A note on additive commutator groups in certain algebras

Nguyen Thi Thai Ha; Pham Duy Vinh; Tran Nam Son

REVIEW 4 major objections 4 minor 27 references

A note on additive commutator groups in certain algebras

T0 review · 4 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read This paper proves that matrix rings over division rings decompose as center plus additive commutators under algebraic or dimension conditions, and applies this to quaternion, semisimple, C*-algebras and twisted group algebras.

desk verdict A salvageable short note: the positive-characteristic matrix decomposition and twisted-group-algebra corollary are the genuine contributions, but the characteristic-zero core is an unstated self-citation and Theorem 2.8 is unsupported as written. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.13303 v1 pith:JGILVFHP submitted 2025-05-19 math.RA

Nguyen Thi Thai Ha , Tran Nam Son , Pham Duy Vinh This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.RA MSC 12E1515B3316K4016S5020C07

keywords DivisionringAdditivecommutatorsubgroupTwistedgroupalgebraMatrixSemisimpleC*-algebraPolynomialimage

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

Every associative algebra has a commutative core, its center, and a part generated by additive commutators $ab-ba$. This paper asks when the whole algebra is exactly the sum of those two parts, written $A=Z(A)+[A,A]$. For matrix rings over division rings it gives two sufficient conditions: the division ring is algebraic in characteristic zero, or it is finite-dimensional over its center in characteristic $p>0$ with $p$ dividing neither $\sqrt{\dim_F D}$ nor the matrix size. The same center-plus-commutator decomposition is then obtained for matrix rings over generalized quaternion algebras in characteristic zero, for finite-dimensional semisimple algebras in characteristic zero, and for finite-dimensional C*-algebras. The paper also proves a commutativity theorem for twisted group algebras of locally finite groups over characteristic zero: if every additive commutator is central, the algebra is commutative.

What carries the argument

The central object is the additive commutator subgroup $[A,A]$, the additive subgroup generated by all elements of the form $ab-ba$, and the identity at stake is $A=Z(A)+[A,A]$. The argument's engine is the reduction of the matrix case to the base case $n=1$: once $D=Z(D)+[D,D]$ is known, cited results pass the decomposition to $M_n(D)$, and the trace decomposition of a matrix into a scalar part and a traceless part handles the remainder. In positive characteristic the condition $p\nmid n$ is exactly what permits division by $n$ in the trace formula; in characteristic zero no such obstruction appears. The twisted group algebra result reduces a locally finite group to its finitely generated subgroups, each finite, so the finite-dimensional semisimple decomposition applies. The quaternion and semisimple corollaries ride on the classification facts that a generalized quaternion algebra is either a division ring or $M_2(F)$, and that finite-dimensional semisimple algebras are products of matrix algebras over division rings.

What would settle it

Take an algebraic division ring $D$ of characteristic zero that is infinite-dimensional over its center and test whether $D=Z(D)+[D,D]$ for $n=1$: any element outside $Z(D)+[D,D]$ refutes Theorem 2.1(i). Since the proof of the characteristic-zero case is not given here, reconstructing or verifying the quoted lemma on such a $D$ is the direct way to settle the claim; the paper's own discussion shows the analogous positive-characteristic failure when $p$ divides $\sqrt{\dim_F D}$.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is Theorem 2.1: if $D$ is a division ring with center $F$ and $n$ is positive, then $M_n(D)=Z(M_n(D))+[M_n(D),M_n(D)]$ whenever (i) $D$ is algebraic over $F$ in characteristic zero, or (ii) the characteristic of $F$ is $p>0$, $D$ is finite-dimensional over $F$, and $p$ divides neither $\sqrt{\dim_F D}$ nor $n$. In words, every matrix is a scalar matrix with entries in the center plus a finite sum of additive commutators. The authors show this structural fact propagates: for a generalized quaternion algebra $A$ over a characteristic zero field, every matrix ring $M_n(A)$ satisfies the same equality; and finite-dimensional semisimple algebras over characteristic zero, as well as finite-dimensional C*-algebras, satisfy $A=Z(A)+[A,A]$. For the twisted group algebra of a locally finite group over a characteristic zero field, the condition that all additive commutators lie in the center forces the algebra to be commutative. The same idea is carried from commutators to arbitrary noncommutative polynomials, yielding that under the hypotheses of Theorem 2.1 the linear span of the image of any noncommutative polynomial that is neither an identity nor central already contains the commutator subspace.

