NUMERICAL SEMIGROUPS PROBLEM LIST

arXiv:1304.6552v1 [math.AC] 24 Apr 2013

M. DELGADO, P. A. GARCÍA-SÁNCHEZ, AND J. C. ROSALES

1. Notable elements and first problems linear combination, with nonnegative integer coefficients, of a fixed set of integers with greatest
A numerical semigroup is a subset of N (here
common divisor equal to 1. He also raised the
N denotes the set of nonnegative integers) that is
question of determining how many positive inteclosed under addition, contains the zero element,
gers do not admit such a representation. With
and its complement in N is finite.
our terminology, the first problem is equivalent
If A is a nonempty subset of N, we denote by
to that of finding a formula in terms of the genhAi the submonoid of N generated by A, that is,
erators of a numerical semigroup S of the greatest
integer not belonging to S (recall that its
hAi = {λ1 a1 +· · ·+λn an | n ∈ N, λi ∈ N, ai ∈ A}.
complement in N is finite). This number is thus
It is well known (see for instance [41, 45]) that known in the literature as the Frobenius numhAi is a numerical semigroup if and only if ber of S, and we will denote it by F(S). The
elements of H(S) = N \ S are called gaps of
gcd(A) = 1.
If S is a numerical semigroup and S = hAi for S. Therefore the second problem consists in
some A ⊆ S, then we say that A is a system of determining the cardinality of H(S), sometimes
generators of S, or that A generates S. More- known as genus of S ([25]) or degree of singularover, A is a minimal system of generators of S if ity of S ([3]).
In [60] Sylvester solves the just quoted probno proper subset of A generates S. In [45] it is
shown that every numerical semigroup admits a lems of Frobenius for embedding dimension
unique minimal system of generators, and it has two. For semigroups with embedding dimension
greater than or equal to three these problems refinitely many elements.
Let S be a numerical semigroup and let {n1 < main open. The current state of the problem is
n2 < · · · < ne } be its minimal system of gen- quite well collected in [30].
erators. The integers n1 and e are known as
Let S be a numerical semigroup. Following
the multiplicity and embedding dimension of S, the terminology introduced in [39] an integer x
and we will refer to them by using m(S) and is said to be a pseudo-Frobenius number of S
e(S), respectively. This notation might seem if x 6∈ S and x + S \ {0} ⊆ S. We will deamazing, but it is not so if one takes into ac- note by PF(S) the set of pseudo-Frobenius numcount that there exists a large list of manuscripts bers of S. The cardinality of PF(S) is called
devoted to the study of analytically irreducible the type of S (see [3]) and we will denote it by
one-dimensional local domains via their value t(S). It is proved in [18] that if e(S) = 2, then
semigroups, which are numerical semigroups. t(S) = 1, and if e(S) = 3, then t(S) ∈ {1, 2}.
The invariants we just introduced, together with It is also shown that if e(S) ≥ 4, then t(S) can
others that will show up later in this work, have be arbitrarily large, t(S) ≤ m(S) − 1 and that
an interpretation in that context, and this is why (t(S)+1)g(S) ≤ t(s)(F(S)+1). This is the startthey have been named in this way. Along this ing point of a new line of research that consists
line, [3] is a good reference for the translation for in trying to determine the type of a numerical
the terminology used in the Theory of Numerical semigroup, once other invariants like multiplicity, embedding dimension, genus or Frobenius
Semigroups and Algebraic Geometry.
Frobenius (1849-1917) during his lectures pro- number are fixed.
posed the problem of giving a formula for the
Wilf in [66] conjectures that if S is a numerical
greatest integer that is not representable as a semigroup, then e(S)g(S) ≤ (e(S) − 1)(F(S) +
1

2

1). Some families of numerical semigroups for
which it is known that the conjecture is true are
collected in [16]. Other such families can be seen
in [23, 59]. The general case remains open.
Bras-Amorós computes in [5] the number
of numerical semigroups with genus g ∈
{0, . . . , 50}, and conjectures that the growth is
similar to that of Fibonacci’s sequence. However it has not been proved yet that there are
more semigroups of genus g than of genus g + 1.
Several attempts already appear in the literature. Kaplan [23] uses an approach that involves
counting the semigroups by genus and multiplicity. He poses many related conjectures which
could be taken literally and be posed here as
problems. We suggest them to the reader. A different approach, dealing with the asymptoptical
behavior of the sequence of the number of numerical semigroups by genus, has been followed
by Zhao [69]. Some progress has been achieved
by Zhai [68], but many questions remain open.
2. Proportionally modular semigroups
Following the terminology introduced in [52],
a proportionally modular Diophantine inequality is an expression of the form ax mod b ≤ cx,
with a, b and c positive integers. The integers a,
b and c are called the factor, the modulus and the
proportion of the inequality, respectively. The
set S(a, b, c) of solutions of the above inequality
is a numerical semigroup. We say that a numerical semigroup is proportionally modular if
it is the set of solutions of some proportionally
modular Diophantine inequality.
Given a nonempty subset A of Q+
0 , we denote by hAi the submonoid of (Q+
,
0 +) generated by A, whose definition is the same of that
used in the previous section. Clearly, S(A) =
hAi ∩ N is a submonoid of N. It is proved in
[52] that if a, b and c are positive
 with
 b integers
b
c < a < b, then S(a, b, c) = S a , a−c . Since
S(a, b, c) = N when a ≥ c, and the inequality
ax mod b ≤ cx has the same integer solutions as
(a mod b)x mod b ≤ cx, the condition c < a < b
is not restrictive.
As a consequence of the results proved in [52],
we have that a numerical semigroup S is proportionally modular if and only if there exist

two positive rational numbers α < β such that
S = S([α, β]). This is also equivalent to the existence of an interval I, with nonempty interior,
of the form S = S(I) (see [55]).
By using the notation introduced in [54], a sequence of fractions ab11 < ab22 < · · · < abpp is said to
be a Bézout sequence if a1 , . . . , ap , b1 , . . . , bp are
positive integers and ai+1 bi − ai bi+1 = 1 for all
i ∈ {1, . . . , p−1}. The importance of the Bézout
sequences in the study of proportionally modular semigroups highlights in the following result
proved in [54]. If ab11 < ab22 < · · · < abpp is a Bézout
i
h
sequence, then S ab11 , abpp = ha1 , . . . , ap i.

