The Proof of Theorem I. Remark 3 proves the statements (I) ~ (3) and (2) ~ (3).

Theo-
rem 2(I) and Lermna 9 prove the statements (3) ~ (I) and (3) ~ (2).
The proofs of Theorems 3 and 4 are quite similar to the proofs of Theorems I and 2.
Finally, for the sake of completeness, we prove the following statement.
Proposition 10. If K is an infinite field of characteristic p and G an arbitrary group,
then the group ring K[G] is not a critical ring.
Proof. Suppose that K[G] is a critical ring with a critical polynomial f. Since K is
an infinite field, we can assume that f is homogeneous. If GF(p) = F, then K[G] = FIG] |
But F[G] is a proper subring and, therefore, f is an identity in it. Then f is also an iden-
tity in K[G] ([5], 1.13).
The author expresses his gratitude to G. K. Genov who introduced him to this circle of
problems and to L. L. Avramov for valuable discussions.

LITERATURE CITED
i. N. Bourbaki, Lie Groups and Lie Algebras [Russian translation], Nauka, Moscow (|976).
2. S . A . Jennings, "The structure of the group ring of a p-group over a modular field,"
Trans. Am. Math. Soc., 50, 175-185 (1941).
3. D. So Passman, The Algebraic Structure of Group Rings, Wiley, New York (1977).
4. C. Curtis and I. Weiner, The Representation Theory of Finite Groups and Associative
Algebras [Russian translation], Mir, Moscow (1969).
5. N. Jacobson, PI-Algebras, Springer-Verlag, Berlin (1974) o
6. Yu. N. Mal'tsev and A. A. Nechaev, "On critical rings and varieties of algebras, ~ Algebra
Logika, 18, No. 3, 341-348 (1979).

n-LIE ALGEBRAS

V. T. Filippov b~C 512.558:512.554.3

in 1960 Kurosh [I] introduced the notion of a multioperator (linear) ~-algebrao He also
selected the class of anticommutative ~-algebras [2] containing the class of Lie algebras.
It is well known that the algebra obtained by means of the commutator operation Ix, y] = xy --
yx on the vector space of an associative algebra is a Lie algebra. In a similar fashion a
class of g-algebras which are obtained from the associative ~-algebras is introduced in [2]~
As has been later established by S. V. Polin ([3], p. 86), some identities not following from
the anticommutativity hold in this class. But it was already noted in [2] that even for a
ternary operation ~ this class does not satisfy an identity similar to the Jacobi iden-
tity in Lie algebras. Also, one of the most important consequences of the Jacobi identity
is lost, namely, that the adjoint endomorphism ad x of an element x of the Lie algebra is a
different iat ion.
The present article introduces the class of n-Lie algebras, the class of ~-algebras with
a single n-ary anticommutative operation w n satisfying the identity~

((x~ . . . . . xn) o)~, y~ . . . . . yn) o)~ = ~ (x~ . . . . . (xi, y~ . . . . . y~) o)n . . . . . x,O ~,~,

which preserves main properties of the Jacobi identity. For n = 2 this class exactly coin-
cides with the class of Lie algebras.
Examples of n-Lie algebras are given in Sec. I. In particular~ it is shown that vector
multiplication of vectors of the (n + 1)-dimensional Euclidean space and the Jacobian l~fi/
~xj! of the polynomial algebra in n variables x1,...,x n can be taken as the operation ~n-
Finite-dimensional n-Lie algebras over a field of characteristic 0 are studied in Sec. 2.
It is easily seen that each n-Lie algebr a A has a solvable radical ~(A), i.e., a maximal

Novosibirsk. Translated from Sibirskii Matematicheskii Zhurnal, Vol. 26, No. 6, pp. 126-
140, November-December, 1985. Original article submitted January 23, 1984.

0037-4466/85/2606-0879509.50 9 1986 Plenum Publishing Corporation 879

solvable ideal such that the quotient algebra A/~(A) contains no solvable ideals. It is
proved in Sec. 2 that, like in the case of Lie algebras, the radical ~(A) of an n-Lie algebra
A is a characteristic idea and, in particular, it is ideally hereditary, i.e., for each ideal
I of the algebra A the equality ~ ( ] ) = ~ ( A ) N ! holds. It is well known that the sum of nil-
potent ideals of a finite-dimensional Lie algebra L is again a nilpotent ideal. Therefore,
L has a nilradical, the maximal nilpotent ideal9 In the same section, it is shown that a
similar statement is not, generally, true for n-Lie algebras, namely, we give an example of
an n-Lie algebra (n > 2) which is a sum of two Abelian ideals but is not nilpotent.
n-Lie algebras of dimension ~n + I over a field of characteristic p ~ 2 are described in
Sec. 3. In essence, the classification of such algebras is similar to the classification of
Lie algebras of dimension <3.
In Sec. 4 we establish that unsolvable (n + 1)-dimensional n-Lie algebras are simple and'
prove that their differentiations are inner provided that the characteristic of the basic
field is equal to 0.

1. Definitions and Examples of n-Lie Algebras

Let ~ be an associative commutative ring with unity. Recall [I, 3] that a multioperator
linear ~-algebra or, simply, an ~-algebra is a unitary G-module A on which a system ~ of poly-
linear n-ary algebraic operations is given.
An anticommutative ~-algebra is an ~-algebra in which for each operation ~ , ~ the iden-
tities
(x,, 9 9 x.)~.= (-t)~(~ ~o,~)~
hold, where ~ runs over the symmetric group Sn and the number ~(o) is equal to 0 or I depend-
ing on the parity of the permutation o.
Henceforth, unless specified otherwise, we assume that ~ contains exactly one n-ary
operation ~n which will be called multiplication, and the result of applying it to (x~..... x~)~
A n , where A n is the Cartesian power of the ~-module A, is denoted by [xl,...,Xn]. Further-
more, we assume that n ~ 2.
An anticommutative ~-algebra A over a ring ~ with a single n-ary operation satisfying
the identity

[[xl . . . . . x Q , Y2. . . . . y ~ ] ~ ~ [x~ . . . . . [x~, y~ . . . . , yQ . . . . . x~] (*)

is called an n-Lie algebra over ~.

