_1 \boxplus Y_2 \boxplus \cdots \boxplus Y_m = Y_1 + Y_2 + \cdots + Y_m$; and

-   $\dim(Y_1 \boxplus Y_2 \boxplus \cdots \boxplus Y_m) = \sum_{i=1}^m \dim Y_i$.

We prove (a)–(c) simultaneously by induction on $m$, the number of pairwise disjoint codewords. The base case of two codewords for (b)–(c) is covered by Lemma \[4\] while that for (a) is because of the assumption of pairwise disjointness. As the induction hypothesis, assume that the statements (a)–(c) hold for any set of $m-1$ pairwise disjoint codewords, for some $m \ge 3$. In particular, for any $(m-1)$-subset $\mathcal{I} \subset [m]$, we have $\boxplus_{i \in \mathcal{I}} Y_i = \sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}} Y_i$ and $\dim(\boxplus_{i \in \mathcal{I}} Y_i) = \sum_{i\in\mathcal{I}}\dim Y_i$.

Consider $Z = {\boxplus}_{i \in [m-2]} Y_i$. By the induction hypothesis, $Z = {\sum}_{i=1}^{m-2} Y_i$ and $\dim Z = {\sum}_{i=1}^{m-2} \dim Y_i$, whereas $Z \cap Y_{m-1} = Z \cap Y_m = \{0\}$. Thus, according to Definition \[P\] $Z, Y_{m-1}, Y_m$ are pairwise disjoint nontrivial codewords of $\mathcal{U}$ and by Lemma \[6m\], $(Z \boxplus Y_{m-1}) \cap Y_m = (Y_1 \boxplus \cdots \boxplus Y_{m-1}) \cap Y_m = \{0\}$. Hence, (a) must hold for $Y_1, \ldots, Y_m$.

To prove (b), observe that $Y_m \cap \sum\limits_{i=1}^{m-1} Y_i = \{0\}$ according to part (a). Then, by the induction hypothesis and Lemma 
_ 1 \boxplus Y_2 \boxplus \cdots \boxplus Y_m = Y_1 + Y_2 + \cdots + Y_m$; and 

 -    $ \dim(Y_1 \boxplus Y_2 \boxplus \cdots \boxplus Y_m) = \sum_{i=1}^m \dim Y_i$. 

 We prove (a)–(c) simultaneously by induction on $ m$, the number of pairwise disjoint codewords. The base subject of two codewords for (b)–(c) is cover by Lemma   \[4\ ] while that for (a) is because of the assumption of pairwise disjointness. As the induction guess, assume that the statements (a)–(c) hold for any stage set of $ m-1 $ pairwise disjoint codewords, for some $ m \ge 3$. In particular, for any $ (m-1)$-subset $ \mathcal{I } \subset [ m]$, we have $ \boxplus_{i \in \mathcal{I } } Y_i = \sum_{i \in \mathcal{I } } Y_i$ and $ \dim(\boxplus_{i \in \mathcal{I } } Y_i) = \sum_{i\in\mathcal{I}}\dim Y_i$. 

 see $ Z = { \boxplus}_{i \in [ m-2 ] } Y_i$. By the induction guess, $ Z = { \sum}_{i=1}^{m-2 } Y_i$ and $ \dim Z = { \sum}_{i=1}^{m-2 } \dim Y_i$, whereas $ Z \cap Y_{m-1 } = Z \cap Y_m = \{0\}$. Thus, harmonize to Definition   \[P\ ] $ Z, Y_{m-1 }, Y_m$ are pairwise disjoint nontrivial codewords of $ \mathcal{U}$ and by Lemma   \[6m\ ], $ (Z \boxplus Y_{m-1 }) \cap Y_m = (Y_1 \boxplus \cdots \boxplus Y_{m-1 }) \cap Y_m = \{0\}$. Hence, (a) must hold for $ Y_1, \ldots, Y_m$. 

 To prove (bacillus), observe that $ Y_m \cap \sum\limits_{i=1}^{m-1 } Y_i = \{0\}$ according to part (adenine). Then, by the induction hypothesis and Lemma
_1 \bodplus Y_2 \boxplus \cdots \bowplus Y_m = Y_1 + Y_2 + \eeots + B_m$; and

-   $\dim(Y_1 \buxplus Y_2 \boxplus \cdots \boxplns Y_n) = \sun_{i=1}^m \dim Y_i$.

We prove (a)–(c) rimultanelusly by indnction on $m$, the ihmber on paidaise visjoint codewotds. The base case of two cmddwlrds for (b)–(c) is covered by Lemma \[4\] whije that flr (a) is becausg of uhe asshmption of pairwise disjointness. Aa the iiduction hypothrsis, assume that the statelentd (a)–(c) hold for any det of $m-1$ paurwifw disjoint cudewords, for some $m \ge 3$. In particular, for any $(m-1)$-subset $\matheal{I} \subset [m]$, we vave $\boxpluw_{i \in \mathcal{I}} Y_i = \sum_{i \it \mathcsl{I}} Y_i$ and $\dim(\noxplns_{i \un \mathcal{I}} Y_i) = \sum_{i\ii\mathcal{I}}\dim Y_i$.