A Bézout sequence ab11 < ab22 < · · · < abpp is
proper if ai+h bi − ai bi+h ≥ 2 for all h ≥ 2
with i, i + h ∈ {1, . . . , p}. Clearly, every Bézout
sequence can be reduced (by removing some
terms) to a proper Bézout sequence with the
same ends as the original one. It is showed in [9],
that if ab11 < ab22 are two reduced fractions, then
there exists an unique proper Bézout sequence
with ends ab11 and ab22 . Furthermore, in this work
a procedure for obtaining this sequence is given.
It is proved in [54] that if ab11 < ab22 < · · · < abpp
is a proper Bézout sequence, then there exists
h ∈ {1, . . . , p} such that a1 ≥ · · · ≥ ah ≤
· · · ≤ ap (the sequence a1 , . . . , ap is convex). The
following characterization is also proved there:
a numerical semigroup is proportionally modular if and only if there exists a convex ordering if its minimal generators n1 , . . . , ne such that
gcd{ni , ni+1 } = 1 for all i ∈ {1, . . . , e − 1} and
nj−1 + nj+1 ≡ 0 (mod nj ) for all j ∈ {2, . . . , e −
1}.
A modular Diophantine inequality is a proportionally modular Diophantine inequality with
proportion equal to one. A numerical semigroup
is said to be modular if it is the set of solutions of
some modular Diophantine inequality. Clearly,
every modular numerical semigroup is proportionally modular, and this inclusion is strict as
it is proved in [52]. A formula for g(S(a, b, 1)) in
function of a and b is given in [53]. The problems
of finding formulas for F(S(a, b, 1)), m(S(a, b, 1)),
t(S(a, b, 1)) and e(S(a, b, 1)) remain open. It is
not known if the mentioned conjecture of Wilf is
true for modular semigroups neither.

3

A semigroup of the form {0, m, →} is said to
be ordinary. A numerical semigroup S is an
open modular numerical semigroup if it 
is orb
b
dinary or of it is the form S = S a , a−1 for
some integers 2 ≤ a < b. Therefore these semigroups are proportionally modular. Moreover, it
is proved in [55] that every proportionally modular numerical semigroup can be expressed as
a finite intersection of open modular numeri
b
cal semigroups. The formulas F S ab , a−1


b
and g S ab , a−1
are also obtained in the just
quoted work. However the rest of the problems previously suggested for modular numerical
semigroups remain still open.
As we mentioned above, a characterization for
proportionally modular numerical semigroups in
terms of its systems of minimal generators is
given in [54]. The question of giving formulas
for the Frobenius number, genus and type of
a proportionally modular numerical semigroup
in terms of its system of minimal generators remains unsolved too.
Following the terminology in [57], a contracted
modular Diophantine inequality is an expression
of the form ax mod b ≤ x − c, where a, b and
c are nonnegative integers and b 6= 0. Let us
denote by T(a, b, c) the set of integer solutions
of the last inequality. Then T(a, b, c) ∪ {0} is a
numerical semigroup. An algorithm that allows
us to determine whether a semigroup is the set
of solutions of a contracted modular Diophantine
equation is given in [57]. A formula for the genus
of T(a, b, c) ∪ {0} is also given there.
A contracted proportionally modular Diophantine inequality is an expression of the form
ax mod b ≤ cx − d, with a, b, c and d nonnegative integers and b 6= 0 6= c. If we denote by
P(a, b, c, d) the set of solutions of such an inequality, then P(a, b, c, d) ∪ {0} is a numerical
semigroup. It is not yet known an algorithm to
determine whether a semigroup is of this form.
The Stern-Brocot tree gives a recursive
method for constructing all the reduced fractions
x
, with x and y positive integers (see [20]). For
y
constructing this tree we start with the expressions 10 and 01 . In each step of the process we
insert between each two consecutive expressions
′
′
m
and m
its median m+m
. We obtain in this
n
n′
n+n′

way the sequences

0
1

<

1
3

<

0
1

<

1
1

<

1
0

1
1

0
1

<

1
2

<

<

2
1

<

1
0

1
2

<

2
3

< 11 <
...

3
2

<

2
1

<

3
1

1
0

<

The Stern-Brocot tree can now be obtained
by connecting each median with the fractions
used for computing it and being in the previous level but not in the levels above it.

1
3
1
4

✡✡

✇
✇✇
✇✇
✹✹
2
5

1
2

❦❦❦❦
❦❦❦
❦
❦
❦
❦
●●
●●
●
2
3

3
5

✡✡

1
1

❙❙❙
❙❙❙❙
❙❙❙❙
3
2

✹✹
3
4

4
3

✡✡

✇
✇✇
✇✇
✹✹

2
1

5
3

●●
●●
●
5
2

✡✡

3
1

✹✹
4
1

m
n

is the comIt is proved in [9] that if
mon predecessor of two fractions ab < dc in the
Stern-Brocot
tree, then m is the multiplicity of


S ab , dc . It could be nice to obtain other constants of the semigroup by looking at this tree.
3. The quotient of a numerical
semigroup by a positive integer
Let S be a numerical semigroup and p be a
positive integer. Let us denote by
S
= {x ∈ N | px ∈ S}.
p
Clearly, Sp is a numerical semigroup, and we will
call it the quotient of S by p. According to this
notation, we will call S2 one half of S and that S4
is a quarter of S. These two cases will have an
special importance in this section.
It is proved in [56] that a numerical semigroup
is proportionally modular if and only if it is the
quotient of an embedding dimension two numerical semigroup by a positive integer. This result
is improved in [32] by proving that a numerical semigroup is proportionally modular if and
only if it is of the form ha,a+1i
with a and d posd
itive
integers.
We
still
do
not
for

 

 haveformulas


ha,a+1i
ha,a+1i
ha,a+1i
ha,a+1i
F
, g
, m
, t
d
d
d
 d

ha,a+1i
.
and e
d

4

The next step in this line of research would
be studying those numerical semigroups that are
the quotient of a numerical semigroup with embedding dimension three by a positive integer.
Unfortunately we do not have a procedure that
allows us to distinguish such a semigroup from
the rest. Moreover, we still do not know of any
example of semigroups that are not of this form.
A numerical semigroup S is symmetric if x ∈
Z \ S implies F(S) − x ∈ S. These semigroups have been widely studied. Their main
motivation comes from a work by Kunz ([26])
from which it can be deduced that a numerical semigroup is symmetric if and only if its
associated numerical semigroup ring is Gorenstein. Symmetric numerical semigroups always
have odd Frobenius number, thus for numerical semigroups with even Frobenius number, the
equivalent notion to symmetric semigroups is
that of pseudo-symmetric numerical semigroups.
We say that S is a pseudo-symmetric numerical
semigroup if it has even Frobenius number and
for all x ∈ Z \ S, we have either F(S) − x ∈ S or
. The concept of irreducible semigroup,
x = F(S)
2
introduced in [40], collects these two families
of semigroups. A numerical semigroup is irreducible if it cannot be expressed as the intersection of two semigroups that contain it properly.
It can be proved that a semigroup is irreducible
if and only if it is either symmetric (with odd
Frobenius number) or pseudo-symmetric (with
even Frobenius number).
Intuition (and the tables of the number of numerical semigroups with a given genus or Frobenius number we have) tells us that the percentage of irreducible numerical semigroups is quite
small. It is proved in [44] that every numerical semigroup is one half of an infinite number
of symmetric numerical semigroups. The apparent parallelism between symmetric and pseudosymmetric numerical semigroups fails as we can
see in [37], where it is proved that a numerical
semigroup is irreducible if and only it is one half
of a pseudo-symmetric numerical semigroup. As
a consequence we have that every numerical
semigroup is a quarter of infinitely many pseudosymmetric numerical semigroups. In [61], it is
also shown that for every positive integer d and

