Pith. sign in

REVIEW 5 major objections 4 minor 1 cited by

Multiple Rota-Baxter algebra and multiple Rota-Baxter modules

T0 review · 5 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-16 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper develops modules over multiple Rota-Baxter algebras, proving enough projectives and injectives and flatness of free and projective modules.

desk verdict Useful new definitions and solid free-module/projective-injective constructions in Sections 2–3, but the flatness program rests on a false theorem and the abstract overclaims a condition that is never proved. read the letter →

arxiv 2504.16643 v1 pith:X7IONJBA submitted 2025-04-23 math.RA

Jun He , Xiaosong Peng , Yi Zhang This is my paper · ORCID
classification math.RA MSC 17B3805E1616W9916S10
keywords multipleRota-Baxtermodulealgebrafreemodulesprojectiveinjectiveflattensorproducthomological
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper sets out to build module theory for multiple Rota-Baxter algebras, meaning associative algebras equipped with a family of Rota-Baxter operators $P_\omega$ indexed by a set $\Omega$. It defines left, right, and bimodules for these algebras, constructs free multiple Rota-Baxter modules, and shows that the category of left modules has enough projective and injective objects, which is what permits derived $\mathrm{Hom}$ functors. The flatness half introduces a tensor product adapted to the operators and asserts that every free and every projective multiple Rota-Baxter module is flat. A sympathetic reader would care because these are exactly the homological properties that allow representation theory and cohomology to be developed for operator algebras of this kind.

What carries the argument

The paper runs on two constructions. First, the free left $(R,P_\Omega)$-module on a set $X$ is realized as the quotient $M_R(X)/I_X$ of the free $\Omega$-operated module $M_R(X)=\bigcup_n M_n(X)$, where $M_1(X)=R\otimes kX$ and $M_n(X)=M_{n-1}(X)\oplus R\otimes k\Omega\otimes M_{n-1}(X)$, by the relations forcing the multiple Rota-Baxter identity. Second, the category of left $(R,P_\Omega)$-modules is identified with the category of left modules over the ring of multiple Rota-Baxter operators $R\mathrm{MRB}\langle Q_\Omega\rangle=k\langle R,k\langle Q_\Omega\rangle\rangle/I_{R,Q_\Omega}$, with $Q_\omega$ acting as the module operator $m_\omega$; injective modules are then built from $\mathrm{Hom}_{\mathbb{Z}}(R\mathrm{MRB}\langle Q_\Omega\rangle,G)$ for a divisible abelian group $G$. The tensor product is the quotient of the ordinary tensor by the relations $(mr,n)=(m,rn)$ and $(m_\omega(m),n)=(m,n_\omega(n))$.

What would settle it

Take one operator $P$ of weight $0$ on a polynomial ring and the singleton free module $M_R(\{x\})/I_{\{x\}}$. A direct normal-form computation in the quotient ring $R\mathrm{MRB}\langle Q\rangle$ will show whether the defining relations force $P(r)=Qr$ for $r\in R$; if they do not, the module-homomorphism property of the inclusion $R\to R\mathrm{MRB}\langle Q\rangle$ fails, and the isomorphism $M\otimes_{(R,P)} R\cong M$ used in Theorem 4.7 is not justified. This settles the flatness claim as stated.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On its own terms, the paper's central discovery is that left modules over a multiple Rota-Baxter algebra behave like modules over an ordinary ring for homological purposes. Free modules are projective because they satisfy the universal lifting property; injectivity is approached through the ring of multiple Rota-Baxter operators $R\mathrm{MRB}\langle Q_\Omega\rangle$, whose modules are the same as $(R,P_\Omega)$-modules, and a Baer-type criterion says a module is injective exactly when maps from left ideals of that ring extend. The tensor product is defined by imposing the operator compatibility $m_\omega(m)\otimes n = m\otimes n_\omega(n)$, and the paper proves that free modules, hence projective modules, are flat for this tensor product. It also characterizes when an ordinary free $R$-module becomes a restricted free multiple Rota-Baxter module: the operators act coefficientwise and the generators must lie in the module of constants $MC(M)=\{m : m_\omega(rm)=P_\omega(r)m\}$.

