary and right serial ring A.
If there is an arrow σ ∈ AQ with s(σ) = i and e(σ) = j, then there is a non-zero
homomorphism fσ : Pi → Pj and Im (fσ ) ⊂ rad (Pj ). Suppose Q(A) contains an
oriented cycle and let p = σ1 σ2 . . . σm be a path of Q with start and end at the
vertex i. Then f = fσ1 fσ2 . . . fσm is a homomorphism from Pi to Pi . Since all
Pi are indecomposable and projective, by lemma 5.5.8, vol.I, all homomorphisms
fσk are monomorphisms. So f is also a monomorphism, that is, Pi Im (f ). But
Im (f ) ⊂ rad (Pi ) and rad (Pi ) = Pi , by proposition 5.1.8, vol.I. This contradiction
proves the proposition.
Let Q be an arbitrary quiver without cycles with an adjacency matrix (tij ).

We define on Q an integral function di = 1 for any end vertex and otherwise

di = tij dj + 1. This function is well-defined. Denote by l(M ) the length of a
module M .
Theorem 5.4.6. A right Artinian right serial ring A is right hereditary if and
only if the quiver Q(A) does not contain oriented cycles and li = l(Pi ) = di for
each principal right A-module Pi .
Proof. Let A be a right Artinian right serial ring. If A is a hereditary ring, then,
by proposition 5.4.5, Q(A) does not contain oriented cycles. For any principal
right A-module Pi , Ri = rad (Pi ) is a projective A-module, as well. Therefore
t
Ri P (Ri ) = ⊕ Pj ij and li = tij lj + 1. If i ∈ Q(A) is an end vertex, then Pi
j
is a simple module, and so li = 1. Hence it follows that li = di .
Conversely, let A be a right Artinian right serial ring and let the
quiver Q(A)
have no oriented cycles and li = di for all i. Then l(Ri ) = li − 1 = tij lj + 1 =
l(P (Ri )), therefore Ri P (Ri ) is a projective module. Therefore R = rad A is
also a projective module, since it is a direct sum of projective modules Pi . Thus
A is a right hereditary ring, by proposition 5.4.4.
Corollary 5.4.7. A right Artinian right serial ring A is right hereditary if and
only if Q(A) is a disjoint union of trees with only one end vertex and li = l(Pi ) is
one more than the length of the (unique) path from the vertex i to the end vertex
(for all i).
Theorem 5.4.6 and corollary 5.4.7 give a full description of right Artinian right
serial hereditary rings. Moreover, theorem 5.4.6 and a simple calculation of the
length of the principal T(V )-modules give a description of all Wedderburn hered-
itary rings.
Corollary 5.4.8. A right hereditary Wedderburn ring A is isomorphic to the

tensor algebra TB (V ), where B = A/R; V = R/R2 . Conversely, if the tensor
algebra TB (V ) is a right Artinian ring, then it is right hereditary.
Remark 5.4.1. Let k be an algebraically closed field. A hereditary finite

dimensional right serial k-algebra is defined by a tuple {Q; n1 , . . . , ns }, where Q is
a disjoint union of trees with only one end vertex. It is isomorphic to the tensor
algebra T(V ), where V is the associated bimodule.
5.5 SEMIPRIME RIGHT SERIAL RINGS

In this section all ideals will be two-sided ideals.
Lemma 5.5.1. A semiprime local right serial ring A is prime.
Proof. Let I1 and I2 be two nonzero ideals from the ring A such that I1 I2 = 0.
Since A is right serial ring, we can assume that I1 ⊃ I2 . But then I22 = 0 and
from the semiprimality of A it follows that I2 = 0. A contradiction.
Theorem 5.5.2. A semiprime right serial ring is a direct product of prime

right serial rings.
Proof. Since a right serial ring is semiperfect, the proof immediately follows
from lemma 5.5.1, proposition 9.2.13, vol.I, and theorem 14.4.6, vol.I.
Recall that a module M is called distributive if
K ∩ (L + N ) = K ∩ L + K ∩ N
for all submodules K, L, N . A module is called semidistributive if it is a direct

sum of distributive modules. A ring A is called right (left) semidistributive
if the right (left) regular module AA (A A) is semidistributive. A right and left
semidistributive ring is called semidistributive. Obviously, every uniserial mod-
ule is a distributive module and every serial module is a semidistributive module.
We write SPSDR-ring for a semiperfect right semidistributive ring and SPSD-ring
for a semiperfect semidistributive ring.
Theorem 5.5.3. A prime hereditary SPSDR-ring A is right serial.
Proof. One can assume that A is a reduced ring. Let 1 = e1 + e2 + . . . + en be

a decomposition of the identity of A into a sum of pairwise orthogonal local idem-
potents, and let Pi = ei A be a right principal A-module (i = 1, 2, . . . , n). Suppose
A is not right serial. Let P = eA be an indecomposable projective right A-module
which is not uniserial (where e is a local idempotent of A). Since A is a hereditary
ring, there is a submodule K ⊆ P such that K = Pi ⊕ Pj (i = j). Since A is
right semidistributive, K = eaei A ⊕ ebej A, where a, b ∈ A. Obviously, eaei A =
(eaei Ae1 , eaei Ae2 , . . . , eaei Aen ) and ebej A = (ebej Ae1 , ebej Ae2 , . . . , ebej Aen ).
Since we have a direct sum of submodules, eaei A ∩ ebej A = 0. By theorem
14.2.1, vol.I, we have eaei Aek = 0 or ebej Aek = 0 This is a contradiction with the
assumption that A is prime. This proves that A is right serial.
Let O be a discrete valuation ring with radical R = πO = Oπ, where π ∈ O is

a prime element, and skew field of fractions D.
Consider a subring Λ ⊂ Mn (D) of the following form
⎛ ⎞
O π α12 O . . . π α1n O
⎜ π α21 O O . . . π α2n O ⎟
⎜ ⎟
Λ = ⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟,
⎝ . . . . ⎠
π O π O ...
αn1 αn2
O
where the αij are integers such that αij + αjk ≥ αik for all i, j, k and where αii = 0
for each i. Such a ring is two-sided Noetherian semiperfect semidistributive prime
ring, and Mn (D) is its classical ring of fractions.
We shall use the following notation: Λ = {O, E(Λ)}, where E(Λ) = (αij ) is the
exponent matrix of the ring Λ.
Theorem 5.5.4. The following conditions for a right Noetherian semiperfect

semiprime and semidistributive ring A are equivalent:
(a) the ring A is right serial;
(b) the ring A is two-sided hereditary;
(c) the ring A is serial;
(d) the ring A is Morita-equivalent to a direct product of skew-fields and rings
of the form Hsj (Oj ) (j = 1, 2, . . . , n).
Proof. It is obvious, that in all cases we can consider that the ring A is reduced
and indecomposable.
(a) ⇒ (b). By theorem 14.5.1, vol.I, the ring A can be considered to be a
division ring or a ring of the form Λ = {O, E(Λ)}. Obviously, a division ring is
a hereditary ring. Since Λ is a reduced ring, the matrix E(Λ) has no symmetric
zeros, therefore the first row corresponding to the first indecomposable projective
Λ-module P1 can be made zero. The module P1 R is projective (it contains a
unique maximal submodule since the ring Λ is right serial) and so it coincides with
P2 = (α21 , 0, . . . , 0) = (1, 0, . . . , 0); the module P2 R = P3 = (1, 2, 0, . . . , 0) and
continuing this process we obtain that Ps−1 R = Ps = (1, 1, . . . , 1, 0). Therefore
the matrix E(Λ) coincides with a matrix of the following form:
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 ... 0 0
⎜1 0 0 . . . 0 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜1 1 0 . . . 0 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. . . .. .. ⎟
⎜. . . . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝1 1 1 . . . 0 0⎠
1 1 1 ... 1 0
Thus, A is two-sided hereditary, by corollary 12.3.7, vol.I.
(b) ⇒ (c) follows from theorem 14.5.1, vol.I, and theorem 5.5.3.
(c) ⇒ (d) follows from theorem 14.5.1, vol.I, and corollary 12.3.7, vol.I.
(d) ⇒ (a) follows from theorem 14.2.1, vol.I, and corollary 12.3.7, vol.I.
Example 5.5.1.
Let Z(p) be the ring of p-integral numbers (p is a prime number), i.e., Z(p) =
m
{ ∈ Q : (n, p) = 1}, and let Fp = Z(p) /pZ(p) be the field consisting of p
n
elements. Consider the ring A of 2 × 2-matrices of the following form:

Fp Fp
A =
0 Z(p)
(where Fp is considered as an Zp -module via the canonical quotient map Zp → Fp ).

0 Fp
R = rad A =
0 pZ(p)
and
0
2 0
R =
0 p2 Z(p) .
So

0 Fp
R/R2 =
0 pZ(p) /p2 Z(p)
and, by the Q-Lemma, the quiver Q(A) of A is the two-pointed quiver with the
adjacency matrix

0 1
[Q(A)] =
0 1.
Therefore, by theorem 14.2.1, vol.I, A is a right serial and left semidistributive
ring. So there is no analogue of the decomposition theorem for serial Noetherian
rings (see theorem 12.3.8, vol.I) even for Noetherian right serial and left semidis-
tributive rings with a two-pointed quiver.
5.6 RIGHT SERIAL QUIVERS AND TREES

Definition. A quiver Q is called right serial if each of its vertices is the start
of at most one arrow.
Examples 5.6.1.
1. The quiver of a right serial ring is right serial.
2. Let Nn = {1, 2, . . . , n} and consider a map ϕ : Nn → Nn . We represent

ϕ as a right serial quiver Qϕ by drawing arrows from i to ϕ(i). For example, the
map

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12
ϕ =
6 7 7 5 4 3 1 2 1 9 12 11
is represented by the following right serial quiver Qϕ :
10
•
9 •
6 3 7 2 4 • • 5 11 • • 12
1 • • • • •
•
8
Quivers which come from maps in this way have the property that each vertex
is the start of precisely one arrow. They are therefore right serial.
3. The following quivers are right serial:
•
(a) • • ... • •
•
•
(b)
• • • • • • •
• •
• •
(c)
• • •
• • • • •
In order to describe all right serial quivers we introduce the following

definitions.
A circuit of a quiver Q is a sequence of pairwise distinct vertices
{i1 , i2 , . . . , it } and a sequence of arrows {σ1 , σ2 , . . . , σt } such that each σk goes
from ik to ik+1 or from ik+1 to ik (where it+1 = i1 ).
Note that it is possible that t = 1. Of course, every cycle is a circuit, but the
converse is not true. A connected quiver without circuits we shall call a tree.
A root of a tree is a vertex which is not a start vertex of any arrow in the
given tree. It is unique, see below.
Theorem 5.6.1. A connected right serial quiver Q is either a tree with a single
root, or a quiver with a unique circuit which is a cycle such that after deleting all
arrows of this cycle, the remaining quiver is a disconnected union of trees whose
roots are the vertices of the cycle. Conversely, every such a quiver is right serial.
Proof. Assume that Q is a right serial quiver. Let {i1 , i2 , . . . , it }, {σ1 , . . . , σt }

be a circuit of Q. Assume that σ1 : i2 → i1 . Then σ2 : i2 → i3 is impossible
and thus σ2 : i3 → i2 . Similarly, σ3 : i4 → i3 , . . ., σt : i1 → it , and thus the
sequence {σt , σt−1 , . . . , σ1 } is a cycle (if σ1 : i1 → i2 then {σ1 , σ2 , . . . , σt } is a
cycle).
If there is no circuit in Q, then Q is a tree. Let i be a root of Q and let V Q1 be
the non-empty set of all vertices of Q from which there is a path to i. Similarly,
denote by V Q2 the set of all vertices from which there is a path to any other root
of Q. Obviously, V Q1 ∩ V Q2 = ∅ and V Q = V Q1 ∪ V Q2 . Therefore, since Q is

connected, V Q2 = ∅. So Q has a unique root.
Now let {σ1 , σ2 , . . . , σt } be the cycle of Q. Observe that σk : ik → ik+1
(with it+1 = i1 ) is the single arrow starting at ik . Denote by V Qk the
set of all vertices of Q from which there is a path to ik not containing any
arrow of the cycle. In particular, each ik ∈ V Qk (the trivial path εk ). Let
$
t
V Q0 = V Q \ V Qk . Obviously, all V Qk (k = 1, . . . , t) are pairwise disjoint.
k=1
Denote by Qk the subquiver of Q, whose vertices are in V Qk . Since every i ∈ V Qk ,
i = ik , is a start vertex for a unique arrow σ whose end vertex is again in V Qk ,
there are no cycles in Qk . Obviously, there is no arrow with a start vertex in V Q0
and an end vertex in one of the V Qk . Since Q is connected, V Q0 = ∅. Thus,
deleting all arrows σ1 , σ2 , . . . , σt , we obtain a disjoint union of the subquivers Qk
each of which is a tree with a single root ik .
Conversely, let Q be a quiver described above. First, if Q is a tree with a
single root, then there is no vertex which is a start vertex of more than one arrow
because there are no circuits in Q. It is easy to see that the same conclusion holds
if there is a single cycle in Q and its complement is a disjoint union of trees with
unique roots which are vertices of the cycle.
Remark 5.6.1. Let Qϕ be a right serial quiver constructed by means of a

map ϕ : Nn → Nn . Then Qϕ contains at least one cycle.
We shall use right serial quivers to prove the Cayley formula for the number of
different trees on a vertex set {1, 2, . . . , n}.
We shall use the main notions of graph theory (see [Harary, 1969]). In what
follows we consider undirected graphs without loops and multiple edges.
Definition. A connected graph without circuits is called a tree.
The following proposition is well-known and we state it without proof (see

[Harary, 1969]. [Harary, 1973]).
Proposition 5.6.2. Let Tn be an undirected graph with n vertices and m

edges. Then the following conditions are equivalent:
1. Tn is a tree.
2. Tn is a connected graph and m = n − 1.
3. There is only one path in Tn from p to q for any vertices p = q.
Let the vertices of a tree Tn be numbered by the numbers 1, . . . , n. It will be

suitable for us to set these vertices in the points corresponding to the vertices of
n-sided regular polygon which are situated on a circumference with radius 1 on the
complex plane. The first vertex is situated on the axis Ox and the next vertices
are situated in the direction opposite to the clock hand.
We shall assume that this numbering is fixed and say that Tn is a tree with
vertex set V Tn = {1, . . . , n}.
Examples 5.6.1.
1. n = 3.
y
2 •
1
• •
0 x
3 •
In this case we can construct 3 trees:
2 • 2 • 2 •
1 1 1
; ;
• • •
3 • 3 • 3 •
2. n = 4.
2 y
•
3 1
• • •
0 x
•
4
In this case we can construct 16 trees:

2 2 2
• • •
3 • • 1 3 • • 1 3 • • 1
• • •
4 4 4
2 2 2
• • •
3 • • 1 3 • • 1 3 • • 1
• • •
4 4 4
2 2 2
• • •
3 • • 1 3 • • 1 3 • • 1
• • •
4 4 4
2 2 2
• • •
3 • • 1 3 • • 1 3 • • 1
• • •
4 4 4
2 2 2
• • •
3 • • 1 3 • • 1 3 • • 1
• • •
4 4 4
2
•
3 • • 1
•
4
Theorem 5.6.3. (The Cayley formula). For any n ≥ 2 there are nn−2
different trees with vertex set {1, . . . , n}.
Proof. Let T be a tree with vertex set V T = {1, . . . , n}. Fix two vertices x
and y in T .
Case I. x = y = k.
For any vertex i ∈ V T there is a single path that starts at i and ends at the
m
vertex k. Let i be the first edge in this path. Define ϕ(T, k, k) = ϕk in
• •
the following way: ϕk (k) = k and ϕk (i) = m for each i = k. Obviously, ϕk is a
well-defined map.
Case II. x = y (x = p, y = q).
Let M = {p, i1 , . . . , ik−2 , q} be the sequence of vertices of the unique path P
starting at the vertex p and ending at the vertex q, where i1 is the end of the edge
p i1 i i2
, i2 is the end of the edge 1 , etc., and q is the end of the edge
• • • •
ik−1 q
. Write
• •

a1 a2 . . . ak−1 ak
ϕ(T, x, y)|M =
p i1 . . . ik−2 q
such that the numbers a1 , a2 , . . . , ak−1 , ak in the first row are the numbers
p, i1 , . . . , ik−2 , q in their natural order. Let ϕ = ϕ(T, x, y). Consequently, write
ϕ(a1 ) = p, ϕ(a2 ) = i1 , . . ., ϕ(ak−1 ) = ik−2 , ϕ(ak ) = q. And for all remaining
m
vertices we define ϕ(i) = m, where i is the first edge in the unique path
• •
starting at the vertex i and ending at the vertex p.
Therefore, a tree T with vertex set {1, . . . , n} defines n2 maps ϕ : Nn → Nn .

Conversely, let f : Nn → Nn be any map. We shall represent f as a right
serial quiver Qf by drawing arrows from i to f (i).
(k)
Let Qf be a connected component of Qf . By remark 5.6.1, there is a unique
(k)
cycle in Qf . Let M ⊂ Nn be a union of the vertex sets of these cycles and
M = {a1 , . . . , ak : a1 < a2 < . . . < ak }. Obviously, M is a unique maximal

subset of Nn such that the restriction of f onto M acts as a bijection on M . The
tree with vertex set {1, . . . , n} corresponding to the map f is now constructed as
follows: write

a1 a2 ... ak−1 ak
f |M =
f (a1 ) f (a2 ) . . . f (ak−1 ) f (ak )
and draw
f (a1 ), f (a2 ), . . . , f (ak−1 ), f (ak )
in this order as a path beginning at the vertex f (a1 ) and ending at the vertex
f (ak ). If the cycle is of length 1 (i.e., ak = a1 ), no edges are drawn. The remaining
vertices are connected as they were connected in Qf without orientation.
Now the proof follows from the fact that the set of all mappings from Nn into
Nn contains nn elements and the fact that a tree with vertex set {1, . . . , n} defines
n2 different mappings from Nn to Nn .
The algorithms used in the proof of theorem 5.6.3 are illustrated by the fol-
lowing examples.
Example 5.6.2.
⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪ 2 • ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ ⎪
⎬
For n = 4 consider the tree T = T4 = 3 • • 1 .
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭
4 •
Construct the 16 mappings N4 = {1, 2, 3, 4} onto itself. It is easy to see that

these mappings are given by the following tables (where on the intersection of the
i-th row and the j-th column there is ϕ(T, i, j)).
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
⎜ 1 2 3 4 ⎟ ⎜ 1 2 3 4 ⎟ ⎜ 1 2 3 4 ⎟ ⎜ 1 2 3 4 ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠
1 1 1 1 1 2 1 1 1 1 3 1 1 1 1 4
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
⎜ 1 2 3 4 ⎟ ⎜ 1 2 3 4 ⎟ ⎜ 1 2 3 4 ⎟ ⎜ 1 2 3 4 ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠
2 1 1 1 2 2 1 1 2 1 3 1 2 1 1 4
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
⎜ 1 2 3 4 ⎟ ⎜ 1 2 3 4 ⎟ ⎜ 1 2 3 4 ⎟ ⎜ 1 2 3 4 ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠
3 1 1 1 3 1 2 1 3 1 3 1 4 1 1 3
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
⎜ 1 2 3 4 ⎟ ⎜ 1 2 3 4 ⎟ ⎜ 1 2 3 4 ⎟ ⎜ 1 2 3 4 ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠
4 1 1 1 4 1 1 2 4 1 1 3 4 1 1 4
Example 5.6.3.
Consider the mapping ϕ : N12 → N12 for N12 = {1, 2, . . . , 12} as in example
5.6.1(2). The tree corresponding to this map ϕ has the following form:
4 y
5 • 3
• •
6 2
• •
7 1
• •
x
• •
8 12
• •
9 • 11
10
Note that this tree has leafs 6, 8, 10, 11 (where a leaf is defined as an end
vertex of a tree).
5.7 CARTAN MATRIX FOR A RIGHT ARTINIAN RIGHT SERIAL RING

Throughout in this section A will denote a right Artinian ring with Jacobson
radical R. Let P1 , P2 , . . . , Pn be all pairwise nonisomorphic principal right A-
modules and let U1 , U2 , . . . , Un be the set of simple right A/R-modules given
by Pi /Pi R Ui . Suppose that e1 , e2 , . . . , en are pairwise orthogonal primitive
idempotents corresponding to the principal right A-modules P1 , P2 , . . . , Pn so that
Pi = ei A for i = 1, . . . , n.
Let modr A be the category of finitely generated right A-modules. If M ∈
modr A then l(M ) denotes the composition length of M , and ci (M ) denotes the
number of factors in a composition series for M that are isomorphic to Ui .
Thus ci (M ) = l((M ei )ei Aei ), the composition length of the right ei Aei -module
M ei .
Let 0 → N → M → L → 0 be an exact sequence of A-modules. If M has
a composition series then l(M ) = l(N ) + l(L), by proposition 3.2.3, vol.I. Using
the Jordan-Hölder theorem (see theorem 3.2.1, vol.I), we also obtain the following
simple corollary:
Corollary 5.7.1. Let 0 → N → M → L → 0 be an exact sequence of A-

modules. If N and L have finite length then M has also finite length and l(M ) =
l(N ) + l(L). And moreover ci (M ) = ci (L) + ci (N )
An important role in the studying modules of finite length is played by a special

group. Denote by |modr A| the set of all isomorphism classes of modules in modr A
(including Pi and Ui , i = 1, . . . , n). Denote by i(M ) the isomorphism class of a
module M ∈ modr A.
Definition. The Grothendick group of modr A is

K0 (modr A) = F /R,
where F is the free Abelian group with basis |modr A| and R is the subgroup of
F generated by the expressions i(M ) − i(M ) − i(M ) for all exact sequences
0 → M → M → M → 0
in modr A.
We denote by [M ] the coset of i(M ) with respect to R, therefore
[M ] = [M ] + [M ]. (5.7.1)
Theorem 5.7.2. Let K0 (modr A) be the Grothendick group of modr A.

Then it is a free Abelian group with basis [U1 ], . . . , [Un ] and the map [M ] →
(c1 (M ), . . . , cn (M )) defines an isomorphism K0 (modr A) Z (n) , and for each
M ∈ modr A we have
n
[M ] = ci (M )[Ui ]. (5.7.2)
i=1
Proof. Denote by S = {i(U1 ), . . . , i(Un )} the set of all isomorphism classes of

simple A-modules. Let SF be a subgroup of F generated by S. Define a map
α : SF → K0 (modr A) by the formula α (i(Ui )) = [Ui ]. For any exact sequence
0 → M → M → M → 0
in modr A we have ci (M ) = ci (M ) + ci (M ) for any simple module Ui . Define

n
a map β : K0 (modr A) → SF by the formula β([M ]) = ci (M )[Ui ] for any
i=1
M ∈ modr A. Then it is easy to check that βα = 1SF and αβ = 1K0 (modr A) . So
α is an isomorphism. The theorem is proved.
Definition. The (right) Cartan matrix of A is the n × n matrix C(A) =

(cij ) ∈ Mn (Z), where cij = ci (Pj ) = ci (ej A) is the number of composition factors
of Pj that are isomorphic to Ui . The integers cij are called the Cartan invariants
of A. The left Cartan matrix of A is defined similarly.
Applying formula (5.7.2) to a principal right A-module Pj we obtain the fol-

lowing simple formula:

n
[Pj ] = cij [Ui ]. (5.7.3)
i=1
Clearly, the ring A has the same Cartan matrix as its basic ring. There is also
the following obvious proposition:
Proposition 5.7.3. If A is a decomposable right Artinian ring A = A1 × A2 ,

then its Cartan matrix is block diagonal:

C(A1 ) 0
C(A) =
0 C(A2 )
Therefore further on in this section we shall assume that A is basic and inde-
composable.
Examples 5.7.1.
1. Let A be a local right Artinian ring. Then C(A) = (m), where m = l(A A).
2. The Cartan matrix of a right Artinian ring is the identity matrix if and only
if A is semisimple.
3. Let A be the ring of upper triangular n × n matrices over a field k. Then
det C(A) = 1.
It is easy to check the following simple properties of the Cartan matrix:

Lemma 5.7.4. Let A be a right Artinian ring with a set of pairwise orthogonal
primitive idempotents e1 , e2 , . . . , en and Cartan matrix C(A). Then
1. cij = l(ei Aei (ei Aej ));
n
2. l(ei A) = cij .
j=1
An important result in the theory of Cartan matrices has been obtained by

S.Eilenberg, who in 1954 showed that the determinant of the Cartan matrix of
an Artinian ring A of finite global dimension must be +1 or −1. We shall prove
this interesting statement following K.R.Fuller.1 This proof uses the Grothendick
group of the category modr A. We shall call the determinant of the Cartan matrix
the Cartan determinant.
Theorem 5.7.5. (S.Eilenberg). Let A be a right Artinian ring. If

gl. dim A < ∞ then det C(A) = ±1.
Proof. If P is a projective module, then there are non-negative integers mk

n
n
such that P Pkmk , so [P ] = mk [Pk ]. Consider projective resolutions
k=1 k=1
0 → Pjt → . . . → Pj1 → Pj0 → Uj → 0
of the Uj , with Pji projective, j = 1, . . . , n, i = 0, 1, . . . , t. Applying to these

resolutions the formulas (5.7.1) and (5.7.3) we obtain integers hkj such that

[Uj ] = (−1)l [Pjl ]
l

n
= hkj (−1)l [Pk ]
k=1

n
n
= cik hkj [Ui ].
i=1 k=1
Thus, writing H = (hij ) ∈ Mn (Z), we see that C(A)−1 = H ∈ Mn (Z), the ring of
n × n integral matrices. Therefore det C(R) = ±1.
Remark 5.7.1. The determinant of the right Cartan matrix is not necessarily
equal to the determinant of the left Cartan matrix even in the case when a ring
is two-sided Artinian (see [Fuller, 1992]). However they are equal to one-another
when A is an Artin algebra (see [Nakayama, 1938]).
1 see [Fuller, 1992]

Proposition 5.7.6. If A is an Artin algebra then det C(A A) = det C(AA ) .
Proof. We shall write
C(A A) = [dij ] and C(AA ) = [cij ]
to distinguish between the two Cartan matrices. Thus
dij = l(ei Aei (ei Aej )) and cij = l((ej Aei )ei Aei ).
Now if A is an Artin algebra over K and ti = l(K (ei Aei /ei Rei )) then
ti dij = l(K (ei Aej )) = tj cji ,
so that
t1 . . . tn det C(A A) = det[ti dij ] = det[tj cij ] = t1 . . . tn det C(AA )T .
This proves the proposition.
In 1957 J.Jans and T.Nakayama2 proved that if a ring A has finite global
dimension and R2 = 0, where R = radA, or A is a quotient ring of a hereditary
ring, then the Cartan determinant is equal to 1. Since there are known examples
of Artinian rings of finite global dimension with Cartan determinant equal −1,
the problem was posed to settle what is now known as the Cartan determinant
conjecture:
If A is an Artinian ring of finite global dimension then its Cartan determinant
is equal to 1.
At the end of this section we shall prove this conjecture for right serial rings.
This conjecture was first proved in 1985 by W.D.Burgess, K.R.Fuller, E.R.Voss
and B.Zimmermann-Huisgen in their paper [Burgess, 1985].
It is easy to prove the following lemma.
Lemma 5.7.7. Let A be a right serial right Artinian ring with a set of primitive
pairwise orthogonal idempotents e1 , e2 , . . . , en and corresponding Cartan matrix
C(A) = (cij ). Then

n
l(ei A) = cij .
j=1
Definition. The sequence e1 A, e2 A, . . . , en A is called a (right) Kupisch se-

ries if ei A is a projective cover of ei+1 R for 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1, and en A is a projective
cover of e1 R or e1 R = 0.
2 see [Jans, Nakayama, 1957].
Lemma 5.7.8. Let A be a right serial ring, and suppose that A has a Kupisch
series e1 A, . . . , en A, all of whose members have the same composition length m.
Write m = an + r with 0 ≤ r < n. Then C has the following form:

a + 1 if 0 ≤ j − i < r or n − r < i − j ≤ n
cij =
a otherwise
(in other words, for r > 0, the matrix C has entries a on its first n−r subdiagonals
and the last n − r superdiagonals, and a + 1 on the remaining diagonals.)
Proof. Denote by [k] the least positive remainder of k modulo n. Then the
sequence of composition factors of ej A is Uj , U[j−1] , . . . , U[j−(n−1)] , Uj ,U[j−1] , . . . ;
it continues for m terms. Thus there are a + 1 copies of the first r candidates in
the list and a copies of the others.
Remark 5.7.2. Since for a quasi-Frobenius serial ring A all ei A have the same
composition length by theorem 5.3.2, the previous lemma gives the structure of
Cartan matrices for quasi-Frobenius serial rings.
Remark 5.7.3. The matrices that occur in lemma 5.7.8 are a special type of
circulant matrices.3 By a circulant matrix of order n is meant a square matrix
of the form
C = circ(c1 , c2 , . . . , cn ) =
⎛ ⎞
c1 c2 . . . cn
⎜cn c1 . . . cn−1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
=⎜ . .. . . .. ⎟
⎝ .. . . . ⎠
c2 c3 ... c1
The elements of each row of C are identical to those of the previous row, but are
moved one position to the right and wrapped around. A circulant matrix can be
also written in the form:
C = (cjk ) = (c[k−j+1] ),
where [t] is the least positive remainder of t modulo n. Denote by (m, n) the
greatest common divisors of two integers m and n. We shall use the following
statement:
Proposition 5.7.9.4 Let C = circ(a, a, . . . , a; b, b, . . . , b) be a circulant matrix

of degree m + n, where the first m elements of the first row are a and the last n
elements are b. Then

(ma + nb)(a − b)m+n−1 if (m, n) = 1,
det C =
0 if (m, n) = 1.
3 see [Davis, 1979]
4 see [Davis, 1979], Problem 27, p.81.
Taking this lemma into account there results the following as an immediately
corollary of lemma 5.7.8.
Lemma 5.7.10. Let C be a matrix as in lemma 5.7.8. Then

m if (m, n) = 1,
det C =
0 if (m, n) = 1.
Lemma 5.7.11. If A is a right serial right Artinian ring with a simple module
of finite projective dimension, then A has a simple module of projective dimension
≤ 1.
Proof. If A has a simple projective module, then everything is done. Otherwise

A has a simple module U of finite projective dimension and so it has a finite
projective resolution of the form:
α
0 → ei A −→ ej A → . . . → U → 0
Let Im α = ej Rm . Suppose we have a projective cover of ej Rm−1 :

g
ek A −→ ej Rm−1 → 0
f
then g induces a split epimorphism ek R −→ ej Rm ei A. Since ek R is indecom-
posable, f is an isomorphism. Therefore Uk = ek A/ek R has projective dimension
1.
Lemma 5.7.12. Let A be a right serial right Artinian ring and e = 1 − e1 .

Suppose A has a simple module U1 = e1 A/e1 R with proj.dim U1 ≤ 1. Then the
right global dimension of A is finite if and only if the right global dimension of eAe
is finite, and r.gl.dim A ≤ r.gl.dim eAe + 2.
Proof. First suppose that r.gl.dim eAe is finite and proj.dim U1 ≤ 1. If

proj.dim U1 = 0, we have e1 R = 0. If proj.dim U1 = 1, then e1 R/e1 R2 U1 .
In both cases Ext1 (U1 , U1 ) = 0.
Now let i = 1 and proj.dimeAe eUi = m. In order to verify that proj.dim Ui ≤
m + 2, consider a projective resolution
fm f1 f0
. . . → Pm −→ Pm−1 → . . . → P1 −→ P0 −→ Ui → 0
of Ui , where all Pm are indecomposable projective. Since proj.dim U1 ≤ 1, we have
e1 R ⊕ ei Ami
i=1
Therefore e1 Ae = e1 Re is projective over eAe and so the sequence
. . . → ePm −→ ePm−1 → . . . → eP1 −→ eP0 −→ eUi → 0

is an eAe-projective resolution of the eAe-module eUi . In particular, fm (ePm ) is

projective and nonzero. Since ePm is indecomposable, fm |ePm is a monomorphism.
Set T = soc Pm .
If T U1 , we have 0 = fm (eT ) ⊂ fm (T ), whence fm : Pm → Pm−1 is also a
monomorphism and proj.dim Ui ≤ m.
Let T U1 and L = soc Pm ⊂ Pm . Since Ext1 (U1 , U1 ) = 0, we have that
L/T U1 . From 0 = fm (eL) ⊆ fm (L), it follows that L ⊆ Ker fm and, conse-
quently, Ker fm ⊆ L. From Ker fm = L we conclude further that Ker fm equals
either T or 0. In the latter case we have proj.dim Ui ≤ m as above. In the former
we obtain an exact sequence
fm
. . . → e1 R → e1 A → Pm −→ . . . → P0 → Ui → 0,
which, in view of the projectivity of e1 R, yields proj.dim Ui ≤ m + 2.

Conversely, finiteness of r.gl.dim A implies finiteness of r.gl.dim eAe, since, as
we have already remarked, multiplication of an A-projective resolution of a simple
module Ui (i ≥ 2) by e results in an eAe-projective resolution of eUi .
Lemma 5.7.13. Suppose that the projective dimension of the simple right
A-module U1 = e1 A/e1 R is ≤ 1 and set e = 1 − e1 . Then det C(eAe) = det C(A).
Proof. By hypothesis, e1 R is projective, and, since A is a semiperfect ring,
e1 R = (e2 A)m2 ⊕ . . . ⊕ (en A)mn
with mi ≥ 0.
Denoting the j-th column of the Cartan matrix C of A by
⎛ ⎞
c1j
⎜ ⎟
cj = ⎝ ... ⎠
cnj ,
we obtain ⎛ ⎞
1
⎜0⎟ n
⎜ ⎟
c1 = ⎜ . ⎟ + m j cj .
⎝ .. ⎠ j=2
0
Thus, subtraction of mj times the j-th column from the first column for j =
2, . . . , n yields the matrix
⎛ ⎞
1 c12 · · · c1n
⎜0 c22 · · · c2n ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎝. . . . ⎠
0 cn2 · · · cnn ,
and consequently, ⎛ ⎞
c22 ··· c2n
⎜ .. .. .. ⎟
det C = det ⎝ . . . ⎠
cn2 ··· cnn .
But the latter matrix is the Cartan matrix of eAe.
Theorem 5.7.14. Given a right serial ring A, the determinant of its Cartan
matrix is 1 if and only if its right global dimension is finite. In any case the
determinant is nonnegative.
Proof. We can assume that A is basic and indecomposable.

If r.gl.dim A < ∞, then the combination of lemmas 5.7.11-5.7.13 allows suc-
cessive elimination of primitive idempotents corresponding to simple modules of
projective dimension ≤ 1 until we are left with one idempotent. But, in this situ-
ation, from the finite dimension property of A it follows that A is semisimple, and
hence det C(A) = 1.
Assume that r.gl.dim A = ∞. By induction on the number n of primitive
idempotents, we shall show that either det C(A) = 0 or det C(A) > 1. The case
n = 1 is trivial. For the induction step we may start with n > 1 primitive
idempotents ei , none of which gives rise to a simple module ei A/ei R of projective
dimension ≤ 1 (otherwise lemmas 5.7.12 and 5.7.13 would permit us to discard
one idempotent and invoke the induction hypothesis). Since A is right serial, its
quiver Q(A) can be either a tree with a single end vertex or it contains a cycle
or a loop, by corollary 5.2.3. And in any case each vertex of Q(A) is a start
of at most one arrow, by theorem 5.2.1. If the quiver of A is a tree then any
root vertex corresponds to a projective module of length 1 which is impossible by
induction assumption. Therefore the quiver contains a cycle or loop with vertices
corresponding to idempotents e1 , . . . , ek (k ≥ 1), say. Since the composition series
of e1 A, . . . , ek A contains only the simple modules U1 , . . . , Uk , the Cartan matrix
of A has the block form
C1 X
0 C2 ,
where C1 is a k ×k matrix as treated in lemmas 5.7.8 and 5.7.10. Hence det C1 = 0
or det C1 > 1. Note that C2 is the Cartan matrix of eAe, where e = 1 − e1 −
e2 − . . . − ek . If r.gl.dim eAe < ∞, we have det C2 = 1 by the first part of the
proof; otherwise the induction hypothesis yields that det C2 ≥ 0. In either case,
det C = (det C1 )(det C2 ) is either zero or greater than 1.
Corollary 5.7.15. Let A be an Artin algebra which is left or right serial, and
let C be its right Cartan matrix. Then det C = 1 if and only if gl.dim A < ∞. In
any case det C ≥ 0.
Proof. It is sufficient to note that in this case the left and right Cartan
matrices have the same determinant by proposition 5.7.6. So the right and left
global dimensions are equal.

Most of the results included in section 5.1 were obtained by M.Auslander
[Auslander, 1955].
Left serial algebras were studied in the papers: [Janusz, 1972], [Tachikawa,
1974]. The structure of two-sided Pierce decompositions of left Artinian left gen-
eralized uniserial rings was studied by G.Ivanov in his paper [Ivanov, 1974]
The main results of sections 5.2, 5.3 and 5.4 were obtained by N.Gubareni,
Yu.A.Drozd and V.V.Kirichenko in the paper [Gubareni, 1976]. The results from
section 5.5 are due to M.Khibina [Khibina, 2001].
By means of a slight modification of the statement given by S.Eilenberg in
1954 (see [Eilenberg, 1954]) there follows the main result which says that the
Cartan matrix of an Artinian ring A of finite global dimension must be +1 or −1.
The proof of theorem 5.7.5 in section 5.7 above follows K.R.Fuller [Fuller, 1972].
D. Zacharia has proved in the article [Zacharia, 1983] that if A is an Artinian
algebra of global dimension 2, then the determinant of its Cartan matrix equals
+1. This result is a generalization of previous results of P.Donovan, A.M.Freislich,
and K.Igusa, G.Todorov, and G.Wilson. P.Donovan, A.M.Freislich have shown
that if A = kG is a group algebra of finite representation type then its Cartan
determinant equals +1 (see [Donovan, Freislich, 1974]). G.Wilson has proved the
same result for a finite dimensional algebra of finite representation type over an
algebraically closed field (see [Wilson, 1982]). The same result was proved by
K.Igusa, G.Todorov without making any assumption on the ground field.
The Cartan determinant conjecture asserts that if A is a right Artinian ring
with finite global dimension then the determinant of its right Cartan matrix is
equal to +1. The Cartan determinant conjecture for right Artinian right se-
rial rings was first proved in 1985 by W.D.Burgess, K.R.Fuller, E.R.Voss and
B.Zimmermann-Huisgen in the paper [Burgess, 1985].
S.Singh has studied modules over right serial rings. He proved that for an
Artinian ring A with Jacobson radical R such that A/R is a direct product of
matrix rings over finite-dimensional divisions rings the following statements are
equivalent: 1) A is right serial; 2) every indecomposable injective left A-module is
uniserial (see [Singh, 1997]).
[Auslander, 1955] M.Auslander, On the dimension of modules and algebras, III

(Global dimension), Nagoya Math. J., v.9, 1955, p.67-77.
[Burgess, 1985] W.D.Burgess, K.R.Fuller, E.R.Voss and B.Zimmermann-Huisgen,
The Cartan matrix as an indicator of finite global dimension for Artinian
rings, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., vol. 95, 1985, p.157-165.
[Davis, 1979] P.J.Davis, Circulant matrices, Wiley, New York, 1979.
[Donovan, Freislich, 1974] P.Donovan, A.M.Freislich, Representable functions on

the category of modular representations of a finite group with cyclic Sylow
subgroup, J. Algebra, v.32, 1974, p.356-364.
[Eilenberg, 1954] S.Eilenberg, Algebras of cohomologically finite dimension, Com-
ment. Math. Helv., v.28, 1954, p.310-319.
[Fuller, 1992] K.R.Fuller, The Cartan determinant and global dimension, Con-
temporary Mathematics, vol. 124, 1992, p.51-72.
[Gubareni, 1976] N.M.Gubareni, Yu.A.Drozd and V.V.Kirichenko, Right serial
rings, Preprint-110, Institute of Electricity Dynamics, Academy of Sciences
of Ukraine, Kiev, 1976, 19p. (in Russian).
[Harary, 1969] F.Harary, Graph theory, Addison-Wesley Publ. Company, 1969.
[Harary, 1973] F.Harary, E.P.Palmer, Graphical Enumeration, Academic Press,
New York and London, 1973.
[Ivanov, 1974] G.Ivanov, Left generalized uniserial rings, J. Algebra, vol. 31,
1974, p.166-181.
[Jans, Nakayama, 1957] J.P.Jans and T.Nakayama, On the dimensions of modules
and algebras, VII, Nagoya Math. J., vol. 11, 1957, p.67-76.
[Janusz, 1972] G.Janusz, Some left serial algebras of finite type, J. Algebra, vol.23,
N.2, 1972, p.404-411.
[Khibina, 2001] M.A.Khibina, Right Noetherian right serial semiprime and
semidistributive rings, Izvestia of Gomel University, Voprosy algebry, v.17,
2001, p.110-113 (in Russian).
[Murase, 1963a] I.Murase, On the structure of generalized uniserial rings. I, Sci.
Pap. Coll. Gen. Educ., Univ. Tokyo, v.13, 1963, p.1-13.
[Murase, 1963b] I.Murase, On the structure of generalized uniserial rings. II, Sci.
Pap. Coll. Gen. Educ., Univ. Tokyo, v.13, 1963, p.131-158.
[Murase, 1964] I.Murase, On the structure of generalized uniserial rings. III, Sci.
Pap. Coll. Gen. Educ., Univ. Tokyo, v. 14, 1964, p.11-25.
[Nakayama, 1938] T. Nakayama, Some studies on regular representations, induced
representations and modular representations, Ann. of Math., v.39, 1938,
p.361-369.
[Nakayama, 1941] T.Nakayama, On Frobeniusean algebras II, Ann. Math.,
v.42(1), 1941, p.1-21.
[Singh, 1997] S.Singh, Artinian right serial rings, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., v.125,
No.8, 1997, p.2239-2240.
[Tachikawa, 1974] H.Tachikawa, Balancedness and left serial algebras of finite
type, In Proc. of Intern. Conf. on Representations of Algebras, Carleton
Math. Lecture Notes, N.9, 1974, p.2601-2628.
[Wilson, 1982] G.Wilson, The Preprojective Partition and Poincare-Betti Series
for Finite Dimensional Algebras, Ph. D. dissertation, Brandeis University,
Waltham Mass., 1982.
[Zacharia, 1983] D.Zacharia, On the Cartan Matrix of an Artin Algebra of Global
Dimension Two, J. Algebra, v.82, 1983, p.353-357.
6. Tiled orders over discrete valuation rings
6.1 TILED ORDERS OVER DISCRETE VALUATION RINGS

AND EXPONENT MATRICES
Exponent matrices appear in the theory of tiled orders over a discrete valuation
ring. Many properties of such an order and its quiver are completely determined
by its exponent matrix. We prove that an arbitrary strongly connected simply
laced quiver with a loop in every vertex is realized as the quiver of a reduced
exponent matrix.
Recall that a tiled order over a discrete valuation ring is a Noetherian prime
semiperfect semidistributive ring A with nonzero Jacobson radical. By theorem
5.1.1, vol.I, any tiled order A is of the form
⎛ ⎞
O π α12 O ... π α1n O
⎜ .. ⎟
⎜ α21 .. .. ⎟
⎜π O . . . ⎟
A=⎜
⎜ .
⎟,
⎟ (6.1.1)
⎜ .. .. ..
⎝ . . π αn1 O ⎟
⎠
π αn1 O ... π αn2 O O
where n ≥ 1, O is a discrete valuation ring with a prime element π, and where

the αij are integers such that αij + αjk ≥ αik for all i, j, k, and αii = 0 for any
i = 1, . . . , n.

n
Therefore A = eij π αij O, where the eij are the matrix units. If a tiled
i,j=1
order A is reduced, then αij + αji > 0 for i, j = 1, . . . , n, i = j.
The ring O is embedded into its classical division ring of fractions D, and so
that the tiled order A is the subset of all matrices (aij ) ∈ Mn (D) such that
aij ∈ π αij O = eii Aejj ,
where the e11 , . . . , enn are the matrix units of Mn (D). It is clear that Q = Mn (D)
is the classical ring of fractions of A.
Since eAe = O is a discrete valuation ring for any primitive idempotent e of a
tiled order A, we have the following simple lemma.
255
Lemma 6.1.1. All principal endomorphism rings of a tiled order are

isomorphic.
Throughout this section, unless specifically noted, A denotes a tiled order with
nonzero Jacobson radical R and classical ring of fractions Q.
We now recall the important notions of a band and a semilattice.
Let E be the set of idempotent elements of a semigroup S. For e, f ∈ E we
define e f iff ef = f e = e. In this case we say that e is under f and f is over
e. To see that is a partial ordering of E, let e, f, g ∈ E. Then
(1) e2 = e, and hence e e.
(2) If e f and f e then ef = f e = e and f e = ef = f , whence e = f .
(3) If e f and f g then ef = f e = e and f g = gf = f , whence eg =
(ef )g = e(f g) = ef = e, and ge = g(f e) = (gf )e = f e = e. Hence e g.
We shall call the natural partial ordering of E.
An element b of a partially ordered set X is called an upper bound of a subset
Y of X if y b for every y in Y . An upper bound b of Y is called a least upper
bound (or join) of Y if b c for every upper bound c of Y . If Y has a join in
X, it is clearly unique. Lower bound and greatest lower bound (or meet)
are defined dually. A partially ordered set X is called an upper (resp. lower)
semilattice if every two-element subset {a, b} of X has a join (resp. meet) in X;
it follows that every finite subset of X has a join (or meet). The join (resp. meet)
of {a, b} will be denoted by a ∪ b (resp. a ∩ b). A partially ordered set which is
both an upper and lower semilattice is called a lattice. A lattice X is said to be
complete if every subset of X has a join and a meet.
We recall that a band is a semigroup S in which every element is an idempo-

tent. Thus S = E if S is a band, and so the natural partial ordering (a b if and
only if ab = ba = a) applies to all of S.
Theorem 6.1.2. A commutative band S is a lower semilattice with respect to

the natural partial ordering of S. The meet a ∩ b of two elements a and b of S is
just their product ab. Conversely, a lower semilattice is a commutative band with
respect to the meet operation.
Proof. That is a partial ordering of S (= E) was shown above. We must

show that the product ab (= ba) of two elements a and b of S is in fact the meet
of {a, b}. From (ba)a = ba2 = ba and (ab)b = ab2 = ab, we see that ab a and
ab b. Suppose c a and c b. Then (ab)c = a(bc) = ac = c, and similarly
c(ab) = c, whence c ab.
The converse is evident.
Definition. Let Q be the classical ring of fractions of both rings A and C. If

A ⊂ C, the ring C is called an overring of A.
The following lemma is obvious:

TILED ORDERS OVER DISCRETE VALUATION RINGS 257
Lemma 6.1.3. Let O be a discrete valuation ring and D be its classical ring of
fractions, which is a division ring. Then D is a uniserial right and left O-module.
If X ⊂ D is a right O-module (X = D), then X = π t O = Oπ t .
Corollary 6.1.4. If Δ = D is an overring of O then Δ = O.
Proof. The ring Δ is an O-bimodule. Since Δ = D, we obtain Δ = π t O = Oπ t .