We will give an example of an (n + 1)-dimensional n-Lie algebra which is an analogue of
the three-dimensional Lie algebra with the cross product as multiplication. Let L be the
(n + 1)-dimensional (real) Euclidean space. We denote by [xl,...,Xn] the vector product of
the vectors xl, ..., x , ~ L (e.g., cf. [4, 5]). Recall that the vector product is a skew-sym-
metric polylinear function of its variables and, if el,...,en+ 1 form an orthonormal basis of
the space L, is equal to the determinant
Xll X12 9149 Xln el
[xl . . . . . Xn] = I x21 X~2 ... Xe. e2 (1)
9 , . . . . . . . . . . ~ .

t Xn+ll Xn+12 9 9 9 Xn+ln en+l

where (xli,...,Xn+li) are the coordinates of the vectors xi, i = l,...,n.

If the n-ary operation in L is defined as the vector product, then L becomes an (n + 1)-
dimensional real anticommutative ~-algebra which, henceforth, is denoted by An+ I. By virtue
of polylinearity, ~ the vector product is completely determined by the multiplication table of
the basis vectors. From (I) we obtain the following multiplication table of the basis vec-
tors:
[e, . . . . . e,-,, ~,, e,+, . . . . . e.+,] =(--l)"+'+'e,, (2)
where i = 1,...,n + I and the symbol ei means that e i is omitted. The remaining products of
the b a s i s vectors are either equal to zero or obtained from (2) and the anticommutativity.
Proposition I. The algebra An+ I is an n-Lie algebra.

880
 Proof. Let <x~ . . . . . xn; Y2. . . . . yn>=[[x:~ . . . . . x-a], Y2 . . . . . YT~]-- ~2J [x 1 . . . . . [x~, y~.. . . . . yn] . . . . . xn] .

By the anticommutativity of the algebra An+l, in order to prove the theorem, it suffices to
show that
<e~. . . . . e~. . . . . e~+~; e~. . . . . ej . . . . , e~, . . . , e~+~> = O,

where i, j, k = 1,...,n + 1, j < k. We p r o v e the case i < j (the proof for the remaining
cases is similar). By (2) and the anticommutativity of the multiplication,

(el, ..., ei~ . . . ~ en+i; el, . . . , ej, I . . ~ e~.~ . . . , e~+t>

= [[e ..... , e; . . . . , e~,..., e~ . . . . , e,~+~], e~ . . . . . ei . . . . . e~ . . . . . e~ . . . . , e,+~]

--[e, ..... e, . . . . . e~-,, Ice, e , , . . . , .... , e~,..., e ~ + , ] , e~+, . . . . . e,,+:]

--let .... , ~ ..... ek-t, [eh, et . . . . , ej . . . . , ek,..., en+t], ek+l . . . . . en+l]

= ( - - t ) ' + ~ + ~ [ e , , e~. . . . , e~. . . . . e~-. . . . , e~. . . . , e,,+~]--
--(--i)5-~[e~, ..., ~ . . . . . e~_~, [et, . ., e~ . . . . . ~ , + , ] , ~;+,, . . . , ~o+,]
-(-t)~-2[~...., e, . . . . . ~_,, [~,,. 9, & .... , e,+d, e~+,,..., e.+,]
= (-l)~[e, ..... e; . . . . . ej_,, [ e i , . ., ~ . . . . , ~ , + , ] , e,+, . . . . , ~+,1
+(-t)k-'[e,, . . . , e~. . . . . eh-,, [ e l , . ., g, . . . . . e~+~], e~ . . . . . e~+,]
=(-i)'(-t)~+~+'[e, . . . . , ~, 9 e s - , , e~, ej+~, . . . , e,~+,] +

+ ( - 1 ) ~-' ( - t ) " + ~ + ' [ e , . . . . , ~ , , . 9, e k - t , ej, e~+t, . . . , ' e~+~] = O.

The proposition is proved 9

Note that Proposition I also follows from Theorem 3 of this article.
Let A be an associative commutative G-algebra. We fix arbitrary differentiations DI,...,
D n of the algebra A which commute, i.e., satisfy the equalities DiD j = DjDi, i, j = 1,...,n.
If for all x ~ , . . . , x ~ A we put
[x,, . . . , x d = legit, (3)
where Icijl is the determinant with elements cij = xiDj, i, j = 1,...,n, then the ~-module A
becomes an anticommutative G-algebra over ~ relative to the operation [xl,...,Xn] we denote
it by A*.
Proposition 2. The algebra A* is an n-Lie G-algebra.
Proof. Obviously, for all x~j~A, i, j = 1,...,n, and each differentiation D of the al-
gebra A the equality

: ~=I Xll " " " Xln

!:iiiiiI Xnl 9 9 9 Xnz~

holds. Therefore, since Dj commute, we have t h e equalities

Ix1 . . . . . x~] D j ~ Ix, . . . . x~Dj . . . . . x,d, ] = t ..... n.

i=l

This, along with (3) and elementary properties of determinants, implies for all xl,...,Xn,
Y2,...,yn ~ A that

I [x, ..... x,~]D1 [x,, . . . , x ~ ] D 2 . . . [x, . . . . . x~]D~

[[xl, x,d, y= . . . . Y~ = yzD, yaD~ ... yaD,,

..... xol k ..... ..... k

i=l ~=i i=i

= y2Ol y=D~ ... y=O,~

9 , , . 9 . . 9 9 , ~ . . 9 9 9 ~ ~ ~ 9 ~ . . 9 o . 9 ~ 9

y~D1 y~D 2 ... yv~D~

881
 l [xl . . . . , x~D 1 . . . . , x, d [x 1 . . . . , x~D . . . . . , xn] ... [xl . . . . . x~D~ . . . . . xn ~,

. :_, . . . . . . . . . . . : . . . . .

=
nI
~ xl . . . . . xi-1,

lY~D1
Y~D1 Y2D~

y~D.2
"'"

...
Y2D~ , x i + l . . . . .

ynDnl
xn
] n
= ~ [x~ . . . . .
i=1
[xi, y~ . . . . . y,d .... , z,d.

Therefore, the identity (*) holds in A*. The proposition is proved.

In particular, it follows from Proposition 2 that the algebra E of polynomials in n
variables xl,...,x n over a ring ~ becomes an n-Lie ~-algebra if we take, as the operation
[fl,...,fn], the Jacobian of the polynomials /I..... ] ~ E :

[h ..... M =
I~ ~ ,

where 3fi/3x j is the partial derivative of the polynomial fi with respect to the variable
xj, i, j = 1,...,n.
We will describe one method of obtaining (n + 1)-Lie algebras from n-Lie algebras by
means of reducing the arity of the operation. Let A be an n-Lie algebra (n > 2), a an arbi-
trary fixed element of the algebra A. We define a new ( n - 1)-ary operation [,...,]l on the
C-module A by putting for all x~, ..., x ~ - i E A
[xi,..., x~-~]~ = [ x , , . . . , x~-~, a].

