Despite the various initiatives being employed for fostering sustainability to globally achieve Agenda 2030, the understanding of the Higher Education Institutions (HEI) practices, discourse, and management remains limited. The present study identifies and quantifies the development of sustainable practices for HEI. It is an exploratory cross-sectional study conducted in 2014 at King Abdul Aziz University (KAU) to identify knowledge, attitudes, and behaviour concerning waste management and what could be done to develop sustainable practices at the campus. The study population comprised of academic and non-academic staff of KAU recruited through random sampling technique. The data was collected through two closed-ended questionnaires and analyzed using IBM Statistical Package of Social Sciences software (SPSS) version 20. The study's findings showed that waste management (WM) would improve KAU's reputation at local, national and international levels resulting in improved regulatory compliance. The results also reflected that environmental pollution caused by the emissions from the energy used and the materials consumed could considerably be reduced by the effective technical measures taken by the organization. The study concluded that sustainability in universities could be achieved when HEI works to inform citizens; there still is a long way to be at par with the European counterparts.
Citation: Nadia A. Abdulghaffar, I. D. Williams. Development of sustainable waste management in higher education institutions[J]. AIMS Environmental Science, 2021, 8(3): 238-254. doi: 10.3934/environsci.2021016
[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 |
Despite the various initiatives being employed for fostering sustainability to globally achieve Agenda 2030, the understanding of the Higher Education Institutions (HEI) practices, discourse, and management remains limited. The present study identifies and quantifies the development of sustainable practices for HEI. It is an exploratory cross-sectional study conducted in 2014 at King Abdul Aziz University (KAU) to identify knowledge, attitudes, and behaviour concerning waste management and what could be done to develop sustainable practices at the campus. The study population comprised of academic and non-academic staff of KAU recruited through random sampling technique. The data was collected through two closed-ended questionnaires and analyzed using IBM Statistical Package of Social Sciences software (SPSS) version 20. The study's findings showed that waste management (WM) would improve KAU's reputation at local, national and international levels resulting in improved regulatory compliance. The results also reflected that environmental pollution caused by the emissions from the energy used and the materials consumed could considerably be reduced by the effective technical measures taken by the organization. The study concluded that sustainability in universities could be achieved when HEI works to inform citizens; there still is a long way to be at par with the European counterparts.
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:∧3L→L 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 li∈L,1≤i≤5.
A homomorphism between two 3-Lie algebras (L1,[−,−,−]L1) and (L2,[−,−,−]L2) is a linear map f:L1→L2 that satisfies f([l1,l2,l3]L1)=[f(l1),f(l2),f(l3)]L2, for all l1,l2,l3∈L1.
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:∧2L→End(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,l4∈L. 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:∧2L→Der(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,l2∈L and h1,h2,h3∈H. 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:∧2H→Der(H) by
ad(h1,h2)h:=[h1,h2,h]H, for all h1,h2,h∈H. |
Then (H;ad) is a representation of (H,[−,−,−]H), which is called the adjoint representation. Furthermore, if the ad satisfies
[ad(h1,h2)h′1,h′2,h′3]H=0, for allh′1,h′2,h′3∈H, |
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:L⊗L⊗L→L 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 li∈L,1≤i≤5.
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, L⊕H 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,l3∈L and h1,h2,h3∈H. This 3-Leibniz algebra (L⊕H,[−,−,−]ρ) is called the nonabelian hemisemidirect product 3-Leibniz algebra, which is denoted by L⋉ρH.
Proof. For any l1,l2,l3,l4,l5∈L and h1,h2,h3,h4,h5∈H, 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]L−ρ([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]L−ρ(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]L−ρ(l3,l4)ρ(l1,l2)h5−ρ(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]H−ρ(l3,l4)[h1,h2,h5]H=0. |
Thus, (L⊕H,[−,−,−]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:H→L that satisfies the following equation:
[Λh1,Λh2,Λh3]L=Λ(ρ(Λh1,Λh2)h3+[h1,h2,h3]H), | (2.6) |
for all h1,h2,h3∈H.