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is that the base algebra $R$ embeds into the auxiliary operator ring $R\mathrm{MRB}\langle Q_\Omega\rangle$ as a left $(R,P_\Omega)$-module, so that $P_\omega(r)$ is identified with $Q_\omega r$ inside that ring; the flatness proofs also rely on the comparison maps between a tensor product and the base module being well defined on the quotient by the Rota-Baxter relations.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • If the completeness theorem is right, $(R,P_\Omega)\mathrm{Mod}$ is an abelian category with enough projectives and injectives, so derived $\mathrm{Hom}$ functors can be computed by either projective or injective resolutions.
  • If free modules are flat, then $-\otimes_{(R,P_\Omega)} -$ can be resolved to define Tor-style derived functors by replacing a module with a free resolution.
  • The Hom-tensor adjunction gives a bridge between module maps and bilinear maps, so extension-of-scalars arguments work in the multiple operator setting.
  • Every multiple Rota-Baxter module is a quotient of a free one, so presentations by generators and relations are available in this category.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • The auxiliary ring $R\mathrm{MRB}\langle Q_\Omega\rangle$ suggests that homological dimensions of multiple Rota-Baxter modules could be studied as ordinary ring-theoretic dimensions over that quotient ring, a route the paper does not follow.
  • Since a single Rota-Baxter operator is the case where $\Omega$ has one element, the constructions should specialize to the single-operator theory; checking that flatness and the tensor product reproduce known single-operator facts would be a natural validation.
  • The coefficientwise action on free modules suggests a normal-form calculus: elements are finite sums of constants with coefficients in $R$, and operator computations reduce to applying $P_\omega$ to coefficients.
  • A testable extension is whether flatness is preserved under directed colimits of multiple Rota-Baxter modules, as it is for ordinary flat modules.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

5 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper develops a theory of multiple Rota-Baxter modules over multiple Rota-Baxter algebras. It defines left, right, and bimodule structures; constructs free Ω-operated modules and free multiple Rota-Baxter modules; introduces restricted free modules; defines projective and injective objects and claims enough projectives and injectives; and finally defines a tensor product and flat modules, claiming that free and projective modules are flat. The abstract also announces a necessary and sufficient condition for a free module to admit a free multiple Rota-Baxter module structure.

Significance. If the main claims were correct, the paper would provide a useful homological toolkit for multiple Rota-Baxter algebras, including projective and injective resolutions, an adjunction between tensor and Hom, and a flatness theory analogous to the single-operator case. The free-module construction and the categorical framework around Hom and tensor are potentially useful and follow standard templates. However, the central flatness results are not merely underproved: Theorem 4.7 is false, and Theorems 4.11 and 4.13 rest on that failure. In addition, the advertised necessary and sufficient condition of the abstract is never actually stated as an iff theorem. The paper therefore cannot be accepted in its present form.

