Knaster–Tarski theorem

Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

In the

lattice theory, the Knaster–Tarski theorem, named after Bronisław Knaster and Alfred Tarski
, states the following:

Let (L, ≤) be a complete lattice and let f : L → L be an order-preserving (monotonic) function w.r.t. ≤ . Then the set of fixed points of f in L forms a complete lattice under ≤ .

It was Tarski who stated the result in its most general form,[1] and so the theorem is often known as Tarski's fixed-point theorem. Some time earlier, Knaster and Tarski established the result for the special case where L is the lattice of subsets of a set, the power set lattice.[2]

The theorem has important applications in

formal semantics of programming languages and abstract interpretation, as well as in game theory
.

A kind of converse of this theorem was proved by

order-preserving function f : LL on a lattice L has a fixed point, then L is a complete lattice.[3]

Consequences: least and greatest fixed points

Since complete lattices cannot be

greatest fixed point
). In many practical cases, this is the most important implication of the theorem.

The

greatest fixpoint
, the greatest element x such that f(x) = x.

If f(lim xn) = lim f(xn) for all ascending

least upper bound of the f β for all β ordinals less than γ.[4]
The dual theorem holds for the greatest fixpoint.

For example, in theoretical

subset inclusion. This reflects the fact that in many applications only such lattices are considered. One then usually is looking for the smallest set that has the property of being a fixed point of the function f. Abstract interpretation
makes ample use of the Knaster–Tarski theorem and the formulas giving the least and greatest fixpoints.

The Knaster–Tarski theorem can be used to give a simple proof of the

Banach–Tarski paradox
.

Weaker versions of the theorem

Weaker versions of the Knaster–Tarski theorem can be formulated for ordered sets, but involve more complicated assumptions. For example:[citation needed]

Let L be a
least element (bottom) and let f : LL be an monotonic function. Further, suppose there exists u in L such that f(u) ≤ u and that any chain
in the subset has a supremum. Then f admits a least fixed point.

This can be applied to obtain various theorems on

invariant sets
, e.g. the Ok's theorem:

For the monotone map F : P(X ) → P(X ) on the
family
of (closed) nonempty subsets of X, the following are equivalent: (o) F admits A in P
(X ) s.t. , (i) F admits invariant set A in P(X ) i.e. , (ii) F admits maximal invariant set A, (iii) F admits the greatest invariant set A.

In particular, using the Knaster-Tarski principle one can develop the theory of global attractors for noncontractive discontinuous (multivalued) iterated function systems. For weakly contractive iterated function systems the Kantorovich theorem (known also as Tarski-Kantorovich fixpoint principle) suffices.

Other applications of fixed-point principles for ordered sets come from the theory of differential, integral and operator equations.

Proof

Let us restate the theorem.

For a complete lattice and a monotone function on L, the set of all fixpoints of f is also a complete lattice , with:

  • as the greatest fixpoint of f
  • as the least fixpoint of f.

Proof. We begin by showing that P has both a least element and a greatest element. Let D = {x | xf(x)} and xD (we know that at least 0L belongs to D). Then because f is monotone we have f(x) ≤ f(f(x)), that is f(x) ∈ D.

Now let (u exists because DL and L is a complete lattice). Then for all xD it is true that xu and f(x) ≤ f(u), so xf(x) ≤ f(u). Therefore, f(u) is an upper bound of D, but u is the least upper bound, so uf(u), i.e. uD. Then f(u) ∈ D (because f(u) ≤ f(f(u))) and so f(u) ≤ u from which follows f(u) = u. Because every fixpoint is in D we have that u is the greatest fixpoint of f.

The function f is monotone on the dual (complete) lattice . As we have just proved, its greatest fixpoint exists. It is the least fixpoint of L, so P has least and greatest elements, that is more generally, every monotone function on a complete lattice has a least fixpoint and a greatest fixpoint.

For a, b in L we write [a, b] for the

closed interval
with bounds a and b: {xL | axb}. If ab, then ⟨[a, b], ≤⟩ is a complete lattice.

It remains to be proven that P is a complete lattice. Let , WP and . We show that f([w, 1L]) ⊆ [w, 1L]. Indeed, for every xW we have x = f(x) and since w is the least upper bound of W, xf(w). In particular wf(w). Then from y ∈ [w, 1L] follows that wf(w) ≤ f(y), giving f(y) ∈ [w, 1L] or simply f([w, 1L]) ⊆ [w, 1L]. This allows us to look at f as a function on the complete lattice [w, 1L]. Then it has a least fixpoint there, giving us the least upper bound of W. We've shown that an arbitrary subset of P has a supremum, that is, P is a complete lattice.

Computing a Tarski fixed-point

Chang, Lyuu and Ti

value oracle
. Their algorithm requires queries, where L is the number of elements in the lattice. In contrast, for a general lattice (given as an oracle), they prove a lower bound of queries.

Deng, Qi and Ye

value oracle
, or a polynomial function. Their algorithms have the following runtime complexity (where d is the number of dimensions, and Ni is the number of elements in dimension i):

Input
Lattice
Polynomial function Value oracle
Componentwise
Lexicographic

The algorithms are based on binary search. On the other hand, determining whether a given fixed point is unique is computationally hard:

Input
Lattice
Polynomial function Value oracle
Componentwise
coNP-complete
Lexicographic
coNP-complete

For d=2, for componentwise lattice and a value-oracle, the complexity of is optimal.[9] But for d>2, there are faster algorithms:

  • Fearnley, Palvolgyi and Savani[10] presented an algorithm using only queries. In particular, for d=3, only queries are needed.
  • Chen and Li[11] presented an algorithm using only queries.

Application in game theory

Tarski's fixed-point theorem has applications to

Investment Games
.

Because the best-response functions are monotone, Tarski's fixed-point theorem can be used to prove the existence of a

pure-strategy Nash equilibrium (PNE) in a supermodular game. Moreover, Topkis[13]
showed that the set of PNE of a supermodular game is a complete lattice, so the game has a "smallest" PNE and a "largest" PNE.

Echenique[14] presents an algorithm for finding all PNE in a supermodular game. His algorithm first uses best-response sequences to find the smallest and largest PNE; then, he removes some strategies and repeats, until all PNE are found. His algorithm is exponential in the worst case, but runs fast in practice. Deng, Qi and Ye[8] show that a PNE can be computed efficiently by finding a Tarski fixed-point of an order-preserving mapping associated with the game.

See also

Notes

References

Further reading