Iterated Hopf Ore Extensions over Group Rings

Can Hatipo\u{g}lu; Christian Lomp

REVIEW 3 major objections 3 minor 15 references

Adjoining two skew-primitive elements to a group algebra yields Hopf algebras whose finite simple modules are exactly three explicit families.

Reviewed by Pith at T0; open to challenge. T0 means a machine referee read the full paper against a public rubric. the ladder, T0–T4 →

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

T0 review · deepseek-v4-flash

2026-08-03 00:59 UTC pith:AEZ4OBRL

load-bearing objection The unified construction is a good idea, but the differential-operator classification collapses on a simple concrete example; the paper needs major repair before the main theorem can be trusted. the 3 major comments →

arxiv 2602.10850 v2 pith:AEZ4OBRL submitted 2026-02-11 math.RA math.QAmath.RT

Iterated Hopf Ore Extensions over Group Rings

Can Hatipo\u{g}lu , Christian Lomp This is my paper

classification math.RA math.QAmath.RT MSC 16T0516P4016S15

keywords Hopf Ore extensiongroup algebrafinite-dimensional simple modulesskew group ringdifferential operator ringgeneralized Taft algebrapointed Hopf algebrawinding automorphism

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal T4 reserved

The pith

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

The paper constructs a class of Hopf algebras H(G,χ,η,b,c,β) by adjoining two skew-primitive elements x and y to a group algebra K[G], where x and y twist the group action through characters χ and η and satisfy yx = η(b)xy + β(1−cb). Its main claim is a complete classification of finite-dimensional simple modules: when β(1−bc)=0 the algebra is a skew group ring and the simples are induced from one-dimensional modules; when β(1−bc)≠0 the characters must be inverses, and the simples are exactly the torsion modules V(ρ), the x-torsion-free modules V^x(ρ,λ,μ), and the y-torsion-free modules V^y(ρ,λ,μ), all given with explicit bases. A sympathetic reader should care because this single family unifies and generalizes the generalized Taft algebras and a known class of sl2-related Hopf algebras, and it shows how the two-step Ore extension dichotomy—commuting versus differential-operator—controls the entire finite-dimensional representation theory.

Core claim

The central object is H(G,χ,η,b,c,β), the iterated Ore extension K[G][x;τχ][y;τη,δ] with x (1,b)-primitive, y (1,c)-primitive, and yx = η(b)xy + β(1−cb). The classification rests on a dichotomy. If β(1−bc)=0, H is a skew group ring K[x,z]#G and simples arise by induction from one-dimensional K[ker χ∩ker η]-modules. If β(1−bc)≠0, the relation forces η=χ^{-1}; H becomes a differential operator ring, and Propositions 5.8–5.15 prove every finite simple is either a torsion module V(ρ), an x-torsion-free V^x(ρ,λ,μ), or a y-torsion-free V^y(ρ,λ,μ), with explicit bases and isomorphism criteria. Proposition 4.5 produces Hopf quotients finite over K[G], recovering Taft and sl2-type examples.

What carries the argument

The engine is the two-step Ore extension with winding automorphisms τχ, τη and a τη-derivation, validated as a Hopf extension by the condition η(b)=χ(c)^{-1}. The element e=1−cb and scalar β decide the regime: β(1−bc)=0 collapses H to the skew group ring K[x,z]#G with z=c^{-1}y; β(1−bc)≠0 forces η=χ^{-1} and yields the identities yx^i−x^i y = x^{i-1}[e]^σ_i and xz^i−z^i x = z^{i-1}([i]_q b − [i]_{q^{-1}} c^{-1}), where [e]^σ_i=∑ σ^{-k}(e). These identities define the explicit bases of V(ρ), V^x(ρ,λ,μ), and V^y(ρ,λ,μ).

Load-bearing premise

The load-bearing premise is the existence of the τη-derivation δ with δ(x)=β(1−cb) in the nonzero-derivation case; this requires the characters to satisfy η=χ^{-1}, and without that condition the multiplication rule is not associative.

What would settle it

Take G=Z^2 with b=(1,0), c=(0,1), χ(b)=2, χ(c)=3, η(b)=1/3, η(c)=1/2, and β=1. Then η(b)=χ(c)^{-1} holds but η≠χ^{-1}; evaluating (yx)c and y(xc) in the free algebra modulo the relation yx = (1/3)xy + (1−cb) gives a difference (1−χ(c)η(c))c(1−bc) = (1−3/2)c(1−bc) ≠ 0, so the asserted Hopf algebra does not exist for this data.