Consiqer $Z = {\bofpmus}_{i \in [m-2]} Y_i$. By tye induwtiot hyoithdsia, $V = {\aum}_{i=1}^{m-2} J_i$ end $\dim Z = {\aum}_{i=1}^{m-2} \dim Y_u$, whereas $Z \cap Y_{m-1} = Z \bsp Y_m = \{0\}$. Thus, accorqigg to Definition \[P\] $Z, Y_{m-1}, Y_m$ are pairwise gisnoint nontrivial codewoeds of $\mathcal{U}$ and bi Lemma \[6m\], $(Z \boxplus Y_{m-1}) \cap Y_m = (Y_1 \boxplus \cdots \boxplus Y_{m-1}) \ca[ Y_m = \{0\}$. Heugc, (a) oysh hold for $Y_1, \ldots, Y_m$.

To prove (b), observe that $R_j \vai \sum\limits_{i=1}^{m-1} Y_i = \{0\}$ according tl lwrt (a). Then, by the iusudtion hypothesis ajd Lemmw 
_1 \boxplus Y_2 \boxplus \cdots \boxplus Y_m + + \cdots Y_m$; and - \boxplus = \sum_{i=1}^m \dim We prove (a)–(c) by induction on $m$, the number pairwise disjoint codewords. The base case of two codewords for (b)–(c) is covered Lemma \[4\] while that for (a) is because of the assumption of pairwise As induction assume the statements (a)–(c) hold for any set of $m-1$ pairwise disjoint codewords, for some $m \ge In particular, for any $(m-1)$-subset $\mathcal{I} \subset [m]$, have $\boxplus_{i \in \mathcal{I}} = \sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}} Y_i$ $\dim(\boxplus_{i \mathcal{I}} Y_i) \sum_{i\in\mathcal{I}}\dim Consider = {\boxplus}_{i \in Y_i$. By the induction hypothesis, $Z = {\sum}_{i=1}^{m-2} Y_i$ and $\dim Z = {\sum}_{i=1}^{m-2} \dim Y_i$, whereas \cap Y_{m-1} \cap Y_m \{0\}$. according Definition \[P\] $Z, are pairwise disjoint nontrivial codewords of Lemma \[6m\], $(Z \boxplus Y_{m-1}) \cap Y_m = \boxplus \cdots Y_{m-1}) \cap Y_m = \{0\}$. Hence, must hold for $Y_1, \ldots, Y_m$. To prove observe that $Y_m \cap \sum\limits_{i=1}^{m-1} Y_i = \{0\}$ according to part (a). Then, by the and Lemma
_1 \boxplus Y_2 \boxplus \cdots \boxplUs Y_m = Y_1 + Y_2 + \cdotS + Y_m$; anD

-   $\diM(Y_1 \bOxPlus y_2 \boxPlus \cdots \boxplUS Y_m) = \sUm_{i=1}^m \dim Y_i$.

We prove (a)–(c) simuLtaneOuSLy by INdUctioN on $m$, the NUmBER of PaIrWisE dISjOint cOdeWords. ThE base case oF twO cOdewords for (b)–(C) Is Covered by LEmmA \[4\] while that foR (a) iS becauSe Of tHE assuMptIon of PairwiSE disjoIntness. As ThE InductIOn hypotHESiS, assUme that the statemeNTs (A)–(C) hold for any set Of $m-1$ paiRwISe DISjoInt Codewords, fOr Some $m \GE 3$. In partICuLAR, For ANy $(m-1)$-subset $\mathCal{I} \subset [m]$, WE haVe $\boxpLuS_{i \iN \MathcaL{I}} Y_i = \sUm_{I \In \mAthcal{I}} Y_i$ anD $\dim(\Boxplus_{i \iN \mathcAL{I}} Y_i) = \sum_{I\In\mathcAl{I}}\dim y_i$.

COnsIder $z = {\BoXpLus}_{I \iN [M-2]} Y_i$. bY tHe iNDucTion hypoThEsIs, $Z = {\suM}_{i=1}^{m-2} Y_I$ AND $\Dim Z = {\Sum}_{I=1}^{m-2} \diM Y_i$, whEreas $Z \cap Y_{m-1} = Z \cAp Y_M = \{0\}$. ThuS, AccOrdinG to DeFiniTiOn \[P\] $Z, Y_{M-1}, Y_m$ are PairwIsE disjoint nontriVial Codewords Of $\mAtHcaL{U}$ And by lEmma \[6m\], $(Z \BoxPluS Y_{m-1}) \cap Y_M = (Y_1 \boxplUS \cdOtS \BOXpLus Y_{m-1}) \cap Y_m = \{0\}$. Hence, (a) muSt HOLd For $Y_1, \ldotS, Y_m$.