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:H→L. We denote a nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebra (H,L,Λ) by the notation HΛ⟶L.
3) Let HΛ1⟶L and HΛ2⟶L be two nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebras. Then, a homomorphism from HΛ1⟶L to HΛ2⟶L consists of two 3-Lie algebras homomorphisms fL:L→L and fH:H→H, which satisfy the following equations:
Λ2∘fH=fL∘Λ1, | (2.7) |
fH(ρ(l1,l2)h)=ρ(fL(l1),fL(l2))fH(h), | (2.8) |
for all l1,l2∈L and h∈H. Furthermore, if fL and fH are nondegenerate, (fL,fH) is called an isomorphism from HΛ1⟶L to HΛ2⟶L.
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:∧3H→H 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:H→L 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|h∈H} forms a subalgebra of the nonabelian hemisemidirect product 3-Leibniz algebra L⋉ρH.
Proof. Let Λ:H→L be a linear map. Then, for any h1,h2,h3∈H, 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|h∈H} is a subalgebra of the nonabelian hemisemidirect product 3-Leibniz algebra L⋉ρH 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 HΛ⟶L be a nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebra. If a linear map [−,−,−]Λ:∧3H→H is given by
[h1,h2,h3]Λ=ρ(Λh1,Λh2)h3+[h1,h2,h3]H, | (2.9) |
for all h1,h2,h3∈H, 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 HΛ1⟶L to HΛ2⟶L. Then fH is a homomorphism of descendent 3-Leibniz algebra from (H,[−,−,−]Λ1) to (H,[−,−,−]Λ2).
Proof. For any h1,h2,h3∈H, 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:∧3H→H, 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,h5∈H.
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,h3∈H1.
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,h3∈H.
Example 3.3. Let (H,[−,−,−]H) be a 4-dimensional 3-Lie algebra given in Example 2.8. We define a nonzero operation {−,−,−}H:∧3H→H 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:∧3H→H, defined as
⟨h1,h2,h3⟩H:=[h1,h2,h3]H+{h1,h2,h3}H, | (3.4) |
for all h1,h2,h3∈H, 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,h5∈H, according to (H,[−,−,−]H) is a 3-Lie algebra and Eqs (3.2)–(3.4), we have
⟨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,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 HΛ⟶L 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,h3∈H.
Proof. For any h1,h2,h3,h4,h5∈H, 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)h5−ρ(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]L−Λρ(Λh1,Λh2)h3,Λh4)h5+ρ(Λh3,[Λh1,Λh2,Λh4]L−Λρ(Λh1,Λh2)h4)h5−ρ(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)h5−ρ(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 HΛ1⟶L to HΛ2⟶L. Then fH is a homomorphism of 3-Leibniz-Lie algebras from (H,[−,−,−]H,{−,−,−}Λ1) to (H,[−,−,−]H,{−,−,−}Λ2).
Proof. For any h1,h2,h3∈H, 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 ⊳:H⊗H→H, ensuring that
h1⊳(h2⊳h3)=(h1⊳h2)⊳h3+h2⊳(h1⊳h3)+[h1,h2]H⊳h3,h1⊳[h2,h3]H=[h1⊳h2,h3]H=0, |
for all h1,h2,h3∈H.
