BZPEERReading, trust and collaboration for research
Menu

Discover

SearchFind papers, people, topics and opportunities from one place.GraphOpen maps around papers, topics and saved views.

Workspaces

HomeOpen the ranked research feed.CollectionsCurate reading lists, evidence sets and shareable dossiers.ResearchSee your private provenance graph, trail and imports.CollaborationMove from discovery into focused discussion rooms.PublishDraft, preview and publish full-text research articles.

Network

ExpertsFind specialists worth following or asking for help.CommunitiesJoin research circles organized around shared work.

Opportunities

ListingsBrowse roles, calls and collaborations with clearer fit signals.

Account

Log inReturn to your reading and collaboration workspace.Create accountStart saving work, following people and joining teams.
Log inCreate account

Source author record

G. Grätzer

G. Grätzer appears in the imported research catalog. Authorship, coauthor and topic links are available while profile ownership is still unclaimed.

ResearcherUnclaimed source record
math.RAmath.GM

Catalog footprint

What is connected

13works
2topics
4close collaborators

Actions

Connect this record

Log in to claim
Open graphBrowse works

Research graph

See the researcher in context

Open full explorer

Inspect adjacent work, topics, institutions and collaborators without jumping out to a separate graph page.

Building this map preview

BZPEER is loading the nearby papers, people, topics and institutions for this page.

Published work

13 published item(s)

preprint2022arXiv

A rectangular interval of a rectangular lattice is a rectangular lattice

Let $L$ be a slim, planar, semimodular lattice (slim means that it does not contain ${\mathsf M}_3$-sublattices). We call the interval $I = [o, i]$ of $L$ \emph{rectangular}, if there are $u_l, u_r \in [o, i] - \{o,i\}$ such that $o = u_l \wedge u_r$ and $i = u_l \vee u_r$, where $u_l$ is to the left of $u_r$. We prove that a rectangular interval of a rectangular lattice is a rectangular lattice. As an application, we get a recent result of G. Czédli.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

Homomorphisms and principal congruences of bounded lattices. III. The Independence Theorem

A new result of G. Czédli states that for an ordered set $P$ with at least two elements and a group $G$, there exists a bounded lattice $L$ such that the ordered set of principal congruences of $L$ is isomorphic to $P$ and the automorphism group of $L$ is isomorphic to $G$. I provide an alternative proof utilizing a result of mine with J. Sichler from the late 1960-s.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2022arXiv

On the algorithmic construction of the 1960 sectional complement

In 1960, G. Grätzer and E.\,T. Schmidt proved that every finite distributive lattice can be represented as the congruence lattice of a sectionally complemented finite lattice $L$. For $u \leq v$ in $L$, they constructed a sectional complement, which is now called the \emph{1960 sectional complement}. In 1999, G. Grätzer and E.\,T. Schmidt discovered a very simple way of constructing a sectional complement in the ideal lattice of a chopped lattice made up of two sectionally complemented finite lattices overlapping in only two elements -- the Atom Lemma. The question was raised whether this simple process can be generalized to an algorithm that finds the 1960 sectional complement. In 2006, G.~Grätzer and M. Roddy discovered such an algorithm -- allowing a wide latitude how it is carried out. In this paper we prove that the wide latitude apparent in the algorithm is deceptive: whichever way the algorithm is carried out, it~produces the same sectional complement. This solves, in fact, Problems 2 and 3 of the Grätzer-Roddy paper. Surprisingly, the unique sectional complement provided by the algorithm is the 1960 sectional complement, solving Problem 1 of the same paper.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2014arXiv

Congruences and prime-perspectivities in finite lattices

IIn a finite lattice, a congruence spreads from a prime interval to another by a sequence of congruence-perspectivities through \emph{intervals of arbitrary size}, by a 1955 result of J. Jakubík. In this note, I introduce the concept of \emph{prime-perspectivity} and prove the Prime-projectivity Lemma: a congruence spreads from a prime interval to another by a sequence of prime-perspectivities through \emph{prime ntervals}. A planar semimodular lattice is \emph{slim} if it contains no $\mathsf{M}_3$ sublattice. I introduce the Swing Lemma, a very strong version of the Prime-projectivity Lemma for slim, planar, semimodular lattices.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2013arXiv

Isoform lattices

Let $L$ be a lattice. We call a congruence relation $\gQ$ of $L$ isoform, if any two congruence classes of $\gQ$ are isomorphic (as lattices). Let us call the lattice $L$ isoform, if all congruences of $L$ are isoform. G. Grätzer and E.\,T. Schmidt proved that every finite distributive lattice $D$ can be represented as the congruence lattice of a finite isoform lattice $L$. We now prove that every finite lattice $K$ has a congruence-preserving extension to a finite isoform lattice $L$.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access
preprint2011arXiv

Isotone maps on lattices

Let (L_i : i\in I) be a family of lattices in a nontrivial lattice variety V, and let ϕ_i: L_i --> M, for i\in I, be isotone maps (not assumed to be lattice homomorphisms) to a common lattice M (not assumed to lie in V). We show that the maps ϕ_i can be extended to an isotone map ϕ: L --> M, where L is the free product of the L_i in V. This was known for V the variety of all lattices (Yu. I. Sorkin 1952). The above free product L can be viewed as the free lattice in V on the partial lattice P formed by the disjoint union of the L_i. The analog of the above result does not, however, hold for the free lattice L on an arbitrary partial lattice P. We show that the only codomain lattices M for which that more general statement holds are the complete lattices. On the other hand, we prove the analog of our main result for a class of partial lattices P that are not-quite-disjoint unions of lattices. We also obtain some results similar to our main one, but with the relationship lattices:orders replaced either by semilattices:orders or by lattices:semilattices. Some open questions are noted.

0 citations0 reviewsNo code linkedOpen access