Since this operation is polylinear and anticommutative, we have defined on the ~-module A
an anticommutative ~-algebra with an ( n - ~)-ary operation which we denote by Al. By the
identity (*) and the anticommutativity in the algebra A, we have
n--1

[[xl . . . . . x=-1, a], Y2 . . . . . Y~-I, al = ~ Ix1 . . . . . [x~, Y2 . . . . . Yn-1, al . . . . . x ~ - l , al

71--I

+ [zl . . . . . x ~ - l , [a, y= . . . . . Y ~ - I , a]] = ~ [xl . . . . . [xi, Y2 . . . . . Y~-I, a l . . . . . x,~-l, a].

Hence

[Ix1 . . . . . . x~-~h, y.z. . . . . y~-ll~ ' = E [Xl . . . . . [Xi' Y2 . . . . . Yn--1]l . . . . . Xn--1]l.

Therefore, the algebra AI is an (n -- 1)-Lie algebra.

Let A be an arbitrary n-Lie ~-algebra. Following [I] we call a r I of the
algebra A an ideal if for all ~ I , xj, ..., x , - ~ A
[~, x~ . . . . , x ~ _ , ] ~ I.
It is known []] that the ideals of an algebra A are exactly the kernels of homomorphisms, and
if I and J are ideals of the algebra A, then I + J and I A J are also ideals, and the iso-
morphism theorem ~s true (e.g., see [6, p. 136]):
( I + J ) / J ~-- I / I N J.
A differentiation of an algebra A is a ~-linear map of A into itself satisfying the con-
dition
n

[X 1. . . . . Xn] D = ~z~ [Xl . . . . . xi D ..... x,,] (14)

for all xl, ...,x ~ A .

The map R(xz,...,Xn): xl [xl, x2,...,Xn] of an algebra A into itself is called the
right multiplication defined by the elements xz,...,Xn.
By virtue of (*), right multiplications and their linear combinations are differentia-
tions which are said to be inner.

882
 Let M = { a = } = ~ be a fixed set of generators of an algebra A. Words of the form [[... x
[all,...,a~]~ ...], ak2,...,akn] , where ay.~.]i, are said to be right-normed. Like in the
case of Lie algebras, each element of the algebra A can be written as a linear combination
of right-normed words. Indeed, by virtue of the anticommutativity of the algebra A and the
identity (*), we have

It, Ix~ . . . . . x,,], ~/~ . . . . . y~,_~] = - - [ [ x ~ . . . . . x,,], t, y._,. . . . . y~_~] = - - ~ [x~ . . . . . [x~, t, y~ . . . . . y~,-~] . . . . . x,,]
i=1

= [x~, [t, x~, y~, y,~_~], x.] = ~" (-- 1) i+~ [[t, x~, y_o, y,,_~], x~, ^:~:i, , 9 x,,l.
~=1 i=l

Hence
~L

R ([~, . . . . . x,,], ~ . . . . . y,,_,) = Y ( - i) ~+~ ~ ( ~ , ~ . . . . . y,,_,) R (~, . . . . . .k . . . . . ~,,).

Let now R = R(x2,...,Xn) be an arbitrary operator of right multiplication defined by words

x2,.o.,x n. Using the last equality, we can write the operator R in the form ~ =~ail~i~ ... l~i~,

where ~ E ~ and each operator Rij has the form R(ai2 .... ,ain) with as,,..,a.,,EM. On the
other hand, since A is anticommutative, each word w = aRz ... Rm, where a~-i, and R i are some
right multiplication operators. Applying the previous argument to the operators Ri, we write
the word w as a linear combination of right-normed words of the same format. Therefore, each
element of the algebra A can be written as a linear combination of right-normed words.
Powers A k of an algebra A are defined inductively. Let A ~ = A. If A i are defined for
all i < k, then for k > 0 p u m A h = ~ [ A~, ..., A 7~] , where the summation is done over all sets
i1,o..,i n such that ii + ... + in = k -- I. Furthermore, we put A <~ = A,...,A <k> = [A <k-l>,
A,..o,A], .... Since each word w ~ A k is a linear combination of right-normed words of the
same composition, A k = A <k> for all k = 0, I, ....
An algebra A is called nilpotent if there exists k such that A k = 0.
We define the derived series A = A ( ~ (~)~
. . . . .~.A. .(k)~ , putting A (k+1) = [A (k),...,A(k)],
k ~ 0. It is easily seen that (A(k))(s) = A (k+s).

By (*), for any ideals Ii,...,I k of an algebra A the @-submodule [I1,...,Ik] is an ideal
ofI(k)A'andInI~articular'are
also ideals
this implies
of A. that for each ideal I of the algebra A the r

An ideal I of A is said to be solvable if there exists k such that I (k) = 0. If 11 = 0,

the ideal I is said to be Abelian. Since the powers I (k) of an ideal I are ideals, each non-
zero solvable ideal of A contains a nonzero Abelian ideal of A.
An algebra A is said to be simple if A I z 0 and it has no ideals distinct from 0 and A.
The algebra An+ 1 (n ~ 2) from Proposition I is an example of a simple algebra (cf. Theorem 4).

2. Radical of Finite-Dimensional n-Lie Algebras

In this section we will study some solvability and nilpotency properties of n-Lie alge-
bras.

Obviously, each subalgebra and each homomorphic image of a solvable n-Lie algebra is
solvable. Moreover, if an algebra A contains a solvable ideal I such that the quotient alge-
bra A/I is solvable, then the algebra A is also solvable. This, together with the isomorphism
theorem, implies that the sum of two solvable ideals is again a solvable ideal. So if A is a
finite-dimensional n-Lie algebra over a field @, then there exists a maximal solvable ideal
~(A) and the quotient algebra A/~(A) contains no nonzero solvable ideals. Like in the case
of Lie algebras, the ideal ~(A) will be called the radical of the algebra A. If ~ ( A ) = 0 ,
the algebra A is said to be semisimple. Obviously, each simple algebra is semisimple.
The scheme of proof of the following theorem repeats:the proof of a similar statement for
Lie algebras.

