Processing math: 77%
Research article

Assessment of methods practiced in the disposal of solid waste in Eastleigh Nairobi County, Kenya

  • Received: 16 June 2020 Accepted: 16 October 2020 Published: 29 October 2020
  • Solid waste management is a documented threat to health and the environment to many countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Rapid industrial development and urbanization have seen a rise in urban population which translates to massive production of solid waste. Though most urban and city planners have adopted new technologies such as landfills and incineration these alone cannot work without training residents on best practices that will guide them on how to manage their waste. Both health and environmental implications are associated with solid waste management and amounting in urgency especially in developing countries. The study aimed to assess the methods used by residents of Eastleigh South Ward in Nairobi County to dispose of their solid waste at the household level. Various waste disposal methods were documented during field observation and interviews while secondary data was obtained from records and reports on the management of waste in Nairobi County. About 48% of the resident indicated they discard waste along the road in heap/drainage, further 35% indicated putting waste in dust bins which eventually ends up in undesignated areas. The study also documents challenges related to waste management including infrequent /irregular waste collection, illegal dumping, low levels of information on poor waste disposal, and lack of concern among residents. Other challenges included irresponsible waste management approaches by the Nairobi County Government as well reluctance to pay private garbage collectors and high cost of disposal services charged by private garbage collectors. Promoting awareness through public education on the management of solid waste will enhance proper solid waste management practices. The study further recommends allocation of more resources to allow for effective management of solid waste.

    Citation: Joseph Muiruri, Raphael Wahome, Kiemo Karatu. Assessment of methods practiced in the disposal of solid waste in Eastleigh Nairobi County, Kenya[J]. AIMS Environmental Science, 2020, 7(5): 434-448. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2020028

    Related Papers:

    [1] Kailash C. Misra, Sutida Patlertsin, Suchada Pongprasert, Thitarie Rungratgasame . On derivations of Leibniz algebras. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(7): 4715-4722. doi: 10.3934/era.2024214
    [2] Yizheng Li, Dingguo Wang . Lie algebras with differential operators of any weights. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(3): 1195-1211. doi: 10.3934/era.2023061
    [3] Shanshan Liu, Abdenacer Makhlouf, Lina Song . The full cohomology, abelian extensions and formal deformations of Hom-pre-Lie algebras. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(8): 2748-2773. doi: 10.3934/era.2022141
    [4] Xueru Wu, Yao Ma, Liangyun Chen . Abelian extensions of Lie triple systems with derivations. Electronic Research Archive, 2022, 30(3): 1087-1103. doi: 10.3934/era.2022058
    [5] Pengliang Xu, Xiaomin Tang . Graded post-Lie algebra structures and homogeneous Rota-Baxter operators on the Schrödinger-Virasoro algebra. Electronic Research Archive, 2021, 29(4): 2771-2789. doi: 10.3934/era.2021013
    [6] Neşet Deniz Turgay . On the mod p Steenrod algebra and the Leibniz-Hopf algebra. Electronic Research Archive, 2020, 28(2): 951-959. doi: 10.3934/era.2020050
    [7] Hongliang Chang, Yin Chen, Runxuan Zhang . A generalization on derivations of Lie algebras. Electronic Research Archive, 2021, 29(3): 2457-2473. doi: 10.3934/era.2020124
    [8] Margarida Camarinha . A natural 4th-order generalization of the geodesic problem. Electronic Research Archive, 2024, 32(5): 3396-3412. doi: 10.3934/era.2024157
    [9] Baoling Guan, Xinxin Tian, Lijun Tian . Induced 3-Hom-Lie superalgebras. Electronic Research Archive, 2023, 31(8): 4637-4651. doi: 10.3934/era.2023237
    [10] Jinguo Jiang . Algebraic Schouten solitons associated to the Bott connection on three-dimensional Lorentzian Lie groups. Electronic Research Archive, 2025, 33(1): 327-352. doi: 10.3934/era.2025017
  • Solid waste management is a documented threat to health and the environment to many countries in sub-Saharan Africa. Rapid industrial development and urbanization have seen a rise in urban population which translates to massive production of solid waste. Though most urban and city planners have adopted new technologies such as landfills and incineration these alone cannot work without training residents on best practices that will guide them on how to manage their waste. Both health and environmental implications are associated with solid waste management and amounting in urgency especially in developing countries. The study aimed to assess the methods used by residents of Eastleigh South Ward in Nairobi County to dispose of their solid waste at the household level. Various waste disposal methods were documented during field observation and interviews while secondary data was obtained from records and reports on the management of waste in Nairobi County. About 48% of the resident indicated they discard waste along the road in heap/drainage, further 35% indicated putting waste in dust bins which eventually ends up in undesignated areas. The study also documents challenges related to waste management including infrequent /irregular waste collection, illegal dumping, low levels of information on poor waste disposal, and lack of concern among residents. Other challenges included irresponsible waste management approaches by the Nairobi County Government as well reluctance to pay private garbage collectors and high cost of disposal services charged by private garbage collectors. Promoting awareness through public education on the management of solid waste will enhance proper solid waste management practices. The study further recommends allocation of more resources to allow for effective management of solid waste.


    The concept of embedded tensors initially emerged in the research on gauged supergravity theory [1]. Using embedding tensors, the N=8 supersymmetric gauge theories as well as the Bagger-Lambert theory of multiple M2-branes were investigated in [2]. See [3,4,5] and the references therein for a great deal of literature on embedding tensors and related tensor hierarchies. In [6], the authors first observed the mathematical essence behind the embedding tensor and proved that the embedding tensor naturally produced Leibniz algebra. In the application of physics, they observed that in the construction of the corresponding gauge theory, they focused more on Leibniz algebra than on embedding tensor.

    In [7], Sheng et al. considered cohomology, deformations, and homotopy theory for embedding tensors and Lie-Leibniz triples. Later on, the deformation and cohomology theory of embedding tensors on 3-Lie algebras were extensively elaborated in [8]. Tang and Sheng [9] first proposed the concept of a nonabelian embedding tensor on Lie algebras, which is a nonabelian generalization of the embedding tensors, and gave the algebraic structures behind the nonabelian embedding tensors as Leibniz-Lie algebras. This generalization for embedding tensors on associative algebras has been previously explored in [10,11], where they are referred to as average operators with any nonzero weights. Moreover, the nonabelian embedding tensor on Lie algebras has been extended to the Hom setting in [12].

    On the other hand, Filippov [13] first introduced the concepts of 3-Lie algebras and, more generally, n-Lie algebras (also called Filippov algebras). Over recent years, the study and application of 3-Lie algebras have expanded significantly across the realms of mathematics and physics, including string theory, Nambu mechanics [14], and M2-branes [15,16]. Further research on 3-Lie algebras could be found in [17,18,19] and references cited therein.

    Drawing inspiration from Tang and Sheng's [9] terminology of nonabelian embedding tensors and recognizing the significance of 3-Lie algebras, cohomology, and deformation theories, this paper primarily investigates the nonabelian embedding tensors on 3-Lie algebras, along with their fundamental algebraic structures, cohomology, and deformations.

    This paper is organized as follows: Section 2 first recalls some basic notions of 3-Lie algebras and 3-Leibniz algebras. Then we introduce the coherent action of a 3-Lie algebra on another 3-Lie algebra and the notion of nonabelian embedding tensors on 3-Lie algebras with respect to a coherent action. In Section 3, the concept of 3-Leibniz-Lie algebra is presented as the fundamental algebraic structure for a nonabelian embedding tensor on the 3-Lie algebra. Naturally, a 3-Leibniz-Lie algebra induces a 3-Leibniz algebra. Subsequently, we study 3-Leibniz-Lie algebras induced by Leibniz-Lie algebras. In Section 4, the cohomology theory of nonabelian embedding tensors on 3-Lie algebras is introduced. As an application, we characterize the infinitesimal deformation using the first cohomology group.

    All vector spaces and algebras considered in this paper are on the field K with the characteristic of 0.

