arXiv:0906.0829v1 [math.OA] 4 Jun 2009
UNIQUENESS THEOREMS FOR TOPOLOGICAL HIGHER-RANK
GRAPH C∗-ALGEBRAS
JEAN RENAULT, AIDAN SIMS, AND TRENT YEEND
Abstract. We consider the boundary-path groupoids of topological higher-rank graphs. We give a direct limit decomposition of the algebra of continuous functions vanishing at infinity on the unit space, and show that the groupoid is amenable. We use these re-sults to prove versions of the gauge-invariant uniqueness theorem and the Cuntz-Krieger uniqueness theorem for the associated C∗-algebras.
1. Introduction
Groupoids are a powerful and very widely applicable model for operator algebras. One area of operator-algebra theory in which they have been particularly visible in recent years is the field of graph algebras and their analogues.
The inception of the field of graph algebras goes back to the work of Cuntz and Krieger [4], and the subsequent work of Enomoto and Watatani [6], on simple purely infinite C∗-algebras associated to finite binary matrices. However, the theory of graph algebras
properly began with the work of Kumjian-Pask-Raeburn-Renault [15]. The analysis there was facilitated by realising the C∗-algebras of interest as groupoid C∗-algebras and
em-ploying Renault’s structure theory for such objects [21].
Since then, the class of graph C∗-algebras has been generalised in various directions,
including ultragraph C∗-algebras [25], higher-rank graph C∗-algebras [13] and topological
graph C∗-algebras [11] to name a few. Though these generalisations have not all been
developed using groupoid methods, in each case a natural groupoid model exists [9, 16, 17, 28].
Recently, Yeend developed the notion of a topological higher-rank graph, simultaneously generalising Katsura’s notion of a topological graph and Kumjian and Pask’s notion of a higher-rank graph. Yeend used a groupoid model to associate to each compactly aligned topological higher-rank graph Λ a C∗-algebra C∗(Λ). This construction is sufficiently
general to capture Katsura’s algebras and the finitely aligned k-graph C∗-algebras of
[19]; the latter being the most general class of discrete higher-rank graph C∗-algebras
considered to date.
Two key results in any generalisation of the theory of graph C∗-algebras are: a
gauge-invariant uniqueness theorem [2, 10]; and a Cuntz-Krieger uniqueness theorem [14] (see also [18]). The former states that if π is a representation of a graph algebra which is nonzero on generators and preserves the canonical gauge action, then π is injective. The
Date: June 4, 2009.
1991 Mathematics Subject Classification. Primary 46L05.
Key words and phrases. Topological graph, higher rank graph, groupoid, amenable, graph algebra,
Cuntz- Krieger algebra.
This research was supported by the Australian Research Council.
latter replaces the hypothesis that π preserves the gauge action with an aperiodicity hypothesis on the graph.
There is a standard program for proving these two theorems using groupoid techniques, starting with a graph-like object Λ with vertices Λ0. After associating a groupoid G
Λto Λ,
one first identifies an embedding of C0(Λ0) into C0(GΛ(0)) and shows that each
representa-tion of the graph groupoid which is faithful on C0(Λ0) is faithful on C0(GΛ(0)). Step two is
to show (1) that GΛis amenable so that C∗(GΛ) ∼= Cr∗(GΛ), and (2) that the kernel GΛ[c] of
the canonical cocycle on GΛ is principal; since c takes values in an amenable group, there
is then a faithful conditional expectation from C∗(G) onto C∗(G(0)). The gauge-invariant
uniqueness theorem then follows from a standard argument. The third step is to prove the Cuntz-Krieger uniqueness theorem, by identifying an aperiodicity hypothesis on Λ which implies that GΛ is topologically principal in the sense that the set of units with
trivial isotropy has empty interior1. The Cuntz-Krieger uniqueness theorem then follows
from a folklore result for topologically principal groupoids implicit in the results of [21, II, Section 4] (see also [8, §3]).
Parts of this program have been carried out for topological higher-rank graph algebras under a number of additional hypotheses on the graph (see [29]). Those results are suf-ficient to show that topological k-graph C∗-algebras capture Katsura’s topological graph
algebras, and also the finitely aligned k-graph C∗-algebras of [19]. However, for various
technical reasons, the techniques used in [29], particularly for step two, are not suitable in general.
In this paper we carry out all three steps and prove versions of both the gauge-invariant uniqueness theorem and the Cuntz-Krieger uniqueness theorem for C∗-algebras of
com-pactly aligned topological higher-rank graphs. Our results imply that all topological higher-rank graph groupoids are amenable, and hence that all topological higher-rank graph C∗-algebras are nuclear. In particular, we make explicit the folklore result
men-tioned above and indicate how it applies to representations of C∗-algebras containing
Cartan subalgebras in the sense of [23].
We learned in the late stages of preparation of this manuscript that a detailed and self-contained proof of the aforementioned folklore result (Proposition 5.3) independent of, but based on, the results of [21, II, Section 4] has appeared in Exel’s recent preprint [8]. The paper is organised as follows. We collect all the required background material in Section 2. In Section 3, given a compactly aligned topological k-graph Λ, we develop an inductive limit decomposition C0(GΛ(0)) and use it to show that representations of C∗(GΛ)
which are injective on the canonical image of C0(Λ0) are injective on all of C0(GΛ(0)). In
Section 4 we prove that all topological higher-rank graph groupoids are amenable, and hence that their C∗-algebras are nuclear. We use this to prove our first main theorem,
a gauge-invariant uniqueness theorem for topological higher-rank graph C∗-algebras. In
Section 5, we consider topologically principal groupoids and prove the well-known folklore theorem that a representation of the reduced C∗-algebra of such a groupoid is faithful if and only if it restricts to a faithful representation of the continuous functions on the unit space. We combine this with the amenability established in the preceding section and
1Note that there is significant confusion in the literature regarding terminology here — topologically
principal groupoids have variously been refereed to elsewhere as essentially free, essentially principal, and topologically free. We use the term topologically principal in agreement with [23] to match up with Tomiyama’s terminology of topologically free actions [26].
the analysis of C0(GΛ(0)) from Section 3 to prove our second main result: a version of
the Cuntz-Krieger uniqueness theorem for topological higher-rank graph C∗-algebras. We
conclude by indicating how the aforementioned folklore theorem applies to representations of C∗-algebras containing Cartan subalgebras as in [23].
Acknowledgement. We thank Toke Carlsen for his reading of a preliminary draft of the manuscript, and for his valuable comments and input.
2. Background
Our results require a fair amount of background. We do not give full detail, especially as regards the theory of groupoids. For the full story see, for example, [1, 21, 29].
We regard Nk as a semigroup with identity 0, or sometimes as a category with a single object and composition defined by the addition operation. For m, n ∈ Nk, we say m ≤ n
if mi ≤ ni for all i ∈ {1, . . . , k}. We write m ∨ n for the coordinatewise maximum of
m and n. We frequently work also with the set (N ∪ {inf ty})k; we extend the addition
operation and the order ≤ from Nk to (N ∪ {∞})k in the obvious way.
