t(\tilde{Y}_{i,0})$ has the same monomials as $E(Y_{i,0})$”.

The property $Q(n)$ is more precise than $P(n)$ because it asks that $F_t(\tilde{Y}_{i,0})$ has only a finite number of monomials.

For $n\geq 1$, the property $Q(n)$ implies the property $P(n)$.

[[*Proof:*]{}]{}We suppose $Q(n)$ is true. In particular the section \[conste\] enables us to construct $E_t(m)\in\mathfrak{K}_t^{\infty}$ for $m\in B$. The defining formula of $E_t(m)$ shows that it has the same monomials as $E(m)$. So $E_t(m)\in\tilde{D}_m$ and $E_t(m)\in\mathfrak{K}_t$.

Let us prove $P(n)$: let $m$ be in $B$. The uniqueness of $F_t(m)$ follows from lemma \[leasto\]. Let $m_L=m>m_{L-1}>...>m_1$ be the dominant monomials of $D_m$ with a total ordering compatible with the partial ordering (it follows from lemma \[fini\] that $D_m\cap B$ is finite). Let us prove by induction on $l$ the existence of $F_t(m_l)$. The unique dominant of $D_{m_1}$ is $m_1$ so $F_t(m_1)=E_t(m_1)\in\tilde{D}_{m_1}$. In general let $\lambda_1(t),...,\lambda_{l-1}(t)\in{\mathbb{Z}}[t^{\pm}]$ be the coefficient of the dominant ${\mathcal{Y}}_t$-monomials $m_1,...,m_{l-1}$ in $E_t(m_l)$. We put: $$F_t(m_l)=E_t(m_l)-\underset{r=1...l-1}{\sum}\lambda_r(t)F_t(m_r)$$ We see in the construction that $F_t(m)\in\tilde{D}_m$ because for $m'\
t(\tilde{Y}_{i,0})$ has the same monomials as $ E(Y_{i,0})$ ”. 

 The property $ Q(n)$ is more precise than $ P(n)$ because it ask that $ F_t(\tilde{Y}_{i,0})$ have only a finite number of monomials. 

 For $ n\geq 1 $, the property $ Q(n)$ imply the property $ P(n)$. 

 [ [ * Proof:*]{}]{}We suppose $ Q(n)$ is on-key. In finical the section \[conste\ ] enable us to manufacture $ E_t(m)\in\mathfrak{K}_t^{\infty}$ for $ m\in B$. The defining rule of $ E_t(m)$ shows that it has the like monomials as $ E(m)$. So $ E_t(m)\in\tilde{D}_m$ and $ E_t(m)\in\mathfrak{K}_t$. 

 Let us rise $ P(n)$: let $ m$ be in $ B$. The uniqueness of $ F_t(m)$ succeed from lemma \[leasto\ ]. Let $ m_L = m > m_{L-1}>... >m_1 $ be the dominant monomials of $ D_m$ with a full ordering compatible with the partial ordering (it follows from lemma \[fini\ ] that $ D_m\cap B$ is finite). permit us prove by induction on $ l$ the existence of $ F_t(m_l)$. The unique dominant of $ D_{m_1}$ is $ m_1 $ therefore $ F_t(m_1)=E_t(m_1)\in\tilde{D}_{m_1}$. In general let $ \lambda_1(t),... ,\lambda_{l-1}(t)\in{\mathbb{Z}}[t^{\pm}]$ be the coefficient of the dominant $ { \mathcal{Y}}_t$-monomials $ m_1,... ,m_{l-1}$ in $ E_t(m_l)$. We put: $ $ F_t(m_l)=E_t(m_l)-\underset{r=1... l-1}{\sum}\lambda_r(t)F_t(m_r)$$ We see in the construction that $ F_t(m)\in\tilde{D}_m$ because for $ m'\
t(\tipde{Y}_{i,0})$ has the same monomlals as $E(Y_{i,0})$”.

The ptoperty $X(n)$ is jore prezise than $P(n)$ because it asks tyat $F_u(\nilde{Y}_{i,0})$ has only a fivite numbvr of monimiaow.

For $n\geq 1$, the proizrty $S(k)$ impnmes the properti $P(n)$.

[[*Proof:*]{}]{}We vuppose $Q(n)$ is drje. In particular the section \[conste\] egables is to construct $G_t(m)\in\kwthfdak{K}_t^{\infty}$ for $m\in B$. The defining rormula of $E_t(m)$ shows that it has the same monoliald as $E(m)$. So $E_t(m)\in\tipde{D}_m$ and $E_j(j)\in\iqthfrak{K}_t$.

