REGULAR -SO-RINGS

DR. K. SIVA PRASAD1 , M. SIVA MALA2 & K. NAGA KOTESWARA

RAO3

Abstract. A -so-ring is a structure possessing a natural partial ordering, an infinitary

partial addition and a ternary multiplication, subject to a set of axioms. The partial functions under disjoint-domain sums and functional composition is a -so-ring. In this paper
we introduce the notions of irreducible, strongly irreducible ideals and a regular -so-ring
and we obtain the characteristics of them.
Keywords. Irreducible ideal, strongly irreducible ideal, regular -so-ring and strongly regular -so-ring.

Introduction
Partially defined infinitary operations occur in the contexts ranging from integration theory to programming language semantics. The general cardinal algebras studied by Tarski in
1949, Housdorff topological commutative groups studied by Bourbaki in 1966, -structures
studied by Higgs in 1980, sum ordered partial monoids & sum ordered partial semirings studied by Arbib, Manes, Benson[3],[7] and Streenstrup[18] are some of the algebraic structures
of the above type.
M. Murali Krishna Rao[11] in 1995 introduced the notion of a -semiring as a generalization of semirings and -rings, and extended many fundamental results of semirings and
-rings to -semirings. In [12] and [13] we introduced the notion of -so-ring, obtained a
necessary and sufficient condition for the quotient R/ to be a /-so-ring, where (, ) is a
congruence relation on (R, ) and (, )-representation of -so-rings. In [14], [15], [16] and
1

2000 Mathematics Subject Classification. 16Y60.

Department of Mathematics, Acharya Nagarjuna University, Nagarjuna Nagar-522510,

Guntur(D.t), Andhra Pradesh, INDIA, Email: siv a235pr asad@y ahoo.co.in

2

Department of Mathematics, V.R. Siddhartha Engineering College, Kanuru, Vijayawada-520007, Andhra

Pradesh, INDIA, Email: sivamala aug 9@y ahoo.co.in

3

Assistant Professor in Maths, Department of Science & Humanities, Nannapaneni Venkata Rao College of

Engineering & Technology, Tenali-522201, Andhra Pradesh, INDIA,

Email: nagakoteswararao.k @g mail.com
.
1

[17], we intoduced the notions of an ideal, a prime ideal and a semiprime ideal in a -so-ring
R and obtained many characteristics of them in R. As a continuation, in this paper we
introduce the notions of irreducible and strongly irreducible ideals and a regular -so-ring
and we obtain the characteristics of them.
1. Preliminaries
In this section we collect important definitions and results from [7], [12], [14],[15], [16],
[17] and [18].
Definition 1.1. [7] A partial monoid is a pair (M, ) where M is a nonempty set and is
a partial addition defined on some, but not necessarily all families (xi : i I ) in M subject
to the following axioms:
(i) Unary Sum Axiom. If (xi : i I ) is a one element family in M and I = {j}, then
(xi : i I ) is defined and equals xj .
(ii) Partition-Associativity Axiom. If (xi : i I ) is a family in M and (Ij : j J ) is a
partition of I , then (xi : i I ) is summable if and only if (xi : i Ij ) is summable
for every j in J , ((xi : i Ij ) : j J ) is summable, and
(xi : i I ) = ((xi : i Ij ) : j J ).
Definition 1.2. [12] Let (R, ) and (, 0 ) be two partial monoids. Then R is said to be a
partial -semiring if there exists a mapping R R R (images to be denoted by xy
for x, y R and ) satisfying the following axioms:
(i) x(yz) = (xy)z,
(ii) a family (xi : i I ) is summable in R implies (xxi : i I ) is summable in R
and x[(xi : i I )] = (xxi : i I ),
(iii) a family (xi : i I ) is summable in R implies (xi x : i I ) is summable in R
and [(xi : i I )]x = (xi x : i I ),
(iv) a family (i : i I ) is summable in implies (xi y : i I ) is summable in R
and x[0 (i : i I )]y = (xi y : i I ) for all x, y, z, (xi : i I ) in R and , ,
(i : i I ) in .
Definition 1.3. [14] A partial -semiring R is said to have a left (right) unity if there exists
a family (ei : i I ) of elements of R and a family (i : i I ) of elements of such that
i ei i r = r (i ri ei = r) for any r in R.