Consider Δ = Δ · Δ = π 2t O = Oπ 2t . By the Nakayama lemma t = 0.
Definition. Let A be a tiled order. A right (left) A-lattice is a right (left)

A-module which is a finitely generated free O-module.
In particular, all finitely generated projective A-modules are A-lattices.

Among all A-lattices we single out the so-called irreducible A-lattices. These
are the A-lattices contained in the simple right (resp. left) Q-module U (resp. V ).
These lattices form a poset Sr (A) (resp. Sl (A)) with respect to inclusion. As was
shown in section 14.5, vol.I, any right (resp. left) irreducible A-lattice M (resp.
N ) lying in U (resp. in V ) is an A-module with O-basis π α1 e1 , . . . , π αn en with

αi + αij ≥ αj , if (α1 , . . . , αn ) ∈ Sr (A)
(6.1.2)
αj + αij ≥ αi , if (α1 , . . . , αn )T ∈ Sl (A).
where the letter T stands for the transposition operation.

Such right (resp. left) modules always exist. For instance for a fixed chosen k
take αi = αki . Then
αi + αij = αki + αij ≥ αkj = αj .
Further if (α1 , . . . , αn ) characterizes an irreducible right A-lattice where A is a

tiled order as in (6.1.1), then
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
π α1 0 ... ... 0 π −α1 0 ... ... 0
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. ⎟ ⎜
.. .. ⎟
..
⎜ 0 πα2 . ⎟ ⎜
. 0 π−α2 . ⎟
.
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. ..⎟ ⎜ .. ..⎟
⎜ .. .. .. ⎟A⎜ .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ . . . . .⎟ ⎜ . . . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. ⎟ ⎜ .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ . . . 0 ⎟ ⎜ . . . 0 ⎟
⎝ ⎠ ⎝ ⎠
0 ... ... 0 π αn 0 ... ... 0 π −αn
is an isomorphic tiled order with all exponents ≥ 0. Thus, if desired, this addi-
tional property can always be assumed.
For our purposes, it suffices to consider a reduced tiled order A. In this case,
the elements of Sr (A) (Sl (A)) are in a bijective correspondence with integer-valued
row vectors a = (α1 , . . . , αn ) (column vectors aT = (α1 , . . . , αn )T ), where a and
aT satisfy the conditions (6.1.2). We shall write M = (α1 , . . . , αn ), if M ∈

Sr (A).
Let b = (β1 , . . . , βn ). The order relation a b in Sr (A) is defined as follows:
a b ⇐⇒ αi ≥ βi for i = 1, . . . , n.
Since A is a semidistributive ring, Sr (A) and Sl (A) are distributive lattices

with respect to addition and intersection.
Proposition 6.1.5. There exists only a finite number of irreducible A-lattices

up to isomorphism.
Proof. Let A = {O, E(A)} be a tiled order with exponent matrix E(A) = (αij ).
Let M = (α1 , . . . , αn ) ∈ Sr (A). Let a = min (α1 , . . . , αn ). Then M1 =
(α1 − a, . . . , αn − a) is an irreducible A-lattice and M1 M . Suppose that αi = a.
Then M1 = (β1 , . . . , βn ), where the β1 , . . . , βn are non-negative and βi = 0. Con-
sequently, every irreducible A-lattice M is isomorphic to a lattice M1 with at least
one zero coordinate. We obtain from (6.1.2) that 0 ≤ βj ≤ αij . So, the number of
irreducible A-lattices of the form M1 is finite. The proposition is proved.
Proposition 6.1.6. All overrings of a tiled order A are tiled orders. They
form a finite lower semilattice.
Proof. Let C ⊇ A be an overring of the tiled order A. If there is k such that

ekk Cekk = D then C = Mn (D). Therefore O ⊆ eii Ceii = D for i = 1, . . . , n and,
by lemma 6.1.3, eii Ceii = O and C is a tiled order. If C1 and C2 are overrings of
A then C1 ∩ C2 is an overring A. So all overrings of A form a lower semilattice
OR(A).
To show that OR(A) is finite take any C ∈ OR(A). Let E(C) = (cij ). Then
every row (ci1 , . . . , 0, . . . , cin ) defines an irreducible A-lattice. By proposition 6.1.5
(or rather a variant of its proof), the number of such rows is finite. Therefore the
semilattice OR(A) is finite. The proposition is proved.
Using the properties of projective covers of finitely generated modules over

semiperfect rings, one can characterize projective modules of the lattice Sr (A)
(resp. Sl (A)) in the following way:
Proposition 6.1.7. An irreducible A-lattice is projective if and only if it

contains exactly one maximal submodule.
Proof. Let M be an irreducible A-lattice and suppose that M contains exactly

one maximal submodule. Then M/M R = U , where U is a simple A-module
and P = P (U ) = P (M ) is an indecomposable principal A-module (where P (M )
stands for is a projective cover of the module M ). Let ϕ : P (M ) → M be the
associated projection. Since M is an A-lattice, Ker ϕ = 0. Therefore, M P (M )
is projective. Conversely, every indecomposable projective A-module (where A is

a tiled order) is an irreducible A-lattice with exactly one maximal submodule.
We denote by Mr (A) (resp. Ml (A)) the partially ordered subset of Sr (A)

(resp. Sl (A)), which is formed by all irreducible projective right (left) A-lattices.
If it is not necessary to distinguish the partially ordered sets (or lattices) formed
by left or right modules, then we shall write them without the indices l and r.
Definition. Let P be an arbitrary poset. A subset of P is called a chain if

any two of its elements are comparable. A subset of P is called an antichain if
no two distinct elements of the subset are comparable. We shall denote a chain of
n elements by CHn and an antichain of n elements by ACHn .
Recall that the maximal number of pairwise incomparable elements in P is
called the width of P and denoted by w(P). Obviously, if w(P) is a finite number
then it is equal to the number of elements in a maximal antichain of P.
We introduce the notion of a strongly dependent subset C of an infinite count-
able poset P of finite width w = w(P).
Definition. A subset C ⊂ P is strongly dependent if for any finite poset

$
k
S ⊂ P there exists a representation S = Li , where L1 , . . . , Lk are pairwise dis-
i=1
joint chains (k ≤ w) such that the intersection S ∩ C is in one of chains L1 , . . . , Lk .
Remark that every strongly dependent set C is a chain. Indeed, let x, y ∈ C

be incomparable. Consider S = {x, y}. Obviously, S ∩ C = S is not a chain.
Theorem 6.1.8 (R.P.Dilworth).1 For a poset P with finite width w(P ) the
minimal number of disjoint chains that together contain all elements of P is equal
to w(P ).
Remark 6.1.1. This theorem holds for any poset P of finite width. Here is
a proof of this theorem for the countable case. To prove this theorem we use the
following lemma.
Lemma 6.1.9. Let P be a countable partially ordered set of finite width w =

w(P ). Suppose there are m disjoint chains that together contain all elements of
P. Then m ≤ w.
Proof (finite case). We use induction on the number of elements of P. The

start of the induction, |P| = 1, is obvious.
Let L be a maximal chain in P. Consider the poset P \ L. Obviously, w(P \ L)
can only be w or w − 1. If w(P \ L) = w − 1, then, by the induction hypothesis,
$
s $
$ w−1
P \ L is a disjoint union of s ≤ w − 1 chains: P \ L = Ci and P = L ( Ci )
i=1 i=1
1 see [Dilworth, 1950]

is a representation of P as a disjoint union of (s + 1) ≤ w chains. Now suppose

that w(P \ L) = w. Let a1 , . . . , aw be an antichain in P \ L, and let c (d) be a
maximal (minimal) element of L.
Define A = {x ∈ P : x ≥ ai for some i = 1, . . . , w} and B = {y ∈ P : y ≤
ai for some i = 1, . . . , w}. Let p ∈ P, then p, a1 , . . . , aw is not an antichain. So,
p ∈ A or p ∈ B and P = A ∪ B. Now |A| < |P| and |B| < |P|. Indeed, if A = P
then d ∈ A and there exists an i such that d ≥ ai . This contradicts the maximality
of L. Analogously, if B = P, then c ∈ B and there exists ai such that c ≤ ai .
Again a contradiction. So, |A| < |P| and |B| < |P|. Obviously, the a1 , . . . , aw
are minimal elements in A and maximal elements in B. By induction, there exist
$
w $w
disjoint chains T1 , . . . , Tw and S1 , . . . , Sw such that A = Ti and B = Si It
i=1 i=1
is possible to number T1 , . . . , Tw and S1 , . . . , Sw in such a way that ai ∈ Ti ∩ Si
for i $= 1, . . . , w. Obviously, Ck = Tk ∪ Sk is a chain for all i = 1, . . . , w and
w
P = k=1 Ck is a disjoint union of w chains.
Proof (infinite countable case). We use induction on w = w(P). The start of

the induction, w(P) = 1, is obvious.
Claim: there exists a maximal strongly dependent set. By assumption, P is
$
∞
a countable set. So, P = {ai }. Denote C0 = {a0 } and let S ⊂ P be finite.
i=0
If S ∩ C0 = ∅, then ∅ ⊂ L, where L is an arbitrary chain. Let S ∩ C0 = a0 and
$k
S= Li . Obviously, a0 ∈ Li for some i. For every k ≥ 0 let Ck+1 = Ck ∪ {ak },
i=1
$
∞
if Ck ∪ {ak } is strongly dependent and Ck+1 = Ck otherwise. Then C = Ci is
i=0
a maximal strongly dependent set.
If w(P \ C) = w − 1, then, according to the induction hypothesis, we can
represent P \ C as a union of the w − 1 disjoint chains
.
w−1
P \C = Ci
i=0
$
w−1
and P = ( Ci ) ∪ C is a union of the w disjoint chains.
i=0
Let w(P \ C) = w and let a1 , . . . , aw be a maximal antichain. Then every
set C ∪ {ai } is not strongly dependent for i = 1, . . . , w. It means that for every
i = 1, . . . , w there exists a finite subset Si ⊂ P such that w(Si ∩ (C ∪ {ai })) = 2.
Consequently, ai ∈ Si for i = 1, . . . , w.
$w
Consider the finite set S = Si . The set S may be presented as a union of w
i=1
$
w
disjoint chains S = Ki by the lemma in the finite case (which has been proved
i−1
above). Renumbering the Ki ’s if needed we can assume that S ∩ C ⊂ K1 . We can
also assume that a1 ∈ K1 . So, w(S ∩ (C ∪ a1 )) = 1 and we have a contradiction.

The lemma is proved.
Proof of theorem 6.1.8. Let m be the minimal number of disjoint chains that
together contain all elements of P , and let w = w(P ). So, there exist pairwise
incomparable elements x1 , . . . , xw . Obviously, any chain cannot contain two of
these elements together. Consequently, m ≥ w.
From lemma 6.1.9 it follows that m ≤ w. Therefore m = w.
Definition. The width of Mr (A) is called the width of a tiled order A

and it is denoted by w(A). Obviously, 1 ≤ w(A) ≤ m, where m is the number of
elements of Mr (A).
Let P be an arbitrary partially ordered set. Then one can construct a new
whose elements are the nonempty subsets of P that consist
partially ordered set P,
of pairwise incomparable elements, including the subsets consisting of only one
element of P. We shall introduce an order in P in the following way. If A, B ∈ P,

then A B in P if and only if for any a ∈ A there exists b ∈ B such that a b
an element a ∈ P is mapped into
in P . The poset P is naturally embedded in P:
the singleton set {a}.
Example 6.1.1.
is the poset of all non-empty subsets of P partially

If P is an antichain then P
ordered by inclusion.
1 2
In particular if P : then
• •
{1, 2}
•
:
P
• •
{1} {2}
;
1 2 3
If P : then
• • •
{1, 2, 3}
•
: {1, 2} {1, 3} {2, 3}

P
• • •
• • •
{1} {2} {3}
Proposition 6.1.10. The set M r (A) is a lattice. There is a natural isomor-

/ /
phism of lattices Mr (A) (resp. Ml (A)) and Sr (A) (resp. Sl (A)), which is the
identity on Mr (A) (resp. Ml (A)).
Proof. Let M ∈ Sr (A). Since M is an irreducible A-lattice, there exists a

projective cover of M :
ϕ
P (M ) −→ M → 0
m
Let P (M ) = Pi , where the Pi are principal modules. The restriction of the
i=1
homomorphism ϕ to Pi is either the zero map or a monomorphism, since Pi is an
irreducible A-lattice. Consequently, any irreducible module M admits a represen-
tation M = P1 + . . . + Pm , where Pi ∈ Mr (A) and Pi ⊂ Pj for i = j. Thus, the
correspondence
Θ : (P1 , . . . , Pm ) → P1 + . . . + Pm
defines an epimorphism of the partially ordered set M /r (A) onto Sr (A). Let M =
P1 + . . . + Pm = Pi1 + . . . + Pit . Then P1 ⊆ Pi1 + . . . + Pit . We may assume that
P1 e11 A, i.e., P1 = (a, α12 + a, . . . , αm + a) for some a ∈ Z.
Obviously, if L1 = (α1 , . . . , αn ) and L2 = (β1 , . . . , βn ) are irreducible A-lattices
from Sr (A) then L1 + L2 = (min (α1 , β1 ), . . . , min (αn , βn )).
(i ) (i )
Let Pik = (a1 k , . . . , an k ). Then
(i )
Pi1 + . . . + Pit = ( min a1 k , . . . , min a(ik)
n ).
1≤k≤t 1≤k≤t
(i ) (i )
From the ordering relation in Sr (A) we obtain that min a1 k ≤ a, i.e., a1 k ≤
1≤k≤t
a for some k. Let Pik eik ik A and Pi1 = (αi1 + b, . . . , αin + b) for some b ∈ Z.
We obtain αij + b ≤ αi1 + α1j + b ≤ α1j + a for j = 1, . . . , n and P1 ⊆ Pik . So

for every j = 1, . . . , m there exists τ (j) ∈ {i1 , . . . , it } and Pj ⊆ Pτ (j) . Therefore
M = P1 + . . . + Pm = Pτ (1) + . . . + Pτ (m) .
If some inclusion Pj ⊆ Pτ (j) is strong, we have M ⊂ M and so M = M , a
contradiction. Therefore we obtain Pj = Pτ (j) and m = t. Consequently Θ is an
injective map.
Moreover, if P1 + . . . + Pm ⊆ Pi1 + . . . + Pit then it follows from the above that
/r (A).
(P1 , . . . , Pm ) (Pi1 , . . . , Pit ) in M
Note that if Θ : L1 → L2 is an isomorphism of partially ordered sets and as
L2 is (of course) a lattice, then L1 is (of course) a lattice as well, and Θ is an
isomorphism of lattices. So the proposition is proved.
Remark 6.1.2. The notions of a lattice and an A-lattice used in this proof are
different; the one is a partially ordered set, the other is a special kind of module.
Note that Mr (A) = Sr (A) if and only if the width of the set Mr (A) is equal
to 1.
Let a tiled order A be reduced. Then αij +αji > 0 for i = j, and the set Mr (A)
can be simply constructed from the matrix (αij ): let pki = (αi1 + k, . . . , αin + k),
where i = 1, . . . , n and k ∈ Z. Suppose pki = plj . This means that αim +k = αjm +l
for m = 1, . . . , n. In particular, αii + k = αji + l, i.e., k = αji + l. Analogously,
αij + k = αjj + l, i.e., l = αij + k. Therefore, k + l = αji + αij + k + l and we obtain
the contradiction: αji + αij = 0. Obviously, the partial ordering on Mr (A) can
be defined as follows: pki plj if and only if αjm + l ≤ αim + k for m = 1, . . . , n.
Therefore, αji + l ≤ k.
Conversely, let αji + l ≤ k. Adding αim to the both sides of this equality we
obtain αji +αim +l ≤ k+αim . But αji +αim ≥ αjm and αji +αim +l ≥ k+αjm +l.
Thus, αjm + l ≤ k + αim , i.e., pki plj .
Analogously, we can construct Ml (A). The element pki is in Ml (A) if pki =
(α1i + k, . . . , αni + k)T and, as above, all elements pki are different and pki plj if
and only if k ≥ l + αij .
Proposition 6.1.11. The sets Ml (A) and Mr (A) are anti-isomorphic.
Proof. We use the correspondence pki → p−k k

i , where pi = (αi1 + k, . . . , αin + k)
−k
and pi = (α1i − k, . . . , αni − k) . Then pi ≤ pj if and only if k ≥ l + αji , and
T k l
p−l
j ≤ pi
−k
if and only if −l ≥ −k + αji . This proves the statement.
Remark 6.1.3. One should note that this anti-isomorphism cannot be ex-
tended to an anti-isomorphism of the lattices Sl (A) and Sr (A), since the anti-
isomorphism of lattices is given by the correspondence:
(α1 , . . . , αn ) → (−α1 , . . . , −αn )T

Proposition 6.1.12. The following properties of a tiled order A are equivalent:

(a) the width of the set Mr (A) does not exceed m;
(b) each right irreducible A-module has not more than m maximal submodules;
(c) for any M ∈ Sr (A) the length of the A/R-module M/M R does not exceed
m, where R is the Jacobson radical of A.
Proof. The equivalence of (a) and (b) follows from the fact that any irreducible
A-lattice M ∈ Sr (A) = M /r (A), is identified with a collection T = {t1 , . . . , tk } of
pairwise incomparable elements of the set M(A), has exactly k maximal submod-
ules identified by the sets T1 , . . . , Tk , where Ti is the union of the sets T \ {ti } with
the set of points strictly less than ti , but not comparable with any point of T \{ti }.
On the other hand, the number k is the number of indecomposable summands of
a projective cover P (M ) of M , which is equal to the length of the module M/M R
and this proves the equivalence of (a) and (c).
Remark 6.1.4. In proposition 6.1.12 right modules can be replaced by left

ones.
We consider now the connection between the semilattice of overrings of a tiled

order A and Sr (A).
Definition. Let M ∈ Sr (A), i.e., M ⊂ U , where U is a simple Q-module. By

the ring of multipliers A(M ) of an irreducible lattice M will be meant the ring
Ar (M ) = {x ∈ Q : M x ⊂ M }, if M is a right module, and Al (M ) = {x ∈ Q :
xM ⊂ M }, if M is a left module.
Obviously, Ar (M ) and Al (M ) are overrings of A. From proposition 6.1.6 it
follows that rings of multipliers are again tiled orders.
Let C be an overring of a tiled order A. Then, obviously, Sr (C) is a sublattice

of the lattice Sr (A).
Proposition 6.1.13. The set of overrings C of a tiled order A is in one-

to-one correspondence with the set of nonempty sublattices of the lattice Sr (A)
which contain along with each module all its isomorphs.
! More precisely, if S1 is a
sublattice of Sr (A), then S1 = Sr (C), where C = Ar (M ).
M∈S1
Proof. Let S1 be a nonempty sublattice of the lattice !

Sr (A), which contains
along with each module all its isomorphs, and let C = Ar (M ). It is clear
M∈S1
that C ⊃ A and Sr (C) ⊃ S1 . Moreover, there exists a finite collection of modules
!
t
M1 , . . . , Mt ∈ S1 , such that C = Ar (Mk ). If Mk = (ak1 , . . . , akn ), then
k=1
E(A(Mk )) = (αkij ), where αkij = akj − aki , and C = (cij ), where cij = max(αkij ).
k
Whence it follows that any module from Mr (C) is the intersection of modules
isomorphic to M1 , . . . , Mt . Since S1 is a lattice, this implies Mr (C) ⊂ S1 , whence

Sr (C) ⊂ S1 , that is, Sr (C) = S1 .
Corollary 6.1.14. The number of maximal overrings of a tiled order A is

equal to the number of its irreducible A-lattices.
Definition. An integer matrix E = (αij ) ∈ Mn (Z) is called
• an exponent matrix if αij + αjk ≥ αik and αii = 0 for all i, j, k;
• a reduced exponent matrix if αij + αji > 0 for all i, j, i = j.
We shall use the following notation: A = {O, E(A)}, where E(A) = (αij ) is the
exponent matrix of the tiled order A, i.e.,

n
A= eij π αij O,
i,j=1
where the eij are the matrix units. If a tiled order is reduced, i.e., A/R is a
direct product of division rings, then αij + αji > 0 if i = j, i.e., E(A) is a reduced
exponent matrix.
Let E = (αij ) be a n × n reduced exponent matrix. Define n × n matrices
"
(1) αij if i = j,
E = (βij ), where βij =
1 if i = j,
and
E (2) = (γij ), where γij = min (βik + βkj ).
1≤k≤n
(2) (1)
Obviously, [Q] = E −E is a (0, 1)-matrix.
The following theorem is the same as theorem 14.7.1, vol.I, where it was proved
using the fact that a tiled order is a prime ring. Here we shall give a direct proof
of this theorem using only the matrix definitions.
Theorem 6.1.15. The matrix [Q] = E (2) − E (1) is the adjacency matrix of
the strongly connected simply laced quiver Q = Q(E).
Proof. Since [Q] is a (0, 1)-matrix, it is the adjacency matrix of a simply laced
quiver.
We shall show that [Q] is a strongly connected quiver. Suppose the contrary.
This means that there is no path from the vertex i to the vertex j in Q for some
i, j. Denote by V Q(i) = V1 a set of all vertices k ∈ Q such that there exists a
path beginning at the vertex i and ending at the vertex k. Then, by assumption,
V2 = V Q\V Q(i) = ∅ (because j ∈ V (Q)\V (Q)(i)). Consequently, V Q = V1 ∪V2
and V1 ∩ V2 = ∅. It is clear, that there are no arrows from V1 to V2 . One can

assume, that V1 = {1, . . . , m} and V2 = {m + 1, . . . , n}. Conjugation with a
diagonal matrix of the form diag(π b1 , . . . , π bn ) gives an isomorphic tiled order
with exponent matrix
αij = αij + bi − bj .
This new tiled order is also reduced if the original one was reduced. This does not
change the matrix [Q] as is easily checked. Thus taking b1 = 0 and bj = α1j it can
be assumed that the exponent matrix E has its first row zero
α1p = 0 p = 1, . . . , n.
It follows that αpq ≥ 0 for p, q = 1, . . . , n, because α1p + αpq ≥ α1q .

By assumption [Q] is of the form
⎛ ⎞
∗ 0
[Q] = ⎝ ⎠.
∗ ∗
Partition E in the same way

⎛ ⎞
E1 ∗
E = ⎝ ⎠,
∗ E2
with, hence, E1 ∈ Mm (Z), E2 ∈ Mn−m (Z). Associate to the matrix E2 a partially

ordered set by defining
i j if and only if αij = 0.
Note that this is transitive because αij + αjk ≥ αik ≥ 0. We can assume that
m + 1 is a minimal element. It follows that
αi,m+1 > 0, i > m + 1.
Indeed, as m + 1 is minimal, either i ≥ m + 1 and so αm+1,i = 0 so that

αi,m+1 > 0 because αi,m+1 + αm+1,i > 0 (as A is reduced), or i and m + 1 are
incomparable which means that both αi,m+1 and αm+1,i are > 0.
Since q1,m+1 , the (1, m + 1)-th entry of [Q], is zero, there is a k such that
0 = q1,m+1 = min(β1,k + βk,m+1 ) − β1,m+1 .

k
This k cannot be 1 or m + 1 because β1,1 = 1 = βm+1,m+1 . Hence there is a

k ∈ {1, . . . , n} \ {1, m + 1} such that
α1,k + αk,m+1 = α1,m+1 .

Also k ≤ m because α1,k = 0 = α1,m+1 while αk,m+1 > 0 for k > m + 1. Thus
there is a k, 2 ≤ k ≤ m + 1 with αk,m+1 = 0. Interchanging the 2-nd and k-
th columns and rows simultaneously we can assume that α2,m+1 = 0. Further
q2,m+1 = 0, and so (arguing as before)
0 = α2,m+1 = αk,m+1 + α2,k
for some k = 2, m + 1. Again k ≤ m is not possible because αk,m+1 > 0 for

k > m + 1. Also k = 1 is not possible as α2,1 + α1,2 > 0 and α1,2 = 0. Thus
3 ≤ k ≤ m and we can assume that k = 3 giving α2,3 = 0 = α3,m+1 . Now use
q3,m+1 = 0 so that
0 = α3,m+1 = αk,m+1 + α3,k
for some k = 3, m + 1 and k ≤ m. Again k = 1 is not possible because α3,1 > 0
and k = 2 is also not possible as α2,3 = 0 so that α3,2 > 0. So 4 ≤ k ≤ m
and we can take k = 4 giving that α4,m+1 = 0 = α3,4 . Continuing this way
α12 = α23 = . . . = αm−1,m = 0, and αk,m+1 = 0, k = 1, . . . , m. Thus the first
superdiagonal of E1 is zero. But 0 ≤ α13 ≤ α12 + α23 and so also α13 = 0 (which
we knew anyway). But quite generally, 0 ≤ αi,i+2 ≤ αi,i+1 + αi+1,i+2 = 0 and so
the second superdiagonal is also zero. Continuing one finds that αk,l = 0 for all
k ≤ l (making the matrix E1 lower triangular). In particular
qm,m+1 = min(βm,k + βk,m+1 ) − βm,m+1 .

k
Now βm,m+1 = αm,m+1 = 0. Further for k ≥ m + 1, βk,m+1 ≥ 1 as αk,m+1 > 0 for

k > m + 1; βm,m = 1 and for k < m βm,k = αm,k > 0 because αm,k + αk,m > 0
and αk. m = 0. Thus qm,m+1 = 1, a contradiction that proves the theorem. (NB.
The argument in the case |V1 | = 1 has to be changed slightly; this is left to the
reader.)
Recall that the quiver of a reduced exponent matrix E is the quiver Q(E)
with adjacency matrix [Q]. A strongly connected simply laced quiver is called
admissible if it is a quiver of a reduced exponent matrix.
A reduced exponent matrix E = (αij ) ∈ Mn (Z) is Gorenstein if there exists
a permutation σ of {1, 2, . . . , n} such that αik + αkσ(i) = αiσ(i) for i, k = 1, . . . , n.
Theorem 6.1.16. An arbitrary strongly connected simply laced quiver Q with

a loop in each vertex is admissible.
Proof. Consider the matrix E = (αij ), where αii = 0 and αij is equal to the
minimum length of a path from the vertex i to the vertex j for i = j. (Note that
a path of minimum length always exists because Q is a strongly connected quiver.
There may be more than one path of minimum length.)
Let us show that E is a reduced exponent matrix. Since the minimum length
of a path from i to k is less than or equal to the minimum length of a path from
i to k which passes through the vertex j, we have αik ≤ αij + αjk . By definition,
αij ≥ 1 if i = j, and so αij + αji > 0.
Let us show that Q(E) = Q. Since αij + αji ≥ 2 for j = i, qii = mink (βik +
βki − βii ≥ 1, and so there exists a loop at each vertex of Q(E). Assume there
exists an arrow from i to j. Then αij = 1. Since αtk ≥ 1 if t = k, there is no
k = i, j such that αik + αkj = 1 = αij . Therefore αik + αkj > αij for all k = i, j,
and
γij − βij = min(βik + βkj ) − βij = min{1, min(αik + αkj − αij )} = 1,

k k
i.e., there exists an arrow from i to j in Q(E).

Assume there is no arrow from i to j in Q. Then a path of minimal length
from i to j passes through a vertex t = i, j. Let
σ1 . . . σu σu+1 . . . σv : i → j
be a path of minimum length from i to j, where
σ1 . . . σu : i → t, σu+1 . . . σv : t → j,
and αij ≥ 2. Then σ1 . . . σu and σu+1 . . . σv are paths of minimum length from i
to t and from t to j, respectively. Hence, αit + αtj = αij . Thus
γij − βij = min(βik + βkj ) − βij = 0,

k
i.e., there is no arrow in Q(E) as well.
Example 6.1.2.
It is easy to see that the quiver Q with the adjacency matrix

1 1
[Q] =
1 0
is not admissible.
Definition. Two exponents matrices E = (αij ) and Θ = (θij ) are called

equivalent if they can be obtained from each other by transformations of the
following two types :
(1) subtracting an integer α from the entries of the l-th row with simultaneous
adding of that integer α to the entries of the l-th column;
(2) simultaneous interchanging of two rows and the same numbered columns.2
Proposition 6.1.17. Suppose E = (αij ), Θ = (θij ) are exponent matrices,

and Θ is obtained from E by a transformation of type (1). Then [Q(E)] = [Q(Θ)].
2 Both these transformations were used in the proof of theorem 6.1.15.
If E is a reduced Gorenstein exponent matrix with a permutation σ(E), then Θ is

also reduced Gorenstein with σ(Θ) = σ(E).
Proof. We have ⎧
⎪
⎪ αij , if i = l, j = l,
⎨
0, if i = l, j = l,
θij =
⎪ αlj − t,
⎪ if i = l, j = l,
⎩
αil + t, if i = l, j = l,
where t is an integer. One can directly check that if αij + αjk = αik for some i, j, k,
then θij + θjk = θik . Since these transformations are invertible, the converse
transformations have a similar form. So the equality θij + θjk = θik implies
αij + αjk = αik . Therefore, θij + θjk = θik if and only if αij + αjk = αik .
Denote Θ(1) = (μij ) and Θ(2) = (νij ).
The equalities γij = βij , νij = μij or inequalities γij > βij , νij > μij hold
simultaneously for the entries of the matrices (βij ) = E1 , (μij ) = Θ(1) , (γij ) = E (2) ,
(νij ) = Θ(2) . Therefore, E (2) − E (1) = Θ(2) − Θ(1) and [Q(E)] = [Q(Θ)].
Suppose that E is a reduced Gorenstein exponent matrix with a permutation
σ(E), i.e., αij + αjσ(i) = αiσ(i) . Whence, θij + θjσ(i) = θiσ(i) . This means that the
matrix Θ is also Gorenstein with the same permutation σ(E).
Let τ be a permutation which determines simultaneous transpositions of rows

and columns of the reduced exponent matrix E under a transformation of type (2).

n
Then θij = ατ (i)τ (j) and Θ = PτT EPτ , where Pτ = eiτ (i) is the permutation
i=1
matrix, and PτT stands for the transposed matrix of Pτ . Since αij + αjσ(i) = αiσ(i)
and αij = θτ −1 (i)τ −1 (j) , we have θτ −1 (i)k + θkτ −1 (σ(i)) = θτ −1 (i)τ −1 (σ(i)) . Hence the
permutation π of Θ satisfies π(τ −1 (i)) = τ −1 (σ(i)) for all i. Whence, π = τ −1 στ .
Since
μij = βτ (i)τ (j) , νij = min(μik + μkj ) = min(βτ (i)l + βlτ (j) ) = γτ (i)τ (j) ,
k l
it follows that,
qij = νij − μij = γτ (i)τ (j) − βτ (i)τ (j) = qτ (i)τ (j) ,
where [Q] = ( of Θ. So we have proved

qij ) is the adjacency matrix of the quiver Q
the following statement.
Proposition 6.1.18. Under transformations of the second type the adjacency

of Q(Θ) is changed according to the formula: [Q]
matrix [Q] = P T [Q]Pτ , where
τ
[Q] = [Q(E)]. If E is Gorenstein, then Θ is also Gorenstein, and for the new
permutation π we have: π = τ −1 στ , i.e., σ(Θ) = τ −1 σ(E)τ .
Note that the type (= conjugacy class) of a permutation is not changed un-
der transformations of the second type. Therefore, in order to describe reduced
Gorenstein exponent matrices, one needs to examine matrices with different types
of permutations. Further, to simplify calculations we can assume that some row
or some column of E is zero. This can always be assured by transformations of
the first type and then the entries of a new exponent matrix will be non-negative
integers (see the proof of theorem 6.1.15).
Indeed, let E = (αij ) ∈ Mn (Z) be an exponent matrix. Subtracting α1i from
the entries of the i-th column and adding this number to the entries of the i-th
row, we obtain a new exponent matrix
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 ... 0
⎜ θ21 0 θ23 . . . θ2n ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ θ31 θ32 0 . . . θ3n ⎟
Θ = ⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎝ . . . . . ⎠
θn1 θn2 θn3 . . . 0
The first row of Θ equals zero. Consequently, θ1i + θij ≥ θ1j = 0 and θij ≥ 0 for
i, j = 1, . . . , n.
6.2 DUALITY IN TILED ORDERS

In this section we shall introduce a duality for tiled orders and study its properties.
Throughout in this section, unless specifically noted, A denotes a tiled order with
nonzero Jacobson radical R and classical ring of fractions Q.
Proposition 6.2.1. Let A be a tiled order with classical ring of fractions Q.

Then Q is a flat and injective two-sided A-module.
Proof. The classical ring of fractions Q is the direct limit of flat submodules
π k A = Aπ k of A, for k ∈ Z (as k → −∞). Thus Q is flat, by proposition 5.4.6,
vol.I.
To prove the injectiveness of Q we use the Baer criterion (see proposition 5.2.4,
vol.I). Let I be a right ideal in A. Since A is a Noetherian ring, I is a finitely
generated ideal. Consider a diagram
i
0 IA AA ,
ϕ
where i is a monomorphism. Since Q is flat, the sequence
i⊗1Q
0 IA ⊗ Q AA ⊗ Q
is exact. Then, by proposition 5.4.11, vol. I, we obtain the following diagram
i
0 I Q,
ϕ

where I IQ and ϕ = ϕ ⊗ 1Q . Since Q = Mn (D) is a simple Artinian ring,

Q is a two-sided injective Q-module. Therefore, by the Baer criterion, there is a
homomorphism ψ : Q → Q such that ϕ = ψi. Restricting i and ϕ
to IA , and ψ to
AA we obtain ϕ = ψi. Thus Q is an injective A-module.
Now consider finitely generated semi-reflexive A-modules.
Proposition 6.2.2. A finitely generated A-module M is semi-reflexive if and

only if M is isomorphic to a submodule of a free A-module of finite rank Am .
Proof. If M ⊂ Am , then M is semi-reflexive, by lemma 4.10.3.

Conversely, let M be a finitely generated semi-reflexive A-module. We shall
write X ∗ = HomA (X, A) for any A-module X. An epimorphism Am → M → 0
induces a monomorphism 0 → M ∗ → (Am )∗ . But A∗ = HomA (A, A) A and
so M ∗ is isomorphic to a submodule of Am . Since A is a Noetherian ring, M ∗
is a finitely generated A-module and therefore there is an exact sequence Ar →
M ∗ → 0. Then 0 → M ∗∗ → Ar is a monomorphism. Since M is semi-reflexive
δM : M → M ∗∗ is a monomorphism. Therefore, M is isomorphic to a submodule
of a free A-module of a finite rank.
Let A be a tiled order of the form (6.1.1). Recall that an A module M is called
an A-lattice if it is a finitely generated free O-module, where O is the discrete
valuation ring of A (see vol.I, p.353). We shall denote by Latr (A) (resp. Latl (A))
the category of right (resp. left) A-lattices.
Proposition 6.2.3. Let A be a tiled order. Then an A-module M is finitely

generated semi-reflexive if and only if M is an A-lattice.

n
n
Proof. Let A = eij π αij O ⊂ eij D = Q = Mn (D). Denote by En
i,j=1 i,j=1

n
the identity matrix of Mn (D). Obviously, En = eii , where the eii are the local
i=1
matrix idempotents of A. Let X = {x ∈ Mn (D) : xeij = eij x for i, j = 1, . . . , n}
and Y = {y ∈ A : yeij = eij y for i, j = 1, . . . , n}. Obviously, X = {dEn }, where
d ∈ D and Y = {αEn }, where α ∈ O. So we can view D as a subring of Mn (D)
and O as a subring of A (where D coincides with X and O coincides with Y ).
Therefore, A is a free O-module of rank n2 , i.e., an A-lattice. By proposition 6.2.2,
an A-module M is finitely generated semi-reflexive if and only if M is an A-lattice.
Obviously, A ⊗O D = Mn (D) = Q and M ⊗A Q = M ⊗A (A ⊗O D) = M ⊗O D,
/ = M ⊗O D is a finite dimensional vector

by proposition 4.5.3, vol.I. In this case M
/, where rankO M = dimD M
space over D and M is a complete right A-lattice in M /.
Proposition 6.2.4. Let
i p
0 L M N 0
be an exact sequence of right A-modules. If L, N ∈ Latr (A) then M ∈ Latr (A) as

well.
Proof. Let m = 0, m ∈ M and mπ t En = 0 for some positive t ∈ Z. Then

p(m)π t En = 0 and p(m) = 0. Therefore m ∈ Ker p = Im i, i.e., m = i(l), where
l ∈ L and mπ t En = i(lπ t En ) = 0. Thus lπ t En = 0. Since L ∈ Latr (A) we obtain
l = 0 and m = 0.
We shall establish now the duality between the category Latr (A) and Latl (A).
Let M ∈ Latr (A) and let M # = HomO (M, O). For any f ∈ M # and a ∈ A we
can define af by the formula (af )(m) = f (ma) where m ∈ M . Then it is easy to
verify that M # is a left A-module.
Since M ∈ Latr (A), it is a free O-module with a finite O-basis e1 , e2 , . . . , en .
As in section 4.10, we can define an O-homomorphism ϕi : M → O by the formula
ϕi (ej ) = δij for i, j = 1, . . . , n, where δij is the Kronecker symbol. Then ϕi ∈ M # .
It is easy to see that M # is a free O-module with O-basis ϕ1 , . . . , ϕn . This O-basis
is called the dual O-basis of M # . Thus, M # ∈ Latl (A). If M ∈ Latl (A), then
M # ∈ Latr (A).
Let ϕ : M → N be a homomorphism of M, N ∈ Latr (A), i.e., ϕ ∈
HomA (M, N ). Then ϕ# : N # → M # can be defined by the formula (ϕ# f )(m) =
f ϕ(m), where f ∈ N # , is a homomorphism from N # to M # , i.e., ϕ# ∈
HomA (N # , M # ). Obviously, if we have homomorphisms ψ : L → M and
ϕ : M → N , then (ϕψ)# = ψ # ϕ# and 1# M = 1M # . Moreover, for any
M ∈ Latr (A) we have M ## = M and for any N ∈ Latl (A) it is true N ## = N .
Besides, for any ϕ : M → N we have ϕ## = ϕ. It is also obvious that
(M ⊕ N )# = M # ⊕ N # .
Proposition 6.2.5. Let L be a submodule of M and L, M/L ∈ Latr (A). Let

p : M → M/L be the natural projection. Then M ∈ Latr (A) and M has the
following O-basis: e1 , . . . , es , p−1 (n1 ), . . . , p−1 (nt ), where e1 , . . . , es is a O-basis of
L and n1 , . . . , nt is a O-basis of M/L.
Proof. By proposition 6.2.4, M ∈ Latr (A). Denote N = M/L. Let e1 α1 +

. . . + es αs + p−1 (n1 )β1 + . . . + p−1 (nt )βt = 0. Then e1 α1 + . . . + es αs + p−1 (n1 β1 +
. . . + nt βt ) = 0. Obviously, p(e1 α1 + . . . + es αs + p−1 (n1 β1 + . . . + nt βt )) =
n1 β1 + . . . + nt βt = 0. Thus β1 = . . . = βt = 0 and e1 α1 + . . . + es αs = 0.
We obtain α1 = . . . = αs . Let m ∈ M . Then p(m) = n1 β1 + . . . + nt βt and
m − p−1 (n1 β1 + . . . + nt βt ) ∈ Ker p. We obtain m − p−1 (n1 β1 + . . . + nt βt ) =
e1 α1 + . . . + es αs and m = e1 α1 + . . . + es αs + p−1 (n1 )β1 + . . . + p−1 (nt )βt . The

proposition is proved.
Proposition 6.2.6. Let L, M, N = M/L be as in the previous proposition.