    This section recalls some basic notions of 3-Lie algebras and 3-Leibniz algebras. After that, we introduce the coherent action of a 3-Lie algebra on another 3-Lie algebra, and we introduce the concept of nonabelian embedding tensors on 3-Lie algebras by its coherent action as a nonabelian generalization of embedding tensors on 3-Lie algebras [8].

    Definition 2.1. (see [13]) A 3-Lie algebra is a pair (L,[,,]L) consisting of a vector space L and a skew-symmetric ternary operation [,,]L:3LL such that

    [l1,l2,[l3,l4,l5]L]L=[[l1,l2,l3]L,l4,l5]L+[l3,[l1,l2,l4]L,l5]L+[l3,l4,[l1,l2,l5]L]L, (2.1)

    for all liL,1i5.

    A homomorphism between two 3-Lie algebras (L1,[,,]L1) and (L2,[,,]L2) is a linear map f:L1L2 that satisfies f([l1,l2,l3]L1)=[f(l1),f(l2),f(l3)]L2, for all l1,l2,l3L1.

    Definition 2.2. 1) (see [20]) A representation of a 3-Lie algebra (L,[,,]L) on a vector space H is a skew-symmetric linear map ρ:2LEnd(H), such that

    ρ([l1,l2,l3]L,l4)=ρ(l2,l3)ρ(l1,l4)+ρ(l3,l1)ρ(l2,l4)+ρ(l1,l2)ρ(l3,l4), (2.2)
    ρ(l1,l2)ρ(l3,l4)=ρ(l3,l4)ρ(l1,l2)+ρ([l1,l2,l3]L,l4)+ρ(l3,[l1,l2,l4]L), (2.3)

    for all l1,l2,l3,l4L. We also denote a representation of L on H by (H;ρ).

    2) A coherent action of a 3-Lie algebra (L,[,,]L) on another 3-Lie algebra (H,[,,]H) is defined by a skew-symmetric linear map ρ:2LDer(H) that satisfies Eqs (2.2) and (2.3), along with the condition that

    [ρ(l1,l2)h1,h2,h3]H=0, (2.4)

    for all l1,l2L and h1,h2,h3H. We denote a coherent action of L on H by (H,[,,]H;ρ).

    Note that Eq (2.4) and ρ(l1,l2)Der(H) imply that

    ρ(l1,l2)[h1,h2,h3]H=0. (2.5)

    Example 2.3. Let (H,[,,]H) be a 3-Lie algebra. Define ad:2HDer(H) by

    ad(h1,h2)h:=[h1,h2,h]H, for all h1,h2,hH.

    Then (H;ad) is a representation of (H,[,,]H), which is called the adjoint representation. Furthermore, if the ad satisfies

    [ad(h1,h2)h1,h2,h3]H=0, for allh1,h2,h3H,

    then (H,[,,]H;ad) is a coherent adjoint action of (H,[,,]H).

    Definition 2.4. (see [21]) A 3-Leibniz algebra is a vector space L together with a ternary operation [,,]L:LLLL such that

    [l1,l2,[l3,l4,l5]L]L=[[l1,l2,l3]L,l4,l5]L+[l3,[l1,l2,l4]L,l5]L+[l3,l4,[l1,l2,l5]L]L,

    for all liL,1i5.

    Proposition 2.5. Let (L,[,,]L) and (H,[,,]H) be two 3-Lie algebras, and let ρ be a coherent action of L on H. Then, LH is a 3-Leibniz algebra under the following map:

    [l1+h1,l2+h2,l3+h3]ρ:=[l1,l2,l3]L+ρ(l1,l2)h3+[h1,h2,h3]H,

    for all l1,l2,l3L and h1,h2,h3H. This 3-Leibniz algebra (LH,[,,]ρ) is called the nonabelian hemisemidirect product 3-Leibniz algebra, which is denoted by LρH.

    Proof. For any l1,l2,l3,l4,l5L and h1,h2,h3,h4,h5H, by Eqs (2.1)–(2.5), we have

    [l1+h1,l2+h2,[l3+h3,l4+h4,l5+h5]ρ]ρ[[l1+h1,l2+h2,l3+h3]ρ,l4+h4,l5+h5]ρ[l3+h3,[l1+h1,l2+h2,l4+h4]ρ,l5+h5]ρ[l3+h3,l4+h4,[l1+h1,l2+h2,l5+h5]ρ]ρ=[l1,l2,[l3,l4,l5]L]L+ρ(l1,l2)ρ(l3,l4)h5+ρ(l1,l2)[h3,h4,h5]H+[h1,h2,ρ(l3,l4)h5]H+[h1,h2,[h3,h4,h5]H]H[[l1,l2,l3]L,l4,l5]Lρ([l1,l2,l3]L,l4)h5[ρ(l1,l2)h3,h4,h5]H[[h1,h2,h3]H,h4,h5]H[l3,[l1,l2,l4]L,l5]Lρ(l3,[l1,l2,l4]L)h5[h3,ρ(l1,l2)h4,h5]H[h3,[h1,h2,h4]H,h5]H[l3,l4,[l1,l2,l5]L]Lρ(l3,l4)ρ(l1,l2)h5ρ(l3,l4)[h1,h2,h5]H[h3,h4,ρ(l1,l2)h5]H[h3,h4,[h1,h2,h5]H]H=[h1,h2,ρ(l3,l4)h5]Hρ(l3,l4)[h1,h2,h5]H=0.

    Thus, (LH,[,,]ρ) is a 3-Leibniz algebra.

    Definition 2.6. 1) A nonabelian embedding tensor on a 3-algebra (L,[,,]L) with respect to a coherent action (H,[,,]H;ρ) is a linear map Λ:HL that satisfies the following equation:

    [Λh1,Λh2,Λh3]L=Λ(ρ(Λh1,Λh2)h3+[h1,h2,h3]H), (2.6)

    for all h1,h2,h3H.

    2) A nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebra is a triple (H,L,Λ) consisting of a 3-Lie algebra (L,[,,]L), a coherent action (H,[,,]H;ρ) of L and a nonabelian embedding tensor Λ:HL. We denote a nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebra (H,L,Λ) by the notation HΛL.

    3) Let HΛ1L and HΛ2L be two nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebras. Then, a homomorphism from HΛ1L to HΛ2L consists of two 3-Lie algebras homomorphisms fL:LL and fH:HH, which satisfy the following equations:

    Λ2fH=fLΛ1, (2.7)
    fH(ρ(l1,l2)h)=ρ(fL(l1),fL(l2))fH(h), (2.8)

    for all l1,l2L and hH. Furthermore, if fL and fH are nondegenerate, (fL,fH) is called an isomorphism from HΛ1L to HΛ2L.

    Remark 2.7. If (H,[,,]H) is an abelian 3-Lie algebra, then we can get that Λ is an embedding tensor on 3-Lie algebra (see [8]). In addition, If ρ=0, then Λ is a 3-Lie algebra homomorphism from H to L.

    Example 2.8. Let H be a 4-dimensional linear space spanned by α1,α2,α3 and α4. We define a skew-symmetric ternary operation [,,]H:3HH by

    [α1,α2,α3]H=α4.

    Then (H,[,,]H) is a 3-Lie algebra. It is obvious that (H,[,,]H;ad) is a coherent adjoint action of (H,[,,]H). Moreover,

    Λ=(1000010000000000)

    is a nonabelian embedding tensor on (H,[,,]H).

    Next, we use graphs to describe nonabelian embedding tensors on 3-Lie algebras.

    Theorem 2.9. A linear map Λ:HL is a nonabelian embedding tensor on a 3-Lie algebra (L,[,,]L) with respect to the coherent action (H,[,,]H;ρ) if and only if the graph Gr(Λ)={Λh+h|hH} forms a subalgebra of the nonabelian hemisemidirect product 3-Leibniz algebra LρH.