Load-bearing premise

Both halves of the main theorem rest on cited results rather than proofs reproduced in this note, and the characteristic-zero half rests on a single quoted lemma about algebraic division rings; if that lemma gives way, the central decomposition and most of its corollaries collapse.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Every matrix over an algebraic division ring in characteristic zero is a central scalar block plus a finite sum of additive commutators, with no further hypotheses on the matrix size.
The same decomposition holds in every matrix size over a generalized quaternion algebra over a characteristic zero field.
Every finite-dimensional semisimple algebra over a characteristic zero field, and every finite-dimensional C*-algebra, can be written as center plus additive-commutator subgroup.
For twisted group algebras of locally finite groups over characteristic zero, centrality of all additive commutators implies commutativity of the whole algebra.
Under the same division-ring hypotheses, the linear span of the image of any noncommutative polynomial that is neither an identity nor central contains the whole commutator subspace; under a further condition the division algebra is generated by such an image.

Reading between the lines

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

If the quoted characteristic-zero lemma is sound, the center-plus-commutator decomposition should extend from matrix rings over division rings to algebraic algebras over characteristic zero fields, a case the paper does not state.
The positive-characteristic obstruction $p\nmid n$ is a concrete boundary; a natural next test is whether $M_n(D)$ fails to decompose when $p\mid n$ but $D$ still satisfies $D=Z(D)+[D,D]$.
The twisted group algebra theorem suggests a sharpened general principle: in any semisimple algebra over a characteristic zero field, if all additive commutators are central then the algebra is commutative; the paper proves this for algebras built from locally finite groups.
The polynomial-image results hint that commutators are not special here: replacing $[A,A]$ by the linear span of any sufficiently noncommutative polynomial image should preserve the decomposition, so the same structural phenomenon may hold for a whole family of subspaces.

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.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Read it. The genuinely new material is Theorem 2.1(ii) — the positive-characteristic decomposition M_n(D)=Z(M_n(D))+[M_n(D),M_n(D)] when p divides neither sqrt(dim_F D) nor n — and Corollary 2.5, the twisted-group-algebra version of the commutativity theorem. Both are useful, and part (ii) contains a real trace argument rather than a citation. That is the part worth keeping.

The characteristic-zero branch is another story. Theorem 2.1(i) simply quotes [14, Lemma 5.8], a lemma from the corresponding author's previous paper, with no statement and no proof. Everything else in characteristic zero — quaternion algebras, semisimple algebras, the C*-algebra remark, and Corollary 2.5 — leans on that unexamined lemma. It may be correct, but the paper as submitted gives a reader no way to check it. The citation pattern is heavy at exactly the point where the load is greatest.

Several smaller problems are easy to fix. Corollary 2.3's proof cites Theorem 2.7, an unproved later theorem about polynomial images, when the needed case is a direct application of Theorem 2.1; the proof should be reorganized. Theorem 2.7 itself has no proof, which would be acceptable for a throwaway lemma but not for a theorem used downstream. The printed definition of g_n is garbled enough to make Lemma 2.9 unverifiable as typeset.

Theorem 2.8 is the real problem. The statement claims that an arbitrary finite-dimensional division F-algebra is generated by the image of a noncommutative polynomial. The proof applies Lemmas 2.10 and 2.12, and both of those require F to be the center of D. The theorem has no such assumption. As stated, Theorem 2.8 is not supported; it needs either a centrality hypothesis or a different proof. The introduction also advertises the theorem as about division rings finite-dimensional over their center, which is not what the theorem says.

Bottom line: the positive-characteristic decomposition and the twisted group algebra corollary are real, salvageable results. The paper deserves a referee, because the kernel is genuine, but it should not be accepted in this form. I would not cite it until the [14] lemma is either stated and verified or proved, and until Theorem 2.8 is repaired or removed.

