text:
# Associativity of crossed products by partial actions, enveloping actions and partial representations

## 1. Introduction

Partial actions of groups appeared independently in various areas of mathematics, in particular, in the theory of operator algebras as a powerful tool in their study (see , , , , ). In the most general setting of partial actions on abstract sets the definition is as follows:

###### Definition 1.1.

Let $`G`$ be a group with identity element $`1`$ and $`𝒳`$ be a set. A partial action $`\alpha `$ of $`G`$ on $`𝒳`$ is a collection of subsets $`𝒟_g𝒳(gG)`$ and bijections $`\alpha _g:𝒟_{g^1}𝒟_g`$ such that

(i) $`𝒟_1=𝒳`$ and $`\alpha _1`$ is the identity map of $`𝒳`$;

(ii) $`𝒟_{(gh)^1}\alpha {}_{h}{}^{1}(𝒟_h𝒟_{g^1})`$;

(iii) $`\alpha _g\alpha _h(x)=\alpha _{gh}(x)`$ for each $`x\alpha {}_{h}{}^{1}(𝒟_h𝒟_{g^1})`$.

Note that conditions (ii) and (iii) mean that the function $`\alpha _{gh}`$ is an extension of the function $`\alpha _g\alpha _h`$. Moreover, it is easily seen that (ii) can be replaced by a “stronger looking” condition: $`\alpha {}_{h}{}^{1}(𝒟_h𝒟_{g^1})=𝒟_{h^1}𝒟_{h{}_{}{}^{1}g^1}.`$ Indeed, it obviously follows from (ii) that $`\alpha {}_{h}{}^{1}(𝒟_h𝒟_{g^1})𝒟_{h^1}𝒟_{h{}_{}{}^{1}g^1}.`$ Replacing $`h`$ by $`h^1`$ and $`g`$ by $`gh`$ we have $`\alpha {}_{h^1}{}^{1}(𝒟_{h^1}𝒟_{h{}_{}{}^{1}g^1})𝒟_h𝒟_{g^1},`$ and consequently, $`\alpha _{h^1}(𝒟_h𝒟_{g^1})𝒟_{h^1}𝒟_{h{}_{}{}^{1}g^1}.`$ By (iii) $`\alpha _{h^1}=\alpha _h^1`$ and we obtain the desired equality. Thus, the conditions (i) - (iii) are equivalent to the following:

(i) $`𝒟_1=𝒳`$ and $`\alpha _1`$ is the identity map of $`𝒳`$;

(ii’) $`\alpha _g(𝒟_{g^1}𝒟_h)=𝒟_g𝒟_{gh}`$;

(iii’) $`\alpha _g(\alpha _h(x))=\alpha _{gh}(x)`$, for all $`x𝒟_{h^1}𝒟_{(gh)^1}.`$

Let $`S(G)`$ be the universal semigroup generated by the symbols $`\{[g]:gG\}`$ subject to relations:

$`a)[g{}_{}{}^{1}][g][h]=[g{}_{}{}^{1}][gh];`$

$`b)[g][h][h{}_{}{}^{1}]=[gh][h{}_{}{}^{1}](g,hG);`$

$`c)[1]=1,`$

where $`1`$ denotes also the identity element of $`S(G)`$. Then $`S(G)`$ is an inverse semigroup and the partial actions of $`G`$ on $`𝒳`$ are in one-to-one correspondence with (ordinary) actions of $`S(G)`$ on $`𝒳`$ .

In what follows, by an algebra we shall mean an associative non-unital (i.e. non necessarily unital) algebra. In order to define a partial action $`\alpha `$ of a group $`G`$ on a $`K`$-algebra $`𝒜`$ we suppose in Definition 1.1 that each $`𝒟_g(gG)`$ is an ideal of $`𝒜`$ and that every map $`\alpha _g:𝒟_{g^1}𝒟_g`$ is an isomorphism of algebras.

Together with the notion of partial actions a generalization of the concept of crossed product appeared in the theory of operator algebras (see , , , ). For simplicity we assume that the twisting is trivial, so we give the definition in the context of corresponding skew group rings.

###### Definition 1.2.

Given a partial action $`\alpha `$ of a group $`G`$ on an algebra $`𝒜,`$ the skew group ring $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ corresponding to $`\alpha `$ is the set of all finite formal sums $`\{_{gG}a_g\delta _g:a_g𝒟_g\},`$ where $`\delta _g`$ are symbols. Addition is defined in the obvious way, and multiplication is determined by $`(a_g\delta _g)(b_h\delta _h)=\alpha _g(\alpha _{g^1}(a_g)b_h)\delta _{gh}.`$

Obviously, $`𝒜aa\delta _1𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is an embedding which permits us to identify $`𝒜`$ with $`𝒜\delta _1.`$ The first question which naturally arises is whether or not $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is associative. The associativity of this construction has been proved in  in the context of $`C^{}`$-algebras roughly ten years ago. Since the $`C^{}`$-algebraic proof employed very special properties of $`C^{}`$-algebras (the existence of approximate units) the associativity question remained open since then for partial action on general algebras.

One of our goals is to prove that $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is always associative if $`𝒜`$ is semiprime (Corollary 3.4). Recall that a unital algebra $`𝒜`$ is called semiprime if $`𝒜`$ has no non-zero nilpotent ideal (for other equivalent definitions see \[18, Theorem 2.6.17\]). More generally, given a partial action of $`G`$ on a unital algebra $`𝒜,`$ the skew group ring $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is associative provided that each ideal $`𝒟_g`$ is idempotent or non-degenerate (Corollary 3.2). We say that an ideal $``$ of $`𝒜`$ is non-degenerate if for every non-zero element $`a`$ there exists $`b`$ such that either $`ab0`$ or $`ba0`$. It is easily proved that a unital algebra $`𝒜`$ is semiprime if and only if each non-zero ideal of $`𝒜`$ is non-degenerate (see Proposition 2.6).

Note that in $`C^{}`$-algebraic context the ideals $`𝒟_g`$ are supposed to be closed by definition, and it is known that each closed ideal in a $`C^{}`$-algebra is an idempotent ideal (see \[13, Theorem V.9.2\]).

We also show that in general $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is not associative (see Section 3). In Section 4 we give a complete answer for the problem of the existence of a “global extension” (called enveloping action) for a given partial action on a unital algebra. More precisely, an enveloping action exists if and only if each ideal $`𝒟_g`$ is generated by a central idempotent (see Theorem 4.5). We introduce the notion of enveloping action with certain minimality condition in order to guarantee its uniqueness up to equivalence (see Section 4 for the definitions). We also prove that if $`(,\beta )`$ is an enveloping action for a partial action $`(𝒜,\alpha )`$ such that $`𝒜`$ and $``$ are unital algebras then the corresponding skew group rings, namely $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ and $`\text{}_\beta G`$, are Morita equivalent.

Another relevant concept which appeared in the theory of operator algebras is the notion of partial representation of a group on a Hilbert space, introduced independently in  and . Partial representations underlie important algebras generated by partial isometries. Among the most interesting cases are the Cuntz-Krieger algebras  investigated in  and  from the point of view of partial representations. The purely algebraic study of partial representations began in  and was continued in  (see also ). Similarly to the case of (usual) representations of groups, there exists an algebra $`K_{\mathrm{par}}(G)`$, called the partial group algebra of $`G`$ over $`K`$, which governs the partial representations of $`G`$ (see ). It is exactly the semigroup algebra $`KS(G)`$. It turns out that $`K_{\mathrm{par}}(G)`$ keeps much more information about the structure of $`G`$ than does $`KG`$ (see ) and this makes them especially interesting with respect to the classical isomorphism problem intensively investigated for group rings (see ).

In the final Section 6 we use crossed products to relate partial actions with partial representations. This leads to a one-to-one correspondence (see Theorem 6.11) when working with so-called “elementary” partial representations, which are structural blocks of the irreducible partial representations (see ). This permits to look at matrix algebras as crossed products by partial actions (see Corollary 6.12), covering this way a substantial part of elementary gradings (see Corollary 6.15). Moreover, starting with the partial representation $`Gg[g]K_{\mathrm{par}}(G),`$ we endow $`K_{\mathrm{par}}(G)`$ with crossed product structure (see Theorem 6.9).

## 2. The algebra of multipliers

Let $`K`$ be a field, $`𝒜`$ an associative $`K`$-algebra with unity element and $``$ an ideal of $`𝒜`$. Take an element $`x𝒜`$ and consider the left and right multiplications of $``$ by $`x`$: $`L_x:axa,R_x:aax.`$ Then $`L=L_x`$ and $`R=R_x`$ are linear transformations of $``$ such that the following properties are satisfied for all $`a,b`$:

(i) $`L(ab)=L(a)b`$;
(ii) $`R(ab)=aR(b)`$;
(iii) $`R(a)b=aL(b)`$.

These properties are obvious consequences of the associativity of $`𝒜`$.

###### Definition 2.1.

The algebra of multipliers (see e.g. \[14, 3.12.2\]) of an algebra $``$ is the set $`M()`$ of all ordered pairs $`(L,R)`$, where $`L`$ and $`R`$ are linear transformations of $``$ which satisfy the properties (i) - (iii). For $`(L,R),(L^{},R^{})M()`$ and $`\alpha K`$ the operations are given by $`\alpha (L,R)=(\alpha L,\alpha R),(L,R)+(L^{},R^{})=(L+L^{},R+R^{}),(L,R)(L^{},R^{})=(LL^{},R^{}R).`$ We say that $`L`$ is a left multiplier and $`R`$ is a right multiplier of $``$.

It is immediately verified that $`M()`$ is an associative algebra with unity element $`(L_1,R_1)`$, where $`L_1`$ and $`R_1`$ are identity maps (which in the case of an ideal $``$ in a unital algebra $`𝒜`$ can be considered as multiplications by the unity element of $`𝒜`$ from left and right, respectively). Define the map $`\varphi :M()`$ by putting $`\varphi (x)=(L_x,R_x),x`$. This is a homomorphism of algebras since it is $`K`$-linear and, moreover, $`L_{xy}=L_xL_y,R_{xy}=R_yR_x`$, which gives $`\varphi (xy)=(L_xL_y,R_yR_x)=\varphi (x)\varphi (y).`$

###### Definition 2.2.

We shall say that an algebra $``$ is non-degenerate if the map $`\varphi :M()`$ mentioned above is injective.

In general the kernel of $`\varphi `$ is the intersection of the left annihilator of $``$ in $``$ with its right annihilator in $``$. Therefore $``$ is non-degenerate if and only if for every non-zero element $`a`$ there exists $`b`$ such that either $`ab0`$ or $`ba0`$.

More generally, if $``$ is an ideal in an algebra $`𝒜`$ then one may consider the homomorphism $`\psi :𝒜a(L_a,R_a)M(),`$ whose kernel is the intersection of the left annihilator of $``$ in $`𝒜`$ with its right annihilator in $`𝒜`$.

###### Proposition 2.3.

The following statements hold:

(i) $`\varphi ()`$ is an ideal of $`M().`$

(ii) $`\varphi :()`$ is an isomorphism if and only if $``$ is a unital algebra.

Proof. (i) Take $`x`$ and let $`(L,R)`$ be an arbitrary element of $`M()`$. Then $`(L_x,R_x)(L,R)=(L_xL,RR_x)`$ and for $`a`$ we have $`L_x(L(a))=xL(a)=R(x)a=L_{R(x)}(a)`$. Moreover, $`R(R_x(a))=R(ax)=aR(x)=R_{R(x)}(a)`$. Hence, $`(L_x,R_x)(L,R)=(L_{R(x)},R_{R(x)})\varphi ()`$, as $`R(x)`$. Similarly, $`(L,R)(L_x,R_x)=(L_{L(x)},R_{L(x)})\varphi ()`$.

(ii) The “only if” part is trivial. For the “if” part we have that $`\varphi (1)\varphi ()`$ is the identity element of $`M()`$ and, consequently, $`\varphi ()=M()`$. Obviously, $`\varphi `$ is injective in this case and thus $`M()`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

Let $``$ be any (preferably non-unital) algebra. Given $`(L,R)`$ and $`(L^{},R^{})`$ in $`()`$ we shall be concerned with the validity of the formula

(1)
$$R^{}L=LR^{}.$$

If $`x`$ and $`x^{}`$ belong to an algebra which contains $``$ as an ideal and $`(L,R)=(L_x,R_x)`$ and $`(L^{},R^{})=(L_x^{},R_x^{})`$, this formula will clearly hold as a consequence of associativity. However this is not always the case: for a very drastic counter-example one could take $``$ to be any vector space equipped with the trivial multiplication

$$xy0,x,y.$$

Any pair $`(L,R)`$ of linear operators on $``$ would constitute a multiplier of $``$ and one would clearly not expect (1) to hold!

###### Definition 2.4.

An algebra $``$ is said to be (L,R)-associative if, given any two multipliers $`(L,R)`$ and $`(L^{},R^{})`$ in $`()`$, one has that $`R^{}L=LR^{}.`$

The following result lists two sufficient conditions for (L,R)-associativity.

###### Proposition 2.5.

The algebra $``$ is (L,R)-associative whenever any one of the following conditions hold:

(i) $``$ is non-degenerate, or

(ii) $``$ is idempotent.

Proof. Let $`(L,R),(L^{},R^{})()`$. Given $`a,b`$ we have that

$$R(L^{}(a))b=L^{}(a)L(b)=L^{}(aL(b))=L^{}(R(a)b)=L^{}(R(a))b.$$

This shows that $`R(L^{}(a))L^{}(R(a))`$ lies in the left annihilator of $``$. By a similar calculation one shows that $`R(L^{}(a))L^{}(R(a))`$ lies in the right annihilator of $``$ as well. Therefore, under assumption $`(i)`$, one must have that $`R(L^{}(a))=L^{}(R(a))`$, for all $`a`$ in $``$.

Next suppose we are given $`a_1,a_2`$. Letting $`a=a_1a_2,`$ notice that

$$R(L^{}(a))=R(L^{}(a_1a_2))=R(L^{}(a_1)a_2)=L^{}(a_1)R(a_2)$$

$$=L^{}(a_1R(a_2))=L^{}(R(a_1a_2))=L^{}(R(a)).$$

Assuming $`(ii)`$ we have that every element of $``$ is a sum of terms of the form $`a_1a_2`$, whence the conclusion. $`\mathrm{}`$

In the next section we will be considering partial actions such that all of the ideals $`D_g`$ are assumed to be (L,R)-associative. It is therefore useful to have a means of deciding when all ideals of a certain algebra possess this property. The following easy result goes in that direction.

