---
abstract: |
    The main results of this note are:

    -   It is consistent that every subparacompact space $X$ of size $\omega_1$ is a $D$-space.

    -   If there exists a Michael space, then all productively Lindelöf spaces have the Menger property, and, therefore, are $D$-spaces.

    -   Every locally $D$-space which admits a $\sigma$-locally finite cover by Lindelöf spaces is a $D$-space.

address:
- 'Faculty of Mathematics and Physics, and Faculty of Education, University of Ljubljana, P. O. Box 2964, Ljubljana, Slovenia 1001.'
- 'Kurt Gödel Research Center for Mathematical Logic, University of Vienna, Währinger Straße 25, A-1090 Wien, Austria.'
author:
- Dušan Repovš and Lyubomyr Zdomskyy
title: 'On the Menger covering property and $D$-spaces'
---

Introduction
============

A *neighbourhood assignment* for a topological space $X$ is a function $N$ from $X$ to the topology of $X$ such that $x\in N(x)$ for all $x$. A topological space $X$ is said to be a *$D$-space* @vDaPfe79, if for every neighbourhood assignment $N$ for $X$ there exists a closed and discrete subset $A\subset X$ such that $N(A)=\bigcup_{x\in A}N(x)=X$.

It is unknown whether paracompact (even Lindelöf) spaces are $D$-spaces. Our first result in this note answers @Gru?? [Problem 3.8] in the affirmative and may be thought of as a very partial solution to this problem[^1].

Our second result shows that the affirmative answer to @Tal?? [Problem 2.6], which asks whether all productively Lindelöf spaces are $D$-spaces, is consistent. It is worth mentioning that our premises (i.e., the existence of a Michael space) are not known to be inconsistent.

Our third result is a common generalization of two theorems from @MarSou09.

Most of our proofs use either the recent important result of Aurichi @Aur10 asserting that every topological space with the Menger property is a $D$-space, or the ideas from its proof. We consider only regular topological spaces. For the definitions of small cardinals $\mathfrak d$ and $\mathrm{cov}(\mathcal M)$ used in this paper we refer the reader to @Vau90.

Subparacompact spaces of size $\omega_1$
========================================

Following @BukHal03 we say that a topological space $X$ has the property $E^*_\omega$ if for every sequence $\langle
u_n:n\in\omega\rangle$ of *countable* open covers of $X$ there exists a sequence $\langle v_n:n\in\omega\rangle$ such that $v_n\in
[u_n]^{<\omega}$ and $\bigcup_{n\in\omega}\cup v_n =X$. In the realm of Lindelöf spaces the property $E^*_\omega$ is usually called the *Menger property* or $\bigcup_{\mathit{fin}}(\mathcal
O,\mathcal O)$, see @Tsa07 and references therein.

We say that a topological space $X$ has property $D_\omega$, if for every neighbourhood assignment $N$ there exists a countable collection $\{A_n:n\in\omega\}$ of closed discrete subsets of $X$ such that $X=\bigcup_{n\in\omega}N(A_n)$. Observe that the property $D_\omega$ is inherited by all closed subsets.

The following theorem is the main result of this section.

\[aur\] Suppose that a topological space $X$ has properties $D_\omega$ and $E^*_\omega$. Then $X$ is a $D$-space.

The proof of Theorem \[aur\] is analogous to the proof of @Aur10 [Proposition 2.6]. In particular, it uses the following game of length $\omega$ on a topological space $X$: On the $n$th move player $I$ chooses a countable open cover $u_n=\{U_{n,k}:k\in\omega\}$ such that $U_{n,k}\subset U_{n,k+1}$ for all $k\in\omega$, and player $II$ responds by choosing a natural number $k_n$. Player $II$ wins the game if $\bigcup_{n\in\omega}
U_{n,k_n}=X$. Otherwise, player $I$ wins. We shall call this game an $E^*_\omega$-game. In the realm of Lindelöf spaces this game is known under the name *Menger game*. It is well-known that a Lindelöf space $X$ has the property $E^*_\omega$ if and only if the first player has no winning strategy in the $E^*_\omega$-game on $X$, see @Hur25 [@COC1]. The proof of @COC1 [Theorem 13] also works without any change for non-Lindelöf spaces.

\[meng\_game\] A topological space $X$ has the property $E^*_\omega$ if and only if the first player has no winning strategy in the $E^*_\omega$-game.

