Operator Ideals arising from Generating Sequences

Abstract: In this note, we will discuss how to relate an operator ideal on Banach spaces to the sequential structures it defines. Concrete examples of ideals of compact, weakly compact, completely continuous, Banach-Saks and weakly Banach-Saks operators will be demonstrated.

\section{Introduction}

Let $T: E\to F$ be  a linear operator between Banach spaces.
Let $U_E, U_F$ be the closed unit balls of $E,F$, respectively.
Note that closed unit balls serve simultaneously the basic model for
open sets and bounded sets in Banach spaces.
The usual way to describe $T$ is to state
either  the bornological property, via $TU_E$, or  the topological
property, via $T^{-1}U_F$, of $T$.
An other way  classifying $T$ is through the sequential structures $T$ preserves.
Here are some well-known examples.

\begin{examples}\label{eg:equiv}
\begin{enumerate}
    \item \quad\ $T$ is {\em bounded} (\ie $TU_E$ is a bounded subset of
$F$)
\\ $\Leftrightarrow$ $T$ is {\em continuous} (\ie $T^{-1}U_F$ is a
0-neighborhood of $E$ in the norm topology)
\\ $\Leftrightarrow$ $T$ is \emph{sequentially bounded} ( i.e.,
$T$ sends bounded sequences to bounded sequences);

    \item \quad\ $T$ is {\em of finite
rank} (\ie $TU_E$ spans a finite dimensional subspace of $F$) \\
$\Leftrightarrow$ $T$ is {\em
weak-norm continuous} (\ie $T^{-1}U_F$ is a 0-neighborhood of $E$ in
the weak topology)
\\ $\Leftrightarrow$ $T$
sends bounded sequences to sequences spanning finite dimensional subspaces of $F$;

    \item \quad\ $T$ is {\em compact} (\ie $TU_E$ is totally
bounded in
 $F$) \\  $\Leftrightarrow$ $T$ is continuous in the topology of uniform
 convergence on norm compact subsets of $E'$
 (\ie $T^{-1}U_F \supseteq K^\circ$, the polar of a norm compact  subset $K$ of
   the dual space $E'$ of $E$)
   \\ $\Leftrightarrow$ $T$ is \emph{sequentially compact} (i.e.,
   $T$ sends bounded sequences to sequences with norm convergent subsequences); and

    \item \quad\ $T$ is {\em weakly compact} (\ie $TU_E$ is relatively weakly compact in
 $F$) \\  $\Leftrightarrow$ $T$ is continuous in the topology of uniform
 convergence on weakly compact subsets of $E'$
 (\ie $T^{-1}U_F \supseteq K^\circ$, the polar of a weakly compact  subset $K$ of
   $E'$)
   \\ $\Leftrightarrow$ $T$ is \emph{sequentially weakly compact} (i.e.,
   $T$ sends bounded sequences to sequences with weakly convergent subsequences).
\end{enumerate}
\end{examples}

In \cite{WW88,WW93, W94}, we  investigate the duality of the topological and bornological
characters of operators demonstrated in the above examples, and applied them in the study of operator ideal
theory in the sense of Pietsch \cite{Pie80}.
In \cite{W08}, we use these concepts in classifying locally convex spaces.
They are also used by other authors in operator algebra theory in \cite{West, CanWest}.

After giving a brief account of the equivalence among the notions of operator ideals, generating
topologies, and generating bornologies developed in \cite{WW88, WW93, W94} in Section 2, we
shall explore into the other option of using sequential structures in Section 3.
The theory is initialed by  Stephani \cite{Step80, Step83}.  We provide a variance here.  In particular, we will show that the notions of operator ideals, generating bornologies and
generating sequences are equivalent in the context of Banach spaces.  However, we note that the sequential
methodology does not seem to be appropriate in the context of locally convex spaces, as successfully as in
\cite{WW88, W08}.  Some examples of popular operator ideals are treated in our new ways as demonstrations in
Section 4.

The author would like to take this opportunity to thank Professor Kar-Ping Shum.  He
has learned a lot from Professor Shum
since he was a student in the Chinese University of Hong Kong in 1980's.
With about 300 publications, Professor Shum has served as a good model for
the author and other fellows since then.
The current work is based  partially on
the thesis of the author finished when he was studying with Professor
Shum.

\section{The triangle of operators, topologies and bornologies}

Let $X$ be a vector space over $\mathbb{K}=\mathbb{R}$ or $\mathbb C$.
Following Hogbe-Nlend \cite{HN77}, by
a {\it vector bornology\/} on $X$ we mean a family $\sB$ of subsets
of $X$ satisfies the following conditions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(VB$_1$)]$X=\cup \sB$;
\item[(VB$_2$)]if $B\in \sB$ and $A \subseteq B$ then $A\in \sB$;
\item[(VB$_3$)]$B_{1}+B_{2}\in \sB$ whenever $B_{1},B_{2}\in \sB$;
\item[(VB$_4$)]$\lam B\in \sB$ whenever $\lam \in \bk$ and $B \in \sB$;
\item[(VB$_5$)]the circle hull $\text{ch}\, B$ of any $B$ in $\sB$ belongs to $\sB$.
\end{enumerate}

Elements in $\sB$ are called $\sB$-bounded sets in $X$.
A vector bornology $\sB$ on $X$ is called a {\it convex bornology\/}
if $\Gamma B\in \sB$  for all $B$ in $\sB$,
where $\Gamma B$ is the absolutely convex hull of $B$. The pair
$(X,\sB)$ is called a {\it convex bornological space\/} which is
denoted by
$X^{\sB}$.

Let $(X,\sT)$ be a locally convex space. For any subset $B$ of $X$,
the {\it $\s$-disked hull\/} of $B$ is defined to be

\begin{center}
$\G_{\s}B=\{\sum^{\infty}_{n=1} \lam_{n}b_{n}:\sum^{\infty}_{n=1}
|\lam_{n}| \leq 1, \lam_{n}\in \bk, b_{n}\in
B, n=1,2,\ldots\}$.
\end{center}
A set $B$ in $X$ is said to be {\it $\s$-disked\/} if $B=\G_{\s}B$.
An absolutely convex, bounded subset $B$ of $X$ is said to be {\it
infracomplete} (or a {\it Banach disk\/}) if the normed space
$(X(B),r_B)$ is complete, where
$$
X(B)=\bigcup_{n\geq 1}nB \quad\text{and}\quad r_B(x):=\inf\{\lambda >0 : x\in \lambda B\}
$$
is the gauge of $B$ defined on $X(B)$.

\begin{lemma}[{\cite{WW88}}]
Let $(X,\script P)$ be a locally convex space and B an absolutely
convex bounded subset of X.
\begin{enumerate}
\item[(a)]If B is $\s$-disked then B is infracomplete.
\item[(b)]If B is infracomplete and closed then B is $\s$-disked.
\end{enumerate}
\end{lemma}

Let $X,Y$ be locally convex spaces.
Denote by $\sigma(X,X')$  the weak topology
of $X$ with respect to its dual space $X'$, while  $\cP_\ori(X)$ is the original topology of $X$.
We employ the notion $\cM_\fin(Y)$ for the {\em finite dimensional bornology}
of $Y$ which has a basis consisting of all convex hulls
of finite sets.
On the other hand, $\cM_\von(Y)$ is used for the {\em von Neumann bornology} of $Y$
which consists of all $\cP_\ori(Y)$-bounded subsets of $Y$.
Ordering of topologies and
bornologies are induced by set-theoretical inclusion, as usual.  Moreover, we write briefly
$X_{\cP}$ for a vector space $X$ equipped with a locally convex
topology $\cP$ and
$Y^{\cM}$ for a vector space $Y$ equipped with a convex vector bornology
$\cM$.

 Let $X, Y$ be locally convex  spaces. We denote by $\gL(X,Y)$ and
$L^{\times}(X,Y)$ the collection of all linear operators from $X$ into $Y$
which are continuous and (locally) bounded (\ie sending bounded sets to bounded
sets), respectively.

\begin{definition}[see \cite{W08}]
Let $\sC$ be a subcategory of locally convex spaces.
\begin{enumerate}
    \item ({\bf ``Operators''}) A family $\gA = \{\gA(X,Y) : X,Y \in \sC\}$ of algebras of operators associated to each pair of spaces $X$ and $Y$ in $\sC$ is called an {\em operator ideal}
if
    \begin{description}
        \item[OI$_1$]  $\gA(X,Y)$ is a nonzero vector subspace of $\gL(X,Y)$ for all $X$, $Y$ in $\sC$; and
        \item[OI$_2$]  $RTS \in \gA(X_0,Y_0)$ whenever $R \in \gL(Y,Y_0)$,
$T\in\gA(X,Y)$ and $S \in \gL(X_0,X)$ for any $X_0$, $X$, $Y$ and $Y_0$ in $\sC$.
    \end{description}

    \item ({\bf ``Topologies''}) A family $\cP =\{\cP(X) : X\in \sC\}$ of locally convex   topologies
associated to each space $X$ in $\sC$ is called a {\em generating topology} if
    \begin{description}
    \item[GT$_1$] $\sigma(X,X') \In \cP(X) \In \cP_\ori(X)$ for all $X$ in $\sC$; and
    \item[GT$_2$] $\gL(X,Y) \In \gL(X_\cP,Y_\cP)$ for all $X$ and $Y$ in $\sC$.
    \end{description}

    \item ({\bf ``Bornologies''}) A family $\cM=\{\cM(Y): Y \in \sC\}$ of convex vector
    bornologies associated to each space $Y$ in $\sC$ is called a {\em generating bornology} if
    \begin{description}
    \item[GB$_1$]  $\cM_\fin(Y) \In \cM(Y) \In \cM_\von(Y)$ for all $Y$ in $\sC$; and
    \item[GB$_2$]  $\gL(X,Y) \In L^\times(X^\cM,Y^\cM)$ for all $X$ and $Y$ in $\sC$.
    \end{description}
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}

\begin{definition}\label{defn:vertices}
Let $\gA$ be an operator ideal, $\cP$ a generating topology and $\cM$  a generating bornology on $\sC$.
\begin{enumerate}
    \item ({\bf ``Operators'' $\rightarrow$ ``Topologies''})
For each $X_0$ in $\sC$, the $\gA$--{\em topology} of $X_0$, denoted by $\sT(\gA)(X_0)$, is the projective topology of $X_0$ with respect to the family
$$
\{T \in \gA(X_0,Y):Y\in\sC\}.
$$
  In other words, a seminorm $p$ of $X_0$ is $\sT(\gA)(X_0)$--continuous if and only if there is a $T$ in $\gA(X_0,Y)$ for some $Y$ in
$\sC$ and a continuous seminorm $q$ of $Y$ such that
$$
p(x) \leq q(Tx), \quad\forall x \in X_0.
$$
In this case, we call $p$ an $\gA$--{\em seminorm} of $X_0$.

