1. Introduction
Direct, semidirect, and Zappa–Szép products offer methods for decomposing algebraic structures, each serving as a natural extension of the one before it. The Zappa–Szép products for semigroups involve mutual actions between two semigroups, which are closely linked to the operations of Mealy machines, or automata that produce output [
1]. The Zappa–Szép products of semigroups were thoroughly developed by Kunze [
2], who provided applications of these products to translational hulls, Bruck–Reilly extensions, and Rees matrix semigroups. Recent advancements in Zappa–Szép products [
3,
4], show that inverse semigroups are now a vibrant area of research. As they provide a unified framework for addressing various algebraic questions, they are set to remain a crucial subject in the field. Neumann [
5] was the first to adopt the term semidirect product to formulate wreath products of semigroups. An entire depiction of semidirect products of monoids that are inverse monoids was given by Nico [
6]. A semidirect product obtained by two inverse semigroups is not necessarily inverse. In ref. [
7], Billhardt bypasses this predicament by adjusting the definition of semidirect products in the inverse case to attain the 
-semidirect products. The 
-semidirect product of inverse semigroups is now an inverse semigroup. In ref. [
8], Billhardt also applied this outcome to the left ample case in which a component is a semilattice. In addition, the same approach was applied to the 
-semidirect product of semilattices as well as a left restriction semigroup [
9]. In ref. [
10], for given two restriction semigroups 
S and 
T, the author demonstrated that 
-semidirect product is also liable to modify the defined actions by specific conditions.
The Zappa–Szép product of groups was developed by G. Zappa in [
11] as a generalization of the semidirect product of groups. Brin [
12] extended the applicability of the Zappa–Szép products to multiplicative structures more general than groups with emphasis on categories and monoids. The texts [
1,
13,
14] mainly investigated the Zappa–Szép products of groups of several classes of semigroups.
In this paper, we investigate the Zappa–Szép products of inverse semigroups by the “groupoid approach”. We pick out a subset of a Zappa–Szép products of two inverse semigroups and show that with restriction of the binary operation, the given subset is a groupoid. By using this groupoid and Ehresmann–Schein–Nambooripad Theorem of inverse semigroups given in [
15], an alternative proof of Billhardt’s 
-semidirect products explored in [
7] is obtained. Terminologies and notations not given in the paper can be found in [
15,
16].
There exists a close relationship between inverse semigroups and inductive groupoids. Schein made this relationship clear when he established that to any inverse semigroup, there correlates a corresponding inductive groupoid and the contra is true [
10]. Theorem 3.4. After, Nambooripad made further contributions and assumed Schein’s results to the regular case and put them in the framework of an isomorphism among categories. Lawson later collectively joined these results in one theorem in [
15] and termed it Ehresmann–Schein–Nambooripad theorem to represent the diversified origin of all its components. We shall further explain this correspondence.
  1.1. From Inverse Semigroups to Inductive Groupoids
In order to obtain a groupoid from an inverse semigroup, we need to identify the following: The vertex set, the set of arrows, the start and finish of an arrow, the identity arrow, the composition of arrows, and the inverse of an arrow. This is achieved as follows: Let S be an inverse semigroup with the partial order relation, with meet semilattices. of idempotents . We associate to S a directed graph whose vertices are labeled by the idempotents of S and whose arrows are labeled by the elements of S such that for each arrow s the idempotent  dom s (i.e., where the arrow begins) and the idempotent  cod s (i.e., where the arrow finishes). An idempotent  determines the identity arrow at  The arrow representing  is simply the opposite of the one representing s since dom  cod s and cod  dom  If  are any two elements of S such that cod  dom t i.e., the arrow t starts at the ends of the arrow  then the composite arrow  dom  cod t is defined such that  (i.e.,  only when the corresponding arrows match head-to-tail) such that  starts at  dom  and finishes at  cod  and then associativity follows from associativity in S. Thus, we have a groupoid denoted by . The natural order on S endows the groupoid  with the structure of an ordered groupoid. To see this we verify the axioms  and . If  this implies that  for some idempotent f. Then  Then  Hence  holds. Let . Let the composition  and  are defined, then there are idempotents e and f such that  and . Thus, . Since  for some idempotent i, we have , and so  Thus,  holds. Let  and e be an idempotent such that  Then  such that  from the definition of the partial order. Also,  Now let  be such that  so we have  Then  is unique. Hence  hold. Similar proof for . Since the set of idempotents  form a meet semilattices., then  is an inductive groupoid.
