2-LOCAL DERIVATIONS ON MATRIX RINGS OVER ASSOCIATIVE RINGS arxiv:1303.6033v1 [math.ra] 25 Mar 2013 SHAVKAT AYUPOV AND FARKHAD ARZIKULOV Abstract. Let M n(r) be the matrix ring over an associative ring R. In the present paper we prove that every inner 2-local derivation on the whole M n(r) is an inner derivation if only if every inner 2-local derivation on a certain subring of M n(r), isomorphic to M 2 (R), is an inner derivation. In particular, we prove that every inner 2-local derivation on the matrix ring M n(r) over a commutative associative ring R is an inner derivation. 2000 Mathematics Subject Classification: Primary 16W25, 46L57; Secondary 47B47 Introduction The present paper is devoted to 2-local derivations on associative rings. Recall that a 2-local derivation is defined as follows: given a ring R, a map : R R (not additive in general) is called a 2-local derivation if for every x, y R, there exists a derivation D x,y : R R such that (x) = D x,y (x) (y) = D x,y (y). In 1997, P. Šemrl [5] introduced the notion of 2-local derivations described 2-local derivations on the algebra B(H) of all bounded linear operators on the infinite-dimensional separable Hilbert space H. A similar description for the finitedimensional case appeared later in [3]. In the paper [4] 2-local derivations have been described on matrix algebras over finite-dimensional division rings. In [2] the authors suggested a new technique have generalized the above mentioned results of [5] [3] for arbitrary Hilbert spaces. Namely they considered 2-local derivations on the algebra B(H) of all linear bounded operators on an arbitrary(no separability is assumed) Hilbert space H proved that every 2-local derivation on B(H) is a derivation. In [1] we extended the above results give a short proof of the theorem for arbitrary semi-finite von Neumann algebras. In this article we develop an algebraic approach to the investigation of derivations 2-local derivations on associative rings. Since we consider a sufficiently general case of associative rings we restrict our attention only on inner derivations inner 2-local derivations. Namely, we consider the following problem: if an inner 2-local derivation on an associative ring is a derivation then is the latter derivation inner? The answer to this question is affirmative if the ring is generated by two elements (Proposition 10). In this article we consider 2-local derivations on the matrix ring M n (R) over an associative ring R. The first step of the investigation consists of proving that, if every inner 2-local derivation on a certain subring of the ring M n (R), isomorphic to M 2 (R), is an inner derivation then every inner 2-local derivation on the whole ring Date: February 18, 2013. Key words phrases. derivation, inner derivation, 2-local derivation, matrix ring over an associative ring. 1
2 SHAVKAT AYUPOV AND FARKHAD ARZIKULOV M n (R) is also an inner derivation. In the case of a commutative associative ring R we prove that arbitrary inner 2-local derivation on M n (R) is an inner derivation. The latter result extends the result of [4] to the infinite dimensional but commutative ring R. The second step consists of proving that if every inner 2-local derivation on M n (R) is an inner derivation then each inner 2-local derivation on a certain subring of the matrix ring M n (R), isomorphic to M 2 (R), is also an inner derivation. 1. 