arXiv:1604.05408v2 [math.RA] 24 Sep 2017

FINITENESS PROPERTIES OF DIRECT PRODUCTS OF
ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES
PETER MAYR AND NIK RUSKUC
Abstract. We consider the preservation of properties of being finitely generated, being finitely presented and being residually finite under direct products
in the context of different types of algebraic structures. The structures considered include Mal’cev algebras (including groups, rings and other classical algebras, as well as loops), idempotent algebras (including lattices), semigroups,
and algebras in congruence modular varieties. We aim to identify as broad
classes as possible in which the ‘expected’ preservation results (A × B satisfies
property P if and only if A and B satisfy P) hold, and to exhibit ways in
which they may fail outside those classes.

1. Introduction: direct products in algebra
The direct product is arguably the most elementary and ubiquitous construction in algebra. Because of its uncomplicated relationship with the constituent
factors, the ‘natural’ statements of the form
A × B satisfies property P if and only if A and B both satisfy P
abound, and are often taken as read. For example, in the class of groups, the
above statement is true for P being any of the following: finitely generated,
finitely presented, residually finite, having decidable word problem, locally finite, torsion, solvable, nilpotent, . . . Somewhat curiously, the statement does not
hold for the property of being hopfian [6]. In fact, these statements hold in the
wider class of monoids (excluding of course the group-specific properties of being
nilpotent or solvable). However, if one moves on to the class of semigroups, the
landscape begins to change and become more interesting. Specifically, the direct
product S × T of two infinite semigroups is:
• finitely generated if and only if S and T are finitely generated and have
no indecomposable elements [20, Theorem 2.1];
Date: September 26, 2017.
2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary: 08B25; Secondary: 08A05, 08B05,
20N05, 06B25.
Key words and phrases. finitely generated, finitely presented, residual finite.
The first author was supported by the Austrian Science Fund (FWF): P24285 and the
National Science Foundation under Grant No. DMS 1500254.
1

2

PETER MAYR AND NIK RUSKUC

• finitely presented if and only if both S and T are finitely presented, have
no indecomposable elements, and satisfy an additional condition called
stability [20, Theorem 3.5];
• residually finite if and only if both S and T are residually finite, but for
apparently non-trivial reasons [12, Theorem 1].
To add further interest, it remains an open question whether it is possible to algorithmically determine if the direct product of two finitely presented semigroups
(given by their finite presentations) is finitely presented. By way of contrast,
the question where one factor is known to be finite is decidable (while still nontrivial), see [1, Theorem 1.2].
The purpose of this article is to raise this problematic to the level of general
algebra, and initiate a comparative study across different classes of algebras. We
will focus on three well known properties of being
• finitely generated,
• finitely presented, and
• residually finite,
and ask under which conditions does the direct product of two algebras A and
B from a certain class of algebras C have one of these properties. The classes C
we wish to cover are many, and we will resort to the language and methodology
of universal algebra to enable us to state results for several classes at once. Here
is the list of classes considered here:
• groups;
• other ‘classical’ structures: rings, (associative and non-associative) algebras, modules;
• group-like, non-associative algebras: loops and quasigroups;
• Mal’cev algebras (encompassing all of the above);
• semigroups and monoids;
• lattices;
• idempotent algebras (including lattices);
• algebras in congruence modular varieties (including Mal’cev algebras and
lattices).
The main general preservation results we prove concern finite generation in congruence permutable or idempotent varieties (Theorems 2.2 and 2.5), and residual
finiteness in congruence modular varieties (Theorem 4.2). Contrasting these are
some rather surprising negative results, such as:
• There exist expansions of groups (and expansions of lattices) A, B that
are finitely generated without A×B being finitely generated (Remarks 2.3
and 2.7).
• There exist algebras A, B with B not finitely presented such that A × B
is finitely presented (Example 3.1).

FINITENESS PROPERTIES OF DIRECT PRODUCTS OF ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES

3

• Direct products of two infinite loops (or two infinite lattices) are never
finitely presented (Theorems 3.8 and 3.10).
Due to the great number of different settings that are considered here, we will
not attempt a systematic definition of all the objects, concepts and properties.
Instead, we will implicitly rely on the reader’s prior, if not explicit or systematic,
familiarity with many of the elementary notions used, and will confine ourselves
to giving an outline of the basic definitions and facts before each individual result
necessary to understand its statement and proof. For a more systematic introduction to universal algebra we refer the reader to [5, 19], [15] for classical algebraic
structures, [14] for semigroups and monoids, [4] for loops and quasigroups, [10]
for lattices.
Throughout the paper we will denote algebras (i.e. sets endowed by certain
operations) by boldface capital letters A, B, C,. . . ; the underlying sets of elements will be denoted by the corresponding plain letters A, B, C,. . . . A type of
algebras is a set F of function symbols with a non-negative integer (the arity)
associated to each f ∈ F . An algebra A of type F is a pair hA, {f A : f ∈ F }i
where f A is an operation on A whose arity equals the arity of the symbol f .
We define terms of type F with variables x1 , x2 , . . . and their length inductively: every variable x1 , x2 , . . . is a term of length 1. For any k-ary f ∈ F and
terms s1 , . . . , sk we have that f (s1 , . . . , sk ) is a term of length 1 + |s1| + · · · + |sk |.
For a term t and an algebra A of type F let tA denote its induced term operation
on A. If there is no danger of confusion, we simply write t instead of tA .
For two algebras A, B of the same type F , their direct product C = A × B
has the carrier set C = A × B and componentwise operations
f A×B ((a1 , b1 ), . . . , (ak , bk )) = (f A (a1 , . . . , ak ), f B (b1 , . . . , bk )),
where f ∈ F is a k-ary operation symbol, a1 , . . . , ak ∈ A and b1 , . . . , 
bk 
∈ B.
a
Occasionally we will resort to the vertical notation for pairs, writing
for
b
(a, b). Associated with A × B are the natural projections πA : A × B → A,
(a, b) 7→ a and πB : A × B :→ B, (a, b) 7→ b, which are epimorphisms. In
particular, A and B are homomorphic images of A × B. In addition, often, but
not always, A and B naturally embed into A × B; this is certainly the case
with structures with a neutral element (such as groups, monoid, rings, etc.) and
idempotent algebras.
We denote varieties (i.e., classes of algebras of the same type that are defined
by identities) by calligraphic letters V, G,. . . For example, the variety of groups
G consists of all algebras of type F = {·,−1 , 1} with arities 2, 1, 0 defined by the
identities
(x · y) · z = x · (y · z), x · 1 = x, x · x−1 = 1.