Let
p
0 L M N 0
be the corresponding exact sequence. Then there is a dual O-basis
ϕ1 , . . . , ϕs , p# Θ1 , . . . , p# Θt of M # , where ϕ1 , . . . , ϕs is a dual O-basis of L# and
Θ1 , . . . , Θt is a dual basis of N # .
Proof. By proposition 6.2.5, M has an O-basis e1 , . . . , es ,

p−1 (n1 ), . . . , p−1 (nt ), where e1 , . . . , es is an O-basis of L and n1 , . . . , nt is an
O-basis of N . It is now easy to see that ϕ1 , . . . , ϕs , p# Θ1 , . . . , p# Θt is a dual
O-basis to the O-basis e1 , . . . , es , p−1 (n1 ), . . . , p−1 (ns ). By definition, ϕi (ej ) = δij
for i, j = 1, . . . , s. Consider p# Θi (p−1 (nj )) = Θi p(p−1 (nj )) = Θi (nj ) = δij for
i, j = 1, . . . , t.
Corollary 6.2.7. Let

p
0 L M M 0
be an exact sequence as above. Then the sequence
p#
0 N# M# L# 0
is exact.
Corollary 6.2.8. Ext1A (N, A A# ) = 0 for any N ∈ Latr (A).
Proof. Let
0 # 0
AA M N
be an exact sequence. By corollary 6.2.7, we obtain that
0 N# M# AA 0
is an exact sequence of left A-lattices. Then from the projectivity of A A we have

M # A ⊕ N # . Therefore M ## = M A A ⊕ N , i.e., Ext1A (N, A A# ) = 0.
It is simple to establish the duality of irreducible and duality of completely

decomposable A-lattices. n
Let M ∈ Sr (A) and M = i=1 ei π O.
αi
If ϕ1 , . . . , ϕn is the dual O-
−α1 −αn
basis for e1 , . . . , en , then π ϕ1 , . . . , π ϕn is the dual O-basis for the O-
basis e1 π α1 , . . . , en π αn . Consequently, if M = (α1 , . . . , αn ), then M # =
(−α1 , . . . , −αn ). Using the same formula for N = (β1 , . . . , βn )T , we obtain

N # = (−β1 , . . . , −βn ). It is easy to see that
(M1 + M2 )# = M1# ∩ M2# and (M1 ∩ M2 )# = M1# + M2#
for any M1 , M2 ∈ Sr (A). Further, if M1 ⊂ M2 are two irreducible A-lattices then

M2# ⊂ M1# . (In this case the lattice M2 is called an overmodule of M1 ).
Definition. An A-lattice M is said to be relatively injective if M A P # ,

where A P is a finitely generated projective left A-module.
Definition. An A-lattice M is called completely decomposable if it is a

direct sum of irreducible A-lattices.
Corollary 6.2.9. A relatively injective A-lattice M is completely decomposable

and any relatively injective indecomposable M has the following form: M =A P # ,
where A P is an indecomposable projective left A-module.
Proof. A tiled order

n
A= eij π αij O
i,j=1
is a completely decomposable right A-lattice
AA = e11 A ⊕ . . . ⊕ enn A
and also a completely decomposable left A-lattice
AA = Ae11 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Aenn .
Every finite generated left projective A-module A P has the following form: AP =
(Ae11 )m1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ (Aenn )mn . Obviously, A P ∈ Latl (A) and
#
AP = (Ae11 )#m1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ (Aenn )#mn .
So, A P # is a completely decomposable right A-lattice. In particular, M is inde-

composable if and only if M = (Aeii )# for some i = 1, . . . , n. The corollary is
proved.
In what follows we assume that the tiled order A is reduced. In this case E(A)
is reduced, i.e., αij + αji > 0 for i = j. An A-lattice N ⊂ Mn (D) is said to be
2
complete if N (OO )n as a right O-module. If a complete A-lattice N is a left
A-module then eii N ejj ⊂ N . So eii N ejj = π γij O and

n
N = eij π γij O.
i,j=1
Note that N is a right and left A-module if and only if γij + αik ≥ γik and
αik +γkj ≥ γij for all i, j, k. In this case the matrix (γij ) is said to be the exponent
matrix of the A-lattice N and we write it as E(N ). Complete A-lattices which
are left A-modules are said to be fractional ideals of the order A. Denote by Δ
the completely decomposable lattice A# A.
Lemma 6.2.10. A completely decomposable left A-lattice Δ is a complete right

A-lattice, and ⎛ ⎞
0 −α21 . . . −αn1
⎜ −α12 0 . . . −αn2 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
E(Δ) = ⎜ .. .. . .. ⎟.
⎝ . . . . . ⎠
−α1n −α2n . . . 0
Proof. Let us show that the k-th row (−α1k , −α2k , . . . , −αnk ) of the matrix
E(Δ) defines an irreducible right A-lattice. Write βi = −αik . We can rewrite the
inequality αij + αjk ≥ αik in the form −αik + αij ≥ −αjk , i.e., βi + αij ≥ βj ,
which implies the assertion of the lemma.
Corollary 6.2.11. A fractional ideal Δ is a relatively injective right and a

relatively injective left A-lattice.
Proof. The proof follows from the relation A A# = AA .
Let A be a reduced tiled order and R = radA. Then

⎛ ⎞
1 α12 . . . α1n
⎜ α21 1 . . . α2n ⎟
⎜ ⎟
E(R) = ⎜ . . .. .. ⎟
⎝ .. .. . . ⎠
αn1 αn2 . . . 1
and ⎛ ⎞
−1 −α21 . . . −αn1
⎜ −α12 −1 . . . −αn2 ⎟
# ⎜ ⎟
E(A R# ) = E(RA ) = ⎜ . .. .. .. ⎟
⎝ .. . . . ⎠
−α1n −α2n ... −1
# #
Write X = AR , Δ = (AA ) .
Lemma 6.2.12. For i = 1, . . . , n we have that eii X (Xeii ) is the unique

minimal overmodule of eii Δ (Δeii ) and eii X/eii Δ = Ui , Xeii /Δeii = Vi , where
Ui is a simple right A-module and Vi is a simple left A-module.
Proof. The proof for the left case follows from the fact that eii R is the only
maximal submodule of eii A and from the duality properties and the annihilation
lemma. The proof for the right case is just the same.
Note once more, that the eii Δ (Δeii ) are all indecomposable relatively right
(left) injective A-lattices (up to isomorphism) and the eii X (Xeii ) are unique
minimal overmodules of eii Δ (Δeii ). Moreover, the notions of indecomposable
relatively injective A-lattice and irreducible relatively injective A-lattice coincide.
Let A1 and A2 be Morita equivalent tiled orders. Then the relatively injective
indecomposable A1 -lattices correspond to relatively injective indecomposable A2 -
lattices. Thus, from lemma 6.2.12 there follows the following lemma
Lemma 6.2.13. Every relatively injective irreducible A-lattice Q has only one
minimal overmodule. Let Q1 and Q2 be relatively injective irreducible A-lattices,
and let X1 ⊃ Q1 and X2 ⊃ Q2 be the unique minimal overmodules of Q1 and Q2 ,
respectively. Then the simple A-modules X1 /Q1 and X2 /Q2 are isomorphic if and
only if Q1 Q2 .
The dual statement to proposition 6.1.7 is the following proposition, the proof
of which can be simply obtained from duality properties:
Proposition 6.2.14. An irreducible A-lattice is relatively injective if and only

if it has exactly one minimal overmodule.
The following proposition states some interesting fact about the injective di-
mension of the lattice A A# .
Proposition 6.2.15. Let A be a tiled order. Then inj.dimA (A A# ) = 1.
Proof. Let I be a right ideal of A. Consider the exact sequence 0 → I →

A → A/I → 0. We shall show that Ext2A (A/I, A A# ) = 0. Indeed, by proposition
5.1.10(2), we obtain Ext2A (A/I, A A# ) = Ext1A (I, A A# ). But Ext1A (I, A A# ) = 0,
by corollary 6.2.8. Consequently, inj.dimA (A A# ) ≤ 1. Since inj.dimA (A A# ) = 0,
we obtain that inj.dimA (A A# ) = 1, as required.
Consider the quotient module Q1 = Mn (D)/A A# . We have an exact sequence

0 → A A# → Q0 = Mn (D) → Q1 → 0. By corollary 6.2.17, we obtain that
Q1 is an injective A-module. Assume that the tiled order A is reduced. Then
by lemma 6.2.12 the injective hulls of the simple A-modules U1 , . . . , Us may be
written in the following form: E(Ui ) = eii Mn (D)/eii Δ, where the eii are the
matrix idempotents, i = 1, 2, . . . , n.
6.3 TILED ORDERS AND FROBENIUS RINGS

In this section we shall construct a countable set of pairwise non-isomorphic Frobe-
nius quotient rings with identity Nakayama permutation for any reduced tiled
order over a given discrete valuation ring. In particular, for any finite poset
P = (p1 , . . . , pn ), we shall construct Frobenius rings Fm (P), all different, such
that the quivers Q(Fm (P)) of all the rings Fm (P) coincide. Denote by Pmax
the set of all maximal elements of P, and denote by Pmin the set of all minimal
elements of P, and denote by Pmax × Pmin their Cartesian product.

To state the relationship between the quiver Q(Fm (P)) of one of these rings
and the poset P we recall the definition of the diagram of a poset P.
The diagram of a poset P = (p1 , . . . , pn ) is the quiver Q(P) with as set of
vertices V Q(P) = {1, . . . , n} and the set of arrows AQ(P) is given by: there is
an arrow from a vertex i to a vertex j if and only if pi ≺ pj , and moreover, if
pi pk pj then either k = i or k = j.
The quiver Q(Fm (P)) is obtained from the diagram of Q(P) by adding arrows
σij for any (pi , pj ) ∈ Pmax × Pmin (see theorem 14.6.3, vol. I).
Therefore, if P is a totally ordered set of n elements, then Q(Fm (P)) is a simple
cycle Cn , and hence all rings Fm (P) are serial in this case.
For any finite poset P = {p1 , . . . , pn } we can construct a reduced tiled (0, 1)-
order A(P) by setting
E(A(P)) = (αij ),
where αij = 0 ⇐⇒ pi pj and αij = 1, otherwise.
Then A(P) = {O, E(A(P))} is a reduced (0, 1)-order (see vol.I, §14.6).
Theorem 6.3.1. For any finite poset P there is a countable set of Frobe-
nius rings Fm (P) with identity Nakayama permutation such that Q(Fm (P)) =
Q(A(P)).
Proof. Denote A = A(P), R = radA, and X = A R# . Let Δ = A# A be the

fractional ideal, as above. Then there exists a least positive integer t such that
π t Δ ⊂ R2 . It is clear that J = π t Δ is a two-sided ideal of the (0, 1)-order A(P).
Write
Fm (P) = A(P)/π m J.
Since π m J ⊂ R2 , it follows that Q(Fm (P)) = Q(A(P)). The description of the
quiver Q(A(P)) is given by theorem 14.6.3, vol.I. The Artinian ring Fm (P) is a
Frobenius ring. Indeed, we have the following chain of inclusions:
A ⊃ R ⊃ R2 ⊃ π m+t X ⊃ π m J.
Every indecomposable projective Fm (P)-module is of the form P̄i =

eii A/eii π m J. Therefore, top P̄i = Ui , and from lemma 6.2.12 it follows that
soc P̄i = eii π m+t X/eii π m+t Δ = Ui for i = 1, . . . , n.
The same relation holds for the left modules. Therefore, the Nakayama permuta-
tion of the ring Fm (P) is the identity permutation.
Theorem 6.3.2. For every reduced tiled order A over a discrete valuation
ring, there is a countable set of Frobenius rings Fm (A) with identity Nakayama
permutation such that Q(Fm (A)) = Q(A).
Proof. For the fractional ideal Δ, there is the least positive integer t such that
π t Δ ⊂ R2 . Then the quotient ring Q(Fm (A)) = A/π m+t Δ is a Frobenius ring
with identity Nakayama permutation.
Example 6.3.1.
Let k be a field, O = k[[x]] and π = x. Let

O O
A = ,
πα O O
where α ≥ 2. Obviously,

0 0 1 1
E(A) = and [Q(A)] = .
α 0 1 1
In this case
0 −α
E(Δ) = .
0 0
We have
2 1
E(R2 ) = .
α+1 2
Consequently, t = α + 1 and

α+1 1
E(π α+1
Δ) =
α+1 α+1
and the quotient ring Fm (A) = A/π m+t Δ is a Frobenius ring with the identity
Nakayama permutation.
Note that
m+α+1 m+1
E(π m+t Δ) = .
m+α+1 m+α+1
Let k be a finite field with q elements. Then Fm (A) is a finite Frobenius ring
and |Fm (A)| = q 4m+3α+4 .
Theorem 6.3.3. For any permutation σ ∈ Sn there exists a countable set of

Frobenius semidistributive algebras Am such that ν(Am ) = σ.
Proof. Indeed, let O be a discrete valuation ring with unique maximal ideal
M, and let ⎛ ⎞
O M ... ... M
⎜ .. .. .. ⎟
⎜M . . . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. ⎟
Kn (O) = ⎜ ... ..
.
..
.
..
. . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ . .. .. ⎟
⎝ .. . . M⎠
M ... ... M O
be a tiled order.
Let σ : i → σ(i) be a permutation of {1, . . . , n} and let Im = (Mwij ) be

the two-sided ideal of Kn (O), where wiσ(i) = m + 1, wij = m for j = σ(i)
(i, j = 1, . . . , n).
It is easy to see that Fm (O) = Kn (O)/Im is a Frobenius ring with Nakayama
permutation σ.
Let O = k[[t]] be the ring of formal power series over a field k, then
Fm (k[[t]]) = Kn (k[[t]])/Im is a countable set of Frobenius semidistributive al-
gebras Am = Fm (k[[t]]) such that ν(Am ) = σ. If k is finite, then all the algebras
Am are finite.
Remark 6.3.1. Recall that QF -algebras with identity Nakayama permuta-

tion are called weakly symmetric algebras. If for O we take the ring of formal
power series k[[t]] over a field k, then we obtain a countable series of weakly
symmetric algebras for every reduced tiled order over k[[t]].
6.4 Q-EQUIVALENT PARTIALLY ORDERED SETS

To any finite poset P = {1, . . . , n}, as before, assign a reduced (0, 1)-matrix
EP = (aij ) in the following way: aij = 0 ⇔ i j, and otherwise aij = 1. Then
A(P) = {O, EP } is a reduced (0, 1)-order.
The original poset P and the [Q]-matrix of the exponent matrix EP have
a great deal to do with one another. Recall that the diagram of P is the
quiver Q(P) which has an arrow i → j if and only if i ≺ j and there is no
k ∈ P such that i ≺ k ≺ j; see the beginning of section 6.3 above. Let

Q(P) (the “extended diagram” of P) be obtained from Q(P) by adding an ar-
row i → j to each pair (i, j) such that i is maximal in P and j is minimal
in P.
For example, if P is the two component poset
4 • • 5
• 3 •
1
2 •

then Q(P) is
4 • • 5
• 3 •
1
2 •
Such extended diagrams have played a role before, see theorem 14.6.3, vol.I.
There is now the following relation between Q(P) and the “[Q]-matrix” of
the exponent matrix EP . Let (pij ) be the adjacency matrix of Q(P) and (qij ) =
[Q(EP )], then pij = qij , i, j = 1, . . . , n.
The proof of this is a rather simple matter of checking various cases, as follows.
There are 4 cases: i = j, i ≺ j, j ≺ i, i and j are incomparable. Let EP = (αij ),
where
0 if i j
αij =
1 otherwise
Then
qij = min(βik + βkj ) − βij
k
where
1 if i = j
βij =
αij j
if i =
Note that for all i, j always βii + βij − βij = βii = 1 and βik + βkj ≥ βij so
that 0 ≤ qij ≤ 1. Also, always βij + βjj − βij = βjj = 1. So to calculate qij it only
remains to deal with the k ∈ {i, j}.
Case 1: i = j. There are two subcases.
Case 1.1: i = j and i is not comparable to any other element of P so that {i}
is a one-element component of P. Then i is both maximal and minimal and there

is a loop at i in Q(P). Thus pii = 1. On the other hand, βii + βii − βii = βii = 1
and for all k = i (if any) βik + βki − βii = 1 + 1 − 1 = 1 because k and i are
incomparable. Thus qii = 1.
Case 1.2: i = j and i is comparable to some k = i. Then 1 = αik + αki =
βik + βki . And so βik + βki − βii = 0 and qii = 0. On the other hand, pii = 0
because i is not maximal and of course not i ≺ i.
Case 2: i ≺ j, so that αij = 0. There are again two subcases.
Case 2.1: i ≺ j and there is no k such that i ≺ k ≺ j, i.e. j covers i. Then
pij = 1. On the other hand, αij = 0. Note that always βii + βij − βij = 1,
βij + βjj − βij = 1 so that to calculate qij it remains to look at the k ∈ {i, j}. For
the location of k vis à vis i and j there are 4 subsubcases.
i ≺ k and k ≺ j. This is not possible under case 2.1.
i ≺ k and not (k ≺ j). Then βik + βkj − βij = αik + βkj − αij = 0 + 1 − 0 = 1.
not (i ≺ k) and k ≺ j. Then βik + βkj − βij = αik + αkj − αij = 1 + 0 − 0 = 1.

not (i ≺ k) and not k ≺ j. Then βik +βkj −βij = αik +αkj −αij = 1+1−0 = 2.
Thus qij = 1.
Case 2.2. There is a k such that i ≺ k ≺ j. Then pij = 0 and for this particular
k, βik + βkj − βij = αik + αkj − αij = 0 + 0 − 0 = 0, so that also qij = 0.
Case 3: j ≺ i. In this case always αij = 1. There three subcases.
Case 3.1: i is maximal and j is minimal. Then pij = 1. On the other hand, for
k = i, j it cannot be that i ≺ k or k ≺ j (because i is maximal and j is minimal).
So for all k = {i, j}, αik = 1, αkj = 1. Also not (i ≺ j) so that αij = 1. Thus
βik + βkj − βij = αik + αkj − αij = 1 + 1 − 1 = 1, and qij = 1.
Case 3.2: i is not maximal. Then pij = 0. On the other hand, there is a
k i. And so, for this particular k, αik = 0, αkj = 1 and so βik + βkj − βij =
αik + αkj − αij = 0 + 1 − 1 = 0, and so qij = 0.
Case 3.3: j is not minimal. Then pij = 0. On the other hand, there is a k ≺ j.
So for this particular k, i j k so that αik = 1, αkj = 0, αij = 1 and so
βik + βkj − βij = αik + αkj − αij = 1 + 0 − 1 = 0, and qij = 0.
Case 4: i and j are incomparable. Then αij = 1. There again three subcases.
Case 4.1: i is maximal and j is minimal. Then pij = 1. Let k ∈ {i, j}. As
always it suffices to look at these k. As i is maximal it cannot be that i ≺ k and
so αik = 1. Also as j is minimal it cannot be that k ≺ j and so αkj = 1. Thus
βik + βkj − βij = 1 + 1 − 1 = 1 for all k, and qij = 1.
Case 4.2: i is not maximal. Then pij = 0. As i is not maximal there is a k i
and so for this particular k, αik = 0. Also αkj = 1 because otherwise we would have
i ≺ k j which would make i and j comparable. Thus αik +αkj −αij = 0+1−1 = 0
for this particular k, so that qij = 0.
Case 4.3: j is not minimal. Then there is a k ≺ j and so αkj = 0. But it
cannot be that i k because then i k j making i and j comparable. Thus
αik = 1 and αik + αkj − αij = 1 + 0 − 1 = 0 for this particular k and qij = 0.

This concludes the proof that the adjacency matrix of Q(P) is equal to [Q(EP )].
Definition. Two finite partially ordered sets S and T are called Q-equivalent
if the reduced exponent (0, 1)-matrices ES and ET are equivalent (meaning that
ET can be obtained from ES by repeated use of the transformations (1) and (2) in
the definition just above proposition 6.1.17 above).
Example 6.4.1. The following posets are Q-equivalent:

4 2 3
• • •
S = 2 • • 3 and T = • 1
• •
1 4
Obviously,
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1
⎜1 0 1 0⎟ ⎜1 0 1 1⎟
ES = ⎜
⎝1
⎟ and ET = ⎜ ⎟.
1 0 0⎠ ⎝1 1 0 1⎠
1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
1 2 • • 3
•
1 •

Q(S) = 2 • • 3 )=
Q(T
• •
4 4
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 1
⎜1 0 0 0⎟
⎜
[Q(S)] = ⎝ ⎟ = [Q(ES )]
1 0 0 0⎠
0 1 1 0
⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 0
⎜0 0 0 1⎟
)] = ⎜
[Q(T ⎟ = [Q(ET )]
⎝0 0 0 1⎠
1 0 0 0
Note that the two adjacency matrices go into one another by a simultaneous
interchange of the first row and fourth row and first column and fourth column,

making Q(S) ) isomorphic quivers.
and Q(T
The matrix ET is obtained from ES by subtracting 1 from the last row of ES
with simultaneous adding 1 to the last column.
A finite poset with a connected diagram will be called connected.
Proposition 6.4.1. For any two posets S and T , if the exponent matrices ES
and ET are equivalent then Q(ES ) and Q(ET ) are isomorphic.
The proof follows from propositions 6.1.17 and 6.1.18.
Theorem 6.4.2. Two finite connected posets P1 and P2 are Q-equivalent if

and only if these$posets are either isomorphic
$ or there exist partitions of these
posets P1 = P1 P1 and P2 = P2 P2 such that each element of P1 is not
greater then any element from P1 , and each element of P2 is not greater then any
element from P2 , and P1 P2 , P1 P2 .
Example 6.4.2.
The following two posets satisfy the conditions of theorem 6.4.2.
(a) (b)
• • • •
• • • • •
• • • •
• • • • •
Both posets contain the partially ordered subsets
• •
• • •
and
• •
• •
and moreover in these posets each element of the one subset is not greater than
any element of the other subset.
Proof of theorem 6.4.2. Let P1 and P2 be finite numbered connected Q-

equivalent posets. Then Q(P 1 ) Q(P
2 ). Here Q(P i ) is the quiver with adjacency
matrix [Q(EPi )], see the definition just above theorem 6.1.15. Renumber the el-
ements of the set P2 (a renumbering of the vertices of a quiver does not affect
the quiver) in such a way that Q(P 1 ) = Q(P 2 ) (inclusive the numbering). Let
1 )] = [Q(P
P1 = {α1 , α2 , ..., αn }, P2 = {γ1 , γ2 , ..., γn } and [Q(P 2 )] = (qij ) (where

[Q(Pi )] is the adjacency matrix of Q(Pi ).
If qij = 0, then the element αj does not cover the element αi and either αi
isn’t maximal or αj isn’t minimal (or both); and the element γj does not cover
the element γi and either γi isn’t maximal or γj isn’t minimal (or both).
If qij = 1, then either the element αj covers the element αi or αi is maximal
and αj is minimal; and either the element γj covers the element γi or γi is maximal
and γj is minimal.
Assume that Q(P1 ) = Q(P2 ). Then (because Q(P 1 ) = Q(P
2 )) there exist an i
and j such that αj covers αi , but γi is maximal and γj is minimal (or vice versa).
Let αj = αj1 cover the elements αi = αi1 , . . . , αis . Then γj = γj1 is a
minimal element, and γi1 , . . . , γis are maximal elements, moreover, there are no
other maximal elements in the poset P2 . Indeed, if there was a maximal element
γi0 ∈ {γi1 , . . . , γis } in P2 there would be an arrow from γj0 to γj in Q(P 2 ) and
hence an arrow from αi0 to αj in Q(P 1 ). But this would mean that αj covers αi0 .
Therefore αi0 ∈ {αi1 , . . . , αis }, this is a contradiction.
If P2 min = {γj1 , ..., γjr }, then all the αj1 , ..., αjr cover every element of
{αi1 , . . . , αis }.
Let P1 max = {αp1 , ..., αpm }, P1 min = {αl1 , ..., αlt }, P2 max = {γi1 , ..., γis }.
Then, if αp = αpv ∈ P1 max and αl = αlu ∈ P1 min , then γlu covers γpv .
Denote P1 = {αq ∈ P1 : αq > αi1 }, P1 = P1 \P1 ; P2 = {γq ∈ P2 : γq >
αp1 }, P2 = P2 \P2 .
Then Q(P1 ) = Q(P2 ) and Q(P1 ) = Q(P2 ). Indeed, since in each set
P1 , P2 , P1 , P2 there are no simultaneously elements of P1 max and P1 min ; P2 max

and P2 min , from the equality qij = 1 for, e.g., αi , αj ∈ P1 , it follows that αj covers
αi and γj covers γi , where γi , γj ∈ P2 .
Conversely, let the connected posets$P1 and P2 be either$isomorphic or there
exist partitions of these sets P1 = P1 P1 and P2 = P2 P2 such that each
element of P1 is not greater than any element of P1 , each element of P2 is not
greater than any element of P2 , and P1 P2 , P1 P2 . If P1 P2 then,
obviously, E(P1 ) ∼ E(P2 ) (renumbering of elements of the poset P2 corresponds
to the second type equivalent transformations of the matrix E(P2 )). If P1 P2
and there exists a suitable partition then

E(P1 ) U E(P2 ) U
E(P1 ) = , E(P2 ) = ,
0 E(P1 ) 0 E(P2 )
where U is a matrix with all entries equal to 1, E(P1 ) = E(P2 ), E(P1 ) = E(P2 )
(therefore P1 P2 , P1 P2 ).
Matrices E(P1 ) and E(P2 ) are equivalent. Really, at first, by means of trans-
formations of the second type from the matrix E(P2 ) we obtain a matrix

E(P 2 ) 0
E(P 2 ) = ,
U E(P 2 )

where E(P 2 ) = E(P2 ) = E(P1 ), E(P 2 ) = E(P2 ) = E(P1 ). Then, by means of
equivalent transformations of the first type from the matrix E(P 2 ) we obtain the
matrix E(P1 ). Thus, the posets P1 and P2 are Q-equivalent. The theorem is
proved.
In the proof of this theorem, we have also proved the following proposition.
Proposition 6.4.3. For finite connected posets S and T , if Q(ES ) and Q(ET )
are isomorphic, then ES and ET are equivalent.
Theorem 6.4.4. Two finite non-connected posets P and S are Q-equivalent

if and only if the diagrams Q(P) and Q(S) are isomorphic.
$
Proof. $ Let P and S be two$non-connected Q-equivalent $ posets, P = P1 P2 ,
S = S1 S2 , Q(P) = Q(P1 ) Q(P2 ), Q(S) = Q(S1 ) Q(S2 ) and, besides, be-
tween Q(P1 ) and Q(P2 ), and between Q(S1 ) and Q(S2 ) there are no arrows. As
the sets P and S are Q-equivalent, by proposition 6.4.1 the quivers Q(P) and

Q(S) are isomorphic. Let ϕ : Q(P) → Q(S) be an isomorphism of quivers. Let
P1 max = {αi1 , ..., αim }, P1 min = {αj1 , ..., αjs }, P2 max = {αk1 , ..., αkt }, P2 min =
{αl1 , ..., αlr }. From each vertex αiv of the set P1 max as well as from each vertex
αku of the set P2 max , in the quiver Q(P) arrows go to each vertex αjp of the set
P1 min as well as to each vertex αlq of the set P2 min . Then from each vertex ϕ(αiv )
of the set ϕ(P1 max ) and from each vertex ϕ(αku ) of the set ϕ(P2 max ) (resp. in
the quiver Q(S), arrows go to each vertex ϕ(αjp ) of the set ϕ(P1 min ) and to each
vertex ϕ(αlq ) of the set ϕ(P2 min )).
Suppose that ϕ(αiv ) does not belong to the set Smax . Then
ϕ(αj1 ), ..., ϕ(αjs ), ϕ(αl1 ), ..., ϕ(αlr ) ∈
/ Smin and ϕ(αi1 ), ..., ϕ(αim ),
ϕ(αk1 ), ..., ϕ(αkt ) ∈ / Smax . There are arrows in Q(S) from each of
the ϕ(αi1 ), ..., ϕ(αim ); ϕ(αk1 ), ..., ϕ(αkt ) to each of the ϕ(αj1 ), ..., ϕ(αjs );
ϕ(αl1 ), ..., ϕ(αlr ). As none of the ϕ(αiv ), v = 1, . . . , m; ϕ(αkw ), w = 1, . . . , t is
maximal these arrows must be in Q(S) itself. Thus the ϕ(αjv ), ϕ(αkw ), ϕ(αjx ),
ϕ(αly ) form a connected subquiver T of Q(S).
Now suppose that there are no minimal elements in S among the
ϕ(αi1 ), ..., ϕ(αim ). Take any α ∈ P1 that is neither maximal nor minimal (if
any). Then there is a path α → . . . → αik for some ik . This gives a path
ϕ(α) → ϕ(αn1 ) → · · · → ϕ(αna ) → ϕ(αik ) (∗)

in Q(S). Now the ϕ(αni ), i = 1, . . . , a are visibly nonminimal and ϕ(αik ) is
nonminimal by hypothesis, so all the arrows of (*) are in fact in Q(S) itself. So
ϕ(α) is connected to T for every α ∈ P1 . Similarly if there is no minimal element
among the ϕ(αk1 ), ..., ϕ(αkt ) every ϕ(α) for α ∈ P2 is connected to T . Thus if
there is no minimal in S among {ϕ(αi1 ), ..., ϕ(αim )} ∪{ϕ(αk1 ), ..., ϕ(αkt )} S would
be connected contrary to the hypothesis in the statement of the theorem.
Thus there is a minimal element in S among the
S (1) = {ϕ(αi1 ), ..., ϕ(αim )}; S (2) = {ϕ(αk1 ), ..., ϕ(αkt )}.
In the same there is a maximal element in S among the
S (3) = {ϕ(αj1 ), ..., ϕ(αjs )}; S (4) = {ϕ(αl1 ), ..., ϕ(αlr )}.
There are 4 cases to consider.

Case 1. There is a minimal element from S in S (1) , say ϕ(αib ), and a maximal
element from S in S (4) , say ϕ(αlc ). Then there is an arrow from ϕ(αlc ) to ϕ(αib )

in Q(S) and hence an arrow αlc → αib in Q(P) which cannot be because αlc is
minimal and αib is maximal and αlc = αib (being from P2 and P1 respectively.
Case 2. There is a minimal element from S in S (1) , say ϕ(αib ), and a maximal
element from S in S (3) , say ϕ(αjc ). Then there is an arrow from ϕ(αjc ) to ϕ(αib ).

So there is an arrow αjc → αib in Q(P). But αib is maximal and αjc is minimal.
So this is only possible if αjc = αib and we have a loop at αjc and {αjc } and
{ϕ(αjc )} are one-element components of P and S. Let α be a maximal element

of P \ {αib }. Then in Q(P) there is an arrow α → αib . So there is also an arrow

ϕ(α) → ϕ(αib ) in Q(S). This arrow cannot be in Q(S) because {ϕ(αib } is a one
vertex component of S. Thus ϕ(α) → ϕ(αib ) is in Q(S) \ Q(S) which can only
be the case if ϕ(α) is maximal. This holds for all maximal α contradicting the
hypothesis that there is an αiv such that ϕ(αiv ) is not maximal.
Case 3. There is a minimal element from S in S (2) and a maximal element
from S in S (3) . This is, mutatis mutandi, treated just as case 1.
Case 4. There is a minimal element from S in S (2) and a maximal element
from S in S (4) . This is, mutatis mutandi, treated just as case 2.
Thus all possible cases lead to a contradiction under the assumption that there
is a αiv with ϕ(αiv ) nonmaximal. In the same way the assumption that there is a
αku such that ϕ(αiv ) is nonminimal leads to a contradiction.
Thus ϕ(Pmax ) ⊂ Smax . In a quite similar way one proves that ϕ(Pmin ) ⊂ Smin .
Working with ϕ−1 instead of ϕ gives ϕ−1 (Smax ) ⊂ Pmax , ϕ−1 (Smin ) ⊂ Pmin . And
so ϕ(Pmax ) = Smax , ϕ(Pmin ) = Smin .

Since the quivers Q(P)
and Q(S) are isomorphic, and maximal and minimal
elements, under the isomorphism, are mapped into maximal and minimal elements,

it follows that the restriction of the isomorphism ϕ : Q(P)
→ Q(S) to Q(P) gives
an isomorphism Q(P) → Q(S).
Conversely, if the diagrams Q(P) and Q(S) are isomorphic then the exponent
matrices EP and ES are equivalent, i.e., the posets P and S are Q-equivalent. The
theorem is proved.
The diagram Q(P) of a finite poset P is the union of its connected compo-
nents Q(P1 ), . . . , Q(Ps ). The subsets P1 , . . . , Ps will be called the connected
components of the poset P.
Theorem 6.4.5. Let P = P1 ∪ · · · ∪ Pn and S = S1 ∪ · · · ∪ Sm be partitions

of two finite disconnected posets into connected components. The posets P and S
are Q-equivalent if and only if m = n and there exists a permutation θ ∈ Sn such

that Pi and Sθ(i) are isomorphic for all i = 1, . . . , n.
The proof of this theorem follows from theorem 6.4.4.
Theorem 6.4.6. For finite posets S and T the following conditions are
equivalent:
(a) Q(ES ) and Q(ET ) are isomorphic;
(b) ES and ET are equivalent.
Proof. (b) ⇒ (a) follows from proposition 6.4.1.

(a) ⇒ (b) follows from theorem 6.4.4 and theorem 14.6.3, vol.I.
6.5 INDICES OF TILED ORDERS

We recall some facts concerning the relations between square matrices and quivers.
Let B = (bij ) be an arbitrary real square n × n-matrix, i.e., B ∈ Mn (R).
Using B one can construct a simply laced quiver Q(B) in the following way: the
set of vertices V Q(B) of Q(B) is {1, . . . , n}. The set of arrows AQ(B) is defined
as follows: there is an arrow from i to j if and only if bij = 0.
Let τ be a permutation of the set {1, 2, . . . , n} and let

n
Pτ = eiτ (i)
i=1
be the corresponding permutation matrix, where the eij are the matrix units.
Clearly, PτT Pτ = Pτ PτT = En is the identity matrix of Mn (R). In particular,
⎛ ⎞
0 0 ... 0 1
⎜ 0 0 ... 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
Dn = ⎜ . . . . . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 1 ... 0 0 ⎠
1 0 ... 0 0

1 2 ... n − 1 n
is a Pσ , where σ = , and DnT = Dn .
n n − 1 ... 2 1
Recall that a matrix B ∈ Mn (R) is called permutationally reducible if
there exists a permutation matrix Pτ such that

B1 B12
PτT BPτ = ,
0 B2
where B1 and B2 are square matrices of order less that n. Otherwise, the matrix
B is called permutationally irreducible.
From the equality

(1)
B1 B12 B1 0
Dn Dn = (2)
0 B2 B21 B2
it follows that B is permutationally reducible if and only if there exists a permu-

tation matrix Pν such that

(1)
T B1 0
Pν BPν = (2) ,
B21 B2
(1) (2)
where B1 and B2 are square matrices of order less that n.
By theorem 11.3.2, vol.I, a matrix B is permutationally irreducible if and only

if the simply laced quiver Q(B) is strongly connected.
Recall that a matrix A = (aij ) ∈ Mn (R) is called positive if aij > 0 for
i, j = 1, . . . , n. If all aij ≥ 0, A is called non-negative.
In 1907 O.Perron found a remarkable property of the spectra (i.e., characteristic

values and characteristic vectors) of positive matrices.
Theorem 6.5.1 (O.Perron).3 A positive matrix A = (aij ) (i, j = 1, . . . , n)

always has a real and positive characteristic value r which is a simple root of the
characteristic equation and which is larger that the absolute values of all other
characteristic values. To this maximal characteristic value r there corresponds a
characteristic vector z = (z1 , z2 , . . . , zn ) of A with positive coordinates zi > 0
(i = 1, . . . , n).
A positive matrix is a special case of an permutationally irreducible non-

negative matrix. G.Frobenius generalized the Perron theorem by investigating
the spectral properties of permutationally irreducible non-negative matrices.
Theorem 6.5.2 (Frobenius).4 A permutationally irreducible non-negative

matrix A = (aij ) i, j = 1, . . . , n always has a positive characteristic value r which
is a simple root of the characteristic equation. The absolute values of all the other
characteristic values do not exceed r. To the maximal characteristic value r there
corresponds a characteristic vector with positive coordinates.
Moreover, if A has h characteristic values λ0 = r, λ1 , . . . , λh−1 of absolute value
r, then these numbers are all distinct and are roots of the equation
λh − rh = 0. (6.5.1)
3 see [Perron, 1907].
4 see [Frobenius, 1912]
More generally: The whole spectrum λ0 , λ1 , . . . , λh−1 of A, regarded as a system

of points in the complex λ-plane, goes over into itself under a rotation of the plane
by the angle 2π/h. If h > 1, then, by means of a permutation, A can be brought
into the following block cyclic form:
⎛ ⎞
0 A12 0 ... ... 0
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ 0 . A23 . . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ . . . . ⎟
⎜ . . ⎟
A=⎜ ⎟, (6.5.2)
⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ . . . . 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. ⎟
⎜ 0 ... ... 0 . Ah−1,h ⎟
⎝ ⎠
Ah1 0 ... ... 0 0
where there are square blocks along the main diagonal.
Remark 6.5.1. Let

n
si = aij (i = 1, 2, . . . , n), s = min si , S = max si .
1≤i≤n 1≤i≤n
j=1
Then for a permutationally irreducible matrix A ≥ 0
s ≤ r ≤ S,
and the equality sign on the left or the right of r holds for s = S only; i.e., they
hold only when all the row-sums s1 , s2 , . . . , sn are all equal.
Remark 6.5.2. A permutationally irreducible matrix A ≥ 0 cannot have two

linearly independent non-negative characteristic vectors.
Theorem 6.5.3. A non-negative matrix A = (aij ) (i, j = 1, . . . , n) always has

a non-negative characteristic value r such that the moduli (= absolute values) of
all the characteristic values of A do not exceed r. To this maximal characteristic
value r there corresponds a non-negative characteristic vector
Ay = ry (y ≥ 0, y = 0).
Let A be a semiperfect ring with Jacobson radical R. Suppose that the quotient
ring A/R2 is right Artinian. In this case the quiver Q(A) of the ring A is defined.
Write [Q(A)] = (tij ) for the adjacency matrix of Q(A). Recall that tij is the
number of arrows between i and j, where V Q(A) = {1, . . . , n}.
By theorem 6.5.3, there exists a non-negative characteristic value r such that
the moduli of all the characteristic values of A do not exceed r.
Definition. The maximal characteristic value r of [Q(A)] is called the index

of the ring A. We shall denote this number by inx A.
Let A ≥ 0 be a permutationally irreducible matrix. If A has only one eigen-

value of module r (h = 1), then A is called primitive, otherwise A is called
imprimitive.
In the following two remarks it is supposed that all rings are semiperfect and
that their quotient rings by the square of the Jacobson radical are right Artinian.
Remark 6.5.3. If a ring A1 is Morita equivalent to a ring A2 then inx A1 =

inx A2 .
Remark 6.5.4. If A = A1 × A2 is a direct product of two rings A1 and A2

then inx A = max(inx A1 , inx A2 ).
Theorem 6.5.5. Let A be a Noetherian semiprime and semiperfect ring then

A is semisimple Artinian if and only if inx A = 0.
Proof. If A is a semisimple Artinian then Q(A) = {•, •, . . . , •} and [Q(A)]=0.

So, inx A = 0. Conversely, by remark 6.5.4, we can assume that A is an inde-
composable ring. By theorem 14.6.1, vol.I, Q(A) is strongly connected. If Q(A)
contains an arrow, then, by remark 6.5.1, inx A ≥ 1.
Therefore, Q(A) does not contain an arrow and [Q(A)] = 0 and Q(A) = {•},
by theorem 11.1.9, vol.I. We obtain A Mn (D), by theorem 11.6.9 vol.I. The
theorem is proved.
Let B be a semiperfect ring with Jacobson radical J = rad B. Denote by

Hn (B) the following ring:
⎛ ⎞
B B ... ... B
⎜ .. ⎟
⎜J B . B⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. ⎟
Hn (B) = ⎜ ... ..
.
..
.
..
. .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜. .. .. ⎟
⎝ .. . . B⎠
J ... ... J B
Let Rn be a Jacobson radical of Hn (B). Obviously,
⎛ ⎞
⎛ ⎞ J J B ... ... B
J B ... ... B ⎜ .. ⎟
⎜ .. .. ..
.. .. ⎟ ⎜J . . . .⎟
⎜J J . .⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ .. .. .. .. .. .⎟
⎜ .. ⎟ , ⎜ . .. ⎟
Rn = ⎜ ... .. .. ..
. . . .⎟
2
Rn = ⎜ . . . . ⎟,
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ . .. .. .. ⎟
⎜. .. .. ⎟ ⎜ .. . . . B⎟
⎝ .. . . B⎠ ⎜ ⎟
⎝J J ... ... J J⎠
J ... ... J J
J2 J ... ... J J
⎛ ⎞
0 B/J 0 ... ... 0
⎜ .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ 0 0 . . . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ . . . . . . ⎟
and Rn /Rn = ⎜
2
⎜ ..
⎟.
⎟ (6.5.3)
⎜ .. .. ..
⎜ . . . . 0 ⎟ ⎟
⎜ .. ⎟
⎝ 0 ... ... . 0 B/J ⎠
J/J 2 0 ... ... 0 0
Consider the following two chains of inclusions:
(i) B ⊃ J ⊃ J 2;
(ii) Hn (B) ⊃ Rn ⊃ Rn2 .

It follows from (6.5.3) that (i) has a composition series if and only if (ii) does.
Consequently, the quiver Q(B) is defined if and only if Q(Hn (B)) is defined.
Denote by [Q(B)] the adjacency matrix of Q(B). Then (6.5.3) implies
⎛ ⎞
0 Em 0 ... ... 0
⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ 0 . . . . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ . . . . . ⎟
[Q(Hn (B))] = ⎜ . ⎟, (6.5.4)
⎜ . .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ .. . . . 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 0 ... 0 Em ⎠
[Q(B)] 0 ... ... 0 0
where Em stands for the identity m × m matrix.
Proposition 6.5.5. For any Noetherian semiperfect ring A:

√
n
inx Hn (A) = inx A
Proof. The proof follows from (6.5.4). Indeed, in this case we have
χ[Q(Hn (B)] (x) = det(xn E − [Q(B)]), where χM (x) is the characteristic polyno-
mial of a square matrix M .
Example 6.5.1.
Let ⎛ ⎞
1 ... 1
⎜ ⎟
Un = ⎝ ... . . . ... ⎠
1 ... 1
be the square n × n-matrix all of whose entries are 1, and let En ∈ Mn (R) be the
identity matrix.
Let Kn (O) be the following tiled order: Kn (O) = {O, E(Kn (O))}, where
E(Kn (O)) = Un − En . Obviously, the corresponding matrix (βij ) = Un and √
so [Q(Kn (O))] = Un and inx Kn (O) = n. If n → ∞ then inx Hn (Kn (O)) = n n
goes to 1.
Theorem 6.5.6. Let A be an indecomposable semiprime and semiperfect

Noetherian ring. Then inx A = 1 if and only if A is Morita-equivalent to a ring
Hn (O), where O is a discrete valuation ring.
Proof. We can assume that A is reduced. Suppose that inx A = 1 and in the
i-th row of [Q(A)] there are two elements 1. By theorem 14.6.1, vol.I, Q(A) is
strongly connected and, by remark 6.5.1, inx A > 1. So in each row of A there
is only one 1. The matrices [Q(A)]T and [Q(A)] are permutationally irreducible
simultaneously and their maximal real eigenvalues coincide. Consequently, in each
column of A there is only one 1. Thus [Q(A)] = Pσ for some σ ∈ Sn . From the
indecomposability of A and theorem 11.1.9, vol.I, σ is a cycle. By corollary 12.3.7
and theorem 12.3.8, vol.I, A is Morita-equivalent to Hn (O). It is obvious that
inx O equals 1 for a discrete valuation ring O. It follows from proposition 6.5.6
that inx Hn (O) = 1. The theorem is proved.
Theorem 6.5.7. Let A be a tiled order and suppose Q(A) contains n vertices.
then 1 ≤ inx A ≤ n and for any integer k (1 ≤ k ≤ n) there exists a tiled order Ak
with inx Ak = k.
Proof. Recall that [Q(A)] is a (0, 1)-matrix. Therefore the inequalities

1 ≤ inx A ≤ n follows from remark 6.5.1. We know that inx Hn (O) = 1 and
inx Kn (O) = n. Let σ ∈ Sn and σ = (12 . . . n) be a cyclic permutation. Let
Dk = En + Pσ + . . . + Pσk−1 , where 2 ≤ k ≤ n − 1 and let Qk be the quiver with
adjacency matrix Dk . By theorem 6.1.16 the quiver Qk is admissible. So there
exists a tiled order Ak with quiver Qk . Obviously, inx [Qk ] = inx Dk = k. The
theorem is proved.
6.6 FINITE MARKOV CHAINS AND REDUCED EXPONENT MATRICES

Recall some notions from the theory of Markov chains (see, e.g. [Kemeny, Snell,
1960]).
Let there be n possible states of a certain system
S 1 , S 2 , . . . , Sn (6.6.1)
and a sequence of instants
t 0 , t1 , t2 , . . . .
Suppose that at each of these instants the system is in one and only one of the
states (6.6.1) and that pij denotes the probability of finding the system in the state
Sj at the instant tk if it is known that at the preceding instant tk−1 the system
was in the state Si (i, j = 1, 2, . . . , n; k = 1, 2, . . .). If the transition probabilities
pij (i, j = 1, 2, . . . , n) do not depend on the index k (of the instant tk ), then the
process is called a homogeneous Markov chain with a finite number of states.
The matrix
P = (pij ) ∈ Mn (R)
is called the transition matrix for the Markov chain. From the above assump-
tions it is obvious that

n
pij ≥ 0, and pij = 1 (i, j = 1, 2, . . . , n). (6.6.2)
j=1
Definition. A square n × n-matrix P = (pij ) ∈ Mn (R) is called (row)

stochastic if P is non-negative and the sum of the elements of each row of P is
1, i.e., if the relations (6.6.2) hold.
Thus, every stochastic matrix can be regarded as the transition matrix for a
finite (homogeneous) Markov chain and, conversely, the transition matrix for such
a Markov chain is stochastic.
Definition. Let P = (pij ) ∈ Mn (R) be the transition matrix for a Markov

chain M Cn . The quiver Q(M Cn ) of the Markov chain M Cn is the quiver
Q(P ) of its transition matrix P .
Obviously, Q(M Cn ) is a simply laced quiver.