2-local derivations on matrix rings Let R be a ring. Recall that a map D : R R is called a derivation, if D(x + y) = D(x) + D(y) D(xy) = D(x)y + xd(y) for any two elements x, y R. A derivation D on a ring R is called an inner derivation, if there exists an element a R such that D(x) = ax xa,x A. A map : R R is called a 2-local derivation, if for any two elements x, y R there exists a derivation D x,y : R R such that (x) = D x,y (x), (y) = D x,y (y). A map : R R is called an inner 2-local derivation, if for any two elements x, y R there exists an element a R such that (x) = ax xa, (y) = ay ya. Let R be an associative unital ring, M n (R), n > 1, be the matrix ring over the associative ring R. Let M2 (R) be a subring of M n (R), generated by the subsets {e ii M n+1 (R)e jj } 2 ij=1 in M n(r). It is clear that M 2 (R) = M 2 (R). The following theorem is the main result of the paper. Theorem 1. Let R be an associative unital ring, let M n (R) be the matrix ring over R, n > 1. Then 1) every inner 2-local derivation on the matrix ring M n (R) is an inner derivation if only if every inner 2-local derivation on its subring M 2 (R) is an inner derivation, 2) if the ring R is commutative then every inner 2-local derivation on the matrix ring M n (R) is an inner derivation First let us prove lemmata propositions which are necessary for the proof of theorem 1. Let R be an associativeunital ring, let {e ij } n i,j=1 be the set ofmatrix units in M n (R) such that e ij is a n n-dimensional matrix in M n (R), i.e. e ij = (a kl ) n k,l=1, the (i,j)-th component of which is 1 (the unit of R), i.e. a ij = 1, the rest components are zeros. Let : M n (R) M n (R) be an inner 2-local derivation. Consider the subset {a(ij)} n i,j=1 M n(r) such that (e ij ) = a(ij)e ij e ij a(ij). Put a ij = e ii a(ji)e jj, for all pairs of different indices i, j let {a kl } k l be the set of all such elements. Lemma 2. Let : M n (R) M n (R) be an inner 2-local derivation. Then for any pair i, j of different indices the following equality holds (e ij ) = {a kl } k l e ij e ij {a kl } k l +a(ij) ii e ij e ij a(ij) jj, (1)
2-LOCAL DERIVATIONS ON MATRIX RINGS 3 where a(ij) ii, a(ij) jj are components of the matrices e ii a(ij)e ii, e jj a(ij)e jj. Proof. Let m be an arbitrary index different from i, j let a(ij,ik) M n (R) be an element such that (e im ) = a(ij,im)e im e im a(ij,im) (e ij ) = a(ij,im)e ij e ij a(ij,im). We have (e im ) = a(ij,im)e im e im a(ij,im) = a(im)e im e im a(im) e mm a(ij,im)e ij = e mm a(im)e ij. Then e mm (e ij )e jj = e mm (a(ij,im)e ij e ij a(ij,im))e jj = e mm a(ij,im)e ij 0 = e mm a(im)e ij e mm e ij {a kl } k l e jj = e mm a mi e ij e mm e ij {a kl } k l e jj = e mm {a kl } k l e ij e mm e ij {a kl } k l e jj = e mm ({a kl } k l e ij e ij {a kl } k l )e jj. Similarly, e mm (e ij )e ii = e mm (a(ij,im)e ij e ij a(ij,im))e ii = e mm a(ij,im)e ij e ii 0 = 0 0 = e mm {a kl } k l e ij e ii e mm e ij {a kl } k l e ii = e mm ({a kl } k l e ij e ij {a kl } k l )e ii. Let a(ij,mj) M n (R) be an element such that (e mj ) = a(ij,mj)e mj e mj a(ij,mj) (e ij ) = a(ij,mj)e ij e ij a(ij,mj). We have (e mj ) = a(ij,mj)e mj e mj a(ij,mj) = a(mj)e mj e mj a(mj). e ij a(ij,mj)e mm = e ij a(mj)e mm. Then e ii (e ij )e mm = e ii (a(ij,mj)e ij e ij a(ij,mj))e mm = 0 e ij a(ij,mj)e mm = 0 e ij a(mj)e mm = 0 e ij a jm e mm = e ii {a kl } k l e ij e mm e ij {a kl } k l e mm = e ii ({a kl } k l e ij e ij {a kl } k l )e mm. Also we have e jj (e ij )e mm = e jj (a(ij,mj)e ij e ij a(ij,mj))e mm = 0 0 = e jj {a(ij)} i j e ij e mm e jj e ij {a(ij)} i j e mm = e jj ({a kl } k l e ij e ij {a kl } k l )e mm, e ii (e ij )e ii = e ii (a(ij)e ij e ij a(ij))e ii = 0 e ij a(ij)e ii = 0 e ij a(ij)e ii = 0 e ij a ji e ii = e ii {a kl } k l e ij e ii e ij {a kl } k l e ii = e ii ({a kl } k l e ij e ij {a kl } k l )e ii. e jj (e ij )e jj = e jj (a(ij)e ij e ij a(ij))e jj = e jj a(ij)e ij 0 = e jj a ji e ij 0 = e jj {a kl } k l e ij e jj e ij {a kl } k l e jj =
