Translation Functors and the Shapovalov Determinant
Arun Ram
Department of Mathematics and Statistics
University of Melbourne
Parkville, VIC 3010 Australia
aram@unimelb.edu.au
Last updated: 10 February 2015
This is an excerpt from the PhD thesis Translation Functors and the Shapovalov Determinant by Emilie Wiesner, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2005.
The Virasoro Algebra
The Virasoro algebra is the Lie algebra
with bracket given by
([MPi1995], 1.9.4). The Virasoro algebra is the universal central extension of the Lie algebra
with relations
See Section 1.3.5 for a definition of central extensions. The Lie algebra is the Witt algebra. The Witt algebra can be identified with the Lie
algebra of derivations on
That is, the derivations
are a basis for the derivations of
and they satisfy the relation
The Virasoro algebra has a regular, finite Hermitian triangular decomposition
where
The associated Hermitian anti-involution on Vir is given by
Let be the universal enveloping algebra of Vir. Proposition 2.0.5 shows that
inherits a triangular decomposition from Vir:
where
is the symmetric algebra of Bases for
and are
and
respectively.
In order to write these bases more efficiently, we introduce the following notation. For a partition
the weight of is
The number of parts of is denoted
Define
Then, the bases for and
can be rewritten as
and
respectively.
Category
Category was introduced in Section 2.1. We now make a few comments specific to the Virasoro algebra.
Recall
We can identify weights with pairs in
by
Then, the partial ordering on is given by
For the Verma module
is the induced module
We write for
where is the pair identified with
Similarly, we write for the unique maximal submodule of
(Lemma 2.1.3) and
for the unique irreducible quotient of
Using the PBW basis for we see
Then
where is the number of partitions of
Recall from Section 2.1.1 that the character of a module records the dimensions of the weight spaces of
For we have
where
Affine Lie Algebras
The Virasoro algebra has a close relationship with affine Lie algebras. In particular, it is possible to construct a representation of the Virasoro algebra on
certain modules for affine Lie algebras. Before discussing this construction, we provide a brief introduction to affine Lie algebras.
Recall from Section 1.2.1 that a reductive Lie algebra is a direct sum of an abelian Lie algebra and simple Lie algebras. Let
be a finite-dimensional reductive Lie algebra with nondegenerate bilinear form
(We assume this is the Killing form when is semisimple.) The affine Lie algebra associated to
is
with relations
for and
We define
Finally, observe that via the identification
For
and we adopt the notation
We extend the form to a bilinear form on all of by
Then is nondegenerate on
The amne Lie algebra has a triangular decomposition with Cartan subalgebra
Then has a basis
where are the simple roots of and
The bilinear form on
extends to all of by
Restricted Modules and the Casimir Element
A module is restricted if for all
for each
for sufficiently large. In particular, simple modules
(since they are highest weight modules) are restricted modules. The restricted completion
of is the set of infinite sums
such that for any restricted module and
for all but finitely many
Two sums are considered the same if they act the same on all restricted modules. (See [Kac1104219], 2.5 and 12.8 for more on these definitions.)
Let be a simple Lie algebra. Let
be a basis for and let be a dual basis with respect to
so that
We define the Casimir element for to be
where
is the dual Coxeter number of (Recall
Observe that
([Kac1104219], Theorem 2.6 and Corollary 2.6).
(i)
Let Then as operators on a restricted
(ii)
For
acts on by
where
The Virasoro Algebra and Affine Lie Algebras
We now construct an action of the Virasoro algebra on restricted
This construction, known as the Sugawara construction, follows [KRa1987].
Let be a simple or abelian Lie algebra and let be the associated affine Lie
algebra. Recall that the Virasoro algebra is the universal central extension of the Lie algebra of differential operators on
Let
These operators have a natural action on given by
Note that
that is, the action of on
coincides with the action of We would like to define an action of Vir on
that is consistent with these relations, For
let
where the normal ordering is
Note that
As we will show, the operators
mimic the action of on
For all and
Proof.
Let From Equations 1.3 and 1.4, and Proposition 1.2.3
we have
and
We then have
For
Proof.
Suppose that is a where
acts by a scalar We will call the level of
Suppose that is a restricted
with level Then
defines an action of on with
Proof.