    Proof. Let Λ:HL be a linear map. Then, for any h1,h2,h3H, we have

    [Λh1+h1,Λh2+h2,Λh3+h3]ρ=[Λh1,Λh2,Λh3]L+ρ(Λh1,Λh2)h3+[h1,h2,h3]H,

    Thus, the graph Gr(Λ)={Λh+h|hH} is a subalgebra of the nonabelian hemisemidirect product 3-Leibniz algebra LρH if and only if Λ satisfies Eq (2.6), which implies that Λ is a nonabelian embedding tensor on L with respect to the coherent action (H,[,,]H;ρ).

    Because H and Gr(Λ) are isomorphic as linear spaces, there is an induced 3-Leibniz algebra structure on H.

    Corollary 2.10. Let HΛL be a nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebra. If a linear map [,,]Λ:3HH is given by

    [h1,h2,h3]Λ=ρ(Λh1,Λh2)h3+[h1,h2,h3]H, (2.9)

    for all h1,h2,h3H, then (H,[,,]Λ) is a 3-Leibniz algebra. Moreover, Λ is a homomorphism from the 3-Leibniz algebra (H,[,,]Λ) to the 3-Lie algebra (L,[,,]L). This 3-Leibniz algebra (H,[,,]Λ) is called the descendent 3-Leibniz algebra.

    Proposition 2.11. Let (fL,fH) be a homomorphism from HΛ1L to HΛ2L. Then fH is a homomorphism of descendent 3-Leibniz algebra from (H,[,,]Λ1) to (H,[,,]Λ2).

    Proof. For any h1,h2,h3H, by Eqs (2.7)–(2.9), we have

    fH([h1,h2,h3]Λ1)=fH(ρ(Λ1h1,Λ1h2)h3+[h1,h2,h3]H)=ρ(fL(Λ1h1),fL(Λ1h2))fH(h3)+fH([h1,h2,h3]H)=ρ(Λ2fL(h1),Λ2fL(h2))fH(h3)+[fH(h1),fH(h2),fH(h3)]H=[fH(h1),fH(h2),fH(h3)]Λ2.

    The proof is finished.

    In this section, we present the concept of the 3-Leibniz-Lie algebra, which serves as the fundamental algebraic framework for the nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebra. Then we study 3-Leibniz-Lie algebras induced by Leibniz-Lie algebras.

    Definition 3.1. A 3-Leibniz-Lie algebra (H,[,,]H,{,,}H) encompasses a 3-Lie algebra (H,[,,]H) and a ternary operation {,,}H:3HH, which satisfies the following equations:

    {h1,h2,h3}H={h2,h1,h3}H, (3.1)
    {h1,h2,{h3,h4,h5}H}H={{h1,h2,h3}H,h4,h5}H+{h3,{h1,h2,h4}H,h5}H+{h3,h4,{h1,h2,h5}H}H+{[h1,h2,h3]H,h4,h5}H+{h3,[h1,h2,h4]H,h5}H, (3.2)
    {h1,h2,[h3,h4,h5]H}H=[{h1,h2,h3}H,h4,h5]H=0, (3.3)

    for all h1,h2,h3,h4,h5H.

    A homomorphism between two 3-Leibniz-Lie algebras (H1,[,,]H1,{,,}H1) and (H2,[,,]H2,{,,}H2) is a 3-Lie algebra homomorphism f:(H1,[,,]H1)(H2,[,,]H2) such that f({h1,h2,h3}H1)={f(h1),f(h2),f(h3)}H2, for all h1,h2,h3H1.

    Remark 3.2. A 3-Lie algebra (H,[,,]H) naturally constitutes a 3-Leibniz-Lie algebra provided that the underlying ternary operation {h1,h2,h3}H=0, for all h1,h2,h3H.

    Example 3.3. Let (H,[,,]H) be a 4-dimensional 3-Lie algebra given in Example 2.8. We define a nonzero operation {,,}H:3HH by

    {α1,α2,α3}H={α2,α1,α3}H=α4.

    Then (H,[,,]H,{,,}H) is a 3-Leibniz-Lie algebra.

    The subsequent theorem demonstrates that a 3-Leibniz-Lie algebra inherently gives rise to a 3-Leibniz algebra.

    Theorem 3.4. Let (H,[,,]H,{,,}H) be a 3-Leibniz-Lie algebra. Then the ternary operation ,,H:3HH, defined as

    h1,h2,h3H:=[h1,h2,h3]H+{h1,h2,h3}H, (3.4)

    for all h1,h2,h3H, establishes a 3-Leibniz algebra structure on H. This structure is denoted by (H,,,H) and is referred to as the subadjacent 3-Leibniz algebra.

    Proof. For any h1,h2,h3,h4,h5H, according to (H,[,,]H) is a 3-Lie algebra and Eqs (3.2)–(3.4), we have

    h1,h2,h3,h4,h5HHh1,h2,h3H,h4,h5Hh3,h1,h2,h4H,h5Hh3,h4,h1,h2,h5HH=[h1,h2,[h3,h4,h5]H]H+[h1,h2,{h3,h4,h5}H]H+{h1,h2,[h3,h4,h5]H}H+{h1,h2,{h3,h4,h5}H}H[[h1,h2,h3]H,h4,h5]H[{h1,h2,h3}H,h4,h5]H{[h1,h2,h3]H,h4,h5}H{{h1,h2,h3}H,h4,h5}H[h3,[h1,h2,h4]H,h5]H[h3,{h1,h2,h4}H,h5]H{h3,[h1,h2,h4]H,h5}H{h3,{h1,h2,h4}H,h5}H[h3,h4,[h1,h2,h5]H]H[h3,h4,{h1,h2,h5}H]H{h3,h4,[h1,h2,h5]H}H{h3,h4,{h1,h2,h5}H}H={h1,h2,{h3,h4,h5}H}H{[h1,h2,h3]H,h4,h5}H{{h1,h2,h3}H,h4,h5}H{h3,[h1,h2,h4]H,h5}H{h3,{h1,h2,h4}H,h5}H{h3,h4,{h1,h2,h5}H}H=0.

    Hence, (H,,,H) is a 3-Leibniz algebra.

    The following theorem shows that a nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebra induces a 3-Leibniz-Lie algebra.

    Theorem 3.5. Let HΛL be a nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebra. Then (H,[,,]H,{,,}Λ) is a 3-Leibniz-Lie algebra, where

    {h1,h2,h3}Λ:=ρ(Λh1,Λh2)h3, (3.5)

    for all h1,h2,h3H.

    Proof. For any h1,h2,h3,h4,h5H, by Eqs (2.3), (2.6), and (3.5), we have

    {h1,h2,h3}Λ=ρ(Λh1,Λh2)h3=ρ(Λh2,Λh1)h3={h2,h1,h3}Λ,{{h1,h2,h3}Λ,h4,h5}Λ+{h3,{h1,h2,h4}Λ,h5}Λ+{h3,h4,{h1,h2,h5}Λ}Λ+{[h1,h2,h3]H,h4,h5}Λ+{h3,[h1,h2,h4]H,h5}Λ{h1,h2,{h3,h4,h5}Λ}Λ=ρ(Λρ(Λh1,Λh2)h3,Λh4)h5+ρ(Λh3,Λρ(Λh1,Λh2)h4)h5+ρ(Λh3,Λh4)ρ(Λh1,Λh2)h5+ρ(Λ[h1,h2,h3]H,Λh4)h5+ρ(Λh3,Λ[h1,h2,h4]H)h5ρ(Λh1,Λh2)ρ(Λh3,Λh4)h5=ρ(Λρ(Λh1,Λh2)h3,Λh4)h5+ρ(Λh3,Λρ(Λh1,Λh2)h4)h5+ρ(Λh3,Λh4)ρ(Λh1,Λh2)h5+ρ([Λh1,Λh2,Λh3]LΛρ(Λh1,Λh2)h3,Λh4)h5+ρ(Λh3,[Λh1,Λh2,Λh4]LΛρ(Λh1,Λh2)h4)h5ρ(Λh1,Λh2)ρ(Λh3,Λh4)h5=ρ(Λh3,Λh4)ρ(Λh1,Λh2)h5+ρ([Λh1,Λh2,Λh3]L,Λh4)h5+ρ(Λh3,[Λh1,Λh2,Λh4]L)h5ρ(Λh1,Λh2)ρ(Λh3,Λh4)h5=0.

