Finite dimensional algebras
Arun Ram
Department of Mathematics and Statistics
University of Melbourne
Parkville, VIC 3010 Australia
aram@unimelb.edu.au
Last update: 6 November 2012
Finite dimensional algebras
The trace, of a
matrix
is the sum of its diagonal elements,
A trace on an algebra is a
map such that for all
Every representation of determines a trace
on given by
where A trace is nondegenerate if for each
there exists such that
A trace
on determines a symmetric bilinear form
on given by
Suppose is finite dimensional and let
be a basis of A basis
of is dual to with respect to the form if
The Gram matrix of is the matrix
Suppose that exists and that
an matrix such that
Then
In matrix notation this says that So
must be Conversely, if
then defining
by (2.4) determines a dual basis This shows that exists
if and only if is invertible and that if it exists it is unique.
(2.5) Proposition. If is a trace on a finite dimensional algebra with
basis and
is given by (2.2) then the Gram matrix
is invertible if and only if is nondegenerate.
|
|
Proof. |
|
The trace is degenerate if and only if there exists
such that
for all
This is the same as saying that
for each basis element If
we have that the satisfy
the system of equations
This system has a nontrivial solution if and only if the matrix
is singular.
|
Symmetrization
Let be a finite dimensional algebra with a nondegenerate trace and let
be a basis of Let be the dual basis to
with respect to the form given by (2.2).
For let denote the element of
such that
Let and be representations of of dimensions
and respectively.
(2.6) Proposition. Let be any
matrix with entries in
If
then, for any
|
|
Proof. |
|
Let Then
|
If and are irreducible then Schur's lemma gives that
if and
are inequivalent and that if
then for some
Let be a finite dimensional algebra. The action of on itself by multiplication on the left turns
into an The resulting representation is the regular representation of
and we denote it by The set is the same as the set
but we distinguish elements of by writing
As usual we denote the
algebra of this representation by
We denote the trace of this representation by tr. Notice that the trace tr of the regular representation can be given by
(2.8) Theorem. If is a finite dimensional algebra such that the regular representation
has nondegenerate trace then every representation of is
completely decomposable.
|
|
Proof. |
|
Let tr denote the trace of the regular representation. Let be a basis of and for each
let denote the element of the dual basis to
with respect to the trace tr such that
Let be a representation of of dimension and let
be an irreducible invariant subspace of Let
be an arbitrary projection of
onto Define
Then, by (2.6), we know that
Since is an subspace,
Since
is irreducible is either 0 or
Let
If then
This shows that
for all
Since tr is nondegenerate we have that
Now let Then since
we have
So and
Let
and let Notice that
for all So is an
subspace of Since, for every
we have
If
then
If P1′V is irreducible then we are done. If not apply the same process again
with P1′V in place of V. Since
V is finite dimensional continuing this process will eventually produce a decomposition of V into irreducible representations.
□
|
Now let A be a finite dimensional algebra such that the trace tr of the regular representation
A→ of A is nondegenerate. Let B be a basis of A
and for each g∈B let g* denote the element of the dual basis to
B with respect to the trace tr such that
tr(gg*)=1.
Let V be a faithful representation of A. By (2.8) we know that V can be
completely decomposed into irreducible representations. Choose a maximal set {Wλ} of
nonisomorphic irreducible representations appearing in the decomposition of V. Let
dλ=dimWλ and define
Md‾(ℂ)⊕λ
Mdλ(ℂ).
We view Md‾(ℂ) as an algebra of block
diagonal matrices with one dλ×dλ block for each
λ.
V(A)≅⊕λWλ(A)
is a subalgebra of Md‾(ℂ)
in a natural way. Let Eijλ denote the d×d
matrix with 1 in the (i,j) entry of the λth
block and 0 everywhere else and let Iλ be the matrix which is the identity on the
λth block and 0 everywhere else.
For each g∈B let
Wijλ(g*)
denote the (i,j) entry of the matrix
Wλ(g*). Then
kth row of
(
Wjiλ
(g*)Wλ(g)
)
=jth row of
(
Wλ(g*)
EikλWλ
(g)
)
.
