Take the 2-minute tour ×
Mathematics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for people studying math at any level and professionals in related fields. It's 100% free, no registration required.

I'm a beginner at matroids - so please forgive the banality of the following question.

Defining a matroid in terms of closed sets: Why is it that the intersection of two closed sets (flats) is a flat, while the union of two flats is not nesceassarily a flat? (This is relevant when defining the join and meet in the lattice of flats of a given matroid.)

Can anyone recommend a good book for getting started on matroids?

Thanks a lot.

share|improve this question
1  
mathoverflow.net/questions/67736/… –  JavaMan Jul 24 '11 at 19:50

1 Answer 1

up vote 2 down vote accepted

Since no one else has done so, I’ll take a crack at the non-reference part of the question; whether this answer actually helps will probably depend on just what definitions you’re using.

Let $M$ be a matroid on a set $E$. The fact that the intersection of two closed sets is closed follows from the fact that the closed sets in $M$ can be defined in terms of a closure operator, i.e., a function $\sigma$ defined on subsets of $E$ that satisfies the following three conditions:

  • $X \subseteq \sigma(X)$ for all $X \subseteq E$ ($\sigma$ is expansive);
  • $\sigma(Y) \subseteq \sigma(X)$ whenever $Y \subseteq X \subseteq E$ ($\sigma$ is order-preserving); and
  • $\sigma(\sigma(X)) = \sigma(X)$ for all $X \subseteq E$ ($\sigma$ is idempotent).

The closed sets are then those $X \subseteq E$ such that $\sigma(X) = X$. Whenever a notion of closed set is defined from a closure operator in this way, it will have the property that the intersection of two closed sets is always a closed set. For suppose that $A$ and $B$ are closed sets. Then $$A \cap B \subseteq \sigma(A \cap B) \subseteq \sigma(A) = A,$$ and $$A \cap B \subseteq \sigma(A \cap B) \subseteq \sigma(B) = B,$$ so $A \cap B \subseteq \sigma(A \cap B) \subseteq A \cap B$, $A \cap B = \sigma(A \cap B)$, and $A \cap B$ is closed. Essentially the same argument shows that if $\mathscr{C}$ is any family of closed sets, then $\bigcap\mathscr{C}$ is closed. (The argument doesn’t actually use the idempotence of $\sigma$, but without idempotence there may not be much in the way of closed sets; the only one whose existence is guaranteed is $E$.)

In the case of a matroid the closure operator is the span function $\sigma_M$ defined by $\sigma_M(X) =$ $X \cup \{e \in E:Y + e\mbox{ is a circuit for some }Y \subseteq X\}$; depending on your definition of closed set, it may or may not be very obvious that a set $X$ is closed iff $\sigma_M(X) = X$.

The situation with unions is different simply because the axioms defining a closure operator aren’t strong enough to guarantee that the union of two closed sets is closed. This is most easily seen from examples. For example, let $E = \{a,b,c\}$, and say that $X \subseteq E$ is independent iff $|X| \le 2$. (Equivalently, $E$ is the only circuit.) Then $\{a\}$ and $\{b\}$ are closed, but $\{a,b\}$ is not, and this should be fairly clear no matter what definition of closed set you’re using.

share|improve this answer
    
Thanks for an excellent answer! –  Bart Patzer Jul 29 '11 at 11:43

Your Answer

 
discard

By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.