i_2}+n_3{\alpha }_{i_3}$. Since $\det w\in
  \{\pm 1\}$ and ${\mathrm{Vol}}_3({\alpha },\beta,\gamma )=1$, this implies that $m_2=n_3=1$. Further, $\beta -{\alpha }\notin R^a$, and hence $w(\beta )={\alpha }_{i_2}$ by Corollary \[co:cij\]. Since $\{{\alpha },\beta,\gamma \}$ is not a base for ${\mathbb{Z}}^I$ at $a$, we conclude that $w(\gamma )\not={\alpha }_{i_3}$. Then Corollary \[co:cij\] and the assumptions $\gamma -{\alpha }$, $\gamma -\beta
  \notin R^a$ imply that $w(\gamma )\notin {\alpha }_{i_3}+{\mathbb{N}}_0{\alpha }_{i_1}$ and $w(\gamma )\notin {\alpha }_{i_3}+{\mathbb{N}}_0{\alpha }_{i_2}$. Thus the claim is proven.

\(2) By (1), $\{{\alpha },\beta \}$ is a base for $V^a({\alpha },\beta )$ at $a$. Thus ${\alpha }-k\beta \notin R^a$ for all $k\in {\mathbb{N}}$. The remaining claims follow by symmetry.

\(3) Suppose that ${\alpha }+\beta \notin R^a$. By (1) there exist $b\in A$, $w\in \operatorname{Hom}(a,b)$, $i_1,i_2,i_3\in I$ and $n_1,n_2\in {\mathbb{N}}$ such that $w({\alpha })={\alpha }_{i_1}$, $w(\beta )={\alpha }_{i_2}$, and $w(\gamma )={\alpha }_{i_3}+n_1{\alpha }_{i_1}+n_2{\alpha }_{i_2}\in R^b_+$. By Theorem \[root\_is\_sum\] there exist $n'_1,n'_2\in {\mathbb{N}}_0$ such that $n'_1\le n_1$, $n'_2\le n_2$, $n'_1+n'_2<n_1+n_2$, and $${\alpha }_{i_3}+n'_1{\
i_2}+n_3{\alpha } _ { i_3}$. Since $ \det w\in 
   \{\pm 1\}$ and $ { \mathrm{Vol}}_3({\alpha }, \beta,\gamma) = 1 $, this implies that $ m_2 = n_3=1$. Further, $ \beta -{\alpha } \notin R^a$, and hence $ w(\beta) = { \alpha } _ { i_2}$ by Corollary   \[co: cij\ ]. Since $ \{{\alpha }, \beta,\gamma \}$ is not a base for $ { \mathbb{Z}}^I$ at $ a$, we conclude that $ w(\gamma) \not={\alpha } _ { i_3}$. Then Corollary   \[co: cij\ ] and the assumption $ \gamma -{\alpha } $, $ \gamma -\beta 
   \notin R^a$ entail that $ w(\gamma) \notin { \alpha } _ { i_3}+{\mathbb{N}}_0{\alpha } _ { i_1}$ and $ w(\gamma) \notin { \alpha } _ { i_3}+{\mathbb{N}}_0{\alpha } _ { i_2}$. Thus the claim is proven. 

 \(2) By (1), $ \{{\alpha }, \beta \}$ is a floor for $ V^a({\alpha }, \beta) $ at $ a$. Thus $ { \alpha } -k\beta \notin R^a$ for all $ k\in { \mathbb{N}}$. The remaining claim surveil by symmetry. 

 \(3) think that $ { \alpha } + \beta \notin R^a$. By (1) there exist $ b\in A$, $ w\in \operatorname{Hom}(a, b)$, $ i_1,i_2,i_3\in I$ and $ n_1,n_2\in { \mathbb{N}}$ such that $ w({\alpha }) = { \alpha } _ { i_1}$, $ w(\beta) = { \alpha } _ { i_2}$, and $ w(\gamma) = { \alpha } _ { i_3}+n_1{\alpha } _ { i_1}+n_2{\alpha } _ { i_2}\in R^b_+$. By Theorem   \[root\_is\_sum\ ] there exist $ n'_1,n'_2\in { \mathbb{N}}_0 $ such that $ n'_1\le n_1 $, $ n'_2\le n_2 $, $ n'_1+n'_2 < n_1+n_2 $, and $ $ { \alpha } _ { i_3}+n'_1{\
i_2}+n_3{\appha }_{i_3}$. Since $\det w\in
  \{\pm 1\}$ and ${\mathrm{Vol}}_3({\copha },\bxta,\gammz )=1$, this kmplies that $m_2=n_3=1$. Further, $\beta -{\aopha }\botin R^a$, and hence $w(\bega )={\alpha }_{p_2}$ by Coroolarb \[co:cij\]. Since $\{{\alpiz },\beta,\gamma \}$ jd noc e base for ${\mathnb{Z}}^I$ at $a$, wa conclude thad $d(\gcmma )\not={\alpha }_{i_3}$. Then Corollary \[co:cij\] wnd the adsumptions $\gamia -{\ak[ha }$, $\gamma -\beta
  \notin R^a$ imply that $w(\famma )\nmtin {\alpha }_{i_3}+{\msthbb{N}}_0{\alpha }_{i_1}$ and $w(\gamma )\nltin {\alpha }_{i_3}+{\mathbb{N}}_0{\alpja }_{i_2}$. Thus tye cjqim is provev.