  1.2. From Inductive Groupoids to Inverse Semigroups
Given an inductive groupoid 
 the partial composition of arrows on 
G may be extended to an everywhere defined composition that gives 
G the structure of an inverse semigroup 
 This can be achieved as follows. We construct the inverse semigroup from the inductive groupoid. The elements of the inverse semigroup 
 are the arrows in the inductive groupoid 
G and since in the groupoid 
G for every arrow 
s there is an inverse arrow 
 such that 
 and 
 then 
 will be the inverse of 
s. If the arrows of the groupoid 
G match up, then we know how to compose them, but if they do not match up, we do the following. Let 
 and let 
 (the greatest lower bound). Put 
 The pseudoproduct of 
x and 
y (where 
 is the corestriction of 
x to 
e and 
 is the restriction of 
y to 
e) and thus 
x and 
y do match up in 
 As in 
Figure 1.
The next result provides a neat, order-theoretic way of viewing the pseudoproduct.
Proposition 1 ([
15])
. Let S be an ordered groupoid. For each pair  put regarded as a subset of the ordered set . Then  exists if and only if there is a maximum element  of  In which case,  It shown in [
15] that 
 is an inverse semigroup that is
The pseudoproduct  of x and y is associative.
 is a regular semigroup, since if  and  exists in the groupoid  then  However, for each element  we have  and 
The idempotents of  are precisely the identities of  Now let e and f be two idempotents of  If  then  since  is the unique restriction of f to e. As restriction is unique, this means only one element of G can be less than f with domain e. Now  and dom  but  and dom  so  Similarly for  with codomain not domain. Thus, the idempotents of  commute.
  2. Zappa–Szép Groupoids
In this section, we shall construct Zappa–Szép groupoids from the Zappa–Szép products of inverse semigroups. The purpose of this section is to provide an overview and a deeper understanding of the construction and basic properties of Zappa–Szép groupoids derived from Zappa–Szép products of inverse semigroups. In this analysis, we summarize the Zappa–Szép product concept, emphasizing its significance and its characteristics. Our next step will be to systematically construct groupoids based on these products, highlighting the mathematical implications and methods involved. These groupoids are described structurally and functionally, demonstrating their theoretical importance and laying the foundation for further applications in semigroup theory. Through detailed discussions and rigorous proofs, we aim to provide a comprehensive understanding of how these groupoids can be characterized and utilized within broader mathematical contexts. We first recall the notion of the Zappa–Szép product of two inverse semigroups and give some necessary properties of Zappa–Szép products of inverse semigroups.
Suppose that we have semigroups 
A and 
B and assume we have maps
      satisfying the following conditions: For all 
 and 
,
(ZS1) 
(ZS2) 
(ZS3)
(ZS4) 
Define a binary operation on 
 by
Then,  forms a semigroup. We call this semigroup the Zappa–Szép product of A and B and denote it by .
Lemma 1. Suppose that S and T are two inverse semigroups and , . Then in , we have the following results:
- (i) 
 If , then .
- (ii) 
 If , then .
- (iii) 
 If  acts trivially on both  and  and , then .
- (iv) 
 If  acts trivially on  and on  and  acts trivially on , then 
 Proof.  For (i), by (ZS2), we compute
 and
 Thus, 
For (ii), we have
        and
 Therefore 
For (iii), we have
        and
 Hence 
For (iv), we have
        and
 Hence 
    □
 Now we consider the following subset
      of the Zappa–Szép product 
 of two inverse semigroups 
S and 
T.
Proposition 2. If  such that - (1) 
 .
- (2) 
 .
- (3) 
 .
- (4) 
 .
 Proof.  By Lemma 1-(iii), we have 
 and so by Lemma 1-(i), we have
 So 
 holds. We also have
 Then
        and so 
 holds.
Now by Lemma 1-(ii), 
 and so by Lemma 1-(iv) we have
        and 
 holds.
For 
 using the fact that 
 we have
        and so 
 becomes
 Now from 
 we have 
 and so
 Thus, 
 which implies
        since 
 Thus, 
 holds.    □
 Proposition 3. Let  such thatand denote . - (5) 
  and acts trivially on  and 
- (6) 
  and acts trivially on  and 
 Proof.  From the proof of Proposition 2-
, we have
 Then
 From the proof of Proposition 2-
, we have
 This proves 
 For 
, we have from the proof of Proposition 2-
, 
 and
 From the proof of Proposition 2-
, we have
 Now
        and so, to conclude the proof of 
 we need to show that 
. However, by Lemma 1-(i) and Lemma 1-(iv),
 We have
        and
        so that 
 Then
 Thus, 
 and 
 hold.    □
 Recall that a groupoid is a small category in which every arrow has an inverse. The following theorem gives our desired Zappa–Szép groupoids.
