THE ELASTICITY OF PUISEUX MONOIDS

arXiv:1703.04207v1 [] 13 Mar 2017

FELIX GOTTI AND CHRISTOPHER O’NEILL
Abstract. Let M be an atomic monoid and let x be a non-unit element of M . The
elasticity of x, denoted by ρ(x), is the ratio of its largest factorization length to its shortest
factorization length, and it measures how far is x from having a unique factorization. The
elasticity ρ(M ) of M is the supremum of the elasticities of all non-unit elements of M .
The monoid M has accepted elasticity if ρ(M ) = ρ(m) for some m ∈ M . In this paper,
we study the elasticity of Puiseux monoids (i.e., additive submonoids of Q≥0 ). First, we
characterize the Puiseux monoids M having finite elasticity and find a formula for ρ(M ).
Then we classify the Puiseux monoids having accepted elasticity in terms of their sets
of atoms. When M is a primary Puiseux monoid, we describe the topology of the set
of elasticities of M , including a characterization of when M is a bounded factorization
monoid. Lastly, we give an example of a Puiseux monoid that is bifurcus (that is, every
nonzero element has a factorization of length at most 2).

1. Introduction
Non-unique factorizations of monoid elements m ∈ M is often studied using arithmetic
invariants that measure how far from unique the factorizations of m are. One of the
most popular factorization invariants is elasticity, computed as the ratio of the largest
factorization length to the shortest, which provides a concise (albeit coarse) measure of
the non-unique factorizations of m. The elasticity of M , computed as the supremum of
the elasticities obtained within M , provides a global measure of the non-uniqueness of
factorizations within M .
Puiseux monoids, which are additive submonoids of Q≥0 , are a recent addition to the
factorization theory literature. Introduced as a generalization of numerical monoids (additive submonoids of the natural numbers), Puiseux monoids are a natural setting in which
to study non-unique factorization theory. Indeed, questions in factorization theory often
involve realization of various pathological behaviors (see, for instance, [7] and [11]), and
Puiseux monoids offer a wide variety of such behaviors. Many known results for numerical
monoids, including concise characterizations of some invariants [8] and pathological behaviors of others [1], are due largely in part to the Archimedean property, i.e., that any two
nonzero elements have a common multiple. Puiseux monoids are also Archimedean, but
need not be finitely generated like numerical monoids, resulting in a wider array of possible
behaviors.
To date, the study of Puiseux monoids has centered around classifying their atomic structure [12, 13]. In this paper, we initiate the study of non-unique factorization invariants for
Date: March 14, 2017.
1

2

F. GOTTI AND C. O’NEILL

the family of Puiseux monoids, focusing specifically on the elasticity invariant. After giving
some preliminary definitions in Section 2, we characterize which Puiseux monoids have finite
elasticity (Theorem 3.2), a result which closely resembles the known formula for numerical
monoids [8]. We also specify which Puiseux monoids have accepted elasticity (Theorem 3.4).
In Sections 4 and 5, we focus our attention on primary Puiseux monoids (Definition 4.1),
characterizing when a primary Puiseux monoid M is a BF-monoid (Theorem 4.8) and describing the set of elasticities of M (Theorems 5.5 and 5.7). We conclude with an example
of a bifurcus Puiseux monoid in Section 6.
2. Background
In this section, we fix notation and establish the nomenclature we will use later. To
do this, we recall some basic definitions related to commutative monoids and their sets
of atoms. Reference material on commutative monoids can be found in Grillet [14]. In
addition, the monograph of Geroldinger and Halter-Koch [10] offers extensive background
information on atomic monoids and non-unique factorization theory.
Notation 2.1. The double-struck symbols N and N0 denote the sets of positive integers
and non-negative integers, respectively. If r ∈ Q>0 , then the unique a, b ∈ N such that
r = a/b and gcd(a, b) = 1 are denoted by n(r) and d(r), respectively.
The unadorned term monoid always refers to a commutative cancellative monoid, say
M , which is always written additively; in particular, “+” denotes the operation of M , while
0 denotes the identity element. We write M • for the set of nonzero elements of M . For
a, b ∈ M , we say that a divides b in M if there exists a0 ∈ M such that a + a0 = b. An
element dividing 0 in M is called a unit, and M is called reduced if its only unit is 0. Every
monoid in this paper is reduced.
Definition 2.2. An element a ∈ M • is irreducible or an atom if whenever a = b + c,
either b or c is a unit. We denote the set of atoms of M by A(M ), and call M atomic if
M = hA(M )i. A factorization of an element x ∈ M • is a formal sum
a1 + · · · + am
of atoms adding to x. We write Z(x) for the set of factorizations of x. If |Z(x)| < ∞ for
all x ∈ M • , we say M is an FF-monoid (finite factorization monoid ).
Definition 2.3. Given a monoid element x ∈ M , the length of a factorization z ∈ Z(x),
denoted |z|, is the number of formal summands in z. In addition,
L(x) = {|z| : z ∈ Z(x)}
is called length set of x. If M is atomic and |L(x)| < ∞ for every x ∈ M , we say that M is
a bounded factorization monoid or, simply, a BF-monoid. The quotient
sup L(x)
ρ(x) =
inf L(x)

