Central derivations of low-dimensional Zinbiel algebras

Basdouri Imed; Bouzid Mosbahi; Jean Lerbet

REVIEW 3 major objections 6 minor 3 cited by

Central derivations of low-dimensional Zinbiel algebras

T0 review · 3 major / 6 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read For each complex Zinbiel algebra of dimension 2, 3, and 4, this paper tabulates the central derivation algebra and uses its vanishing to classify decomposable centroids.

desk verdict The central derivation table is internally wrong: A3^3 alone has a two-dimensional CD(A), contradicting Definition 2.11 and the printed dimension 0. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.15642 v1 pith:MYDLP72E submitted 2024-11-23 math.RA

Basdouri Imed , Jean Lerbet , Bouzid Mosbahi This is my paper · ORCID

classification math.RA MSC 16D7017A3017A32

keywords centralderivationZinbielalgebracentroiddecomposablelow-dimensionalalgebrasnon-associativedendriformpre-Lie

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 compute, for every complex Zinbiel algebra of dimension up to four, the algebra of central derivations: linear maps that annihilate all products and send the whole algebra into its center. It presents the central derivation algebra CD(A) of each isomorphism class as an explicit matrix algebra together with its dimension, and it uses a structural criterion to conclude which algebras have decomposable centroids. The results state that the unique two-dimensional Zinbiel algebra has a one-dimensional CD(A) and an indecomposable centroid, while in dimension three the algebras $A_3^3$, $A_4^3$, $A_6^3$, $A_7^3$ have zero central derivations, and in dimension four the algebras $A_1^4$, $A_3^4$, $A_5^4$, $A_9^4$, $A_{10}^4$, $A_{11}^4$, and $A_{16}^4$ have zero central derivations; in all these cases the centroid is decomposable. A sympathetic reader would care because central derivations capture internal symmetries and deformation data of non-associative algebras, and centroid decomposition tells whether the algebra splits as a direct sum of ideals.

What carries the argument

The carrying object is the central derivation algebra CD(A) = Der(A) ∩ Γ(A), defined by the conditions φ(A•A) = 0 and φ(A) ⊆ C(A), together with the linear system it induces on the structure constants. Writing the product as $e_i \bullet e_j = \sum \gamma^k_{ij} e_k$ and a candidate derivation as the matrix $(a_{it})$, the requirement that the map lies in CD(A) becomes $\sum_t \gamma^t_{ij} a_{tk} = \sum_t a_{it} \gamma^k_{tj} = \sum_t a_{jt} \gamma^k_{it} = 0$ for all $i, j, k$. Solving this system for each class in the quoted classification yields the matrix tables. The paper also relies on Corollary 2.16, which states that if CD(A) = 0 then the centroid Γ(A) is decomposable; this is the bridge from the computed zero matrices to the decomposition claims.

What would settle it

Re-run the linear system in Section 3 on each printed multiplication table and check that the matrices in Tables 1-3 are exactly the solution spaces. The decisive check is the four-dimensional classes $A_{12}^4$ through $A_{16}^4$, which are all printed with the same products $e_1 \bullet e_2 = e_3$, $e_2 \bullet e_1 = e_4$: if the printed tables are complete, these classes must have distinct central derivation algebras as listed, and if the classification is missing distinguishing relations, the table entries for them will not reproduce.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

On the paper's own terms, the central claim is that the tables in Section 3 give the complete central derivation algebra and its dimension for every isomorphism class of complex Zinbiel algebra in dimensions two, three, and four, and that Corollaries 3.2, 3.4, and 3.6 correctly classify the decomposable centroids by checking when CD(A) vanishes. The 2D case $A_2^1$ has CD of dimension 1 with a single free parameter, so its centroid is indecomposable. In 3D, the algebras $A_3^3$, $A_4^3$, $A_6^3$, and $A_7^3$ satisfy CD(A) = 0, making their centroids decomposable, while the remaining 3D algebras carry CD dimensions 4 (for $A_2^3$ and $A_5^3$) and 9 (for $A_1^3$). In 4D, the seven algebras $A_1^4$, $A_3^4$, $A_5^4$, $A_9^4$, $A_{10}^4$, $A_{11}^4$, and $A_{16}^4$ have CD(A) = 0 and decomposable centroids; the other classes have CD dimensions 1, 2, or 9, with $A_{15}^4$ jumping from dimension 2 to dimension 9 when its parameter $\alpha$ equals $-1$.