Theorem 1. The set  is a groupoid under the restriction of the binary operation in the Zappa–Szép product  of two inverse semigroups S and T. Moreover, the following statements are true:
vertex set is 
arrow set 
the inverse arrow for  is 
identity arrow at  is 
an arrow  starts at  finishes at 
two arrows , are composable if and only if and the product is given by 
 Proof.  We need to prove for every 
 such that 
 is an arrow from 
 to 
 And 
 such that 
 is an arrow from 
 to 
 such that
 (that is 
 ends where 
 begins) then the composite of arrows defined by 
 makes 
 a groupoid, i.e., we need to check the followings.
        
If 
, then 
. That is, we need to prove that if
            then
In fact, by Lemma 1-(i) and (ii) we have 
 and 
 Moreover,
 This implies that
 We calculate
 Now
 and 
 Then
 We calculate
 Thus
 We calculate
 Now
 By Lemma 1 part (iv) we have 
 Thus
 Hence
 Thus, by (
2)–(
5), we have 
 .
        
 starts at 
 In fact, 
 starts at
By Proposition 2-
 and the matching condition (
1), we have
 which means that 
 starts at 
.
        
 ends at 
 In fact, 
 ends at
By Proposition 2-
 and the matching condition (
1),
 and 
 Thus, 
 ends at 
.
        
 We have to prove
From Proposition 3 with , the results follows.    □
   3. An Alternative Proof of Billhardt’s -Semidirect Product
In this section, we shall give an alternative proof of Billhardt’s -semidirect product using the result in the previous section and the ESN Theorem. We first recall some notions and results.
Let S be a groupoid and let ≤ be a partial order on S. Then  is an ordered groupoid if the following axioms hold.
- (OG1)
  for all 
- (OG2)
 If  and the compositions  and  are defined, then  for all 
- (OG3)
 Let  and let be e an identity such that  Then there exists a unique element  called the restriction of x to e, such that  and 
An ordered groupoid is said to be inductive if the partially ordered set of its identities forms a meet semilattices.
Lemma 2 ([
15])
. Let S be an inductive groupoid. Denote  for all  with . Then S forms an inverse semigroup with respect to the following multiplication Now, we consider the Zappa–Szép groupoids of inverse semigroups 
S and 
T such that the action of 
S on 
T is trivial. In this case, it is easy to see that
We shall denote  by  in this case, where . By Theorem 1, we have the following result.
Proposition 4. Suppose the set  with composition given by
 is defined if and only if .
Then  is a groupoid with the set of identities  Now we introduce a partial order on .
Proposition 5. Suppose  with ordering given by
 and .
Then  is a partially ordered set such that  is a meet lattice.
 Proof.  To prove that ≤ defined on  is a partial order, we need to check ≤ is reflexive, transitive and antisymmetric.
It is reflexive since  and so  Therefore  and (trivially),  This implies that 
It is transitive for assume that . Then  and  Since  this implies that  Also . However,  and this implies that  Hence 
It is antisymmetric for assume that  Then  and  Now,  implies that  and then  which implies  by symmetry  then 
To show the partially ordered set  is a meet semilattices, we need to prove that each pair of elements  and  has a greatest lower bound. We shall prove  First we show that . Observe that  is an idempotent if and only if
,  and 
Since the idempotents of 
S and 
T are commute, we have 
 and 
 Moreover,
Second we show that 
 Observe that
 Obviously, 
. Moreover, we have 
 and 
 since 
 is an idempotent. This implies that 
. Similarly, 
 Now suppose that 
 is such that 
. Then 
 and 
 It follows that 
 and so
 But
 Thus, 
    □
 Proposition 6. The partially ordered set  is an inductive groupoid.
 Proof.  We must prove 
 and 
. To verify 
, suppose that 
 are such that 
 so that 
 and 
 Then by 
 in the inverse semigroup 
T, we deduce that 
. It follows that 
 Then,
        and hence 
, as required.
To verify 
, suppose that 
 such that 
 and 
 Suppose that 
 and 
 are defined. Then
        that is
 Now
		
 Since 
 if and only if
        and 
 if and only if
 From (
9) and (
10), we deduce that 
 which implies that
        and 
 implies that 
 Thus
 From (
9), (
11) and (
12), we have 
 and 
 Thus, 
 holds.