THE ELASTICITY OF PUISEUX MONOIDS

3

is the elasticity of x. The set of elasticities of M is R(M ) = {ρ(x) | x ∈ M • } ⊆ [1, ∞],
while the elasticity of M is
ρ(M ) = sup R(M ).
The elasticity of M is accepted if there exists x ∈ M such that ρ(M ) = ρ(x). Moreover, M
is said to be fully elastic if R(M ) is an interval of rationals.
Definition 2.4. A Puiseux monoid is an additive submonoid M of Q≥0 . We say M is a
numerical monoid if it is finitely generated.
Remark 2.5. The definition of numerical monoid given above differs slightly from the
standard definition, which requires M to be a cofinite subset of N0 . However, there is
no risk of ambiguity here as every finitely generated Puiseux monoid is isomorphic to a
(standardly defined) numerical monoid.
Remark 2.6. Albeit a natural generalization of numerical monoids, Puiseux monoids need
not be atomic; see, for instance, [12, Example 3.5]. For more on the atomic structure of
Puiseux monoids, see [12] and [13].
3. Elasticity
In this section, we examine the elasticity ρ(M ) of an arbitrary Puiseux monoid M .
More specifically, we give a formula for the elasticity ρ(M ) in terms of the atoms of M
(Theorem 3.2), and determine when this elasticity is accepted (Theorem 3.4). The next
proposition is used in the proof of Theorem 3.2.
Proposition 3.1. Let M be a Puiseux monoid. If 0 is not a limit point of M , then M is
a BF-monoid.
Proof. The atomicity of M when 0 is not a limit point is precisely [12, Theorem 3.10]. So
it suffices to verify that every element of M has bounded length set. Suppose, by way of
contradiction, that M has an element x with |L(x)| = ∞. For any  > 0, there exists
n > x/ such that x = a1 + · · · + an for some a1 , . . . , an ∈ A(M ). Assuming a1 ≤ ai for
i = 1, . . . , n, we obtain
na1 ≤ a1 + · · · + an = x,
and, therefore, it follows that a1 ≤ x/n < . As such, 0 is a limit point of M , a contradiction.

Theorem 3.2. Let M be an atomic Puiseux monoid. If 0 is a limit point of M , then
ρ(M ) = ∞. Otherwise,
(3.1)

ρ(M ) =

sup A(M )
.
inf A(M )

4

F. GOTTI AND C. O’NEILL

Proof. First, suppose {an } is a sequence of atoms decreasing to 0 and, for every n ≥ 1, set
xn = n(an )n(a1 ). We can factor each xn as
xn = n(an )d(a1 )a1 = n(a1 )d(an )an ,
so inf L(xn ) ≤ n(an )d(a1 ) and sup L(xn ) ≥ n(a1 )d(an ). As a result,
ρ(xn ) =

n(a1 )d(an )
a1
sup L(xn )
≥
= ,
inf L(xn )
n(an )d(a1 )
an

which implies that the sequence {ρ(xn )} is unbounded. Thus, ρ(M ) = ∞.
Now, suppose 0 is not a limit point of M . Set A = sup A(M ) and a = inf A(M ). Let {bn }
and {cn } be sequences of atoms converging to a and A, respectively. Setting xn = n(bn )n(cn ),
we find that
sup L(xn )
n(cn )d(bn )
cn
≥
= .
ρ(M ) ≥ ρ(xn ) =
inf L(xn )
n(bn )d(cn )
bn
Taking the limit when n → ∞ yields ρ(M ) ≥ A/a. Therefore it only remains to show
that ρ(M ) ≤ A/a. Fix x ∈ M • and set ` = min L(x) and L = max L(x) (finite by
Proposition 3.1). If a1 + · · · + aL and a01 + · · · + a0` are factorizations in Z(x), it follows that
La ≤ L min {aj } ≤ a1 + · · · + aL = a01 + · · · + a0` ≤ ` max {a0i } ≤ `A.
1≤j≤L

1≤i≤`

This implies that ρ(x) = L/` ≤ A/a, so we obtain ρ(M ) ≤ A/a, as desired.