###### Proposition 2.6.

Let $`𝒜`$ be a unital algebra. The following are equivalent:

* Every non-zero ideal of $`𝒜`$ is non-degenerate,
* Every non-zero ideal of $`𝒜`$ is either idempotent or non-degenerate,
* Every non-zero ideal of $`𝒜`$ is right-non-degenerate (we say that $``$ is right-non-degenerate if for every non-zero element $`a`$ one has that $`a\{0\}`$),
* Every non-zero ideal of $`𝒜`$ is left-non-degenerate (defined in a similar way with $`a\{0\}`$),
* $`𝒜`$ is semiprime.

In this case every ideal of $`𝒜`$ is (L,R)-associative.

Proof. In the following implications the ones marked with a star are self-evident:

$$(i)^{^{}}(ii)(v)(iii)^{^{}}(i).$$

Moreover $`(iv)`$ can be substituted for $`(iii)`$, by symmetry, so we really only need to worry about $`(ii)(v)(iii).`$

If $`𝒜`$ has a non-zero nilpotent ideal then there is a non-zero ideal $``$ in $`𝒜`$ whose square is zero. Then $``$ is neither idempotent nor non-degenerate which shows $`(ii)(v).`$

Assuming $`(v)`$, and arguing by contradiction, let $``$ be an ideal possessing a non-zero element $`a`$ such that $`a=\{0\}`$. Then the ideal generated by $`a`$, namely $`𝒥=𝒜a𝒜`$, is non-zero since we are assuming $`𝒜`$ to be unital. However

$$𝒥^2=𝒜a(𝒜𝒜a)𝒜𝒜a𝒜=\{0\},$$

violating $`(v).`$ $`\mathrm{}`$

Let $`\pi :𝒥`$ be an isomorphism of $`K`$-algebras. Then it is easy to see that for $`(L,R)M()`$ the pair $`(\pi L\pi ^1,\pi R\pi ^1)`$ is an element of $`M(𝒥)`$ and we obviously have the following:

###### Proposition 2.7.

The map $`\overline{\pi }:M()M(𝒥),`$ defined by

$$\overline{\pi }(L,R)=(\pi L\pi ^1,\pi R\pi ^1),$$

is an isomorphism of $`K`$-algebras.

## 3. The associativity question

We are now ready to present an answer to the associativity question:

###### Theorem 3.1.

If $`𝒜`$ is an algebra and $`\alpha `$ is a partial action of a group $`G`$ on $`𝒜`$ such that each $`𝒟_g`$ $`(gG)`$ is (L,R)-associative, then the skew group ring $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is associative.

Proof. Obviously, $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is associative if and only if

(2)
$$(a\delta _hb\delta _g)c\delta _f=a\delta _h(b\delta _gc\delta _f)$$

for arbitrary $`h,g,fG`$ and $`a𝒟_h,b𝒟_g,c𝒟_f`$. We compute first the left hand side of the above equality. We have

$$(a\delta _hb\delta _g)c\delta _f=\alpha _h(\alpha _{h^1}(a)b)\delta _{hg}c\delta _f=\alpha _{hg}\{\alpha _{hg}^1[\alpha _h(\alpha _{h^1}(a)b)]c\}\delta _{hgf}.$$

We see that $`\alpha _{h^1}(a)b𝒟_{h^1}𝒟_g`$ implies $`\alpha _h(\alpha _{h^1}(a)b)\alpha _h(𝒟_{h^1}𝒟_g)=𝒟_h𝒟_{hg}.`$ It follows that $`\alpha _{hg}^1[\alpha _h(\alpha _{h^1}(a)b)]=\alpha _{g^1}(\alpha _{h^1}[\alpha _h(\alpha _{h^1}(a)b)])=\alpha _{g^1}(\alpha _{h^1}(a)b).`$ Since this element belongs to $`𝒟_{g^1}𝒟_{g{}_{}{}^{1}h^1}`$, we can also split $`\alpha _{hg}`$, which gives

$$(a\delta _hb\delta _g)c\delta _f=\alpha _h[\alpha _g\{\alpha _{g^1}(\alpha _{h^1}(a)b)c\}]\delta _{hgf}.$$

Comparing with

$$a\delta _h(b\delta _gc\delta _f)=a\delta _h\alpha _g(\alpha _{g^1}(b)c)\delta _{gf}=\alpha _h[\alpha _{h^1}(a)\alpha _g(\alpha _{g^1}(b)c)]\delta _{hgf},$$

and applying $`\alpha _{h^1}`$, we obtain that (2) holds if and only if

$$\alpha _g\{\alpha _{g^1}(\alpha _{h^1}(a)b)c\}=\alpha _{h^1}(a)\alpha _g(\alpha _{g^1}(b)c)$$

is verified for all $`a𝒟_h,b𝒟_g,c𝒟_f`$. Because $`\alpha _{h^1}:𝒟_h𝒟_{h^1}`$ is an isomorphism, $`\alpha _{h^1}(a)`$ runs over $`𝒟_{h^1}`$ and, consequently, the above condition is equivalent to the following:

(3)
$$\alpha _g\{\alpha _{g^1}(ab)c\}=a\alpha _g(\alpha _{g^1}(b)c)$$

for every $`a𝒟_{h^1},b𝒟_g,c𝒟_f.`$ If $`h=f=1`$, then $`𝒟_h=𝒟_f=𝒜`$ and thus $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is associative if and only if (3) holds for arbitrary $`gG,a,c𝒜`$ and $`b𝒟_g.`$ It is equivalent to say that

(4)
$$(\alpha _gR_c\alpha _{g^1})L_a=L_a(\alpha _gR_c\alpha _{g^1})$$

is valid on $`𝒟_g`$ for every $`gG`$ and all $`a,c𝒜`$.

Consider $`R_c`$ as a right multiplier of $`𝒟_{g^1}`$ and $`L_a`$ as a left multiplier of $`𝒟_g`$. By Proposition 2.7 we have that $`\alpha _gR_c\alpha _{g^1}`$ is a right multiplier of $`𝒟_g`$. Hence if $`𝒟_g`$ is (L,R)-associative then (4) holds. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 3.2.

If $`\alpha `$ is a partial action of a group $`G`$ on an algebra $`𝒜`$ such that each $`𝒟_g`$ $`(gG)`$ is either idempotent or non-degenerate, then the skew group ring $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is associative.

Proof. Directly follows from Proposition 2.5 and Theorem 3.1. $`\mathrm{}`$

For ease of reference it would be useful to introduce the following terminology:

###### Definition 3.3.

We say that an algebra $`𝒜`$ is strongly associative if for any group $`G`$ and an arbitrary partial action $`\alpha `$ of $`G`$ on $`𝒜`$ the skew group ring $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is associative.

As an immediate consequence of Proposition 2.6 and Corollary 3.2 we have:

###### Corollary 3.4.

A semiprime algebra is strongly associative.

The following is an easy example which shows that $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is not associative in general.

###### Example 3.5.

Let $`𝒜`$ be a four-dimensional $`K`$-vector space with basis $`\{1,t,u,v\}`$. Define the multiplication on $`𝒜`$ by setting $`u^2=v^2=uv=vu=tu=ut=t^2=0,tv=vt=u`$ and $`1a=a1=a`$ for each $`a𝒜`$. Then $`𝒜`$ is an associative $`K`$-algebra with unity. Let $`G=g:g^2=1`$ and $``$ be the ideal of $`𝒜`$ generated by $`v`$ (it is the subspace generated by $`u`$ and $`v`$). Consider the partial action $`\alpha `$ of $`G`$ on $`𝒜`$ given by $`𝒟_g=`$, $`\alpha _g:uv,vu`$ (by definition $`𝒟_1=𝒜`$ and $`\alpha _1`$ is the identity map of $`𝒜`$). Then the skew group ring $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is not associative. More precisely, taking $`x=t\delta _1+u\delta _g`$ we have that $`(xx)x=0`$ and $`x(xx)=u\delta _g`$, so that $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ does not even have associative powers.

An important class of non-semiprime algebras is formed by the group algebras $`KG`$ of finite groups $`G`$ with $`charK`$ dividing the order of $`G`$ (for more general information see \[16, Theorems 2.12 and 2.13\]). It is easy to check that if $`charK=2`$ then the algebra of the above example is isomorphic to the group algebra of the Klein four-group over $`K`$. On the other hand, it can be verified that the group algebra of the cyclic group of order $`2`$ over a field of characteristic $`2`$ is strongly associative. Thus it would be interesting to characterize the strongly associative group algebras. Another classical example of non-semiprime algebras is given by the algebra $`T(n,K)`$ of upper-triangular $`n\times n`$-matrices over $`K`$.

###### Proposition 3.6.

The algebra $`𝒜=T(n,K)`$ is strongly associative if and only if $`n2.`$

Proof. If $`n=1`$ then $`𝒜=K`$ is obviously strongly associative. If $`n=2,`$ then the only non-idempotent ideal of $`𝒜`$ is its Jacobson radical $`(𝒜)`$, which is one-dimensional over $`K`$. So all multipliers of $`(𝒜)`$ commute and hence it is (L,R)-associative.

Suppose that $`n3`$ and let $`G=g`$ be the infinite cyclic group. Denote by $`e_{i,j}`$ the elementary $`n\times n`$-matrix whose unique non-zero entry equals $`1`$ and is placed at the intersection of the $`i`$-th row and $`j`$-th column. Take $`𝒟_{g^1}=e_{1,n1}Ke_{1,n}K,`$ $`𝒟_g=e_{1,n}Ke_{2,n}K`$ and $`𝒟_{g^m}=e_{1,n}K`$ for each $`m`$ with $`|m|2.`$ Define $`\alpha _g:𝒟_{g^1}𝒟_g`$ by $`\alpha _g(xe_{1,n1}+ye_{1,n})=ye_{1,n}+xe_{2,n}`$ $`(x,yK)`$ and for $`m2`$ let $`\alpha _{g^m}:𝒟_{g^m}=𝒟_{g^m}𝒟_{g^m}`$ be the identity map. An easy verification shows that we have defined a partial action $`\alpha `$ of $`G`$ on $`𝒜`$. We see that

$`(e_{1,1}\delta _1e_{2,n}\delta _g)e_{n1,n}\delta _1=(e_{1,1}e_{2,n}\delta _g)e_{n1,n}\delta _1=0,`$
as $`e_{1,1}e_{2,n}=0.`$ On the other hand

$`e_{1,1}\delta _1(e_{2,n}\delta _ge_{n1,n}\delta _1)=e_{1,1}\delta _1(\alpha _g(\alpha _{g^1}(e_{2,n})e_{n1,n})\delta _g)=`$
$`=e_{1,1}\delta _1(\alpha _g(e_{1,n1}e_{n1,n})\delta _g)=e_{1,1}\delta _1\alpha _g(e_{1,n})\delta _g=e_{1,1}\delta _1e_{1,n}\delta _g=`$
$`=(e_{1,1}e_{1,n})\delta _g=e_{1,n}\delta _g0,`$
so that $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is non-associative. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 4. Enveloping actions

Natural examples of partial actions can be obtained by restricting (global) actions to non-necessarily invariant subsets (ideals in our case). More precisely, suppose that a group $`G`$ acts on an algebra $``$ by automorphisms $`\beta _g:`$ and let $`𝒜`$ be an ideal of $`.`$ Set $`𝒟_g=𝒜\beta _g(𝒜)`$ and let $`\alpha _g`$ be the restriction of $`\beta _g`$ to $`𝒟_{g^1}.`$ Then it is easily verified that we have a partial action $`\alpha =\{\alpha _g:𝒟_{g^1}𝒟_g:gG\}`$ of $`G`$ on $`𝒜`$. We shall say that $`\alpha `$ is a restriction of $`\beta `$ to $`𝒜.`$ We want to know circumstances under which a given partial action can be obtained “up to equivalence” as the restriction of a (global) action. If $`_1`$ is the subalgebra of $``$ generated by $`_{gG}\beta _g(𝒜),`$ it may happen that $`_1`$ and, since $`_1`$ is invariant with respect to $`\beta ,`$ we see that $`\alpha `$ can be obtained as a restriction of an action of $`G`$ to $`_1`$ which is a proper subalgebra of $`.`$ Thus it is reasonable to require that $`=_1`$ and in this case we say that $`\alpha `$ is an admissible restriction of $`\beta .`$ The notion of the equivalence of partial actions is defined as follows:

###### Definition 4.1.

We say that a partial action $`\alpha =\{\alpha _g:𝒟_{g^1}𝒟_g:gG\}`$ of a group $`G`$ on an algebra $`𝒜`$ is equivalent to the partial action $`\alpha ^{}=\{\alpha _{}^{}{}_{g}{}^{}:𝒟_{}^{}{}_{g^1}{}^{}𝒟_{}^{}{}_{g}{}^{}:gG\}`$ of $`G`$ on an algebra $`𝒜^{}`$ if there exists an algebra isomorphism $`\phi :𝒜𝒜^{}`$ such that for every $`gG`$ the following two conditions hold:

(i) $`\phi (𝒟_g)=𝒟_g^{}`$;

(ii) $`\alpha _{}^{}{}_{g}{}^{}\phi (x)=\phi \alpha _g(x)`$ for all $`x𝒟_{g^1}.`$

We shall deal with enveloping actions:

###### Definition 4.2.

An action $`\beta `$ of a group $`G`$ on an algebra $``$ is said to be an enveloping action for the partial action $`\alpha `$ of $`G`$ on an algebra $`𝒜`$ if $`\alpha `$ is equivalent to an admissible restriction of $`\beta `$ to an ideal of $`.`$

In other words, $`\beta `$ is an enveloping action for $`\alpha `$ if there exists an algebra isomorphism $`\phi `$ of $`𝒜`$ onto an ideal of $``$ such that for all $`gG`$ the following three properties are satisfied:

(i’) $`\phi (𝒟_g)=\phi (𝒜)\beta _g(\phi (𝒜))`$;

(ii’) $`\phi \alpha _g(x)=\beta _g\phi (x)`$ for each $`x𝒟_{g^1},`$

(iii’) $``$ is generated by $`_{gG}\beta _g(\phi (𝒜)).`$

Thus a general problem is to decide whether or not a given partial action possesses an enveloping action.

With respect to the results of Section 3 we observe the following:

###### Proposition 4.3.

If $`\beta `$ is an action of a group $`G`$ on an algebra $`,`$ which is enveloping for the partial action $`\alpha `$ of $`G`$ on an algebra $`𝒜,`$ then the skew group ring $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ has an embedding into $`\text{}_\beta G`$. In particular, $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is associative.