Referee Report

4 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper studies the additive decomposition A = Z(A) + [A,A] for unital associative algebras, where [A,A] is the additive subgroup generated by commutators. The main results are: Theorem 2.1 gives this decomposition for matrix rings M_n(D) when D is an algebraic division ring of characteristic zero, or when D is finite-dimensional over its center F in positive characteristic with p not dividing either n or √dim_F D. Corollaries are drawn for generalized quaternion algebras, finite-dimensional semisimple algebras, finite-dimensional C*-algebras, and twisted group algebras of locally finite groups. A second group of results concerns linear spans of images of noncommutative polynomials: Theorem 2.7 claims a decomposition M_n(D) = Z(M_n(D)) + span f(M_n(D)) under the hypotheses of Theorem 2.1, and Theorems 2.8 and 2.13 claim that, under an algebraic-degree condition, the image of a noncommutative polynomial generates a division algebra. The paper relies heavily on external results, including a key lemma from the corresponding author's previous work.

Significance. If Theorem 2.1(i) is correct, the paper gives a clean unified statement that matrix rings over algebraic division rings in characteristic zero decompose as center plus additive commutators, and the positive-characteristic condition involving √dim_F D is a useful quantitative refinement. The applications to quaternion algebras and to twisted group algebras are appealing, and the final theorem on generation by images of noncommutative polynomials is a natural analogue of recent results. The paper is also honest in flagging the open boundary of the non-algebraic case. However, the central characteristic-zero statement is not proved in this paper; it is quoted from a lemma in [14] that is neither stated nor reproduced. Several later results depend on an omitted proof or on missing centrality hypotheses, so the significance in its present form is conditional on repairs that could be made in a revision.

major comments (4)

[§2, Theorem 2.1(i)] The proof of Theorem 2.1(i) is a single sentence: 'Part (i) follows directly from [14, Lemma 5.8].' That lemma is not stated in the paper, and its hypotheses are not reproduced. Since every characteristic-zero application in the paper — Corollaries 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and the use of Corollary 2.3 in Corollary 2.5 — rests on this quotation, the keystone of the paper is not verifiable from the manuscript alone. The revision should either state [14, Lemma 5.8] in full and explain why it applies to arbitrary algebraic division rings of characteristic zero for every n, or prove Theorem 2.1(i) directly.
[§2, Corollary 2.3 proof] The proof of Corollary 2.3 invokes Theorem 2.7 to obtain the decomposition for each matrix algebra M_{n_i}(D_i). However, Theorem 2.7 is stated later and its proof is omitted ('we omit the details'). This is both an ordering problem and a logical gap: an unproved result cannot support a corollary. The same conclusion for Corollary 2.3 is already available from Theorem 2.1(i), since each D_i is finite-dimensional over its center and hence algebraic in characteristic zero; the proof should be reorganized accordingly.
[§2, Theorem 2.7] Theorem 2.7 is a main stated theorem, yet its proof is entirely omitted. The sentence preceding it says 'With Lemmas 2.6 and 2.1 in place, we are now fully equipped' and the proof is deferred with 'we omit the details.' A stated theorem of this level, which is also used in Corollary 2.3, needs a proof. Additionally, the reference should be to Theorem 2.1, not 'Lemma 2.1.'
[§2, Theorems 2.8 and 2.13; Lemmas 2.10 and 2.12] Theorems 2.8 and 2.13 are false as stated because they omit the condition that F is the center of D. Lemma 2.10 relies on Amitsur's theorem for central simple algebras: the equality I(R)=I(M_n(F)) requires F=Z(D). If F is a proper subfield of Z(D), counterexamples exist; for instance, if D has degree 2 over its center C and [C:F]=4, then dim_F D=16 so n=4, but the standard identity S_4 vanishes on D and on M_2(C) while it does not vanish on M_4(F), contradicting I(D)=I(M_4(F)). Lemma 2.12 similarly requires F=Z(D): a maximal subfield K containing a proper subfield F can have dim_F K strictly larger than n=√dim_F D. Theorems 2.8 and 2.13 must include the hypothesis that D is central over F, and Lemmas 2.10 and 2.12 must be stated with that hypothesis.

minor comments (4)