4

PETER MAYR AND NIK RUSKUC

For an algebra A we denote the set of all congruences on A by Con(A), the
trivial congruence (equality) by 0A and the total congruence by 1A . The congruence on A generated by a set R ⊆ A × A is denoted by CgA (R).
A variety V is congruence permutable or Mal’cev if for every algebra A in V
all congruences permute, i.e.,
∀α, β ∈ Con(A) : α ◦ β = β ◦ α.
Equivalently V is congruence permutable if and only if it has a ternary term m
such that the identities
m(x, y, y) = x, m(y, y, x) = x
hold in V. Mal’cev varieties contain in particular all varieties that have the operations of a group (multiplication, inversion, identity) or quasigroup (multiplication,
left division, right division).
A variety V is congruence modular if every algebra in V has a modular congruence lattice. Congruence modular varieties contain Mal’cev varieties and all
varieties with lattice operations.
Idempotent algebras are another general class that will play a prominent role
throughout. We say that an algebra A of type F is idempotent if
f A (x, x, . . . , x) = x
for all f ∈ F and all x ∈ A. Note that this implies that the above equality in
fact holds for all the terms over F . One distinguished example of idempotent
algebras is provided by lattices, considered as algebras of type (∧, ∨).
2. Finite generation
In this section we ask under which conditions is the direct product A×B of two
algebras finitely generated. We immediately note that A and B are homomorphic
images of A × B, and so we have:
Observation 2.1. If A × B is finitely generated, then so are both A and B.
So the only question to consider is which conditions ensure that A and B
finitely generated implies that A × B is finitely generated. The statement certainly holds for groups, and it actually turns out that this can be generalised to
Mal’cev varieties.
Theorem 2.2. Let V be a Mal’cev variety of type F , and let A, B ∈ V. Suppose
that there exist a0 ∈ A and b0 ∈ B such that the sets {f A(a0 , . . . , a0 ) : f ∈ F }
and {f B (b0 , . . . , b0 ) : f ∈ F } are finite. Then A × B is finitely generated if and
only if both A and B are finitely generated.
Proof. This result was known to A. Geddes (unpublished). Only the converse
direction needs to be proved. Let A, B be respectively generated by finite sets
X, Y , and let
X ′ = X ∪ {f A (a0 , . . . , a0 ) : f ∈ F }, Y ′ = Y ∪ {f B (b0 , . . . , b0 ) : f ∈ F },

FINITENESS PROPERTIES OF DIRECT PRODUCTS OF ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES

5

which are finite sets by the assumptions in the theorem. We claim that A × B is
generated by the finite set
Z = (X ′ × {b0 }) ∪ ({a0 } × Y ′ ) ∪ {(a0 , b0 )}.
First we prove
(2.1)

A × {b0 } ⊆ hZi.

Let a ∈ A be arbitrary. Since A is generated by X, supposing X = {x1 , . . . , xm },
we have an m-ary term s over F such that sA (x1 , . . . , xm ) = a. Now we can
use induction on the length of s. If s is a variable, then a ∈ X and (a, b0 ) ∈ Z
by definition. So assume that s = f (t1 , . . . , tk ) for some k-ary f ∈ F and terms
t1 , . . . , tk . Let ai = tA
i (x1 , . . . , xm ) for 1 ≤ i ≤ k. By the induction hypothesis we
have (a1 , b0 ), . . . , (ak , b0 ) ∈ hZi. From this and the definition of Z it follows that
the pairs
 A
 
  
f (a1 , . . . , ak )
a0
a
, B
, 0
f B (b0 , . . . , b0 )
f (b0 , . . . , b0 )
b0
all belong to hZi (in fact, the second and third belong to Z). By applying the
Mal’cev term m to the three pairs above, we obtain (f A (a1 , . . . , ak ), b0 ) ∈ hZi
which proves (2.1).
It follows similarly that
{a0 } × B ⊆ hZi.
Now for an arbitrary (a, b) ∈ A × B we have that
     
a
a
a
, 0 , 0
b0
b0
b
all belong to hZi. Applying the Mal’cev term m once more yields (a, b) ∈ hZi. 
Remark 2.3. The extra assumption that the sets {f A (a0 , . . . , a0 ) : f ∈ F }
and {f B (b0 , . . . , b0 ) : f ∈ F } be finite is essential. Consider for example the
algebra A of type (+, −, ca (a ∈ A)), where hA, +, −i is an abelian group that
is not finitely generated, and ca is a constant symbol representing the element
a of A. Then, clearly, A is finitely generated (by the empty set, say), and
we claim that the direct square A × A is not finitely generated. Suppose that
A × A is generated by a finite set Z. This means that considered just as an
abelian group (i.e. without the constants) it would be generated by the set
Z1 = Z ∪ {(a, a) : a ∈ A}. It is straightforward to show that the subgroup
generated by Z1 to {(a, b) ∈ A × A : a − b ∈ A′ }, where A′ is the subgroup of
A generated by the set {x − y : (x, y) ∈ Z}. Since Z is finite and hA, +, −i is
not finitely generated it follows that A′ 6= A, and hence Z does not generate the
entire A × A, a contradiction.
The extra assumption is sufficiently weak for Theorem 2.2 to hold in any Malcev
varieties with finitely many basic operations, or those in which every member
contains an idempotent. In particular:

6

PETER MAYR AND NIK RUSKUC

Corollary 2.4. Let V be any of the following classes: groups, rings, modules
over a ring, Lie algebras, loops, or quasigroups, and let A, B ∈ V. Then A × B
is finitely generated if and only if both A and B are finitely generated.
Another large class for which the if and only if result holds is provided by
idempotent algebras. In fact we will prove a slightly more general result. Note
that the idempotency condition can be interpreted as the requirement for the
unary clone of the algebra to consist only of the identity mapping. Recall that
the k-ary clone Clok (A) is obtained by taking the set of all k-ary terms over the
type of A, and interpreting them as k-ary functions Ak → A; for details see [19].
Theorem 2.5. Let A, B be algebras of the same type. Assume that all functions
in Clo1 (A) and Clo1 (B) are surjective, and that, moreover, one of Clo1 (A) or
Clo1 (B) is finite (and hence a group of bijections). Then A × B is finitely generated if and only if both A and B are finitely generated. In particular, the direct
product of two idempotent algebras is finitely generated if and only if both algebras
are finitely generated.
Proof. Only the converse direction needs to be proved. Let X = {x1 , . . . , xm }
and Y = {y1 , . . . , yn } be finite generating sets for A and B respectively. Without
loss of generality assume that Clo1 (A) is a finite group, and that X is closed
under its action. We will prove that Z = X × Y is a generating set for A × B.
Let a ∈ A, b ∈ B be arbitrary. Since X generates A, there exists an m-ary term
p such that
a = pA (x1 , . . . , xm ).
Denote by p1 the unary term p(x, . . . , x). By assumption the unary function
′
pB
1 (x) is surjective, and so there exists b ∈ B such that
′
pB
1 (b ) = b.

Since Y generates B there exists an n-ary term q such that
b′ = q B (y1 , . . . , yn ).
Let q1 be the unary term q(x, . . . , x), and let
x′i = (q1A )−1 (xi ) ∈ X (i = 1, . . . , m).
Now, for each i = 1, . . . , m we have
 ′
 ′
xi
xi
,...,
∈ Z,
y1
yn
from which it follows that
 ′
 ′

  
xi
xi
q1A (x′i )
xi
A×B
q
(
,...,
)= B
=
y1
yn
b′
q (y1 , . . . , yn )

FINITENESS PROPERTIES OF DIRECT PRODUCTS OF ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES

7

is in hZi. Now applying p to
 
 
x1
x
, . . . , m′ ∈ hZi
′
b
b
we obtain
p

A×B

 A
  
 
 
p (x1 , . . . , xm )
a
xm
x1
)=
=
∈ hZi
( ′ ,...,
′
pB
(b
)
b
b′
b
1

as required.



Corollary 2.6. The direct product A × B of two lattices is finitely generated if
and only if A and B are finitely generated.
Remark 2.7. The above corollary does not extend to arbitrary expansions of
lattices (algebras with near-unanimity term or algebras in congruence distributive
varieties) in general. Indeed, the algebra hN, max, min, si, where s : x 7→ x + 1
is the successor function, is clearly generated by 1. We claim that its square
is not finitely generated. Suppose otherwise, and let Z be a finite generating
set. Noting that if (x, y) = m((x1 , y1 ), (x2 , y2)), where m is either of max or
min, we have |x − y| ≤ max(|x1 − y1 |, |x2 − y2 |), while if (x, y) = s(x1 , y1) then
|x − y| = |x1 − y1 |, it follows that hZi is contained in {(x, y) : |x − y| ≤ M},
where M = max{|z − u| : (z, u) ∈ Z}, which is clearly not the entire N × N, a
contradiction. This example also shows that Theorem 2.2 does not generalize to
congruence modular varieties. However, Theorem 2.5 does apply to lattices with
involutions.
Remark 2.8. The assumption that at least one of the two clones is finite in
Theorem 2.5 is necessary, even if both consist entirely of bijections: for instance,
Z × Z is not finitely generated when considered as a Z-set. Likewise, finiteness of
unary clones is not sufficient for finite generation: Consider the free semigroup
S in the variety defined by x2 = 0 on 3 generators. It is well known that S is
infinite; see [17, Chapter 2]. Then S × S is not finitely generated by [20, Theorem
2.1], even though Clo1 (S) contains only two mappings, namely the identity and
the constant 0-mapping.
3. Finite presentability
To be finitely presented means to be isomorphic to a quotient of a finitely
generated free algebra by a finitely generated congruence. Compared with finite
generation and residual finiteness, finite presentability presents a subtle issue: to
be finitely presented is not an intrinsic property of the algebra, but rather it also
makes reference to the class within which the free algebras are taken (typically
a variety). For instance, a finitely generated free group is (obviously) finitely
presented as a group, is also finitely presented as a monoid, but is not finitely
presented as a magma (groupoid, a set with an arbitrary binary operation). For
a variety V of type F we will denote by FV (X) the free algebra over X in V. It

8

PETER MAYR AND NIK RUSKUC

consists of all terms of type F over variables X modulo the identities that hold
in V.
3.1. From products to factors
Unlike for finite generation, the fact that a direct product is finitely presented
does not always imply that the factors are finitely presented as demonstrated by
the following example the main idea of which is due to Keith Kearnes and Ágnes
Szendrei.
Example 3.1. Let G be the free group on two generators x, y. Then G is a
semidirect product of A = hyi and a normal subgroup B = hxa : a ∈ Ai.
We let G act on itself by multiplication on the right to obtain a regular G-set.
Since as a group G is generated by x and y, this regular G-set is term-equivalent
to the algebra C = hG, fx , gx , fy , gy i where for z ∈ G we have
fx (z) = zx, gx (z) = zx−1 , fy (z) = zy, gy (z) = zy −1 .
The cosets of the subgroups A and B of G yield congruences
α = {(u, v) ∈ C 2 : Au = Av},
β = {(u, v) ∈ C 2 : Bu = Bv}
on C. We claim:
(1) The algebra C is free in the variety V of unary algebras of type {fx , gx , fy , gy }
defined by the identities
gx fx (z) = z, fx gx (z) = z, gy fy (z) = z, fy gy (z) = z.
(2) C is isomorphic to C/α × C/β.
(3) C/β is not finitely presented.
For (1), clearly C belongs to V and is one-generated. From the defining identities
of V, it follows that FV (z) is isomorphic to C. For (2) we note that α ∧ β = 0C
and α ◦ β = β ◦ α = 1C because A ∩ B = {1} and AB = BA = G. Finally
for (3) it suffices to show that β is not finitely generated as a congruence of C.
Suppose otherwise that β is generated by (u1, v1 ), . . . , (uk , vk ) for some k ∈ N,
u1 , . . . , uk , v1 , . . . , vk ∈ G. Then it is straightforward that B is generated as a
group by u1 v1−1 , . . . , uk vk−1 . But B is a normal subgroup of a free group of infinite
index, and so is not finitely generated by [18, Proposition 1.3.12]. Hence β is not
finitely generated, and the direct factor C/β is not finitely presented.
To prove the implication from A×B being finitely presented to A and B being
finitely presented it is sufficient to prove that the kernels of natural projections
πA , πB are finitely generated congruences on A × B. This is the case for a wide
range of varieties. For instance:
Theorem 3.2. Let V be a variety in which every direct product of two finitely
generated algebras is finitely generated, and let A, B ∈ V. If A × B is finitely
presented, then both A and B are finitely presented.

