সমস্ত আদিম শব্দগুলির সেটটি কি প্রধান ভাষা?

Question

একটি শব্দ $w$ বলা হয় আদিম , যদি সেখানে কোন শব্দ নেই $v$ এবং $k > 1$ যাতে $w = v^k$ । সেট $Q$ একটি বর্ণমালা সব আদিম শব্দের $\Sigma$ একটি সুপরিচিত ভাষা। WLOG আমরা নির্বাচন করতে পারবেন $\Sigma = \{ a,b \}$ ।

একটি ল্যাঙ্গুয়েজ $L$ হয় মৌলিক , যদি প্রত্যেক ভাষার জন্য $A$ এবং $B$ সঙ্গে $L = A \cdot B$ আমরা আছে $A = \{\epsilon\}$ বা $B = \{ \epsilon \}$ ।

কিউ প্রাইম?

একটি স্যাট সাহায্যে সমাধানকারী আমি দেখাতে পারে যে, আমরা পারেন সঙ্গে $\{a,b\} \subseteq A$ বা $\{a,b\} \subseteq B$ অন্যথায় $\{ ababa, babab \} \subset Q$ মধ্যে factorized করা যাবে না $A$ এবং $B$ , তবে তখন থেকেই আটকে আছে।

Answer 1

উত্তরটি হল হ্যাঁ. মনে করুন আমাদের একটি গুণক $Q = A\cdot B$ ।

এক সহজ পর্যবেক্ষণ করে $A$ এবং $B$ অসংলগ্ন করা হতে হবে (যেহেতু জন্য $w\in A\cap B$ আমরা পেতে $w^2\in Q$ )। বিশেষ করে, মাত্র এক $A,B$ ধারণ করতে পারে $\epsilon$ । আমরা ওয়েলগ ধরে নিতে পারি (যেহেতু অন্য কেসটি সম্পূর্ণ প্রতিসাম্যযুক্ত) যা $\epsilon\in B$ । তারপরে যেহেতু $a$ এবং $b$ খালি খালি কারণগুলির মধ্যে ফ্যাক্টর করা যায় না, তাই আমাদের অবশ্যই $a,b\in A$ ।

পরবর্তী আমরা পেতে যে $a^mb^n\in A$ (এবং, সম্পূর্ণ অনুরূপভাবে, $b^ma^n\in A$ ) সব জন্য $m,n>0$ আনয়ন করে $m$ :

জন্য $m=1$ , যেহেতু $ab^n\in Q$ , আমরা থাকতে হবে $ab^n = uv$ সঙ্গে $u\in A, v\in B$ । যেহেতু $u\neq\epsilon$ , $v$ অবশ্যই কিছু কে ≤ n এর জন্য $b^k$ হতে হবে । তবে যদি কে > 0 , তবে খ ∈ এ যেহেতু আমরা খ 1 + কে ∈ কিউ ভি = পেয়েছি$k\le n$$k>0$$b\in A$$b^{1+k}\in Q$ , বৈপরীত্য। সুতরাং$v=\epsilon$ , এবং$ab^n\in A$ ।

প্রস্তাবনামূলক পদক্ষেপ স্বরূপ, যেহেতু $a^{m+1}b^n\in Q$ আমরা আছে $a^{m+1}b^n = uv$ সঙ্গে $u\in A, v\in B$ । আবার যেহেতু $u\neq\epsilon$ , আমরা হয় আছে $v = a^kb^n$ কিছু $0<k<m+1$ , বা $v=b^k$ কিছু $k<n$ । তবে আগের ক্ষেত্রে, $v$ ইতিমধ্যে রয়েছে$A$ by the induction hypothesis, so $v^2\in Q$, contradiction. In the latter case, we must have $k=0$ (i.e. $v=\epsilon$) since from $b\in A$ we get $b^{1+k}\in Q$. So $u=a^{m+1}b^n\in A$.