[§1, paragraph 1] The phrase 'over a fieldFof of characteristic zero' contains a duplicated word 'of'; it should read 'over a field F of characteristic zero.'
[§2, Theorem 2.8 proof] In the final paragraph of the proof of Theorem 2.8, the text says 'both f(a_1,...,a_m) and its conjugate belong to p(D)'; the symbol 'p(D)' should be 'f(D).'
[§2, Corollary 2.5 proof] The notation for twisted group algebras is inconsistent: the paper uses 'F τG' and 'F τH' without spacing or a clear multiplication symbol, which makes formulas such as 'FτH=Z(FτH)+[FτH,FτH]' harder to read. A consistent notation such as F^τ G would improve clarity.
[§2, Theorem 2.13 proof] The case 'If F is finite, then D is also finite-dimensional over a finite field, so the result is immediate' is not, by itself, evident: a nonzero polynomial can vanish identically on a finite field (e.g., x^q - x), so the nonzero-polynomial hypothesis alone does not guarantee that f(D) generates D. The argument for the finite-field case should be expanded or the hypothesis should be adjusted.

Circularity Check

1 steps flagged · score 4.0 of 10

Theorem 2.1(i) and its characteristic-zero corollaries are imported verbatim from a prior self-cited lemma [14, Lemma 5.8], making the paper's central char-zero decomposition depend on an unverified self-citation.

self citation load bearing [Section 2, opening paragraph and proof of Theorem 2.1(i)]
"As established in [14, Lemma 5.8], if D is an algebraic division ring of characteristic zero and n is a positive integer, then the matrix algebra M_n(D) admits the decomposition M_n(D) = Z(M_n(D)) + [M_n(D), M_n(D)]. ... Proof. Part (i) follows directly from [14, Lemma 5.8]."

Theorem 2.1(i) is a central claim of the paper, and its entire proof is a citation to [14, Lemma 5.8]. Reference [14] is a paper co-authored by the corresponding author of the present work, and the lemma is neither stated in full, nor proved, nor checked here. The conclusion of the cited lemma is exactly the conclusion of Theorem 2.1(i), so the derivation of that part reduces to a self-citation rather than an independent argument. All characteristic-zero applications (Corollaries 2.2, 2.3, 2.4, and the twisted-group-algebra step in Corollary 2.5) inherit this dependence. This is load-bearing self-citation, not definitional circularity, because if [14, Lemma 5.8] is true, the theorem follows.

full rationale

The main circularity concern is the characteristic-zero branch. Theorem 2.1(i) is not proved in this paper; it is quoted from [14, Lemma 5.8], a prior paper by the same research group (T. N. Son is an author of both works). The lemma is not reproduced, so the reader cannot verify its precise hypotheses, and the paper's char-zero decomposition program rests on that self-citation. The positive-characteristic branch (Theorem 2.1(ii)) is different: it is argued from Chuang-Lee's results [11, Theorem 5, Theorems 1 and 3, Lemma 2] plus a trace argument, which are independent external results. The applications to quaternion algebras, semisimple algebras, C*-algebras, and twisted group algebras are valid deductions once Theorem 2.1 is granted. There are also non-circular presentation gaps: Corollary 2.3 invokes Theorem 2.7, whose proof is omitted, and the text says 'Lemma 2.1' where Theorem 2.1 is meant, and the non-algebraic counterexample boundary is explicitly left unverified. These are correctness/rigor issues, not circularity. Overall, because the paper contains an independent positive-characteristic proof and the char-zero case is a self-contained citation to prior work by the same authors, the appropriate score is 4: some self-citation is load-bearing, but the central claim still has independent content outside the self-cited lemma.

