Steven Duplij - Polyadic systems, representations and quantum groups

UDC 539.12
POLYADIC SYSTEMS, REPRESENTATIONS AND QUANTUM GROUPS
S.A. Duplij∗
Center for Mathematics, Science and Education Rutgers University,
118 Frelinghuysen Rd., Piscataway, NJ 08854-8019
Е-mail: duplij@math.rutgers.edu, http://homepages.spa.umn.edu/˜duplij
Received 20 May 2012
Polyadic systems and their representations are reviewed and a classification of general polyadic systems is presented. A new multiplace
generalization of associativity preserving homomorphisms, a ’heteromorphism’ which connects polyadic systems having unequal arities,
is introduced via an explicit formula, together with related definitions for multiplace representations and multiactions. Concrete examples
of matrix representations for some ternary groups are then reviewed. Ternary algebras and Hopf algebras are defined, and their properties
are studied. At the end some ternary generalizations of quantum groups and the Yang-Baxter equation are presented.
KEY WORDS: n-ary group, Post theorem, commutativity, homomorphism, group action, Yang-Baxter equation
ПОЛИАДИЧЕСКИЕ СИСТЕМЫ, ПРЕДСТАВЛЕНИЯ И КВАНТОВЫЕ ГРУППЫ
С.А. Дуплий
Центр математики, науки и образования, университет Ратгерса, Пискатавэй, 08854-8019, США
Приведен обзор полиадических систем и их представлений, дана классификация общих полиадических систем. Построены
многоместные обобщения гомоморфизмов, сохраняющие ассоциативность. Определены мультидействия и мультиместные пред-
ставления. Приведены конкретные примеры матричных представлений для некоторых тернарных групп. Определены тернарные
алгебры и Хопф алгебры, изучены их свойства. В заключение, предствлены некоторые тернарные обобщения квантовых групп
и уравнения Янга-Бакстера.
КЛЮЧЕВЫЕ СЛОВА: n-арная группа, теорема Поста, коммутативность, гомоморфизм, групповое действие, уравнение Янга-
Бакстера
ПОЛIАДИЧНI СИСТЕМИ, ПРЕДСТАВЛЕННЯ I КВАНТОВI ГРУПИ
С.А. Дуплiй
Центр математики, науки та освiти, унiверситет Ратгерсу, Пiскатавєй, 08854-8019, США
Зроблено огляд полiадичних систем та їх представлень, дана класифiкацiя загальних полiадичних систем. Побудованi багатомiс-
нi узагальнення гомоморфiзмиiв, що зберiгають асоцiативнiсть. Визначенi мультидiї i мультимiснi представлення. Наведенi
конкретнi приклади матричних представлень для деяких тернарних груп. Визначенi тернарна алгебра i алгебри Хопфа, вивченi
їх властивостi. На закiнчення, предствленi деякi тернарнi узагальнення квантових груп та рiвняння Янга-Бакстера.
КЛЮЧОВI СЛОВА: n-арна група, теорема Поста, комутативнiсть, гомоморфiзм, групова дiя, рiвняння Янга-Бакстера
One of the most promising directions in generalizing physical theories is the consideration of higher arity algebras [1],
in other words ternary and n-ary algebras, in which the binary composition law is substituted by a ternary or n-ary one [2].
Firstly, ternary algebraic operations (with the arity n = 3) were introduced already in the XIX-th century by A.
Cayley in 1845 and later by J. J. Silvester in 1883. The notion of an n-ary group was introduced in 1928 by [3] (inspired
by E. N¨other) and is a natural generalization of the notion of a group. Even before this, in 1924, a particular case, that
is, the ternary group of idempotents, was used in [4] to study infinite abelian groups. The important coset theorem of
Post explained the connection between n-ary groups and their covering binary groups [5]. The next step in study of n-ary
groups was the Gluskin-Hossz´u theorem [6,7]. Another definition of n-ary groups can be given as a universal algebra with
additional laws [8] or identities containing special elements [9].
The representation theory of (binary) groups [10, 11] plays an important role in their physical applications [12].
It is initially based on a matrix realization of the group elements with the abstract group action realized as the usual
matrix multiplication [13, 14]. The cubic and n-ary generalizations of matrices and determinants were made in [15, 16],
and their physical application appeared in [17, 18]. In general, particular questions of n-ary group representations were
considered, and matrix representations derived, by the author [19], and some general theorems connecting representations
of binary and n-ary groups were presented in [20]. The intention here is to generalize the above constructions of n-ary
group representations to more complicated and nontrivial cases.
In physics, the most applicable structures are the nonassociative Grassmann, Clifford and Lie algebras [21–23], and so
their higher arity generalizations play the key role in further applications. Indeed, the ternary analog of Clifford algebra was
∗On leave of absence from V.N. Karazin Kharkov National University, Svoboda Sq. 4, Kharkov 61022, Ukraine.
28
«Journal of Kharkiv National University», №1017, 2012 S.A. Duplij
physical series «Nuclei, Particles, Fields», issue 3 /55/ Polyadic systems...
© Duplij S.A., 2012

considered in [24], and the ternary analog of Grassmann algebra [25] was exploited to construct various ternary extensions
of supersymmetry [26].
The construction of realistic physical models is based on Lie algebras, such that the fields take their values in a con-
crete binary Lie algebra [23]. In the higher arity studies, the standard Lie bracket is replaced by a linear n-ary bracket, and
the algebraic structure of the corresponding model is defined by the additional characteristic identity for this generalized
bracket, corresponding to the Jacobi identity [2]. There are two possibilities to construct the generalized Jacobi identity: 1)
The Lie bracket is a derivation by itself; 2) A double Lie bracket vanishes, when antisymmetrized with respect to its entries.
The first case leads to the so called Filippov algebras [27] (or n-Lie algebra) and second case corresponds to generalized
Lie algebras [28] (or higher order Lie algebras).
The infinite-dimensional version of n-Lie algebras are the Nambu algebras [29,30], and their n-bracket is given by
the Jacobian determinant of n functions, the Nambu bracket, which in fact satisfies the Filippov identity [27]. Recently,
the ternary Filippov algebras were successfully applied to a three-dimensional superconformal gauge theory describing
the effective worldvolume theory of coincident M2-branes of M-theory [31–33]. The infinite-dimensional Nambu bracket
realization [34] gave the possibility to describe a condensate of nearly coincident M2-branes [35].
From another side, Hopf algebras [36–38] play a fundamental role in quantum group theory [39,40]. Previously, their
Von Neumann generalization was introduced in [41–43], their actions on the quantum plane were classified in [44], and
ternary Hopf algebras were defined and studied in [45,46].
The goal of this paper is to give a comprehensive review of polyadic systems and their representations. First, we
classify general polyadic systems and introduce n-ary semigroups and groups. Then we consider their homomorphisms and
multiplace generalizations, paying attention to their associativity. We define multiplace representations and multiactions,
and give examples of matrix representations for some ternary groups. We define and investigate ternary algebras and Hopf
algebras, study their properties and give some examples. At the end we consider some ternary generalizations of quantum
groups and the Yang-Baxter equation.
PRELIMINARIES
Let G be a non-empty set (underlying set, universe, carrier), its elements we denote by lower-case Latin letters
gi ∈ G. The n-tuple (or polyad) g1, . . . , gn of elements from G is denoted by (g1, . . . , gn). The Cartesian product1
n
G × . . . × G = G×n
consists of all n-tuples (g1, . . . , gn), such that gi ∈ G, i = 1, . . . , n. For all equal elements g ∈ G,
we denote n-tuple (polyad) by power (gn
). If the number of elements in the n-tuple is clear from the context or is not
important, we denote it with one bold letter (g), in other cases we use the power in brackets g(n)
. We now introduce
two important constructions on sets.
The i-projection of the Cartesian product G×n
on its i-th “axis” is the map Pr
(n)
i : G×n
→ G such that
(g1, . . . gi, . . . , gn) −→ gi.
The i-diagonal Diagn : G → G×n
sends one element to the equal element n-tuple g −→ (gn
).
The one-point set {•} can be treated as a unit for the Cartesian product, since there are bijections between G and
G × {•}
×n
, where G can be on any place. On the Cartesian product G×n
one can define a polyadic (n-ary, n-adic, if it is
necessary to specify n, its arity or rank) operation μn : G×n
→ G. For operations we use small Greek letters and place
arguments in square brackets μn [g]. The operations with n = 1, 2, 3 are called unary, binary and ternary.
The case n = 0 is special and corresponds to fixing a distinguished element of G, a “constant” c ∈ G, and it is called a
0-ary operation μ
(c)
0 , which maps the one-point set {•} to G, such that μ
(c)
0 : {•} → G, and formally has the value
μ
(c)
0 [{•}] = c ∈ G. The 0-ary operation “kills” arity, which can be seen from the following [47]: the composition of n-ary
and m-ary operations μn ◦ μm gives (n + m − 1)-ary operation by
μn+m−1 [g, h] = μn [g, μm [h]] . (1)
Then, if to compose μn with the 0-ary operation μ
(c)
0 , we obtain
μ
(c)
n−1 [g] = μn [g, c] , (2)
because g is a polyad of length (n − 1). So, it is necessary to make a clear distinction between the 0-ary operation μ
(c)
0
and its value c in G, as will be seen and will become important below.
A polyadic system G is a set G which is closed under polyadic operations.
We will write G = set |operations or G = set |operations |relations , where “relations” are some additional
properties of operations (e.g., associativity conditions for semigroups or cancellation properties). In such a definition it is
not necessary to list the images of 0-ary operations (e.g. the unit or zero in groups), as is done in various other definitions.
Here, we mostly consider concrete polyadic systems with one “chief” (fundamental) n-ary operation μn, which is called
polyadic multiplication (or n-ary multiplication).
1We place the sign for the Cartesian product (×) into the power, because the same abbreviation will also be used below for other types of product.
29

A n-ary system Gn = G | μn is a set G closed under one n-ary operation μn (without any other additional
structure).
Note that a set with one closed binary operation without any other relations was called a groupoid by Hausmann and
Ore [48] (see, also [49]). However, nowadays the term “groupoid” is widely used in category theory and homotopy theory
for a different construction with binary multiplication, the so-called Brandt groupoid [50] (see, also, [51]). Alternatively,
and much later on, Bourbaki [52] introduced the term “magma” for binary systems. Then, the above terms were extended
to the case of one fundamental n-ary operation as well. Nevertheless, we will use some neutral notations “polyadic system”
and “n-ary system” (when arity n is fixed/known/important), which adequately indicates all of their main properties.
Let us consider the changing arity problem:
For a given n-ary system G | μn to construct another polyadic system G | μn over the same set G, which has
multiplication with a different arity n .
The formulas (1) and (2) give us the simplest examples of how to change the arity of a polyadic system. In general,
there are 3 ways:
1. Iterating. Using composition of the operation μn with itself, one can increase the arity from n to niter (as in (1)) without
changing the signature of the system. We denote the number of iterating multiplications by μ, and use the bold Greek
letters μ μ
n for the resulting composition of n-ary multiplications, such that
μn = μ μ
n
def
=
μ
μn ◦ μn ◦ . . . μn × id×(n−1)
. . . × id×(n−1)
, (3)
where
n = niter = μ (n − 1) + 1, (4)
which gives the length of a polyad (g) in the notation μ μ
n [g]. Without assuming associativity there many variants for
placing μn’s among id’s in the r.h.s. of (3). The operation μ μ
n is named a long product [3] or derived [53].
2. Reducing (Collapsing). Using nc distinguished elements or constants (or nc additional 0-ary operations μ
(ci)
0 , i =
1, . . . nc), one can decrease arity from n to nred (as in (2)), such that2
μn = μ
(c1...cnc )
n
def
= μn ◦



nc
μ
(c1)
0 × . . . × μ
(cnc )
0 × id×(n−nc)


 , (5)
where
n = nred = n − nc, (6)
and the 0-ary operations μ
(ci)
0 can be on any places.
3. Mixing. Changing (increasing or decreasing) arity may be done by combining iterating and reducing (maybe with
additional operations of different arity). If we do not use additional operations, the final arity can be presented in a
general form using (4) and (6). It will depend on the order of iterating and reducing, and so we have two subcases:
(a) Iterating→Reducing. We have
n = niter→red = μ (n − 1) − nc + 1. (7)
The maximal number of constants (when niter→red = 2) is equal to
nmax
c = μ (n − 1) − 1 (8)
and can be increased by increasing the number of multiplications μ.
(b) Reducing→Iterating. We obtain
n = nred→iter = μ (n − 1 − nc) + 1. (9)
Now the maximal number of constants is
nmax
c = n − 2 (10)
and this is achieved only when μ = 1.
2In [54] μ
(c1...cnc )
n is named a retract (which term is already busy and widely used in category theory for another construction).
30

To give examples of the third (mixed) case we put n = 4, μ = 3, nc = 2 for both subcases of opposite ordering:
1. Iterating→Reducing. We can put
μ
(c1,c2)
8 g(8)
= μ4 [g1, g2, g3, μ4 [g4, g5, g6, μ4 [g7, g8, c1, c2]]] . (11)
2. Reducing→Iterating. We can have
μ
(c1,c2)
4 g(4)
= μ4 [g1, c1, c2, μ4 [g2, c1, c2, μ4 [g3, c1, c2, g4]]] . (12)
It is important to find conditions where iterating and reducing compensate each other, i.e. they do not change arity
overall. Indeed, let the number of the iterating multiplications μ be fixed, then we can find such a number of reducing
constants n
(0)
c , such that the final arity will coincide with the initial arity n. The result will depend on the order of operations.
There are two cases:
1. Iterating→Reducing. For the number of reducing constants n
(0)
c we obtain from (4) and (6)
n(0)
c = (n − 1) ( μ − 1) , (13)
such that there is no restriction on μ.
2. Reducing→Iterating. For n
(0)
c we get
n(0)
c =
(n − 1) ( μ − 1)
μ
, (14)
and now μ ≤ n − 1. The requirement that n
(0)
c should be an integer gives two further possibilities
n(0)
c =
n − 1
2
, μ = 2,
n − 2, μ = n − 1.
(15)
The above relations can be useful in the study of various n-ary multiplication structures and their presentation in
special form is needed in concrete problems.
SPECIAL ELEMENTS AND PROPERTIES OF POLYADIC SYSTEMS
Let us recall the definitions of some standard algebraic systems and their special elements, which will be considered
in this paper, using our notation.
A zero of a polyadic system is a distinguished element z (and the corresponding 0-ary operation μ
(z)
0 ) such that
for any (n − 1)-tuple (polyad) g ∈ G×(n−1)
we have
μn [g, z] = z, (16)
where z can be on any place in the l.h.s. of (16).
There is only one zero (if its place is not fixed) which can be possible in a polyadic system. As in the binary case, an
analog of positive powers of an element [5] should coincide with the number of multiplications μ in the iterating (3).
A (positive) polyadic power of an element is
g μ
= μ μ
n g μ(n−1)+1
. (17)
An element of a polyadic system g is called μ-nilpotent (or simply nilpotent for μ = 1), if there exist
such μ that
g μ
= z. (18)
A polyadic system with zero z is called μ-nilpotent, if there exists μ such that for any ( μ (n − 1) + 1)-tuple
(polyad) g we have
μ μ
n [g] = z. (19)
Therefore, the index of nilpotency (number of elements whose product is zero) of an μ-nilpotent n-ary
system is ( μ (n − 1) + 1), while its polyadic power is μ .
31