\(2) By (1), $\{{\alpha },\beta \}$ is a base for $V^a({\alpha },\beta )$ at $a$. Thjs ${\al'ha }-k\beta \nitun G^d$ for all $k\mn {\matrbb{N}}$. The remaining cnaims fpllow by symmebry.

\(3) Snppowe that ${\alpha }+\beta \novin R^a$. By (1) there exift $b\in A$, $f\iu \operatorname{Hom}(a,b)$, $i_1,u_2,i_3\un I$ dnd $t_1,n_2\in {\natfbb{H}}$ xudh thah $w({\elpha })={\alpha }_{i_1}$, $w(\beta )={\alpha }_{i_2}$, and $w(\gamma )={\alkha }_{p_3}+m_1{\alpha }_{i_1}+n_2{\alpga }_{i_2}\in R^f_+$. By Theorem \[root\_is\_sum\] there exist $n'_1,n'_2\in {\katgbb{N}}_0$ such that $n'_1\le n_1$, $n'_2\lw n_2$, $n'_1+n'_2<n_1+n_2$, and $${\alpha }_{i_3}+n'_1{\
i_2}+n_3{\alpha }_{i_3}$. Since $\det w\in \{\pm 1\}$ },\beta,\gamma this implies $m_2=n_3=1$. Further, $\beta $w(\beta }_{i_2}$ by Corollary Since $\{{\alpha },\beta,\gamma is not a base for ${\mathbb{Z}}^I$ $a$, we conclude that $w(\gamma )\not={\alpha }_{i_3}$. Then Corollary \[co:cij\] and the assumptions -{\alpha }$, $\gamma -\beta \notin R^a$ imply that $w(\gamma )\notin {\alpha }_{i_3}+{\mathbb{N}}_0{\alpha }_{i_1}$ $w(\gamma {\alpha }_{i_2}$. the claim is proven. \(2) By (1), $\{{\alpha },\beta \}$ is a base for $V^a({\alpha },\beta at $a$. Thus ${\alpha }-k\beta \notin R^a$ for $k\in {\mathbb{N}}$. The remaining follow by symmetry. \(3) Suppose ${\alpha \notin R^a$. (1) exist A$, $w\in \operatorname{Hom}(a,b)$, I$ and $n_1,n_2\in {\mathbb{N}}$ such that $w({\alpha })={\alpha }_{i_1}$, $w(\beta )={\alpha }_{i_2}$, and $w(\gamma )={\alpha }_{i_3}+n_1{\alpha }_{i_1}+n_2{\alpha R^b_+$. By there exist {\mathbb{N}}_0$ that n_1$, $n'_2\le n_2$, $${\alpha }_{i_3}+n'_1{\
i_2}+n_3{\alpha }_{i_3}$. Since $\det w\in
  \{\pm 1\}$ and ${\mAthrm{Vol}}_3({\alPha },\beTa,\gAmmA )=1$, tHis iMpliEs that $m_2=n_3=1$. FurtheR, $\Beta -{\Alpha }\notin R^a$, and hence $w(\bEta )={\alPhA }_{I_2}$ by CORoLlary \[Co:cij\]. SiNCe $\{{\ALPha },\BeTa,\GamMa \}$ IS nOt a baSe fOr ${\mathbB{Z}}^I$ at $a$, we coNclUdE that $w(\gamma )\nOT={\aLpha }_{i_3}$. Then COroLlary \[co:cij\] anD thE assumPtIonS $\Gamma -{\AlpHa }$, $\gamMa -\beta
  \NOtin R^a$ Imply that $W(\gAMma )\notIN {\alpha }_{i_3}+{\MAThBb{N}}_0{\aLpha }_{i_1}$ and $w(\gamma )\notIN {\aLPha }_{i_3}+{\mathbb{N}}_0{\alpHa }_{i_2}$. ThuS tHE cLAIm iS prOven.

\(2) By (1), $\{{\alphA },\bEta \}$ is A Base for $v^A({\aLPHA },\beTA )$ at $a$. Thus ${\alpha }-K\beta \notin R^A$ For All $k\in {\MaThbB{n}}$. The reMainiNg CLaiMs follow by sYmmeTry.