    \item ({\bf ``Operators'' $\rightarrow$ ``Bornologies''})
For each $Y_0$ in $\sC$, the $\gA$--{\em bornology} of $Y_0$, denoted by $\sB(\gA)(Y_0)$, is the inductive bornology of $Y_0$ with respect to the family
$$
\{T \in \gA(X,Y_0):X\in\sC\}.
$$
  In other words, a subset $B$ of $Y_0$ is $\sB(\gA)(Y_0)$--bounded if and only if there is a $T$ in $\gA(X,Y_0)$ for some $X$ in
$\sC$ and a topologically bounded subset $A$ of $X$ such that
$$
B \In TA.
$$
In this case, we call $B$ an $\gA$--{\em bounded subset} of $Y_0$.

    \item ({\bf ``Topologies'' $\rightarrow$ ``Operators''})
For $X$, $Y$ in $\sC$, let
$$
\sO(\cP)(X,Y) = \gL(X_\cP,Y)
$$
be the vector space of all continuous operators from $X$ into $Y$ which is still continuous with
respect to the $\cP(X)$--topology.

    \item ({\bf ``Bornologies'' $\rightarrow$ ``Operators''})
For $X$, $Y$ in $\sC$, let
$$
\sO(\cM)(X,Y) = \gL(X,Y)\cap L^\times(X,Y^\cM)
$$
be the vector space of all continuous operators from $X$ into $Y$ which send bounded
sets to $\cM(Y)$--bounded sets.

    \item ({\bf ``Topologies'' $\leftrightarrow$ ``Bornologies''})
For $X$, $Y$ in $\sC$, the $\cP^\circ(Y)$--{\em bornology} of $Y$ (resp.\ $\cM^\circ(X)$--{\em topology} of $X$) is
defined to be the bornology (resp.\ topology) polar to
$\cP(X)$ (resp.\ $\cM(Y)$).  More precisely,
\begin{itemize}
    \item a bounded subset $A$ of $Y$ is $\cP^\circ(Y)$--bounded if and only if  its   polar
$A\po$ is a $\cP(Y'_\beta)$--neighborhood of zero; and
    \item a neighborhood $V$ of zero of $X$ is a $\cM^\circ(X)$--neighborhood of zero if and only if
$V^\circ$ is $\cM(X'_\beta)$--bounded.
\end{itemize}
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}

Here are two examples: the ideals $\gK$ of compact operators and $\gP$ of
absolutely summing operators (see \eg\cite{Pie80}), the generating systems $\cP_{pc}$ of precompact
topologies (see \eg\cite{Ran72}) and $\cP_{pn}$ of prenuclear topologies (see \eg\cite[p.\ 90]{Sch71}),
and the generating systems $\cM_{pc}$ of precompact bornologies
and $\cM_{pn}$ of prenuclear bornologies (see \eg\cite{HN81}),
respectively.

\begin{definition}
An operator ideal $\gA$ on Banach spaces is said to be
\begin{enumerate}
    \item \emph{injective} if $S\in\gA(E,F_0)$ infers
$T\in \gA(E,F)$, whenever  $T\in \gL(E,F)$ and
$\|Tx\|\leq \|Sx\|, \forall x\in E$;
    \item \emph{surjective} if $S\in\gA(E_0, F)$ infers
$T\in \gA(E,F)$, whenever $T\in \gL(E,F)$ and
$TU_E\subseteq SU_{E_0}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{definition}

The \emph{injective hull} $\gA^\inj$ and the \emph{surjective hull} $\gA^\sur$,
of $\gA$ is the
intersection of all injective and surjective operator ideals
containing $\gA$, respectively.
For example, $\gK=\gK^\inj=\gK^\sur$ and $\gP=\gP^\inj \varsubsetneq\gP^\sur$ (see, e.g., \cite{Pie80}).

In the following, we see that the notions of operator ideals, generating topologies,
  and generating bornologies are equivalent (see also \cite{West} for
the operator algebra version).

\begin{theorem}[\cite{Step70, Step73, WW88,W08}]\label{thm:tri_edges}
Let $\gA$ be an operator ideal, $\cP$ a generating topology and $\cM$ a generating bornology on
Banach spaces.
We have
\begin{enumerate}
    \item $\sT(\gA) = \{\sT(\gA)(X) : X \in \sC\}$ is a generating topology.
    \item $\sB(\gA) = \{\sB(\gA)(Y) : Y \in \sC\}$ is a generating bornology.
    \item $\sO(\cP) = \{\sO(\cP)(X,Y) : X,Y \in \sC\}$ is an operator ideal.
    \item $\sO(\cM) = \{\sO(\cM)(X,Y) : X,Y \in \sC\}$ is an operator ideal.
    \item $\cP^\circ = \{\cP^\circ(Y) : Y \in \sC\}$ is a generating bornology.
    \item $\cM^\circ = \{\cM^\circ(Y) : Y \in \sC\}$ is a generating topology.
    \item $\sO(\sT(\gA)) = \gA^\inj$.
    \item $\sO(\sB(\gA)) = \gA^\sur$.
    \item $\sT(\sO(\cP))  = \cP$.
    \item $\sB(\sO(\cM))  = \cM$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{theorem}

For generating topologies $\cP$ and $\cP_1$, and generating
bornologies $\cM$ and $\cM_1$ on Banach spaces,  we can also associate to them
the operator ideals with components
\begin{align*}
\sO(\cP/\cP_1)(X,Y) &= \gL(X_\cP,Y_{\cP_1}),\\
\sO(\cM/\cM_1)(X,Y) &=L^\times(X^{\cM_1},Y^{\cM})\cap\gL(X,Y)\\
\sO(\cP/\cM)(X,Y) &= \gL(X_\cP,Y^\cM).
\end{align*}
These give rise to
\begin{align*}
\sO(\cP/\cP_1) &= \sO(\cP_1)^{-1}\circ\sO(\cP)\quad \text{\cite{Step80}},\\
\sO(\cM/\cM_1) &= \sO(\cM)\circ\sO(\cM_1)^{-1} \quad \text{\cite{Step83}},\\
\sO(\cP/\cM) &= \sO(\cM)\circ\sO(\cP) = \sO(\cM)\circ\sO(\cP)\quad \text{\cite{WW88}}.
\end{align*}
Here, the product $\gA\circ\gB$ consists of operators of the form $ST$ with
$S\in \gA$ and $T\in \gB$, while the quotient $\gA\circ\gB^{-1}$ consists
of those $S$ such that $ST\in \gA$ whenever $T\in \gB$.
 Readers are referred to Pietsch's classic \cite{Pie80}
 for information regarding quotients and products of operator ideals.

\section{Generating sequences}

The following is based on a version in \cite{Step80}.

\begin{definition}
A family $\Phi(E)$ of bounded sequences in a Banach space $E$ is
    called a \emph{vector sequential structure} if
    \begin{itemize}
        \item $\{ax_n + by_n\}\in \Phi(E)$ whenever $\{x_n\},\{y_n\}\in \Phi(E)$ and $a,b$ are scalars;
        \item every subsequence of a sequence in $\Phi(E)$ belongs to $\Phi(E)$.
    \end{itemize}
\end{definition}

Clearly, the biggest vector sequential structure on a Banach space $E$ is the family
$\Phi_b(E)$ of all bounded sequences in $E$.  On the other hand, we let
$\Phi_{\text{fin}}(E)$ to be the vector sequential structure on $E$ of all
bounded sequences $\{x_n\}$ with finite dimensional ranges, i.e., there is a finite
dimensional subspace of $F$ containing all
$x_n$'s.

Given two Banach spaces $E, F$ with vector sequential structures $\Phi, \Psi$, we let
$\gL(E^\Phi, F^\Psi)$ be the vector space of all continuous linear operators sending
a bounded sequence in $\Phi$ to a bounded sequence in $F$ with a subsequence in $\Psi$.

\begin{definition}
A family
$\Phi := \{\Phi(F) : F \text{ is a Banach space}\}$
of (bounded) vector sequential structures on each Banach space is called a \emph{generating sequential
structure} if
    \begin{description}
        \item[GS$_1$] $\Phi_{\text{fin}}(F) \subseteq \Phi(F) \subseteq \Phi_b(F)$ for every Banach space $F$.
        \item[GS$_2$] $\gL(E,F)\subseteq \gL(E^\Phi, F^\Phi)$ for all Banach spaces $E,F$.
    \end{description}
\end{definition}

\begin{definition}
Let $\gA$ be an operator ideal on Banach spaces.
Call a bounded sequence $\{y_n\}$ in a Banach space $F$ an \emph{$\gA$-sequence}
if there is a bounded sequence $\{x_n\}$ in a Banach space $E$ and a continuous
linear operator $T$ in $\gA(E,F)$ such that $Tx_n=y_n$, $n=1,2,\ldots$.
Denote by $\sS(\gA)(F)$ the family of all $\gA$-sequences in $F$.
\end{definition}

\begin{lemma}\label{lem:A-seq}
Let $\gA$ be an operator ideal on Banach spaces.
Then
$$
\sS(\gA) := \{\sS(\gA)(F): F \text{ is a Banach space}\}
$$
is a generating
sequential structure.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It is easy to see that all $\sS(\gA)(F)$ is a bounded vector
sequential structure.  Since the ideal $\gF$ of continuous linear operators  of finite rank
is the smallest operator ideal, while the ideal $\gL$ of all continuous
linear operators is the biggest, we see that (GS$_1$) is satisfied.
On the other hand, (GS$_2$) follows from (OI$_2$) directly.
\end{proof}

We now work on the converse of Lemma \ref{lem:A-seq}.
Let $\Phi$ be a generating sequential structure.
Denote by $\sM^\Phi_\text{base}(E)$ the family of all bounded sets $M$ in a
Banach space $E$ such that every sequence $\{x_n\}$ in $M$ has a subsequence
$\{x_{n_k}\}$ in $\Phi(E)$.

\begin{lemma}\label{lem:seq2born}
The family $\sM^\Phi(E)$ of all (bounded) sets with circle hull in
$\sM^\Phi_\text{base}(E)$ in a Banach space $E$ forms a generating bornology $\sM^\Phi$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
Let $M, N\in \sM^\Phi(E)$, let $\lambda$ be a scalar, and let $W\subseteq M$.  It is
easy to see that the circle hull $\text{ch}\, M$, $\lambda M$ and $W$ are all
in $\sM^\Phi(E)$.  For the sum $M+N$, we first notice that both
$\text{ch}\, M$ and $\text{ch}\, N$ belong to $\sM^\Phi_\text{base}(E)$.  Now
$$
M+N \subseteq \text{ch}\, M + \text{ch}\,  N \in \sM^\Phi_{\text{base}}(E)
$$
and
$$
\text{ch}\, (M+N) \subseteq \text{ch}\, M + \text{ch}\, N
$$
give $M+N\in \sM^\Phi(E)$.  All these together say that
$\sM^\Phi(E)$ is a vector bornology on the Banach space $E$.