Definition 1.4. [18] The sum ordering on a partial monoid (M, ) is the binary relation
such that x y if and only if there exists a h in M such that y = x + h for x, y M .
Definition 1.5. [18] A sum-ordered partial monoid or so-monoid, in short, is a partial
monoid in which the sum ordering is a partial ordering.
Definition 1.6. [12] A partial -semiring R is said be a sum-ordered partial -semiring
(in short -so-ring) if the partial monoids R and are so-monoids.
Definition 1.7. [14] Let R be a partial -semiring, A be a nonempty subset of R and
be a nonempty subset of . Then the pair (A, ) of (R, ) is said to be a left (right)
partial -ideal of R if it satisfies the following:
(i) (xi : i I ) is a summable family in R and xi A i I implies i xi A,
(ii) (i : i I ) is a summable family in and i i I implies i i , and
(iii) for all x R, y A and , xy A (yx A).
If (A, ) is both left and right partial -ideal of a partial -semiring R, then (A, ) is
called a partial -ideal of R. If = , then A is called a partial ideal of R.
Definition 1.8.

[14] Let R be a -so-ring, A be a nonempty subset of R and be a

nonempty subset of . Then the pair (A, ) is said to be a left (right) -ideal of R if it
satisfies the following:
(i) (A, ) is a left (right) partial -ideal of R,
(ii) x R and y A such that x y implies x A, and
(iii) and such that implies .
If (A, ) is both left and right -ideal of a -so-ring R, then (A, ) is called a -ideal of
R. If = , then A is called an ideal of (R, ).
Definition 1.9. [14] Let R be a -so-ring. If A and are subsets of R and respectively,
then the intersection of all -ideals of R containing (A, ) is called the -ideal generated
by (A, ) and is denoted by < (A, ) >.
If = , then < A > is the ideal of (R, ) generated by A.
Definition 1.10. [14] A -so-ring R is said to be a complete -so-ring if every family of
elements in R is summable and every family of elements in is summable.

Theorem 1.11. [14] Let R be a complete -so-ring. If A and are subsets of R and
respectively, then the -ideal generated by (A, ) is the pair ({x R | x i xi + j rj j x0 +
k k k

00 0 0r

k x

l l l

+ r00 00 x000 000 000

r , where x , 0x 00, x 000
,x

lj

A, r0 , r00 , r000 , r R and 0 , 00 , 000 ,

}, { | 0 ii , i }).
For n N, n a means that sum of n copies of a.
Remark 1.12. [14] Let R be a complete -so-ring and a R. Then the left/right/both sided
ideals of R generated by a are
(i) < a] = {x R | x n a + j rj j a, rj R, j , n N},
(ii) [a >= {x R | x n a + j aj rj , rj R, j , n N},
(iii) < a >= {x R | x n a + j rj j a + k ak0 rk0 + l rl00 l00 al000 rl000 , where
rj , rk0 , rl00 , rl 000 R and j , k0 , l 00 , l 000 , n N}.
We call < a > as the principal ideal generated by a.
Remark 1.13.
of -ideals of a -so-ring R. Then
j ) | j J } be a family_
[ [14] Let {(Aj , _
we
(Aj , j ) > as
(Aj , j ) and thus
(Aj , j ) = ({x R | x j xj , xj
denote <
jJ
jJ
jJ
W
W
0
A2 , 1 2 ) = ({x R | x
[ Aj }, { | j ,j j [ j }). In particular (A1
jJ

jJ

x1 + x2 , x1 A1 , x2 A2 }, { | 1 + 2 , 1 1 , 2 2 }) is the smallest -ideal

of R containing (Ai , i ) for i = 1, 2.
Definition 1.14. [14] Let R be a -so-ring. If A, B are subsets of R and 1 is a subset of ,
define A1 B as the set {x R | ai A, i 1 , bi B, i ai i bi exists and x i ai i bi }.
If A = {a} then we also denote A1 B by a1 B. If B = {b} then we also denote A1 B by
A1 b. Similarly if A = {a} and B = {b}, we denote A1 B by a1 b and thus a1 b = {x R |
x ab for some 1 }.
Remark 1.15. [15] Let R be a -so-ring with left/right unity and a, b R. Then a aR
and b Rb.
Theorem 1.16. [14] Let R be a complete -so-ring. If A and B are ideals of R then AB
T
is an ideal of R. Moreover, AB A B.
An ideal A of a -so-ring R is called proper if A = R.