every numerical semigroup S, there exist infinitely many symmetric numerical semigroups T
such that S = T /d, and if d ≥ 3, then there exist infinitely many pseudo-symmetric numerical
semigroups T with S = T /d.
From the definition, we deduce that a numerical semigroup S is symmetric if and only if
. Therefore these numerical semig(S) = F(S)+1
2
groups verify Wilf’s conjecture previously mentioned. We raise the following question. If a
numerical semigroup verifies Wilf’s conjecture,
then does so its half?
It can easily be seen that every numerical
semigroup can be expressed as a finite intersection of irreducible numerical semigroups. A
procedure for obtaining such a decomposition is
given in [50]. Furthermore it is also explained
how to obtain a decomposition with the least
possible number of irreducibles. We still do not
know how many numerical semigroups appear
in these minimal decompositions, moreover, we
wonder if there exists a positive integer N such
that every numerical semigroup can be expressed
as an intersection of at most N irreducible numerical semigroups.
In [62] Toms introduces a class of numerical
semigroups that are the positive cones of the
K0 groups of certain C ∗ -algebras. Given a numerical semigroup we say, inspired in this work,
that it admits a Toms decomposition if and
only if there exist positive integers q1 , . . . , qn ,
m1 , . . . , mn and L such that gcd{qi , mi } =
gcd{L, mi } = gcd{L,
Tnqi } = 1 for all i ∈
1
{1, . . . , n} and S = L i=1 hqi , mi i.
T
T
ii
As L1 ni=1 hqi , mi i = ni=1 hqi ,m
, we have that
L
if a numerical semigroup admits a Toms decomposition, then S is a finite intersection of proportionally modular numerical semigroups. It
is proved in [46] that the reciprocal is also true.
Therefore, a numerical semigroup admits a Toms
decomposition if and only if it is an intersection
of finitely many proportionally modular numerical semigroups. These kind of semigroups are
studied in [14], where an algorithm for distinguishing whether a numerical semigroup is an intersection of finitely many proportionally modular numerical semigroups is given. Furthermore,

5

in the affirmative case it gives us a minimal decomposition, and in the negative case it gives us
the least numerical semigroup which is intersection of proportionally modular semigroups and
contains the original numerical semigroup (its
proportionally modular closure).
It is conjectured in [57] that every contracted
modular numerical semigroup admits a Toms decomposition.
Note that the numerical semigroups that admit a Toms decomposition are those that are
the set of solutions of a system of proportionally
modular Diophantine inequalities. It is proved
in [32] that two systems of inequalities are always equivalent to another system with all the
inequalities having the same modulus, which
moreover can be chosen to be prime. Now we
raise the following question: is every system of
proportionally modular Diophantine inequalities
equivalent to a system with all proportions being equal to one?, or equivalently, if a numerical
semigroup admits a Tom decomposition, can it
be expressed as an intersection of modular numerical semigroups?
Following the terminology introduced in [51],
a gap x in a numerical semigroup S is said to
be fundamental if {2x, 3x} ⊂ S (and therefore
kx ∈ S for every integer with k ≥ 2). Let us
denote by FG(S) the set of all fundamental gaps
of S. If X ⊆ Z, then D(X) will denote the union
of all positive divisors of the elements of X. It
can easily be shown that S = N \ D(FG(S)).
Therefore, a way to represent a semigroup is by
giving its fundamental gaps. This representation
is specially useful when studying the quotient
of a semigroup
  h S by a positive integer d, since
S
FG d = d | h ∈ FG(S), h ≡ 0 (mod d) .
The cardinality of the set of fundamental gaps
of a semigroup is an invariant of the semigroup.
We can therefore open a new line of research
by studying numerical semigroups attending to
their number of fundamental gaps. It would be
also interesting to find simple sufficient conditions that allow us to decide when a subset X
of N is the set of fundamental gaps of some numerical semigroup.
Let S be a numerical semigroup. In [33]
the set T of all numerical semigroups such that

S = T2 is studied, the semigroup of the “doubles” of S. In the just quoted work we raise the
question of finding a formula that depends on S
and allows us to compute the minimum of the
Frobenius numbers of the doubles of S.
Following this line we can ask ourselves about
the set of all “triples” (or multiples in general)
of a numerical semigroup.
Finally, it would be interesting to characterize the families of numerical semigroups verifying that any of its elements can be realized as a
quotient of some element of the family by a fixed
positive integer.

4. Frobenius Varieties
A directed graph G is a pair (V, E), where V
is a nonempty set whose elements are called vertices, and E is a subset of {(u, v) ∈ V × V | u 6=
v}. The elements of E are called edges of the
graph. A path connecting two vertices x and y
of G is a sequence of distinct edges of the form
(v0 , v1 ), (v1 , v2 ), . . . , (vn−1, vn ) with v0 = x and
vn = y. A graph G is a tree if there exists a
vertex r (called the root of G) such that for any
other vertex x of G, there exists an unique path
connecting x and r. If (x, y) is an edge of the
tree, then x is a son of y. A vertex of a tree is a
leaf if it has no sons.
Let S be the set of all numerical semigroups.
We define the graph associated to S, G(S), to be
the graph whose vertices are all the elements of S
and (T, S) ∈ S × S is an edge if S = T ∪ {F(T )}.
In [45], it is proved that G(S) is a tree with
root N, and that the sons of S ∈ S are the subsets S \ {x1 }, . . . , S \ {xr }, where x1 , . . . , xr are
the minimal generators of S greater than F(S).
Therefore S is a leaf of G(S) if it has no minimal generators greater than F(S). These results
allow us to construct recursively the set of numerical semigroups starting with N.