This follows from the previous lemma.
Let be a reductive Lie algebra. Then
where is simple or abelian. For each
suppose is a restricted
with level The above construction gives an action of Vir on
denote the action of by
Note that
Therefore, the tensor product
is a (where
acts on Define
The map defines a representation of
on with
Proof.
Since commutes with
the operators and
commute, and the result follows.
For the proof of Theorem 3.4.3, we will use a slight modification of the above construction. Let be a reductive Lie algebra and let
be a reductive subalgebra of Then, for any restricted
we can construct representations of Vir corresponding to both and
Denote the Vir-operators corresponding to and by
and
respectively. Define
an action of on restricted by
The operators form a representation of the Virasoro algebra with acting by
Moreover, the action of commutes with the action of
Proof.
Since
for
This implies
Therefore
The Affine Lie Algebra
The proof of the determinant formula given in the next section relies specifically on the representions of the Virasoro algebra on
We fix the simple root of
Then,
([KRa1987] 11.4 and 12.1). Let
such that
Set
Then,
where
Also,
where
are such that
The minimum value of for which
is nonzero is
For dominant integral weights and of
the tensor product of
is completely reducible ([Kac1104219], Corollary 10.7). (A weight is
dominant integral if
Therefore, Equation 3.8 implies that as
We use the construction from the previous section, with
and
(We embed in
via the diagonal map:
Let and be restricted
For
and define
Therefore,
Let such that
We consider the action of Vir on
Proposition 3.2.1 and Equation 3.4 imply that
•
acts on by
•
acts on by
•
acts on
by
(The dual Coxeter number of is
Therefore,
acts on by
Also,
A Determinant Formula for
Recall the Hermitian anti-involution
denned by
For
we use this to
define an Hermitian form
by
•
where is a (fixed) generator of
•
for
As we saw in the previous chapter, the form
has two important properties:
•
for (Lemma 2.4.1);
•
(Lemma 2.4.2).
Therefore, the determinant
provides a tool to study
Example. Below,
(for
is computed for
Theorem 3.4.3 gives a general formula for
The highest power of in
is
and the coefficient of this term is
Proof.
Consider the entries of
Let and be partitions of
Writing
in terms of the decomposition of in Equation 3.1, we have that
where
is a polynomial in and Then
Now consider
more closely. We can use the relations
to rearrange
as in (3.14). These imply that, as a polynomial in the degree of
is less than or equal to
and the degree of
if and only if Therefore, for any given row of
the entry with the highest powers of is the diagonal entry. Thus, the highest power of in the determinant comes from the
product of the diagonal entries in
The degree of this term is
We now compute the coefficient of this term. A partition may be written as
Note that
and so
terms of lower degree in Therefore, the coefficient of the highest power of
in a diagonal entry
is
and the coefficient of the highest power of in
is
Since the highest power of in
does not involve we fix and think of
as a polynomial in
Fix Let
and suppose divides
Then
divides
Proof.
Suppose divides
This implies is
degenerate. In other words, there is a vector
and for at least one
such that
Then.
where the are polynomials in which are divisible by
Define
We then have divides
Consider
(Here we view as a Vir-module under the adjoint action.)
This set is linearly independent in and can be extended
to a set of basis vectors for
Let be the matrix taking to
Then the entries of are in and
Now, for
Also, divides
for all Then
Finally,
Since this implies
divides
([KRa1987], [FFu1990]). For
and
where
Proof.
Given lemmas 3.4.1 and 3.4.2, we only need to show that
divides
We will use the representation of Vir on restricted
to prove this. Recall (from Equation 3.9) that, for
we can write the tensor product
of
as
Let be the space of highest weight vectors of weight
in
Then,
and
is the space of highest weight vectors of weight for
From Section 3.3, we know that
is a Vir-module. Since the action of
and Vir commute (Proposition 3.3.5), we also have that is a Vir-module.
Moreover, given Equations 3.11 and 3.13 and Proposition 3.2.1, it is clear that
is a weight space for the action of Vir such that
•
for all
•
for
Define
where
Note that
switches these definitions.
