See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/373770408

EXTENSION OF STAR-OPERATION

Article · September 2023

CITATIONS READS

0 57

2 authors, including:

Ahmed Elmakki
University of Monastir
2 PUBLICATIONS 0 CITATIONS

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Ahmed Elmakki on 12 June 2024.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Moroccan Journal of Algebra
and Geometry with Applications
x (xx) (2023), 1–9
—————————————————————————————————————————————
Supported by Sidi Mohamed Ben Abdellah University, Fez, Morocco ISSN: 2820-7114

Extension of star-operation

Elmakki Ahmed1 and Taha Eddhay2

1 Department of Mathematics, Faculty of Sciences, Monastir, Tunisia.
e-mail: [email protected]
2 Preparatory Institute for Engineering Studies, Gafsa, Tunisia.

e-mail: [email protected]

Communicated by Ahmed Hamed

(Received 19 June 2023, Revised 12 September 2023, Accepted 22 September 2023)

Abstract. Let D be an integral domain, ∗ a star operation on D and S a multiplicative subset of D. In this paper, we
generalize the notion of ∗-ideals (resp, ∗-invertible) of D, by introducing the concept of S-∗-ideals (resp, S-∗-invertible) of
D. A fractional ideal of D is called S-∗-ideals (resp, S-∗-invertible) if there exists an s ∈ S such that sI ∗ ⊆ I ⊆ I ∗ (resp, if there
exists an s ∈ S and a fractional ideal J of D such that sD ⊆ (IJ)∗ ⊆ D). We investigate many proprieties and characterizations
of the notion S-∗-ideals (resp, S-∗-invertible).
Key Words: ∗-operation, S-∗-ideals, S-∗-invertible.
2010 MSC: 13G05, 13A15.

1 Introduction
Throughout this paper D will be an integral domain with quotient field K. We denote by F (D), the
set of nonzero fractional ideals of D. A ∗-operation on D is a mapping I 7−→ I ∗ , from F (D) to F (D)
which satisfies the following conditions for a ∈ K\{0} and I, J ∈ F (D) :

1. (a)∗ = (a) and (aI)∗ = aI ∗ ,

2. I ⊆ I ∗ ; if I ⊆ J, then I ∗ ⊆ J ∗ and

3. (I ∗ )∗ = I ∗ .

I ∈ F (D) is called a ∗-ideal if I ∗ = I. We use the notation ∗-Max(D) for the set of ∗-ideals which are
maximal among proper integral ∗-ideals of D. An element I of F (D) is called to be ∗-invertible if
(IJ)∗ = D for some J ∈ F (D) or equivalently (II −1 )∗ = D, where I −1 = {x ∈ K | xI ⊆ D}. We can construct
the ∗-operation ∗s defined by I ∗s = {(I ′ )∗ | I ′ ∈ F (D), I ′ is finitely generated and I ′ ⊆ I}. We say ∗s
S
that is the finite type ∗-operation induced by ∗. Also, ∗ is said to be of finite type if ∗ = ∗s i.e., I ∗ = I ∗s
for each I ∈ F (D). For the general theory of ∗-operations, the reader is referred to [4, Sects. 32 and
34]. An important ∗-operation is the υ-operation given by Iυ = (I −1 )−1 for each I ∈ F (D). The finite
type ∗-operation induced by the υ-operation is called the t-operation. For f = a0 + · · · + an X n ∈ K[X],
Af will denote the D-submodule of K generated by {a0 , ..., an }. The set N∗ = {f ∈ D[X] | (Af )∗ = D} is a
multiplicatively closed subset of D[X] by [9, Proposition 2.1], and it is easy to see that, N∗ = N∗s .
In this paper, we generalize the notion of ∗-ideal (resp, ∗-invertible) by introducing the concept
of S-∗-ideal (resp, S-∗-invertible). Let I be a fractional ideal of an integral domain D and S a multi-
plicative subset of D. We say that I is S-∗-ideal if there exists an s ∈ S such that sI ∗ ⊆ I ⊆ I ∗ . We say
that I is S-∗-invertible if there exists an s ∈ S and a fractional ideal J of D such that sD ⊆ (IJ)∗ ⊆ D,
equivalently there exists an s ∈ S such that sD ⊆ (II −1 )∗ ⊆ D (Proposition 3.4).
In Section 2, we study basic results of S-∗-ideal, we give an example of an S-∗-ideal which is not
2 Moroccan Journal of Algebra and Geometry with Applications / E. Ahmed and T. Eddhay