Load-bearing premise

The list of complex Zinbiel algebras in dimensions 2, 3, and 4 used for the tables is complete and correctly transcribed; an omitted isomorphism class or a mistyped product would change the central derivation entries built on it.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

The unique two-dimensional complex Zinbiel algebra has a one-dimensional central derivation algebra, so its centroid is indecomposable.
In dimension three, the classes $A_3^3$, $A_4^3$, $A_6^3$, and $A_7^3$ have zero central derivations, and by the paper's criterion their centroids are decomposable; the other 3D classes have CD dimensions 4 or 9.
In dimension four, the classes $A_1^4$, $A_3^4$, $A_5^4$, $A_9^4$, $A_{10}^4$, $A_{11}^4$, and $A_{16}^4$ have zero central derivations and hence decomposable centroids.
CD(A) dimensions range from 1 in dimension two to between 0 and 9 in dimensions three and four, with the 4D class $A_{15}^4$ jumping from 2 to 9 at its parameter value $\alpha = -1$.
The tables list the matrix form of CD(A) for every class, giving a complete picture of the intersection between the centroid and the derivation algebra for all low-dimensional complex Zinbiel algebras.

Reading between the lines

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

The decomposability criterion Corollary 2.16 is one-directional: a zero central derivation algebra forces the centroid to decompose, but a nonzero CD(A) does not by itself rule out decomposition; checking the nonzero classes would settle whether the converse holds in low dimensions.
The jump in the dimension of CD($A_{15}^4$) from 2 to 9 at $\alpha = -1$ points to a symmetry enhancement at that parameter; comparing with the geometric classification of 4D Zinbiel algebras could reveal which other class the algebra degenerates into.
The structure-constant system that defines CD(A) could be specialized to compute the centroid or the full derivation algebra alone, giving a uniform way to tabulate all three invariants for any finite-dimensional Zinbiel algebra from its multiplication table.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

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

Quick take: the tables are not reliable. I checked the stress-test example against the text, and it lands. For A3^3 (e1*e1=e3, e2*e2=e3), the center contains e3, and any map sending e1 to αe3, e2 to βe3, e3 to 0 satisfies φ(A) ⊂ center and φ(A*A)=0. So CD(A3^3) has dimension at least 2, while Table 2 says 0. That is a direct contradiction with the paper's own Definition 2.11, not an OCR artifact.

What the paper does well: it lays out a clean linear-algebra recipe—central derivation is the intersection of centroid and derivation—and applies it class-by-class to known Zinbiel classifications. A compact table of CD(A) for dimensions 2–4 would be genuinely useful for people studying deformations or centroids of these algebras. The link between zero central derivations and centroid decomposability is an interesting idea, and the corollaries would be worth having if the premises were true.

Soft spots beyond the counterexample: Theorem 2.14 has an unproven converse; the proof asserts the reverse inclusion without a derivation. Corollary 2.16 claims CD(A)=0 implies C(A)=0, which is false in both directions as stated, and that invalidates the decomposability claims for A3^3, A4^3, etc. The four-dimensional classification lists A12^4–A16^4 with identical products (e1*e2=e3, e2*e1=e4), so either the classification is incomplete or the tables were computed from data the reader cannot see. No code or Maple worksheet is supplied, and the reference list is padded with unrelated papers.

Verdict: the paper needs a full recomputation before it can be a reference. The two- and three-dimensional cases might be fixable; the four-dimensional tables rest on a suspect classification. I would not send it to a referee in this form, and I would not cite it.

Referee Report

3 major / 6 minor

Summary. This paper defines central derivations of Zinbiel algebras and sets out to compute the space CD(A) for every complex Zinbiel algebra of dimension 2, 3, and 4, using classifications taken from earlier work. The results are collected in Tables 1–3, and Corollaries 3.2, 3.4, 3.6, and 3.7 draw conclusions about decomposability of centroids and about the range of possible dimensions of CD(A). The main claims are the table entries themselves and the derived centroid-decomposability statements.