According to Proposition 3.3.6, the minimum value of for which
is Therefore, as a Vir-module,
has highest weight
Since
this shows that
The character of is
(Here we are intentionally confusing (for the
Virasoro algebra) and (for
Since the maximum weight for is
Therefore,
Let be whichever of the pairs
has minimum product. Note that
The coefficient of in
is less than the coefficient of in
implying
Then,
Since
We then have
Since
vanishes at infinitely many points along the curve
Therefore,
divides
Blocks
Recall that we define an equivalence relation on the weights of Vir generated by the
relation if
The blocks of the Virasoro algebra are the equivalence classes of Prom Theorem 2.3.6, we know that
if and only if
We will use this alternative formulation of in order to describe the blocks of Vir.
Blocks and the Determinant Formula
For define
Viewing
as a polynomial in we have
Therefore, the determinant formula for can be rewritten as
For we know that
if and only if
Equation 3.15 implies that if
are such that the product is minimal with
then
and
for all Therefore, any vector
is a highest weight vector and so
Theorem 3.5.1 shows that for any
such that
and that these embeddings produce a complete description of the submodule structure of
For fixed the curves
are hyperbolas. Below is the curve
Also note that
•
•
if and only if
•
For fixed
can be factored into terms linear in and
where such that
Thus, for fixed the solutions to the equation
form two sets of parallel lines. The figure below illustrates the example
To find all integer solutions to
we only need to consider one line, say
(If is a point on any of the other lines,
or
will lie on the line
We fix one of the lines and call it
Theorem 3.5.1 will show that the integer points on this line encode the embeddings
Note that a line passes through 0, 1, or infinitely many integer points. (If the line passes through two integer points, it has rational slope and therefore passes
through infinitely many integer points.) In other words, there are 0, 1, or infinitely many curves
passing through a fixed point
Below we include a partial picture of curves
for values of near
There are three points in the picture where multiple curves intersect:
As Theorem 3.5.1 shows, these weights belong to the block
The line has nonzero slope. Thus, if it passes through
infinitely many integer points with
it must pass through finitely many points with
and vice versa.
([FFu1990]). Suppose
such that
Then,
All embeddings of Verma modules arise in this way. Therefore, we have the following description of Verma module embeddings.
Fix a pair
and let be one of the lines defined by this pair. Then the
Verma module embeddings involving are described by one of the
following four cases.
(i)
Suppose passes through no integer points. The Verma
module is irreducible and does not embed in any other Verma
modules. The block is given by
(ii)
Suppose passes through exactly one integer point
(a)
If the embeddings for
look like
where the arrow indicates inclusion.
(b)
If the embeddings for
look like
The block is given by
(iii)
Suppose passes through infinitely many integer points
and crosses an axis at an integer point. Label these points
so that
(We exclude points where or
these correspond to the embedding
The embeddings between the corresponding Verma modules take one of the following forms:
The block is given by
(iv)
Suppose passes through infinitely many integer points
and does not cross either axis at an integer point. Again label the integer points
on so that
Also consider the auxiliary line
with the same slope as passing through the point
Label the integer points on this line
as above. The embeddings between the corresponding Verma modules take one of the forms
The block is given by
See Section 2.5 for more on Jantzen filtrations.
([FFu1990]). Let
and classify according to the cases given above. Then the Jantzen filtration of
is given as follows:
(i), (iia)
for all
(iib)
and for all
(iii)
and if there is no point
on the line
We have the following picture of the Jantzen filtration of
(iv)
Write
Then
and
We have the following picture of the Jantzen filtration of
Partial Proof of Theorems 3.5.1 and 3.5.2.
We give a proof of cases (i) and (ii) for both theorems simultaneously.
We note that if we set then for any
will be nondegenerate. Therefore, Theorem 2.5.1 holds.
Case (i): Suppose passes through no integer points.
Then,
for all and so
is irreducible.
Case (ii)a: Suppose passes through one
integer point with
Since
we can assume that and that
and are the only positive integers such
Therefore,
This means
and so
for all However, from Theorem 2.5.1,
Therefore
and for
Since
there are no integers such that
This implies is irreducible.
Case (ii)b: Suppose passes through one integer point
with
Since
the point is on the line
(if we choose the line carefully out of the four possible lines.)