Proof. Obvious. $`\mathrm{}`$

Thus it follows from Example 3.5 (or Proposition 3.6) that not every partial action admits an enveloping action. We need the following easy fact:

###### Lemma 4.4.

Suppose that $`𝒜`$ is an algebra which is a (non-necessarily direct) sum of a finite number of ideals, each of which is a unital algebra. Then $`𝒜`$ is a unital algebra.

Proof. By induction on the number of summands it is enough to consider the case with two ideals: $`𝒜=+𝒥`$. Let $`1_{}`$ and $`1_𝒥`$ be the unity elements of $``$ and $`𝒥`$ respectively. Then $`1_{}`$ and $`1_𝒥`$ are central idempotents of $`𝒜`$ and $`1_{}+1_𝒥1_{}1_𝒥`$ is the unity of $`𝒜.`$ $`\mathrm{}`$

The following result is inspired by F. Abadie’s thesis  (see also ):

###### Theorem 4.5.

Let $`𝒜`$ be a unital algebra. Then a partial action $`\alpha `$ of a group $`G`$ on $`𝒜`$ admits an enveloping action $`\beta `$ if and only if each ideal $`𝒟_g`$ $`(gG)`$ is a unital algebra. Moreover, $`\beta ,`$ if it exists, is unique up to equivalence.

Proof. The “only if” part is trivial, because if $`\beta `$ exists and $`\phi :𝒜`$ is the monomorphism giving the equivalence, then $`\phi (𝒟_g)=\phi (𝒜)\beta _g(\phi (𝒜))`$ is clearly a unital algebra for each $`gG.`$

For the “if” part we suppose that each ideal $`𝒟_g`$ $`(gG)`$ is a unital algebra. It means that for every $`gG`$ there exists a central idempotent $`1_g`$ of $`𝒜`$ such that $`𝒟_g=1_g𝒜.`$

Let $`=(G,𝒜)`$ be the Cartesian product of the copies of $`𝒜`$ indexed by the elements of $`G,`$ that is, the algebra of all functions of $`G`$ into $`𝒜.`$ For convenience of notation $`f(g)`$ will be also written as $`f|_g`$ $`(f,gG).`$

For $`gG`$ and $`f`$ define $`\beta _g(f)`$ by the formula:

$$\beta _g(f)|_h=f(g{}_{}{}^{1}h),hG.$$

It is easily verified that $`f\beta _g(f)`$ defines an automorphism $`\beta _g`$ of $``$ and hence $`\beta =\{\beta _g::gG\}`$ is an action of $`G`$ on $``$.

It is easy to see that for each $`g,hG`$ the idempotent $`1_g1_h`$ is the unity element of the algebra $`𝒟_g𝒟_h,`$ which means that $`𝒟_g𝒟_h=1_g1_h𝒜`$. Because $`\alpha `$ is a partial action, the equality $`\alpha _g(𝒟_{g^1}𝒟_h)=𝒟_g𝒟_{gh}`$ obviously implies

(5)
$$\alpha _g(1_{g^1}1_h)=1_g1_{gh}.$$

For any $`a𝒜`$ the element $`a1_g`$ belongs to $`𝒟_g`$ and the formula

$$\phi (a)|_g=\alpha _{g^1}(a1_g),gG,$$

defines a monomorphism $`\phi :𝒜.`$

Let $``$ be the subalgebra of $``$ generated by $`_{gG}\beta _g(\phi (𝒜)),(gG).`$ Our purpose is to show that the restriction of $`\beta `$ to $``$ is an enveloping action for $`\alpha `$. We denote this restriction by the same symbol $`\beta .`$ We start by checking property (ii’) of Definition 4.2.

For $`g,hG`$ and $`a𝒟_{g^1}`$ we have $`\beta _g(\phi (a))|_h=\phi (a)|_{g{}_{}{}^{1}h}=\alpha _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g}(a1_{g{}_{}{}^{1}h})`$ and $`\phi (\alpha _g(a))|_h=\alpha _{h^1}(\alpha _g(a)1_h).`$ Thus (ii’) is satisfied if and only if the following equality holds for all $`g,hG`$ and every $`a𝒟_{g^1}`$:

(6)
$$\alpha _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g}(a1_{g{}_{}{}^{1}h})=\alpha _{h^1}(\alpha _g(a)1_h).$$

Observing that $`a1_{g{}_{}{}^{1}h}𝒟_{g^1}𝒟_{g{}_{}{}^{1}h}`$ we can split $`\alpha _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g}`$ in the left hand side and using (5) we obtain:

$`\alpha _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g}(a1_{g{}_{}{}^{1}h})=\alpha _{h^1}(\alpha _g(a1_{g{}_{}{}^{1}h}))=\alpha _{h^1}(\alpha _g(a1_{g^1}1_{g{}_{}{}^{1}h}))=`$
$`=\alpha _{h^1}(\alpha _g(a)\alpha _g(1_{g^1}1_{g{}_{}{}^{1}h}))=\alpha _{h^1}(\alpha _g(a)1_g1_h)=\alpha _{h^1}(\alpha _g(a)1_h),`$
as $`1_g`$ is the unity of $`𝒟_g.`$

Next we show that

(7)
$$\phi (𝒟_g)=\phi (𝒜)\beta _g(\phi (𝒜)),$$

for all $`gG.`$ An element from the right hand side can be written as $`\phi (a)=\beta _g(\phi (b))`$ for some $`a,b𝒜.`$ Then for each $`hG`$ the equality $`\phi (a)|_h=\beta _g(\phi (b))|_h`$ means that

(8)
$$\alpha _{h^1}(a1_h)=\phi (b)|_{g{}_{}{}^{1}h}=\alpha _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g}(b1_{g{}_{}{}^{1}h}).$$

Taking $`h=1`$ this gives $`a=\alpha _g(b1_{g^1})𝒟_g`$ and, consequently, $`\phi (𝒟_g)\phi (𝒜)\beta _g(\phi (𝒜)).`$ For the reverse inclusion, given an element $`a𝒟_g`$ we need to find $`b𝒜`$ so that (8) holds. For $`b=\alpha _{g^1}(a)`$ the right hand side of (8) is $`\alpha _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g}(\alpha _{g^1}(a)1_{g{}_{}{}^{1}h})`$ which is equal to the left hand side of (8) in view of (6). Hence (7) follows and condition (i’) is also satisfied.

In order to show that $`\beta `$ is an enveloping action for $`\alpha `$ it remains to prove that $`\phi (𝒜)`$ is an ideal of $`.`$ To see this it is enough to check that $`\beta _g(\phi (a))\phi (b),\phi (b)\beta _g(\phi (a))\phi (𝒜)`$ for all $`gG`$ and $`a,b𝒜.`$ For $`hG,`$ using (6), we have

$`\beta _g(\phi (a))|_h\phi (b)|_h=\phi (a)|_{g{}_{}{}^{1}h}\phi (b)|_h=\alpha _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g}(a1_{g{}_{}{}^{1}h})\alpha _{h^1}(b1_h)=`$
$`=\alpha _{h^1}(\alpha _g(a1_{g^1})1_h)\alpha _{h^1}(b1_h)=\alpha _{h^1}(\alpha _g(a1_{g^1})b1_h)=\phi (\alpha _g(a1_{g^1})b)|_h.`$
Thus $`\beta _g(\phi (a))\phi (b)=\phi (\alpha _g(a1_{g^1})b)\phi (𝒜)`$ and similarly $`\phi (b)\beta _g(\phi (a))=\phi (b\alpha _g(a1_{g^1}))\phi (𝒜),`$ as desired.

We shall prove now the uniqueness of the enveloping action. Suppose that $`\beta ^{}`$ is another action of $`G`$ on an algebra $`^{}`$, which is enveloping for $`\alpha `$. Let $`\phi ^{}`$ be the corresponding embedding of $`𝒜`$ into $`^{}.`$ The admissibility incorporated in Definition 4.2 means that $`^{}`$ is the sum of the ideals $`\beta _g^{}(\phi ^{}(𝒜)),gG.`$ Thus an element of $`^{}`$ can be written as a finite sum $`_i\beta _{g_i}^{}(\phi ^{}(a_i))`$ with $`g_iG`$ and $`a_i𝒜.`$ Define a map $`\varphi :^{}`$ by $`\beta _g^{}(\phi ^{}(a))\beta _g(\phi (a)),gG,a𝒜.`$ We have to show, of course, that $`\varphi `$ is well defined. Suppose that $`_{i=1}^s\beta _{g_i}^{}(\phi ^{}(a_i))=0.`$ We want to be sure that $`_{i=1}^s\beta _{g_i}(\phi (a_i))=0.`$

For all $`hG`$ and $`a𝒜`$ we have $`_i\beta _{g_i}^{}(\phi ^{}(a_i))\beta _h^{}(\phi ^{}(a))=0`$ and applying $`\beta _{h^1}^{}`$ we obtain $`_i\beta _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}^{}(\phi ^{}(a_i))\phi ^{}(a)=0.`$ Since $`\phi (𝒜^{})`$ is an ideal in $`^{}`$ the element $`\beta _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}^{}(\phi ^{}(a_i))\phi ^{}(a)`$ is contained in the algebra $`\beta _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}^{}(\phi ^{}(𝒜))\phi ^{}(𝒜)=\phi ^{}(𝒟_{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}})=\phi ^{}(𝒜1_{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}})=\phi ^{}(𝒜)\phi ^{}(1_{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}),`$ whose unity element is $`\phi ^{}(1_{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}).`$ Therefore, using (ii’),

$`\beta _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}^{}(\phi ^{}(a_i))\phi ^{}(a)=\beta _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}^{}(\phi ^{}(a_i))\phi ^{}(1_{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}})\phi ^{}(a)=`$
$`=\beta _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}^{}(\phi ^{}(a_i))\phi ^{}\alpha _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}(1_{g_i{}_{}{}^{1}h})\phi ^{}(a)=\beta _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}^{}(\phi ^{}(a_i))\beta _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}^{}\phi ^{}(1_{g_i{}_{}{}^{1}h})\phi ^{}(a)=`$
$`=\beta _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}^{}\phi ^{}(a_i1_{g_i{}_{}{}^{1}h})\phi ^{}(a)=\phi ^{}\alpha _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}(a_i1_{g_i{}_{}{}^{1}h})\phi ^{}(a)=\phi ^{}(\alpha _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}(a_i1_{g_i{}_{}{}^{1}h})a).`$
In a similar fashion we see that $`\beta _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}(\phi (a_i))\phi (a)=\phi (\alpha _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}(a_i1_{g_i{}_{}{}^{1}h})a).`$ Thus,

$`0={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}}\beta _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}^{}(\phi ^{}(a_i))\phi ^{}(a)={\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}}\phi ^{}(\alpha _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}(a_i1_{g_i{}_{}{}^{1}h})a),`$
which implies $`_{i=1}^s\alpha _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}(a_i1_{g_i{}_{}{}^{1}h})a=0.`$ Hence $`0=_{i=1}^s\phi (\alpha _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}(a_i1_{g_i{}_{}{}^{1}h})a)=_{i=1}^s\beta _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g_{i}^{}}(\phi (a_i))\phi (a),`$ and applying $`\beta _h`$ we obtain

$`{\displaystyle \underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}}\beta _{g_i}(\phi (a_i))\beta _h(\phi (a))=0,`$
for all $`a𝒜`$. Therefore, the element $`_{i=1}^s\beta _{g_i}(\phi (a_i))`$ annihilates each $`\beta _h(\phi (𝒜)).`$ Let $`_1`$ be the algebra generated by $`_{i=1}^s\beta _{g_i}(\phi (𝒜)).`$ Then $`_{i=1}^s\beta _{g_i}(\phi (a_i))_1`$ and by Lemma 4.4 $`_1`$ posses the unity element, say $`1__1.`$ Then

$$\underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}\beta _{g_i}(\phi (a_i))=\underset{i=1}{\overset{s}{}}\beta _{g_i}(\phi (a_i))1__1=0,$$

so that $`_{i=1}^s\beta _{g_i}^{}(\phi ^{}(a_i))=0`$ implies $`_{i=1}^s\beta _{g_i}(\phi (a_i))=0`$ and $`\varphi :^{}`$ is a well-defined homomorphism of algebras.

By symmetry, $`\beta _g(\phi (a))\beta _g^{}(\phi ^{}(a)),gG,a𝒜`$ also determine a well-defined map $`\varphi ^{}:^{}.`$ Obviously, $`\varphi ^{}\varphi =\varphi \varphi ^{}=1`$ and, consequently, $`\varphi `$ is an isomorphism of algebras. It is easily seen that for all $`gG`$ one has $`\beta _g\varphi =\varphi \beta _g^{}`$ and this yields that $`\beta ^{}`$ is equivalent to $`\beta `$.

$`\mathrm{}`$

## 5. Morita equivalence

Recall from \[18, Section 4.1\] that a Morita context is a six-tuple $`(R,R^{},M,M^{},\tau ,\tau ^{})`$, where:

(a) $`R`$ and $`R^{}`$ are rings,

(b) $`M`$ is an $`R`$-$`R^{}`$-bimodule,

(c) $`M^{}`$ is an $`R^{}`$-$`R`$-bimodule,

(d) $`\tau :M_R^{}M^{}R`$ is a bimodule map,

(e) $`\tau ^{}:M^{}_RMR^{}`$ is a bimodule map,

such that

$$\tau (xx^{})y=x\tau ^{}(x^{}y),x,yM,x^{}M^{},$$

and

$$\tau ^{}(x^{}x)y^{}=x^{}\tau (xy^{}),x^{},y^{}M^{},xM.$$

By Morita’s fundamental results \[18, Theorems 4.1.4 and 4.1.17\], given a Morita context with $`\tau `$ and $`\tau ^{}`$ onto, the categories of $`R`$-modules and of $`R^{}`$-modules are equivalent. In this case $`R`$ and $`R^{}`$ are said to be Morita equivalent.

Let $`\alpha `$ be a partial action of a group $`G`$ on a unital algebra $`𝒜`$ and suppose that $`(\beta ,)`$ is an enveloping action for $`(\alpha ,𝒜)`$ such that $``$ also has unity. It is our goal in this section to exhibit an explicit Morita context for the rings $`R=𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ and $`R^{}=\text{}_\beta G`$, with $`\tau `$ and $`\tau ^{}`$ onto, hence proving these to be Morita equivalent. This should be seen as a purely algebraic counterpart to \[2, Theorem 4.18\].