major comments (5)
  1. [Abstract and Section 2.3] The abstract promises 'a necessary and sufficient condition for a free module to admit a free multiple Rota-Baxter module structure,' but no such condition is formulated in the body. Section 2.3 defines a 'restricted free left (R,P_Ω)-module' and proves in Theorem 2.16 that (~F(X), ~p_Ω) has the restricted universal property. This is a definition plus a construction, not a necessary and sufficient criterion, and no converse or characterization theorem appears. The advertised contribution is therefore missing.
  2. [Theorem 4.7] The proof of Theorem 4.7 uses an inclusion φ: (R,P_Ω) → (RMRB⟨Q_Ω⟩, P_Ω) claimed to be an injective left (R,P_Ω)-module homomorphism. This is false. On the source, the operators are P_ω, whereas on RMRB⟨Q_Ω⟩ the operator P_ω is left multiplication by Q_ω, by Proposition 3.7(b). A module homomorphism would require P_ω(r) = Q_ω r inside RMRB⟨Q_Ω⟩, and the relations in Definition 3.6 do not imply this. Consequently the asserted natural isomorphism M ⊗_{(R,P_Ω)} R ≅ M is unsupported. It is in fact false: take k a field, Ω = {ω}, λ_ω = 0, P_ω = 0, M = k^2 with m_ω(e) = f and m_ω(f) = 0. Then RMRB⟨Q_Ω⟩ ≅ k[Q]/(Q^2), and the tensor relation m_ω(m) ⊗ n = m ⊗ m_ω(n) forces f ⊗ 1 = 0, so M ⊗_{(R,P_Ω)} R ≅ k, not M.
  3. [Theorem 4.11] The proof of Theorem 4.11 asserts mutually inverse isomorphisms φ and φ' between S ⊗_{(R,P_Ω)} (MR({x})/I_{\{x\}}) and S. Well-definedness of these maps on the quotient is not verified: no check is given that φ vanishes on the ideal I_{\{x\}}, and no check is given that φ'(s) is independent of choices or compatible with the defining relations. The displayed 'apparently φ∘φ' = id' and 'φ'∘φ = id' do not constitute a proof for a quotient module. Since the free module on a singleton is not R, this theorem does not follow from Theorem 4.7 either. Thus the flatness of free modules lacks a valid foundation.
  4. [Theorem 4.13 and Section 4.2] Theorem 4.13, asserting that every projective left (R,P_Ω)-module is flat, depends on Theorem 4.11 and on Lemma 4.12. Because Theorem 4.11 is unsupported and Theorem 4.7 is false, the flatness claim for projective modules collapses. Moreover, the framework of flat modules itself relies on the tensor product of Definition 4.1; the failure of M ⊗_{(R,P_Ω)} R ≅ M in even the zero-weight, zero-operator case shows that the proposed tensor product does not have the basic unit property expected of a module tensor product.
  5. [Proposition 3.7] Proposition 3.7 asserts an isomorphism of categories between left (R,P_Ω)-modules and RMRB⟨Q_Ω⟩-modules, but the proof only establishes the object-level correspondence. It is not shown that a k-linear map commuting with each m_ω is exactly a map commuting with the action of the free-product generators, nor that the two constructions are inverses on morphisms. This gap matters because the Baer-criterion argument and the injective embedding in Theorem 3.10 transfer properties through this purported equivalence. The equivalence is plausible and likely repairable, but the proof as written is incomplete.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Throughout] There are numerous typos and OCR-style artifacts, including 'Rota-Baxte r' in the abstract, 'muitiple' in the keywords, 'n/greaterorequalslant1' in formulas, and inconsistent spacing in displayed equations. These should be corrected in any revision.
  2. [Proposition 2.6] In the long computation for Proposition 2.6(b), one intermediate term reads λ_β m_α(xy) where the context requires m_α(xm); this appears to be a typo, but it makes the verification harder to follow.
  3. [References] The paper relies on reference [22], an unpublished preprint by members of the same research group, for the definition and free objects of multiple Rota-Baxter algebras. Since this is load-bearing for the basic definitions, the status of [22] should be made explicit and, if possible, the needed results should be summarized or stated independently.
  4. [Theorem 4.7] The notation M ⊗_{RMRB⟨Q_Ω⟩} RMRB⟨Q_Ω⟩ is used before the tensor product over RMRB⟨Q_Ω⟩ has been introduced; the intended meaning is clear from Proposition 3.7, but a brief explanation would improve readability.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 2.0 of 10

No circular reduction; the only self-citation is a non-load-bearing lemma.

full rationale

The paper's central module-theoretic results are derived from explicit constructions rather than from fitted data or from the cited prior work. The free multiple Rota-Baxter module is built as a quotient of a free Omega-operated module (Theorem 2.14), the equivalence with modules over the operator ring RMRB<Q_Omega> is proved directly (Proposition 3.7), and the flatness claims are attempted by direct tensor-product computations (Theorems 4.7 and 4.11). The sole substantive self-citation is Proposition 2.6(a), where the paper says 'By [22], (R, P_I) is a multiple Rota-Baxter algebra' and [22] is an unpublished preprint coauthored by Y. Zhang. That lemma, however, is not used later in the projective, injective, or flatness arguments, so it is not load-bearing. The tensor-product identifications in Section 4 do rely on unsupported assertions, for example the claimed injective left (R,P_Omega)-module homomorphism in Theorem 4.7 and the unverified well-definedness of the maps in Theorem 4.11; those are correctness gaps rather than circular reductions, because they are not obtained by renaming an input as a conclusion. No fitted parameter is renamed as a prediction, and no uniqueness theorem is imported from the authors' own prior work to force a choice. Accordingly, the paper exhibits no significant circularity beyond a minor, non-load-bearing self-citation.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 4 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The paper introduces one new algebraic object, RMRB<Q_Omega>, and relies on standard homological facts. No free parameters are fitted. The two ad hoc assumptions are the false R-to-RMRB module map and the unproven singleton free module isomorphism, both of which break the flatness section.