Definition 1.17. [16] A proper ideal P of a -so-ring R is said to be prime if and only if
for any ideals A, B of R, AB P implies A P or B P .
Lemma 1.18. [16] Let R be a complete -so-ring and P be a proper ideal of R. Then
the following conditions are equivalent:
(i) P is prime
(ii) If a, b R such that < a > < b > P then a P or b P .
Lemma 1.19. [16] Let R be a complete -so-ring and a R. Then RaR = R < a > R.
Theorem 1.20. [16] Let R be a complete -so-ring and P be a proper ideal of R. Then
the following conditions are equivalent:
(i) P is prime
(ii) If a, b R such that aRb P then a P or b P
(iii) If A1 , A2 are right ideals of R such that A1 A2 P then A1 P or A2 P
(iv) If B1 , B2 are left ideals of R such that B1 B2 P then B1 P or B2 P .
Lemma 1.21. [16] Let R be a complete -so-ring and P be a prime ideal of R. Then for
any a R, RaR P implies a P .
Definition 1.22. [16] Let R be a -so-ring and A be a nonempty subset of R. Then A is
said to be an m-system of R if for any a, b A there exists r R and , such that
arb A.
Theorem 1.23. [16] Let R be a complete -so-ring and P be a proper ideal of R. Then P
is prime if and only if R \ P is an m-system of R.
Definition 1.24. [17] A proper ideal P of a -so-ring R is said to be semiprime if and only
if for any ideal A of R, AA P implies A P .
Theorem 1.25. [17] Let R be a complete -so-ring and P be a proper ideal of R. Then
the following conditions are equivalent:
(i) P is a semiprime ideal of R
(ii) For any a R, aRa P implies a P
(iii) For any right ideal U of R, U U P implies U P
(iv) For any left ideal V of R, V V P implies V P .

Lemma 1.26. [17] Let R be a complete -so-ring and P be a semiprime ideal of R. Then
for any a R, RaR P implies a P .
Definition 1.27. [17] Let R be a -so-ring and A be a nonempty subset of R. Then A is
said to be a p-system of R if for any a A there exists r R and , such that
ara A.
Theorem 1.28. [17] Let R be a complete -so-ring and P be a proper ideal of R. Then P
is semiprime if and only if R \ P is a p-system of R.
2. Irreducible & Strongly Irreducible Ideals
Definition 2.1. An ideal P of a -so-ring R is said to be irreducible if and only if for any
T
ideals H and K of R, P = H K implies P = H or P = K .
Definition 2.2. An ideal P of a -so-ring R is said to be strongly irreducible if and only if
T
for any ideals H and K of R, H K P implies H P or K P .
Clearly every prime ideal of a -so-ring R is strongly irreducible and every strongly irreducible ideal of R is irreducible. The following is an example of an irreducible ideal which is
not a strongly irreducible ideal of a -so-ring.
Example 2.3. Let R = {0, a, b, c, d, e}. Define on R as

xj , if xi = 0 i = j, f or some j,

i xi = d, if (xj = a, xk = b or xj = b, xk = c f or some j, k) and xi = 0 i = j, k,

undef ined, otherwise.