2.1. Groupoids. For details of what follows, see [21]. A groupoid G is a category with inverses. We denote the domain and codomain maps by s and r, the unit space by G(0),
and the collection of composable pairs by G(2). A topological groupoid is a groupoid
endowed with a topology under which both the inversion map and the composition map are continuous. In this paper, we consider only locally compact Hausdorff groupoids. A groupoid is ´etale if the range map is a local homeomorphism; when the topology is Hausdorff, it follows that G(0) is both open and closed in G. For each unit u of an ´etale
groupoid G the sets uG and Gu are discrete. A circle-valued 2-cocycle σ on G is a map σ : G(2) → T such that σ(x, y)σ(xy, z) = σ(y, z)σ(x, yz) for all composable triples (x, y, z)
in G.
The isotropy at a unit u ∈ G(0) is the group uGu. The phrase “points with trivial
isotropy” is frequently used in the literature to refer to the units u of a groupoid G such that the isotropy at u is the trivial group. We say that a groupoid G is principal if every unit u has trivial isotropy; a principal groupoid is the same thing as an equivalence relation.
The orbit of a unit u of a groupoid G is the set [x] = {r(x) : x ∈ Gu}.
2.2. Groupoid C∗-algebras. We will now summarise the constructions of the full- and
reduced twisted groupoid C∗-algebras of an ´etale locally compact Hausdorff groupoid G
endowed with a continuous circle-valued 2-cocycle σ. Note that these constructions can be carried through for any groupoid admitting a Haar system, but the formulae are simpler in our situation. For full details see [21, Section II.1]; or for a detailed treatment of ´etale groupoids, see [7, Section 3].
Consider the space Cc(G) of compactly supported complex-valued functions on G. For
x ∈ G, the set {y : r(y) = r(x), f (y) 6= 0} is both compact and discrete and hence finite. Thus we may sensibly define an operation ∗ : Cc(G, σ) × Cc(G, σ) → Cc(G, σ) by
(f ∗ g)(x) = X
r(y)=r(x)
The space Cc(G) becomes a topological ∗-algebra denoted Cc(G, σ) when endowed with
the involution f∗(x) = σ(x, x−1)f (x−1) and the convolution product ∗ above.
A representation of Cc(G, σ) is a nondegenerate ∗-homomorphism π : Cc(G, σ) → B(H)
which is continuous from the inductive limit topology on Cc(G, σ) to the strong-operator
topology on B(H). Renault’s disintegration theorem [22, Proposition 4.2] together with [21, Propositions II.1.7 and II.1.11] implies that there is a pre-C∗-norm on C
c(G, σ)
de-termined by
kf k = sup{kπ(f )k : π is a representation of Cc(G, σ)}.
The full twisted groupoid C∗-algebra C∗(G, σ) is the C∗-completion of C
c(G, σ) with
re-spect to this norm.
To define the reduced twisted groupoid C∗-algebra, fix u ∈ G(0) and let ℓ2(uG) be
the Hilbert space with orthonormal basis {ξx : x ∈ uG}. There is a representation
Ind ǫu : Cc(G, σ) → ℓ2(uG) such that for f ∈ Cc(G, σ) and x ∈ uG, we have
Ind ǫu(f )ξx =
X
y∈G
σ(yx−1, x)f (yx−1)ξy.
The reduced groupoid C∗-algebra C∗
r(G, σ) is then the completion of Cc(G, σ) in the C∗
-norm
kf kr = sup u∈G(0)
k Ind ǫu(f )k.
Let 1 denote the trivial cocycle 1(x, y) = 1 for all (x, y) ∈ G(2); then C∗(G, 1) and
C∗
r(G, 1) are called the full- and reduced groupoid C∗-algebras of G and are denoted
C∗(G) and C∗ r(G).
2.3. Amenable groupoids. For more detail, see [1]. A Haar system for a topological groupoid G is a collection {λu : u ∈ G(0)} of nonnegative measures on G such that
• each λu is supported on uG,
• For each f ∈ Cc(G), the function u 7→R f(x) dλu(x) belongs to Cc(G(0)), and
• the system is left-invariant in the sense that R f(xy) dλs(x)(y) = R f(z) dλr(x)(z)
for all f ∈ Cc(G) and x ∈ G.
Given a groupoid G with Haar system, each measure µ on G(0) induces a measure ν
on G determined by ν = R λu(·) dµ(u). We say that µ is quasi-invariant if the induced
measure ν is equivalent to its image ν−1 under the inverse map: ν−1 =R λu((·)−1) dµ(u).
We give the definition of amenability most suited to our situation; note that this is not the original definition, for which see [21, Section II.3]. For the details of the relationships between various definitions of amenability for groupoids, see [1, Chapter 3]. In particular, since our groupoids are ´etale with second-countable unit space, they have countable orbits, so [1, Theorem 3.3.7] applies to ensure that GΛ is topologically amenable if and only if
it is measurewise amenable in the sense described below. The key point for use is that when G is topologically amenable, the C∗-algebras C∗(G) and C∗
r(G) coincide.
Fix a quasi-invariant measure µ on G(0), and let ν be the induced measure on G. For
h ∈ Cc(G(0)), f ∈ Cc(G), and φ ∈ L∞(G, ν), define hφ ∈ L∞(G) and f φ ∈ L∞(G, ν) by
(hφ)(x) = h(r(x))φ(x) and (f φ)(x) = Z
G
Then in particular for ρ ∈ L∞(G(0), µ) ⊂ L∞(G, ν), we have
(hρ)(u) = h(u)ρ(u and (f ρ)(x) = f (x)ρ(s(x)).
A quasi-invariant measure µ on G(0) is said to be amenable if it admits an invariant
mean m : L∞(G, ν) → L∞(G(0), µ); that is, a positive unital linear map m such that
• m(hφ) = hm(φ) for all φ ∈ L∞(G, ν) and h ∈ C
c(G(0)), and
• m(f φ) = f m(φ) for all φ ∈ L∞(G, ν) and all f ∈ C c(G).
The groupoid G is called measurewise amenable if (G, µ) is amenable for every quasi-invariant measure µ on G(0).
2.4. Topological higher-rank graphs. For the details of this and the next section, see [27, 29]. A k-graph is a small category Λ equipped with a functor d : Λ → Nk which
satisfies the factorisation property: if d(λ) = m + n then there exist unique µ ∈ d−1(m)
and ν ∈ d−1(n) such that λ = µν. We call d the degree map on Λ, and denote d−1(n) by
Λn. An argument using the factorisation property shows that Λ0 is equal to the collection
of identity morphisms of Λ. So the domain and codomain functions determine maps s, r : Λ → Λ0 which we call the source and range maps. Given sets X, Y ⊂ Λ we write
XY for the set {µν : µ ∈ X, ν ∈ Y, s(µ) = r(ν)}. In particular, for V ⊂ Λ0 and X ⊂ Λ,
V X = {λ ∈ X : r(λ) ∈ V } and XV = {λ ∈ X : s(λ) ∈ V }.
The factorisation property implies that if λ ∈ Λ and m ≤ n ≤ d(λ), then there are unique paths λ(0, m) ∈ Λm, λ(m, n) ∈ Λn−m and λ(n, d(λ)) ∈ Λd(λ)−n such that
λ = λ(0, m)λ(m, n)λ(n, d(λ)). We think of λ(m, n) as the segment of λ from position m to position n along λ.