A polyadic (n-ary) identity (or neutral element) of a polyadic system is a distinguished element e (and
the corresponding 0-ary operation μ
(e)
0 ) such that for any element g ∈ G we have
μn g, en−1
= g, (20)
where g can be on any place in the l.h.s. of (20).
In binary groups the identity is the only neutral element, while in polyadic systems, there exist neutral polyads
n consisting of elements of G satisfying
μn [g, n] = g, (21)
where g can be also on any place. The neutral polyads are not determined uniquely. It follows from (20) that the sequence
of polyadic identities en−1
is a neutral polyad.
An element of a polyadic system g is called μ-idempotent (or simply idempotent for μ = 1), if there exist
such μ that
g μ
= g. (22)
Both zero and the identity are μ-idempotents with arbitrary μ. We define (total) associativity as the
invariance of the composition of two n-ary multiplications
μ2
n [g, h, u] = μn [g, μn [h] , u] = inv (23)
under placement of the internal multiplication in r.h.s. with a fixed order of elements in the whole polyad of (2n − 1)
elements t(2n−1)
= (g, h, u). Informally, “internal brackets/multiplication can be moved on any place”, which gives n
relations
μn ◦ μn × id×(n−1)
= . . . = μn ◦ id×(n−1)
×μn . (24)
There are many other particular kinds of associativity which were introduced in [55] and studied in [56,57]. Here we will
confine ourselves the most general, total associativity (23). In this case, the iteration does not depend on the placement of
internal multiplications in the r.h.s of (3).
A polyadic semigroup (n-ary semigroup) is a n-ary system in which the operation is associative, or
Gsemigrp
n = G | μn | associativity .
In a polyadic system with zero (16) one can have trivial associativity, when all n terms are (23) are equal
to zero, i.e.
μ2
n [g] = z (25)
for any (2n − 1)-tuple g. Therefore, we state that
Any 2-nilpotent n-ary system (having index of nilpotency (2n − 1)) is a polyadic semigroup.
In the case of changing arity one should use in (25) not the changed final arity n , but the “real” arity which is n for
the reducing case and μ (n − 1) + 1 for all other cases. Let us give some examples.
In the mixed (interacting-reducing) case with n = 2, μ = 3, nc = 1, we have a ternary system G | μ3 iterated
from a binary system G | μ2, μ
(c)
0 with one distinguished element c (or an additional 0-ary operation)3
μ
(c)
3 [g, h, u] = (g ∙ (h ∙ (u ∙ c))) , (26)
where for binary multiplication we denote g ∙ h = μ2 [g, h]. Thus, if the ternary system G | μ
(c)
3 is nilpotent of index 7
(see 9), then it is a ternary semigroup (because μ
(c)
3 is trivially associative) independently of the associativity of μ2 (see,
e.g. [19]).
It is very important to find the associativity preserving conditions (constructions), where an associative
initial operation μn leads to an associative final operation μn during the change of arity.
An associativity preserving reduction can be given by the construction of a binary associative operation using
(n − 2)-tuple c consisting of nc = n − 2 different constants
μ
(c)
2 [g, h] = μn [g, c, h] . (27)
Associativity preserving mixing constructions with different arities and places were considered in [54,57,58].
An associative polyadic system with identity (20) is called a polyadic monoid.
The structure of any polyadic monoid is fixed [59]: it can be obtained by iterating a binary operation [60] (for polyadic
groups this was shown in [3]).
In polyadic systems, there are several analogs of binary commutativity. The most straightforward one comes from
commutation of the multiplication with permutations.
3This construction is named the b-derived groupoid in [54].
32

A polyadic system is σ-commutative, if μn = μn ◦ σ, or
μn [g] = μn [σ ◦ g] , (28)
where σ ◦ g = gσ(1), . . . , gσ(n) is a permutated polyad and σ is a fixed element of Sn, the permutation group on n
elements. If (28) holds for all σ ∈ Sn, then a polyadic system is commutative.
A special type of the σ-commutativity
μn [g, t, h] = μn [h, t, g] , (29)
where t is any fixed (n − 2)-polyad, is called semicommutativity. So for a n-ary semicommutative system we have
μn g, hn−1
= μn hn−1
, g . (30)
If a n-ary semigroup Gsemigrp
is iterated from a commutative binary semigroup with identity, then Gsemigrp
is
semicommutative.
Let G be the set of natural numbers N, and the 5-ary multiplication is defined by
μ5 [g] = g1 − g2 + g3 − g4 + g5, (31)
then GN
5 = N, μ5 is a semicommutative 5-ary monoid having the identity eg = μ5 g5
= g for each g ∈ N. Therefore,
GN
5 is the idempotent monoid.
Another possibility is to generalize the binary mediality in semigroups
(g11 ∙ g12) ∙ (g21 ∙ g22) = (g11 ∙ g21) ∙ (g12 ∙ g22) , (32)
which, obviously, follows from binary commutativity. But for n-ary systems they are different. It is seen that the mediality
should contain (n + 1) multiplications, it is a relation between n × n elements, and therefore can be presented in a matrix
from. The latter can be achieved by placing the arguments of the external multiplication in a column.
A polyadic system is medial (or entropic), if [56,61]
μn



μn [g11, . . . , g1n]
...
μn [gn1, . . . , gnn]


 = μn



μn [g11, . . . , gn1]
...
μn [g1n, . . . , gnn]


 . (33)
For polyadic semigroups we use the notation (3) and can present the mediality as follows
μn
n [G] = μn
n GT
, (34)
where G = gij is the n × n matrix of elements and GT
is its transpose. The semicommutative polyadic semigroups are
medial, as in the binary case, but, in general (except n = 3) not vice versa [62]. A more general concept is σ-permutability
[63], such that the mediality is its particular case with σ = (1, n).
A polyadic system is cancellative, if
μn [g, t] = μn [h, t] =⇒ g = h, (35)
where g, h can be on any place. This means that the mapping μn is one-to-one in each variable. If g, h are on the same i-th
place on both sides, the polyadic system is called i-cancellative.
The left and right cancellativity are 1-cancellativity and n-cancellativity respectively. A right and left cancella-
tive n-ary semigroup is cancellative (with respect to the same subset).
A polyadic system is called (uniquely) i-solvable, if for all polyads t, u and element h, one can (uniquely) resolve
the equation (with respect to h) for the fundamental operation
μn [u, h, t] = g (36)
where h can be on any i-th place.
A polyadic system which is uniquely i-solvable for all places i is called a n-ary (or polyadic) quasigroup.
It follows, that, if (36) uniquely i-solvable for all places, than
μ μ
n [u, h, t] = g (37)
can be (uniquely) resolved with respect to h on any place.
An associative polyadic quasigroup is called a n-ary (or polyadic) group.
33

The above definition is the most general one, but it is overdetermined. Much work on polyadic groups was done [64]
to minimize the set of axioms (solvability not in all places [5, 65], decreasing or increasing the number of unknowns in
determining equations [66]) or construction in terms of additionally defined objects (various analogs of the identity and
sequences [67]), as well as using not total associativity, but instead various partial ones [57,68,69].
In a polyadic group the only solution of (36) is called a querelement of g and denoted by ˉg [3], such that
μn [h, ˉg] = g, (38)
where ˉg can be on any place. So, any idempotent g coincides with its querelement ˉg = g. It follows from (38) and (21),
that the polyad
ng = gn−2
ˉg (39)
is neutral for any element of a polyadic group, where ˉg can be on any place. If this i-th place is important, then we write
ng;i. The number of relations in (38) can be reduced from n (the number of possible places) to only 2 (when g is on the
first and last places [3,70], or on some other 2 places ). In a polyadic group the D¨ornte relations
μn [g, nh;i] = μn [nh;j, g] = g (40)
hold true for any allowable i, j. In the case of a binary group the relations (40) become g ∙ h ∙ h−1
= h ∙ h−1
∙ g = g.
The relation (38) can be treated as a definition of the unary queroperation
ˉμ1 [g] = ˉg. (41)
A polyadic group is a universal algebra
Ggrp
n = G | μn, ˉμ1 | associativity, D¨ornte relations , (42)
where μn is a n-ary associative operation and ˉμ1 is the queroperation.
A straightforward generalization of the queroperation concept and corresponding definitions can be made by sub-
stituting in the above formulas (38)–(41) the n-ary multiplication μn by iterating the multiplication μ μ
n (3) (cf. [71] for
μ = 2).
Let us define the querpower k of g recursively
ˉg k
= ˉg k−1 , (43)
where ˉg 0
= g, ˉg 1
= ˉg, or as the k composition ˉμ◦k
1 =
k
ˉμ1 ◦ ˉμ1 ◦ . . . ◦ ˉμ1 of the queroperation (41).
For instance [66], ˉμ◦2
1 = μn−3
n , such that for any ternary group ˉμ◦2
1 = id, i.e. one has ˉg = g. Using the queroperation
in polyadic groups we can define the negative polyadic power of an element g by the following recursive relation
μn g μ−1
, gn−2
, g − μ
= g, (44)
or (after use of (17)) as a solution of the equation
μ μ
n g μ(n−1)
, g − μ
= g. (45)
It is known that the querpower and the polyadic power are mutually connected [72]. Here, we reformulate this con-
nection using the so called Heine numbers [73] or q-deformed numbers [74]
[[k]]q =
qk
− 1
q − 1
, (46)
which have the “nondeformed” limit q → 1 as [k]q → k. Then
ˉg k
= g −[[k]]2−n , (47)
which can be treated as follows: the querpower coincides with the negative polyadic deformed power with a “deforma-
tion” parameter q which is equal to the “deviation” (2 − n) from the binary group.
34

HOMOMORPHISMS OF POLYADIC SYSTEMS
Let Gn = G; μn and Gn = G ; μn be two polyadic systems of any kind (quasigroup, semigroup, group, etc.).
If they have the multiplications of the same arity n = n , then one can define the mappings from Gn to Gn. Usually such
polyadic systems are similar, and we call mappings between them the equiary mappings.
Let us take n + 1 mappings ϕGG
i : G → G , i = 1, . . . , n + 1. An ordered system of mappings ϕGG
i is called a
homotopy from Gn to Gn, if
ϕGG
n+1 (μn [g1, . . . , gn]) = μn ϕGG
1 (g1) , . . . , ϕGG
n (gn) , gi ∈ G. (48)
In general, one should add to this definition the “mapping” of the multiplications
μn
ψ
(μμ )
nn
→ μn . (49)
In such a way, homotopy can be defined as the extended system of mappings ϕGG
i ; ψ
(μμ )
nn .
The existence of the additional “mapping” ψ
(μμ )
nn acting on the second component of G; μn is tacitly implied. We
will write/mention the “mappings” ψ
(μμ )
nn manifestly, e.g.,
Gn
ϕGG
i ;ψ
(μμ )
nn
Gn , (50)
only as needed. If all the components ϕGG
i of a homotopy are bijections, it is called an isotopy. In case of polyadic
quasigroups [56] all mappings ϕGG
i are usually taken as permutations of the same underlying set G = G . If the multipli-
cations are also coincide μn = μn, then ϕGG
i ; id is called an autotopy of the polyadic system Gn. Various properties
of homotopy in universal algebras were studied, e.g. in [75,76].
A homomorphism from Gn to Gn is given, if there exists a mapping ϕGG
: G → G satisfying
ϕGG
(μn [g1, . . . , gn]) = μn ϕGG
(g1) , . . . , ϕGG
(gn) , gi ∈ G. (51)
Usually the homomorphism is denoted by the same one letter ϕGG
, while it would be more consistent to use for its
notation the extended pair of mappings ϕGG
; ψ
(μμ )
nn . We will use both notations on a par.
We first mention a small subset of known generalizations of the homomorphism (for bibliography till 1982 see, e.g.,
[77]) and then introduce a concrete construction for an analogous mapping which can change the arity of the multiplication
(fundamental operation) without introducing additional (term) operations. A general approach to mappings between free
algebraic systems was initiated in [78], where the so-called basic mapping formulas for generators were introduced, and its
generalization to many-sorted algebras was given in [79]. In [80] it was shown that the construction of all homomorphisms
between similar polyadic systems can be reduced to some homomorphisms between corresponding mono-unary algebras
[81]. The notion of n-ary homomorphism is realized as a sequence of n consequent homomorphisms ϕi, i = 1, . . . , n, of
n similar polyadic systems
n
Gn
ϕ1
→ Gn
ϕ2
→ . . .
ϕn−1
→ Gn
ϕn
→ Gn (52)
(generalizing Post’s n-adic substitutions [5]) was introduced in [82], and studied in [83,84].
The above constructions do not change the arity of polyadic systems, because they are based on the corresponding
diagram which gives a definition of an equiary mapping. To change arity one has to:
1) add another equiary diagram with additional operations using the same formula (51), where both do not
change arity;
2) use one modified (and not equiary) diagram and the underlying formula (51) by themselves, which will allow us
to change arity without introducing additional operations.
The first way leads to the concept of weak homomorphism which was introduced in [85–87] for non-indexed
algebras and in [88] for indexed algebras, then developed in [89] for Boolean and Post algebras, in [90] for coalgebras
and F-algebras [91] (see also [92]). To define the weak homomorphism in our notation we should incorporate into the
polyadic systems G; μn and G ; μn the following additional term operations of opposite arity νn : G×n
→ G and
νn : G ×n
→ G and consider two equiary mappings between G; μn, νn and G ; μn , νn .
35

A weak homomorphism from G; μn, νn to G , μn , νn is given, if there exists a mapping ϕGG
: G → G
satisfying two relations simultaneously
ϕGG
(μn [g1, . . . , gn]) = νn ϕGG
(g1) , . . . , ϕGG
(gn) , (53)
ϕGG
(νn [g1, . . . , gn ]) = μn ϕGG
(g1) , . . . , ϕGG
(gn ) . (54)
If only one of the relations (53) or (54) holds, such a mapping is called a semi-weak homomorphism [93]. If ϕGG
is bijective, then it defines a weak isomorphism. Any weak epimorphism can be decomposed into a homomorphism
and a weak isomorphism [94], and therefore the study of weak homomorphisms reduces to weak isomorphisms (see
also [95–97]).
MULTIPLACE MAPPINGS OF POLYADIC SYSTEMS
Let us turn to the second way of changing the arity of the multiplication and use only one relation which we then
modify in some natural manner. First, recall that in any set G there always exists the additional distinguished mapping, viz.
the identity idG. We use the multiplication μn with its combination of idG. We define an ( id-intact) id-product
for the polyadic system G; μn as
μ( id)
n = μn × (idG)
× id
, (55)
μ( id)
n : G×(n+ id)
→ G×(1+ id)
. (56)
To indicate the exact i-th place of μn in the r.h.s. of (55), we write μ
( id)
n (i), as needed. Here we use the id-product
to generalize the homomorphism and consider mappings between polyadic systems of different arity. It follows from (56)
that, if the image of the id-product is G alone, than id = 0. Let us introduce a multiplace mapping Φ
(n,n )
k acting
as follows
Φ
(n,n )
k : G×k
→ G . (57)
We are allowed to take only one upper Φ
(n,n )
k , because of one G in the upper right corner. Since we already know
that the lower right corner is exactly G ×n
(as a pre-image of one multiplication μn ), the lower horizontal arrow should
be a product of n multiplace mappings Φ
(n,n )
k . So we can write a definition of a multiplace analog of homomorphisms
which changes the arity of the multiplication using one relation.
A k-place heteromorphism from Gn to Gn is given, if there exists a k-place mapping Φ
(n,n )
k (57) such that
the corresponding defining equation (a modification of (51)) depends on the place i of μn in (55). For i = 1 it can read as
Φ
(n,n )
k