∗-ideal. We also, show that every S-invertible ideal (recall from [6], that a fractional ideal I of D is
said to be S-invertible if sD ⊆ IJ ⊆ D for some s ∈ S and some fractional ideal J of D) is S-∗-ideal
(Proposition 2.4). An ideal M of D disjoint with S is called S-∗-maximal if it is maximal in the set
of all integral proper S-∗-ideals of D. We prove that every S-∗-maximal ideal of D is a prime ideal of
D (Proposition 2.8). Let D be an integral domain and S a multiplicative subset of D. We say that S
is anti-Archimedean if ∩n≥1 sn D ∩ S , ∅ for every s ∈ S. In [2], the authors generalized this notion by
introducing the concept of weakly anti-Archimedean multiplicative set. According [2], a multiplica-
tive set S of an integral domain D is called weakly anti-Archimedean if for each family (sα )α∈Λ of
elements of S we have (∩α∈Λ sα D) ∩ S , ∅. Note that every weakly anti-Archimedean multiplicative
set is anti-Archimedean. The converse is not true as was observed in [3, Example 2.7]. Let D be an
integral domain, ∗ a finite type ∗-operation on D and S a weakly anti-Archimedean multiplicative
subset of D. We show that every integral proper S-∗-ideal of D is included in an S-∗-maximal ideal
of D (Theorem 2.9). In the particular case when S consists of units of D, we get every integral proper
∗-ideal of D is included in a ∗-maximal ideal of D (Corollary 2.10). Let D be an integral domain, ∗ a
finite type ∗-operation on D and S a weakly anti-Archimedean multiplicative subset of D. We prove
T
that for each S-∗-ideal I of D, I = M∈S -∗-Max(D) IDM (Theorem 2.12).
In section 3, we study basic propertis of S-∗-invertible. It’s easy to show that if S consists of units
of D the notions ∗-invertible and S-∗-invertible coincide. Let D be an integral domain, ∗ a finite type
∗-operation on D and S a weakly anti-Archimedean multiplicative subset of D. Let I be a fractional
ideal of D. We show that I is an S-∗-invertible ideal of D if and only if I is S-∗-finite and for each
M ∈ S-∗-Max(D), IDM is a principal ideal of DM (Theorem 3.8). In the particular case when S con-
sists of units of D we recover the folloing known result, I is a ∗-invertible ideal of D if and only if I
is of ∗-finite type and it is t-locally principal (Corollary 3.9). Let D be an integral domain and S a
multiplicative subset of D. It is well-known that for each finitely generated fractional ideal I of D,
(IS )−1 = (I −1 )S . We extented this result to S-∗-finite ideal of D. We show that if I is an S-∗-finite ideal
of D, then (IS )−1 = (I −1 )S (Proposition 3.10) where ∗ a finite type ∗-operation on D and I a fractional
ideal of D.

2 Basic properties of S-∗-ideals

Definition 2.1. Let D be an integral domain, S a multiplicative subset of D and ∗ a star-operation on
D. A fractional ideal I of D is called S-∗-ideal if there exists an s ∈ S such that sI ∗ ⊆ I ⊆ I ∗ .

Example 2.2. 1. Every ∗-ideal is an S-∗-ideal.

2. Let D = Z[X] and I = 2Z + XZ[X]. By [1, Lemma 2.1], it is easy to show that I −1 = ( 21 Z) ∩ Z +
XZ[X]; so Iv = Z[X] which implies that I is not a divisorial ideal of D. Now, let S = {2n | n ∈
N ∪ {0}}. Then S is a multiplicative subset of D. Moreover,

2Iv = 2Z[X] ⊆ I ⊆ Z[X] = Iv .

Hence I is an S-v-ideal of D. This shows that the converse of (1) is not true in general.

3. Let D be an integral domain, S a multiplicative subset of D and ∗ a star-operation on D. If S

consists of units of D, then the notions of S-∗-ideals and ∗-ideals are coincide.

Let D be an integral domain and S a multiplicative subset of D. Recall from [8] that an ideal I of D
is called S-principal, if sI ⊆ J ⊆ I for some principal ideal J of D and some s ∈ S. The next proposition
collects some properties of S-∗-ideals of an integral domain D.

Proposition 2.3. Let D be an integral domain, S a multiplicative subset of D and ∗ a star-operation on D.

 Extension of star-operation 3

1. Let S ⊆ T be multiplicative subsets of D. If I is an S-∗-ideal of D, then I is a T -∗-ideal of D.

2. Let S̄ be the saturation of S. Then I is an S-∗-ideal of D if and only if I is an S̄-∗-ideal of D.

3. If I is S-principal, then I is an S-∗-ideal of D.

Proof. (1). Obvious.