Given paths µ and ν in Λ, we say that λ is a common extension of µ and ν if we can factorise λ = µµ′ and λ = νν′ for some µ′, ν′ ∈ Λ. We say that λ is a minimal common
extension of µ and ν if it is a common extension such that d(λ) = d(µ) ∨ d(ν). We denote by MCE(µ, ν) the set
{λ ∈ Λ : λ is a minimal common extension of µ and ν}
Observe that if r(µ) 6= r(ν), then MCE(µ, ν) = ∅. Given subsets X, Y ⊂ Λ, we define MCE(X, Y ) := [
µ∈X,ν∈Y
MCE(µ, ν).
A topological k-graph is a k-graph Λ endowed with a second-countable locally compact Hausdorff topology such that each Λn is open, the range map and the composition map
are both continuous, and the source map is a local homeomorphism.
We say that the topological k-graph Λ is compactly aligned if, for every pair of compact subsets X, Y ⊂ Λ, the set MCE(X, Y ) is also compact. Given v ∈ Λ0we say that a subset
E of Λ is compact exhaustive for v if E is compact, r(E) is a neighbourhood of v, and for all λ ∈ r(E)Λ there exists µ ∈ E such that MCE(λ, µ) 6= ∅.
An important class of examples of higher-rank graphs, which we will use to make sense of the notion of an infinite path in a k-graph, are the (discrete) higher-rank graphs Ωk,m.
These are defined as follows. For fixed k ≥ 1 and m ∈ (N ∪ {∞})k, the k-graph Ω
k,m has
morphisms {(p, q) : p, q ∈ Nk, p ≤ q ≤ m}. The range and source maps are r(p, q) = (p, p)
and s(p, q) = (q, q), composition is determined by (p, q)(q, r) = (p, r), and the degree map is given by d(p, q) = q − p.
A k-graph morphism x from a k-graph Λ to a k-graph Γ is a functor x : Λ → Γ which intertwines the degree maps. Each finite path λ in a k-graph Λ determines, and is determined by, the unique k-graph morphism xλ : Ωk,d(λ) → Λ such that xλ(m, n) =
λ(m, n) for all m ≤ n ≤ d(λ). By analogy, for arbitrary m ∈ (N ∪ {∞})k, we regard a
k-graph morphism x : Ωk,m → Λ as a (possibly infinite) path in Λ, and define r(x) := x(0, 0),
and d(x) = m. If mi < ∞ for all i, then we also write s(x) for x(m), but if mi = ∞ for
some i, then x has no source.
For m ∈ (N ∪ {∞})k, a boundary path of degree m in a topological graph Λ is a
k-graph morphism x : Ωk,m → Λ such that for every n ∈ Nk with n ≤ m and each compact
exhaustive set E for x(n, n), there is an element λ of E such that x(n, n + d(λ)) = λ. Fix a boundary path x of degree m. For each n ∈ Nk with n ≤ m, there is a unique boundary
path σn(x) of degree m − n defined by σn(x)(p, q) = x(n + p, n + q) for all (p, q) ∈ Ω k,m−n.
Given µ ∈ Λ with s(µ) = r(x), there is a unique boundary path µx of degree d(µ)+m such that (µx)(0, d(µ)) = µ and such that (µx)(p+d(µ), q +d(µ)) = x(p, q) for all (p, q) ∈ Ωk,m.
We have
σd(µ)(µx) = x = x(0, n)σn(x).
We denote the collection of all boundary paths in Λ by ∂Λ. For a subset U of Λ, we denote by Z(U) the collection
{x ∈ ∂Λ : x(0, n) ∈ U for some n ∈ Nk with n ≤ d(x)}.
The collection of sets
{Z(U) ∩ Z(F )c : U ⊂ Λm is relatively compact and open, F ⊂ U Λ is compact}
form a basis for a locally compact Hausdorff topology on ∂Λ.
2.5. The boundary-path groupoid of a topological higher-rank graph. Given a topological k-graph Λ, we define a set GΛ by
GΛ:= {(x, m − n, y) : m, n ∈ Nk, x, y ∈ ∂Λ, m ≤ d(x), n ≤ d(y) and σm(x) = σn(y)}.
Define GΛ(0) := {(x, 0, x) : x ∈ ∂Λ}, and define maps r, s : GΛ → GΛ(0) by
r(x, p, y) = (x, 0, x) and s(x, p, y) = (y, 0, y).
For convenience, we will frequently identify GΛ(0) with ∂Λ via (x, 0, x) ↔ x. We define an inversion (·)−1 : G
Λ → GΛ by (x, p, y)−1 = (y, −p, x), and a composition GΛ(2) → GΛ by
(x, p, y)(y, q, z) := (x, p + q, z). With these structure maps, GΛ is a groupoid with unit
space ∂Λ, and c(x, p, y) := p defines a continuous 1-cocycle c : GΛ→ Zk.
For U, V ⊂ Λ, define U ∗sV := {(µ, ν) ∈ U × V : s(µ) = s(ν)}. For F ⊂ Λ ∗sΛ and
p ∈ Zk, define
Z(F, p) := {(µx, p, νx) : (µ, ν) ∈ F, d(µ) − d(ν) = p, s(µ) = s(ν), x ∈ s(µ)∂Λ}. The collection
{Z(U ∗sV, p − q) ∩ Z(F, p − q)c : p, q ∈ Nk, U ⊂ Λp and V ⊂ Λq,
U, V are relatively compact and open, and F is a compact subset of S
α∈ΛUα × V α}
is a basis for a locally compact Hausdorff topology on GΛ under which GΛ becomes a
The topological higher-rank graph C∗-algebra C∗(Λ) is defined to be the full groupoid
C∗-algebra C∗(G Λ).
3. Analysis of the canonical abelian subalgebra
In this section, for a compactly aligned topological higher-rank graph Λ, we analyse the canonical abelian subalgebra C0(GΛ(0)) ∼= C0(∂Λ) of C∗(GΛ). We exhibit an injective
homomorphism i0 : C0(Λ0) → C0(∂Λ), and show that a representation of C∗(GΛ) is
injective on C0(∂Λ) if and only if it is injective on C0(Λ0).
Lemma 3.1. Let Λ be a compactly aligned topological higher-rank graph, and let GΛ
be the associated groupoid. For each n ∈ Nk, there is an injective ∗-homomorphism
ιn : C0(Λn) → C0(∂Λ) determined by
ιn(f )(x) =
(
f (x(0, n)) if d(x) ≥ n
0 otherwise.
Proof. Fix n ∈ Nk and f ∈ C
c(Λn). Let U = supp(f ) ⊂ Λn. Then supp(ιn(f )) = Z(U)
is a precompact subset of ∂Λ by definition of the topology thereon. To see that ιn(f )
is continuous, fix an open subset V of C. Then f−1(V ) is an open subset of Λn, and
therefore ιn(f )−1(V ) = Z(V ) is an open subset of ∂Λ.
For f ∈ Cc(Λn), the uniform norm of ιn(f ) is dominated by the uniform norm of f
itself, and it follows that ιn extends to a map from C0(Λn) → C0(∂Λ). The map ιn is a
homomorphism because the operations in both C0(Λn) and C0(∂Λ) are pointwise.