μn [g1, . . . , gn]
gn+1
...
gn+ id





= μn


Φ
(n,n )
k



g1
...
gk


 , . . . , Φ
(n,n )
k



gk(n −1)
...
gkn





 . (58)
This notion is motivated by [98,99], where mappings between objects from different categories were considered and
called ’chimera morphisms’. See, also, [100].
In the particular case n = 3, n = 2, k = 2, id = 1 we have
Φ
(3,2)
2
μ3 [g1, g2, g3]
g4
= μ2 Φ
(3,2)
2
g1
g2
, Φ
(3,2)
2
g3
g4
. (59)
This formula was used in the construction of the bi-element representations of ternary groups [19]. Consider the
example.
Let G = Madiag
2 (K), a set of antidiagonal 2 × 2 matrices over the field K and G = K, where K = R, C, Q, H.
The ternary multiplication μ3 is a product of 3 matrices. Obviously, μ3 is nonderived. For the elements gi =
0 ai
bi 0
,
i = 1, 2, we construct a 2-place mapping G × G → G as
Φ
(3,2)
2
g1
g2
= a1a2b1b2, (60)
which satisfies (59). We can introduce a standard 1-place mapping by ϕ (gi) = aibi. It is important to note, that ϕ (gi)
satisfies (51) for a commutative field K only (= R, C) becoming a homomorphism, and in this case we can have the relation
36

between the heteromorhism Φ
(3,2)
2 and the standard homomorphism
Φ
(3,2)
2
g1
g2
= ϕ (g1) ∙ ϕ (g2) , (61)
where the product (∙) in l.h.s. is taken in K, such that (51) and (59) coincide. For the noncommutative field K (= Q or H)
we can define the heteromorphism (60) only.
A heteromorphism is called derived, if it can be expressed through an ordinary (1-place) homomorphism. So,
in the above example the heteromorphism is derived (by formula (61)) for a commutative field K and nonderived for a
noncommutative one.
For arbitrary n a slightly modified construction (59) with still binary final arity, defined by n = 2, k = n − 1,
id = n − 2,
Φ
(n,2)
n−1





μn [g1, . . . , gn−1, h1]
h2
...
hn−1





= μ2


Φ
(n,2)
n−1



g1
...
gn−1


 , Φ
(n,2)
n−1



h1
...
hn−1





 . (62)
was used in [53] to study representations of n-ary groups. However, no new results compared with [19] (other than changing
3 to n in some formulas) were obtained. This reflects the fact that a major role is played by the final arity n and the number
of n-ary multiplications in the l.h.s. of (59) and (62). In the above cases, the latter number was one, but can make it arbitrary
below n.
A heteromorphism is called a μ-ple heteromorphism, if it contains μ multiplications in the argument of
Φ
(n,n )
k in its defining relation. According this definition the mapping defined by (58) is the 1μ-ple heteromorphism. So
by analogy with (55)–(56) we define a μ-ple id-intact id-product for the polyadic system G; μn as
μ( μ, id)
n = (μn)
× μ
× (idG)
× id
, (63)
μ( μ, id)
n : G×(n μ+ id)
→ G×( μ+ id)
. (64)
A μ-ple k-place heteromorphism from Gn to Gn is given, if there exists a k-place mapping Φ
(n,n )
k (57).
The corresponding main heteromorphism equation is
Φ
(n,n )
k










μn [g1, . . . , gn] ,
...
μn gn( μ−1), . . . , gn μ



μ
gn μ+1,
...
gn μ+ id



id










= μn


Φ
(n,n )
k



g1
...
gk


 , . . . , Φ
(n,n )
k



gk(n −1)
...
gkn





 . (65)
Obviously, we can consider various permutations of the multiplications on both sides, as further additional demands
(associativity, commutativity, etc.), are introduced, which will be considered below. The system of equations connecting
initial and final arities is
kn = n μ + id, (66)
k = μ + id. (67)
Excluding μ or id, we obtain two arity changing formulas, respectively
n = n −
n − 1
k
id, (68)
n =
n − 1
k
μ + 1, (69)
where n−1
k id ≥ 1 and n−1
k μ ≥ 1 are integer. The following inequalities hold valid
1 ≤ μ ≤ k, (70)
0 ≤ id ≤ k − 1, (71)
μ ≤ k ≤ (n − 1) μ, (72)
2 ≤ n ≤ n, (73)
37

which are important for the further classification of heteromorphisms. The main statement follows from (73):
The heteromorphism Φ
(n,n )
k defined by the relation (65) decreases arity of the multiplication.
Another important observation is the fact that only the id-product (63) with id = 0 leads to a change of the arity. In
the extreme case, when k approaches its minimum, k = kmin = μ, the final arity approaches its maximum nmax = n, and
the id-product becomes a product of μ initial multiplications μn without id’s, since now id = 0 in (65). Therefore, we
call a heteromorphism defined by (65) with id = 0 a k (= μ)-place homomorphism. The ordinary homomorphism
(48) corresponds to k = μ = 1, and so it is really a 1-place homomorphism. An opposite extreme case, when the final
arity approaches its minimum nmin = 2 (the final operation is binary), corresponds to the maximal value of k, that is
k = kmax = (n − 1) μ. The number of id’s now is id = (n − 2) μ ≥ 0, which vanishes, when the initial operation is
binary as well. This is the case of the ordinary homomorphism (48) for both binary operations n = n = 2 and k = μ = 1.
We conclude that:
Any polyadic system can be mapped into a binary system by means of the special k-place μ-ple heteromorphism
Φ
(n,n )
k , where k = (n − 1) μ (we call it a binarizing heteromorphism) which is defined by (65) with id =
(n − 2) μ.
In relation to the Gluskin-Hossz´u theorem [7] (any n-ary group can be constructed from the special binary group and
its homomorphism) our statement can be treated as:
Theorem 27. Any n-ary system can be mapped into a binary system, using a suitable binarizing heteromorphism Φ
(n,2)
k
(65).
The case of 1-ple binarizing heteromorphism ( μ = 1) corresponds to the formula (62). Further requirements (asso-
ciativity, commutativity, etc.) will give additional relations between multiplications and Φ
(n,n )
k , and fix the exact structure
of (65). Thus, we arrive to the following
Classification of μ-ple heteromorphisms:
1. n = nmax = n =⇒ Φ
(n,n)
k is the μ-place or multiplace homomorphism, i.e.,
k = kmin = μ. (74)
2. 2 < n < n =⇒ Φ
(n,n )
k is the intermediate heteromorphism with
k =
n − 1
n − 1
μ. (75)
In this case the number of intact elements is proportional to the number of multiplications
id =
n − n
n − 1
μ. (76)
3. n = nmin = 2 =⇒ Φ
(n,2)
k is the (n − 1) μ-place (multiplace) binarizing heteromorphism, i.e.,
k = kmax = (n − 1) μ. (77)
In the extreme (first and third) cases there are no restrictions on the initial arity n, while in the intermediate case n is
“quantized” due to the fact that fractions in (68) and (69) should be integers. Thus, we have established a general structure
and classification of heteromorphisms defined by (65). The next important issue is the preservation of special properties
(associativity, commutativity, etc.), while passing from μn to μn , which will further restrict the concrete shape of the main
relation (65) for each choice of the heteromorphism parameters: arities n, n , places k, number of intacts id and
multiplications μ.
ASSOCIATIVITY AND HETEROMORPHISMS
The most important property of the heteromorphism, which is needed for its next applications to representation theory,
is the associativity of the final operation μn , when the initial operation μn is associative. In other words, we consider here
the concrete form of semigroup heteromorphisms. In general, this is a complicated task, because it is not clear from (65),
which permutation in the l.h.s. should be taken to get an associative product in its r.h.s. for each set of the heteromorphism
parameters. Straightforward checking of the associativity of the final operation μn for each permutation in the l.h.s. of (65)
is almost impossible, especially for higher n. To solve this difficulty we introduce the concept of the associative polyadic
quiver and special rules to construct the associative final operation μn .
38

A polyadic quiver of products is the set of elements from Gn (presented as several copies of some matrix
of the elements glued together) and arrows, such that the elements along arrows form n-ary products μn. For instance, for
the multiplication μ4 [g1, h2, g2, u1] the 4-adic quiver is denoted by {g1 → h2 → g2 → u1}. Here the elements from Gn
are arbitrary and have no connection with heteromorphisms.
Next we define polyadic quivers which are related to the main heteromorphism equation (65) in the following
way: 1) the matrix of elements is the transposed matrix from the r.h.s. of (65), such that different letters correspond to their
place in Φ
(n,n )
k and the low index of an element is related to its position in the μn product; 2) the number of polyadic
quivers is μ, which corresponds to μ multiplications in the l.h.s. of (65); 3) the heteromorphism parameters (n, n , k, id
and μ) are not arbitrary, but satisfy the arity changing formulas (68)-(69). In this way, a polyadic quiver makes for a clear
visualization of the main heteromorphism equation (65); 4) The intact elements will be placed after a semicolon.
For example, the polyadic quiver {g1 → h2 → g2 → u1; h1, u2} corresponds to the heteromorphism with n = 4,
n = 2, k = 3, id = 2 and μ = 1 is
Φ
(4,2)
3


μ4 [g1, h2, g2, u1]
h1
u2

 = μ2

Φ
(4,2)
3


g1
h1
u1

 , Φ
(4,2)
3


g2
h2
u2



 . (78)
As it is seen from (78), the product μ2 is not associative, if μ4 is associative. So, not all polyadic quivers preserve associa-
tivity.
An associative polyadic quiver is a polyadic quiver which ensures the final associativity of μn in the
main heteromorphism equation (65), when the initial multiplication μn is associative.
So, one of the associative polyadic quivers which corresponds to the same heteromorphism parameters as the non-
associative quiver (78) is {g1 → h2 → u1 → g2; h1, u2} which corresponds to
Φ
(4,2)
3


μ4 [g1, h2, u1, g2]
h1
u2

 = μ2

Φ
(4,2)
3


g1
h1
u1

 , Φ
(4,2)
3


g2
h2
u2



 . (79)
We propose a classification of associative polyadic quivers and the rules of construction of the corresponding het-
eromorphism equations, and use the heteromorphism parameters for the classification of μ-ple heteromorphisms (75). In
other words, we describe a consistent procedure for building the semigroup heteromorphisms.
Let us consider the first class of heteromorphisms (without intact elements id = 0 or intactless), that is μ-
place (multiplace) homomorphisms. In the simplest case, associativity can be achieved, when all elements in a product
are taken from the same row. The number of places k is not fixed by the arity relation (68) and can be arbitrary, while the
arrows can have various directions. There are 2k
such combinations which preserve associativity. If the arrows have the
same direction, this kind of mapping is also called a homomorphism. As an example, for n = n = 3, k = 2, μ = 2 we
have
Φ
(3,3)
2
μ3 [g1, g2, g3]
μ3 [h1, h2, h3]
= μ3 Φ
(3,3)
2
g1
h1
, Φ
(3,3)
2
g2
h2
, Φ
(3,3)
2
g3
h3
. (80)
Note that the analogous quiver with opposite arrow directions is
Φ
(3,3)
2
μ3 [g1, g2, g3]
μ3 [h3, h2, h1]
= μ3 Φ
(3,3)
2
g1
h1
, Φ
(3,3)
2
g2
h2
, Φ
(3,3)
2
g3
h3
. (81)
The latter mapping was used in constructing the middle representations of ternary groups [19].
An important class of intactless heteromorphisms (with id = 0) preserving associativity can be constructed using an
analogy with the Post substitutions [5], and therefore we call it the Post-like associative quiver. The number
of places k is now fixed by k = n − 1, while n = n and μ = k = n − 1. An example of the Post-like associative quiver
with the same heteromorphisms parameters as in (80)-(81) is
Φ
(3,3)
2
μ3 [g1, h2, g3]
μ3 [h1, g2, h3]
= μ3 Φ
(3,3)
2
g1
h1
, Φ
(3,3)
2
g2
h2
, Φ
(3,3)
2
g3
h3
. (82)
This construction appeared in the study of ternary semigroups of morphisms [101–103]. Its n-ary generalization was
used in the consideration of polyadic operations on Cartesian powers [104], polyadic analogs of the Cayley and Birkhoff
theorems [84,105] and special representations of n-groups [106,107] (where the n-group with the multiplication μ2 was
called the diagonal n-group). Consider the following example.
Let Λ be the Grassmann algebra consisting of even and odd parts Λ = Λˉ0 ⊕ Λˉ1 (see e.g., [108]). The odd part
can be considered as a ternary semigroup G
(ˉ1)
3 = Λˉ1, μ3 , its multiplication μ3 : Λˉ1 × Λˉ1 × Λˉ1 → Λˉ1 is defined by
μ3 [α, β, γ] = α ∙ β ∙ γ, where (∙) is multiplication in Λ and α, β, γ ∈ Λˉ1, so G
(ˉ1)
3 is nonderived and contains no unity. The
39

even part can be treated as a ternary group G
(ˉ0)
3 = Λˉ0, μ3 with the multiplication μ3 : Λˉ0 × Λˉ0 × Λˉ0 → Λˉ0, defined
by μ3 [a, b, c] = a ∙ b ∙ c, where a, b, c ∈ Λˉ0, thus G
(ˉ0)
3 is derived and contains unity. We introduce the heteromorphism
G
(ˉ1)
3 → G
(ˉ0)
3 as a mapping (2-place homomorphism) Φ
(3,3)
2 : Λˉ1 × Λˉ1 → Λˉ0 by the formula
Φ
(3,3)
2
α
β
= α ∙ β, (83)
where α, β ∈ Λˉ1. It is seen that Φ
(3,3)
2 defined by (83) satisfies the Post-like heteromorphism equation (82), but not
the “vertical” one (80), due to the anticommutativity of odd elements from Λˉ1. In other words, G
(ˉ0)
3 can be treated as a
nontrivial example of the “diagonal” semigroup of G
(ˉ1)
3 (according to the notation of [106,107]).
Note that for k ≥ 3 there exist additional (to the above) associative quivers having the same heteromorphism param-
eters. For instance, when n = n = 4 and k = 3 we have the Post-like associative quiver
Φ
(4,4)
3


μ4 [g1, h2, u3, g4]
μ4 [h1, u2, g3, h4]
μ4 [u1, g2, h3, u4]

 = μ4

Φ
(4,4)
3


g1
h1
u1

 , Φ
(4,4)
3


g2
h2
u2

 , Φ
(4,4)
3


g1
h1
u1

 , Φ
(4,4)
3


g2
h2
u2



 . (84)
Also, we have one intermediate non-Post associative quiver
Φ
(4,4)
3


μ4 [g1, u2, h3, g4]
μ4 [h1, g2, u3, h4]
μ4 [u1, h2, g3, u4]

 = μ4

Φ
(4,4)
3


g1
h1
u1

 , Φ
(4,4)
3


g2
h2
u2

 , Φ
(4,4)
3


g1
h1
u1

 , Φ
(4,4)
3


g2
h2
u2



 . (85)
The next type of heteromorphism (intermediate) is described by the equations (66)-(76), and it contains intact ele-
ments ( id ≥ 1) and changes (decreases) arity to n < n. For each fixed k the arities are not arbitrary. There are many other
possibilities (using permutations and different variants of quivers) to obtain an associative final product μn corresponding
the same heteromorphism parameters. The above examples are sufficient to understand the rules of their construction for
each concrete case.
MULTIPLACE REPRESENTATIONS OF POLYADIC SYSTEMS
Representation theory (see e.g. [109]) deals with mappings from abstract algebraic systems into linear systems, such
as, e.g. linear operators in vector spaces, or into general (semi)groups of transformations of some set. In our notation,
this means that in the mapping of polyadic systems (50) the final multiplication μn is a linear map. This leads to some
restrictions on the final polyadic structure Gn , which are considered below.
Let V be a vector space over a field K (usually algebraically closed) and End V be a set of linear endomorphisms of
V , which is in fact a binary group. In the standard way, a linear representation of a binary semigroup G2 = G; μ2 is a
(1-place) map Π1 : G2 → End V , such that Π1 is a homomorphism
Π1 (μ2 [g, h]) = Π1 (g) ∗ Π1 (h) , (86)
where g, h ∈ G and (∗) is the binary multiplication in End V (usually, it is a (semi)group with multiplication as compo-
sition of operators or product of matrices, if a basis is chosen). If G2 is a binary group with the unity e, then we have the
additional condition
Π1 (e) = idV . (87)
We will generalize these known formulas to the corresponding polyadic systems along with the heteromorphism con-
cept introduced above. Our general idea is to use the heteromorphism equation (65) instead of the standard homomorphism
equation (86), such that the arity of the representation will be different from the arity of the initial polyadic system n = n.
Consider the structure of the final n -ary multiplication μn in (65), taking into account that the final polyadic system
Gn should be constructed from End V . The most natural and physically applicable way is to consider the binary End V
and to put Gn = dern (End V ), as it was proposed for the ternary case in [19]. In this way Gn becomes a derived n -ary
(semi)group of endomorphisms of V with the multiplication μn : (End V )
×n
→ End V , where
μn [v1, . . . , vn ] = v1 ∗ . . . ∗ vn , vi ∈ End V. (88)
Because the multiplication μn (88) is derived and is therefore associative by definition, we may consider the as-
sociative initial polyadic systems (semigroups and groups) and the associativity preserving mappings that are the special
heteromorphisms constructed in the previous section.
Let Gn = G; μn be an associative n-ary polyadic system. By analogy with (57), we introduce the following k-place
mapping
Π
(n,n )
k : G×k
→ End V. (89)
40