Watch this falsifier — get emailed when new claim-graph text bears on it.

If this is right

In the zero-derivation case, all finite-dimensional simples are either 1-dimensional or have dimension equal to the index of ker χ ∩ ker η in G; for η=χ^t with t coprime to the order of χ, the dimension is exactly the order of the character, recovering earlier results for generalized Taft algebras.
In the differential-operator case, every finite-dimensional simple module is cyclic with an explicit basis of size n = order of χ, and isomorphism classes are parameterised by a character ρ plus two scalars (λ, μ) modulo the action of powers of q.
The Hopf quotients H(G,χ,η,b,c,β,λ1,λ2) are free finite-rank modules over K[G]; for finitely generated abelian G they are Noetherian PI Hopf algebras and Artin–Schelter–Gorenstein of injective dimension dim G.
The classification separates the representation theory into two uncoupled cases: torsion, x-torsion-free, and y-torsion-free simples occur only in the differential case, while the commuting case has a different stratification (one-dimensional characters plus induced modules).
Because the parameter β can be rescaled to 0 or 1 (Theorem 4.3), the entire family reduces to two isomorphism types, so the classification covers all parameter values.

Where Pith is reading between the lines

These are editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

The same two-regime dichotomy likely governs iterated Hopf Ore extensions of more than two steps: a nonzero derivation at a step should force an inversion relation between the characters of adjacent steps, restricting the possible pointed Hopf algebras of this form.
The explicit bases make the differential-case modules a natural laboratory for computing tensor products and fusion rules; the paper computes tensor products only in the zero case, so this is a direct next step.
The Hopf quotients with parameters λ1, λ2 give continuous families of Hopf algebras of fixed dimension, which could provide new counterexamples to finiteness conjectures of Kaplansky type.
For torsion-free groups, allowing characters of infinite order might yield infinite-dimensional analogues of V^x(ρ,λ,μ) with a similar cyclic structure; the finite-dimensional assumptions in the paper are used mainly to force eigenvalues, so the classification suggests how to drop them.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

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

Desk Editor's Note

The unified construction is a good idea, but the differential-operator classification collapses on a simple concrete example; the paper needs major repair before the main theorem can be trusted.

read the letter

The framework H(G, χ, η, b, c, β) is genuinely useful: it unifies generalized Taft algebras, Takeuchi's U(1), and the Wang–Wu–Tan sl2 Hopf algebras under one roof, and the zero-derivation (skew group ring) treatment in Section 5.1 is mostly standard and sound. That part is worth keeping.

The trouble is the nonzero-derivation case, Section 5.2, where the advertised complete classification of finite-dimensional simple modules is not correct. The stress-test counterexample is hitting a real nerve. Take G=Z² with χ(b)=χ(c)=−1, η=χ^{-1}, β=1, and ρ trivial. Then e=c^{-1}−b, [e]^σ_2=0, so d=2. In V(ρ), x switches v0 and v1, and y kills both, so K·v1 is a nonzero proper submodule. Proposition 5.8 is simply false as stated. The same pattern breaks Proposition 5.12. The root cause is that d is defined as the least index with [e]^σ_d=0 in K[G], but the module action only sees ρ([e]^σ_i); ρ may kill earlier factors. The proofs need extra nonvanishing hypotheses, and the classification would have to be restated with those hypotheses built in.

There's also a narrower but telling problem in Theorem 2.1: it asserts existence of a τ_η-derivation without checking the derivation consistency condition. When β(1−cb)≠0, that condition forces η=χ^{-1}. The authors notice this later in Remark 2.2 and quietly assume it from then on, but the theorem as stated is false. That's not a fatal blow to the whole paper, but it means the foundational statement needs correcting, not just the proofs.

Minor: the abstract promises a tensor-product section that never appears. That's sloppy but easy to fix.

Who is this for? Hopf algebra people working on pointed Hopf algebras and Ore extensions will find the construction and the zero-derivation classification useful. But the main theorem—the simple-module classification in the differential operator case—is unsupported. The paper deserves a serious referee because the construction is important and the errors are concrete and fixable, but as written it should not be accepted. It needs major revision and a careful rewriting of Section 5.2.

