arXiv:1502.00959v3 [math.RT] 19 Jan 2016

THE GLOBAL DIMENSION OF THE FULL
TRANSFORMATION MONOID WITH AN APPENDIX BY
V. MAZORCHUK AND B. STEINBERG
BENJAMIN STEINBERG
Abstract. The representation theory of the symmetric group has been
intensively studied for over 100 years and is one of the gems of modern
mathematics. The full transformation monoid Tn (the monoid of all
self-maps of an n-element set) is the monoid analogue of the symmetric
group. The investigation of its representation theory was begun by
Hewitt and Zuckerman in 1957. Its character table was computed by
Putcha in 1996 and its representation type was determined in a series of
papers by Ponizovskiı̆, Putcha and Ringel between 1987 and 2000. From
their work, one can deduce that the global dimension of CTn is n − 1 for
n = 1, 2, 3, 4. We prove in this paper that the global dimension is n − 1
for all n ≥ 1 and, moreover, we provide an explicit minimal projective
resolution of the trivial module of length n − 1.
In an appendix with V. Mazorchuk we compute the indecomposable
tilting modules of CTn with respect to Putcha’s quasi-hereditary structure and the Ringel dual (up to Morita equivalence).

1. Introduction
The character theory of the symmetric group (cf. [JK81, FH91, Mac95,
Sag01, CSST10]) is an elegant piece of mathematics, featuring a beautiful
blend of algebra and combinatorics, with applications to such diverse areas
as probability [Dia88, Dia89] and mathematical physics.
The analogue in monoid theory of the symmetric group is the full transformation monoid Tn . This is the monoid of all self-maps of an n-element
set. In 1957, Hewitt and Zuckerman initiated the study of the representation
theory of Tn , showing that the simple CTn -modules are parameterized by
partitions of r where 1 ≤ r ≤ n [HZ57]. However, very few of their results
were specific to Tn , as witnessed by the fact their main theorem is a special
Date: April 16, 2015, Revised January 19, 2016.
2010 Mathematics Subject Classification. 20M30, 16E10, 20M25, 16G99.
Key words and phrases. full transformation monoid, global dimension, monoid representation theory, quivers.
This work was partially supported by a grant from the Simons Foundation(#245268
to Benjamin Steinberg) and the Binational Science Foundation of Israel and the US
(#2012080 to Benjamin Steinberg), by a PSC-CUNY grant and by a CUNY Collaborative Incentive Research Grant. The research in the appendix was conducted by VM and
BS during the Representation Theory program at the Institut Mittag-Leffler in May 2015.
1

2

BENJAMIN STEINBERG

case of a result for arbitrary finite monoids obtained at approximately the
same time by Munn and Ponizovskiı̆ [Pon56, Mun57].
In a tour de force work [Put96], Putcha computed the character table of
Tn and gave an explicit description of all the simple CTn -modules except
for one family. It was the discovery of an explicit description of this second
family via exterior powers that led to this paper. Putcha, in fact, knows
this explicit description (private communication), but only became aware of
it after [Put96, Put98] were written.
Recall that a finite dimensional algebra A has finite representation type
if there are only finitely many isomorphism classes of finite dimensional indecomposable A-modules. Ponizovskiı̆ proved that CTn has finite representation type for n ≤ 3 and conjectured that this was true for all n [Pon87].
Putcha disproved Ponizovskiı̆’s conjecture by showing that CTn does not
have finite representation type for n ≥ 5 [Put98]. He did this by computing enough of the quiver of CTn to see that CTn /rad2 (CTn ) already
does not have finite representation type. Putcha also computed the quiver
of CT4 and observed that CT4 /rad2 (CT4 ) does have finite representation
type. Ringel [Rin00] computed a quiver presentation for CT4 and proved
that it is of finite representation type. It is an open question to compute
the quiver of CTn in full generality.
Ringel also proved that CT4 has global dimension 3 by exhibiting the minimal projective resolutions of the simple modules. It is easy to check that
the global dimension of CTn is also n − 1 for n = 1, 2, 3 using the results
of [Put98]. The main result of this paper is that the global dimension of CTn
is n − 1 for all n ≥ 1. As a byproduct of the proof, we also establish that
the quiver of CTn is acyclic. In fact, these results hold mutatis mutandis
over any ground field of characteristic 0 because Q is a splitting field for all
symmetric groups and hence for all full transformation monoids. In an appendix with Volodymyr Mazorchuk we describe the indecomposable tilting
modules of CTn with respect to Putcha’s quasi-hereditary structure [Put98].
They turn out to be precisely the injective indecomposable modules, except
the trivial module, and the simple projective one-dimensional module that
restricts to the sign representation on permutations and is annihilated by
all non-permutations. We also compute the Ringel dual of CTn .
We prove the main theorem using homological techniques for working
with the algebra of a von Neumann regular monoid developed by the author
and Margolis in [MS11]. One could alternatively use the theory of quasihereditary algebras [CPS88,DR89]. The key point is that outside of a single
family the standard modules with respect to the natural quasi-hereditary
structure found by Putcha [Put98] are simple and standard modules have
good homological properties.
The paper begins with a review of monoid representation theory and the
character theory of the full transformation monoid. The following section
consists of two parts: the first part proves that the exterior powers of the

THE GLOBAL DIMENSION OF THE FULL TRANSFORMATION MONOID

3

natural CTn -module Cn are projective indecomposable modules with simple tops and simple radicals that are exterior powers of the augmentation
submodule; the second part establishes a vanishing result for higher Extfunctors between simple modules and proves the main result. The appendix,
with V. Mazorchuk, uses the results of the previous sections to compute the
indecomposable tilting modules and Ringel dual of CTn with respect to its
natural quasi-hereditary structure [Put98].
The reader is referred to [CP61,KRT68,Eil76,Hig92,RS09] for basic semigroup theory. We use [ARS97, Ben98, ASS06] as our primary references for
the theory of finite dimensional algebras. In this paper, all modules are
assumed to be left modules and all monoids are assumed to act on the left
of sets unless otherwise indicated. For a detailed discussion of the representation theory of finite monoids and its applications, the reader is referred to
the author’s forthcoming book [Ste].
2. The representation theory of finite monoids
This section reviews the necessary background results for the paper. Details can be found in [GMS09, Ste].
2.1. Finite monoids. Fix a finite monoid M . An ideal I of M is a nonempty subset I such that M IM ⊆ I. Left and right ideals are defined
analogously. If m ∈ M , then M m, mM and M mM are the principal left,
right and two-sided ideals generated by m, respectively. We put
I(m) = {n ∈ M | m ∈
/ M nM }.
If I(m) 6= ∅, then it is an ideal.
The following equivalence relations are three of Green’s relations [Gre51].
Set, for m1 , m2 ∈ M ,
(i) m1 J m2 if and only if M m1 M = M m2 M ;
(ii) m1 L m2 if and only if M m1 = M m2 ;
(iii) m1 R m2 if and only if m1 M = m2 M .
The J -class of an element m is denoted by Jm , and similarly the L -class
and R-class of m are denoted Lm and Rm , respectively.
Let us describe Green’s relations on Tn ; this is a standard exercise in
semigroup theory (cf. [CP61, GM09]). The rank of a mapping f ∈ Tn is the
cardinality of its image. Let f, g ∈ Tn . Then f J g if and only if they have
the same rank, f R g if and only if they have the same image and f L g if
and only if they induce the same partition of the domain into fibers.
The set of idempotents of a monoid M is denoted E(M ). If e ∈ E(M ),
then eM e is a monoid with identity e. Let Ge be the group of units of
eM e. It is called the maximal subgroup of M at e. If e, f ∈ E(M ) with
M eM = M f M , then eM e ∼
= f M f and Ge ∼
= Gf (cf. [Til76]).
The group of units of Tn is the symmetric group Sn . If e ∈ Tn has rank r,
then it is well known and easy to show that eTn e ∼
= Tr and hence Ge ∼
= Sr .
A standard fact in the theory of finite monoids is the following [Til76].