To see that ιn is injective, fix f ∈ C0(Λn) \ {0}. Then there exists ν ∈ Λn such that
f (ν) 6= 0. By Proposition 4.3 of [29], we have s(ν)∂Λ 6= ∅, say x ∈ s(ν)∂Λ. We then have
ιn(f )(νx) = f (ν) 6= 0, so ιn(f ) 6= 0.
Lemma 3.2. Fix m, n ∈ Nk. Then ι
m(C0(Λm))ιn(C0(Λn)) ⊂ ιm∨n(C0(Λm∨n)).
Proof. By continuity it suffices to fix f ∈ Cc(Λn) and g ∈ Cc(Λm) and show that
im(f )in(g) ∈ im∨n(Cc(Λm∨n)). Define h : Λm∨n → C by h(λ) = f (λ(0, m))g(λ(0, n)).
Then supp(h) ⊂ MCE(supp(f ), supp(g)), which is compact because Λ is compactly aligned. Thus h ∈ Cc(Λm∨n). Moreover, for x ∈ ∂Λ, we have
(ιm(f )ιn(g))(x) = ( f (x(0, m))g(x(0, n)) if d(x) ≥ m ∨ n 0 otherwise. = ιm∨n(h)(x). Our next step is to show that the images of the Cc(Λn) span a dense subspace of C0(∂Λ).
Proposition 3.3. We have C0(∂Λ) = span Sn∈NkCc(Λn).
Proof. We aim to apply the Stone-Weierstrass approximation theorem. For this, first observe that A := span S
n∈NkCc(Λn) is a subalgebra of C0(∂Λ): the only axiom that
is not trivially satisfied is that A is closed under multiplication, and this follows from Lemma 3.2.
It is clear that A is nowhere zero: for x ∈ ∂Λ fix a precompact open subset U of Λ0 such
ι0(f )(x) = 1. To see that A separates points in ∂Λ, fix distinct x, y ∈ ∂Λ. We consider
two cases: (1) d(x) 6= d(y); or (2) there exists n ≤ d(x), d(y) such that x(0, n) 6= y(0, n). Consider case (1). Then there exists i ≤ k such that d(x)i 6= d(y)i; without loss of
generality, we assume that d(x)i > d(y)i. Let n = (d(y)i+ 1)ei ∈ Nk. Then n ≤ d(x) but
n 6≤ d(y). Fix any function f ∈ Cc(Λn) such that f (x(0, n)) = 1. Then ιn(f )(x) = 1 by
construction, but ιn(f )(y) = 0 by definition of ιn.
Next consider case (2). Since Λn is Hausdorff and locally compact, we there are disjoint
open subsets U and V of Λn such that x(0, n) ∈ U and y(0, n) ∈ V . Fix a function
f which takes the value 1 at x(0, n) and vanishes on Uc and hence on V ; in particular ιn(f )(x) = 1 6= 0 = ιn(f )(y).
The Stone-Weierstrass approximation theorem now implies that A = C0(∂Λ).
The following technical result and its proof are a direct adaptation of [3, Lemma 3.4]. Recall that a finite subset F of Nk is said to be directed if whenever m, n ∈ F , we also
have m ∨ n ∈ F .
Lemma 3.4. For each finite nonempty directed subset F of Nk, the subspace
BF := span Sm∈Fιm(C0(Λm))
is a C∗-subalgebra of C
0(∂Λ).
Proof. Each BF is clearly a subspace and closed under involution, and Lemma 3.2 shows
that each BF is closed under multiplication. It therefore suffices to show that each BF is
norm-closed.
We proceed by induction on |F |. When |F | = 1, the result is immediate because the range of a C∗-homomorphism is automatically closed. Fix a finite directed subset F ⊂ Nk
with |F | = l > 1, and suppose the result holds whenever |F | < l. Fix a minimal element m of F . Then G := F \ {m} is closed under ∨ so the inductive hypothesis implies that BG is
a C∗-subalgebra of C
0(∂Λ). Moreover, Lemma 3.2 implies that B{m}BG, BGB{m} ⊂ BG,
so that BG is an ideal in the C∗-algebra BG+ B{m}. Now [5, Corollary 1.8.4] applied
with A = BG+ B{m}, B = B{m} and I = BG implies that BG+ B{m} is norm-closed as
required.
Corollary 3.5. Let π : C0(∂Λ) → B be a C∗-homomorphism. Suppose that π|BF is
injective for each finite nonempty directed subset F of Nk. Then π is injective.
Proof. Proposition 3.3 and Lemma 3.4 imply that C0(∂Λ) = lim−→FBF.
We now analyse the BF themselves. We start with a technical lemma.
Lemma 3.6. Let E be a compact subset of Λ and fix λ ∈ Λ. Suppose MCE({λ}, E) = ∅. Then there exists a neighbourhood U of λ such that MCE(U, E) = ∅.
Proof. We prove the contrapositive. Suppose that MCE(U, E) 6= ∅ for every neigh-bourhood U of λ. Then there is a sequence (λj)∞j=1 in Λd(λ) such that λj → λ and
MCE({λj}, E) 6= ∅. For each j fix αj ∈ MCE({λj}, E). Fix a compact neighbourhood K
of λ. Then the λj eventually belong to K, so the αj eventually belong to MCE(K, E) which
is compact because Λ is compactly aligned. Thus, by passing to a subsequence if necessary, we may assume that the αj converge, say to α, which then belongs to MCE({λ}, E).
Proposition 3.7. Let π : C0(∂Λ) → B be a homomorphism such that each π|in(C0(Λn)) is
injective. Then π|BF is injective for each finite nonempty directed subset F of N k.
Proof. Just as in the proof of Lemma 3.4, we proceed by induction on |F |. If |F | = 1, then there exists n ∈ Nk such that F = {n} and B
F = C0(Λn), so π|BF is injective by
hypothesis.
Now fix a finite directed subset F ⊂ Nk with at least two elements, and suppose π| BG
is injective for each nonempty directed G ⊂ Nk with |G| < |F |. Fix a minimal element m
of F and define G := F \ {m}. Then G is nonempty and directed just as in the proof of Lemma 3.4. Hence π|BG is injective.
Fix a ∈ BF ∩ Cc(∂Λ), and suppose that π(a) = 0. By definition, there are fn∈ Cc(Λn)
for each n ∈ F such that a =P
n∈F in(fn). Fix x ∈ ∂Λ. We must show that a(x) = 0.
If d(x) 6≥ m then each in(fn)(x) = 0 by definition of the in, and therefore a(x) = 0. So
we will suppose that d(x) ≥ m. Let E :=S
n∈Gsupp(fn); so E is a compact subset of Λ.
We consider two cases: (1) x ∈ Z(E), or (2) x 6∈ Z(E).
Case 1. Suppose that x ∈ Z(E). Then in particular, there exists n ∈ G such that d(x) ≥ n. Fix h ∈ Cc(Λn) with h(x(0, n)) = 1. We have in(h)a ∈ BG by Lemma 3.2, and
since π(a) = 0, we have π(in(h)a) = 0 forcing in(h)a = 0 by the inductive hypothesis.
Thus
0 = (in(h)a)(x) = in(h)(x)a(x) = a(x)
completing the proof for Case 1.