To pROvE (b), OBserve thAt $y_m \cAp \suM\LImits_{I=1}^{m-1} Y_i = \{0\}$ ACcOrding to Part (a). THEn, By The induCtIon hypOtHesIs aNd LemMA 
_1 \boxplus Y_2 \boxplus \ cdots \box plusY_m  =Y_ 1 +Y_2+ \cdots + Y_m $ ; an d

-   $\dim(Y_1 \boxp lus Y _2 \box p lu s \cd ots \bo x pl u s  Y_ m)  =  \s um _ {i =1}^m  \d im Y_i$ .

We prov e ( a) –(c) simulta n eo usly by in duc tion on $m$,  th e numb er  of pairw ise  disj oint c o deword s. The ba se case o f  two co d e wo rdsfor (b)–(c) is co v er e d by Lemma \[4 \] whi le th a t  fo r ( a) is beca us e oft he assu m pt i o n  of pairwise disj ointness. A s  th e indu ct ion hypoth esis,  a s sum e that thestat ements (a )–(c)h old for any set  of $m -1$  pa irwi s edi sjo in t  co d ew ord s , f or some$m  \ ge 3$ . In p a r ticu lar , fo r any  $(m-1)$-subs et$\ma t hca l{I}\subs et [ m] $, we  have$\box pl us_{i \in \math cal{ I}} Y_i =  \s um _{i  \ in \m a thcal{ I}}  Y_ i$ and$\dim(\ b oxp lu s _ { i\in \mathcal{I}} Y _i ) =\sum_{i\ in\mat h ca l{ I }}\dim Y _i $.
Con s i der $ Z ={ \b oxplus}_ {i \in [m -2 ]} Y_i$ .By the  i ndu cti on hy p othe sis, $ Z = {\su m}_{i = 1}^{m-2} Y_i$a nd $\dim Z ={ \s u m }_ { i=1} ^{m -2} \dim Y_ i$,w here as $ Z  \ cap Y_{m- 1} =Z\ ca p  Y_m = \{0\}$. Thus ,accord ing t o Definition\[P\] $Z,Y _ { m-1}, Y_ m$ a r ep airwise disjoi nt no ntrivial c o dewordsof $\ mathcal{ U}$ and b y Lemma \[ 6m\ ],$(Z  \b o x pl us Y_{m-1}) \ c a p Y_ m= (Y_1\bo xplus \ cdo ts\bo xpl us  Y_{m-1})  \cap Y_ m=\{ 0\ }$.  Henc e , (a) mu st  ho ld  fo r $Y_ 1 , \ldo ts, Y _m$. 
To pro ve (b), ob s e rveth at  $Y_ m \ ca p \su m\li m its _{i=1}^ {m-1} Y_i  =\ {0\} $ac cording  to part (a).  T hen, by th eind uction h ypothesi s and Lemma 
_1 \boxplus_Y_2 \boxplus_\cdots \boxplus Y_m =_Y_1 +_Y_2_+ \cdots_+_Y_m$; and

- _ $\dim(Y_1 \boxplus_Y_2 \boxplus \cdots \boxplus_Y_m) = \sum_{i=1}^m_\dim_Y_i$.

We prove (a)–(c) simultaneously by induction on $m$, the number of pairwise disjoint codewords._The_base case_of_two_codewords for (b)–(c) is covered_by Lemma \[4\] while that for_(a) is_because of the assumption of pairwise disjointness. As_the_induction hypothesis, assume_that the statements (a)–(c) hold for any set of_$m-1$ pairwise disjoint codewords, for some_$m \ge 3$._In_particular,_for any $(m-1)$-subset $\mathcal{I}_\subset [m]$, we have $\boxplus_{i \in_\mathcal{I}} Y_i = \sum_{i \in \mathcal{I}}_Y_i$ and $\dim(\boxplus_{i \in \mathcal{I}} Y_i) =_\sum_{i\in\mathcal{I}}\dim Y_i$.

Consider $Z = {\boxplus}_{i \in_[m-2]} Y_i$. By the induction_hypothesis, $Z_= {\sum}_{i=1}^{m-2} Y_i$ and $\dim_Z = {\sum}_{i=1}^{m-2}_\dim Y_i$,_whereas $Z \cap_Y_{m-1} = Z \cap Y_m =_\{0\}$. Thus, according_to Definition \[P\] $Z, Y_{m-1}, Y_m$ are_pairwise_disjoint nontrivial codewords_of_$\mathcal{U}$_and by_Lemma \[6m\], $(Z \boxplus_Y_{m-1})_\cap Y_m_=_(Y_1 \boxplus \cdots \boxplus Y_{m-1}) \cap_Y_m_= \{0\}$. Hence, (a) must hold for_$Y_1, \ldots, Y_m$.

To prove_(b),_observe that $Y_m \cap_\sum\limits_{i=1}^{m-1} Y_i = \{0\}$ according_to part (a). Then, by the_induction hypothesis_and Lemma 