4

BENJAMIN STEINBERG

Proposition 2.1. Let e ∈ E(M ). Then Je ∩ eM e = Ge , Je ∩ M e = Le and
Je ∩ eM = Re .
The maximal subgroup Ge at an idempotent e acts freely on the right of
Le and on the left of Re , respectively, by multiplication and two elements of
one of these sets are in the same Ge -orbit if and only if they are R-equivalent,
respectively, L -equivalent; see [CP61] or [RS09, Appendix A].
A monoid M is (von Neuman) regular if, for all m ∈ M , there exists
′
m ∈ M with mm′ m = m. For example, it is well known that the full
transformation monoid Tn is regular [CP61,GM09], as is the monoid Mn (F)
of all n × n matrices over a field F [CP61]. A finite monoid is regular if
and only if each J -class contains an idempotent, cf. [KRT68] or [RS09,
Appendix A].
2.2. Simple modules. Let k be a field. We continue to hold fixed a finite
monoid M . If X ⊆ M we let kX denote the k-linear span of X in the
monoid algebra kM . If I ⊆ M is a left (respectively, right or two-sided)
ideal of M , then kI is a left (respectively, right or two-sided) ideal of kM .
Let S be a simple kM -module. We say that an idempotent e ∈ E(M ) is
an apex for S if eS 6= 0 and kI(e)S = 0. One has that mS = 0 if and only
if m ∈ I(e). It follows that if e, f are apexes of S, then M eM = M f M .
Fix an idempotent e ∈ E(M ) and put Ae = kM/kI(e). Observe that
eAe e ∼
= k[eM e]/k[eI(e)e] ∼
= kGe by Proposition 2.1. A simple kM -module
S with apex e is the same thing as a simple Ae -module S with eS 6= 0.
One can then apply the theory [Gre80, Chapter 6] to classify these modules.
This was done in [GMS09]. See [Ste, Chapters 4,5] for details.
Notice that as k-vector spaces we have that Ae e ∼
= kLe and eAe ∼
=
kRe [GMS09]. The corresponding left kM -module structure on kLe is defined by
(
mℓ, if mℓ ∈ Le
m⊙ℓ=
0,
else
for m ∈ M and ℓ ∈ Le . From now on we will omit the symbol “⊙.”
The right kM -module structure on kRe is defined dually. In the semigroup
theory literature, kLe and kRe are known as left and right Schützenberger
representations. Note that kLe is a free right kGe -module and kRe is a free
left kGe -module because Ge acts freely on the right of Le and on the left
of Re . In fact, kLe is a kM -kGe -bimodule and dually kRe is a kGe -kM bimodule. Thus we can define functors
IndGe :
CoindGe :
ResGe :
Te :
Ne :

kGe -mod −→ kM -mod
kGe -mod −→ kM -mod
kM -mod −→ kGe -mod
kM -mod −→ kM -mod
kM -mod −→ kM -mod

THE GLOBAL DIMENSION OF THE FULL TRANSFORMATION MONOID

5

by putting
IndGe (V ) = Ae e ⊗eAe e V = kLe ⊗kGe V
CoindGe (V ) = HomeAe e (eAe , V ) = HomkGe (kRe , V )
ResGe (V ) = eV = HomAe (Ae e, V ) = eAe ⊗Ae V
Te (V ) = kM eV
Ne (V ) = {v ∈ V | ekM v = 0}}.
One has that ResGe (IndGe (V )) ∼
=V ∼
= ResGe (CoindGe (V )) for any kGe module, cf. [GMS09]. Note that the functors IndGe and CoindGe are exact
(cf. [GMS09] or [Ste, Chapters 4,5]) because kLe and kRe are free kGe modules (on the appropriate sides). They also preserve indecomposability
(see [Ste, Chapters 4,5]).
If V is a module over a finite dimensional algebra A, then rad(V ) denotes
the radical of V and soc(V ) the socle of V (see [ASS06] for the definitions).
We now state the fundamental theorem of Clifford-Munn-Ponizovskiı̆ theory [CP61, Chapter 5], as formulated in [GMS09]; see also [Ste, Chapter 5].
Theorem 2.2. Let M be a finite monoid and k a field.
(i) There is a bijection between isomorphism classes of simple kM -modules
with apex e ∈ E(M ) and isomorphism classes of simple kGe -modules
given on a simple kM -module S with apex e and a simple kGe -module
V by
S 7−→ ResGe (S) = eS
V 7−→ V ♯ = IndGe (V )/Ne (IndGe (V )) = IndGe (V )/ rad(IndGe (V ))
∼
= soc(CoindG (V )) = Te (CoindG (V )).
e

e

(ii) Every simple kM -module has an apex (unique up to J -equivalence).
(iii) If V is a simple kGe -module, then every composition factor of IndGe (V )
and CoindGe (V ) has apex f with M eM ⊆ M f M . Moreover, V ♯ is the
unique composition factor of either of these two kM -modules with apex
e and it appears in both these modules as a composition factor with
multiplicity one.
If we denote the set of isomorphism classes of simple kM -modules by
Irrk (M ), then there is the following parametrization of the irreducible representations of M .
Corollary 2.3. Let e1 , . . . , es be a complete set of idempotent representatives of the J -classes of M containing idempotents.
Then there is a
Ss
bijection between Irrk (M ) and the disjoint union i=1 Irrk (Gei ).
If M is regular and k has characteristic 0, then the modules IndGe (V )
and CoindGe (V ) with e ∈ E(M ) and V ∈ Irrk (Ge ) form the standard and
costandard modules, respectively, for the natural structure quasi-hereditary
algebra on kM found by Putcha [Put98]. See [CPS88, DR89] for more on
quasi-hereditary algebras.