4 SHAVKAT AYUPOV AND FARKHAD ARZIKULOV Thus e jj ({a kl } k l e ij e ij {a kl } k l )e jj. (e ij ) = n e kk (e ij )e ll = k,l=1 n e kk ({a kl } k l e ij e ij {a kl } k l )e ll +e ii (e ij )e jj = k,l=1 {a kl } k l e ij e ij {a kl } k l +a(ij) ii e ij e ij a(ij) jj. The proof is complete. Consider the element x = n 1 i=1 e i,i+1. For arbitrary different indices i j there exists an element c M n (A) such that (e ij ) = ce ij e ij c (x) = cx xc. Let c = n ij=1 c ij be the Pierce decomposition of c, a ii = c ii for any i ā = n ij=1 a ij. Lemma 3. Let : M n (R) M n (R) be an inner 2-local derivation. Suppose that the ring R is commutative k, l are arbitrary different indices. If b M n (R) is an element such that (e kl ) = be kl e kl b (x) = bx xb then c kk c ll = b kk b ll. Proof. We can suppose that k < l. We have Hence Then for the sequence we have (x) = cx xc = bx xb. e kk (cx xc)e k+1,k+1 = e kk (bx xb)e k+1,k+1 c kk c k+1,k+1 = b kk b k+1,k+1. (k,k +1),(k +1,k +2)(l 1,l) c kk c k+1,k+1 = b kk b k+1,k+1,c k+1,k+1 c k+2,k+2 = b k+1,k+1 b k+2,k+2,... Hence c l 1,l 1 c ll = b l 1,l 1 b ll. c kk b kk = c k+1,k+1 b k+1,k+1,c k+1,k+1 b k+1,k+1 = c k+2,k+2 b k+2,k+2,... c l 1,l 1 b l 1,l 1 = c ll b ll. Therefore c kk b kk = c ll b ll, i.e. c kk c ll = b kk b ll. The proof is complete. Proposition 4. Let : M n (R) M n (R) be an inner 2-local derivation, n > 1. Then 1) if every inner 2-local derivation on the ring M 2 (R) is an inner derivation then every inner 2-local derivation on M n (R) is an inner derivation. 2) if the ring R is commutative then every inner 2-local derivation on M n (R) is an inner derivation.
2-LOCAL DERIVATIONS ON MATRIX RINGS 5 Proof. Let x be a symmetric matrix in M n (R) let d(ij) M n (R) be an element such that (e ij ) = d(ij)e ij e ij d(ij) (x) = d(ij)x xd(ij) i j. Then by Lemma 2 (e ij ) = d(ij)e ij e ij d(ij) = e ii d(ij)e ij e ij d(ij)e jj +(1 e ii )d(ij)e ij e ij d(ij)(1 e jj ) = a(ij) ii e ij e ij a(ij) jj +{a kl } k l e ij e ij {a kl } k l for all i, j. Since e ii d(ij)e ij e ij d(ij)e jj = a(ij) ii e ij e ij a(ij) jj we have (1 e ii )d(ij)e ii = {a kl } k l e ii,e jj d(ij)(1 e jj ) = e jj {a kl } k l for all different i j. Hence by lemma 3 we have e jj (x)e ii = e jj (d(ij)x xd(ij))e ii = e jj d(ij)(1 e jj )xe ii +e jj d(ij)e jj xe ii e jj x(1 e ii )d(ij)e ii e jj xe ii d(ij)e ii = Similarly e jj {a kl } k l xe ii e jj x{a kl } k l e ii +e jj d(ij)e jj xe ii e jj xe ii d(ij)e ii. e ii (x)e jj = e ii {a kl } k l xe jj e ii x{a kl } k l e jj +e ii d(ij)e ii xe jj e ii xe jj d(ij)e jj. Also, we have e ii (x)e ii = e ii (d(ij)x xd(ij))e ii = e ii d(ij)(1 e ii )xe ii +e ii d(ij)e ii xe ii e ii x(1 e ii )d(ij)e ii e ii xe ii d(ij)e ii = e ii {a kl } k l xe ii e ii x{a kl } k l e ii +e ii d(ij)e ii xe ii e ii xe ii d(ij)e ii e jj (x)e jj = e jj (d(ij)x xd(ij))e jj = e jj {a kl } k l xe jj e jj x{a kl } k l e jj +e jj d(ij)e jj xe jj e jj xe jj d(ij)e jj. Now in both cases 1) 2) we have e ii d(ij)e ii xe ii e ii xe ii d(ij)e ii = c ii e ii xe ii e ii xe ii c ii, e jj d(ij)e jj xe jj e jj xe jj d(ij)e jj = c jj e jj xe jj e jj xe jj c jj, e jj d(ij)e jj xe ii e jj xe ii d(ij)e ii = c jj e jj xe ii e jj xe ii c ii, Hence e ii d(ij)e ii xe jj e ii xe jj d(ij)e jj = c ii e ii xe jj e ii xe jj c jj. (x) = ( c ii )x x( c ii )+{a kl } k l x x{a kl } k l = i i āx xā for all x M n (R). The proof is complete.