assumptions (4)
  • domain assumption The category of left (R,P_Omega)-modules is isomorphic to the category of left modules over RMRB<Q_Omega>.
    Proposition 3.7 proves this equivalence, but it is a foundational step used to construct injectives and to justify tensor calculations. The ring RMRB<Q_Omega> is a new construction, and the equivalence depends on the universal property of the free product.
  • ad hoc to paper The inclusion R -> RMRB<Q_Omega> is an injective left (R,P_Omega)-module homomorphism.
    This is asserted in the proof of Theorem 4.7. It is false because the P_omega action on R is not carried to the Q_omega action on RMRB<Q_Omega>. No relation in the ideal forces P_omega(r) to equal Q_omega r.
  • ad hoc to paper The quotient module MR({x})/I_{x} admits the reciprocal maps of Theorem 4.11 as well-defined isomorphisms.
    Theorem 4.11 defines maps phi and phi' on the singleton free module and claims they are mutually inverse. The proof does not show that phi' is well-defined on quotient classes or that phi' composed with phi equals the identity; this is an unproven assumption.
  • standard math Standard homological facts: Zorn's lemma, Baer's criterion, and that every abelian group embeds in a divisible abelian group.
    These are used in Proposition 3.8 and Theorem 3.10 to construct enough injectives. They are standard background results and are cited to Rotman.
invented entities (1)
  • RMRB<Q_Omega>, the ring of multiple Rota-Baxter operators
    purpose: A quotient of the free product of R and a free algebra on symbols Q_omega, used to identify (R,P_Omega)-modules with ordinary modules and to build injective objects.
    This is a new algebraic object introduced by the paper. It has no external falsifiable handle; its utility is internal to the proofs. The construction itself is plausible, but the attempted use in Theorem 4.7 relies on the false inclusion assumption.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Multiple Rota-Baxter algebra and multiple Rota-Baxter modules." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/X7IONJBA

@misc{pith2026250416643,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Multiple Rota-Baxter algebra and multiple Rota-Baxter modules},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/X7IONJBA}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2504.16643}
}
abstract

In this paper, we develop the theory of multiple Rota-Baxter modules over multiple Rota-Baxter algebras. We introduce left, right, and bimodule structures and construct free $\Omega$-operated modules with mixable tensor establishing free commutative multiple Rota-Baxter modules. We provide a necessary and sufficient condition for a free module to admit a free multiple Rota-Baxter module structure. Furthermore, we define projective and injective multiple Rota-Baxter modules, showing that their category has enough projective and injective objects to support derived $\mathrm{Hom}$ functors. Finally, we introduce the tensor product of multiple Rota-Baxter algebras and define flat multiple Rota-Baxter modules, proving that both free and projective modules satisfy the flatness property.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 1 Pith paper

Reviewed papers in the Pith corpus that reference this work. Sorted by Pith novelty score. Full citation record

  1. Nijenhuis modules and the ring of Nijenhuis operators

    math.RT 2026-07 conditional novelty 5.0 of 10

    Nijenhuis modules are shown to be the same as modules over a constructed ring U_N(A), and the category is claimed to have enough projective, injective, and flat objects.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

36 extracted references · 33 canonical work pages · cited by 1 Pith paper

  1. [1]

    Aguiar, Pre-poisson algebras, Lett

    M. Aguiar, Pre-poisson algebras, Lett. Math. Phys. 54 (2000), 263-277. 2

    work page 2000

  2. [2]

    An and C

    H. An and C. Bai, From Rota-Baxter algebras to pre-Lie alg ebras, J. Phys. A 41 (2008). 2

    work page 2008

  3. [3]