Theorem 3.8. Let (H,[−,−]H,⊳) be a Leibniz-Lie algebra, and let ς∈H∗ be a trace map, which is a linear map that satisfies the following conditions:
ς([h1,h2]H)=0,ς(h1⊳h2)=0,for allh1,h2∈H. |
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)h2⊳h3−ς(h2)h1⊳h3,for allh1,h2,h3∈H. |
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,h5∈H, we have
{h1,h2,h3}Hς=ς(h1)h2⊳h3−ς(h2)h1⊳h3=−(ς(h2)h1⊳h3−ς(h1)h2⊳h3)=−{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(h2⊳h3)h4⊳h5−ς(h4)ς(h1)(h2⊳h3)⊳h5−ς(h2)ς(h1⊳h3)h4⊳h5+ς(h4)ς(h2)(h1⊳h3)⊳h5+ς(h3)ς(h1)(h2⊳h4)⊳h5−ς(h1)ς(h2⊳h4)h3⊳h5−ς(h3)ς(h2)(h1⊳h4)⊳h5+ς(h2)ς(h1⊳h4)h3⊳h5+ς(h1)ς(h3)h4⊳(h2⊳h5)−ς(h1)ς(h4)h3⊳(h2⊳h5)−ς(h2)ς(h3)h4⊳(h1⊳h5)+ς(h2)ς(h4)h3⊳(h1⊳h5)+ς(h1)ς([h2,h3]H)h4⊳h5−ς(h4)ς(h1)[h2,h3]H⊳h5+ς(h2)ς([h3,h1]H)h4⊳h5−ς(h4)ς(h2)[h3,h1]H⊳h5+ς(h3)ς([h1,h2]H)h4⊳h5−ς(h4)ς(h3)[h1,h2]H⊳h5+ς(h3)ς(h1)[h2,h4]H⊳h5−ς(h1)ς([h2,h4]H)h3⊳h5+ς(h3)ς(h2)[h4,h1]H⊳h5−ς(h2)ς([h4,h1]H)h3⊳h5+ς(h3)ς(h4)[h1,h2]H⊳h5−ς(h4)ς([h1,h2]H)h3⊳h5−ς(h1)ς(h3)h2⊳(h4⊳h5)+ς(h2)ς(h3)h1⊳(h4⊳h5)+ς(h1)ς(h4)h2⊳(h3⊳h5)−ς(h2)ς(h4)h1⊳(h3⊳h5)=−ς(h4)ς(h1)(h2⊳h3)⊳h5+ς(h4)ς(h2)(h1⊳h3)⊳h5+ς(h3)ς(h1)(h2⊳h4)⊳h5−ς(h3)ς(h2)(h1⊳h4)⊳h5+ς(h1)ς(h3)h4⊳(h2⊳h5)−ς(h1)ς(h4)h3⊳(h2⊳h5)−ς(h2)ς(h3)h4⊳(h1⊳h5)+ς(h2)ς(h4)h3⊳(h1⊳h5)−ς(h4)ς(h1)[h2,h3]H⊳h5−ς(h4)ς(h2)[h3,h1]H⊳h5+ς(h3)ς(h1)[h2,h4]H⊳h5+ς(h3)ς(h2)[h4,h1]H⊳h5−ς(h1)ς(h3)h2⊳(h4⊳h5)+ς(h2)ς(h3)h1⊳(h4⊳h5)+ς(h1)ς(h4)h2⊳(h3⊳h5)−ς(h2)ς(h4)h1⊳(h3⊳h5)=0. |
Similarly, we obtain
{h1,h2,[h3,h4,h5]Hς}Hς=ς(h1)ς(h3)h2⊳[h4,h5]H−ς(h2)ς(h3)h1⊳[h4,h5]H+ς(h1)ς(h4)h2⊳[h5,h3]H−ς(h2)ς(h4)h1⊳[h5,h3]H+ς(h1)ς(h5)h2⊳[h3,h4]H−ς(h2)ς(h5)h1⊳[h3,h4]H=0 |
and
[{h1,h2,h3}Hς,h4,h5]Hς=ς(h1)ς(h2⊳h3)[h4,h5]H+ς(h4)ς(h1)[h5,h2⊳h3]H+ς(h5)ς(h1)[h2⊳h3,h4]H−ς(h2)ς(h1⊳h3)[h4,h5]H−ς(h4)ς(h2)[h5,h1⊳h3]H−ς(h5)ς(h2)[h1⊳h3,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:H⊗H⊗V→V,m:H⊗V⊗H→V,r:V⊗H⊗H→V, |
satisfying for any a1,a2,a3,a4,a5∈H and u∈V
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 n≥1, denote the n-cochains of 3-Leibniz algebra (H,[−,−,−]H) with coefficients in a representation (V;l,m,r) by
Cn3Leib(H,V)=Hom(n−1⏞∧2H⊗⋯⊗∧2H⊗H,V). |
