1. Introduction
Spaces and mappings have become a frontier research subject in general topology and have achieved rich results in the past half century [
1]. Symmetric spaces introduced by Arhangel’skiǐ [
2] are an important class of generalized metric spaces and play a special role in this field [
1,
3]. It is particularly prominent in metrizability and in the quotient and
-images of metric spaces.
Externally, a symmetric space is a topological space that is compatible with a symmetric distance [
2]. In fact, the characteristic difficulty with studying symmetric spaces lies in the concept of weak bases, which is a network having a certain base-like property. One of the ways to overcome this difficulty was to introduce the concept of
-networks [
1]; this is a natural generalization of weak bases and has better properties compared to weak bases [
1] and thus to defined
-symmetric spaces [
4]. It is known that, in Hausdorff sequential spaces,
-countable spaces are equivalent to
-countable spaces [
1], and symmetric spaces are equivalent to
-symmetric spaces [
4]. It can be seen that the further development of symmetric spaces involves deeper research into
-symmetric spaces and sequential spaces [
1].
The following are some basic results on symmetric spaces.
Theorem 1 ([
5])
. A topological space X is a symmetric space if and only if it has a sequence of covers such that the family is a weak base at x for each , where each . Theorem 2 ([
6])
. The following are equivalent for a Hausdorff space X:- (1)
X is a quotient and π-image of a metric space.
- (2)
X is a symmetric space with a weak Cauchy condition.
Theorem 3 ([
6])
. The following are equivalent for a Hausdorff space X:- (1)
X is a quotient, sequence-covering, and π-image of a metric space.
- (2)
X is a symmetric space with a Cauchy condition.
The above results all involve the convergence of sets or sequences in symmetric spaces. In recent years, the ideal convergence of sequences in topological spaces has become an active topic [
7,
8,
9,
10]. Although the usual convergence of sequences in topological spaces is ideally convergent, the situation becomes more complex for specific topological spaces.
Question 1 (Question 5.10, [
10])
. Is every -countable space an --countable space for some admissible ideal on ? Existing research has rarely related to the properties of generalized metric spaces determined by the ideal convergence of sequences. Thus, we discuss some properties of spaces and mappings with respect to symmetric spaces under ideal convergence and provide an application to statistical convergence. In addition, we also provide several examples to illustrate the non-implicative relationship between certain spaces and provide a negative answer to Question 1.
The following main results are obtained in this article.
Theorem 4. Let be an admissible ideal on . The following are equivalent for a -space X:
- (1)
X is an --symmetric space.
- (2)
X has a point-star --network.
- (3)
X is an FU- and -symmetric space.
Theorem 5. Let be an admissible ideal on . The following are equivalent for a -space X:
- (1)
X is an --symmetric space with the -Cauchy condition.
- (2)
X has a point-star network consisting of --covers.
- (3)
X is an -covering and π-image of a metric space.
Theorem 6. Let be an asymptotic density zero ideal. The following are equivalent for a -space X:
- (1)
X is a 1--covering and π-image of a metric space.
- (2)
X is an -covering and π-image of a metric space.
- (3)
X has a point-star network consisting of --covers.
- (4)
X has a point-star network consisting of --covers.
- (5)
X is an --symmetric space with the -Cauchy condition.
These not only generalize some classical results on symmetric spaces [
1,
4,
5,
6,
10,
11] but also provide new directions to study generalized metric spaces in the sense of ideal convergence, and we obtain some applications to statistical convergence.
2. Preliminaries
In this section, we mainly recall the ideal convergence of sequences, generalized sequential spaces determined by ideal convergence, and symmetric spaces. Afterwards, some relationships among spaces defined by these notions are given. Readers may refer to [
12] for some terminology unstated here. In this article, all spaces are assumed to be
, all mappings are continuous and surjective, and
is the set of all positive integers.
A family
of subsets of
is called an
on
(p. 670, [
8]), provided that the following are satisfied: if
, then
; if
, then
. An ideal
on
is called
if
, and
covers
. The ideal
of all finite subsets of
is the smallest admissible ideal on
. Next, we always assume that
is an admissible ideal on
.