    Andrew, L

    G. Andrew, L. Guo, W . Keigher and K. One, Baxter algebras a nd Hopf algebras, Trans. Amer . Math. Soc. 355 (2003), 4639-4656. 2

    2003

  4. [4]

    C. Bai, L. Guo and X. Ni, Nonablian generalized Lax pairs, the classical Y ang-Baxter equation and postLie algebra, Comm. Math. Phys. 297 (2010), 553-596. 2

    work page 2010

  5. [5]

    Bai, An introduction to pre-Lie algebras, ISTE, Londo n, 2020, 245-273

    C. Bai, An introduction to pre-Lie algebras, ISTE, Londo n, 2020, 245-273. 2

    work page 2020

  6. [6]

    C. Bai, L. Guo, Y . Sheng and R. Tang, Post-groups, (Lie-)B utcher groups and the Y ang-Baxter equation, Math. Ann. 388 (2024), 3127-3167. 2

    work page 2024

  7. [7]

    C. Bai, L. Guo, G. Liu and T. Ma, Rota-Baxter Lie bialgebra s, classical Y ang-Baxter equations and special L-dendriform bialgebras, Algebr . Represent. Theory27 (2024), 1347-1372. 2

    work page 2024

  8. [8]

    Baxter, An analytic problem whose solution follows fr om a simple algebraic identity, Pacific J

    G. Baxter, An analytic problem whose solution follows fr om a simple algebraic identity, Pacific J. Math. 10 (1960), 731-742. 1

    1960

Show all 36 references
  1. [9]

    V . G. Bardakov and V . Y . Gubarev, Rota-Baxter groups, skew left braces, and the Y ang-Baxter equation, J. Algebra 596 (2022), 328-351. 2

    2022

  2. [10]

    Bruned, M

    Y . Bruned, M. Hairer and L. Zambotti, Algebraic renorma lisation of regularity structures, Invent. Math. 215 (2019), 1039-1156. 2

    2019

  3. [11]

    Connes and D

    A. Connes and D. Kreimer, Renormalization in quantum fie ld theory and the Riemann-Hilbert problem. I. The Hopf algebra structure of graphs and the main theorem, Comm. Math. Phys. 210 (2000), 249-273. 2

    2000

  4. [12]

    Das, Twisted Rota-Baxter operators and Reynolds ope rators on Lie algebras and NS-Lie algebras, J

    A. Das, Twisted Rota-Baxter operators and Reynolds ope rators on Lie algebras and NS-Lie algebras, J. Math. Phys. 62 (2021). 2

    2021

  5. [13]

    Ebrahimi-Fard and L

    K. Ebrahimi-Fard and L. Guo, Rota-Baxter algebras and d endriform algebras, J. Pure and Appl. Algebra 212 (2006), 320-339. 2

    2006

  6. [14]

    Foissy, Algebraic structures on typed decorated roo ted trees, SIGMA Symmetry Integrability Geom

    L. Foissy, Algebraic structures on typed decorated roo ted trees, SIGMA Symmetry Integrability Geom. Methods Appl. 17 (2021). 2

    2021

  7. [15]

    X. Gao, L. Guo, Z. Han and Y . Zhang, Rota-Baxter operator s, di fferential operators, pre-and Novikov structures on groups and Lie algebras, arXiv:2408.06096. 2

    arXiv

  8. [16]

    Gubarev and P

    V . Gubarev and P . Kolesnikov, Gr¨ obner-Shirshov basisof the universal enveloping Rota-Baxter algebra of a Lie algebra, J. Lie Theory 27 (2017), 887-905. 2

    2017

  9. [17]

    Guo, An introduction to Rota-Baxter algebra

    L. Guo, An introduction to Rota-Baxter algebra. Somerv ille: International Press, 2012. 1, 2, 6 26 JUN HE, XIAO-SONG PENG, AND YI ZHANG

    2012

  10. [18]

    Guo, Operated semigroups, Motzkin paths and rooted t rees

    L. Guo, Operated semigroups, Motzkin paths and rooted t rees. J. Algebraic Combin 29 (2009), 35-62. 6

    2009

  11. [19]