The following definitions are in [Kemeny, Snell, 1960]). A Markov chain is
called ergodic, if its transition matrix is permutationaly irreducible. An ergodic
Markov chain M Cn is called regular if its transition matrix is primitive, otherwise
M Cn is called cyclic.
Definition. A stochastic matrix P = (pij ) ∈ Mn (R) is called doubly

n
stochastic if it also satisfies pkj = 1 for j = 1, . . . , n.
k=1
Proposition 6.6.1. Let S be a doubly stochastic matrix. Then the quiver

Q(S) is a disjoint union of strongly connected quivers.
Proof. Let S ∈ Mn (R) be a doubly stochastic matrix. Suppose that the quiver
Q(S) is connected but non-strongly
connected.
Then there exists a permutation
T S1 X
matrix Pτ such that Pτ SPτ = .
0 S2
The matrix PτT SPτ is also doubly stochastic as a product of the doubly stochas-
tic matrices. Therefore S1T and S2 are stochastic matrices (or because, obviously,
if S is doubly stochastic so are SP and P S for any permutation matrix P ).
Let S1 ∈ Mm (R) and S2 ∈ Mn−m (R), and m ≥ 1. Denote by Σ(Y ) the
sum of all elements of an arbitrary matrix Y ∈ Mn (R). Obviously, Σ(PτT SPτ ) =
Σ(S1 ) + Σ(S2 ) + Σ(X). For any stochastic matrix S ∈ Mn (R), the equality
Σ(S) = Σ(S T ) = n holds. This sum does not change under a simultaneous
transposition of rows and columns. Hence, Σ(PτT SPτ ) = n. Clearly, S1T and
S2 are stochastic matrices. Consequently, n = m + n − m + Σ(X). Whence,
Σ(X) = 0 and X = 0. Thus, the doubly stochastic matrix S is permutationally
decomposable. This completes the proof.
Definition. A finite homogeneous Markov chain with transition matrix P

is called ergodic if the quiver Q(P ) is strongly connected. This fits with the
definition given on the previous page.
Let Q be a quiver with adjacency matrix [Q] = (qij ). We shall refer to the
eigenvectors (resp. eigenvalues) of [Q] as the eigenvectors (resp. eigenvalues) of
the quiver Q. If Q is strongly connected, then the index of Q (written inx Q) is
the maximal real eigenvalue of [Q]; its eigenvector
f = (f1 , . . . , fn )T
is called its Frobenius vector. The numeration of Q is called standard if f1 ≥

f2 ≥ . . . ≥ fn
Definition. A quiver Q with V Q = ∅ is called Frobenius if it has a positive

right eigenvector.
Theorem 6.6.2.5 For any Frobenius quiver Q there exists a stochastic matrix
P such that Q(P ) = Q.
Proof. Suppose [Q] has a positive eigenvector z = (z1 , z2 , . . . , zn ) > 0. This

means that zi > 0 for i = 1, . . . , n.
Let λ be the eigenvalue corresponding to the eigenvector z , i.e.,
[Q]z = λz (6.6.3)

We shall show that λ > 0. Since V Q = ∅, [Q] is a nonzero non-negative matrix.
Hence, on the left hand side of (6.6.3) we have a nonzero positive vector, and the
vector on its right hand side has nonzero coordinates. Consequently, λz > 0 and
λ > 0. Consider the diagonal matrix Z = diag (z1 , z2 , . . . , zn ). Then the matrix
n
P = (pij ) = λ−1 Z −1 [Q]Z is stochastic. Indeed, we have qij zj = λzi and
j=1
5 Compare this with [Gantmakher, 1960], Ch.13, §6 and [Kostrikin, 2000]


n
n
pij = λ−1 zi−1 qij zj = λ−1 zi−1 λzi = 1. Obviously, [Q(P )] = [Q].
j=1 j=1
The Markov chain with this stochastic matrix is called the Markov chain of the
Frobenius quiver Q.
It follows from the Perron-Frobenius theorem6 and corollary 11.3.3, vol.I that
every strongly connected quiver is Frobenius.
Example 6.6.1.
Let
0 1
P = .
0 1
Then
Q(P ) = • •
1 2
is a Frobenius quiver.
Example 6.6.2.
⎛ ⎞ ⎡ ⎤
1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0
⎜ 0 1/2 1/2 0 ⎟ ⎢ 0 1 1 0 ⎥
Let P = ⎜⎝ 0 1/2
⎟. Then [Q(P )] = ⎢
⎠ ⎣
⎥.
1/2 0 0 1 1 0 ⎦
1/4 1/4 1/4 1/4 1 1 1 1
Obviously, χ[Q(P )] = x(x − 1)2 (x − 2) and we have
⎛ ⎞⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0 0 0
⎜0 1 1 0⎟ ⎜1⎟ ⎜1⎟
⎜ ⎟⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝0 1 1 0⎠ ⎝1⎠ = 2 ⎝1⎠ .
1 1 1 1 2 2
Consequently, the quiver of a Markov chain is not necessarily Frobenius.
Recall some facts from section 11.3, vol.I. An arrow σ : i → j of an acyclic

quiver Q is called extra if there exists also a path from i to j of length greater
then 1.
Let Q∗ be the condensation7 of a quiver Q. If we delete from Q∗ all extra
arrows, then, by proposition 11.3.7, vol.I, we obtain the diagram of a finite partially
ordered set, which shall be denoted by S(Q). In particular, with any matrix
B ∈ Mn (R) we associate the finite poset S(B) = S(Q(B)).
Definition. Let M Cn be a finite Markov chain. The partially ordered set

SQ(M Cn ) is called the associated poset of M Cn . In particular, if M Cn is
ergodic, then SQ(M Cn ) contains only one element.
6 See also [Gantmakher, 1960], Ch.13, §2

7 See Volume I, Page 277.
6.7 FINITE PARTIALLY ORDERED SETS, (0, 1)-ORDERS AND FINITE

MARKOV CHAINS
Recall that a tiled order Λ = {O, E(Λ)} is called a (0,1)-order if E(Λ) is a
(0,1)-matrix (see vol.I, section 14.6).
Definition. The index (written inx P) of a finite partially ordered set P is

the maximal real eigenvalue of the adjacency matrix of Q(P).
Thus, inx P = inx Λ(P).

In this case Q(P) = Q(EP ), where EP is a reduced exponent matrix, corre-
sponding to P (see section 6.4). By theorem 6.1.15 the quiver Q(EP ) is strongly
connected.
Definition. A finite partially ordered set P is called regular if the adjacency

matrix [Q(EP )] of Q(EP ) is primitive, otherwise P is cyclic.
Definition. We say that two finite posets S = {s1 , . . . , sn } and T =

{t1 , . . . , tn } are Q-equivalent if Q(S) ).
Q(T
This agrees with the definition in section 6.4 above as shown there.
Example 6.7.1.
The index of a finite linearly ordered set CHn is 1.
Example 6.7.2.
Let
" #
1 2 3 ... n−1 n
ACHn =
• • • ... • •

be an antichain of width n. Clearly, Q(ACH n ) is a complete simply laced quiver
with n vertices. Thus inxACHn = n.
Example 6.7.3.
Let Pm,n = (m, m, . . . , m) be a primitive poset formed by n linearly
√ ordered
disjoint sets each of length m. It is easy to verify that inx Pm,n = m n.
Example 6.7.4.
Consider ⎧ ⎫
⎪ • •⎪
⎨ ⎬
P4 = .
⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭
• •
Denote by ⎛ ⎞
1 ... 1
⎜ .. .. .⎟
Un = ⎝ . . .. ⎠
1 ... 1
the square n × n-matrix whose all entries are 1. Obviously, the adjacency matrix
4 ) is
Q(P
0 U2
[Q(P4 )] =
U2 0
and inx P4 = 2
Example 6.7.5.
Let
⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪ 1 3 5 2n − 3 2n − 1 ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ • • • ... • • ⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎨ ⎪
⎬
P2n = .
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ • • • ... • • ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭
2 4 6 2n − 2 2n
Obviously,
⎡ ⎤
0 U2 0 ... ... 0
⎢ .. .. ⎥
⎢ 0 0 U2 . . ⎥
⎢ ⎥
⎢ .. .. .. .. .. .. ⎥
2n )] = ⎢
[Q(P ⎢ . . . . . . ⎥
⎥
⎢ .. .. .. .. ⎥
⎢ . . . 0 ⎥
⎢ . ⎥
⎣ 0 ... 0 U2 ⎦
U2 0 ... ... 0 0
and inx P2n = 2.
Example 6.7.6.
Let
2 3
• •
N: (6.7.1)
• •
4 1
be a partially ordered set with 4 elements. Obviously,
⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 0
⎜1 0 0 1⎟
[Q(EN )] = ⎜
⎝1
⎟
0 0 1⎠
0 1 0 0
and
χB (x) = x2 (x2 − 3).
√
So inx (N ) = 3 and the Frobenius eigenvector is
√ √
f = (2, 3, 3, 1)T .
The√ numeration (6.7.1) of N is standard with Frobenius eigenvector
√
(2, 3, 3, 1)T . The transition matrix TN of the Markov chain associated with
N is
⎛ ⎞⎛ ⎞⎛ ⎞
1/2 0√ 0 0 0 1 1 0 2 √0 0 0
√ ⎜ 0 1/ 3 0√ 0⎟ ⎜ ⎟⎜ 3 √0 0⎟
TN = 1/ 3 ⎜ ⎟ ⎜1 0 0 1⎟ ⎜0 ⎟=
⎝ 0 0 1/ 3 0⎠ ⎝1 0 0 1⎠ ⎝0 0 3 0⎠
0 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 0 1
⎛ ⎞
0 1/2 1/2 0
⎜2/3 0 0 1/3⎟
=⎜⎝2/3 0
⎟.
0 1/3⎠
0 1 0 0
Evidently, TN defines an ergodic cyclic Markov chain. So, the poset N is cyclic.
The numeration of N :
4 3 (6.7.2)
• •
• •
2 1
is nonstandard and this is in accordance with the Frobenius theorem (see, [Gant-
makher, 1998], Section XIII, § 2).

Indeed, let EN be an exponent matrix of N corresponding the numeration
(6.7.2). We have ⎛ ⎞
0 0 1 1
⎜0 0 0 1⎟
[Q(EN )] = ⎜

⎝1
⎟
1 0 0⎠
1 1 0 0
and √ the √Frobenius eigenvector corresponding the numeration (6.7.2) is
(2, 1, 3, 3)T . So, the numeration (6.7.2) is not standard.
Below there is the list of indexes and Frobenius vectors of posets with at most
four elements.
Remark 6.7.1. Obviously, inx CHn = 1 and inx ACHn = n. The vector
(1, . . . , 1)T is the Frobenius vector of CHn and ACHn .
I. (1) = { • }, inx (I, 1) = 1.

" #
•
II. (1) = , inx (II, 1) = 1; (2) = { • • }, inx (II, 2) = 2.
•
⎧ ⎫
⎪ •
⎨ ⎪ ⎬
III. (1) = • , inx (III, 1) = 1;
⎩ ⎪
⎪ ⎭
•
⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪ 3 ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ • ⎪
⎬
(2) = ,
⎪
⎪ • •⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭
1 2
⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪ 1 2⎪⎪
⎪
⎨• •⎪⎬ √
(3) = , inx (III, 2) = inx (III, 3) = 2; f(III, 2) =
⎪
⎪ • ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭
3
√ T
f(III, 3) = (1, 1, 2) ;
⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪ 3⎪ ⎪
⎪ √
⎨ •⎪ ⎬ 1+ 5
(4) = , inx (III, 4) = ; (5) = { • • • }, inx (III, 5) = 3;
⎪
⎪ • • ⎪
⎪ 2
⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭
1 √2
5−1 T
f(III, 4) = (1, , 1) .
2
⎧ ⎫
⎧ ⎫ ⎪
⎪ 4 ⎪
⎪
⎪ •⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪ ⎪
⎪ • ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨•⎪⎬ ⎪
⎨ ⎪
⎬
IV. (1) = , inx (IV, 1) = 1; (2) = 2 • • 3 , inx (IV, 2) =
⎪
⎪ •⎪⎪ ⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪ ⎪ ⎪
⎩ ⎪ ⎭ ⎪
⎪
⎪ • ⎪
⎪
⎪
• ⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭
1
√
3
2;
⎧ ⎫ ⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪2 3⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪ 1 ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ • •⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪ • ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨ ⎪
⎬ ⎪
⎨ ⎪
⎬
1
• √
3
(3) = • , (4) = , inx (IV, 3) = inx (IV, 4) = 2;
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
4 ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ • ⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪ • • ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭ ⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭
4 2 3
√ √
f(IV, 2) = f(IV, 3) = f(IV, 4) = ( 3 4, 1, 1, 3 2)T
⎧ ⎫ ⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪ • 3⎪⎪ ⎪
⎪ • 1⎪⎪
⎪
⎨ ⎪
⎬ ⎪
⎨ ⎪
⎬
(5) = 4 • • 2 , (6) = 4 • • 3 ; χ5,6 (x) = x(x3 − x − 1) and
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭ ⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭
• 1 • 2
1.32 < inx (IV, 5) = inx (IV, 6) < 1.33; f(IV, 5) = f(IV, 6) = (λ2 , 1, λ, λ)T ,
where λ3 − λ − 1 = 0.
⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪ 3 4⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨• •⎪⎬ √ √
√ 2 2
(7) =
, inx (IV, 7) = 2; f (IV, 7) = ( , , 1, 1)T ;
⎪
⎪ • • ⎪
⎪ 2 2
⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭
⎧ 1 2 ⎫
⎪
⎪ • 4⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎨ ⎪
⎬
(8) = • 3 , χ8 (x) = x(x3 − x2 − 1) and 1.46 < inx (IV, 8) < 1.47;
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭
1 • • 2
f(IV, 8) = (1, λ − 1, λ2 − λ, 1)T , where λ3 − λ2 − 1 = 0.
⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪ 4 2⎪
⎪
⎪
⎨• •⎪⎬ √ √ √
(9) = , inx (IV, 9) = 3; f(IV, 9) = (2, 3, 1, 3)T .
⎪
⎪ • •⎪⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭
3 1
⎧ ⎫ ⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪ 4 ⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪ 1 2 3⎪⎪
⎪
⎨ • ⎪
⎬ ⎪
⎨• • •⎪ ⎬ √
(10) = , (11) = , inx (IV, 10) = inx (IV, 11) = 3;
⎪
⎪ • • •⎪ ⎪ ⎪
⎪ • ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭ ⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭
1 2 3 4
√ √ √
f(IV, 10) = f(IV, 11) = ( 3, 3, 3, 3)T .
⎧ ⎫ ⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪ 4 ⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪1 2 3⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎨ • ⎪
⎬ ⎪
⎨• • •⎪ ⎬
(12) = , (13) = ,
⎪
⎪ • • •⎪ ⎪ ⎪
⎪ • ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭ ⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭
1 2 3 4
inx (IV, 12) = inx (IV, 13) = 2; f(IV, 12) = (2, 1, 1, 2)T ; f(IV, 13) =
(1, 1, 1, 1)T .
⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪ 3 4⎪⎪
⎪
⎨• •⎪ ⎬
(14) = , inx(IV, 14) = 2; f(IV, 14) = (1, 1, 1, 1)T ;
⎪
⎪ • • ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭
1 2
⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪ 4⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎨ •⎪ ⎬ √
(15) = , χ15 (x) = x2 (x2 − 2x − 1) and inx (IV, 15) = 1 + 2;
⎪
⎪ • • •⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎪
⎭
1 2 3
√ √ √
f(IV ), 15) = (1 + 2, 1 + 2, 1, 1 + 2)T ;
(16) = { • • • • }, inx (IV, 16) = 4.
Note that the posets (IV, 2), (IV, 3) and (IV, 4) are Q-equivalent. The other
non-singleton Q-equivalence classes are {(III, 2), (III, 3)}, {(IV, 10), (IV, 11)}.
√
For the posets N = (IV, 9) and F4 = (IV, 11) we have inx N = inx F4 = 3,
but N and F4 are not Q-equivalent.
The posets (IV, 12) and (IV, 13) are antiisomorphic, and w(IV, 12) =
w(IV, 13) = 3 but (IV, 12) and (IV, 13) are not Q-equivalent, because
f(IV, 12) = (2, 1, 1, 2)T and f(IV, 13) = (1, 1, 1, 1)T . The posets (IV, 13)
and (IV, 14) have both index and Frobenius vector equal but they are not

Q-equivalent because Q(IV,
13) has a loop and Q(IV, 14) does not.
6.8 ADJACENCY MATRICES OF ADMISSIBLE QUIVERS

WITHOUT LOOPS
In [Harary, 1969] (Appendix 2, Digraph diagrams) there is a list of simply laced
digraphs without loops for s ≤ 4 (s is the number of vertices Q). The number of
such quivers is 3 for s = 2, 16 for s = 3, and 218 for s = 4. Using this list, it
is easy to determine the number of strongly connected quivers among them. This
gives 1 for s = 2, 5 for s = 3, and 83 for s = 4.

We shall give the list of admissible quivers without loops for 2 ≤ s ≤ 4.
The number of these quivers is 1 for s = 2, 2 for s = 3 and 11 for s = 4.
We use the following notations:
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 ... 0 0 0 0 0 ... 0 0
⎜1 0 0 . . . 0 0⎟ ⎜1 0 1 . . . 1 1⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜1 1 0 . . . 0 0⎟ ⎜1 1 0 . . . 1 1⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
Hs = ⎜ . . . .
. . ... ... ⎟
, Fs = ⎜ . . . .
. . ... ... ⎟
,
⎜ .. .. .. ⎟ ⎜ .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝1 1 1 . . . 0 0⎠ ⎝1 1 1 . . . 0 1⎠
1 1 1 ... 1 0 1 1 1 ... 1 0
Ωs = (ωij ), where ωij = 0 for i ≤ j and ωij = i−j for i ≥ j; Hs , Fs , Ωn ∈ Ms (Z).
Note that notation Fs agrees (up to renumbering)
⎛ with⎞the notation F4 for case
0 0 0 0
⎜1 0 1 1 ⎟
(IV, 11) at the end of section 6.7 in that ⎜ ⎟
⎝1 1 0 1⎠ is the exponent matrix
1 1 1 0
2 3 4
• • •
of the poset .
•
1
Proposition 6.8.1. There exists only one admissible quiver without loops for
s = 2 which is C2 = Q(H2 ) and there are precisely two admissible quivers without
loops C3 = Q(H3 ) and Q(Ω3 ) for s = 3.
Proof. In what follows we assume that exponent matrices are reduced and their
first rows are zero, which can be done because we are after admissible quivers,
which are quivers coming from reduced exponent
matrices..
0 0 (1) 1 0
Let s = 2. Then E = , E = and E (2) =
α 0 α 1

(2, α) (1, α)
, where (α1 , . . . , αt ) = min(α1 , . . . , αt ). Here, quite generally, as
α + 1 (2, α)
before, see just below corollary 6.1.14 in section 6.1, the following notation is used.
If E is an (reduced) exponent matrix, E = (αij ), then E (1) = (βij ) with βii = 1 and
(2) (2) (1)
βij = αij if i =
j, E = (γij ), γij =minK (βik + βkj ), so that [Q(E)] = E − E .
(1, α − 1) 1
So [Q(E)] = and Q(E) is either C2 for α = 1 or LC2 for
1 (1, α − 1)
α ≥ 2 (Cn is a simple cycle with n vertices, [LCn ] = [Cn ] + En , En is the identity
n × n matrix). ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 1 0 0
Let s = 3. Then E = ⎝α 0 δ ⎠ , E (1) = ⎝α 1 δ ⎠ and E (2) =
β γ 0 β γ 1
⎛ ⎞
(2, α, β) (1, γ) (1, δ)
⎝ (α + 1, β + δ) (2, α, γ + δ) (α, δ + 1) ⎠.
(β + 1, α + γ) (β, γ + 1) (2, β, γ + δ)
Obviously, one can suppose 1 ≤ α ≤ β. Then α = 1. Indeed, if α ≥ 2 we have a
loop in the first vertex. If β = 1 we have either E ∼ H3 or E ∼ F3 . Obviously,
Ω3 ∼ F3 . If β = 2 then E ∼ Ω3 .
Let s = 4. As above we obtain the admissible quivers without loops, listed be-
low. The notation E ∼ Θ means equivalence of these matrices by transformations
of the first type.
n
We put d = d(E) = αij for an exponent matrix E = (αij ). Obviously,
i,j=1
d(E) = d(Θ) for equivalent reduced exponent matrices E and Θ.
It is convenient to place the first six exponent matrices in the following se-
quence: ⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
⎜1 0 0 0 ⎟ ⎜0 0 1 0⎟
(1) d = 6, E1 = H4 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
⎝1 1 0 0⎠, [Q(E1 )] = ⎝0 0 0 1⎠;
⎟
1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
⎜1 0 0 0⎟ ⎜ ⎟
(2) d = 7, E2 = ⎜ ⎟, [Q(E2 )] = ⎜0 0 1 0⎟
⎝1 1 0 0⎠ ⎝1 0 0 1 ⎠
2 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 1
⎜0 0 0 0 ⎟
and E2 ∼ Θ2 , where Θ2 = ⎜ ⎝0 1 0 0⎠;
⎟
1 1 1 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
⎜1 0 0 0⎟ ⎜1 0 1 0 ⎟
(3) d = 8, E3 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
⎝2 1 0 0⎠, [Q(E3 )] = ⎝0 0 0 1⎠
⎟
2 1 1 0 0 1 0 0
⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 1
⎜0 0 0 0 ⎟
and E3 ∼ Θ3 , where Θ3 = ⎜ ⎝0 1 0 0⎠;
⎟
1 1 1 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
⎜1 0 0 0⎟ ⎜1 0 1 0 ⎟
(4) d = 9, E4 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
⎝2 1 0 0⎠, [Q(E4 )] = ⎝0 1 0 1⎠
⎟
2 2 1 0 1 1 1 0
⎛ ⎞
0 0 1 1
⎜1 0 1 1 ⎟
and E4 ∼ Θ4 , where Θ4 = ⎜
⎝1 0 0 0⎠;
⎟
1 1 1 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
⎜1 0 0 0⎟ ⎜1 0 1 0⎟
(5) d = 10, E5 = Ω4 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
⎝2 1 0 0⎠, [Q(Ω4 )] = ⎝0 1 0 1⎠;
⎟
3 2 1 0 0 0 1 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 1
⎜1 0 1 1⎟ ⎜1 0 0 0⎟
(6) d = 9, E6 = F4 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
⎝1 1 0 1⎠, [Q(F4 )] = ⎝1 0 0 0⎠;
⎟
1 1 1 0 1 0 0 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
⎜1 0 1 0⎟ ⎜1 0 0 1 ⎟
(7) d = 8, E7 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
⎝1 1 0 0⎠, [Q(E7 )] = ⎝1 0 0 1⎠ ,
⎟
2 1 1 0 0 1 1 0
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 1
⎜1 0 1 1 ⎟
and E7 ∼ Θ7 , where Θ7 = ⎜
⎝1 1 0 1⎠;
⎟
1 0 0 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0
⎜1 0 0 0 ⎟ ⎜1 0 1 0 ⎟
(8) d = 10, E8 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
⎝2 2 0 0⎠, [Q(E8 )] = ⎝0 0 0 1⎠;
⎟
2 2 1 0 1 0 1 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
⎜1 0 1 0⎟ ⎜1 0 0 1 ⎟
(9) d = 10, E9 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝2 1 0 0⎠, [Q(E9 )] = ⎝0 1 0 1⎠, σ(E9 ) =
2 2 1 0 1 0 1 0
(1423);
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
⎜1 0 1 0⎟ ⎜1 0 0 1⎟
(10) d = 11, E10 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
⎝2 2 0 0⎠, [Q(E10 )] = ⎝0 0 0 1⎠;
⎟
2 2 1 0 1 0 1 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
⎜1 0 1 1⎟ ⎜1 0 0 0⎟
(11) d = 11, E11 = ⎜ ⎟ ⎜
⎝2 2 0 0⎠, [Q(E11 )] = ⎝0 0 0 1⎠.
⎟
2 2 1 0 1 0 1 0
6.9 TILED ORDERS AND WEAKLY PRIME RINGS

Recall that a ring A is called semiprime if it does not have nonzero nilpotent
ideals. A ring A is called prime if the product of any two nonzero two-sided ideals
of A is nonzero. In what follows in this section any ideal is a two-sided ideal. Let
R be the Jacobson radical of a ring A.
Definition. A ring A is called weakly prime if the product of any two

nonzero ideals not contained in R is nonzero.
Clearly, any prime ring is weakly prime and a weakly prime ring is indecom-
posable.
Lemma 6.9.1. If e is a nonzero idempotent of a weakly prime ring A, then

the ring eAe is weakly prime.
Proof. Let I and J be two-sided ideals in eAe which are not contained in
the Jacobson radical eRe of the ring eAe (see proposition 3.4.8, vol.I), and let
1 = e + f . Consider the following two-sided ideals
I = I + IeAf + f AeI + f AeIeAf

and
J = J + J eAf + f AeJ + f AeJ eAf
of the ring A. It is clear that I ⊆ R and J ⊆ R. Thus, IJ = 0. On the other
hand,
IJ = IJ + IJ eAf + f AeIJ + f AeIJ eAf.
This implies IJ = 0 and so the lemma is proved.
Theorem 6.9.2. Let 1 = e1 + e2 . . . + en be a decomposition of the unity of

a semiperfect ring A into the sum of mutually orthogonal local idempotents and
Aij = ei Aej (i, j = 1, . . . , n). The ring A is weakly prime if and only if Aij = 0
for all i, j.
Proof. Assume that the ring A is weakly prime and Apq = 0 for some p = q.
Consider the ring C = App +Aqq +Aqp . Then, Z = App +Aqp and N = Aqq +Aqp
are two-sided ideals of the ring C that do not belong to the Jacobson radical of C
and such that ZN = 0. But this contradicts lemma 6.9.1.
We shall show that, if all Aij = 0, then A is weakly prime. There exists a
decomposition of the identity of the ring A into the sum of mutually orthogonal
idempotents 1 = f1 + . . . + fs such that fi Afi = Mni (Oi ), with local rings Oi ,
i = 1, . . . , s, and fi Afj = fi Rfj (i = j, i, j = 1, . . . , s) (see proposition 11.1.1,
vol.I).
Consider two-sided ideals I and J such that I ⊆ R, J ⊆ R. Let fk Ifl = Ikl

and fp J fq = Jpq . It is clear that there exists an index t0 such that It0 t0 ⊆ R.
Without loss of generality, we can assume that t0 = 1. Similarly, there exists
an index t1 such that Jt1 t1 ⊆ R. If t1 = 1, then IJ = 0. Hence, we can
assume that t1 = 2 and J22 = Mn2 (O2 ). Since I11 f1 Af2 = f1 Af2 ⊆ I and
f1 Af2 J22 = f1 Af2 ⊆ J , we obtain f1 If1 f1 J f2 = f1 Af1 f1 Af2 = f1 Af2 = 0.
Here is an example of an indecomposable semiprime ring which is not weakly

prime. Let Q be the field of rational numbers and let Z(p) (p is a prime integer)
m
be the ring of p-integral numbers, i.e., Z(p) = { ∈ Q | (n, p) = 1} (see example
n
1.1.9, vol.I). Consider the Q-algebra M2 (Q) × M2 (Q). Let e11 , e12 , e21 , e22 be the
matrix units of the first matrix ring and f11 , f12 , f21 , f22 be the matrix units of
the second matrix ring. Let A be the Z(p) -order in the Q-algebra M2 (Q) × M2 (Q)
with Z(p) -basis e11 , pe12 , e21 , pe22 , e22 + f11 , pf12 , f21 , f22 . Let e1 = e11 , e2 = e22 +
f11 , e3 = f22 . Then, 1 = e1 + e2 + e3 is a decomposition of 1 ∈ A into the sum of
mutually orthogonal local idempotents. Clearly, e1 Ae3 = 0 and, hence, A is not
weakly prime, by theorem 6.9.2. On the other hand, the ring A is semiprime as
an order in M2 (Q) × M2 (Q).
Theorem 6.9.3. The quiver Q(A) of a weakly prime semiperfect Noetherian

ring A is strongly connected.
The proof follows from theorem 11.6.3, vol.I and theorem 6.9.2.
Proposition 6.9.4. If A is a tiled order, then the quotient ring B = A/πA is

weakly prime Noetherian and semidistributive.
Proof. Since A is semidistributive and Noetherian, B is the same. Let 1 =

e11 + . . . + enn be the decomposition of 1 ∈ A into the sum of mutually orthogonal
matrix idempotents. Write ēii = eii + πA for i = 1, . . . , n. Obviously, ēii Bējj = 0
for i, j = 1, . . . , n. So, by theorem 6.9.2, B is weakly prime.
Proposition 6.9.5. Let A be a tiled order and B = A/πA. The quiver Q(B)
of the ring B is obtained from the quiver Q(A) of the tiled order A by deleting all
loops.
Proof. We can assume that A is reduced. Obviously, for any i = 1, . . . , n

we have ēii Bēii O/πO = T , where T is a division ring. Let R(B) be the
Jacobson radical of B. Since A is reduced, B is also reduced and ēii R(B)ēii = 0
for i = 1, . . . , n. By the Q-lemma (vol.I, p.266), Q(B) has no loops.
Recall that Q(A) is simply laced and strongly connected. Let there exist an
arrow from i to j in Q(A) (i = j). This means that eii Rejj = π αij O and eii R2 ejj =
π αij +1 O, where R is the Jacobson radical of A. Therefore in Q(B) there exists an
arrow from i to j (i = j), and so in Q(A) there exists an arrow from i to j.
Let O = k[[x]] be the ring of formal power series over a field k. We know that
O is a discrete valuation ring with a prime element x. Let A = {k[[x]], E(A) =
(αij )} be a reduced tiled order. Then A/xA is an n2 -dimensional weakly prime
semidistributive algebra over a field k, where n is the number of vertices in Q(A).
Theorem 6.9.6. Let Q be an arbitrary simply laced quiver without loops.

There exists a weakly prime semidistributive Artinian ring B such that Q(B) = Q.
Proof. Consider the quiver Q1 with the following adjacency matrix: [Q1 ] =
[Q] + En . By theorem 6.1.16, every strongly connected simply laced quiver Q1
with a loop in each vertex is admissible. So there exists a reduced exponent
matrix E = (αij ) such that Q(E) = Q1 . Let O be a discrete valuation ring with a
prime element π and let A = {O, E} be a tiled order. Obviously, by proposition
6.9.5, the quiver Q(B) coincides with Q, where B = A/πA.
Corollary 6.9.7. For any simply laced quiver Q with n vertices and for any
field k there exists a weakly prime semidistributive n2 -dimensional algebra B over
k such that Q(B) = Q.
Proof. It is sufficient to consider the ring A = {O, E}, where O = k[[x]].
Remark 6.9.1 H.Fujita in [Fujita, 2003] introduced an interesting class of

finite dimensional algebras in the following way:
Let K be a field and n an integer with n ≥ 2. Let A = (A1 , . . . , An ) be an n-
(k)
tuple of n × n matrices Ak = (aij ) ∈ Mn (K) (1 ≤ k ≤ n) satisfying the following
three conditions.
(k) (j) (k) (j)
(A1) aij ail = ail akl for all i, j, k, l ∈ {1, . . . , n},
(k) (k)
(A2) akj = aik = 1 for all i, j, k ∈ {1, . . . , n}, and
(k)
(A3) aii = 0 for all i, k ∈ {1, . . . , n} such that i = k.

Let A = Kuij be a K-vector space with basis {uij | 1 ≤ i, j ≤ n}.
1≤i,j≤n
Then, using A, define a multiplication of A as follows:
(k)
aij uij , if k = l
uik ulj = .
0 otherwise
Then A is an associative n2 -dimensional K-algebra with Jacobson radical

R(A) = Kuij . So A/R(A) = K × K × . . . × K , i.e., A is a split
i=j; 1≤i,j≤n

n times
reduced n2 -dimensional associative K-algebra. In what follows, we assume that

(k)
aij = 0 or 1 for all 1 ≤ i, j, k ≤ n. We call such algebras as Fujita algebras.
Recall that a basis e1 , . . . , et of a finite dimensional algebra B is multiplicative
(= monomial) if a product ei ej is either zero or ek for some k = 1, . . . , t. It is easy
to see that a Fujita algebra has a multiplicative basis.
Obviously, uii ujj = δij ujj , where δij is the Kronecker delta. For 1 ∈ A we
have 1 = u11 + . . . + unn . Therefore for any Fujita algebra A it is the case that:
uii Aujj = K, 1 ≤ i, j ≤ n. By theorem 6.9.2 and theorem 14.2.1, vol. I, any
Frobenius algebra A is weakly prime and semidistributive. By theorem 14.3.1,
vol. I and theorem 6.9.3 the quiver Q(A) is a simply laced and strongly connected
quiver without loops.
We remark without proof, that for any simply laced strongly connected quiver
Q which has no loops, there exists a Fujita algebra A with quiver Q(A) = Q. The
properties of Fujita algebras are considered in [Fujita, 2006].
As an example of weakly prime semiperfect rings we consider right 2-rings.

Recall that a ring A is called a right 2-ring if each right ideal in A is two-
generated.
Lemma 6.9.8. If A is a semiperfect Noetherian weakly prime 2-ring and

s
A = Pini is the decomposition as in lemma 6.5.9, then n1 = n2 = . . . = ns .
i=1
Proof. Assume that the modules P1 , P2 , . . . , Ps , are numbered in such a way

that n1 ≥ n2 . . . ≥ ns . Suppose that n1 = n2 = . . . = nk but nk > nk+1 .
We shall show that ej Aei HomA (Pk+1 , Pk ) = 0. Indeed, otherwise exists a
nonzero homomorphism ψ : Pk+1 → Pk . Obviously, Pk+1 nk
is a projective cover
nk
of (Im ψ) . Therefore a projective cover of the finitely generated right ideal
nk+1 nk +nk+1
I = Im ψ)nk ⊕ Pk+1 is equal to Pk+1 , where nk + nk+1 > 2nk+1 . Let μA (I)
be the minimal number of generators of the right ideal I. Then, by lemma 11.1.8,
vol.I, we obtain that μA (I) ≥ 3. Let 1 = e1 + . . . + en be a decomposition of 1 ∈ A
into a sum of local idempotents such that for some e and f from this decomposition
we have Pk = eA and Pk+1 = f A. Consequently, HomA (Pk+1 , Pk ) eAf = 0.
We have a contradiction with theorem 6.9.2. The lemma is proved.
Theorem 6.9.9. The quiver Q(A) of a Noetherian weakly prime semiperfect

2-ring A consists of at most two points. If Q(A) consists of one point, then there
are at most two loops at this point. If Q(A) consists of two points, then there is
only one arrow from one point to another and each point has at most one loop,
i.e., the two-pointed quiver Q(A) is simply laced.
Proof. By lemma 6.9.8 we can assume that A = P1n ⊕ . . . ⊕ Psn . But then
A Mn (End (P1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Ps )) and the ring B = End A (P1 ⊕ . . .⊕ Ps ) is a basic ring,
i.e., the quotient ring of B by its Jacobson radical is a direct product of division
rings.
It is clear that the rings A and B are 2-rings simultaneously.

Let A be a basic Noetherian semiperfect weakly prime 2-ring, and let 1 =
e1 + . . . + en be a decomposition of 1 ∈ A into a sum of pairwise orthogonal
idempotents.
Assume that the quiver Q(A) of the ring A consists of more then two points.
Let P1 = e1 A, P2 = e2 A, P3 = e3 A be nonisomorphic indecomposable projective
modules. Since e1 Ae3 = 0 and e2 Ae3 = 0, there exist nonzero homomorphisms
φ : P3 → P1 and ψ : P3 → P2 . Thus, P33 is a projective cover of the right ideal
Im φ ⊕ Im ψ ⊕ P3 which contradicts, by lemma 11.1.8, vol.I, with the fact that A
is a 2-ring. Hence, the quiver Q(A) consists of at most two points. If it has only
one point, then there are at most two loops at this point by lemma 11.1.8, vol.I.
Assume now that Q(A) consists of two points and A = P1 ⊕ P2 . Suppose that
the point 1, for example, has more than one loop. Since A is weakly prime, there
exists a nontrivial homomorphism ν : P1 → P2 . Then P13 is a direct summand of
the projective cover of the right ideal P1 R ⊕ Im ν which gives a contradiction, by
lemma 11.1.8, vol.I. Thus, each point of Q(A) has at most one loop. Similarly, one
can prove that there is only one arrow from one point to another. The theorem is
proved.
From theorem 6.9.9 we immediately obtain the following corollaries.
Corollary 6.9.10 (Theorem of reduction for Noetherian weakly prime

2-rings.) Any Noetherian weakly prime semiperfect right 2-ring A is isomorphic
to a ring Mn (B), where B is either a local 2-ring or B = P1 ⊕ P2 (where P1 , P2
are nonisomorphic, indecomposable projective B-modules), and the quiver Q(B) is
a two-pointed simply laced quiver.
Corollary 6.9.11. Let A be a Noetherian weakly prime semiperfect and

semidistributive right 2-ring. Then A is isomorphic to a ring Mn (B), where B
is either a discrete valuation ring or a uniserial Artinian ring. In this case the
quiver Q(A) has one vertex. If Q(A) contains two vertices then it is a simply laced
quiver.
Corollary 6.9.12. If a tiled order A is a right 2-ring, then either A Mn (O),

where O is a discrete valuation ring or A = Mn (B), where
6
0 0
B = O,
α 0

0 0
and ∈ M2 (Z).
α 0
!
∞
If M is a uniserial A-module such that M Rm = 0, where R = rad A, and
n=1
m ∈ M Rt \ M Rt+1 , we write t = d(m). Let M be an arbitrary A-module. An
element m ∈ M is called a primitive generator if m = me for some primitive

idempotent e ∈ A. In this case there exists a homomorphism ϕ : eA → mA such
that ϕ(e) = m.
Proposition 6.9.13. If B is a reduced Noetherian SP SD-ring with

two-pointed quiver Q(B), then B is a right and left 2-ring.
Proof. Let 1 ∈ B and 1 = e1 + e2 be a decomposition of 1 into a sum of two

local idempotents. Write Bi = ei Bei and Ri = rad (Bi ), i = 1, 2. Let X = e1 Be2
and Y = e2 Be1 . By theorem 14.2.1, vol. I, B1 and B2 are uniserial rings, X is
a uniserial right B2 -module and a uniserial left B1 -module; Y is a uniserial right
B1 -module and a uniserial left B2 -module. Moreover, by corollary 14.2.4, vol. I,
R1 X = XR2 and Y R1 = R2 Y .
Let J be a right ideal in B. There is the decomposition J = J e1 ⊕ J e2 .
Obviously, all nonzero elements from J e1 are primitive generators for e1 and all
nonzero elements
from J e2 are primitive generators
for e2 . Ifb ∈ Je1 , then
a 0 a 0 a0 0
b = . Let t0 = min d(a), where ∈ J e1 and ∈ J e1
y 0 y 0 y0 0

a 0
with d(a0 ) = t0 . Consequently, for any ∈ J e1 we have a = a0 a1 , where
y 0
a0 , a1 , a ∈ B1 . Obviously,

a0 0 a1 0 a0 a1 0
= ∈ J e1 .
y0 0 0 0 y 0 a1 0

0
0
Let t1 = min d(y), where ∈ J e1 . We obtain that y = y1 a1 , where d(y1 ) =
y
0
a0 0
t1 and a1 ∈ B1 . Let ϕ1 : e1 B → J be a homomorphism with ϕ1 (e1 ) =
y0 0

0 0
and let ϕ2 : e1 B → J be a homomorphism with ϕ2 (e1 ) = . Consider
y1 0
ϕ : e1 B ⊕ e1 B → J , where ϕ = (ϕ1 , ϕ2 ) and ϕ(e1 b1 , e1 b2 ) = ϕ1 (e1 b1 ) + ϕ2 (e2 b2 ).
Obviously, Im ϕ ⊇ J e1 . Analogously, there exists a homomorphism ψ : e2 B ⊕
e2 B → J e2 such that Im ψ ⊇ J e2 . By lemma 11.1.8, vol.I, we obtain that
μA (J ) ≤ 2. Analogously, for any left ideal L ⊂ A we obtain that μA (L) ≤ 2. The
proposition is proved.
Let’s consider a Noetherian reduced SP SD-ring B with two-pointed quiver in

more detail. Let B be weakly prime. Then there are the following possibilities for
the quiver of B (up to a renumbering of vertices).
(a) 1 • • 2
(b) 1 2
• •
(c) 1 2
• •
Case (a). In this case the ring B is serial, by theorem 12.3.11, vol.I. We shall
study in which cases B is not Artinian. Let 1 ∈ B and let 1 = e1 + e2 be a
decomposition of 1 into a sum of local pairwise orthogonal idempotents. Write
R = rad B, Bi = ei Bei and Ri = rad (Bi ), X = e1 Be2 , Y = e2 Be1 , where B1
and B2 are uniserial rings, X is an uniserial right B2 -module and an uniserial left
B1 -module; Y is an uniserial right B1 -module and an uniserial left B2 -module, by
theorem 14.2.1, vol.I. If B1 and B2 are Artinian, then B is Artinian. Let R be the
Jacobson radical of B. Then, as usual,
2
R1 X R1 + XY R1 X + XR2
R = and R2 = .
Y R2 Y R1 + R2 Y Y X + R22
Moreover, by corollary 14.2.4, vol.I, R1 X = XR2 and Y R1 = R2 Y .

Case (b). Suppose that Q(B) is the quiver of the ring B in this case. By the
Q-lemma (see vol.I, p.266), we obtain Y X + R22 = R2 . By the Nakayama lemma,
Y X = R2 . So XY X = XR2 and XY X ⊆ R12 X = XR22 . Therefore, XR2 ⊆ XR22
and, again by the Nakayama lemma, XR2 = 0, i.e., XY X = 0. Note that R1 X =
XR2 . Consequently, R1 X = 0. Analogously, Y R1 = R2 Y = 0. Now note that
R22 = 0. Indeed, Y XY X = R22 = 0. If XY = 0, then XY = R1m . Therefore,
R1m+1 = XY R1 = XR2 Y = XY XY = 0 and B is an Artinian semidistributive
ring. We obtain that if B1 is a discrete valuation ring then XY = 0. Suppose that
B1 is a discrete valuation ring. Then there is the following countable descending
Loewy series:
2 m
R1 0 R13 0 R1 0
B⊃R⊃ ⊃ ⊃ ... ⊃ ⊃ ...
0 R2 0 0 0 0
!
∞
and Rm = 0. Note that e2 B is serial and that l(e2 B) ≤ 3.
m=0
Case (c). If B is not Artinian, then B1 is a discrete valuation ring (up to a
renumbering). Assume that B2 is Artinian. If XY = 0, then XY = R1m . For
some t we have (Y X)t = 0, since Y X ⊆ R22 and R2 is nilpotent. Therefore,
m(t+1)
X(Y X)t Y = R1 = 0. This contradiction proves that XY = 0.
Let Bi = Oi (i = 1, 2) be discrete valuation rings. If XY = 0, but Y X = 0
we obtain that B1 is Artinian. Therefore, XY and Y X are not equal to zero
simultaneously. Let XY = R1m = 0 and Y X = R2m = 0. Obviously, XY X =
R1m X = XR2n . If m = n, then B must be Artinian. Consequently, m = n. If
t+m
R1t X = 0 for some t, then R1t XY = R 1 = 0. Itis easy to see that B is a prime
O O
ring, i.e., B is a tiled order, and B , where m ≥ 1.
πm O O
The last case is the following: XY = 0 and Y X = 0.
In this case there are the following countable descending Loewy series for P1 =
e1 B and P2 = e2 B:
P1 ⊃ P1 R = (R1 , X) ⊃ P1 R2 = (R12 , R1 X) ⊃ . . . ⊃ P1 Rm = (R1m , R1m−1 X) ⊃ . . .
and
P2 ⊃ P2 R = (Y, R2 ) ⊃ P2 R2 = (R2 Y, R22 ) ⊃ . . . ⊃ P2 Rm = (R2m−1 Y, R2m ) ⊃ . . . .
In the following proposition the ring B is a Noetherian but non-Artinian

reduced ring with two-pointed quiver Q(B).
Proposition 6.9.14. If B is not a tiled order then there exists a two-sided

nilpotent ideal J of B such that the quotient ring B/J is serial (it is possible
J = 0).
Proof. If Q(B) is strongly connected and B is weakly prime then the proof
follows from the consideration of the cases: (a), (b) and (c) above. Let B be
not weakly prime. Up to renumbering we may assume that Y = 0. If X = 0,
then B = B 1 × B2 , where B is serial (B1 and B2 are uniserial). If X = 0, then
0 X
L= is a two-sided ideal of B, L2 = 0 and B/L B1 × B2 is serial.
0 0
Let A be a ring. Denote μ∗r (A) = max μA (I), where I is a right ideal A.
I⊆A
Analogously, one can define μ∗l (A). By definition, A is a right principal ideal ring
if and only if μ∗r (A) = 1.
Example 6.9.1 (I.N.Herstein).8

Let Q be the field of rational numbers and let Q(x) be the field of rational
functions over Q in an indeterminate x. Write K = Q(x). Define a monomorphism
ϕ : K → K by (ϕ(f ))(x) = f (x2 ). Let K[y, ϕ] = { y i αi : αi ∈ K} be the ring
of right polynomials in y over K, where equality and the addition are defined as
usual but the multiplication is defined by means of the rule αy = yϕ(α) for α ∈ K.
It is easy to show that every right ideal of K[y, ϕ] is principal, and so K[y, ϕ] is
right Noetherian, but K[y, ϕ] is not left Noetherian.
Note that μ∗r (K[y, ϕ]) = 1 and μ∗l (K[y, ϕ]) = ∞.
Let O = K[[y, ϕ]] be a ring of formal power series, where K is as above and
αy = yϕ(α). Denote by M = yO the unique right maximal ideal in O. Therefore,
M is the Jacobson radical of O and O/M = K. Obviously, O is right uniserial
and every right ideal of O is principal, but O is not left Noetherian. So, μ∗r (O) = 1
and μ∗l (O) = ∞.
Let O be as above and M = yO. Consider the ring B of 2 × 2-matrices of the
following form:
8 see [Herstein, 1968]

O K
B= .
K K
We describe the multiplication and addition in B. Denote by e11 , e12 , e21 , e22
the matrix units of B: e12 e21 = 0 and e21 e12 = 0. Let ϕ : O → K be the
canonical epimorphism. If α ∈ O, then (αe11 )e12 = ϕ(α)e12 = e12 ϕ(α) and
e21 (αe11 ) = e21 ϕ(α) = ϕ(α)e21 . Further, αe11 = e11 α for α ∈ O and βe22 = e22 β
for β ∈ K. The multiplication in K is defined as multiplication of 2 × 2-matrices
and the addition is defined elementwise. It is easy to see that μ∗r (B) = 2 and
μ∗l (B) = ∞.
6.10 GLOBAL DIMENSION OF TILED ORDERS

In this section we want to give a short survey on some more fairly recent results
of the theory of tiled orders. Most of these results are presented without proofs.
Theorem 2.3.24, vol.I, asserts that the ideals in a semisimple ring
A = Mn1 (D1 ) × Mn2 (D2 ) × . . . × Mns (Ds )

form a finite Boolean algebra consisting of 2s elements. Therefore, any two-sided
ideal I in A is idempotent, i.e., I 2 = I.
Let A be an associative ring with 1 = 0. Denote by I(A) the set of all idem-
potent ideals in A.
Proposition 6.10.1. The set I(A) is a commutative band under addition.
Proof. Let J1 , J2 ∈ I(A). Then (J1 +J2 )2 = J12 +J1 J2 +J2 J1 +J22 = J1 +J2 .
Obviously, for any idempotent e ∈ A the ideal AeA is idempotent. This follows
from the following inclusions: AeAAeA ⊂ AeA and AeA ⊂ AeAAeA.
Recall that an associative ring A with 1 is called semiprimary if its Jacobson

radical R is nilpotent and A/R is a semisimple ring. An ideal J of A is said to
be heredity if J 2 = J , J RJ = 0 and J , considered as a right A-module JA ,
is projective. In fact, this also implies that the left A-module A J is projective. A
semiprimary ring A is called quasi-hereditary if there is a chain
0 = J0 ⊂ J1 ⊂ . . . ⊂ Jt−1 ⊂ Jt ⊂ . . . ⊂ Jm = A
of ideals of A such that, for any 1 ≤ t ≤ m, Jt /Jt−1 is a heredity ideal of A/Jt−1 .

