<p>We study restrictions of the correspondence between the lattice <InlineEquation ID="IEq1"> <InlineMediaObject> <ImageObject Color="BlackWhite" FileRef="10485_2025_9802_Article_IEq1.gif" Format="GIF" Height="19" Rendition="HTML" Resolution="72" Type="Linedraw" Width="44" /> </InlineMediaObject> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\textsf{SE}(L)\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">SE</mi> <mo stretchy="false">(</mo> <mi>L</mi> <mo stretchy="false">)</mo> </mrow> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> of strongly exact filters, of a frame <i>L</i>, and the coframe <InlineEquation ID="IEq2"> <InlineMediaObject> <ImageObject Color="BlackWhite" FileRef="10485_2025_9802_Article_IEq2.gif" Format="GIF" Height="19" Rendition="HTML" Resolution="72" Type="Linedraw" Width="42" /> </InlineMediaObject> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\mathcal {S}_o(L)\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="script">S</mi> <mi>o</mi> </msub> <mrow> <mo stretchy="false">(</mo> <mi>L</mi> <mo stretchy="false">)</mo> </mrow> </mrow> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> of fitted sublocales. In particular, we consider the classes of exact filters <InlineEquation ID="IEq3"> <InlineMediaObject> <ImageObject Color="BlackWhite" FileRef="10485_2025_9802_Article_IEq3.gif" Format="GIF" Height="19" Rendition="HTML" Resolution="72" Type="Linedraw" Width="35" /> </InlineMediaObject> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\textsf{E}(L)\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">E</mi> <mo stretchy="false">(</mo> <mi>L</mi> <mo stretchy="false">)</mo> </mrow> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation>, regular filters <InlineEquation ID="IEq4"> <InlineMediaObject> <ImageObject Color="BlackWhite" FileRef="10485_2025_9802_Article_IEq4.gif" Format="GIF" Height="19" Rendition="HTML" Resolution="72" Type="Linedraw" Width="36" /> </InlineMediaObject> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\textsf{R}(L)\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">R</mi> <mo stretchy="false">(</mo> <mi>L</mi> <mo stretchy="false">)</mo> </mrow> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation>, and the intersections <InlineEquation ID="IEq5"> <InlineMediaObject> <ImageObject Color="BlackWhite" FileRef="10485_2025_9802_Article_IEq5.gif" Format="GIF" Height="19" Rendition="HTML" Resolution="72" Type="Linedraw" Width="74" /> </InlineMediaObject> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\mathcal {J}(\textsf{CP}(L))\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="script">J</mi> <mo stretchy="false">(</mo> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">CP</mi> <mo stretchy="false">(</mo> <mi>L</mi> <mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo stretchy="false">)</mo> </mrow> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> and <InlineEquation ID="IEq6"> <InlineMediaObject> <ImageObject Color="BlackWhite" FileRef="10485_2025_9802_Article_IEq6.gif" Format="GIF" Height="19" Rendition="HTML" Resolution="72" Type="Linedraw" Width="74" /> </InlineMediaObject> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\mathcal {J}(\textsf{SO}(L))\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="script">J</mi> <mo stretchy="false">(</mo> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">SO</mi> <mo stretchy="false">(</mo> <mi>L</mi> <mo stretchy="false">)</mo> <mo stretchy="false">)</mo> </mrow> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> of completely prime and Scott-open filters, respectively. We show that all these classes of filters are sublocales of <InlineEquation ID="IEq7"> <InlineMediaObject> <ImageObject Color="BlackWhite" FileRef="10485_2025_9802_Article_IEq7.gif" Format="GIF" Height="19" Rendition="HTML" Resolution="72" Type="Linedraw" Width="44" /> </InlineMediaObject> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\textsf{SE}(L)\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <mrow> <mi mathvariant="sans-serif">SE</mi> <mo stretchy="false">(</mo> <mi>L</mi> <mo stretchy="false">)</mo> </mrow> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> and as such correspond to subcolocales of <InlineEquation ID="IEq8"> <InlineMediaObject> <ImageObject Color="BlackWhite" FileRef="10485_2025_9802_Article_IEq8.gif" Format="GIF" Height="19" Rendition="HTML" Resolution="72" Type="Linedraw" Width="42" /> </InlineMediaObject> <EquationSource Format="TEX">\(\mathcal {S}_o(L)\)</EquationSource> <EquationSource Format="MATHML"><math> <mrow> <msub> <mi mathvariant="script">S</mi> <mi>o</mi> </msub> <mrow> <mo stretchy="false">(</mo> <mi>L</mi> <mo stretchy="false">)</mo> </mrow> </mrow> </math></EquationSource> </InlineEquation> with a concise description. The theory of polarities of Birkhoff is central to our investigations. We automatically derive universal properties for the said classes of filters by giving their descriptions in terms of polarities. The obtained universal properties strongly resemble that of the canonical extensions of lattices. We also give new equivalent definitions of subfitness in terms of the lattice of filters.</p>

错误:搜索内容不能为空,请输入英文关键词
错误:关键词超出字数限制,请精简
高级检索

Canonical extensions via fitted sublocales

  • Tomáš Jakl,
  • Anna Laura Suarez

摘要

We study restrictions of the correspondence between the lattice \(\textsf{SE}(L)\) SE ( L ) of strongly exact filters, of a frame L, and the coframe \(\mathcal {S}_o(L)\) S o ( L ) of fitted sublocales. In particular, we consider the classes of exact filters \(\textsf{E}(L)\) E ( L ) , regular filters \(\textsf{R}(L)\) R ( L ) , and the intersections \(\mathcal {J}(\textsf{CP}(L))\) J ( CP ( L ) ) and \(\mathcal {J}(\textsf{SO}(L))\) J ( SO ( L ) ) of completely prime and Scott-open filters, respectively. We show that all these classes of filters are sublocales of \(\textsf{SE}(L)\) SE ( L ) and as such correspond to subcolocales of \(\mathcal {S}_o(L)\) S o ( L ) with a concise description. The theory of polarities of Birkhoff is central to our investigations. We automatically derive universal properties for the said classes of filters by giving their descriptions in terms of polarities. The obtained universal properties strongly resemble that of the canonical extensions of lattices. We also give new equivalent definitions of subfitness in terms of the lattice of filters.