Significance. If correct, the tables would provide a useful reference for central derivations and centroid decomposability in low-dimensional Zinbiel algebras. The computations are direct linear algebra from Definition 2.11 and cited classifications, and no fitted parameters enter, so the project is in principle checkable. However, the paper supplies no code or machine-checked verification, and a central table entry directly contradicts the paper's own definition, so the claimed classification cannot be accepted as it stands.

major comments (3)

[Table 2 / Theorem 3.3 / Corollary 3.4] The entry for A3^3 in Table 2 contradicts Definition 2.11. For A3^3, defined by e1•e1=e3 and e2•e2=e3 with all other products zero, the centre is C(A)=span{e3}. For arbitrary α,β∈C, define φ(e1)=αe3, φ(e2)=βe3, φ(e3)=0. Then φ(A)⊆C(A) and φ(A•A)=φ(span{e3})=0, so φ∈CD(A). Hence dim CD(A3^3)≥2, not 0. The same direct computation gives nonzero central derivations for A4^3, A5^3, A6^3 and A7^3 (dimensions at least 2, 2, 2 and 1 respectively), so the zero rows of Table 2 and the ensuing claims in Corollaries 3.4 and 3.7(2) are invalid.
[Theorem 3.5 / Table 3] The four-dimensional classification is internally inconsistent. The algebras A12^4, A13^4, A14^4, A15^4 and A16^4 are all printed with the same multiplication table e1•e2=e3, e2•e1=e4 (with A13^4 additionally missing a bullet in 'e2e1=e4'), yet Table 3 assigns them different central derivation spaces, with dimensions 2, 2, 2, 2-or-9, and 0 respectively. Since CD(A) is determined by the multiplication table, either the displayed classification is incomplete (some products or parameters are missing) or the table was computed from data not shown in the paper. In either case, the four-dimensional results cannot be verified or accepted.
[Corollary 2.16 / proof] The proof of Corollary 2.16 asserts that 'CD(A)=0, which implies that the center of A, denoted by C(A), is trivial'. This inference is not justified: CD(A)=0 constrains nonzero endomorphisms whose image lies in the centre and whose kernel contains A•A; it does not by itself rule out nonzero central elements. Since this corollary is the logical bridge used to conclude decomposability of the centroid from zero rows in Tables 2 and 3, the centroid-decomposability claims are unsupported even apart from the numerical errors in Table 2.

minor comments (6)

[Definition 2.8] The centroid condition is misprinted: 'a • (b)' should be 'a • φ(b)'.
[Theorem 2.14] In the proof of part (1), the conclusion is written as 'Der(A) ∩ Γ(A) = C(A)'; it should be CD(A). The reverse inclusion also begins with 'suppose φ ∈ C(A)' instead of 'φ ∈ CD(A)'.
[Proposition 2.13] The proof of part (i) ends with the phrase '⊆ Der(A)' attached to an equality of vectors; this should be rewritten as a proper derivation-condition check.
[Theorem 2.12] The proof verifies that conjugation sends derivations to derivations, but it does not verify the two defining conditions of a central derivation from Definition 2.11; the argument needs to be completed.
[Section 3 / algorithm] The index notation in the displayed equations is inconsistent with the matrix convention introduced just above; in particular the roles of a_it and a_ti should be clarified.
[References] The reference list contains duplicates and several unrelated entries on hydrokinetic turbines (references 24–28); these should be removed or replaced with relevant literature.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No circularity: central-derivation tables are direct linear-algebra solutions of an explicit system, with self-citations not load-bearing.

full rationale

The paper's central content is a set of matrix computations of CD(A) for each listed isomorphism class of complex Zinbiel algebras in dimensions 2, 3, and 4. Those matrices are obtained by applying the explicit linear equations stated in Section 3 to structure constants taken from earlier classifications; they are not fitted parameters renamed as predictions, and no quantity is defined in terms of the result it is supposed to establish. The classifications quoted in Theorems 3.3 and 3.5 are external inputs rather than outputs of the paper, and using them as starting data is standard mathematical practice rather than circularity. The large block of self-citations (references 11-30) is attached to the final corollary and plays no role in the derivation of the tables or in the centroid-decomposability arguments. Even if Corollary 2.16's implication from CD(A)=0 to decomposability of the centroid, or the tabulated zero entries such as that for A3^3, were logically or computationally incorrect, that would be a correctness or transcription error, not a circularity, because the conclusions are not assumed in the computations. No step in the paper reduces by construction to its own input, so the appropriate finding is no significant circularity.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 3 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The central claim rests on the correctness of the cited classifications, on the paper's theorem equating derivations with centroid, and on the inference from CD=0 to decomposability. No new algebraic entities are introduced; the only inputs are the classification parameters alpha and lambda. None of these assumptions is verified against independent source code or formal proof.