The condition (GB$_1$) follows directly from (GS$_1$).  For (GB$_2$),
let $T\in \gL(E,F)$ and $M\in \sM^\Phi(E)$.
Then for every sequence $\{Tx_n\}$ in $TM$, we
will have a subsequence of $\{x_n\}$ in $\Phi(E)$.
By (GS$_2$), we have a further subsequence $\{Tx_{n_k}\}$ belonging
to $\sM^\Phi(F)$.
\end{proof}

\begin{definition}
A generating sequential structure $\Phi$ is said to be \emph{normal}
if for every $\{x_n\}$ in $\Phi(E)$ and every bounded scalar sequence $(\lambda_n)$ in $\ell^\infty$
of norm not greater than $1$, we have $\{\lambda_n x_n\}\in \Phi(E)$.
\end{definition}

It is clear that $\sS(\gA)$ is normal for any operator ideal $\gA$.

\begin{lemma}\label{lem:base}
For every normal generating sequential structure $\Phi$, we have
$$
\sM^\Phi_{\rm{base}} = \sM^\Phi.
$$
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
It suffices to show that every $M$ in $\sM^\Phi_{\text{base}}(E)$
has its circle hull $\text{ch}\, M$ in $\sM^\Phi_{\text{base}}(E)$ for
each Banach space $E$, i.e., $\sM^\Phi_{\text{base}}$ is itself circled.
To this end, let $\{x_n\}$ be from $\text{ch}\, M$.  Then there is
a $(\lambda_n)$ from $\ell^\infty$ of norm not greater than $1$ such that
$$
x_n = \lambda_n y_n, \quad n=1,2,\ldots
$$
for some $\{y_n\}$ in $M$.  Now, there is a subsequence $\{y_{n_k}\}$ in $\Phi(E)$
ensuring that $\{x_{n_k}\} = \{\lambda_{n_k} y_{n_k}\} \in \Phi(E)$ for
$\Phi$ being normal.
\end{proof}

\begin{definition}
Let $\Phi$ be a generating sequential structure on Banach spaces.
Let $E,F$ be Banach spaces.
Denote by $\sO(\Phi)(E,F)$ the family of all continuous linear operators $T$
in $\gL(E,F)$ sending every bounded sequence $\{x_n\}$ in $E$ to a bounded
sequence in  $F$ with a subsequence $\{Tx_n\}$ in $\Phi(F)$.  In other words,
$\sO(\Phi)(E,F) = \gL(E^{\Phi_b}, F^\Phi)$.
\end{definition}

\begin{theorem}\label{thm:seq2OI}
Let $\Phi$ be a generating sequential structure on Banach spaces.
Then $\sO(\Phi)$ is a surjective operator ideal.  More precisely,
$$
\sO(\Phi)= \sO(\sM^\Phi).
$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
The ideal property of $\sO(\Phi)$ is trivial.  For the surjectivity of
$\sO(\Phi)$, we let $S\in \sO(\Phi)(E_0,F)$ and $T\in\gL(E,F)$ such that
$TU_E\subseteq SU_{E_0}$.  Here, $U_E, U_{E_0}$ are the closed unit balls of
$E, E_0$, respectively.  We need to show that $T\in \sO(\Phi)(E,F)$.  In fact,
for any bounded sequence $\{x_n\}$ in $E$, we have
$$
Tx_n = Sy_n, \quad n=1,2,\ldots,
$$
with some bounded sequence $\{y_n\}$ in $F$.  Now, the fact $\{Sy_n\}$ has
a subsequence $\{Sy_{n_k}\}\in \Phi(F)$ implies that $T\in \sO(\Phi)(E,F)$, as
asserted.

Finally, we check the representation.  The inclusion $\sO(\Phi)\subseteq \sO(\sM^\Phi)$ is
an immediate consequence of the definition of $\sM^\Phi$.  Conversely, let $T\in \sO(\sM^\Phi)(E,F)$,
i.e., $TU_E\in \sM^\Phi(F)$.  Let $\{x_n\}$ be a bounded sequence in $E$.
We can assume $\|x_n\|\leq 1$ for all $n$.  Then $\{Tx_n\}\subseteq TU_E$ and hence
possesses a subsequence $\{Tx_{n_k}\}\in \Phi(F)$.  In other words, $T\in \sO(\Phi)(E,F)$.
\end{proof}

\begin{corollary}
If a generating sequential structure $\Phi$ is normal then
$$
\sS(\sO(\Phi))=\Phi.
$$
Conversely, if $\gA$ is an operator ideal on Banach spaces then
$$
\sO(\sS(\gA)) = \gA^\sur.
$$
\end{corollary}

\begin{theorem}\label{thm:quotient}
Let $\Phi,\Psi$ be two generating sequential structures.
Let
$$
\sO(\Phi/\Psi)(E,F) := \gL(E^\Psi, F^\Phi),
$$
i.e., $T\in \sO(\Phi/\Psi)(E,F)$
if and only if the continuous linear operator $T$ sends each bounded sequence
$\{x_n\}$ in $\Psi(E)$ to a sequence in $F$ with a subsequence $\{Tx_{n_k}\}$ in
$\Phi(F)$.  Then $\sO(\Phi/\Psi)(E,F)$ is an operator ideal on Banach spaces.  Moreover,
if $\Psi$ is normal, then
$$
\sO(\Phi/\Psi)= \sO(\sM^\Phi/\sM^\Psi)= \sO(\sM^\Phi)\circ\sO(\sM^\Psi)^{-1}.
$$
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Conditions (OI$_1$) and (OI$_2$) follow from Conditions (GS$_1$) and (GS$_2$), respectively.

Assume $\Psi$ is normal.  Let $T\in \sO(\Phi/\Psi)(E,F)$ and $M\in \sM^\Psi(E)$ be circled.
Suppose, on contrary, $TM\notin \sM^\Phi(F)$.  By definition, there is a sequence $\{Tx_n\}$
in $TM$ having no subsequence $\{Tx_{n_k}\}$ in $\Phi(F)$.  But since $\{x_n\}\subseteq M$,
it has a subsequence $\{x_{n_k}\}$ in $\Psi(E)$.  And thus $\{Tx_{n_k}\}$ has a further subsequence
in $\Phi(F)$, a contradiction.

Conversely, let $T\in\sO(\sM^\Phi/\sM^\Psi)(E,F)$.  It is easy to see that
the range of any sequence $\{x_n\}$ in $\Psi(E)$ is a bounded set in $\sM^\psi(E)$, by
noting that $\Psi$ is normal.  The range of the sequence $\{Tx_n\}$ is bounded in $\sM^\Phi(F)$.
Therefore, there is a subsequence $\{Tx_{n_k}\}$ of $\{Tx_n\}$ belongs to $\Phi(F)$.
This ensures $T\in \sO(\Phi/\Psi)(E,F)$.
\end{proof}

\begin{definition}\label{defn:coordinated}
Given two generating sequential structures $\Phi$ and $\Psi$.  We say
that $\Psi(E)$ is \emph{coordinated to} $\Phi(E)$ if the following conditions holds.
Suppose $\{x_n\}\in \Psi(E)$.  The bounded sequence $\{x_n\}\notin \Phi(E)$ if and only if
$\{x_n\}$ has a subsequence $\{x_{n_k}\}$ which has no further subsequence belonging to $\Phi(E)$.
We write, in this case, $\Phi(E) \ll \Psi(E)$.  If $\Phi(E) \ll \Psi(E)$ for all Banach spaces
$E$ then we write $\Phi \ll \Psi$.
\end{definition}

\begin{theorem}\label{thm:coordinated-quotient}
Assume $\Phi,\Psi$ be two generating sequential structures such that $\Phi(F)\ll\Psi(F)$ for
some Banach space $F$.  Then $\sO(\Phi/\Psi)(E,F)$ consists of exactly those continuous
linear operators sending bounded sequences in $\Psi(E)$ to bounded sequences in $\Phi(F)$ for
any Banach space $E$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
Assume $T\in \sO(\Phi/\Psi)(E,F)$ and $\{x_n\}\in \Psi(E)$.  Now, suppose
$\{Tx_n\}\notin \Phi(F)$.  Since $\{Tx_n\}\in \Psi(F)$ by (GS$_2$), we
can verify the condition in Definition \ref{defn:coordinated}.
Therefore, we might have a subsequence $\{Tx_{n_k}\}$ having no further subsequence in
$\Phi(F)$.  However, by the facts that $\{x_{n_k}\}\in \Psi(E)$ and $T\in \sO(\Phi/\Psi)(E,F)$,
we arrive at the asserted contradiction.
\end{proof}

\begin{corollary}
Let $\Phi,\Psi$ be two generating sequential structures such that $\Phi \ll\Psi $ and
$\Psi$ is normal.  Then, the operator ideal $\sO(\sM^\Phi, \sM^\Psi)$ consists
of exactly those operators sending sequences in $\Psi$ to   sequences in $\Phi$.
\end{corollary}

\section{Examples}

We begin with some useful generating bornologies.

\begin{examples}
A set $W$ in a Banach space $F$ is called
\begin{enumerate}
    \item \emph{nuclear} (see, e.g., \cite{Step80}) if
    $$
    W \subseteq \{ y\in F: y = \sum_{n=1}^\infty \lambda_n y_n, |\lambda_n| \leq 1\}
    $$
    for an absolutely summable sequence $\{y_n\}$ in $F$;

    \item \emph{unconditionally summable} (see, e.g., \cite{Step80}) if
    $$
    W \subseteq \{ y\in F: y = \sum_{n=1}^\infty \lambda_n y_n \text{ in norm}, |\lambda_n| \leq 1\}
    $$
    for an unconditionally  summable series $\sum_{n=1}^\infty y_n$ in $F$;

    \item \emph{weakly unconditionally summable} (see, e.g., \cite{Step80}) if
    $$
    W \subseteq \{ y\in F: y = \sum_{n=1}^\infty \lambda_n y_n \text{ weakly}, |\lambda_n| \leq 1\}
    $$
    for a weakly unconditionally  summable series $\sum_{n=1}^\infty y_n$ in $F$;