Referee Report

3 major / 3 minor

Summary. The paper defines Hopf algebras H(G, χ, η, b, c, β) as two-step Ore extensions of a group algebra K[G], with generators G, x, y satisfying xg = χ(g)gx, yg = η(g)gy, and yx = qxy + β(1−cb), with comultiplication making x and y skew-primitive. It studies Noetherian, PI, Gorenstein, and GK-dimension properties, and aims to classify all finite-dimensional simple modules. In the zero derivation case the algebra is presented as a skew group ring K[x,y]#G and simple modules are described by induction. In the nonzero derivation case, the paper introduces torsion modules V(ρ), x-torsion-free modules V^x(ρ,λ,μ), and y-torsion-free modules V^y(ρ,λ,μ), with explicit bases and isomorphism criteria, and claims this gives a complete classification.

Significance. If the construction and classification were correct, the paper would provide a useful unifying framework for generalized Taft algebras and the Hopf algebras of Wang–Wu–Tan, with explicit bases making the representation theory very concrete. The separation into skew-group-ring and differential-operator cases is natural, and the explicit module constructions are a strength. However, two load-bearing problems prevent acceptance: the main construction theorem does not verify a necessary Ore-extension consistency condition, and the torsion-module simplicity statement is false as written. The proposed objection to the x-torsion-free modules does not land, but the torsion-module flaw alone invalidates the advertised complete classification.

major comments (3)

[§2, Theorem 2.1] The proof never verifies the τ_η-derivation consistency condition. For δ(x)=β(1−cb) and δ|_K[G]=0, the relation xg=χ(g)gx forces δ(gx)=χ(g)^{-1}δ(xg)=χ(g)^{-1}β(1−cb)g, while the τ_η-derivation rule gives δ(gx)=δ(g)x+τ_η(g)δ(x)=η(g)gβ(1−cb). Hence η(g)=χ(g)^{-1} whenever β(1−cb)≠0. Thus the theorem as stated, which permits arbitrary η satisfying η(b)=χ(c)^{-1}, is false; Remark 2.2 derives this rigidity from the algebra relations but does not repair the theorem. This gap is load-bearing for all of §5.2.
[§5.2, Proposition 5.8] The simplicity claim is false. Let G=Z²=⟨b,c⟩, χ(b)=χ(c)=−1, η=χ^{-1}=χ, β=1, and let ρ be the trivial character. Then e=c^{-1}−b, [e]^σ_1=e, [e]^σ_2=0, so d=2. The module V(ρ) has basis v0,v1 with x·v0=v1, x·v1=0, y·v0=0, and y·v1=ρ(e)v0=0. The subspace K v1 is a submodule: x·v1=0, y·v1=0, and b·v1=−v1, c·v1=−v1. Hence V(ρ) is not simple. The proof's assertion that minimality of d forces ρ([e]^σ_{d−k})≠0 conflates nonvanishing of [e]^σ_k in K[G] with nonvanishing of its image under ρ. This breaks the torsion-module classification.
[§5.2, Proposition 5.10] The proof uses a different choice of d from the one used to define V(ρ). The module V(ρ) was defined using the least d with [e]^σ_d=0 in K[G], but the proof of Proposition 5.10 takes d to be the least integer with ρ([e]^σ_i)=0. The map v_i ↦ x^i v with v_d=0 only makes sense with the latter, ρ-dependent d. As written, Proposition 5.8 and Proposition 5.10 are therefore not about the same V(ρ), and the claim that every finite-dimensional torsion simple module is one of the constructed V(ρ) is not established. For completeness: the analogous objection to Proposition 5.12 does not land, because the G-action is nontrivial in the example proposed; span(v0+v1) is not invariant under b.

minor comments (3)

[§5.2, notation] The symbol V(ρ) is used both for the infinite-dimensional module and for its finite quotient V(ρ)/Hv_d. Please introduce a separate symbol, e.g., V∞(ρ), for the infinite module.
[§5.1, Eq. (6)] The sentence 'From Lemma 5.1 and Corollaries 5.5, 5.5 and 5.7' should read 'Corollaries 5.5, 5.6, and 5.7'.
[Abstract/Introduction] The classification is stated for H(G,χ,η,b,c,β) generally, but Section 5 imposes that G is finitely generated abelian and χ, η have finite order, and the nonzero derivation case additionally requires β(1−bc)≠0. These hypotheses should be stated in the abstract and introduction.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged

No significant circularity: the construction and classification are self-contained; identified issues are proof gaps, not circular reductions.

full rationale

The paper's derivation chain is not circular under the standards of this review. The central object H(G, χ, η, b, c, β) is introduced as a Hopf Ore extension via Panov's theorem (an external standard result), and no parameter is fitted to the target classification. The classification in Section 5 constructs modules V(ρ), V^x(ρ, λ, μ), and V^y(ρ, λ, μ) with explicit bases and actions, then proves simplicity, isomorphism criteria, and completeness; simplicity is not built into the definitions, so even if Proposition 5.8's minimality argument is invalid (as the skeptical note observes), that is a proof error, not a circular reduction. There are no self-citations by Hatipoğlu and Lomp; all references are to external work (Panov, Goodearl, Wu–Zhang, Wang–Wu–Tan, etc.), used as benchmarks, examples, or standard tools. The 'rigidity' χ = η^{-1} in the nonzero-derivation case is derived from a consistency computation inside the assumed algebra, not imported from a uniqueness theorem by the same authors. The examples re-express known algebras (Takeuchi, generalized Taft, Wang–Wu–Tan) in the new framework, but that is unification and contextualization, not a renamed prediction. The flagged gap in Theorem 2.1 — the unverified Ore consistency condition for δ — is a correctness risk affecting the whole construction, but it does not amount to defining the target result in terms of itself or fitting a parameter to a prediction. Therefore the circularity score is 0.

Axiom & Free-Parameter Ledger

0 free parameters · 7 axioms · 0 invented entities

No fitted free parameters; β, χ, η, b, c are input data defining the family, not numbers fitted to data. No invented entities beyond the new algebra itself, which is supported by examples and the module classification.

axioms (7)

domain assumption K is an algebraically closed field of characteristic zero.
Imposed throughout; used for one-dimensional simples and Nullstellensatz-style arguments (Section 5).
domain assumption G is finitely generated abelian and χ, η have finite order.
General assumptions for the classification in Section 5; without them the module theory differs.
standard math Panov's theorem characterizes Hopf Ore extensions.
Basis for the construction of H(G, χ, η, b, c, β) in Theorem 2.1.
domain assumption In the differential-operator case, η = χ^{-1}.
Required for δ to be a τ_η-derivation when β(1−bc) ≠ 0; derived in Remark 2.2 but not stated as a hypothesis in Theorem 2.1.
standard math Goodearl's lemma that S_x and S_y are left denominator sets.
Used to define torsion submodules in Section 5.
standard math Wu–Zhang theorem: Noetherian PI Hopf algebras with finite-dimensional simples are AS-Gorenstein.
Used in Proposition 4.6.
standard math q-binomial theorem.
Used in Proposition 4.5 to show the ideal is a Hopf ideal.

pith-pipeline@v1.3.0-alltime-deepseek · 20914 in / 30328 out tokens · 245854 ms · 2026-08-03T00:59:12.896986+00:00 · methodology

0 comments

read the original abstract

We introduce and study a class of Hopf algebras $H(G, \chi, \eta, b, c, \beta)$ which are two-step Ore extensions of a group algebra $\mathbb{K}[G]$. This construction unifies and generalizes some known families of Hopf algebras such as generalized Taft algebras and Hopf algebras related to $\mathfrak{sl}_2$ constructed by Wang, Wu, and Tan. We analyze the ring theoretical properties of these algebras and classify all finite dimensional simple modules over them. We also consider the tensor products of simple modules in the zero derivation case.

discussion (0)

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

15 extracted references · 6 canonical work pages

[1]

Beattie, S

M. Beattie, S. D˘ asc˘ alescu, and L. Gr¨ unenfelder,Constructing pointed Hopf algebras by Ore extensions, J. Algebra225(2000), no. 2, 743–770, DOI 10.1006/jabr.1999.8148. MR1741560

arXiv 2000
[2]

K. A. Brown, S. O’Hagan, J. J. Zhang, and G. Zhuang,Connected Hopf algebras and iterated Ore extensions, J. Pure Appl. Algebra219(2015), no. 6, 2405–2433, DOI 10.1016/j.jpaa.2014.09.007. MR3299738

doi:10.1016/j.jpaa.2014.09.007 2015
[3]