free parameters (2)

alpha = not fitted (classification parameter; cases alpha=0, alpha != 0, alpha=-1)
The central derivation dimension of A8_4 and A15_4 depends on alpha, and the table splits cases; the paper does not explain how alpha was handled in the symbolic computation.
lambda = not fitted (classification parameter, lambda != 0)
A6_3 is a one-parameter family; Table 2 lists dimension 0 without addressing dependence on lambda.

assumptions (3)

domain assumption The classifications of complex Zinbiel algebras in Theorems 3.1, 3.3, and 3.5, taken from references [6]-[10], are complete and correctly transcribed.
The central derivation tables are computed class-by-class; if the classification omits classes or transcribes products incorrectly, the tables are incomplete. The identical appearance of A12_4 through A16_4 makes this assumption fragile.
ad hoc to paper Theorem 2.14: Der(A) intersect Gamma(A) = CD(A).
The paper uses this identity to justify the algorithm, but the proof contains an unjustified equality to zero. The algorithm can be run directly from Definition 2.11, so this axiom is not necessary if the tables are recomputed independently.
ad hoc to paper Corollary 2.16: CD(A)=0 implies the centroid Gamma(A) is decomposable.
The proof assumes CD(A)=0 forces the center to be trivial, hence the cross components C1 and C2 vanish; this inference is applied to algebras where the claimed CD=0 is already contradicted.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Central derivations of low-dimensional Zinbiel algebras." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/MYDLP72E

@misc{pith2026241115642,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Central derivations of low-dimensional Zinbiel algebras},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/MYDLP72E}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.15642}
}

abstract

The study of central derivations in low-dimensional algebraic structures is a crucial area of research in mathematics, with applications in understanding the internal symmetries and deformations of these structures. In this article, we investigate the central derivations of complex Zinbiel algebras of dimension $\leq 4$. Key properties of the central derivation algebras are presented, including their structures and dimensions. The results are summarized in a tabular format, providing a clear classification of decomposable and indecomposable centroids based on these derivations. Specifically, we show that the centroid of two-dimensional Zinbiel algebras is indecomposable, while in three-dimensional Zinbiel algebras, centroids such as $\A_3^3$, $\A_4^3$, $\A_6^3$, and $\A_7^3$ are decomposable. For four-dimensional Zinbiel algebras, centroids including $\A_1^4$, $\A_3^4$, $\A_5^4$, $\A_9^4$, $\A_{10}^4$, $\A_{11}^4$, and $\A_{16}^4$ are decomposable. Furthermore, the dimensions of central derivation algebras vary across different dimensions: two-dimensional Zinbiel algebras have central derivation dimensions of one, while in three-dimensional and four-dimensional cases, these dimensions range from zero to nine.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Forward citations

Cited by 3 Pith papers

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

Computational Approaches to Derivations and Automorphism Groups of Associative Algebras
math.RA 2025-01 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

The paper claims to compute derivations and automorphism groups of low-dimensional associative algebras over C, but the computations are not self-contained and contain errors.
Rota-type operators on 2-dimensional dendriform algebras
math.RA 2024-11 reject novelty 4.0 of 10

The claimed classifications of Rota-type operators on 2D dendriform algebras are invalid as stated, with table entries that fail the defining operator equations.
An Algorithmic Approach to Inner Derivations of Low-Dimensional Zinbiel Algebras
math.RA 2024-12 reject novelty 2.0 of 10

The central claim that ad_w(u)=u∘w-w∘u is a derivation of every Zinbiel algebra is false; a counterexample appears in the paper's own four-dimensional table.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

29 extracted references · 10 canonical work pages · cited by 3 Pith papers

[1]

Loday, J. L. (1995). Cup-product for Leibniz cohomology a nd dual Leibniz algebras. Mathematica Scandinavica, 189-1 96

1995
[2]