FINITENESS PROPERTIES OF DIRECT PRODUCTS OF ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES

9

Proof. Assume A × B is finitely presented. The kernel of the projection πA
is 0A × 1B which can be regarded as a subalgebra of A2 × B2 . As such it is
isomorphic to A × B2 . Since A and B are finitely generated, by the assumption
on V also A × B2 will be finitely generated. Hence 0A × 1B is finitely generated
as a congruence. Thus A and similarly B are finitely presented.

In particular Theorem 3.2 applies to idempotent and Mal’cev varieties as we
saw in Section 2. We also recall that finite generation is not preserved by direct
products in all congruence modular varieties. However we will prove the analog
of Theorem 3.2 in these varieties as well. For that we need the following two
auxiliary results.
Lemma 3.3. Let A and B be algebras in a variety V, and let ρ ∈ Con(A × B).
(1) The congruence ρ ∨ (0A × 1B ) is a product congruence, namely ρ ∨ (0A ×
1B ) = τ × 1B for
τ = {(u, v) ∈ A2 : (u, b) ≡ρ∨(0A ×1B ) (v, c) for all b, c ∈ B}.
(2) If V is congruence modular, then ρ∧(1A ×0B ) = σ ×0B for the congruence
σ = {(u, v) ∈ A2 : (u, b) ≡ρ (v, b) for some b ∈ B}
on A.
Proof. For (1) we first prove that the equality
(3.1)

ρ ∨ (0A × 1B ) = τ × 1B

holds. Let u, v ∈ A, r, s ∈ B. Assume (u, r) ≡ρ∨(0A ×1B ) (v, s). Then (u, b) ≡ρ∨(0A ×1B )
(v, c) for all b, c ∈ B. Hence (u, v) ∈ τ and ((u, r), (v, s)) ∈ τ × 1B . Conversely,
if ((u, r), (v, s)) ∈ τ × 1B , then (u, r) ≡ρ∨(0A ×1B ) (v, s) by the definition of τ .
Thus (3.1) is proved.
It remains to check that τ is a congruence. By (3.1) we have that τ is the
projection of ρ ∨ (0A × 1B ) onto A. The projection of any congruence is preserved
by the operations of A, is reflexive and symmetric. To see that τ is transitive,
we use the particular form of ρ ∨ (0A × 1B ). Let (u, v) ∈ τ and (v, w) ∈ τ . Then
(u, b) ≡ρ∨(0A ×1B ) (v, c) for all b, c ∈ B and (v, d) ≡ρ∨(0A ×1B ) (w, e) for all d, e ∈ B.
So (u, b) ≡ρ∨(0A ×1B ) (w, e) for all b, e ∈ B and (u, w) ∈ τ . Thus τ ∈ Con(A) and
item (1) is proved.
For (2) assume that V is congruence modular. Let µ = ρ ∧ (1A × 0B ). Then
µ = µ ∨ [(1A × 0B ) ∧ (0A × 1B )],
= (1A × 0B ) ∧ [µ ∨ (0A × 1B )] by the modular law.
By (1) we have σ ∈ Con(A) such that µ ∨ (0A × 1B ) = σ × 1B . It follows that
µ = σ × 0B .
So σ is the projection of µ onto A, i.e.,
(u, v) ∈ σ iff (u, b) ≡µ (v, b) for some b ∈ B.

10

PETER MAYR AND NIK RUSKUC

Since µ = ρ ∧ (1A × 0B ), the latter condition is equivalent to (u, b) ≡ρ (v, b) for
some b ∈ B. Hence σ satisfies (2).

Lemma 3.4. Let V be a congruence modular variety of type F , and let A, B ∈ V.
Suppose that there exist a0 ∈ A and b0 ∈ B such that the sets {f A (a0 , . . . , a0 ) :
f ∈ F } and {f B (b0 , . . . , b0 ) : f ∈ F } are finite. If A is finitely generated, then
the kernel of the projection of A × B onto B is a finitely generated congruence of
A × B.
Proof. Let X = {x1 , . . . , xk } be a finite generating set for A, and define

ρ = CgA×B ((x, b0 ), (a0 , b0 )) : x ∈ X


∪ ((f A (a0 , . . . , a0 ), b0 ), (a0 , b0 )) : f ∈ F .

Clearly ρ ≤ 1A × 0B . By Lemma 3.3 (2) we have ρ = σ × 0B for σ ∈ Con(A) with



(3.2)
σ = CgA (x, a0 ) : x ∈ X ∪ (f A (a0 , . . . , a0 ), a0 ) : f ∈ F .

Since ρ is finitely generated, the result will follow once we have shown that σ = 1A .
For that we claim
a ≡σ a0 for all a ∈ A.

(3.3)

Since X generates A, we have a k-ary term t such that tA (x1 , . . . , xk ) = a. We
prove (3.3) by induction on the length of t. If t is a variable, the statement is true
by (3.2). So assume t = f (s1 , . . . , sℓ ) for f an ℓ-ary operation in F and k-ary
terms s1 , . . . , sℓ . We obtain
A
a = f A (sA
1 (x1 , . . . , xk ), . . . , sℓ (x1 , . . . , xk ))

≡σ f A (a0 , . . . , a0 )

(by the induction assumption)

≡σ a0

(by (3.2)).

This proves (3.3). Thus σ = 1A and ρ = 1A × 0B is finitely generated.