6 SHAVKAT AYUPOV AND FARKHAD ARZIKULOV 2. Extension of derivations 2-local derivations Proposition 5. Let M 2 (R) be the matrix ring over a unital associative ring R let D : e 11 M 2 (R)e 11 e 11 M 2 (R)e 11 be a derivation on the subring e 11 M 2 (R)e 11. Then, if φ : e 11 M 2 (R)e 11 e 22 M 2 (R)e 22 is an isomorphism defined as φ(a) = e 21 ae 12, a e 11 M 2 (R)e 11 then the map defined by the following conditions 1) D(a) = D(a), a e 11 M 2 (R)e 11, 2) D(a) = φ D φ 1 (a), a e 22 M 2 (R)e 22, 3) D(e 12 ) = e 12, D(e 21 ) = e 21, 4) D(a) = D(ae 21 )e 12 +ae 21 D(e 12 ), a e 11 M 2 (R)e 22, 5) D(a) = D(e 21 )e 12 a+e 21 D(e 12 a), a e 22 M 2 (R)e 11, 6) D(a) = D(e 11 ae 11 )+ D(e 11 ae 22 )+ D(e 22 ae 11 )+ D(e 22 ae 22 ), a M 2 (R), is a derivation. Proof. For every a M 2 (R) the value D(a) is uniquely defined. Therefore D is a map. It is clear that D is additive. Now we will prove that D(ab) = D(a)b +a D(b) for arbitrary elements a, b M 2 (R). Let a 1 = e 11 ae 11, a 12 = e 11 ae 22, a 21 = e 22 ae 11, a 2 = e 22 ae 22, b 1 = e 11 be 11, b 12 = e 11 be 22, b 21 = e 22 be 11, b 2 = e 22 be 22, D = φ D φ 1 for arbitrary elements a, b M 2 (R). Then we have the following Pierce decompositions of the elements a b a = a 1 +a 12 +a 21 +a 2,b = b 1 +b 12 +b 21 +b 2. The following equalities hold D(a 1 b 1 ) = D(a 1 b 1 ), D(a 1 b 2 ) = D(0) = 0 = D(a 1 )b 2 +a 1 D(b2 ), D(a 1 b 12 ) = D(a 1 b 12 e 21 )e 12 +a 1 b 12 e 21 D(e12 ) = D(a 1 )b 12 +a 1 D(b 12 e 21 )e 12 +a 1 b 12 e 21 D(e12 ) = D(a 1 )b 12 +a 1 (D(b 12 e 21 )e 12 +b 12 e 21 D(e12 )) = D(a 1 )b 12 +a 1 D(b12 ) = D(a 1 )b 12 +a 1 D(b12 ), D(a 1 b 21 ) = D(0) = 0 = a 1 ( D(e 21 )e 12 b 21 +e 21 D(e 12 b 21 )) = a 1 D(b21 ) = D(a 1 )b 21 +a 1 D(b21 ) = D(a 1 )b 21 +a 1 D(b21 ), D(a 2 b 1 ) = D(a 2 )b 1 +a 2 D(b1 ) = D(a 2 )b 1 +a 2 D(b 1 ) = 0, D(a 12 b 1 ) = D(0) = 0 = (D(a 12 e 21 )e 12 +a 12 e 21 D(e12 ))b 1 = D(a 12 )b 1 = D(a 12 )b 1 +a 12 D(b 1 ) = D(a 12 )b 1 +a 12 D(b1 ). Also, since D(e 12 )a 12 +e 12 D(a21 ) = e 12 a 21 +e 12 ( D(e 21 )e 21 a 21 +e 21 D(e 12 a 21 )) = we have e 12 a 21 e 12 e 21 e 12 a 21 +e 12 e 21 D(e 12 a 21 ) = D(e 12 a 21 ) D(a 21 b 1 ) = D(e 21 )e 12 a 21 b 1 +e 21 D(e 12 a 21 b 1 ) = a 21 b 1 +e 21 (D(e 12 a 21 )b 1 +e 12 a 21 D(b 1 )) = a 21 b 1 +e 21 D(e 12 a 21 )b 1 +a 21 D(b 1 ) = a 21 b 1 +e 21 ( D(e 12 )a 21 +e 12 D(a21 ))b 1 +a 21 D(b 1 ) = a 21 b 1 +a 21 b 1 +e 22 D(a21 )b 1 +a 21 D(b 1 ) = e 22 D(a21 )b 1 +a 21 D(b 1 ) = D(a 21 )b 1 +a 21 D(b1 )