(2). The "only if“ part follows from (1). Now, assume that I is an S̄-∗-ideal of D. Then there exists
an s ∈ S̄ such that sI ∗ ⊆ I ⊆ I ∗ . Since s ∈ S̄, there exists a t ∈ S such that t = ss′ for some s′ ∈ D. Thus

tI ∗ ⊆ sI ∗ ⊆ I ⊆ I ∗ ,

and hence I is an S-∗-ideal of D.

(3). Since I is S-principal, there exist an s ∈ S and d ∈ D such that sI ⊆ dD ⊆ I. This implies that

sI ∗ = (sI)∗ ⊆ (dD)∗ = dD ⊆ I ⊆ I ∗ .

Hence I an S-∗-ideal of D.

Recall from [6], that for a multiplicative set S in D, a fractional ideal I of D is said to be S-invertible
if sD ⊆ IJ ⊆ D for some s ∈ S and some fractional ideal J of D. It is shown that I is an S-invertible
ideal of D if and only if sD ⊆ II −1 ⊆ D for some s ∈ S. It well known that every invertible ideal is a
∗-ideal. Our next Proposition generalize this result.

Proposition 2.4. Let D be an integral domain, ∗ a star-operation on D and S a multiplicative subset of D.

Each S-invertible ideal of D is S-∗-ideal.

Proof. Let I be an S-invertible ideal of D. By [6, Remark 2.4], sJ −1 ⊆ I ⊆ J −1 for some s ∈ S and some
fractional ideal J of D. This implies that

sJ −1 = (sJ −1 )∗ ⊆ I ∗ ⊆ (J −1 )∗ = J −1 .

Thus sI ∗ ⊆ sJ −1 ⊆ I, and hence I is an S-∗-ideal of D.

Example 2.5. Let D be a Prüfer domain, ∗ a star-operation on D and S a multiplicative subset of D.

Then each nonzero S-finite ideal of D is S-∗-ideal. Indeed, let I be an S-finite ideal of D. Then there
exist an s ∈ S and a nonzero finitely generated ideal F of D such that sI ⊆ F ⊆ I. Thus sF −1 ⊆ I −1 .
Since D is a Prüfer domain, FF −1 = D; so

sD = sFF −1 ⊆ FI −1 ⊆ II −1 ⊆ D

which implies that I is an S-invertible ideal of D. Hence by the previous Proposition, I is an S-∗-ideal
of D.

Let D be an integral domain and S a multiplicative subset of D. We say that S is anti-Archimedean

if ∩n≥1 sn D ∩ S , ∅ for every s ∈ S. In [2], the authors generalized this notion by introducing the con-
cept of weakly anti-Archimedean multiplicative set. According [2], a multiplicative set S of an inte-
gral domain D is called weakly anti-Archimedean if for each family (sα )α∈Λ of elements of S we have
(∩α∈Λ sα D) ∩ S , ∅. Note that every weakly anti-Archimedean multiplicative set is anti-Archimedean.
The converse is not true as was observed in [3, Example 2.7].

Proposition 2.6. Let D be an integral domain, ∗ a finite type ∗-operation on D and S a weakly anti-
Archimedean multiplicative subset of D. Let (Iα )α∈Λ be a totally ordered family of fractional ideals of D. If
for each α ∈ Λ, Iα is S-∗-ideal, then ∪α∈Λ Iα is an S-∗-ideal of D.
4 Moroccan Journal of Algebra and Geometry with Applications / E. Ahmed and T. Eddhay

Proof. For each α ∈ Λ, there exists an sα ∈ S such that sα Iα∗ ⊆ Iα . Since S is weakly anti-Archimedean,
∩α∈Λ sα D ∩ S , ∅. Let t ∈ ∩α∈Λ sα D ∩ S. Note that for each α ∈ Λ, tIα∗ ⊆ Iα . We show that t(∪α∈Λ Iα )∗ ⊆
∪α∈Λ Iα . Let x ∈ (∪α∈Λ Iα )∗ . Since ∗ is of finite character, there exists a finitely generated subideal J of
∪α∈Λ Iα such that x ∈ J ∗ . Since J is a finitely generated ideal of D, there exists a β ∈ Λ such that J ⊆ Iβ .
We have tx ∈ tJ ∗ ⊆ tIβ∗ ⊆ Iβ ; so tx ∈ Iβ for some β ∈ Λ which implies that t(∪α∈Λ Iα )∗ ⊆ ∪α∈Λ Iα , and
hence ∪α∈Λ Iα is an S-∗-ideal of D.