Theorem 3.5. Let V be a congruence modular variety of type F , and let A, B ∈
V. Suppose that there exist a0 ∈ A and b0 ∈ B such that the sets {f A (a0 , . . . , a0 ) :
f ∈ F } and {f B (b0 , . . . , b0 ) : f ∈ F } are finite. If A × B is finitely presented,
then both A and B are finitely presented.
Proof. Assume A × B is finitely presented in a congruence modular variety of
finite type, i.e. it is a quotient of a finitely generated free algebra in V by a
finitely generated congruence. In particular A and B are finitely generated, and
hence, by Lemma 3.4, are quotients of A × B by finitely generated congruences.
Therefore both A and B are finitely presented.

Of course, as in Section 2, Theorem 3.5 in particular applies to congruence
modular varieties of finite type, or those whose members contain idempotents. We
also remark that the analog for Theorems 3.2 and 3.5 also holds for semigroups;
see [20].

FINITENESS PROPERTIES OF DIRECT PRODUCTS OF ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES 11

3.2. From factors to products
We first make a general observation.
Proposition 3.6. For any variety V the following are equivalent:
(1) The direct product of any two finitely generated free algebras in V is finitely
presented.
(2) The direct product of any two finitely presented algebras in V is finitely
presented.
Proof. The implication (2)⇒(1) is immediate.
For proving the converse, assume (1). Note that this implies in particular that
the direct product of any two finitely generated algebras in V is finitely generated.
Let A, B ∈ V be finitely presented. Then we have a finite set X = {x1 , . . . , xm }
and a finite set R of pairs of terms over X such that A ∼
= FV (X)/CgFV (X) (R).
−1
Without loss of generality, we may assume that R = R and {(xi , xi ) : 1 ≤
i ≤ m} ⊆ R. Similarly B ∼
= FV (Y )/CgFV (Y ) (S) for finite Y and S. By assumption FV (X) × FV (Y ) is finitely presented. So A × B being finitely presented is
equivalent to CgFV (X) (R) × CgFV (Y ) (S) being finitely generated as a congruence
of FV (X) × FV (Y ).
We claim that
(3.4)

CgFV (X) (R) × 0FV (Y ) is finitely generated.

First observe that hRi × 0FV (Y ) ≤ FV (X)2 × FV (Y )2 is finitely generated as direct
product of finitely generated algebras. Let R′ be a finite generating set.
Assume that (u, v) ∈ CgFV (X) (R). By our assumptions hRi is reflexive and
symmetric on FV (X). So CgFV (X) (R) is the transitive closure of hRi. We have
w0 , . . . , wn ∈ FV (X) such that
u = w0 , v = wn , (wi , wi+1 ) ∈ hRi
for all i ∈ {0, . . . , n − 1}. It then follows that
  

wi
wi+1
(
,
) ∈ hRi × 0FV (Y )
t
t
for any t ∈ FV (Y ), and hence, since R′ is a generating set for hRi × 0FV (Y ) , we
have
  

wi
wi+1
(
,
) ∈ hR′ i
t
t
   
u
v
for all i ∈ {0, . . . , n−1}. Hence (
,
) is contained in the transitive closure
t
t
of hR′ i, that is, in CgFV (X)×FV (Y ) (R′ ). Thus CgFV (X) (R) × 0FV (Y ) is generated by
R′ , and (3.4) is proved.
Similarly 0FV (X) ×CgFV (Y ) (S) is finitely generated. Since CgFV (X) (R)×CgFV (Y ) (S)
is the join of CgFV (X) (R) × 0FV (Y ) and 0FV (X) × CgFV (Y ) (S), the result follows. 

12

PETER MAYR AND NIK RUSKUC

As an immediate consequence, we obtain the if and only if statement for all
the ‘classical’ algebraic structures:
Corollary 3.7. Let V be any of the following varieties: groups, rings, modules
over a ring R, algebras over a field, Lie algebras, or monoids, and let A, B ∈ V.
Then A × B is finitely presented if and only if A and B are finitely presented.
Proof. Let X, Y be disjoint finite sets. Then FV (X) × FV (Y ) is isomorphic to
FV (X ∪ Y )/ρ where the congruence ρ is generated by the following set R.
V
R
groups, monoids
{(xy, yx) : x ∈ X, y ∈ Y }
modules
∅
rings, algebras
{(xy, 0), (yx, 0) : x ∈ X, y ∈ Y }
Lie algebras
{([x, y], 0), ([y, x], 0) : x ∈ X, y ∈ Y }
Since ρ is finitely generated in each case, FV (X)×FV (Y ) is finitely presented.



In the light of Theorem 2.2 one may wonder whether Corollary 3.7 generalizes
to Mal’cev algebras. This however is not the case, and it fails for loops in a very
strong sense. Recall that the variety L of loops has type (·, \, /, 1) (of arities
(2, 2, 2, 0)) and defining identities
y\(yx) = y(y\x) = (xy)/y = (x/y)y = x1 = 1x = x;
e.g. see [5, Section II.1].
Theorem 3.8. In the variety of loops, no infinite direct product L × M with L
and M non-trivial is finitely presented.
Proof. Suppose that L × M is finitely presented, and, without loss of generality,
that L is infinite. Both L and M must be finitely generated. Choose finite
generating sets X and Y for L and M respectively such that neither contains the
identity element. Then the set Z = (X × {1}) ∪ ({1} × Y ) is a finite generating
set for L × M.
We are going to make use of Evans’ solution to the word problem for finitely
presented loops [8, 7]. As a consequence of [7, Theorem 4.1] and its proof there
exists a finite presentation FL (Z)/CgFL (Z) (R) for L × M with the following properties:
• The set Z is finite, say Z = {z1 , . . . , zn } and contains Z. (The assumption
that the generators in X and Y are not equal to 1 plays a role in ensuring
that this is true.)
• All pairs in R have the form (zi ◦ zj , zk ) where ◦ is one of the basic loop
operations ·, \, / and zi , zj , zk ∈ Z.
• Given a term t(z1 , . . . , zn ) in variables Z, the unique normal form of the
element tL×M (z1 , . . . , zm ) can be obtained by successively, and in arbitrary
order, applying the following transformations: (1) replace zi ◦ zj by zk for