Case 2. Suppose that x 6∈ Z(E). Then in particular, fn(x(0, n)) = 0 for all n ∈ G.
Thus a(x) = im(fm)(x) = fm(x(0, m)), so it suffices to show that fm(x(0, m)) = 0. Let
E(0, m) := {λ(0, m) : λ ∈ E}. We shall consider two sub-cases: (2i) x(0, m) belongs to the interior of E(0, m), or (2ii) x(0, m) ∈ Λm\ E(0, m).
Sub-case (2ii). Suppose that x(0, m) belongs to the interior of E(0, m). Let E′ :=
{λ(m, d(λ)) : λ ∈ E}. Since x 6∈ Z(E) and x ∈ ∂Λ, the set E′ is not compact exhaustive
for x(m). Since s is a local homeomorphism and x(0, m) belongs to the interior of E(0, m), we have that r(E′) is a neighbourhood of x(m). Combined with the compactness of E′
and the definition of the term compact exhaustive, this implies that there is a sequence (τj)∞j=1 such that r(τj) → x(m), and MCE({τj}, E′) = ∅ for all j. Using again that s
is a local homeomorphism, there exists a sequence (λj)∞j=1 such that s(λj) = r(τj) and
λj → x(0, m). We then have MCE({λjτj}, E) = ∅ for all j. By continuity of fm, it suffices
to show that fm(λj) = 0 for all j.
Fix j > 0. By Lemma 3.6, there is a neighbourhood Uj of τjsuch that MCE(Uj, E′) = ∅.
Since the source map is continuous, ΛmU
j is an open neighbourhood of λj. Since Λm+d(τj)
is locally compact, there is a compact neighbourhood Vj of λjτj such that
MCE({µ(m, m + d(τj)) : µ ∈ Vj}, E′) = ∅;
in particular, in(fn)|Z(Vj) = 0 for all n ∈ G. Fix h ∈ Cc(Λ
m+d(τj)) with support contained
in Vj and h(λjτj) = 1. Then
im+d(τj)(h)a = im+d(τj)(h)im(fm)
by choice of Vj. In particular, for any z ∈ ∂Λ with r(z) = s(τ ), we have
(3.1) (im+d(τj)(h)a)(λjτjz) = h(λjτj)fm(λj) = fm(λj).
Since π(a) = 0, we have
Lemma 3.2 implies that im+d(τj)(h)im(fm) ∈ Cc(Λ
m+d(τj)), and since π is injective on each
Cc(Λn) by hypothesis, it follows that im+d(τj)(h)im(fm) = 0. In particular,
(im+d(τj)(h)im(fm))(λjτjz) = 0,
and (3.1) therefore forces fm(λj) = 0, completing the proof of sub-case (2i).
Sub-case (2ii). Suppose that x(0, m) ∈ Λm\ E(0, m). Then there exists a sequence
(λj)∞j=1 in Λm \ E(0, m) such that λj → x(0, m). Once again, by continuity of fm, it
suffices to show that fm(λj) = 0 for all j.
Fix j > 0. Since E is compact and α 7→ α(0, m) is continuous, the set E(0, m) is also compact and hence closed. Since Λm is locally compact, it follows that there is a compact
neighbourhood Uj of λj such that Uj ∩ E(0, m) = ∅. Fix a function hj ∈ Cc(Λm) with
supp(hj) ⊂ Uj, and hj(λj) = 1. Fix z ∈ ∂Λ with r(z) = s(λj). Then
(3.2) fm(λj) = im(fm)(λjz) = (im(hj)im(fm))(λjz).
By construction of Uj and hj, we have im(hj)in(fn) = 0 for all n ∈ G, so im(hj)a =
im(hj)im(fm). Since π(a) = 0, we therefore have
0 = π(im(hj)a) = π(im(hj)im(fm)).
We have im(hj)im(fm) ∈ Cc(Λm), and π is injective on Cc(Λm) by hypothesis. It follows
that im(hj)im(fm) = 0, and combining this with (3.2), we deduce that fm(λj) = 0,
completing the proof of sub-case (2ii).
The proposition now follows by induction.
It remains only to show that any representation which is injective on Cc(Λ0) is also
injective on each C0(Λn), and then to put everything together.
Lemma 3.8. Fixn ∈ Nk. Suppose thatπ is a representation of C∗(G
Λ) and that π|ι0(Cc(Λ0))
is injective. Then π|ι0(C0(Λn)) is injective for each n ∈ N k.
Proof. We prove the contrapositive statement. Let I := ker(π) and suppose that I ∩ ιn(C0(Λn)) 6= {0}. We will show that I ∩ ι0(Cc(Λ0)) 6= {0}.
Fix g ∈ Cc(Λn) with g > 0 such that ιn(g) ∈ I. Since the source map in Λ is a local
homeomorphism, we may assume that s restricts to a homeomorphism of supp(g) onto s(supp(g)). Define h : GΛ → C by (3.3) h(x, p, y) := ( g(x(0, n))1/2 if p = n and y = σn(x) 0 otherwise, We have h ∗ h∗(x, p, y) = X r(w,q,z)=x h(w, q, z)h∗((w, q, z)−1(x, p, y)) = X (x,q,z)∈GΛ h(x, q, z)h(y, q − p, z). (3.4)
Suppose that q ∈ Zk and z ∈ ∂Λ satisfy (x, q, z) ∈ ∂Λ, and h(x, q, z)h(y, q − p, z) 6= 0.
Since s restricts to a homeomorphism on supp(g), it follows that x(0, n) = y(0, n), so p = 0 and x = y; that is, there is at most one term in the sum (3.4), and we obtain
h ∗ h∗(x, p, y) = ( g(x(0, n))1/2g(x(0, n))1/2 if p = 0 and x = y 0 otherwise = ιn(g)(x, p, y). In particular, h ∗ h∗ ∈ I.
It therefore suffices to show that h∗∗ h ∗ h∗∗ h ∈ ι
0(C0(Λ0)) \ {0}. A calculation similar
to the above shows that for (x, p, y) ∈ GΛ,
(h∗∗ h)(x, p, y) = (
P
λ∈Λn(r(x))g(λ) if p = 0 and x = y
0 otherwise.
In particular, h∗ ∗ h 6= 0. Let U = {s(λ) : g(λ) 6= 0}. Then U is compact because g
has compact support and s is continuous. By assumption on g, for each v ∈ U there is a unique λv ∈ Λnv such that g(λv) 6= 0. Moreover, the map v 7→ λv is a homeomorphism
from U to ΛnU ∩ supp(g). We may therefore define a function l ∈ C
c(Λ0) by l(v) = ( g(λv) if v ∈ U 0 otherwise. Then h∗∗ h = ι
0(l) belongs to ι0(C0(Λ0)) \ {0}, and then h∗∗ h ∗ h∗∗ h ∈ ι0(C0(Λ0)) \ {0}
also.
Theorem 3.9. Let π be a representation of C∗(G
Λ). If π|ι0(Cc(Λ0)) is injective, then
π|C
0(GΛ(0))
is injective.
Proof. Each π|ιn(C0(Λn)) is injective by Lemma 3.8, and then each π|BF is injective by
Proposition 3.7. The result then follows from Corollary 3.5.