The coboundary map δ:Cn3Leib(H,V)→Cn+13Leib(H,V), for Ai=ai∧bi∈∧2H,1≤i≤n and c∈H, as
(δφ)(A1,A2,…,An,c)=∑1≤j<k≤n(−1)jφ(A1,…,^Aj,…,Ak−1,ak∧[aj,bj,bk]H+[aj,bj,ak]H∧bk,…,An,c)+n∑j=1(−1)jφ(A1,…,^Aj,…,An,[aj,bj,c]H)+n∑j=1(−1)j+1l(Aj,φ(A1,…,^Aj,…,An,c))+(−1)n+1(m(an,φ(A1,…,An−1,bn),c)+r(φ(A1,…,An−1,an),bn,c)). |
It was proved in [23,24] that δ2=0. Therefore, (⊕+∞n=1Cn3Leib(H,V),δ) is a cochain complex.
Let HΛ⟶L 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:H⊗H⊗L→L,mΛ:H⊗L⊗H→L,rΛ:L⊗H⊗H→L, |
by
lΛ(h1,h2,l)=[Λh1,Λh2,l]L,mΛ(h1,l,h2)=[Λh1,l,Λh2]L−Λρ(Λh1,l)h2,rΛ(l,h1,h2)=[l,Λh1,Λh2]L−Λρ(l,Λh1)h2, |
for all h1,h2∈H,l∈L. Then (L;lΛ,mΛ,rΛ) is a representation of the descendent 3-Leibniz algebra (H,[−,−,−]Λ).
Proof. For any h1,h2,h3,h4,h5∈H and l∈L, 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 HΛ1⟶L and HΛ2⟶L be two nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebras and (fL,fH) a homomorphism from HΛ1⟶L to HΛ2⟶L. 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,h2∈H,l∈L. In other words, the following diagrams commute:
![]() |
Proof. For any h1,h2∈H,l∈L, 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]L−Λ1ρ(Λ1h1,l)h2)=[fL(Λ1h1),fL(l),fL(Λ1h2)]L−fL(Λ1ρ(Λ1h1,l)h2)=[Λ2fH(h1),fL(l),Λ2fH(h2)]L−Λ2fH(ρ(Λ1h1,l)h2)=[Λ2fH(h1),fL(l),Λ2fH(h2)]L−Λ2ρ(Λ2fH(h1),fL(l))fH(h2)=mΛ2(fH(h1),fL(l),fH(h2)). |
And the other equation is similar to provable.
For n≥1, 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 ϕ∈Cn3Leib(H,L),Hi=ui∧vi∈∧2H,1≤i≤n and w∈H, we have
(δΛϕ)(H1,H2,…,Hn,w)=∑1≤j<k≤n(−1)jϕ(H1,…,^Hj,…,Hk−1,uk∧[uj,vj,vk]Λ+[uj,vj,uk]Λ∧vk,…,Hn,w)+n∑j=1(−1)jϕ(H1,…,^Hj,…,Hn,[uj,vj,w]Λ)+n∑j=1(−1)j+1lΛ(Hj,ϕ(H1,…,^Hj,…,Hn,w))+(−1)n+1(mΛ(un,ϕ(H1,…,Hn−1,vn),w)+rΛ(ϕ(H1,…,Hn−1,un),vn,w)). |
In particular, for ϕ∈C13Leib(H,L):=Hom(H,L) and u1,v1,w∈H, 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]L−Λρ(Λu1,ϕ(v1))w+[ϕ(u1),Λv1,Λw]L−Λρ(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,∀u∈H. |
Proposition 4.4. Let HΛ⟶L be a nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebra. Then δΛ(δΛ(a1,a2))=0, that is, the composition C03Leib(H,L)δΛ⟶C13Leib(H,L)δΛ⟶C23Leib(H,L) is the zero map.