FINITENESS PROPERTIES OF DIRECT PRODUCTS OF ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES 13

any (zi ◦ zj , zk ) ∈ R; (2) replace u by v where u = v is a defining identity
for the variety L and |u| > |v|.
(In Evans’ terminology, R is a closed set of defining relations.)
Let X ⊆ L be such that
X × {1} = Z ∩ (L × {1}),
and without loss suppose
X × {1} = {z1 , . . . , zm }
where m ≤ n. From X × {1} ⊆ Z ⊆ Z it follows that X ⊆ X, and hence X is a
generating set for L.
Claim. For every l ∈ L the normal form of (l, 1) ∈ L × M has the form
p(z1 , . . . , zm ) for some m-ary term p, i.e. it involves solely variables from X ×{1}.
Proof. Since X is a generating set for L ∼
= L × {1}, there exists an m-ary term
L×M
q such that (l, 1) = q
(z1 , . . . , zm ). Consider the process of reducing the term
q(z1 , . . . , zm ) to its normal form according to the process described above. If a
rule (zi ◦zj , zk ) is applied, then necessarily zi , zj ∈ X ×{1}; but then zk ∈ X ×{1},
as otherwise the equality would not hold in L × M. If a loop identity is applied,
replacing the longer term by the shorter, no new variables are introduced. It
follows that after the first step we obtain another term over variables z1 , . . . , zm ,
and an inductive argument completes the proof of the claim.

Returning to the proof of the theorem, since L is infinite and X is finite, the
set (L × 1) \ {z1, . . . , zm } is non-empty, and in particular there will exist a normal
form zi ◦ zj (1 ≤ i, j ≤ m), which represents an element (l, 1) from this set.
Since M is non-trivial, the set Y is non-empty; so let y ∈ Y be arbitrary. From
{1}×Y ⊆ Z ⊆ Z it follows that (1, y) = zk for some k (m < k ≤ n). Now consider
the terms (zi ◦ zj ) · zk and zk · (zi ◦ zj ). Clearly, no rule from R can be applied to
either of those two terms, and neither can a loop identity. Hence (zi ◦ zj ) · zk and
zk · (zi ◦ zj ) are distinct normal forms with respect to the presentation hX|Ri.
On the other hand, these two terms clearly represent the same element (l, y) of
L × M. This contradicts the fact that L × M ∼
= FL (Z)/CgFL (Z) (R), and hence
L × M is not finitely presented.

Further classes in which this direction fails, even though the underlying result
for finite generation holds, are provided by idempotent magmas (or groupoids,
where we have a single binary operation symbol · and the defining identity x · x =
x) and lattices.
Theorem 3.9. In the variety I of idempotent magmas (groupoids), the direct
product of two free algebras on two generators FI (x1 , x2 )2 is not finitely presented
(even though it is finitely generated).

14

PETER MAYR AND NIK RUSKUC

Proof. Consider the homomorphism
h : FI (x11 , x12 , x21 , x22 ) → FI (x1 , x2 )2
that is defined by
h(xij ) = (xi , xj ) for i, j ∈ {1, 2}.
We note that h is onto by the idempotence of · (cf. the proof of Theorem 2.5).
In particular FI (x1 , x2 )2 is finitely generated.
To prove that FI (x1 , x2 )2 is not finitely presented, it suffices to show that
ker h is not generated as a congruence by finitely many elements. So seeking a
contradiction, we suppose that there exist n ∈ N and (s1 , t1 ), . . . , (sn , tn ) ∈ ker h
such that
CgFI (x1 ,x2 )2 ((s1 , t1 ), . . . , (sn , tn )) = ker h.
Without loss of generality si 6= ti for all i ≤ n. Note that every term over the
binary operation · has odd length. Let 2k − 1 be the maximal length of the terms
s1 , . . . , sn , t1 , . . . , tn .
Observe that for terms s(x11 , x12 , x21 , x22 ), t(x11 , x12 , x21 , x22 ) we have
(3.5)
(s, t) ∈ ker h iff s(x1 , x1 , x2 , x2 ) = t(x1 , x1 , x2 , x2 ), s(x1 , x2 , x1 , x2 ) = t(x1 , x2 , x1 , x2 ).
In the absence of parentheses we will associate all products on the left in what
follows. Let
u = (x11 x21 · · · x21 )(x12 x22 · · · x22 )
| {z }
| {z }
k

k

and consider its congruence class modulo ker h.
We first note that the defining identity of I yields a confluent rewriting system
where tt can be replaced by t for any term t. Hence we have normal forms for
terms in the language of I which are obtained by repeatedly performing such
replacements in any order. Clearly u is already in normal form.
Let w be a term that reduces to u modulo the identities in I. Then w = w1 w2
for terms w1 , w2 and one of the following holds:
(1) either both w1 and w2 can be reduced to u or
(2) w1 reduces to x11 x21 · · · x21 and w2 reduces to x12 x22 · · · x22 .
| {z }
| {z }
k

k

Consequently every subterm t of w of length at most 2k−1 reduces to a subterm of
x11 x21 · · · x21 or of x12 x22 · · · x22 . So t is a term either in {x11 , x21 } or in {x12 , x22 }.
Hence t is only congruent to itself modulo ker h by (3.5). In particular none of
the relations (s1 , t1 ), . . . , (sn , tn ) can be applied to t or to w. It follows that u is
congruent only to itself modulo ker h. This contradicts the fact that by (3.5) and
idempotence
u ≡ (x11 x12 ) (x21 x22 ) · · · (x21 x22 ) mod ker h.
{z
}
|
k

Thus ker h is not finitely generated, and FI (x1 , x2 )2 is not finitely presented.



