TWO-SIDED IDEALS IN LEAVITT PATH ALGEBRAS

Let $J$ be the ideal of $L_{K}(E)_{\rm R}$ generated by elements in $I_{\rm{real}}$ of the indicated form. Our claim is $J=I_{\rm{real}}$. Towards a contradiction, suppose $I_{\rm{real}}\setminus J\neq\emptyset$; choose $\mu\in I_{\rm{real}}\setminus J$ of minimal length. By Remark 5, we can write $\mu=\tau_{1}+\cdots+\tau_{m}$ with each $\tau_{i}$ is in $I_{\rm{real}}$ and is the sum of those paths whose sources are all the same and whose ranges are all the same. Since $\mu\not\in J$, one of the $\tau_{i}\not\in J$. Replacing $\mu$ by $\tau_{i}$, we may assume that $\mu=\lambda_{1}\mu_{1}+\cdots+\lambda_{n}\mu_{n}$ where all the $\mu_{i}$ have the same source and the same range. First we claim that one of the $\mu_{i}$ must have length 0, i.e. $\mu_{i}=kv$ for some vertex $v\in E^{0}$ and $k\in K$. Suppose not. Then for each $i$ we can write $\mu_{i}=e_{i}\nu_{i}$ where $e_{i}\in E^{1}$. So $\mu=\sum^{n}_{i=1}e_{i}\nu_{i}$. Now

and has smaller length than $\mu$. So $e_{i}^{*}\mu\in J$ and hence clearly $e_{i}e_{i}^{*}\mu\in J$. Then

a contradiction. So we can assume without loss of generality that $\mu_{1}=kv$, with $v$ a vertex. Since all the terms in $\mu$ have the same source and the same range, each $\mu_{i}$ is a closed path based at $v$. Multiplying by a scalar if necessary we can write $\mu=v+\lambda_{2}\mu_{2}+\cdots+\lambda_{n}\mu_{n}$, $\mu_{i}$ closed paths at $v$.

Case I: There exists no, or exactly one, closed simple path at $v$. If there are no closed simple paths at $v$ then we get $\mu\in J$, a contradiction. If there is exactly one closed simple path $g$ based at $v$ then necessarily $g$ must be a cycle. Furthermore, the only paths in $E$ which have source and range equal to $v$ are powers of $g$. Then $\mu=v+\sum_{i=2}^{n}\lambda_{i}g^{m_{i}}\in J$, a contradiction.

Case II: There exist at least two distinct closed simple paths $g_{1}$ and $g_{2}$ based at $v$. As $g_{1}\neq g_{2}$ and neither is a subpath of the other, $g_{2}^{*}g_{1}=0=g_{1}^{*}g_{2}$. Without loss of generality assume $|\mu_{2}|\geq\cdots\geq|\mu_{n}|\geq 1$. Then for some $k\in\mathbb{N}$ $|g_{1}^{k}|>|\mu_{2}|$. Multiplying by $(g_{1}^{*})^{k}$ on the left and $g_{1}^{k}$ on the right, we get

Note that if $0\neq(g_{1}^{*})^{k}\mu_{i}(g_{1})^{k}$, then $(g_{1}^{*})^{k}\mu_{i}\neq 0$. Since $|g_{1}^{k}|>|\mu_{i}|$, we get $g_{1}^{k}=\mu_{i}\mu_{i}^{\prime}$ for some path $\mu_{i}^{\prime}$. Since the $\mu_{i}$ are closed paths based at the vertex $v$, one gets from the equation $(g_{1})^{k}=\mu_{i}\mu_{i}^{\prime}$ that $\mu_{i}=(g_{1})^{r}$ for some integer $r\leq k$. So $\mu_{i}$ commutes with $(g_{1})^{k}$ and thus each non-zero term $(g_{1}^{*})^{k}\mu_{i}(g_{1})^{k}=\mu_{i}$.

Since $g_{2}^{*}g_{1}=0$, $g_{2}^{*}\mu_{i}=0$ for every $i\in\{2,\dots,n\}$ and so we get $g_{2}^{*}\mu^{\prime}g_{2}=g_{2}^{*}vg_{2}=v\in I\cap L_{K}(E)_{\rm R}=I_{\rm real}$, which implies that $v$ is in $J$. Then $\mu=\mu v\in J$, a contradiction.