Then R is a so-monoid.
Let = {00 , 10 }. Define 0 on as

10 , if i = 00 i = j f or some j
0
i i =
undef ined, otherwise.
Then is a so-monoid.
Define a mapping R R R as follows:

00 0 a b c d e

10 0 a b c d e

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 a

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 b

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 c

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 d

e 0 0 0 0 0 0
e 0 a b c d e
Then R is a -so-ring. For the ideals A = {0, a}, B = {0, b} and C = {0, c} of R,
T
T
B C = {0, b} {0, c} = {0} A and B * A, C * A. Hence A = {0, a} is not a strongly
irreducible ideal of R. However the ideal A = {0, a} is an irreducible ideal of R.
Definition 2.4. Let R be a -so-ring and A be a non empty subset of R. Then A is said to
T
T
be an i-system of R if and only if for any a, b A, < a > < b >
A = .
Example 2.5. Let R = {0, u, v, x, y, z}. Define on R as

xj , if xi = 0 i = j, f or some j,
i xi =
undef ined, otherwise.
Then R is a so-monoid.
Let = {00 , 10 }. Define 0 on as

10 , if i = 00 i = j f or some j
i0 i =
undef ined, otherwise.
Then is a so-monoid.
Define a mapping R R R as follows:
00 0 u v x y z

10 0 u v x y z

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 u 0 0 0 u

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 v 0 0 v

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 x

0 0 0 0 0 0

0 0 0 0 0 y

z 0 0 0 0 0 0
z 0 u v x y z
Then R is a -so-ring. Then the subset {0, u} of R is an i-system whereas the subset {x, y}
T
T
is not an i-system since < x >= {0, x}, < y >= {0, y} and < x > < y >
A = .

Theorem 2.6. If P is an ideal of a complete -so-ring R then the following conditions are
equivalent:
(i) P is strongly irreducible
(ii) If a, b R such that < a >

< b > P then a P or b P

(iii) R \ P is an i-system of R.
Proof. (i)(ii): Suppose P is a strongly irreducible ideal of R. Let a, b R 3 < a >

<b

> P . Since P is strongly irreducible, < a > P or < b > P . Hence a P or b P .

T
(ii)(iii): Suppose a, b R 3 < a > < b > P imply a P or b P . Let a, b R \P .
T
T
T
Then < a > < b >6 P . < a > < b > (R \ P ) = . Hence R \ P is an i-system
of R.
(iii)(i): Suppose R \ P is an i-system of R. Let H, K be ideals of R 3 H * P and K
T
T
* P . Then x H and y K such that x, y R \ P . < x >
<y>
R \ P = (by
T
T
our assumption). z < x >
< y > and z 6 P . z H
K and z 6 P and
T
hence H K * P . Hence P is a strongly irreducible ideal of R.
Theorem 2.7. An ideal P of a complete -so-ring R is prime if and only if it is semiprime
and strongly irreducible.
Proof. Suppose P is a prime ideal of R. Then P is a semiprime ideal of R. Let H, K be
T
T
ideals of R 3 H
K P . Since H K H
K P . Since P is prime, H P or K P
and hence P is a strongly irreducible ideal of R.
Conversely, suppose that P is semiprime and strongly irreducible ideal of R. Let H, K
T
T
be ideals of R 3 H K P . Then (H
K )(H
K ) H K P . Since P is semiprime,
T
H
K P . Since P is strongly irreducible, H P or K P . Hence P is a prime ideal of
R.
3. Regular -so-rings
Definition 3.1. Let R be a -so-ring. An element a of R is said to be regular if a aRa.
If every element of R is regular then R is called a regular -so-ring.
Definition 3.2. Let R be a -so-ring. An element a of R is said to be strongly regular
if there exists , and b R such that aba = a. If every element of R is strongly
regular then R is called a strongly regular -so-ring.