6

N = h1i
h2, 3i
♣♣♣
♣♣♣

h2, 5i

h3, 4, 5i
qqq
qqq

h4, 5, 6i

◆◆◆
◆◆◆

h3, 5, 7i

▲▲▲
▲▲

h3, 4i

h2, 7i

The level of a vertex in a directed graph is the
length of the path connecting this vertex with
the root. Note that in G(S) the level of a vertex
coincides with its genus as numerical semigroup.
Therefore, the Bras-Amorós’ conjecture quoted
in the end of the first section can be reformulated
by saying that in G(S) there are more vertices
in the (n + 1)th level than in the nth one.
A Frobenius variety is a nonempty family V
of numerical semigroups such that
1) if S, T ∈ V, then S ∩ T ∈ V,
2) if S ∈ V, S 6= N, then S ∪ {F(S)} ∈ V.
The concept of Frobenius variety was introduced
in [38] with the aim of generalizing most of the
results in [6, 14, 48, 49]. In particular, the semigroups that belong to a Frobenius variety can be
arranged as a directed tree with similar properties to those of G(S).
Clearly, S is a Frobenius variety. If A ⊆ N,
then {S ∈ S | A ⊆ S} is also a Frobenius variety. In particular, O(S), the set of all numerical
semigroups that contain S, is a Frobenius variety. We next give some interesting examples of
Frobenius varieties.
Inspired by [1], Lipman introduces and motivates in [27] the study of Arf rings. The characterization of them via their numerical semigroup of values, brings us to the following concept: a numerical semigroups S is said to be Arf
if for every x, y, z ∈ S, with x, y ≥ z we have
x + y − z ∈ S. It is proved in [48] that the set of
Arf numerical semigroups is a Frobenius variety.
Saturated rings were introduced independently in three distinct ways by Zariski ([67]),
Pham-Teissier ([29]) and Campillo ([10]), although the definitions given in these works are
equivalent on algebraically closed fields of characteristic zero. Like in the case of numerical

semigroups with the Arf property, saturated numerical semigroups appear when characterizing
these rings in terms of their numerical semigroups of values. A numerical semigroup S
is saturated if for every s, s1 , . . . , sr ∈ S with
si ≤ s for all i ∈ {1, . . . , r} and z1 , . . . , zr ∈ Z
being integers such that z1 s1 + · · · + zr sr ≥ 0,
then we have s + z1 s1 + · · · + zr sr ∈ S. It is
proved in [49] that the set of saturated numerical semigroups is a Frobenius variety.
The class of Arf and Saturated numerical
semigroups is also closed under quotients by positive integers as shown in [17], though the larger
class of maximal embedding dimension numerical semigroups is not (if S is a numerical semigroup, then e(S) ≤ m(S); a numerical semigroup is said to be a maximal embedding dimension semigroup, or to have maximal embedding
dimension, if e(S) = m(S)). What is the Frobenius variety generated by maximal embedding
dimension numerical semigroups?
As a consequence of [14] and [46], it can be
deduced that the set of numerical semigroups
that admit a Toms decomposition is a Frobenius variety. Every semigroup with embedding
dimension two admits a Toms decomposition. Is
the variety of numerical semigroups admitting
a Toms decomposition the least Frobenius variety containing all semigroups with embedding
dimension two?
The idea of pattern of a numerical semigroup
was introduced in [6] with the aim of trying to
generalize the concept of Arf numerical semigroup. A pattern P of length n is a linear homogeneous polynomial with non-zero integer coefficients in x1 , . . . , xn (for n = 0 the only pattern
is p = 0). We will say that numerical semigroup
S admits a pattern a1 x1 + . . . + an xn if for every sequence s1 ≥ s2 ≥ · · · ≥ sn of elements in
S, we have a1 s1 + · · · + an sn ∈ S. We denote
by SP the set of all numerical semigroups that
admit a pattern P . Then the set of numerical
semigroups with the Arf property is Sx1 +x2 −x3 .
It is proved in [6] that for every pattern P of a
special type (strongly admissible), SP is a Frobenius variety. What varieties arise in this way? It
would be interesting to give a weaker definition

7

of pattern such that every variety becomes the
variety associated to a pattern.
The intersection of Frobenius varieties is again
a Frobenius variety. This fact allows us to
construct new Frobenius varieties from known
Frobenius varieties and moreover, it allows us to
talk of the Frobenius variety generated by a family X of numerical semigroups. This variety will
be denoted by F (X), and it is defined to be the
intersection of all Frobenius varieties containing
X. If X is finite, then F (X) is finite and it is
shown in [38] how to compute all the elements
of F (X).
Let V be a Frobenius variety. A submonoid
M of N is a V-monoid if it can be expressed
as an intersection of elements of V. It is clear
that the intersection of V-monoids is again a Vmonoid. Thus given A ⊆ N we can define the
V-monoid generated by A as the intersection of
all V-monoids containing A. We will denote by
V(A) this V-monoid and we will say that A is a
V-system of generators of it. If there is no proper
subset of A being a V-system of generators V(A),
then A is a minimal V-system of generators of
V(A). It is proved in [38] that every V-monoid
admits an unique minimal V-system of generators, and that moreover this system is finite.
We define the directed graph G(V) in the same
way we defined G(S), that is, as the graph whose
vertices are the elements of V, and (T, S) ∈ V ×
V is an edge of the above graph if S = T ∪
{F(T )}. This graph is a tree with root N ([38]).
Moreover, the sons of a semigroup S in V are
S \ {x1 }, . . . , S \ {xr }, where x1 , . . . , xr are the
minimal V-generators of S greater than F(S).
This fact allows us to find all the elements of
the variety V from N.
The following figure represents part of the
tree associated to the variety of numerical semigroups with the Arf property.

N = V(1),
F = −1

V(2, 3),
F=1

V(3, 4),
F=2

V(4, 5),
F=3

③③
③③

①①
①①①

✈✈✈
✈✈✈

V(2, 5),
F=3

❍❍❍
❍❍❍

❋❋
❋❋

V(5, 6),
F=4

❋❋❋
❋❋

V(4, 6, 7),
F=5

V(3, 5),
F=4

V(2, 7),
F=5

V(3, 7),
F=5

V(2, 9),
F=7

The following figure represents part of the
tree corresponding to saturated numerical semigroups.
V(1),
F = −1
V(2, 3),
F=1
V(3, 4),
F=2
V(4, 5),
F=3
V(5, 6),
F=4

①

①

V(2, 5),
F=3

❋

❋
V(4, 6, 7),
F=5

V(3, 5),
F=4

V(2, 7),
F=5
V(3, 7),
F=5

V(2, 9),
F=7

As a generalization of Bras-Amorós’ conjecture, we can raise the following question. If V
is a Frobenius variety, does there exist on G(V)
more vertices in the (n + 1)th level than in the
nth one? The answer to this question is no, as
it is proved in [38, Example 26]. However, the
same question in the case of V being infinite remains open. Another interesting question would
be characterizing those Frobenius varieties that
verify the Bras-Amorós’ conjecture.
If V is a Frobenius variety and S ∈ V, then
it is known that S admits an unique minimal Vsystem of generators, and moreover it is finite.
The cardinality of the set above is an invariant of
S that will be called the embedding V-dimension
of S, and it will be denoted by eV (S). As a
generalization of Wilf’s conjecture, we would like
to characterize those Frobenius varieties V such
that for every S ∈ V, then eV (S)g(S) ≤ (eV (S)−
1)(F(S) + 1).