Consider the linear subspaces $`M,N\text{}_\beta G`$ given by

$$M=\{\underset{gG}{}c_g\delta _g:c_g𝒜\text{ for all }g\}$$

and

$$N=\{\underset{gG}{}c_g\delta _g:c_g\beta _g(𝒜)\text{ for all }g\}.$$

###### Proposition 5.1.

$`M`$ is a right ideal and $`N`$ is a left ideal of $`\text{}_\beta G`$.

Proof. Let $`c\delta _g`$ be in $`M`$, where $`gG`$ and $`c𝒜`$. If $`hG`$ and $`b`$ we have that

$$c\delta _gb\delta _h=c\beta _g(b)\delta _{gh}M,$$

because $`c\beta _g(b)𝒜`$ since $`𝒜`$ is an ideal in $``$. So $`M`$ is a right ideal in $`\text{}_\beta G`$.

Next let $`c\delta _g`$ be in $`N`$, where $`gG`$ and $`c=\beta _g(c^{})`$ with $`c^{}𝒜`$. If $`hG`$ and $`b`$ we have

$$b\delta _hc\delta _g=b\beta _h(c)\delta _{hg}=b\beta _{hg}(c^{})\delta _{hg}N,$$

because $`\beta _{hg}(𝒜)`$ is an ideal in $``$. So $`N`$ is a left ideal. $`\mathrm{}`$

In our next result we will view $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ as a subalgebra of $`\text{}_\beta G`$ as in (4.3).

###### Proposition 5.2.

$`(𝒜\text{}_\alpha G)MM`$ and $`N(𝒜\text{}_\alpha G)N`$ so that $`M`$ may be viewed as a left $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$-module and $`N`$ may be viewed as a right $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$-module.

Proof. Let $`c\delta _g`$ be in $`M`$, where $`gG`$ and $`c𝒜`$, and let $`a\delta _h𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$, where $`hG`$ and $`a𝒟_h`$. Then

$$a\delta _hc\delta _g=a\beta _h(c)\delta _{hg}M,$$

because $`𝒜`$ is an ideal in $`M`$. So $`M`$ is a left $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$-module.

Next let $`c\delta _g`$ be in $`N`$, where $`gG`$ and $`c=\beta _g(c^{})`$ with $`c^{}𝒜`$, and let $`a\delta _h𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$, where $`hG`$ and $`a𝒟_h`$. Then

$$c\delta _ga\delta _h=c\beta _g(a)\delta _{gh}=\beta _g(c^{}a)\delta _{gh}=\mathrm{}$$

Since $`𝒟_h`$ is an ideal in $`𝒜`$ we have that $`c^{}a𝒟_h`$ and hence $`c^{}a=\alpha _h(x)`$ for some $`x𝒟_{h^1}`$. So the above equals

$$\mathrm{}=\beta _g(\alpha _h(x))\delta _{gh}=\beta _g(\beta _h(x))\delta _{gh}=\beta _{gh}(x)\delta _{gh}N.$$

So $`N`$ is a right $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$-module. $`\mathrm{}`$

So far we have therefore seen that $`M`$ is an ($`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$)-($`\text{}_\beta G`$)-bimodule, whereas $`N`$ is a ($`\text{}_\beta G`$)-($`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$)-bimodule. These give the third and fourth components of the Morita context we are looking for. Next we need to find $`\tau `$ and $`\tau ^{}`$.

Given linear subspaces $`X`$ and $`Y`$ of an algebra we will denote by $`XY`$ the linear span of the set of products $`xy`$ with $`xX`$ and $`yY`$. This notation will be used in our next:

###### Proposition 5.3.

$`MN=𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ and $`NM=\text{}_\beta G`$.

Proof. Let $`c_1\delta _gM`$ and $`c_2\delta _hN`$, where $`g,hG`$, $`c_1𝒜`$, and $`c_2=\beta _h(c_2^{})`$ with $`c_2^{}𝒜`$. Then

$$c_1\delta _gc_2\delta _h=c_1\beta _g(c_2)\delta _{gh}=c_1\beta _{gh}(c_2^{})\delta _{gh}𝒜\text{}_\alpha G,$$

because $`c_1\beta _{gh}(c_2^{})𝒜\beta _{gh}(𝒜)=𝒟_{gh}`$. This shows that $`MN𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$.

Given $`c𝒟_h`$ observe that $`c\alpha _h(𝒟_{h^1})\beta _h(𝒜)`$ so that $`c\delta _hN`$. Letting $`1_𝒜`$ be the unit of $`𝒜`$ we have that $`1_𝒜\delta _eM`$ and

$$1_𝒜\delta _ec\delta _h=1_𝒜c\delta _h=c\delta _h.$$

So $`c\delta _hMN`$. Since $`c`$ is arbitrary we conclude that $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha GMN`$.

Let $`g,hG`$ and let $`c𝒜`$. Then $`\beta _g(c)\delta _gN`$ and $`1_𝒜\delta _{g{}_{}{}^{1}h}M`$. Moreover

$$\beta _g(c)\delta _g1_𝒜\delta _{g{}_{}{}^{1}h}=\beta _g(c1_𝒜)\delta _h=\beta _g(c)\delta _h.$$

Since $`_{gG}\beta _g(𝒜)`$ generates $``$ we conclude that $`\delta _hNM`$ and hence $`NM=\text{}_\beta G`$. $`\mathrm{}`$

The above result suggests that we define

$$\tau :mnM_{_{\text{}_\beta G}}Nmn𝒜\text{}_\alpha G$$

and

$$\tau ^{}:nmN_{_{𝒜\text{}_\alpha G}}Mnm\text{}_\beta G.$$

It is then easy to see that the six-tuple $`(𝒜\text{}_\alpha G,\text{}_\beta G,M,N,\tau ,\tau ^{})`$ is a Morita context. This leads us to the main result of this section:

###### Theorem 5.4.

Let $`\alpha `$ be a partial action of a group $`G`$ on a unital algebra $`𝒜`$ and suppose that $`(\beta ,)`$ is an enveloping action for $`(\alpha ,𝒜)`$ such that $``$ is also unital. Then $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ and $`\text{}_\beta G`$ are Morita equivalent.

Proof. By (5.3) we have that both $`\tau `$ and $`\tau ^{}`$ are onto. The conclusion then follows from \[18, Theorem 4.1.17\]. $`\mathrm{}`$

## 6. Partial representations and partial actions

In this section we use crossed products to relate partial actions with partial representations of groups.

###### Definition 6.1.

A partial representation of a group $`G`$ into a unital $`K`$-algebra $``$ is a map

$$\pi :G,$$

which sends the unit element of the group to the unity element of $``$, such that for all $`g,hG`$ we have

$$\pi (g)\pi (h)\pi (h^1)=\pi (gh)\pi (h^1)\text{ and }\pi (g^1)\pi (g)\pi (h)=\pi (g^1)\pi (gh).$$

In particular, if $``$ is the algebra of linear transformations $`\mathrm{End}(V)`$ of a vector space $`V`$ over a field $`K`$ then we have a partial representation of $`G`$ on the vector space $`V`$.

###### Lemma 6.2.

Let $`\alpha =\{\alpha _g:𝒟_{g^1}𝒟_g(gG)\}`$ be a partial action of $`G`$ on an algebra $`𝒜`$ such that each $`𝒟_g(gG)`$ is a unital algebra with unity $`1_g`$. Then the map $`\pi _\alpha :Gg1_g\delta _g𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is a partial representation.

Proof. Obviously, $`11\delta _1`$, the identity element of $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G.`$ We see that

$`(1_{g^1}\delta _{g^1}1_g\delta _g)1_h\delta _h=\alpha _{g^1}(\alpha _g(1_{g^1})1_g)\delta _11_h\delta _h=\alpha _{g^1}(1_g^2)\delta _11_h\delta _h=`$
$`=\alpha _{g^1}(1_g)\delta _11_h\delta _h=1_{g^1}\delta _11_h\delta _h=1_{g^1}1_h\delta _h.`$
On the other hand, using (5), we have

$`1_{g^1}\delta _{g^1}1_{gh}\delta _{gh}=\alpha _{g^1}(\alpha _g(1_{g^1})1_{gh})\delta _h=\alpha _{g^1}(1_g1_{gh})\delta _h=1_{g^1}1_h\delta _h.`$
Thus $`1_{g^1}\delta _{g^1}1_g\delta _g1_h\delta _h=1_{g^1}\delta _{g^1}1_{gh}\delta _{gh}`$ for all $`g,hG`$ and one similarly verifies that $`1_g\delta _g1_h\delta _h1_{h^1}\delta _{h^1}=1_g1_{gh}\delta _g=1_{gh}\delta _{gh}1_{h^1}\delta _{h^1}`$ $`(g,hG),`$ which shows that $`\pi _\alpha :G𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is a partial representation. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Definition 6.3.

Two partial representations $`\pi :G`$ and $`\pi ^{}:G^{}`$ are equivalent if there is an isomorphism $`\phi :^{}`$ such that

$$\pi (g)=\phi (\pi ^{}(g))$$

for all $`gG.`$

###### Remark 6.4.

It is easily verified that the map $`\alpha \pi _\alpha `$ sends equivalent partial actions into equivalent partial representations.

Let $`\pi :G`$ be a partial representation of a group $`G`$ into a unital $`K`$-algebra $``$. Then by (2), (3) of  the elements $`\epsilon _g=\pi (g)\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1})`$ $`(gG)`$ are commuting idempotents such that

(9)
$$\pi (g)\epsilon _h=\epsilon _{gh}\pi (g),\epsilon _h\pi (g)=\pi (g)\epsilon _{g{}_{}{}^{1}h}.$$

Let $`𝒜`$ be the subalgebra of $``$ generated by all the $`\epsilon _g`$ $`(gG)`$ and for a fixed $`gG`$ set $`𝒟_g=\epsilon _g𝒜`$.

###### Lemma 6.5.

The maps $`\alpha _g^\pi :𝒟_{g^1}𝒟_g`$ $`(gG),`$ defined by $`\alpha _g^\pi (a)=\pi (g)a\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1})`$ $`(a𝒟_{g^1}),`$ are isomorphisms of $`K`$-algebras, which determine a partial action $`\alpha ^\pi `$ of $`G`$ on $`𝒜`$.

Proof. Write for simplicity $`\alpha ^\pi =\alpha .`$ We observe first that $`𝒜`$ is invariant with respect to the map $`a\pi (g)a\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1}).`$ Obviously, $`𝒜`$ is spanned by elements $`a=\epsilon _{h_1}\mathrm{}\epsilon _{h_s}`$ with $`h_1,\mathrm{},h_sG.`$ We see that

$$\pi (g)\epsilon _{h_1}\mathrm{}\epsilon _{h_s}\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1})=\pi (g)\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1})\epsilon _{gh_1}\mathrm{}\epsilon _{gh_s}=\epsilon _g\epsilon _{gh_1}\mathrm{}\epsilon _{gh_s}𝒜.$$

Thus $`\pi (g)𝒜\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1})𝒜.`$ It is easily verified that this map sends $`\epsilon _{g^1}`$ to $`\epsilon _g.`$ Since $`𝒟_g`$ is generated in $`𝒜`$ by the idempotent $`\epsilon _g`$, we obtain a $`K`$-map $`\alpha _g:𝒟_{g^1}𝒟_g.`$ Moreover, it is a homomorphism of algebras. Indeed, taking $`a,b𝒟_{g^1}`$ we see that

$`\alpha _g(a)\alpha _g(b)=\pi (g)a\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1})\pi (g)b\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1})=\pi (g)a\epsilon _{g^1}b\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1})=\pi (g)ab\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1})=\alpha _g(ab),`$
as $`\epsilon _{g^1}`$ is the identity element of $`𝒟_{g^1}.`$ Then $`\alpha _{g^1}:𝒟_g𝒟_{g^1}`$ is also a homomorphism of algebras and it is easily seen that $`\alpha _g\alpha _{g^1}`$ and $`\alpha _{g^1}\alpha _g`$ are identity maps.

Taking $`g,hG`$ write an element $`a𝒟_h𝒟_{g^1}`$ as $`a=\epsilon _h\epsilon _{g^1}b`$ with $`b𝒜`$. Then

$$\alpha {}_{h}{}^{1}(a)=\pi (h{}_{}{}^{1})\epsilon _h\epsilon _{g^1}b\pi (h)=\pi (h{}_{}{}^{1})\epsilon _h\pi (h)\epsilon _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g^1}b^{}=\epsilon _{h^1}\epsilon _{h{}_{}{}^{1}g^1}b^{}𝒟_{(gh)^1},$$

with $`b^{}𝒜.`$ Hence $`𝒟_{(gh)^1}\alpha {}_{h}{}^{1}(𝒟_h𝒟_{g^1}),`$ which is condition $`(ii)`$ of Definition 1.1.

Finally, for $`a\alpha {}_{h}{}^{1}(𝒟_h𝒟_{g^1})`$, we have $`\epsilon _{h^1}a=a\epsilon _{h^1}=a,`$ as $`a𝒟_{h^1}`$ and, thus,

$`\alpha _g\alpha _h(a)=\pi (g)\pi (h)a\pi (h{}_{}{}^{1})\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1})=\pi (g)\pi (h)a\epsilon _{h^1}\pi (h{}_{}{}^{1})\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1})=`$
$`=\pi (g)\pi (h)a\epsilon _{h^1}\pi (h{}_{}{}^{1}g{}_{}{}^{1})=\pi (g)\pi (h)\epsilon _{h^1}a\pi (h{}_{}{}^{1}g{}_{}{}^{1})=`$
$`=\pi (gh)\epsilon _{h^1}a\pi (h{}_{}{}^{1}g{}_{}{}^{1})=\alpha _{gh}(a),`$
which gives $`(iii)`$ of Definition 1.1. Since $`(i)`$ is obvious, the Lemma is proved. $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Remark 6.6.

As in the previous case it is readily seen that $`\pi \alpha ^\pi `$ also preserves equivalence relations.

###### Proposition 6.7.

Let $`\alpha =\{\alpha _g:𝒟_{g^1}𝒟_g(gG)\}`$ be a partial action of $`G`$ on an algebra $`𝒜`$ such that each $`𝒟_g(gG)`$ is a unital algebra with unity $`1_g`$. Let further $`𝒜^{}`$ be the subalgebra of $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ generated by all $`1_g\delta _1`$ $`(gG).`$ Then the map $`\phi _\alpha :𝒜^{}1_g\delta _11_g𝒜`$ is a monomorphism such that $`\phi _\alpha \alpha _g^{\pi _\alpha }=\alpha _g\phi _\alpha `$ for each $`gG.`$ In particular, if $`𝒜`$ is generated by the elements $`1_g`$ $`(gG),`$ then the partial actions $`\alpha ^{\pi _\alpha }`$ and $`\alpha `$ are equivalent.