A strategy of the first player in the $E^*_\omega$-game may be thought of as a map $\Upsilon:\omega^{<\omega}\to\mathcal O(X)$, where $\mathcal O(X)$ stands for the collection of all countable open covers of $X$. The strategy $\Upsilon$ is winning, if $X\neq\bigcup_{n\in\omega}U_{z\upharpoonright n, z(n)}$ for all $z\in\omega^\omega$, where $\Upsilon(s)=\{U_{s,k}:k\in\omega\}\in\mathcal O(X)$.

We are in a position now to present the proof of Theorem \[aur\].

We shall define a strategy $\Upsilon:X\to\mathcal
O(X)$ of the player $I$ in the $E^*_\omega$-game on $X$ as follows. Set $F_\emptyset=X$. The property $D_\omega$ yields an increasing sequence $\langle
A_{\emptyset,k}:k\in\omega\rangle$ of closed discrete subsets of $F_\emptyset$ such that $X=\bigcup_{k\in\omega}N(A_{\emptyset,k})$. Set $\Upsilon(\emptyset)=u_\emptyset=\{N(A_{\emptyset,k}):k\in\omega\}$.

Suppose that for some $m\in\omega$ and all $s\in\omega^{\leq m}$ we have already defined a closed subset $F_s$ of $X$, an increasing sequence $\langle A_{s,k}:k\in\omega\rangle $ of closed discrete subsets of $F_s$, and a countable open cover $\Upsilon(s)=u_s$ of $X$ such that $u_s=\{(X\setminus F_s)\cup N(A_{s,k}):k\in\omega\}$.

Fix $s\in\omega^{m+1}$. Since $X$ has the property $D_\omega$, so does its closed subspace $F_{s}:=X\setminus\bigcup_{i<m+1}
N(A_{s\upharpoonright i,s(i)})$, and hence there exists an increasing sequence $\langle A_{s,k}:k\in\omega\}$ of closed discrete subsets of $F_{s}$ such that $F_{s}\subset\bigcup_{k\in\omega}N(A_{s,k})$. Set $\Upsilon(s)=u_{s}=\{(X\setminus F_s)\cup N(A_{s,k}):k\in\omega\}$. This completes the definition of $\Upsilon$.

Since $X$ has the property $E^*_\omega$, $\Upsilon$ is not winning. Thus there exists $z\in\omega^\omega$ such that $X
=\bigcup_{n\in\omega} (X\setminus F_{z\upharpoonright n})\cup
N(A_{z\upharpoonright n,z(n)}).$ By the inductive construction, $X\setminus F_{\emptyset}=\emptyset$ and $X\setminus
F_{z\upharpoonright n}=\bigcup_{i<n} N(A_{z\upharpoonright i,z(i)})$ for all $n>0$. It follows from above that $X =\bigcup_{n\in\omega} N(A_{z\upharpoonright n,z(n)}).$ In addition, $ A_{z\upharpoonright n,z(n)}\subset
F_{z\upharpoonright n}=X\setminus \bigcup_{i<n}
N(A_{z\upharpoonright i,z(i)})$ for all $n>0$, which implies that $A:=\bigcup_{n\in\omega}A_{z\upharpoonright n,z(n)}$ is a closed discrete subset of $X$. It suffices to note that $N(A)=X$.

We recall from @Bur84 that a topological space $X$ is called *subparacompact*, if every open cover of $X$ has a $\sigma$-locally finite closed refinement.

\[l\_subpara\] Suppose that $X$ is a subparacompact topological space which can be covered by $\omega_1$-many of its Lindelöf subspaces. Then $X$ has the property $D_\omega$.[^2]

In particular, every subparacompact space of size $\omega_1$ has the property $D_\omega$.

Let $\mathcal L=\{L_\xi:\xi<\omega_1\}$ be an increasing cover of $X$ by Lindelöf subspaces, $\tau$ be the topology of $X$, and $N:X\to\tau$ be a neighbourhood assignment. Construct by induction a sequence $\langle C_\alpha:\alpha<\omega_1\rangle$ of (possibly empty) countable subsets of $X$ such that

-   $L_0\subset N(C_0)$;

-   $C_\alpha\cap N(\bigcup_{\xi<\alpha}C_\xi)=\emptyset$ for all $\alpha<\omega_1$; and

-   $L_\alpha\setminus N(\bigcup_{\xi<\alpha}C_\xi)\subset N(C_\alpha)$ for all $\alpha<\omega_1$.