Notation 2.7. Let D be an integral domain, ∗ a star-operation on D and S a multiplicative subset of

D. An ideal M of D disjoint with S is called S-∗-maximal if it is maximal in the set of all integral
proper S-∗-ideal of D. We denote by S-∗-Max(D) the set of all S-∗-maximal ideals of D.
Proposition 2.8. Every S-∗-maximal ideal of D is a prime ideal of D.
Proof. Let P be an S-∗-maximal ideal of D. Assume that P is not prime, there exist a, b ∈ D\P such
that ab ∈ P . Let I = P + aD and J = P + bD. Since P ⊊ I ⊆ I ∗ ⊆ D, by maximality of P in the set of
all integral proper S-∗-ideal of D, I ∗ = D. In the same way we can prove J ∗ = D. This implies that
(IJ)∗ = (I ∗ J ∗ )∗ = D. But IJ = P 2 + aP + bP + abP ⊆ P ; so P ∗ = D. Now, since P is an S-∗-ideal of D, there
exists an s ∈ S such that sP ∗ ⊆ P which implies that sD ⊆ P , a contradiction because P ∩ S = ∅. Hence
P is a prime ideal of D.

Theorem 2.9. Let D be an integral domain, ∗ a finite type ∗-operation on D and S a weakly anti-
Archimedean multiplicative subset of D. Then every integral proper S-∗-ideal of D is included in an
S-∗-maximal ideal of D.
Proof. Let F be the set of all integral proper S-∗-ideals of D. Then F , ∅, since F contain all integral
proper S-principal ideals of D. Now, let (Iα )α∈Λ be a totally ordered family of elements of F . By
Proposition 2.6, ∪α∈Λ Iα is an element of F ; so we conclude by Zorn’s Lemma our result.

In the particular case when S consists of units of D, we regain the following well-known result.
Corollary 2.10. Let D be an integral domain and ∗ a finite type ∗-operation on D. Then every integral
proper ∗-ideal of D is included in a ∗-maximal ideal of D.
Lemma 2.11. Let D be an integral domain, ∗ a star-operation on D and S a multiplicative subset of D. Let
(Ik )1≤k≤n be a finite family of fractional ideals of D such that ∩1≤k≤n Ik , (0). If for each 1 ≤ k ≤ n, Ik is
S-∗-ideal, then ∩1≤k≤n Ik is an S-∗-ideal of D.
Proof. For each 1 ≤ k ≤ n, there exists an sk ∈ S such that sk Ik∗ ⊆ Ik . Let t = s1 s2 · · · sn . Then t ∈ S
and for each 1 ≤ k ≤ n, tIk∗ ⊆ Ik . For each 1 ≤ m ≤ n, t(∩1≤k≤n Ik )∗ ⊆ tIm ∗ ⊆ I . This implies that
m
∗
t(∩1≤k≤n Ik ) ⊆ ∩1≤k≤n Ik , and hence ∩1≤k≤n Ik is an S-∗-ideal of D.

Theorem 2.12. Let D be an integral domain, ∗ a finite type ∗-operation on D and S a weakly anti-
Archimedean multiplicative subset of D. Then for each S-∗-ideal I of D,
\
I= IDM .
M∈S -∗-Max(D)
T
Proof. Let x be a nonzero element of M∈S -∗-Max(D) IDM . Then for each S-∗-maximal ideal M of D,
there exists an sM ∈ D\M such that sM x ∈ I. Let J = D ∩ ( 1x I). Then sM ∈ J for each S-∗-maximal ideal
M of D. Moreover, Since I is an S-∗-ideal of D, 1x I is an S-∗-ideal of D; so by Lemma 2.11, J is an
S-∗-ideal of D. Assume that J , D. Then J is an integral proper S-∗-ideal of D; so by Theorem 2.9,
there exists M ∈ S- ∗ -Max(D) such that J ⊆ M which implies that sM ∈ J ⊆ M, a contradiction. Thus
T
J = D which implies that x ∈ I. Hence I ⊆ M∈S -∗-Max(D) IDM . This completed the proof, since other
inclusion is obvious.
 Extension of star-operation 5

Corollary 2.13. Let D be an integral domain, ∗ a finite type ∗-operation on D and I a ∗-ideal of D. Then
\
I= IDM .
M∈∗-Max(D)

Remark 2.14. Let I be an S-∗-ideal of an integral domain D, where S is a multiplicative subset of

D and ∗ a star-operation of finite character on D. Then there exits an s ∈ S such that sI ∗ ⊆ I. But
I ∗ = M∈∗-Max(D) I ∗ DM ; so
T