6

BENJAMIN STEINBERG

2.3. Homological aspects. Let A be a finite dimensional k-algebra. The
projective dimension pd V of an A-module V is the minimum length (possibly infinite) of a projective resolution of V . Each finite dimensional Amodule V has a unique minimal projective resolution (minimal in both
length and in a certain categorical sense); see [ARS97, Ben98, ASS06]. Formally, a projective resolution P• −→ V is minimal if each boundary map
dn : Pn −→ dn (Pn ) is a projective cover. The following well-known proposition is stated in the context of group algebras in [CTVEZ03, Proposition 3.2.3], but the proof there is valid for any finite dimensional algebra.
Proposition 2.4. Let A be a finite dimensional k-algebra, M a finite dimensional A-module and let P• −→ M be a projective resolution. Then the
following are equivalent.
(1) P• −→ M is the minimal projective resolution of M .
q
(2) HomA (Pq , S) ∼
= ExtA (M, S) for any q ≥ 0 and simple A-module S.
The global dimension of A is
gl. dim A = sup{pd V | V is an A-module}.
It is convenient to reformulate the definition in terms of the Ext-functors.
The Ext-functors measure the failure of the Hom-functors to be exact. Details about their properties can be found in [Ben98, ASS06] or any text on
homological algebra. A classical fact is that
gl. dim A = sup{n ∈ N | ExtnA (S, S ′ ) 6= 0, for some simple modules S, S ′ }
where the supremum could be infinite [ARS97, Ben98, ASS06]. This reformulation relies on the following well-known lemma, which is proved by induction on the number of composition factors using the long exact sequence
associated to the Ext-functors.
Lemma 2.5. Let V, W be finite dimensional A-modules. Then one has that
ExtnA (V, W ) = 0 if either of the following two conditions hold.
(i) ExtnA (V, S) = 0 for each composition factor S of W .
(ii) ExtnA (S ′ , W ) = 0 for each composition factor S ′ of V .
The following result is [MS11, Lemma 3.3].
Lemma 2.6. Let M be a finite regular monoid and k a field. Let I be an
ideal of M . Then the isomorphism
ExtnkM (V, W ) ∼
= ExtnkM/kI (V, W )
holds for any kM/kI-modules V, W and all n ≥ 0.
The author and Margolis proved in [MS11, Lemma 3.5] the following
lemma in the same vein as the Eckmann-Shapiro lemma from group cohomology.

THE GLOBAL DIMENSION OF THE FULL TRANSFORMATION MONOID

7

Lemma 2.7. Let M be a finite regular monoid and k a field. Let e ∈ E(M )
and I = M eM \ Je . Then, for any kGe -module V and kM/kI-module W ,
one has natural isomorphisms
ExtnkM (IndGe (V ), W ) ∼
= ExtnkGe (V, ResGe (W ))
Extn (W, CoindG (V )) ∼
= Extn (ResG (W ), V )
kM

e

kGe

e

for all n ≥ 0.
Since kGe is semisimple whenever k is of characteristic zero, we obtain
the following corollary.
Corollary 2.8. Let M be a finite regular monoid and k a field of characteristic 0. Let e ∈ E(M ) and let I = M eM \ Je . Then, for any kGe -module
V and kM/kI-module W , one has
ExtnkM (IndGe (V ), W ) = 0
ExtnkM (W, CoindGe (V )) = 0
for all n ≥ 1.
Nico [Nic71, Nic72] proved that the global dimension of a regular monoid
over a field of characteristic zero is always finite.
Theorem 2.9 (Nico). Let M be a finite regular monoid and let k be a field
of characteristic 0. Then gl. dim kM is bounded by 2(m − 1) where m is the
length of the longest chain of non-zero principal ideals of M .
2.4. The character theory of the full transformation monoid. The
character theory of Tn has a very long history, beginning with the work of
Hewitt and Zuckerman [HZ57]. A complete computation of the character
table of Tn was finally achieved by Putcha nearly 40 years later [Put96,
Theorem 2.1]. To formulate his result, first let er ∈ Tn be the idempotent
given by
(
i, if i ≤ r
er (i) =
(2.1)
1, if i > r
and note that e1 , . . . , en form a complete set of idempotent representatives of
the J -classes of Tn and er Tn er ∼
= Tr , whence Ger ∼
= Sr . The isomorphism
takes f ∈ er Tn er to f |[r] where [r] = {1, . . . , r}.
The reader is referred to [JK81] for the representation theory of the symmetric group. If λ is a partition of n, then S(λ) will denote the corresponding
simple module (Specht module). We put L(λ) = S(λ)♯ to avoid cumbersome
notation. Let us use 1k as short hand for a sequence of k ones occurring in a
partition. With this notation, S((1r )) is the sign representation of Sr . On
the other hand, S((r)) is the trivial representation of Sr . Thus we consider
S((1))) to be both the trivial and the sign representation of S1 .
Theorem 2.10 (Putcha). Fix n ≥ 1 and let S(λ) ∈ IrrC (Sr ) for 1 ≤ r ≤ n.

8

BENJAMIN STEINBERG

(i) If λ 6= (1r ), then IndSr (S(λ)) is simple (and hence equal to L(λ)).
Moreover, its restriction to CSn is isomorphic to the induced module
CSn ⊗C[Sr ×Sn−r ] (S(λ) ⊗ S((n − r))).
(ii) If λ = (1r ), then the restriction of L((1r)) to CSn is the simple module
S((n − r + 1, 1r−1 )) of dimension n−1
r−1 .