    Furthermore, by Eqs (2.4), (2.5), and (3.5), we have

    [{h1,h2,h3}Λ,h4,h5]H=[ρ(Λh1,Λh2)h3,h4,h5]H=0,{h1,h2,[h3,h4,h5]H}Λ=ρ(Λh1,Λh2)[h3,h4,h5]H=0.

    Thus, (H,[,,]H,{,,}Λ) is a 3-Leibniz-Lie algebra.

    Proposition 3.6. Let (fL,fH) be a homomorphism from HΛ1L to HΛ2L. Then fH is a homomorphism of 3-Leibniz-Lie algebras from (H,[,,]H,{,,}Λ1) to (H,[,,]H,{,,}Λ2).

    Proof. For any h1,h2,h3H, by Eqs (2.7), (2.8), and (3.5), we have

    fH({h1,h2,h3}Λ1)=fH(ρ(Λ1h1,Λ1h2)h3)=ρ(fL(Λ1h1),fL(Λ1h2))fH(h3)=ρ(Λ2fH(h1),Λ2fH(h2))fH(h3)={fH(h1),fH(h2),fH(h3)}Λ2.

    The proof is finished.

    Motivated by the construction of 3-Lie algebras from Lie algebras [17], at the end of this section, we investigate 3-Leibniz-Lie algebras induced by Leibniz-Lie algebras.

    Definition 3.7. (see [9]) A Leibniz-Lie algebra (H,[,]H,) encompasses a Lie algebra (H,[,]H) and a binary operation ⊳:HHH, ensuring that

    h1(h2h3)=(h1h2)h3+h2(h1h3)+[h1,h2]Hh3,h1[h2,h3]H=[h1h2,h3]H=0,

    for all h1,h2,h3H.

    Theorem 3.8. Let (H,[,]H,) be a Leibniz-Lie algebra, and let ςH be a trace map, which is a linear map that satisfies the following conditions:

    ς([h1,h2]H)=0,ς(h1h2)=0,for allh1,h2H.

    Define two ternary operations by

    [h1,h2,h3]Hς=ς(h1)[h2,h3]H+ς(h2)[h3,h1]H+ς(h3)[h1,h2]H,{h1,h2,h3}Hς=ς(h1)h2h3ς(h2)h1h3,for allh1,h2,h3H.

    Then (H,[,,]Hς,{,,}Hς) is a 3-Leibniz-Lie algebra.

    Proof. First, we know from [17] that (H,[,,]Hς) is a 3-Lie algebra. Next, for any h1,h2,h3,h4,h5H, we have

    {h1,h2,h3}Hς=ς(h1)h2h3ς(h2)h1h3=(ς(h2)h1h3ς(h1)h2h3)={h2,h1,h3}Hς

    and

    {{h1,h2,h3}Hς,h4,h5}Hς+{h3,{h1,h2,h4}Hς,h5}Hς+{h3,h4,{h1,h2,h5}Hς}Hς+{[h1,h2,h3]Hς,h4,h5}Hς+{h3,[h1,h2,h4]Hς,h5}Hς{h1,h2,{h3,h4,h5}Hς}Hς=ς(h1)ς(h2h3)h4h5ς(h4)ς(h1)(h2h3)h5ς(h2)ς(h1h3)h4h5+ς(h4)ς(h2)(h1h3)h5+ς(h3)ς(h1)(h2h4)h5ς(h1)ς(h2h4)h3h5ς(h3)ς(h2)(h1h4)h5+ς(h2)ς(h1h4)h3h5+ς(h1)ς(h3)h4(h2h5)ς(h1)ς(h4)h3(h2h5)ς(h2)ς(h3)h4(h1h5)+ς(h2)ς(h4)h3(h1h5)+ς(h1)ς([h2,h3]H)h4h5ς(h4)ς(h1)[h2,h3]Hh5+ς(h2)ς([h3,h1]H)h4h5ς(h4)ς(h2)[h3,h1]Hh5+ς(h3)ς([h1,h2]H)h4h5ς(h4)ς(h3)[h1,h2]Hh5+ς(h3)ς(h1)[h2,h4]Hh5ς(h1)ς([h2,h4]H)h3h5+ς(h3)ς(h2)[h4,h1]Hh5ς(h2)ς([h4,h1]H)h3h5+ς(h3)ς(h4)[h1,h2]Hh5ς(h4)ς([h1,h2]H)h3h5ς(h1)ς(h3)h2(h4h5)+ς(h2)ς(h3)h1(h4h5)+ς(h1)ς(h4)h2(h3h5)ς(h2)ς(h4)h1(h3h5)=ς(h4)ς(h1)(h2h3)h5+ς(h4)ς(h2)(h1h3)h5+ς(h3)ς(h1)(h2h4)h5ς(h3)ς(h2)(h1h4)h5+ς(h1)ς(h3)h4(h2h5)ς(h1)ς(h4)h3(h2h5)ς(h2)ς(h3)h4(h1h5)+ς(h2)ς(h4)h3(h1h5)ς(h4)ς(h1)[h2,h3]Hh5ς(h4)ς(h2)[h3,h1]Hh5+ς(h3)ς(h1)[h2,h4]Hh5+ς(h3)ς(h2)[h4,h1]Hh5ς(h1)ς(h3)h2(h4h5)+ς(h2)ς(h3)h1(h4h5)+ς(h1)ς(h4)h2(h3h5)ς(h2)ς(h4)h1(h3h5)=0.

    Similarly, we obtain

    {h1,h2,[h3,h4,h5]Hς}Hς=ς(h1)ς(h3)h2[h4,h5]Hς(h2)ς(h3)h1[h4,h5]H+ς(h1)ς(h4)h2[h5,h3]Hς(h2)ς(h4)h1[h5,h3]H+ς(h1)ς(h5)h2[h3,h4]Hς(h2)ς(h5)h1[h3,h4]H=0

    and

    [{h1,h2,h3}Hς,h4,h5]Hς=ς(h1)ς(h2h3)[h4,h5]H+ς(h4)ς(h1)[h5,h2h3]H+ς(h5)ς(h1)[h2h3,h4]Hς(h2)ς(h1h3)[h4,h5]Hς(h4)ς(h2)[h5,h1h3]Hς(h5)ς(h2)[h1h3,h4]H=0.

    Hence Eqs (3.1)–(3.3) hold and we complete the proof.

    In this section, we revisit fundamental results pertaining to the representations and cohomologies of 3-Leibniz algebras. We construct a representation of the descendent 3-Leibniz algebra (H,[,,]Λ) on the vector space L and define the cohomologies of a nonabelian embedding tensor on 3-Lie algebras. As an application, we characterize the infinitesimal deformation using the first cohomology group.

    Definition 4.1. (see [22]) A representation of the 3-Leibniz algebra (H,[,,]H) is a vector space V equipped with 3 actions

    l:HHVV,m:HVHV,r:VHHV,

    satisfying for any a1,a2,a3,a4,a5H and uV

    l(a1,a2,l(a3,a4,u))=l([a1,a2,a3]H,a4,u)+l(a3,[a1,a2,a4]H,u)+l(a3,a4,l(a1,a2,u)), (4.1)
    l(a1,a2,m(a3,u,a5))=m([a1,a2,a3]H,u,a5)+m(a3,l(a1,a2,u),a5)+m(a3,u,[a1,a2,a5]H), (4.2)
    l(a1,a2,r(u,a4,a5))=r(l(a1,a2,u),a4,a5)+r(u,[a1,a2,a4]H,a5)+r(u,a4,[a1,a2,a5]H), (4.3)
    m(a1,u,[a3,a4,a5]H)=r(m(a1,u,a3),a4,a5)+m(a3,m(a1,u,a4),a5)+l(a3,a4,m(a1,u,a5)), (4.4)
    r(u,a2,[a3,a4,a5]H)=r(r(u,a2,a3),a4,a5)+m(a3,r(u,a2,a4),a5)+l(a3,a4,r(u,a2,a5)). (4.5)

    For n1, denote the n-cochains of 3-Leibniz algebra (H,[,,]H) with coefficients in a representation (V;l,m,r) by

    Cn3Leib(H,V)=Hom(n12H2HH,V).