2-LOCAL DERIVATIONS ON MATRIX RINGS 7 by condition 5). Similarly we have D(a 21 b 12 ) = D (a 21 e 12 e 21 b 12 ) = D (a 21 e 12 )e 21 b 12 +a 21 e 12 D (e 21 b 12 ) = D (e 21 e 12 a 21 e 12 )e 21 b 12 +a 21 e 12 D (e 21 b 12 e 21 e 12 ) = φ D(e 12 a 21 )e 21 b 12 +a 21 e 12 φ D(b 12 e 21 ) = e 21 D(e 12 a 21 )e 12 e 21 b 12 +a 21 e 12 e 21 D(b 12 e 21 )e 12 = e 21 D(e 12 a 21 )b 12 a 21 b 12 +a 21 b 12 +a 21 D(b 12 e 21 )e 12 = e 21 D(e 12 a 21 )b 12 + D(e 21 )e 12 a 21 b 12 +a 21 b 12 e 21 D(e12 )+a 21 D(b 12 e 21 )e 12 = D(e 21 D(e 12 a 21 )+ D(e 21 )e 12 a 21 )b 12 +a 21 (b 12 e 21 D(e12 )+D(b 12 e 21 )e 12 ) = D(a 21 )b 12 +a 21 D(b12 ) D(a 12 b 21 ) = D(a 12 )b 21 +a 12 D(b21 ). By conditions 4) 5) above the following equalities hold D(a 12 b 12 ) = D(a 12 )b 12 +a 12 D(b12 ) = 0, D(a 21 b 21 ) = D(a 21 )b 21 +a 21 D(b21 ) = 0. By these equalities we have D(ab) = D((a 1 +a 12 +a 21 +a 2 )(b 1 +b 12 +b 21 +b 2 )) = D(a 1 b 1 )+ D(a 1 b 12 )+ D(a 1 b 21 )+ D(a 1 b 2 )+ D(a 12 b 1 )+... + D(a 2 b 21 )+ D(a 2 b 2 ) = D(a)b+a D(b). Hence, the map D is a derivation it is an extension of the derivation D on the ring M 2 (R). The proof is complete. Let M m (R)beasubringofM n (R), m < n,generatedbythesubsets{e ii M n (R)e jj } m ij=1 in M n (R). It is clear that M m (R) = M m (R). Proposition 6. Let R be an associative ring, let M n (R) be a matrix ring over R, n > 2. Then every derivation on M 2 (R) can be extended to a derivation on M n (R). Proof. By proposition 5 every derivation on M 2 (R) can be extended to a derivation on M 4 (R). In its turn, every derivation on M 4 (R) can be extended to a derivation on M 8 (R) so on. Thus every derivation on M 2 (R) can be extended to a derivation D on M 2 k(r). Suppose that n 2 k. Let e = n i=1 e ii D(a) = ed(a)e,a M n (R). Then D : Mn (R) M n (R) D is a derivation on M n (R). Indeed, it is clear that D is a linear map. At the same time, for all a, b M n (R) we have D(ab) = ed(ab)e = e(d(a)b+ad(b))e = ed(a)be+ead(b)e = ed(a)eb+aed(b)e = D(a)b+a D(b). Hence, D : Mn (R) M n (R) is a derivation. At the same time, on the subalgebra M 2 (R) the derivation D coincides with the derivation. Therefore, D is an extension of to M n (R). Thus,inthecaseoftheringM 2 (R)foranyderivationonthesubringe 11 M 2 (R)e 11 we can take its extension onto the whole M 2 (R) defined as in proposition 5, which is also a derivation.