So
kth row of
(
∑g∈B
Wjiλ
(g*)Wλ(g)
)
=
jth row of
(
∑g
Wλ(g*)
EikλWλ
(g)
)
=
jth row of
(cIλδik)
.
(2.10)
So the ith row of
∑gWjiλ(g*)Wλ(g)
is all zeros except for c in the jth spot and all other rows of
∑g∈BWjiλ(g*)Wλ(g)
are zero. So
∑gWjiλ
(g*)Wλ(g)
=cEijλ
(2.11)
for some c∈ℂ. We can determine c by setting
i=k to get
cdλ
=
tr
(cIλδii)
=
tr
(
∑gWλ
(g*)
EiiλWλ
(g)
)
=
tr
(
∑g
Wλ(g)
Wλ(g*)
Eii
)
=
tr
(
Wλ
(∑ggg*)
Eiiλ
)
.
Since the trace of the regular representation was used to construct the g* we have, (2.9), that
∑ggg*=1, giving
tr
(
Wλ
(∑ggg*)
Eiiλ
)
=
tr
(
Wλ(1)
Eiiλ
)
=
tr
(IλEiiλ)
=
1.
So cdλ=1 and we can write (2.11) as
dλ∑g
Wjiλ
(g*)Wλ
(g)=Eijλ.
Since we have expressed each Eijλ as a linear combination of basis
elements of V(A) we have that
Eijλ∈V(A)
for every i and j. But the Eijλ
form a basis of Md‾(ℂ).
So Md‾(ℂ)⊆V(A). Then
A≅V(A)=Md‾(ℂ).
We have proved the following theorem.
(2.12) Theorem. (Artin-Wedderburn) If A is a finite dimensional algebra such that the trace of the regular representation
of A is nondegenerate, then, for some set of positive integers dλ,
A≅⊕λ
Mdλ(ℂ).
Examples
-
Let 𝒜={ai} and
ℬ=
b
i
be two bases of
A
and let
𝒜*=
a
i
*
and
ℬ*=
b
i
*
be the associated dual bases with respect to a nondegenerate trace
t
→
on
A.
Then
b
i
=
∑
j
s
ij
a
j
,and
b
i
*=
∑
j
t
ij
a
j
*,and
for some constants
s
ij
and
t
ij
.
Then
δ
ij
=
b
i
b
j
*
=
∑
k
s
ik
a
k
∑
l
t
jl
a
l
*
=
∑
k,l
s
ik
t
jl
a
k
a
l
*
=
∑
k,l
s
ik
t
jl
δ
kl
=
∑
k
s
ik
t
jk
.
In matrix notation this says that the matrices
S=∥
s
ij
∥
and
T=∥
t
ij
∥
are such that
S
T
t
=I.
Then, in the setting of Proposition 2.6,
∑
i
V
1
b
i
C
V
2
b
i
*
=
∑
i
∑
j
s
ij
V
1
a
j
C
∑
k
t
ik
V
2
a
k
*
=
∑
j,k
∑
i
s
ij
t
ik
V
1
a
j
C
V
2
a
k
*
=
∑
j,k
δ
jk
V
1
a
j
C
V
2
a
k
*
=
∑
j
V
1
a
j
C
V
2
a
j
*.
This shows that the matrix
C
of proposition 2.6 is independent of the choice of basis.
-
Let
A
be the algebra of elements of the form
c
1
+
c
2
e,
c
1
,
c
2
∈ℂ,
where
e
2
=0.
A
is commutative and
t
→
defined by
t
→
c
1
+
c
2
e
=
c
1
+
c
2
is a nondegenerate trace on
A.
The regular representation
A
→
of
A
is not completely decomposable. The subspace
ℂ
e
→
⊆
A
→
is invariant and its complemenetary subspace is not. The trace of the regular representation is given explicitly by
tr
1
=2
and
tr
e
=0.
tr
is degenerate. There is no matrix representation of
A
that has trace given by
t
→
.
-
Suppose
G
is a finite group and that
A=ℂG
is its group algebra. The the group elements
g∈G
form a basis of
A.
So, using 2.7, the trace of the regular representation can be expressed in the form
tr
a
=
∑
g∈G
ag
|
g
=
∑
g∈G
a
|
1
=
G
a
|
1
,
where 1 denotes the identity in
G
and
a
|
g
denotes the coefficient of
g
in
a.