Let $J$ be the two-sided ideal of $L_{K}(E)$ generated by $I_{\rm{real}}$. By Lemma 6, it is enough if we show that $I=J$. Suppose not. Choose $x=\sum^{d}_{i=1}\lambda_{i}\mu_{i}\nu_{i}^{*}$ in $I\setminus J$, where $d$ is minimal and $\mu_{1},\dots,\mu_{d},\nu_{1},\dots,\nu_{d}$ are real paths in $L_{K}(E)_{R}$. By Remark 5, $x=\alpha_{1}+\cdots+\alpha_{m}$, where each $\alpha_{i}\in I$ and is a sum of those monomials all having the same source and same range. Since $x\not\in J$, $\alpha_{j}\not\in J$ for some $j$. By the minimality of $d$, we can replace $x$ by $\alpha_{i}$. Thus we we can assume that $x=\sum^{d}_{i=1}\lambda_{i}\mu_{i}\nu_{i}^{*}$, where for all $i$, $j$, $s(\mu_{i}\nu_{i}^{*})=s(\mu_{j}\nu_{j}^{*})$ and $r(\mu_{i}\nu_{i}^{*})=r(\mu_{j}\nu_{j}^{*})$. Among all such $x=\sum^{d}_{i=1}\lambda_{i}\mu_{i}\nu_{i}^{*}\in I\setminus J$ with minimal $d$, select one for which $(|\nu_{1}|,\dots,|\nu_{d}|)$ is the smallest in the lexicographic order of $(\mathbb{Z}^{+})^{d}$. First note that we have $|\nu_{i}|>0$ for some $i$, otherwise $x$ is in $I_{\rm real}\subset J.$ Let $e$ be in $E^{1}$. Then note that

either has fewer terms $(d^{\prime}<d)$, or $d=d^{\prime}$ and $(|\nu_{i}^{\prime}|,\dots,|\nu_{d}^{\prime}|)$ is smaller than $(|\nu_{1}|,\dots,|\nu_{d}|)$. Then by minimality, we get $xe$ is in $J$ for every $e\in E^{1}$. Since $|\nu_{i}|>0$ for some $i$, $w$ is not a sink and emits finitely many edges. Hence we have

We get a contradiction, so the result follows.

Let $\mu$ be a path from $u$ to $v$. We claim $v$ must lie on the cycle $g$. Because, otherwise, $\mu^{*}g=0$ and so $\mu^{*}p(g)\mu=\mu^{*}u\mu+\sum a_{r}\mu^{*}g^{r}\mu=v\in I$. This contradicts the fact that ${\rm deg}q(x)>0$. So we can write $g=\mu\nu$ and $h=\nu\mu$ where $\nu$ is the part of $g$ from $v$ to $u$. Since $\mu^{*}g\mu=h$, we get $\mu^{*}p(g)\mu=p(h)\in I$. By the minimality of $q(x)$, $q(x)$ is a divisor of $p(x)$ in $K[x]$. Similarly, since $\nu^{*}q(h)\nu=q(g)\in I$, we conclude that $p(x)$ is a divisor of $q(x)$. Thus $q(x)=kp(x)$ for some $k\in K$. Since $p(0)=1=q(0)$, $q(x)=p(x)$. Hence $q(h)=p(h)=\mu^{*}p(g)\mu\in<p(g)>$.

We recall that $\overline{S}=\cup_{n\geq 0}\Lambda_{n}(S)$. Let $k$ be the smallest non-negative integer such that $v\in\Lambda_{k}(S)$. We prove the Lemma by the induction on $k$, the Lemma being true by definition when $k=0$. Assume $k>0$ and that the Lemma holds when $k=n-1$. Let $k=n$. Since $v\in\Lambda_{n}(S)\setminus\Lambda_{n-1}(S)$, $0<|s^{-1}(v)|<\infty$ and $\{w_{1},\dots,w_{m}\}=r(s^{-1}(v))\subset\Lambda_{n-1}(S)$. Since $v$ is the base of a non-trivial cycle $g$, one of the vertices, say, $w_{j}$ lies on the cycle $g$ and so $w_{j}\geq v$. Since $w_{j}\in\Lambda_{n-1}(S)$ and is the base of a cycle, by induction there is a $u\in S$ such that $u\geq w_{j}$. Then $u\geq v$, as desired.

$(3)\Rightarrow(1)$ Suppose the ascending chain condition holds on the hereditary saturated closures of the subsets of $E^{0}$. Let $I$ be a two-sided ideal of $L_{K}(E)$. By Theorem 8 and by Remark 10, $I$ is generated by the set

It is well known that two-sided Noetherian is equivalent to every two-sided ideal being finitely generated, so we wish to show that $I$ is generated by a finite subset of $T$.

