Hostname: page-component-7dd5485656-glrdx Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2025-10-31T20:50:54.928Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Semi-de Morgan algebras

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  12 March 2014

Hanamantagouda P. Sankappanavar
Hanamantagouda P. Sankappanavar*
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics and Computer Science, State University of New York at New Paltz, New Paltz, New York 12561
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Extract

The purpose of this paper is to define and investigate a new (equational) class of algebras, which we call semi-De Morgan algebras, as a common abstraction of De Morgan algebras and distributive pseudocomplemented lattices. We were first led to this class of algebras in 1979 (in Brazil) as a result of our attempt to extend both the well-known theorem of Glivenko (see [4, Theorem 26]) and Lakser's characterization of principal congruences to a setting more general than that of distributive pseudocomplemented lattices. In subsequent years, our work in [20] on a subvariety of Ockham algebras, first considered by Berman [3], renewed our interest in semi-De Morgan algebras by providing new examples. It seems worth mentioning that these new algebras may also turn out to be useful in resolving a conjecture made in [22] to unify certain strikingly similar results on Heyting algebras with a dual pseudocomplement (see [21]) and Heyting algebras with a De Morgan negation (see [22]).

In §2 we introduce semi-De Morgan algebras and prove the main theorem, which, roughly speaking, states that certain elements of a semi-De Morgan algebra form a De Morgan algebra. Several applications then follow, including new axiomatizations of distributive pseudocomplemented lattices, Stone algebras and De Morgan algebras.

Information

Type
Research Article
Information
The Journal of Symbolic Logic , Volume 52 , Issue 3 , September 1987 , pp. 712 - 724
Copyright
Copyright © Association for Symbolic Logic 1987

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

[1] Balbes, R. and Dwinger, P., Distributive lattices, University of Missouri Press, Columbia, Missouri, 1974.Google Scholar
[2] Berman, J., Congruence relations of pseudocomplemented distributive lattices, Algebra Universalis, vol. 3(1973), pp. 288–293.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[3] Berman, J., Distributive lattices with an additional unary operation, Aequationes Mathematicae, vol. 16 (1977), pp. 165–171.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[4] Birkhoff, G., Lattice theory, 3rd ed., American Mathematical Society, Providence, Rhode Island, 1967.Google Scholar
[5] Burris, S. and Sankappanavar, H. P., A course in universal algebra, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1981.Google Scholar
[6] Frink, O., Pseudocomplements in semilattices, Duke Mathematical Journal, vol. 29 (1962), pp. 505–514.Google Scholar
[7] Glivenko, V., Sur quelques points de la logique de M. Brouwer, Bulletin de l'Académie desSciences de Belgique, vol. 15 (1929), pp. 183–188.Google Scholar
[8] Grätzer, G., Lattice theory. First concepts and distributive lattices, Freeman, San Francisco, California, 1971.Google Scholar
[9] Grätzer, G. and Lakser, H., The structure of pseudocomplemented distributive lattices. II: Congruence extension and amalgamation, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 156 (1971), pp. 343–358.Google Scholar
[10] Grätzer, G. and Lakser, H., The structure of pseudocomplemented distributive lattices. III: Injective andabsolute subretracts, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 169 (1972), pp. 475–487.Google Scholar
[11] Jónsson, B., Algebras whose congruence lattices are distributive, Mathematica Scandinavica, vol. 21 (1967), pp. 110–121.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[12] Kalman, J. A., Lattices with involution, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 87 (1958), pp. 485–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[13] Lakser, H., The structure of pseudocomplemented distributive lattices. I: Subdirect decomposition, Transactions of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 156 (1971), pp. 335–342.Google Scholar
[14] Lakser, H., Principal congruences of pseudocomplemented distributive lattices, Proceedings of the American Mathematical Society, vol. 37 (1973), pp. 32–36.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[15] Lee, K. B., Equational classes of distributive pseudocomplemented lattices, Canadian Journal of Mathematics, vol. 22 (1970), pp. 881–891.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[16] Rasiowa, H., An algebraic approach to nonclassical logics, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1974.Google Scholar
[17] Ribenboim, P., Characterization of the sup-complement in a distributive lattice with last element, Summa Brasiliensis Mathematicae, vol. 2 (1949), pp. 43–49.Google Scholar
[18] Sankappanavar, H. P., Congruence lattices of pseudocomplemented semilattices, Algebra Universalis, vol. 9 (1979), pp. 304–316.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[19] Sankappanavar, H. P., A characterization of principal congruences of De Morgan algebras and its applications, Mathematical logic in Latin America, North-Holland, Amsterdam, 1980, pp. 341–349.Google Scholar
[20] Sankappanavar, H. P., Distributive lattices with a dual endomorphism, Zeitschrift für Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 31 (1985), pp. 385–392.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[21] Sankappanavar, H. P., Heyting algebras with dual pseudocomplementation, Pacific Journal of Mathematics, vol. 117 (1985), pp. 405–415.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
[22] Sankappanavar, H. P., Heyting algebras with a dual (lattice) endomorphism, Zeitschrift für Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 34 (1988) (to appear).Google Scholar
[23] Sankappanavar, H. P., Pseudocomplemented Ockham and De Morgan algebras, Zeitschrift für Mathematische Logik und Grundlagen der Mathematik, vol. 32 (1986), pp. 385–394.Google Scholar
[24] Sankappanavar, H. P., Demi-p-lattices: principal congruences and subdirect irreducibility (preprint).Google Scholar