THEOREM I. Let A be a finite-dimensional n-Lie algebra over a field of characteristic

0, ~{A) the radical of the algebra A. Then for each differentiation D of the algebra A this
inclusion holds:

883
 ~(A)D~(A). (5)
This implies that for each ideal I of the algebra A holds the equality

re(I)= re(A) ~ L (6)

Proof. The following lemma easily follows from (4).
LEMMA I. If I is an ideal of an algebra A and D its differentiation, then I + ID is
also an ideal of A.
Now, in order to prove the theorem, it suffices to prove the solvability of the ideal
~(A)+~(A)D which, by virtue of maximality of ~(A) , will imply the inclusion (5). To this
end, we will use the following generalization of Leibniz's formula whose validity can be
easily established. Let x~x2 ... x k be an arbitrary word in A with some fixed arrangement of
parentheses. Then for each differentiation D of the algebra A holds the equality

. . . . . .
(7)

where ik = k -- i I --...-- ik-l, the summation is performed over all il, i2,...,ik_ l such that
O~i~k, O~ia~k-ii, ..., O ~ i ~ - ~ k - i i - . . . - i ~ - 2 ~ a n d the words (xlD~l)(xiD ~2) . . . (xkD ~l~) have the
same a r r a n g e m e n t of parentheses as t h e word x l x 2 . . . x k .
Let I be a solvable ideal of the algebra A, i.e., I (k) = 0 for some k. Then, by (7),
we have the inclusion (ID) (~)~ [ + I(h)D(~ = I . Hence ( I + I D ) (~) ~ f(~)= 0. Therefore, the ideal
I + ID is also solvable. In particular, if f = ~ ( N ) , then the ideal ~ ( N ) + ~ ( A ) D is solvable
and, therefore, ~ ( N ) t ~ ( N ) D = ~ ( A ) . This implies the inclusion (5).
Obviously, ~(A) n f ~ ( 1 ) . To prove the reverse inclusion, it suffices to show that ~(f)
is an ideal of the algebra A. By (*), for all x~, ..., x ~ A the restriction of the right
multiplication R(xi,...,x n) to the ideal I is a differentiation of the ideal I. Therefore,
by (5), for each i ~ ( 1 ) [i, xi, ..., x~]=iR(x~, ..., x~)~(I), ~(i) is an ideal of the algebra A,
9 ( I ) ~ ( A ) n7, ~ ( I ) = ~ ( A ) n I . The theorem is proved.
In the class of finite-dimensional Lie algebras an important role belongs to the notion
of the nilradical, the nilpotent ideal containing each nilpotent ideal of the algebra. In
particular, it is known that if L is a Lie algebra, ~(L) and N(L) are the radical and the
nilradical of the algebra L, respectively, then for each differentiation D of the algebra L
the inclusion N ( L ) D ~ N ( L ) holds (e.g., cf. [7]). The following example shows that for n >
2 there is no analogue of the nilradical in n-Lie algebras.
Let A be an n-dimensional anticommutative g-algebra over a field with a basis el,...,e n
and the multiplication table
[e~ . . . . . ~1 = e~. (8)
The r e m a i n i n g p r o d u c t s a r e o b t a i n e d f r o m (8) a n d t h e a n t i c o m m u t a t i v i t y o f t h e a l g e b r a A. It
is easily seen that A is an n-Lie algebra. Furthermore, the algebra A is solvable and, there-
fore, coincides with its radical. L e t n > 2. Consider the subspaces B and C generated, re-
spectively, by the elements el, e2,...,ek and e~, ek+l,...,en, where 1 < k < n. Obviously,
B a n d C a r e A b e l i a n i d e a l s o f t h e a l g e b r a A a n d A = B + C. On t h e o t h e r h a n d , e l R ( e 2 , . . . ,
e n ) S x 0 f o r e a c h s ) 1. Therefore, t h e a l g e b r a A i s a sum o f n i l p o t e n t (even Abelian) ideals
but is not nilpotent itself, Moreover, the algebra A gives an example of a solvable algebra
such that AD = A for some differentiation D. Indeed, consider the linear transformation D
given on el,...,e n as follows:
e~D=e~, i = t . . . . . n - - l ,
e~D=--(n - 2)e~.
The transformation D is a differentiation of the algebra A. To this end, it suffices to veri-
fy that

[e~ . . . . . e~l D = ~ [e~ . . . . . e~D . . . . . e~]. (9)

By ( 8 ) , [e~,...,en]D = ezD = e l . On t h e other hand,

let . . . . . eiD . . . . . e~] = ~, [e~ . . . . , e~D . . . . . e~] + [e~, ..., e~_~, e~Dl
i=l i~l

884
 n--I
"~ ~.] [et . . . . . ei . . . . . enl--(n - - 2)[et ..... en] = ( n -- t ) q - - ( n --2) e~ = e l .
,i.=l

Therefore, equality (9) holds. Thus, D is a d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of the algebra A. The equality

AD = A is obvious.

3. A Description of n-Lie Algebras of L o w D i m e n s i o n a l i t i e s

The d e s c r i p t i o n of n-Lie algebras of d i m e n s i o n ~n I is essentially similar to the
d e s c r i p t i o n of Lie algebras of dimension ~3. Like in [8], we first consider a n t i c o m ~ u t a t i v e
algebras. Let A be an a n t i c o m m u t a t i v e algebra over a field F with the n-ary m u l t i p l i c a t i o n
[xl,...,Xn]. If d i m A < n, then A is Abelian.
Suppose that d i m A = n. If A 1 = 0, then A is also Abelian. Suppose n o w that A l ~ O.
Let el,...~e n be a basis of the algebra A. Then [el,...,en] = ~lel + ... + ~nen, where at
least one of ~i is not zero. Furthermore, A I = F[ez,...,en] and, therefore, dim A l = {. Let
~z ~ 0. Then, p u t t i n g e~ = ~lel + . +. enen,. . we . have. [e~, ei, ,e n] =~[e~, ,enl ~le i' . = . . . =

So we can put [el .... ,en] = ~lez. R e p l a c i n g e2 by ~[le2, we obtain [el,. .... en] = el. There-
fore, we have a u n i q u e n o n - A b e l i a n algebra of d i m e n s i o n n. It is easily seen that it is an
n-Lie algebra. In particular, this implies that all anticommutative algebras of d i m e n s i o n
< n are n-Lie algebras.