Also, is the only integer point on
Then falls into case (ii)a.
We do not provide a proof of cases (hi) and (iv). The proof of these cases can be found in [FFu1990], Part II, Section 1. However, we do make a few comments to show that
these results are reasonable.
Case (iii): Suppose passes through infinitely many integer
points and crosses an axis at an integer
point. We will assume the slope is positive and
passes through a the point for some
(If
or crosses
the axis at a different point, we can still make arguments similar to those below.) Write
where and
We observe that (r1,s1)=(-(k+1)q,s0‾-p).
(If s0‾=0, then there are two points
on the line ℒ(h,c),(-(k+1)q,-p) and
(q,(k+1)p),
with the same product. In this case, there is not a unique choice for (r1,s1).
We choose either point.)
We have M(h+r1s1,c)⊆M(h,c),
and (r1,-s1) is on the line
ℒ(h+r1s1,c)
(for a careful choice of this line). The line ℒ∼(h,c)=ℒ(h+r1s1,c)
so passes through infinitely many integer points and crosses an axis at an integer point, so that we can use the same arguments as above. We see that
(r∼1,s∼1)=(-(k+2)q,-s0‾),
which implies M(h+r1s1+r∼1s∼1,c)⊆M(h+r1s1,c)⊆M(h,c).
Since r1s1+r∼1s∼1=r2s2,
we have M(h+r2s2,c)⊆M(h+r1s1,c)⊆M(h,c).
We can continue this argument to get M(h,c)⊇M(h+r1s1,c)⊇M(h+r2s2,c)⊇M(h+r3s3)⊆⋯,
To show that M(h,c)⊆M(h+r-1s-1,c)⊆M(h+r-2s-2,c)⊆⋯,
we use the fact that 𝒞r,s(h,c)=𝒞-r,s(h+rs,c)
and apply the above argument to the Verma modules M(h+r-is-i,c).
Therefore, the Verma module embeddings for M(h,c) are at least
those indicated in Theorem 3.5.1.
Case (iv): We again have M(h+r1s1,c)⊆M(h,c).
Since ℒ(h,c) does not cross at axis at an integer point,
detM(h+r1s1,c)(h+r2s2,c)≠0.
Therefore, M(h+r1s1,c)(h+r2s2,c)∩M(h,c)j=0
for j>0. However, ordM(h+t,c)(h+t+r2s2,c)=p(r2s2-r1s1)+1=dimM(h+r1s1,c)(h+r2s2,c)+1.
Using Theorem 2.5.1, we see that there must be some vector 0≠v∈M(h,c)1(h+r2s2,c)
so that v≠M(h+r1s1,c).
It remains to show that v is a highest weight vector.
□
Another Description of Blocks
We can use the line ℒ(h,c) to generate lines corresponding to the
entire block [(h,c)] in the following way. If
(r,s) is an integer point on the line ℒ(h,c)
let ℒ∼(h,c) be the line with the same slope
as ℒ(h,c) and passing through the point (-r,s).
Then ℒ∼(h,c)=ℒ∼(h+rs,c)
corresponds to the weight (h+rs,c)∈[(h,c)].
Using this approach we can construct a set of lines corresponding to the weights in a given block. In this section, we begin with a line and generate the weights in a
given block.
Let ℒ(μ,a,b) be a line where μ
is the slope of the line and (a,b) is a point on the line. Then ℒ(μ,a,b)
determines a weight (h,c) by
h=(aμ-b)2-(μ-1)24μ,c=13-6(μ+1μ).
We will write [(μ,a,b)] for
[(h,c)] if ℒ(μ,a,b)
determines (h,c).
•
Blocks of size two are indexed by triples
{(μ,a,b)|μ∈ℝ-ℚwith∣μ∣<1anda,b∈ℤ>0}∪{(μ,a,a)|μ∈ℂ-ℚ,∣μ∣=1,a∈ℤ>0}.
The weights in a block of size two [(μ,a,b)]
are indexed by triples {(μ,a,±b)}.
•
Infinite blocks with a maximal element are indexed by triples
{(pq,a,b)|p,q∈ℤ>0, withgcd(p,q)=1,p<qIf2∤q, then0≤a<q2,0≤b<pIf2|q, then0≤a<q,0≤b<p2}.