    \item \emph{limited} (\cite{BourgainDiestel84}) if
    $$
    \lim_{n\to\infty} \sup_{a\in W} |y_n'(a)| = 0
    $$
    for any $\sigma(F',F)$-null sequence $\{y_n'\}$ in $F'$.
\end{enumerate}
The above defines generating bornologies $\sM_\nu$, $\sM_{uc}$, $\sM_{wuc}$, and $\sM_{\text{lim}}$, respectively.
\end{examples}

Another way to obtain generating bornologies is through  generating
sequential structures.

\begin{examples}
A bounded sequence $\{x_n\}$ in a Banach space $F$ is called
    \begin{enumerate}
        \item \emph{$\delta_0$-fundamental} (\cite{Step80}) if
        $$
        t_n = x_{n+1} - x_n, \quad n=1,2,\ldots,
        $$
        forms a weakly unconditionally summable series;

        \item \emph{limited} (\cite{BourgainDiestel84}) if
        $$
        \langle x_n, x_n'\rangle \to 0 \text{ as } n\to\infty
        $$
        for any $\sigma(F', F)$-null sequence $\{x_n'\}$ in $F'$;

        \item \emph{Banach-Saks} if
        $$
        \lim_{n\to\infty} \frac{x_1 + x_2 + \cdots + x_n}{n} = x_0
        $$
        for
        some $x_0$ in $F$ in norm.
    \end{enumerate}
\end{examples}

\begin{examples}
The following are all generating sequential structures.
\begin{enumerate}
    \item $\Phi_{\delta_0}$ of all $\delta_0$-fundamental sequences.
    \item $\Phi_{\text{lim}}$ of all limited sequences.
    \item $\Phi_{\text{BS}}$ of all Banach-Saks sequences.
    \item $\Phi_c$ of all convergent sequences.
    \item $\Phi_{wc}$ of all weakly convergence sequences.
    \item $\Phi_{wCa}$ of all weakly Cauchy sequences.
\end{enumerate}
\end{examples}

\begin{examples}[\cite{Step80}]
The following generating bornologies can be induced by the corresponding generating
sequential structures as in Lemma \ref{lem:seq2born}.
\begin{enumerate}
    \item The $\delta_0$-compact bornology $\sM_{\delta_0}$ is defined by $\Phi_{\delta_0}$.
    \item The compact bornology $\sM_c$ is defined  by $\Phi_c$.
    \item The weakly compact bornology $\sM_{wc}$ is defined  by $\Phi_{wc}$.
    \item The Rosenthal compact bornology $\sM_{wCa}$ is defined  by $\Phi_{wCa}$.
    \item The Banach-Saks bornology $\sM_{\text{BS}}$  is defined by $\Phi_{\text{BS}}$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{examples}

\begin{proposition}
The generating bornology induced by $\Phi_{\rm{lim}}$ is $\sM_{\rm{lim}}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
First, we notice that $\Phi_{\text{lim}}$ is normal.  Hence,
$\sM_{\text{base}}^{\Phi_{\text{lim}}} = \sM^{\Phi_{\text{lim}}}$ by
Lemma \ref{lem:base}.  Let $W\in \sM_{\text{lim}}(F)$.  Then,
by definition,
$$
\lim_{n\to\infty} \sup_{a\in W} |\langle a,y_n'\rangle| = 0
$$
for any $\sigma(F',F)$-null sequence $\{y_n'\}$ in $F'$ and any
sequence $\{y_n\}$ in $W$.  Hence, $W\in \sM^{\Phi_{\text{lim}}}(F)$.

Conversely, if $W$ is a bounded set in $F$ such that every sequence
$\{y_n\}$ in $W$ has a limited subsequence $\{y_{n_k}\}$, we need
to check that $W\in \sM_{\text{lim}}$.  Assume, on contrary, that there
were some $\sigma(F',F)$-null sequence $\{y_n'\}$ in $F'$ and some sequence $\{a_n\}$ in $W$
such that
$$
\lim_{n\to\infty} |\langle a_{n_k}, y_{n_k}'\rangle| = 0.
$$
This is a contradiction and thus $W$ is a member of $\sM_{\text{lim}}(F)$.
\end{proof}

\begin{proposition}
The generating bornologies $\sM_c$, $\sM_{wc}$, $\sM_{wCa}$, $\sM_\nu$,
$\sM_{uc}$, $\sM_{wuc}$ and $\sM_{\rm{lim}}$ are all $\sigma$-disked.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
For the case of $\sM_{\text{lim}}$, see \cite{BourgainDiestel84}.
For all others, see \cite{Step80}.
\end{proof}

We are now ready to give a number of examples.

\begin{examples}
Using Definition \ref{defn:vertices} and Theorem \ref{thm:seq2OI}, we can
obtain the following operator ideals on Banach spaces through the
associated generating bornologies.
\begin{enumerate}
    \item The ideal \emph{$\gN^\sur$ of co-nuclear operators} for the nuclear
    bornology $\sM_\nu$.
    \item The ideal \emph{$\gL_{\text{lim}}$ of limited operators} for the limited bornology
    $\sM_{\rm{lim}}$.
    \item The ideal \emph{$\mathfrak{BS}$ of Banach-Saks operators} for the Banach-Saks bornology
    $\sM_{\text{BS}}$.
    \item The ideal \emph{$\gK$ of compact operators} for the compact bornology $\sM_c$.
    \item The ideal \emph{$\gW$ of weakly compact operators} for the weakly compact bornology $\sM_{wc}$.
    \item The ideal \emph{$\mathfrak R$ of Rosenthal compact operators} for the Rosenthal compact bornology $\sM_{wCa}$.
    \item The ideal \emph{$\mathfrak{D}_0$ of $\delta_0$-compact operators} for the $\delta_0$-compact
    bornology $\sM_{\delta_0}$.
\end{enumerate}
For a proof of (a), see \cite[p.~112]{Pie80}.  For (b), see \cite{Drewnowski86}.
For (c), see Theorem \ref{thm:seq2OI}.  For others, see \cite{Step80}.
\end{examples}

Concerning Theorem \ref{thm:coordinated-quotient}, we have

\begin{examples}
\begin{enumerate}
    \item $\Phi_c \ll \Phi_{wc}$.
    \item $\Phi_c \ll \Phi_{wCa}$.
    \item $\Phi_{wc} \ll \Phi_{wCa}$.
    \item $\Phi_c \ll \Phi_{\delta_0}$.
    \item $\Phi_c \ll \Phi_{\text{lim}}$.
\end{enumerate}
The first four can be found in \cite{Step80}.
For the last one, we observe the fact that each limited sequence is weakly Cauchy (see \cite{BourgainDiestel84})
and (c).
\end{examples}

\begin{examples}
The following operator ideals have  desirable representations.
\begin{enumerate}
    \item The ideal $\mathfrak U$ of unconditionally summing operators
    \begin{align*}
    {\mathfrak U} &= \sO(\sM_{uc}/\sM_{wuc}) = \sO(\sM_{uc})\circ\sO(\sM_{wuc})^{-1}\\
        &= \sO(\sM_c/\sM_{\delta_0}) = \sO(\sM_c)\circ\sO(\sM_{\delta_0})^{-1} = \gK\circ{\mathfrak D}_0^{-1}.
    \end{align*}

    \item The ideal $\mathfrak V$ of completely continuous operators
    \begin{align*}
    {\mathfrak V} &= \sO(\Phi_c/\Phi_{wc}) = \sO(\sM_c/\sM_{wc}) = \sO(\sM_c)\circ\sO(\sM_{wc})^{-1} = \gK\circ\gW^{-1}\\
        &= \sO(\Phi_c/\Phi_{wCa}) = \sO(\sM_c/\sM_{wCa}) = \sO(\sM_c)\circ\sO(\sM_{wCa})^{-1}=\gK\circ
        {\mathfrak R}^{-1}.
    \end{align*}

    \item The ideal $w{\mathfrak{SC}}$ of weakly sequentially complete operators
    $$
    s{\mathfrak{SC}} = \sO(\Phi_{wc}/\Phi_{wCa}) = \sO(\sM_{wc}/\sM_{wCa}) =
        \sO(\sM_{wc})\circ\sO(\sM_{wCa})^{-1} = \gW \circ {\mathfrak R}^{-1}.
    $$

    \item The ideal $\mathfrak{GP}$ of Gelfand-Phillips operators
    $$
    {\mathfrak{GP}} = \sO(\Phi_c/\Phi_{\text{lim}})
                 = \sO(\sM_c/\sM_{\text{lim}}) = \sO(\sM_c)\circ\sO(\sM_{\text{lim}})^{-1}
                 = \gK\circ {\mathfrak L}_{\text{lim}}^{-1}.
    $$

    \item The ideal $w{\mathfrak{BS}}$ of weakly Banach-Saks operators
    $$
    w{\mathfrak{BS}} = \sO(\Phi_{\text{BS}}/\Phi_{wc})
                    = \sO(\sM_{\text{BS}}/\sM_{wc}) =  \sO(\sM_{\text{BS}})\circ\sO(\sM_{wc})^{-1}
                     = {\mathfrak{BS}}\circ\gW^{-1}.
    $$