    The coboundary map δ:Cn3Leib(H,V)Cn+13Leib(H,V), for Ai=aibi2H,1in and cH, as

    (δφ)(A1,A2,,An,c)=1j<kn(1)jφ(A1,,^Aj,,Ak1,ak[aj,bj,bk]H+[aj,bj,ak]Hbk,,An,c)+nj=1(1)jφ(A1,,^Aj,,An,[aj,bj,c]H)+nj=1(1)j+1l(Aj,φ(A1,,^Aj,,An,c))+(1)n+1(m(an,φ(A1,,An1,bn),c)+r(φ(A1,,An1,an),bn,c)).

    It was proved in [23,24] that δ2=0. Therefore, (+n=1Cn3Leib(H,V),δ) is a cochain complex.

    Let HΛL be a nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebra. By Corollary 2.10, (H,[,,]Λ) is a 3-Leibniz algebra. Next we give a representation of (H,[,,]Λ) on L.

    Lemma 4.2. With the above notations. Define 3 actions

    lΛ:HHLL,mΛ:HLHL,rΛ:LHHL,

    by

    lΛ(h1,h2,l)=[Λh1,Λh2,l]L,mΛ(h1,l,h2)=[Λh1,l,Λh2]LΛρ(Λh1,l)h2,rΛ(l,h1,h2)=[l,Λh1,Λh2]LΛρ(l,Λh1)h2,

    for all h1,h2H,lL. Then (L;lΛ,mΛ,rΛ) is a representation of the descendent 3-Leibniz algebra (H,[,,]Λ).

    Proof. For any h1,h2,h3,h4,h5H and lL, by Eqs (2.1), (2.3)–(2.6), and (2.9), we have

    lΛ(h1,h2,lΛ(h3,h4,l))lΛ([h1,h2,h3]Λ,h4,l)lΛ(h3,[h1,h2,h4]Λ,l)lΛ(h3,h4,lΛ(h1,h2,l))=[Λh1,Λh2,[Λh3,Λh4,l]L]L[[Λh1,Λh2,Λh3]L,Λh4,l]L[Λh3,[Λh1,Λh2,Λh4]L,l]L[Λh3,Λh4,[Λh1,Λh2,l]L]L=0

    and

    lΛ(h1,h2,mΛ(h3,l,h5))mΛ([h1,h2,h3]Λ,l,h5)mΛ(h3,lΛ(h1,h2,l),h5)mΛ(h3,l,[h1,h2,h5]Λ)=[Λh1,Λh2,[Λh3,l,Λh5]L]L[Λh1,Λh2,Λρ(Λh3,l)h5]L[[Λh1,Λh2,Λh3]L,l,Λh5]L+Λρ([Λh1,Λh2,Λh3]L,l)h5[Λh3,[Λh1,Λh2,l]L,Λh5]L+Λρ(Λh3,[Λh1,Λh2,l]L)h5[Λh3,l,[Λh1,Λh2,Λh5]L]L+Λρ(Λh3,l)ρ(Λh1,Λh2)h5+Λρ(Λh3,l)[h1,h2,h5]H=[Λh1,Λh2,Λρ(Λh3,l)h5]L+Λρ([Λh1,Λh2,Λh3]L,l)h5+Λρ(Λh3,[Λh1,Λh2,l]L)h5+Λρ(Λh3,l)ρ(Λh1,Λh2)h5+Λρ(Λh3,l)[h1,h2,h5]H=Λ(ρ(Λh1,Λh2)ρ(Λh3,l)h5+[h1,h2,ρ(Λh3,l)h5]H)+Λρ(Λh1,Λh2)ρ(Λh3,l)h5+Λρ(Λh3,l)[h1,h2,h5]H=Λ[h1,h2,ρ(Λh3,l)h5]H+Λρ(Λh3,l)[h1,h2,h5]H=0,

    which imply that Eqs (4.1) and (4.2) hold. Similarly, we can prove that Eqs (4.3)–(4.5) are true. The proof is finished.

    Proposition 4.3. Let HΛ1L and HΛ2L be two nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebras and (fL,fH) a homomorphism from HΛ1L to HΛ2L. Then the induced representation (L;lΛ1,mΛ1,rΛ1) of the descendent 3-Leibniz algebra (H,[,,]Λ1) and the induced representation (L;lΛ2,mΛ2,rΛ2) of the descendent 3-Leibniz algebra (H,[,,]Λ2) satisfying the following equations:

    fL(lΛ1(h1,h2,l))=lΛ2(fH(h1),fH(h2),fL(l)), (4.6)
    fL(mΛ1(h1,l,h2))=mΛ2(fH(h1),fL(l),fH(h2)), (4.7)
    fL(rΛ1(l,h1,h2))=rΛ2(fL(l),fH(h1),fH(h2)), (4.8)

    for all h1,h2H,lL. In other words, the following diagrams commute:

    Proof. For any h1,h2H,lL, by Eqs (2.7) and (2.8), we have

    fL(lΛ1(h1,h2,l))=fL([Λ1h1,Λ1h2,l]L)=[fL(Λ1h1),fL(Λ1h2),fL(l)]L=[Λ2fH(h1),Λ2fH(h2),fL(l)]L=lΛ2(fH(h1),fH(h2),fL(l)),fL(mΛ1(h1,l,h2))=fL([Λ1h1,l,Λ1h2]LΛ1ρ(Λ1h1,l)h2)=[fL(Λ1h1),fL(l),fL(Λ1h2)]LfL(Λ1ρ(Λ1h1,l)h2)=[Λ2fH(h1),fL(l),Λ2fH(h2)]LΛ2fH(ρ(Λ1h1,l)h2)=[Λ2fH(h1),fL(l),Λ2fH(h2)]LΛ2ρ(Λ2fH(h1),fL(l))fH(h2)=mΛ2(fH(h1),fL(l),fH(h2)).

    And the other equation is similar to provable.

    For n1, let δΛ:Cn3Leib(H,L)Cn+13Leib(H,L) be the coboundary operator of the 3-Leibniz algebra (H,[,,]Λ) with coefficients in the representation (L;lΛ,mΛ,rΛ). More precisely, for all ϕCn3Leib(H,L),Hi=uivi2H,1in and wH, we have

    (δΛϕ)(H1,H2,,Hn,w)=1j<kn(1)jϕ(H1,,^Hj,,Hk1,uk[uj,vj,vk]Λ+[uj,vj,uk]Λvk,,Hn,w)+nj=1(1)jϕ(H1,,^Hj,,Hn,[uj,vj,w]Λ)+nj=1(1)j+1lΛ(Hj,ϕ(H1,,^Hj,,Hn,w))+(1)n+1(mΛ(un,ϕ(H1,,Hn1,vn),w)+rΛ(ϕ(H1,,Hn1,un),vn,w)).

    In particular, for ϕC13Leib(H,L):=Hom(H,L) and u1,v1,wH, we have

    (δΛϕ)(u1,v1,w)=ϕ([u1,v1,w]Λ)+lΛ(u1,v1,ϕ(w))+mΛ(u1,ϕ(v1),w)+rΛ(ϕ(u1),v1,w)=ϕ([u1,v1,w]Λ)+[Λu1,Λv1,ϕ(w)]L+[Λu1,ϕ(v1),Λw]LΛρ(Λu1,ϕ(v1))w+[ϕ(u1),Λv1,Λw]LΛρ(ϕ(u1),Λv1)w.

    For any (a1,a2)C03Leib(H,L):=2L, we define δΛ:C03Leib(H,L)C13Leib(H,L),(a1,a2)δΛ(a1,a2) by

    δΛ(a1,a2)u=Λρ(a1,a2)u[a1,a2,Λu]L,uH.

    Proposition 4.4. Let HΛL be a nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebra. Then δΛ(δΛ(a1,a2))=0, that is, the composition C03Leib(H,L)δΛC13Leib(H,L)δΛC23Leib(H,L) is the zero map.