Infinite blocks with a minimal element are indexed by triples
{(-pq,-a,b)|p,q∈ℤ>0, withgcd(p,q)=1,p<qIf2∤q, then0≤a<q2,0≤b<pIf2|q, then0≤a<q,0≤b<p2}.
For a block [(±pq,±a,b)]
with a≠0, the weights in the block are indexed by triples
{(pq,a,±b+2kp)|k∈ℤ}or{(-pq,-a,±b+2kp)|k∈ℤ}.
For a block [(±pq,0,b)],
the weights in the block are indexed by triples
{(pq,0,b),(pq,0,±b+2kp)|k∈ℤ>0}or{(-pq,0,b),(-pq,0,±b+2kp)|k∈ℤ>0}.
Proof.
Suppose (μ,a,b)→(h,c)
and ∣[(h,c)]∣>1.
Then, ℒ(μ,a,b) must pass through at least one
integer point. Therefore, we can restrict to triples (μ,a,b) with
a,b∈ℤ.
We now consider what values of μ will determine real values for h and c.
Note that c=13-6(μ+1μ)∈ℝ
only if μ∈ℝ or μ∈ℂ with ∣μ∣=1.
Suppose μ∈ℂ-ℝ with ∣μ∣=1.
Then μ=A+Bi= with B≠0.
It is straightforward to check that h=(aμ-b)2-(μ-1)24μ∈ℝ
only if a2=b2.
Recall that (μ,a,b),(μ,-a,-b),(1μ,a,b),
and (1μ,-a,-b)
all determine to the same weight (h,c). Therefore, we restrict
our attention to triples (μ,a,b) with
μ∈ℝ so that 0<∣μ∣<1
and a∈ℤ>0,b∈ℤ≠0; or with
μ∈ℂ so that ∣μ∣=1,a∈ℤ>0, and
b=±a.
•
We first consider blocks of size two. A pair (h,c) belonging to a block of size two lies on
exactly one curve 𝒞r,s(h,c)=0,
and so any line determining the pair (h,c) passes through exactly one integer point. Therefore,
triples in the set {(μ,a,b)|μ∈ℝ-ℚwith∣μ∣<1anda∈ℤ>0,b∈ℤ}∪{(μ,a,±a)|μ∈ℂ-ℚ,∣μ∣=1,a∈ℤ>0}
are in one-to-one correspondence with such pairs (h,c). If (h,c) is the pair defined by
(μ,a,b), then
M(h+ab,c)⊆M(h,c).
This implies that (h+ab,c) corresponds to the line with slope
μ passing through the point (-a,b).
Therefore, any block of size two can be identified with a set {(μ,a,±b)},
with μ,a, and b as in the previous paragraph. Taking
one triple from each of these pairs of triples, we see that the set
{(μ,a,b)|μ∈ℝ-ℚwith∣μ∣<1anda,b∈ℤ>0}∪{(μ,a,a)|μ∈ℂ-ℚ,∣μ∣=1,a∈ℤ>0}
indexes the blocks of size two.
•
Now we consider infinite blocks. Let (h,c) be a pair in an infinite block. We assume
0<μ≤1 and μ∈ℚ.
(The arguments for 1≤μ<0 are the similar.) Write μ=pq
such that p and q are relatively prime. Consider weights (h,c)
which are maximal in their own block [(h,c)].
Since M(h,c) does not embed in any other Vermas, any line determined by
(h,c) must pass through only integer points (a,b)
such that ab>0. It is clear that the triples corresponding to maximal
weights are contained in the set {(μ,a,b)|0≤a<q2,0≤b<p}
(or {(μ,a,b)|0≤a<q,0≤b<p2}
if q is even). However, (pq,a,b)
and (pq,q-a,p-b)
determine the same weight. Therefore, the set {(μ,a,b)|0≤a<q2,0≤b<p}
(or {(μ,a,b)|0≤a<q,0≤b<p2})
contains exactly one triple corresponding to each such pair (h,c). We can also describe the block [(h,c)].
Let (μ,a,b)(μ=pq∈ℚ≠0
with ∣μ∣≤1 and a,b∈ℤ
with 0≤a<q2 be a triple which determines (h,c).