Proof. For any u1,v1,w∈V, 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]L−Λρ(Λu1,δΛ(a1,a2)(v1))w+[δΛ(a1,a2)(u1),Λv1,Λw]L−Λρ(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]L−Λρ(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]L−Λρ(Λρ(a1,a2)u1,Λv1)w+Λρ([a1,a2,Λu1]L,Λv1)w=−Λρ(a1,a2)ρ(Λu1,Λv1)w−Λρ(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]H−Λρ(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]H−Λρ(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)w−Λρ(Λu1,Λρ(a1,a2)v1)w+Λρ(Λu1,[a1,a2,Λv1]L)w+Λ(Λρ(a1,a2)u1,Λv1)w−Λρ(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 δΛ(δΛ(a1,a2))=0.
Now we develop the cohomology theory of a nonabelian embedding tensor Λ on the 3-Lie algebra (L,[−,−,−]L) with respect to the coherent action (H,[−,−,−]H;ρ†).
For n≥0, define the set of n-cochains of Λ by CnΛ(H,L):=Cn3Leib(H,L). Then (⊕∞n=0CnΛ(H,L),δΛ) is a cochain complex.
For n≥1, we denote the set of n-cocycles by ZnΛ(H,L), the set of n-coboundaries by BnΛ(H,L), and the n-th cohomology group of the nonabelian embedding tensor Λ by
HHnΛ(H,L)=ZnΛ(H,L)BnΛ(H,L). |
Proposition 4.5. Let HΛ1⟶L and HΛ2⟶L be two nonabelian embedding tensor 3-Lie algebras and let (fL,fH) be a homomorphism from HΛ1⟶L to HΛ2⟶L in which fH is invertible. We define a map Ψ:CnΛ1(H,L)→CnΛ2(H,L) by
Ψ(ϕ)(H1,H2,…,Hn−1,w)=fL(ϕ(f−1H(u1)∧f−1H(v1),…,f−1H(un−1)∧f−1H(vn−1),f−1H(w))), |
for all ϕ∈CnΛ1(H,L),Hi=ui∧vi∈∧2H,1≤i≤n−1, and w∈H. Then Ψ:(Cn+1Λ1(H,L),δΛ1)→(Cn+1Λ2(H,L),δΛ2) is a cochain map.
That is, the following diagram commutes:
![]() |
Consequently, it induces a homomorphism Ψ∗ from the cohomology group HHn+1Λ1(H,L) to HHn+1Λ2(H,L).