8

Clearly, the Frobenius variety generated by irreducible numerical semigroups is S, the set of
all numerical semigroups. What is the Frobenius
variety generated only by the symmetric ones?
and by the pseudo-symmetric ones?
5. Presentations of a numerical
semigroup
Let (S, +) be a commutative monoid. A congruence σ over S is an equivalence relation that
is compatible with addition, that is, if aσb with
a, b ∈ S, then (a+c)σ(b+c) for all c ∈ S. The set
S/σ endowed with the operation [a]+[b] = [a+b]
is a monoid. We will call it the quotient monoid
of S by σ.
If S is generated by {s1 , . . . , sn }, then the map
ϕ : Nn → S, (a1 , . . . , an ) 7→ a1 s1 + · · ·+ an sn is a
monoid epimorphism. Therefore S is isomorphic
to Nn / ∼S , where ∼S is the kernel congruence
of ϕ, that is, a ∼S b if ϕ(a) = ϕ(b).
The intersection of congruences over a monoid
S is again a congruence over S. This fact allows
us, given σ ⊆ S × S, to define the concept of
congruence generated by σ as the intersection of
all congruences over S containing σ, and it will
be denoted by hσi.
Rédei proves in [31] that every congruence
over Nn is finitely generated, that is, there exists
a subset of Nn × Nn with finitely many elements
generating it. As a consequence we have that
giving a finitely generated monoid is, up to isomorphism, equivalent to giving a finite subset of
Nn × Nn .
If S is a numerical semigroup with minimal
generators system {n1 , . . . , ne }, then there exists a finite subset σ of Ne × Ne such that S is
isomorphic to Ne /hσi. We say that σ is a presentation of S. If moreover σ has the least possible
cardinality, then σ is a minimal presentation of
S.
A (non directed) graph G is a pair (V, E),
where V is a nonempty set of elements called
vertices, and E is a subset of {{u, v} | u, v ∈
V, u 6= v}. The non ordered pair {u, v} will be
denoted by uv, and if it belongs to E, then we
say that it is an edge of G. A sequence of the
form v0 v1 , v1 v2 , . . . , vm−1 vm is a path of length
m connecting the vertices v0 and vm . A graph

is connected if any two distinct vertices are connected by a path. A graph G′ = (V ′ , E ′ ) is said
to be a subgraph of G if V ′ ⊆ V and E ′ ⊆ E.
A connected component of G is a maximal connected subgraph of G. It is well known (see for
instance [28]) that a connected graph with n vertices has at least n−1 edges. A (finite) tree with
n vertices is a connected graph with n − 1 edges.
Let us remind now the method described
in [35] for computing the minimal presentation of a numerical semigroup. Let S be a
numerical semigroup with minimal system of
generators {n1 , . . . , ne }. For each n ∈ S,
let us define Gn = (Vn , En ), where Vn =
{ni | n − ni ∈ S} and En = {ni nj | n −
(ni + nj ) ∈ S, i 6= j}. If Gn is connected,
we take σn = ∅. If Gn is not connected and
V1 , . . . , Vr are the sets of vertices corresponding to the connected components in Gn , then
we define σn = {(α1 , α2 ), (α1 , α3 ), . . . , (α1 , αr )},
where αi ∈ ϕ−1 (n) and its j-th component is
zero whenever
nj 6∈ Vi . It is proved in [35]
S
that σ = n∈S σn is a minimal presentation for
S. Let us notice that the set Betti(S) = {n ∈
S | Gn is not connected} is finite, and that its
cardinality is an invariant of S. A line of research could be the study of Betti(S), and its
relation with other invariants of S mentioned
above. In [19] affine semigroups (and thus numerical semigroups) with a single Betti element
are studied. What are those numerical semigroups having two or three Betti elements?
It is also shown in [35] how all the minimal
presentations of a semigroup are. In particular, we can determine whether a numerical semigroup admits a unique minimal presentation.
Motivated by the idea of generic ideal, we may
ask what are the numerical semigroups which
admit a unique minimal presentation, and characterize them in terms of their minimal generators.
If S is a numerical semigroup, then the cardinality of a minimal presentation of S is greater
than or equal to e(S) − 1. Those semigroups
that attain this bound are said to be complete
intersections. This kind of semigroup has been
well studied, and Delorme gives in [15] a good

9

characterization of them. Every numerical semigroup with embedding dimension two is a complete intersection, and every complete intersection is symmetric (see [21]). We raise the following questions. What semigroups can be expressed as the quotient of a complete intersection
by a positive integer? What is the least Frobenius variety containing all the complete intersection numerical semigroups?
Let S1 and S2 be two numerical semigroups minimally generated by {n1 , . . . , nr } and
{nr+1 , . . . , ne }, respectively. Let λ ∈ S1 \
{n1 , . . . , nr } and µ ∈ S2 \ {nr+1 , . . . , ne }, such
that gcd{λ, µ} = 1. We then say that S =
hµn1 , . . . , µnr , λnr+1 , . . . , λne i is a gluing to S1
and S2 . It is proved in [45] how given minimal presentations of S1 and S2 , one easily gets a
minimal presentation of S. The characterization
given by Delorme in [15], with this notation, can
be reformulated in the following way: a numerical semigroup is a complete intersection if and
only if is a gluing to two numerical semigroups
that are a complete intersection. A consequence
of this result is that the set of semigroups that
are a complete intersection is the least family of
numerical semigroups containing N being closed
under gluing. It is well known that the family of
numerical symmetric semigroups is also closed
under gluing ([45]). It would be interesting to
study other families closed under gluing. Which
is the least family containing those semigroups
with maximal embedding dimension and closed
under gluing?
Bresinsky gives in [7] a family of numerical
semigroups with embedding dimension four and
with cardinality of its minimal presentations arbitrarily large. This fact proves that the cardinality of a minimal presentation of a numerical semigroup cannot be upper bounded just in
function of its embedding dimension. Bresinski
also proves in [8] that the cardinality for a minimal presentation of a symmetric numerical semigroup with embedding dimension four can only
be three or five. It is conjectured in [36] that if
S is a numerical semigroup with e(S) ≥ 3, then
the cardinality of a minimal presentation for S
− 1. Barucci
is less than or equal to e(S)(e(S)−1)
2
[2] proves with the semigroup h19, 23, 29, 31, 37i

that the conjecture above is not true. However,
the problem of determining if the cardinality of
a minimal presentation of a symmetric numerical semigroup can be bounded in function of the
embedding dimension remains open.
Let σ be a finite subset of Nn × Nn . By using the results in [41, 45] it is possible to deterNn
is isomorphic
mine algorithmically whether hσi
to a numerical semigroup. However we miss in
the literature families of subsets σ of Nn so that
we can assert, without using algorithms, that
Nn /hσi is isomorphic to a numerical semigroup.
More specifically, we suggest the following problem: given
σ = {((c1 , 0, . . . , 0), (0, a11 , . . . , a1n )), . . . ,
((0, . . . , cn ), (an1 , . . . , ann−1 , 0))},
which conditions the integers ci and ajk have
to verify so that Nn /hσi is isomorphic to a
numerical semigroup? Herzog proved in [21]
that embedding dimension three numerical semigroups always have a minimal presentation of
this form. Neat numerical semigroups introduced by Komeda in [24] are also of this form.