Let us remark that Putcha [Put96] uses very different notation than ours.
If θ is an irreducible representation of Sr afforded by a simple module V ,
then Putcha uses θ + to denote the representation afforded by IndSr (V ) and
θ − to denote the representation afforded by CoindSr (V ). He uses θe for
the representation afforded by V ♯ . A proof of Theorem 2.10 can be found
in [Ste, Chapter 5].
We proceed to give a new proof of Theorem 2.10(ii), which is simpler
than Putcha’s, by exhibiting the simple module. Putcha has informed the
author that he is aware of this construction. The key observation is that
S((n − r + 1, 1r−1 )) is an exterior power of the representation S((n − 1, 1))
of Sn .
Note that Cn is a CTn -module by defining f vi = vf (i) , for f ∈ Tn , where
v1 , . . . , vn denotes the standard basis for Cn . We call this the natural module.
Moreover, the augmentation
Aug(Cn ) = {(x1 , . . . , xn ) ∈ Cn | x1 + · · · + xn = 0}
is a CTn -submodule and Cn / Aug(Cn ) is the trivial CTn -module.
Theorem 2.11. Let n ≥ 1 and let V = Aug(Cn ). Then the exterior power
Λr−1 (V ), for 1 ≤ r ≤ n, is a simple CTn -module with apex er and with
er Λr−1 (V ) ∼
= S((1r )) the sign representation of Ger ∼
= Sr . In other words,
r
L((1 )) = Λr−1 (V ).
∼ Cm and em Aug(Cn ) ∼
Proof. If 1 ≤ m ≤ n, then clearly em Cn =
= Aug(Cm )
under the identification of em CTn em = C[em Tn em ] with CTm induced by
restricting an element of em Tn em to [m]. In particular, as em Λr−1 (V ) =
Λr−1 (em V ) and dim em V = dim Aug(Cm ) = m − 1, we conclude that
em Λr−1 (V ) = 0 if m < r.
Let us now assume that m ≥ r. By [FH91, Proposition 3.12], the exterior
power Λr−1 (em V ) ∼
= Λr−1 (Aug(Cm )) is a simple CSm -module of degree
m−1
r−1 and by [FH91, Exercise 4.6] it is, in fact, the Specht module S((m −
r + 1, 1r−1 )). In particular, we have that er Λr−1 (V ) = S((1r )). It follows
that W = Λr−1 (V ) is a simple CTn -module with apex er and that W ∼
=
L((1r )).

3. The global dimension of CTn
In this section, we prove that the global dimension of CTn is n − 1. Our
first goal is to provide the minimal projective resolutions of the exterior
powers of Aug(Cn ). We retain the notation of the previous section.

THE GLOBAL DIMENSION OF THE FULL TRANSFORMATION MONOID

9

3.1. Minimal projective resolutions of the exterior powers. We continue to denote the natural CTn -module by Cn . It turns out that each
exterior power of Cn is a projective indecomposable module.
Theorem 3.1. For each r with 1 ≤ r ≤ n, the CTn -module Λr (Cn ) is a
projective indecomposable module.
Proof. Let er be the idempotent from (2.1) and W = Cn . Let
1 X
sgn(g|[r] )g.
η=
r!
g∈Ger

We will prove that η is a primitive idempotent of CTn and that CTn η ∼
=
Λr (W ).
Again denote by v1 , . . . , vn the standard basis for W . Observe that Tn er
consists of all the mappings f ∈ Tn with f (x) = f (1) for x > r. We can
thus define an isomorphism of CTn -modules ρ : CTn er −→ W ⊗r by
ρ(f ) = vf (1) ⊗ · · · ⊗ vf (r)
for f ∈ Tn er . We can identify Ger with the symmetric group Sr via the
isomorphism g 7→ g|[r] . Under this identification, we see that if g ∈ Ger and
f ∈ Tn er , then
ρ(f g) = vf (g(1)) ⊗ · · · ⊗ vf (g(r)) = ρ(f )g|[r]
where Sr acts on the right of W ⊗r by permuting the tensor factors.
We have that η is a primitive idempotent of CGer and CGer η affords the
sign representation of Ger ∼
= Sr . By definition, Λr (W ) = W ⊗r ⊗CSr S((1r ))
and hence
Λr (Cn ) ∼
= CTn er ⊗CGer S((1r )) = CTn er ⊗CGer CGer η ∼
= CTn η.
Since η ∈ CTn is an idempotent, we deduce that Λr (Cn ) is a projective
CTn -module.
It remains to prove that η is primitive or, equivalently, that ηCTn η is
a local ring. In fact, we show that it is isomorphic to C. Indeed, as a
CGer -module we have that
er CTn η ∼
= er Λr (W ) = Λr (er W ) ∼
= S((1r ))
and hence there is a vector space isomorphism ηCTn η ∼
= ηS((1r )) ∼
= C,
as η is the primitive idempotent of CGer corresponding to S((1r )). Since
dim ηCTn η = 1, we conclude that ηCTn η ∼
= C as a C-algebra. This completes the proof that η is primitive and hence Λr (W ) is a projective indecomposable CTn -module.

A crucial observation for understanding the representation theory of Tn is
the following short exact sequence for the projective indecomposable module
Λr (Cn ), which can be viewed as a categorification of Pascal’s identity for
binomial coefficients.

10

BENJAMIN STEINBERG

Theorem 3.2. Let 1 ≤ r ≤ n and let V = Aug(Cn ). Then there is a short
exact sequence of CTn -modules
0

Λr (V )

Λr (Cn )

Λr−1 (V )

0

which does not split if 1 ≤ r < n. Note that Λn (Cn ) ∼
= Λn−1 (V ) is the
n
projective simple module L((1 )).
Proof. Clearly, Λr (V ) is a submodule Λr (Cn ). Let v1 , . . . , vn be the standard
basis for Cn and put wi = vi − vn for i = 1, . . . , n − 1. Then w1 , . . . , wn−1 is
a basis for V . We claim that Λr (Cn )/Λr (V ) ∼
= Λr−1 (V ).
Put wn = v1 + · · · + vn . Then w1 , . . . , wn is a basis for Cn . Define
ρ : Λr (Cn ) −→ Λr−1 (V ) on the basis of r-fold wedge products of w1 , . . . , wn
by
(
wi1 ∧ · · · ∧ wir−1 , if ir = n
ρ(wi1 ∧ · · · ∧ wir ) =
0,
else
for 1 ≤ i1 < · · · < ir ≤ n. This is clearly a surjective linear map with kernel
Λr (V ). Let us check that it is a CTn -module homomorphism. If g ∈ Tn ,
then since Cn /V is the trivial module, it follows that gwn + V = wn + V and
so gwn = wn + vg with vg ∈ V . Therefore, if 1 ≤ i1 < · · · < ir−1 ≤ n − 1,
then
g(wi1 ∧ · · · ∧ wir−1 ∧ wn ) = gwi1 ∧ · · · ∧ gwir−1 ∧ wn +
gwi1 ∧ · · · ∧ gwir−1 ∧ vg
∈ gwi1 ∧ · · · ∧ gwir−1 ∧ wn + Λr (V ).
We conclude that
gρ(wi1 ∧ · · · ∧ wir−1 ∧ wn ) = gwi1 ∧ · · · ∧ gwir−1 = ρ(g(wi1 ∧ · · · ∧ wir−1 ∧ wn )).
This completes the proof that there is such an exact sequence. If 1 ≤ r < n,
then it cannot split because Λr (Cn ) is indecomposable by Theorem 3.1. 
Let us deduce the following important corollary.
Corollary 3.3. For 1 ≤ r ≤ n, the exterior power Λr (Cn ) is a projective
indecomposable module with rad(Λr (Cn )) = Λr (Aug(Cn )) and simple top
Λr−1 (Aug(Cn )).
Proof. Theorem 3.1 yields that P = Λr (Cn ) is a projective indecomposable module and hence has a simple top. As the modules Λr (Aug(Cn ))
and Λr−1 (Aug(Cn )) are simple by Theorem 2.11, Theorem 3.2 yields that
rad(P ) = Λr (Aug(Cn )) and P/ rad(P ) ∼

= Λr−1 (Aug(Cn )).
Theorem 3.2 allows us to construct the minimal projective resolution of
for 1 ≤ r ≤ n.