Set $C=\bigcup_{\alpha<\omega_1}C_\alpha$. The subparacompactness of $X$ yields a closed cover $\mathcal
F=\bigcup_{n\in\omega}\mathcal{F}_n$ of $X$ which refines $\mathcal
 U=\{N(x):x\in C\}$ and such that each $\mathcal{F}_n$ is locally-finite. Since every element of $\mathcal{U}$ contains at most countably many elements of $C$, so do elements of $\mathcal F$. Therefore for every $F\in\mathcal F_n$ such that $C\cap
F\neq\emptyset$ we can write this intersection in the form $\{x_{n,F,m}:m\in\omega\}$. Now it is easy to see that $A_{n,m}:=\{x_{n,F,m}:F\in\mathcal F_n,C\cap F\neq\emptyset\}$ is a closed discrete subset of $X$ and $\bigcup_{n,m\in\omega}A_{n,m}=C$.

What we have actually used in the proof of Lemma \[l\_subpara\] is the following weakening of subparacompactness: every open cover $\mathcal{U}$ which is closed under unions of its countable subsets admits a $\sigma$-locally finite closed refinement. We do not know whether this property is strictly weaker than subparacompactness.

\[cor\_tightness\] Let $X$ be a countably tight subparacompact topological space of density $\omega_1$. Then $X$ has the property $D_\omega$.

Let $\{x_\alpha:\alpha<\omega_1\}$ be a dense subspace of $X$. Since $X$ has countable tightness, $X=\bigcup_{\alpha<\omega_1}\overline{\{x_\xi:\xi<\alpha\}}$. It suffices to note that the closure of any countable subspace of a subparacompact space is Lindelöf.

It is well-known @COC2 [Theorem 4.4] (and it easily follows from corresponding definitions) that any Lindelöf space of size $<\mathfrak d$ has the Menger property. The same argument shows that every topological space of size $<\mathfrak d$ has the property $E^*_\omega$. Combining this with Theorem \[aur\] and Lemma \[l\_subpara\] we get the following corollary, which implies the first of the results mentioned in our abstract.

\[main\_cor\] Suppose that $X$ is a subparacompact topological space of size $|X|<\mathfrak d$ which can be covered by $\omega_1$-many of its Lindelöf subspaces. Then $X$ is a $D$-space.

Concerning the existence of a Michael space
===========================================

A topological space $X$ is said to be *productively Lindelöf*, if $X\times Y$ is Lindelöf for all Lindelöf spaces $Y$. It was asked in @Tal?? whether productively Lindelöf spaces are $D$-spaces. The positive answer to the above question has been proved consistent and in a stream of recent papers (see the list of references in @Tal??) several sufficient set-theoretical conditions were established. The following statement gives a uniform proof for some of these results. In particular, it implies @Tal10 [Theorems 5 and 7], @AlaAurJunTal?? [Corollary 4.5], and answers @Tal??? [Question 15] in the affirmative.

A Lindelöf space $Y$ is called a *Michael* space, if $\omega^\omega\times Y$ is not Lindelöf.

\[obs1\] If there exists a Michael space, then every productively Lindelöf space has the Menger property.

We refer the reader to @Moo99 where the existence of a Michael space was reformulated in a combinatorial language and a number of set-theoretic conditions guaranteeing the existence of Michael spaces were established.

In the proof of Proposition \[obs1\] we shall use set-valued maps, see @RepSem98. By a *set-valued map* $\Phi$ from a set $X$ into a set $Y$ we understand a map from $X$ into $\mathcal P(Y
)$ and write $\Phi : X\Rightarrow Y$ (here $\mathcal P(Y)$ denotes the set of all subsets of $Y$). For a subset $A$ of $X$ we set $\Phi(A) = \bigcup_{x\in A}\Phi(x) \subset Y$. A set-valued map $\Phi$ from a topological spaces $X$ to a topological space $Y$ is said to be

-   *compact-valued*, if $\Phi(x)$ is compact for every $x \in X$;

-   *upper semicontinuous*, if for every open subset $V$ of $Y$ the set $\Phi^{-1}_\subset (V) = \{x \in  X : \Phi(x) \subset V\}$ is open in $X$.

The proof of the following claim is straightforward.

\[trivial\]

1.  Suppose that $X,Y$ are topological spaces, $X$ is Lindelöf, and $\Phi:X\Rightarrow Y$ is a compact-valued upper semicontinuous map such that $Y=\Phi(X)$. Then $Y$ is Lindelöf.

