1: \begin{abstract}
2: A regular language $L$ is \emph{union-free} if it can be represented by a regular expression without the union operation. A union-free language is \emph{deterministic} if it can be accepted
3: by a deterministic \emph{one-cycle-free-path} finite automaton; this is an automaton which has one final state and exactly one cycle-free path from any state to the final state.
4: Jir\'askov\'a and Masopust proved that the state complexities of the basic operations reversal, star, product, and boolean operations in deterministic union-free languages are exactly the same as those in the class of all regular languages.
5: To prove that the bounds are met they used five types of automata, involving eight types of transformations of the set of states of the automata.
6: We show that for each $n\ge 3$ there exists one ternary witness of state complexity $n$ that meets the bound for reversal and product.
7: Moreover, the restrictions of this witness to binary alphabets meet the bounds for star and boolean operations.
8: We also show that the tight upper bounds on the state complexity of binary operations that take arguments over different alphabets are the same as those for arbitrary regular languages.
9: Furthermore, we prove that the maximal syntactic semigroup of a union-free language has $n^n$ elements, as in the case of regular languages, and
10: that the maximal state complexities of atoms of union-free languages are the same as those for regular languages.
11: Finally, we prove that there exists a most complex union-free language that meets the bounds for all these complexity measures.
12: Altogether this proves that the complexity measures above cannot distinguish union-free languages from regular languages.
13: \medskip
14:
15: \noin
16: {\bf Keywords:}
17: atom, boolean operation, concatenation, different alphabets, most complex, one-cycle-free-path, regular, reversal, star, state complexity, syntactic semigroup, transition semigroup, union-free
18: \end{abstract}