    Proof. For any u1,v1,wV, by Eqs (2.1)–(2.6) and (2.9) we have

    δΛ(δΛ(a1,a2))(u1,v1,w)=δΛ(a1,a2)([u1,v1,w]Λ)+[Λu1,Λv1,δΛ(a1,a2)(w)]L+[Λu1,δΛ(a1,a2)(v1),Λw]LΛρ(Λu1,δΛ(a1,a2)(v1))w+[δΛ(a1,a2)(u1),Λv1,Λw]LΛρ(δΛ(a1,a2)(u1),Λv1)w=Λρ(a1,a2)[u1,v1,w]Λ+[a1,a2,[Λu1,Λv1,Λw]L]L+[Λu1,Λv1,Λρ(a1,a2)w]L[Λu1,Λv1,[a1,a2,Λw]L]L+[Λu1,Λρ(a1,a2)v1,Λw]L[Λu1,[a1,a2,Λv1]L,Λw]LΛρ(Λu1,Λρ(a1,a2)v1)w+Λρ(Λu1,[a1,a2,Λv1]L)w+[Λρ(a1,a2)u1,Λv1,Λw]L[[a1,a2,Λu1]L,Λv1,Λw]LΛρ(Λρ(a1,a2)u1,Λv1)w+Λρ([a1,a2,Λu1]L,Λv1)w=Λρ(a1,a2)ρ(Λu1,Λv1)wΛρ(a1,a2)[u1,v1,w]H+Λρ(Λu1,Λv1)ρ(a1,a2)w+Λ[u1,v1,ρ(a1,a2)w]H+Λρ(Λu1,Λρ(a1,a2)v1)w+Λ[u1,ρ(a1,a2)v1,w]HΛρ(Λu1,Λρ(a1,a2)v1)w+Λρ(Λu1,[a1,a2,Λv1]L)w+Λ(Λρ(a1,a2)u1,Λv1)w+Λ[ρ(a1,a2)u1,v1,w]HΛρ(Λρ(a1,a2)u1,Λv1)w+Λρ([a1,a2,Λu1]L,Λv1)w=Λρ(a1,a2)ρ(Λu1,Λv1)w+Λρ(Λu1,Λv1)ρ(a1,a2)w+Λρ(Λu1,Λρ(a1,a2)v1)wΛρ(Λu1,Λρ(a1,a2)v1)w+Λρ(Λu1,[a1,a2,Λv1]L)w+Λ(Λρ(a1,a2)u1,Λv1)wΛρ(Λρ(a1,a2)u1,Λv1)w+Λρ([a1,a2,Λu1]L,Λv1)w=Λρ(a1,a2)ρ(Λu1,Λv1)w+Λρ(Λu1,Λv1)ρ(a1,a2)w+Λρ(Λu1,[a1,a2,Λv1]L)w+Λρ([a1,a2,Λu1]L,Λv1)w=0.

    Therefore, we deduce that \delta_\Lambda (\delta_\Lambda(a_1, a_2)) = 0.

    Now we develop the cohomology theory of a nonabelian embedding tensor \Lambda on the 3-Lie algebra (L, [−, −, −]_L) with respect to the coherent action (H, [−, −, −]_H; \rho^{\dagger}) .

    For n\geq 0 , define the set of n -cochains of \Lambda by \mathcal{C}^n_\Lambda(H, L): = \mathcal{C}^n_{\mathrm{3Leib}}(H, L). Then (\oplus_{n = 0}^{\infty}\mathcal{C}^n_\Lambda(H, L), \delta_\Lambda) is a cochain complex.

    For n\geq 1 , we denote the set of n -cocycles by {\bf Z}^n_\Lambda(H, L) , the set of n -coboundaries by {\bf B}^n_\Lambda(H, L) , and the n -th cohomology group of the nonabelian embedding tensor \Lambda by

    \mathrm{H}\mathrm{H}^n_\Lambda(H, L) = \frac{{\bf Z}^n_\Lambda(H, L)}{{\bf B}^n_\Lambda(H, L)}.

    Proposition 4.5. Let H\stackrel{\Lambda_1}{\longrightarrow}L and H\stackrel{\Lambda_2}{\longrightarrow}L be two nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebras and let (f_L, f_{H}) be a homomorphism from H\stackrel{\Lambda_1}{\longrightarrow}L to H\stackrel{\Lambda_2}{\longrightarrow}L in which f_H is invertible. We define a map \Psi:\mathcal{C}^{n}_{\Lambda_1}(H, L)\rightarrow \mathcal{C}^{n}_{\Lambda_2}(H, L) by

    \begin{align*} \Psi (\phi)(\mathfrak{H}_1, \mathfrak{H}_2, \ldots, \mathfrak{H}_{n-1}, w) = f_L\big(\phi(f_H^{-1}(u_1)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_1), \ldots, f_H^{-1}(u_{n-1})\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_{n-1}), f_H^{-1}(w) )\big), \end{align*}

    for all \phi\in \mathcal{C}^{n}_{\mathrm{\Lambda_1}}(H, L), \mathfrak{H}_i = u_i\wedge v_i\in \wedge^2 H, 1\leq i\leq {n-1} , and w\in H . Then \Psi: (\mathcal{C}^{n+1}_{\mathrm{\Lambda_1}}(H, L), \delta_{\Lambda_1})\rightarrow (\mathcal{C}^{n+1}_{\mathrm{\Lambda_2}}(H, L), \delta_{\Lambda_2}) is a cochain map.

    That is, the following diagram commutes:

    Consequently, it induces a homomorphism \Psi^* from the cohomology group \mathrm{H}\mathrm{H}^{n+1}_{\mathrm{\Lambda_1}}(H, L) to \mathrm{H}\mathrm{H}^{n+1}_{\mathrm{\Lambda_2}}(H, L) .

    Proof. For any \phi\in \mathcal{C}^{n}_{\mathrm{\Lambda_1}}(H, L), \mathfrak{H}_i = u_i\wedge v_i\in \wedge^2 H, 1\leq i\leq {n} , and w\in H , by Eqs (4.6)–(4.8) and Proposition 2.11, we have