Remark 3.3. If A(M ) is finite, then M is a numerical monoid; in this case, Theorem 3.2
coincides with the elasticity formula given in [8, Theorem 2.1].
Recall that the elasticity of M is accepted if there exists x ∈ M with ρ(x) = ρ(M ).
Theorem 3.4. For any atomic Puiseux monoid M such that ρ(M ) < ∞, the elasticity of
M is accepted if and only if A(M ) has both a maximum and a minimum.
Proof. Let a = sup A(M ) and b = inf A(M ). By Theorem 3.2, we have ρ(M ) = a/b. For
the direct implication, suppose x ∈ M • satisfies ρ(x) = ρ(M ). Set L = max L(x) and
` = min L(x), and let a1 + · · · + aL and a01 + · · · + a0` be two factorizations in Z(x). Since
L/` = a/b by assumption, every inequality in the expression
Lb ≤ L min {aj } ≤ a1 + · · · + aL = a01 + · · · + a0` ≤ ` max {a0i } ≤ `a
1≤j≤L

1≤i≤`

a0j

is, indeed, an equality. Hence each ai = a and each
= b. As such, a, b ∈ A(M ).
Conversely, suppose that a, b ∈ A(M ). Setting x = n(a)n(b) yields
ρ(x) =
so ρ(M ) = ρ(x).

n(a)d(b)
a
sup L(x)
≥
= = ρ(M ),
inf L(x)
n(b)d(a)
b


Corollary 3.5 follows immediately from the proof of Theorem 3.4 and matches the analogous result for numerical semigroups [8].

5

THE ELASTICITY OF PUISEUX MONOIDS

Corollary 3.5. If the elasticity of M is both finite and accepted, then x ∈ M has elasticity
ρ(M ) if and only if x is an integer multiple of both min A(M ) and max A(M ).
4. Primary Puiseux monoids
In this section and the next, we focus our attention on primary Puiseux monoids. Let
us recall that M is a BF-monoid if it is atomic and L(x) is finite for all x ∈ M . Not every
atomic Puiseux monoid is a BF-monoid; see, for instance, Example 4.6. The main result in
this section is Theorem 4.8, which characterizes those primary Puiseux monoids that are
BF-monoids.
Definition 4.1. A primary Puiseux monoid is a monoid of the form
ap /p p ∈ P and ap ∈ N \ pN ⊂ Q≥0
for some set of primes P . Notice that if ap = 1 for each p ∈ P , we recover the Puiseux
monoids introduced in [13, Definition 5.1], formerly called primary Puiseux monoids.
Example 4.2. Let p1 , p2 , . . . be an increasing enumeration of the prime numbers, and
consider the Puiseux monoid


1 pn + 1
,
n≥2 .
M=
2 pn
Figure 1 displays the elasticities of m ∈ M for ρ(m) > 1. Since min A(M ) = 12 and
max A(M ) = 34 , the elasticity ρ(M ) = 83 is accepted by Theorem 3.4. Moreover, since every
atom of M is unstable (Definition 4.4), we will see in Theorem 5.7 that the set R(M ) is
dense in [1, 38 ].
3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

Figure 1. A plot depicting the elasticities of those elements m ∈ M with
ρ(m) > 1 from Example 4.2.