Proof. For any ϕ∈CnΛ1(H,L),Hi=ui∧vi∈∧2H,1≤i≤n, and w∈H, by Eqs (4.6)–(4.8) and Proposition 2.11, we have
(δΛ2Ψ(ϕ))(H1,H2,…,Hn,w)=∑1≤j<k≤n(−1)jΨ(ϕ)(H1,…,^Hj,…,Hk−1,uk∧[uj,vj,vk]Λ2+[uj,vj,uk]Λ2∧vk,…,Hn,w)+n∑j=1(−1)jΨ(ϕ)(H1,…,^Hj,…,Hn,[uj,vj,w]Λ2)+n∑j=1(−1)j+1lΛ2(Hj,Ψ(ϕ)(H1,…,^Hj,…,Hn,w))+(−1)n+1mΛ2(un,Ψ(ϕ)(H1,…,Hn−1,vn),w)+(−1)n+1rΛ2(Ψ(ϕ)(H1,…,Hn−1,un),vn,w)=∑1≤j<k≤n(−1)jfL(ϕ(f−1H(u1)∧f−1H(v1),…,^Hj,…,f−1H(uk−1)∧f−1H(vk−1),f−1H(uk)∧f−1H([uj,vj,vk]Λ2)+f−1H([uj,vj,uk]Λ2)∧f−1H(vk),…,f−1H(un)∧f−1H(vn),f−1H(w)))+n∑j=1(−1)jfL(ϕ(f−1H(u1)∧f−1H(v1),…,^Hj,…,f−1H(un)∧f−1H(vn),f−1H([uj,vj,w]Λ2)))+n∑j=1(−1)j+1lΛ2(Hj,fL(ϕ(f−1H(u1)∧f−1H(v1),…,^Hj,…,f−1H(un)∧f−1H(vn),f−1H(w))))+(−1)n+1mΛ2(un,fL(ϕ(f−1H(u1)∧f−1H(v1),…,f−1H(un−1)∧f−1H(vn−1),f−1H(vn))),w)+(−1)n+1rΛ2(fL(ϕ(f−1H(u1)∧f−1H(v1),…,f−1H(un−1)∧f−1H(vn−1),f−1H(un))),vn,w)=fL(∑1≤j<k≤n(−1)jϕ(f−1H(u1)∧f−1H(v1),…,^Hj,…,f−1H(uk−1)∧f−1H(vk−1),f−1H(uk)∧[f−1H(uj),f−1H(vj),f−1H(vk)]Λ1+[f−1H(uj),f−1H(vj),f−1H(uk)]Λ1∧f−1H(vk),…,f−1H(un)∧f−1H(vn),f−1H(w))+n∑j=1(−1)jϕ(f−1H(u1)∧f−1H(v1),…,^Hj,…,f−1H(un)∧f−1H(vn),[f−1H(uj),f−1H(vj),f−1H(w)]Λ1)+n∑j=1(−1)j+1lΛ1(f−1H(uj),f−1H(vj),ϕ(f−1H(u1)∧f−1H(v1),…,^Hj,…,f−1H(un)∧f−1H(vn),f−1H(w)))+(−1)n+1mΛ1(f−1H(un),ϕ(f−1H(u1),f−1H(v1),…,f−1H(un−1)∧f−1H(vn−1),f−1H(vn)),f−1H(w))+(−1)n+1rΛ1(ϕ(f−1H(u1)∧f−1H(v1),…,f−1H(un−1)∧f−1H(vn−1),f−1H(un)),f−1H(vn),f−1H(w)))=fL(δΛ1ϕ)(f−1H(u1)∧f−1H(v1),…,f−1H(un)∧f−1H(vn),f−1H(w))=Ψ(δΛ1ϕ)(H1,H2,…,Hn,w). |
Hence, Ψ is a cochain map and induces a cohomology group homomorphism Ψ∗:HHn+1Λ1(H,L) →HHn+1Λ2(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 Λ:H→L be a nonabelian embedding tensor on a 3-Lie algebra (L,[−,−,−]L) with respect to a coherent action (H,[−,−,−]H;ρ†). An infinitesimal deformation of Λ is a nonabelian embedding tensor of the form Λt=Λ+tΛ1, where t is a parameter with t2=0.
Let Λt=Λ+tΛ1 be an infinitesimal deformation of Λ, then we have
[Λtu1,Λtu2,Λtu3]L=Λtρ(Λtu1,Λtu2)u3+Λt[u1,u2,u3]H, |
for all u1,u2,u3∈H. Therefore, we obtain the following equation:
[Λ1u1,Λu2,Λu3]L+[Λu1,Λ1u2,Λu3]L+[Λu1,Λu2,Λ1u3]L=Λ1ρ(Λu1,Λu2)u3+Λρ(Λ1u1,Λu2)u3+Λρ(Λu1,Λ1u2)u3+Λ1[u1,u2,u3]H. | (4.9) |
It follows from Eq (4.9) that Λ1∈C1Λ(H,L) is a 1-cocycle in the cohomology complex of Λ. Thus the cohomology class of Λ1 defines an element in HH1Λ(H,L).