Λr−1 (Aug(Cn ))

Corollary 3.4. Let v1 , . . . , vn be the standard basis for Cn , let wi = vi − vn
for 1 ≤ i ≤ n − 1 and let wn = v1 + · · · + vn . Let V = Aug(Cn ). Then, for

THE GLOBAL DIMENSION OF THE FULL TRANSFORMATION MONOID

11

1 ≤ r ≤ n, the minimal projective resolution of the simple module Λr−1 (V )
is
dn−r
d1
d0
0
Pn−r
···
P0
Λr−1 (V )
0
where Pq = Λq+r (Cn ) and

(
wi1 ∧ · · · ∧ wiq+r−1 ,
dq (wi1 ∧ · · · ∧ wiq+r ) =
0,

if iq+r = n
else.

Therefore, pd Λr−1 (V ) = n−r for 1 ≤ r ≤ n. In particular, the projective
dimension of the trivial CTn -module is n − 1.
Proof. The exactness of the resolution follows from repeated application of
Theorem 3.2 (and its proof). Corollary 3.3 implies that each mapping
dq : Λq+r (Cn ) −→ dq (Λq+r (Cn )) = Λq+r−1 (V )
is a projective cover and so the resolution is a minimal projective resolution.
The final statement holds because Λ0 (V ) is the trivial CTn -module.

It follows from Corollary 3.4 that the global dimension of CTn is at least
n − 1. The next subsection will show that this lower bound is tight. In
fact, Corollary 3.4 yields that the cohomological dimension of Tn over C is
n − 1 (the cohomological dimension of a monoid M over a base ring R is the
projective dimension of the trivial RM -module).
3.2. A computation of the global dimension. We first compute Ext
from an exterior power of the augmentation submodule of Cn .
Proposition 3.5. For 1 ≤ k, r ≤ n and λ a partition of k, one has that
(
r+m )
r
∼ C, if λ = (1
Extm
CTn (L((1 )), L(λ)) =
0, else.
Proof. Let V = Aug(Cn ). Recall that L((1r )) ∼
= Λr−1 (V ) by Theorem 2.11.
r−1
Using the minimal projective resolution for Λ (V ) from Corollary 3.4 and
Proposition 2.4, we deduce that
Extm (Λr−1 (V ), L(λ)) ∼
= HomCT (Λr+m (Cn ), L(λ))
CTn

n

∼
= HomCTn (Λr+m−1 (V ), L(λ))
where the last isomorphism uses that Λr+m (Cn ) has simple top Λr+m−1 (V )
by Corollary 3.3. Recalling that Λr+m−1 (V ) ∼
= L((1r+m )) by Theorem 2.11,
the result follows.

We next prove a vanishing result when the first variable is not one of
the exterior powers of the augmentation submodule of Cn (and hence is an
induced module).
Proposition 3.6. Let n ≥ 1 and 1 ≤ k, r ≤ n. Let S(λ) be a simple
CSr -module with λ 6= (1r ) and let S(µ) be a simple CSk -module. Then
Extm
CTn (L(λ), L(µ)) = 0 unless 0 ≤ m ≤ r − k ≤ n − 1.

12

BENJAMIN STEINBERG

Proof. Suppose first that k ≥ r. Let Ir−1 ⊆ Tn be the ideal of mappings
of rank at most r − 1, where we take I0 = ∅, and put A = CTn /CIr−1 .
Since L(λ) = IndGer (S(λ)) by Theorem 2.10 and L(µ) is an A-module, we
conclude that Extm
CTn (L(λ), L(µ)) = 0 for all m ≥ 1 by Corollary 2.8. Since
there are no homomorphisms from L(λ) to L(µ) if k > r, this completes the
first case.
Next suppose that k ≤ r. We proceed by induction on r − k where the
base case r = k has already been handled. Assume that k < r and that the
result is true for k′ with k < k′ ≤ n. Let A = CTn /CIk−1 and consider the
exact sequence of A-modules
0

L(µ)

CoindGek (S(µ))

CoindGek (S(µ))/L(µ)

0.

Since L(λ) is an A-module, Corollary 2.8 and the long exact sequence for
Ext imply that, for m > r − k ≥ 1,
m−1
∼
Extm
CTn (L(λ), L(µ)) = ExtCTn (L(λ), CoindGek (S(µ))/L(µ)) = 0
where the last equality uses that each composition factor of the module
CoindGek (S(µ))/L(µ) has apex ek′ with k′ > k by Theorem 2.2, induction
and Lemma 2.5. This completes the proof.

We are now prepared to prove the main result of the paper.
Theorem 3.7. The global dimension of CTn is n − 1 for all n ≥ 1.
n−1
(L((1)), L((1n ))) ∼
Proof. By Proposition 3.5, we have that ExtCT
= C. On
n
the other hand, Proposition 3.5 and Proposition 3.6 yield that
Extm
CTn (L(λ), L(µ)) = 0
for all simple modules L(λ), L(µ) and m ≥ n. This completes the proof that
gl. dim CTn = n − 1.

We remark that since L((1)) is a simple injective module (because it is
isomorphic to HomC (e1 CTn , C) where e1 is the constant mapping to 1) it
n−1
(L(λ), L(µ)) = 0 for all partitions µ
follows that if λ 6= (1), then ExtCT
n
and hence no simple module other than the trivial module has projective
dimension n − 1.
In fact, since Q is a splitting field for all symmetric groups, and hence for
all full transformation monoids, the above argument works mutatis mutandis
to prove that kTn has global dimension n − 1 for all fields k of characteristic
0.
Recall that if A is a finite dimensional algebra over an algebraically closed
field, then the quiver of A is the directed graph with vertices the isomorphism
classes of simple A-modules and edges as follows. If S1 and S2 are simple Amodules, the number of directed edges from the isomorphism class of S1 to
the isomorphism class of S2 is dim Ext1A (S1 , S2 ). See [ARS97,Ben98,ASS06]
for details.
Corollary 3.8. The quiver of CTn is acyclic for all n ≥ 1.

THE GLOBAL DIMENSION OF THE FULL TRANSFORMATION MONOID

13

Proof. Proposition 3.5 implies that the only arrow exiting L(1r )) is the arrow L((1r )) −→ L((1r+1 )) for 1 ≤ r ≤ n − 1 and that L((1n )) is a sink.
Proposition 3.6 implies that all other arrows go from a module with apex
ek to a module with apex ej with j < k. It follows immediately that the
quiver of CTn is acyclic.