Let n o w A be an a n t i c o m m u t a t i v e algebra of d i m e n s i o n n + I and el,...~en+ I a basis of A.

We put

~=(-~)~+'+~[e, .... , g .... , e~+,], ~=~ ..... n+~. (~0)

It is easily seen that for all x~, ..., x ~ A with coordinates x i = (~li,...,~n+li) in the
basis ez,...,en 1 the m u l t i p l i c a t i o n [xz,...,Xn] can be written in the f o r m

I ~ 9 ~ ~ I (~)
. . . . . =

The m u l t i p l i c a t i o n in the algebra A is given by the m a t r i x B determined by the equalities

e~=~e~+o..+~+~e~+~, i = ~,...,n + or, in the matrix form,
( e ~, . . . , e"+')=(e,, ..., e.+t)B. (~2)

Obviously_, the r_ank of the m a t r i x B is equal to the dimension of the subalgehra A l = [A,...,
A]. Let e l , . . ~ be a new basis of the algebra A for which

(~, . . . . , ~r, ..., ~,~+d~" (13)

We denote by T = (tij) the m a t r i x of change from the new basis to the old one:
(e, . . . . , e,+,)=(~, .... , g'~+,)T. (14)
Then if T* = (Tii) is the m a t r i x consisting of the algebraic complements of the m a t r i x T, then
(10) and (11) imply
e ~ = ( - - t) ~+~+~ [ea . . . . . e~ . . . . . e~+~] = ( - - t ) '*+~+~ [ t l , e , + ...

. .. q- t n + l l e n + l , .... e~, . . . , lln+le 1 + ... -q- t ~ , + l n + l e ~ + i ~

t -1
(-- 1).+1+ i 1~ ... t1~-1 t1~+i .....tl.~+le.

I ~nq-ll- 9 9 tn+l{-- 1 tn+li+1 . 9 t~+ln+le

-1
tn .,. tl~_ 1 e t1~+1 ... tln+a
. . . . . . . . . . . .- ~ +. ~ . . . . . . . .t T~/+ ... + T ~ + ~ ~'+~
tn+ll ... tn+l~_ 1 e tn+li+l .,. n-]-ln+l

or, in the m a t r i x form,

(e~ . . . . . e~+~) = (~ . . . . . ~+~) T*', (15)
where the primes denote the transpose operation. By (12)-(15), we have the equality

(e, . . e,~.+,). . T B. =. (el, , e,~+t) B = (e ~, . . . , e,~l) = (~1, . . . , -e~z~l)' T * ' = ~I . . . . -en+~} B T ~ .

So TB = BT*' But TT* = }TIE, where IT[ is the determinant of the m a t r i x T and E is the iden-
tity matrix. So B = [TI-ITBT'. This implies

885
 THEOREM 2. Two anticommutative .q-algebras of dimension n + I defined by the relation-
ships (12) and (13) are isomorphic if and only if there exists a nonsingular matrix T such
that
N= IT~'-'T B T . '

We will now find conditions on elements of the matrix B under which an anticommutative
algebra A of dimension n + I is an n-Lie algebra. Since the algebra A is anticommutative, a
necessary and sufficient condition for it to be an n-Lie algebra is given by the equalities
A A
[[el ..... 7~. . . . . e,~+~], e l . . . . . ej ..... ek ..... e,~
7~-!- I

-- ~ [el . . . . . e,~_,. [e~, e I . . . . . e~ . . . . . ~j . . . . . . e,,+,l, e~_, .... ei ..... e,,_-,] = 0 , (16)

S==l
,s~'i
where i, j, k = 1,...,n + 1, j < k . If i = j or i = k, then the subalgebra generated by the
basic elements appearing in the left-hand part of (16) has dimension n and, therefore, is an
n-Lie algebra. In this case (16) does hold. So a n e c e s s a r y and sufficient condition for the
algebra A to be n-Lie is given by the equalities (16) for distinct subscripts i, j, k. We
will now prove that the algebra A is an n-Lie algebra if and only if the equalities

(~o -- ~ ) e k + (t~h, -- [ ~ ) e j + ( , ~ -- ~k~) e ~ = 0 ( t 7)

hold for all i, j, k = 1,...,n + I. We denote the left-hand part of (16) by a and let i > k.
By (10), (12), and the anticommutativity of A,
A
(Z = [[C,, ..., ~i .... , en+t], el . . . . . ~j,..., ek . . . . . e,,+i]
--[el,..., C,-I, [ff], et ..... d,.... , e~, ..., e,|-~i], ej-~i,-.., ei..... e,+t]
--[el,..., eh-i, [ek, el . . . . . eh..., ea,..., e,t+l], e E + l , . . . , ei . . . . . e,~+tl

= (--t)'~+'+'[e ':, e, . . . . . ej, . . . , e'k. . . . , e,,+,] -- (--t)',+~+~[e, . . . . . ej-,, e ~, ej+~. . . . . e, . . . . . e,,+,]

-(-t)"+J+"+'[e, ..... e~-,, e s, e,~+, . . . . . e, . . . . . e,:+,] = ( - l ) ~ + ~ + % , [ e ~ , e, . . . . . ej . . . . , e~ . . . . . e~+,]

-(-l)~+J+"~,~[e,, e~-,, e,, ej+l, 9 e,,..., e,,+,] + r ~,~+J+~ ro ^

+ (-l)~+J+~t~,s[e,,..., e~-,, e , e ~ + , , . . . , ~,..., e,,+,] =(-t)'+J+~+'~j,e ~ + ( - l ) ~ + ~ + ~ k , e 5 - (-t)~+~+~+'~J~e ~

_ ( _ 1 ) ~ + ~ + ~ e ~ + ( - - 1 ) ~+i+~+'~e ~ + ( - - t ) " + ~ + ~ e ~ = (--t)'+~+~[ (~i~ -- ~ i ) e ~ + ( ~ - ~,~) e~ + ( ~ -- ~ ) e'].