Recalling that a sequence
in a topological space
X is said to be
-
to a point
provided for any neighborhood
U of
x, we have
, which is denoted by
(Definition 3.1, [
8]).
Let
P be a subset of a topological space
X. A sequence
in
X is said to be
-eventually in
P if the set
(p. 1982, [
9]). The set
P is said to be an
-sequential neighborhood of a point
if each sequence that is
-convergent to
x is
-eventually in
P (Definition 2.5, [
13]). The set
P is said to be an
-open set of
X if
P is an
-sequential neighborhood of
x for each
(p. 4, [
9]).
-sequential neighborhoods of
x or
-open sets are called
sequential neighborhoods of
x [
14] or
sequentially open sets, respectively (p. 108, [
15]). It is known that every open subset is
-open, and every
-open subset is sequentially open (Lemma 2.1, [
9]).
Put
Then,
(Lemma 2.6, [
9]).
Definition 1. Let X be a topological space.
- (1)
X is called a sequential space if any sequentially open subset of X is open [15]. - (2)
X is called an -sequential space if any -open subset of X is open (Definition 3.1, [10]). - (3)
X is called a Fréchet–Urysohn space if for each [15]. - (4)
X is called an -FU-space if for each (Definition 3.1, [10]). - (5)
X is called an FU--space if for each .
Sequential spaces and Fréchet–Urysohn spaces in the sense of ideal convergence were first defined by Pal [
16] and Renukadevi and Prakash [
17], respectively. It is obvious that every Fréchet–Urysohn space is an
-FU, FU-
, and sequential space and that each sequential space and each
-FU-space is an
-sequential space.
The concept of networks is important to topological spaces [
2]. Let
be a family of subsets of a topological space
X and
.
is called a
network at
x in
X, if
and, whenever
with
U open in
X, then
for some
[
2].
Definition 2. Let be a family of subsets of a topological space X. is called an --network of X provided that, for each , is a network at x in X satisfying the following conditions: (1) each is an -sequential neighborhood of x; (2) for each , there is such that . The family is called an --network at x in X (Definition 5.1, [10]). X is called an --countable space if X has a countable --network at each point in X (Definition 4.1, [10]). An --network is called an -network (Definition 1.1.8, [1]), and an --countable space is called an -countable space (Definition 1.1.8, [1]). Let
X be a set. A function
is called a
d-function on
X if, for each
: (1)
; (2)
(p. 4, [
1]). For each
and
, put
.
Definition 3. Let d be a d-function on a topological space X. The space is called a semi-metric space [2] if, whenever , is a neighborhood base at x in X. The space is called a symmetric space [2] if a subset U in X is open if and only if, for each , there exists such that . A topological space X is called -countable [2] if, for each , there is a countable and decreasing family of subsets of X satisfying that a subset U in X is open if and only if, for each , there exist and such that . Remark 1. If is a decreasing network at a point x in X, then for each sequential neighborhood U of x in X, there exists such that . Otherwise, there is a sequence such that each , and then the sequence in X contradicts U being a sequential neighborhood of x.
It is obvious that every symmetric space is
-countable, and it follows from Remark 1 that every
-countable space is sequential [
2].
Remark 2. In the sense of ideal convergence, -open sets in topological spaces are one of the first concepts proposed. Every -open set in a topological space is -open, and every -open set is sequentially open (Lemma 2.1, [9]). In this article, we chose the -open sets instead of the -open sets for the following two main reasons: - (1)
The family of -open sets in a topological space forms a topology, while the family of -open sets forms a generalized topology [9]. - (2)
In --countable spaces, each -open set is -open (Corollary 5.2, [18]).
3. -Symmetric Spaces
In this section, we define and study some properties of -symmetric spaces and --symmetric spaces, answer Question 1 in the negative, and obtain some relationships among -symmetric spaces, --symmetric spaces, and -symmetric spaces.
As a generalization of symmetric spaces, -symmetric spaces were introduced in the sense of the usual convergence of sequences. Next, we discuss the ideal convergence versions of these types of generalized metric spaces. A subset U of a topological space X is called an -open neighborhood of a point x in X if for some -open subset V of X.
Definition 4. Let d be a d-function on a topological space X.