\(3) SupposE that ${\aLPha }+\beta \NOtin R^a$. BY (1) there ExiSt $b\In A$, $w\IN \oPeRatOrNAme{hOm}(A,b)$, $i_1,I_2,I_3\in i$ and $n_1,n_2\in {\MaThBb{N}}$ suCh thAT $W({\ALpha })={\AlpHa }_{i_1}$, $w(\Beta )={\aLpha }_{i_2}$, and $w(\gammA )={\alPha }_{i_3}+N_1{\AlpHa }_{i_1}+n_2{\aLpha }_{i_2}\In R^b_+$. by theorEm \[root\_Is\_sum\] ThEre exist $n'_1,n'_2\in {\matHbb{N}}_0$ Such that $n'_1\Le n_1$, $N'_2\lE n_2$, $n'_1+N'_2<n_1+N_2$, and $${\aLPha }_{i_3}+n'_1{\
i_2}+n_3{\alpha }_{i_3}$.Since $\de t w\i n
 \{ \p m 1\ }$ a nd ${\mathrm{V o l}}_ 3({\alpha },\beta,\gam ma )= 1$ ,  thi s  i mplie s that$ m_ 2 = n_3 =1 $.  Fu rt h er , $\b eta  -{\alp ha }\notin  R^ a$ , and hence$ w( \beta )={\ alp ha }_{i_2}$byCoroll ar y \ [ co:ci j\] . Sin ce $\{ { \alpha  },\beta, \g a mma \} $  is not a  b asefor ${\mathbb{Z}} ^ I$ at $a$, we con cludeth a t$ w (\g amm a )\not={\ al pha } _ {i_3}$. Th e n Cor o llary \[co:ci j\] and the ass umptio ns  $\ g amma - {\alp ha }$,  $\gamma -\ beta 
  \notin  R^a$i mply th a t $w(\g amma ) \no tin  {\a l ph a}_{ i_ 3 }+{ \ ma thb b {N} }_0{\alp ha  } _{i_1 }$ a n d $ w(\g amm a )\ notin  {\alpha }_{i _3} +{\m a thb b{N}} _0{\a lpha  } _{i_2 }$. Th us th eclaim is proven .

\ (2) By (1 ),$\ {{\ al pha } , \beta\}$  is  a base  for $V ^ a({ \a l p h a},\beta )$ at $a$.  T h u s${\alpha  }-k\b e ta  \ n otin R^a $for  all $ k\in{\ma t hb b{N}}$.The re m ai ni ng clai ms  follo wbysym metry . 

\( 3) Sup pose tha t ${\ a lpha }+\beta \ n otin R^a$. By (1 ) th e re e xis t $b\in A$,  $w\ i n \o pera t or nam e {Hom} (a,b) $, $i _ 1,i_2,i_3\in I$ and  $ n_1,n_ 2\in{\mathbb{N}}$  such that $ w ({\alpha  })= { \a l pha }_{i_1}$,$w(\b eta )={\al p ha }_{i_ 2}$,and $w(\ gamma )={ \ a lpha }_{ i_3 }+n _1{ \al p h a}_{i_1}+n_2{\ a l pha}_ {i_2}\i n R ^b_+$.ByThe ore m \ [r oot\_is\_ sum\] th er eex is t $ n'_1, n '_2\in { \m ath bb {N} }_0$s uch th at $n '_1\ le  n _ 1$,  $n'_2\ l en _ 2$,$n '_ 1+n' _2< n_ 1+n_2 $, a n d $ ${\alph a }_{i_3} +n' _ 1{\
i_2}+n_3{\alpha }_{i_3}$._Since $\det_w\in
  \{\pm 1\}$_and ${\mathrm{Vol}}_3({\alpha_},\beta,\gamma_)=1$, this_implies_that $m_2=n_3=1$. Further,_$\beta -{\alpha }\notin_R^a$, and hence $w(\beta_)={\alpha }_{i_2}$ by_Corollary \[co:cij\]._Since $\{{\alpha },\beta,\gamma \}$ is not a base for ${\mathbb{Z}}^I$ at $a$, we conclude_that_$w(\gamma )\not={\alpha_}_{i_3}$._Then_Corollary \[co:cij\] and the assumptions $\gamma_-{\alpha }$, $\gamma -\beta
 _\notin R^a$_imply that $w(\gamma )\notin {\alpha }_{i_3}+{\mathbb{N}}_0{\alpha }_{i_1}$ and_$w(\gamma_)\notin {\alpha }_{i_3}+{\mathbb{N}}_0{\alpha_}_{i_2}$. Thus the claim is proven.

\(2) By (1), $\{{\alpha_},\beta \}$ is a base for_$V^a({\alpha },\beta )$_at_$a$._Thus ${\alpha }-k\beta \notin_R^a$ for all $k\in {\mathbb{N}}$. The_remaining claims follow by symmetry.

\(3) Suppose_that ${\alpha }+\beta \notin R^a$. By (1)_there exist $b\in A$, $w\in \operatorname{Hom}(a,b)$,_$i_1,i_2,i_3\in I$ and $n_1,n_2\in {\mathbb{N}}$_such that_$w({\alpha })={\alpha }_{i_1}$, $w(\beta )={\alpha_}_{i_2}$, and $w(\gamma_)={\alpha }_{i_3}+n_1{\alpha_}_{i_1}+n_2{\alpha }_{i_2}\in R^b_+$._By Theorem \[root\_is\_sum\] there exist $n'_1,n'_2\in {\mathbb{N}}_0$_such that $n'_1\le_n_1$, $n'_2\le n_2$, $n'_1+n'_2<n_1+n_2$, and $${\alpha_}_{i_3}+n'_1{\