Let us prove $K(n)$: let $m$ be jn $B$. The uniqueness of $F_t(m)$ folluws fxom lemma \[lgcwto\]. Net $m_L=m>m_{L-1}>...>m_1$ ue the dominant mokpmials of $D_m$ eith a total ovderiig cimpatible with the pactial ordering (it fojlows frok memma \[fini\] that $D_n\cqp B$ hs fhnitd). Leg ua 'robe by lndnction on $l$ the existebce of $F_t(m_l)$. The uniauq dominant of $S_{m_1}$ is $i_1$ fo $F_t(m_1)=E_t(m_1)\in\tilde{D}_{m_1}$. In general let $\lambdd_1(t),...,\lzmbda_{l-1}(t)\in{\mathbb{Z}}[t^{\pm}]$ be rhe coefficient of thg dominant ${\mathcal{Y}}_t$-monomials $m_1,...,m_{l-1}$ in $E_t(m_l)$. We put: $$F_t(m_l)=E_t(m_l)-\ungersev{r=1...u-1}{\sun}\lwovdw_r(t)F_t(m_r)$$ We see in the construction that $F_t(m)\in\ejlce{C}_m$ because for $m'\
t(\tilde{Y}_{i,0})$ has the same monomials as $E(Y_{i,0})$”. $Q(n)$ more precise $P(n)$ because it a number of monomials. $n\geq 1$, the $Q(n)$ implies the property $P(n)$. [[*Proof:*]{}]{}We $Q(n)$ is true. In particular the section \[conste\] enables us to construct $E_t(m)\in\mathfrak{K}_t^{\infty}$ $m\in B$. The defining formula of $E_t(m)$ shows that it has the same as So and Let us prove $P(n)$: let $m$ be in $B$. The uniqueness of $F_t(m)$ follows from lemma Let $m_L=m>m_{L-1}>...>m_1$ be the dominant monomials of $D_m$ a total ordering compatible the partial ordering (it follows lemma that $D_m\cap is Let prove by induction $l$ the existence of $F_t(m_l)$. The unique dominant of $D_{m_1}$ is $m_1$ so $F_t(m_1)=E_t(m_1)\in\tilde{D}_{m_1}$. In general let be the the dominant $m_1,...,m_{l-1}$ $E_t(m_l)$. put: $$F_t(m_l)=E_t(m_l)-\underset{r=1...l-1}{\sum}\lambda_r(t)F_t(m_r)$$ We the construction that $F_t(m)\in\tilde{D}_m$ because for
t(\tilde{Y}_{i,0})$ has the same monomiaLs as $E(Y_{i,0})$”.

The PropeRty $q(n)$ iS mOre pReciSe than $P(n)$ becausE It asKs that $F_t(\tilde{Y}_{i,0})$ has only A finiTe NUmbeR Of MonomIals.

For $N\GeQ 1$, THe pRoPeRty $q(n)$ IMpLies tHe pRoperty $p(n)$.

[[*Proof:*]{}]{}We sUppOsE $Q(n)$ is true. In pARtIcular the sEctIon \[conste\] enaBleS us to cOnStrUCt $E_t(m)\In\mAthfrAk{K}_t^{\inFTy}$ for $m\In B$. The defInINg formULa of $E_t(m)$ SHOwS thaT it has the same monoMIaLS as $E(m)$. So $E_t(m)\in\tiLde{D}_m$ aNd $e_T(m)\IN\MatHfrAk{K}_t$.

Let us pRoVe $P(n)$: lET $m$ be in $B$. tHe UNIQueNEss of $F_t(m)$ folloWs from lemma \[LEasTo\]. Let $m_l=m>M_{L-1}>...>m_1$ BE the doMinanT mONomIals of $D_m$ witH a toTal orderiNg compATible wiTH the parTial orDerIng (It foLLoWs FroM lEMma \[FInI\] thAT $D_m\Cap B$ is fiNiTe). let us ProvE BY INducTioN on $l$ The exIstence of $F_t(m_l)$. the UniqUE doMinanT of $D_{m_1}$ Is $m_1$ sO $F_T(m_1)=E_t(m_1)\In\tildE{D}_{m_1}$. In GeNeral let $\lambda_1(t),...,\LambDa_{l-1}(t)\in{\matHbb{z}}[t^{\Pm}]$ bE tHe coeFFicienT of The DominanT ${\mathcaL{y}}_t$-mOnOMIAlS $m_1,...,m_{l-1}$ in $E_t(m_l)$. We put: $$F_t(m_L)=E_T(M_L)-\uNderset{r=1...L-1}{\sum}\laMBdA_r(T)f_t(m_r)$$ We seE iN thE conSTRuctiOn thAT $F_T(m)\in\tildE{D}_m$ becAUsE fOr $m'\
t(\tilde{Y}_{i,0})$ has th e same mon omial s a s $ E( Y_{i ,0}) $”.