A multiplace representation of an associative polyadic system Gn in a vector space V is given, if there
exists a k-place mapping (89) which satisfies the (associativity preserving) heteromorphism equation (65), that is
Π
(n,n )
k










μn [g1, . . . , gn] ,
...
μn gn( μ−1), . . . , gn μ



μ
gn μ+1,
...
gn μ+ id



id










=
n
Π
(n,n )
k



g1
...
gk


 ∗ . . . ∗ Π
(n,n )
k



gk(n −1)
...
gkn


, (90)
where μ
( μ, id)
n is given by (63), μ and id are the numbers of multiplications and intact elements in the l.h.s. of (90),
respectively.
The exact permutation in the l.h.s. of (90) is given by the associative quiver presented in the previous section. The
representation parameters (n, n , k, μ and id) in (90) are the same as the heteromorphism parameters, and they satisfy
the same arity changing formulas (68) and (69). Therefore, a general classification of multiplace representations can be
done by analogy with that of the heteromorphisms (74)–(77) as follows:
1. The hom-like multiplace representation which is a multiplace homomorphism with n = nmax = n,
without intact elements lid = l
(min)
id = 0, and minimal number of places
k = kmin = μ. (91)
2. The intact element multiplace representation which is the intermediate heteromorphism with 2 <
n < n and the number of intact elements is
lid =
n − n
n − 1
μ. (92)
3. The binary multiplace representation which is a binarizing heteromorphism (77) with n = nmin = 2,
the maximal number of intact elements l
(max)
id = (n − 2) μ and maximal number of places
k = kmax = (n − 1) μ. (93)
The multiplace representations for n-ary semigroups have no additional defining relations, as compared with (90).
In case of n-ary groups, we need an analog of the “normalizing” relation (87). If the n-ary group has the unity e, then one
can put
Π
(n,n )
k



e
...
e



k


 = idV . (94)
If there is no unity at all, one can “normalize” the multiplace representation, using analogy with (87) in the form
Π1 h−1
∗ h = idV , (95)
as follows
Π
(n,n )
k











ˉh
...
ˉh



μ
h
...
h



id











= idV , (96)
for all h ∈Gn, where ˉh is the querelement of h. The latter ones can be placed on any places in the l.h.s. of (96) due to the
D¨ornte identities. Also, the multiplications in the l.h.s. of (90) can change their place due to the same reason.
A general form of multiplace representations can be found by applying the D¨ornte identities to each n-ary product
in the l.h.s. of (90). Then, using (96) we have schematically
Π
(n,n )
k



g1
...
gk


 = Π
(n,n )
k











t1
...
t μ
g
...
g



id











, (97)
41

where g is an arbitrary fixed element of the n-ary group and
ta = μn [ga1, . . . , gan−1, ˉg] , a = 1, . . . , μ. (98)
This is the special shape of some multiplace representations, while the concrete formulas should be obtained in
each case separately. Nevertheless, some conclusions can be drawn from (97). Firstly, the equivalence classes on which
Π
(n,n )
k is constant are determined by fixing μ + 1 elements, i.e. by the surface ta = const, g = const. Secondly, some
k-place representations of a n-ary group can be reduced to μ-place representations of its retract. In the case μ = 1,
multiplace representations of a n-ary group derived from a binary group correspond to ordinary representations of the
latter (see [19,53]).
The above formulas describe various properties of multiplace representations, but they give no idea of how to build
representations for concrete polyadic systems. The most common method of representation construction uses the concept
of a group action on a set. Below we extend this concept to the multiplace case, as it was done above for homomorphisms
and representations.
MULTIACTIONS AND G-SPACES
Let Gn = G; μn be a polyadic system and X be a set. A (left) 1-place action of Gn on X is the external binary
operation ρ
(n)
1 : G × X → X such that it is consistent with the multiplication μn, i.e. composition of the binary operations
ρ1 {g|x} gives the n-ary product, that is,
ρ
(n)
1 {μn [g1, . . . gn] |x } = ρ
(n)
1 g1|ρ
(n)
1 g2| . . . |ρ
(n)
1 {gn|x } . . . , g1, . . . , gn ∈ G, x ∈ X . (99)
If the polyadic system is a n-ary group, then in addition to (99) it is implied the there exist such ex ∈ G (which may or
may not coincide with the unity of Gn) that ρ
(n)
1 {ex|x} = x for all x ∈ X, and the mapping x → ρ
(n)
1 {ex|x} is a bijection
of X. The right 1-place actions of Gn on X are defined in a symmetric way, and therefore we will consider below only one
of them. Obviously, we cannot compose ρ
(n)
1 and ρ
(n )
1 with n = n . Usually X is called a G-set or G-space depending on
its properties (see, e.g., [110]).
The application of the 1-place action defined by (99) to the representation theory of n-ary groups gave mostly rep-
etitions of the ordinary (binary) group representation results (except for trivial b-derived ternary groups) [20]. Also, it is
obviously seen that the construction (99) with the binary external operation ρ1 cannot be applied for studying the most
important regular representations of polyadic systems, when the X coincides with Gn itself and the action arises from
translations.
Here we introduce the multiplace concept of action for polyadic systems, which is consistent with heteromorphisms
and multiplace representations. Then we will show how it naturally appears when X = Gn and apply it to construct
examples of representations including the regular ones.
For a polyadic system Gn = G; μn and a set X we introduce an external polyadic operation
ρk : G×k
× X → X , (100)
which is called a (left) k-place action or multiaction. To generalize the 1-action composition (99), we use
the analogy with multiplication laws of the heteromorphisms (65) and the multiplace representations (90) and propose
(schematically)
ρ
(n)
k



μn [g1, . . . , gn] ,
...
μn gn( μ−1), . . . , gn μ



μ
gn μ+1,
...
gn μ+ id



id
x



= ρ
(n)
k
n



g1
...
gk
. . . ρ
(n)
k



gk(n −1)
...
gkn
x



. . .



. (101)
The connection between all the parameters here is the same as in the arity changing formulas (68)–(69). Composition
of mappings is associative, and therefore in concrete cases we can use the associative quiver technique, as it is described in
the previous sections. If Gn is n-ary group, then we should add to (101) the “normalizing” relations analogous with (94)
or (96). So, if there is a unity e ∈Gn, then
ρ
(n)
k



e
...
e
x



= x, for all x ∈ X. (102)
42

In terms of the querelement, the normalization has the form
ρ
(n)
k



ˉh
...
ˉh



μ
h
...
h



id
x



= x, for all x ∈ X and for all h ∈ Gn. (103)
The multiaction ρ
(n)
k is transitive, if any two points x and y in X can be “connected” by ρ
(n)
k , i.e. there exist
g1, . . . , gk ∈Gn such that
ρ
(n)
k



g1
...
gk
x



= y. (104)
If g1, . . . , gk are unique, then ρ
(n)
k is sharply transitive. The subset of X, in which any points are connected
by (104) with fixed g1, . . . , gk can be called the multiorbit of X. If there is only one multiorbit, then we call X the
heterogenous G-space (by analogy with the homogeneous one). By analogy with the (ordinary) 1-place actions, we
define a G-equivariant map Ψ between two G-sets X and Y by (in our notation)
Ψ


ρ
(n)
k



g1
...
gk
x





 = ρ
(n)
k



g1
...
gk
Ψ (x)



∈ Y, (105)
which makes G-space into a category (for details, see, e.g., [110]). In the particular case, when X is a vector space over K,
the multiaction (100) can be called a multi-G-module which satisfies (102) and the additional (linearity) conditions
ρ
(n)
k



g1
...
gk
ax + by



= aρ
(n)
k



g1
...
gk
x



+ bρ
(n)
k



g1
...
gk
y



, (106)
where a, b ∈ K. Then, comparing (90) and (101) we can define a multiplace representation as a multi-G-module by the
following formula
Π
(n,n )
k



g1
...
gk


 (x) = ρ
(n)
k



g1
...
gk
x



. (107)
In a similar way, one can generalize to polyadic systems many other notions from group action theory [109].
REGULAR MULTIACTIONS
The most important role in the study of polyadic systems is played by the case, when X =Gn, and the multiaction
coincides with the n-ary analog of translations [111], so called i-translations [56]. In the binary case, ordinary translations
lead to regular representations [109], and therefore we call such an action a regular multiaction ρ
reg(n)
k . In this
connection, the analog of the Cayley theorem for n-ary groups was obtained in [105,112]. Now we will show in examples,
how the regular multiactions can arise from i-translations.
Let G3 be a ternary semigroup, k = 2, and X =G3, then 2-place (left) action can be defined as
ρ
reg(3)
2
g
h
u
def
= μ3 [g, h, u] . (108)
This gives the following composition law for two regular multiactions
ρ
reg(3)
2
g1
h1
ρ
reg(3)
2
g2
h2
u = μ3 [g1, h1, μ3 [g2, h2, u]]
= μ3 [μ3 [g1, h1, g2] , h2, u] = ρ
reg(3)
2
μ3 [g1, h1, g2]
h2
u . (109)
Thus, using the regular 2-action (108) we have, in fact, derived the associative quiver corresponding to (59).
43

The formula (108) can be simultaneously treated as a 2-translation [56]. In this way, the following left regular
multiaction
ρ
reg(n)
k



g1
...
gk
h



def
= μn [g1, . . . , gk, h] , (110)
corresponds to (62), where in the r.h.s. there is the i-translation with i = n. The right regular multiaction
corresponds to the i-translation with i = 1. The binary composition of the left regular multiactions corresponds to (62). In
general, the value of i fixes the minimal final arity nreg, which differs for even and odd values of the initial arity n.
It follows from (110) that for regular multiactions the number of places is fixed
kreg = n − 1, (111)
and the arity changing formulas (68)–(69) become
nreg = n − id (112)
nreg = μ + 1. (113)
From (112)–(113) we conclude that for any n a regular multiaction having one multiplication μ = 1 is binarizing
and has n − 2 intact elements. For n = 3 see (109). Also, it follows from (112) that for regular multiactions the number
of intact elements gives exactly the difference between initial and final arities.
If the initial arity is odd, then there exists a special middle regular multiaction generated by the i-
translation with i = (n + 1) 2. For n = 3 the corresponding associative quiver is (81) and such 2-actions were used
in [19] to construct middle representations of ternary groups, which did not change arity (n = n). Here we give a more
complicated example of a middle regular multiaction, which can contain intact elements and can therefore change arity.
Let us consider 5-ary semigroup and the following middle 4-action
ρ
reg(5)
4



g
h
u
v
s



= μ5

g, h,
i=3
↓
s , u, v

 . (114)
Using (113) we observe that there are two possibilities for the number of multiplications μ = 2, 4. The last case μ = 4
is similar to the vertical associative quiver (81), but with a more complicated l.h.s., that is
ρ
reg(5)
4



μ5 [g1, h1, g2, h2,g3]
μ5 [h3, g4, h4, g5, h5]
μ5 [u5, v5, u4, v4, u3]
μ5 [v3, u2, v2, u1, v1]
s



=
ρ
reg(5)
4



g1
h1
u1
v1
ρ
reg(5)
4



g2
h2
u2
v2
ρ
reg(5)
4



g3
h3
u3
v3
ρ
reg(5)
4



g4
h4
u4
v4
ρ
reg(5)
4



g5
h5
u5
v5
s















. (115)
Now we have an additional case with two intact elements id and two multiplications μ = 2 as
ρ
reg(5)
4



μ5 [g1, h1, g2, h2,g3]
h3
μ5 [h3, v3, u2, v2, u1]
v1
s



= ρ
reg(5)
4



g1
h1
u1
v1
ρ
reg(5)
4



g2
h2
u2
v2
ρ
reg(5)
4



g3
h3
u3
v3
s









, (116)
with arity changing from n = 5 to nreg = 3. In addition to (116) we have 3 more possible regular multiactions due to the
associativity of μ5, when the multiplication brackets in the sequences of 6 elements in the first two rows and the second
two ones can be shifted independently.
For n > 3, in addition to left, right and middle multiactions, there exist intermediate cases. First, observe that the
i-translations with i = 2 and i = n−1 immediately fix the final arity nreg = n. Therefore, the composition of multiactions
will be similar to (115), but with some permutations in the l.h.s.
Now we consider some multiplace analogs of regular representations of binary groups [109]. The straightforward
generalization is to consider the previously introduced regular multiactions (110) in the r.h.s. of (107). Let Gn be a finite
44

polyadic associative system and KGn be a vector space spanned by Gn (some properties of n-ary group rings were con-
sidered in [113,114]). This means that any element of KGn can be uniquely presented in the form w = l al ∙hl, al ∈ K,
hl ∈ G. Then, using (110) and (107) we define the i-regular k-place representation by
Π
reg(i)
k



g1
...
gk


 (w) =
l
al ∙ μk+1 [g1 . . . gi−1hlgi+1 . . . gk] . (117)
Comparing (110) and (117) one can conclude that all the general properties of multiplace regular representations are
similar to those of the regular multiactions. If i = 1 or i = k, the multiplace representation is called a right or left
regular representation respectively. If k is even, the representation with i = k 2 + 1 is called a middle
regular representation. The case k = 2 was considered in [19] for ternary groups.
MULTIPLACE REPRESENTATIONS OF TERNARY GROUPS
Let us consider the case n = 3, k = 2 in more detail, paying attention to its special peculiarities, which corresponds
to the 2-place (bi-element) representations of ternary groups [19]. Let V be a vector space over K and End V be a set
of linear endomorphisms of V . From now on we denote the ternary multiplication by square brackets only, as follows
μ3 [g1, g2, g3] ≡ [g1g2g3], and use the “horizontal” notation Π
g1
g2
≡ Π (g1, g2).
A left representation of a ternary group G, [ ]) in V is a map ΠL
: G × G → End V such that
ΠL
(g1, g2) ◦ ΠL
(g3, g4) = ΠL
([g1g2g3] , g4) , (118)
ΠL
(g, g) = idV , (119)
where g, g1, g2, g3, g4 ∈ G.
Replacing in (119) g by g we obtain ΠL
(g, g) = idV , which means that in fact (119) has the form ΠL
(g, g) =
ΠL
(g, g) = idV , ∀g ∈ G. Note that the axioms considered in the above definition are the natural ones satisfied by left
multiplications g → [abg]. For all g1, g2, g3, g4 ∈ G we have
ΠL
([g1g2g3] , g4) = ΠL
(g1, [g2g3g4]) .
For all g, h, u ∈ G we have
ΠL
(g, h) = ΠL
([guu], h) = ΠL
(g, u) ◦ ΠL
(u, h) (120)
and
ΠL
(g, u) ◦ ΠL
(u, g) = ΠL
(u, g) ◦ ΠL
(g, u) = idV , (121)
and therefore every ΠL
(g, u) is invertible and ΠL
(g, u)
−1
= ΠL
(u, g). This means that any left representation gives
a representation of a ternary group by a binary group [19]. If the ternary group is medial, then
ΠL
(g1, g2) ◦ ΠL
(g3, g4) = ΠL
(g3, g4) ◦ ΠL
(g1, g2) ,
i.e. the group so obtained is commutative. If the ternary group G, [ ] is commutative, then also ΠL
(g, h) = ΠL
(h, g),
because
ΠL
(g, h) = ΠL
(g, h) ◦ ΠL
(g, g) = ΠL
([g h g] , g) = ΠL
([h g g] , g) = ΠL
(h, g) ◦ ΠL
(g, g) = ΠL
(h, g) .
In the case of a commutative and idempotent ternary group any of its left representations is idempotent and ΠL
(g, h)
−1
=
ΠL
(g, h), so that commutative and idempotent ternary groups are represented by Boolean groups.
Let Let G, [ ] = der (G, ) be a ternary group derived from a binary group G, , then there is one-to-one
correspondence between representations of (G, ) and left representations of (G, [ ]).
Indeed, because (G, [ ]) = der (G, ), then g h = [geh] and e = e, where e is unity of the binary group (G, ). If
π ∈ Rep (G, ), then (as it is not difficult to see) ΠL
(g, h) = π (g) ◦ π (h) is a left representation of G, [ ] . Conversely,
if ΠL
is a left representation of G, [ ] then π (g) = ΠL
(g, e) is a representation of (G, ). Moreover, in this case
ΠL
(g, h) = π (g) ◦ π (h), because we have
ΠL
(g, h) = ΠL
(g, [ehe]) = ΠL
([geh], e) = ΠL
(g, e) ◦ ΠL
(h, e) = π (g) ◦ π (h) .
Let (G, [ ]) be a ternary group and (G×G, ∗) be a semigroup used in the construction of left representations. According
to Post [5] one says that two pairs (a, b), (c, d) of elements of G are equivalent, if there exists an element g ∈ G such that
45