Since
tr
g
-1
g
=
G
≠0
for each
g∈G,
tr
is nondegenerate. If we set
t
→
a
=a
|
1
then
t
→
is a trace on
A
and
g
-1
g∈G
is the dual basis to the basis
g
g∈G
with respect to the trace.
-
Let
t
→
be the trace of a faithful realisation
φ
of an algebra
A
(ie for each
a∈A,
t
→
a
is given by the styandard trace of
φ
a
where
φ
is an injective homomorphism
φ:A→
M
d
ℂ
). Let
A
=
a∈A|
t
→
ab
=0for allb∈A
.
A
is an ideal of
A.
Let
a∈
A
.
Then
tr
a
k-1
a
=tr
a
k
=0
for all
k.
If
λ
1
,…,
λ
d
are the eigenvalues of
φ
a
then
t
→
a
k
=
λ
1
k
+
λ
2
k
+…+
λ
d
k
=
p
k
λ
=0
for all
k>0
, where
p
k
represents the
k
-th power symmetric functions [Mac1979]. Since the power symmetric functions generate the ring of symmetric functions this means that the elementary symmetric functions
e
k
λ
=0
for
k>0
, [Mac1979] p17, 2.14. Since the characteristic polynomial of
φ
a
can be written in the form
char
φ
a
t
=
t
d
-
e
1
λ
t
d-1
+
e
2
λ
t
d-2
+…±
e
d
λ
,
we get that
char
φ
a
t
=
t
d
. But then the Cayley-Hamilton theorem implies that
φ
a
d
=0.
Since
φ
is injective we have that
a
d
=0.
So
a
is nilpotent. Let
J
be an ideal of nilpotent elements and suppose that
a∈J.
For every element
b∈A,ba∈J
and
ba
is nilpotent. This implies that
φ
ba
is nilpotent. By noting that a matrix is nilpotent only if in Jordan block form the diagonal contains all zeros we see that
t
→
ba
=0.
Thus
a∈
A
.
So
A
can be defined as the largest ideal of nilpotent elements. Furthermore, since the regular representation of
A
is always faitful,
A
is equal to the set
a∈A| tr
ab
=0for allb∈A
where
tr
is the trace of the regular representation of
A.
- Let
𝒜
be the basis and
t
→
the trace of a faithful realisation of an algebra
A
as in Ex3 and let
G
𝒜
be the Gram matrix with respect to the basis
𝒜
and the trace
t
→
as given by 2.2 and 2.3. If
ℬ
is another basis of
A
then
G
ℬ
=
P
t
G
𝒜
P,
where
P
is the change of basis matrix from
𝒜
to
ℬ.
So the rank of the Gram matrix is independent of the choice of the basis
𝒜.
Choose a basis
a
1
,
a
2
,…,
a
k
of
A
(
A
defined in Ex 3) and extend this basis to a basis
a
1
a
2
…
a
k
b
1
…
b
s
of
A.
The Gram matrix with respect to this basis is of the form
0
0
0
G
B
where
G
B
denotes the Gram matrix on
b
1
,
b
2
…
b
s
.
So the rank of the Gram matrix is certainly less than or equal to
s
.
Suppose that the rows of
G
B
are linearly dependent. Then for some contants
c
1
,
c
2
,…,
c
s
,
not all zero,
c
1
t
→
b
1
b
i
+
c
2
t
→
b
2
b
i
+…+
c
s
t
→
b
s
b
i
=0
for all
1≤i≤s.
So
t
→
∑
j
c
j
b
j
b
i
=0,for alli.
This implies that
∑
j
c
j
b
j
∈
A
. This is a contradiction to the construction of the
b
j
.
So the rows of
B
B
are linearly independent.
Thus the rank of the Gram matrix is
s
or equivalently the corank of the Gram matrix of
A
is equal to the dimension of the radical
A
.
Thus the trace
tr
of the regular representation of
A
is nondegenerate iff
A
=
0
.
- Let
W
be an irreducible representation of an arbitrary algebra
A
and let
d=dimW. Denote
W
A
by
A
W
.