Let Λt=Λ+tΛ1 and Λ′t=Λ+tΛ′1 be two infinitesimal deformations of Λ. They are said to be equivalent if there exists a1∧a2∈∧2L such that the pair (idL+tad(a1,a2),idH+tρ(a1,a2)) is a homomorphism from HΛt⟶L to HΛ′t⟶L. That is, the following conditions must hold:
1) The maps idL+tad(a1,a2):L→L and idH+tρ(a1,a2):H→H are two 3-Lie algebra homomorphisms,
2) The pair (idL+tad(a1,a2),idH+tρ(a1,a2)) satisfies:
(idH+tρ(a1,a2))(ρ(a,b)u)=ρ((idL+tad(a1,a2))a,(idL+tad(a1,a2))b)(idH+tρ(a1,a2))(u),(Λ+tΛ′1)(idH+tρ(a1,a2))(u)=(idL+tad(a1,a2))((Λ+tΛ1)u), | (4.10) |
for all a,b∈L,u∈H. It is easy to see that Eq (4.10) gives rise to
Λ1u−Λ′1u=Λρ(a1,a2)u−[a1,a2,Λu]=δΛ(a1,a2)u∈C1Λ(H,L). |
This shows that Λ1 and Λ′1 are cohomologous. Thus, their cohomology classes are the same in HH1Λ(H,L).
Conversely, any 1-cocycle Λ1 gives rise to the infinitesimal deformation Λ+tΛ1. Furthermore, we have arrived at the following result.
Theorem 4.7. Let Λ:H→L be a nonabelian embedding tensor on (L,[−,−,−]L) with respect to (H,[−,−,−]H;ρ†). Then, there exists a bijection between the set of all equivalence classes of infinitesimal deformations of Λ and the first cohomology group HH1Λ(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] | Ahmed E, Stone I, Hack R (2013) NLWA Optimising Communications, Engagement and Education Final Report, Birmingham. |
[2] | Zafar (2015) Solid waste management in Saudi Arabia, EcoMENA. Retrieved from: https://www.ecomena.org/solid-waste-management-in-saudi-arabia/s |
[3] |
Sadef Y, Nizami AS, Batool SA, et al. (2016) Waste-to-energy and recycling value for developing integrated solid waste management plan in Lahore. Energ Source Part B 11: 569-579. doi: 10.1080/15567249.2015.1052595
![]() |
[4] | Hoornweg D, Bhada-Tata P (2012) What a waste: A global review of solid waste management. |
[5] |
Gholami H, Bachok MF, Saman MZM, et al. (2020) An ISM Approach for the Barrier Analysis in Implementing Green Campus Operations: Towards Higher Education Sustainability. Sustainability 12: 363. doi: 10.3390/su12010363
![]() |
[6] |
Ruiz-Mallén I, Heras M (2020) What Sustainability? Higher Education Institutions' Pathways to Reach the Agenda 2030 Goals. Sustainability 12: 1290. doi: 10.3390/su12041290
![]() |
[7] | Paulraj CRKJ, Bernard M A, Raju J, et al (2019) Sustainable waste management through waste to energy technologies in India-opportunities and environmental impacts. IJRER 9: 309-342. |
[8] | Nizami A, Rehan M, Ouda OK, et al. (2015) An argument for developing waste-to-energy technologies in Saudi Arabia. Chem Eng Trans 45: 337-342. |
[9] | Anjum M, Miandad R, Waqas M, et al. (2016) Solid waste management in Saudi Arabia. JAAB 1: 13-26. |
[10] |
Aleixo AM, Leal S, Azeiteiro UM (2018) Conceptualization of sustainable higher education institutions, roles, barriers, and challenges for sustainability: An exploratory study in Portugal. J Clean Prod 172: 1664-1673. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2016.11.010
![]() |
[11] |
Griffin M, Sobal J, Lyson TA (2009) An analysis of a community food waste stream. Agric Human Values 26: 67-81 doi: 10.1007/s10460-008-9178-1
![]() |
[12] |
Thyberg KL, Tonjes DJ (2015) A management framework for municipal solid waste systems and its application to food waste prevention. Systems 3: 133-151 doi: 10.3390/systems3030133
![]() |
[13] |