[abg] = [cdg]. Using a covering group we can see that if this equation holds for some g ∈ G, then it holds also for all
g ∈ G. This means that
ΠL
(a, b) = ΠL
(c, d) ⇐⇒ (a, b) ∼ (c, d),
i.e.
ΠL
(a, b) = ΠL
(c, d) ⇐⇒ [abg] = [cdg]
for some g ∈ G. Indeed, if [abg] = [cdg] holds for some g ∈ G, then
ΠL
(a, b) = ΠL
(a, b) ◦ ΠL
(g, g) = ΠL
([abg], g)
= ΠL
([cdg], g) = ΠL
(c, d) ◦ ΠL
(g, g) = ΠL
(c, d).
By analogy we can define
A right representation of a ternary group (G, [ ]) in V is a map ΠR
ΠR
(g3, g4) ◦ ΠR
(g1, g2) = ΠR
(g1, [g2g3g4]) , (122)
ΠR
(g, g) = idV , (123)
where g, g1, g2, g3, g4 ∈ G.
From (122)-(123) it follows that
ΠR
(g, h) = ΠR
(g, [u u h]) = ΠR
(u, h) ◦ ΠR
(g, u) . (124)
It is easy to check that ΠR
(g, h) = ΠL
h, g = ΠL
(g, h)
−1
. So it is sufficient to consider only left representations
(as in the binary case). Consider the following example of a group algebra ternary generalization [19].
Let G be a ternary group and KG be a vector space spanned by G, which means that any element of KG can be
uniquely presented in the form t =
n
i=1 kihi, ki ∈ K, hi ∈ G, n ∈ N (we do not assume that G has finite rank). Then
left and right regular representations are defined by
ΠL
reg (g1, g2) t =
n
i=1
ki [g1g2hi] , (125)
ΠR
reg (g1, g2) t =
n
i=1
ki [hig1g2] . (126)
Let us construct the middle representations as follows.
A middle representation of a ternary group G, [ ] in V is a map ΠM
ΠM
(g3, h3) ◦ ΠM
(g2, h2) ◦ ΠM
(g1, h1) = ΠM
([g3g2g1] , [h1h2h3]) , (127)
ΠM
(g, h) ◦ ΠM
g, h = ΠM
g, h ◦ ΠM
(g, h) = idV (128)
It can be seen that a middle representation is a ternary group homomorphism ΠM
: G × Gop
→ der End V. Note
that instead of (128) one can use ΠM
g, h ◦ ΠM
(g, h) = idV after changing g to g and taking into account that g =
g. In the case of idempotent elements g and h we have ΠM
(g, h) ◦ ΠM
(g, h) = idV , which means that the matrices
ΠM
are Boolean. Thus all middle representation matrices of idempotent ternary groups are Boolean. The composition
ΠM
(g1, h1) ◦ ΠM
(g2, h2) is not a middle representation, but the following proposition nevertheless holds.
Let ΠM
be a middle representation of a ternary group G, [ ] , then, if ΠL
u (g, h) = ΠM
(g, u) ◦ ΠM
(h, u) is a left
representation of G, [ ] , then ΠL
u (g, h) ◦ ΠL
u (g , h ) = ΠL
u ([ghu ] , h ), and, if ΠR
u (g, h) = ΠM
(u, h) ◦ ΠM
(u, g) is a
right representation of G, [ ] , then ΠR
u (g, h) ◦ ΠR
u (g , h ) = ΠR
u (g, [hg h ]). In particular, ΠL
u (ΠR
u ) is a family of left
(right) representations.
If a middle representation ΠM
of a ternary group G, [ ] satisfies ΠM
(g, g) = idV for all g ∈ G, then it is a left
and a right representation and ΠM
(g, h) = ΠM
(h, g) for all g, h ∈ G. Note that in general ΠM
reg(g, g) = id. For regular
representations we have the following commutation relations
ΠL
reg (g1, h1) ◦ ΠR
reg (g2, h2) = ΠR
reg (g2, h2) ◦ ΠL
reg (g1, h1) .
Let G, [ ] be a ternary group and let G × G, [ ] be a ternary group used in the construction of the middle repre-
sentation. In G, [ ] , and consequently in G × G, [ ] , we define the relation
(a, b) ∼ (c, d) ⇐⇒ [aub] = [cud]
46

for all u ∈ G. It is not difficult to see that this relation is a congruence in the ternary group G × G, [ ] . For regular
representations ΠM
reg(a, b) = ΠM
reg(c, d) if (a, b) ∼ (c, d). We have the following relation
a a ⇐⇒ a = [ga g] for some g ∈ G
or equivalently
a a ⇐⇒ a = [gag] for some g ∈ G.
It is not difficult to see that it is an equivalence relation on G, [ ] , moreover, if G, [ ] is medial, then this relation
is a congruence.
Let G × G, [ ] be a ternary group used in a construction of middle representations, then
(a, b) (a , b) ⇐⇒ a = [gag] and
b = [hbb ] for some (g, h) ∈ G × G
is an equivalence relation on G × G, [ ] . Moreover, if (G, [ ]) is medial, then this relation is a congruence. Unfortunately,
however it is a weak relation. In a ternary group Z3, where [ghu] = (g − h + u) (mod 3) we have only one class, i.e. all
elements are equivalent. In Z4 with the operation [ghu] = (g + h + u + 1) (mod 4) we have a a ⇐⇒ a = a .
However, for this relation the following statement holds. If (a, b) (a , b ), then
tr ΠM
(a, b) = tr ΠM
(a , b ).
We have tr(AB) = tr(BA) for all A, B ∈ EndV , and
tr ΠM
(a, b) = tr ΠM
([ga g], [hb h] ) = tr ΠM
(g, h) ◦ ΠM
(a , b ) ◦ ΠM
(g, h)
= tr ΠM
(g, h) ◦ ΠM
(g, h) ◦ ΠM
(a , b ) = tr idV ◦ ΠM
(a b ) = tr ΠM
(a , b )
In our derived case the connection with standard group representations is given by the following. Let (G, ) be a
binary group, and the ternary derived group as G, [ ] = der (G, ). There is one-to-one correspondence between a pair of
commuting binary group representations and a middle ternary derived group representation. Indeed, let π, ρ ∈ Rep (G, ),
π (g) ◦ ρ (h) = ρ (h) ◦ π (g) and ΠL
∈ Rep (G, [ ]). We take
ΠM
(g, h) = π (g) ◦ ρ h−1
, π (g) = ΠM
(g, e) , ρ (g) = ΠM
(e, g) .
Then using (127) we prove the needed representation laws.
Let G, [ ] be a fixed ternary group, G × G, [ ] a corresponding ternary group used in the construction of middle
representations, ((G × G)
∗
, ) a covering group of G × G, [ ] , (G × G, ) = ret(a,b)(G × G, ). If ΠM
(a, b) is a
middle representation of G, [ ] , then π defined by
π(g, h, 0) = ΠM
(g, h), π(g, h, 1) = ΠM
(g, h) ◦ ΠM
(a, b)
is a representation of the covering group [5]. Moreover
ρ(g, h) = ΠM
(g, h) ◦ ΠM
(a, b) = π(g, h, 1)
is a representation of the above retract induced by (a, b). Indeed, (a, b) is the identity of this retract and ρ(a, b) = ΠM
(a, b)◦
ΠM
(a, b) = idV . Similarly
ρ ((g, h) (u, u)) = ρ ( (g, h), (a, b), (u, u) ) = ρ ([gau], [ubh]) = ΠM
([gau], [ubh])) ◦ ΠM
(a, b)
= ΠM
(g, h) ◦ ΠM
(a, b) ◦ ΠM
(u, u) ◦ ΠM
(a, b) = ρ(g, h) ◦ ρ(u, u)
But τ(g) = (g, g) is an embedding of (G, [ ]) into G × G, [ ] . Hence μ defined by μ(g, 0) = ΠM
(g, g) and
μ(g, 1) = ΠM
(g, g) ◦ ΠM
(a, a) is a representation of a covering group G∗
for (G, [ ]) (see the Post theorem [5] for
a = c). On the other hand, β(g) = ΠM
(g, g) ◦ ΠM
(a, a) is a representation of a binary retract (G, ∙ ) = reta(G, [ ]). Thus
β can induce some middle representation of (G, [ ]) (by the Gluskin-Hossz´u theorem [7]).
Note that in the ternary group of quaternions K, [ ] (with norm 1), where [ghu] = ghu(−1) = −ghu and gh
is the multiplication of quaternions (−1 is a central element) we have 1 = −1, −1 = 1 and g = g for others. In
K × K, [ ] we have (a, b) ∼ (−a, −b) and (a, −b) ∼ (−a, b), which gives 32 two-element equivalence classes. The
embedding τ(g) = (g, g) suggest that ΠM
(i, i) = π(i) = π(−i) = ΠM
(−i, −i). Generally ΠM
(a, b) = ΠM
(−a, −b)
and ΠM
(a, −b) = ΠM
(−a, b).
47

The relation (a, b) ∼ (c, d) ⇐⇒ [abg] = [cdg] for all g ∈ G is a congruence on (G × G, ∗). Note that this relation
can be defined as "for some g". Indeed, using a covering group we can see that if [abg] = [cdg] holds for some g then it
holds also for all g. Thus πL
(a, b) = ΠL
(c, d) ⇐⇒ (a, b) ∼ (c, d). Indeed
ΠL
(a, b) = ΠL
(a, b) ◦ ΠL
(g, g) = ΠL
([a b g], g)
= ΠL
([c d g], g) = ΠL
(c, d) ◦ ΠL
(g, g) = ΠL
(c, d).
We conclude, that every left representation of a commutative group G, [ ] is a middle representation. Indeed,
ΠL
(g, h) ◦ ΠL
(g, h) = ΠL
([g h g], h) = ΠL
([g g h], h) = ΠL
(h, h) = idV
and
ΠL
(g1, g2) ◦ ΠL
(g3, g4) ◦ ΠL
(g5, g6) = ΠL
([[g1g2g3]g4g5], g6) = ΠL
([[g1g3g2]g4g5], g6)
= ΠL
([g1g3[g2g4g5]], g6) = ΠL
([g1g3[g5g4g2]], g6) = ΠL
([g1g3g5], [g4g2g6]) = ΠL
([g1g3g5], [g6g4g2]).
Note that the converse holds only for the special kind of middle representations such that ΠM
(g, g) = idV . Therefore,
There is one-one correspondence between left representations of G, [ ] and binary representations of the retract
reta(G, [ ]).
Indeed, let ΠL
(g, a) be given, then ρ(g) = ΠL
(g, a) is such representation of the retract, as can be directly shown.
Conversely, assume that ρ(g) is a representation of the retract reta(G, [ ]). Define ΠL
(g, h) = ρ(g) ◦ ρ(h)−1
, then
ΠL
(g, h)◦ΠL
(u, u) = ρ(g)◦ρ(h)−1
◦ρ(u)◦ρ(u)−1
= ρ(g (h)−1
◦ u)◦ρ(u)−1
= ρ([ [ g a [ a h a ] ] a u ])◦ρ(u)−1
=
ρ([ g h g ]) ◦ ρ(u)−1
= ΠL
([ g h u ], u),
MATRIX REPRESENTATIONS OF TERNARY GROUPS
Here we give several examples of matrix representations for concrete ternary groups. Let G = Z3 {0, 1, 2} and
the ternary multiplication be [ghu] = g − h + u. Then [ghu] = [uhg] and 0 = 0, 1 = 1, 2 = 2, therefore (G, [ ]) is an
idempotent medial ternary group. Thus ΠL
(g, h) = ΠR
(h, g) and
ΠL
(a, b) = ΠL
(c, d) ⇐⇒ (a − b) = (c − d)mod 3. (129)
The calculations give the left regular representation in the manifest matrix form
ΠL
reg (0, 0) = ΠL
reg (2, 2) = ΠL
reg (1, 1) = ΠR
reg (0, 0)
= ΠR
reg (2, 2) = ΠR
reg (1, 1) =


1 0 0
0 1 0
0 0 1

 = [1] ⊕ [1] ⊕ [1], (130)
ΠL
reg (2, 0) = ΠL
reg (1, 2) = ΠL
reg (0, 1) = ΠR
reg (2, 1) = ΠR
reg (1, 0) = ΠR
reg (0, 2) =


0 1 0
0 0 1
1 0 0


= [1] ⊕



−
1
2
−
√
3
2√
3
2
−
1
2


 = [1] ⊕ −
1
2
+
1
2
i
√
3 ⊕ −
1
2
−
1
2
i
√
3 , (131)
ΠL
reg (2, 1) = ΠL
reg (1, 0) = ΠL
reg (0, 2) = ΠR
reg (2, 0) = ΠR
reg (1, 2) = ΠR
reg (0, 1) =


0 0 1
1 0 0
0 1 0


= [1] ⊕



−
1
2
√
3
2
−
√
3
2
−
1
2


 = [1] ⊕ −
1
2
−
1
2
i
√
3 ⊕ −
1
2
+
1
2
i
√
3 . (132)
Consider next the middle representation construction. The middle regular representation is defined by
ΠM
reg (g1, g2) t =
n
i=1
ki [g1hig2] .
48

For regular representations we have
ΠM
reg (g1, h1) ◦ ΠR
reg (g2, h2) = ΠR
reg (h2, h1) ◦ ΠM
reg (g1, g2) , (133)
ΠM
reg (g1, h1) ◦ ΠL
reg (g2, h2) = ΠL
reg (g1, g2) ◦ ΠM
reg (h2, h1) . (134)
For the middle regular representation matrices we obtain
ΠM
reg (0, 0) = ΠM
reg (1, 2) = ΠM
reg (2, 1) =


1 0 0
0 0 1
0 1 0

 ,
ΠM
reg (0, 1) = ΠM
reg (1, 0) = ΠM
reg (2, 2) =


0 1 0
1 0 0
0 0 1

 ,
ΠM
reg (0, 2) = ΠM
reg (2, 0) = ΠM
reg (1, 1) =


0 0 1
0 1 0
1 0 0

 .
The above representation ΠM
reg of Z3, [ ] is equivalent to the orthogonal direct sum of two irreducible representations
ΠM
reg (0, 0) = ΠM
reg (1, 2) = ΠM
reg (2, 1) = [1] ⊕
−1 0
0 1
,
ΠM
reg (0, 1) = ΠM
reg (1, 0) = ΠM
reg (2, 2) = [1] ⊕



1
2
−
√
3
2
−
√
3
2
−
1
2


 ,
ΠM
reg (0, 2) = ΠM
reg (2, 0) = ΠM
reg (1, 1) = [1] ⊕



1
2
√
3
2√
3
2
−
1
2


 ,
i.e. one-dimensional trivial [1] and two-dimensional irreducible. Note, that in this example ΠM
(g, g) = ΠM
(g, g) = idV ,
but ΠM
(g, h) ◦ ΠM
(g, h) = idV , and so ΠM
are of the second degree.
Consider a more complicated example of left representations. Let G = Z4 {0, 1, 2, 3} and the ternary multiplica-
tion be
[ghu] = (g + h + u + 1) mod 4. (135)
We have the multiplication table
[g, h, 0] =