2.  If $\Phi_0:X_0\Rightarrow Y_0$ and $\Phi_0:X_1\Rightarrow Y_1$ are compact-valued upper semicontinuous, then so is the map $\Phi_0\times\Phi_1 :X_0\times X_1\Rightarrow Y_0\times Y_1$ assigning to each $(x_0,x_1)\in X_0\times X_1$ the product $\Phi_0(x_0)\times\Phi_1(x_1)$.

*Proof of Proposition \[obs1\].* Suppose, contrary to our claim, that $X$ is a productively Lindelöf space which does not have the Menger property and $Y$ is a Michael space. It suffices to show that $X\times Y$ is not Lindelöf.

Indeed, by @Zdo05 [Theorem 8] there exists a compact-valued upper semicontinuous map $\Phi:X\to \omega^\omega$ such that $\Phi(X)=\omega^\omega$. By Claim \[trivial\](2) the product $\omega^\omega\times Y$ is the image of $X \times Y$ under a compact-valued upper semicontinuous map. By the definition of a Michael space, $\omega^\omega\times Y$ is not Lindelöf. By applying Claim \[trivial\](1) we can conclude that $X\times Y$ is not Lindelöf neither. $\Box$

By a result of Tall @Tal10 the existence of a Michael space implies that all productively Lindelöf analytic metrizable spaces are $\sigma$-compact. Combining recent results obtained in @AlaAurJunTal?? and @Rep?? we can consistently extend this result to all $\Sigma^1_2$ definable subsets of $2^\omega$.

\[sigma\_1\_2\] Suppose that $\mathrm{cov}(\mathcal M)>\omega_1$ and there exists a Michael space. Then every productively Lindelöf $\Sigma^1_2$ definable subset of $2^\omega$ is $\sigma$-compact.

Let $X$ be a productively Lindelöf $\Sigma^1_2$ definable subset of $2^\omega$.

If $X$ cannot be written as a union of $\omega_1$-many of its compact subspaces, then it contains a closed copy of $\omega^\omega$ @Rep??, and hence the existence of the Michael space implies that $X$ is not productively Lindelöf, a contradiction.

Thus $X$ can be written as a union of $\omega_1$-many of its compact subspaces, and therefore it is $\sigma$-compact by @AlaAurJunTal?? [Corollary 4.15].

We do not know whether the assumption $\mathrm{cov}(\mathcal
M)>\omega_1$ can be dropped from Theorem \[sigma\_1\_2\].

Suppose that there exists a Michael space. Is every coanalytic productively Lindelöf space $\sigma$-compact?

By @Tal???? [Proposition 31] the affirmative answer to the question above follows from the Axiom of Projective Determinacy.

Locally finite unions
=====================

\[simp\_obs\] Suppose that $X$ is a locally $D$-space which admits a $\sigma$-locally finite cover by Lindelöf spaces. Then $X$ is a $D$-space.

Let $\mathcal F=\bigcup_{n\in\omega}\mathcal F_n$ be a cover of $X$ by Lindelöf subspaces such that $\mathcal F_n$ is locally finite. Fix $F\in\mathcal F_n$. For every $x\in F$ there exists an open neighbourhood $U_x$ of $x$ such that $\bar{U_x}$ is a $D$-space. Let $C_F$ be a countable subset of $F$ such that $F\subset\bigcup_{x\in
C_F}U_x$. Then $\mathcal Z_F=\{\overline{F\cap U_x}:x\in C_F\}$ is a countable cover of $F$ consisting of closed $D$-subspaces of $X$ such that $F\cap Z$ is dense in $Z$ for all $Z\in\mathcal Z_F$. It follows from the above that $X$ admits a $\sigma$-locally finite cover consisting of closed $D$-subspaces. Since a union of a locally finite family of closed $D$-subspaces is easily seen to be a closed $D$-subspace, $X$ is a union of an increasing sequence of its closed $D$-subspaces. Therefore it is a $D$-space by results of @BorWeh91.

\[cor3\_1\] If a topological space $X$ admits a $\sigma$-locally finite locally countable cover by topological spaces with the Menger property, then it is a $D$-space.

In particular, a locally Lindelöf space admitting a $\sigma$-locally finite cover by topological spaces with the Menger property is a $D$-space.

The second part is a direct consequence of the first one since every $\sigma$-locally countable family of subspaces of a locally Lindelöf space is locally countable.