f o r i < k we o b t a i n t h e same e x p r e s s i o n in the right-hand part of the last equality. So a = 0

and, therefore, A is an n-Lie algebra if and only if the equalities (17) hold.
Consider arbitrary elements e i, eJ, i, j = 1,...,n + 1, i ~ j . If each element ek is a
linear combination of these elements, t h e n r a n k B <~ 2. So i f r a n k B > 2 , t h e n t h e r e e x i s t s
ek which is not a linear combination of the elements e i, eJ. B u t t h e n , b y ( 1 7 ) , g i j -- 8 j i =
O, B i j = B j i a n d , t h e r e f o r e , the matrix B is symmetric. On t h e o t h e r h a n d , i t i s o b v i o u s
t h a t ~f t h e m a t r i x B i s s y m m e t r i c , t h e n t h e e q u a l i t i e s ( 1 7 ) do h o l d . S i n c e r a n k B = d i m A ~,
this implies
THEOREM 3. Let A be an (n + 1)-dimensional anticommutative ~-algebra over a field F with
one n-ary operation given by the relationship (12), and d i m A ~ > 2. Then A is an n-Lie algebra
if and only if the matrix B is symmetric.
Note that Theorem 3 implies, among other things, Proposition I.
Let now d i m A ~ ~< 2. If A ~ = O, then the algebra A is Abelian. If d i m A ~ = I, then A ~ =
Fe I for some e,~A. Consider two cases: I) A~=-Z; 2) A i ~ Z , where Z = { z ~ A : [z, A, .., A ] = 0 )
is the center of the algebra A.
I) Ai---Z 9 Then there exist e~_.... , e~+i~A such that [e2,...,en+l] = el and the algebra A
has the basis el,...,en+l with the multiplication table
[e= . . . . . e~+,] = e~, [e, . . . . . e...., e ~ + , l = 0,

where i = 2,...,n + 1.. It is easily seen that in this case A is an n - L i e algebra.

2) A ~ i r : Z . Then: t h e r e e x i s t e l e m e n t s e~, . . . , e , ~ A such that [e~, e2,...,en] ~ 0. But
then [e~, e2,...,en]i = ge~ ~ 0 a n d we c a n p u t [ e z , e ~ , . . . , e n ] = ea. L e t en+ ~ b e a n e l e m e n t

886
e x t e n d i n g e ~ , . . . , e n to a basis of the a l g e b r a A. S i n c e A~ = F e i , [e~,...,ei,...,e n, en+i] =
aie~, where i = 1,...,n. Hence

let ..... ei ..... e~, en+~ + ~ (-- t ) ~ + ~ + ~ ; e ~ ] =

= [el . . . . . ei . . . . . e . , en+ d + ( - - t ) ~+~+~ a i [el . . . . . e~ . . . . . en, ed

= [e~ . . . . . ei . . . . . eo, e~+d - - ~ [e~ . . . . . e~] = =~e~ - - e~et = O.

So~ replacing en+l by en+l+ ~(--t)~+~+~.~e~, we o b t a i n an algebra A with the basis e.;,...,en+ ~
#=1
and the m u l t i p l i c a t i o n table
[e, . . . . , e,,] = e,, [e,, . . 9, e i . . . . , e.+,] = O,

where i = 2,...,n. It is easily seen that A is a n n-Lie algebra.

Let n o w A be an n-Lie algebra, d i m A 1 = 2. We choose a basis en, en+ ~ of the s u b a l g e b r a
A ~ and e x t e n d it by elements e ~ , . . . , e n - ~ to a basis of the a l g e b r a A. Then we have the fol-
lowing m u l t i p l i c a t i o n table:
e i = [ e , . . . . , m, . . . , e,, e , + ~ l = } ~ e , + 6,+~e,+~, (18)
where i = 1,...,n + I. By (17), for all i, j = I .... ,n -- I we have the e q u a l i t i e s

(~,;- 6~,) e ~ + ( 6 - , - k , , ) e~ + (~;. -~)e; = 0,

( 6 , - + , - ~ - + , , ) e~ + (~-~ - 6 ~ ) e ~+* + ( ~ - + , ~ - ~ - + ~ ) e~ = 0.

By (18), $is= 0 for all i = I .... ,n -- I, s = 1,...,n + I. So the last e q u a l i t i e s assume the
form
6.~e ~ - ~.~e' = O,
(19)

~.+lie ~ }n+l~e =
t
0, (2o)
- 6 . + , , e ~ + :a~e"+' + ( , ~ + , . -- ~,ln+l)e ~---
0.
(21)

[ \
We denote the m a t r i x \~,~n
| ~+~+1/ by C and i t s determinant by k. If the elements e i, eJ

are tinearly independent, t h e n , b y ( 1 9 ) a n d ( 2 0 ) , }~i, }~+,~, }~j, } ~ + ~ = 0 . But t h e n , by ( 1 8 ) , e i

a n d e] a r e e q u a l t o z e r o w h i c h c o n t r a d i c t s their linear independence. Therefore, for all
i, j = 1,...,n -- 1 t h e e l e m e n t s e 1 a n d eJ a r e l i n e a r l y dependent. So i f C = 0 , t h e n d i m A z =
1, c o n t r a r y to the assumption. Therefore, C a 0 a n d we may p u t e n a 0 .
Suppose that A = 0. But t h e n en+l = ae n for some ~ F . Hence, by v i r t u e of (21),

(~+,~ - - 6,,,,+,)e ~ = ( ~ + i l - ~i)e ~ (22)

for all i = 1,...,n -- 1. I f S n + l n -- B n n + l a 0 , then rankB = 1, d i m A 1 = 1, c o n t r a r y to the
assumption. So B n + l n -- S n n + l = 0 , i . e . ,
6,,+1~ = }~=+l- (23)
But then, by (22),

},+,i=e}~ (24)
for all i = 1,...,n -- I. F u r t h e r m o r e , the e q u a l i t y e n+l = ~e n implies the e q u a l i t i e s } ~ + ~ =
~}==, }=+i~+, = ~}=+~=. This, together w i t h (23), implies the e q u a l i t i e s 6 ~ + ~ = = } ~ + i = ~ } = ~ , 6=+,~+i=
~+~=~+~, which, along w i t h the e q u a l i t i e s (24), show that ~ + ~ i = ~ for all i = I,...,
n + I. Therefore, r a n k B = I w h i c h c o n t r a d i c t s the assumption. So A ~ 0. We will choose
e l e m e n t s e n and en+ I of the a l g e b r a A in such a way that ~ i = 0 , 6~+,~=0 for all i = I,...,
n -- I. To this end, we put

~+~ E~+~ ~+~ ' ~ = a I ff~+~ ~+~1'

where i = 1,...,n -- I. Then, by (18) and the a n t i c o m m u t a t i v i t y of the algebra A,