Such a chain of idempotent ideals is called a heredity chain.
Let Λ = {O, E(Λ)} be a tiled order over a discrete valuation ring O and let
Mn (D) be its classical ring of fractions, where D is the classical division ring of frac-
tions of O, and write E(Λ) = (αij ). Let E(Λ)T = (αji ) and ΛT = {O, E(Λ)T }.
Then the following proposition is obvious.
Proposition 6.10.2. ΛT is a tiled order and Λ is anti-isomorphic to ΛT .
Proposition 6.10.3. gl.dim Λ = gl.dim ΛT .
Proof. The proof follows from the equality gl.dim ΛT = l.gl.dim Λ and from
Auslander’s theorem 5.1.16, which asserts that l.gl.dim Λ = r.gl.dim Λ if Λ is
two-sided Noetherian.
We now consider the global dimension of tiled orders having finite global di-
mension and width at most 2.
Note that if two tiled orders A1 and A2 are Morita equivalent, then gl. dim A1 =
gl. dim A2 . So, we can assume (for global dimension considerations) that a tiled
order Λ with finite global dimension is reduced.
Let Λ be a reduced tiled order of finite global dimension with w(Λ) = 2. The
following theorem is stated without proof.
Theorem 6.10.4.9 The following conditions are equivalent for a tiled

order Λ:
(a) the endomorphism ring of any indecomposable Λ-lattice is a discrete valu-
ation ring;
(b) every Λ-lattice M is a direct sum of irreducible Λ-lattices;
(c) every irreducible Λ-lattice has no more then two maximal submodules;
(d) w(Λ) ≤ 2.
Since, by this theorem, any tiled order of width at most 2 is a direct sum
of irreducible lattices, to determine the global dimension of such a tiled order it
is sufficient to check the projective dimensions of irreducible Λ-lattices, by the
Auslander theorem (theorem 5.1.13).
It is obvious that the notion of the diagram of a finite poset (see vol. I, p.279
and section 6.3 above) may be extended in the same way to M(Λ), where M(Λ) is
the partially ordered set, which is formed by all irreducible projective A-lattices.
We shall denote this infinite quiver by Q(M(Λ)).
Lemma 6.10.5. Let Λ be a tiled order of width at most two. If gl. dim Λ < ∞,
then there exists an element P ∈ M(Λ) such that only one arrow in Q(M(Λ))
starts from P .
Proof. If w(Λ) = 1, then gl. dim Λ = 1, by propositions 6.1.7 and 6.1.10. In

this case lemma is true.
Suppose that w(Λ) = 2. By the Dilworth theorem (theorem 6.1.8), we can
assume that M(Λ) = L1 ∪ L2 , where L1 , L2 are chains and L1 ∩ L2 = ∅. So,
from any P ∈ M(Λ) in Q(M(Λ)) there start at most two arrows. Let M ∈ S(Λ)
with maximal proj. dimΛ M . Obviously, M = P1 + P2 , where P1 ∈ L1 and P2 ∈ L2
and P1 , P2 are non-comparable. Suppose two arrows P1 → Q1 and P1 → Q2 start
9 see [Zavadskij, Kirichenko, 1976]
from P1 , where Q1 ∈ L1 and Q2 ∈ L2 . Analogously, let P2 → R1 and P2 → R2 be

two arrows, where R1 ∈ L1 and R2 ∈ L2 . We have the following (part) diagrams:
Q1 • • Q2 R1 • • R2
• •
P1 P2
Suppose that R1 ⊆ P1 . Then P2 ⊆ R1 and P2 ⊆ P1 . So R1 ⊇ Q1 ⊃ P1 .

Analogously, Q2 ⊇ R2 ⊃ P2 . Consider R1 ∩ Q2 . We have R1 ⊇ P1 and Q2 ⊇ P1 ,
i.e., P1 ⊆ R1 ∩ Q2 . Analogously, Q2 ⊇ P2 and R1 ⊇ P2 , i.e., P2 ⊆ R1 ∩ Q2 .
Consequently, R1 ∩ Q2 ⊇ P1 + P2 . We now show that R1 ∩ Q2 = P1 + P2 . Indeed,
if R1 ∩Q2 = F1 + F2 , where F1 ∈ L1 and F2 ∈ L2 , then F1 ⊆ R1 ∩Q2 and therefore
F1 ⊆ P1 . Analogously, F2 ⊆ P2 .
Thus R1 ∩ Q2 = P1 + P2 . Write M1 = R1 + Q2 . Let π : R1 ⊕ Q2 → M1 be the
canonical epimorphism. Obviously, Ker π R1 ∩ Q2 = M . So, proj. dimA M1 =
proj. dimA M + 1. We obtain a contradiction. The lemma is proved.
Let Λ = {O, E = (αij )} be a reduced tiled order and let 1 = e1 + . . . + en be

a decomposition of 1 ∈ Λ into a sum of mutually orthogonal local idempotents,
P1 = e1 Λ, . . . , Pn−1 = en−1 Λ, Pn = en Λ. Write f = e1 + . . . + en−1 , e = en ,
B = f Λf , O = eΛe, X = f Λe, Y = eΛf and {Pn } = {(αn1 + c, . . . , αnn−1 +
c, c), where c ∈ Z}.
Lemma 6.10.6. M(Λ) \ {Pn } M(f Λf ).
Proof. Let P = (α1 , . . . , αn−1 , αn ) ∈ M(Λ) \ {Pn }. We assert that

α1 , . . . , αn−1 ∈ M(f Λf ).
Indeed, by proposition 6.1.7, P has a unique maximal submodule P R and
P/P R = Ui for some i = 1, . . . , n − 1. So, P = (αi1 + c, . . . , αin−1 + c, αin + c) and
(αi1 + c, . . . , αin−1 + c) ∈ M(f Λf ). Conversely, let Pi f = (αi1 + c, . . . , αin−1 + c) ∈
M(f Λf ). Consider Pi = (αi1 +c, . . . , αin−1 +c, αin +c) ∈ M(Λ)\{Pn }. Obviously,
these maps are inverse to each other and preserve the ordering.
If w(Λ) = 2, then every irreducible Λ-lattice is either projective or M = P1 +P2 ,

where P1 ∈ L1 , P2 ∈ L2 and P1 , P2 are non-comparable.
Assume that gl. dim Λ < ∞. Let M ∈ S(Λ) and M = P1 + P2 as above.
(1) (1) (1)
If P1 ∩ P2 is not projective, then P1 ∩ P2 = P1 + P2 , where P1 ∈ L1 and
(1) (1) (1) (1)
P2 ∈ L2 , and P1 and P2 are non-comparable. Obviously, from P1 there
(1)
start two arrows and from P2 there also start two arrows. So, to a projective
resolution of M we can assign a sequence of pairs of non-comparable elements
(1) (1) (k) (k) (j)
(P1 , P2 ), (P1 , P2 ), . . . , (P1 , P2 ), where Pi ∈ Li for i = 1, 2, j = 1, . . . , k
(j) (k) (k)

and such that from Pi there start two arrows. We can assume that P1 ∩ P2
(k) (k)
is a projective module and that from P1 ∩ P2 there also start two arrows.
Lemma 6.10.7. Let Λ = {O, E = (αij )} be a reduced tiled order of width 2

with gl. dim Λ < ∞. Then there exists a decomposition 1 = e + f , where e is a
local idempotent, such that
gl. dim Λ − 1 ≤ gl. dim f Λf ≤ gl. dim Λ.
Proof. By lemma 6.10.5, there exists an element P ∈ M(Λ) such that only one
arrow in Q(M(Λ)) issues from P . Let P = eΛ, and 1 = e + f . If af, bf ∈ M(f Λf )
is a pair of non-comparable elements in M(f Λf ), then a, b ∈ M(Λ) is a pair of
non-comparable elements in M(Λ). Consider a projective resolution of a + b as
a Λ-module. To a projective resolution of a + b we can assign a sequence of non-
comparable pairs (a1 , b1 ), . . . , (ak , bk ), where aj ∈ L1 , bj ∈ L2 for j = 1, . . . , k and
from ak and bk there start two arrows. Let ak ∩ bk be projective. Obviously, two
arrows start from ak ∩ bk . Consequently, a, b, a1 , b1 , . . . , ak , bk ∈ M(Λ) \ {Pn }. By
lemma 6.10.6, (af, bf ), (a1 f, b1 f ), . . . , (ak f, bk f ) corresponds to a finite projective
resolution of the f Λf -module af + bf . So, gl. dim f Λf ≤ gl. dim Λ. Conversely, in
(1) (1) (k) (k) (k) (k)
a sequence (P1 , P2 ), (P1 , P2 ), . . . , (P1 , P2 ), where P1 ∩ P2 is projective,
(1) (1) (k) (k) (k) (k)
all the modules P1 , P2 , . . . , P1 , P2 , P1 ∩ P2 ∈ M(Λ) \ {Pn }. Therefore,
gl. dim f Λf ≥ gl. dim Λ − 1.
Theorem 6.10.8. Let Λ be a tiled order in Mn (D) and w(Λ) ≤ 2. If

gl.dim Λ < ∞ then gl.dim Λ ≤ n − 1.
Proof. This will be proved by induction on n. Let n = 2. We can assume that

6
0 0
Λ= O, .
α 0
If α = 1, then Λ = H2 (O) is hereditary and gl. dim Λ = 1. If α ≥ 2, then

(α − 1, 0) = (α − 1, α − 1) + (α, 0) and (α − 1, α − 1) ∩ (α, 0) = (α, α − 1) (1, 0).
Obviously, (1, 0) = (1, 1) + (α, 0) and (1, 1) ∩ (α, 0) = (α, 1) (α − 1, 0). So,
proj. dimΛ (α − 1, 0) = ∞.
In the general case, when n > 2, by lemma 6.10.7, there exists f 2 = f ∈ Λ
with gl. dim f Λf < ∞ and gl. dim f Λf ≥ gl. dim Λ − 1, w(f Λf ) ≤ 2, and f is a
sum of n − 1 mutually orthogonal local idempotents. By the induction hypothesis,
gl. dim f Λf ≤ n − 2. So, n − 2 ≥ gl. dim Λ − 1 and gl. dim Λ ≤ n − 1. The theorem
is proved.
Theorem 6.10.9. Let Λ be a tiled order and w(Λ) ≤ 2. If gl.dim Λ = k <

∞, then for any m (1 ≤ m ≤ k) there exists an idempotent e ∈ Λ such that
gl.dim eΛe = m.
The proof of this theorem follows from lemma 6.10.7 and the fact that all
tiled orders in M2 (D) of finite global dimension are isomorphic to H2 (O) with
gl. dim H2 (O) = 1.
Remark 6.10.1. Theorems 6.10.8 and 6.10.9 first were proved by

Kh.M.Danlyev (see [Danlyev, 1989]).
Example 6.10.1.
The tiled order Λn = {O, E(Λn )}, where
⎛ ⎞
0 0 ... ... ... 0
⎜ .. .. .. ⎟
⎜1 . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜2 . . . .⎟
E(Λn ) = ⎜
⎜. .⎟
⎟
⎜ .. .. . . .
⎜ . . . . . . . .. ⎟ ⎟
⎜. .. .. .. ⎟
⎝ .. . . . 0⎠
2 ... ... 2 1 0
is an n × n-matrix, is a triangular tiled order of width 2 and gl.dim Λn = n − 1.
Example 6.10.2.
The tiled order Ωn = {O, E(Ωn )}, where
⎛ ⎞
0 0 ... ... ... ... ... 0
⎜ .. ⎟
⎜ .. .. ⎟
⎜ 1 . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ 2 . . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ 3 . . . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
E(Ωn ) = ⎜ . .. ⎟
⎜ . . .. . .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ . . . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. .⎟
⎜n − 3 ... . . . . . .. ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜n − 2 n − 3 ... . . . . 0⎟
⎝ ⎠
n−1 n−2 n−3 ... 3 2 1 0
is an n × n-matrix, is triangular tiled order and gl.dim Ωn = 2.
The following proposition is very useful. The proof of it can be found in the
paper [Kirkman, Kuzmanovich, 1989].
Proposition 6.10.10. Let Λ be an order, and let e be an idempotent of Λ

such that eΛe is a hereditary ring and I = ΛeΛ. Then gl.dim (Λ/I) ≤ gl.dimΛ ≤
gl.dim (Λ/I) + 2.
We use the Dlab-Ringel example of a serial ring A with gl.dim A = 4 and

Kupisch series 4,4,3 for the construction of a tiled order Λ of width 2 with
10
gl.dim Λ = 4 and such that
⎛ the quiver
⎞ Q(Λ) has five vertices. .
0 0 0
Let H3 (O) = O, ⎝ 1 0 0 ⎠ and let L ⊂ H3 (O) be the two-sided ideal
1 1 ⎛0 ⎞
2 1 1
with exponent matrix E(L) = ⎝2 2 1⎠. Consider the tiled order Δ5 with
2 2 1
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 1 0
⎜ 1 0 0 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
E(Δ5 ) = ⎜
⎜ 1 1 0 1 1 ⎟.
⎟
⎝ 1 1 0 0 0 ⎠
2 1 1 1 0
Obviously, w(Δ5 ) = 2. We shall show that Δ5 has global dimension 4. This

follows from proposition 6.10.6. Indeed, let e = e44 + e55 and I = Δ5 eΔ5 .
⎛ ⎞
2 1 1 1 0
⎜ 2 2 1 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
E(I) = ⎜ ⎜ 2 2 1 1 1 ⎟
⎟
⎝ 1 1 0 0 0 ⎠
2 1 1 1 0
and gl.dim Δ5 ≥ gl.dim Λ/I = 4. From theorem 5.10.4 it follows that gl.dim Δ5 =
4. Let f = e11 + e22 + e33 . Then
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 1 0
⎜ 1 0 0 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
E(J ) = E(Δ5 f Δ5 ) = ⎜
⎜ 1 1 0 1 1 ⎟.
⎟
⎝ 1 1 0 1 1 ⎠
2 1 1 2 2
It is easy to see that gl.dim Δ5 /J = 2. Consequently, we have gl.dim Δ5 =

gl.dim Δ5 /I and gl.dim Δ5 = gl.dim Δ5 /J + 2.
From this example it follows that both equalities in proposition 6.10.10 may
hold.
Theorem 6.10.11.11 If Λ is a tiled order and gl.dim Λ < ∞, then Q(Λ) has
no loops.
10 see [Dlab, Ringel, 1989]
11 see [Weidemann, Roggenkamp, 1983]
Theorem 6.10.12. If Λ is a tiled order and Q(Λ) has at most 3 vertices, then
gl.dim Λ is finite if and only if Q(Λ) has no loops. In this case w(Λ) ≤ 2.
A proof follows from theorem 6.10.11 and proposition 6.7.1. If Q(Λ) is a cycle,
then Λ is hereditary and gl.dimΛ = 1. If Ω3 (O) = {O, Ω3 }, then gl.dim Ω3 (O) = 2.
Remark 6.10.2. This theorem was first proved by R.B.Tarsy (see [Tarsy,
1970]).
The list of the orders Λ with gl.dim Λ < ∞ and such that Q(Λ) has 4 vertices
is given in the papers [Fujita, 1990], [Fujita, 1991]. The first six exponent matrices
(1)-(6) from section 6.8 exhaust this list.
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0
⎜ 1 0 1 1 ⎟
Recall that E(F4 ) = ⎜ ⎟
⎝ 1 1 0 1 ⎠ . Obviously, w(F4 ) = 3.
1 1 1 0
Note, that all tiled orders of finite global dimension, whose quivers have at
most four vertices, are isomorphic to (0, 1)-orders, except Ω4 . Now we give a list
of the associated posets PΛ , where gl.dim Λ < ∞ and Λ is a (0, 1)-order.
List of posets:
n = 1, P1 = {•}, gl.dim ΛP1 = 1;
⎧ ⎫
⎨ • ⎬
n = 2, P2 = | , gl.dim ΛP2 = 1;
⎩ ⎭
•
⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪ • ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎨ | ⎬
n = 3, P3 = • , gl.dim ΛP3 = 1;
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪ |
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎭
•
⎧ ⎫
⎨ • • ⎬
n = 3, P4 = , gl.dim ΛP4 = 2;
⎩ ⎭
•
⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪ • ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪ | ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎨ • ⎪
⎬
n = 4, P5 = | , gl.dim ΛP5 = 1;
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ • ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪ | ⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎪ ⎭
•
⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪ • ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎨ | ⎬
n = 4, P6 = • • , gl.dim ΛP6 = 2;
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ | ⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎭
•
⎧ ⎫
⎪
⎪ • • ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎨ ⎬
n = 4, P7 = • , gl.dim ΛP7 = 2;
⎪
⎪ ⎪
⎪
⎪
⎪ | ⎪
⎪
⎩ ⎭
•
⎧ ⎫
⎨ • • ⎬
n = 4, P8 = | | , gl.dim ΛP8 = 3;
⎩ ⎭
• •
⎧ ⎫
⎨ • • • ⎬
n = 4, P9 = | , gl.dim ΛP9 = 2.
⎩ ⎭
•
It follows from proposition 6.10.2 that if the finite posets PΛ1 and PΛ2 , which
are associated with (0, 1)-orders Λ1 and Λ2 , are anti-isomorphic, then gl.dim Λ1 =
gl.dim Λ2 .
Proposition 6.10.13. If gl.dim Λ ≤ 2, then M(Λ) is a lower semilattice.
Proof. By the Michler theorem (see theorem 12.3.4, vol.I), gl.dim Λ = 1 if and
only if M(Λ) is a chain. In this case M(Λ) is a lower semilattice. If M(Λ) is not
a chain, let Pi and Pj be non-comparable elements of M(Λ). Then Pi + Pj = M
and the projective cover P (M ) of M is Pi ⊕ Pj . Let ϕ : P (M ) −→ M . Then
Ker ϕ Pi ∩ Pj is projective.
Proposition 6.10.14. If a poset PΛ associated with a (0, 1)-order Λ has a

unique maximal element or a unique minimal element, then gl.dim Λ < ∞.
Proof. By proposition 6.10.2, we can assume that PΛ has a unique minimal

element and ⎛ ⎞
0 0 ... 0 0
⎜ 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ∗ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
E(Λ) = ⎜ . . ⎟.
⎜ . . . . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ * ⎠
1 0
Let e = e11 and I = ΛeΛ. In this case the quotient ring Λ/I is, obviously, an
Artinian piecewise domain. Thus gl.dim Λ/I is finite and, by proposition 6.10.10,
gl.dim Λ is finite.
Proposition 6.10.15. The chain of the ideals
I1 ⊂ I2 . . . ⊂ In−1 ⊂ Ωn
with ⎛ ⎞
n−1 n−2 ... 1 0
⎜n − 1 n − 2 . . . 1 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
E(I1 ) = ⎜ . .. .. .. .. ⎟ ,
⎝ .. . . . .⎠
n−1 n−2 ... 1 0
⎛ ⎞
n−2 n−3 ... 0 0
⎜n − 2 n − 3 . . . 0 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. ⎟ ,
E(I2 ) = ⎜ ... ..
.
..
. . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝n − 2 n − 3 . . . 0 0⎠
n−1 n−2 ... 1 0
··········································
⎛ ⎞
1 0 ... ... 0
⎜ .. .. ⎟
⎜ 1 0 . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. . .. .. .. ⎟ ,
E(In−1 ) = ⎜ . .. . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. ⎟
⎝n − 2 . . . 0⎠
n−1 n−2 ... 1 0
⎛ ⎞
0 0 ... ... ... 0
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ 1 . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ . . . .. .. ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
E(Ωn ) = ⎜ .. ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. ⎟
⎜n − 3 ... . . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. ⎟
⎜n − 2 n − 3 ... . . 0⎟
⎝ ⎠
n−1 n−2 n−3 ... 1 0
is a chain of projective idempotent ideals of Ωn and the quotient ring Ωn /I1 is

quasi-hereditary.
Proposition 6.10.16. The chain of the ideals
J1 ⊂ J2 ⊂ . . . ⊂ Jn−1 ⊂ Λn
with
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
2 2 ... 1 0 2 ... ... 2 1 0 0
⎜2 2 ... 1 0⎟ ⎜2 . . . ... 2 1 0 0⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. ⎟ , E(J ) = ⎜ .. .. ⎟
E(J1 ) = ⎜ ... ..
.
..
.
..
. .⎟ 2 ⎜.
..
.
..
.
..
.
.. ..
. . .⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎝2 2 ... 1 0⎠ ⎝2 . . . ... 2 1 0 0⎠
2 2 ... 1 0 2 ... ... 2 2 1 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 ... ... ... 0 0 0 ... ... ... 0
⎜ .. .. ⎟ ⎜ .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ . ⎟ ⎜ . . ⎟
⎜1 0 .⎟ ⎜1 .⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟ ⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜2 . . . .⎟ ⎜ . . . .⎟
. . . , E (Jn−1 ) = ⎜ ⎟ E (Λn ) = ⎜2 ⎟
⎜. .. .. .. .. .. ⎟ ⎜. .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ .. . . . . .⎟ ⎜ .. . . . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜. ⎟ ⎜. ⎟
⎜. .. .. .. ⎟ ⎜. .. .. .. ⎟
⎝. . . . 0⎠ ⎝. . . . 0⎠
2 ... ... 2 1 0 2 ... ... 2 1 0
is a chain of projective idempotent ideals of Λn and the quotient ring Ωn /J1 is

quasi-hereditary.
Now we shall compute the quiver Q(Ωn ) and its transition matrix for the re-
(2) (1)
duced exponent matrix Ωn . We use the formula [Q(Ω)n ] = Ωn −Ωn . Obviously,
⎛ ⎞
1 1 0
... ... ... ... 0
⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ 2 . . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ 2 . . . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ 3 . . . . . .⎟
Ω(2)
n = ⎜
⎜ . .. ⎟
⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. .. ..
⎜ . . . . . . .⎟ ⎟
⎜ . .. .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ .. . . . . . . 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎝n − 2 n−3 ... . . . . 1⎠
n−1 n − 2 n − 3 ... 3 2 2 1
and [Q(Ωn )] = Jn− (0) + Jn+ (0) = Yn , where Jn+ (0) = e12 + e23 + . . . + en−1n
π
and Jn− (0) = e21 + e32 + . . . + enn−1 . We have that inx Ωn = 2 cos and
n+1
π
f = (a1 , a2 , . . . , an ) is a positive eigenvector of Y with eigenvalue λ = 2 cos ,
n+1
iπ
Z = diag (a1 , . . . , an ), where ai = sin for i = 1, 2, . . . , n.
n+1
Thus the transition matrix Sn for the quiver Q(Ωn ) is:
Sn = λ−1 Z −1 Yn Z =
1 1 1 1
= π · diag( , . . . , ) · Yn · diag(a1 , . . . , an ) = π · C,
2 cos n+1 a1 an 2 cos n+1
iπ
where Yn = (yij ), C = (cij ) and ai = sin for i = 1, 2, . . . , n,
n+1

1, if i = j − 1 or i = j + 1,
yij =
0, otherwise,
⎧ ai+1
⎪
⎪ , if i = j − 1,
⎪
⎪ ai
⎪
⎪
⎨
cij = ai
⎪ , if i = j + 1,
⎪
⎪ ai+1
⎪
⎪
⎪
⎩
0, otherwise,
for i, j = 1, 2, . . . , n.
The matrix Sn defines a random walk on the set {1, 2, . . . , n} ⊂ N.

The main concepts of this chapter are reduced exponent matrices and their quivers.
Note that exponent matrices appeared first in the study of completely decompos-
able orders (see [Kirichenko, 1967], [Zavadskij, 1973]) and were used for the study
of semimaximal rings of finite type (see [Zavadskij, Kirichenko, 1976], [Zavadskij,
Kirichenko, 1977]).
Theorem 6.1.8 was proved by R.P.Dilworth in the paper [Dilworth, 1950]. The
direct proof of theorem 6.1.12 was given in [Kirichenko, 2004]. Theorem 6.1.13
was first proved in [Kirichenko, 2005].
In section 6.3 we have followed the paper [Dokuchaev, 2002]. In sections 6.6
and 6.7 we have followed the papers [Chernousova, 2002], [Chernousova, 2003].
The list of the section 6.7 was given in [Chernousova, 2003].
The notions of weakly prime and right 2-rings were introduced in [Danlyev,
1997]. Theorem 6.9.1 and 6.9.9 were proved in this article.
Consider the following example, due to H.Fujita [Fujita, 1990]. Let A be the
tiled order with the following exponent matrix:
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 0
⎜1 0 0 1 1 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜2 1 0 1 1 0⎟
E=⎜ ⎜2 1 0 0 0 0⎟
⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝2 2 1 1 0 0⎠
2 2 2 2 1 0
Then gl. dimA = 6 and this is also a counterexample to the Tarsy conjecture (see
[Tarsy, 1970]) saying that the maximal possible finite global dimension of a tiled
order in (K)n is n − 1.
The following example of W.Rump shows that the global dimension of an order
is determined not only by its exponent matrix even for the case of (0,1)-orders.
Consider the tiled O-order Λ in the matrix algebra M14 (K), where O is a
discrete valuation domain with quotient field K with exponent matrix:
⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
⎜0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜0 0 0 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜0 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 ⎟
E =⎜ ⎜0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 1 ⎟
⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜0 1 0 0 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜0 0 1 0 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 1 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝0 0 0 0 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 1 0 1 ⎠
0 0 0 0 1 1 0 1 0 0 1 1 1 0
If the characteristic of the residue class field k of O is 2, then gl.dim (Λ) = 4,
otherwise gl.dim (Λ) = 3.
Details can be found in example 1 of the paper [Rump, 1996].
The authors thank W.Rump for helpful discussions on the presentation of this
chapter.
[Chernousova, 2002] Zh.T.Chernousova, M.A.Dokuchaev, M.A.Khibina,

V.V.Kirichenko, S.G.Miroshnichenko, and V.N.Zhuravlev, Tiled orders over
discrete valuation rings, finite Markov chains and partially ordered sets. I,
Algebra and Discrete Math., v.1, 2002, p.32-63.
[Chernousova, 2003] Zh.T.Chernousova, M.A.Dokuchaev, M.A.Khibina, V.V.
Kirichenko, S.G.Miroshnichenko, and V.N.Zhuravlev, Tiled orders over dis-
crete valuation rings, finite Markov chains and partially ordered sets. II,
Algebra and Discrete Math., v.2, N2, 2003, p. 47-86.
[Danlyev, 1989] Kh.M.Danlyev, The homological dimension of semi-maximal
rings, Izv. Akad. Nauk Turkmen. SSR, Ser. Fiz.-Tekhn. Khim. Geol.
Nauk, 1989, No.4, p.83-86 (in Russian).
[Danlyev, 1997] Kh.M.Danlyev, V.V.Kirichenko, Yu.V.Yaremenko, On weakly
prime Noetherian semiperfect rings with two-generated right ideals, Dopov.
Nats. Akad. Nauk Ukraini, N.12, 1997, p.7-9.
[Dilworth, 1950] R.P.Dilworth, A decomposition theorem for partially ordered

sets, Annals of Mathematics, vol. 51, N1, 1950, p.161-166.
[Dlab, Ringel, 1989] V.Dlab, C.M.Ringel, Quasi-hereditary algebras, Illinois J.
Math., v.33, 1989, No.2, p.280-291.
[Dokuchaev, 2002] M.A.Dokuchaev, V.V.Kirichenko and Zh.T.Chernousova,
Tiled orders and Frobenius rings, Math. Notes, v.72, N3, 2002, p.428-432
(in Russian).
[Frobenius, 1912] G.Frobenius, Über Matrizen aus nicht negativen Elementen,
S.-B. Deutsch. Akad. Wiss. Berlin. Math-Nat. Kl., 1912, p.456-477.
[Fujita, 1990] H.Fujita, Tiled orders of finite global dimension, Trans. Amer.
Math. Soc., v.322, 1990, p.329-342.
[Fujita, 1991] H.Fujita, Erratum to “Tiled orders of finite global dimension”,
Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., v.327, No.2, 1991, p.919-920.
[Fujita, 2003] H.Fujita, Full matrix algebras with structure systems, Colloq.
Math., v.98, N.2, 2003, p.249-258.
[Fujita, 2006] H.Fujita and Y.Sakai, Frobenius full matrix algebras and Gorenstein
tiled orders, Comm. in Algebra, v.34, 2006, p.1181-1203.
[Gantmakher, 1960] F.R.Gantmakher, The theory of matrices, vol.II, Chelsea
Publ. Cg., 1960.
[Gantmakher, 1998] F.R.Gantmakher, The theory of matrices, AMS Chelsea Pub-
lishing Cg., 1998.
[Harary, 1969] F.Harary, Graph theory, Addison-Wesley Publ. Company, 1969.
[Herstein, 1968] I.N.Herstein, Noncommutative rings. Carus Mathematical
Monographs, No 15, Mathematical Association of America, 1968, p.35.
[Kemeny, Snell, 1960] John G.Kemeny and J.Laurie Snell, Finite Markov chains,
Princeton, 1960.
[Kirichenko, 1967] V.V.Kirichenko, Orders, all of whose representations are com-
pletely decomposable, Mat. Zametki, v.2, No.2, 1967, p. 139-144 (in Rus-
sian). English transl. Math. Notes, v.2, 1967.
[Kirichenko, 2004] V.V. Kirichenko, A.V. Zelensky and V.N. Zhuravlev, Expo-
nent matrices and their quivers, Bul. Acad. de Stiinte a Rep. Moldova,
Matematica, v.44, N1, 2004, p. 57-66.
[Kirichenko, 2005] V.V. Kirichenko, A.V. Zelensky, and V.N. Zhuravlev, Expo-
nent matrices and tiled orders over a discrete valuation rings, Intern. Journ.
of Algebra and Computation, v.15, 2005, No. 5-6, p.997-1012.
[Kirkman, Kuzmanovich, 1989] E.Kirkman and J.Kuzmanovich, Global Dimen-
sions of a Class of Tiled Orders, J. Algebra, v.127, 1989, p.57-72.
[Kostrikin, 2000] A.I.Kostrikin, Linear Algebra, Fiz-math. Lit., Moscow, 2000.
[Perron, 1907] O.Perron, Über Matrizen, Math. Ann., v.64, 1907, p.248-263.
[Rump, 1996] W.Rump, Discrete posets, cell complexes, and the global dimension
of tiled orders, Comm. Algebra, v.24, 1996, p.55-107.
[Tarsy, 1970] R.B.Tarsy, Global dimension of orders, Trans. Amer. Math.Soc.,
v.151, 1970, p.335-340.
[Weidemann, Roggenkamp, 1983] A.Weidemann, K.W.Roggenkamp, Path orders

of global dimension two, J. Algebra, v.80, 1983, p. 113-133.
[Zavadskij, 1973] A.G. Zavadskij, The Structure of Orders with Completely De-
composable Representations, Mat. Zametki, v.13, No.2, 1973, p. 325-335
(in Russian). English translation: Math. Notes, v.13, 1972, p. 196-201.
[Zavadskij, Kirichenko, 1976] A.G. Zavadskij, and V.V. Kirichenko, Torsion-free
Modules over Prime Rings, Zap. Nauch. Seminar. Leningrad. Otdel. Mat.
Steklov. Inst. (LOMI), v.57, 1976, p.100-116 (in Russian). English transla-
tion: J. Soviet Math., v.11, N.4, April, 1979, p.598-612.
[Zavadskij, Kirichenko, 1977] A.G. Zavadskij, and V.V. Kirichenko, Semimaximal
rings of finite type, Mat. Sb., v.103 (145), N.3, 1977, p. 323-345 (in Russian).
English translation: Math. USSR Sb., v.32, 1977, p. 273-291.
7. Gorenstein matrices
7.1 GORENSTEIN TILED ORDERS. EXAMPLES

In this section we consider a special type of tiled orders which is defined by the
equivalent conditions of the following theorem:
Theorem 7.1.1. The following conditions are equivalent for a tiled order A:
(i) inj. dimA AA = 1;
(ii) inj. dimA A A = 1;
(iii) A∗A is projective left A-module;
(iv) A A∗ is projective right A-module.
Proof. (i)⇒ (iv). Write Q = Q0 = Mn (D), where D is is the classical ring of

fractions of O. By proposition 6.2.1, Q is an injective right and left A-module. If
inj. dimA AA = 1 then there exists an exact sequence
0 → AA → Q0 → Q0 /AA → 0.
By proposition 6.5.5, vol. I, the module Q0 /AA is injective. Obviously, every inde-
composable direct summand of Q0 /AA has the form eii Q0 /eii A. Since eii Q0 /eii A
is indecomposable injective soc (eii Q0 /eii A) is simple. Therefore every eii A is a
relatively injective irreducible A-lattice by proposition 6.2.14, and AA is a rela-
tively injective right A-module. By definition, AA A P ∗ . By duality properties,
A P =A P1 ⊕ . . . ⊕A Ps ⊕ P , where A P1 , . . .A Ps are all pairwise non-isomorphic left
principal A-modules and every indecomposable direct summand of P is isomorphic
to some A Pi . Therefore, A A∗ is a projective right A-module.
From corollary 6.2.11 we obtain (iii) ⇔ (iv). In conclusion, we obtain that
(iv) ⇒ (i), by corollary 6.2.15 and the fact, that A A∗ and AA contain the same
indecomposable summands if A A∗ is projective. The equivalence (ii) ⇔ (iii) for
left modules is proved just like (i) ⇔ (iv) for right modules. The theorem is
proved.
Definition. A tiled order A, which satisfies the equivalent conditions of the-

orem 7.1.1, is called a Gorenstein tiled order1 . As follows from theorem 7.1.1
the definition of a Gorenstein tiled order is right-left symmetric.
1 Recallthat a commutative ring is called Gorenstein if its injective dimension is finite. These
rings were first considered by H.Bass (see [Bass, 1963])
327
Proposition 7.1.2. Let A = {O, E(A)} be a reduced tiled order with exponent
matrix E(A) = (αij ) ∈ Mn (Z). A is Gorenstein if and only if the matrix E(A)
is Gorenstein, i.e., there exists a permutation σ of the set {1, . . . , n} such that
αik + αkσ(i) = αiσ(i) for i, k = 1, . . . , n.
Proof. Since A is reduced we have that A A∗ AA . But

⎛ ⎞
0 α12 . . . ... α1n
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. ⎟
⎜ α21 0 . . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ . . ⎟
⎜
E (AA ) = ⎜ .. . .. . .. . .. .. ⎟
⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ . . . αn−11 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
αn1 αn2 . . . αnn−1 0
and ⎛ ⎞
⎜ 0 −α21 ... ... −αn1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. ⎟
⎜ −α12 0 . . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ . .. .. .. .. ⎟
E (A A ) = ⎜
∗
⎜ .
. . . . . ⎟.
⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ . . . −αnn−1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ⎠
−α1n −α2n . . . −αn−1n 0
Therefore, there exists a permutation σ of {1, . . . , n} such that
(αi1 , . . . , 0, . . . , αin ) = (−α1σ(i) + ci , . . . , −αnσ(i) + ci ),

where ci ∈ Z for i = 1, . . . , n. Consequently, αik + αkσ(i) = ci for i, k = 1, . . . , n.
For i = k we obtain αiσ(i) = ci and hence αik + αkσ(i) = αiσ(i) and E(A) is a
Gorenstein matrix. Conversely, if E(A) is Gorenstein then A A∗ AA and, by
theorem 7.1.1, the tiled order A is Gorenstein. The proposition is proved.
Example 7.1.1.
Let ⎧ ⎛ ⎞⎫
⎨
0 0 0 ⎬
A = O, ⎝1 0 1⎠
⎩ ⎭
1 1 0
and P1 = (0, 0, 0); P2 = (1, 0, 1); P3 = (1, 1, 0) be projective A-modules. Obvi-
ously, P1∗ = (0, 0, 0)T ; P2∗ = (−1, 0, −1)T (0, 1, 0)T and P3∗ = (−1, −1, 0)T
(0, 0, 1)T . Therefore, the modules P2 and P3 are relatively injective, but A is not
Gorenstein. It is well-known that gl.dim A = 2.
GORENSTEIN MATRICES 329
In this section we shall assume that the first row of a Gorenstein matrix E is
zero.
Let ⎛ ⎞
0 0 ... ... 0
⎜ .. ⎟
⎜α 0 . . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. . . . . . . .. ⎟
.
Tn,α = ⎜ . . . . ⎟,
⎜ ⎟
⎜. .. ⎟
⎝ .. . 0 0⎠
α ... ... α 0
where α is a natural integer, Tn,α ∈ Mn (Z). Obviously, Tn,α is a cyclic Gorenstein
matrix with σ = σ(Tn,α ) = (n n−1 . . . 2 1). Write Jn+ (0) = e12 +e23 +. . .+en−1n .
It is easy to see that [Q(Tn,1 )] = Jn+ (0) + en1 and [Q(Tn,α )] = En + Jn+ (0) + en1 ,
where En is the identity n × n-matrix and α ≥ 2.
We shall write Tn,1 = Hn . Therefore, Q(Hn ) is a simple cycle Cn . For the
quiver Q(Tn , α) (α ≥ 2) we use the notation LCn , i.e., LCn is a simple cycle with
a loop in each vertex.
Obviously, inx Hn = 1 and inx Tn,α = 2. In this case [Q(Hn )] = Pσn−1 and
[Q(Tn,α )] = Pid + Pσn−1 .
Definition. A tiled order A = {O, E(A)} is called triangular if the matrix

E(A) = (αij ) is triangular, i.e., αij = 0 for i ≤ j.
The following theorem is stated without proof.
Theorem 7.1.3.2 A reduced tiled order A = {O, E(A)} is a Gorenstein tri-

angular tiled order if and only if Q(A) is a simple cycle Cs or a quiver LCs . In
this case A is isomorphic to the order Tn,α .
Below the Gorenstein tiled orders and hence Gorenstein matrices are described
in detail for n ≤ 6.
To do this efficiently it is important to recall that up to equivalence it can be
assumed that the first row of an exponent matrix E = (αij ) consists of zeroes (and
then αij ≥ 0 for all i, j). Up to equivalence that still leaves the freedom to permute
columns and rows simultaneously by a permutation τ which leaves 1 fixed. Such
an operation turns a Gorenstein matrix E with first row zero and permutation σ
into a new Gorenstein matrix E with first row zero and permutation σ = τ −1 στ .
A second important point to note is that the permutation of a reduced Goren-
stein matrix cannot have a fixed point. Indeed, suppose that σ(i) = i. Then for
all k, αik + αkσ(i) = αiσ(i) and so αik + αki = αii = 0 contradicting that E is
reduced.
We shall use the decomposition of a permutation σ ∈ Sn into a product of
1 2 3 4 5
independent cycles. For example, the permutation σ = is the
3 5 4 1 2
2 see [Roggenkamp, 2001]
product of two cycles (1 3 4)(2 5) of lengths 3 and 2. The permutation of a reduced

Gorenstein matrix has no cycles of length 1.
Let σ ∈ Sn be a product of m independent cycles of lengths d1 , . . . , dm and τ ∈
Sn be a product of m independent cycles of lengths d1 , . . . , dm . Two permutations
σ and τ have the same cyclic type if m = m and there exists a permutation μ ∈ Sm
such that di = dμ(i) for i = 1, . . . , m. It is well-known that two permutations are
conjugate if and only if they have the same cyclic type. By proposition 6.1.18, we
can consider a permutation σ(E) for a Gorenstein matrix up to cyclic type.
Let n = 2. Then any reduced exponent matrix is equivalent to T2,α .
Let n = 3. We may assume that σ(E) = (3 2 1). From the Gorenstein condition
follows: ⎧
⎨ α12 + α23 = α13
α23 + α31 = α21 .
⎩
α31 + α12 = α32
Since α12 = α13 = 0, we obtain α23 = 0 and α31 = α32 = α21 . Set α21 = α.
Therefore, ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0
E = ⎝α 0 0⎠ = T3,α (α ≥ 1).
α α 0
So there is the following statement.
Proposition 7.1.4. For n = 2 every reduced exponent matrix is cyclic Goren-

stein, and for n = 3 every Gorenstein matrix is cyclic. Obviously, inx Hn =
w(Hn ) = 1 and inx Tn,α = w(Tn,α ) = 2 for α ≥ 2.
For n = 4 there are two possibilities for σ(E): a simple cycle and a product of
two transpositions. By proposition 4.1.12, we may assume that

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
σ(E) = and σ(E) = .
4 1 2 3 2 1 4 3
Case (a): σ = σ(E) = (4 3 2 1).
We shall use notations like: (α1 , . . . , αk ) = min (α1 , . . . , αk ) and δ = (2, α, β).
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0
⎜α 0 α − β 0⎟
E = Eα,β = ⎜⎝β β
⎟ (α ≥ β > 0).
0 0⎠
α β α 0
We have
⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0
⎜α 1 α−β 0⎟
= ⎜ ⎟
(1)
Eα,β ⎝β β 1 0⎠
α β α 1
and
⎛ ⎞
δ 1 (1, α − β) 0
⎜ α δ (α, α − β + 1) (1, α − β)⎟
= ⎜ ⎟.
(2)
Eα,β ⎝(α, β + 1) ⎠
β δ 1
α+1 (α, β + 1) α δ
Therefore, E1,1 = H4 and Q(E1,1 ) = C4 . If α ≥ 2, then Eα,α = T4,α and
Q(Eα,α ) = LC4 .
If β = 1 we have α ≥ 2 and
⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 0
⎜0 0 1 1⎟
[Q(Eα,1 )] = ⎜
⎝1
⎟.
0 0 1⎠
1 1 0 0
1
•
4 • • 2
•
3
In this case, [Q(Eα,1 )] = Pσ3 + Pσ2 and inx Eα,1 = 2.
If α > β > 1, then
⎛ ⎞
1 1 1 0
⎜0 1 1 1 ⎟
[Q(Eα,β )] = ⎜ ⎟
⎝1 0 1 1⎠ = Pσ2 + Pσ3 + Pσ4
1 1 0 1
and inx Eα,β = 3.
Case (b): σ = σ(E) = (1 2)(3 4).

In this case
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0
⎜γ + δ 0 γ δ⎟
Eγ,δ = ⎜
⎝ δ
⎟, (γ > 0, δ > 0).
0 0 δ⎠
γ 0 γ 0
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0 Δ 0 1 1
⎜γ + δ 1 γ δ⎟ ⎜γ + δ Δ γ + 1 δ + 1⎟
= ⎜ ⎟ and E ⎜ ⎟,
(1) (2)
Eγ,δ ⎝ δ γ,δ = ⎝ δ + 1
0 1 δ⎠ 1 Δ δ ⎠
γ 0 γ 1 γ+1 1 γ Δ
where Δ = (2, γ, δ).

Therefore,
⎛ ⎞
Δ−1 0 1 1
⎜ 0 Δ−1 1 1 ⎟
[Q(Eα,δ )] = ⎜
⎝ 1
⎟.
1 Δ−1 0 ⎠
1 1 0 Δ−1
If Δ = 1 we have
⎛ ⎞
0 0 1 1
⎜0 0 1 1⎟
B = [Q(E1,δ )] = [Q(Eγ,1 )] = ⎜
⎝1
⎟
1 0 0⎠
1 1 0 0
and inx E1,δ = inx Eγ,1 = 2. In this case, B = Pτ + Pw , where

1 2 3 4 1 2 3 4
τ = and w = .
4 3 2 1 3 4 1 2
For Δ ≥ 2, i.e., γ ≥ 2 and δ ≥ 2 we have
[Q(Eγ,δ )] = E + B = Pτ + Pτ 2 + Pw
and inx Eγ,δ = 3.