Now consider the general case of primitive words with $r$ alternations between $a$ and $b$, i.e. $w$ is either $a^{m_1}b^{n_1}\ldots a^{m_s}b^{n_s}$, $b^{m_1}a^{n_1}\ldots b^{m_s}a^{n_s}$ (for $r=2s-1$), $a^{m_1}b^{n_1}\ldots a^{m_{s+1}}$, or $b^{m_1}a^{n_1}\ldots b^{m_{s+1}}$ (for $r=2s$); we can show that they are all in $A$ using induction on $r$. What we did so far covered the base cases $r=0$ and $r=1$.

For $r>1$, we use another induction on $m_1$, which works very much the same way as the one for $r=1$ above:

If $m_1=1$, then $w=uv$ with $u\in A, v\in B$, and since $u\neq\epsilon$, $v$ has fewer than $r$ alternations. So $v$ (or its root in case $v$ itself is not primitive) is in $A$ by the induction hypothesis on $r$ for a contradiction as above unless $v=\epsilon$. So $w=u\in A$.

If $m_1>1$, in any factorization $w=uv$ with $u\neq\epsilon$, $v$ either has fewer alternations (and its root is in $A$ unless $v=\epsilon$ by the induction hypothesis on $r$), or a shorter first block (and its root is in A unless $v=\epsilon$ by the induction hypothesis on $m_1$). In either case we get that we must have $v=\epsilon$, i.e. $w=u\in A$.

---

The case of $Q' := Q\cup\{\epsilon\}$ is rather more complicated. The obvious things to note are that in any decomposition $Q = A\cdot B$, both $A$ and $B$ must be subsets of $Q'$ with $A\cap B = \{\epsilon\}$. Also, $a,b$ must be contained in $A\cup B$.

With a bit of extra work, one can show that $a$ and $b$ must be in the same subset. Otherwise, assume wlog that $a\in A$ and $b\in B$. Let us say that $w\in Q'$ has a proper factorization if $w=uv$ with $u\in A\setminus\{\epsilon\}$ and $v\in B\setminus\{\epsilon\}$. We have two (symmetric) subcases depending on where $ba$ goes (it must be in $A$ or $B$ since it has no proper factorization).

• If $ba\in A$, then $aba$ has no proper factorization since $ba,a\notin B$. Since $aba\in A$ would imply $abab\in A\cdot B$, we get $aba\in B$. As a consequence, $bab$ is neither in $A$ (which would imply $bababa\in A\cdot B$) nor in $B$ (which would imply $abab\in A\cdot B$). Now consider the word $babab$. It has no proper factorization since $bab\notin A\cup B$ and $abab,baba$ are not primitive. If $babab\in A$, then since $aba\in B$ we get $(ba)^4\in A\cdot B$; if $babab\in B$, then since $a\in A$ we get $(ab)^3\in A\cdot B$. So there is no way to have $babab\in A\cdot B$, contradiction.
• The case $ba\in B$ is completely symmetric. In a nutshell: $bab$ has no proper factorization and cannot be in $B$, so it must be in $A$; therefore $aba$ cannot be in $A$ or $B$; therefore $ababa$ has no proper factorization but also cannot be in either $A$ or $B$, contradiction.

I am currently not sure how to proceed beyond this point; it would be interesting to see if the above argument can be systematically generalized.

Comments

Wow, you have my respect. I'll go through it later today or tomorrow as I don't have time right now, but I am seriously impressed :) It took me a few hours to get that {a, b} are in A but I didn't exploit that \epsilon is not a primitive word. How did you approach this problem (or was it "just do it"?)? How long did it take you to come up with that proof?

— Henning

Thanks! I got the main idea (showing that any nonempty proper suffix of words must be in $A$) by thinking about what happens to some "simple" words. $\epsilon, a$, and $b$ were relatively straightforward, $a^n$ or $b^n$ were out of the question, and considering $ab, abb, abbb, \ldots$ got me on the right path.

— Klaus Draeger

Your proof is beautiful and not as hard as I thought (I feel quite stupid now, I spent some time thinking about it). However it seems to heavily relay on epsilon not being element of Q. Is $Q \cup \{ \epsilon \}$ also prime?

— Henning

Good question! I'll have to get back to you on that one.

— Klaus Draeger

Thanks for the comments, and sorry for the delay. The case where we want to include the empty word seems to be more complicated, see update.

— Klaus Draeger