887
 e, . . . . . ei ..... e~ + ~ %e~, e~+~ + ~ ?~e~ = [e~ . . . . . e~ . . . . . e~e~+~]
3=i $=i

+ ~ile~ . . . . . ~i, . . . , e , e~+~] + ?~ [e~ . . . . . ei ..... e ~ ed =

_--e i + ( - - l)~+i+~aie ~ + ( - - t) ~+i y~e~+l = ( ~ + ( - - t) n+i+~ a ~

+ (- I)~-e,~.+i)e~ + (~+i~ + (- i)~+~+I ~n+1~ + (- I)~+~ ~n+~,,+~)e.+1 = 0,

~--I n--I
So, replacing en by e n + ~ ajej and en+ I by en+1 + ~ ?~es , we obtain an algebra A with the

basis el,..-,en+1 and the multiplication table

[e,,...,e~ .... ,e~,e~+,]=O, i=t,...,n-l,

[e,, . . . , e~, e=+d = ~ e ~ + ~+,~e~+,, (25)
[ei, . . . , em e.+,] -- i3~:+ie,, + l~,,+l,~+ie,,+l,

where C----~nn+1 ~+I~+I/; is a nonsingular matrix. It is easily seen that the algebra a with

the multiplication table (25) is an n-Lie algebra. Like in the case of Lie algebras (for in-
stance, cf. [7, p. 21]), it is easily seen that two n-Lie algebras determined by matrices C1
and C2 are isomorphic if and only if there exist a nonsingular matrix B of order two and a n
element = ~ ] 7 = ~ 0 , such that Cz = ~BCIB -1.
If the field F is algebraically closed, then we can choose A with one of the following
multiplication tables of basis elements:
1) [e, . . . . . e~,...,e,,e, i=l,...,n--t,
[e,, ..., e',<,, e:+,] = e:, [e, .... , e~, D",,+,] = e~e,,+,, c~ % O;

2) [e, . . . . , e , , . . . . e:, e , + , ] = O, i = t , . . . , n - t ,
[e, . . . . , 7:, e=+,] = e . + 13e.+,, ~$:/: O, [e,, . . . , e., e~+,] = e.+,.

Henceforth, unless specified otherwise, we will assume that the characteristic of the base
field F is not equal to 2.
Suppose now that d i m A I = r > 2. Then if A is an n-Lie algebra, then, by Theorem 3, the
matrix B is symmetric and it can be viewed as the matrix of some quadratic form f of rank r
over the field F. So the matrix B can be reduced to a diagonal matrix BI by a nonsingular
transformation with a matrix T:BI = TBT' If we multiply the last equality by [Ti -I, the
matrix B = ITI-iTBT ' is also diagonal,

N=
ifh~. [ ~"0 '
9 o

I " Oj
where ~ii ~ O, i = 1,...,r. Furthermore, the matrix T can be chosen in such a way that B11 =
I. It follows from this and Theorem 2 that for r > 2 the n-Lie algebra A has a basis with
the following multiplication table:

[el, .,.,e~ . . . . . en+l]=lO, r < : i < ~ n + t,

if r < n + I, or
[e,, . . . , e'~, . . . , e~+d = ~,e,, % r O, t < i ~< n + l, (26)
ifr=n+1.

888
 If the field F is algebraically closed, then it is possible to choose a basis of the
algebra A with the multiplication table
^ le~, l < i ~ r ,
[e~ . . . . . e~ . . . . . e~+~]=(O, r < ~ n + i ,

if r < n + ~, or
[e~ . . . . ,e~ .... ,e~+d=e~, t<i~<n+l,

if r = n + ~.
If F is the field of real numbers, then the algebra A can be one of the following:
^ [ e~, i~s,
[e~ . . . . . e~ . . . . . e,~+~] = l - - e~, s < ~ ~< r,
O, r < ~ n + t ,

where 0 ~< s ~< [(r + I)/2], r < n + I, or

[e 1 . . . . . . ei . . . . . e,~+~] = el, ~"< i ~ rt -t-. l ,

where 0 ~ s ~ [(r + I)/2], r = n + I.

The results of this section imply that each (n + 1)-dimensional n-Lie algebra A is solv-
able provided that d i m A I < n + I and unsolvable if d i m A l = n + I. In this case, as we will
show in the next section, the algebra A is simple.

4. Simple n-Lie Algebras of Dimension n + I and Their Differentiations

Let A be an arbitrary unsolvable (n + 1)-dimensional n-Lie algebra. It follows from the
results of the previous section that A is determined by the multiplication table (26). This
table can be more conveniently written in the form

[e~ . . . . , e",., . . . , e ~ + , ] = ( - - l ) ' * + i + ' ~ e , , ~,v~O, i=t ..... n+t. (27)

Note that for ~i = I, i = 1,...,n + I we have the algebra An+ l from Proposition |.
THEOREM 4. Each n-Lie algebra A over a field F of c h a r a c t e r i s t i c # 2 with the condition
dimA = d i m A l = n + I is simple.

Proof. Let I be an arbitrary nonzero ideal of the algebra A, a n a nonzero element of I,

n+l
a= ~ ~jej. Since a ~ 0, there exists ~i ~ O. Then, by (27), for each s = ~,...,n + I, s ~ i,
j=1

we have
A
[ei, . . . , e~, . . . , e,_~, a, e,+~, . . . , e~+~]

= ~,[e~ . . . . . e~. . . . . e , - , , e,, e,+,, . . . , e ~ + d + u,[e~_, ..--, ~ , . . . , e - + d = ( - - t ) ' + ~ e * +(--fl'+'**~,~ 'e'~t" "

Therefore, b----ai~e,-~ie~l. Hence, by (27), for each j ~ i, s ~/

[e, . . . . , e~. . . . . e~-,, b, e,+~, . . . , e~+,]---- ~ [ e , ..... ej . . . . . en+t] = ( - - t } * + ~ + * ~ , ~ e ~ L

Since BsBj ~ 0, this implies that o~e~l, e ~ l . But then, by (27), I = A, i.e., the: algebra
A is simple. The theorem is proved.