To prove the first assertion, note that by local countability every point $x\in X$ has a closed neighbourhood which is a countable union of its subspaces with the Menger property, and hence it has the Menger property itself. Therefore $X$ is a locally $D$-space. It now suffices to apply Theorem \[simp\_obs\].

It is known that every Lindelöf $\mathcal C$-scattered space is $\mathcal C$-like, and that $\mathcal C$-like spaces have the Menger property, see @Tel87 [p. 247] and references therein. Thus Corollary \[cor3\_1\] implies Theorems 2.2 and 3.1 from @MarSou09.

<span>10</span>

Alas, O.; Aurichi, L.F.; Junqueira, L.R.; Tall, F.D., <span>*Non-productively Lindelöf spaces and small cardinals,*</span> preprint, 2010.

Aurichi, L.F., <span>*$D$-spaces, topological games, and selection principles,*</span> Topology Proc. **36** (2010), 107–122.

Borges, C.R.; Wehrly, A.C., <span>*A study of $D$-spaces,*</span> Topology Proc. **16** (1991), 7–15.

Bukovský, L.; Haleš, J., <span>*On Hurewicz properties,*</span> Topology Appl. **132** (2003), 71–79.

Burke, D.K., <span>*Covering properties*</span>, in: <span>*Handbook of Set-Theoretic Topology*</span> (K. Kunen, J.E. Vaughan, eds.), North Holland, Amsterdam, 1984, 347–422.

Van Douwen, E.K.; Pfeffer, W.F., <span>*Some properties of the Sorgenfrey line and related spaces,*</span> Pacific J. Math. **81** (1979), 371–377.

Gruenhage, G., <span>*A survey on $D$ spaces*</span>, Contemp. Math., to appear.

Hurewicz, W., <span>*Über die Verallgemeinerung des Borellschen Theorems*</span>, Math. Z. **24** (1925), 401–421.

Just, W.; Miller, A.W.; Scheepers, M.; Szeptycki, P.J., <span>*The combinatorics of open covers. II,*</span> Topology Appl. **73** (1996), 241–266.

Martínez, J.C.; Soukup, L., <span>*The D-property in unions of scattered spaces,*</span> Topology Appl. **156** (2009), 3086–3090.

Moore, J.T., <span>*Some of the combinatorics related to Michael's problem,*</span> Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. **127** (1999), 2459–2467.

Repický, M., <span>*Another proof of Hurewicz theorem,*</span> Tatra Mt. Math. Publ., to appear.

Repovš, D.; Semenov, P., <span>*Continuous selections of multivalued mappings.*</span> Mathematics and its Applications, 455. Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, 1998.

Scheepers, M., <span>*Combinatorics of open covers. I. Ramsey theory,*</span> Topology Appl. **69** (1996), 31–62.

Shi, W.; Zhang, H., <span>*A note on $D$-spaces*</span>, preprint, 2010.

Tall, F.D., <span>*Productively Lindelöf spaces may all be $D$,*</span> preprint, 2010.

Tall, F.D., <span>*Lindelöf spaces which are Menger, Hurewicz, Alster, productive, or $D$,*</span> preprint, 2010.

Tall, F.D., <span>*A note on productively Lindelöf spaces,*</span> preprint, 2010.

Tall, F.D., <span>*Set-theoretic problems concerning Lindelöf spaces*</span>, preprint, 2010.

Telgársky, R., <span>*Topological games: on the 50th anniversary of the Banach-Mazur game,*</span> Rocky Mountain J. Math. **17** (1987), 227–276.

Tsaban, B., <span>*Selection principles and special sets of reals,*</span> in: <span>*Open problems in topology II*</span> (edited By Elliott Pearl), Elsevier Sci. Publ., 2007, pp. 91–108.

Vaughan J., <span>*Small uncountable cardinals and topology*</span>, in: <span>*Open problems in topology*</span> (J. van Mill, G.M. Reed, Eds.), Elsevier Sci. Publ., 1990, pp. 195-218.

Zdomskyy, L, <span>*A semifilter approach to selection principles,*</span> Comment. Math. Univ. Carolin. **46** (2005), 525–539.

[^1]: While completing this manuscript we have learned that this result has been independently obtained by Hang Zhang and Wei-Xue Shi, see @ShiZha??.

[^2]: By the methods of @ShiZha?? the submetalindelöfness is sufficient here.

{'source': 'arXiv_out/1012'}