Proof. Clearly, $`\phi _\alpha `$ is the restriction of the isomorphism $`𝒜\delta _1a\delta _1a𝒜`$ and thus is a monomorphism of $`𝒜^{}`$ into $`𝒜`$.

According to Lemma 6.2 we have the partial representation $`\pi _\alpha :Gg1_g\delta _g𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ which by Lemma 6.5 induces a partial action on the subalgebra of $`𝒜\text{}_\alpha G,`$ generated by the elements $`\pi _\alpha (g)\pi _\alpha (g{}_{}{}^{1}).`$ Because

$$\pi _\alpha (g)\pi _\alpha (g{}_{}{}^{1})=1_g\delta _g1_{g^1}\delta _{g^1}=\alpha _g(\alpha _{g^1}(1_g)1_{g^1})\delta _1=1_g\delta _1,$$

this subalgebra is exactly $`𝒜^{}.`$ An arbitrary element of $`𝒜^{}`$ can be written as $`a^{}\delta _1`$ where $`a^{}`$ belongs to the image $`Im\phi _\alpha `$ of $`\phi _\alpha .`$ The partial action $`\alpha ^{\pi _\alpha }`$ is given by the isomorphisms $`\alpha ^{\pi _\alpha }:𝒟_{g^1}^{}a^{}\delta _11_g\delta _ga^{}1_{g^1}\delta _{g^1}𝒟_g^{},`$ where $`𝒟_g^{}`$ is the ideal of $`𝒜^{}`$ generated by $`1_g\delta _1.`$ For $`a^{}\delta _1𝒟_{g^1}^{}`$ we see that

$`\phi _\alpha (\alpha _g^{\pi _\alpha }(a^{}\delta _1))=\phi _\alpha (1_g\delta _ga^{}1_{g^1}\delta _{g^1})=\phi _\alpha (\alpha _g(\alpha _{g^1}(1_g)a^{}1_{g^1})\delta _1)=`$
$`\phi _\alpha (\alpha _g(a^{}1_{g^1})\delta _1)=\alpha _g(a^{})=\alpha _g(\phi _\alpha (a^{}\delta _1)),`$
so that $`\phi _\alpha \alpha _g^{\pi _\alpha }=\alpha _g\phi _\alpha `$ for all $`gG.`$ If $`𝒜`$ is generated by the elements $`1_g`$ $`(gG),`$ then clearly $`\phi _\alpha :𝒜^{}𝒜`$ is an isomorphism which gives the equivalence of the partial actions $`\alpha ^{\pi _\alpha }`$ and $`\alpha .`$ $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Proposition 6.8.

Let $`\pi :G`$ be a partial representation and suppose that the subalgebra $`𝒜`$ and the partial action $`\alpha ^\pi `$ of $`G`$ on $`𝒜`$ are as in Lemma 6.5. Then the map $`\varphi _\pi :𝒜\text{}_{\alpha ^\pi }G,`$ defined by $`\varphi _\pi (_{gG}a_g\delta _g)=_{gG}a_g\pi (g),`$ is a homomorphism of $`K`$-algebras such that $`\varphi _\pi \pi _{\alpha ^\pi }=\pi .`$ In particular, if $`\varphi _\pi `$ is an isomorphism, then the partial representations $`\pi `$ and $`\pi _{\alpha ^\pi }`$ are equivalent.

Proof. Obviously, the elements $`a_g\delta _g`$ $`(gG,a_g𝒟_g)`$ span $`𝒜\text{}_{\alpha ^\pi }G`$. Since $`\epsilon _g`$ is the identity element of $`𝒟_g`$ and $`\epsilon _g\pi (gh)=\epsilon _g\pi (g)\pi (h),`$ we have

$`\varphi _\pi (a_g\delta _gb_h\delta _h)=`$
$`=\varphi _\pi (\alpha _g^\pi (\alpha _{g^1}^\pi (a_g)b_h)\delta _{gh})=\alpha _g^\pi (\alpha _{g^1}^\pi (a_g)b_h)\pi (gh)=\alpha _g^\pi (\alpha _{g^1}^\pi (a_g)b_h)\epsilon _g\pi (gh)=`$
$`=\alpha _g^\pi (\alpha _{g^1}^\pi (a_g)b_h)\epsilon _g\pi (g)\pi (h)=\alpha _g^\pi (\alpha _{g^1}^\pi (a_g)b_h)\pi (g)\pi (h)=`$
$`=\pi (g)(\alpha _{g^1}^\pi (a_g)b_h)\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1})\pi (g)\pi (h)=\pi (g)\alpha _{g^1}^\pi (a_g)b_h\epsilon (g{}_{}{}^{1})\pi (h)=`$
$`=\pi (g)\alpha _{g^1}^\pi (a_g)b_h\pi (h),`$
as $`\alpha _{g^1}^\pi (a_g)b_h𝒟_{g^1}.`$ Continuing this calculation, we see that

$`\pi (g)\alpha _{g^1}^\pi (a_g)b_h\pi (h)=\pi (g)\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1})a_g\pi (g)b_h\pi (h)=\epsilon (g)a_g\pi (g)b_h\pi (h)=`$
$`=a_g\pi (g)b_h\pi (h)=\varphi _\pi (a_g\delta _g)\varphi _\pi (b_h\delta _h),`$
using once more that $`\epsilon _g`$ is the identity of $`𝒟_g`$. Thus, $`\varphi _\pi :𝒜\text{}_{\alpha ^\pi }G`$ is a homomorphism of algebras. It is easily seen that $`\varphi _\pi \pi _{\alpha ^\pi }(g)=\varphi _\pi (\epsilon _g\delta _g)=\epsilon _g\pi (g)=\pi (g)\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1})\pi (g)=\pi (g),`$ for each $`gG,`$ which shows that $`\varphi _\pi \pi _{\alpha ^\pi }=\pi .`$ If $`\varphi _\pi `$ is an isomorphism, then it obviously follows that $`\pi `$ and $`\pi _{\alpha ^\pi }`$ are equivalent. $`\mathrm{}`$

Now we can show that the partial group algebras can be naturally endowed with a crossed product structure. We remind the reader that the partial group algebra $`K_{\mathrm{par}}(G)`$ of a group $`G`$ over $`K`$ is the semigroup algebra $`KS(G),`$ where $`S(G)`$ is the universal semigroup, generated by the symbols $`\{[g]:gG\}`$ subject to relations:

$`a)[g{}_{}{}^{1}][g][h]=[g{}_{}{}^{1}][gh];`$

$`b)[g][h][h{}_{}{}^{1}]=[gh][h{}_{}{}^{1}](g,hG);`$

$`c)[1]=1,`$

where $`1`$ also denotes the identity element of $`S(G)`$. It is easily seen that $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }:Gg[g]K_{\mathrm{par}}(G)`$ is a partial representation and $`K_{\mathrm{par}}(G)`$ has the following universal property: for every partial representation $`\pi `$ of $`G`$ into a unital algebra $``$ there exists a unique homomorphism of algebras $`\psi :K_{\mathrm{par}}(G)`$ such that $`\pi =\psi \stackrel{~}{\pi }`$, and, conversely, for each algebra homomorphism $`\psi :K_{\mathrm{par}}(G)`$ the map $`\psi \stackrel{~}{\pi }`$ is a partial representation of $`G`$ into $`.`$

###### Theorem 6.9.

Let $`𝒜`$ be the subalgebra of $`K_{\mathrm{par}}(G)`$ generated by the elements $`\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_g=\stackrel{~}{\pi }(g)\stackrel{~}{\pi }(g{}_{}{}^{1})=[g][g{}_{}{}^{1}]`$. Then the homomorphism $`\varphi _{\stackrel{~}{\pi }}:𝒜\text{}_{\alpha ^{\stackrel{~}{\pi }}}GK_{\mathrm{par}}(G)`$ associated to the partial representation $`\stackrel{~}{\pi }:Gg[g]K_{\mathrm{par}}(G)`$ is actually an isomorphism.

Proof. By Proposition 6.8, $`\varphi _{\stackrel{~}{\pi }}:𝒜\text{}_{\alpha ^{\stackrel{~}{\pi }}}GK_{\mathrm{par}}(G)`$ is a homomorphism and we shall show that it has an inverse. Recall that $`𝒟_g`$ is spanned by the elements of form $`\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_g\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{h_1}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{h_s}.`$ By the universal property of partial group rings, the partial representation $`\pi _{\alpha ^{\stackrel{~}{\pi }}}:Gg\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_g\delta _g𝒜\text{}_{\alpha ^{\stackrel{~}{\pi }}}G`$ gives a homomorphism $`\psi :K_{\mathrm{par}}(G)𝒜\text{}_{\alpha ^{\stackrel{~}{\pi }}}G`$ such that $`\psi ([g])=\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_g\delta _g.`$

Obviously, $`\varphi _{\stackrel{~}{\pi }}\psi [g]=\varphi _{\stackrel{~}{\pi }}(\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_g\delta _g)=\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_g[g]=[g][g{}_{}{}^{1}][g]=[g]`$ for each $`gG,`$ so that $`\varphi _{\stackrel{~}{\pi }}\psi `$ is the identity map. On the other hand, since $`\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_g\delta _g\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{g^1}\delta _{g^1}=\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_g\delta _1,`$ we have

$`\psi \varphi _{\stackrel{~}{\pi }}((\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_g\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{h_1}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{h_s})\delta _g)=\psi ((\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_g\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{h_1}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{h_s})[g])=`$
$`=\psi ([g][g{}_{}{}^{1}][h_1][h{}_{1}{}^{1}]\mathrm{}[h_s][h{}_{s}{}^{1}][g])=`$
$`=(\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_g\delta _g\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{g^1}\delta _{g^1})(\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{h_1}\delta _{h_1}\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{h_1^1}\delta _{h_1^1})\mathrm{}(\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{h_s}\delta _{h_s}\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{h_s^1}\delta _{h_s^1})\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_g\delta _g=`$
$`=\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_g\delta _1\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{h_1}\delta _1\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{h_s}\delta _1\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_g\delta _g=\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_g^2\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{h_1}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{h_s}\delta _g=\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_g\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{h_1}\mathrm{}\stackrel{~}{\epsilon }_{h_s}\delta _g.`$
Thus $`\psi \varphi _{\stackrel{~}{\pi }}`$ is also the identity map and consequently $`\psi `$ is the inverse of $`\varphi _{\stackrel{~}{\pi }}.`$ $`\mathrm{}`$

The next fact helps to identify algebras as crossed products.

###### Proposition 6.10.

Let $`\alpha =\{\alpha _g:𝒟_{g^1}𝒟_g(gG)\}`$ be a partial action of $`G`$ on an algebra $`𝒜`$ such that for each $`gG`$ the right annihilator of $`𝒟_g`$ in $`𝒟_g`$ is zero. Suppose that $`\phi :𝒜\text{}_\alpha G`$ is a homomorphism of algebras whose restriction to $`𝒜`$ is injective. If there exists a $`K`$-linear transformation $`E:`$ such that for every $`gG,a𝒟_g`$

$`E(\phi (a\delta _g))=\{\begin{array}{cc}\phi (a\delta _g)\hfill & \text{if }g=1,\hfill \\ 0\hfill & \text{if }g1.\hfill \end{array}`$
then $`\phi `$ is injective.

Proof. Suppose that $`_{gG}a_g\delta _g`$ belongs to the kernel $`Ker\phi `$ of $`\phi `$. Then for each $`b𝒟_{h^1}`$ we have $`a_g\delta _gb\delta _{h^1}Ker\phi `$ and

$`0=\phi ({\displaystyle \underset{gG}{}}a_g\delta _gb\delta _{h^1})=\phi ({\displaystyle \underset{gG}{}}\alpha _g(\alpha _{g^1}(a_g)b)\delta _{gh^1}).`$
Applying $`E`$ we eliminate all terms with $`gh`$ so that

$$\phi (\alpha _h(\alpha _{h^1}(a_h)b)\delta _1)=0.$$

Because $`\phi `$ is injective on $`𝒜`$ $`(=𝒜\delta _1)`$ we obtain that

$$0=\alpha _h(\alpha _{h^1}(a_h)b)=a_h\alpha _h(b)$$

for every $`b𝒟_{h^1}.`$ Since $`\alpha _h(b)`$ runs over $`𝒟_h`$ and the annihilator of $`𝒟_h`$ in $`𝒟_h`$ is zero, we conclude that $`a_h=0`$ for each $`hG.`$ This yields that $`\phi `$ is a monomorphism. $`\mathrm{}`$

We apply the above results to matrix partial representations. First we recall some facts obtained in  and  (see also ). Let $`A`$ be a subset of a group $`G`$ which contains $`1`$ and let $`H`$ be the stabilizer of $`A`$ in $`G`$ with respect to multiplication from left, that is $`H=St(A)=\{hG:hA=A\}.`$ Then $`A`$ is a union of right cosets of $`H.`$ Suppose that $`A`$ is a finite union of such cosets, i.e. the index $`(A:H)`$ of $`H`$ in $`A`$ is finite, say $`n`$. Then left multiplication of $`A`$ by the elements $`g`$ with $`g{}_{}{}^{1}A`$ give a finite number of distinct sets $`A=A_1,A_2,\mathrm{},A_n,`$ each of which contains $`1.`$ Consider the category $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ whose objects are the sets $`A_1,\mathrm{},A_n`$ and the morphisms are as follows. If $`A_i`$ and $`A_j`$ are given and there is some $`gG`$ such that $`gA_i=A_j`$ (in which case $`g^1`$ necessarily belongs to $`A_i`$) then Hom$`(A_i,A_j)`$ is the set of all pairs $`(A_i,g)`$ with $`g`$ as above. Otherwise Hom$`(A_i,A_j)`$ is the empty set. A morphism can be viewed as left multiplication of $`A_i`$ by $`g,`$ where $`g{}_{}{}^{1}A_i.`$ The product $`(A_i,g)(A_j,g^{})`$ is defined in $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ if and only if $`g^{}A_j=A_i`$ and if so, is equal to $`(A_j,gg^{}).`$ The identity morphism of $`A_i`$ is clearly $`(A_i,1)`$ and, because each morphism has an inverse, $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is a groupoid. The subgroup $`H`$ is the isotropy group of $`A`$ and the isotropy group of $`A_i`$ is conjugate to $`H`$ in $`G.`$ Identify $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ with the set of its morphisms. Then the groupoid algebra $`K\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is the $`K`$-vector space with basis $`\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ endowed with the following multiplication:

$$\gamma _1\gamma _2=\{\begin{array}{cc}\gamma _1\gamma _2,\hfill & \text{if the composite morphism}\gamma _1\gamma _2\text{ exists in }\mathrm{\Gamma },\hfill \\ 0,\hfill & \text{otherwise}.\hfill \end{array}$$