In the theory of finite-dimensional Lie algebras of characteristic 0 an important role

belongs to the split three-dimensional simple Lie algebra over a field F with a basis e, f, h
and the multiplication table [eh] = 2e, [fh] =--2f, [ef] = h. In this algebra the adjoint
endomorphism ad h determined by the element h has a nonzero characteristic root in F. In n-
Lie algebras one can also introduce the notion of a split algebra.
An n-Lie algebra A over a field F is called a 8pl~t algebra if there exist he, ..., h ~ A
such that the right multiplication R(h2,...,hn) has a nonzero characteristic root = ~ F .
An analogue of the split three-dimensional simple Lie algebra is the (n + |)-dimensional
simple n-Lie algebra A over a field F of characteristic z2 with a basis ex,...,en+ ~ and the
multiplication table

889
 [e~, e 2 , . . . , e,+,] = -2e~., [e,, e'~. . . . , e,+,] = 2e~,
[e,, e2 . . . . . e',. . . . . e,~+,] = e,, ~= 3 .... , n+ 1.

Indeed, if el is replaced by el -- e2, e2 by el + e2, then we obtain a n e w basis with the

m u l t i p l i c a t i o n table (26), where Bii = 2, i = 1,...,n + 1. So A is an n-Lie algebra and,
since d i m A ~ = n + I, A is simple by T h e o r e m 4. It is easily seen that the right m u l t i p l i c a -
tion R(ea,...,en+ ~) has a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c root ~ = 2. Therefore, the algebra A is split.
THEOREM 5. Each d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of a simple (n + l)-dimensional n-Lie algebra A over a
field of characteristic 0 is inner.
Proof. Let el,...,en+ ~ be a basis of the algebra A with the m u l t i p l i c a t i o n table (27),
D a d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n of A defined by the equalities
n+l
e ~ O = ~ ai~e~, ai:~f, i=t ..... n+t. (28)
j=t

By (27) and (4),

n+l
[e 1. . . . . . ejD . . . . . ei . . . . . en+l] = (-- t)~t+i+l~ie~D.
j--t
jr

We substitute (28) in the right- and left-hand parts of the last equality:

j=l 2=1
j,=,;

Because of the a n t i c o m m u t a t i v i t y and by (27),

~+t n+l

j=t 1= 1

Since e i are basis elements, the last equality implies

n+l
(-- 1)~+i+11~:r z = (-- t ) ~ + i + l ~ a , i ,
j=t

(-I) n+, ~ .~ , = ( - i ) ~+++'~,o~,i"

Since ~i = 0 for all i = 1,...,n + I, this implies the equalities

n+l
Z r162 ~ O~ii , (29)
j~-t

(30)

By ( 2 9 ) , we obtain a homogeneous system of n + I linear equations relative to ~jj with the

matrix
--I i I... i~

I t i s e a s i l y s e e n that ]B I = (--l)n2n(n -- i) #0.

B=
I 1 --i i ...

9 "i"
S o ~ i i = 0 f o r a n y i = l ..... n + l . Furthermore,
i|.

L'll!
(30)
implies the equalities ~ji =--Bi~ij/$j " So if ~r is the m a t r i x of the d i f f e r e n t i a t i o n D

in the basis el,...,en+l, then 6gD = ,.(

9.--'I

aO E~j-- E)i i e.

rill
~? ~J
9~ D = ~.J~=l ~J ( ~ E i j - - ~iEji), (31)

where Eij are the matrix units.

890
 On the other hand, let R(el,...,ei,...,ej,...,en+l) be the right multiplication deter-
mined by the elements el,...,gi,...,gj,...,en+1, i < j. By (27), for all s = 1,...,n + I we
have the equalities

e,R (eI. . . . . e'~. . . . . e'j. . . . . en+]) ---- [es, e 1 . . . . . e~, . . . . . e"j. . . . , en+l] =
i (-- A\n+i+jo
~0,
1) pjej,
s=/=i,],
s= i,
(-- t)n+i+J+~e~, s = j.

Therefore,
B (e, . . . . . e, ..... 7j,. . . , e.+~) = ( - 1 ) "+'+J(~E,~ - ,B,E ~i).

This, along with (31), implies the equality

n+l
t~n+i+j ~ ~ ^
3r = Z ( - - "" -~) -" (el . . . . . ei . . . . . ej . . . . . en+l),
~,j=l

The theorem is proved.

In conclusion, we note that the results of the first two sections of this article have
been reported in [9].

LITERATURE CITED
I. A.G. Kurosh, "Free sums of multioperator algebras," Sib. Mat. Zh., No. I, 62-70 (1960).
2. A.G. Kurosh, "Multioperator rings and algebras," Usp. Mat. Nauk, 24, No. I, 3-15 (1969).
3. T.M. Baranovich and M. S. Burgin, "Linear ~-algebras," Usp. Mat. Na---uk,30, No. 4, 61-106
(1975).
4. B . A . Rozenfel'd, Spaces of Higher Dimensions [in Russian], Nauka, Moscow (1966).
5. N . V . Efimov and E. R. Rozenforn, Linear Algebra and Multidimensional Geometry [in Rus-
sian], Nauka, Moscow (1974).
6. A . G . Kurosh, Lectures in General Algebra [in Russian], Nauka, Moscow (1973).
7. N. Jacobson, Lie Algebras [Russian translation], Mir, Moscow (1969).
8. M. Goto and F. Grosshans, Semisimple Lie Algebras [Russian translation], Mir, Moscow
(1981).
9. V.T. Filippov, "On one generalization of Lie algebras," Preprint No. 64, Mathematics
Inst., Siberian Branch, Acad. Sci. of the USSR, Novosibirsk (1984).

A MOLLIFYING OPERATOR WITH A VARIABLE RADIUS, AND AN INVERSE THEOREM

ON TRACES

V. V. Shan'kov UDC 517.518

INTRODUCTION
Let R n be the n-dimensional space of points x = (xl,...,Xn) , ~ = R n be an open set, F
be the ( n - 1)-dimensional smooth boundary of ~, and r, p, ~ be real numbers, where r is a
natural number (r = I, 2 .... ) and I x< p ~< ~
We denote by
W r = W ~

the class of functions with the finite norm

UYIIw;,=(n > = II/IILp<n) I{f l;,~;,~(n), (1)

Zelenyi Settlement, Moscow Region. Translated from Sibirskii Matematicheskii Zhurnal,

Vol. 26, No. 6, pp. 141-152, November-December, 1985. Original article submitted May 4,
1983.

0037-4466/85/2606-0891509.50 9 1986 Plenum Publishing Corporation 891