- (1)
The space is called an -semi-metric space, in which d is called an -semi-metric on X if, for each , is a network at x in X consisting of -open neighborhoods of x.
- (2)
The space is called an -symmetric space, in which d is called an -symmetric on X, if a subset U in X is -open if and only if, for each , there exists such that .
- (3)
The space is called an --symmetric space, in which d is called an --symmetric on X if, for each , is an --network at x in X.
An --symmetric space is called an -symmetric space (Definition 2.6, [4]). Lemma 1. Let X be a Hausdorff space.
- (1)
X is an -symmetric space if and only if X is an -symmetric space and each sequentially open subset of X is -open.
- (2)
X is a -countable space if and only if X is an -countable sequential space (Corollary 1.3.10, [1]).
Proof. We only prove that part (1) holds.
Sufficiency. Suppose that each sequentially open set of X is -open and d is -symmetric on X. We prove that d is -symmetric on X. If U is -open in X and , it follows from Remark 1 that there exists such that . On the other hand, if a subset V of X satisfies that, for each , there exists such that , then V is sequentially open because each is a sequential neighborhood of x in X. Thus, V is -open. Consequently, d is -symmetric on X.
Necessity. Let d be -symmetric on X. Then, for each , the family is a network at x in X. If U is sequentially open in X, it follows from Remark 1 that, for each , there exists such that ; thus, U is -open. Next, we just need to prove that, for each and , the set is a sequential neighborhood of x in X. Otherwise, there is a sequence such that and each . Let . Then, . Since X is Hausdorff, if , then ; thus, there exists such that . Therefore, U is -open, which contradicts . □
A non-trivial relationship for weak first-countability is as follows.
Lemma 2. Every --countable space is an FU--space.
Proof. Let X be an --countable space and . For each , let be an --network at x in X. For each , put . Since the intersection of finitely many -sequential neighborhoods of x is still an -sequential neighborhood of x, it is easy to see that the set is also an -sequential neighborhood of x. Then, some . Otherwise, there is for each . Then, in X, which is a contradiction because A is a sequential neighborhood of x. Therefore, some , and . Thus, X is an FU--space. □
The following result is direct by means of Remark 1.
Lemma 3. A topological space X is a symmetric space if and only if it is an -symmetric and -sequential space.
Figure 1 illustrates some relationships among these spaces in Definitions 1–4.
The following example gives a negative answer to Question 1. It shows that the Hausdorff space in Lemma 1 cannot be weakened to a -space.
Example 1. There is a Fréchet–Urysohn and symmetric space that is not an --countable space for each admissible ideal on .
Proof. Let
X be the space consisting of the countable ordinals with cofinite topology. Then,
X is a symmetric space (Example 2.13, [
19]). Next, we show that
X is not an
-countable space. If
and
, then
is a finite set. Otherwise, take a non-trivial sequence
S in
. Then, the sequence
S converges to
x in
X; thus, it is eventually in
A, which is a contradiction. Since
is finite,
A is open in
X. Hence,
. This implies that
X is a Fréchet–Urysohn space and that no point in
X is
-countable; thus,
X is not an
-
-countable space for each admissible ideal
on
. □
Example 2. There is an -symmetric space that is neither an -symmetric space nor an --countable space.
Proof. There is a maximal ideal
on
and an
-FU-space
X such that it is neither an
-
-countable space nor contains no non-trivial convergent sequence (Examples 3.4 and 5.8, [
10]). Define a function
by
Then, it is a
d-function, and each
is sequentially open in
X. Hence,
is an
-symmetric space.
If X is an -symmetric space, it follows from Lemma 3 that X is a symmetric space; thus, X is a sequential space. Since each subset of X is sequentially open, X is a discrete space, which is a contradiction. Thus, X is not an -symmetric space. □
Let and be families of subsets of X. Put . For each , denote and st.
The following are the core concepts in this article, which can establish connections among several types of symmetric spaces.
Definition 5. Let be a sequence of covers of a topological space X. is said to be a point-star network (Definition 3.1.1, [1]) (resp., point-star --network) of X if is a network (resp., an --network) at x for every . A point-star --network is called a point-star -network (Definition 3.1.1, [1]). Theorem 7. The following are equivalent for a topological space X:
- (1)
X is an --symmetric space.