6

F. GOTTI AND C. O’NEILL

For a prime p and a natural n, let vp (n) denote the exponent of the maximal power of
p dividing n (define vp (0) = ∞). The p-adic valuation map on Q is the map defined by
vp (0) = ∞ and vp (r) = vp (n(r)) − vp (d(r)) for r 6= 0. The next elementary result, whose
proof follows immediately by taking each pi -valuation to both sides of (4.1), is frequently
used throughout the paper.
Lemma 4.3. Fix x, a1 , . . . an ∈ Z, and distinct primes p1 , . . . , pn . If
n
X
ai
,
(4.1)
x=
p
i
i=1
then pi | ai for each i.
Definition 4.4. Let M be a Puiseux monoid. We say a ∈ A(M ) is stable if the set
{x ∈ A(M ) | n(x) = n(a)}
is infinite, and unstable otherwise. The submonoid of M generated by the stable (resp.,
unstable) atoms is denoted by S(M ) (resp., U(M )) and is called the stable (resp., unstable) submonoid of M . The elements of S(M ) and U(M ) are called stable and unstable,
respectively. We call an element absolutely unstable if it has no nonzero stable divisors in
M . Notice that an element might be stable and unstable simultaneously.
Remark 4.5. Example 4.6 demonstrates how stable atoms affect factorization lengths.
Although Example 4.6 follows from results in Section 5, we include a thorough discussion
here because the techniques used therein appear throughout the next two sections.
Example 4.6. Let P be an infinite set of primes, and M = h1/p | p ∈ P i. For x ∈ M •, we
claim |L(x)| < ∞ if and only if |Z(x)| = 1. The key observation is that L(1) = P . Clearly
P ⊆ L(1) since 1 = p(1/p) for each p ∈ P . On the other hand, any factorization
1
1
a1 + · · · + an ∈ Z(1)
p1
pn
with an > 0 satisfies pn | an by Lemma 4.3, meaning a1 + · · · + an = an = pn ∈ P .
More generally, suppose x ∈ M has two distinct factorizations, say
1
1
1
1
x = a1 + · · · + am
= b1 + · · · + bm .
p1
pm
p1
pm
By reindexing appropriately, we can assume am < bm . Subtracting the two equations and
applying Lemma 4.3, we find that pm must divide bm − am . Therefore bm > pm , so
1
1
1
x = 1 + (bm − pm )
+ b1 + · · · + bm−1
.
pm
p1
pm−1
Since |L(1)| = ∞, it follows that |L(x)| = ∞.

THE ELASTICITY OF PUISEUX MONOIDS

7

Lemma 4.7. Let M be a Puiseux monoid.
(1) If s ∈ A(M ) is stable, then |L(n(s))| = ∞.
(2) If s ∈ M is a stable element with more than one factorization, then |L(s)| = ∞.
Proof. First, fix a stable atom s ∈ A(M ). There exists an infinite sequence of distinct
integers d1 , d2 , . . . such that n(s)/di ∈ A(M ) for each i ≥ 1. Writing
n(s) = d1

k
k
= d2 = · · · ,
d1
d2

we see that {di | i ≥ 1} ⊂ L(n(s)), so |L(n(s))| = ∞. This proves part (1).
Next, fix a stable element s ∈ M , and write M = han /pn | n ∈ Ni, where {an } is a
sequence of naturals and {pn } is an increasing sequence of primes such that pn - an for
every natural n. Suppose s has two distinct factorizations
(4.2)

z=

n
X
j=1

n

αj

X aj
aj
and z 0 =
βj ,
pj
pj
j=1

and assume that aj /pj is stable whenever αj > 0. By omitting atoms appearing in both
z and z 0 and replacing s with an appropriate divisor, it suffices to assume αj and βj are
never simultaneously nonzero. Equating each pj -adic valuation of both sums in (4.2), we
conclude that s ∈ N, at which point Lemma 4.3 and part (1) imply |L(s)| = ∞.

Theorem 4.8 proves that the phenomenon in Lemma 4.7 (i.e., stable atoms) is the only
obstruction to finite length sets in a primary Puiseux monoid.
Theorem 4.8. For a primary Puiseux monoid M , the following are equivalent:
(1) M is a FF-monoid;
(2) M is a BF-monoid;
(3) Every a ∈ A(M ) is unstable.
Proof. Clearly (1) implies (2), and (2) implies (3) follows from Lemma 4.7. Suppose every
atom of M is unstable. It suffices to show that each integer in M has only finitely many
factorizations. Fix x ∈ N ∩ M and a factorization
m
X
ai
αi ∈ Z(x),
pi
i=1
with ai /pi ∈ A(M ) and pi - ai . By Lemma 4.3, pi must divide αi for 1 ≤ i ≤ m, and
thus each ai ≤ x. Since M has no stable atoms, only finitely many atoms of M appear in
factorizations of x, so Z(x) is finite.

We conclude this section with several examples demonstrating that Theorem 4.8 does
not easily generalize to more general classes of Puiseux monoids.

8

F. GOTTI AND C. O’NEILL

Example 4.9. Let p1 , p2 , . . . be an enumeration of the odd prime numbers, and consider
the Puiseux monoid





pn /2 pn − pn /2
,
M=
n∈N .
pn
pn
It is not hard to verify that M is atomic and every generator given above is an atom.
Additionally, as a ≥ 1/3 for every a ∈ A(M ), it follows that M is a BF-monoid, but
1 ∈ M has infinitely many factorizations of length 2, so |Z(1)| = ∞. In particular, M is a
BF-monoid that fails to be an FF-monoid.
Example 4.10. Now take {pn } to be a strictly increasing sequence of primes such that
pn > (n + 1)2 for every natural n, and consider the Puiseux monoid


