4

Let $D(X)$ be the free distributive bounded lattice on a finite set $X$. Then one can show that every element of $D(X)$ has the form

$$\bigvee_{A \in \mathcal{A}} \bigwedge_{a \in A} a$$

for some antichain $\mathcal{A} \subseteq P(X)$. For example, the antichain $\{\{x\},\{y,z\}\}$ yields the element $x \vee (y \wedge z)$. This is true for every distributive bounded lattice generated by a set $X$. If $X$ is infinite, we just take a finite antichain of finite subsets of $X$.

I would like to show that this antichain is uniquely determined, without constructing $D(X)$ as the set of reduced words (via antichains), which seems to be the usual approach. The reason is that it will be a mess to write down the lattice operations in terms of reduced words, and proving even basic things such as absorption laws require some computational effort that I would like to avoid.

Instead, I would like to follow a similar approach as the one to verify the uniqueness of reduced words in a free group $F(X)$, using its universal property. Here, one writes down a map $X \to \mathrm{Sym}(R)$, where $R$ is the set of reduced words, and then extends it to a homomorphism $F(X) \to \mathrm{Sym}(R)$ via the universal property of $F(X)$. Finally, one verifies that $F(X) \to \mathrm{Sym}(R) \xrightarrow{ev_1} R$ is left inverse to $R \to F(X)$, so that $R \to F(X)$ is indeed injective. This approach works more generally to describe the elements of a coproduct of groups or monoids, see here and there.

So I assume I need to construct a certain lattice $L$ based on the set of antichains on $X$, construct a map $X \to L$ and then extend it to $D(X) \to L$ via the universal property. I tried for $L$ the power set of the set of antichains, but this didn't work out.

  • It might be easier to proceed in two steps: first construct the free meet semilattice on a set, then construct the free distributive lattice on a meet semilattice. – Zhen Lin Oct 16 '24 at 12:41
  • @ZhenLin That sounds interesting! The free meet semilattice just consists of finite subsets, here a direct construction is also no issue. The free distributive lattice on a meet semilattice should consist of antichains in the underlying partial order, I think. The problem then is again how to define the meet and join of antichains without making that (in my opinion, awkward) reduction procedure? For example, the join of two antichains will be the "reduction" of the union. I ask because doing this will make the verification of the lattice axioms a bit tedious. – Martin Brandenburg Oct 16 '24 at 18:42
  • In my view the antichain representation is not elegant. At least, it seems to me to rely on the law of excluded middle. As explained in an answer below, the way to get the free distributive lattice on a meet semilattice is to take the set of finitely generated downward-closed sets. This is constructively valid and has easy descriptions of joins and meets. – Zhen Lin Oct 16 '24 at 23:37
  • I see. While I agree that the other representation has some merits, I think the question how to show uniqueness in the antichain representation by using the universal property is still interesting in its own right. – Martin Brandenburg Oct 17 '24 at 00:59

1 Answers1

1

There is a construction of the free distributive lattice that follows by (Birkhoff) duality: given the set X, consider $\mathcal{P}(X)$, understood as a powerset under inclusion. This is a partially ordered set. Now take the set of upwards closed subsets of $\mathcal{P}(X)$. Then this forms a distributive lattice (with set-theoretic intersection and union), and indeed is the dual of the free distributive lattice on $X$ many generators. The map from $X$ to $Up(\mathcal{P}(X))$ maps an element $x$ to the principal upset at $\{x\}$.

Your observation follows from this: a given upwards closed subset $U$ is a finite union of principal upsets of the form ${\uparrow}S$ where $S$ is a finite subset of $U$. We think of the element ${\uparrow}S_{0}\cup...\cup {\uparrow}S_{n}$ as $\bigvee_{i=0}^{n}\bigwedge_{s\in S_{i}}s$. This gives an obvious way to lift any map from $X$ to a distributive latice $D$ to a homomorphism, and the lift is unique because it is determined by its image on the singletons.

I can add more details as desired, let me know if this is what you were looking for!

  • How does this imply that the antichain is unique? It seems that you answer the question "what is an alternative construction for the free distributive lattice", but this is not my question. – Martin Brandenburg Oct 16 '24 at 19:35
  • If $U$ is an upwards closed subset, and $S_{0},...,S_{n}$ are the finitely many minimal subsets such that $U={\uparrow}S_{0}\cup...\cup {\uparrow}S_{n}$, then your antichain is precisely ${S_{0},...,S_{n}}$. It is unique, because if ${T_{0},...,T_{m}}$ was some other antichain such that $U={\uparrow}T_{0}\cup...\cup {\uparrow}T_{m}$, then $S_{i}\supseteq T_{k}$ for each $i\leq n$, for some $k$, but since $S_{i}$ is minimal in the subset, $T_{k}=S_{i}$. – Rodrigo Nicolau Almeida Oct 16 '24 at 20:22
  • 1
    Alright. I think that this answer is unfortunately not what I am looking for. I think the outline in the post should make it clear. I am interested in a rather specific type of proof of uniqueness. And it should not use a different concrete model of $D(X)$, but rather the universal property applied to a non-universal target lattice. The idea is to mimic the proof for free groups. – Martin Brandenburg Oct 17 '24 at 01:03