By \[5, Proposition 3.1\], the groupoid algebra $`K\mathrm{\Gamma }`$ is isomorphic to the algebra $`M_n(KH)`$ of $`n\times n`$-matrices over the group algebra $`KH`$ and an isomorphism $`\tau :K\mathrm{\Gamma }M_n(KH)`$ can be obtained as follows. For each $`A_i`$ fix an element $`g_iG`$ such that $`g_iA=A_i.`$ If $`gA_i=A_j`$, we see that $`g{}_{j}{}^{1}gg_i=h`$ for some $`hH.`$ Then the map $`\tau `$ is given by $`(A_i,g)e_{j,i}(h),`$ where $`e_{j,i}(h)`$ is the elementary matrix whose unique non-zero entry is $`hH`$, which is placed in the intersection of the $`j`$’th row and $`i`$’th column. Consider also the map $`\lambda :GK\mathrm{\Gamma }`$, defined by

$$\lambda (g)=\{\begin{array}{cc}_{\begin{array}{c}A_ig^1\end{array}}(A_i,g),\hfill & \text{if}g{}_{}{}^{1}_iA_i,\hfill \\ 0,\hfill & \text{otherwise}.\hfill \end{array}$$

According to  $`\lambda `$ is a partial representation of $`G`$ into $`K\mathrm{\Gamma }.`$ If $`\sigma ^{}:M_n(KH)M_{nm}(K)`$ is the representation extended from an irreducible representation $`\sigma :HM_m(K)`$ then $`\sigma ^{}\tau \lambda :GM_{nm}(K)`$ is an irreducible partial representation and, moreover, every irreducible partial matrix $`K`$-representation of $`G`$ is equivalent to a partial representation of the form $`\sigma ^{}\tau \lambda `$ for some subset $`A1`$ of $`G`$ and some irreducible matrix $`K`$-representation $`\sigma `$ of the isotropy group $`H`$ of $`A.`$ Thus the “partial part” of an irreducible finite dimensional partial $`K`$-representation is given by the partial representation $`\tau \lambda :GM_n(KH)`$. The partial representations of the form $`\tau \lambda `$ obtained from the subsets $`A1`$ shall be called the elementary partial representations of $`G.`$ Different choices of the elements $`g_i`$ with $`A_i=g_iA`$ give rise to equivalent partial representations. By the equivalence class of an elementary partial representation we mean the set of all partial representations of $`G`$ which are equivalent to the given elementary partial representation. An elementary partial representation has trivial isotropy if the corresponding isotropy group $`H`$ is $`1.`$

We shall see that an elementary partial representation $`\pi :GM_n(KH)`$ gives rise to a certain partial action of $`G`$ on the diagonal subalgebra $`diag(K,\mathrm{},K)`$ of the full matrix algebra $`M_n(K).`$ This diagonal algebra is obviously isomorphic to $`K^n,`$ the $`n`$’th direct power of $`K,`$ so we shall speak about partial actions on $`K^n.`$ Given a partial action $`\alpha `$ of $`G`$ on $`diag(K,\mathrm{},K)K^n`$ we see that each $`𝒟_g`$ is an algebra with unity $`1_g`$ which is a sum of some minimal idempotents $`e_{i,i}(1).`$ Set $`A_i(\alpha )=\{gG:(1_g)_{i,i}0\},`$ where $`(1_g)_{i,i}`$ denotes the $`i`$’th diagonal entry of $`1_g.`$

###### Theorem 6.11.

For a fixed $`n>0`$ and a fixed subgroup $`H`$ of a group $`G`$ the maps $`\pi \alpha ^\pi `$ and $`\alpha \pi _\alpha `$ establish a one-to-one correspondence between the equivalence classes of the elementary partial representations $`\pi :GM_n(KH)`$ and the equivalence classes of the partial actions $`\alpha `$ of $`G`$ on $`K^n`$ with $`St(A_1(\alpha ))=H`$ and $`(A_1(\alpha ):H)=n`$.

Proof. Let $`\pi :GM_n(KH)`$ be an elementary partial representation and $`𝒜`$ the subalgebra, generated by all $`\epsilon _g`$ $`(gG).`$ Then there is a subset $`A1`$ in $`G`$ with isotropy group $`H`$ such that $`H`$ has index $`n`$ in $`A`$ and $`\pi `$ is of form $`\tau \lambda `$ with $`\lambda `$ and $`\tau `$ described above. Thus $`\tau `$ is determined by a fixed choice of the elements $`g_iG`$ with $`A_i=g_iA.`$ It is easily seen that each matrix $`\pi (g)`$ is “monomial over $`H`$”, i.e. each row and each column of $`\pi (g)`$ contains at most one non-zero entry, which is an element of $`H`$ (observe that zero rows and zero columns are allowed). It follows that $`\epsilon _g=_{\begin{array}{c}A_ig\end{array}}e_{ii}(1)`$. For every $`i,k\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$ with $`ki`$ there exists $`g^{}A_i`$ such that $`g^{}A_k`$ and we see that the $`k`$’th diagonal entry of the matrix $`\epsilon _g\epsilon _g^{}`$ is zero. Hence for a fixed $`i`$ we have $`_{gA_i}\epsilon _g=e_{ii}(1)`$ and consequently $`𝒜`$ coincides with the diagonal subalgebra $`diag(K,\mathrm{},K)`$ of $`M_n(K).`$ Thus by Lemma 6.5, $`\alpha ^\pi `$ is a partial action of $`G`$ on $`𝒜K^n`$ and we obviously see that $`A_1(\alpha ^\pi )=A_1=A`$ so that $`St(A_1(\alpha ^\pi ))=H`$ (note that $`\epsilon _g=1_g`$).

Next we want to show that $`\varphi _\pi :𝒜\text{}_{\alpha ^\pi }GM_n(KH),`$ defined in Proposition 6.8, is an isomorphism. Observe first that $`\varphi _\pi `$ is an epimorphism. Indeed, we saw already that the diagonal subalgebra $`diag(K,\mathrm{},K)`$ is contained in the image $`Im(\varphi _\pi )`$ of $`\varphi _\pi .`$ Moreover, for $`gG`$ we have $`𝒟_g=_{A_ig}Ke_{i,i}(1)`$. Fix arbitrarily $`hH`$, $`i,j\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$ and take $`g=g_ihg_j^1`$. Then $`gA_i`$ and thus $`e_{i,i}(1)𝒟_g`$ so that $`e_{i,i}(1)\delta _g`$ is an element of $`𝒜\text{}_{\alpha ^\pi }G`$. We see that the unique non-zero entry in the $`i`$’th row of $`\pi (g)=\pi (g_ihg_j{}_{}{}^{1})`$ is $`h`$ and it is placed in the intersection with the $`j`$’th column. Hence $`\varphi _\pi (e_{i,i}(1)\delta _g)=e_{i,i}(1)\pi (g)=e_{i,j}(h)Im(\varphi _\pi ),`$ and because this holds for all $`hH`$, $`i,j\{1,\mathrm{},n\},`$ it follows that $`Im(\varphi _\pi )=M_n(KH).`$

For an element $`x=_{hH}x(h)hKH`$ set $`trx=x(1)`$ and consider the linear transformation $`E:M_n(KH)(x_{i,j})(trx_{1,1},\mathrm{},trx_{n,n})diag(K,\mathrm{},K)M_n(K).`$ It is easily seen that if $`g1`$ then the only possible diagonal entries of $`a\pi (g)`$ $`(a𝒟_g)`$ are non-identity elements of $`H`$ multiplied by scalars from $`K.`$ Thus $`E(\varphi _\pi (a\delta _g))=0`$ for all $`1gG,a𝒟_g`$ and moreover $`E(\varphi _\pi (a\delta _1))=\varphi _\pi (a\delta _1),`$ for each $`a𝒜.`$ Since the restriction of $`\varphi _\pi `$ to $`𝒜`$ is injective, it follows from Proposition 6.10 that $`\varphi _\pi `$ is a monomorphism. Hence $`\varphi _\pi `$ is an isomorphism and by Proposition 6.8 the partial representations $`\pi `$ and $`\pi _{\alpha ^\pi }`$ are equivalent.

Suppose now that $`\alpha =\{\alpha _g:𝒟_{g^1}𝒟_g(gG)\}`$ is a partial action of $`G`$ on $`K^n`$ such that $`St(A_1(\alpha ))=H`$ and the index of $`H`$ in $`A_1(\alpha )`$ is $`n`$. We are going to construct an elementary partial representation whose $`\epsilon _g`$’s will be exactly the $`1_g`$’s. Suppose for a moment that $`G`$ is finite and let $`S`$ be a subset of $`G`$. One of the important working tools in  is the product $`_{gS}\epsilon _g_{gS}(1\epsilon _g)`$. Substituting $`S`$ and $`GS`$ by certain finite subsets it is possible to use this kind of product also for infinite $`G`$’s, as it is done in the proof of Theorem 1 of . We proceed by adopting these ideas to our situation. Let $`G`$ be again arbitrary and $`S1`$ be a subset of $`G`$. Each $`1_g`$ is an idempotent in $`K^n`$ and because this algebra has only a finite number of idempotents, we can choose finite subsets $`S^{}S`$ and $`S^{\prime \prime }GS`$ such that $`\{1_g:gS\}=\{1_g:gS^{}\}`$ and $`\{1_g:gGS\}=\{1_g:gS^{\prime \prime }\}.`$ Set

$$f_S=\underset{gS^{}}{}1_g\underset{gS^{\prime \prime }}{}(11_g).$$

Write for simplicity $`A_i=A_i(\alpha ).`$ It follows from the definition of the $`A_i(\alpha )`$’s that

(10)
$$1_g=\underset{A_ig}{}e_{i,i}(1).$$

We see that $`f_{A_i}0`$ for each $`i=1,\mathrm{},n,`$ as $`(f_{A_i})_{ii}=e_{i,i}(1).`$ Moreover,

(11)
$$f_S0\text{ if and only if }S=A_i\text{ for some }1in.$$

Indeed, suppose that $`SA_j`$ for all $`j=1,\mathrm{},n`$ and fix $`i\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$ arbitrarily. Then either there exists $`gS`$ with $`gA_i`$ or there is an element $`tA_i`$ such that $`tS.`$ In the first case $`(1_g)_{ii}=0`$ and hence $`(f_S)_{ii}=0.`$ In the second, $`(f_S)_{ii}=0`$ because $`(1_t)_{ii}=1`$ implies $`(11_t)_{ii}=0,`$ where $`1`$ is the identity element of $`K^n=diag(K,\mathrm{},K)`$. Since $`i`$ is arbitrary, it follows that $`f_S=0.`$

Next we compute the effect of $`\alpha _g`$ on $`f_S`$ where $`g{}_{}{}^{1}S.`$ It follows from the definition of $`f_S`$ that taking larger $`S^{}`$ and $`S^{\prime \prime }`$ does not alter $`f_S.`$ Thus we can choose $`S^{}`$ and $`S^{\prime \prime }`$ in the definition of $`f_S`$ such that the conditions $`\{1_h:hgS^{}\}=\{1_h:hgS\}`$ and $`\{1_t:tgS^{\prime \prime }\}=\{1_t:tGgS\}`$ are also guaranteed. Moreover, since $`1S`$ we may clearly suppose that $`S^{}1.`$ By (5) $`\alpha _g(1_{g^1}1_h)=1_g1_{gh}`$ for $`g,hG.`$ Hence for $`g,h_1,\mathrm{},h_sG`$ we see that

$`\alpha _g(1_{g^1}1_{h_1}1_{h_2}\mathrm{}1_{h_s})=\alpha _g((1_{g^1}1_{h_1})(1_{g^1}1_{h_2})\mathrm{}(1_{g^1}1_{h_s}))=`$
$`=\alpha _g(1_{g^1}1_{h_1})\alpha _g(1_{g^1}1_{h_2})\mathrm{}\alpha _g(1_{g^1}1_{h_s})=(1_g1_{gh_1})(1_g1_{gh_2})\mathrm{}(1_g1_{gh_s})=`$
$`=1_g1_{gh_1}1_{gh_2}\mathrm{}1_{gh_s}.`$
Consequently, for $`gG`$ with $`g{}_{}{}^{1}S`$ we obtain

$`\alpha _g(f_S)=\alpha _g(1_{g^1}{\displaystyle \underset{hS^{}}{}}1_h{\displaystyle \underset{tS^{\prime \prime }}{}}(11_t))=1_g{\displaystyle \underset{hS^{}}{}}1_{gh}{\displaystyle \underset{tS^{\prime \prime }}{}}(11_{gt})=`$
$`={\displaystyle \underset{hgS^{}}{}}1_h{\displaystyle \underset{tgS^{\prime \prime }}{}}(11_t)=f_{gS}.`$
Thus we have

(12)
$$\alpha _g(f_S)=f_{gS}(g{}_{}{}^{1}S).$$

According to our assumption $`St(A_1)=H`$ has index $`n`$ in $`A_1.`$ Therefore there exist elements $`g_1,\mathrm{},g_nG`$ with $`g_1{}_{}{}^{1},\mathrm{}g_n{}_{}{}^{1}A_1`$ such that we have $`n`$ distinct sets $`g_1A_1,\mathrm{},g_nA_1.`$ It follows from (11) and (12) that up to a permutation these are exactly the sets $`A_1,A_2,\mathrm{},A_n.`$ Hence we may suppose that $`g_iA_1=A_i(i=1,\mathrm{},n).`$ In particular $`A_iA_j`$ if $`1ijn.`$ Similarly as in the proof of (11) we easily see that $`(f_{A_i})_{jj}=0`$ for every $`ji`$ and consequently $`f_{A_i}=e_{i,i}(1)`$ for each $`i=1,\mathrm{},n.`$

Let $`\pi ^{}`$ be the elementary partial representation of $`G`$ determined by the set $`A_1.`$ Then by (10), $`\epsilon _g^{}=\pi ^{}(g)\pi ^{}(g{}_{}{}^{1})=_{A_ig}e_{i,i}(1)=1_g`$ for every $`gG`$ and the isomorphism $`\alpha _g^\pi ^{}`$ has the same domain as $`\alpha _g.`$ Moreover, the algebra $`K^ndiag(K,\mathrm{},K)`$ is generated by the $`1_g`$’s and for arbitrary $`g,h_1,\mathrm{},h_sG`$ we have

$`\alpha _g^\pi ^{}(1_{g^1}1_{h_1}\mathrm{}1_{h_s})=\pi ^{}(g)\epsilon _{g^1}^{}\epsilon _{h_1}^{}\mathrm{}\epsilon _{h_s}^{}\pi ^{}(g{}_{}{}^{1})=\pi ^{}(g)\epsilon _{g^1}^{}\pi ^{}(g{}_{}{}^{1})\epsilon _{gh_1}^{}\mathrm{}\epsilon _{gh_s}^{}=`$
$`=\epsilon _g^{}\epsilon _{gh_1}^{}\mathrm{}\epsilon _{gh_s}^{}=\alpha _g(1_{g^1}1_{h_1}\mathrm{}1_{h_s}).`$
Consequently, the partial actions $`\alpha ^\pi ^{}`$ and $`\alpha `$ coincide. On the other hand, the fact that $`K^n`$ is generated by the $`1_g`$’s implies by Proposition 6.7 that the partial actions $`\alpha `$ and $`\alpha ^{\pi _\alpha }`$ are equivalent.

