Skip to main content
14 events
when toggle format what by license comment
Apr 4, 2017 at 22:34 vote accept Salvo Tringali
Apr 3, 2017 at 17:30 comment added Salvo Tringali For the record, the converse is true under mild assumptions, that are often met in applications (where K is typically a monoid of zero-sum sequences over an abelian group $G$ with support in a set $G_0\subseteq G$): (i) if $K$ is reduced (i.e., the only unit of $K$ is the identity) and atomic; (ii) if $K$ is atomic and $\varphi$ is a weak transfer homomorphism (viz., an essentially surjective equimorphism with the additional property that $\varphi^{-1}(K^\times)\subseteq H^\times$).
Apr 3, 2017 at 8:41 history edited Salvo Tringali CC BY-SA 3.0
confused March with April...
Apr 3, 2017 at 8:31 history edited Salvo Tringali CC BY-SA 3.0
fixed a mistake
Apr 1, 2017 at 21:30 history edited Salvo Tringali CC BY-SA 3.0
fixed one more mistake
Apr 1, 2017 at 19:03 answer added Salvo Tringali timeline score: 1
Apr 1, 2017 at 17:32 history edited Salvo Tringali CC BY-SA 3.0
fixed a mistake in the definition of the set of factorizations
Apr 1, 2017 at 17:30 comment added Salvo Tringali My fault, it's a mistake: I want $\mathscr{Z}_H(x) := \pi_H^{-1}(x) \cap \mathscr{F}^\ast(\mathcal A(H))$ for every $x \in H$. Besides that, I think I can prove that the answer is in the affirmative. I will post it later.
Apr 1, 2017 at 17:13 comment added Benjamin Steinberg Since $\pi_H$ is defined in the free monoid on H why would $\pi_H^{-1}$ be contained in the free monoid on the atoms?
Apr 1, 2017 at 11:55 history edited Salvo Tringali CC BY-SA 3.0
fixed a typo and a mistake in the definition of an atom
Apr 1, 2017 at 10:22 history edited Salvo Tringali CC BY-SA 3.0
added the definition of atom
Apr 1, 2017 at 10:04 history edited Salvo Tringali CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 7 characters in body
Apr 1, 2017 at 9:58 history edited Salvo Tringali CC BY-SA 3.0
deleted 361 characters in body
Apr 1, 2017 at 9:52 history asked Salvo Tringali CC BY-SA 3.0