L., Chapoton, F., Frabetti, A., Goichot, F., & Lo day, J

Loday, J. L., Chapoton, F., Frabetti, A., Goichot, F., & Lo day, J. L. (2001). Dialgebras (pp. 7-66). Springer Berlin Heidelberg

work page 2001
[3]

Livernet, M. (1998). Rational homotopy of Leibniz algebr as. manuscripta mathematica, 96, 295-315

work page 1998
[4]

Chapoton, F. (2002). Un th´ eor` eme de Cartier–Milnor–Moore–Quillen pour les big` ebres dendriformes et les alg` ebr es braces. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, 168(1), 1-18

work page 2002
[5]

Ronco, M. (2000). Primitive elements in a free dendriform algebra. Contemporary Mathematics, 267, 245-264

work page 2000
[6]

Omirov, B. A. (2002). Classiﬁcation of two-dimensional c omplex Zinbiel algebras. Uzbek. Mat. Zh, 2, 55-59

work page 2002
[7]

A., J´ unior, R

Alvarez, M. A., J´ unior, R. F., & Kaygorodov, I. (2022). Th e algebraic and geometric classiﬁcation of Zinbiel algebra s. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, 226(11), 107106

work page 2022
[8]

Q., Khudoyberdiyev, A

Adashev, J. Q., Khudoyberdiyev, A. K., & Omirov, B. A. (201 0). Classiﬁcations of some classes of Zinbiel algebras. Jou rnal of Generalized Lie Theory and Applications, 4, 1-10

work page

Show all 29 references

[9]

Ni, J. (2014). Centroids of Zinbiel algebras. Communicat ions in Algebra, 42(4), 1844-1853

2014
[10]

Almutairi, H., & AbdGhafur, A. (2018). Derivations of so me classes of Zinbiel algebras. International Journal of Pu re and Applied Mathematics, 2, 12-13

2018
[11]

Sania, A., Imed, B., Mosbahi, B., & Saber, N. (2023). Coho mology of compatible BiHom-Lie algebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2303.12906

2023 arXiv
[13]

Zahari, A., Mosbahi, B., & Basdouri, I. (2023). Classiﬁc ation, Derivations and Centroids of Low-Dimensional Compl ex BiHom-Trialgebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2304.06781

2023 arXiv
[14]

Mosbahi, B., Zahari, A., & Basdouri, I. (2023). Classiﬁc ation, α -Inner Derivations and α -Centroids of Finite-Dimensional Complex Hom-Trialgebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2305.0047 1

2023
[15]

Mosbahi, B., Asif, S., & Zahari, A. (2023). Classiﬁcatio n of tridendriform algebra and related structures. arXiv pr eprint arXiv:2305.08513

2023 arXiv
[16]

A., Zahari, A., & Mosbahi, B

Fiidow, M. A., Zahari, A., & Mosbahi, B. (2023). Quasi-Ce ntroids and Quasi-Derivations of Low Dimensional Associat ive Algebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2306.14331

2023 arXiv
[17]

Asif, S., Wang, Y., Mosbahi, B., & Basdouri, I. (2023). Co homology and deformation theory of O-operators on Hom-Lie conformal algebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2312.04121

2023 arXiv
[18]

Mansuroglu, N., & Mosbahi, B. (2024). On structures of Bi Hom-Superdialgebras and their derivations. arXiv preprin t arXiv:2404.12098

2024 arXiv
[19]

Mansuroglu, N., & Mosbahi, B. (2024). Generalized deriv ations of BiHom-supertrialgebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.12112

2024 arXiv
[20]

Mainellis, E., Mosbahi, B., & Zahari, A. (2024). Cohomol ogy of BiHom-Associative Trialgebras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2404.15567

2024 arXiv
[21]

Mainellis, E., Mosbahi, B., & Zahari, A. (2024). Compati ble Associative Algebras and Some Invariants. arXiv prepri nt arXiv:2405.18243

2024 arXiv
[22]

Imed, B., & Mosbahi, B. (2024). Classiﬁcation of ( ρ, τ, σ )-derivations of two-dimensional left-symmetric dialgeb ras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.05716

2024 arXiv
[23]

Imed, B., Lerbet, J., & Mosbahi, B. (2024). Quasi-Centro ids and Quasi-Derivations of low-dimensional Zinbiel alge bras. arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.09532