FINITENESS PROPERTIES OF DIRECT PRODUCTS OF ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES 15

Theorem 3.10. In the variety of lattices, no direct product of two infinite lattices
is finitely presented.
Proof. Seeking a contradiction let A, B be infinite lattices such that A × B is
finitely presented. By [11, Theorem 1] (see also [10, Theorem 95]) every finitely
presented lattice L has a congruence ρ such that L/ρ is finite and every congruence class embeds into some free lattice. Note that each congruence class
is a sublattice because of the idempotence of the operations. Since all congruences on A × B are product congruences (by [10, Theorem 149] and [5, Lemma
IV.11.10]), this implies we have α ∈ Con(A), β ∈ Con(B) such that A/α and
B/β are finite and every α × β-class in A × B embeds into a free lattice. Let
a ∈ A, b ∈ B such that a/α and b/β are infinite. By a result of Jónsson [16,
Theorem 2.7] (see also [10, Theorem 5.4.5]) every sublattice of finite length (i.e.,
without infinite chain) in a free lattice is finite. Since a/α and b/β are infinite
and embed into a free lattice, each must contain either a copy of the infinite chain
N = hN, max, mini or its dual N′ = hN, min, maxi. In particular, both a/α and
b/β contain a copy of the 4-element chain C4 = h{0, 1, 2, 3}, max, mini, and so
C4 × C4 embeds into (a, b)/(α × β) which in turn embeds into some free lattice.
Now every free lattice F satisfies Whitman’s condition [10, Theorem 5.44],
namely that for all x, y, u, v ∈ F we have
x ∧ y ≤ u ∨ v ⇐⇒ x ≤ u ∨ v or y ≤ u ∨ v or x ∧ y ≤ u or x ∧ y ≤ v.
But Whitman’s condition does not hold in C4 ×C4 as witnessed by x = (1, 3), y =
(3, 1), u = (0, 2), v = (2, 0). So (a, b)/(α × β) does not embed in any free lattice
contradicting our assumption. Thus A × B is not finitely presented.

Finally we recall that the situation for semigroups is quite subtle, and is dealt
in some detail in [20, 1].
4. Residual finiteness
An algebra A is residually finite if for all distinct a, b ∈ A there exists a
finite algebra C and a homomorphism f from A to C such that f (a) 6= f (b).
Equivalently, there exists a congruence ρ of A such that A/ρ is finite and a 6≡ρ b.
Recall that it was an easy and completely general fact that if A × B is finitely
generated, then so are A and B. In the case of residual finiteness it is precisely
the other direction that always holds:
Proposition 4.1. If A and B are residually finite algebras, then so is A × B.
Proof. For distinct (a, b), (c, d) ∈ A × B we must have a 6= c or b 6= d. Without
loss assume a 6= c. Since A is residually finite, there exists a homomorphism
f : A → C with C finite and f (a) 6= f (c). The composition of f with the
projection πA : A × B → A yields a homomorphism A × B → C that separates
(a, b) and (c, d).


16

PETER MAYR AND NIK RUSKUC

In fact, the converse is often just as obvious. For instance, it is clear that
residual finiteness is a hereditary property, i.e. if A is residually finite and B is
a subalgebra of A, then B is residually finite as well. Thus the if and only if
statement holds for all classical algebraic structures, monoids, loops, idempotent
algebras, in particular lattices, and many other classes, because factors embed
into the direct product. In [12] the authors prove that the analogous statement
holds for semigroups, albeit for not altogether trivial reasons, and provide examples which show that it does sometimes fail (in particular for unary algebras).
Here we prove the result for congruence modular varieties.
Theorem 4.2. Let A and B be algebras in a congruence modular variety. Then
A × B is residually finite if and only if both A and B are residually finite.
Proof. Our argument requires some commutator theory for congruence modular
varieties as developed in [9]. Assume that A × B is residually finite. To show
that A is residually finite, we consider distinct elements a1 , a2 ∈ A and fix some
b1 ∈ B. Since A × B is residually finite, we have ρ1 ∈ Con(A × B) of finite index
such that (a1 , b1 ) 6≡ρ1 (a2 , b1 ).
Note that the product congruences of A × B form a sublattice of Con(A × B).
In particular, there exists a minimal product congruence α × β above ρ1 and a
maximal product congruence γ × δ below ρ1 . Note that α × β must have finite
index, because it contains ρ1 which has finite index; hence both α and β are
congruences of finite index. If ρ1 itself is a product of congruences, then α = γ
separates a1 , a2 and the result is proved.
So we assume that ρ1 < α × β is a skew congruence. By factoring A × B by
γ × δ we may assume that 0A × 0B is the only product congruence below ρ1 . We
first claim that
(4.1)

β is abelian, i.e. [β, β] = 0B .

From the basic properties of the commutator [9, Propositon 3.4] we have that
[ρ1 , 0A × β] ≤ ρ1 and [1A × 0B , 0A × β] = [1A , 0A ] × [0B , β] = 0A × 0B ≤ ρ1 . Since
the commutator is join distributive by [9, Exercise 2.2], this yields
(4.2)

[ρ1 ∨ (1A × 0B ), 0A × β] ≤ ρ1 .

By Lemma 3.3 we have that ρ1 ∨ (1A × 0B ) is a product congruence that contains
ρ1 and hence contains α×β by minimality. Since the commutator is monotone [9,
Proposition 3.4], (4.2) yields
[α × β, 0A × β] ≤ ρ1 .
So [α × β, 0A × β] = 0A × [β, β] is a product congruence that is contained in ρ1
and hence it is 0A × 0B . Thus (4.1) is proved.
Recall that β has finite index, say |B/β| =: n, and extend b1 to a complete
set of representatives b1 , . . . , bn for the β-classes in B. For every i ∈ {2, . . . , n}

FINITENESS PROPERTIES OF DIRECT PRODUCTS OF ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES 17

we have
Tn ρi ∈ Con(A × B) of finite index such that (a1 , bi ) 6≡ρi (a2 , bi ). Then
ρ = i=1 ρi has finite index in A × B, ρ < α × β and

(4.3)

(a1 , bi ) 6≡ρ (a2 , bi ) for all i ∈ {1, . . . , n}.

By Lemma 3.3 (2) we have a congruence
σ = {(u, v) ∈ A2 : (u, b) ≡ρ (v, b) for some b ∈ B}
on A.
Let m = |(A × B)/ρ|. We claim that |A/σ| ≤ m. Suppose otherwise that
u1 , . . . , um+1 ∈ A are pairwise distinct modulo σ. Then for any b ∈ B we have
that (u1 , b) . . . , (um+1 , b) are pairwise distinct modulo ρ which contradicts our
assumption that ρ has only m classes. Hence |A/σ| ≤ |A × B/ρ|.
Seeking a contradiction we now suppose that a1 ≡σ a2 . Then we have b ∈ B
and some i ∈ {1, . . . , n} such that b ≡β bi and
(a1 , bi ) = (a1 , bi )
(a1 , b) = (a1 , b)
(a1 , b) ≡ρ (a2 , b)
By [9, Theorem 5.5] each congruence modular variety has a difference term, which
is a ternary term d which satisfies the following for all algebras C in the variety:
dC (x, x, y) = y and dC (x, y, y) ≡ x mod [CgC (x, y), CgC (x, y)] for all x, y ∈ C.
Together with (4.1), b ≡β bi implies dB (bi , b, b) = bi . So applying d to the three
equations above yields
(a1 , bi ) ≡ρ (a2 , bi )
which contradicts (4.3). Hence a1 6≡σ a2 and A is residually finite.