1 2 3 0
2 3 0 1
3 0 1 2
0 1 2 3



 [g, h, 1] =




2 3 0 1
3 0 1 2
0 1 2 3
1 2 3 0




[g, h, 2] =




3 0 1 2
0 1 2 3
1 2 3 0
2 3 0 1



 [g, h, 3] =




0 1 2 3
1 2 3 0
2 3 0 1
3 0 1 2




Then the skew elements are 0 = 3, 1 = 2, 2 = 1, 3 = 0, and therefore (G, [ ]) is a (non-idempotent) commutative ternary
group. The left representation is defined by the expansion ΠL
reg (g1, g2) t =
n
i=1 ki [g1g2hi], which means that (see the
general formula (117))
ΠL
reg (g, h) |u >= | [ghu] > .
Analogously, for right and middle representations
ΠR
reg (g, h) |u >= | [ugh] >, ΠM
reg (g, h) |u >= | [guh] > .
Therefore | [ghu] >= | [ugh] >= | [guh] > and
ΠL
reg (g, h) = ΠR
reg (g, h) |u >= ΠM
reg (g, h) |u >,
so ΠL
reg (g, h) = ΠR
reg (g, h) = ΠM
reg (g, h). Thus it is sufficient to consider the left representation only.
49

In this case the equivalence is ΠL
(a, b) = ΠL
(c, d) ⇐⇒ (a + b) = (c + d)mod 4, and we obtain the following
classes
ΠL
reg (0, 0) = ΠL
reg (1, 3) = ΠL
reg (2, 2) = ΠL
reg (3, 1) =




0 0 0 1
1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0



 = [1] ⊕ [−1] ⊕ [−i] ⊕ [i] ,
ΠL
reg (0, 1) = ΠL
reg (1, 0) = ΠL
reg (2, 3) = ΠL
reg (3, 2) =




0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1
1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0



 = [1] ⊕ [−1] ⊕ [−1] ⊕ [−1] ,
ΠL
reg (0, 2) = ΠL
reg (1, 1) = ΠL
reg (2, 0) = ΠL
reg (3, 3) =




0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1
1 0 0 0



 = [1] ⊕ [−1] ⊕ [i] ⊕ [−i] ,
ΠL
reg (0, 3) = ΠL
reg (1, 2) = ΠL
reg (2, 1) = ΠL
reg (3, 0) =




1 0 0 0
0 1 0 0
0 0 1 0
0 0 0 1



 = [1] ⊕ [−1] ⊕ [1] ⊕ [1] .
It is seen that, due to the fact that the ternary operation (135) is commutative, there are only one-dimensional irreducible
left representations.
Let us “algebralize” the above regular representations in the following way. From (118) we have, for the left repre-
sentation
ΠL
reg (i, j) ◦ ΠL
reg (k, l) = ΠL
reg (i, [jkl]) , (136)
where [jkl] = j − k + l, i, j, k, l ∈ Z3. Denote γL
i = ΠL
reg (0, i), i ∈ Z3, then we obtain the algebra with the relations
γL
i γL
j = γL
i+j. (137)
Conversely, any matrix representation of γiγj = γi+j leads to the left representation by ΠL
(i, j) = γj−i. In the case of
the middle regular representation we introduce γM
k+l = ΠM
reg (k, l), k, l ∈ Z3, then we obtain
γM
i γM
j γM
k = γM
[ijk], i, j, k ∈ Z3. (138)
In some sense (138) can be treated as a ternary analog of the Clifford algebra. As before, any
matrix representation of (138) gives the middle representation ΠM
(k, l) = γk+l.
TERNARY ALGEBRAS AND HOPF ALGEBRAS
Let us consider associative ternary algebras [2, 115]. One can introduce an autodistributivity property [[xyz] ab] =
[[xab] [yab] [zab]] (see [72]). If we take 2 ternary operations { , , } and [ , , ], then distributivity is given by {[xyz] ab} =
[{xab} {yab} {zab}]. If (+) is a binary operation (addition), then left linearity is
[(x + z) , a, b] = [xab] + [zab] . (139)
By analogy one can define central (middle) and right linearity. Linearity is defined, when left, middle and right linearity
hold simultaneously.
An associative ternary algebra is a triple A, μ3, η(3)
, where A is a linear space over a field K, μ3 is
a linear map A ⊗ A ⊗ A → A called ternary multiplication μ3 (a ⊗ b ⊗ c) = [abc] which is ternary associative
[[abc] de] = [a [bcd] e] = [ab [cde]] or
μ3 ◦ (μ3 ⊗ id ⊗ id) = μ3 ◦ (id ⊗μ3 ⊗ id) = μ3 ◦ (id ⊗ id ⊗μ3) . (140)
There are two types [45] of ternary unit maps η(3)
: K → A:
1) One strong unit map
μ3 ◦ η(3)
⊗ η(3)
⊗ id = μ3 ◦ η(3)
⊗ id ⊗η(3)
= μ3 ◦ id ⊗η(3)
⊗ η(3)
= id; (141)
2) Two sequential units η
(3)
1 and η
(3)
2 satisfying
μ3 ◦ η
(3)
1 ⊗ η
(3)
2 ⊗ id = μ3 ◦ η
(3)
1 ⊗ id ⊗η
(3)
2 = μ3 ◦ id ⊗η
(3)
1 ⊗ η
(3)
2 = id; (142)
50

In first case the ternary analog of the binary relation η(2)
(x) = x1, where x ∈ K, 1 ∈ A, is
η(3)
(x) = [x, 1, 1] = [1, 1, x] = [1, x, 1] . (143)
Let (A, μA, ηA), (B, μB, ηB) and (C, μC, ηC) be ternary algebras, then the ternary tensor product space
A ⊗ B ⊗ C is naturally endowed with the structure of an algebra. The multiplication μA⊗B⊗C on A ⊗ B ⊗ C reads
[(a1 ⊗ b1 ⊗ c1)(a2 ⊗ b2 ⊗ c2)(a3 ⊗ b3 ⊗ c3)] = [a1a2a3] ⊗ [b1b2b3] ⊗ [c1c2c3] , (144)
and so the set of ternary algebras is closed under taking ternary tensor products. A ternary algebra map (homo-
morphism) is a linear map between ternary algebras f : A → B which respects the ternary algebra structure
f ([xyz]) = [f (x) , f (y) , f (z)] , (145)
f (1A) = 1B. (146)
Let C be a linear space over a field K.
A ternary comultiplication Δ(3)
is a linear map over a field K such that
Δ3 : C → C ⊗ C ⊗ C. (147)
In the standard Sweedler notations [37] Δ3 (a) =
n
i=1 ai ⊗ ai ⊗ ai = a(1) ⊗ a(2) ⊗ a(3). Consider different
possible types of ternary coassociativity [45,46].
1. A standard ternary coassociativity
(Δ3 ⊗ id ⊗ id) ◦ Δ3 = (id ⊗Δ3 ⊗ id) ◦ Δ3 = (id ⊗ id ⊗Δ3) ◦ Δ3, (148)
2. A nonstandard ternary Σ-coassociativity (Gluskin-type positional operatives)
(Δ3 ⊗ id ⊗ id) ◦ Δ3 = (id ⊗ (σ ◦ Δ3) ⊗ id) ◦ Δ3,
where σ ◦ Δ3 (a) = Δ3 (a) = a(σ(1)) ⊗ a(σ(2)) ⊗ a(σ(3)) and σ ∈ Σ ⊂ S3.
3. A permutational ternary coassociativity
(Δ3 ⊗ id ⊗ id) ◦ Δ3 = π ◦ (id ⊗Δ3 ⊗ id) ◦ Δ3,
where π ∈ Π ⊂ S5.
A ternary comediality is
(Δ3 ⊗ Δ3 ⊗ Δ3) ◦ Δ3 = σmedial ◦ (Δ3 ⊗ Δ3 ⊗ Δ3) ◦ Δ3,
where σmedial = 123456789
147258369 ∈ S9. A ternary counit is defined as a map ε(3)
: C → K. In general, ε(3)
= ε(2)
satisfying one of the conditions below. If Δ3 is derived, then maybe ε(3)
= ε(2)
, but another counits may exist. There are
two types of ternary counits:
1. Standard (strong) ternary counit
(ε(3)
⊗ ε(3)
⊗ id) ◦ Δ3 = (ε(3)
⊗ id ⊗ε(3)
) ◦ Δ3 = (id ⊗ε(3)
⊗ ε(3)
) ◦ Δ3 = id, (149)
2. Two sequential (polyadic) counits ε
(3)
1 and ε
(3)
2
(ε
(3)
1 ⊗ ε
(3)
2 ⊗ id) ◦ Δ = (ε
(3)
1 ⊗ id ⊗ε
(3)
2 ) ◦ Δ = (id ⊗ε
(3)
1 ⊗ ε
(3)
2 ) ◦ Δ = id, (150)
Below we will consider only the first standard type of associativity (148). The σ-cocommutativity is defined as
σ ◦ Δ3 = Δ3.
A ternary coalgebra is a triple C, Δ3, ε(3)
, where C is a linear space and Δ3 is a ternary comultiplication
(147) which is coassociative in one of the above senses and ε(3)
is one of the above counits.
Let A, μ(3)
be a ternary algebra and (C, Δ3) be a ternary coalgebra and f, g, h ∈ HomK (C, A). Ternary con-
volution product is
[f, g, h]∗ = μ(3)
◦ (f ⊗ g ⊗ h) ◦ Δ3 (151)
or in the Sweedler notation [f, g, h]∗ (a) = f a(1) g a(2) h a(3) .
51

A ternary coalgebra is called derived, if there exists a binary (usual, see e.g. [37]) coalgebra Δ2 : C → C ⊗ C
such that
Δ3,der = (id ⊗Δ2) ⊗ Δ2. (152)
A ternary bialgebra B is B, μ(3)
, η(3)
, Δ3, ε(3)
for which B, μ(3)
, η(3)
is a ternary algebra and B, Δ3, ε(3)
is a ternary coalgebra and they are compatible
Δ3 ◦ μ(3)
= μ(3)
◦ Δ3 (153)
One can distinguish four kinds of ternary bialgebras with respect to a “being derived” property:
1. A Δ-derived ternary bialgebra
Δ3 = Δ3,der = (id ⊗Δ2) ◦ Δ2 (154)
2. A μ-derived ternary bialgebra
μ
(3)
der = μ
(3)
der = μ(2)
◦ μ(2)
⊗ id (155)
3. A derived ternary bialgebra is simultaneously μ-derived and Δ-derived ternary bialgebra.
4. A non-derived ternary bialgebra which does not satisfy (154) and (155).
Possible types of ternary antipodes can be defined by analogy with binary coalgebras.
A skew ternary antipod is
μ(3)
◦ (S
(3)
skew ⊗ id ⊗ id) ◦ Δ3 = μ(3)
◦ (id ⊗S
(3)
skew ⊗ id) ◦ Δ3 = μ(3)
◦ (id ⊗ id ⊗S
(3)
skew) ◦ Δ3 = id . (156)
If only one equality from (156) is satisfied, the corresponding skew antipode is called left, middle or right.
Strong ternary antipode is
μ(2)
⊗ id ◦ (id ⊗S
(3)
strong ⊗ id) ◦ Δ3 = 1 ⊗ id, id ⊗μ(2)
◦ (id ⊗ id ⊗S
(3)
strong) ◦ Δ3 = id ⊗1,
where 1 is a unit of algebra.
If in a ternary coalgebra the relation
Δ3 ◦ S = τ13 ◦ (S ⊗ S ⊗ S) ◦ Δ3 (157)
holds true, where τ13 = 123
321 , then it is called skew-involutive.
A ternary Hopf algebra H, μ(3)
, η(3)
, Δ3, ε(3)
, S(3)
is a ternary bialgebra with a ternary antipode S(3)
of the
corresponding above type .
Let us consider concrete constructions of ternary comultiplications, bialgebras and Hopf algebras. A ternary
group-like element can be defined by Δ3 (g) = g ⊗ g ⊗ g, and for 3 such elements we have
Δ3 ([g1g2g3]) = Δ3 (g1) Δ3 (g2) Δ3 (g3) . (158)
But an analog of the binary primitive element (satisfying Δ(2)
(x) = x ⊗ 1 + 1 ⊗ x) cannot be chosen simply as Δ3 (x) =
x⊗e⊗e+e⊗x⊗e+e⊗e⊗x, since the algebra structure is not preserved. Nevertheless, if we introduce two idempotent
units e1, e2 satisfying “semiorthogonality” [e1e1e2] = 0, [e2e2e1] = 0, then
Δ3 (x) = x ⊗ e1 ⊗ e2 + e2 ⊗ x ⊗ e1 + e1 ⊗ e2 ⊗ x (159)
and now Δ3 ([x1x2x3]) = [Δ3 (x1) Δ3 (x2) Δ3 (x3)]. Using (159) ε (x) = 0, ε (e1,2) = 1, and S(3)
(x) = −x,
S(3)
(e1,2) = e1,2, one can construct a ternary universal enveloping algebra in full analogy with the binary case (see
e.g. [39]).
One of the most important examples of noncocommutative Hopf algebras is the well known Sweedler Hopf algebra
[37] which in the binary case has two generators x and y satisfying
μ(2)
(x, x) = 1, (160)
μ(2)
(y, y) = 0, (161)
σ
(2)
+ (xy) = −σ
(2)
− (xy) . (162)
It has the following comultiplication
Δ2 (x) = x ⊗ x, (163)
Δ2 (y) = y ⊗ x + 1 ⊗ y, (164)
52

counit ε(2)
(x) = 1, ε(2)
(y) = 0, and antipod S(2)
(x) = x, S(2)
(y) = −y, which respect the algebra structure. In the
derived case a ternary Sweedler algebra is generated also by two generators x and y obeying
μ(3)
(x, e, x) = μ(3)
(e, x, x) = μ(3)
(x, x, e) = e, (165)
σ
(3)
+ ([yey]) = 0, (166)
σ
(3)
+ ([xey]) = −σ
(3)
− ([xey]) . (167)
The derived Hopf algebra structure is given by
Δ3 (x) = x ⊗ x ⊗ x, (168)
Δ3 (y) = y ⊗ x ⊗ x + e ⊗ y ⊗ x + e ⊗ e ⊗ y, (169)
ε(3)
(x) = ε(2)
(x) = 1, (170)
ε(3)
(y) = ε(2)
(y) = 0, (171)
S(3)
(x) = S(2)
(x) = x, (172)
S(3)
(y) = S(2)
(y) = −y, (173)
and it can be checked that (168)-(170) are algebra maps, while (172) are antialgebra maps. To obtain a non-derived ternary
Sweedler example we have the following possibilities: 1) one “even” generator x, two “odd” generators y1,2 and one
ternary unit e; 2) two “even” generators x1,2, one “odd” generator y and two ternary units e1,2. In the first case the ternary
algebra structure is (no summation, i = 1, 2)
[xxx] = e, (174)
[yiyiyi] = 0, (175)
σ
(3)
+ ([yixyi]) = σ
(3)
+ ([xyix]) = 0, (176)
[xeyi] = − [xyie] ,
[exyi] = − [yixe] , (177)
[eyix] = − [yiex] , (178)
σ
(3)
+ ([y1xy2]) = −σ
(3)
− ([y1xy2]) . (179)
The corresponding ternary Hopf algebra structure is
Δ3 (x) = x ⊗ x ⊗ x, Δ3 (y1,2) = y1,2 ⊗ x ⊗ x + e1,2 ⊗ y2,1 ⊗ x + e1,2 ⊗ e2,1 ⊗ y2,1, (180)
ε(3)
(x) = 1, ε(3)
(yi) = 0, (181)
S(3)
(x) = x, S(3)
(yi) = −yi. (182)
In the second case we have for the algebra structure
[xixjxk] = δijδikδjkei, [yyy] = 0, (183)
σ
(3)
+ ([yxiy]) = 0, σ
(3)
+ ([xiyxi]) = 0, (184)
σ
(3)
+ ([y1xy2]) = 0, σ
(3)
− ([y1xy2]) = 0, (185)
and the ternary Hopf algebra structure is
Δ3 (xi) = xi ⊗ xi ⊗ xi,
Δ3 (y) = y ⊗ x1 ⊗ x1 + e1 ⊗ y ⊗ x2 + e1 ⊗ e2 ⊗ y, (186)
ε(3)
(xi) = 1, (187)
ε(3)
(y) = 0, (188)
S(3)
(xi) = xi, (189)
S(3)
(y) = −y. (190)
TERNARY QUANTUM GROUPS
A ternary commutator can be obtained in different ways [116]. We will consider the simplest version called a Nambu
bracket (see e.g. [2,30]). Let us introduce two maps ω
(3)
± : A ⊗ A ⊗ A → A ⊗ A ⊗ A by
ω
(3)
+ (a ⊗ b ⊗ c) = a ⊗ b ⊗ c + b ⊗ c ⊗ a + c ⊗ a ⊗ b, (191)
ω
(3)
− (a ⊗ b ⊗ c) = b ⊗ a ⊗ c + c ⊗ b ⊗ a + a ⊗ c ⊗ b. (192)
53