Suppose, towards a contradiction, there are infinitely many $p_{i}(g_{i})=v_{i}+\sum\lambda_{r}g_{i}^{r}\in T$ with $i\in H$, an infinite set and for each $i$, $g_{i}$ is a non-trivial cycle based at $v_{i}$ and that ${\rm deg}p_{i}(x)>0$. By Lemma 11, we may assume that for any two $i$, $j$ with $i\neq j$, $v_{i}\ngeq v_{j}$. Well-order the set $H$ and consider it as the set of all ordinals less than an infinite ordinal $\kappa$. Define $S_{1}={v_{1}}$ and for any $\alpha<\kappa$, define $S_{\alpha}=\cup_{\beta<\alpha}S_{\beta}$ if $\alpha$ is a limit ordinal, and define $S_{\alpha}=S_{\beta}\cup\{v_{\beta+1}\}$ if $\alpha$ is a non-limit ordinal of the form $\beta+1$. By the hypothesis the ascending chain of hereditary saturated closures of subsets $\overline{S}_{1}\subset\overline{S}_{2}\subset\cdots\overline{S}_{\alpha}\subset\cdots$ becomes stationary after a finite number of steps. So there is an integer $n$ such that $\overline{S}_{n}=\overline{S}_{n+1}=\cdots$. Now $v_{n+1}\in\overline{S}_{n+1}=\overline{S}_{n}$ and by Lemma 12, there is a $v_{i}\in S_{n}$ such that $v_{i}\geq v_{n+1}$. This is a contradiction. Hence the set $W=\{p_{i}(g_{i})\in T~|~{\rm deg}p_{i}(x)>0\}$ is finite.

So by the previous paragraph, if there are only finitely many $p_{i}(g_{i})$ in $T$ with ${\rm deg}p_{i}(x)=0$, that is, only finitely many vertices in $T$, then we are done. We index the vertices $v_{\alpha}$ in $T$ by ordinals $\alpha<\kappa$, an infinite ordinal, then as before, we get a well-ordered ascending chain of hereditary saturated closure of subsets $\overline{S}_{1}\subset\overline{S}_{2}\subset\cdots\subset\overline{S}_{\alpha}\subset\cdots$ $(\alpha<\kappa)$ where $S_{1}=\{v_{1}\}$ and the $S_{\alpha}$ are inductively defined as before. Since, by hypothesis, this chain becomes stationary after a finite number of steps, there is an integer $n$ such that $\overline{S}_{\alpha}=\overline{S}_{n}$ for all $\alpha>n$. Thus $\{v_{\alpha}~|~\alpha<\kappa\}\subset\overline{S}_{n}$. Since the ideal generated by the finite set $S_{n}=\{v_{1},\dots,v_{n}\}$ contains $\overline{S}_{n}$, we conclude that the ideal $I$ is generated by the finite set $W\cup S_{n}$. Thus the Leavitt path algebra is two-sided Noetherian.

$(1)\Rightarrow(3)$ Conversely, suppose $L_{K}(E)$ is two-sided Noetherian. Consider an ascending chain of hereditary saturated closures of subsets of vertices $\overline{S}_{1}\subset\overline{S}_{2}\subset\cdots$ in $E^{0}$. Consider the corresponding ascending chain of two-sided ideals $I_{1}\subset I_{2}\subset\cdots,$ where for each integer $i$, $I_{i}$ is the two-sided ideal generated by $\overline{S}_{i}$. By hypothesis, there is an integer $n$ such that $I_{n}=I_{i}$ for all $i>n$. We claim that $\overline{S}_{i}=\overline{S}_{n}$ for all $i>n$. Otherwise, we can find a vertex $w\in\overline{S}_{i}\setminus\overline{S}_{n}$ and since $w\in I_{i}=I_{n}$, $w\in I_{n}\cap E^{0}=\overline{S}_{n}$ by Lemma 13 and this is a contradiction.

$(1)\Leftrightarrow(2)$ It is well-known (see [8]) that if $I(H)$ is a two-sided ideal of $L_{K}(E)$ generated by a hereditary and saturated subset $H$ of $E^{0}$, then $I(H)$ is a graded ideal of $L_{K}(E)$. If we call $L_{K}(E)$ graded two-sided Noetherian if graded two-sided ideals of $L_{K}(E)$ satisfy the ascending chain condition, then Theorem 14 states that for any graph $E$, $L_{K}(E)$ is two-sided Noetherian if and only if it is graded two-sided Noetherian.