- (2)
X has a point-star --network.
- (3)
X is an --countable and -symmetric space.
- (4)
X is an FU- and -symmetric space.
Proof. (1) ⇒ (2). Let
be an
-
-symmetric space. For each
, put
Then, st
for each
. In fact, if
, then there exists
such that
. Thus,
, and hence,
. On the other hand, if
, then
. So,
, and hence,
. This implies that
is an
-
-network at each
. Therefore,
is a point-star
-
-network of
X.
(2) ⇒ (3). Let
be a point-star
-
-network of
X. It is clear that
X is an
-
-countable space. We can assume that each
refines
. In fact, let
for each
. Then,
refines
and, for each
,
Since
is an
-
-network at
x in
X, it follows that
is an
-
-network at
x.
For distinct two points
x and
y in
X, since
X is
, there is
such that
, and we denote
. Define
by
Then,
d is a
d-function, and it is clear that
. If
, then
Thus, st
for each
and
. This means that
is an
-
-network at
x in
X. Consequently,
X is an
-symmetric space.
(3) ⇒ (4) is true by Lemma 2.
(4) ⇒ (1). Let X be an FU- and -symmetric space. Then, for each , each -network at x is an --network at x. Therefore, X is an --symmetric space. □
Corollary 1. The following are equivalent for a Hausdorff space X:
- (1)
X is a sequential and --symmetric space.
- (2)
X is an -sequential and --symmetric space.
- (3)
X is an -sequential, --countable, and -symmetric space.
- (4)
X is an --countable and symmetric space.
- (5)
X is an FU- and symmetric space.
Proof. It is obvious that . By Lemma 3, we have that . It follows from Lemma 2 that . Next, we prove that (2) ⇒ (3) and (5) ⇒ (1).
(2) ⇒ (3). Let X be an -sequential and --symmetric space. Then, X is --countable. It follows from Remark 1 that X is an -symmetric space.
(5) ⇒ (1). Let X be an FU- and symmetric space. Then, X is a sequential space, and it follows from Lemmas 1 and 3 that X is an -symmetric space. By Theorem 7, X is an --symmetric space. □
Corollary 2. The following are equivalent for a topological space X:
- (1)
X is a semi-metric space.
- (2)
X is an -sequential and -semi-metric space.
- (3)
X is an -FU and --symmetric space.
- (4)
X is a Fréchet–Urysohn and -symmetric space.
Proof. It is obvious that .
(2) ⇒ (3). Let be an -sequential and -semi-metric space. Then, X is an --symmetric space. If and , it follows from Remark 1 and -semi-metric d that there exist and an -open subset V of X such that . Since X is an -sequential space, . This implies that . Hence, X is an -FU-space.
(3) ⇒ (4). Let be an -FU and --symmetric space. Then, X is an -symmetric space. If and , it follows from Remark 1 that there is such that . Then, . Thus, . Therefore, X is a Fréchet–Urysohn space. □
Example 3. There is an -semi-metric space that is not a sequential space.
Proof. There is a non-discrete space that has no non-trivial convergent sequence (Corollary 3.6.15, [
12]). Thus, every subset of
X is sequentially open. However,
X is not a discrete space, and thus
X is not a sequential space.
Take
. Define
by
Then, it is a
d-function, and
is
-open for each
and
. By Definition 4,
is an
-semi-metric space. □
Question 2. Is every Hausdorff symmetric space --countable for each admissible ideal on ?
4. -Covering and -Images of Metric Spaces
-Cauchy sequences are important concepts in studying
-convergence of topological spaces and
-completeness of metric spaces [
20,
21]. In this section, we define
d-
-Cauchy sequences in topological spaces under
-convergence, discuss some properties of
-
-symmetric spaces with the
-Cauchy condition, and give the characterizations of
-covering and
-images of metric spaces.
Definition 6. - (1)
Let be an --symmetric space. A sequence in X is said to be a d--Cauchy sequence if, for any , there is such that for each .
- (2)
X is said to be an --symmetric space with the -Cauchy condition if there is an --symmetric d on X such that every -convergent sequence in X is a d--Cauchy sequence.
