Variety (universal algebra)

en.wikipedia.org

This article is about a class of algebraic structures of the same signature. For the set of solutions to a system of
polynomial equations, see Algebraic variety.

In the mathematical subject of universal algebra, a variety of algebras is the class of all algebraic structures of a
given signature satisfying a given set of identities. Equivalently, a variety is a class of algebraic structures of the same
signature that is closed under the taking of homomorphic images, subalgebras and (direct) products. In the context
of category theory, a variety of algebras is usually called a nitary algebraic category.
A covariety is the class of all coalgebraic structures of a given signature.
A variety of algebras should not be confused with an algebraic variety. Intuitively, a variety of algebras is an equa-
tionally dened collection of algebras, while an algebraic variety is an equationally dened collection of elements from
a single algebra. The two are named alike by analogy, but they are formally quite distinct and their theories have little
in common.

1 Birkhos theorem
Garrett Birkho proved the equivalence of the two denitions of a variety given above, a result of fundamental
importance to universal algebra and known as Birkhos theorem or as the HSP theorem. H, S, and P stand,
respectively, for the closure operations of homomorphism, subalgebra, and product.
An equational class for some signature is the collection of all models, in the sense of model theory, that satisfy
some set E of universally quantied equations, asserting equality between terms. A model satises these equations if
they are true in the model for every valuation of the variables. The equations in E are then said to be identities of the
model. Examples of such identities are the commutative law, satised by commutative algebras, and the absorption
law, satised by lattices.
It is simple to see that the class of algebras satisfying some set of equations will be closed under the HSP operations.
Proving the converseclasses of algebras closed under the HSP operations must be equationalis harder.

2 Examples
The class of all semigroups forms a variety of algebras of signature (2). A sucient dening equation is the associative
law:

x(yz) = (xy)z.

It satises the HSP closure requirement, since any homomorphic image, any subset closed under multiplication and
any direct product of semigroups is also a semigroup.
The class of groups forms a class of algebras of signature (2,1,0), the three operations being respectively multiplication,
inversion and identity. Any subset of a group closed under multiplication, under inversion and under identity (i.e.
containing the identity) forms a subgroup. Likewise, the collection of groups is closed under homomorphic image
and under direct product. Applying Birkhos theorem, this is sucient to tell us that the groups form a variety, and

1
2 4 CATEGORY THEORY

so it should be dened by a collection of identities. In fact, the familiar axioms of associativity, inverse and identity
form one suitable set of identities:

x(yz) = (xy)z

1x = x1 = x

xx1 = x1 x = 1.
A subvariety of a variety V is a subclass of V that has the same signature as V and is itself a variety. Notice that
although every group becomes a semigroup when the identity as a constant is omitted (and/or the inverse operation
is omitted), the class of groups does not form a subvariety of the variety of semigroups because the signatures are
dierent. On the other hand the class of abelian groups is a subvariety of the variety of groups because it consists
of those groups satisfying xy = yx, with no change of signature. Viewing a variety V and its homomorphisms as
a category, a subclass U of V that is itself a variety is a subvariety of V implies that U is a full subcategory of V,
meaning that for any objects a, b in U, the homomorphisms from a to b in U are exactly those from a to b in V. On the
other hand there is a sense in which Boolean algebras and Boolean rings can be viewed as subvarieties of each other
even though they have dierent signatures, because of the translation between them allowing every Boolean algebra to
be understood as a Boolean ring and conversely; in this sort of situation the homomorphisms between corresponding
structures are the same.

3 Pseudovariety of nite algebras

Since varieties are closed under arbitrary direct products, all non-trivial varieties contain innite algebras. Attempts
have been made to develop a nitary analogue of the theory of varieties.
A pseudovariety is usually dened to be a class of algebras of a given signature, closed under the taking of homomor-
phic images, subalgebras and nitary direct products. Not every author assumes that all algebras on a pseudovariety
are nite; if this is the case, one sometimes talks of a variety of nite algebras. For pseudovarieties, there is no
general nitary counterpart to Birkhos theorem, but in many cases the introduction of a more complex notion of
equations allows similar results to be derived.[1]
Pseudovarieties are of particular importance in the study of nite semigroups and hence in formal language theory.
Eilenbergs theorem, often referred to as the variety theorem, describes a natural correspondence between varieties
of regular languages and pseudovarieties of nite semigroups.

4 Category theory
If A is a nitary algebraic category, then the forgetful functor

U : A Set

is monadic. Even more, it is strictly monadic, in that the comparison functor

K : A SetT

is an isomorphism (and not just an equivalence).[2] Here, SetT is the EilenbergMoore category on Set . In gen-
eral, one says a category is an algebraic category if it is monadic over Set . This is a more general notion than
nitary algebraic category (the notion of variety used in universal algebra) because it admits such categories as
CABA (complete atomic Boolean algebras) and CSLat (complete semilattices) whose signatures include innitary
operations. In those two cases the signature is large, meaning that it forms not a set but a proper class, because its
operations are of unbounded arity. The algebraic category of sigma algebras also has innitary operations, but their
arity is countable whence its signature is small (forms a set).
 3

5 See also
Quasivariety

6 Notes
[1] E.g. Banaschewski, B. (1983), The Birkho Theorem for varieties of nite algebras, Algebra Universalis, Volume 17(1):
360-368, DOI 10.1007/BF01194543

[2] Saunders Mac Lane (1971), Categories for the Working Mathematician, Springer. (See p. 152.)

7 References
Birkho, G. (1935), On the structure of abstract algebras, Proceedings of the Cambridge Philosophical Soci-
ety, 31: 433454.

Two monographs available free online:

Stanley N. Burris and H.P. Sankappanavar (1981), A Course in Universal Algebra. Springer-Verlag. ISBN
3-540-90578-2. [Proof of Birkhos Theorem is in II11.]
Peter Jipsen and Henry Rose (1992), Varieties of Lattices, Lecture Notes in Mathematics 1533. Springer
Verlag. ISBN 0-387-56314-8.
4 8 TEXT AND IMAGE SOURCES, CONTRIBUTORS, AND LICENSES

8 Text and image sources, contributors, and licenses

8.1 Text
Variety (universal algebra) Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Variety_(universal_algebra)?oldid=790995182 Contributors: Michael
Hardy, Charles Matthews, Chuunen Baka, Tea2min, Giftlite, Cambyses, Thorwald, Smimram, Livajo, Oleg Alexandrov, Woohookitty,
Linas, Uncle G, Zoz, Trovatore, SmackBot, RDBury, Nbarth, JMK, Vaughan Pratt, CBM, Pascal.Tesson, Pavel Jelnek, Jesper Carlstrom,
TheSeven, VolkovBot, JackSchmidt, Anchor Link Bot, UKoch, Hans Adler, Addbot, Yobot, Backslash Forwardslash, AnomieBOT,
Taeshadow, Dorchard, LilHelpa, Untalker, Quondum, Paolo Lipparini, Brad7777, Jochen Burghardt and Anonymous: 11

8.2 Images

8.3 Content license

Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0