To verify 
, suppose that 
 and 
 Then we need to find a unique element 
 such that (•) 
 and (
) 
 We define this element of 
 by 
 Since 
 and 
 Then
 This proves (•). Now 
 if and only if 
 and 
 However, 
 Then 
, since 
 and 
 since 
 Thus, (
) holds.
Now suppose that  also satisfy (•) and (). So, we have  so  by uniqueness of restriction in T. We deduce  Also  by uniqueness of restriction in S. We deduce  Thus,  holds.    □
 Theorem 2 ([
7])
. Let S and T be inverse semigroups such that T acts on S by endomorphisms. Then  forms an inverse semigroup with respect to the operation Proof.  Suppose that 
. Since 
 and 
, we form the pseudoproduct 
 using the greatest lower bound
 Put 
. We now compute 
. Now
        and
 Write 
 and 
 Then the pseudoproduct 
 is equal to 
 Thus, 
 and this is exactly the binary operation defined by Billhardt (cf. [
7]). The fact that this binary operation makes 
 an inverse semigroup follows from its construction as the pseudoproduct on an inductive groupoid.    □
   4. Examples
In this section, we explore various practical examples to illustrate the theoretical constructs discussed earlier in the paper. These examples are purposefully chosen to demonstrate the versatility and applicability of the Zappa–Szép groupoids across different types of inverse semigroups. By examining specific cases, we aim to provide the reader with a clearer understanding of how abstract concepts manifest in more concrete scenarios. Each example is designed to highlight the unique characteristics and potential real-world applications of the Zappa–Szép construction, filling the gap between theoretical insight and practical application. The section will sequentially address different configurations of semigroups and groupoids, showcasing the breadth and depth of the Zappa–Szép groupoids’ impact in the field.
For any inverse semigroups 
S and 
T such that 
 is the Zappa–Szép product of 
S and 
T, 
 is a groupoid with 
 an ordered set of idempotents. Sometimes this is true in other cases as in examples 
 where we have trivial actions 
 where 
S and 
T are groups only idempotents are 
 and for groups we would assume these act trivially 
 where 
 is a Clifford semigroup and 
 here we find 
 is a group and 
 where 
 where 
A is a semilattice with regular actions, here we find that 
 But sometimes we have 
 is not inductive as in example 
 where the partially ordered set of identities do not form a meet semilattice. So, we can say in general the construction does not proceed any further in general. Then in [
1], we choose 
. Therefore, 
 is a semilattice, and we can extend the ordering on 
E to an ordering on 
 to get an inductive groupoid and so an inverse semigroup.
- 1.
 If the action of 
S on 
T is trivial, so 
 the familiar semidirect product, then 
 as in 
Section 4.
- 2.
 If 
S and 
T are groups, then 
 is again a group. Here we would expect 
 to be a groupoid with set of vertices
However, then  so there is only one vertex  and a groupoid with one vertex is a group.
- 3.
 If  a Clifford semigroup and  Suppose that the action of  on A for each  is as follows:  Observe that  for all  The action of A on  as follows:  Thus,  the Zappa–Szép product of A and  We have  is a groupoid with one vertex. So  is just the cyclic group of order 
- 4.
 If 
 the Zappa–Szép product of a band 
A with left and right regular actions of 
A on itself, we take here 
A a semilattice (which is of course inverse) with the same actions, so we have then 
 the Zappa–Szép product of a semilattice 
A with itself. The multiplication is given by: 
 where 
 Thus, 
 Hence 
 via the function 
 given by 
 which is clear injective, surjective and homomorphism function and hence 
 is an inductive groupoid and so an inverse semigroup. The ordering on 
 is given by the ordering on 
A that is
- 5.
 If 
 and 
. Thus
Hence
          which is a groupoid with
vertex set 
arrow set 
the inverse of an arrow  is 
each arrow  starts and finishes at  and
the composite arrow is the same arrow at each vertex 
However, we cannot obtain an inductive groupoid from 
 since the partially ordered set of identities do not form a meet semilattice. The ordering on 
 is given by:
From this, we conclude the following 
Figure 2 illustrating that 
 and 
 do not have the greatest lower bound. Similarly, 
 and 
We have
          and 
 However, 
 since 
 (
 or 
 because 
 Also 
 since 
 Because 
 (
 Thus, 
 is not a semilattice.