6. Numerical semigroups with
embedding dimension three
Herzog proves in [21] that a numerical semigroup with embedding dimension three is symmetric if and only if it is a complete intersection.
This fact allows us to characterize symmetric numerical semigroups with embedding dimension
three in the following way (see [45]). A numerical semigroup S with e(S) = 3 is symmetric
if and only if S = ham1 , am2 , bm1 + cm2 i, with
a, b, c, m1 and m2 nonnegative integers, such
that m1 , m2 , a and b + c are greater than or
equal to two and gcd{m1 , m2 } = gcd{a, bm1 +
cm2 } = 1. Moreover, as it is proved in [45],
F(ham1 , am2 , bm1 + cm2 i) = a(m1 m2 − m1 −
m2 ) + (a − 1)(bm1 + cm2 ). We also have a
formula for the genus, since S is symmetric,
g(S) = F(S)+1
. Finally, we also know the type,
2
since it is proved in [18] that a numerical semigroup is symmetric if and only if its type is equal
to one.

10

We study in [43] the set of pseudo-symmetric
numerical semigroups with embedding dimension three. In particular, we give the
following characterization.
A numerical
semigroup S with e(S) = 3 is pseudosymmetric if and only if for some ordering
of
its minimal generators, by taking ∆ =
pP
( nni )2 − 4(n1 n2 + n1 n3 + n2 n3 − n1 n2 n3o
),

2 +n3 +∆ n1 +n2 −n3 +∆ −n1 +n2 +n3 +∆
then n1 −n2n
⊂
,
,
2n2
2n3
1
N. Moreover, in this case, F(hn1 , n2 , n3 i) =
∆ − (n1 + n2 + n3 ). We also know the genus
and the type, since if S is a pseudo-symmetric
numerical semigroups, then g(S) = F(S)+2
and
2
by [18], t(S) = 2.
Bresinsky ([7]) and Komeda ([24]) fully characterize those symmetric and pseudo-symmetric
numerical semigroups, respectively, with embedding dimension four. They show that their minimal presentations always have cardinality five.
Curtis proves in [13] the impossibility of giving
an algebraic formula for the Frobenius number
of a numerical semigroup in terms of its minimal generators on embedding dimension three.
We raise the following question. Given a polynomial f (x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 ) ∈ Q[x1 , x2 , x3 , x4 ], study
the family of numerical semigroups S such that
if S is minimally generated by n1 < n2 < n3 ,
and F is the Frobenius number of S, then
f (n1 , n2 , n3 , F ) = 0.
Our aim now is studying the set of numerical
semigroups with embedding dimension three in
general. By [18], we know that these semigroups
have type one or two, and by using [22, 34] if we
are concerned with the Frobenius number and
the genus, we can focus ourselves in those numerical semigroups whose minimal generators are
pairwise relatively prime. The following result
appears in [42]. Let n1 , n2 and n3 three pairwise relatively prime positive integers. Then the
system of equations

n1 = r12 r13 + r12 r23 + r13 r32 ,
n2 = r13 r21 + r21 r23 + r23 r31 ,
n3 = r12 r31 + r21 r32 + r31 r32 .
has a (unique) positive integer solution if
and only if {n1 , n2 , n3 } generates minimality
hn1 , n2 , n3 i. In [42] the authors give formulas
for the pseudo-Frobenius number and the genus

of hn1 , n2 , n3 i from the solutions of the above
system. Thus it seems natural to ask, given
positive integers rij , with i, j ∈ {1, 2, 3}, when
r12 r13 + r12 r23 + r13 r32 , r13 r21 + r21 r23 + r23 r31
and r12 r31 + r21 r32 + r31 r32 are pairwise relatively
prime?
Let S be a numerical semigroup minimally
generated by three positive integers n1 , n2 and
n3 being pairwise relatively prime. For each
i ∈ {1, 2, 3}, let ci = min{x ∈ N \ {0} | xni ∈
h{n1 , n2 , n3 } \ {ni }i}. In [42] formulas for F(S)
and g(S) from ni and ci (i ∈ {1, 2, 3}) are given.
Therefore, if we had a formula for computing c3
from n1 and n2 , we would have solved the problems raised by Frobenius for embedding dimension three. Note that c3 is nothing but the multiplicity of the proportionally modular semigroup
hn1 ,n2 i
. It is proved in [58] that if u is a posin3
tive integer such that un2 ≡ 1 (mod n1 ), then
hn1 ,n2 i
= {x ∈ Z | un2 n3 x mod n1 n2 ≤ n3 x}.
n3
We suggest in this line the problem of finding a
formula that allows us to give the multiplicity of
S(un2 n3 , n1 n2 , n3 ) from n1 , n2 and n3 .
Fermat’s Last Theorem asserts that for any integer n ≥ 3, the Diophantine equation xn + y n =
z n does not admit an integer solution such that
xyz 6= 0. As it is well known, this theorem
was proved by Wiles, with the help of Taylor,
in 1995 ([64, 65]) after 300 years of fruitless attempts. Let us observe that for n ≥ 3, the
Diophantine equation xn + y n = z n has no solution verifying zyz 6= 0 with some of the factors equal to 1. Therefore in order to solve this
equation it can be supposed that x, y and z
are integers greater than or equal to two, and
pairwise relatively prime. It is proved in [63],
that Fermat’s Last Theorem is equivalent to the
following statement: if a, b and c are integers
greater than or equal to two, pairwise relatively
prime, and n is an integer greater than or equal
to three, then the proportionally modular nun n
merical semigroup ha c,b i is not minimally generated by {an , cn−1 , bn }. It would be interesting
to prove this fact without using Fermat’s last
Theorem.

11

7. Non-unique factorization invariants

The invariant ω(S, s) is the least positive integer such that whenever s divides s1 + · · · +
sk for some s1 , . . . , sk ∈ S, then s divides
si1 + · · · + siω(S,s) for some {i1 , . . . , iω(S,s) } ⊆
{1, . . . , k}. The ω-primality of S is defined as
ω(S) = max{ω(S, n1 ), . . . , ω(S, ne )}. In [4] it
is highlighted that numerical semigroups fulfilling ω(S) 6= t(S) are rare. A characterization
for numerical semigroups fulfilling this condition
should be welcomed.
Another problem proposed by A. Geroldinger
is to determine when can we find a numerical
semigroup and an element in it with a given set
of lengths.