2024 arXiv
[24]

Mosbahi, M., Elgasri, S., Lajnef, M., Mosbahi, B., & Dris s, Z. (2021). Performance enhancement of a twisted Savonius hydrokinetic turbine with an upstream deﬂector. Internati onal Journal of Green Energy, 18(1), 51-65

2021
[25]

Mosbahi, M., Lajnef, M., Derbel, M., Mosbahi, B., Aric` o , C., Sinagra, M., & Driss, Z. (2021). Performance improveme nt of a drag hydrokinetic turbine. Water, 13(3), 273. 12 BASDOURI IMED 1, JEAN LERBET 2, BOUZID MOSBAHI 3

2021
[26]

Mosbahi, M., Derbel, M., Lajnef, M., Mosbahi, B., Driss, Z., Aric` o, C., & Tucciarelli, T. (2021). Performance study of twisted Darrieus hydrokinetic turbine with novel blade des ign. Journal of Energy Resources Technology, 143(9), 09130 2

2021
[27]

Mosbahi, M., Lajnef, M., Derbel, M., Mosbahi, B., Driss, Z., Aric` o, C., & Tucciarelli, T. (2021). Performance impro vement of a Savonius water rotor with novel blade shapes. Ocean Engi neering, 237, 109611

2021
[28]

Mosbahi, M., Derbel, M., Hannachi, M., Mosbahi, B., Dris s, Z., Aric` o, C., & Tucciarelli, T. (2023). Performance stu dy of spiral Darrieus water rotor with V-shaped blades. Proceedi ngs of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part C: Jour nal of Mechanical Engineering Sc...

2023
[29]

Mosbahi, B., Zahari, A., Basdouri, I. (2023). Classiﬁca tion, α -Inner Derivations and α -Centroids of Finite-Dimensional Complex Hom-Trialgebras. Pure and App lied Mathematics Journal, 12(5), 86-97. https://doi.org/10.11648/j.pamj.20231205.12

2023 doi
[30]

Z., & MOSBAHI, B

ABDOU, A. Z., & MOSBAHI, B. (2024). CLASSIFICATION OF COM PATIBLE ASSOCIATIVE ALGEBRAS AND SOME INV ARIANTS. Available at SSRN 4877916. 1Department of Mathematics, F aculty of Sciences, Universit y of Gafsa, Gafsa, Tunisia 2Laboratoire de Math´ematiques et Mod´elisation d’´Evr...

2024

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Loday, J. L. (1995). Cup-product for Leibniz cohomology a nd dual Leibniz algebras. Mathematica Scandinavica, 189-1 96

1995

[2] [2]

L., Chapoton, F., Frabetti, A., Goichot, F., & Lo day, J

Loday, J. L., Chapoton, F., Frabetti, A., Goichot, F., & Lo day, J. L. (2001). Dialgebras (pp. 7-66). Springer Berlin Heidelberg

work page 2001

[3] [3]

Livernet, M. (1998). Rational homotopy of Leibniz algebr as. manuscripta mathematica, 96, 295-315

work page 1998

[4] [4]

Chapoton, F. (2002). Un th´ eor` eme de Cartier–Milnor–Moore–Quillen pour les big` ebres dendriformes et les alg` ebr es braces. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, 168(1), 1-18

work page 2002

[5] [5]

Ronco, M. (2000). Primitive elements in a free dendriform algebra. Contemporary Mathematics, 267, 245-264

work page 2000

[6] [6]

Omirov, B. A. (2002). Classiﬁcation of two-dimensional c omplex Zinbiel algebras. Uzbek. Mat. Zh, 2, 55-59

work page 2002

[7] [7]

A., J´ unior, R

Alvarez, M. A., J´ unior, R. F., & Kaygorodov, I. (2022). Th e algebraic and geometric classiﬁcation of Zinbiel algebra s. Journal of Pure and Applied Algebra, 226(11), 107106

work page 2022

[8] [8]

Q., Khudoyberdiyev, A

Adashev, J. Q., Khudoyberdiyev, A. K., & Omirov, B. A. (201 0). Classiﬁcations of some classes of Zinbiel algebras. Jou rnal of Generalized Lie Theory and Applications, 4, 1-10

work page