    \begin{align*} &(\delta_{\Lambda_2}\Psi(\phi))(\mathfrak{H}_1, \mathfrak{H}_2, \ldots, \mathfrak{H}_n, w)\\ = &\sum\limits_{1\leq j < k\leq n}(-1)^j\Psi(\phi)(\mathfrak{H}_1, \ldots, \widehat{\mathfrak{H}_j}, \ldots, \mathfrak{H}_{k-1}, u_k \wedge[u_j, v_j, v_k]_{\Lambda_2}+[u_j, v_j, u_k]_{\Lambda_2}\wedge v_k, \ldots, \mathfrak{H}_n, w)\\ &+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^n(-1)^j\Psi(\phi)(\mathfrak{H}_1, \ldots, \widehat{\mathfrak{H}_j}, \ldots, \mathfrak{H}_{n}, [u_j, v_j, w]_{\Lambda_2})+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^n(-1)^{j+1}\mathfrak{l}_{\Lambda_2}(\mathfrak{H}_j, \Psi(\phi)(\mathfrak{H}_1, \ldots, \widehat{\mathfrak{H}_j}, \ldots, \mathfrak{H}_{n}, w))\\ &+(-1)^{n+1}\mathfrak{m}_{\Lambda_2}(u_n, \Psi(\phi)(\mathfrak{H}_1, \ldots, \mathfrak{H}_{n-1}, v_n), w)+(-1)^{n+1}\mathfrak{r}_{\Lambda_2}(\Psi(\phi)(\mathfrak{H}_1, \ldots, \mathfrak{H}_{n-1}, u_n), v_n, w) \\ = &\sum\limits_{1\leq j < k\leq n}(-1)^jf_L(\phi(f_H^{-1}(u_1)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_1), \ldots, \widehat{\mathfrak{H}_j}, \ldots, f_H^{-1}(u_{k-1})\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_{k-1}), \\ &f_H^{-1}(u_k) \wedge f_H^{-1}([u_j, v_j, v_k]_{\Lambda_2})+f_H^{-1}([u_j, v_j, u_k]_{\Lambda_2}) \wedge f_H^{-1}(v_k), \ldots, f_H^{-1}(u_n)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_n), f_H^{-1}(w) ))\\ &+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^n(-1)^jf_L(\phi(f_H^{-1}(u_1)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_1), \ldots, \widehat{\mathfrak{H}_j}, \ldots, f_H^{-1}(u_n)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_n), f_H^{-1}([u_j, v_j, w]_{\Lambda_2})))\\ &+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^n(-1)^{j+1}\mathfrak{l}_{\Lambda_2}(\mathfrak{H}_j, f_L(\phi(f_H^{-1}(u_1)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_1), \ldots, \widehat{\mathfrak{H}_j}, \ldots, f_H^{-1}(u_n)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_n), f_H^{-1}(w))))\\ &+(-1)^{n+1}\mathfrak{m}_{\Lambda_2}(u_n, f_L(\phi(f_H^{-1}(u_1)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_1), \ldots, f_H^{-1}(u_{n-1})\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_{n-1}), f_H^{-1}(v_n))), w)\\ &+(-1)^{n+1}\mathfrak{r}_{\Lambda_2}(f_L(\phi(f_H^{-1}(u_1)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_1), \ldots, f_H^{-1}(u_{n-1})\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_{n-1}), f_H^{-1}(u_n))), v_n, w)\\ = &f_L\Big(\sum\limits_{1\leq j < k\leq n}(-1)^j\phi\big(f_H^{-1}(u_1)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_1), \ldots, \widehat{\mathfrak{H}_j}, \ldots, f_H^{-1}(u_{k-1})\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_{k-1}), \\ &f_H^{-1}(u_k) \wedge [f_H^{-1}(u_j), f_H^{-1}(v_j), f_H^{-1}(v_k)]_{\Lambda_1}+[f_H^{-1}(u_j), f_H^{-1}(v_j), f_H^{-1}(u_k)]_{\Lambda_1} \wedge f_H^{-1}(v_k), \ldots, \\ &f_H^{-1}(u_n)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_n), f_H^{-1}(w)\big)+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^n(-1)^j\phi\big(f_H^{-1}(u_1)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_1), \ldots, \widehat{\mathfrak{H}_j}, \ldots, f_H^{-1}(u_n)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_n), \\ &[f_H^{-1}(u_j), f_H^{-1}(v_j), f_H^{-1}(w)]_{\Lambda_1}\big)+\sum\limits_{j = 1}^n(-1)^{j+1}\mathfrak{l}_{\Lambda_1}(f_H^{-1}(u_j), f_H^{-1}(v_j), \phi(f_H^{-1}(u_1)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_1), \ldots, \\ &\widehat{\mathfrak{H}_j}, \ldots, f_H^{-1}(u_n)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_n), f_H^{-1}(w)))+(-1)^{n+1}\mathfrak{m}_{\Lambda_1}(f_H^{-1}(u_n), \phi(f_H^{-1}(u_1), f_H^{-1}(v_1), \ldots, \\ &f_H^{-1}(u_{n-1})\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_{n-1}), f_H^{-1}(v_n)), f_H^{-1}(w))+(-1)^{n+1}\mathfrak{r}_{\Lambda_1}(\phi(f_H^{-1}(u_1)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_1), \ldots, \\ &f_H^{-1}(u_{n-1})\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_{n-1}), f_H^{-1}(u_n)), f_H^{-1}(v_n), f_H^{-1}(w))\Big)\\ = &f_L(\delta_{\Lambda_1}\phi)(f_H^{-1}(u_1)\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_1), \ldots, f_H^{-1}(u_{n})\wedge f_H^{-1}(v_{n}), f_H^{-1}(w))\\ = &\Psi(\delta_{\Lambda_1}\phi)(\mathfrak{H}_1, \mathfrak{H}_2, \ldots, \mathfrak{H}_n, w). \end{align*}

    Hence, \Psi is a cochain map and induces a cohomology group homomorphism \Psi^*: \mathrm{H}\mathrm{H}^{n+1}_{\mathrm{\Lambda_1}}(H, L) \rightarrow \mathrm{H}\mathrm{H}^{n+1}_{\mathrm{\Lambda_2}}(H, L) .

    At the conclusion of this section, we employ the well-established cohomology theory to describe the infinitesimal deformations of nonabelian embedding tensors on 3-Lie algebras.

    Definition 4.6. Let \Lambda: H\rightarrow L be a nonabelian embedding tensor on a 3-Lie algebra (L, [−, −, −]_L) with respect to a coherent action (H, [−, −, −]_H; \rho^\dagger) . An infinitesimal deformation of \Lambda is a nonabelian embedding tensor of the form \Lambda_t = \Lambda+t\Lambda_1 , where t is a parameter with t^2 = 0.

    Let \Lambda_t = \Lambda+t\Lambda_1 be an infinitesimal deformation of \Lambda , then we have

    \begin{align*} [\Lambda_tu_1, \Lambda_tu_2, \Lambda_tu_3 ]_L = & \Lambda_t\rho(\Lambda_tu_1, \Lambda_tu_2)u_3+\Lambda_t[u_1, u_2, u_3]_H, \end{align*}

    for all u_1, u_2, u_3\in H. Therefore, we obtain the following equation:

    \begin{align} &[\Lambda_1u_1, \Lambda u_2, \Lambda u_3]_L+[\Lambda u_1, \Lambda_1 u_2, \Lambda u_3]_L+[\Lambda u_1, \Lambda u_2, \Lambda_1 u_3]_L \\ & = \Lambda_1\rho(\Lambda u_1, \Lambda u_2)u_3+\Lambda\rho(\Lambda_1 u_1, \Lambda u_2)u_3+\Lambda\rho(\Lambda u_1, \Lambda_1 u_2)u_3+\Lambda_1 [u_1, u_2, u_3]_H. \end{align} (4.9)

    It follows from Eq (4.9) that \Lambda_1\in \mathcal{C}_\Lambda^1(H, L) is a 1-cocycle in the cohomology complex of \Lambda . Thus the cohomology class of \Lambda_1 defines an element in \mathrm{H}\mathrm{H}_\Lambda^1(H, L) .

    Let \Lambda_t = \Lambda+t\Lambda_1 and \Lambda'_t = \Lambda+t\Lambda'_1 be two infinitesimal deformations of \Lambda . They are said to be equivalent if there exists a_1\wedge a_2\in \wedge^2 L such that the pair (id_L+tad(a_1, a_2), id_H+t\rho(a_1, a_2)) is a homomorphism from H\stackrel{\Lambda_t}{\longrightarrow}L to H\stackrel{\Lambda'_t}{\longrightarrow}L . That is, the following conditions must hold:

    1) The maps id_L+tad(a_1, a_2):L\rightarrow L and id_H+t\rho(a_1, a_2): H\rightarrow H are two 3-Lie algebra homomorphisms,

    2) The pair (id_L+tad(a_1, a_2), id_H+t\rho(a_1, a_2)) satisfies:

    \begin{array}{c} \big(id_H+t\rho(a_1, a_2)\big)\big(\rho(a, b)u\big) = \rho\big((id_L+tad(a_1, a_2))a, (id_L+tad(a_1, a_2))b\big)\big(id_H+t\rho(a_1, a_2)\big)(u), \\ (\Lambda+t\Lambda'_1)\big(id_H+t\rho(a_1, a_2)\big)(u) = \big(id_L+tad(a_1, a_2)\big)\big((\Lambda+t\Lambda_1)u\big), \end{array} (4.10)

    for all a, b\in L, u\in H. It is easy to see that Eq (4.10) gives rise to

    \Lambda_1 u-\Lambda'_1u = \Lambda\rho(a_1, a_2)u-[a_1, a_2, \Lambda u] = \delta_\Lambda(a_1, a_2)u\in \mathcal{C}_\Lambda^1(H, L).