4. Amenability of GΛ and the gauge-invariant uniqueness theorem
Recall that given a topological higher-rank graph Λ, we denote by c the canonical 1-cocycle c := GΛ→ Zk given by c(x, m, y) = m.
Theorem 4.1. Let(Λ, d) be a compactly aligned topological k-graph, and let ι0 : C0(Λ0) →
C0(GΛ(0)) be as defined in Lemma 3.1. Let π : C∗(Λ) → B be a representation in a
C∗-algebra such that π|
ι0(Cc(Λ0)) is injective. Suppose that there is a strongly continuous
action β : Tk → Aut(B) such that for each n ∈ Nk and each f ∈ C
c(GΛ) such that
supp(f ) ⊂ c−1(n), we have β
z(π(f )) = znπ(f ). Then π is injective.
To prove the theorem, we first show that Yeend’s boundary-path groupoid is amenable, and then follow the standard argument of [13]. We begin by showing that the kernel of c is amenable. We thank Toke Carlsen for pointing out an error in an earlier version of the proof of this result.
Proposition 4.2. Let Λ be a topological k-graph. Then the kernel H := GΛ[c] of c is
measurewise amenable and principal, and satisfies H(0)= G(0) Λ .
Proof. For m ∈ Nk, let R
m denote the subgroupoid of H defined by
Rm := {(x, 0, x) : x ∈ ∂Λ} ∪ {(x, 0, y) : d(x) = d(y) ≥ m, σm(x) = σm(y)}.
= {(x, 0, x) : x ∈ ∂Λ} ∪ {(αz, 0, βz) : z ∈ ∂Λ, α, β ∈ Λmr(z)}.
Each Rm is an equivalence relation, and each Rm is also an Fσ set (that is, a countable
union of closed sets) in ∂Λ × ∂Λ because GΛ is locally compact. We claim that each
Rm is proper as a Borel groupoid [1, Definition 2.1.2]. By [1, Examples 2.1.4.(2)], this is
equivalent to the quotient space being a standard Borel space. Theorem 2.1 of [20] implies that this in turn is equivalent here to the assertion that the orbits are locally closed.
Fix m ∈ Nk. To see that the orbits in R
m are indeed locally closed, first observe that
the orbit [x] of x in Rm is equal to {x} if d(x) 6≥ m, and is equal to {ασm(x) : α ∈
Λm, s(α) = x(m)} otherwise. In the first case, [x] = {x} is in fact closed because the
topology on G0
Λ is Hausdorff. In the second case, we claim that
(4.1) [x] =R(0)m ∩ Z(Λm∗ sΛm)
∩ {(ασm(x), 0, βσm(x)) : d(α) = d(β) = m}.
To see this, observe that the right-hand side clearly contains [x], so we need only show the reverse inclusion. Fix
(w, p, z) ∈R(0)m ∩ Z(Λm∗ sΛm)
∩ {(ασm(x), 0, βσm(x)) : d(α) = d(β) = m}.
Then w = z ∈ ∂Λ, p = 0, and d(w) ≥ m. Fix a sequence of pairs (αj, βj) ∈ Λmx(m) ×
Λmx(m) such that (α
jσm(x), 0, βjσm(x)) → (w, 0, w). In particular, αjσm(x), βjσm(x) →
w in ∂Λ. Then [29, Proposition 3.12](i) ensures that the αjσm(x)(0, p ∧ d(x)) converge to
w(0, m + p) for all p ≤ d(w) − m, which implies that d(w) ≤ d(x) and then that in fact (αjσm(x))(0, q) → w(0, q) for all q ≤ d(w). It therefore suffices to show that d(w) ≥ d(x).
Suppose for contradiction that i ≤ k satisfies d(w)i < d(x)i. Then mi ≤ d(w)i < d(x)i,
whence
(αjσm(x))(d(w), d(w) + ei) = x(d(w), d(w) + ei) for all j ∈ N.
In particular, the set
Jd(w),i= {j ∈ N : d(αjσm(x))i ≥ d(w) + ei}
is equal to N and hence infinite, but the sequence (αjσm(x))(d(w), d(w) + ei)j∈Jd(w),i is
the constant sequence, and in particular is not wandering, contradicting [29, Proposi-tion 3.12](ii), establishing (4.1).
Since Rm is an ´etale groupoid the unit space Rm(0) is open. Each Z(Λn∗sΛn) is open in
GΛ by definition of the topology on GΛ, so
Rm(0)∩ [
n≥m
Z(Λn∗sΛn)
is open in the relative topology on Rm. Hence [x] is the intersection of an open set and
a closed set in Rm and hence is locally closed. So Rn is a proper Borel groupoid; in
particular it is measurewise amenable. The groupoid H = S
n∈NkRn is therefore a direct limit of measurewise amenable
groupoids with a common unit-space, and hence is itself measurewise amenable by [1, Proposition 5.3.37].
The factorisation property in Λ implies that if d(α) = d(β) = m, then for any x ∈ ∂Λ, we have αx = βx if and only if α = β. Hence each Rm is principal, and hence that H is
also principal.
We now give a fairly general bootstrapping result which will in particular allow us to deduce amenability of GΛ from amenability of GΛ[c].
Proposition 4.3. Let G be a Borel groupoid with Haar system λ, and let c : G → Γ be a cocycle into an amenable discrete group Γ. Suppose that H := GΛ[c] is measurewise
amenable and H(0) = G(0). Then G is also measurewise amenable.
Proof. Fix a measure µ on G(0) which is quasi-invariant for λ. As discussed in the opening
paragraph of [1, Section 3.3], it suffices to show that the triple (G, λ, µ) is an amenable measured groupoid. To do this, fix an invariant mean n : L∞(G, ν) → L∞(G(0), µ), and
let l be a mean on ℓ∞(Γ).
Since H acts on the right of G, we may form the quotient G/H. We claim that there is an invariant mean ˜m : L∞(G) → L∞(G/H) satisfying
(4.2) m(φ)(gH) =˜
Z
H
φ(gh) dns(g)(h) for all φ ∈ L∞(G), g ∈ G.
To prove this claim, we proceed as in the proof of [1, Theorem 5.3.14]. Let : L∞(G)H →
L∞(G/H) be the isomorphism obtained from n. Let H act on the right of the fibred
product H ∗ G, and let L∞(H ∗ G)H be the subspace of fixed points for this action. Then
1H⊗ is an isomorphism from L∞(H ∗ G) to → L∞(H ∗ (G/H)). Let k denote the natural
isomorphism of H ∗ (G/H) with G, and let k∗ : L∞(G) → L∞(H ∗ (G/H)) the isomorphism
induced by k. Define ı to be the isomorphism k−1
∗ ◦ 1H ⊗ : L∞(H ∗ G) → L∞(G). Then
˜
m := ◦ (n ⊗ 1G) ◦ ı−1 satisfies (4.2), proving the claim.
We now construct m : L∞(G) → L∞(G(0)) from ˜m. By definition of H := G[c], for each
x ∈ ∂Λ, the cocycle c descends to a continuous injection ˜cx : {gH : r(g) = x} ֒→ Γ. Since
Γ is discrete, it follows that for f ∈ L∞(G/H), the restriction f |
{gH:r(g)=x} determines
an element (˜cx)∗(f ) ∈ ℓ∞(Γ). The mean l on ℓ∞(Γ) therefore yields a complex number
l(f )(x) := l (˜cx)∗(f ). Since f ∈ L∞(G/H) and l is a mean, the function l(f ) thus defined
belongs to ∈ L∞(G(0)), and l is a mean from L∞(G/H) to L∞(G(0)).