Definition 7 (Definition 2.7, [
13])
. Let be a family of subsets of a topological space X. is called an --cover of X if, whenever is a sequence in X with , there are and such that . Definition 8. Let be a mapping.
- (1)
Here, f is called an -covering mapping if, whenever a sequence in Y, there is a sequence in X satisfying , and each (Definition 4.1, [9]). An -covering mapping is called a sequence-covering mapping [22]. - (2)
Suppose that is a metric space. Then, f is called a π-mapping with respect to d if for every neighborhood U of y in Y [23].
Lemma 4 (Lemma 3.3, [
18])
. Let be a mapping and a sequence -converging to some point in Y. If is a decreasing network at x in X and the sequence is -eventually in for each , then there is a sequence -converging to the point x in X with each . Theorem 8. The following are equivalent for a topological space X:
- (1)
X is an --symmetric space with the -Cauchy condition.
- (2)
X has a point-star network consisting of --covers.
- (3)
X is an -covering and π-image of a metric space.
Proof. (1) ⇒ (2). Suppose that
is an
-
-symmetric space with the
-Cauchy condition. For each
, put
Then, st
for each
(see the proof of Theorem 7). Thus,
is a point-star
-
-network of
X. Next, we show that each
is an
-
-cover of
X. Let
be a sequence in
X with
. Since
is an
-
-symmetric space with the
-Cauchy condition,
is a
d-
-Cauchy sequence. Hence, for each
, there is
such that
for each
. Note that
is an
-sequential neighborhood of
x in
X, and thus there is
such that
for each
. Put
and
. Then,
and
. This implies that each
is an
-
-cover of
X. Thus,
X has a point-star network consisting of
-
-covers.
. Let
be a point-star network consisting of
-
-covers of
X. For each
,
is denoted by
, and
is endowed with discrete topology. Put
Define a function
by
. Then,
because
X is
. The subspace
M of
is a metrizable space.
(i) Here, f is a -mapping.
It is easy to see that
f is continuous and surjective. For each
, define
where
is the projection for each
. Thus,
d is a metric on
M. For each
with
U open in
X, there is
such that st
. For each
, if
, then
for each
; thus,
, and
. Therefore,
. This implies that
f is a
-mapping.
(ii) For each
and
, put
Then,
.
In fact, let
. Then,
So,
. On the other hand, let
. Since
f is surjective, there exists
such that
. For each
, put
, if
;
, if
. Then,
is a network at
y in
X. Let
. Then,
and
, so
. Thus,
. This shows that
.
(iii) Here, f is an -covering mapping.
For each , let be a sequence in X with . For each , since is an --cover of X, there is such that the sequence is -eventually in . Put . Since is a point-star network of X, it is easy to check that the family is a network at x in X. Thus, and . For each , let . It follows from (ii) that , and it is easy to see that the sequence is -eventually in . Since is a decreasing neighborhood base at in M, it follows from Lemma 4 that there is a sequence -converging to in M with each . Therefore, f is an -covering mapping.
. Let be an -covering and -mapping, where d is a metric on M. For each , put and . Then, is a point-star --network of X.
In fact, let be a sequence in X with . Since f is -covering, there are and a sequence in M such that and each . For each , the sequence is -eventually in ; thus, is -eventually in . This shows that is an --cover and is an -sequential neighborhood of x.
On the other hand, let U be an open neighborhood U of x in X. Since f is a -mapping, there exists such that . If , then there is with , and thus , so ; otherwise, . Hence, , and then st. This implies that is a point-star --network of X.
Let d be the --symmetric on X in the proof of “” in Theorem 7. Let be a sequence in X with . For each , there is such that . Since is an --cover of X, there are and such that . If , then ; thus, , and so (see the proof of Theorem 7). This means that is a d--Cauchy sequence. Consequently, X is an --symmetric space with the -Cauchy condition. □
Let
be a mapping. Here,
f is called
quotient provided that, for each
with
open in
X,
U is open (p. 91, [
12]);
f is called
pseudo-open provided that, for each
and
with
U open in
X,
is a neighborhood of
y in
Y (p. 113, [
15]). It is known that every pseudo-open mapping is quotient (p. 113, [
15]). The following result is a generalization of Theorem 1.3 under
-convergence.