As above, for n = 5 we may assume:

1 2 3 4 5
σ =
5 1 2 3 4
or σ = (1 2)(3 4 5).
Case (a):
n = 5, σ = (5 4 3 2 1). It is easy to see that
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0
⎜μ 0 μ − ν μ − ν 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
Eμ,ν = ⎜⎜ ν ν 0 μ − ν 0⎟
⎟ (μ ≥ ν > 0)
⎝ν 2ν − μ ν 0 0⎠
μ ν ν μ 0
⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 0 0
⎜ μ 1 μ−ν μ−ν 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
(1)
Eμ,ν =⎜
⎜ ν ν 1 μ−ν 0 ⎟.
⎟
⎝ ν 2ν − μ ν 1 0 ⎠
μ ν ν μ 1
(2)
Let δ = min (2, μ, ν). The matrix Eμ,ν is:
⎛ ⎞
δ (1, 2ν − μ) (1, μ − ν) (1, μ − ν) 0
⎜ μ δ (ν, μ − ν + 1) (μ, μ − ν + 1) (1, μ − ν) ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ (μ, ν + 1) ν δ (ν, μ − ν + 1) (1, μ − ν) ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ (μ, ν + 1) (ν, 2ν − μ + 1) ν δ (1, 2ν − μ) ⎠
(μ + 1, 2ν) (μ, ν + 1) (μ, ν + 1) μ δ
and
(2) (1)
[Q(Eμ,ν )] = Eμ,ν − Eμ,ν =
⎛ ⎞
δ−1 (1, 2ν − μ) (1, μ − ν) (1, μ − ν) 0
⎜ 0 δ−1 (1, 2ν − μ) (1, μ − ν) (1, μ − ν) ⎟
⎜ ⎟
= ⎜
⎜ (1, μ − ν) 0 δ−1 (1, 2ν − μ) (1, μ − ν) ⎟⎟.
⎝ (1, μ − ν) (1, μ − ν) 0 δ−1 (1, 2ν − μ)⎠
(1, 2ν − μ) (1, μ − ν) (1, μ − ν) 0 δ−1
If μ = ν we obtain that E1,1 = H5 and Eμ,μ = T5,μ for μ ≥ 2.
If μ = 2ν and ν = 1, we have
⎛ ⎞
0 0 1 1 0
⎜0 0 0 1 1⎟
⎜ ⎟
C = [Q(E2,1 )] = ⎜
⎜1 0 0 0 1⎟⎟.
⎝1 1 0 0 0⎠
0 1 1 0 0
Obviously, C = Pσ2 + Pσ3 and inx C = 2. Denote E2,1 = E5 . We have

⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0
⎜2 0 1 1 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
E5 = ⎜
⎜1 1 0 1 0⎟
⎟
⎝1 0 1 0 0⎠
2 1 1 2 0
and
1 3
Q(E5 ) =
5 4
If μ = 2ν > 2, then
⎛ ⎞
1 0 1 1 0
⎜0 1 0 1 1⎟
⎜ ⎟
[Q(E2ν,ν )] = ⎜
⎜1 0 1 0 1⎟⎟ = E + C = Pid + Pσ2 + Pσ3
⎝1 1 0 1 0⎠
0 1 1 0 1
and inx (E + C) = 3. If ν = 1, then 2 − μ ≥ 0 and μ = 1, 2. These cases were

considered above.
Let 2ν = μ > 1 and μ > ν = 1. Obviously, [Q(Eμ,ν )] = Pid +Pσ2 +Pσ3 +Pσ4
and inx Eμ,ν = 4.
Case (b): σ = (1 2)(3 4 5). We obtain the following Gorenstein matrices:

⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0
⎜4α 0 2α 2α 2α⎟
⎜ ⎟
Eα = ⎜ ⎜2α 0 0 2α α ⎟ ⎟.
⎝2α 0 α 0 2α⎠
2α 0 2α α 0
⎛ ⎞
2 0 1 1 1
⎜ 4α 2 2α + 1 2α + 1 2α + 1⎟
⎜ ⎟
Eα(2) = ⎜
⎜2α + 1 1 2 2α α+1⎟ ⎟
⎝2α + 1 1 α+1 2 2α ⎠
2α + 1 1 2α α+1 2
and ⎛ ⎞
1 0 1 1 1
⎜0 1 1 1 1⎟
⎜ ⎟
[Q(Eα )] = ⎜
⎜1 1 1 0 1⎟
⎟ = Pid + Pτ + Pw + Pθ ,
⎝1 1 1 1 0⎠
1 1 0 1 1
where τ = (1 3 5 2 4), w = (1 4 3 2 5) and θ = (1 5 4 2 3). Therefore inx Eα = 4.
The next proposition follows from our considerations.
Proposition 7.1.5. An adjacency matrix of the quiver of a Gorenstein matrix

G for n = 2, 3, 4, 5 has the form [Q(G)] = λS, where S is a doubly stochastic
matrix and λ = 1, 2, 3, 4.
Let n = 6. In this case there are four types of permutations:
(a) σ = (6 5 4 3 2 1); (b) σ = (3 2 1)(6 5 4);
(c) σ = (4 3 2 1)(5 6); (d) σ = (1 2)(3 4)(5 6).

Case (a): σ = (6 5 4 3 2 1). In this case we have the following Gorenstein

matrix:
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 0
⎜ α + βγ 0 α β α 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ β+γ β+γ 0 β β 0⎟
Eα,β,γ = ⎜
⎜ α+γ
⎟,
⎜ γ α+γ 0 α 0⎟
⎟
⎝ β+γ γ γ β+γ 0 0⎠
α+β+γ β+γ α+γ β+γ 0 0
where α ≥ 0, β ≥ 0, γ ≥ 0, β + γ ≥ 1, α + γ ≥ 1. Then
⎛ ⎞
δ (1, γ) (1, α, γ) (1, β) (1, α, β) 0
⎜ 0 δ (1, γ) (1, α, γ) (1, β) (1, α, β)⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜(1, α, β) 0 δ (1, γ) (1, α, γ) (1, β) ⎟
[Q(Eα,β,γ )] = ⎜
⎜ (1, β)
⎟,
⎜ (1, α, β) 0 δ (1, γ) (1, α, γ)⎟
⎟
⎝(1, α, γ) (1, β) (1, α, β) 0 δ (1, γ) ⎠
(1, γ) (1, α, γ) (1, β) (1, α, β) 0 δ
where δ = (2, β + γ, γ + α) − 1.
Let α = β = 0, then E0,0,γ = T6,γ . In this case, E0,0,1 = H6 and inx E0,0,γ = 2
for γ ≥ 2. In the case α = δ = 0 we have γ = 1 and
⎛ ⎞
0 1 0 (1, β) 0 0
⎜ 0 0 1 0 (1, β) 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 0 0 1 0 (1, β)⎟
[Q(E0,β,1 )] = ⎜
⎜(1, β)
⎟.
⎜ 0 0 0 1 0 ⎟ ⎟
⎝ 0 (1, β) 0 0 0 1 ⎠
1 0 (1, β) 0 0 0
If β = 0, then we obtain the matrix H6 . Let α = δ = 0, γ = 1 and β ≥ 1. In

this case, we obtain [Q(E0,β,1 )] = Pσ3 + Pσ5 and inx E0,β,1 = 2.
Now we consider the following case: α = 0, γ ≥ 2, β ≥ 1. We obtain
[Q(E0,β,γ )] = Pid + Pσ3 + Pσ5 and inx E0,β,γ = 3.
Let α ≥ 1, β = δ = 0. As above γ = 1. We obtain the following adjacency
matrices: ⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 0 0 0
⎜0 0 1 1 0 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜0 0 0 1 1 0⎟
⎜
[Q(Eα,0,1 )] = ⎜ ⎟.
⎟
⎜0 0 0 0 1 1⎟
⎝1 0 0 0 0 1⎠
1 1 0 0 0 0
Obviously, [Q(Eα,0,1 )] = Pσ4 + Pσ5 and inx E0,β,1 = 2.

Write Eα,0,1 = Γα . We obtain, that

⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 0
⎜α + 1 0 α 0 α 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 1 0 0 0 0⎟
Γα = ⎜⎜α + 1
⎟
⎜ 1 α+1 0 α 0⎟⎟
⎝ 1 1 1 1 0 0⎠
α+1 1 α+1 1 α+1 0
and
6 2
Q(Γα ) =
5 3
If α ≥ 1, β = 0, δ = 1 and γ ≥ 2, then [Q(Eα,0,γ )] = Pid + Pσ4 + Pσ5 and

inx Eα,0,γ = 3.
Let γ = 0, δ = 0. We obtain the following adjacency matrices:
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 1 1 0
⎜0 0 0 0 1 1⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜1 0 0 0 0 1⎟
[Q(Eα,β,0 )] = ⎜ ⎟
⎜1 1 0 0 0 0⎟ = Pσ2 + Pσ3
⎜ ⎟
⎝0 1 1 0 0 0⎠
0 0 1 1 0 0
and inx Eα,β,o = 2.

If γ = 0 and δ = 1, then [Q(Eα,β,0 )] = Pid + Pσ2 + Pσ3 and inx Eα,β,o = 3.
Consequently, we may assume, that α, β, γ ≥ 1. Therefore, δ = 1 and
[Q(Eα,β,γ )] = U6 − Pσ , where
⎛ ⎞
1 ... 1
⎜ .⎟
Un = ⎝ ... ..
. .. ⎠
1 ... 1
for any n and inx Eα,β,γ = 5. Obviously, U6 − Pσ = Pid + Pσ2 + Pσ3 + Pσ4 + Pσ5 .
Remark 7.1.1. For Un there is the obvious equality:

n
Un = Pσi ,
i=1
where σ = (n n − 1 . . . 2 1).
From the considerations above there results the following proposition.
Proposition 7.1.6. The adjacency matrix of any cyclic Gorenstein matrix E

with σ = σ(E) = (6 5 4 3 2 1) is a sum of some powers of the permutation matrix
Pσ and for inx E there are the possibilities: inx E = 1, 2, 3, 5.
Remark 7.1.2. The matrix

⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 0
⎜4 0 4 4 3 3⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜4 0 0 4 2 2⎟
Γ6 = ⎜
⎜4
⎟
⎜ 0 0 0 1 1⎟
⎟
⎝3 0 1 2 0 3⎠
3 0 1 2 3 0
is Gorenstein with permutation

1 2 3 4 5 6
τ = .
2 3 4 1 6 5
Note that ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 1 1 1
⎜1 1 0 0 1 1⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜0 1 1 0 1 1⎟
[Q(Γ6 )] = ⎜
⎜0
⎟
⎜ 0 1 1 1 1⎟
⎟
⎝1 1 1 1 1 0⎠
1 1 1 1 0 1
is not a multiple of a doubly stochastic matrix. We have that
1 2
Q(Γ6 ) = 5 6
4 3
Example 7.1.2.
To conclude this section, here is an example of a non-Gorenstein reduced ex-

ponent matrix Δ such that [Q(Δ)] = 3P , where P is a stochastic matrix, but not
doubly stochastic. Let ⎡ ⎤
0 0 0 0
⎢ 2 0 1 1 ⎥
Δ=⎢ ⎣ 2 2 0 0 ⎦
⎥
3 3 2 0
⎡ ⎤ ⎡ ⎤
1 0 0 0 2 1 1 0
⎢ 2 1 1 1 ⎥ ⎢ 3 2 2 1 ⎥
Δ(1) =⎢
⎣ 2
⎥, Δ(2) =⎢ ⎥,
2 1 0 ⎦ ⎣ 3 2 2 1 ⎦
3 3 2 1 4 3 3 2
⎡ ⎤
1 1 1 0
⎢ 1 1 1 0 ⎥
B = [Q(Δ)] = ⎢
⎣ 1 0
⎥
1 1 ⎦
1 0 1 1
and χB (x) = x2 (x − 1)(x − 3), where χB (x) is a characteristic polynomial of the

matrix B.
7.2 CYCLIC GORENSTEIN MATRICES

Let E = (αij ) ∈ Mn (Z) be a Gorenstein (reduced) matrix with a permutation σ.
Lemma 7.2.1. If αij + αjk = αik for some i, j, k, then
ασ(i)σ(j) + ασ(j)σ(k) = ασ(i)σ(k) .
Proof. Consider the sum
αiσ(i) + αjσ(j) + αkσ(k) (7.2.1)

On the one hand using the Gorenstein property repeatedly and using αij + αjk =
αik , this is equal to
αik + αkσ(i) + αjσ(i) + ασ(i)σ(j) + αkσ(j) + ασ(j)σ(k) =
αij + αjk + αkσ(i) + αjσ(i) + αkσ(j) + ασ(i)σ(j) + ασ(j)σ(k) (7.2.2)

On the other hand (7.2.1) is also equal to
αij + αjσ(i) + αjk + αkσ(j) + αkσ(i) + ασ(i)σ(k) (7.2.3)
Comparing (7.2.2) and (7.2.3) is follows that ασ(i)σ(j) + ασ(j)σ(k) = ασ(i)σ(k) ,

proving the lemma.
Lemma 7.2.2. For i, j = 1, . . . , s the following equalities hold:
αij + αji = ασ(i)σ(j) + ασ(j)σ(i) .
Proof. The proof follows from the equalities:
1) αij + αjσ(i) = αiσ(j) + ασ(j)σ(i) = αiσ(i) ,

2) αji + αiσ(j) = αjσ(i) + ασ(i)σ(j) = αjσ(j) .
Adding them gives
αij + αji + αjσ(i) + αiσ(j) = αiσ(j) + αjσ(i) + ασ(j)σ(i) + ασ(i)σ(j)
proving the lemma.
Corollary 7.2.3. If αij + αjk = αik for some i, j, k, then
ασm (i)σm (j) + ασm (j)σm (k) = ασm (i)σm (k)
for all positive integers m. For i, j = 1, . . . , n
αij + αji = ασm (i)σm (j) + ασm (j)σm (i)
for any positive integer m.
Corollary 7.2.4. If for any j = i, j = k, αij + αjk > αik for some i, k (i = k),
then
ασm (i)σm (j) + ασm (j)σm (k) > ασm (i)σm (k) .
Proof. Assume that
ασm (i)σm (j) + ασm (j)σm (k) = ασm (i)σm (k) .
Let σ n be the identity. By corollary 7.2.3, we have
ασn−m (σm (i))σn−m (σm (j)) + ασn−m (σm (j))σn−m (σm (k)) = ασn−m (σm (i))σn−m (σm (k)) .
So ασn (i)σn (j) + ασn (j)σn (k) = ασn (i)σn (k) , i.e., αij + αjk = αik . The corollary is
proved.
Let [Q] = (tij ) be the adjacency matrix of the quiver Q(E) of a Gorenstein
matrix E.
Lemma 7.2.5. Let i, k = 1, . . . , n and let m be a positive integer. Then

tσm (i)σm (k) = tik .
Proof. Let tij = 0 for i = j. By the definition of [Q(E)], there exists an integer
k such that βik + βkj = βij . If k = i or k = j then βik + βkj > βij . Consequently,
i, j, k are distinct and βik = αik , βkj = αkj , βij = αij . By corollary 7.2.3, we
have
βσm (i)σm (k) + βσm (k)σm (j) = βσm (i)σm (j) .
Then tσm (i)σm (j) = min (βσm (i)k + βkσm (j) ) − βσm (i)σm (j) = 0 = tij .
If tij = 1 for i = j, then βik + βkj > βij for all k. We shall prove that
βσm (i)σm (k) + βσm (k)σm (j) > βσm (i)σm (j)
for k = 1, . . . , n.
It is obvious for i = k or j = k. Therefore we can consider that i, j, k are
distinct. And so the inequality βik + βkj > βij is the same thing as the inequality
αik + αkj > αij . By corollary 7.2.4, we have
ασm (i)σm (k) + ασm (k)σm (j) > ασm (i)σm (j)
and βσm (i)σm (k) + βσm (k)σm (j) > βσm (i)σm (j) . As k ranges over 1, . . . , n so does
σ m (k) and hence tσm (i)σm (j) > 0 and hence tij = 1 as [Q(E)] is a (0, 1)-matrix.
So, tij = tσm (i)σm (j) for i = j.
Let tii = 0. Then αik + αki = 1 for some k = i. By corollary 7.2.3,
ασm (i)σm (k) + ασm (k)σm (i) = 1.
Hence, γσm (i)σm (i) = 1, and tσm (i)σm (i) = 0. If tii = 1 then γii = 2. Since
βii + βii = 1 + 1 = 2 for i = 1, . . . , n it follows that βij + βji ≥ 2 for i = j. But
βij = αij for i = j and, by corollary 7.2.3, we have
βσm (i)σm (j) + βσm (j)σm (i) = βij + βji ≥ 2.
So γσm (i)σm (i) ≥ 2 and tσm (i)σm (i) = 1. The lemma is proved.
Theorem 7.2.6. Let E be a cyclic Gorenstein matrix. Then [Q(E)] = λP ,

where λ is a positive integer and P is a doubly stochastic matrix.
Proof. Let σ be a cyclic permutation. Then the integers
tik , tσ(i)σ(k) , . . . , tσs−1 (i)σs−1 (k)

n
n
belong to different rows and columns. Let Ci = tij and Dj = tij . Then
j=1 i=1

n
n
Ci = tij = tσm (i)σm (j) = Cσm (i)
j=1 j=1
and

n
n
Dj = tij = tσm (i)σm (j) = Dσm (j)
i=1 i=1
for any m, i.e., Ci = C and Dj = D for i, j = 1, . . . , n. Obviously,

n
n
n
Ci = tij = Dj .
i=1 i,j=1 j=1
Then nC = nD, i.e., C = D = λ and [Q(E)] = λP , where P is a doubly stochastic

matrix. The theorem is proved.
Theorem 7.2.7 (G.D.Birkhoff ). Every doubly stochastic matrix P is a

linear combination of permutation matrices

P = τσ Pσ ,
σ∈Sn

where τσ ≥ 0, τσ = 1 and the Pσ are permutation matrices. Conversely,
σ∈Sn
τσ Pσ is a doubly stochastic matrix if τσ ≥ 0 and τσ = 1.
σ∈Sn σ∈Sn
The proof of this theorem is based on the Frobenius-König lemma for which
we shall need to introduce some new notions.
Definition. A (p × q)-submatrix N = (nks ) of an (n × n)-matrix M = (mij ) ∈

Mn (R) is a (p × q)-matrix with entries from M such that nks = mik ,js for k =
i1 , . . . , ip and s = j1 , . . . , jq . We shall write also
N = Ni1 ,...,ip ;j1 ,...,jq .
Let T = (tij ) ∈ Mn (R) be a non-negative matrix. A normal set of elements

of T is a set of n elements t1j1 , . . . , tnjn of T , where

1 2 ... n
j1 j2 . . . jn
is an element of the symmetric group Sn of degree n.
Lemma 7.2.8 (Frobenius-König). Let T = (tij ) ∈ Mn (R) be a non-

negative matrix. If each normal set of T contains a zero element, then there
is a zero (p × q)-submatrix of T such that p + q = n + 1.
Proof. We shall prove the lemma by induction on the degree of the matrix.
We assume that the statement is true for all matrices of degree < n.
The case n = 1 is trivial: t11 = 0 and 1 + 1 = 2.
Let n > 1. We can assume that T = 0 and tnn = 0. Therefore by permuting

rows and columns (independently) if necessary
⎛ ⎞
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ T1 * ⎟
T = ⎜
⎜
⎟
⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ⎠
* tnn
The matrix T1 satisfies the conditions of the lemma, since otherwise there is a
normal set of positive elements of T . So, by the induction hypothesis, there is a
zero (p1 × q1 )-submatrix N of T1 such that p1 + q1 = n; p1 , q1 ≤ n − 1. We may
assume that N = N1,...,p1 ;1,...q1 and T has the following form
p1 0 T2
q1 T3
q1 p1
At least one of the square matrices T2 or T3 satisfies the conditions of the

lemma. Otherwise there would be a normal set of T with all elements nonzero. Let
the matrix T2 satisfies the conditions of the lemma. By the induction hypothesis,
there exists a zero (p2 × q2 )-submatrix of T2 such that p2 + q2 = p1 + 1. We can
assume that T2 has the form
p2 0 *
* *
q2
Then the matrix T has the form:
p2 0 0 *
p1 − p2 0 * *
* * *
q1 q2
And thus there is a zero (p2 ×(q1 +q2 ))-submatrix of T . Therefore, p2 +q1 +q2 =
p1 + q1 + 1 = n + 1. The lemma is proved.
Lemma 7.2.9. Let B = (bij ) ∈ Mn (R) be a non-negative matrix and

n
n
bij = bij = ω.
i=1 j=1
Then there exists a normal set b1i1 , . . . , bnin of strictly positive elements of B.
Proof. Suppose that the statement is not true. Then, by the previous lemma,
we can assume that B has the following form:
p 0
n−p
q n−q
and p + q = n + 1. The sum of the elements of the first p rows is equal to pω

and the sum of the first q columns is equal to qω. The sum of all elements of the
matrix B is equal to nω. Therefore pω + qω = (n + 1)ω > nω. This contradiction
proves the lemma.
Proof of theorem 7.2.7. Let T be a doubly stochastic matrix. By the previous

lemma, there is a normal set
t1j1 , . . . , tnjn (7.2.4)
of positive elements of T . Let
min tsjs = τ1 (τ1 > 0) (7.2.5)

s
and let P1 be a permutation matrix which has nonzero elements on the places
corresponding to the set (7.2.4). Consider the matrix
B1 = T − τ1 P1 .
The elements of B1 are non-negative, and the sum of elements in each row and
each column of B1 is equal to 1 − τ1 = ω1 ≥ 0. The number of zero elements in
B1 is at least one more than the number of zero elements in T . If 1 − τ1 = 0 we
are through. Continuing this process after k steps we obtain:
Bk = T − τ1 P1 − τ2 P2 − . . . − τk Pk .
As the number of zeros in Bk is at least one more than the number of of zeros
in Bk−1 this procedure terminates, proving that a doubly stochastic matrix is a
linear sum of permutation matrices whose coefficients are positive and sum to 1.

Conversely, the right side of the equality T = τσ Pσ , where τσ ≥ 0 and
σ∈Sn
τσ = 1, is obviously a doubly stochastic matrix. The theorem is proved.
σ∈Sn
Theorem 7.2.10. The adjacency matrix of a cyclic Gorenstein matrix with

permutation σ is a sum of powers of the permutation matrix Pσ .
Proof. Let E be a cyclic Gorenstein matrix with permutation σ. Then the

adjacency matrix [Q(E)] of the quiver Q(E) is a multiple of a doubly stochastic
matrix. By the Birkhoff theorem every non-negative doubly stochastic matrix
is a linear
combination of permutation matrices with non-negative coefficients:
P = ατ Pτ , where aτ ≥ 0. Consequently, [Q(E)] is a linear combination of
τ ∈Sn
permutation matrices.
By lemma 7.2.5, tij = tσ(i)σ(j) = . . . = tσn−1 (i)σn−1 (j) , where σ is a cyclic
permutation. As σ is cyclic j = σ k (i) for some k ∈ {0, 1, . . . , n − 1}. Hence,
tiσk (i) = tσ(i)σk+1 (i) = . . . = tσn−1 (i)σn+k−1 (i) . Renumbering the columns (and
rows) simultaneously of E so that σ becomes (1 2 . . . n−1 n) (which can be done, see
the text just below the statement of theorem 7.1.3), this gives for all k, t1σk (1) =

n n
t2σk (2) = . . . = tnσk (n) . Since [Q] = tij eij and Pτ = eiτ (i) , where the
i,j=1 i=1
eij are the matrix units, we have

n
n
n
[Q] = tij eij = tiσk (i) eiσk (i) = t1σk (1) Pσk .
i,j=1 i,k=1 k=1
Taking into account that Pτ m = (Pτ )m for any permutation matrix Pτ , we obtain
n
[Q] = t1σk (1) Pσk , where t1σk (1) equals either 0 or 1.
k=1
Example 7.2.1.
Let E2m ∈ M2m (Z) be the following exponent matrix:
⎛ ⎞
A C
... ... C
⎜ .. ⎟
⎜ .. ⎟
⎜B A . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜. .. .. .. .. ⎟
E2m = ⎜ .. . . . .⎟ ,
⎜ ⎟
⎜. .. . ⎟
⎜ .. . . . C⎟
⎝ ⎠
B ... ... B A

0 0 1 1 0 0
where A = ,B = ,C = .
2 0 2 1 1 0
It is easy to see that E2m is a cyclic Gorenstein matrix and [Q(E2m )] = Pσn−2 +
Pσn−1 , where n = 2m with σ = (n n − 1 . . . 2 1).
Q(E2 ) = 1 2
Q(E4 ) = 4 2
6 2
Q(E6 ) =
5 3
8 1
7 2
Q(E8 ) =
6 3
5 4
7.3 GORENSTEIN (0, 1)-MATRICES

Recall that an (exponent) matrix E = (αij ) is called a (0, 1)-matrix if αij ∈
{0, 1}.
Consider the following Gorenstein (0, 1)-matrices:

I. The (n × n)-matrix
⎛ ⎞
0 0 ... ... 0
⎜ .. ⎟
⎜1 0 . . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. . . . . . ⎟
Hn = ⎜ . . . . . . .⎟
.
⎜ ⎟
⎜. .. .. ⎟
⎝ .. . . 0⎠
1 ... ... 1 0
is a Gorenstein cyclic matrix with permutation

1 2 ... n
σ = σ(Hn ) = .
n 1 ... n − 1
For the adjacency matrix [Q(Hn )] we have that [Q(Hn )] = Pσn−1 .
II. The (2m × 2m)-matrix

(1)
Hm Hm
G2m =
(1)
Hm Hm
is Gorenstein with the permutation

1 2 ... m m+1 m+2 . . . 2m
σ(G2m ) = .
m + 1 m + 2 . . . 2m 1 2 ... m
If m = 1 then
1 1
[Q(G2 )] = = E + Pτ ,
1 1
where τ is the transposition (1 2).
In the general case, [Q(G2m )] = Pτ m−1 + Pτ 2m−1 , where

1 2 ... 2m
τ =
2m 1 . . . 2m − 1
is a cycle and inx G2m = 2.

Associate with a reduced exponent (0, 1)-matrix the poset
PE = {1, . . . , n}
with the relation defined by the formula i j ⇔ αij = 0. It is easy to see that
(, PE ) is a poset. Conversely, with any finite poset
P = {1, . . . , n}
there is associated, as before (see just above theorem 6.3.1), the reduced exponent
(0, 1)-matrix EP = (αij ) defined by: αij = 0 if and only if i j in P, otherwise
αij = 1.
Definition. The width of the poset PE is called the width of a reduced

exponent (0, 1)-matrix and is denoted by w(E).
Let E = (αij ) ∈ Mn (Z) be a reduced exponent matrix. We shall use the

notations: Pi = (αi1 , . . . , αin ) and rad Pi = (αi1 , . . . , 1, . . . , αin ).
We shall identify the poset PE with the set {P1 , . . . , Pn } and Pi Pj if and
only if αij = 0.
Then the diagram of PHn is: P1 → P2 → . . . → Pn−1 → Pn and the diagram
of PG2s is the garland P2s :
P1 P2 P3 ... Ps−1 Ps
P2s = (7.3.1)
Ps+1 Ps+2 Ps+3 ... P2s−1 P2s
Lemma 7.3.1. Let E = (αij ) ∈ Mn (Z) be a reduced exponent (0, 1)-matrix

and w(E) = 1. Then E is equivalent to Hn .
Proof. We may assume that α12 = α23 = . . . = αn−1n = 0 because PE is a

chain. From the exponent matrix inequalities we have αij + αjk ≥ αik . Therefore,
αik = 0 for i ≤ k. Since there are no symmetric zeroes in E, we have that αpq = 1
for p > q. The lemma is proved.
Lemma 7.3.2. Let E = (αij ), i, j = 1, . . . , n, be a Gorenstein (0, 1)-matrix

with permutation σ = σ(E) and let there exist an i such that αiσ(i) = 0. Then
E Hn and w(PE ) = 1.
Proof. If n = 2, then E H2 and w(PE ) = 1. Then n ≥ 3. We may assume

that i = 1 and σ(1) = n. From α1j + αjσ(1) = α1n = 0 follows that α1j = 0
and αjn = 0 for j = 1, . . . , n, i.e., the first row and the last column of E is zero.
This means that P1 = (0, 0, . . . , 0) is the unique minimal element in PE . Consider
rad P1 = (1, 0, . . . , 0). The matrix E does not have symmetric zeroes hence, αj1 = 1
for j = 2, . . . , n. There exists such k that σ(k) = 1. By proposition 6.1.18 one

can assume that k = 2. Therefore, α21 = α2σ(2) = α2j + αj1 = 1 and α2j = 0 for
j = 2, . . . , n. So P2 = rad P1 = (1, 0, . . . , 0). As above αj2 = 1 for j ≥ 3.
Let σ(3) = 2. We have α32 = 1 = α3σ(3) = α3j + αj2 and α3j = 0 for
j = 3, . . . , n. So P3 = (1, 1, 0, . . . , 0) = rad P2 and αj3 = 1 for j ≥ 4.
Continuing this process we obtain the following chain of the elements of PE
P1 rad P1 = P2 rad P2 . . . rad Pn−1 = Pn .

The exponent matrix has the following form
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 ... 0 0
⎜1 0 0 ... 0 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜1 1 0 ... 0 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
E = ⎜. . . .. . .. ⎟ .
⎜ .. .. .. . .. .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝1 1 1 ... 0 0⎠
1 1 1 ... 1 0
So w(PE ) = 1 and E Hn . The lemma is proved.
Theorem 7.3.3. Any reduced Gorenstein (0, 1)-matrix E is equivalent either

to Hn or to G2m .
Proof. Let σ = σ(E) be the permutation of an E. First of all we shall prove

that the width w(E) of a reduced Gorenstein (0,1)-matrix E is not greater than 2.
Let w(E) ≥ 3. Consequently there exist 3 pairwise non-comparable indecom-
posable rows
Pi = (αi1 , . . . , 0, . . . , αin );
Pj = (αj1 , . . . , 0, . . . , αjn );
Pk = (αk1 , . . . , 0, . . . , αkn ).
Using the elementary transformations of the second type (see proposition 6.1.18)
we can assume that i = 1, j = 2, k = 3. Then
⎛ ⎞
0 1 1
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 0 1 * ⎟
⎜ ⎟
E = ⎜ ⎟.
⎜ 1 1 0 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
* *
Obviously, σ(i) > 3 for i = 1, 2, 3. As above, we can consider that σ(1) = 4,

σ(2) = 5, σ(3) = 6. ¿From the Gorenstein conditions it follows that αi4 = 1 − α1i ,
αi5 = 1 − α2i , αi6 = 1 − α3i . First of all we shall compute the elements of E for
i = 1, 2, 3, and after that for i = 4, 5, 6. This is done as follows. The Gorenstein
conditions and lemma 7.3.2 say that α1i + αiσ(1) + α1σ(1) = α14 = 1. Then, taking
i = 2, 3, we obtain α24 = α34 = 0. Similarly α2i + αiσ(i) = α25 . By lemma
7.3.2, α25 = 1. For i = 3 we have α23 + α35 = 1 and α35 = 0. Analogously,
α21 + α15 = 1 and α15 = 0 (recall that we are dealing with a (0, 1)-matrix).
Similarly α16 = α26 = 0. Next the αij for 4 ≤ i, j ≤ 6 are calculated. For instance
α34 + α46 = α36 = 1, so that α46 = 1. Further α24 + α45 = α25 and so α45 = 1.
As a result E looks like
⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 1 0 0
⎜1 0 1 0 1 0 ∗ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜1 1 0 0 0 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
E = ⎜
⎜ 0 1 1 ⎟.
⎟
⎜ ∗ 1 0 1 ∗ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ⎠
∗ ∗ ∗
As αij + αji > 0 (i = j) it follows that α51 = α61 = α42 = α62 = α43 = α53 = 1.
Further α24 +α41 ≥ α21 = 1 and as α24 = 0 this gives α41 = 1; α15 +α52 ≥ α12 = 1
and α15 = 0 gives α52 = 1; α16 + α63 ≥ α13 = 1 and α16 = 0 gives α63 = 1. Thus
the matrix E is of the form
⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 1 0 0
⎜1 0 1 0 1 0 ∗ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜1 1 0 0 0 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜
E = ⎜1 1 1 0 1 1 ⎟.
⎟
⎜1 1 1 1 0 1 ∗ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜1 1 1 1 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ⎠
∗ ∗ ∗
Now observe that σ(i) > 6 for i = 4, 5, 6. Indeed, if σ(4) = 1, then α4σ(4) = 1 =
α42 + α21 = 2, a contradiction. Analogously, the cases σ(4) = 2 and σ(4) = 3
are impossible. Recall that σ(1) = 4, σ(2) = 5 and σ(3) = 6. Therefore, σ(i) ∈
{4, 5, 6} for i = 4, 5, 6. So it can be assumed that σ(4) = 7, σ(5) = 8, σ(6) = 9.
Again, of course, the Gorenstein condition is used in the form
α4i + αi7 = α47 , α5i + αi8 = α58 , α6i + αi9 = α69 .
As α41 = α51 = α61 = 1, this gives α47 = α58 = α69 = 1. Put i = 4, 6 in
α5i + αi8 = 1 to find α48 = α68 = 0; put i = 5, 6 in α4i + αi7 = 1 to find
α57 = α67 = 0; put i = 4, 5 in α6i + αi9 = 1 to find α49 = α59 = 0.
Further put i = 8, 9 in α4i + αi7 = 1 to find α87 = 1, α97 = 1; put i = 7, 9 in
α5i + αi8 = α58 = 1 to find α78 = α98 = 1, put i = 7, 8 in α6i + αi9 = 1 to find
α79 = α89 = 1.
Next put i = 1, 2, 3 in α4i + αi7 = 1, α5i + αi8 = 1, α6i + αi9 = 1 to find αij = 0
for i ∈ {1, 2, 3}, j ∈ {7, 8, 9}.
Thus the matrix E is of the form
⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
⎜ 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 ∗⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 ∗⎟
⎜ ⎟
E = ⎜
⎜ 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 ⎟.
⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ∗ ∗ 1 0 1 ∗⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ⎠
∗ ∗ ∗ ∗
Because αij + αji > 0, (i = j), it now follows that αij = 1 for i ∈ {7, 8, 9},
j ∈ {1, 2, 3} and α75 = α76 = α84 = α86 = α94 = α95 = 1. Next
α57 + α74 ≥ α54 = 1, α48 + α85 ≥ α45 = 1, α49 + α96 ≥ α46 = 1
and α57 = α48 = α49 = 0, so that α74 = α85 = α96 = 1. So the exponent matrix
E looks like
⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0
⎜ 1 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 0 ∗⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 1 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 1 1 0 1 1 1 0 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 1 1 1 0 1 0 1 0 ∗⎟
⎜ ⎟
E = ⎜
⎜ 1 1 1 1 1 0 0 0 1 ⎟.
⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 1 ∗⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ⎠
∗ ∗ ∗ ∗
Again, σ(i) > 6 for i = 7, 8, 9. Continuing this process we finally obtain after m
steps that the Gorenstein matrix E has the following block form:
⎛ ⎞
A E O ... O ∗
⎜ .. .. .. . .⎟
⎜U . . . .. .. ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .⎟
⎜ . . . O .. ⎟
E = ⎜. ⎟,
⎜. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ .. . . E .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝U . . . . . . U A ∗⎠
∗ ... ... ∗ ∗ ∗
where n = 3m + r, 0 ≤ r ≤ 2, the bottom ∗’s are matrices with r rows. The ∗’s
on the right are have r columns, and where
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 1 1 1
A = ⎝1 0 1⎠ , U = ⎝1 1 1⎠ ,
1 1 0 1 1 1
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 1 0 0
O = ⎝0 0 0⎠ , E = ⎝0 1 0⎠ .
1 1 0 0 0 1
But then the Gorenstein condition forces (as above) that σ(i) > 3m for i ∈
{1, 2, . . . , 3m} for which there is no room. Thus the hypothesis w(E) ≥ 3 leads to
a contradiction proving that w(E) ≤ 2.
Consider the case w(PE ) = 2, that means PE has two non-comparable ele-
ments. Let they be P1 and P2 . Then α12 = α21 = 1, and the exponent matrix
has the following form:
⎛ ⎞
0 1
∗
E = ⎝ 1 0 ⎠.
∗ ∗
Suppose, σ(1), σ(2) > 2. One may then assume that σ(1) = 3 and σ(2) = 4.
Then, in view of the Gorenstein condition and lemma 7.3.2, we obtain α1j + αj3 =
α13 = 1 and α2j + αj4 = α24 = 1.
As α12 = 1 it follows that α13 = 1 and α23 = 0; and as α21 = 1 it follows that
α24 = 1 and α14 = 0.
Further α23 + α34 = α24 = 1, so α34 = 1; α14 + α43 = α13 = 1, so α43 = 1.
Thus the exponent matrix E looks like
⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 0
⎜ 1 0 ∗ ⎟
⎜ 0 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
E = ⎜⎜ 0 1 ⎟.
∗ ∗ ⎟
⎜ 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ⎠
∗ ∗ ∗
Next as αij + αji > 0 for i = j, it follows that α32 = α41 = 1. Also α14 + α42 ≥
α12 = 1 and as α14 = 0, α42 = 1; α23 + α31 ≥ α21 = 1, α23 = 0, so that α31 = 1.
So E is of the form
⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 0
⎜ 1 0 ∗⎟
⎜ 0 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜
E = ⎜ 1 1 0 1 ⎟.
⎜ 1 1 ∗⎟⎟
⎜ 1 0 ⎟
⎝ ⎠
∗ ∗ ∗
Now observe that it must be the case that σ(3), σ(4) > 4. Indeed, suppose
σ(3) ∈ {1, 2, 4} (a fixed point being impossible). The Gorenstein condition says
α34 + α4σ(3) = α3σ(3) = 1.

As α34 = 1 this gives α4σ(3) = 0, so σ(3) = 1, 2. Also if σ(3) = 4 it would be the
case that
α3i + αi4 = α34 = 1

for all i. But it is not true for i = 2. Thus, indeed, σ(3) > 4. A similar argument
gives σ(4) > 4. Thus we can assume σ(3) = 5, σ(4) = 6.
Then α3i + αi5 = α35 , α34 = 1, so α35 = 1, α45 = 0; α4i + αi6 = α46 , α43 = 1,
so α46 = 1, α36 = 0. Further α31 + α15 = α35 = 1, α31 = 1, so α15 = 0;
α41 + α16 = α46 = 1, α41 = 1, so α16 = 1, α32 + α25 = α35 = 1, α32 = 1, so
α25 = 0; α42 + α26 = α46 = 1, α42 = 1, so α26 = 0.
Next α45 + α56 = α46 = 1, α45 = 0, so α56 = 1; α36 + α65 = α35 = 1, α36 = 0,
so α65 = 1. Therefore the exponent matrix E is of the form
⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 0 0 0
⎜ 1 0 ∗⎟
⎜ 0 1 0 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 1 0 1 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ∗⎟
⎜ 1 1 1 0 0 1 ⎟
E = ⎜ ⎜
⎟.
⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 1 ⎟
⎜ ∗ ∗ ∗⎟
⎜ 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ⎠
∗ ∗ ∗ ∗
As αij + αji > 0 for all i = j it now follows that α51 = α52 = α61 = α62 = 1
and α54 = α63 = 1. Further α36 + α64 ≥ α34 = 1, α36 = 0, so α64 = 1;
α15 + α53 ≥ α13 = 1, α15 = 0, so α53 = 1.
Thus the exponent matrix E looks like
⎛ ⎞
0 1 1 0 0 0
⎜ 1 ∗⎟
⎜ 0 0 1 0 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 1 0 1 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ∗⎟
E = ⎜
⎜ 1 1 1 0 0 1 ⎟.
⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 1 1 1 0 1 ⎟
⎜ ∗⎟
⎝ 1 1 1 1 1 0 ⎠
∗ ∗ ∗ ∗
Now observe that the Gorenstein condition forces σ(i) > 6 for i ∈ {1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6}
and continue in the same manner. The result, after m steps, is that E must be of
the form
⎛A E O ... ... O ∗⎞
⎜U .. .. .. .. . .. ⎟
⎜ . . . . .. .⎟
⎜. .. .. .. .. . .. ⎟
⎜ .. . . . . .. .⎟
⎜ ⎟
E = ⎜
⎜ ... .. .. .. .. .. ⎟ ,
⎜ . . . . O .⎟ ⎟
⎜. .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ .. . . . . E .⎟
⎝ ⎠
U ... ... ... U A ∗
∗ ... ... ... ∗ ∗ ∗
where n = 2m + r, 0 ≤ r ≤ 1, where the bottom ∗’s are matrices with r rows and
the ∗’s on the right are blocks with r columns and where

0 1 1 1 0 0 1 0
A = ,U = ,O = ,E = .
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1
The Gorenstein condition forces σ(i) > 2m for i ∈ {1, 2, . . . , 2m} for which
there is no room, giving a contradiction with the hypothesis σ(1), σ(2) > 2.
Hence, at least one of the numbers σ(1) or σ(2) is less than 3. Suppose σ(1) = 2,
but σ(2) = 1. Let σ(2) = 3 and α2σ(2) = 1 = α23 = α2i + αi3 . We assume that
α12 = α21 = 1. Then αi3 = 1 − α2i . Therefore α13 = 0 and α23 = 1. Consequently
⎛ ⎞
0 1 0
∗⎠
E = ⎝ 1 0 1 .
∗ ∗ ∗
Since E is reduced, αij +αji > 0 for i = j, and α13 +α32 ≥ α12 . So α31 = α32 = 1.
Hence
⎛ ⎞
0 1 0
⎜ 1 0 1 ∗⎟
E = ⎜⎝ 1 1 0
⎟.
⎠
∗ ∗
Now consider σ(3). Since σ(1) = 2 and σ(2) = 3, σ(3) = 2 cannot hold. If
σ(3) = 1 then α32 + α21 = 2. So σ(3) ∈ {1, 2} and σ(3) > 3. It can be assumed
that σ(3) = 4. The Gorenstein condition gives α3i + αi4 = α34 . As α31 = 1,
α34 = 1 and α14 = 0, and then also α24 = 0 because α32 = 1. So E looks like
⎛ ⎞
0 1 0 0
⎜ 1 0 1 0 ∗⎟
E = ⎜
⎝ 1 1
⎟.
⎠
0 1
∗ ∗
Further α41 = α42 = 1 because α14 = α24 = 0 and α43 = 1 because α24 + α43 =
α23 = 1 and α24 = 0. Thus E has the form
⎛ ⎞
0 1 0 0
⎜ 1 0 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ∗⎟
E = ⎜⎜ 1 1 0 1 ⎟.
⎟
⎝ 1 1 1 0 ⎠
∗ ∗
Continuing this process it follows that E is equal to
⎛ ⎞
0 1 0
... ... 0
⎜ .. ..
.. .. ⎟
⎜1 . .. .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. . . . .. .. .. ⎟
⎜. . .. . . .⎟
E = ⎜
⎜.
⎟.
⎟
⎜ .. . . .
⎜
.. .. .. 0⎟ ⎟
⎜. .. .. ⎟
⎝ .. . . 1⎠
1 ... ... ... 1 0
and that σ(i) = i + 1, i = 1, . . . , n − 1. But then σ(n) has to be 1 and αn2 + α21 =
αn1 which is not true because αn2 = 1 = α21 = αn1 (if n ≥ 3). Thus σ(2) > 2
cannot hold and we must have σ(1) = 2, σ(2) = 1.
Quite generally this means that if Pi and Pj are two incomparable elements
then σ(i) = j, σ(j) = i. And further, if Pk (k = j) would also be incomparable
with Pi , σ(i) = k, σ(k) = i which cannot be. So for any Pk , k = i, j, Pk is
comparable with both Pi and Pj . This means that P splits up in a number s of
pairs of incomparable elements which after renumbering can be labelled
P1 , Ps+1 ; P2 , Ps+2 ; . . . ; Ps , P2s

and a number of singletons P2s+1 , . . . , Pn such that for all t = 1, . . . , s, Pt is
only incomparable with Pt+s and P2s+r is comparable with all other Pt for r =
1, . . . , n − 2s. A further renumbering, if needed, sees to it that the ordered set
looks like
Pi , Ps+1 ≺ Pj , Ps+j , i, j ∈ {1, . . . , s}, i < j;
P2s+i ≺ P2s+j , i, j ∈ {1, 2, . . . , n − 2s}, i < j.
But nothing can be done by renumbering about the pattern odd singletons and
pairs in the poset PE . For instance PE could look like
1 2 3
• • •
7 • • • • 10
8 9
• • •
4 5 6
Now we show that if such an E is to be Gorenstein there can not be both pairs
and singletons.
Indeed suppose that there are both pairs and singletons. Now σ takes each
pair {Pi , Pj } into itself. It follows that σ takes singletons into singletons. Thus
there must be at least one pair and 2 singletons. This means that PE must have
one of the 3 following subposets.
j
•
i • • l (a)
•
k
σ(j) = k, σ(k) = j, σ(l) = i.
j
•
i • • (b)
l
•
k
σ(j) = k, σ(k) = j, σ(i) = l.

j
•
i • • l (c)
•
k
σ(j) = k, σ(k) = j, σ(i) = l.
Indeed take for i the minimal singleton (among the singletons) and for {j, k}
the minimal pair (among the pairs). Suppose i ≺ j, k and σ(i) ≺ j, k then we
have case (b) with i = i and l = σ(i). Next suppose i ≺ j, k and σ(i) j, k. Let
A = {c : c is a singleton and c ≺ j, k}, B = {c : c is a singleton and c j, k}.
Then σ takes A∪B into itself and as σ(i ) ∈ B, i ∈ A there must be an l ∈ B with
σ(l) ∈ A. Take i = σ(l). This gives subposet (a). Finally if i j, k, σ(i ) i (as
i is minimal), so take i = i , l = σ(i) to find case (c).
Case (a). The Gorenstein condition says
αlj + αjσ(l) = αlj + αji = αli .