The prope r ty $ Q(n)$ is more precisethan$P ( n)$b ec auseit asks th a t  $F _t (\ til de { Y} _{i,0 })$  has on ly a finit e n um ber of monom i al s.

For $n \ge q 1$, the pr ope rty $Q (n )$i mplie s t he pr operty $P(n)$ .

[[*Pro of : *]{}]{ } We supp o s e$Q(n )$ is true. In pa r ti c ular the secti on \[c on s te \ ]  en abl es us to c on struc t  $E_t(m ) \i n \ m ath f rak{K}_t^{\in fty}$ for $ m \in  B$. T he  de f iningformu la of$E_t(m)$ sh owsthat it h as the same mo n omialsas $E( m)$ . S o $E _ t( m) \in \t i lde { D} _m$ and  $E_t(m) \i n\ mathf rak{ K } _ t $.
Let  usprove  $P(n)$: let$m$  bei n $ B$. T he un ique ne ss of  $F_t( m)$ f ol lows from lemma  \[l easto\].Let  $ m_L =m >m_{L - 1}>... >m_ 1$be thedominan t  mo no m i a ls  of $D_m$ with a t ot a l  o rderingcompat i bl ew ith thepa rti al o r d ering  (it fo llows fr om lem m a\[ fini\]th at $D_ m\ cap  B$  is f i nite ). Let  us prov e byi nduction on $l $  the existenc e  o f $F _ t(m_ l)$ . The uniqu e do m inan t of $D _{m _ 1}$ i s $m_ 1$ so $F_t(m_1)=E_t(m_1)\ in \tilde {D}_{ m_1}$. In gen eral let $ \ l a mbda_1(t ),.. . ,\ l ambda_{l-1}(t) \in{\ mathbb{Z}} [ t^{\pm}] $ bethe coef ficient o f the domi nan t $ {\m ath c a l{ Y}}_t$-monomi a l s $m _1 ,...,m_ {l- 1}$ in$E_ t(m _l) $.We  put: $$F _t(m_l)= E_ t( m_ l) -\u nders e t{r=1... l- 1}{ \s um} \lamb d a_r(t) F_t(m _r)$ $We see  in the co n s truc ti on  tha t $ F_ t(m)\ in\t i lde {D}_m$because f or$ m'\
t(\tilde{Y}_{i,0})$ has_the same_monomials as $E(Y_{i,0})$”.

The property_$Q(n)$ is_more_precise than_$P(n)$_because it asks_that $F_t(\tilde{Y}_{i,0})$ has_only a finite number_of monomials.

For $n\geq_1$,_the property $Q(n)$ implies the property $P(n)$.

[[*Proof:*]{}]{}We suppose $Q(n)$ is true. In particular the_section_\[conste\] enables_us_to_construct $E_t(m)\in\mathfrak{K}_t^{\infty}$ for $m\in B$._The defining formula of $E_t(m)$_shows that_it has the same monomials as $E(m)$. So_$E_t(m)\in\tilde{D}_m$_and $E_t(m)\in\mathfrak{K}_t$.

Let us_prove $P(n)$: let $m$ be in $B$. The uniqueness_of $F_t(m)$ follows from lemma \[leasto\]._Let $m_L=m>m_{L-1}>...>m_1$ be_the_dominant_monomials of $D_m$ with_a total ordering compatible with the_partial ordering (it follows from lemma_\[fini\] that $D_m\cap B$ is finite). Let_us prove by induction on $l$_the existence of $F_t(m_l)$. The_unique dominant_of $D_{m_1}$ is $m_1$ so_$F_t(m_1)=E_t(m_1)\in\tilde{D}_{m_1}$. In general_let $\lambda_1(t),...,\lambda_{l-1}(t)\in{\mathbb{Z}}[t^{\pm}]$_be the coefficient_of the dominant ${\mathcal{Y}}_t$-monomials $m_1,...,m_{l-1}$ in_$E_t(m_l)$. We put:_$$F_t(m_l)=E_t(m_l)-\underset{r=1...l-1}{\sum}\lambda_r(t)F_t(m_r)$$ We see in the construction_that_$F_t(m)\in\tilde{D}_m$ because for_$m'\