We now compose ˜m : L∞(G) → L∞(G/H) and l : L∞(G/H) → L∞(G(0)) to obtain the
desired mean
m := l ◦ ˜m : L∞(G) → L∞(G(0)),
which is itself invariant because ˜m was, and l is trivially so. This completes the proof. The claimed amenability of GΛ follows immediately.
Theorem 4.4. Let Λ be a topological k-graph, and let GΛ be the associated groupoid as
in [29]. Then GΛ is topologically amenable.
Proof. Proposition 4.2 verifies that the cocycle c : GΛ → Zk satisfies the hypothesis of
Proposition 4.3. The latter result then implies that GΛ is measurewise amenable, and
since GΛ is also ´etale by [29, Theorem 3.16 and Definition 4.8], the result follows.
We now have the wherewithal to prove our gauge-invariant uniqueness theorem. Recall that a conditional expectation from a C∗-algebra A to a subalgebra B is a linear,
Φ(ba) = bΦ(a) for all a ∈ A and b ∈ B. A conditional expectation Φ : A → B is called faithful if it does not annihilate any strictly positive element of A.
Proof of Theorem 4.1. Averaging over the gauge-action γ : Tk → Aut(C∗(Λ)) determines
a conditional expectation Φγ : C∗(G
Λ) → C∗(GΛ[c]). Composing this with the canonical
conditional expectation P : C∗(G
Λ[c]) → C0(GΛ(0)) yields a conditional expectation Φ :
C∗(G
Λ) → C0(GΛ(0)). Theorem 4.4 implies that GΛ is topologically amenable, so [23,
Proposition 4.3] implies that Φ is faithful, and hence that Φγ is faithful. Averaging over
the action β : Tk→ Aut(B) determines a conditional expectation Φβ : B → π(C∗(G Λ[c]))
such that π ◦ Φγ = Φβ ◦ π, so by a standard argument it suffices to show that π|
C∗(GΛ[c])
is injective.
By hypothesis π is injective on ι0(Cc(Λ0)), and it follows from Theorem 3.9 that π
is injective on C0(GΛ(0)) = C0(GΛ[c](0)). Since Proposition 4.2 implies that GΛ[c] is both
principal and amenable, it follows from [21, II, Proposition 4.6] that π|C∗(GΛ[c])is injective.
Corollary 4.5. Let Λ be a compactly aligned topological higher-rank graph, and let XΛ
be the product system ofC0(Λ0)–C0(Λ0) bimodules associated to Λ in [3, Section 5]. Then
the homomorphism φ : C∗(G
Λ) → N OXΛ of [3, Corollary 5.18] is an isomorphism.
Proof. Since bounded subsets of Nk have maximal elements, [24, Lemma 3.15] ensures
that the hypotheses of [3, Theorem 4.1] are satisfied. Theorem 4.1 of [3] implies that the canonical homomorphism from C0(∂Λ) to N OXΛ is injective — so that φ|i0(C0(∂Λ)) is also
injective — and also that there is an action of Tk on N O
XΛ which is compatible with the
canonical action on C∗(G
Λ). The result then follows from Theorem 4.1.
5. A Cuntz-Krieger uniqueness theorem
The main result of this section is an analogue of the Cuntz-Krieger uniqueness theorem for topological higher-rank graph C∗-algebras.
Recall from [29] that given a topological higher-rank graph Λ, a boundary path x ∈ ∂Λ is said to be aperiodic if σm(x) 6= σn(x) for all distinct m, n ∈ Nk with m, n ≤ d(x).
Theorem 5.1. Let(Λ, d) be a compactly aligned topological k-graph, and suppose that for every open setV ⊂ Λ0 there exists an aperiodic pathx in Z(V ). Let ι
0 : C0(Λ0) → C0(GΛ(0))
be the homomorphism of Lemma 3.1. Let π : C∗(Λ) → B be a representation in a C∗
-algebra such that π|ι0(Cc(Λ0)) is injective. Then π is injective.
Definition 5.2. We will say that a groupoid G is topologically principal if the set of units with trivial isotropy is dense in G(0).
Note that what we are calling topologically principal groupoids have elsewhere been referred to variously as essentially principal, as essentially free, and as topologically free.
To prove Theorem 5.1, we first state a proposition (Proposition 5.3 below) regarding representations of topologically principal groupoids whose proof goes back to [21], but which was stated there only in the stronger form it takes for an ´etale groupoid whose reduction to each open invariant subset of its unit space is topologically principal. In this setting, the results of [21, II, Section 4] assert that every ideal of a reduced twisted groupoid algebra is generated by its intersection with the canonical Cartan subalgebra C0(G(0)). When the groupoid itself, but not necessarily every reduction, is topologically
principal, we cannot expect this. However, it remains true that every nontrivial ideal must intersect the canonical Cartan subalgebra, which is sufficient to recover various versions of the Cuntz-Krieger uniqueness theorem for graph algebras from their groupoid realisations. Until recently, Proposition 5.3 has been folklore in the groupoid literature; in the late stages of preparation of this paper, we learned that Exel has given a detailed and independent proof in the recent preprint [8].
Proposition 5.3. Let G be an ´etale topologically principal groupoid, and σ : G(2) → T a
continuous 2-cocycle. Let I be an ideal of C∗
r(G, σ). If I ∩ C0(G(0)) = {0} then I = {0}.
Proof. Let L be a representation of C∗
r(G, σ) such that ker(L) = I. Then L lives on
some quasi-invariant probability measure µ on G(0). Since I ∩ C0(G(0)) = {0}, we have
supp(µ) = G(0).
We first claim that for any f ∈ Cc(G) we have
sup
u∈G(0)
|f (u)| ≤ kL(f )k.
Since G is topologically principal, it suffices to establish the inequality for u ∈ G(0) such
that G(u) = {u}, and the argument of [21, II, Proposition 4.4] does the job.
As in the opening paragraph of the proof of [21, II, Proposition 4.6], we obtain that k Ind µ(f )k ≤ kL(f )k. Moreover, if P : C∗
r(G, σ) → C0(G(0)) is the restriction map, then
P is a faithful conditional expectation, and Ind µ is equal to the GNS representation associated with the state µ ◦ P and hence is a faithful representation. It follows that L is
faithful, so I = {0} as claimed.
Remark 5.4. Those familiar with the literature may be uneasy in that there is known to be an error in the statement of [21, II, Proposition 4.5(i)] which could, at first glance, impinge on the preceding argument. However, the offending statement holds trivially for U = ∅, and this is the situation with which we are concerned.
We can now prove the main theorem of the section.
Proof of Theorem 5.1. Theorem 5.2 of [29] implies that the groupoid GΛ satisfies the
hy-potheses of Proposition 5.3. By the preceding section, GΛ is amenable, and it follows
that C∗
r(GΛ) = C∗(GΛ) = C∗(Λ), so π is a representation of Cr∗(GΛ). Since π is injective
on i0(Cc(Λ0)), Theorem 3.9 implies that ker(π) ∩ C0(GΛ(0)) = {0}. Hence Proposition 5.3
implies that ker(π) = {0}, so π is injective.