It is an open question to compute the quiver of CTn for n ≥ 5. The quiver
for 1 ≤ n ≤ 4 can be found in [Put98].
Appendix A. Tilting modules and the Ringel dual for the full
transformation monoid
by Volodymyr Mazorchuk and Benjamin Steinberg
A.1. Quasi-hereditary algebras and Ringel dual. Let k be a field, A a
finite dimensional k-algebra and {L(λ) | λ ∈ Λ} a fixed set of representatives
of isomorphism classes of simple A-modules, where Λ is a fixed finite index
set. For λ ∈ Λ, we fix an indecomposable projective cover P (λ) of L(λ) and
an indecomposable injective envelope I(λ) of L(λ).
Fix a partial order < on Λ and let ≤ be the union of < with the equality
relation. Let ∆(λ), where λ ∈ Λ, denote the quotient of P (λ) by the submodule generated by the images of all possible homomorphisms P (µ) −→ P (λ),
where µ 6≤ λ. The modules ∆(λ), where λ ∈ Λ, are called standard modules.
Let ∇(λ), where λ ∈ Λ, denote the submodule of I(λ) defined as the intersection of the kernels of all possible homomorphisms I(λ) −→ I(µ), where
µ 6≤ λ. The modules ∇(λ), where λ ∈ Λ, are called costandard modules.
The pair (A, <) is called a quasi-hereditary algebra, see [Sco87, CPS88,
DR89], provided that
• the endomorphism algebra of each ∆(λ) is a division algebra;
• each P (λ) has a standard filtration, that is, a filtration whose subquotients are isomorphic to standard modules.
Equivalently, (A, <) is quasi-hereditary provided that
• the endomorphism algebra of each ∇(λ) is a division algebra;
• each I(λ) has a costandard filtration, that is, a filtration whose subquotients are isomorphic to costandard modules.
We refer the reader to the appendices in [DK94, Don98] and to [KK99] for
more details.
Following [Rin91], an A-module T is called a tilting module provided that
it has both a standard filtration and a costandard filtration. If (A, <) is
quasi-hereditary, then, for any λ ∈ Λ, there is a unique (up to isomorphism)
indecomposable tilting module T (λ) which contains ∆(λ) and such that
the cokernel of the corresponding inclusion ∆(λ) ֒→ T (λ) has a standard
filtration. Moreover, every tilting module is isomorphic to a direct sum of
(copies of) these T (λ). The module
M
T =
T (λ)
λ∈Λ

14

BENJAMIN STEINBERG

is called the characteristic tilting module for A. The algebra EndA (T )op is
quasi-hereditary and is called the Ringel dual of A. We refer to [Rin91,KK99]
for more details.
A.2. Representation theory of the full transformation monoid.
A.2.1. The full transformation monoid. We fix a field k of characteristic 0
and n ≥ 1. We will continue to use the notation of the previous sections.
Simple kTn -modules are parameterized by partitions λ = (λ1 , . . . , λs ) of r
where 1 ≤ r ≤ n. We denote by Λ the set of all such partitions. We write
|λ| = λ1 + · · · + λs . A special case of Putcha’s results [Put98] shows that
kTn is quasi-hereditary with respect to the partial order that puts λ < ρ if
|λ| > |ρ| for λ, ρ ∈ Λ. For each λ ∈ Λ, we fix a corresponding simple Tn module L(λ). For each λ ∈ Λ, we denote by S(λ) the Specht kS|λ| -module
corresponding to λ.
A.2.2. Standard and costandard kTn -modules. The following descriptions of
the standard and costandard kTn -modules (with respect to this quasi-hereditary structure) are well known, see for example [Put98]. We continue
to use the idempotents e1 , . . . , en from earlier. The standard modules then
turn out to be the induced modules and the costandard modules are the
co-induced modules. More precisely, for a partition λ of r, we have that
∆(λ) ∼
= IndG (S(λ))
er

∇(λ) ∼
= CoindGer (S(λ)).
Note that, if λ is a partition of n, then we have ∆(λ) = L(λ) = ∇(λ).
A.2.3. (Co)standard versus simple kTn -modules. We have the natural kTn module N = kn in which the module structure is defined by putting f vi =
vf (i) , for f ∈ Tn , where v1 , . . . , vn is the standard basis for kn . Let Aug(N )
be the augmentation submodule of N , it consists of all vectors whose coordinates sum to zero.
Theorem A.1. Let λ be a partition of r with 1 ≤ r ≤ n.
(i) If λ 6= (1r ), then ∆(λ) = L(λ).
(ii) If λ = (1r ), then ∆(λ) = P (λ) ∼
= Λr (N ) and L(λ) = Λr−1 (Aug(N )).
(iii) For each 1 ≤ r ≤ n − 1, there is a short exact sequence
0 −→ L((1r+1 )) −→ P ((1r )) −→ L((1r )) −→ 0.

(A.1)

(iv) We have P ((1n )) = L((1n )) is the one-dimensional sign representation
of Sn , extended to Tn by sending all singular mappings to zero.
Proof. Other than the claim ∆((1r )) = P ((1r )), the theorem is just a restatement of Theorem 2.10, Theorem 3.1 and Theorem 3.2. Corollary 3.3
implies that P ((1r )) has no composition factor L(λ) with λ  (1r ) and hence
P ((1r )) = ∆((1r )) (alternatively, one can easily find a direct isomorphism
between IndGer (S((1r ))) and Λr (N )).


THE GLOBAL DIMENSION OF THE FULL TRANSFORMATION MONOID

15

A.3. Tilting modules for kTn and the Ringel dual.
A.3.1. Multiplicities of L((1r )) in injective modules. Our goal is to show
that the indecomposable tilting modules for kTn with respect to the quasihereditary structure mentioned above are precisely the injective indecomposable modules I(λ), where λ 6= (1), together with the simple projective
module L((1n )). We begin by studying multiplicities of L((1r )) in injective
modules. We shall write [V : L] for the multiplicity of a simple module L as
a composition factor of a kTn -module V .
Proposition A.2. Let 1 ≤ r ≤ n
have


1,
r
[I(λ) : L((1 ))] = 1,


0,

and let λ be a partition of r. Then we
λ = (1r );
λ = (1r+1 ), 1 ≤ r ≤ n − 1;
else.

Proof. As k is a splitting field for Tn , we have that
[I(λ) : L((1r ))] = dim Hom(P ((1r )), I(λ)) = [P ((1r )) : L(λ)].

Therefore, the claim follows directly from Theorem A.1(iii),(iv).