\ \ \
s( IDM ) ⊆ s( I ∗ DM ) = sI ∗ ⊆ I ⊆ IDM .
M∈∗-Max(D) M∈∗-Max(D) M∈∗-Max(D)

Hence there exists an s ∈ S such that

\ \
s( IDM ) ⊆ I ⊆ IDM .
M∈∗-Max(D) M∈∗-Max(D)

3 S-∗-invertible ideals
In this section we extended the notion of S-invertible using the ∗-operation and we generalize some
classical results concerning the notion of ∗-invertibility. We begin this section by the following defi-
nition.
Definition 3.1. Let D be an integral domain, ∗ a star-operation on D and S a multiplicative subset of
D. A fractional ideal I of D is called S-∗-invertible if there exists an s ∈ S and a fractional ideal J of D
such that sD ⊆ (IJ)∗ ⊆ D.
Example 3.2. Let D = Z + XZ[i][X], S = {2n | n ∈ N} and I = 2Z + (1 + i)XZ[i][X]. Since 2 ∈ I, then
2D ⊆ I.D ⊆ D. Which implies that I is S-invertible. On the other part, by [1, Lemma 2.1], it is easy
to show that I −1 = Z + X 1−i 2 Z[i][X]. Thus if II
−1 = D, then 1 = P (0)Q (0) + · · · + P (0)Q (0) for some
1 1 n n
P1 , ..., Pn ∈ I and Q1 , ..., Qn ∈ I −1 . But for 1 ≤ j ≤ n, Pj (0) ∈ 2Z and Qj (0) ∈ Z; so 1 = 2m1 + · · · + 2mn ,
mj ∈ Z. A contradiction. Hence I is not invertible.
Remark 3.3. Let D be an integral domain, ∗ a star-operation on D and S a multiplicative subset of D.
1. Since I ∗ ⊆ Iv for each fractional ideal I of D, every S-∗-invertible ideal of D is S-v-invertible.
2. Note that for a fractional ideal I of D, we have I is S-∗-invertible if and only if I ∗ is S-∗-invertible.
Indeed, I is S-∗-invertible if and only if sD ⊆ (IJ)∗ = (I ∗ J)∗ ⊆ D for some s ∈ S and some fractional
ideal J of D if and only if I ∗ is S-∗-invertible.
3. Let I be a fractional S-∗-invertible ideal of D, then there exist an s ∈ S and a fractional ideal J
of D such that sD ⊆ (IJ)∗ ⊆ D. We have

sI −1 = (I −1 sD)∗ ⊆ (I −1 (IJ)∗ )∗ = (I −1 (IJ))∗ ⊆ J ∗ .

Moreover, since IJ ∗ ⊆ (IJ)∗ ⊆ D, J ∗ ⊆ I −1 . Thus sI −1 ⊆ J ∗ ⊆ I −1 . Note that in the same way we can
prove that sJ −1 ⊆ I ∗ ⊆ J −1 .
4. By [6, Proposition 2.7], every S-principal ideal of D is S-invertible. This implies that each
S-principal ideal of D is S-∗-invertible.
Proposition 3.4. Let I be a fractional ideal of an integral domain D, S a multiplicative subset of D and ∗ a
star-operation on D. Then I is S-∗-invertible if and only of there exists an s ∈ S such that sD ⊆ (II −1 )∗ ⊆ D.
In particular, I −1 is also an S-∗-invertible ideal of D.
6 Moroccan Journal of Algebra and Geometry with Applications / E. Ahmed and T. Eddhay

Proof. If I is S-∗-invertible, then there exist an s ∈ S and a fractional ideal J of D such that sD ⊆
(IJ)∗ ⊆ D. But by Remark 3.3(3), J ∗ ⊆ I −1 ; so sD ⊆ (IJ)∗ = (IJ ∗ )∗ ⊆ (II −1 )∗ ⊆ D. The other implication is
obvious.

Definition 3.5. Let D be an integral domain, S a multiplicative subset of D and ∗ a star-operation on

D. A fractional ideal I of D is called of S-∗-finite type if there exist an s ∈ S and a fractional finitely
generated ideal F of D such that sI ⊆ F ∗ ⊆ I ∗ .