Example 3.3. Let R := [0, 1] be the unit interval of real numbers. For any family (xi : i I
)
S
in R, define i xi = sup{xi | i I }. Then R is a so-monoid. Let := N {0}, the set of
all nonnegative integers. Then is a so-monoid with finite support addition. Consider the
mapping (x, , y) 7 inf{x, , y} of R R into R. Now R is a -so-ring. For any a R
1, 1 and a R such that a1a1a = inf {a, 1, a, 1, a} = a. Hence R is strongly regular
-so-ring.
Lemma 3.4. Let R be a complete -so-ring with left unity. Then R is regular if and only if
T
BA = A
B for any left ideal A and right ideal B of
R.
Proof. Suppose R is regular. Let A be a left ideal and B be a right ideal of R. Then
T
T
BA RA A and BA BR B and hence BA A B. Let a A B. Since
R is regular, a aRa. a i ai bi i a for some i , i , bi R. Since a A and A is
a left ideal of R, bi i a A. a i ai (bi i a), a B, i , bi i a A. a BA.
T
T
Therefore A B BA. Hence BA = A B.
T
Conversely, suppose that BA = A B for any left ideal A and right ideal B of R. Let
a R. Take A :=< a], the principal left ideal generated by a and B := [a >, the principal
T
T
right ideal generated by a. Then A = A
R = RA Ra and B = R
B = BR
T
T
aR. Now a A
B Ra
aR = aRRa aRa. Therefore a is a regular
element in R. Hence R is a regular -so-ring.
Theorem 3.5. Let R be a regular complete -so-ring with left unity and P be an ideal
of
R. Then P is prime if and only if it is irreducible.
Proof. Suppose P is prime, then by theorem 2.7, P is strongly irreducible and hence P
is irreducible. Conversely suppose that P is irreducible. Let A, B be ideals of R such that
W
T
W
W
W
AB P .Let x (A P ) (B P ). Since R is regular, by lemma 3.4, (A P )(B P ) =
W
T
W
W
W
W
(A P ) (B P ) and hence x (A P )(B
P ). x i yi i zi where yi A P, i

j
j
P , i I . x i [j (pi + ai )]i [k (pi0 + bi )] for some pi j , pi0 P, ai j
k
k
k
W
k
j
0
A, bi B. x i j k [pi i +pi i bi +ai i p +ai i bi ] and hence x P (AB) =
p0
ik
j
j
ik
j
k
k
W
T
W
W
W
P . (A P ) (B P ) = P . Since P is irreducible, A P = P or B P = P . A P

, zi B

or B P . Hence P is a prime ideal of R.

Lemma 3.6. Let R, R0 be complete -so-rings and f : R R0 be a -epimorphism. If R
is regular then R0 is also regular.

Proof. Let a0 R0 .
aRa.

Since f is onto, a R 3 f (a) = a0 .

Since R is regular, a

This implies i , i , bi R 3 a i ai bi i a. f (a) f (i ai bi i a)

=
i f (a)i f (bi )i f (a). a0 a0 R0 a0 . Therefore a0 is a regular element in R0 . Hence R0
is
a regular -so-ring.
Theorem 3.7. Let R be a regular complete -so-ring and be a -congruence relation
on
R. Then the quotient -so-ring R/ is regular.
Proof. Define a mapping f : R R/ by f (a) = a a R. Now we prove that f is a
-epimorphism. Let (ai : i I ) be a (summable) family in R. Then f (i ai ) = (i ai )
= i (ai ) = i f (ai ). Now let a, b R and . Then f (ab) = (ab) = (a)(b)
= f (a)f (b). Hence f is a -homomorphism of R into R/.

Now for every a R/,

there exists a R such that f (a) = a. Therefore f is a -epimorphism. By the Lemma 3.6,
R/ is a regular -so-ring.
4. Strongly regular -so-rings
Lemma 4.1. Let R be a -so-ring. If a is a strongly regular element in R then there exists
, and b R such that aba = a and bab = b.
Proof. Since a is a strongly regular element of R, by definition , , e R 3 a = aea.
Take b := eae. Then b R and aba = a(eae)a = (aea)ea = aea = a.
Now bab = (eae)a(eae) = eae = b. Hence the lemma.
Definition 4.2. Let R be a -so-ring and . An element a of R is said to be an
-idempotent if aa = a.
Example 4.3. Consider the -so-ring R := [0, 1] as in the Example 4.3. Let 0 = and
a R. Then aa = inf {a, , a} = a. Hence every element of R is an -idempotent of R,
where = 0.
Proposition 4.4. Let R be a strongly regular -so-ring. Then for any , there exists
an -idempotent element e in R.
Proof. Let a R and . Then aa R. Since R is strongly regular, , and b
R 3 (aa)b(aa) = aa and b(aa)b = b (by the Lemma 4.1). Take e := aba,
then e R and ee = (aba)(aba) = a(baab)a = aba = e. Hence e is an
-idempotent element in R.