\end{enumerate}
See \cite{Step80} for a proof of (a), (b) and (c).  See \cite{Drewnowski86} for (d).
For (e), we simply recall that a $T$ in $\gL(E,F)$ is called \emph{weakly Banach-Saks} if $T$
sends each weakly convergent sequence to a sequence possessing a Banach-Saks subsequence, by definition.
\end{examples}

\begin{proposition}[\cite{Step80}]
Let $\gA$ be a surjective operator ideal such that $\gA$ is idempotent, i.e., $\gA^2=\gA$.  Then
for any operator ideal $\gB\supseteq \gA$, there exists an operator
ideal $\gC$ such that
$$
\gA = \gC\circ \gB^\sur,
$$
and $\gC$ can be chosen to be $\gA\circ(\gB^\sur)^{-1}$.
\end{proposition}
\begin{proof}
We present a proof here for completeness.
Denote
$$
\sM_\gA := \sM(\gA), \quad \sM_\gB :=\sM(\gB)
$$
and set
$$
\gC := \sO(\sM_\gA/\sM_\gB).
$$
Now the facts $\gA\subseteq \gB$ and
$$
\gA\subseteq \gC =\sO(\sM_\gA)\circ\sO(\sM_\gB)^{-1} = \gA\circ(\gB^\sur)^{-1}
$$
implies that
$$
\gA = \gA^2 \subseteq \gC\circ\gB \subseteq \gC\circ\gB^\sur.
$$
On the other hand, if $T\in \gC\circ\gB^\sur(E,F)$ then $T=RS$ for
some $R\in \gC(G,F)= L^\times(G^{\sM_\gB},F^{\sM_\gA})\cap\gL(G,F)$ and $S\in\gB^\sur(E,G)=
L^\times(E,G^{\sM_\gB})\cap\gL(E,G)$ with some Banach space $G$.
Hence,
$$
T\in L^\times(E,F^{\sM_\gA})\cap\gL(E,F) = \gA(E,F).
$$
\end{proof}

\begin{examples}[\cite{Step80}]
\begin{enumerate}
    \item Since the surjective ideal $\gK$ of compact operators is idempotent and
    contained in the surjective ideal $\gW$, $\mathfrak R$, and ${\mathfrak D}_0$ of
    weakly compact operators, Rosenthal compact operators, and $\delta_0$-compact
    operators, respectively, we have
    \begin{enumerate}
        \item $\gK = {\mathfrak V}\circ \gW$ since ${\mathfrak V} = \sO(\sM_c/\sM_{wc})
        =\gK\circ\gW^{-1}$;
        \item $\gK = {\mathfrak V}\circ {\mathfrak R}$ since ${\mathfrak V} = \sO(\sM_c/\sM_{wcA})
        = \gK\circ{\mathfrak R}^{-1}$;
        \item $\gK = {\mathfrak U}\circ{\mathfrak D}_0$ since
        ${\mathfrak U} = \sO(\sM_c/\sM_{\delta_0})= \gK\circ{{\mathfrak D}_0}^{-1}$.
    \end{enumerate}
    \item Since the ideal $\gW$ of weakly compact operators is idempotent and contained in the surjective
    ideal $\mathfrak R$ of Rosenthal compact operators, we have
    $$
    \gW= w{\mathfrak{SC}}\circ {\mathfrak R},
    $$
    where $w{\mathfrak{SC}}=\sO(\sM_{wc}/\sM_{wCa}) = \gW\circ{\mathfrak R}^{-1}$ is the ideal
    of weakly sequentially complete operators.
\end{enumerate}
\end{examples}


On local matchability in groups and vector spaces

Abstract: In this paper, we define locally matchable subsets of a group which is extracted from the concept of matchings in groups and used as a tool to give alternative proofs for existing results in matching theory. We also give the linear analogue of locally matchability for subspaces in a field extension. Our tools mix additive number theory, combinatorics and algebra

\section{Introduction}
The notion of matchings in groups was used to study an old problem of Wakeford concerning canonical forms for symmetric
tensors \cite{11}.  Losonczy in \cite{10} introduced matchings for groups to work on Wakeford's problem
\,Let $G$ be an additive abelian group and  $A$ and $B$ be two non-empty subsets of $G$. A
\textit{matching} from $A$ to $B$ is a  map $f: A\to B$ which is bijective and satisfies the condition $a+f(a)\not\in
A$, for any $a\in A$
\,This concept can be used to define the matching property in the sense  of groups.
It is said that the abelian group $G$ has the \textit{matching property}, if for
every pair $A$ and $B$ of non-empty finite subsets satisfying $\# A=\# B$ and $0\not\in B$, there exists at least one
matching from $A$ to $B$.
In addition to this generalization of the definition of  matching, we can see the following which is its extension in
a new fashion:\\%[5mm]
 Let $A$, $B$ and $C$  be non-empty finite subsets of $G$ such that $A\subseteq C$. A
\textit{$C$-matching} from $A$ to $B$ is a map $f:A\to B$ which is bijective and satisfies the condition $a+f(a)\not\in
C$, for all $a\in A$. Clearly, $a$ matching from $A$ to $B$ is an $A$-matching from $A$ to $B$.\\%[2mm]
The following definition can also be extracted from the original concept of matchable subsets of a group.\\%[5mm]
 Let $A$ and $B$ be non-empty subsets of $G$ such that for any proper subgroup $H$ of $G$ with $H\cap
B\neq\emptyset$ and $a+H\subseteq A$ for some $a\in A$, one can find an $A$-matching from a subset of $A$ to $H\cap
B$. Then we say $A$ is locally matched to $B$. \\
It is obvious that if $A$ is matched to $B$, then it is locally matched to $B$ as well. We will see in the section 3
that matchability concludes local  matchability, i.e. these two concepts are equivalent.
We will use this concept as a tool to give an alternative proof for  groups with matching property.
\section*{Organization of the paper}
The purpose of this paper is to find the relations between local  matchability and matchability in groups and vector spaces to give alternative proofs for existing results on matching property for groups and also its linear analogue. In   section 2, we will mention the results that have been proven on matching in groups and vector spaces and also some tools of additive number theory required to prove our main results.
In  section 3, we will show the equivalency between matchability and local  matchability for subsets of a group.
Section 4  concerned with the linear analogue  of one  of Losonzy's results on matchings for cyclic groups.  Furthermore, we will present a dimension criteria for the primitive subspaces related to our results in Theorem 4.1
\,Finally, in section 5, we   show that if $A$ is matched to $B$, then $A$ it is locally matched to $B$ in the sense of vector spaces. However, the  converse is still not clear in the general case. We will see in Theorem 5.2 that for vector spaces in a field extension whose
algebraic elements are separable, the local  matchability implies the matchability. As an application we give an alternative proof for author's main result in \cite{6}.
\section{Prelimanaries}
The following theorems are known about matching for groups and vector spaces. As we already mentioned, our goal in this paper is to prove their
more general cases.
\begin{theorem}
 An abelian group $G$ has the matching property if and only if $G$ is torsion-free or cyclic of
prime order \cite{8}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}
 Let  $G$ be a non-trivial finite cyclic group. Suppose we are given non-empty subsets $A$ and $B$
of $G$  such that $\# A=\# B$ and every element of $B$ is a generator of $G$. Then there exists at least one matching
from $A$ to $B$ \cite{8}.
\end{theorem}
Here, we define the matching property for subspaces in a field extension.
 Let $K\subseteq L$ be a field extension and $A$ and $B$ be $n$-dimensional $K$-subspaces of
the field extension $L$. Let $\mathcal{A}=\{a_1,\ldots,a_n\}$ and $\mathcal B=\{b_1,\ldots,b_n\}$ be bases of $A$ and
$B$, respectively. It is said that $\mathcal A$ is \textit{matched} to  $\mathcal B$ if
\[
a_ib\in A \;\Rightarrow \; b\in \langle b_1,\ldots,\hat{b}_i,\ldots,b_n\rangle,
\]
for all $b\in B$ and $i=1,\ldots,n$, where $\langle b_1,\ldots,\hat{b}_i,\ldots,b_n\rangle$ is the hyperplane of $B$
spanned by the set $\mathcal B\setminus \{b_i\}$; moreover, it is said that $A$ is \textit{matched } to $B$ if every
basis $\mathcal A$ of $A$ can be matched to a basis $\mathcal B$ of $B$. As it is seen, the matchable bases are defined
in a natural way based on the definition of matching in a group. Indeed, we can consider $\mathcal{A}$ and
$\mathcal{B}$ as subsets of the multiplicative group $L^*$ and so the bijection $a_i\mapsto b_i$ is a matching in the group
setting sense.
It's said $L$ has the \textit{linear matching property} if, for every $n\geq1$
and every $n$-dimensional subspaces $A$ and $B$ of $L$ with $1\not\in B$, the subspaces $A$ is matched with $B$.  \\
Now, our definition for matchable subsets of two matchable bases:\\%[5mm]
 Let $\tilde{A}$ and $\tilde{B}$ be two $K$-subspaces of $A$ and $B$, respectively. We say that
$\tilde{A}$ is $A$-matched to $\tilde{B}$, if for any basis $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}=\{a_1,\ldots,a_m\}$ of $\tilde{A}$,
there exists a basis $\tilde{\mathcal{B}}=\{b_1,\ldots,b_m\}$ of $\tilde{B}$ for which $a_ib_i\not\in A$, for
$i=1,\ldots,m$. In this case, it is also said that $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}$ is $A$-matched to $\tilde{\mathcal{B}}$.\\%[2mm]
The following is the linear analogue of locally matchable subsets for the vector spaces in a field extension.\\%[5mm]
 Let $K\subseteq L$ be a field extension and $A$, $B$ be two $n$-dimensional $K$-subspaces of
$L$.  We say that $A$ is locally matched to $B$ if for any proper subfield $H$ of $L$ with $H\cap B\neq\{0\}$ and $aH\subseteq
A$, for some $a\in A$, one can find a subspace $\tilde{A}$ of $A$ such that $\tilde{A}$ is $A$-matched to $H\cap B$.\\
The following theorem is a dimension criteria for matchable bases. For more results on linear version of matching  see
[2, 3, 4 and 6].
\begin{theorem}
 Let $K\subset L$ be a field extension and $A$ and $B$ be two $n$-dimensional $K$-subspaces of
$L$. Suppose that $\mathcal A=\{a_1,\ldots,a_n\}$ is a basis of $A$. Then $\mathcal A$ can be matched to a basis of
$B$ if and only if, for all $J\subseteq\{1,\ldots,n\}$, we have:
\[
\dim\displaystyle\bigcap_{i\in J}\left(a_i^{-1}A\cap B\right)\leq n-\# J.
\]
\end{theorem}
See \cite{6} for more details.
One of the main result in \cite{6} is that a field extension $K\subset L$ has the linear matching property if and only
if there are no trivial finite intermediate extension $K\subset M\subset L$. We would like to mention that, although
the statement of \cite[Theorem 2.6]{6} is slightly different and assumes that the  extension is either purely
transcendental or finite of prime degree, what they actually use in their proof is that there are no nontrivial finite
intermediate extensions, which is a weaker condition. (See also \cite{1}.)

For proving our main results, we shall need the following theorems from \cite[page 116, Theorem 4.3]{9}.
\begin{theorem}[Kneser]
  If $C=A+B$, where $A$ and $B$ are finite subsets of an abelian group $G$, then
\[
\# C\geq \# A+\# B-\# H,
\]
where $H$ is the subgroup $H=\{g\in G:\; C+g=C\}$.
 \\
 See \cite{5} for more details regarding the following theorem which is the linear analogue of Kneser's theorem.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}
 Let $K\subseteq L$ be a field extension in which every algebraic element of $L$ is separable
 over $K$. Let $A, B\subset L$ be non-zero finite-dimensional $K$-subspaces of $L$ and $H$ be the stabilizer of
 $\langle AB\rangle$. Then
 \[
 \dim_K\langle AB\rangle\geq\dim_KA+\dim_KB-\dim_KH.
 \]
(Here $H$ is a subfield of $L$ containing $K$ and we have $H\langle AB\rangle=\langle AB\rangle$.)