Let D be an integral domain and S a multiplicative subset of D. According to [5], D is called

an S-Mori domain if every increasing sequence of integral divisorial ideals of D is S-stationary (an
increasing sequence (Ik )k∈N of ideals of D is called S-stationary if there exist a positive integer n and
an s ∈ S such that for each k ≥ n, sIk ⊆ In [8]). It was shown in [5], that if D is an S-Mori domain,
then for each nonzero fractional ideal I of D, sI ⊆ Jυ ⊆ Iυ for some s ∈ S and some finitely generated
fractional ideal J of D such that J ⊆ I. This implies that in an S-Mori domain every nonzero fractional
ideal I of D is of S-v-finite type.

Remark 3.6. Let D be an integral domain, ∗ a star-operation on D and S a multiplicative subset of D.

Let I be a fractional ideal of D of S-∗-finite type. Then there exist an s ∈ S and a fractional finitely
generated ideal J of D such that sI ⊆ J ∗ ⊆ I ∗ . If the star-operation ∗ is of finite character, then we
can suppose that J ⊆ I. Indeed, let J = (a1 , ..., an ), where ai ∈ I ∗ . Then for each 1 ≤ i ≤ n, there exist
a finitely generated subideal Ji of I. Let J ′ = J1 + · · · + Jn . Then J ′ is a finitely generated subideal of I.
Moreover, J ⊆ J1∗ + · · · + Jn∗ ⊆ (J ′ )∗ ; so sI ⊆ J ∗ ⊆ (J ′ )∗ ⊆ I ∗ .

Let D be an integral domain and ∗ a star-operation on D. Let I and J be tow fractional ideals of D.
It will known that if ∗ is of finite character, then

(IJ)∗ = ∪{(I ′ J ′ )∗ | I ′ ⊆ I, J ′ ⊆ J, two finitely generated fractional ideals of D}.

Our next Theorem prove a neccesary and sufficient condition for a fractional ideal to be S-∗-invertible.
This extended a result proved by Kang in [9]. To prove it we need the following Lemma.

Lemma 3.7. Let D be an integral domain, ∗ a finite type ∗-operation on D and S a multiplicative subset of
D. Every S-∗-invertible ideal of D is an S-∗-finite ideal of D.

Proof. Let I be an S-∗-invertible ideal of D. There exist an s ∈ S and a fractional ideal J of D such that
sD ⊆ (IJ)∗ ⊆ D. Since ∗ is of finite character, there exist two finitely generated fractional ideals I ′ and
J ′ of D such that I ′ ⊆ I, J ′ ⊆ J and s ∈ (I ′ J ′ )∗ . This implies that sD ⊆ (I ′ J ′ )∗ ⊆ D. Now by Remark 3.3(3),
s(J ′ )−1 ⊆ (I ′ )∗ ⊆ (J ′ )−1 and sJ −1 ⊆ I ∗ ⊆ J −1 . Since J ′ ⊆ J, J −1 ⊆ (J ′ )−1 ; so

sI ⊆ sI ∗ ⊆ s(J ′ )−1 ⊆ (I ′ )∗ ⊆ I ∗ .

Hence I is of S-∗-finite type.

Theorem 3.8. Let D be an integral domain, ∗ a finite type ∗-operation on D and S a weakly anti-
Archimedean multiplicative subset of D. Let I be a fractional ideal of D. Then the following state-
ments are equivalent.

1. I is an S-∗-invertible ideal of D.

2. I is S-∗-finite and for each M ∈ S-∗-Max(D), IDM is a principal ideal of DM .

 Extension of star-operation 7

Proof. (1) ⇒ (2) By Lemma 3.7, I is of S-∗-finite type. Let M be an S-∗-maximal ideal of D. We have
II −1 ⊈ M, indeed, if II −1 ⊆ M, then sD ⊆ (II −1 )∗ ⊆ M for some s ∈ S; so s ∈ M, a contradiction because
S ∩ M = ∅. This implies that (IDM )(I −1 DM ) = II −1 DM = DM , and thus IDM is an invertible ideal of
DM . Hence IDM is principal since DM is a local ring.
(2) ⇒ (1) By hypothesis, there exist an s ∈ S and a fractional finitely generated subideal J of I
such that sI ⊆ J ∗ ⊆ I ∗ . Assume that I is not S-∗-invertible. Then (II −1 )∗ ⊊ D; so by Theorem 2.9,
there exist an S-∗-maximal ideal M of D such that (II −1 )∗ ⊆ M. By hypothesis, IDM is principal, then
IDM = aDM for some a ∈ I. This implies that 1a I ⊆ DM ; so 1a J ⊆ DM . Since J is finitely generated, there
exists a t ∈ D\M such that at J ⊆ D. We have

st st t
I ⊆ I ∗ ⊆ J ∗ ⊆ D.
a a a

Thus sta ∈ I −1 which implies that st ∈ aI −1 ⊆ II −1 ⊆ M. Since t < M, s ∈ M because M is a prime ideal
of D by Proposition 2.8. This contradict that M ∩ S = ∅. Hence I is an S-∗-invertible ideal of D.