Thus, obviously μ(3)
◦ ω
(3)
± = σ
(3)
± ◦ μ(3)
, where σ
(3)
± ∈ S3 denotes a sum of terms having even and odd permutations
respectively. In the binary case ω
(2)
+ = id ⊗ id and ω
(2)
− = τ is the twist operator τ : a ⊗ b → b ⊗ a, while μ(2)
◦ ω
(2)
− is
permutation σ
(2)
− (ab) = ba. So the Nambu product is ω
(3)
N = ω
(3)
+ − ω
(3)
− , and the ternary commutator is [, , ]N = σ
(3)
N =
σ
(3)
+ − σ
(3)
− , or [30]
[a, b, c]N = [abc] + [bca] + [cab] − [cba] − [acb] − [bac] (193)
An abelian ternary algebra is defined by the vanishing of the Nambu bracket [a, b, c]N = 0 or ternary
commutation relation σ
(3)
+ = σ
(3)
− . By analogy with the binary case a deformed ternary algebra can be
defined by
σ
(3)
+ = qσ
(3)
− or [abc] + [bca] + [cab] = q ([cba] + [acb] + [bac]) , (194)
where multiplication by q is treated as an external operation.
Let us consider a ternary analog of the Woronowicz example of a bialgebra construction, which in the binary case
has two generators satisfying xy = qyx (or σ
(2)
+ (xy) = qσ
(2)
− (xy)), then the following coproducts
Δ2 (x) = x ⊗ x (195)
Δ2 (y) = y ⊗ x + 1 ⊗ y (196)
are algebra maps. In the derived ternary case using (194) we have
σ
(3)
+ ([xey]) = qσ
(3)
− ([xey]) , (197)
where e is the ternary unit and ternary coproducts are
Δ3 (e) = e ⊗ e ⊗ e, (198)
Δ3 (x) = x ⊗ x ⊗ x, (199)
Δ3 (y) = y ⊗ x ⊗ x + e ⊗ y ⊗ x + e ⊗ e ⊗ y, (200)
which are ternary algebra maps, i.e. they satisfy
σ
(3)
+ ([Δ3 (x) Δ3 (e) Δ3 (y)]) = qσ
(3)
− ([Δ3 (x) Δ3 (e) Δ3 (y)]) . (201)
Let us consider the group G = SL (n, K). Then the algebra generated by ai
j ∈ SL (n, K) can be endowed with
the structure of a ternary Hopf algebra (see e.g. [117] for the binary case) by choosing the ternary coproduct, counit and
antipode as (here summation is implied)
Δ3 ai
j = ai
k ⊗ ak
l ⊗ al
j, ε ai
j = δi
j, S(3)
ai
j = a−1 i
j
. (202)
This antipode is a skew one since from (156) it follows that
μ(3)
◦ (S(3)
⊗ id ⊗ id) ◦ Δ3 ai
j = S(3)
ai
k ak
l al
j = a−1 i
k
ak
l al
j = δi
l al
j = ai
j. (203)
This ternary Hopf algebra is derived since for Δ(2)
= ai
j ⊗ aj
k we have
Δ3 = id ⊗Δ(2)
⊗ Δ(2)
ai
j = id ⊗Δ(2)
ai
k ⊗ ak
j = ai
k ⊗ Δ(2)
ak
j = ai
k ⊗ ak
l ⊗ al
j. (204)
In the most important case n = 2 we can obtain the manifest action of the ternary coproduct Δ3 on components.
Possible non-derived matrix representations of the ternary product can be done only by four-rank n × n × n × n twice co-
variant and twice contravariant tensors aij
kl . Among all products the non-derived ones are only the following: aoi
jkbjl
oocko
il
and aij
okbol
iocko
il (where o is any index). So using e.g. the first choice we can define the non-derived Hopf algebra structure
by
Δ3 aij
kl = aiμ
vρ ⊗ avσ
kl ⊗ aρj
μσ, (205)
ε aij
kl =
1
2
δi
kδj
l + δi
l δj
k , (206)
and the skew antipod sij
kl = S(3)
aij
kl which is a solution of the equation siμ
vρavσ
kl = δi
ρδμ
k δσ
l .
54

Next consider ternary dual pair k (G) (push-forward) and F (G) (pull-back) which are related by k∗
(G) ∼= F (G)
(see e.g. [118]). Here k (G) = span (G) is a ternary group algebra (G has a ternary product [ ]G or μ
(3)
G ) over a field k. If
u ∈ k (G) (u = ui
xi, xi ∈ G), then
[uvw]k = ui
vj
wl
[xixjxl]G (207)
is associative, and so (k (G) , [ ]k) becomes a ternary algebra. Define a ternary coproduct Δ3 : k (G) → k (G) ⊗ k (G) ⊗
k (G) by
Δ3 (u) = ui
xi ⊗ xi ⊗ xi (208)
(derived and associative), then Δ3 ([uvw]k) = [Δ3 (u) Δ3 (v) Δ3 (w)]k, and k (G) is a ternary bialgebra. If we define a
ternary antipod by S
(3)
k = ui
ˉxi, where ˉxi is a skew element of xi, then k (G) becomes a ternary Hopf algebra.
In the dual case of functions F (G) : {ϕ : G → k} a ternary product [ ]F or μ
(3)
F (derived and associative) acts on
ψ (x, y, z) as
μ
(3)
F ψ (x) = ψ (x, x, x) , (209)
and so F (G) is a ternary algebra. Let F (G) ⊗ F (G) ⊗ F (G) ∼= F (G × G × G), then we define a ternary coproduct
Δ3 : F (G) → F (G) ⊗ F (G) ⊗ F (G) as
(Δ3ϕ) (x, y, z) = ϕ ([xyz]F ) , (210)
which is derive and associative. Thus we can obtain Δ3 ([ϕ1ϕ2ϕ3]F ) = [Δ3 (ϕ1) Δ3 (ϕ2) Δ3 (ϕ3)]F , and therefore F (G)
is a ternary bialgebra. If we define a ternary antipod by
S
(3)
F (ϕ) = ϕ (ˉx) , (211)
where ˉx is a skew element of x, then F (G) becomes a ternary Hopf algebra.
Let us introduce a ternary analog of the R-matrix. For a ternary Hopf algebra H we consider a linear map R(3)
:
H ⊗ H ⊗ H → H ⊗ H ⊗ H.
A ternary Hopf algebra H, μ(3)
, η(3)
, Δ3, ε(3)
, S(3)
is called quasifiveangular4
if it satisfies
(Δ3 ⊗ id ⊗ id) = R
(3)
145R
(3)
245R
(3)
345, (212)
(id ⊗Δ3 ⊗ id) = R
(3)
125R
(3)
145R
(3)
135, (213)
(id ⊗ id ⊗Δ3) = R
(3)
125R
(3)
124R
(3)
123, (214)
where as usual the index of R denotes action component positions.
Using the standard procedure (see e.g. [39, 119, 120]) we obtain a set of abstract ternary quantum Yang-
Baxter equations, one of which has the form
R
(3)
243R
(3)
342R
(3)
125R
(3)
145R
(3)
135 = R
(3)
123R
(3)
132R
(3)
145R
(3)
245R
(3)
345, (215)
and others can be obtained by corresponding permutations. The classical ternary Yang-Baxter equations form a one pa-
rameter family of solutions R (t) can be obtained by the expansion
R(3)
(t) = e ⊗ e ⊗ e + rt + O t2
, (216)
where r is a ternary classical R-matrix, then e.g. for (215) we have
r342r125r145r135 + r243r125r145r135 + r243r342r145r135 + r243r342r125r135 + r243r342r125r145
= r132r145r245r345 + r123r145r245r345 + r123r132r245r345 + r123r132r145r345 + r123r132r145r245.
For three ternary Hopf algebras HA,B,C, μ
(3)
A,B,C, η
(3)
A,B,C, Δ
(3)
A,B,C, ε
(3)
A,B,C, S
(3)
A,B,C we can introduce a non-degenerate
ternary “pairing” (see e.g. [119] for the binary case) , ,
(3)
: HA × HB × HC → K, trilinear over K, satisfying
η
(3)
A (a) , b, c
(3)
= a, ε
(3)
B (b) , c
(3)
, a, η
(3)
B (b) , c
(3)
= ε
(3)
A (a) , b, c
(3)
,
b, η
(3)
B (b) , c
(3)
= a, b, ε
(3)
C (c)
(3)
, a, b, η
(3)
C (c)
(3)
= a, ε
(3)
B (b) , c
(3)
,
a, b, η
(3)
C (c)
(3)
= ε
(3)
A (a) , b, c
(3)
, η
(3)
A (a) , b, c
(3)
= a, b, ε
(3)
C (c)
(3)
,
4The reason for such notation is clear from (215).
55

μ
(3)
A (a1 ⊗ a2 ⊗ a3) , b, c
(3)
= a1 ⊗ a2 ⊗ a3, Δ
(3)
B (b) , c
(3)
,
Δ
(3)
A (a) , b1 ⊗ b2 ⊗ b3, c
(3)
= a, μ
(3)
B (b1 ⊗ b2 ⊗ b3) , c
(3)
,
a, μ
(3)
B (b1 ⊗ b2 ⊗ b3) , c
(3)
= a, b1 ⊗ b2 ⊗ b3, Δ
(3)
C (c)
(3)
,
a, Δ
(3)
B (b) , c1 ⊗ c2 ⊗ c3
(3)
= a, b, μ
(3)
C (c1 ⊗ c2 ⊗ c3)
(3)
,
a, b, μ
(3)
C (c1 ⊗ c2 ⊗ c3)
(3)
= Δ
(3)
A (a) , b, c1 ⊗ c2 ⊗ c3
(3)
,
a1 ⊗ a2 ⊗ a3, b, Δ
(3)
C (c)
(3)
= μ
(3)
A (a1 ⊗ a2 ⊗ a3) , b, c
(3)
,
S
(3)
A (a) , b, c
(3)
= a, S
(3)
B (b) , c
(3)
= a, b, S
(3)
C (c)
(3)
,
where a, ai ∈ HA, b, bi ∈ HB. The ternary “paring” between HA ⊗ HA ⊗ HA and HB ⊗ HB ⊗ HB is given by
a1 ⊗ a2 ⊗ a3, b1 ⊗ b2 ⊗ b3
(3)
= a1, b1
(3)
a2, b2
(3)
a3, b3
(3)
. These constructions can naturally lead to ternary gen-
eralizations of the duality concept and the quantum double which are key ingredients in the theory of quantum groups
[39,120,121].
CONCLUSIONS
In this paper we have presented a review of polyadic systems and their representations, ternary algebras and Hopf
algebras. We have classified general polyadic systems and considered their homomorphisms and their multiplace gener-
alizations, paying attention to their associativity. We have defined multiplace representations and multiactions and have
given examples of matrix representations for some ternary groups. We have defined and investigated ternary algebras and
Hopf algebras, and have given some examples. We then considered some ternary generalizations of quantum groups and
the Yang-Baxter equation.
REFERENCES
1. Kerner R. Ternary algebraic structures and their applications in physics // Paris, 2000. - 15 p. (Preprint Univ. P. & M. Curie).
2. de Azcarraga J. A., Izquierdo J. M. n-ary algebras: a review with applications // J. Phys. - 2010. - Vol. A43. - P. 293001.
3. Dörnte W. Unterschungen über einen verallgemeinerten Gruppenbegriff // Math. Z. - 1929. - Vol. 29. - P. 1–19.
4. Prüfer H. Theorie der abelshen Gruppen I. Grundeigenschaften // Math. Z. - 1924. - Vol. 20. - P. 165–187.
5. Post E. L. Polyadic groups // Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. - 1940. - Vol. 48. - P. 208–350.
6. Hosszú L. M. On the explicit form of n-group operation // Publ. Math. Debrecen. - 1963. - Vol. 10. - P. 88–92.
7. Gluskin L. M. Position operatives // Math. Sbornik. - 1965. - Vol. 68(110). - № 3. - P. 444–472.
8. Dudek W. A., Głazek K., Gleichgewicht B. A note on the axioms of n-groups // Coll. Math. Soc. J. Bolyai. 29. Universal Algebra.
- Esztergom (Hungary). , 1977. - P. 195–202.
9. Rusakov S. A. A definition of an n-ary group // Dokl. Akad. Nauk BSSR. - 1979. - Vol. 23. - P. 965–967.
10. Weyl H. Classical Groups, Their Invariants and Representations. - Princeton: Princeton Univ. Press, 1946.
11. Fulton W., Harris J. Representation Theory: a First Course. - N. Y.: Springer, 1991.
12. Cornwell J. F. Group Theory in Physics: An Introduction. - London: Academic Press, 1997. - 349 p.
13. Curtis C. W., Reiner I. Representation theory of finite groups and associative algebras. - Providence: AMS, 1962.
14. Collins M. J. Representations And Characters Of Finite Groups. - Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1990. - 242 p.
15. Kapranov M., Gelfand I. M., Zelevinskii A. Discriminants, Resultants and Multidimensional Determinants. - Berlin: Birkhäuser,
1994. - 234 p.
16. Sokolov N. P. Introduction to the Theory of Multidimensional Matrices. - Kiev: Naukova Dumka, 1972. - 175 p.
17. Kawamura Y. Cubic matrices, generalized spin algebra and uncertainty relation // Progr. Theor. Phys. - 2003. - Vol. 110. - P. 579–
587.
18. Rausch de Traubenberg M. Cubic extentions of the poincare algebra // Phys. Atom. Nucl. - 2008. - Vol. 71. - P. 1102–1108.
19. Borowiec A., Dudek W., Duplij S. Bi-element representations of ternary groups // Comm. Algebra. - 2006. - Vol. 34. - № 5. -
P. 1651–1670.
20. Dudek W. A., Shahryari M. Representation theory of polyadic groups // Algebr. Represent. Theory. - 2012. - Vol. 15. - № 1. -
P. 29–51.
21. Lõhmus J., Paal E., Sorgsepp L. Nonassociative Algebras in Physics. - Palm Harbor: Hadronic Press, 1994. - 271 p.
22. Lounesto P., Ablamowicz R. Clifford Algebras: Applications To Mathematics, Physics, And Engineering. - Birkhäuser, 2004. -
626 p.
23. Georgi H. Lie Algebras in Particle Physics. - New York: Perseus Books, 1999. - 320 p.
56