Corollary 3. The following are equivalent for a topological space X:
- (1)
X is a sequential and --symmetric space with the -Cauchy condition.
- (2)
X is a quotient, -covering, and π-image of a metric space.
Proof. Let X be sequential and --symmetric space with the -Cauchy condition. By Theorem 8, there are a metric space M and an -covering and -mapping . Suppose that that and is open in M. Since f is -covering, it is easy to check that U is -open. And, since X is sequential, U is open. Thus, f is quotient.
On the other hand, let
X be a quotient,
-covering, and
-image of a metric space. Since every sequential space is preserved by a quotient mapping (Proposition 1.2, [
15]), by Theorem 8,
X is a sequential and
-
-symmetric space with the
-Cauchy condition. □
Corollary 4. The following are equivalent for a topological space X:
- (1)
X is a Fréchet–Urysohn and --symmetric space with the -Cauchy condition.
- (2)
X is a pseudo-open, -covering, and π-image of a metric space.
Proof. Let
X be a Fréchet–Urysohn and
-
-symmetric space with the
-Cauchy condition. Since every
-covering mapping onto a Fréchet–Urysohn space is pseudo-open (Theorem 4.7, [
10]), by Theorem 8,
X is a pseudo-open,
-covering and
-image of a metric space.
On the other hand, let
X be a pseudo-open,
-covering, and
-image of a metric space. Since every Fréchet–Urysohn space is preserved by a pseudo-open mapping (Proposition 2.3, [
15]), by Theorem 8,
X is a Fréchet–Urysohn and
-
-symmetric space with the
-Cauchy condition. □
Example 4. There exists a sequential --symmetric Hausdorff space that is not an -covering π-image of a metric space. Thus, the “-Cauchy condition” in Theorem 8 is essential.
Proof. There exists a symmetric Hausdorff space
X that is not a sequence-covering
-image of a metric space (Example 3.1, [
4]). Put
. Then,
X is not an
-covering
-image of a metric space. It follows from
Figure 1 and Corollary 1 that
X is an
-
-symmetric space. □
The answer to the following question is positive if
[
6].
Question 3. If a Hausdorff space X is a pseudo-open, -covering, -image of a metric space, is X an open -image of a metric space?
By Theorems 7 and 8, the following question is posed.
Question 4. How can we characterize --symmetric spaces by point-star networks consisting of certain covers?
5. An Application to Statistical Convergence
Statistical convergence is a special type of ideal convergence. In this section, we present an application of --symmetric spaces under asymptotic density zero ideals.
Recall the notion of statistical convergence in topological spaces. For each subset
A of
, the
asymptotic density of
A, denoted by
, is given by
if this limit exists. Let
be the family of subsets
with
. It is easy to verify that
is an admissible ideal [
8], which is called an
asymptotic density zero ideal.
Let
X be a topological space. A sequence
in
X is said to
converge statistically to a point
[
24] if
for each neighborhood
U of
x in
X.
It is well-known that the usual convergence of sequences is a special statistical convergence, and statistical convergence is a special ideal convergence. Therefore, the results of ideal convergence (resp., statistical convergence) are fully applicable to statistical convergence (resp., the usual convergence), and we may obtain better results than ideal convergence (resp., statistical convergence) under statistical convergence (resp., the usual convergence). Our goal of this section is to strengthen Theorem 8 into a better form in the sense of statistical convergence.
First, we introduce several concepts related to Theorem 8. Let
be a family of subsets of a topological space
X.
is called an
-sn-cover of
X (Definition 2.7, [
13]) if, for each
, there exists
such that
P is an
-sequential neighborhood of
x in
X. Let
be a mapping. Here,
f is called a
1--covering mapping (Definition 4.6, [
13]) if, for every
, there exists
such that, whenever
is a sequence
-converging to
y in
Y, then there exists a sequence
-converging to
x in
X with each
. A 1-
-covering mapping is called a
1-sequence-covering mapping (Definition 1.1.3, [
1]).