In the particular case when S consists of units of D we regain the following well-known result
proved by B.G. Kang ([9]).

Corollary 3.9. Let D be an integral domain, ∗ a finite type ∗-operation on D and I a fractional ideal of D.
Then the following statements are equivalent.

1. I is a ∗-invertible ideal of D.

2. I is of ∗-finite type and it is t-locally principal.

Let D be an integral domain and S a multiplicative subset of D. It is well-known that for each
finitely generated fractional ideal I of D, (IS )−1 = (I −1 )S . Our next Proposition improves this result.

Proposition 3.10. Let S a multiplicative subset of an integral domain D, ∗ a finite type ∗-operation on D
and I a fractional ideal of D. If I is an S-∗-finite ideal of D, then (IS )−1 = (I −1 )S .

Proof. We have always that (I −1 )S ⊆ (IS )−1 , so we must prove the converse in order to conclude. Since
I is S-∗-finite, there exist an s ∈ S and a finitely generated ideal J ⊆ I such that sI ⊆ J ∗ ⊆ I ∗ . Thus
J −1 ⊆ 1s I −1 , and consequently (J −1 )S ⊆ (I −1 )S . Since J is finitely generated, (J −1 )S = (JS )−1 . Moreover,
JS ⊆ IS . Thus (IS )−1 ⊆ (JS )−1 = (J −1 )S ⊆ (I −1 )S , and hence (I −1 )S = (IS )−1 .

Next, we give a relation between S-t-invertible ideals of D and t-invertible ideals of the localization
DS , where t- is the t-operation.

Proposition 3.11. Let S a multiplicative subset of an integral domain D and I a fractional ideal of D.

1. If I is an S-t-invertible ideal of D, then IS is a t-invertible ideal of DS .

2. Assume that for each t-finite type ideal J of D, (JS )t ∩D = Jt : s for some s ∈ S. Then I is S-t-invertible
if and only if IS is t-invertible and I is an S-∗-finite ideal of D.

Proof. (1). Since I is S-t-invertible, sD ⊆ (II −1 )t ⊆ D for some s ∈ S. This implies that DS = ((II −1 )t )S .
But ((II −1 )t )S ⊆ ((II −1 )S )t ; so DS = ((II −1 )S )t because ((II −1 )S )t ⊆ DS . Thus DS = (IS (I −1 )S )t , and hence
IS is a t-invertible ideal of DS .
(2). The "only if“ part follows from (1) and Lemma 3.7, since t is a finite type ∗-operation. For
the "if“ part, let s ∈ S and J a finitely generated subideal of I such that sI ⊆ Jt ⊆ It . This implies that
8 Moroccan Journal of Algebra and Geometry with Applications / E. Ahmed and T. Eddhay

(It )S = (Jt )S . First we show that JS is t-invertible. Since IS is t-invertible, DS = (IS (I −1 )S )t . Thus

DS = (IS (I −1 )S )t
⊆ ((It )S (I −1 )S )t
⊆ ((Jt )S (J −1 )S )t
= ((Jt J −1 )S )t
⊆ ((JJ −1 )S )t
⊆ DS .

This implies that ((JS (J −1 )S ))t = ((JJ −1 )S )t = DS , hence JS is t-invertible. Now, since JS is t-invertible,
(JS )−1 is of t-finite type; so there exists a finitely generated subideal F of J −1 such that (J −1 )S = (JS )−1 =
(FS )t . Thus DS = ((JJ −1 )S )t = ((FJ)S )t ; so D = ((FJ)S )t ∩ D. By hypothesis, D = (FJ)t : s′ for some s′ ∈ S,
which implies that s′ D ⊆ (FJ)t . But F ⊆ J −1 ⊆ 1s I −1 and J ⊆ I, thus ss′ D ⊆ (sFJ)t ⊆ (II −1 )t ⊆ D, and
hence I is an S-t-invertible ideal of D.