8 SHAVKAT AYUPOV AND FARKHAD ARZIKULOV In proposition 7 we take the extensions of derivations defined as in proposition 5. Proposition 7. Let M 2 (R) be the matrix ring over a unital associative ring R let : e 11 M 2 (R)e 11 e 11 M 2 (R)e 11 be a 2-local derivation on the subring e 11 M 2 (R)e 11. Then, if φ : e 11 M 2 (R)e 11 e 22 M 2 (R)e 22 is an isomorphism defined as φ(a) = e 21 ae 12, a e 11 M 2 (R)e 11 then the map defined by the following conditions is a 2-local derivation: 1) (a) = (a) if a e 11 M 2 (R)e 11, 2) (a) = φ φ 1 (a) if a e 22 M 2 (R)e 22, 3) (e 12 ) = e 12, (e 21 ) = e 21, 4) (a) = (ae 21 )e 12 +ae 21 (e 12 ) if a e 11 M 2 (R)e 22, 5) (a) = (e 21 )e 12 a+e 21 (e 12 a) if a e 22 M 2 (R)e 11, 6) (a) = D(e 11 ae 11 )+ D(e 11 ae 22 )+ D(e 22 ae 11 )+ D(e 22 ae 22 ), a M 2 (R), where, if e 11 ae 11 0 then D is the extension of the derivation D on e 11 M 2 (R)e 11 such that (e 11 ae 11 ) = D(e 11 ae 11 ), if e 11 ae 11 = 0 e 22 ae 22 0 then D is the extension of the derivation D on e 11 M 2 (R)e 11 such that (e 12 e 22 ae 22 e 21 ) = D(e 12 e 22 ae 22 e 21 ), if e 11 ae 11 = e 22 ae 22 = 0 e 11 ae 22 0 then D is the extension of the derivation D on e 11 M 2 (R)e 11 such that (e 11 ae 22 e 21 ) = D(e 11 ae 22 e 21 ), if e 11 ae 11 = e 22 ae 22 = e 11 ae 22 = 0 e 22 ae 11 0 then D is the extension of the derivation D on e 11 M 2 (R)e 11 such that (e 12 e 22 ae 11 ) = D(e 12 e 22 ae 11 ). Proof. It is clearthat, if a e 11 M 2 (R)e 11 then the value (a) defined in the case 1)coincideswiththevalue (a)definedinthecase6). Similarly,ifa e 22 M 2 (R)e 22 then the value (a) defined in the case 2) coincides with the value of (a) defined in the case 6) so on. Hence is a correctly defined map. Now we should prove that is a 2-local derivation. Let a, b be arbitrary elements of the algebra M 2 (R). Suppose that e 11 ae 11 0, e 11 be 11 0. Then by the definition there exists a derivation D on e 11 M 2 (R)e 11 such that (a) = D(e 11 ae 11 ) (b) = D(e 11 be 11 ). Let D be the extension of the derivation D satisfying the conditions of the proposition 5. Hence (a) = D(a) (b) = D(b) by the definition of the map. Now suppose that e 11 ae 11 = 0, e 22 ae 22 0 e 11 be 11 0. Then by the definition there exists a derivation D on e 11 M 2 (R)e 11 such that (a) = D(e 12 e 22 ae 22 e 21 ) (b) = D(e 11 be 11 ).