Math.252(2011), no

Fernando Fantino and Gaston Andr´ es Garcia,On pointed Hopf algebras over dihedral groups, Pacific J. Math.252(2011), no. 1, 69–91, DOI 10.2140/pjm.2011.252.69. MR2862142

work page doi:10.2140/pjm.2011.252.69 2011
[4]

Algebra209(1998), no

Shlomo Gelaki,Pointed Hopf algebras and Kaplansky’s 10th conjecture, J. Algebra209(1998), no. 2, 635–657, DOI 10.1006/jabr.1998.7513. MR1659891

arXiv 1998
[5]

K. R. Goodearl,Prime ideals in skew polynomial rings and quantized Weyl algebras, J. Algebra150 (1992), no. 2, 324–377, DOI 10.1016/S0021-8693(05)80036-5. MR1176901

doi:10.1016/s0021-8693(05)80036-5 1992
[7]

140–142, DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-34072-8 14

Sebastian Halbig and Ulrich Kr¨ ahmer,A Hopf algebra without a modular pair in involution, Geometric methods in physics XXXVII, Trends Math., Birkh¨ auser/Springer, Cham, [2019]©2019, pp. 140–142, DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-34072-8 14. MR4143889

work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-34072-8 2019
[8]

MR0435126

Irving Kaplansky,Bialgebras, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, University of Chicago, Department of Mathematics, Chicago, IL, 1975. MR0435126

1975
[9]

155, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1995

Christian Kassel,Quantum groups, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 155, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1995. MR1321145

1995
[10]

J. C. McConnell and J. C. Robson,Noncommutative Noetherian rings, Pure and Applied Mathematics (New York), John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Chichester, 1987. With the cooperation of L. W. Small; A Wiley-Interscience Publication. MR0934572

1987
[11]

London Math

Eric M¨ uller,Finite subgroups of the quantum general linear group, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3)81 (2000), no. 1, 190–210, DOI 10.1112/S002461150001248X. MR1757051

work page doi:10.1112/s002461150001248x 2000
[12]

A. N. Panov,Ore extensions of Hopf algebras, Mat. Zametki74(2003), no. 3, 425–434, DOI 10.1023/A:1026115004357 (Russian, with Russian summary); English transl., Math. Notes74(2003), no. 3-4, 401–410. MR2022506

work page doi:10.1023/a:1026115004357 2003
[13]

Passman,Infinite crossed products, Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol

Donald S. Passman,Infinite crossed products, Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 135, Academic Press, Inc., Boston, MA, 1989. MR0979094

1989
[14]

Math., vol

Mitsuhiro Takeuchi,Representations of the Hopf algebraU(n), Hopf algebras and generaliza- tions, Contemp. Math., vol. 441, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2007, pp. 155–174, DOI 10.1090/conm/441/08504. MR2381540 20 CAN HAT ˙IPO ˘GLU AND CHRISTIAN LOMP

work page doi:10.1090/conm/441/08504 2007
[15]

Algebra49(2021), no

Jing Wang, Zhixiang Wu, and Yan Tan,Some Hopf algebras related tosl 2, Comm. Algebra49(2021), no. 8, 3335–3368, DOI 10.1080/00927872.2021.1894568. MR4283152

arXiv 2021
[16]

Wu and J

Q.-S. Wu and J. J. Zhang,Noetherian PI Hopf algebras are Gorenstein, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.355 (2003), no. 3, 1043–1066, DOI 10.1090/S0002-9947-02-03106-9. MR1938745 College of Engineering and Technology, American University of the Middle East, Kuwait Email address:osman.hatipoglu@aum.edu.kw Department of Mathematics of the F aculty of Science and Center...

work page doi:10.1090/s0002-9947-02-03106-9 2003

[1] [1]

Beattie, S

M. Beattie, S. D˘ asc˘ alescu, and L. Gr¨ unenfelder,Constructing pointed Hopf algebras by Ore extensions, J. Algebra225(2000), no. 2, 743–770, DOI 10.1006/jabr.1999.8148. MR1741560

arXiv 2000

[2] [2]