n n+1
,
n∈N .
M=
pn pn
One can check using elementary divisibility that the displayed generators are precisely the
atoms of M and, as a result, M is atomic. As pn > (n + 1)2 , there exist a, b ∈ N0 such that
an + b(n + 1) = pn . Therefore
an + b(n + 1)
a+b>
>n+1
n+1
implies |L(1)| = ∞. Hence, M is an unstable Puiseux monoid that is not a BF-monoid.
5. The set of elasticity of primary Puiseux monoids
Results in [8, Section 2] state that the set of elasticities of a numerical monoid S has only
one limit point, namely ρ(S). As the elasticity of a numerical monoid is accepted, R(S) is
closed, i.e., R(S) = R(S). In this section, we describe the topology of R(M ) for all primary
Puiseux monoids M . In contrast to numerical monoids, many primary Puiseux monoids M
satisfy that R(M ) = [1, ρ(M )]. We start the section gathering a few technical results, and
then we use them to describe R(M ) in Theorems 5.5 and 5.7.
Example 5.1. Let p1 , p2 , . . . be an increasing enumeration of the prime numbers, and let
M1 = hn/pn | n ∈ Ni. Figure 2 shows a plot depicting the elasticities of selected elements
of M1 . The large red dots denote elasticities of integer elements n ∈ M1 , and the small blue
dots trailing each red dot are for selected elements of the form n +  for  ∈ M1 uniquely
factorable. Proposition 5.3 ensures every elasticity achieved in M1 occurs in this way.
Example 5.2. Let p1 , p2 , . . . be an increasing enumeration of the prime numbers, and
consider the Puiseux monoid
 

 
 

30 30
n
30
1 2
12
M2 =
n ≤ 12 +
n > 12 =
, ,...,
+
, ,... .
pn
pn
2 3
37
41 43
A plot depicting the elasticities of selected elements of M2 is given in Figure 2. Since
|L(30)| = ∞, every subsequent integer has infinite elasticity. As such, every finite elasticity
achieved in M2 occurs as in the plot.

9

THE ELASTICITY OF PUISEUX MONOIDS

3
2.5
2
1.5
1
0

10

20

30

40

50

0

10

20

30

40

50

3
2.5
2
1.5
1

Figure 2. A plot depicting the elasticities of elements of M1 and M2 from
Examples 5.1 and 5.2, respectively. In each, the large red dots denote elasticities of integer elements.
Proposition 5.3 illustrates the main property of primary Puiseux monoids that we use to
characterize their sets of elasticities (cf. [5, Lemma 2.1]).
Proposition 5.3. Let M be a primary Puiseux monoid with infinitely many atoms. For
each x ∈ M , there exists x0 ∈ M with L(x0 ) = L(x) + 1.
Proof. Fix a factorization a1 + · · · + ar ∈ Z(x). Since M has infinitely many atoms, some
atom a = q/p ∈ A(M ) does not appear among the ai . Let x0 = x+a, and fix a factorization
a01 + · · · + a0s ∈ Z(x0 ). Applying the p-adic valuation map to a1 + · · · + ar + a = a01 + · · · + a0s ,
we obtain that d(a0i ) = p for some index i. In particular, every factorization of x0 must have
a as a formal summand, so L(x0 ) = L(x) + 1.

Proposition 5.4. Fix a primary Puiseux monoid M and an element x ∈ M .
(1) There is at most one expression of the form x = s + u where s is stable and uniquely
factorable, and u is unstable.
(2) If L(x) is finite, then there exist unique s ∈ S(M ) and u ∈ U(M ) such that x = s+u.
Moreover, s is uniquely factorable and u is absolutely unstable.

10

F. GOTTI AND C. O’NEILL

Proof. First, suppose by contradiction that x = s + u = s0 + u0 , where u, u0 ∈ U(M ) and
s, s0 ∈ S(M ) are distinct elements with unique factorizations
n
X
i=1

αi

n
X
ai
ai
∈ Z(s) and
αi0 ∈ Z(s0 ).
pi
pi
i=1

0

We can assume s and s have no common divisors in M . Since u and u0 can be factored
using only unstable atoms, by applying each pj -adic valuation to both expressions for x, we
see that s ∈ N, at which point Lemmas 4.3 and 4.7 imply |L(s)| = ∞, a contradiction.
Next, fix s ∈ S(M ) and u ∈ U(M ) such that x = s + u has L(x) finite. Because L(s) is
also finite, Lemma 4.7 forces s to be uniquely factorable. Then by the above argument, the
given decomposition of x must be unique, which in turn immediately implies that u has to
be absolutely unstable.