It remains to observe that the partial representations $`\pi ^{}`$ and $`\pi _\alpha `$ are equivalent. Since $`\alpha ^\pi ^{}=\alpha ,`$ we have by the first part of the proof the isomorphism $`\varphi _\pi ^{}:K^n\text{}_\alpha GM_n(KH),`$ given by $`_{gG}a_g\delta _g_{gG}a_g\pi ^{}(g),(a_g𝒟_g).`$ We see that $`\varphi _\pi ^{}(\pi _\alpha (g))=\varphi _\pi ^{}(1_g\delta _g)=\varphi _\pi ^{}(\epsilon _g^{}\delta _g)=\epsilon _g^{}\pi ^{}(g)=\pi ^{}(g)`$ for all $`gG.`$ This yields the equivalence of $`\pi ^{}`$ and $`\pi _\alpha .`$ $`\mathrm{}`$

###### Corollary 6.12.

For each elementary partial representation $`\pi :GM_n(KH)`$ the map $`\varphi _\pi :K^n\text{}_{\alpha ^\pi }GM_n(KH),`$ given by $`_{gG}a_g\delta _g_{gG}a_g\pi (g),`$ is an isomorphism.

###### Corollary 6.13.

The partial action $`\alpha ^\pi `$ which corresponds to an elementary partial representation $`\pi :GM_n(KH)`$ acts transitively on the minimal idempotents of $`diag(K,\mathrm{},K),`$ i.e. for every $`1i,jn`$ there exists an element $`gG`$ such that $`e_{i,i}(1)𝒟_{g^1},e_{j,j}(1)𝒟_g`$ and $`\alpha _g(e_{i,i}(1))=e_{j,j}(1).`$

Proof. For arbitrary fixed $`1i,jn`$ there exists $`gG`$ with $`gA_i=A_j.`$ Since $`g{}_{}{}^{1}A_i`$ and $`\epsilon _{g^1}=_{\begin{array}{c}A_kg^1\end{array}}e_{kk}(1)`$ we see that $`e_{i,i}(1)\epsilon _{g^1}diag(K,\mathrm{},K)=𝒟_{g^1}.`$ By (9) and the equality $`_{fA_i}\epsilon _f=e_{ii}(1)`$ we have

$`\alpha _g^\pi (e_{i,i}(1))=\alpha _g^\pi ({\displaystyle \underset{fA_i}{}}\epsilon _f)=\pi (g){\displaystyle \underset{fA_i}{}}\epsilon _f\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1})={\displaystyle \underset{fA_i}{}}\epsilon _{gf}\pi (g)\pi (g{}_{}{}^{1})=`$
$`=({\displaystyle \underset{fA_j}{}}\epsilon _f)\epsilon _g={\displaystyle \underset{fA_j}{}}\epsilon _f=e_{j,j}(1),`$
as desired. $`\mathrm{}`$

We see that the full matrix algebra $`M_n(KH)`$ can be viewed as a crossed product $`K^n\text{}_\alpha G`$ in many ways. In particular, we have the following.

###### Corollary 6.14.

For each positive integer $`n`$ and an arbitrary group $`G`$ of order $`n+1`$ there is a partial action $`\alpha `$ of $`G`$ on $`K^n`$ such that $`M_n(K)K^n\text{}_\alpha G.`$

Proof. Pick an element $`1gG`$ and take $`A=G\{g\}.`$ Then $`St(A)=1`$ and $`A`$ determines an elementary partial representation $`\pi :GM_n(K),`$ which gives rise to the isomorphism $`\varphi _\pi :K^n\text{}_{\alpha ^\pi }GM_n(K).`$ $`\mathrm{}`$

A crossed product structure on $`M_n(KH)`$ gives a grading of this $`K`$-algebra by $`G.`$ It is easily seen that this grading is elementary. More precisely, we recall that a grading on the $`K`$-algebra $`M_n(K)`$ by a group $`G`$ is called elementary if each elementary matrix $`e_{i,j}(1)`$ is homogeneous. The elementary gradings are essential for the description of gradings on matrix algebras (see ). It is known that each elementary grading on $`M_n(K)`$ by a group $`G`$ is determined by an $`n`$-tuple $`(g_1=1,g_2,\mathrm{},g_n)`$ of non-necessarily distinct elements of $`G`$ in such a way that the homogeneous degree $`deg(e_{i,j}(1))`$ of $`e_{i,j}(1)`$ is $`g_i{}_{}{}^{1}g_{j}^{}.`$ Conversely, in this manner each $`n`$-tuple $`(g_1=1,g_2,\mathrm{},g_n)`$ determines an elementary grading on $`M_n(K).`$ It turns out that if in $`(g_1=1,g_2,\mathrm{},g_n)`$ the $`g_i`$’s are pairwise distinct and $`St(\{g_1,g_2,\mathrm{},g_n\})=1,`$ then the corresponding elementary grading of $`M_n(K)`$ necessarily comes from a crossed product structure $`K^n\text{}_{\alpha ^\pi }GM_n(K).`$ More generally, we say that a grading of the $`K`$-algebra $`M_n(KH)`$ by a group $`G`$ is elementary if for each $`hH,i,j\{1,\mathrm{},n\}`$ the elementary matrix $`e_{i,j}(h)`$ is homogeneous. Given a subset $`1A`$ of $`G`$ with $`St(A)=H`$ one defines an elementary grading of $`M_n(KH)`$ by the equality $`deg(e_{i,j}(h))=g_i{}_{}{}^{1}hg_j(hH,i,j\{1,\mathrm{},n\}),`$ where $`A=Hg_1Hg_2\mathrm{}Hg_n,g_1=1`$ and $`Hg_iHg_j`$ for $`1ijn.`$ Changing the $`g_i`$’s to $`g_i^1`$’s in the definition of the elementary partial representations, we easily obtain the following.

###### Corollary 6.15.

For the elementary grading of $`M_n(KH)`$ by a group $`G,`$ determined by a subset $`AG`$ with $`A1,`$ $`H=St(A),`$ and for the elementary partial representation
$`\pi :GM_n(KH),`$ constructed from $`A_1=A,A_2=g_2{}_{}{}^{1}A,\mathrm{},A_n=g_n{}_{}{}^{1}A,`$ the map $`\varphi _\pi :K^n\text{}_{\alpha ^\pi }GM_n(KH)`$ is an isomorphism of graded $`K`$-algebras.

Acknowledgments

While this work was carried out the first author visited several times the Federal University of Santa Catarina (Brazil) in 2001-2003. He expresses his appreciation to the Department of Mathematics of that University for its warm hospitality and financial support during the visits.


format: text

text:
# Neutron stars and the transition to superconducting quark matter

## 1 Introduction

According to QCD, the fundamental theory of strong interaction, nuclear matter is viewed as the confined phase of quark-gluon matter, where chiral symmetry is broken and quarks are bound inside nucleons. At large enough density, nuclear matter is expected to undergo a phase transition to the deconfined phase, where quarks and gluons are free to move in the medium and chiral symmetry is restored. Unfortunately, this transition is not well understood, since QCD lattice calculations cannot yet be performed at large density, i.e., at large chemical potential. Experimentally, in ultra-relativistic heavy ion collisions the transition to the deconfined phase is expected to occur at high temperature but essentially at zero baryon density. On the other hand, neutron stars are believed to contain very high baryon density in their interior, where the transition to the deconfined phase could occur. It has been argued by several authors that the bulk properties of neutron stars can be strongly affected by the presence of a core where a quark phase or a mixed hadron-quark phase is present. The fact that the quark phase - if present - is likely to be a color superconductor has recently attracted much attention (For reviews see  and references therein). In general, the condensation energy associated with the superconductivity is only a small fraction of the total energy, and the bulk properties of the equation of state (EOS) are hardly affected. This is because only a small fraction of fermions around the Fermi surface participates effectively to pairing, and the condensation energy is not proportional to the pairing gap $`\mathrm{\Delta }`$, but to $`\mathrm{\Delta }^2/E_F`$, where $`E_F`$ is the Fermi energy. These considerations equally apply to color superconductivity in quark matter. However, as recently argued , the structure of neutron stars appears to be sensitive to the properties of the possible quark phase and even a relatively small change in the quark equation of state could affect the predictions of neutron star properties.

In this paper we study the consequence of introducing explicitly color superconducting phases in the deconfined quark matter for the structure and bulk properties of neutron stars. To this purpose, we describe the hadronic phase by the EOS derived from a microscopic many-body theory . For the quark matter we adopt a three-flavor Nambu-Jona Lasinio (NJL) type model, which has been recently extended to include diquark condensates . In contrast to bag models which are often employed to describe quark phases, the NJL model dynamically generates a density-dependent effective bag constant and density dependent effective quark masses which can be considerably larger than the bare masses. It has been shown earlier that this has important consequences for the (non-) existence of absolutely stable strange quark matter  and the color-flavor (un-) locking phase transition in quark matter . In the context of neutron star interiors the NJL model has been employed in Refs.  and . It was found by both groups that quarks exist at most in a small mixed phase regime but not in a pure quark core. This could be traced back to the relatively large values for effective bag constant and the effective strange quark mass which results from the calculation. On the other hand these calculations did not include diquark condensates. As recently discussed within a bag model  the latter effectively lower the bag constant and could have sizable consequences for the hadron-quark phase transition and for the properties of compact stars. It is therefore interesting to study these effects for an NJL model equation of state.

Depending on the flavors which participate in a diquark condensate one can distinguish between several color superconducting quark phases, most important the two-flavor superconducting (2SC) phase  where only up and down quarks are paired and the color-flavor locked (CFL) phase  which contains $`ud`$, $`us`$, and $`ds`$ pairs. In principle this can give rise to a large number of globally electric and color neutral mixed quark phases which are, however, unlikely to be stable if Coulomb and surface effects are included . Therefore in this letter we discuss only homogeneous neutral quark phases which have been constructed first in Ref. . We have checked, however, that the use of the mixed quark phase equation of state of Ref.  yields practically the same results.

Similarly, we assume a sharp (first order) transition from the hadronic to the quark phase. This is motivated by the results of Ref.  where it was found that a quark-hadron mixed phase is unlikely to be stable for reasonable values of the surface tension. We will briefly comment on the possible consequences of a mixed phase in Sec. 4.

## 2 Hadronic and quark EOS

We start with the description of the hadronic phase. The EOS is based on the Brueckner–Bethe–Goldstone (BBG) many-body theory, which is a linked cluster expansion of the energy per nucleon of nuclear matter (see Ref. , chapter 1 and references therein). It has been shown that the non-relativistic BBG expansion is well convergent , and the Brueckner-Hartree-Fock (BHF) level of approximation is accurate in the density range relevant for neutron stars. The basic ingredient in this many–body approach is the Brueckner reaction matrix $`G`$, which is the solution of the Bethe–Goldstone equation

$$G[n;\omega ]=v+\underset{k_ak_b}{}v\frac{|k_ak_bQk_ak_b|}{\omega e(k_a)e(k_b)}G[n;\omega ],$$
(1)
where $`v`$ is the bare nucleon-nucleon (NN) interaction, $`n`$ is the nucleon number density, and $`\omega `$ the starting energy. The single-particle energy $`e(k)`$ (assuming $`\mathrm{}`$=1 here and throughout the paper),

$$e(k)=\frac{k^2}{2m}+U(k),$$
(2)
and the Pauli operator $`Q`$ determine the propagation of intermediate baryon pairs. The Brueckner–Hartree–Fock (BHF) approximation for the single-particle potential $`U(k)`$ using the continuous choice prescription is

$$U(k)=\mathrm{Re}\underset{k^{}k_F}{}kk^{}|G[n;e(k)+e(k^{})]|kk^{}_a,$$
(3)
where the subscript “a” indicates antisymmetrization of the matrix element. Due to the occurrence of $`U(k)`$ in Eq. (2), they constitute a coupled system that has to be solved in a self-consistent manner for several Fermi momenta of the particles involved. In the BHF approximation the energy per nucleon is

$$\frac{E}{A}=\frac{3}{5}\frac{k_F^2}{2m}+\frac{1}{2n}\mathrm{Re}\underset{k,k^{}k_F}{}kk^{}|G[n;e(k)+e(k^{})]|kk^{}_a.$$
(4)
In the calculations reported here we have used the Paris potential  as the two-nucleon interaction and the Urbana model as three-body force . The corresponding nuclear matter EOS fulfills several requirements, namely (i) it reproduces the correct nuclear matter saturation point $`\rho _0`$ , (ii) the incompressibility is compatible with the values extracted from phenomenology, (iii) the symmetry energy is compatible with nuclear phenomenology, (iv) the causality condition is always fulfilled.

Recently, we have included the hyperon degrees of freedom within the same approximation to calculate the nuclear EOS needed to describe the NS interior . We have included the $`\mathrm{\Sigma }^{}`$ and $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$ hyperons. To this purpose, one needs also nucleon-hyperon and hyperon-hyperon interactions . However, because of a lack of experimental data, the hyperon-hyperon interaction has been neglected in the first approximation in this work, whereas for the nucleon-hyperon interaction the Nijmegen soft-core model  has been adopted.