We conclude the paper with a small digression. We prove a corollary to Theorem 5.1 which combines Proposition 5.3 with the first author’s work on Cartan subalgebras [23] to obtain a uniqueness theorem of sorts for Cartan pairs.
First recall from Kumjian [12] that given an abelian subalgebra B of a C∗-algebra A,
a normaliser of B in A is an element n ∈ A such that nBn∗ ⊂ B and n∗Bn ⊂ B,
and N(B) denotes the set of all normalisers of B in A. As in [23, Definition 4.1], we say that B is regular in A if A is generated as a C∗-algebra by N(B). As in [23, Definition 5.1],
we say that B is a Cartan subalgebra of A, or that (A, B) is a Cartan pair if (i) B contains an approximate identity for A,
(iii) B is regular in A, and
(iv) there exists a faithful conditional expectation P : A → B.
Corollary 5.5. Let (A, B) be a Cartan pair, and let φ : A → C be a C∗-homomorphism.
If φ|B is injective, then φ is injective.
Proof. Theorem 5.6 of [23] shows that there is an isomorphism of A onto the reduced C∗
-algebra Cr∗(G, Σ) of the Weyl groupoid G and cocycle associated to the pair (A, B) (see [23,
Definition 4.2]), and that this isomorphism carries B onto C0(G0). Proposition 5.4 of [23]
implies that G is a Hausdorff ´etale groupoid, and since B is a maximal abelian subalgebra of A by assumption, Proposition 4.2 of [23] implies that G is topologically free (the term used in that paper is essentially principal, but see [23, Definition 3.1] and the paragraph which immediately follows it). The result then follows from Proposition 5.3.
References
[1] C. Anantharaman-Delaroche and J. Renault, Amenable groupoids, Monographies de L’Enseignement Mathmatique, 36, L’Enseignement Mathmatique, Geneva, 2000.
[2] T. Bates, D. Pask, I. Raeburn, and W. Szyma´nski, The C∗-algebras of row-finite graphs, New York J. Math. 6 (2000), 307–324 (electronic).
[3] T. Carlsen, N. Larsen, A. Sims and S. Vittadello, Co-universal algebras associated to product systems,
and gauge-invariant uniqueness theorems, in preparation.
[4] J. Cuntz and W. Krieger, A class of C∗-algebras and topological Markov chains, Invent. Math. 56 (1980), no. 3, 251–268.
[5] J. Dixmier, C∗-algebras, North-Holland Publishing Co., Amsterdam, Translated from the French by Francis Jellett, North-Holland Mathematical Library, Vol. 15, 1977, xiii+492.
[6] M. Enomoto and Y. Watatani, A graph theory for C∗-algebras, Math. Japon. 25 (1980), no. 4, 435–442.
[7] R. Exel, Inverse semigroups and combinatorial C∗-algebras, Bull. Braz. Math. Soc. (N.S.) 39 (2008), no. 2, 191–313.
[8] R. Exel, A non-Hausdorff ´etale groupoid, preprint 2008 (arXiv:0812.4087v2 [math.OA]).
[9] C. Farthing, P. S. Muhly, and T. Yeend, Higher-rank graph C∗-algebras: an inverse semigroup and
groupoid approach, Semigroup Forum 71 (2005), no. 2, 159–187.
[10] A. an Huef and I. Raeburn, The ideal structure of Cuntz-Krieger algebras, Ergodic Theory Dynam. Systems 17 (1997), no. 3, 611–624.
[11] T. Katsura, A class of C∗-algebras generalizing both graph algebras and homeomorphism C∗-algebras
I. Fundamental results, Trans. Amer. Math. Soc. 356 (2004), no. 11, 4287–4322 (electronic).
[12] A. Kumjian, On C∗-diagonals, Canad. J. Math. 38 (1986), no. 4, 969–1008.
[13] A. Kumjian and D. Pask, Higher rank graph C∗-algebras, New York J. Math. 6 (2000), 1–20 (elec-tronic).
[14] A. Kumjian, D. Pask, and I. Raeburn, Cuntz-Krieger algebras of directed graphs, Pacific J. Math. 184(1998), no. 1, 161–174.
[15] A. Kumjian, D. Pask, I. Raeburn, and J. Renault, Graphs, groupoids, and Cuntz-Krieger algebras, J. Funct. Anal. 144 (1997), no. 2, 505–541.
[16] A. Marrero and P. Muhly, Groupoid and inverse semigroup presentations of ultragraph C∗-algebras, Semigroup Forum 77 (2008), 399–422.
[17] A. L. T. Paterson, Graph inverse semigroups, groupoids and their C∗-algebras, J. Operator Theory 48(2002), no. 3, suppl., 645–662.
[18] I. Raeburn, Graph algebras, Published for the Conference Board of the Mathematical Sciences, Washington, DC, 2005, vi+113.
[19] I. Raeburn, A. Sims, and T. Yeend, The C∗-algebras of finitely aligned higher-rank graphs, J. Funct. Anal. 213 (2004), no. 1, 206–240.
[20] A. Ramsay, The Mackey-Glimm dichotomy for foliations and other Polish groupoids, J. Funct. Anal. 94(1990), no. 2, 358–374.
[21] J. Renault, A groupoid approach to C∗-algebras, Springer, Berlin, 1980, ii+160.
[22] J. Renault, Repr´esentation des produits crois´es d’alg`ebres de groupo¨ıdes, J. Operator Theory 18 (1987), no. 1, 67–97.
[23] J. Renault, Cartan subalgebras in C∗-algebras, Irish Math. Soc. Bulletin 61 (2008), 29–63.
[24] A. Sims and T. Yeend, C∗-algebras associated to product systems of Hilbert bimodules, J. Operator Theory, to appear (arXiv:0712.3073v2 [math.OA]).
[25] M. Tomforde, A unified approach to Exel-Laca algebras and C∗-algebras associated to graphs, J. Operator Theory 50 (2003), no. 2, 345–368.
[26] J. Tomiyama, The interplay between topological dynamics and theory of C∗-algebras, Seoul National University Research Institute of Mathematics Global Analysis Research Center, Seoul, 1992, vi+69. [27] T. Yeend, Topological higher-rank graphs, their groupoids, and operator algebras, PhD thesis,
Uni-versity of Newcastle, 2005.
[28] T. Yeend, Topological higher-rank graphs and the C∗-algebras of topological 1-graphs, Operator
theory, operator algebras, and applications, Amer. Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 2006, 231–244.
[29] T. Yeend, Groupoid models for the C*-algebras of topological higher-rank graphs, J. Operator. Th, 57(2007), 95–120.
J. Renault, D´epartement de Math´ematiques, Universit´e d’Orl´eans, BP 6759, 45067 Orl´eans Cedex 2, FRANCE
E-mail address: [email protected]
A. Sims, School of Mathematics and Applied Statistics, Austin Keane Building (15), University of Wollongong, NSW 2522, AUSTRALIA
E-mail address: [email protected]
T. Yeend, School of Mathematical and Physical Sciences, Building V, University of Newcastle, Callaghan NSW 2308, AUSTRALIA