Let S be a numerical semigroup minimally
generated by {n1 < · · · < ne }. Then we already
know that S is isomorphic to Ne / ∼S , where
∼S is the kernel congruence of the epimorphism
ϕ : Ne → S, (a1 , . . . , ae ) 7→ a1 n1 + . . . + ae ne .
For s ∈ S, the elements in Z(s) = ϕ−1 (s)
are known as factorizations of s.
Given
(x1 , . . . , xe ) ∈ Z(s), its length is |x| = x1 + · · · +
xe . The set of lengths of s is L(s) = {|x| | x ∈
Z(s)}. If L(s) = {l1 < l2 < · · · < lt }, then the
set of differences of lengths of factorizations of
s is ∆(s)S = {l2 − l1 , . . . , lt − lt−1 }. Moreover
∆(S) = s∈S ∆(s). These sets are known to be
eventually periodic ([12]).
References
L(s)
The elasticity of s ∈ S is ρ(s) = max
,
and
min L(s)
[1] C. Arf, Une interprétation algébrique de la suite
ρ(S) = sups∈S (ρ(s)), which turns out to be a
des ordres de multiplicité d’une branche algébrique,
maximum ([47]). For numerical semigroups it is
Proc. London Math. Soc., 20 (1949), 256-287.
well known that ρ(S) = nn1e .
[2] V. Barucci, Numerical semigroup algebras, in Multiplicative ideal theory in commutative algebra, 39–
For x = (x1 , . . . , xe ), y = (y1 , . . . , ye ) ∈ Ne ,
53, Springer, New York, 2006.
the greatest common divisor of x and y is
[3] V. Barucci, D. E. Dobbs, M. Fontana, Maximality
gcd(x, y) = (min(x1 , y1 ), . . . , min(xe , ye )). The
Properties in Numerical Semigroups and Applicadistance between x and y is d(x, y) = max{|x −
tions to One-Dimensional Analytically Irreducible
gcd(x, y)|, |y − gcd(x, y)|}.
Local Domains, Memoirs of the Amer. Math. Soc.
598 (1997).
An N-chain (with N a positive integer) joining
two factorizations x and y of s ∈ S is a sequence [4] V. Blanco, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, A. Geroldinger,
Semigroup-theoretical characterizations of arithz1 , . . . , zt of factorizations of s such that z1 =
metical invariants with applications to numerical
x, zt = y and d(zi , zi+1 ) ≤ N. The catenary
monoids and Krull monoids, Illinois J. Math, to apdegree of s, c(s), is the least N such that for
pear.
every two factorizations x and y of s, there is an [5] M. Bras-Amorós, Fibonacci-like behavior of the
number of numerical semigroups of a given genus,
N-chain joining them. The catenary degree of
Semigroup Forum, 76 (2008), 379–384.
S is c(S) = sups∈S {c(s)}. This supremum is a
[6]
M.
Bras-Amorós, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, Patterns on
maximum and actually c(S) = maxs∈Betti(S) c(s)
numerical semigroups, Linar Alg. Appl. 414 (2006),
([11]). It was asked by F. Halter-Koch whether
652-669.
this invariant is periodic, that is, if there exists [7] H. Bresinsky, On prime ideals with generic zeo xi =
n ∈ S such that for s “big enough”, c(s + n) =
tni , Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 47 (1975), 329-332.
[8]
H.
Bresinsky, Symmetric semigroups of integers genc(s).
erated
by four elements, Manuscripta Math. 17
The tame degree of s ∈ S, t(s), is the min(1975),
205-219.
imum N such that for any i ∈ {1, . . . , e} with
[9] M. Bullejos, J. C. Rosales, Proportionally modular
s − ni ∈ S and any x ∈ Z(s), there exists y =
diophantine inequalities and the Stern-Brocot tree,
(y1 , . . . , ye ), such that yi 6= 0 and d(x, y) ≤ N.
Mathematics of Computation 78 (2009), 1211-1226
The tame degree of S is t(S) = sups∈S (t(S)). [10] A. Campillo, On saturation of curve singularities
(any characteristic), Proc. of Symp. in Pure Math.
This supremum is again a maximum and it is
40 (1983), 211-220.
reached in the (finite) set of elements of the form
[11]
S.
T. Chapman, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, D. Llena, V.
ni + w with w ∈ S such that w −nj 6∈ S for some
Ponomarenko, and J. C. Rosales, The catenary and
j 6= i. F. Halter-Koch also proposed the problem
tame degree in finitely generated commutative canof studying the eventual periodicity of S.
cellative monoids, Manuscripta Math. 120 (2006),
253-264.

12

[12] S. T. Chapman, R. Hoyer and N. Kaplan, Delta Sets
of Numerical Monoids are Eventually Periodic, Aequationes Math. 77(2009), 273–279.
[13] F. Curtis, On formulas for the Frobenius number of
a numerical semigroup. Math. Scand. 67 (1990), no.
2, 190-192.
[14] M. Delgado, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, J. C. Rosales, J.
M. Urbano-Blanco, Systems of proportionally modular Diophantine inequalities, Semigroup Forum, 76
(2008), 469-488.
[15] C. Delorme, Sous-monoı̈des d’intersection complète
de N, Ann. Scient. École Norm. Sup. (4), 9 (1976),
145-154.
[16] D. E. Dobbs, G. L. Matthews, On a question of
Wilf concerning numerical semigroups, en Focus on
Commutative Rings Research, 193-202, Nova Sci.
Publ., New York, 2006.
[17] D. E. Dobbs, H. J. Smith, Numerical semigroups
whose fractions are of maximal embedding dimension, Semigroup Forum 82 (2011), no. 3, 412-422
[18] R. Fröberg, C. Gottlieb, R. Häggkvist, On numerical
semigroups, Semigroup Forum, 35 (1987), 63-83.
[19] P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, I. Ojeda, J. C. Rosales, Affine
semigroups having a unique Betti element, to appear
in Journal of Algebra and its Applications.
[20] R. L. Graham, D. E. Knuth, O. Patashnik, Concrete mathematics. A foundation for computer science. Addison-Wesley Publishing Company, Advanced Book Program, Reading, MA, 1989.
[21] J. Herzog, Generators and relations of abelian semigroups and semigroup rings, Manuscripta Math. 3
(1970), 175-193.
[22] S. M. Johnson, A linear Diophantine problem, Can.
J. Math., 12 (1960), 390-398.
[23] N. Kaplan, Counting numerical semigroups by genus
and some cases of a question of Wilf, Journal of Pure
and Applied Algebra, 216 (2012) 1016-1032.
[24] J. Komeda, On the existence of Weierstrass points
with a certain semigroup generated by 4 elements,
Tsukuba J. Math, 6 (1982)m 237-270.
[25] J. Komeda, Non-weierstras numerical semigroups,
Semigroup Forum 57(1998), 157-185.
[26] E. Kunz, The value-semigroup of a one-dimensional
Gorenstein ring, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc., 25 (1973),
748-751.
[27] J. Lipman, Stable ideals and Arf rings, Amer. J.
Math., 93 (1971), 649-685.
[28] D. Narsingh, Graph Theory with Applications to
Engineering and Computer Science, Prentice Hall
Series in Automatic Computation, 1974.
[29] F. Pham, B. Teissier, Fractions lipschitziennes et
saturations de Zariski des algébres analytiques complexes, Centre Math. École Polytech., Paris, 1969.
Actes du Congrès International des Mathématiciens
(Nice, 1970), Tome 2, pp. 649–654. Gauthier-Villars,
Paris, 1971.