Let $E$ be a vector space over the field $K$ and let $\mathcal{E} = \{E_1, E_2,\ldots, E_n\}$ be a collection of vector
subspaces of $E$. A \textit{free transversal} for $\mathcal{E}$ is a free family of vectors $\{x_1,\ldots , x_n\}$ in
$E$ satisfying $x_i \in E_i$ for all $i=1,\ldots , n$. The following result of Rado [8] gives necessary and sufficient
conditions for the existence of a free transversal for $\mathcal{E}$, very similar to those of Hall's marriage theorem.
The interested readers are also referred to \cite{7}.
\end{theorem}
\begin{theorem}
Let $E$ be a vector space over $K$ and let $\mathcal{E} = \{E_1, E_2,\ldots, E_n\}$ be a family
of vector subspaces of $E$. Then $\mathcal{E}$ admits a free transversal if and only if
\[
\dim_K\displaystyle+_{i\in J}E_i \geq \# J,
\]
for all $J\subseteq \{1,\ldots, n\}$.\\
\\
We shall use the following standard notation denoted by
\[
B^\ast=\{f: B\to K:\; f \text{ is linear}\},
\]
the dual of $B$ where $B$ is a $K$-vector space; furthermore, for any subspace $C\subseteq B$, we denote by
\[
C^\perp=\{f\in B^\ast:\; C\subseteq\ker f\}
\]
the orthogonal of $C$ in $B^\ast$. Recall that $\dim_K C^\perp=\dim_K B-\dim_K C$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{corollary}
 Let $E$ be a $n$-dimensional vector space over $K$ and $\mathcal E=\{E_1,\ldots, E_k\}$ be a
family of vector subspaces of $E$ such that for any $J\subseteq\{1,\ldots,k\}$, $\dim_K\displaystyle\bigcap_{i\in
J}E_i\leq n-\# J$. Then, there exist vector subspaces $\tilde{E_i}$ of $E$ such that $E_i\subseteq \tilde{E_i}$ for
$i=1,\ldots,k$ and for any $J\subseteq \{1,\ldots, k\}$, $\dim_K\displaystyle\bigcap_{i\in J}\tilde{E_i}=n-\# J$.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
 Since $\dim_K\displaystyle\bigcap_{i\in J}E_i\leq n-\# J$, then $\dim_K+_{i\in J}E_i^\perp\geq J$. Using Theorem 2.6, $\tilde{\mathcal E}=\left\{E_1^\perp, \ldots, E_k^\perp\right\}$ admits a free transversal. Let
$(a_1,\ldots,a_k)$ be a free transversal for $\tilde{\mathcal E}$. Then $\dim_K+_{i\in J}\langle a_i\rangle=\# J$. Set
$\tilde E_i=\langle a_i\rangle^\perp$, thus $E_i\subseteq\tilde E_i$ and $\dim_K\displaystyle\bigcap_{i\in J}\tilde
E_i=n-\# J$.
\end{proof}
We finish this section by inclusion-exclusion principle for vector spaces which states that for two finite dimensional $K$-vector spaces $A$ and $B$, we have the following equality for the dimension of $K$-vector space $A+B$:
\[\dim_K(A+B)=\dim_KA+\dim_KB-\dim_K A\cap B.\]
Note that since $\dim_K(A+B)=\dim_K\langle A\cup B\rangle$, then we can rewrite the above equality as follows:
\[\dim_K\langle A\cup B\rangle=\dim_KA+\dim_KB-\dim_K(A\cap B).\]

\section{Local  matchability for groups}
The following theorem  shows that local  matchability is equivalent to matchability for abelian groups. Note that it is obvious that matchability implies local  matchability. Then, we just show its converse.
\begin{theorem}
 Let $G$ be an additive abelian group and $A$, $B$ be non-empty finite subsets of $G$ satisfying
the conditions $\# A=\# B$ and $0\not\in B$.
 If $A$  is locally matched to $B$, then $A$ is matched to $B$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
 Suppose there is no matching from $A$ to $B$. We are going to reach a contradiction. By Hall marriage
Theorem there exists a non-empty finite subset $S$ of $A$ such that $\# B\setminus U<\# S$, where $U=\{b\in B:\; s+b\in
A, $ for any $s\in S\}$. Let $\# A=\# B=n$, then $\# U+\# S>n$.
Set $U_0=U\cup\{0\}$. Using Kneser's Theorem one can find the subgroup $H$ of $G$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eq1}
\# (U_0+S)\geq\# U_0+\# S-\#  H,
\end{equation}
where $H=\{g\in G:\; g + U_0 +S=U_0+S\}$. Applying  Kneser's Theorem for $U'=H\cup U$ and $S$, we can find the subgroup $H'$ of $G$ for which
\begin{equation}\label{eq2}
\#(U'+S)\geq \# U' +\# S- \# H',
\end{equation}
 where  $H'=\{g\in G:\; g+U'+S=U'+S\}$. We claim that $H=H'$ and to prove this, it suffices to show that $U'+S=U_0+S$. We have
 \begin{eqnarray}\label{eq3}
 U'+S&=&(H\cup U)+S=(H+S)\cup (U_0+S)\nonumber\\
 &=&(H+S)\cup(U_0+S+H)\nonumber\\
 &=& H+(S\cup(U_0+S))\nonumber\\
 &=&H+(U_0+S)=U_0+S.
 \end{eqnarray}
Then  $H=H'$ and it follows from \eqref{eq2} that
\begin{equation}\label{eq4}
\#  (U_0+S)\geq \# U' +\# S-\# H.
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{eq3}, \eqref{eq4} we get
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eq5}
\# (U_0+S)&=& \#(U'+S)\nonumber\\
&=&\# U' + \# S- \# H \nonumber\\
&=& \# (H\cup U) + \# S -\# H\nonumber\\
&=&\# H+\# U -\#(H\cap U)+\# S- \# H\nonumber\\
&=& \# U+ \# S -\# (H\cap U).
\end{eqnarray}
As $U_0+S=S\cup (S+U)$, \eqref{eq5} follows
\begin{equation}\label{eq6}
\#(S\cup (S+U))\geq \# U+\# S-\# (H\cap U).
\end{equation}
Now, we have two cases for $H\cap U$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
If $H\cap U$ is empty, then by \eqref{eq6} we conclude that $\#(S\cup (S+U))\geq n$. On the other hand $S\cup (S+U)$  is a subset of $A$. We would have $\# A>n$, which contradicts $\# A=n$ above.
\item
If  $H\cap U$ is non-empty, then $H\cap B$ is. Also, if $s\in S\subseteq A$, then according to  the definition of $H$, $s+H\subseteq U_0+S+H=U_0+S\subseteq A$. As $A$ is locally matched to $B$, then there is  an $A$-matching $f$ from a subset of $A$ to $H\cap B$. We claim that $f^{-1}(H\cap U)\cap (U_0+S)$ is empty. If not and $a\in f^{-1}(H\cap U)\cap (U_0+S)$, then  $a+f(a)\in (U_0+S)+H$ as $ a \in U_0+S$ and $f(a) \in H\cap U\subseteq H$. Since $U_0+S\subseteq A$, then $a+f(a)\in A$ which contradicts the case $f$ being an $A$-matching. Therefore $f^{-1}(H\cap U)\cap(U_0+S)$ is empty. As the sets $f^{-1}(H\cap U)$ and $U_0+S$ are both subsets of $A$ and have nothing in common, then $\# f^{-1}(H\cap U)+\#(U_0+S)\leq n$. Thus $\#(H\cap U)+\#(U_0+S)\leq n$ and this tells us $\#(H\cap  U)+\#(S\cup(S+U))\leq n$. Next, using \eqref{eq6} yields that $\# U+\# S\leq n$ which is a contradiction.
\end{enumerate}
Therefore in both cases we extract contradictions. Then there is a matching from $A$ to $B$.
\end{proof}
Using Theorem 3.1, we give an alternative proof to Theorem 2.1.\\[2mm]
Assume that $G$ is either torsion-free or cyclic of prime order. Then $G$ has no non-trivial subgroup of finite order. This means if $A,B\subseteq G$ with $|A|=|B|$ and $0\not \in B$, then $A$ is locally matched to $B$. Using Theorem 3.1  yields that $A$ is matched to $B$ and so $G$ has matching property. \\
Conversely, assume that $G$ is neither torsion-free nor cyclic of prime order. Then it has a non-trivial finite subgroup $H$. Choose $g\in G\setminus H$ and set $A=H$ and $B=H\cup \{g\}\setminus \{0\}$. Clearly, $H\cap B\neq \emptyset$ and $a+H\subseteq A$ for some $a\in A$ (Indeed for any $a\in A$). If $A$ is locally matched to $B$, then one can find an $A$-matching $f$ from a subset $A_0$ of $A$ to $H\cap B$. But if $a\in A_0$, then $a+f(a)\in H+(H\cap B)=H+(H\setminus\{0\})=H=A$, which is a contradiction. Then $A$ is not locally matched to $B$ and so by Theorem 3.1, $A$ is not matched to $B$. Therefore $G$ has no  matching property.