    This shows that \Lambda_1 and \Lambda'_1 are cohomologous. Thus, their cohomology classes are the same in \mathrm{H}\mathrm{H}_\Lambda^1(H, L) .

    Conversely, any 1-cocycle \Lambda_1 gives rise to the infinitesimal deformation \Lambda+t\Lambda_1 . Furthermore, we have arrived at the following result.

    Theorem 4.7. Let \Lambda: H\rightarrow L be a nonabelian embedding tensor on (L, [−, −, −]_L) with respect to (H, [−, −, −]_H; \rho^{\dagger}) . Then, there exists a bijection between the set of all equivalence classes of infinitesimal deformations of \Lambda and the first cohomology group \mathrm{H}\mathrm{H}_\Lambda^1(H, L) .

    The authors declare they have not used Artificial Intelligence (AI) tools in the creation of this article.

    This research is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 12361005) and the Universities Key Laboratory of System Modeling and Data Mining in Guizhou Province (Grant No. 2023013).

    The authors declare there is no conflicts of interest.



    [1] Mahar A, Malik R, Qadir A (2007) Review and analysis of current management of solid waste situation in urban areas of Pakistan. In Proceedings of International Conference. Sustainable Solid Waste Management. 5-7 Sept. 2007. Chennai, India, 34-41, gongolwa PG (2007) Evaluation.
    [2] Nabegu A (2010) An analysis of municipal solid waste in Kano Metropolis, Nigeria. J Human Ecol 31: 11-119.
    [3] United Nations Environmental Programme (UNEP) (2011) Towards a green economy. Pathway to Sustainable Development and Poverty Eradication. Nairobi: United Nations.
    [4] Ayodeji I (2010) Exploring secondary school students' understanding and practices of waste management in Ogun State, Nigeria. Intl J Env Sci Educ 5: 201-215.
    [5] Fernando R (2019) Solid waste management of local governments in the Western Province of Sri Lanka: An implementation analysis. Waste Manage 84: 194-203.
    [6] Henry R, Yongsheng Z, Jun D (2006) Municipal management of solid waste challenges in developing countries-Kenyan case study. Waste Manage 26: 92-100.
    [7] Nemerow N, Agardy F, Salvato J (2009) Environmental engineering: environmental health and safety for municipal infrastructure, land use and planning, and industry. John Wiley & Sons.
    [8] Asmawati D, Nor Ba'yah A, Fatimah Y (2010) A Study on the Knowledge, Attitudes, Awareness Status and Behaviour Concerning Solid Waste Management School of Psychology and Human Development, Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia, 43600 UKM Bangi, Malaysia.
    [9] Wilson D, Velis C, Cheeseman C (2006) Role of informal sector recycling in waste management in developing countries. Habitat Int 30: 797-808.
    [10] Munyaga N (2016) Challenges of solid waste disposal in Gachororo, Kiambu County. University of Nairobi Press.
    [11] Safiuddin M, Jumaat M, Salam M, et al. (2010) Utilization of solid wastes in construction materials. Int J Phy Sci 5: 1952-1963.
    [12] Wilson D, Rodic L, Scheinberg A, et al. (2012) Comparative analysis of solid waste management in 20 cities. Waste manage res 30: 237-254.
    [13] Kassim S, Ali M (2006) Solid waste collection by the private sector: Households' perspective in Dar-es-Salaam city, Tanzania. Habitat Int 30: 769-780.
    [14] Kassenga G, Mbuligwe S (2009) Impacts of a Solid Waste Disposal Site on Soil, Surface Water and Groundwater Quality in Dar es Salaam City, Tanzania. J Sust Dev Africa 10: 73-94.
    [15] Omofonmwan S, Eseigbe J (2009) Effects of solid waste on the quality of underground water in Benin Metropolis, Nigeria. J Human Ecol 26: 99-105.
    [16] Leah O (2018) How Nairobi can fix its serious waste problem. Quartz Africa.
    [17] Otieno J (2010) Management of solid waste in Uganda: Issues Challenges and Opportunities. POVIDE programme Workshop. The Netherlands.
    [18] Gakungu N, Gitau A, Njoroge B, et al. (2012) Management of solid waste in Kenya: A case study of public technical training institutions. ICASTOR J Engineer 5: 127-138.
    [19] Tilahun E, Bayrakdar A, Sahinkaya E, et al. (2017) Performance of polydimethylsiloxane membrane contactor process for selective hydrogen sulfide removal from biogas. Waste manage 61: 250-257.
    [20] KNBS (2019) Kenya Population and Housing Census Volume I: Population by County and SubCounty.
    [21] Stephen N (2019) Assessment of Household Domestic Waste Management Practices, Kiambu County- Kenya. South-Eastern Kenyan University (SEKU) Repository.
    [22] Njoroge B, Kimani M, Ndunge D (2014) Review of Municipal Management of solid waste: A Case Study of Nairobi, Kenya. Int J Engineer Sci 4: 2319-6483.
    [23] Musyoka M (2019) Assessment of Community Perception, Policies and Land use factors in relation to Climate Change Processes in Nairobi city (Doctoral dissertation, JKUAT-IEET).
    [24] Muniafu M, Otiato E (2010) Solid Waste Management in Nairobi, Kenya. A case for emerging economies. J Lang Technol & Entre Africa 2: 342-350.
    [25] National Environment Management Authority (2014) National Management of solid waste Strategy, Nairobi. Kenya.
    [26] Bryman A (2004) Social research methods (2 ed.). New York: Oxford University.
    [27] Castagna A, Casagranda M, Zeni A, et al. (2013) 3R'S from Citizens Point of View and Their Proposal from a Case-Study. UPB Sci Bull 75: 253-264.
    [28] Chu Z, Wang W, Wang B, et al. (2016) Research on factors influencing municipal household solid waste separate collection: Bayesian belief networks. Sustainability 8: 152.
    [29] Firdaus G, Ahmad A (2010) Management of urban solid waste pollution in developing countries. Int J Env Res 4: 795-806.
    [30] Ampofo S, Soyelle J, Abanyie S (2016) The Negative Impacts of Poor Municipal Management of solid waste on Livelihoods in Walewale Township, West Mamprusi District, Ghana: A Social Survey and Assessment. International Institute for Science, Technology and Education.
    [31] Dhamija U (2006) Sustainable solid waste management: Issues, policies, and structures. Academic Foundation.
    [32] Giusti L (2009) A review of waste management practices and their impact on human health. Waste manage 29: 2227-2239.
    [33] Saveyn H, Eder P, Ramsay M, et al. (2016) Towards a better exploitation of the technical potential of waste-to-energy. Seville: European Commission.
    [34] Un-Habitat (2010) Management of solid waste in the world's cities. UN-HABITAT.
    [35] Tiwari A (2019) Integrated Management of solid waste Turns Garbage into Gold: A Case Study of abalpur City. Waste Manage Res Effi 385-392.
    [36] Boadi K, Markku K (2005) Environment and health impacts of household solid waste handling and disposal practices in the third world cities: the case of Accra metropolitan area, Ghana. J Env Health. 68: 34-36.
    [37] Parrot L, Sotamenou J, Dia B (2009) Municipal management of solid waste in Africa: Strategies and livelihoods in Yaoundé, Cameroon. Waste Manage 29: 986-995. Republic of Kenya (2012a), County Government Act, Nairobi.
    [38] Henry R, Yongsheng Z, Jun D (2006) Municipal management of solid waste challenges in developing countries-Kenyan case study. Waste manage 26: 92-100.
    [39] Constitution of Kenya (2010) Government Press.
  • Reader Comments
  • © 2020 the Author(s), licensee AIMS Press. This is an open access article distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0)
通讯作者: 陈斌, bchen63@163.com
  • 1. 

    沈阳化工大学材料科学与工程学院 沈阳 110142

  1. 本站搜索
  2. 百度学术搜索
  3. 万方数据库搜索
  4. CNKI搜索

Metrics

Article views(8988) PDF downloads(728) Cited by(10)

Other Articles By Authors

/

DownLoad:  Full-Size Img  PowerPoint
Return
Return

Catalog