[30] J. L. Ramı́rez Alfonsı́n, The Diophantine Forbenius
Problem, Oxford University Press, 2005.
[31] L. Rédei, The theory of finitely generated commutative semigroups, Pergamon, Oxford-Edinburgh-New
York, 1965.
[32] A. M. Robles-Pérez, J. C. Rosales, Equivalent
proportionally modular Diophantine inequalities,
Archiv der Mathematik 90 (2008), 24-30.
[33] A. M. Robles-Pérez, J. C. Rosales y P. Vasco, The
doubles of a numerical semigroup, J. Pure Appl. Algebra (aceptado para publicación).
[34] Ö. J. Rödseth, On a linear Diophantine problem of
Frobenius, J. Reine Angew. Math. 301 (1979), 431440.
[35] J. C. Rosales, An algorithmic method to compute
a minimal relation for any numerical semigroup, Internat. J. Algebra Comput. 6 (1996), no. 4, 441-455.
[36] J. C. Rosales, Symmetric numerical semigroups with
arbitrary multiplicity and embedding dimension,
Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 129 (8) (2001), 2197-2203.
[37] J. C. Rosales, One half of a pseudo-symmetric numerical semigroup, Bull. London Math. Soc. 40
(2008), 347-352.
[38] J. C. Rosales, Families of numerical semigroups
closed under finite intersections and for the Frobenius number, Houston J. Math. 34 (2008), 339-348.
[39] J. C. Rosales, M. B. Branco, Numerical semigroups
that can be expressed as an intersection of symmetric numerical semigroups, J. Pure Appl. Algebra
171 (2-3) (2002), 303–314.
[40] J. C. Rosales, M. B. Branco, Irreducible numerical
semigroups, Pacific J. Math. 209 (2003), 131-143.
[41] J. C. Rosales, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, Finitely generated commutative monoids, Nova Science Publishers, New York, 1999.
[42] J. C. Rosales, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, Numerical
semigroups with embedding dimension three, Archiv
der Mathematik 83 (2004), 488-496.
[43] J. C. Rosales, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, Pseudosymmetric numerical semigroups with three generators, J. Algebra 291 (2005), 46-54.
[44] J. C. Rosales, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, Every numerical semigroup is one half of infinitely many symmetric numerical semigroups, Comm. Algebra 36
(2008), 2910-2916.
[45] J. C. Rosales, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, Numerical
semigroups, Springer, 2009.
[46] J. C. Rosales, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, Numerical
semigroups having a Toms decompositoin, Canadian
Math. Bull. 51 (2008), 134-139.
[47] J. C. Rosales, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, J. I. Garcı́aGarcı́a, Atomic commutative monoids and their
elasticity, Semigroup Forum 68 (2004), 64-86.
[48] J. C. Rosales, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, J. I. Garcı́aGarcı́a, M. B. Branco, Arf numerical semigroups, J.
Algebra 276 (2004), 3-12.

13

[49] J. C. Rosales, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, J. I. Garcı́aGarcı́a, M. B. Branco, Saturated numerical semigroups, Houston J. Math. 30 (2004), 321-330.
[50] J. C. Rosales, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, J. I. Garcı́aGarcı́a, J. A. Jimenez-Madrid, The oversemigroups
of a numerical semigroup, Semigroup Forum 67
(2003), 145-158.
[51] J.C. Rosales, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, J.I. Garcı́aGarcı́a, J.A. Jiménez-Madrid, Fundamental gaps
in numerical semigroups, J. Pure Appl. Alg. 189
(2004), 301-313.
[52] J. C. Rosales, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, J. I. Garcı́aGarcı́a, J. M. Urbano-Blanco, Proportionally modular Diophantine inequalities, J. Number Theory 103
(2003), 281-294.
[53] J. C. Rosales, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, J. M. UrbanoBlanco, Modular Diophantine inequalities and numerical semigroup, Pacific J. Math. 218 (2) (2005),
379-398.
[54] J. C. Rosales, P. A. Garcı́a-Sánchez, J. M. UrbanoBlanco, The set of solutions of a proportionally modular Diophantine inequality, J. Number Theory. 128
(2008), 453-467.
[55] J. C. Rosales, J. M. Urbano-Blanco, Opened modular numerical semigroups, J. Algebra 306 (2006),
368-377.
[56] J. C. Rosales, J. M. Urbano-Blanco, Proportionally modular Diophantine inequalities and full semigroups, Semigroup Forum 72 (2006), 362-374.
[57] J. C. Rosales y J. M. Urbano-Blanco, Contracted
modular Diophantine inequalities and numerical
semigroups, Math.Inqual. Appl. 10 (2007), 491-498.
[58] J. C. Rosales, P. Vasco, The smallest positive integer that is solution of a proportionally modular Diophantine inequality, Math. Inequal. Appl. 11 (2008),
203- 212.
[59] A. Sammartano, Numerical semigroups with large
embedding dimension satisfy Wilf’s conjecture,
Semigroup Forum. To appear.
[60] J. J. Sylvester, Mathematical questions with their
solutions, Educational Times 41 (1884), 21.
[61] I. Swanson, Every numerical semigroup is one over d
of infinitely many symmetric numerical semigroups,
in Commutative algebra and its applications, Walter
de Gruyter, Berlin, 2009, 383–386.
[62] A. Toms, Strongly perforated K0 -groups of simple
C ∗ -algebras, Canad. Math. Bull. 46 (2003), 457-472.
[63] J. M. Urbano-Blanco, Semigrupos numéricos proporcionalmente modulares, Tesis Doctoral, Universidad de Granada, Spain, March 2005.
[64] A. Wiles, Modular elliptic curves and Fermat’s last
theorem, Ann. Math. 141 (1995), 443-551.
[65] A. Wiles y R. Taylos, Ring-Theoretic properties of
certain Hecke algebras, Ann. Math. 141 (1005), 553572.

[66] H. S. Wilf, Circle-of-lights algorithm for money
changing problem, Am. Math. Mo. 85 (1978), 562565.
[67] O. Zariski, General theory of saturation and saturated local rings I, II, III, Amer. J. Math. 93 (1971),
573-684, 872-964, 97 (1975), 415-502.
[68] A. Zhai, Fibonacci-like growth of numerical semigroups with a given genus. arXiv:1111.3142v1.
[69] Y. Zhao, Constructing numerical semigroups of a
given genus Semigroup Forum, 80 (2010) 242-254
E-mail address: mdelgado@fc.up.pt
CMUP and DM-FCUP,
Porto, Portugal

Universidade

do

E-mail address: pedro@ugr.es
E-mail address: jrosales@ugr.es
Departamento de Álgebra, Universidad de
Granada, España