In neutron stars one has to consider matter in beta equilibrium, where electrons and eventually muons coexist with baryons, while neutrinos are considered to escape from the star. The EOS for the beta equilibrated matter can be obtained once the hadron matter is known, together with the chemical potentials of different species as a function of total baryon density. Since the procedure is standard, we do not give further details of the calculations.

For the quark phase we consider a leptonic contribution from electrons and muons and a quark contribution. The former is treated in free gas approximation. For the latter we employ the model defined by the Lagrangian

$$_{eff}=\overline{\psi }(i/\widehat{m})\psi +_{q\overline{q}}+_{qq},$$
(5)
where $`\psi `$ denotes a quark field with three flavors and three colors. The mass matrix $`\widehat{m}`$ has the form $`\widehat{m}=\mathrm{diag}(m_u,m_d,m_s)`$ in flavor space. We consider an NJL-type interaction with a quark-quark part

$$_{qq}=H\underset{A=2,5,7}{}\underset{A^{}=2,5,7}{}(\overline{\psi }i\gamma _5\tau _A\lambda _A^{}C\overline{\psi }^T)(\psi ^TCi\gamma _5\tau _A\lambda _A^{}\psi )$$
(6)
and a quark-antiquark part

$`_{q\overline{q}}`$ $`=`$ $`G{\displaystyle \underset{a=0}{\overset{8}{}}}\left[(\overline{\psi }\tau _a\psi )^2+(\overline{\psi }i\gamma _5\tau _a\psi )^2\right]`$ (7)
$`K\left[\mathrm{det}_f\left(\overline{\psi }(1+\gamma _5)\psi \right)+\mathrm{det}_f\left(\overline{\psi }(1\gamma _5)\psi \right)\right].`$
Here $`\tau _i`$ and $`\lambda _j`$ are $`SU(3)`$\- (Gell-Mann-)matrices in flavor and color space, respectively. $`\tau _0=\sqrt{\frac{2}{3}}\mathrm{\hspace{0.17em}11}_f`$ is proportional to the unit matrix in flavor space ***In this form the interaction is understood to be used at mean-field level in Hartree approximation.. In order to determine the energy density and the pressure of the system we calculate the mean-field (grand canonical) thermodynamic potential $`\mathrm{\Omega }(T=0,\{\mu _i\})`$ in the presence of three quark-antiquark condensates $`\overline{u}u`$, $`\overline{d}d`$, and $`\overline{s}s`$, and three possible diquark condensates corresponding to $`ud`$, $`us`$, and $`ds`$ pairing in the scalar color- antitriplet channel. The different chemical potentials $`\{\mu _i\}`$ are associated with the conserved charges of the system and are adjusted such that we deal with color and electrically neutral quark matter in beta equilibrium. More details about the model can be found in Refs. , where it has been employed to study color superconducting quark matter.

Since the model is not renormalizable we have to specify a regularization procedure. For simplicity we will use a three-dimensional momentum cutoff $`\mathrm{\Lambda }`$. The values of $`\mathrm{\Lambda }=602.3`$ MeV, the two coupling constants $`G=1.835/\mathrm{\Lambda }^2`$ and $`K=12.36/\mathrm{\Lambda }^5`$ as well as the current quark masses $`m_u=m_d=5.5`$ MeV, $`m_s=140.7`$ MeV are taken from Ref. , where they have been adjusted to reproduce masses and decay constants of the pseudoscalar meson nonet. For the quark-quark coupling constant we take $`H=G`$, as motivated in Ref. . This is likely to be an upper limit of the realistic values for this coupling constant.

We should mention that we neglect possible contributions of the “pseudo”-Goldstone bosons of broken chiral symmetry to $`\mathrm{\Omega }`$ in the CFL phase. Since in neutral CFL matter the electric charge chemical potential vanishes  no charged bosons are excited. The contributions of a possible $`K_0`$-condensate  are expected to be small (see, e.g., the discussion in Ref. ) and will therefore be neglected.

## 3 Hadron-quark phase transition

In Fig. 1 the pressure of neutral hadron and quark matter in beta equilibrium is displayed as a function of the baryon chemical potential. For the hadronic case, we consider the microscopic EOS including only nucleons and leptons as well as also including hyperons (dashed and dotted lines, respectively). The presence of strange matter considerably softens  the EOS, which results in a steeper increase of pressure as a function of baryon chemical potential.

The pressure of quark matter with and without color superconductivity (CS) is indicated by the bold lines. In both EOS strangeness is included. (For CS in neutral NJL quark matter without strangeness see ). The EOS without CS (bold dashed line) is identical to the one employed in Refs. . Here the strangeness content is zero below $`\mu _B=1295`$ MeV and rises smoothly above this point. This is quite different for the case with color superconductivity (solid line). Strictly speaking, this line corresponds to two phases, separated by a first order phase transition at $`\mu _01240`$ MeV: the 2SC phase for $`\mu _B<\mu _0`$ and the CFL phase for $`\mu _B>\mu _0`$. At $`\mu _B=\mu _0`$ ( open square in the figure) the number density of strange quarks increases discontinuously from almost zero in the 2SC phase to 1/3 of the total quark number density in the CFL phase. Thereby the total baryon density jumps from less than four to more than five times nuclear matter density. This corresponds to a sudden increase of the slope of the curve, which is clearly visible in the figure.

Starting from the surface of a neutron star, the baryon density and the baryon chemical potential increase as one moves inside, until a possible transition to quark matter occurs. In the considered plot of pressure vs. baryon chemical potential, the transition is marked by the crossing of the hadron EOS with the quark matter EOS. If only nucleons are included in the hadronic sector, this crossing indeed occurs. However, the presence of CS substantially lowers the density at which the transition happens (see Table 1). Obviously, this is closely related to the kink at the 2SC-CFL transition point: In the 2SC phase the introduction of color superconductivity leads only to a moderate enhancement $`\delta p`$ of the pressure which can be attributed to some additional binding caused by the formation of Cooper pairs. However, in the CFL phase $`\delta p`$ grows faster and thereby reduces the critical chemical potential for the hadron-quark phase transition by about 165 MeV. As discussed above, this increased slope corresponds to a higher density which is mainly due to the sudden appearance of a large amount of strange quarks in the CFL phase.

The microscopic hadronic EOS which includes hyperons does not present any crossing with the quark EOS up to large density, even if color superconducting phases are included. In that case there would be no transition to a quark phase at densities relevant for neutron stars. However, it has already been found in Ref.  that this EOS gives a maximum neutron star mass of about 1.25 solar masses (see next section), which is below the observational limit of 1.44 solar masses . Therefore, this EOS cannot describe the whole interior of neutron stars, and either this particular EOS or the NJL description of the quark phase must be ruled out. But even if we keep the considered quark EOS, the appearance of hyperons cannot be excluded, since the microscopic EOS depends on the adopted hyperon-hyperon interaction, at least at high density. In fact, while the hyperon-nucleon interaction is constrained, to some extent, by hyperon-nucleus phenomenology, very little is known about the hyperon-hyperon interaction potential. It is therefore possible that the hyperon-hyperon interaction becomes strongly repulsive at higher density, and the corresponding EOS is actually stiffer than the adopted one. To illustrate the relevance of this uncertainty, we have considered a phenomenological hadronic EOS based on relativistic mean field scheme of Ref.  with $`K=240`$ MeV (hereafter called ‘G240’). Without hyperons this EOS turns out to be very similar to our microscopic EOS. Once hyperons are introduced, the microscopic (dotted) and mean field (dashed-dotted) EOS are quite different above the hyperon threshold, which indicates that the hyperon interactions are quite different in the two cases. With the mean field EOS, a phase transition is now possible, but only if CS is included in the quark EOS. Due to this uncertainty on the hyperon interactions, it is not possible to firmly establish if and in which place the quark phase can appear once hyperons are considered. As we will see, this uncertainty will not affect our main conclusions.

In Fig. 2 the energy density as a function of pressure is displayed for the various EOS discussed above. We have also indicated the points where the hadron-quark phase transitions take place, as obtained from Fig. 1. The open circles and the full squares mark the phase transition from the microscopic EOS (with nucleons only) to quark matter with and without CS, respectively. The asterisks correspond to the transition from the mean field EOS (with hyperons) to the quark EOS with CS.

As discussed above, the quark EOS with CS (solid line) contains a first order phase transition from the 2SC phase to the CFL phase. At the transition point ($`p80`$ MeV/fm3), this leads to a strong discontinuity in the energy density. As a consequence, the effect of including color superconducting phases in the NJL model is qualitatively different from the behavior in a bag model, like in Ref. . In a bag model, the formation of Cooper pairs more or less acts like a negative contribution to the bag constant, reducing the energy density and enhancing the pressure for a given chemical potential. In our case the situation is more complicated. If we compare the solid line with the bold dashed line we see that color superconductivity enhances the energy density in a certain regime of pressure. The reason is again the fact that the CFL phase always contains a large amount of (relatively heavy!) strange quarks which strongly contribute to the energy density, whereas the NJL quark matter without CS contains no or very few strange quarks up to much larger values of $`p`$.

For our later discussion it is useful to introduce effective bag model parameters to characterize the NJL EOS. To that end one inserts the effective quark masses and diquark gaps of the NJL model into the bag model expression for the pressure and defines an effective bag constant $`B_{\mathrm{𝑒𝑓𝑓}}`$ by equating the result with the pressure obtained in the NJL model. Note, however, that in contrast to a bag model $`B_{\mathrm{𝑒𝑓𝑓}}`$, the gaps, and effective quark masses are density dependent quantities. In Table 1 they are given for the chemical potentials corresponding to the phase transition points from the hadronic phase. Compared with most bag models, both, the strange quark mass and the bag constant, are relatively large. As we will see below, this has important consequences for the structure of compact stars.

## 4 Neutron star structure

For a given EOS the mass of a static compact star as a function of its radius can be obtained by solving the Tolman-Oppenheimer-Volkoff equation. The resulting curves for the EOS constructed above are displayed in Fig. 3. The corresponding maximum masses and maximum central energy densities are listed in Table 2.

We are particularly interested in the possible existence of hybrid stars with a pure quark core. According to the results of Sec. 3 there are three cases where such a hybrid star could be expected, namely for the microscopic EOS without hyperons combined with a quark EOS with or without CS (solid and bold dashed line, respectively) and for the relativistic mean field EOS combined with the quark EOS with CS (bold dashed-dotted line). As a consequence of the discontinuous energy density at the transition point (see Fig. 2) the phase transitions manifest themselves by cusps in the mass-radius relation. It turns out, however, that in all three cases this cusp is strong enough to render the star unstable. Hence, if our EOS are correct, no star with a pure quark core can exist.

This result seems to be rather insensitive to the choice of the hadronic EOS and must mainly be attributed to the quark EOS derived within the NJL model. Recently, Alford and Reddy have found stable hybrid stars with pure quark cores described within a bag model EOS . The hadronic EOS employed in that analysis are comparable to our microscopic EOS without hyperons. For a bag constant $`B=137`$ MeV/fm3 and a strange quark mass $`M_s=200`$ MeV the authors found that a star with a pure quark core is unstable without CS, but stable if a (CFL) diquark gap of 100 MeV is chosen. If we compare the above numbers with the effective quantities listed in Table 1, we see that the NJL model is characterized by relatively large values of the strange quark mass and the effective bag constant. This leads to considerably larger energy densities in the quark phase which are finally responsible for the instability.

Of course, the existence of a mixed phase, instead of a sharp transition, would smooth out the cusps in Fig. 3 and a quark component could be present in the core of the neutron star. However, the value of the maximum mass is not expected to be modified by a substantial amount.

## 5 Conclusions

We have combined various hadronic EOS with an NJL model EOS with and without color superconductivity to construct the hadron-quark phase transition and to investigate the structure of compact stars. Our results do not allow for a pure quark phase in the interior of a neutron star. In some cases we find no phase transition at all while in other cases the star becomes unstable as soon as the phase transition occurs. Both phenomena are mainly due to the relatively large values of the effective strange quark mass and the effective bag constant in the NJL model. Considering non-superconducting quark matter we thus confirm the results of Ref. . Including color superconductivity does not change these findings.

Of course, the properties of the NJL EOS depend on model parameters. In this letter we have adopted the parameters of Ref.  which have been adjusted to vacuum properties. Although this is common practice in this field, it is very well possible that these parameters are not appropriate to describe quark matter at densities relevant for compact stars. Thus our arguments could also be turned around: If there were strong hints for the existence of pure quark cores in compact stars, this would indicate a considerable modification of the effective NJL-type quark interactions in dense matter After submission of our manuscript, two groups have reported the construction of a stable hybrid star with a pure quark matter core described within two-flavor NJL-type models including color superconductivity, but without strange quarks. This is in strong contradiction to our results where even a phase transition to quark matter seems to be impossible without strange quarks. In Ref.  this was achieved within a standard NJL model with relatively light up and down quarks, corresponding to a relatively small effective bag constant. The authors of Ref.  find stable quark cores if the integrals are regularized by Gaussian form factors, but not for a sharp cut-off. In both papers the hadronic phase is described within relativistic mean field models. These findings call for a systematic survey of the parameter dependence of the results and of the influence of possible extensions and modifications of the model..

If there are no stable quark cores in compact stars, color superconductivity is unlikely to exist in any natural surrounding. Nevertheless, the possibility of CS could have an effect on the maximum mass of neutron stars, as is evident from the difference between the solid line and the bold dashed line in Fig. 3. While excluding CS the maximum mass can be close to a value of two solar masses, including CS the maximum mass is reduced to 1.77 solar masses in our calculations. (If we had chosen a smaller value for the quark-quark coupling constant $`H`$ in Eq. (6) the maximum mass would of course come out somewhere in between these two values.) Introducing hyperons softens the EOS further, and the corresponding maximum mass is further lowered. If the softening is large, as, e.g., in the case of the EOS of Ref. , the neutron star becomes unstable already before the transition density to a possible quark matter core is reached. In this case the maximum mass falls below the observational limit.

In conclusion, the inclusion of CS in the quark phase keeps the neutron star maximum mass well below two solar masses, independently of the details of the hadronic EOS. The observation of a neutron star with a mass well above two solar masses would seriously question our present view on the EOS of quark matter and on the structure of the quark matter phase.
Acknowledgments:
M.B. thanks INFN for financial support during his visit to Catania in November 2002 and Marcello Baldo and Fiorella Burgio for their warm hospitality. M.O. acknowledges support from the Alexander von Humboldt foundation as a Feodor-Lynen fellow.