But αlj = 1, αji = 1, αli = 1, so this cannot be.
Case (b). Here the Gorenstein condition says that
αij + αjl = αil = 0.

But αij = 0, αjl = 1, αil = 0, so this also cannot be.
Case (c). Finally in this case the Gorenstein condition says that
αij + αjl = αil .

But αil = 0, αij = 1, so this cannot be.3
It follows that there are either only singletons so that PE is a chain and
E = Hn or there are only pairs and then PE is a garland (see (7.3.1)) and E = G2m .
7.4 INDICES OF GORENSTEIN MATRICES

Let r be the maximal eigenvalue of a permutationally irreducible non-negative
n
matrix A = (aij ). Write si = aik (i = 1, 2, . . . , n), s = min si , S =
k=1 1≤i≤n
max si . We recall:
1≤i≤n
Proposition 7.4.1. Let A be a permutationally irreducible non-negative ma-

trix. Then s ≤ r ≤ S and the equality sign on the left side or on the right side of
3 The argument suggest e.g. in case (a) that a chain • • • cannot give a Gorenstein
i j l
exponent matrix. That is not true of course. The reason that cases (a), (b), (c) are not possible
is that the specified permutation is the wrong one in each case.
r holds only for s = S, i.e., it holds only when all the “row-sums” s1 , s2 , . . . , sn
are equal.
Corollary 7.4.2. Let A be a permutationally irreducible (0, 1)-matrix and

s = k, S = k + 1. Then r is not integer.
Definition. Let X and Y be any two (disjoint) posets. The ordinal sum
X ⊕Y of X and Y is the set of all x ∈ X and y ∈ Y (as a set, i.e. the disjoint union
of the sets X and Y ). The ordering relation on it is defined as following: x ≺ y
for all x ∈ X and y ∈ Y ; the relations x x1 and y y1 (x, x1 ∈ X; y, y1 ∈ Y )
are as before.
For instance
(• •) ⊕ (• •) = • • • •
and
•
(• •) ⊕ (• •) = • •
•
The ordinal sum is associative (but not commutative), and we can consider the
ordinal power X ⊕n = X ⊕ . . . ⊕ X for any poset X.

n
In particular, CHn = CH1⊕n and P2n = ACH2⊕n .
If X and Y are finite posets, then

EX 0m×n
EX⊕Y = ,
Un×m EY
where m (resp. n) is a number of elements in X (resp. in Y ); 0m×n is an m × n-

matrix, with all entries 0 and Un×m is an n × m-matrix, all of whose entries are
1. As usual one writes, Un×n = Un and 0n×n = 0n .
Remark 7.4.1. inx CHn = w(CHn ) = 1 and inx P2n = w(P2n ) = 2.
Recall that the index of a poset P is the largest eigenvalue of the adjacency
)].
matrix [Q(P
Proposition 7.4.3. If inx P = 1, then P is CHn for some n.
Proof. The proof follows from proposition 7.4.1.

Proposition 7.4.4. For any finite poset P we have:
inx P ≤ w(P).
Proof. Let c1 , . . . , cm form the antichain of all minimal elements of P. There

are exactly m arrows from a maximal element a to each ci , (i = 1, . . . , m).
The elements a1 , . . . , ak ∈ P which cover a b ∈ P form an antichain. Thus,
there are exactly k arrows to b from a1 , . . . , ak . Obviously, m ≤ w(P) and k ≤
n
w(P). Let [Q̃(P)] = B = (bij ). Then, S = max bij ≤ w(P) and, by
1≤i≤n j=1
proposition 7.4.1, we have inx P ≤ w(P).
Example 7.4.1.
The quiver Q with adjacency matrix
⎡ ⎤
0 1 1
[Q] = ⎣ 1 0 1 ⎦
1 1 0
is not a quiver associated with any finite poset P.
Theorem 7.4.5. Let P be a finite poset. Then inx P = w(P) = 2 if and

only if P = P2n = ACH2⊕n .
Proof. The equalities inx P2n = w(P2n ) = 2 follow from proposition 7.4.1.

Let P = {p1 , . . . , pn }, n ≥ 3 and inx P = 2. We shall show first that Q(P) has
no loops when n ≥ 3. For n = 2, w(P) = 2 implies directly that P = ACH2 . Let
pn be an isolated element. Then, as w(P) = 2, {p1 , . . . , pn−1 } is a chain CHn−1 .
One can suppose that
p1 ≺ p2 ≺ . . . ≺ pn−1 .
Thus, for n ≥ 3
⎛ ⎞
0 1 0 ... ... 0
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜. . . . .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ . . . .⎟
[Q(P)] = ⎜ . ⎟.
⎜ .. .. ⎟
⎜0 . . 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝1 0 ... ... 0 1⎠
1 0 ... ... 0 1
We have s1 = 1 and sn = 2. By corollary 7.4.2, 1 < inx P < 2 contradicting

inx (P) = 2. So Q(P) has no loops as required. Consequently, the (0, 1)-matrix
[Q(P)] with inx P = 2 has the zero main diagonal and exactly two 1’s in each
row. Thus, Pmin consists of two elements as there is an arrow from each maximal
element to all minimal elements.
Denote by P T the poset anti-isomorphic to P. Obviously, inx P = inx P T .
Then inx P T = 2 and P T has exactly two minimal elements. Hence P also has
precisely two maximal elements, say pn−1 and pn . Thus, one can assume that

Pmin = {p1 , p2 }, Pmax = {pn−1 , pn }. The (0, 1)-matrix [Q(P)] has zero main
diagonal and exactly two 1’s in each row and in each column.
Every partial order can be refined to a total order. Number the elements of
the poset P \ {1, 2, n − 1, n} according to such a total order with the numbers
3, 4, . . . , n − 2. Then in P
pi ≺ pj ⇒ i < j (7.4.1)
From everyi, 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 2 there issue precisely two arrows of Q(P) and in every i,

3 ≤ i ≤ n there arrive precisely 2 arrows (because each column and row of [Q(P)]
has precisely two entries equal to 1 and is otherwise zero).
Now consider the element 3. Two arrows must terminate in p3 and as there
are no loops these must come from p1 and p2 because of (7.4.1). Thus
p1 • • p3
P = ...? ...
p2 •
Next consider the element p4 . Two arrows must terminate in p4 . These must
come from {p1 , p2 , p3 }. Suppose one of them comes from p3 . Let the other come
from p1 . This gives p1 p3 p4 and p1 p4 which is a contradiction
as p4 then does not cover p1 . Similarly, if the second arrow arriving in 4 comes
from p2 we would have p2 p3 p4 , p2 p4 also a contradiction. Thus
the two arrows arriving in p4 come from p1 and p2 and P looks like
p1 • • p3
...
p2 • • p4
Now consider p5 . There are two arrows terminating in p5 . These must come
from {p1 , p2 , p3 , p4 }. But there are already 2 arrows starting in p1 , p2 . Thus these
two arrows ending in p5 must come from p3 , p4 and P is of the form
p1 p3 p5
• • •
...
• •
p2 p4
Now look at p6 . There must be precisely 2 arrows ending in p6 . These must

issue from {p3 , p4 , p6 }. Arguing exactly as for p4 we see that p5 p6 is not
possible. And so P looks like
p1 p3 p5
• • •
...
• • •
p2 p4 p6
Continuing in this way the partially ordered set P would look like
p1 p3 pn−4 pn−2 pn
• • • • •
...
• • • •
p2 p4 pn−3 pn−1
if n is odd. But that contradicts that there are two maximal elements. Thus n is
even and
p1 p3 pn−3 pn−1
• • • •
P = ... = (ACH2 )⊕n/2
• • • •
p2 p4 pn−2 pn

Remark 7.4.2. Similarly, one can show that if inx P = w(P) = m and Q(P)
⊕n
has no loops, then P = ACHm .
The description of reduced Gorenstein (0, 1)-orders is given by theorem 7.3.3.

In view of theorem 7.4.5 and the definition of an ordinal power, we have the
following statements.
Theorem 7.4.6. A reduced (0, 1)-matrix E is Gorenstein if and only if PE is

an ordinal power of either a singleton or an antichain with two elements.
Theorem 7.4.7. A reduced (0, 1)-matrix E is Gorenstein if and only if either

inx PE = w(PE ) = 1 or inx PE = w(PE ) = 2. In the first case, the reduced tiled
(0,1)-order with the exponent matrix E is hereditary.
Denote by Mn (Z) the ring of all square n × n matrices over the integers Z. Let
A = (aij ) ∈ Mn (Z).
Definition. A matrix A = (aij ) is called a (0, 1, 2)-matrix if aij ∈ {0, 1, 2}.
Theorem 7.4.8. For any permutation σ on {1, . . . , n} without fixed elements

there exists a Gorenstein (0, 1, 2)-matrix Eσ .
Proof. Let σ : i → σ(i) be a permutation on {1, . . . , n} without fixed elements

and let Eσ = (αij ) be the following (0, 1, 2)-matrix:
• αii = 0 and αiσ(i) = 2 for i = 1, . . . , n;

• αij = 1 for i = j and j = σ(i) (i, j = 1, . . . , n).
Obviously, Eσ is a Gorenstein matrix with permutation σ.
Let σ be an arbitrary permutation on {1, . . . , n} without fixed elements and

n
let Eσ be the Gorenstein (0, 1, 2)-matrix as in theorem 7.4.8. Let Pσ = eiσ(i)
i=1
be the permutation matrix of σ. It is easy to see that [Q(Eσ )] = Un − Pσ .
Here is how one can represent the matrix [Q(Eσ )] as a sum of permutation
matrices.
Let σ1 , . . . , σn−1 be the permutations: σk (i) = σ(i) + k (mod n). Obviously,

n−1
σk (i) = σm (i) for k = m and [Q(Eσ )] = Pσk .
k=1
Examples 7.4.2.
I. Let ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0
E3 = ⎝ 2 0 0⎠
2 2 0
be the Gorenstein matrix with the permutation

1 2 3
σ = .
3 1 2
Straight forward calculation gives
⎛ ⎞
1 1 0
(2)
E3 = ⎝ 2 1 1⎠ and [Q(E3 )] = E + Pσ2 .
3 2 1
Thus, Q(E3 ) has the following form:
3 2
II. Let ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0
⎜2 0 1 0⎟
E4 = ⎜
⎝1
⎟
1 0 0⎠
2 1 2 0
be the Gorenstein matrix with permutation

1 2 3 4
σ = .
4 1 2 3
One calculates
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 1 1 0 0 1 1 0
⎜2 1 2 1⎟ ⎜0 0 1 1⎟
= ⎜ ⎟ and [Q(E4 )] = Pσ2 + Pσ3 = ⎜ ⎟.
(2)
E4 ⎝2 1 1 1⎠ ⎝1 0 0 1⎠
3 2 2 1 1 1 0 0
Hence, Q(E4 ) has the following form:
4 2
III. Let ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0
⎜2 0 1 1 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
E5 = ⎜
⎜1 1 0 1 0⎟⎟
⎝1 0 1 0 0⎠
2 1 1 2 0

1 2 3 4 5
σ = .
5 1 2 3 4
By straight forward calculation
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 1 1 0 0 0 1 1 0
⎜2 1 1 2 1⎟ ⎜0 0 0 1 1⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
E5 = ⎜ 1⎟ ⎜ 1⎟
(2)
⎜2 1 1 1 ⎟ and [Q(E5 )] = ⎜1 0 0 0 ⎟.
⎝2 1 1 1 0⎠ ⎝1 1 0 0 0⎠
2 2 2 2 1 0 1 1 0 0
So, Q(E5 ) has the following form
1 3
5 4
and [Q(E5 )] = Pσ2 + Pσ3 .
IV. Let ⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 0 0 0
⎜2 0 1 1 1 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜1 1 0 1 1 0⎟
E6 = ⎜
⎜1
⎟
⎜ 0 1 0 1 0⎟
⎟
⎝1 0 0 1 0 0⎠
2 1 1 1 2 0

1 2 3 4 5 6
σ = .
6 1 2 3 4 5
Then
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 0 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 1 1 0
⎜2 1 1 1 2 1⎟ ⎜0 0 0 0 1 1⎟
⎜ ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
⎜2 1 1 1 1 1⎟ ⎜ 1⎟
E6
(2)
= ⎜ ⎟ [Q(E6 )] = Pσ2 + Pσ3 = ⎜1 0 0 0 0 ⎟.
⎜2 1 1 1 1 0⎟⎟ ⎜1 1 0 0 0 0⎟
⎜ ⎜ ⎟
⎝1 1 1 1 1 0 ⎠ ⎝0 1 1 0 0 0⎠
2 1 2 2 2 1 0 0 1 1 0 0
And Q(E6 ) looks as follows
6 2
5 3
4
In the general case we have that

⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 ... ... ... 0 0
⎜2 0 1 ... ... ... 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜1 1 . . . . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. . .. .. . .. ⎟
⎜. 0 .. . . .
. . ⎟
En = ⎜
⎜. .. . . .. ..
⎟
⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ . . . . . . . ⎟
⎜. .. .. .. .. ⎟
⎜ .. . . . ⎟
⎜ . 1 0 ⎟
⎝1 0 ... ... 0 1 0 0 ⎠
2 1 ... ... ... 1 2 0
is a Gorenstein matrix with permutation

1 2 ... n
σ(En ) = σ = .
n 1 ... n − 1
It is easy to show that [Q(En )] = Pσ2 + Pσ3 .
Proposition 7.4.9. For every positive integer n there exists a Gorenstein

cyclic (0, 1, 2)-matrix En such that inx En = w(En ) = 2.
7.5 D-MATRICES
Definition. Let A ∈ Mm×n (R) and A ≥ 0, i.e., if A = (aij ), then aij ≥ 0.

n m
We say that A is a d-matrix for some d > 0, if aij = d and aij = d
j=1 i=1
for all i, j.
Lemma 7.5.1. If A is a d-matrix, then m = n.

Proof. Obviously, aij = md = nd. So, m = n.
i,j
Lemma 7.5.2. If A is a d-matrix and B is a d1 -matrix, then AB is a dd1 -

matrix.
From proposition 6.6.1 it follows that the quiver Q(A) of a d-matrix A is a

disjoint union of strongly connected quivers.
Proposition 7.5.3. The set Dn of all (n × n) doubly stochastic matrices is a

semigroup with identity with respect to multiplication.
The proof follows immediately from lemma 7.5.2.

Theorem 7.5.4. If A is a (0, 1) d-matrix, then A is a sum of permutation

matrices.
Proof. We shall prove this theorem by induction on the number d. If d = 1,

then A is a permutation matrix. By lemma 6.2.9, in an arbitrary d-matrix (d ≥ 2)
there exists a normal set a1i1 , . . . , a1in of 1’s in A. Denote by σ the permutation

1 ... n
σ = .
i1 . . . in
A − Pσ = A1 . Obviously, A1 is a (0, 1) (d − 1)-matrix and, by induction,

Consider
A1 = ατ Pτ , where ατ is either 0 or 1.
τ ∈Sn

Note that a presentation A = ατ Pτ need not be unique. For example,
⎛ ⎞
1 1 1
U3 = ⎝1 1 1⎠ = Pid + Pσ + Pσ2 ,
1 1 1

1 2 3
where σ = . Write
2 3 1

1 2 3 1 2 3 1 2 3
σ1 = , σ2 = , σ3 = ,
3 2 1 1 3 2 2 1 3
then also U3 = Pσ1 + Pσ2 + Pσ3 .
Remark 7.5.1. Let A be a d-matrix and let there exists a permutation matrix
Pτ such that
⎛ ⎞
0 A12 0 ... 0
⎜ 0 0 A23 . . . 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
T ⎜ .. . . . .. ⎟
B = Pτ APτ = ⎜ . .. .. .. . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 0 0 . . . Ah−1h ⎠
Ah1 0 0 ... 0
By lemma 7.5.2, PτT APτ = B is a d-matrix. Therefore the matrices
A12 , A23 , . . . , Ah1 are d-matrices. By lemma 7.5.1, all these matrices are square.
Example 7.5.1.
By theorem 7.3.3, any Gorenstein (0, 1)-matrix E is equivalent to either Hs
or G2s . In the case Hs we obtain the adjacency matrix [Q(Hs )] of Q(Hs ) in the
following form
[Q(Hs )] = Pσ ,
where σ = (12 . . . s). The exponent matrix G2s is equivalent to the matrix E2s
⎛ ⎞
A O O ... O O
⎜U A O ... O O⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. ⎟ ,
E2s = ⎜ ... ..
.
..
.
.. .
. .. .⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝U U U ... A O⎠
U U U ... U A
where

0 1 1 1 0 0
A = , U = , O = .
1 0 1 1 0 0
Obviously,
⎡ ⎤
0 U2 0 ... 0
⎢ 0 0 U2 ... ⎥
0
⎢ ⎥
⎢ .. .. .. .. ⎥
..
[Q(E2s )] = ⎢ . . . . ⎥.
.
⎢ ⎥
⎣ 0 0 0 . . . U2 ⎦
U2 0 0 ... 0
We recall some facts which can be found in the book [Gantmakher, 1959]
(Chapter III, §5 Primitive and imprimitive matrices).
Definition. Let A ≥ 0 be a permutationally irreducible matrix, and let the

maximal characteristic root be r. Suppose there are exactly h characteristic num-
bers of modulus r, i.e., λ1 = . . . = | λh | = r. If h is 1, the matrix is called
primitive; if h > 1, the matrix is called imprimitive, and the number h is
called the index of imprimitivity.
Theorem 7.5.5. A nonnegative matrix A is primitive if and only if there is a

power of A which is positive:
Ap > 0 (for some p ≥ 1).
Remark 7.5.2. An algebraic proof of this theorem was given by I.N. Herstein
in the paper [Herstein, 1954].
Let A1 , . . . , At be the square matrices of orders m1 , . . . , mt . Denote by A =

diag (A1 , . . . , At ) the following block diagonal matrix of order m = m1 + . . . + mt :
⎛ ⎞
A1 0 . . . 0 0
⎜ 0 A2 . . . 0 0⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. . . . .. ⎟ .
A = ⎜ . .. .. .. . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝0 0 . . . At−1 0 ⎠
0 0 ... 0 At
Theorem 7.5.6. Let A be a nonnegative permutationally irreducible matrix,

and let some power Aq of A be reducible. Then Aq is completely reducible, i.e.,
there is a permutation of indices such that Aq can be written in the form
Aq = diag (A1 , A2 , . . . , Ad ), (d > 1)

after the permutation. Moreover, A1 , A2 , . . . , Ad are permutationally irreducible
matrices. The maximal characteristic numbers of these matrices are equal. Hence,
d is the greatest common divisor of the numbers q, h, where h is the index of
imprimitivity of the matrix A.
Corollary 7.5.7. Every power a of primitive matrix A ≥ 0 is permutationally

irreducible, and therefore primitive.
In the formulation of the next corollary we use the notation of theorem 6.5.2.
Corollary 7.5.8. If A ≥ 0 is an imprimitive matrix, the index of imprimitivity

being h, then the matrix Ah is (after permutation of indices) a diagonal block
matrix
Ah = diag {A12 . . . Ah−1n Ah1 , A23 . . . Ah1 A12 , . . . , Ah1 A12 . . . Ah−1h },
where each block is permutationally irreducible, and each block has the same max-
imal characteristic number.
Lemma 7.5.9. If Q is a quiver and [Q]m = (tij ), then tij is the number of all
paths from a vertex i to a vertex j of length m.
The proof goes by induction on m.
In accordance with the terminology of Markov chains, we shall call a strongly

connected quiver Q regular if its adjacency matrix [Q] is primitive. Otherwise,
Q is called cyclic.
Theorem 7.5.10. A quiver Q is regular if and only if it is strongly connected

and the lengths of all its cycles have greatest common divisor 1.
Proof. Let Q be regular. By theorem 7.5.5, there exists an integer m such that
[Q]m > 0. Therefore [Q]m+1 > 0 and there exist two cycles from 1 to 1. The
first cycle has the length m, the second m + 1. So, the greatest common divisor
of all cycles equals 1.
If Q is not regular then, by theorem 6.5.2, there exists a permutation matrix
Pτ such that
⎛ ⎞
0 A12 0 ... 0
⎜ 0 0 A23 ... 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. .. ⎟
PτT [Q]Pτ =⎜ . . . . . ⎟,
⎜ ⎟
⎝ 0 0 0 . . . Ah−1,h ⎠
Ah1 0 0 ... 0
where there are square zero blocks along the main diagonal.
Denote by mi the order of the i-th zero square block. The set V Q of vertices
of Q may be numerated in such a way that
V Q = V1 ∪ V2 ∪ . . . ∪ Vh , Vi ∩ Vj = 0,
for i = j and | Vi | = mi for i = 1, . . . , h. Obviously, in Q there exists an arrow
k → l only in the case if k ∈ Vi and l ∈ Vi+1 for i = 1, . . . , h − 1 and k ∈ Vh for
i = h, l ∈ V1 . So, in Q the greatest common divisor d of the lengths of all cycles is,
at least, h ≥ 2. We shall show that if d = 1, then [Q] is primitive. The matrix [Q]
is permutationally irreducible, therefore, by definition, [Q] is either primitive or
imprimitive. If [Q] is imprimitive, then d ≥ h ≥ 2 and we obtain a contradiction.
Therefore, [Q] is primitive and Q is regular. The theorem is proved.
This theorem was first proved in the book [Dulmage, Mendelsohn, 1967].
Remark 7.5.3. Let Q be the quiver with adjacency matrix
⎛ ⎞
0 0 0 1
⎜0 0 1 0⎟
[Q] = ⎜⎝1 0 0 0⎠ .
⎟
0 1 0 0
Obviously, Q is the simple cycle
1 2
• •
• •
3 4
and h = 2 is not the greatest common divisor of all cycles.
Assume we have a homogeneous Markov chain with a finite number of states
and transition matrix P = (pij ) ∈ Mn (R). Let Q(P ) be the simply laced quiver
associated with P (see vol.I, pp. 275-276 and section 6.6 above).
Corollary 7.5.11. A Markov chain is regular if and only if the quiver Q(P )
of its transition matrix is regular, i.e., the greatest common divisor of all cycles of
Q(P ) equals 1.
The following theorem is stated without proof (see [Menon, 1967]).
Theorem 7.5.12. To a given square matrix A with strictly positive elements

there corresponds exactly one doubly stochastic matrix T which can be expressed
in the form T = D1 AD2 , where D1 and D2 are diagonal matrices with strictly
positive diagonal elements. The matrices D1 and D2 themselves are unique up to
a scalar factor.
7.6 CAYLEY TABLES OF ELEMENTARY ABELIAN 2-GROUPS

We introduce the following notations:
⎛ ⎞
0 1 2 3
0 1 ⎜1 0 3 2⎟
Γ0 = (0), Γ1 = , Γ2 = ⎜
⎝2
⎟,
1 0 3 0 1⎠
3 2 1 0
⎛ ⎞
1 1 ... 1
⎜1 1 . . . 1⎟
⎜ ⎟
Un = ⎜ . .. . . .. ⎟ ∈ Mn (Z), Xk−1 = 2k−1 U2k−1 ;
⎝ .. . . .⎠
1 1 ... 1

Γk−1 Γk−1 + Xk−1
Γk = for k = 1, 2, . . . .
Γk−1 + Xk−1 Γk−1

0 1
The matrix Γ1 = is the Cayley table of the cyclic group G1 of order 2
1 0
and is a Gorenstein matrix with permutation σ(Γ1 ) = (12).
Clearly, the Cayley table of the Klein four-group Z/(2) × Z/(2) = V4 =
(2) × (2) can be written as

Γ1 Γ1 + 2U2
Γ2 = .
Γ1 + 2U2 Γ1
Here the elements of Z/(2) × Z/(2) are numbered as follows: (0, 0) has the label
0, and (1, 0), (0, 1), (1, 1) have respectively the labels 1, 2, 3.
Consider
Γk−1 Γk−1 + Xk−1
Γk = .
Γk−1 + Xk−1 Γk−1
Proposition 7.6.1. The matrix Γk is an exponent matrix for any natural

number k.
Proof. The proof is obvious.

Let G = H× < g > be a finite Abelian group, H = {h1 , . . . , hn }, g 2 = e. We

shall consider the Cayley table of H as the matrix C(H) = (hij ) with entries in
H, where hij = hi hj . The following proposition is obvious.
Proposition 7.6.2. The Cayley table of G is

C(H) gC(H)
C(G) = .
gC(H) C(H)
Proposition 7.6.3. The matrix Γk is the Cayley table of the elementary

Abelian group Gk of order 2k .
Proof. The proof goes by induction on k. The basis of the induction has already
been done. If Γk−1 is the Cayley table of Gk−1 , then, by proposition 7.6.2, Γk is
the Cayley table of Gk .
Proposition 7.6.4. The matrix Γk is Gorenstein with permutation

1 2 3 . . . 2k − 1 2k
σ(Γk ) = .
2k 2k − 1 2k − 2 . . . 2 1
Proof. This is obvious for k = 1. Suppose that Γk = (αkij )( i, j = 1, 2, . . . , 2k )

is Gorenstein and σ(Γk ) = σk , where σk (i) = 2k +1−i. Now αkij +αkjσk (i) = αkiσk (i)
for all i, j = 1, 2, . . . , 2k . Since
αk+1
2k +i,j
= αk+1
i,2k +j
= αkij + 2k , αk+1
2k +i,2k +j
= αk+1
ij = αkij for all i, j = 1, 2, . . . , 2k
and (αkij + 2k ) + αkjσk (i) = (αkij + αkjσk (i) ) + 2k = αkiσk (i) + 2k , we obtain that
αk+1
ij + αk+1
j,2k +σk (i)
= αk+1
i,2k +σk (i)
, αk+1
i,2k +j
+ αk+1
2k +j,2k +σk (i)
= αk+1
i,2k +σk (i)
,
αk+1
2k +i,2k +j
+ αk+1
2k +j,σk (i)
= αk+1
2k +i,σk (i)
, αk+1
2k +i,j
+ αk+1 k+1
jσk (i) = α2k +i,σk (i) ,
i, j = 1, 2, . . . , 2k . Putting σk+1 (i) = 2k + σk (i), σk+1 (2k + i) = σk (i), we have

k+1 k+1
αk+1
pq + αqσk+1 (p) = αpσk+1 (p) for all p, q = 1, 2, . . . , 2
k+1
, i.e., Γk+1 is Gorenstein
with the permutation σ(Γk+1 ) = σk+1 , where σk+1 (i) = 2k+1 + 1 − i.
Now we compute the adjacency matrix of the quiver Q(Γk ).

(1) k (2) k
Let Γk = (βij ) and Γk = (γij ). We have

(1)
(1) Γk−1 Γk−1 + Xk−1
Γk = (1) ,
Γk−1 + Xk−1 Γk−1

(2) (1)
(2) Γk−1 Γk−1 + Xk−1
Γk = (1) (2) .
Γk−1 + Xk−1 Γk−1
Hence, 7 8
[Q(Γk−1 )] E
[Q(Γk )] = .
E [Q(Γk−1 )]
Here is the characteristic polynomial χk+1 (x) = χ[Q(Γk+1 ] (x).
9 9
9 xE − [Q(Γk )] −E 9
χk+1 (x) = |xE − [Q(Γk+1 )]| = 99 9=
9
−E xE − [Q(Γk )]
9 9
9 xE − [Q(Γk )] − E 0 9
= 99 9=
−E xE − [Q(Γk )] + E 9
= |(x − 1)E − [Q(Γk )]| · |(x + 1)E − [Q(Γk )]|
Therefore,
χk+1 (x) = χk (x − 1) · χk (x + 1). (7.6.1)
Since 9 9
9 x−1 −1 99
χ1 (x) = 99 = x(x − 2),
−1 x−1 9
we obtain χ2 (x) = (x − 3)(x − 1)(x − 1)(x + 1) = (x − 3)(x − 1)2 (x + 1),
χ3 (x) = (x − 4)(x − 2)2 x(x − 2)x2 (x + 2) = (x − 4)(x − 2)3 x3 (x + 2).

m i
m!
Proposition 7.6.5. χm (x) = (x − m − 1 + 2i)Cm , where Cm
i
= .
i=0 (m − i)!i!
Proof. This proposition is proved by induction on m. The basis of induction

is clear. Suppose that the formula is true for m = k. Then, by formula (7.6.1), we
obtain
k
i
k
j
χk+1 (x) = (x − k − 2 + 2i)Ck · (x − k + 2j)Ck =
i=0 j=0

k
i
k−1
j
= (x − k − 2) (x − k − 2 + 2i)Ck · (x − k + 2j)Ck (x + k) =
i=1 j=0

k−1
i+1
k−1
j
= (x − k − 2) (x − k + 2i)Ck · (x − k + 2j)Ck (x + k) =
i=0 j=0

k−1
i i+1
= (x − k − 2) (x − k + 2i)Ck +Ck (x + k).
i=0

k−1 i+1
Since Cki +Cki+1 = Ck+1
i+1
, we obtain χk+1 (x) = (x−k−2) (x−k+2i)Ck+1 (x+k) =
i=0

k j
k+1 j
(x − k − 2) (x − k + 2(j − 1))
Ck+1
(x + k) = (x − (k + 1) − 1 + 2j)Ck+1 .
j=1 j=0
k k

2
2
By induction on k, it is easy to prove that qij (Γk ) = k+1, qij (Γk ) = k+1.
i=1 j=1
Thus, [Q(Γk )] = (k + 1)Pk , where Pk is a doubly stochastic matrix.
Examples 7.6.1.
I. The Latin square
⎛ ⎞
0 1 2 3
⎜1 0 3 2⎟
L4 = ⎜
⎝3
⎟
2 0 1⎠
2 3 1 0
is a Gorenstein matrix with permutation

1 2 3 4
σ = σ(L4 ) =
4 3 1 2
and ⎛ ⎞
1 1 1 0
⎜ 1 1 0 1⎟
[Q(L4 )] = ⎜
⎝0
⎟.
1 1 1⎠
1 0 1 1
So [Q(L4 )] = E + Pσ2 + Pσ3 and
1 2
Q(L4 ) =
3 4
II. The Latin square

⎛ ⎞
0 1 2 3
⎜1 0 3 2⎟
Γ2 = ⎜
⎝2
⎟
3 0 1⎠
3 2 1 0
is the Cayley table of the Klein four-group and it is a Gorenstein matrix with
permutation σ(Γ2 ) = (14)(23). By propositions 4.1.11 and 4.1.12, the matrices
Γ2 and L4 are non-equivalent.
⎛ ⎞ ⎛ ⎞
1 1 2 3 2 2 3 3
⎜1 1 3 2⎟ ⎜2 2 3 3⎟
= ⎜ ⎟; = ⎜ ⎟.
(1) (2)
Γ2 ⎝2 Γ2
3 1 1⎠ ⎝3 3 2 2⎠
3 2 1 1 3 3 2 2
⎛ ⎞
1 1 1 0
⎜1 1 0 1⎟
[Q(Γ2 )] = ⎜
⎝1
⎟
0 1 1⎠
0 1 1 1
1 2
Q(Γ2 ) =
3 4
Theorem 7.6.6. Suppose that a Latin square Ln with first row and first
column (0 1 . . . n − 1) is an exponent matrix. Then n = 2m and Ln = Γm is the
Cayley table of the direct product of m copies of the cyclic group of order 2.
Conversely, the Cayley table Γm of the elementary Abelian group Gm =
Z/(2) × . . . × Z/(2) = (2) × . . . × (2) (m factors) of order 2m is a Latin square and
a Gorenstein symmetric matrix with first row (0, 1, . . . , 2m − 1) and permutation

1 2 3 . . . 2m − 1 2m
σ(Γm ) = .
2m 2m − 1 2m − 2 ... 2 1
The second part of this theorem follows from proposition 7.6.3.
Lemma 7.6.7. Let Ln = (αij ) be defined as above. Then
| i − j | ≤ αij ≤ i + j − 2.
Proof. Obviously, α1i + αij ≥ α1j and so αij ≥ j − 1 − (i − 1) = j − i.

Analogously, αij + αj1 ≥ αi1 and αij ≥ i − 1 − (j − 1) = i − j, i.e., αij ≥ | i − j |.
Also αi1 + α1j ≥ αij so that αij ≤ i + j − 2.
Lemma 7.6.8. The last row of Ln is (n − 1, n − 2, . . . , 1).

Proof. We have αn1 = n − 1, by the definition of Ln . By lemma 7.6.7, we

have αni ≥ n − i. So, αn2 = n − 2, αn3 = n − 3 and αnn = 0 because otherwise
the row sum of the last row would be larger than that of the 1-st row.
Corollary 7.6.9. The last column of Ln is (n − 1, n − 2, . . . , 1)T , where T is

the transpose.
Lemma 7.6.10. Let Ln = (αij ) be defined as above. Then
|i + j − (n + 1)| ≤ |n − 1 − αij |.
Proof. By lemma 7.6.8 and corollary 7.6.9, we have αij ≤ αin + αnj = (n − i) +
(n − j) = 2n − (i + j). By lemma 7.6.7, αij ≤ i + j − 2. From the first inequality
we have
αij − (n − 1) ≤ n + 1 − (i + j).
From the second inequality we have
αij − (n − 1) ≤ (i + j) − (n + 1).
So
|(i + j) − (n + 1)| ≤ |αij − (n − 1)|.
Corollary 7.6.11. The integer n in theorem 7.6.6 is even.
Proof. By lemma 7.6.7, if the integer n − 1 appears in position (i, j) then

|(n − 1) − (n − 1)| ≥ |i + j − (n + 1)|, i.e., i + j = n + 1. Hence, the secondary
diagonal, (a1n , a2n−1 , . . . , an1 ), has the following form: (n − 1, . . . , n − 1) because,
Ln being a Latin square, n − 1 must appear once in each row. If n is odd then for
i=j = n+ 1
2 we have αii = n − 1. This is a contradiction. So n = 2n1 .
Proof of theorem 7.6.6. If αij = 1, then |i − j| = 1 by lemma 7.6.7. By
assumptions in the statement of the theorem α12 = 1 = α21 . Now look at the 3-rd
row. The number 1 must occur somewhere. This can only be at (3, 2) or (3, 4).
But at (3, 2) is not possible because that would give two 1’s at the 2-nd column.
Thus α34 = 1. Next look at the 3-rd column. There must be a 1 somewhere in this
column. This can only occur at (2, 3) or (4, 3). But (2, 3) is impossible because
that would give two 1’s in the second row and so α43 = 1. Further look at the
fifth row. There must be a 1 somewhere. This can only be at (5, 4) or (5, 6). But
(5, 4) is not possible as that would give two 1’s in the 4-th column. So α56 = 1.
Next look at the 5-th column which must have a 1 somewhere. This can only be
at (4, 5) or (6, 5), but at (4, 5) is not possible because that would give two 1’s in
the fourth row. So α65 = 1. Continuing this argument it follows that Ln look like
⎛ ⎞
0 1
⎜ 1 0 ∗ ... ∗ ⎟ ⎛ ⎞
⎜ ⎟ Γ1 ∗ ... ∗
⎜ 0 1 ⎟
⎜ ∗ ... ∗ ⎟ ⎜ ∗ Γ1 ... ∗ ⎟
⎜ 1 0 ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
Ln = ⎜ ⎟=⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟.
⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟ ⎝ . . . . ⎠
⎜ . . . . ⎟
⎜ ⎟ ∗ ∗ . . . Γ1
⎝ 0 1 ⎠
∗ ∗ ...
1 0
If αij = 2 then | i − j | ≤ 2, by lemma 7.6.7. By the assumption of the theorem

α13 = α31 = 2. There must be a 2 in the second row. This can only happen at
(2, 1), (2, 2), (2, 3), (2, 4). But (2, 1) and (2, 2) are already occupied (by a 1 and
a 0) and (2, 3) is impossible because that would give two 2’s in the 3-rd column.
So α24 = 2. Similarly, looking at the 2-nd column and the 3-rd row, one obtains
α42 = 2. Now look at the 5-th row. Columns 3 and 4 already have a 2 and places
(5, 5), (5, 6) are already occupied, so α57 = 2. Next look at row 6. Column 4
already has a 2, places (6, 5) and (6, 6) are occupied, column 7 already has a 2
and it follows that α68 = 2. Next look at column 5. Rows 3, 4 already have a 2,
places (5, 5) and (6, 5) are already occupied and so α75 = 2. Now examine column
6. Rows 4, 5 already have a 2, places (5, 6), (6, 6) are already occupied, row 7
already has a 2 and so α86 = 2. Continuing in this way it follows that Ln looks
like
⎛ ⎞
0 1 2
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 0 2 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 2 0 1 * ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 2 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 1 2 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 0 2 ⎟
⎜ * ⎟
Ln = ⎜
⎜
* 2 0 1 ⎟
⎟
⎜ 2 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. ⎟
⎜ . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 1 2 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 0 2 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ * ⎟
⎝ 2 0 1 ⎠
2 1 0
It also follows that n is divisible by 4. Otherwise we would obtain a “cutoff

version” like illustrated below
⎛ ⎞
0 1 2
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 0 2 ⎟
⎜ * ⎟
⎜ 2 0 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 2 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 1 2 ⎟
⎜ * ⎟
⎜ 2 ⎟
⎜ 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ 2 0 1 ⎠
2 1 0
and the last row would have no 2 in it.

Obviously the next step is to figure out where the 3’s must be located. If
αij = 3, then | i − j | ≤ 3. By the assumption of the theorem α14 = 3 = α41 .
Consider places (4t + 2, 4t + 3), t = 0, 1, . . . , (n/4 − 1). Now α4t+2,4t+3 must be
≥ 3 because all the 0, 1, 2 have been placed. On the other hand
α4t+2,4t+3 ≤ α4t+2,4t+1 + α4t+1,4t+3 = 1 + 2 = 3

and so α4t+2,4t+3 = 3. Similarly α4t+3,4t+2 ≥ 3, but
α4t+3,4t+2 ≤ α4t+3,4t+1 + α4t+1,4t+2 = 2 + 1 = 3

and so α4t+3,4t+2 = 3.
Also
α4t+1,4t+4 ≤ α4t+1,4t+2 + α4t+2,4t+4 = 1 + 2 = 3
α4t+4,4t+1 ≤ α4t+4,4t+2 + α4t+2,4t+1 = 2 + 1 = 3

and the same argument gives α4t+1,4t+4 = 3 = α4t+4,4t+1 . Thus the matrix Ln is
of the following form
⎛ ⎞
0 1 2 3
⎜ 1 0 3 2 ⎟
⎜ ∗ ... ∗ ⎟
⎜ 2 3 0 1 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 3 2 1 0 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 1 2 3 ⎟ ⎛ ⎞
⎜ ⎟ Γ2 ∗ ... ∗
⎜ 1 0 3 2 ⎟
⎜ ∗ ... ∗ ⎟ ⎜∗ Γ2 ... ∗⎟
⎜ 2 3 0 1 ⎟ ⎜ ⎟
Ln = ⎜ ⎟ = ⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟ .
⎜ 3 2 1 0 ⎟ ⎝ . . . .⎠
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. .. ⎟ ∗ ∗ ··· Γ2
⎜ . . . . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 0 1 2 3 ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 1 0 3 2 ⎟
⎜ ∗ ∗ ... ⎟
⎝ 2 3 0 1 ⎠
3 2 1 0
The next and final step is to prove by induction the following two statements.
• for every k there exists a unique Latin square Ln of order 2k satisfying

theorem 7.6.6, viz. Ln = Γk ;
• for every k the number of blocks Γk (Γk = Ln ) on the main block diagonal
of Lk is even.
The start of the induction was taken care of above.

Now assume that Ln has blocks Γk , 2k < n on the main block diagonal and
let there be nk of them. Note that this has been shown to be the case for k = 1
and k = 2. So Ln looks like
⎛ ⎞
Γk ∗∗ ∗ . . . ∗
⎜ ∗ Γk ∗ . . . ∗ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. .. .. ⎟
Ln = ⎜⎜ ∗ ∗ . . . ⎟
⎟
⎜ . . . . ⎟
⎝ .. .. .. .. ∗ ⎠
∗ ∗ . . . ∗ Γk
If αij = 2k then | i − j | ≤ 2k . Claim
αi,i+2k = 2k for i = 1, . . . , 2k .
It helps to realize that this is a statement about the 2k × 2k block indicated
by ∗∗ above. The claim is proved by induction. For i = 1 it is true by the
assumptions of theorem 7.6.6. Now let i > 1. The number 2k must occur at one
of the places (i, 1), (i, 2), . . . , (i, i − 1), (i, i), (i, i + 1), . . . , (i, i + 2k ). The places
(i, 1), . . . , (i, 2k ) are already filled. Further the columns 2k + 1, . . . , 2k + i − 1
already contain a 2k by the induction hypothesis. So it must be the case that
αi,i+2k = 2k .
Similarly, switching rows and columns in the argument, one finds
αi+2k ,i = 2k for i = 1, 2, . . . , 2k .
Moreover, this pattern persists in that
αt2k+1 +i,t2k+1 +i+2k = 2k = αt2k+1 +i+2k ,t2k+1 +i (7.6.2)

k
for t = 0, 1, . . .; i = 1, 2, . . . , 2 . This is again proved by induction on i. Consider
row t2k+1 + i. The number 2k must occur at one of the places
(t2k+1 + i, t2k+1 + i − 2k + j), j = 0, 1, . . . , 2k+1 .

Now the place (t2k+1 +i, t2k+1 +i−2k +j) with i+j ≤ 2k is in the (2t+1)-th Γk and
hence already occupied by one of the numbers 0, 1, . . . , . . . , 2k −1. By induction on
i, the columns with with index t2k+1 +1+2k , . . . , t2k+1 +(i−1)+2k already have a
2k in them. So it must be that 2k occurs at position (t2k+1 +i, t2k+1 +i+2k ). This
proves the first half of (7.6.2). The second half is handled by the same argument
(switching rows and columns).
Now suppose that the number of blocks Γk is odd. Then by what has just been
proved the matrix Ln looks like
⎛ ⎞
2k
⎜ .. ⎟
⎜ Γk . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 2k ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 2k ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. ⎟
⎜ . Γk ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 2k ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. ⎟
⎜ . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 2k ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ Γk .. ⎟
⎜ . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 2k ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 2k ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ .. Γk ** ⎟
⎜ . ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ 2 k ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎜ ⎟
⎝ ** Γk ⎠
But then there is no 2k in the blocks indicated by ∗∗’s and hence no 2k in the
last 2k rows and columns because αij = 2k implies | i − j | ≤ 2k .
Let Yt denote the t-th 2k+1 × 2k+1 diagonal block of Ln , t = 1, 2, . . . , 2−1 nk ,
and write

Γk E12
Yt = .
E21 Γk
As 0, 1, 2, . . . , 2k −1 occur in each row (and column) of Γk and Ln is a Latin square
all elements of E12 must be ≥ 2k . On the other hand for any element of an E12
αt2k+1 +i,t2k+1 +2k +j ≤ αt2k+1 +i,t2k+1 +j + αt2k+1 +j,t2k+1 +j+2k

By (7.6.2) above, the second element on the right hand side is equal to 2k and the
first element on the right hand side is in a Γk and hence < 2k . Hence E12 is a
Latin square on the numbers 2k , 2k + 1, . . . , 2k+1 − 1. Similarly for E21 .
Since 2k U2k ≤ E12 < 2k+1 , we obtain 0 ≤ E12 − 2k U2k < 2k , and E12 − 2k U2k
is a Latin square on the set {0, 1, 2, . . . , 2k − 1}.
Since 2k U2k ≤ E21 < 2k+1 , we obtain 0 ≤ E21 − 2k U2k < 2k , and E21 − 2k U2k
is a Latin square on the set {0, 1, 2, . . . , 2k − 1}.
urthermore
αt·2k+1 +i,t·2k+1 +2k +1 ≤ αt·2k+1 +i,t·2k+1 +1 +αt·2k+1 +1,t·2k+1 +2k +1 = (i−1)+2k = 2k +i−1
αt·2k+1 +2k +i,t·2k+1 +1 ≤ αt·2k+1 +2k +i,t·2k+1 +i +αt·2k+1 +i,t·2k+1 +1 = 2k +(i−1) = 2k +i−1
for all i = 1, 2, . . . , 2k . Thus for i = 1, 2, . . . , 2k we have
αt·2k+1 +i,t·2k+1 +2k +1 = 2k + i − 1
αt·2k+1 +2k +i,t·2k+1 +1 = 2k + i − 1

for all i = 1, 2, . . . , 2k . So the first row (resp. column) of the matrices E12 − 2k U2k
and E21 −2k U2k have the following form (0, 1, . . . , 2k −1) (resp. (0, 1, . . . , 2k −1)T ).
By induction, we have E12 − 2k U2k = E21 − 2k U2k = Γk and blocks

Γk Γk + 2k U2k
Γk+1 =
Γk + 2k U2k Γk
are on the main diagonal.
With induction Γk is a 2k × 2k matrix and hence Ln is the Γk with n = 2k .

