0

Given an alphabet $\Sigma$, $P (\Sigma^*)$, the power set of $\Sigma^*$, is a monoid, with language concatenation as morphism.

  1. What is the identity: the empty language, or the language consisting of only the empty string?

  2. What is the difference between concatenating a language with the empty language and with the language consisting of only the empty string?

Thanks.

Tim
  • 47,382

2 Answers2

3

For languages $L_1$ and $L_2$, the concatenation of $L_1$ with $L_2$ is defined elmentwise as:

$$L_1L_2=\{s_1s_2\mid s_1\in L_1\land s_2\in L_2\}$$

(at least in every case that I have seen)

The concatenation of a language $L$ with the empty languae is thus:

$$L\emptyset = \{s_1s_2\mid s_1\in L\land s_2\in\emptyset\}$$

By definition, $x\notin\emptyset$ for all $x$, so $(s_1\in L)\land (s_2\in \emptyset) \equiv (s_1\in L)\land \bot \equiv \bot$. Hence $L\emptyset=\{s_1s_2\mid\bot\}=\emptyset$ for any language $L$.

It stands to reason that the identity element of $\mathcal{P}(\Sigma^*)$ would be $E=\{\varepsilon\}$, where $\varepsilon$ is the empty string. This follows from $LE=EL=L$ for all $L\in\mathcal{P}(\Sigma^*)$.

For a more "mathy" take, consider the following:

Claim: If $\mathcal{P}(\Sigma^*)$ with language concatenation is a monoid, then $E=\{\varepsilon\}$ is the identity element.

proof-sketch: By definition, if $M$ is a monoid, then $M$ contains a unique identity element $e$ satisfying $xe=ex=x$ for all $x\in M$. Observe that for all $s\in\Sigma$, $s\varepsilon=\varepsilon s=s$ where $\varepsilon$ is the empty string.

If $E=\{\varepsilon\}$ is the language containing the empty string, then for all $L\in\mathcal{P}(\Sigma^*)$...

$$LE=\{le\mid l\in L\land e\in E\}=\{l\varepsilon\mid l\in L\}=\{l\mid l\in L\}=L$$

...and...

$$EL=\{el\mid e\in E\land l\in L\}=\{\varepsilon l\mid l\in L\}=\{l\mid l\in L\}=L$$

Whence...

$$LE=EL=L$$

Thus, $E$ is the unique identity of the monoid $P(\Sigma^*)$. Q.E.D.

R. Burton
  • 4,942
  • Thanks. Could you find other references which also say that the concatenation of a language with the empty languae is empty? – Tim Jun 24 '20 at 02:09
  • @Tim https://cs.stackexchange.com/questions/50608/why-does-the-concatenation-of-the-empty-set-with-any-language-give-the-empty-set, https://cs.stackexchange.com/questions/42631/why-is-emptyset-l-l-emptyset-emptyset-correct, https://math.stackexchange.com/questions/472952/understanding-concatenating-the-empty-set-to-any-set, http://www.vssut.ac.in/lecture_notes/lecture1428551440.pdf, http://www.math.uaa.alaska.edu/~afkjm/csce351/handouts/regular-expressions.pdf – R. Burton Jun 24 '20 at 02:39
1

This is not a specific property of free monoids, it holds for any monoid. More precisely, take a monoid $M$ with identity $1$. Then ${\cal P}(M)$, the power set of $M$ is a monoid under the product defined, for each $S,T \in {\cal P}(M)$ by $$ ST = \{st \mid s \in S, t \in T\} $$ The identity of ${\cal P}(M)$ is the singleton $\{1\}$, since, according to the definition of the product $$ S\{1\} = \{st \mid s \in S, t \in \{1\} \} = \{s1 \mid s \in S\} = S $$ and $\{1\}S = S$ by a dual argument. The empty set is a zero of the monoid ${\cal P}(M)$. Indeed $$ S \emptyset = \{st \mid s \in S, t \in \emptyset\} = \emptyset $$ and $\emptyset S = \emptyset$ by a dual argument.

J.-E. Pin
  • 40,163
  • Thanks. Given a monoid M, does the product of two subsets S and T of M belong to P(M)? Is the product the same or different from Cartesian product of two sets? I guess yes, and think that the Cartesian product of two subsets of M doesn't belong to P(M) but to P(M*M). – Tim Jun 24 '20 at 09:45
  • Yes, $ST$ belongs to ${\cal P}(M)$ and $S \times T$ to ${\cal P}(M \times M)$. – J.-E. Pin Jun 24 '20 at 09:59