Proposition 4.5. Let I be an ideal of a strongly regular -so-ring R. Then I is strongly

regular and any ideal J of I is an ideal of R.
Proof. Let I be an ideal of a strongly regular -so-ring R. Since I is an ideal of R, I is a
sub-so-ring of R. Let a I R. Since R is strongly regular, 1 , 2 and b R
3 a = a1 b2 a and b := b2 a1 b. Since a I , I is an ideal of R so b I . Therefore a
is a strongly regular element in I . Hence I is strongly regular. Let J be an ideal of I and
let a J , , r R. Since I is an ideal of R, ar I . Since I is strongly regular, 3
, 4 and d R 3 (ar)3 d4 (ar) = ar. Since r3 d4 ar I and J is an ideal of I ,
a(r3 d4 ar) J . ar J . Similarly we can prove that ra J . Hence J is an
ideal of R.
Lemma 4.6. Let R be a complete -so-ring.
following are hold in R:

If a = aba, , , b R then the

(i) [a >= aR = aR,

(ii) < a] = Ra = Ra, and
(iii) < a >= RaR.
Proof. (i) Note that [a >= {x R | x i a + i ai xi , i , xi R, i I }. Since a
= aba, a aR. Therefore [a > aR. Now let x aR. Then x i ai xi , i , xi
R, i I . x [a >. Therefore aR [a >. Hence [a >= aR. Now clearly aR
aR. Let x aR. Then x i ai xi , i , xi R, i I . x i (aba)i xi .
x a(bi ai xi ). x aR. Therefore aR aR. Hence [a >= aR = aR.
Similarly, we prove that < a] = Ra = Ra and < a >= RaR.
Proposition 4.7. Let R be a complete -so-ring. If an element a of R is strongly regular
then there exists a -idempotent e R such that [a >= eR.
Proof. Suppose a is a strongly regular element in R. Then , and b R 3 a = aba.
Take e = ab. Then e R and ee = (ab)(ab) = (aba)b = ab = e. Also
ea = aba = a. Then by the Lemma 4.6, [a >= aR = eaR = e(aR) eR. Let
x eR. Then x ed for some d R. x ed = (ab)d = a(bd) aR = [a >.
x [a >. Hence [a >= eR.

Proposition 4.8. Let R be a strongly regular -so-ring, R0 be any -so-ring. Let f be a

-epimorphism of R onto R0 and in . If e0 is an -idempotent in R0 , then f 1 (e0 ) contains
an -idempotent of R.
Proof. Suppose e0 is an -idempotent in R0 . Then e0 e0 = e0 . Since f is onto, e R 3 f
(e) = e0 . Since R is strongly regular ee R, , and c R 3 (ee)c(ee) = ee
and c(ee)c = c. Now (ece)(ece) = e(ceec)e = ece and hence ece
is an -idempotent in R.

f (ece) = f (e)f (c)f (e) = e0 f (c)e0 = e0 e0 f

(c)e0 e0
= f (ee)f (c)f (ee) = f (eecee) = f (ee) = e0 e0 = e0 . Thus f 1 (e0 ) contains
an
-idempotent of R.
Definition 4.9. The centre of a -so-ring R is defined to be the set {a R | ax = xa x
R, }, and is denoted by C (R). Thus C (R) = {a R | ax = xa x R, }.
Theorem 4.10. The centre C (R) of a -so-ring R is a sub-so-ring of R.
Proof. Let (ai : i I ) be a summable family in R such that ai C (R) i I . Then
i ai exists in R and ai x = xai x R and . Now for any and x R,
(i ai )x = i (ai x) = i (xai ) = x(i ai ) and hence i ai C (R). Now let a, b C
(R) and R. Then ax = xa x R and . For any and x R, (ab)x
= a(bx) = (bx)a = (xb)a = x(ba) = x(ab) and hence ab C (R). Hence C
(R) is a sub-so-ring of R.
Definition 4.11. An element x in a -so-ring R is said to be nilpotent if there exists a
positive integer n such that (x)n x = 0 for all in where (x)n x = xx...xx
Theorem 4.12. Let R be a strongly regular -so-ring. If all idempotents of R are in its
centre then R has no nonzero nilpotent elements.
Proof. Suppose all idempotent elements of R are in C (R). Let a R. Since R is strongly
regular, , and x R 3 axa = a. Now (ax)(ax) = (axa)x = ax
and hence ax is a -idempotent. ax C (R). Therefore a = axa = (ax)a =
a(ax) = (aa)x. Suppose a is nilpotent.