Let us begin the study of R(M ) for those primary Puiseux monoids M having finitely
many unstable atoms.
Theorem 5.5. Fix a non-finitely generated primary Puiseux monoid M with finitely many
unstable atoms. If M contains an absolutely unstable element u with |L(u)| > 1, then 1 is
the only limit point of R(M ). Otherwise, R(M ) = {1, ∞}.
Proof. First, we claim that for every k ∈ N there exists a uniquely factorable stable element
sk with L(sk ) = {k}. Since S(M ) is not finitely generated, there is an infinite sequence
{an } of stable atoms with d(an ) < d(an+1 ) for each natural n. It is not hard to check that
mai is uniquely factorable for every m < d(ai ). Hence choosing n large enough such that
k < d(an ), one finds that sk = kan satisfies L(sk ) = {k}, which proves the claim.
Now, given an absolutely unstable element u ∈ M with |L(u)| > 1, consider the elements
x = sk + u. Since U(M ) is finitely generated, it follows that |L(u)| < ∞. Take ` = min L(u)
and L = max L(u). Since sk is uniquely factorable, Proposition 5.4 guarantees that the
given decomposition of x in S(M ) + U(M ) is unique, and as such, min L(x) = ` + k and
max L(x) = L + k. In particular,


L+k
k ∈ N ⊆ R(M ).
`+k
On the other hand, since U(M ) is finitely generated, all but finitely many unstable elements
are divisible by stable elements; let them be U = {u1 , . . . , un }. Lemma 4.7 and Proposition 5.4 ensure that the only elements having finite elasticity are of the form ui + s for
some factorial stable element s. This, along with the fact that L(n(s)) is infinite for each
s ∈ S(M ), yields


max L(ui ) + k
R(M ) = {1, ∞} ∪
1 ≤ i ≤ n and k ∈ N .
min L(ui ) + k
At this point, both claims immediately follow.



THE ELASTICITY OF PUISEUX MONOIDS

11

Theorem 5.7 implies that, aside from numerical monoids and the primary Puiseux monoids
covered by Theorem 5.5, the set R(M ) of elasticities of a primary Puiseux monoid M is
dense in [1, ρ(M )]. Let us collect one last technical result central to the proof of Theorem 5.7.
Lemma 5.6. Let {an } and {bn } be two sequences in N such that {an /bn } converges to
` ∈ R>1 ∪ {∞}, and an /bn < ` for each natural n. Then the set


an + k
n, k ∈ N
S=
bn + k
is dense in [1, `].
Proof. Since ` > 1, we can assume without loss of generality that an > bn for n ∈ N.
Replacing {an /bn } by one of its subsequences if necessary, we can assume that either ` = ∞
or lim bn = ∞. Then setting cn = an − bn for each natural n, one finds that lim cn = ∞.
Suppose first that ` = ∞. In this case, lim cn /bn = ∞. Since
an + k
cn
=1+
,
bn + k
bn + k
it suffices to show that the set


bn
k
n, k ∈ N
T =
+
cn cn
is dense in R≥0 . Indeed, we can find an element of T within  > 0 of any q ∈ R>0 by
first choosing n large enough that bn /cn < q and 1/cn < , and then choosing k so that
bn /cn + k/cn is within  of q.
Now suppose that ` is finite. Since lim cn /bn = ` − 1, it suffices to show the set T defined
1
above is dense in the ray [ `−1
, ∞). This amounts to showing that

X = xn + k/cn n ∈ N
is dense in R≥0 , where xn = bn /cn − (` − 1)−1 . Since lim xn = 0, we proceed as in the
previous paragraph to check that X is dense in R≥0 . This completes the proof.

Theorem 5.7. For a primary Puiseux monoid M such that U(M ) is not finitely generated,
the following statements hold.
(1) If M = U(M ), then R(M ) is dense in [1, ρ(M )].
(2) If M ) U(M ), then R(M ) is dense in [1, ρ(U(M ))] ∪ {∞}.
Proof. We begin by showing that if S(M ) 6= {0}, then
(5.1)

R(M ) = R(U(M )) ∪ {∞}.