Assumptions & free parameters 0 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

No free parameters or invented entities. The paper rests on standard structural theorems plus one unstated centrality assumption in Theorems 2.8/2.13.

assumptions (5)

standard math Wedderburn-Artin theorem: finite-dimensional semisimple algebras are finite products of matrix algebras over division rings.
Used in Corollary 2.3 to reduce the semisimple case to matrix algebras over division rings.
domain assumption [14, Lemma 5.8]: M_n(D) = Z(M_n(D)) + [M_n(D), M_n(D)] for algebraic division rings of characteristic zero.
This is the self-cited prior result that carries Theorem 2.1(i) and the main characteristic-zero cases.
standard math [11, Theorem 5]: D = F + [D,D] for division rings finite-dimensional over their center under the stated divisibility conditions.
Basis for the positive-characteristic part of Theorem 2.1(ii).
standard math [25, Theorem 4.2]: twisted group algebras of finite groups are semisimple when the field characteristic does not divide the group order.
Used in Corollary 2.5 to reduce to the semisimple decomposition.
ad hoc to paper Centrality assumption missing from Theorems 2.8 and 2.13: D must be a central division F-algebra (F equal to the center) for Lemmas 2.10 and 2.12 to be valid.
Without this, Lemma 2.10 is false (a commutative field extension is a counterexample) and Theorem 2.8 fails for f=[x,y] on a field.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of A note on additive commutator groups in certain algebras." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/JGILVFHP

@misc{pith2026250513303,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: A note on additive commutator groups in certain algebras},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/JGILVFHP}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.13303}
}

abstract

We study whether a unital associative algebra $ A $ over a field admits a decomposition of the form $A = Z(A) + [A,A]$ where $ Z(A) $ is the center of $ A $ and $ [A,A] $ denotes the additive subgroup of $A$ generated by all additive commutators of $A$. Among our main considerations are the cases in which $A$ is the matrix ring over a division ring, a generalized quaternion algebra, or a semisimple finite-dimensional algebra. We also discuss some applications that do not necessarily require the decomposition, such as the case where $ A $ is the twisted group algebra of a locally finite group over a field of characteristic zero: if all additive commutators of $A$ are central, then $ A $ must be commutative.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

27 extracted references · 27 canonical work pages

[14]

T. H. Dung, B. X. Hai, T. N. Son, Reversibility in matrix rings and group algebras,Period. Math. Hungar.90(2024), 203-216

work page 2024
[1]

Aaghabali, S

M. Aaghabali, S. Akbari, M. H. Bien, Division algebras with left algebraic commutators,Algebr. Rep- resent. Theory21(4) (2018), 807-816

work page 2018
[2]

A. A. Albert and B. Muckenhoupt, On matrices of trace zero,Michigan Math. J.4(1957), 1-3

work page 1957
[3]

S. A. Amitsur, Rational identities and applications to algebra and geometry,J. Algebra3(1966), 304–359

work page 1966
[4]

Ancochea, On semi-automorphisms of division algebras,Ann

G. Ancochea, On semi-automorphisms of division algebras,Ann. Math.48(1947), 147-153

work page 1947
[5]

Archbold, L

R. Archbold, L. Robert, and A. Tikuisis, The Dixmier property and tracial states for C*-algebras,J. Funct. Anal.273(2017), 2655–2718

work page 2017
[6]

R. J. Archbold, I. Gogic, and L. Robert, Local variants of the Dixmier property and weak centrality for C*-algebras,Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN(2023), 1483–1513

work page 2023
[7]

Asano, On invariant subspaces of division algebras,K¯ odai Math

S. Asano, On invariant subspaces of division algebras,K¯ odai Math. Sem. Rep.18(1966), 322–334

work page 1966

Show all 27 references

[8]

K. I. Beidar, W. S. Martindale, A. V. Mikhalev,Rings with Generalized Identities, Monographs and Textbooks in Pure and Applied Mathematics, Marcel Dekker, Inc., 1996

1996
[9]

Breˇ sar, E

M. Breˇ sar, E. Kissin, and V. S. Shulman, Lie ideals: from pure algebra to C*-algebras,J. Reine Angew. Math.623(2008), 73–121

2008
[10]

Breˇ sar, Commutators and images of noncommutative polynomials.Adv

M. Breˇ sar, Commutators and images of noncommutative polynomials.Adv. Math.374(2020), 107346, 21 pp

2020
[11]

C. L. Chuang, P. H. Lee, Idempotents in simple rings,J. Algebra56(1979), 510-515

1979
[12]

K. R. Davidson,C*-Algebras by Example, Fields Institute Monographs, vol.6, American Mathematical Society, Providence, RI, 1996

1996
[13]