K. A. Brown, S. O’Hagan, J. J. Zhang, and G. Zhuang,Connected Hopf algebras and iterated Ore extensions, J. Pure Appl. Algebra219(2015), no. 6, 2405–2433, DOI 10.1016/j.jpaa.2014.09.007. MR3299738

doi:10.1016/j.jpaa.2014.09.007 2015

[3] [3]

Math.252(2011), no

Fernando Fantino and Gaston Andr´ es Garcia,On pointed Hopf algebras over dihedral groups, Pacific J. Math.252(2011), no. 1, 69–91, DOI 10.2140/pjm.2011.252.69. MR2862142

work page doi:10.2140/pjm.2011.252.69 2011

[4] [4]

Algebra209(1998), no

Shlomo Gelaki,Pointed Hopf algebras and Kaplansky’s 10th conjecture, J. Algebra209(1998), no. 2, 635–657, DOI 10.1006/jabr.1998.7513. MR1659891

arXiv 1998

[5] [5]

K. R. Goodearl,Prime ideals in skew polynomial rings and quantized Weyl algebras, J. Algebra150 (1992), no. 2, 324–377, DOI 10.1016/S0021-8693(05)80036-5. MR1176901

doi:10.1016/s0021-8693(05)80036-5 1992

[6] [7]

140–142, DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-34072-8 14

Sebastian Halbig and Ulrich Kr¨ ahmer,A Hopf algebra without a modular pair in involution, Geometric methods in physics XXXVII, Trends Math., Birkh¨ auser/Springer, Cham, [2019]©2019, pp. 140–142, DOI 10.1007/978-3-030-34072-8 14. MR4143889

work page doi:10.1007/978-3-030-34072-8 2019

[7] [8]

MR0435126

Irving Kaplansky,Bialgebras, Lecture Notes in Mathematics, University of Chicago, Department of Mathematics, Chicago, IL, 1975. MR0435126

1975

[8] [9]

155, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1995

Christian Kassel,Quantum groups, Graduate Texts in Mathematics, vol. 155, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1995. MR1321145

1995

[9] [10]

J. C. McConnell and J. C. Robson,Noncommutative Noetherian rings, Pure and Applied Mathematics (New York), John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., Chichester, 1987. With the cooperation of L. W. Small; A Wiley-Interscience Publication. MR0934572

1987

[10] [11]

London Math

Eric M¨ uller,Finite subgroups of the quantum general linear group, Proc. London Math. Soc. (3)81 (2000), no. 1, 190–210, DOI 10.1112/S002461150001248X. MR1757051

work page doi:10.1112/s002461150001248x 2000

[11] [12]

A. N. Panov,Ore extensions of Hopf algebras, Mat. Zametki74(2003), no. 3, 425–434, DOI 10.1023/A:1026115004357 (Russian, with Russian summary); English transl., Math. Notes74(2003), no. 3-4, 401–410. MR2022506

work page doi:10.1023/a:1026115004357 2003

[12] [13]

Passman,Infinite crossed products, Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol

Donald S. Passman,Infinite crossed products, Pure and Applied Mathematics, vol. 135, Academic Press, Inc., Boston, MA, 1989. MR0979094

1989

[13] [14]

Math., vol

Mitsuhiro Takeuchi,Representations of the Hopf algebraU(n), Hopf algebras and generaliza- tions, Contemp. Math., vol. 441, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2007, pp. 155–174, DOI 10.1090/conm/441/08504. MR2381540 20 CAN HAT ˙IPO ˘GLU AND CHRISTIAN LOMP

work page doi:10.1090/conm/441/08504 2007

[14] [15]

Algebra49(2021), no

Jing Wang, Zhixiang Wu, and Yan Tan,Some Hopf algebras related tosl 2, Comm. Algebra49(2021), no. 8, 3335–3368, DOI 10.1080/00927872.2021.1894568. MR4283152

arXiv 2021

[15] [16]

Wu and J

Q.-S. Wu and J. J. Zhang,Noetherian PI Hopf algebras are Gorenstein, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc.355 (2003), no. 3, 1043–1066, DOI 10.1090/S0002-9947-02-03106-9. MR1938745 College of Engineering and Technology, American University of the Middle East, Kuwait Email address:osman.hatipoglu@aum.edu.kw Department of Mathematics of the F aculty of Science and Center...

work page doi:10.1090/s0002-9947-02-03106-9 2003