\section{The linear analogue of Losonzcy's result on matchable subsets}
The following is the  linear version of Theorem 2.2   which investigates the matchable subspaces in a simple field extension. Here, we say that $K\subseteq L$ is a simple field extension if $L=K(\alpha)$, for some $\alpha\in L$. Also, if $B$ is a $K$-subspace of $L$ suth that $K(b)=L$, for any $b\in B\setminus \{0\}$, we say that $B$ is a primitive $K$-subspace of $L$.
\begin{theorem}
 Let $K\subsetneqq L$ be a finite and separable field extension and $A$ and $B$ be two
$n$-dimensional $K$-subspaces in $L$ with $n\geq1$ and $B$ is a primitive $K$-subspace of $L$.  Then $A$ is matched with
$B$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
 Assume that  $A$ is not  matched  to $B$. Using Theorem 2.3, one can find  $J\subseteq\{1,\ldots,n\}$
and a basis $\mathcal A=\{a_1,\ldots,a_n\}$ of $A$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eqn7}
\displaystyle\bigcap_{i\in J}\left(a_i^{-1}A\cap B\right)>n-\# J.
\end{equation}
Set  $S=\langle a_i:\; i\in J\rangle$ the $K$-subspace of $A$ spanned by $a_i$'s, $i\in J$, $U=\displaystyle\bigcap_{i\in J}\left(a_i^{-1}A\cap B\right)$ and  $U_0=U\cup\{1\}$. Now, by Theorem 2.5 one can find a subfield $H$ of $L$ such that
\begin{eqnarray*}
\dim_K\langle U_0S\rangle &\geq& \dim_KU_0+\dim_KS-\dim_KH,
\end{eqnarray*}
where $H$ is the stabilizer of $\langle U_0S\rangle$, i.e. $H=\{x\in L:\; x\langle U_0S\rangle\subseteq \langle U_0S\rangle\}$. Define  $U'=\langle H\cup U\rangle$. Using Theorem 2.5 again, we have
\[\dim_K\langle U'S\rangle \geq \dim_K \langle U'\rangle +\dim_K\langle S\rangle -\dim_KH',\]
where $H'$  is the stabilizer of  $\langle U'S\rangle$. Next, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eqn8}
\langle U'S\rangle&=&\langle (H\cup U)S\rangle =\langle HS\cup U_0S\rangle\nonumber\\
&=&\langle HS\cup HU_0S \rangle =H\langle S\cup U_0S\rangle\nonumber\\
&=&H\langle U_0S\rangle =\langle U_0S\rangle.
\end{eqnarray}
This follows $H=H'$ and  then
\begin{equation}\label{eqn9}
\dim_K\langle U'S\rangle \geq\dim_K\langle U'\rangle +\dim_KS-\dim_KH.
\end{equation}
Using \eqref{eqn8} and \eqref{eqn9}, we have
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eqn10}
\dim_K\langle U_0S\rangle&\geq& \dim_KU'+\dim_KS-\dim_KH\nonumber\\
&=& \dim_K\langle H\cup U\rangle+\dim_KS-\dim_KH.
\end{eqnarray}
Using \eqref{eqn10}, the fact that $\langle U_0S\rangle=\langle S\cup SU\rangle$ and inclusion-exclusion principle for vector spaces we have:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eqn11}
\dim_K\langle S\cup SU\rangle&\geq& \dim_K \langle H\cup U\rangle+\dim_KS-\dim_KH\nonumber\\
&=& \dim_K H+\dim_K U -\dim_K(H\cap U)+\dim_KS-\dim_KH\nonumber\\
&=&\dim_K U+\dim_KS-\dim_K(H\cap U).
\end{eqnarray}
Now, we have two cases for the subspace $H\cap U$.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
If $H\cap U=\{0\}$, then by \eqref{eqn7} and \eqref{eqn11} we get $\dim_K \langle S\cup SU \rangle\geq n$ and this is impossible as
$S\cup SU\subseteq A$ and $\dim_KA=n$
\item
If $H\cap U\neq\{0\}$, then $H\cap B\neq\{0\}$ and since $B$ is a primitive subspace of $L$, then $H=L$. By the definition of $U$ and $S$, $HUS\subseteq A$ and  this follows $LUS\subseteq A$ and so $A=L$. Then $B=L$ as  $\dim_K A=\dim_K B$ and this
means $K\subseteq B$. Therefore if $a\in K\setminus\{0\}$, then $K=K(a)=L$, which is impossible.
\end{enumerate}
In both cases, we extract contradictions. Then $A$ is matched to $B$.
\end{proof}
We discussed the matching property for the subspaces of a simple field extension whose non-zero elements generates the
whole field in Theorem 4.1. We call such a  vector space as a primitive subspace of the field extension. Now, this
question can be asked that how large can this vector space be? We answer to this question in the following
theorem:
\begin{theorem}
Let $K$ be an infinite field and $K\subsetneq L$ be a finite simple field extension. Then we have:
\[n=n(K,L)+m(K,L),\]
where $n=[L:K]$, $n(K,L)=\max\left\{[F:K];\; K\subseteq F\subsetneq L\;\text{is a filed}\right\}$ and
$m(K,L)=\max\left\{\dim_KV;\; K(a)=L,\;\text{for any}\; a\in V\setminus\{0\}\right\}$ .\\[2mm]
Before proving the above theorem, we mention a well-known theorem of elementary linear algebra that
if $V$ is a finite dimensional vector space over an infinite field $K$, then $V$ can not be written as a finite union of its proper subspaces. Also, we use Atin's theorem on field extensions which states that if $K\subseteq L$ is a finite field extension, then it is simple, i.e. $L=K(\alpha)$, for some $\alpha\in L$ if and only if there exist only finitely many intermediate subfields $F$ of $K\subseteq L$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
As  $K\subseteq L$ is a simple field extension, by Artin's theorem on primitive elements it has only finitely many
intermediate subfields. Let $\{F_i\}_{i=1}^m$ be the family of the all proper intermediate subfields of $K\subseteq L$.
By the above-mentioned theorem, we get $\displaystyle\bigcup_{i=1}^mF_i\neq L$.\\
Now, without loss if generality, we may assume that $n(K,L)=[F_1:K]$. Choose $a_1\in
L\setminus\displaystyle\bigcup_{i=1}^mF_i$ and define $F_i^{(1)}=F_i\oplus\langle a_1\rangle$, for $1\leq i\leq m$. We break the proof to two cases:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
If
$L=\displaystyle\bigcup_{i=1}^mF_i^{(1)}$, then $L=F_j^{(1)}$, for some $1\leq j\leq m$. Consider the $K$-subspace
$T_1=\langle a_1\rangle$ of $L$, spanned by $a_1$. We claim that $m(K,L)=1=\dim_KT_1$. If $m(K,L)>1$, so  there exists
a $K$-subspace $T'_1$ of $L$ for which $\dim T_1<\dim T'_1$ and $K(a)=L$, for any $a\in T'_1\setminus\{0\}$. We have
$n=\dim_KL=\dim_K(F_j\oplus T_1)\leq \dim_K(F_1\oplus T'_1)$. On the other hand, as $F_1\oplus T'_1\subseteq L$, then
$\dim_K(F_1\oplus T'_1)\leq n$. Consequently, we get $\dim_K(F_1\oplus T'_1)=\dim_K(F_1\oplus T_1)$. This yields
$\dim_KT_1=\dim_KT'_1$, a contradiction. Then $m(K,L)=1$ and so $n=[F_1:K]+\dim_KT_1=n(K,L)+m(K,L)$.
\item
If
$L\neq\displaystyle\bigcup_{i=1}^mF_i^{(1)}$,  choose $a_2\in L\setminus \displaystyle\bigcup_{i=1}^mF_i^{(1)}$ and
define $T_2=\langle a_1,a_2\rangle$ as a $K$-subspace of $L$ spanned by $a_1$ and $a_2$, and $F_i^{(2)}=F_i\oplus T_2$,
$1\leq i\leq m$. We break this case to two subcases.
\begin{enumerate}
\item
If $L=\displaystyle\bigcup_{i=1}^mF_i^{(2)}$, by using the similar argument to the previous case, we
get $n=n(K,L)+m(K,L)$.
\item
If $L\neq \displaystyle\bigcup_{i=1}^mF_i^{(2)}$, choose $a_3\in
L\setminus\displaystyle\bigcup_{i=1}^mF_i^{(2)}$ and define the $K$-subspace of $L$  $T_3=\langle a_1,a_2,a_3\rangle$
generated by $a_1,a_2,a_3$, and $F_i^{(3)}=F_i\oplus T_3$.
\end{enumerate}
\end{enumerate}
 Continuing this procedure, we get two increasing families
$\{F_i^{(j)}\}$, $\{T_j\}$ of $K$-subspaces of $L$ ($1\leq i\leq m$ and  $j\in \mathbb{N}$). Since $[L:K]<\infty$, so
$F_i^\ell=F_i^{\ell+1}=\cdots$ and $T_\ell=T_{\ell+1}=\cdots$, for some $\ell\in \mathbb{N}$. We get the desired
equality.
\end{proof}
We discussed Theorem 4.2 for the finite extensions of infinite fields. The interested reader is encouraged to
investigate this equality in the case that the base field is finite.
\section{Local  matchability for subspaces in a field extension}
In this section, Theorem 5.2 and 5.3 give  the relation between matchability and local  matchability for vector spaces in a   field
extension. First, we state the following lemma which gives a dimension criteria for vector subspaces of matchable spaces in a field extension.\\[5mm]
\begin{lemma}
Let $K\subsetneq  L$ be a field extension and $A,B\subseteq L$ be two non-zero $n$-dimensional
$K$-subspaces of $L$. Assume that $H$ is an intermediate field of $K\subsetneq L$ satisfying the followings conditions:
\begin{enumerate}
\item
$H\cap B\neq\{0\}$;
\item
$aH\subseteq A$, for some $a\in A$.
\end{enumerate}
Let $\tilde{\mathcal{B}}=\{b_1,\ldots,b_m\}$ be a basis for $H\cap B$ and $A_b=\{a\in A:\; ab\in A\}$, for any $b\in B$. Then we have
\begin{equation}\label{eq12}
\dim_K\underset{i\in J}{\bigcap}A_{b_i}\leq n-\# J,
\end{equation}
for any $J\subseteq \{1,\ldots,m\}$.
\end{lemma}
\begin{proof}
  If $\underset{i\in J}{\bigcap}A_{b_i}=\{0\}$, then \eqref{eq12} holds. Now, assume that $\underset{i\in J}{\bigcap}A_{b_i}$ is non-zero and $\{a_1,\ldots,a_t\}$ is a basis for it. As $a_k\in \underset{i\in J}{\bigcap}A_{b_i}$, for all $1\leq k\leq t$, then $a_kb_i\in A$, for any $i\in J$. This means $b_i\in a_k^{-1}A\cap B$, for all $i\in J$ and so $b_i\in \overset{t}{\underset{k=1}{\bigcap}}\left(a_k^{-1}A\cap B\right)$. Therefore $\#J\leq \dim_K\overset{t}{\underset{k=1}{\bigcap}}\left(a_k^{-1}A\cap B\right)$. As $A$ is matched to $B$, then by Theorem 2.3 we have $\dim_K\overset{t}{\underset{k=1}{\bigcap}}\left(a_k^{-1}A\cap B\right)\leq n-t$. Therefore, totally we obtain $t\leq n-\#J$ and this means $\dim_K\underset{i\in J}{\bigcap}A_{b_i}\leq n-\# J$.