Note that representation
W
is also an irreducible representation of
A
W
(
W
a
=a
for all
a∈
A
W
).
We show that
tr
is nondegenerate on
A
W
,
ie that if
a∈
A
W
,a≠0
, then there exists
b∈
A
W
such that
tr
ba
≠0.
Since
a
is a nonzero matrix there exists some
w∈W
such that
a w≠0.
Thus
Aaw=W.
So there exists some
w∈W
such that
aw≠0.
Now
Aaw⊆W
is an
A
-invariant subspace of
W
and not 0 since
aw≠0.
Thus
Aaw=W
. So there exists some
b∈
A
W
such that
baw=w.
This shows that
ba
is not nilpotent. So
tr
ba
≠0. So
tr
is nondegenerate on
A
W
.
This means that
A
W
=
⊕
λ
M
d
λ
ℂ
for some
d
λ
.
But since by Schur's lemma
A
W
=
I
d
ℂ
,
where
d=dimW,
we see that
W
A
=
A
W
=
M
d
ℂ
.
-
Let
A
be a finite dimensional algebra and let
A
→
denote the regular representation of
A.
The set
A
→
is the same as the set
A
, but we distinguish elements of
A
→
by writing
a
→
∈A.
A linear transformation
B
of
A
→
is in the centraliser of
A
→
if for every element
a∈A
and
x
→
∈
A
→
,
Ba
x
→
=aB
x
→
.
Let
B
1
→
=
b
→
.
Then
B
a
→
=
Ba
1
→
=
aB
1
→
=
a
b
→
=
ab
→
.
So
B
acts on
a
→
∈
A
→
by right multiplication on
b.
Conversely it is easy to see that the action of right multiplication commutes with the action of left mutliplication since
a
x
→
b=a
x
→
b
,
for all
a,b∈A
and
x
→
∈
A
→
. So the centraliser algebra of the regular represnetation is the algebra of matrices determined by the action of right multiplication of elements of
A.
Notes and References
The approach to the theory of semisimple algebras that is presented in this section and the following section follows closely a classical approach to the
representation theory of finite groups, see for example [Ser1977] or [Ham1962]. Once one has the analogue of the symmetrization process for finite groups, the only nontrivial
step in the theory that is not exactly analogous to the theory for finite groups is formula (2.9).
I discovered this method after reading the sections of [CRl] concerning Frobenius and symmetric algebras. Frobenius and symmetric algebras were introduced by R. Brauer
and C. Nesbitt, [BNe1937] and [Nes1938]. T. Nakayama [Nak1941] has a version of Theorem (2.6) and R. Brauer [Bra1945] proves analogues of the Schur orthogonality relations that are
analogous to formula (2.10). Ikeda [Ike1953], and Higman [Hig1955], following work of Gaschütz [Gas1952], construct "Casimir" type elements similar to those in (2.9) and §3
Ex. 7. In [CRe1981] §9 Curtis and Reiner use a similar approach but with different proofs, communicated to them by R. Kilmoyer, to obtain theorems (3.8) and (3.9) for
split semisimple algebras (over fields of characteristic 0). N. Wallach has told me that essentially the same approach works for finite dimensional Lie algebras.
This approach is useful for studying semisimple algebras that have distiguished bases. The recent interest in quantum deformations is producing a host of examples of
semisimple algebras that are not group algebras but that do have distinguished bases. Some examples are Hecke algebras associated to root systems, the Brauer algebra,
and the Birman-Wenzl algebra [BWe1989]. For an approach to the Hecke algebras that is essentially an application of the general theory given here see [GUn1989] and [Cr3] §68C.
I would like to thank Prof. A. Garsia for suggesting that I try to find an analogue of the symmetrization process for finite groups for the Brauer algebra. It was this
problem that resulted in my discovery of this approach. I would like to thank Prof. C.W. Curtis for his helpful suggestions in locating literature with a similar
approach. I would also like to thank Prof. Garsia for showing me the proofs of Exs. 4 and 5.
Notes and References
This is an excerpt from the unpublished first chapter of Arun Ram's dissertation entitled Representation Theory, written July 4, 1990.
page history