    Guo and Z

    L. Guo and Z. Lin, Representations and modules of Rota-B axter algebras, Asian J. Math. 25 (2021), 841-870. 2

    2021

  12. [20]

    L. Guo, H. Lang and Y . Sheng, Integration and geometriza tion of Rota-Baxter Lie algebras, Adv. Math. 387 (2021). 2

    2021

  13. [21]

    Jiang, Y , Sheng and C

    J. Jiang, Y , Sheng and C. Zhu, Lie theory and cohomology o f relative Rota-Baxter operators, J. Lond. Math. Soc. (2) 109 (2024). 2

    2024

  14. [22]

    K. Jiao, F. Wang, K. Zhang and Y . Zhang, Multiple Rota-Ba xter algebras and the construction of their free objects. prepare. 3, 5

  15. [23]

    Lang and Y

    H. Lang and Y . Sheng, Factorizable Lie bialgebras, quad ratic Rota-Baxter Lie algebras and Rota-Baxter Lie bialgebras, Comm. Math. Phys. 397 (2023), 763-791. 2

    2023

  16. [24]

    Lin and L

    Z. Lin and L. Qiao, Representations of the Laurent serie s Rota-Baxter algebras and regular-singular decompositions. J. Pure Appl. Algebra 228 (2024). 2, 14

    2024

  17. [25]

    Magri, A simple model of the integrable Hamiltonian e quation, J

    F. Magri, A simple model of the integrable Hamiltonian e quation, J. Math. Phys. 19 (1978), 1156-1162. 2

    1978

  18. [26]

    L. Qiao, X. Gao and L. Guo. Rota-Baxter modules toward de rived functors. Algebr . Represent. Theory 22 (2019), 321-343. 2, 3

    2019

  19. [27]

    Qiao and J

    L. Qiao and J. Pei, Representations of polynomial Rota- Baxter algebras, J. Pure Appl. Algebra 222 (2018), 1738-1757. 2

    2018

  20. [28]

    J. J. Rotman, An introduction to homological algebra. N ew Y ork: Springer, 2009.16, 17, 18

    2009

  21. [29]

    M. A. Semenov-Tyan-Shansky, What is a classical r-matrix? Funct. Ana. Appl. 17 (1983), 259-272. 2

    1983

  22. [30]

    Sheng, R

    Y . Sheng, R. Tang and F. Wagemann, From relative Rota-Ba xter operators and relative averaging opera- tors on Lie algebras to relative Rota-Baxter operators on Le ibniz algebras: a uniform approach, F . Math. Res. Lett. 31 (2024), 1551-1594. 2

    2024

  23. [31]

    R. Tang, C. Bai, L. Guo and Y . Sheng, Deformations and the ir controlling cohomologies of O-operators, Comm. Math. Phys. 368 (2019), 665-700. 2

    2019

  24. [32]

    Tang and N

    X. Tang and N. Liu, Modules of Non-unital Polynomial Rot a-Baxter Algebras, Algebr . Represent. Theory 26 (2023), 1295-1318. 2

    2023

  25. [33]

    Weibel, An Introduction to Homological Algebra, Cam bridge university press, 1994.11

    C. Weibel, An Introduction to Homological Algebra, Cam bridge university press, 1994.11. 14

    1994

  26. [34]

    Zhang, X

    Y . Zhang, X. Gao and L. Guo, Matching Rota-Baxter algebras, matching dendriform algebras and match- ing pre-Lie algebras, J.Algebra 552 (2020), 134-170. 2, 3

    2020

  27. [35]

    Zheng, L

    H. Zheng, L. Guo and L.Y . Zhang, Rota-Baxter paired modu les and their constructions from Hopf alge- bras, J. Algebra 559 (2020), 601-624. 2

    2020

  28. [36]

    Zheng and L

    H. Zheng and L. Liu, Matching Rota-Baxter modules and ma tching O-operators of associative algebras, J. Algebra Appl. 24 (2025). 3 School of Mathematics and Statistics, N anjing University of Information Science & T echnology, N anjing, Jiangsu 210044, P . R. China Email addre...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 16, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.