By assumption, Theorem 4.8 implies ∞ ∈ R(M ). Also, any u ∈ U(M ) with LM (u) finite
is absolutely unstable by Proposition 5.4, so ρU (M ) (u) = ρM (u) ∈ R(M ). As a consequence, we have that R(U(M )) ∪ {∞} ⊆ R(M ). Conversely, fix x ∈ M with LM (x)

12

F. GOTTI AND C. O’NEILL

finite. Proposition 5.4 states there is a unique expression x = s + u with s ∈ S(M ) and
u ∈ U(M ), and also guarantees s is uniquely factorable and u is absolutely unstable. Writing LM (s) = {`}, one obtains that LM (x) = L(u) + `. Since U(M ) is not finitely generated,
Proposition 5.3 implies some unstable u0 ∈ U(M ) satisfies LU (M ) (u0 ) = LM (x). In particular,
ρM (x) = ρU (M ) (u0 ) ∈ R(U(M )). Thus, (5.1) holds.
It suffices to assume M = U(M ). We claim there exists a sequence {rn } ⊆ M such that
the sequence {ρ(rn )} converges to ρ(M ) and ρ(rn ) < ρ(M ) for every natural n. Indeed,
Theorem 4.8 ensures this happens if ρ(M ) = ∞. So assume that ρ(M ) < ∞. The existence
of such a sequence {rn } is also guaranteed if the elasticity of M is not accepted. Finally,
suppose the elasticity of M is accepted and set a = min A(M ) and A = max A(M ). Take
rn = nn(a)n(A) + a0 , where a0 ∈ A(M )\{a, A}. Because for any  > 0,
nd(a)n(A) + 1
A
max L(rn )
≥
> −
ρ(rn ) =
min L(rn )
nd(A)n(a) + 1
a
for all large enough n, the sequence {ρ(rn )} converges to ρ(M ). Also, by Corollary 3.5,
ρ(rn ) < ρ(M ) for every n. Now, Proposition 5.3 ensures that

 

n(ρ(rn )) + k
max L(rn ) + cn k
n, k ∈ N =
n, k ∈ N ⊂ R(M ),
d(ρ(rn )) + k
min L(rn ) + cn k
where cn = max L(rn )n(ρ(rn ))−1 . Thus, the proof follows by Lemma 5.6.



Example 5.8. A primary Puiseux monoid M satisfying the conditions of Theorem 5.7 can
be fully elastic, but in general need not be. For example, let p1 , p2 , . . . be an increasing
enumeration of all prime numbers except 3, and set M = hn/pn | n ≥ 1i. Notice that R(M )
contains no odd integers larger than 1. Indeed, each integer n ≥ 2 has max factorization
length M(n) = pn and min factorization length m(n) = 2n, so by the proof of Theorem 5.7,


pn + k
R(M ) =
k≥0 .
2n + k
In particular, n(r) − d(r) is odd for any r ∈ R(M ) aside from r = 1.
6. A bifurcus Puiseux monoid
In this section we introduce a Puiseux monoid that is bifurcus (Definition 6.1), thus
demonstrating the broad range of behaviors exhibited by the sets of elasticities of Puiseux
monoids.
Definition 6.1. An atomic monoid M is bifurcus if 2 ∈ L(x) for every x ∈ M \A(M ).
Suppose {pj,n | j, n ≥ 1} is a collection of primes satisfying pj,n ≥ 13 and pj,n ≥ 2j for
all j, n ≥ 1. We construct a bifurcus monoid M iteratively, starting with M0 = h 21 , 31 i.
Enumerate the reducibles a1,1 , a1,2 , . . . ∈ M0 with no length 2 factorization, and let


a1,n
1 a1,n
1
M1 = M0 +
−
,
+
n≥1 .
2
p1,n 2
p1,n

THE ELASTICITY OF PUISEUX MONOIDS

13

Construct Mj from Mj−1 in the same manner as above by enumerating the reducible elements aj,1 , aj,2 , . . . ∈ Mj−1 with no length 2 factorization. Finally, let
S
M = j≥0 Mj .
Theorem 6.2. The monoid M constructed above has the following properties.
(1) min M • =S1/3.
(2) A(M ) = j≥0 A(Mj ).
(3) Every element of M has a length 2 factorization.
In particular, M is atomic, bifurcus, and a BF-monoid.
Proof. For each generator u = 12 aj,n ± p−1
j,n defined above, let p(u) = pj,n . The smallest
element of M0 with no length 2 factorization is 23 + 12 , which means every generator in
A(M1 )\M0 is strictly greater than 21 since each p1,n ≥ 13. Proceeding inductively, if the
smallest generator introduced in Mj−1 is at least 21 , the smallest element of Mj with no
length 2 factorization must be at least 23 + 12 , so every generator of Mj \ Mj−1 is also at
least 12 . As such, min M • = 13 .
Suppose by contradiction that u ∈ A(Mj )\Mj−1 is reducible in Mj 0 for some j 0 > j. Pick
a factorization z = α1 u1 + · · · + αm um ∈ Z(u) in Mj 0 with maximal length. Notice that
no two distinct atoms ui and ui0 in z can satisfy p(ui ) = p(ui0 ) since ui + ui0 would have a
length 3 factorization. Hence each atom ui in z is uniquely determined by p(ui ).
Comparing p(u)-valuations above, we see that p(u) must appear in the denominator of
some atom (which we may assume is u1 ) in z. The key observation is that if p(u1 ) = pj+1,n
for some n, then aj+1,n ≥ u + 23 , so
−1
2
2u1 = aj+1,n ± 2p−1
j+1,n ≥ u + 3 ± 2pj+1,n > u.
k−j
Inductively, this implies that if u1 = 21 ak,n ± p−1
u1 > u.
k,n for some k, n ≥ 1, then 2
Now, if some other atom in z has p(u1 ) in its denominator, we can again relabel it as
u1 , and 2k−j u1 > u will still be satisfied for p(u1 ) = pk,n with k strictly larger than before.
Since only finitely many atoms appear in the factorization for u, this process eventually
terminates in a choice for u1 such that p(u1 ) = pk,n does not appear in the denominator of
any ui for i ≥ 2 and 2k−j u1 > u.
At this point, comparing the p(u1 )-valuation of u and its factorization, we can conclude
p(u1 ) divides α1 . As such,