A.3.2. Directed injective tilting modules. From Proposition A.2, we easily
deduce that a vast majority of the injective indecomposable modules are
tilting modules.
Corollary A.3. Let 1 ≤ r ≤ n and λ be a partition of r different from (1r ).
Then T (λ) = I(λ).
Proof. Any injective indecomposable module for a quasi-hereditary algebra
always has a filtration by costandard modules. By Proposition A.2, each
composition factor of I(λ) is of the form L(ν) with ν not of the form (1s ).
But then ∆(ν) = L(ν) by Theorem A.1 and so a composition series for I(λ)
is a filtration by standard modules. Thus I(λ) is an indecomposable tilting
module with socle L(λ) = ∆(λ). We conclude that I(λ) = T (λ).

A.3.3. Indecomposable tilting kTn -modules. We can now describe all indecomposable tilting kTn -modules.
Theorem A.4. Let k be a field
where 1 ≤ r ≤ n. Then we have

n

L((1 )),
T (λ) = I(1r+1 ),


I(λ),

of characteristic 0 and λ a partition of r,
if λ = (1n );
if λ = (1r ), 1 ≤ r ≤ n − 1;
else.

Proof. Since P ((1n )) = L((1n )) = ∆((1n )) = ∇((1n )), we have T ((1n )) =
L((1n )). Hence, by Corollary A.3, it remains to show that T ((1r )) =
I((1r+1 )), for every 1 ≤ r ≤ n − 1.
The module I((1r+1 )) has simple socle L((1r+1 )), which is a submodule of ∆((1r )) = P ((1r )) by (A.1). Hence, by injectivity of I((1r+1 )),

16

BENJAMIN STEINBERG

the inclusion L((1r+1 )) ֒→ I((1r+1 )) extends to a non-zero homomorphism
ϕ : ∆((1r )) −→ I((1r+1 )), which must be injective because L((1r+1 )) =
rad(∆((1r ))) is the unique maximal submodule of ∆((1r )) by (A.1). Since
∆((1r )) = P ((1r )) has exactly two composition factors by Theorem A.1(iii),
namely L((1r )) and L((1r+1 )), we deduce from Proposition A.2 that the
cokernel V = I((1r+1 ))/∆((1r )) has no composition factor of the form
L((1s )), where 1 ≤ s ≤ n. Thus, by Theorem A.1, every simple subquotient of V is a standard module and hence V has a standard filtration.
As I((1r+1 )) has a costandard filtration (being injective), we obtain that
I((1r+1 )) is a tilting module. Moreover, from the definitions we also have
that I((1r+1 )) ∼

= T ((1r )).
A.3.4. The Ringel dual. Let I1 be the ideal of Tn consisting of the constant
mappings. We show that the Ringel dual of kTn with respect to the quasihereditary structure we have been considering is Morita equivalent to a
one-point extension of kTn /kI1 . Here we use that the Ringel dual is Morita
equivalent to EndkTn (T ′ )op for any tilting module T ′ that contains each T (λ)
as a direct summand.
Let D be the standard duality between right and left kTn -modules, so
D(V ) = Homk (V, k) for a right/left kTn -module. Note that D sends projective/injective modules to injective/projective modules and simple modules
to simple modules. Let P ′ (λ) denote the right projective cover of the simple
module L′ (λ) = D(L(λ)). Then as a right module
M
′
kTn =
P ′ (λ)dim L (λ)
λ∈Λ

and, in particular, P ′ ((1)) appears with multiplicity one in this decomposition. Note that the constant mapping e1 is a primitive idempotent with
P ′ ((1)) = e1 kTn = L′ ((1)). To ease notation, we put e = e1 . Then
M
′
(1 − e)kTn =
P ′ (λ)dim L (λ)
(A.2)
λ∈Λ\{(1)}

and if V =

L′ ((1n ))

⊕ (1 − e)kTn , then

T ′ = D(V ) = L((1n )) ⊕

M

I(λ)dim L(λ)

λ∈Λ\{(1)}

is a tilting module containing each indecomposable tilting module as a direct
(V ) is Morita
summand by Theorem A.4. Thus A = EndkTn (T ′ )op ∼
= EndkTop
n
equivalent to the Ringel dual of kTn .
Clearly, we have


EndkTop
(L′ ((1n )))
HomkTop
((1 − e)kTn , L′ ((1n )))
∼
n
n
A=
HomkTop
(L′ ((1n )), (1 − e)kTn )
EndkTop
((1 − e)kTn )
n
n


k
L′ ((1n ))(1 − e)
∼
=
0 (1 − e)kTn (1 − e)

THE GLOBAL DIMENSION OF THE FULL TRANSFORMATION MONOID

17

because HomkTop
(L′ ((1n )), (1 − e)kTn ) = 0 by the dual of Proposition A.2,
n
as [(1 − e)kTn : L′ ((1n ))] = 1 and the occurrence is as the simple top of
P ′ ((1n )), not in the socle.
Now if f, g ∈ Tn , then (1 − e)f (1 − e) = f − f e and (f − f e)(g − ge) =
f g − f ge. Also, note that f − f e = 0 for any constant mapping f . Thus
there is an isomorphism from kTn /kI1 to (1 − e)Tn (1 − e) sending the coset
of f ∈ Tn \ I1 to f − f e. The coset of f acts on the right of L′ ((1n ))(1 − e)
by multiplication by sgn(f ) where we extend sgn to Tn by sending nonpermutations to 0. In conclusion, we have proved the following theorem.
Theorem A.5. The Ringel dual of kTn is Morita equivalent to the one-point
extension of kTn /kI1


k
k
0 kTn /kI1

where I1 is the ideal of constant mappings and where k is made a right
kTn /kI1 -module via the extension of the sign representation of Sn to Tn
that vanishes on Tn \ Sn (and, in particular, on I1 ).
References

[ARS97]

M. Auslander, I. Reiten, and S. O. Smalø. Representation theory of Artin algebras, volume 36 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge
University Press, Cambridge, 1997. Corrected reprint of the 1995 original.
[ASS06]
I. Assem, D. Simson, and A. Skowroński. Elements of the representation theory of associative algebras. Vol. 1, volume 65 of London Mathematical Society
Student Texts. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2006. Techniques of
representation theory.
[Ben98]
D. J. Benson. Representations and cohomology. I, volume 30 of Cambridge
Studies in Advanced Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge,
second edition, 1998. Basic representation theory of finite groups and associative algebras.
[CP61]
A. H. Clifford and G. B. Preston. The algebraic theory of semigroups. Vol. I.
Mathematical Surveys, No. 7. American Mathematical Society, Providence,
R.I., 1961.
[CPS88]
E. Cline, B. Parshall, and L. Scott. Finite-dimensional algebras and highest
weight categories. J. Reine Angew. Math., 391:85–99, 1988.
[CSST10] T. Ceccherini-Silberstein, F. Scarabotti, and F. Tolli. Representation theory of the symmetric groups, volume 121 of Cambridge Studies in Advanced
Mathematics. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2010. The OkounkovVershik approach, character formulas, and partition algebras.
[CTVEZ03] J. F. Carlson, L. Townsley, L. Valeri-Elizondo, and Mucheng Zhang. Cohomology rings of finite groups, volume 3 of Algebras and Applications. Kluwer
Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 2003. With an appendix: Calculations of
cohomology rings of groups of order dividing 64 by Carlson, Valeri-Elizondo
and Zhang.
[Dia88]
P. Diaconis. Group representations in probability and statistics. Institute of
Mathematical Statistics Lecture Notes—Monograph Series, 11. Institute of
Mathematical Statistics, Hayward, CA, 1988.
[Dia89]
P. Diaconis. A generalization of spectral analysis with application to ranked
data. Ann. Statist., 17(3):949–979, 1989.