As an immediate consequence, we obtain the if and only if statement for all
the ‘classical’ algebraic structures:
Corollary 4.3. Let V be any of the following varieties: groups, rings, modules
over a ring R, associative algebras or Lie algebras over a field, lattices, quasigroups, or loops, and let A, B ∈ V. Then A × B is residually finite if and only
if A and B are residually finite.
5. Conclusion
Throughout this paper we have seen various situations where finiteness properties are not preserved by direct products and settings where they are by somehow
non-trivial reasons. We close the paper by giving some questions and suggestions
for future research that – to our mind – would further enhance our understanding
of these phenomena.
In the variety of semigroups the direct product of free semigroups is not finitely
presented in general. Still certain direct products of infinite, finitely presented
semigroups are finitely presented. This is quite different from our result for loops

18

PETER MAYR AND NIK RUSKUC

(Theorem 3.8) where no direct product is ever finitely presented except for trivial
reasons.
Question 5.1. Is there a congruence modular variety where direct products of
free algebras are not finitely presented but some product of non-trivial algebras
is infinite and finitely presented?
For loops, and also idempotent magmas (Theorem 3.9), it is the non-associativity
of operations that seems to be an obstacle for the preservation of finite presentability in direct products.
Question 5.2. Is finite presentability preserved in some varieties of loops that
satisfy some generalized associativity law, like Bol loops or Moufang loops.
Theorem 3.10 shows that it is difficult for an infinite direct product of lattices
to be finitely presented without ruling it out altogether.
Question 5.3. Is there an infinite, finitely presented lattice L and a non-trivial
lattice M (necessarily finite) such that L × M is finitely presented?
Throughout our paper unary algebras provide examples of unexpected behaviour.
Question 5.4. Classify classes of unary algebras where direct products preserve
finite generation, finite presentability, or residual finiteness.
Congruence modular varieties provided a broad context in which direct products were well-behaved with respect to residual finiteness and finite presentability
(from products to factors).
Question 5.5. Do our results on finite presentability and residual finiteness also
hold for generalizations of congruence modular varieties, e.g. varieties with Taylor
term [13]?
Another possible direction for future research is to consider preservation of
finiteness conditions under subdirect products, which play a prominent role in
the theory of groups [2, 3] and more generally Mal’cev algebras.
Acknowledgements
The authors are grateful to Erhard Aichinger, Ralph Freese, Keith Kearnes,
Michael Kinyon, Ágnes Szendrei and Petr Vojtěchovský for helpful conversations
on the material in this paper.
References
[1] I. M. Araújo and N. Ruškuc. On finite presentability of direct products of semigroups,
Algebra Colloq., 7:83–91, 2000.
[2] M. R. Bridson and C. F. Miller, III. Structure and finiteness properties of subdirect products
of groups. Proc. Lond. Math. Soc. (3), 98(3):631–651, 2009.

FINITENESS PROPERTIES OF DIRECT PRODUCTS OF ALGEBRAIC STRUCTURES 19

[3] M. R. Bridson, J. Howie, C.F. Miller, III, and H. Short. On the finite presentation of
subdirect products and the nature of residually free groups, Amer. J. Math., 135:891–933,
2013.
[4] R. H. Bruck. A survey of binary systems. Springer, Berlin, 1958.
[5] S. Burris and H. P. Sankappanavar. A course in universal algebra. GTM 78, Springer, New
York, 1981.
[6] A. L. S. Corner. Three examples of hopficity in torsion-free abelian groups. A. L. S., Acta
Math. Acad. Sci. Hungar. 16:303–310, 1965.
[7] T. Evans. On multiplicative systems defined by generators and relations. I. Normal form
theorems. Proc. Cambridge Philos. Soc., 47:637–649, 1951.
[8] T. Evans. The word problem for abstract algebras. J. London Math. Soc., 26:64–71, 1951.
[9] R. Freese and R. N. McKenzie. Commutator Theory for Congruence Modular Varieties,
volume 125 of London Math. Soc. Lecture Note Ser. Cambridge University Press, 1987.
[10] G. Grätzer. Lattice theory: foundation. Birkhäuser/Springer Basel AG, Basel, 2011.
[11] G. Grätzer, A. P. Huhn, and H. Lakser. On the structure of finitely presented lattices.
Canad. J. Math., 33(2):404–411, 1981.
[12] R. Gray and N. Ruškuc. On residual finiteness of direct products of algebraic systems,
Monatsh. Math. 158:6369, 2009.
[13] D. Hobby and R. McKenzie. The structure of finite algebras, volume 76 of Contemporary
Mathematics. American Mathematical Society, 1988.
[14] J. M. Howie. Fundamentals of semigroup theory. LMS Monographs 12, The Clarendon
Press, New York, 1995.
[15] T. W. Hungerford. Algebra. GTM 73, Springer, New York, 1980.
[16] B. Jónsson. Sublattices of a free lattice. Canad. J. Math., 13:256–264, 1961.
[17] M. Lothaire. Combinatorics on words. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1997.
[18] R. C. Lyndon and P. E. Schupp. Combinatorial group theory. Classics in Mathematics,
Springer, Berlin, 2001.
[19] R. N. McKenzie, G. F. McNulty, and W. F. Taylor. Algebras, Lattices, Varieties, Vol. 1.
Wadsworth & Brooks/Cole, Monterey, CA, 1987.
[20] E. F. Robertson, N. Ruškuc, and J. Wiegold. Generators and relations of direct products
of semigroups. Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 350 (1998), 2665–2686.
(Peter Mayr) Department of Mathematics, CU Boulder, USA
E-mail address: peter.mayr@colorado.edu
(Nik Ruškuc) School of Mathematics and Statistics, University of St Andrews,
St Andrews, Scotland, UK
E-mail address: nik.ruskuc@st-andrews.ac.uk