Proposition 3.12. Let I be a non zero ideal of an integral domain D. Let T be a multiplicatively closed
subset of D and S be a multiplicative subset of D.
T
1. If I is an S-t-ideal of D, then IT D is an S-t-ideal of D.
T
2. If IT is an S-t-ideal of DT , then IT D is an S-t-ideal of D.
T T
Proof. 1. Let I be a S-t-ideal of D. Then sIt ⊆ I for some s ∈ S. We show that s(IT D)t ⊆ IT D.
T
Let α ∈ (IT D)t , thus there exists a finitely generated fractional ideal F of D contained in
T
(IT D) such that α ∈ Fυ . Since F ⊆ FT ⊆ IT , then sα ∈ s(IT )t and there exists an r ∈ T such that
rF ⊆ I. Then rα ∈ rFυ = (rF)υ ⊆ It ⊆ 1s I. Hence srα ⊆ I, so sα ⊆ IT , then sα ⊆ IT D. Therefore
T
T T
s(IT D)t ⊆ IT D.
T T
2. Let IT be an S-t-ideal of DT . Then s(IT )t ⊆ IT for some s ∈ S. We show that s(IT D)t ⊆ IT D.
T
Let α ∈ (IT D)t , thus there exists a finitely generated fractional ideal J of D contained in
T T T
(IT D) such that α ∈ Jυ . Since J ⊆ JT ⊆ IT , then sα ∈ s(IT )t . Hence sα ∈ s(IT )t D ⊆ IT D.
T T
Therefore s(IT D)t ⊆ IT D.

Let D be an integral domain with quotient field K. Let ∗ be a star operation on D. Let f = a0 + · · · +
an X n ∈ K[X], Af will denote the D-submodule of K generated by {a0 , ..., an }. The set N∗ = {f ∈ D[X] |
f
(Af )∗ = D} is a multiplicatively closed subset of D[X]. We defined the ring D[X]N∗ by D[X]N∗ = { g |
f ∈ D[X], g ∈ N∗ }.
Proposition 3.13. Let ∗ be a ∗-operation on an integral domain D with quotient field K, S be a multiplica-
tive subset of D. Let I be an ideal of D. Then :
T
1. If I is S-∗-ideal, then there exist s ∈ S such that s(ID[X]N∗ K) ⊆ I.

2. If I is an S-υ-ideal (resp., S-t-ideal) of D, then I[X]Nυ is an S-υ-ideal (resp., S-t-ideal) of D[X]Nυ .

1. Let I be S-∗-ideal. Then sI ∗ ⊆ I, for some s ∈ S. We show that s(ID[X]N∗ K) ⊆ I. Let
T
Proof.
a ∈ (ID[X]N∗ K). Then ag = f for some g ∈ N∗ and f ∈ I[X]. Hence (a) = (aAg )∗ = (Aag )∗ =
T

(Af )∗ ⊆ I ∗ ⊆ 1s I. So sa ∈ I. Therefore s(ID[X]N∗ K) ⊆ I.

T

2. Suppose that I is a S-υ-ideal, then sIυ ⊆ I, for some s ∈ S. Then s(I[X]Nυ )υ = sIυ [X]Nυ by [9,
Proposition 2.2]. Hence s(I[X]Nυ )υ ⊆ I[X]Nυ . Therefore I[X]Nυ is a S-υ-ideal of D[X]Nυ . In the
some way we can show that I[X]Nυ is an S-t-ideal of D[X]Nυ .
 Extension of star-operation 9

Acknowledgments. The authors would like to thank the reviewer for many helpful comments
and suggestions which improved the paper in a significant way.

References
[1] D.F. Anderson, S. E. Baghdadi and S. E. Kabbaj, On the class group of A + XB[X] domains,
Advances in Commutaive Ring Theory, Lecture Notes in Pure and Appl. Math. Marcel Dekker
205 (1999) 73 − 85.

[2] M. Achraf and A. Hamed, S-prime ideals of a commutative ring, Beiträge zur Algebra und Ge-
ometrie, 61 (2020), 533 − 542.

[3] D.E. Dobbs, Ahmes Expansions of Formal Laurent Series and a Class of Nonarchimedean Integral
Domains, J. Algebra, 103 (1986), 193-201.

[4] R. Gilmer, Multiplicative Ideal theory, Maecel Dekker, New York, (1972).

[5] A. Hamed, On S-Mori domains, J. Algebra Appl., 17 (09), (2018)1850171.

[6] A. Hamed, The local S-class group of an integral domain, Rocky Mountain J. Math., 48(5) (2018),
1585 − 1605.

[7] A. Hamed, A new characterization of GCD domains of formal power series, St. Petersbg. Math.
J., 33 (2022), 879 − 889.

[8] A. Hamed and S. Hizem, Modules satisfying the S-Noetherian property and S-ACCR, Comm.
Algebra, 44 (2016), 1941 − 1951.

[9] B.G. Kang, Prüfer v-multiplication domains and the ring R[X]Nv , J. Algebra 123 (1989), 151−170.

View publication stats