Dixmier, Les anneaux d’op´ erateurs de classe finie,Ann

J. Dixmier, Les anneaux d’op´ erateurs de classe finie,Ann. Sci.´Ec. Norm. Sup´ er.(3)66(1949), 209–261

1949
[15]

T. Y. Lam,A first course in noncommutative rings, GTM 131, 2-nd ed., Springer, 1991

1991
[16]

Algebra Appl.22, No

T-K Lee and J-H Lin, Values of polynomials on centrally closed prime algebras,J. Algebra Appl.22, No. 11(2023), 2350246 (16 pages)

2023
[17]

Mesyan, Commutator rings,Bull

Z. Mesyan, Commutator rings,Bull. Austral. Math. Soc.74(2006), 279-288

2006
[18]

P. W. Ng and L. Robert, Sums of commutators in pure C*-algebras,Munster J. Math.9(2016), 121–154

2016
[19]

B. X. Hai, T. H. Dung, M. H. Bien, Almost subnormal subgroups in division rings with generalized algebraic rational identities,J. Algebra Appl.21(2022), no. 4, Paper No. 2250075, 12 pp

2022
[20]

Hazrat, Wedderburn’s factorization theorem application to reduced K-theory,Proc

R. Hazrat, Wedderburn’s factorization theorem application to reduced K-theory,Proc. Am. Math. Soc. 130(2) (2002), 311-314

2002
[21]

Hazrat, A note on multiplicative commutators of division rings,J

R. Hazrat, A note on multiplicative commutators of division rings,J. Algebra Appl.18, No. 2 (2019) 1950031 (2 pages). A NOTE ON ADDITIVE COMMUTATOR GROUPS IN CERTAIN ALGEBRAS 11

2019
[22]

I. N. Herstein, A note on a commutativity theorem,Kodai Math. Sem. Rep.5(1953), 119-120

1953
[23]

I. N. Herstein, A. Ramer, A note on division algebras,Canadian J. Math.24(1972), 734–736

1972
[24]

Thiel, Lie ideals in properly infinite C*-algebras, arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.16087, 2024

H. Thiel, Lie ideals in properly infinite C*-algebras, arXiv preprint arXiv:2412.16087, 2024

2024 arXiv
[25]

D. S. Passman,Infinite Crossed Products, vol.135, New York: Academic Press, 1989

1989
[26]

Pop, Finite sums of commutators,Proc

C. Pop, Finite sums of commutators,Proc. Amer. Math. Soc.130(2002), 3039–3041

2002
[27]

Voight,Quaternion algebras, Graduate Texts in Mathematics288, Springer, 2021

J. Voight,Quaternion algebras, Graduate Texts in Mathematics288, Springer, 2021

2021

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [14]

T. H. Dung, B. X. Hai, T. N. Son, Reversibility in matrix rings and group algebras,Period. Math. Hungar.90(2024), 203-216

work page 2024

[2] [1]

Aaghabali, S

M. Aaghabali, S. Akbari, M. H. Bien, Division algebras with left algebraic commutators,Algebr. Rep- resent. Theory21(4) (2018), 807-816

work page 2018

[3] [2]

A. A. Albert and B. Muckenhoupt, On matrices of trace zero,Michigan Math. J.4(1957), 1-3

work page 1957

[4] [3]

S. A. Amitsur, Rational identities and applications to algebra and geometry,J. Algebra3(1966), 304–359

work page 1966

[5] [4]

Ancochea, On semi-automorphisms of division algebras,Ann

G. Ancochea, On semi-automorphisms of division algebras,Ann. Math.48(1947), 147-153

work page 1947

[6] [5]

Archbold, L

R. Archbold, L. Robert, and A. Tikuisis, The Dixmier property and tracial states for C*-algebras,J. Funct. Anal.273(2017), 2655–2718

work page 2017

[7] [6]

R. J. Archbold, I. Gogic, and L. Robert, Local variants of the Dixmier property and weak centrality for C*-algebras,Int. Math. Res. Not. IMRN(2023), 1483–1513

work page 2023

[8] [7]

Asano, On invariant subspaces of division algebras,K¯ odai Math

S. Asano, On invariant subspaces of division algebras,K¯ odai Math. Sem. Rep.18(1966), 322–334

work page 1966