Γm−1 Γm−1 + Xm−1
Γm = , Xm−1 = 2m−1 U2m−1 .
Γm−1 + Xm−1 Γm−1
By proposition 7.6.3, Γm is the Cayley table of the elementary Abelian group
Gk of order 2k . Theorem 7.6.2 is proved.
Remark 7.6.1. Example 7.6.1(I) shows, that for theorem 7.6.2 the condi-
tion for a Latin square having the first row and the first column of the form
(0 1 . . . n − 1) is essential.
7.7 QUASI-FROBENIUS RINGS AND GORENSTEIN TILED ORDERS

Theorem 7.7.1. A reduced tiled order A is Gorenstein if and only if the ring
B = A/πA is Frobenius. In this case ν(B) = σ(A).
Proof. Let A = {O, E(A)} be a Gorenstein tiled order. By proposition 7.1.2,
A is Gorenstein if and only if E(A) is Gorenstein. Obviously, E(πA) = E(A) + Un ,
where
⎛ ⎞
1 ... 1
⎜ ⎟
Un = ⎝ ... . . . ... ⎠ .
1 ... 1
Let Pσ = Pσ(A) be the permutation matrix of σ = σ(A). It is easy to see

that the set X ⊂ A, which is defined by the matrix E(X) = E(A) + Un − Pσ , is a
two-sided ideal in A. Further, X̄ = X/πA is a right and left semisimple module:
X = Uσ(1) ⊕ . . . ⊕ Uσ(n) as a right A-module and X = V1 ⊕ . . . ⊕ Vn as a left
A-module. Consider B = A/πA. Obviously, X̄ = soc (BB ) = soc (B B) and X̄ is a
monomial ideal. By definition of a quasi-Frobenius ring, the ring B is Frobenius
with Nakayama permutation σ(A).
Conversely, let B = A/πA be Frobenius and ν(B) be its Nakayama permuta-
tion. Obviously, ν(B) is a fixed point free permutation. So every indecomposable
projective πPi has only one minimal overmodule Xi and Xi /πPi Uν(i) . Con-
sequently, by lemma 5.2.13, πP1 , . . . , πPs are indecomposable relatively injective
pairwise nonisomorphic A-lattices and A A# is a projective right A-module. It is
easy to see that ν(B) = σ(A). The theorem is proved.
Definition. A permutation σ on the set S = {1, . . . , n} is called a fixed point

free permutation if σ(i) = i for all i ∈ S.
Corollary 7.7.2. For any fixed point free permutation σ there exists a semidis-
tributive weakly prime Artinian Frobenius ring B with ν(B) = σ.
The proof follows from theorem 7.4.8 and theorem 7.7.1.
Lemma 7.7.3. Let e and f be non-zero idempotents of a ring A such that the
modules eA and f A are indecomposable. In this case eA and f A are isomorphic
if and only if the following equality holds: f = f λ0 eλ1 , where λ0 , λ1 ∈ A.
Proof. Suppose that modules eA and f A are isomorphic, and ϕ : eA → f A

is this isomorphism. Then ϕ(eλ) = ϕ(e · eλ) = ϕ(e)eλ = f λ0 e · λ, i.e., ϕ acts on
eλ by left multiplication by f λ0 . Therefore f = ϕ(eλ1 ) = f λ0 eλ1 . Conversely, let
f = f λ0 eλ1 . Then ϕ : eA → f A, where ϕ(eA) = f λ0 e · eλ is an epimorphism.
Since the module f A is projective, we have eA f A ⊕ X. Note that f A = 0, and
that the module eA is indecomposable, so eA f A. The lemma is proved.
Theorem 7.7.4. Let A = {O, E(A)} be a reduced tiled Gorenstein order with
Jacobson radical R and let J be a two-sided ideal of A such that A ⊃ R2 ⊃ J ⊃ Rn
(n ≥ 2). The quotient ring A/J is quasi-Frobenius if and only if there exists a
p ∈ R2 such that J = pA = Ap.
s s
Proof. Let A = i,j=1 eij π αij O, and let Ms (D) = i,j=1 eij D be the ring of
fractions of A, where D is the division ring of fractions of O, and the eij are the
matrix units (i, j = 1, . . . , s). Let J = pA = Ap be a two-sided ideal of A and A ⊃
R2 ⊃ J ⊃ Rn . Obviously, Ms (D)J Ms (D) = Ms (D)pAMs (D) = Ms (D)pMs (D)
is a non-zero two-sided ideal of Ms (D). Therefore p ∈ Ms (D) has an inverse p−1
in Ms (D). Since the quotient ring A/Rn is Artinian, the quotient ring Ā = A/J
is also Artinian. We now show that the quotient ring Ā is quasi-Frobenius. Let
1 = e11 +. . .+ess be the decomposition of 1 ∈ A into a sum of matrix idempotents,

A = ⊕si=1 Pi , where Pi = eii A. Obviously, every indecomposable projective Ā-
module is of the form Pi eii Λ/eii pΛ for some i = 1, . . . , s. The right modules
A and pA are isomorphic because p is an invertible element in Ms (D). Since,
J = pA = ⊕si=1 eii pA, we have eii A ⊃ eii R2 ⊃ eii pA ⊃ eii Rn . Therefore for each
module eii pA there exists a unique minimal overmodule. It follows that soc P̄i is
a simple module for i = 1, . . . , s. Suppose that soc P̄i soc P̄k for i = k. Then
we have eii pA ekk pA. This implies that p−1 eii pA p−1 ekk pA. Since, pA = Ap
we have p−1 Ap = A, therefore p−1 eii p ∈ A for i = 1, . . . , s. By lemma 7.7.3,
the following equality holds: p−1 rkk λ0 eii pλ1 = p−1 ekk p, so ekk pλ0 p−1 eii pλ1 p−1 =
ekk . Since pλ0 p−1 and pλ1 p−1 are elements of A, we have eii A ekk A. This
contradiction shows that if i = k then soc P̄i soc P̄k . The same holds for left
modules, so, by the classical definition of QF-rings by Nakayama, we see that Ā is
a QF -ring.
Conversely, let A ⊃ R2 ⊃ J ⊃ Rn , and let Ā = A/J be a QF -ring. Since
eii A ⊃ eii R2 ⊃ eii J ⊃ eii Rn , we see that for every module eii J there exists a
unique minimal overmodule Xi such that Xi /eii J Xj /ejj J for i = j. Since A
is Gorenstein, by lemma 6.2.13, one can see that the modules eii J (i = 1, . . . , s)
are all pairwise non-isomorphic indecomposable projective A-modules. It follows
that the right A-module J = ⊕si=1 eii J is isomorphic to AA . Since EndA A A,
we can conclude that there exists a monomorphism ϕ : A → A defined by the
formula ϕ(λ) = qλ and Imϕ = J . Therefore J = qA, where q is a regular
element. Analogously, Ap = J , where p is a regular element. Then q = a0 p
and p = qa1 , q = a0 qa1 . Obviously, the elements a0 and a1 are regular. Let
us show that if b1 A ⊂ b2 A and b1 A = b2 A for some elements b1 , b2 ∈ A, then
xb1 A ⊂ xb2 A and xb1 A = xb2 A for any regular element x ∈ A. Suppose that
xb1 A = xb2 A. Then xb1 y = xb2 , i.e., b2 = b1 y and b2 A = b1 yA ⊂ b1 A. So we
obtain a contradiction with our assumption. Thus if a1 A ⊂ A and a1 A = A
then qa1 A = qA. Therefore a0 qa1 A is a proper submodule of a0 qA. It follows
that qA is a proper submodule of a0 qA ⊂ J . This contradiction shows that
a1 A = A and a1 is an invertible element of the ring A. Finally, we see that
pA = qa1 A = qA = Ap, i.e., J = pA = Ap, where p ∈ R2 . The theorem is proved.

Gorenstein rings were introduced by D.Gorenstein in the paper [Gorenstein, 1952].
In the article [Bass, 1962] H.Bass wrote (footnote 2 on page 18): ”After writing
this paper I discovered from Professor Serre that these rings have been encountered
by Grothendieck, the latter having christened them “Gorenstein rings”. They are
described in this setting by the fact that a certain module of differentials is locally
free of rank one”. (See, also [Bass, 1963]).
Let O be a Dedekind ring with a field of fractions K, and let Λ be an O-order
in a finite dimensional separable K-algebra A (see [Curtis, Reiner, 1981]). In
this case it is natural to consider Λ-lattices, i.e., finitely generated O-torsion free
Λ-modules.
Noncommutative Gorenstein O-orders appeared first in [Drozd, 1967] (see the

definition and proposition 6.1). An O-order Λ is left Gorenstein if and only if the
injective dimension of Λ as a left Λ-module is 1 (O = K). From the definition and
proposition 6.1 in the paper mentioned above it follows that Λ is left Gorenstein
if and only if it is right Gorenstein.
Given a Λ-lattice M, a sublattice N of M is called pure if M/N is O-torsion
free.
The following theorem is proved in [Gustafson, 1974]:
An O-order Λ is Gorenstein if and only if each left Λ-lattice is isomorphic to

a pure sublattice of a free Λ- lattice.
In [Nishida, 1988] there is the example of the (0, 1)-order Λ(P5 ) associated with
the finite poset
• •
P5 = •
• •
which is such that inj. dim Λ(P5 ) = 2 and gl. dimΛ(P5 ) = ∞.

Let Λ be a Gorenstein order. If Λ has the additional property that every O-
order containing Λ is also Gorenstein, then Λ is called a Bass order. The following
inclusions are easily verified:
(maximal orders) ⊆ (hereditary orders) ⊆

⊆ (Bass orders) ⊆ (Gorenstein orders)
(see §37 in [Curtis, Reiner, 1981]).
Denote by μΛ (X) the minimal number of generators of a finitely generated
Λ-module X. The following theorem is proved in [Roiter, 1966] (see also theorem
37.17 in [Curtis, Reiner, 1981]).
Let Λ be an O-order such that μΛ (I) ≤ 2 for each left ideal I of Λ. Then Λ is
a Bass order.
Obviously, the Z-order

Z 4Z
Z Z
is a Bass order, because for every left ideal J we have μΛ (I) ≤ 2, (see also [Chatters,
Hajaruavis, 2003], [Chatters, 2006]).
Tiled orders over a discrete valuation rings appeared first in [Tarsy, 1970] (see
also [Jategaonkar, 1973] and [Jategaonkar, 1974]). The Gorenstein condition for
exponent matrices of tiled orders was formulated in [Kirichenko, 1978]. Note that
the notion of an exponent matrix appeared first in the English translation of

[Zavadskij, Kirichenko, 1977].
Theorem 7.7.4 was proved in [Roggenkamp, 2001].
[Bass, 1962] H.Bass, Injective dimension in Noetherian rings, Trans. Amer.

Math. Soc., v.102, 1962, p.18-29.
[Bass, 1963] H.Bass, On the ubiquity of Gorenstein rings, Math. Zeit., v.82, 1963,
p.8-28.
[Chatters, Hajaruavis, 2003] A.W.Chatters and C.R.Hajaruavis, Noetherian rings
of injective dimension one which are orders in quasi-Frobenius rings, Journal
of Algebra, v.270, 2003, p.249-260.
[Chatters, 2006] A.W.Chatters, Multiple idealiser rings of injective dimension
one, Journal of Algebra, v.296, 2006, p.234-248.
[Curtis, Reiner, 1981] C.W.Curtis and I.Reiner, Methods of Representation The-
ory, Wiley, 1981.
[Drozd, 1967] Yu.A.Drozd, V.V.Kirichenko, A.V.Roiter, On hereditary and Bass
orders, Izv. Akad. Mauk SSSR Ser. Mat., v.31, 1967, p. 1415-1436
(in Russian); English translation Math. USSR - Izvestija, v.1, 1967,
p. 1357-1375.
[Dulmage, Mendelsohn, 1967] A.L.Dulmage, N.S.Mendelsohn, Graphs and ma-
trices, In: Graph Theory and Theoretical Physics, Academic Press, London,
1967, p. 167-227.
[Gantmakher, 1959] F.R.Gantmakher, Applications of theory of matrices, Inter-
science Publishers, New York, 1959.
[Gorenstein, 1952] D.Gorenstein, An arithmetic theory of adjoint plane curves,
Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., v.72, 1952, p.414-436.
[Gustafson, 1974] W.H.Gustafson, Torsionfree modules and classes of orders, Bull.
Austral. Math. Soc., v.11, 1974, p.365-371.
[Herstein, 1954] I.N.Herstein, A note on primitive matrices, Amer. Math.
Monthly, v.61, 1954, p. 18-20.
[Jategaonkar, 1973] V.A.Jategaonkar, Global dimension of triangular orders over
a discrete valuation ring, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., v.38, 1973, p. 8-14.
[Jategaonkar, 1974] V.A.Jategaonkar, Global dimension of tiled orders over a
discrete valuation ring, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc., v.196, 1974, p. 313-330.
[Kirichenko, 1978] V.V.Kirichenko, Quasi-Frobenius rings and Gorenstein orders,
In: Algebra, number theory and their applications. Trudy Mat. Inst. Steklov,
v.148, 1978, p. 168-174 (in Russian).
[Menon, 1967] M.V.Menon, Reduction of a matrix with positive elements to a
doubly stochastic matrix, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., v.18, 1967, p.244-247.
[Nishida, 1988] K.Nishida, A characterization of Gorenstein orders, Tsukuba J.
Math., vol.12, N2, 1988, p.459-468.
[Roggenkamp, 2001] K.W.Roggenkamp, V.V.Kirichenko, M.A.Khibina,
V.N.Zhuravlev, Gorenstein tiled orders, Special issue dedicated to Alexei
Ivanovich Kostrikin, Comm. Algebra, v.29, No. 9, 2001, p.4231-4247.

[Roiter, 1966] A.V.Roiter, An analog of the theorem of Bass for modules of repre-
sentations of noncommutative orders, Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR, 168, 1966,
p.1261-1264 (in Russian).
[Tarsy, 1970] R.B.Tarsy, Global dimension of orders, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.,
v.151, 1970, p. 335-340.
[Zavadskij, Kirichenko, 1977] A.G.Zavadskij, and V.V.Kirichenko, Semimaximal
rings of finite type, Mat. Sb., v.103 (145), N3, 1977, p. 323-345 (in Russian);
English translation: Math. USSR Sb., v.32, 1977, p. 273-291.
SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER READING
1. R.Albamowicz, G.Sobczyk (eds.), Lectures on Clifford (Geometric) Algebras

and Applications, Birkhauser, Boston, 2004.
2. J.L.Alperin, B.B.Rowen, Groups and Representations. Graduate Texts in
Mathematics, Vol. 162, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1995.
3. D.M.Arnold, Abelian Groups and Representations of Finite Partially Ordered
Sets, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2000.
4. M.A.Armstrong, Groups and Symmetry, Springer-Verlag, 1997.
5. M.Auslander, I.Reiten, O.Smalø, Representation Theory of Artin Algebras,
Cambridge University Press, 1995.
6. T.S.Blyth, Lattices and Ordered Algebraic Structures, Springer-Verlag, Lon-
don, 2005.
7. H.Cartan and S.Eilenberg, Homological Algebra, Princeton University Press,
Princeton, New York, 1956.
8. C.W.Curtis, I.Reiner, Methods of Representation Theory I, II, Wiley, New
York, 1990.
9. A.Facchini, Module Theory, Birkhäuser Verlag, Basel, 1998.
10. D.K.Faddeev (ed.), Investigations on Representation Theory, Zap. Nauchn.
Sem. LOMI, 1972, v.28.
11. C.Faith, Algebra: Rings, Modules and Categories I, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-
Heidelberg- New York, 1973.
12. C.Faith, Algebra II. Ring Theory, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg- New
York, 1976.
13. C.Faith, Algebra: Rings, Modules and Categories I, Moscow, 1977 (in Rus-
sian).
14. C.Faith, Algebra: Ring, Modules and Categories II, Moscow, 1979 (in Rus-
sian).
15. V.Dlab, C.Ringel, Indecomposable representations of graphs and algebras,
Memoirs Amer. Math. Soc., v.173, 1976.
385
16. Yu.A.Drozd, V.V.Kirichenko, Finite Dimensional Algebras, Springer-Verlag,

Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1994.
17. P.Gabriel, A.V.Roiter, Representations of Finite Dimensional Algebras,
Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1997.
18. N.Jacobson, Lectures in Abstract Algebra, I, II, III. Graduate Texts in Math-
ematics, Vol. 30, 31, 32, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1975.
19. G.James, M.Liebeck, Representations and Characters of Groups, Cambridge
Univ. Press, 2001.
20. M.Hall, Combinatorial Theory, Wiley, 1986.
21. John G.Kemeny and J.Laurie Snell, Finite Markov chains, Princeton, Univ.
Press, 1960.
22. F.Kasch, Modules and Rings, Academic Press, New York, 1982.
23. T.Y.Lam, Lectures on Modules and Rings, Graduate Texts in Mathematics,
Vol. 189, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1999.
24. S.MacLane, Homology, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Gttingen-Heidelberg, 1963.
25. S.MacLane, Categories for the working mathematician, Springer-Verlag,
Berlin-Gttingen-Heidelberg, 1971.
26. J.C.McConnell and J.C.Robson, Noncommutative Noetherian Rings, Wiley-
Interscience, New York, 1987.
27. B.Mitchell, Theory of categories, Academic Press, 1965.
28. W.K.Nicholson, M.F.Yousif, Quasi-Frobenius Rings, Cambridge Tracts in
Math., vol.158, Cambridge University Press, 2003.
29. D.G.Northcott, A first course of homological algebra, Cambridge University
Press, 1973.
30. J.Okninski, Semigroup Algebras, Marcel Dekker, INC, 1991.
31. M.S.Osborne, Basic homological algebra, Springer-Verlag, New York, 2000.
32. B.L.Osofsky, Homological Dimensions of Modules, 1973.
33. D.S.Passman, The Algebraic Structure of Group Rings, Wiley, New York-
London-Sydney-Toronto, 1977.
34. G.Puninski, Serial rings, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2001.
35. C.M.Ringel, Tame Algebras and Integral Quadratic Forms, Lecture Notes in
Math., v.1099, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg, 1884.
36. K.W.Roggenkamp, V. Huber-Dyson, Lattices over Orders I, Lecture Notes
in Math., v. 115, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 1970.
37. K.W.Roggenkamp, M.Taylor, Group Rings and Class Groups, Birkhäuser
Verlag, Basel, 1992.
38. J.Rotman, An Introduction to Homological Algebra, Academic Press, New
York, 1979.
39. L.H.Rowen, Ring Theory I, II, Academic Press, New York-Boston, 1988.
40. B.E.Sagan, The Symmetric Group, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, Vol.
203, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-New York, 2001.
41. S.K.Sehgal, Topics in Group Rings, M. Dekker, 1978.
SUGGESTIONS FOR FURTHER READING 387
42. D.Simson, Linear Representation of Partially Ordered Sets and Vector Space
Categories, Algebra, Logic and Appl. v.4, Gordon and Breach Science Pub-
lishers, 1992.
43. B.Stenström, Rings of quotients: An introduction to methods of ring theory,
Springer-Verlag, 1975.
44. H.Tachikawa, Quasi-Frobenius Rings and Generalizations: QF-3 and QF-1
Rings, Lecture Notes in Math., v. 345, Springer-Verlag, Berlin-Heidelberg-
New York, 1973.
45. W.T.Trotler, Combinatorics and Partially Ordered Sets: Dimension Theory,
The John Hopkins Univ. Press, 1992.
46. A.A.Tuganbaev, Semidistributive Modules and Rings, Kluwer Academic
Publishers, Dordrecht-Boston-London, 1998.
47. J.Waschbüsch, On selfinjective algebras of finite representation type, Univer-
sidad Nacional Autonoma de Mexico, 1983.
Subject Index
A canonical two-sided Peirce decompo-
Abelian group, 2 sition of a ring, 166
additive group, 2 canonical two-sided Peirce decompo-
adjacency matrix, 68 sition of an ideal, 166, 167
admissible ideal, 74 cardinal sum of posets, 131
admissible relation, 73 Cartan determinant, 246
affine group, 6 Cartan determinant conjecture, 247
affine variety, 93 Cartan invariants, 245
algebra of finite type, 140 Cartan matrix, 93, 245
algebra of finite representation type, category of representations, 99
140 Cayley formula, 241
algebra of infinite representation Cayley table, 4
type, 140 Cayley theorem, 12
algebra of right bounded finite center, 17
dimensional representation centralizer, 17
type, 155 chain, 130, 259
algebra of a quiver with relations, 74 character of a group, 38
algebra of tame representation type, character of a representation, 39
141 character table, 44
algebra of wild representation type, circuit of a quiver, 239
141, 142 circulant matrix, 248
algebraic group, 94 class equation, 17
alternating group, 5 commutative group, 2
antichain, 259 commutative relation, 74
anticommutator, 55 commutator, 22
anti-ismorphism of lattices, 162 commutator series of a group, 23
arrow of a quiver, 67 commutator subgroup, 22
Artinian algebra, 147 complete lattice, 256, 274
associated poset of a Markov chain, completely decomposable lattice, 274
295 completely reducible representation,
automorphism, 12 31, 138
composition series of a group, 21
B conjugacy class, 16
band, 256 conjugate elements, 16
bijective module, 209 conjugating element, 16
bound quiver algebra, 74 connected components, 286
Brauer-Thrall conjectures, 154 connected poset, 282
coordinate vector, 115
contragredient representation, 136
C
Coxeter group, 109
canonical decomposition, 166
Coxeter matrix, 109
canonical epimorphism, 12
389
390 SUBJECT INDEX
Coxeter system, 109 epimorphism, 12

critical subposets, 117 equivalent matrices, 268
cyclic group, 13 equivalent representations, 27, 28,
cyclic Markov chain, 293 100
cyclic poset, 296 ergodic Markov chain, 293
cyclic quiver, 367 essential ideal, 61
cyclic subgroup, 13 Euclidean diagrams, 80, 88
cyclic subset, 207 even element, 56
even permutation, 5
D exact representation, 115
d-matrix, 364 exponent matrix, 265, 275
decomposable representation, 35, extended Dynkin diagrams, 88
76, 138 extended simple Dynkin diagrams,
degree of a representation, 27, 135 80
derived series of a group, 23 exterior algebra, 58
diagram of a poset, 277 exterior algebra of a bimodule, 67
diagram of a species, 99 exterior K-ring, 55
differential of a poset with respect to exterior power, 59
a maximal element, 131 exterior product, 58
differential of a poset with respect to extra arrow, 295
a suitable pair, 133
differentiation map with respect to a F
suitable pair, 134 factor group, 11
dihedral group, 8 factor of a normal series, 21
dimension of a representation, 27, faithful representation, 27, 135
128, 135 F DI-ring, 194
dimension of a subset, 94 Fermat theorem, 14
dimension vector, 77 finite dimensional representation,
direct sum of representations, 76, 115 27, 100
distributive module, 234 finite group, 2
Dlab-Ringel-Ovsienko-Roiter first Brauer-Thrall conjecture, 141,
quadratic form, 90, 107 147
doubly stochastic matrix, 293 fixed point free permutation, 380
DSM -ring, 190 flat dimension, 220
dual basis, 188 fractional ideal, 275
dual homomorphism, 187 free K-algebra, 55
dual module, 187 Frobenius algebra, 164
dual representation, 136 Frobenius ring, 174
duality functors, 162 Frobenius quiver, 294
Dynkin diagrams, 79, 87 Frobenius system, 206
Frobenius vector, 294
E Fujita algebra, 308
end of a maximal path, 204 fundamental ideal, 61, 205
end vertex, 67, 225
SUBJECT INDEX 391
G index of imprimitivity, 366

Gabriel theorem, 93 index of a poset, 296
Galilean group, 10 index of a ring, 289
Galois group, 6 index of a quiver, 294
garland, 133 index of a subgroup, 11
general linear group, 3 initial vertex, 67
generalized Cartan matrix, 106 invariant subgroup, 11
generalized quaternions group, 8 inverse element, 2
Gorenstein matrix, 267 irreducible character, 39
Gorenstein tiled order, 327 irreducible lattice, 257
graded algebra, 55 irreducible pair, 132
graded module, 53 irreducible representation, 31, 35,
graded ring, 54 76, 137
grading, 55 irreducible subset, 93
graduation, 55 isomorphic quivers, 68
Grassmann algebra, 55 isomorphic representations, 115, 135
greatest lower bound, 256 isomorphism of groups, 12
Green theorem, 161, 205 isomorphism of representations, 75,
Grothendick group, 244 135
group, 2
group algebra, 26 J
group homomorphism, 12 join, 256
Jordan-Hölder theorem, 21
H
hereditary ring, 231 K
heredity chain, 313 k-quiver, 99
heredity ideal, 313 k-species, 99
Hermitian inner product, 45 kernel, 12
homogeneous element, 54, 55 Klein 4-group, 4
homogeneous Markov chain, 293 König graph theorem, 181
homogeneous submodule, 54 Köthe algebra, 172
homology group, 6 Krull-Remark-Schmidt theorem, 77
Kupisch series, 247
I
identity of a group, 2 L
image, 12 l-hereditary ring, 184
imaginary root, 86 Lagrange theorem, 10
imprimitive matrix, 290, 360 lattice, 256
improper subgroup, 3 least upper bound, 256
incidence matrix, 68 left coset, 11
indecomposable matrix, 106 left group action, 15
indecomposable P-space, 114 left hereditary ring, 231
indecomposable representation, 35, left lattice, 257
76, 100, 114, 138 left regular action, 15
392 SUBJECT INDEX
left regular representation, 29 non-differential poset, 132

left self-injective ring, 193 non-negative definite quadratic form,
left semidistributive ring, 234 82
left socular ring, 183 non-negative matrix, 288
left weak global dimension, 221 norm, 47
length of a module, 140 normal decomposition, 148
length of a normal series, 21 normal series, 21
length of a path, 69 normal set of elements, 341
linear matrix problem, 138 normal subgroup, 11
linear representation, 28 normalizer, 17
locally closed subset, 93 normally indecomposable module,
Lorentz group, 10 148
lower bound, 256
lower central series, 25 O
lower cone, 130 (0,1)-order, 296
lower semilattice, 256 odd element, 56
odd permutation, 5
M orbit, 15
(0,1)-matrix, 346 order of a group, 2
(0,1,2)-matrix, 361 order of an element, 13
Maschke theorem, 31 ordinal sum of posets, 357
matrix representation, 27, 28, 136 oriented cycle, 69
maximal path, 204 orthogonal group, 9
maximal ring, 65 orthogonal transformation, 9
meet, 256 orthogonality relations, 42, 44
modular group representation, 47 Osofsky theorem, 181
monomial ideal, 167 overmodule, 274
monomorphism, 12 overring, 256
morphism of representations, 75,
114, 135 P
multiplicative group, 2 p-group, 18
multiplication table, 3 P-space, 114
p-subgroup, 18
N p-vector, 59
N∗ -free poset, 133 path algebra, 69, 205
Nakayama conditions, 191 permutation, 4
Nakayama permutation, 161, 168, permutation group, 4
212 permutation representation, 28
natural partial ordering, 256 permutationally irreducible matrix,
natural projection, 12 287
negative element, 2 permutationally reducible matrix,
negatively graded module, 54 287
nilpotency class, 24 piecewise domain, 184
nilpotent group, 24 point of a quiver, 67
SUBJECT INDEX 393
polynomial ring, 55 reduction algorithm of Nazarova-

poset of finite representation type, Roiter, 131
114 reflexive module, 188
poset of infinite representation type, rejection lemma, 209
114 regular character, 39
poset of tame representation type, regular dual representation, 137
128 regular Markov chain, 293
poset of wild representation type, 128 regular poset, 296
positive definite quadratic form, 82 regular representation, 136
positive matrix, 288 regular quiver, 367
positive semi-definite quadratic form, relation in a group, 4
82 relatively injective lattice, 274
positively graded module, 54 representation of an algebra, 135
primitive generator, 310 representation of a group, 27
primitive matrix, 290, 366 representation of a poset, 114
principal character, 39 representation of a quiver, 74
principal right module, 231 representation of a species, 99
proper subgroup, 3 right 2-ring, 308
right adjacent class, 10
Q right coset, 10
Q-equivalent posets, 281, 296 right group action, 15
QF -algebra, 169 right hereditary ring, 231
QF -ring, 174 right lattice, 257
quasidihedral group, 8 right Kupisch series, 247
quasi-Frobenius algebra, 169 right regular representation, 29
quasi-Frobenius ring, 174 right quiver of a ring, 225
quasi-hereditary ring, 313 right self-injective ring, 193
quiver, 67, 143, 225 right semidistributive ring, 234
quiver of finite type, 79 right serial bimodule, 227
quiver of infinite type, 79 right serial ring, 219, 224
quiver of a Markov chain, 293 right serial quiver, 236
quiver of tame type, 79 right socular ring, 183
quiver of wild type, 79 right weak global dimension, 221
quotient group, 11 ring of bounded representation
quotient representation, 136 type, 141
ring of multipliers, 264
R ring of polynomials, 55
radical of a quadratic form, 82 ring of strongly unbounded represen-
real root, 86 tation type, 141
reduced exponent matrix, 265 ring of unbounded representation
reduced tiled order, 265 type, 141
reducible character, 39 ring with duality for simple modules,
reducible representation, 31, 35 190
394 SUBJECT INDEX
Ringel resolution, 73 strongly dependent subset, 259

Roiter theorem, 147 subgroup, 3
root of a tree, 237 subrepresentation, 75, 136
rotation, 9 subspace-finite poset, 114
rotation group, 8 subspace-infinite poset, 114
suitable pair of a poset, 132
S symmetric algebra, 58, 165
second Brauer-Thrall conjecture, 141 symmetric bilinear form, 78
semidistributive module, 234 symmetric figure, 7
semidistributive ring, 234 symmetric group, 4
semilocal ring, 178 symmetry, 7
semiprimary ring, 313 symmetry group, 7
semiprime ring, 305 Sylow p-subgroup, 19
semi-reflexive module, 188 Sylow theorems, 14
separated diagram, 144
serial module, 219, 224 T
serial ring, 224 tame algebra, 141
set of fixed points, 16 tame group, 48
set of roots, 86 target vertex, 67, 225
similar representations, tensor algebra, 56, 57
27, 28 tensor algebra of a bimodule, 60
simple cycle, 204 tiled order, 255
simple Dynkin diagrams, 79 Tits quadratic form, 78, 127
simple group, 11, 21 trace, 38
simple path, 204 transfinite ascending Loewy series,
simple representation, 183
76, 137 transition matrix, 293
simple root, 86 transposition, 5
socle of a module, tree, 237, 238
163, 177 triangular tiled order, 329
socular ring, 183 trivial representation, 28
solvable group, 21 trivial subrepresentation, 76
solvable length, 23 two-sided Peirce decomposition of an
source vertex, 67 ideal, 166
special linear group, 3
special tensor algebra, 66
species, 99 U
species of finite type, 100 unimodular group, 3
splitting decomposition, 133 unit subgroup, 3
stabilizer, 16 upper bound, 256
standard numeration, 294 upper central series, 24
start vertex, 67 upper cone, 130
stochastic matrix, 293 upper semilattice, 256
strict vector, 82
SUBJECT INDEX 395
V Weierstrass-Dedekind theorem, 36
valued graph, 87 width of a poset, 130, 259
vertex of a quiver, 67 width of a reduced exponent
(0,1)-matrix, 347
W width of a tiled order, 261
weak dimension, 222 wild algebra, 142
weakly non-negative quadratic wild group, 48
form, 127
weakly positive quadratic form, 127 Z
weakly prime ring, 305 Zariski topology, 93
weakly symmetric algebra, 172, 279 zero, 2
Wedderburn-Artin theorem, 35 zero-relation, 73
Wedderburn ring, 61 zero representation, 76
Name Index
A D
Abel N.H., 49 Danlyev Kh.M., 317, 324, 325
Albamowicz R., 385 Davis P.J., 248, 253
Alperin J.L., 385 Dickson L.E., 34, 35
Armstrong M.A., 385 Dieudonné J., 213, 214
Arnold D.M., 117, 154, 156, 385 Dilworth R.P., 259, 323, 325
Arnold V.I., 109 Dinh H., 214, 215
Assen I., 214 Dlab V., 89,90, 92, 99–102, 110,
Auslander M., 141, 155, 156, 202, 145–147, 155,
213, 214, 223, 252, 385 156, 318, 325, 385
Dokuchaev M.A., 213, 215, 323–325
B Donovan P., 98, 101, 102, 140,
Bass H., 327, 381, 383 153, 156, 252, 253
Bautista R., 141, 156 Donnelly R.G., 110
Bell A.D., 155, 156 Drozd Yu.A., 48–50, 113, 128,
Berstein I.N., 53, 93, 101, 102 140, 142, 153–156, 252,
Birkhoff G.D., 341 253, 382, 383, 386
Blyth T.S., 385 Dugas M., 154, 156
Bondarenko V.M., 48–50, 154, 156 Dulmage A.L., 368, 383
Bongartz K., 141, 155
Borel A., 110
Bourbaki N., 102 E
Brauer R., 47, 50, 154, 155, 212–214, Eilenberg S., 100, 102, 201, 213,
Brenner S., 154 215, 246, 252, 253, 385
Bretscher O., 214 Eklof P.C., 189
Browder F.E., 111 Erdmann K., 214, 215
Burgess W.D., 247, 252 Euler L., 49
Burnside W., 2, 49, 50
Butler M.C.R., 154
Byrnes C., 111 F
Facchini A., 385
Faddeev D.K., 385
C Faith C., 161, 202, 212, 215, 385
Cartan E., 100 Fedorov E.S., 7, 50, 51
Cartan H., 385 Freislich M.R., 98, 101, 102, 140,
Cayley A.L., 2, 12, 49, 50, 136 153, 156, 252, 253
Chatters A.W., 382, 383 Friedom R., 110
Chernousova Zh.T., 323–325 Frobenius F.G., 1, 42, 50, 215,
Crawley-Boevey W., 93, 102 288, 325
Curtis C.W., 173, 213, 214, Fujita H., 308, 323, 325
381–383, 385 Fuller K.R., 246, 247, 252, 253
397
398 NAME INDEX
G Jans J.P., 66, 103, 154, 157,

Gabriel P., 53, 67, 93, 99–102, 247, 253
110, 113, 114, 143–146, Janusz G., 252, 253
155–157, 386 Jategaonkar V.A., 382, 383
Galois E., 49 Jordan C., 49
Gantmakher F.R., 294, 295,
325, 383 K
Gel’fand I.M., 53, 93, 101, 102 Kac V., 89, 92, 98, 101, 103,
Gek M, 111 107, 111
Goodearl K.R., 155, 156, 200, 215 Kang S.J., 89, 92, 103
Gordon R., 213, 215 Kasch F., 213, 216, 386
Gorenstein D., 381, 383 Kemeny G., 292, 325, 386
Grassmann H., 100, 103 Kerner O., 153, 157
Green E.L., 101, 103, 146, 157, Khibina M., 252, 253, 324, 384
205, 213, 215 Kirichenko V.V., 133, 154, 156,
Greferath M., 214, 215 160, 212, 213, 215, 216,
Gubareni N.M., 252, 253 225, 252, 253, 314, 323–326,
Gustafson W.H., 102, 103, 155, 382–384, 386
157, 382, 383 Kirkman E., 317, 326
Klein F., 5, 49
H Kleiner M.M., 113, 116, 117, 130,
Hajaruavis C.R., 382, 383 153, 154, 157
Hall M., 33, 51, 386 Kostrikin A.I., 294, 326
Hannula T.A., 213, 215 Kraft H., 111
Harary F., 253, 301, 325 Krause H., 154
Hazewinkel M., 111 Kronecker L., 49, 50
Hesseling W., 111 Krugliak S.A., 154, 157
Herstein I.N., 33, 51, 312, 325, Kupisch H., 213, 214, 216
366, 383 Kuzmanovich J., 317, 326
Higman D.G., 47, 51, 154, 157
Hochschild G., 65, 100, 101, 103 L
Hong J., 89, 92, 103 Lady E.L., 154
Huber-Dyson V., 387 Lagrange J.L., 49, 51
Huhges D., 214, 215 Lam T.Y, 386
Läser C., 214
I Levitzki J., 196
Igusa K., 252 Liebeck M., 386
Ikeda M., 212, 215, 216 Lopez-Permouth S.R., 214, 215
Ivanov G., 252, 253 Lorentz H.A., 10
J M
Jacobson N., 386 MacLane S., 386
James G., 386 Malle G., 111
Maschke H., 31, 34, 50, 51
NAME INDEX 399
Martin C.F., 111 Ponomarev V.A., 53, 93, 98,

McConnell J.C., 386 101, 102
Mekler A.H., 189 Puninski G., 386
Mendelsohn N.S., 368, 383
Menon M.V., 369, 384 R
Miroshniczenko S.G., 324 Reiner I., 173, 213, 214,
Mitchell B., 386 381–383, 385
Molien T., 1, 35 Reiten I., 385
Moody R.V., 107, 111 Richman F., 117, 156
Morita K., 214, 216 Riedtmann C., 111, 213, 214, 217
Morgan J.W., 110 Rim S., 212, 217
Möbius A., 49 Ringel C.M., 73, 89, 90, 92, 93,
Murase I., 225, 253 99–104, 110, 145–147,
Müller B., 212, 214, 216 154–156, 159, 318, 325,
385, 386
N Robson J.C., 386
Nakayama T., 66, 103, 154, 157, Roganov Yu.V., 101, 104
169, 177, 201, 212, 213, Roggenkamp K.W., 318, 326, 329,
215, 216, 224, 246, 383, 384, 387
247, 253 Roiter A.V., 90, 103, 110, 113, 114,
Nazarova L.A., 98, 101, 103, 113, 130, 140, 141, 147, 153–155,
129, 130, 140, 153, 154, 158, 159, 382–384, 386
156, 158, 159 Romanovsky V.Yu., 101, 104
Nechaev A., 215 Rosenberg A., 100
Nehring J., 214, 216, 217 Rotman J., 387
Nesbitt C., 212–214, 217 Rowen B.B., 385, 387
Nicholson W.K., 386 Rump W., 324, 326
Nishida K., 384
Noether E., 1, 50 S
Northcott D.G., 213, 217, 386 Sagan B.E., 387
Sakai Y., 325
O Sandomerski F.L., 200, 217
Okninski J., 386 Schoenflies A., 7, 51
Osborne M.S., 386 Schur I., 1, 50, 51
Oshiro K., 212, 217 Sehgal S.K., 387
Osofsky B., 193, 200, 213, 217, 386 Serre J.-P., 31, 51
O’Sullivan M.E., 214, 215 Shkabara A.S., 101, 104
Ovsienko S., 90, 101, 103 Sierma D., 111
Simson D., 154, 159, 387
P Singh S., 252, 253
Palmer E.P., 253 Skowroński A., 214, 215, 217
Passman D.S., 386 Small L.W., 213, 215
Perron O., 288, 326 Smalø, S.O., 385
Poincaré H., 10 Snell J.L., 292, 325, 386
400 NAME INDEX
Sobczyk G., 385 Warfield R.B., 225

Stenström B., 387 Waschbüsch J., 214, 215,
Sylow P.L.M., 14, 50, 51 217, 387
Webb P., 111
T Weber H., 50, 51
Tachikawa H., 155, 159, 216, 252, Weidemann A., 318, 326
253, 387 Weil H., 1
Tarsy R.B., 324, 326, 382, 384 Wilson G., 252, 253
Taylor M., 387 Wisbauer R., 215
Thrall R., 154, 159, 214, 217 Wood G., 214, 217
Tits J., 93
Todorov G., 252 Y
Trotler W.T., 387 Yaremenko Yu.V., 216, 325
Tuganbaev A.A., 387 Yoshii T., 101, 104, 154,
159, 160
V Young A., 1
Valio S., 216 Yousif M., 212, 218, 386
Vandermonde A., 49
Veldkamp F.D., 111 Z
Villamayor O., 220 Zacharia D., 252, 253
Vinberg E.B., 106, 111 Zaslow E., 111
Vinsonhaler C., 154 Zavadskij A.G., 101, 104, 130, 133,
Voss E.R., 247, 252 134, 153–156, 159, 160,
314, 323, 326, 383, 384
W Zelensky A.V., 325, 326
Wakimoto M., 111 Zelinsky D., 100, 102
Walker E.A., 161, 202, 212, 215 Zhuravlev V.N., 324–326
Wan Z.X., 88, 89, 92, 104, 111 Zimmermann-Huisgen B., 247, 252

Algebras, Rings and Modules Vol.2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Algebras, Rings and Modules Vol.2

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Algebras, Rings and Modules Vol.2

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Algebras, Rings and Modules

Mathematics and Its Applications

ISBN 978-1-4020-5141-8 (HB)

Printed on acid-free paper

All Rights Reserved

Chapter 1. Groups and group representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Chapter 2. Quivers and their representations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 53

Appendix to section 2.5. More about Dynkin and extended

Chapter 3. Representations of posets and of ﬁnite dimensional

3.5 Roiter theorem . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 147

Chapter 4. Frobenius algebras and quasi-Frobenius rings . . . . . . . . . . . 161

Chapter 5. Right serial rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 219

Chapter 6. Tiled orders over discrete valuation rings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 255

Chapter 7. Gorenstein matrices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 327

Suggestions for further reading . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 385

Subject index .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. .. . . 389

Name index . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 397

In this book we consider the results belonging to the classical representation

1.1 GROUPS AND SUBGROUPS. DEFINITIONS AND EXAMPLES

Deﬁnition. A group is a nonempty set G together with a given binary

A group G is called Abelian (or commutative) if a ∗ b = b ∗ a for all a, b ∈ G.

If G is a ﬁnite set G is called a ﬁnite group. The number of elements of a

Deﬁnition. A non-empty subset H of a group G which itself is a group with

The following simple statement may be considered as an equivalent deﬁnition

Proposition 1.1.1. A subset H of a group G is a subgroup of G if and only

The subset of a group G consisting of the identity element only is clearly a

SLn (k) = {A ∈ GLn (k) : det(A) = 1},

Very important examples of non-Abelian groups are groups of transformations

A permutation σ ∈ Sn is called an even permutation if ε(σ) = 1 and an odd

Symf = {σ ∈ Sn : f (xσ(1) , xσ(2) , ..., xσ(n) ) = f (x1 , x2 , ..., xn )}

is a subgroup of the group Sn . In particular, the polynomial f is symmetric if and

transformations. In his famous lecture in 1872 he gave the deﬁnition of geometry

1.2 SYMMETRY. SYMMETRY GROUPS

which is generated by a rotation σ of 180 degrees and a reﬂection τ across the

This group is called the quasidihedral group of order n.

for some integer n ≥ 2. For n = 2 we obtain

O(n) = {X ∈ Mn (R) : XXT = In },

where In is the identity matrix of degree n. The transformations of O(n) which

1 ∂2u ∂2u ∂2u ∂2u

1.3 QUOTIENT GROUPS, HOMOMORPHISMS AND NORMAL

Theorem 1.3.1 (Lagrange theorem). If G is a ﬁnite group and H is a

Deﬁnition. A subgroup H of a group G is called a normal subgroup (or

Suppose G is a group, N is a normal subgroup, and G/N is the collection of all

The mapping π : g → N g is a group epimorphism of G onto G/N , called the

is commutative, i.e., ψπ = ϕ, where π is the natural projection.

Theorem 1.3.2 (A.Cayley). Let G be a ﬁnite group of order n and let Sn be

Proof. For any a ∈ G we deﬁne fa : G → G by setting fa (g) = g · a. Let

Deﬁne a mapping f : G → Sn by setting f (a) = fa for any a ∈ G. From the

fab (g) = (ab)g = a(bg) = fa (bg) = fa fb (g)

for any g ∈ G. This shows that fab = fa fb . Therefore f is a group homomorphism,

As a consequence of this theorem we obtain that the number of all non-

Deﬁnition. For a group G and an element x ∈ G deﬁne the order2 of x to

Corollary 1.3.5 (Fermat theorem). Let a group G be of order n and let

Proof. Suppose the order of an element x ∈ G is equal to m. Then, by the

Corollary 1.3.6. Any group G of order p, where p is a prime integer, is cyclic.

1.4 SYLOW THEOREMS

Deﬁnition. A left group action of a group G on a set X is a mapping

The expression g ·x will usually be written simply as gx when there is no danger

x ∼ y if and only if x = gy for some g ∈ G

is an equivalence relation. To each element x ∈ X we can let correspond the set

G/H (G/G )/(H/G )