\end{proof}
Now, we are ready to prove our theorem  regarding the relation between matchability and local  matchability.
\begin{theorem}
 Let $K, H, L, A, B, \tilde{\mathcal{B}}$ and $A_b$ be as Lemma 5.1. If $A$ is matched to $B$, then $A$ is locally matched to $B$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
We must prove that there exists a $K$-subspace $\tilde{A}$ of $A$ such that $\tilde{A}$ is $A$-matched to $H\cap B$. \\
Consider the family $\mathcal{E}=\{A_{b_1},\ldots,A_{b_m}\}$ of vector subspaces of $A$. Using Corollary 2.7 and Lemma 5.1, there exist subspaces $\tilde{A}_i$ of $A$ for which $A_{b_i}\subseteq \tilde{A}_i$ and $\dim_K\underset{i\in J}{\bigcap}\tilde{A}_{b_i}=n-\#J$. Let $\tilde{A}$ be an algebraic complement of $\overset{m}{\underset{i=1}{\bigcap}}\tilde{A}_i$ in $A$, i.e. $\tilde{A}\oplus \overset{m}{\underset{i=1}{\bigcap}}\tilde{A}_i=A$. We prove that $\tilde{A}$ is the desired subspace of $A$. Namely, we show that it is $A$-matched to $H\cap B$. \\
Let $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}=\{a_1,\ldots,a_m\}$ be a basis for $H\cap B$. We claim that there exists $\sigma\in\mathcal{S}_m$ such that  $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}$ is $A$-matched to $\tilde{\mathcal{B}}_\sigma=\{b_{\sigma(1)},\ldots,b_{\sigma(m)}\}$. Obvieusly  $\overset{m}{\underset{i=1}{\bigcap}}\tilde{A}_i\cup \left(\underset{i\in J}{\bigcap}\tilde{A}_i\cap \tilde{A}\right)\subseteq \underset{i\in J}{\bigcap}\tilde{A}_i$ and  $\overset{m}{\underset{i=1}{\bigcap}}\tilde{A}_i\cap \left(\underset{i\in J}{\bigcap}\tilde{A}_i\cap \tilde{A}\right)=\{0\}$, for any $J\subseteq \{1,\ldots,m\}$. Then $\dim_K\left(\underset{i\in J}{\bigcap}\tilde{A}_i\cap \tilde{A}\right)+\dim_K\overset{m}{\underset{i=1}{\bigcap}}\tilde{A}_i\leq \dim_K\underset{i\in J}{\bigcap}\tilde{A}_i$. So, we actually get:
\begin{equation}\label{neq13}
\dim_K\left(\underset{i\in J}{\bigcap}\tilde{A}_i\cap \tilde{A}\right)\leq (n-\#J)-(n-m)=m-\#J,
\end{equation}
for any $J\subseteq\{1,\ldots,m\}$. It follows from \eqref{neq13} that at least $\#J$ elements of $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}$ are not in $\underset{i\in J}{\bigcap}\tilde{A}_i\cap \tilde{A}$. Without loss of generality, we assume that $a_1,\ldots,a_{\#J}$ are such  elements. Then for any $k\in \{1,\ldots,\#J\}$, one can find $i\in J$ such that $a_k\not\in\tilde{A}_i$. Therefore, $a_k\in\tilde{A}_{b_i}$ and so $a_kb_i\not\in A$. Using Hall marriage Theorem, there exists a bijection $f:\tilde{\mathcal{A}}\to \tilde{\mathcal{B}}$ such that $a_if(a_i)\not\in A$, for any $1\leq i\leq m$. Define the permutation $\sigma\in\mathcal{S}_m$ by $\sigma(i)=j$ if $f(a_i)=b_j$, $1\leq i,j\leq m$. Thus $\tilde{\mathcal{A}}$ is $A$-matched to $\tilde{\mathcal{B}}_\sigma$, as claimed.
\end{proof}
The following theorem shows that local  matchability impleis  matchability for subspaces of a field extension whose algebraic  elements are separable.
\begin{theorem}
 Let $K\subseteq L$ be a field extension in which every algebraic element of $L$ is separable over
$K$. Let $A, B\subseteq L$ be two non-zero $n$-dimensional $K$-subspaces with $1\not\in B$. If $A$ is locally matched
to $B$, then   $A$ is matched to $B$.
\end{theorem}
\begin{proof}
 Assume to the contrary $A$ is not matched to $B$.  Then, by Theorem 2.3 there exist a basis
$\mathcal{A}=\{a_1,\ldots,a_n\}$ of $A$ and $J\subseteq\{1,\ldots,n\}$ such that $\dim\displaystyle\bigcap_{i\in
J}(a_i^{-1}A\cap B)>n-\# J$. Set $S=\langle a_i:\; i\in J\rangle$ as a $K$-subspace of $A$,
$U=\displaystyle\bigcap_{i\in J}(a_i^{-1}A\cap B)$ and $U_0=\langle U\cup \{1\}\rangle$.
Using Theorem 2.5 there exists an intermediate subfield $H$ of $K\subset L$ such that
\begin{equation}\label{eqn13}
\dim_K\langle U_0S\rangle\geq\dim_K U_0+\dim_KS-\dim_KH
\end{equation}
, where $H$ is the stabilizer of $\langle U_0S\rangle$. Define  $U'=H\cup U$. Reusing Theorem 2.5, one can find an intermediate subfield $H'$ of $K\subseteq L$ for which
\begin{equation}\label{eqn14}
\dim_K \langle U'S\rangle \geq \dim_K \langle U'\rangle+\dim_KS-\dim_KH'
\end{equation}
, where $H'$ is the stabilizer  of  $\langle U'S\rangle$. The following computations show that $\langle  U'S\rangle=\langle U_0S\rangle$;
 \begin{eqnarray}\label{eqn15}
 \langle U'S\rangle&=&\langle (H\cup U)S\rangle =\langle HS\rangle\cup\langle U_0S\rangle\nonumber\\
 &=&\langle HS\rangle\cup\langle U_0SH\rangle=H\langle S\cup U_0S\rangle\nonumber\\
 &=&H\langle U_0S\rangle=\langle U_0S\rangle.
 \end{eqnarray}
 Then, the stabilizers of these two subspaces must be the same, i.e. $H=H'$. Then we would  have
 \begin{equation}\label{eqn16}
  \dim_K\langle U'S\rangle\geq\dim_K\langle   U'\rangle+\dim_KS-\dim_KH.
 \end{equation}
Bearing \eqref{eqn14} and \eqref{eqn15} in mind and using inclusion-exclusion principle for vector spaces we get:
\begin{eqnarray}\label{eqn17}
\dim_K\langle U_0S\rangle&=& \dim_K\langle U'S\rangle\nonumber\\
&\geq&\dim_K\langle U'\rangle +\dim_KS-\dim_KH\nonumber\\
&=&\dim_K\langle H\cup U\rangle+\dim_KS-\dim_KH\nonumber\\
&=& \dim_KH+\dim_KU-\dim_K(H\cap U)+\dim_KS-\dim_KH\nonumber\\
&=&\dim_KU+\dim_KS-\dim_K(H\cap U).
 \end{eqnarray}
 Now, we have two cases for $H\cap U$.
 \begin{enumerate}
 \item
If $H\cap U=\{0\}$, then $\dim_K\langle S\cup SU\rangle>n$. On the other hand since $S\cup SU\subseteq A$, we would
have $\dim_KA>n$, contradicting our assumption $\dim_KA=n$.
\item
If  $H\cap U$ is a non-zero vector space, then $H\cap B$ so is.
It is clear that $aH\subseteq A$, for some $a\in A$ (Indeed, $USH\subseteq A$).
 Since $A$ is locally matched to $B$, one can find a subspaces $\tilde{A}$ of $A$ such that $\tilde{A}$ is $A$-matched
 to $H\cap B$. Let $\tilde{A}\cap \langle U_0S\rangle\neq\{0\}$ and choose a non-zero element $a$ of it.  We extend $\{a\}$ to a basis $\{a,
 a_2,\ldots, a_m\}$ for  $\tilde{A}$. Then,  there exists a basis $\{b, b_2, \ldots, b_m\}$ of $H\cap B$ such that $ab
 \not\in A$ and $a_ib_i \not\in A$, where $2 \leq i \leq m$ (according to local  matchability). But, we have $ab \in \langle U_0S\rangle H=\langle U_0S\rangle \subseteq A$, which contradicts the case $\tilde{A}$ is $A$-matched to $H\cap B$. So $\tilde{A}\cap U_0S=\{0\}$. Then, $\dim_K \tilde{A} + \dim_K\langle U_0S\rangle \leq n$.
This yields $\dim_K\langle H\cap U\rangle+\dim_K\langle (U\cup\{1\}S)\rangle \leq n$. This follows $\dim_K\langle H\cap
U\rangle+\dim_K\langle S\cup SU\rangle\leq n$. So, by \eqref{eqn17} we have $\dim_KU+\dim_KS\leq n$, which is impossible.
 \end{enumerate}
 Then in both cases, we extract contradictions and so  $A$ is matched to $B$.
\end{proof}
Using Theorems 5.2 and 5.3, we give an alternative proof to the auther's main theorem in \cite{6} which states that the necessary and sufficient condition for a field extension having linear matching property is not having any proper intermediate field with finite degree. However, our proof works just in the case that every algebraic element is assumed to be separable. Note that we use this fact that matchability and local matchability are  equivalent in such a field extension. Let $K\subseteq L$ be a field extension whose algebraic elements are separable and has no proper intermediate field with finite degree. If $A$ and $B$ are two $n$-dimensional $K$-subspaces of $L$ with $n\geq1$ and $1\not\in B$, clearly $A$  is locally matched to $B$ and then $A$ is matched to $B$. This means $K\subseteq L$ has the linear matching property.\\
Coversely, assume that $K\subseteq L$ has the proper intermediate field $H$ of finite degree. Set $A=H$, choose $x\in L\setminus H$ and define $B=\langle H\cup \{x\}\setminus K\rangle$. Clearly $\dim_KA=\dim_KB$, $H\cap B\neq \{0\}$ and $aH\subseteq H=A$, for some $a\in A$. (Indeed for any $a\in A$). If $A$ is locally matched to $B$, then  a $K$-subspace $\tilde{A}$ of $A$ is $A$-matched to $H\cap B$. If $\{a_1,\ldots,a_m\}$ is a basis for $\tilde{A}$, then there must be a basis $\{b_1,\ldots,b_m\}$ of $H\cap B$ for which $a_ib_i\not\in A$, for $1\leq i\leq m$. But  this is impossible because $a_ib_i\in A(H\cap B)\subseteq H\langle H\setminus K\rangle \subseteq H=A$. Then, $A$ is not locally matched to $B$ and so $A$ is not matched to $B$. Thus $K\subseteq L$ does not have the linear matching property.

Group Theory (math.GR); Combinatorics (math.CO)