In mathematics order theory, an ideal is a special subset of a partially ordered set (poset). Although this term historically was derived from the notion of a ring ideal of abstract algebra, it has subsequently been generalized to a different notion. Ideals are of great importance for many constructions in order and lattice theory.
While this is the most general way to define an ideal for arbitrary posets, it was originally defined for lattices only. In this case, the following equivalent definition can be given: a subset of a lattice is an ideal if and only if it is a lower set that is closed under finite joins (suprema); that is, it is nonempty and for all x, y in , the element of P is also in .
A weaker notion of order ideal is defined to be a subset of a poset that satisfies the above conditions 1 and 2. In other words, an order ideal is simply a lower set. Similarly, an ideal can also be defined as a "directed lower set".
The dual notion of an ideal, i.e., the concept obtained by reversing all ≤ and exchanging with is a filter.
, and pseudoideal are different generalizations of the notion of a lattice ideal.
An ideal or filter is said to be proper if it is not equal to the whole set P.
The smallest ideal that contains a given element p is a and p is said to be a of the ideal in this situation. The principal ideal for a principal p is thus given by .
A subset of a lattice is a prime ideal, if and only if
It is easily checked that this is indeed equivalent to stating that is a filter (which is then also prime, in the dual sense).
For a complete lattice the further notion of a is meaningful. It is defined to be a proper ideal with the additional property that, whenever the meet (infimum) of some arbitrary set is in , some element of A is also in . So this is just a specific prime ideal that extends the above conditions to infinite meets.
The existence of prime ideals is in general not obvious, and often a satisfactory amount of prime ideals cannot be derived within ZF (Zermelo–Fraenkel set theory without the axiom of choice). This issue is discussed in various prime ideal theorems, which are necessary for many applications that require prime ideals.
When a poset is a distributive lattice, maximal ideals and filters are necessarily prime, while the converse of this statement is false in general.
Maximal filters are sometimes called , but this terminology is often reserved for Boolean algebras, where a maximal filter (ideal) is a filter (ideal) that contains exactly one of the elements { a, ¬ a}, for each element a of the Boolean algebra. In Boolean algebras, the terms prime ideal and maximal ideal coincide, as do the terms prime filter and maximal filter.
There is another interesting notion of maximality of ideals: Consider an ideal and a filter F such that is Disjoint sets from F. We are interested in an ideal M that is maximal among all ideals that contain and are disjoint from F. In the case of distributive lattices such an M is always a prime ideal. A proof of this statement follows.
However, in general it is not clear whether there exists any ideal M that is maximal in this sense. Yet, if we assume the axiom of choice in our set theory, then the existence of M for every disjoint filter–ideal-pair can be shown. In the special case that the considered order is a Boolean algebra, this theorem is called the Boolean prime ideal theorem. It is strictly weaker than the axiom of choice and it turns out that nothing more is needed for many order-theoretic applications of ideals.
Generalization to any posets was done by Orrin Frink.
|
|