18

[DK94]

[Don98]
[DR89]
[Eil76]

[FH91]

[GM09]

[GMS09]

[Gre51]
[Gre80]
[Hig92]

[HZ57]
[JK81]

[KK99]

[KRT68]

[Mac95]

[MS11]

[Mun57]
[Nic71]
[Nic72]

BENJAMIN STEINBERG

Y. A. Drozd and Vladimir V. Kirichenko. Finite-dimensional algebras.
Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1994. Translated from the 1980 Russian original and
with an appendix by Vlastimil Dlab.
S. Donkin. The q-Schur algebra, volume 253 of London Mathematical Society
Lecture Note Series. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998.
V. Dlab and C. M. Ringel. Quasi-hereditary algebras. Illinois J. Math.,
33(2):280–291, 1989.
S. Eilenberg. Automata, languages, and machines. Vol. B. Academic Press,
New York, 1976. With two chapters (“Depth decomposition theorem” and
“Complexity of semigroups and morphisms”) by Bret Tilson, Pure and Applied Mathematics, Vol. 59.
W. Fulton and J. Harris. Representation theory, volume 129 of Graduate Texts
in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, New York, 1991. A first course, Readings
in Mathematics.
O. Ganyushkin and V. Mazorchuk. Classical finite transformation semigroups, an introduction. Number 9 in Algebra and Applications. Springer,
2009.
O. Ganyushkin, V. Mazorchuk, and B. Steinberg. On the irreducible representations of a finite semigroup. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 137(11):3585–3592,
2009.
J. A. Green. On the structure of semigroups. Ann. of Math. (2), 54:163–172,
1951.
J. A. Green. Polynomial representations of GLn , volume 830 of Lecture Notes
in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1980.
P. M. Higgins. Techniques of semigroup theory. Oxford Science Publications.
The Clarendon Press Oxford University Press, New York, 1992. With a foreword by G. B. Preston.
E. Hewitt and H. S. Zuckerman. The irreducible representations of a semigroup related to the symmetric group. Illinois J. Math., 1:188–213, 1957.
G. James and A. Kerber. The representation theory of the symmetric group,
volume 16 of Encyclopedia of Mathematics and its Applications. AddisonWesley Publishing Co., Reading, Mass., 1981. With a foreword by P. M.
Cohn, With an introduction by Gilbert de B. Robinson.
M. Klucznik and S. König. Characteristic tilting modules over quasihereditary algebras. Preprint 99004, SFB 343, Bielefeld University, Bielefeld,
Germany, 1999.
K. Krohn, J. Rhodes, and B. Tilson. Algebraic theory of machines, languages,
and semigroups. Edited by Michael A. Arbib. With a major contribution
by Kenneth Krohn and John L. Rhodes. Academic Press, New York, 1968.
Chapters 1, 5–9.
I. G. Macdonald. Symmetric functions and Hall polynomials. Oxford Mathematical Monographs. The Clarendon Press, Oxford University Press, New
York, second edition, 1995. With contributions by A. Zelevinsky, Oxford Science Publications.
S. Margolis and B. Steinberg. The quiver of an algebra associated to the
Mantaci-Reutenauer descent algebra and the homology of regular semigroups.
Algebr. Represent. Theory, 14(1):131–159, 2011.
W. D. Munn. Matrix representations of semigroups. Proc. Cambrdige Philos.
Soc., 53:5–12, 1957.
W. R. Nico. Homological dimension in semigroup algebras. J. Algebra, 18:404–
413, 1971.
W. R. Nico. An improved upper bound for global dimension of semigroup
algebras. Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 35:34–36, 1972.

THE GLOBAL DIMENSION OF THE FULL TRANSFORMATION MONOID

[Pon56]
[Pon87]

[Put96]
[Put98]
[Rin91]
[Rin00]
[RS09]
[Sag01]

[Sco87]

[Ste]
[Til76]

19

I. S. Ponizovskiı̆. On matrix representations of associative systems. Mat. Sb.
N.S., 38(80):241–260, 1956.
I. S. Ponizovskiı̆. Some examples of semigroup algebras of finite representation type. Zap. Nauchn. Sem. Leningrad. Otdel. Mat. Inst. Steklov. (LOMI),
160(Anal. Teor. Chisel i Teor. Funktsii. 8):229–238, 302, 1987.
M. S. Putcha. Complex representations of finite monoids. Proc. London Math.
Soc. (3), 73(3):623–641, 1996.
M. S. Putcha. Complex representations of finite monoids. II. Highest weight
categories and quivers. J. Algebra, 205(1):53–76, 1998.
C. M. Ringel. The category of modules with good filtrations over a quasihereditary algebra has almost split sequences. Math. Z., 208(2):209–223, 1991.
C. M. Ringel. The representation type of the full transformation semigroup
T4 . Semigroup Forum, 61(3):429–434, 2000.
J. Rhodes and B. Steinberg. The q-theory of finite semigroups. Springer Monographs in Mathematics. Springer, New York, 2009.
B. E. Sagan. The symmetric group, volume 203 of Graduate Texts in Mathematics. Springer-Verlag, New York, second edition, 2001. Representations,
combinatorial algorithms, and symmetric functions.
L. L. Scott. Simulating algebraic geometry with algebra. I. The algebraic
theory of derived categories. In The Arcata Conference on Representations
of Finite Groups (Arcata, Calif., 1986), volume 47 of Proc. Sympos. Pure
Math., pages 271–281. Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1987.
B. Steinberg. The representation theory of finite monoids. Springer. To appear.
B. Tilson. Depth decomposition theorem, chapter XI, pages 287–312. In Eilenberg [Eil76], 1976.

BS: Department of Mathematics, City College of New York, Convent Avenue at 138th Street, New York, New York 10031, USA
E-mail address: bsteinberg@ccny.cuny.edu
VM: Department of Mathematics, Uppsala University, Box 480, SE-75106,,
Uppsala, SWEDEN
E-mail address: mazor@math.uu.se