u ≥ α1 u1 ≥ p(u1 )u1 > 2k u1 ≥ u,
which is a contradiction.
For the third claim, each element a ∈ M first appears in some Mj . If a has a factorization
of length 2, then we are done. Otherwise a has a length 2 factorization in each subsequent
monoid by part (2).
We now conclude that M is atomic and a BF-monoid by part (1) and Theorem 3.1, and
the remaining claim follows from part (3).


14

F. GOTTI AND C. O’NEILL

Acknowledgments
While working on this paper, the first author was supported by the UC Berkeley Chancellor Fellowship.
References
[1] J. Amos, S. T. Chapman, N. Hine, and J. Paixao: Sets of lengths do not characterize numerical
monoids, Integers 7 (2007), A50.
[2] D. D. Anderson, D. F. Anderson, S. T. Chapman, and W. W. Smith: Rational elasticity of factorizations in Krull domains, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 117 (1993), 37–43.
[3] D. F. Anderson: Elasticity of factorizations in integral domains: A survey, in Factorization in integral
domains (Iowa City, IA, 1996), Marcel Dekker, New York, 1997, pp. 1–29.
[4] D. F. Anderson and S. T. Chapman: On the elasticities of Krull domains with finite cyclic divisor
class group, Comm. Algebra 28 (2000), 2543–2553.
[5] P. Baginski, S. T. Chapman, C. Crutchfield, K. Kennedy, and M. Wright: Elastic properties and prime
elements, Results. Math. 49 (2006), 187–200.
[6] T. Barron, C. O’Neill, and R. Pelayo: On the set of elasticities in numerical monoids, to appear,
Semigroup Forum. [arXiv:1409.3425]
[7] S. T. Chapman, F. Gotti, and R. Pelayo: On delta sets and their realizable subsets in Krull monoids
with cyclic class groups, Colloq. Math. 137 (2014), 137–146.
[8] S. T. Chapman, M. T. Holden, and T. A. Moore: Full Elasticity in Atomic Monoids and Integral
Domains, Rocky Mountain J. Math. 36 (2006), 1437–1455.
[9] P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez and J. C. Rosales: Numerical Semigroups, Developments in Mathematics, 20,
Springer-Verlag, New York, 2009.
[10] A. Geroldinger and F. Halter-Koch: Non-Unique Factorizations: Algebraic, Combinatorial and Analytic Theory, Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 278, Chapman & Hall/CRC, Boca Raton, 2006.
[11] A. Geroldinger and W. Schmid: A realization theorem for sets of distances, to appear, Journal of
Algebra. [arXiv:1608.06407]
[12] F. Gotti: On the atomic structure of Puiseux monoids, Journal of Algebra and Its Applications 16
(2017), 20pp. [arXiv:1607.01731]
[13] F. Gotti and M. Gotti: Atomicity and boundedness of monotone Puiseux monoids, submitted to
Semigroup Forum. [arXiv:1608.04044]
[14] P. A. Grillet: Commutative Semigroups, Advances in Mathematics, vol. 2, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Boston, 2001.
[15] R. J. Valenza: Elasticity of factorization in number fields, J. Number Theory 36 (1990), 212–218.
Mathematics Department, UC Berkeley, Berkeley, CA 94720
E-mail address: felixgotti@berkeley.edu
Mathematics Department, UC Davis, Davis, CA 95616
E-mail address: coneill@math.ucdavis.edu