2-LOCAL DERIVATIONS ON MATRIX RINGS 9 Let D be the extension of the derivation D satisfying the conditions of the proposition 5. Hence (a) = D(a) (b) = D(b) so on. In all cases there exists a derivation D such that (a) = D(a) (b) = D(b) Since a, b are arbitrary elements in M 2 (R) we have is a 2-local derivation. Proposition 8. Let R be an associative ring, let M n (R) be a matrix ring over R, n > 2. Then every 2-local derivation on M 2 (R) can be extended to a 2-local derivation on M n (R). Proof. By proposition 7 every 2-local derivation on M 2 (R) can be extended to a 2-local derivation on M 4 (R). In its turn, every 2-local derivation on M 4 (R) can be extended to a 2-local derivation on M 8 (R) so on. Thus every 2-local derivation on M 2 (R) can be extended to a 2-local derivation on M 2 k(r). Suppose that n 2 k. Let e = n i=1 e ii (a) = e (a)e,a M n (R). Then : Mn (R) M n (R) is a 2-local derivation on M n (R). Indeed, it is clear that is a map. At the same time, for all a, b M n (R) there exists a derivation D : M 2 k(r) M 2 k(r) such that (a) = D(a), (b) = D(b). Then (a) = ed(a)e, (b) = ed(b)e. By the proof of proposition 6 the map D(a) = ed(a)e,a M n (R) is a derivation (a) = D(a), (b) = D(b). Hence, : Mn (R) M n (R) is a 2-local derivation. At the same time, on the subalgebra M 2 (R) the 2-local derivation coincides with the 2-local derivation. Therefore, is an extension of to M n (R). Proposition 9. Let R be an associative unital ring, let M n (R), n > 1, be the matrix ring over R. Then, if every inner 2-local derivation on the matrix ring M n (R) is an inner derivation then every inner 2-local derivation on the ring M 2 (R) is an inner derivation. Proof. Let be a 2-local derivation on M 2 (R). Then by proposition 8 is extended to a 2-local derivation on M n (R). By the condition is an inner derivation, i.e. there exists d M n (R) such that (a) = da ad,a M n (R). But M2 (R) =. Hence for all a M 2 (R), i.e. (a) = da ad M 2 (R) (e 11 +e 22 )(da ad)(e 11 +e 22 ) = da ad, da ad = ca ac for all a M 2 (R), where c = (e 11 +e 22 )d(e 11 +e 22 ). Since c M 2 (R), we have that is an inner derivation. The proof is complete.
10 SHAVKAT AYUPOV AND FARKHAD ARZIKULOV Proof of theorem 1. Propositions 4 9 immediately imply theorem1. We conclude the paper by the following more general observation. Proposition 10. Let : R R be an inner 2-local derivation on an associative ring R. Suppose that R is generated by its two elements. Then, if is additive then it is an inner derivation. Proof. Let x, y be generators of R, i.e. R = Alg({x,y}), where Alg({x,y}) is an associative ring, generated by the elements x, y in R. We have that there exists d R such that (x) = [d,x], (y) = [d,y], where [d,a] = da ad for any a R. Hence by the additivity of we have Note that Similarly (x+y) = (x)+ (y) = [d,x+y]. (xy) = (x)y +x (y) = [d,x]y +x[d,y] = [d,xy], (x 2 ) = (x)x+x (x) = [d,x]x+x[d,x] = [d,x 2 ], (y 2 ) = (y)y +y (y) = [d,y]y +y[d,y] = [d,y 2 ], (x k ) = [d,x k ], (y m ) = [d,y m ], (x k y m ) = [d,x k y m ] (x k y m x l ) = (x k y m )x l +x k y m (x l ) = [d,x k y m ]x l +x k y m [d,x l ] = [d,x k y m x l ]. Finally, for every polynomial p(x 1,x 2,...,x m ) R, where x 1,x 2,...,x m {x,y} we have (p(x 1,x 2,...,x m )) = [d,p(x 1,x 2,...,x m )], i.e. is an inner derivation on R. References [1] Sh. A. Ayupov, F. N. Arzikulov, 2-local derivations on semi-finite von Neumann algebras, www.arxiv.org v1 [math.oa] 27 july 2012 (to appear in Glasgow Mathematical Journal, 2013, doi: 10.1017/S00117089512000870). [2] Sh. A. Ayupov, K. K. Kudaybergenov, 2-local derivations automorphisms on B(H), J. Math. Anal. Appl. 395 (2012), 15-18. [3] S. O. Kim, J. S. Kim, Local automorphisms derivations on M n, Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 132 (2004), 13891392. [4] Y. Lin, T. Wong, A note on 2-local maps, Proc. Edinb. Math. Soc. 49 (2006), 701708. [5] P. Šemrl, Local automorphisms derivations on B(H), Proc. Amer. Math. Soc. 125 (1997), 26772680. Institute of Mathematics, National University of Uzbekistan, Tashkent, Uzbekistan the Abdus Salam International Centre for Theoretical Physics (ICTP) Trieste, Italy E-mail address: sh ayupov@mail.ru Andizhan State University, Andizhan, Uzbekistan E-mail address: arzikulovfn@rambler.ru