Lozano R, Ceulemans K, Alonso-Almeida et al. (2015) A review of commitment and implementation of sustainable development in higher education: results from a worldwide survey. J Clean Prod 108: 1-18. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2014.09.048
![]() |
[14] |
Adams R, Martin S, Boom K (2018) University culture and sustainability: Designing and implementing an enabling framework. J Clean Prod 171: 434-445. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2017.10.032
![]() |
[15] |
Shawe R, Horan W, Moles R, et al. (2019) Mapping of sustainability policies and initiatives in higher education institutes. Environ Sci Policy 99: 80-88. doi: 10.1016/j.envsci.2019.04.015
![]() |
[16] |
Ouda OK, Peterson HP, Rehan M, et al. (2018) A Case Study of Sustainable Construction Waste Management in Saudi Arabia. Waste Biomass Valori 9: 2541-2555. doi: 10.1007/s12649-017-0174-9
![]() |
[17] |
Yuan X, Zuo J (2013) A critical assessment of the Higher Education For Sustainable Development from students' perspectives-a Chinese study. J Clean Prod 48: 108-115. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2012.10.041
![]() |
[18] | Barth M, Timm J (2011) Higher education for sustainable development: Students' perspectives on an innovative approach to educational change. J Soc Sci 7: 13-23. |
[19] |
Abubakar IR, Al-Shihri FS, Ahmed SM (2016) Students' assessment of campus sustainability at the University of Dammam, Saudi Arabia. Sustainability 8: 59. doi: 10.3390/su8010059
![]() |
[20] | Alshuwaikhat HM, Abubakar IR, Aina YA, et al. (2017) Networking the Sustainable Campus Awards: Engaging with the Higher Education Institutions in Developing Countries. In Handbook of Theory and Practice of Sustainable Development in Higher Education: 93-107. Springer, Cham. |
[21] |
Islam MM, Murad MW, McMurray AJ, et al. (2017) Aspects of sustainable procurement practices by public and private organizations in Saudi Arabia: an empirical study. Int J Sust Dev World 24: 289-303. doi: 10.1080/13504509.2016.1209794
![]() |
[22] | Grant DB, Wong CY, Trautrims A (2017) Sustainable logistics and supply chain management: Principles and practices for sustainable operations and management. Kogan Page Publishers. |
[23] |
Evans J, Jones R, Karvonen A, et al. (2015) Living labs and co-production: university campuses as platforms for sustainability science. Current Opinion in Environmental Sustainability 16: 1-6. doi: 10.1016/j.cosust.2015.06.005
![]() |
[24] |
Masseck T (2017) Living labs in architecture as innovation arenas within higher education institutions. Energy Pro 115: 383-389. doi: 10.1016/j.egypro.2017.05.035
![]() |
[25] |
Voytenko Y, McCormick K, Evans J, et al. (2016) Urban living labs for sustainability and low carbon cities in Europe: Towards a research agenda. J Clean Prod 123: 45-54. doi: 10.1016/j.jclepro.2015.08.053
![]() |
[26] | Cohen T, Lovell B (2013) The campus as a living laboratory. Using the built environment to revitalize college education, Prepared for the American Association of Community Colleges, SEED Center and Center for Green Schools. Available at: https://theseedcenter.org/Special-Pages/Campus-asa-Living-Lab. |
[27] |
Evans J, Karvonen A (2014) 'Give me a laboratory and I will lower your carbon footprint!'-Urban laboratories and the governance of low-carbon futures. Int J Urban Regional 38: 413-430. doi: 10.1111/1468-2427.12077
![]() |