## Distributive lattice embedding into a finite lattice.

### Remember to vote up questions/answers you find interesting or helpful (requires 15 reputation points)

Suppose one has an inclusion $\iota : D \hookrightarrow S$ where $D$ is a finite distributive lattice and $S$ is a finite join-semilattice.

If $\iota$ preserves all meets and joins one can show that $|J(D)| \leq |J(S)|$ i.e. $D$ has no more join-irreducibles than $S$.

Does this also hold if $\iota$ only preserves finite joins?

I only know that it is true in the special cases where $S$ is a distributive lattice or $S \cong S^{op}$ is order-dual.

-

If S had empty joins and i preserved meets then you get the inequality you want. I am skeptical joins work.  – Benjamin Steinberg Feb 8 at 1:33

## 1 Answer

Well, I proved that it is true with a friend yesterday, so I'll include it here.

Recall that we have an inclusion $\iota : D \hookrightarrow S$ where $S$ is a finite join-semilattice and $D$ is a finite distributive lattice. More explicitly: $S$ has all finite joins, so it is a complete lattice with a top and bottom element and furthermore $D$ has a top and bottom too.

In the case where $\iota$ preserves all meets then the same function defines a meet-semilattice morphism $\iota : D^{op} \hookrightarrow S^{op}$, so by duality we have the surjection $\iota' : S \twoheadrightarrow D$, hence $|J(D)| \leq |J(S)|$ because join-irreducibles (we exclude zero) in join-semilattices form the minimal generating set.

But the question was whether the same is true when $\iota$ preserves all joins.

First recall that in any finite distributive lattice $D$, the cardinality $|J(D)|$ is the size of the maximal chain in $D$ (counting the edges). Since we have an embedding $\iota : D \hookrightarrow S$, it follows that $S$'s maximal chain has size more than or equal to $n = |J(D)|$. For a contradiction assume that $|J(S)| < n$. Then $S$ is generated by $n-1$ elements, so we have a join-semilattice morphism $f : 2^{n-1} \twoheadrightarrow S$. By duality there is an embedding $f' : S^{op} \hookrightarrow (2^{n-1})^{op}$, hence $S^{op}$'s maximal chain has size at most $n-1$, as does its order-dual $S$, this being a contradiction.

-

Nice. Having the domain be distributive really helps.  – Benjamin Steinberg Feb 9 at 15:59
@Benjamin Steinberg: Cheers. Perhaps you can see a pattern emerging regarding my other question that you answered i.e. I am searching for various conditions that imply a subalgebra has no more generators. By the way, the motivation is automata theory e.g. the above result can be used to identify a class of regular languages that have a canonical state-minimal nondeterministic acceptor. – Rob Myers Feb 9 at 16:56
{"extraction_info": {"found_math": true, "script_math_tex": 0, "script_math_asciimath": 0, "math_annotations": 0, "math_alttext": 0, "mathml": 0, "mathjax_tag": 0, "mathjax_inline_tex": 34, "mathjax_display_tex": 0, "mathjax_asciimath": 0, "img_math": 0, "codecogs_latex": 0, "wp_latex": 0, "mimetex.cgi": 0, "/images/math/codecogs": 0, "mathtex.cgi": 0}, "config": {"markdown_headings": true, "markdown_code": true, "boilerplate_config": {"ratio_threshold": 0.18, "absolute_threshold": 10, "end_threshold": 15, "enable": false}, "remove_buttons": true, "remove_image_figures": true, "remove_link_clusters": true, "table_config": {"min_rows": 2, "min_cols": 3, "format": "plain"}, "remove_chinese": true, "remove_edit_buttons": true, "extract_latex": true}, "english_confidence": 0.9203289151191711, "perplexity_flag": "head"}