Lemma 5 (Lemma 4.3, [
10])
. Let be a mapping. If, for each , there is a decreasing network at x in X such that each is an -sequential neighborhood of in Y, then f is a 1--covering mapping. The following result is a beneficial attempt to apply ideal convergence to statistical convergence.
Theorem 9. Let . The following are equivalent for a topological space X:
- (1)
X is a 1--covering and π-image of a metric space.
- (2)
X is an -covering and π-image of a metric space.
- (3)
X has a point-star network consisting of --covers.
- (4)
X has a point-star network consisting of --covers.
- (5)
X is an --symmetric space with the -Cauchy condition.
Proof. Since every 1--covering mapping is an -covering mapping, is clear. And since every --cover of X is an --cover, is also obvious. In view of Theorem 8, . Next, we will prove that .
. Let be a point-star network consisting of --covers of X. It is easy to see that, if and are --covers of X, then so is the intersection . Therefore, according to the proof of “(2) ⇒ (3)” in Theorem 7, we can assume that each refines , and there is a d-function d on X such that for each and .
The function has the following property:
Claim. For every
and
, there is
such that
Otherwise, there are and sequences and in X such that and for each . Choose such that . Since is a point-star network of X, the sequences and converge to x. Thus, the sequence also converges to x, and then it converges statistically to x. Since is an --cover of X, there are and such that .
Subclaim. for some .
Otherwise, assume that there is no
such that
. Put
. Then,
; and so
, and
. Put
It is obvious that
. Thus,
. Without loss of generality, we can assume that
If
, then
for some
. It follows from the assumption that
, and thus
. This implies
. We have that
, which is a contradiction. This completes the proof of the Subclaim.
It follows from the Subclaim that there is such that . Thus, , and then , which is a contradiction. This completes the proof of the Claim.
The above property (i.e., the Claim) shows that, for every
and
, there is
such that if
, and then
. Put
Note that
is an
-
-cover of
X, so it follows that
is an
-sequential neighborhood of
x. Thus,
is also an
-sequential neighborhood of
x. Consequently,
is an
-
-cover of
X.
If is not a point-star network of X, then there is an open neighborhood O of x in X such that each . Thus, there are sequences and in X such that and for each . It follows from the definition of that for each , and the sequence is not convergent to x, which is a contradiction. This implies that the family is a point-star network consisting of --covers of X.
. Let
be a point-star network consisting of
-
-covers of
X, where each
. According to the proof of “(2) ⇒ (3)” in Theorem 8, there are a metric space
M and an
-covering and
-mapping
, where
and
. We now show that the mapping
f is a 1-
-covering mapping.
Let
. For each
, since
is an
-
-cover of
X, choose
such that
is an
-sequential neighborhood of
x in
X. Since
is a point-star network of
X, the family
is a network at
x in
X. Put
. Then,
and
. For each
, put
It follows from part (ii) of the proof in Theorem 8 that
. Since each
is an
-sequential neighborhood of
x in
X, the set
is also an
-sequential neighborhood of
x in
X. It is clear that the family
is a decreasing neighborhood base of
in
M. It follows from Lemma 5 that
f is a 1-
-covering mapping. This completes the proof. □
The following example shows that “-mapping” in Theorem 9 is essential.
Example 5. There exists an -covering image of a metric space that is not a 1--covering image of a metric space.
Proof. Let
X be the sequential fan
, i.e., it is the quotient space obtained by identifying all limit points of the topological sum of
for many convergent sequences. Let
be the family of convergent sequences in
X that contains the limit point. Put
. For each
, let
be the set
equipped with the subspace topology of
X. Put the topological sum
. Then,
M is a metric space. Define a mapping
such that each restriction
is the identity. Then,
f is a sequence-covering mapping. It is obvious that
X is a Fréchet–Urysohn space that is not first-countable. Thus,
X is not an
-countable space. Consequently,
X is not a 1-sequence-covering image of a metric space (Theorem 4.5, [
10]). Put
. Then,
X is an
-covering image of a metric space, which is not a 1-
-covering image of a metric space. □
Question 5. Let be an admissible ideal on and X be an -covering and -image of a metric space. Is X a 1--covering and -image of a metric space?