Then (a)n a = 0 for all , for some

positive integer n. a = (aa)x = a(aax)x = ..... = (a)n a(xx)...(xx) = 0.

Thus R has no nonzero nilpotent elements.

References
[1] Acharyulu, G.V.S.: Matrix representable So-rings, Semigroup Forum, Springer-Verlag, 46(1993), 31-47.
[2] Acharyulu, G.V.S.: A Study of Sum-Ordered Partial Semirings, Doctoral thesis, Andhra University,
1992.
[3] Arbib, M.A., Manes, E.G.: Partially Additive Categories and Flow-diagram Semantics, Journal of
Algebra, 62(1980), 203-227.
[4] Dutta, T.K. and Sardar, S.K.: Semiprime ideals and irreducible ideals of -semirings, Novi Sad J.
Math., 30(1)(2000), 97-108.
[5] Dutta, T.K. and Sardar, S.K.: On the Operator Semirings of a -semiring, Southeast Asian Bulletin of
Mathematics, 26(2)(2002), 215-225.
[6] Jonathan S. Golan. : Semirings and their Applications, Kluwer Academic Publishers, 1999.
[7] Manes, E.G., and Benson, D.B.: The Inverse Semigroup of a Sum-Ordered Partial Semiring, Semigroup
Forum, 31(1985), 129-152.
[8] Murali Krishna Rao, M.: -semirings-I, Southeast Asian Bulletin of Mathematics, 19(1)(1995), 49-54.
[9] Murali Krishna Rao, M.: -semirings-II, Southeast Asian Bulletin of Mathematics, 21(1997), 281-287.
[10] Murali Krishna Rao, M.: The Jacobson Radical of a -semiring, Southeast Asian Bulletin of Mathematics, 23(1999), 127-134.
[11] Murali Krishna Rao, M.: -Semirings, Doctoral thesis, Andhra University, 1995.
[12] Siva Mala, M., and Siva Prasad, K.: Partial -Semirings, Southeast Asian Bulletin of Mathematics,
Vol. 38, No. 6, pp. 873-885, 2014.
[13] Siva Mala, M., and Siva Prasad, K.: (, )-Representation of -So-Rings, Iranian Journal of Mathematical Sciences and Informatics, Vol. 10, No. 1, pp. 103-119, 2015.
[14] Siva Mala, M., Siva Prasad, K.: Ideals of Sum-Ordered partial -Semirings, accepted in the Southeast
Asian Bulletin of Mathematics.
[15] Siva Prasad, K., Siva Mala, M. & Srinivasa Rao, P.V.: Greens Relations in Partial -Semirings,
International Journal of Algebra and Statistics(IJAS), Vol. 2, Issue 2, pp. 21-28, 2013.
[16] Siva Mala, M., and Siva Prasad, K.: Prime Ideals of -So-rings, International Journal of Algebra and
Statistics(IJAS), Vol. 3(1), pp. 1-8, 2014.
[17] Siva Mala, M., and Siva Prasad, K.: Semiprime Ideals of -So-rings, International Journal of Algebra
and Statistics(IJAS), Vol. 3(1), pp. 26-33, 2014.
[18] Streenstrup, M.E.: Sum-Ordered Partial Semirings, Doctoral thesis, Graduate school of the University
of Massachusetts, Feb 1985 (Department of Computer and Information Science).
[19] Srininvasa Rao, P.V. : Ideals of Sum Ordered Partial semirings, International Journal of Computational
Cognition(IJCC), 7(2)(2009), 59-64.
[20] Srinivasa Rao, P.V.: Ideal Theory of Sum-Ordered Partial Semirings, Doctoral thesis, Acharya Nagarjuna University, 2011.