24. Abramov V. Z3-graded analogues of Clifford algebras and algebra of Z3-graded symmetries // Algebras Groups Geom. - 1995. -
Vol. 12. - № 3. - P. 201–221.
25. Abramov V. Ternary generalizations of Grassmann algebra // Proc. Est. Acad. Sci., Phys. Math. - 1996. - Vol. 45. - № 2-3. -
P. 152–160.
26. Abramov V., Kerner R., Le Roy B. Hypersymmetry: a Z3-graded generalization of supersymmetry // J. Math. Phys. - 1997. -
Vol. 38. - P. 1650–1669.
27. Filippov V. T. n-Lie algebras // Sib. Math. J. - 1985. - Vol. 26. - P. 879–891.
28. Michor P. W., Vinogradov A. M. n-ary Lie and associative algebras // Rend. Sem. Mat. Univ. Pol. Torino. - 1996. - Vol. 54. - № 4.
- P. 373–392.
29. Nambu Y. Generalized Hamiltonian dynamics // Phys. Rev. - 1973. - Vol. 7. - P. 2405–2412.
30. Takhtajan L. On foundation of the generalized Nambu mechanics // Commun. Math. Phys. - 1994. - Vol. 160. - P. 295–315.
31. Bagger J., Lambert N. Comments on multiple M2-branes // - 2008. - Vol. 2. - P. 105.
32. Bagger J., Lambert N. Gauge symmetry and supersymmetry of multiple M2-branes // Phys. Rev. - 2008. - Vol. D77. - P. 065008.
33. Gustavsson A. One-loop corrections to Bagger-Lambert theory // Nucl. Phys. - 2009. - Vol. B807. - P. 315–333.
34. Ho P.-M., Hou R.-C., Matsuo Y., Shiba S. M5-brane in three-form flux and multiple M2-branes // - 2008. - Vol. 08. - P. 014.
35. Low A. M. Worldvolume superalgebra of BLG theory with Nambu-Poisson structure // - 2010. - Vol. 04. - P. 089.
36. Abe E. Hopf Algebras. - Cambridge: Cambridge Univ. Press, 1980. - 221 p.
37. Sweedler M. E. Hopf Algebras. - New York: Benjamin, 1969. - 336 p.
38. Montgomery S. Hopf algebras and their actions on rings. - Providence: AMS, 1993. - 238 p.
39. Kassel C. Quantum Groups. - New York: Springer-Verlag, 1995. - 531 p.
40. Shnider S., Sternberg S. Quantum Groups. - Boston: International Press, 1993. - 371 p.
41. Duplij S., Li F. Regular solutions of quantum Yang-Baxter equation from weak Hopf algebras // Czech. J. Phys. - 2001. - Vol. 51.
- № 12. - P. 1306–1311.
42. Duplij S., Sinel’shchikov S. Quantum enveloping algebras with von Neumann regular Cartan-like generators and the Pierce de-
composition // Commun. Math. Phys. - 2009. - Vol. 287. - № 1. - P. 769–785.
43. Li F., Duplij S. Weak Hopf algebras and singular solutions of quantum Yang-Baxter equation // Commun. Math. Phys. - 2002. -
Vol. 225. - № 1. - P. 191–217.
44. Duplij S., Sinel’shchikov S. Classification of Uq (SL2)-module algebra structures on the quantum plane // J. Math. Physics, Anal-
ysis, Geometry. - 2010. - Vol. 6. - № 6. - P. 21–46.
45. Duplij S. Ternary Hopf algebras // Symmetry in Nonlinear Mathematical Physics. - Kiev. Institute of Mathematics, 2001. - P. 25-34.
46. Borowiec A., Dudek W., Duplij S. Basic concepts of ternary Hopf algebras // Journal of Kharkov National University, ser. Nuclei,
Particles and Fields. - 2001. - Vol. 529. - № 3(15). - P. 21–29.
47. Bergman G. M. An invitation to general algebra and universal constructions. - Berkeley: University of California, 1995. - 358 p.
48. Hausmann B. A., Ore Ø. Theory of quasigroups // Amer. J. Math. - 1937. - Vol. 59. - P. 983–1004.
49. Clifford A. H., Preston G. B. The Algebraic Theory of Semigroups. Vol. 1 - Providence: Amer. Math. Soc., 1961.
50. Brandt H. Über eine Verallgemeinerung des Gruppenbegriffes // Math. Annalen. - 1927. - Vol. 96. - P. 360–367.
51. Bruck R. H. A Survey on Binary Systems. - New York: Springer-Verlag, 1966.
52. Bourbaki N. Elements of Mathematics: Algebra 1. - Springer, 1998.
53. Dudek W. A. Remarks to głazek’s results on n-ary groups // Discuss. Math., Gen. Algebra Appl. - 2007. - Vol. 27. - № 2. -
P. 199–233.
54. Dudek W. A., Michalski J. On retract of polyadic groups // Demonstratio Math. - 1984. - Vol. 17. - P. 281–301.
55. Thurston H. A. Partly associative operations // J. London Math. Soc. - 1949. - Vol. 24. - P. 260–271.
56. Belousov V. D. n-ary Quasigroups. - Kishinev: Shtintsa, 1972. - 225 p.
57. Sokhatsky F. M. On the associativity of multiplace operations // Quasigroups Relat. Syst. - 1997. - Vol. 4. - P. 51–66.
58. Michalski J. Covering k-groups of n-groups // Arch. Math. (Brno). - 1981. - Vol. 17. - № 4. - P. 207–226.
59. Pop M. S., Pop A. On some relations on n-monoids // Carpathian J. Math. - 2004. - Vol. 20. - № 1. - P. 87–94.
60. ˇCupona G., Trpenovski B. Finitary associative operations with neutral elements // Bull. Soc. Math. Phys. Macedoine. - 1961. -
Vol. 12. - P. 15–24.
61. Evans T. Abstract mean values // Duke Math J. - 1963. - Vol. 30. - P. 331–347.
62. Głazek K., Gleichgewicht B. Abelian n-groups // Colloq. Math. Soc. J. Bolyai. Universal Algebra (Esztergom, 1977). - Amsterdam.
North-Holland, 1982. - P. 321–329.
63. Stojaković Z., Dudek W. A. On σ-permutable n-groups // Publ. Inst. Math., Nouv. Sér. - 1986. - Vol. 40(54). - P. 49–55.
64. Rusakov S. A. Some Applications of n-ary Group Theory. - Minsk: Belaruskaya navuka, 1998. - 180 p.
65. Celakoski N. On some axiom systems for n-groups // Mat. Bilt. - 1977. - Vol. 1. - P. 5–14.
66. Gal’mak A. M. n-ary Groups, Part 1. - Gomel: Gomel University, 2003. - 195 p.
67. ˇUsan J. n-groups in the light of the neutral operations // Math. Moravica. - 2003. - Vol. Special vol.
68. Sokolov E. I. On the theorem of Gluskin-Hosszú on Dörnte groups // Mat. Issled. - 1976. - Vol. 39. - P. 187–189.
57

69. Yurevych O. V. Criteria for invertibility of elements in associates // Ukr. Math. J. - 2001. - Vol. 53. - № 11. - P. 1895–1905.
70. Timm J. Verbandstheoretische Behandlung n-stelliger Gruppen // Abh. Math. Semin. Univ. Hamb. - 1972. - Vol. 37. - P. 218–224.
71. Dudek W. A. Remarks on n-groups // Demonstratio Math. - 1980. - Vol. 13. - P. 165–181.
72. Dudek W. A. Autodistributive n-groups // Annales Sci. Math. Polonae, Commentationes Math. - 1993. - Vol. 23. - P. 1–11.
73. Heine E. Handbuch der Kugelfunktionan. - Berlin: Reimer, 1878.
74. Kac V., Cheung P. Quantum calculus. - New York: Springer, 2002. - 112 p.
75. Petrescu A. On the homotopy of universal algebras. I. // Rev. Roum. Math. Pures Appl. - 1977. - Vol. 22. - P. 541–551.
76. Halaˇs R. A note on homotopy in universal algebra // Acta Univ. Palacki. Olomuc., Fac. Rerum Nat., Math. - 1994. - Vol. 33. -
№ 114. - P. 39–42.
77. Głazek K., Gleichgewicht B. Bibliography of n-groups (polyadic groups) and some group like n-ary systems // Proceedings of
the Symposium on n-ary structures. - Skopje. Macedonian Academy of Sciences and Arts, 1982. - P. 253–289.
78. Fujiwara T. On mappings between algebraic systems // Osaka Math. J. - 1959. - Vol. 11. - P. 153–172.
79. Vidal J. C., Tur J. S. A 2-categorial generalization of the concept of institution // Stud. Log. - 2010. - Vol. 95. - № 3. - P. 301–344.
80. Novotný M. Homomorphisms of algebras // Czech. Math. J. - 2002. - Vol. 52. - № 2. - P. 345–364.
81. Novotný M. Mono-unary algebras in the work of Czechoslovak mathematicians // Arch. Math., Brno. - 1990. - Vol. 26. - № 2-3.
- P. 155–164.
82. Gal’mak A. M. Generalized morphisms of algebraic systems // Vopr. Algebry. - 1998. - Vol. 12. - P. 36–46.
83. Gal’mak A. M. Generalized morphisms of Abelian m-ary groups // Discuss. Math. - 2001. - Vol. 21. - № 1. - P. 47–55.
84. Gal’mak A. M. n-ary Groups, Part 2. - Minsk: Belarus State University, 2007. - 324 p.
85. Goetz A. On weak isomorphisms and weak homomorphisms of abstract algebras // Colloq. Math. - 1966. - Vol. 14. - P. 163–167.
86. Marczewski E. Independence in abstract algebras. Results and problems // Colloq. Math. - 1966. - Vol. 14. - P. 169–188.
87. Głazek K., Michalski J. On weak homomorphisms of general non-indexed algebras // Bull. Acad. Pol. Sci., Sér. Sci. Math. Astron.
Phys. - 1974. - Vol. 22. - P. 651–656.
88. Głazek K. Weak homomorphisms of general algebras and related topics // Math. Semin. Notes, Kobe Univ. - 1980. - Vol. 8. -
P. 1–36.
89. Traczyk T. Weak isomorphisms of Boolean and Post algebras // Colloq. Math. - 1965. - Vol. 13. - P. 159–164.
90. Denecke K., Wismath S. L. Universal Algebra and Coalgebra. - Singapore: World Scientific, 2009.
91. Denecke K., Saengsura K. State-based systems and (F1, F2)-coalgebras // East-West J. Math.,. - 2008. - Vol. Spec. Vol. - P. 1–31.
92. Chung K. O., Smith J. D. H. Weak homomorphisms and graph coalgebras // Arab. J. Sci. Eng., Sect. C, Theme Issues. - 2008. -
Vol. 33. - № 2. - P. 107–121.
93. Kolibiar M. Weak homomorphisms in some classes of algebras // Stud. Sci. Math. Hung. - 1984. - Vol. 19. - P. 413–420.
94. Głazek K., Michalski J. Weak homomorphisms of general algebras // Commentat. Math. - 1977. - Vol. 19 (1976). - P. 211–228.
95. Czákány B. On the equivalence of certain classes of algebraic systems // Acta Sci. Math. (Szeged). - 1962. - Vol. 23. - P. 46–57.
96. Mal’tcev A. I. Free topological algebras // Izv. Akad. Nauk SSSR. Ser. Mat. - 1957. - Vol. 21. - P. 171—-198.
97. Mal’tsev A. I. The structural characteristic of some classes of algebras // Dokl. Akad. Nauk SSSR. - 1958. - Vol. 120. - P. 29–32.
98. Ellerman D. A theory of adjoint functors – with some thoughts about their philosophical significance // What is category theory?
- Monza (Milan). Polimetrica, 2006. - P. 127–183.
99. Ellerman D. Adjoints and emergence: applications of a new theory of adjoint functors // Axiomathes. - 2007. - Vol. 17. - № 1. -
P. 19–39.
100. csi B. P. On Morita contexts in bicategories // Applied Categorical Structures. - 2011. - P. 1–18.
101. Chronowski A. A ternary semigroup of mappings // Demonstr. Math. - 1994. - Vol. 27. - № 3-4. - P. 781–791.
102. Chronowski A. On ternary semigroups of homomorphisms of ordered sets // Arch. Math. (Brno). - 1994. - Vol. 30. - № 2. -
P. 85–95.
103. Chronowski A., Novotný M. Ternary semigroups of morphisms of objects in categories // Archivum Math. (Brno). - 1995. -
Vol. 31. - P. 147–153.
104. Gal’mak A. M. Polyadic associative operations on Cartesian powers // Proc. of the Natl. Academy of Sciences of Belarus, Ser.
Phys.-Math. Sci. - 2008. - Vol. 3. - P. 28–34.
105. Gal’mak A. M. Polyadic analogs of the Cayley and Birkhoff theorems // Russ. Math. - 2001. - Vol. 45. - № 2. - P. 10–15.
106. Gleichgewicht B., Wanke-Jakubowska M. B., Wanke-Jerie M. E. On representations of cyclic n-groups // Demonstr. Math. -
1983. - Vol. 16. - P. 357–365.
107. Wanke-Jakubowska M. B., Wanke-Jerie M. E. On representations of n-groups // Annales Sci. Math. Polonae, Commentationes
Math. - 1984. - Vol. 24. - P. 335–341.
108. Berezin F. A. Introduction to Superanalysis. - Dordrecht: Reidel, 1987. - 421 p.
109. Kirillov A. A. Elements of the Theory of Representations. - Berlin: Springer-Verlag, 1976.
110. Husemöller D., Joachim M., Jurˇco B., Schottenloher M. G-spaces, G-bundles, and G-vector bundles // Basic Bundle Theory and
K-Cohomology Invariants. - Berlin-Heidelberg. Springer, 2008. - P. 149-161.
111. Mal’tcev A. I. On general theory of algebraic systems // Mat. Sb. - 1954. - Vol. 35. - № 1. - P. 3–20.
112. Gal’mak A. M. Translations of n-ary groups. // Dokl. Akad. Nauk BSSR. - 1986. - Vol. 30. - P. 677–680.
113. Zeković B., Artamonov V. A. A connection between some properties of n-group rings and group rings // Math. Montisnigri. -
1999. - Vol. 15. - P. 151–158.
114. Zeković B., Artamonov V. A. On two problems for n-group rings // Math. Montisnigri. - 2002. - Vol. 15. - P. 79–85.
115. Carlsson R. N-ary algebras // Nagoya Math. J. - 1980. - Vol. 78. - № 1. - P. 45–56.
116. Bremner M., Hentzel I. Identities for generalized lie and jordan products on totally associative triple systems // J. Algebra. - 2000.
- Vol. 231. - № 1. - P. 387–405.
117. Madore J. Introduction to Noncommutative Geometry and its Applications. - Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
118. Kogorodski L. I., Soibelman Y. S. Algebras of Functions on Quantum Groups. - Providence: AMS, 1998.
119. Chari V., Pressley A. A Guide to Quantum Groups. - Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.
120. Majid S. Foundations of Quantum Group Theory. - Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1995.
121. Drinfeld V. G. Quantum groups // Proceedings of the ICM, Berkeley. - Phode Island. AMS, 1987. - P. 798–820.
58

Steven Duplij (Stepan Anatolievich Douplii) is a theoretical physicist, a Lead Staff Researcher of the Theory
Group, Nuclear Physics Laboratory at V.N. Karazin Kharkov National University, and Doctor of Physical and
Mathematical Sciences. He has more than hundred scientific publications, several monographs. The main
scientific directions are supersymmetry and supermanifolds, quantum groups and their actions, singular theories
and constrained systems, nonlinear and conformal electrodynamics, multigravity and Pauli-Fierz models, ternary
and polyadic structures, von Neumann regularity and semigroups, DNA theory and genetic code. Editor-compiler
of "Concise Encylopedia of Supersymmetry"(Springer), he has received grants from the Fulbright and Humboldt
Foundations.
59
, issue /55/ Polyadic systems...

Steven Duplij - Polyadic systems, representations and quantum groups

More Related Content

What's hot (18)

Viewers also liked (16)

Similar to Steven Duplij - Polyadic systems, representations and quantum groups (20)

More from Steven Duplij (Stepan Douplii) (17)

Recently uploaded (20)

Steven Duplij - Polyadic systems, representations and quantum groups