Then the integer points lying on ℒ(pq,a,b)
are (a+kq,b+kp),k∈ℤ. This implies that
M(h+(a+kq)(b+kp),c)⊆M(h,c).
Therefore, the line given by (μ,-a+kq,-(b+kp))
must determine (h+(a+kq)(b+kp),c)∈ℬ.
This may not produce all pairs (h,c) in the block (as in case (iv) of Theorem 3.5.1).
Therefore, we also consider the pair (h+ab,c)∈ℬ,
which is determined by the triple (μ,a,-b).
Using the same argument as above, we get the triples (μ,a,-b).
Therefore, the set
{(pq,a-kq,±b+kp)|k∈ℤ}⟷{(pq,a,±b+2kp)|k∈ℤ}
is in general a set of representatives for the elements of the block corresponding to (pq,a,b).
If a=0, the triples (pq,0,b+2kp)
and (pq,0,-b-2kp)
correspond to distinct lines but still determine the same weight. In this case, the set {(pq,0,±b+2kp)|k∈ℤ≥0}
forms set of representatives of the elements of the block. Consider the example with μ=23.
The set of integer points {(a,b)∈ℤ2|0≤a<32,0≤b<2}
indexes the infinite blocks with c=13-6(23+32)=0.
The line ℒ(23,1,1) determines
the weight (0,0). From the integer points
(1,1),(-2,-1),
and (4,3) on the line ℒ(23,1,1),
we get the lines ℒ(1,-1),ℒ(23,-2,1),
and ℒ(23,4,-3);
these lines determine the weights (1,0),(2,0), and (12,0)
respectively. In general, the set of points {(1,4k±1)|k∈ℤ}
correspond to the block
{((12k+2±3)2-124,0)|k∈ℤ}={(j(3j±1)2,0)|j∈ℤ≥0}.
□
Define the group W=〈s0,s1|si2=1〉.
We can define an action of W on the triples (μ,a,b) so that
(i)
a block of size two [(μ,a,b)]
is the orbit of the subgroup 〈s0〉⊆W;
(ii)
a infinite block [(±pq,±a,b)],
with a≠0, is the orbit of W;
(iii)
a infinite block [(±pq,0,b)],b≠0, is the orbit of the subgroup
〈s1,s0s1s0〉⊆W;
(iv)
a infinite block [(±pq,0,0)]
is of the form {(s1s0)k(±pq,0,0)|k∈ℤ≥0}.
Proof.
We define an action of W on triples (μ,a,b) as follows:
•
s0 is the reflection about 0: s0(μ,a,b)=(μ,a,-b);
•
for μ=pq,s1 is the reflection
about p:s1(±pq,±a,b)=(±pq,±a,-(b-p)+p)=(±pq,±a,-b+2p).
Then (i) and (ii) follow from the previous proposition.
For (iii), note that s0s1s0 is the reflection
about -p. Also, (pq,0,-b+2kp)
and (pq,0,b-2kp)
determine the same weight. Then 〈s1,s0s1s0〉
generates [(±pq,0,b)],
where we replace (pq,0,-b+2kp)
with (pq,0,b-2kp)
for k even.
Finally, we have that s1s0 is translation by
2p. Then, (iv) follows.
□
Translation Functors
We now consider M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′).
From Theorem 2.3.12, we know that
M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′)=⨁[μ]∈[𝔥*](M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[μ]
and (M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[μ]≠0
only if [μ]=[(h+h′+k,c+c′)]
for some k∈ℤ≥0. Moreover, we know this
submodule has a filtration by Verma modules. In this section, we use the contravariant form to better describe
(M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[μ].
Recall 〈,〉:M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′)×M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′)→ℂ
is defined by
〈v⊗w,v′⊗w′〉=〈v,v′〉〈w,w′〉
where v,v′∈M(h,c)
and w,w′∈L(h∼,c′).
This form on M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′)
is contravariant.
Let (h,c),(h′,c′)∈ℝ2,
and let {wk,j|1≤j≤dim(L(h′,c′)(h′+k,c′))}
be a basis for L(h′,c′)(h′+k,c′).
From Lemma 2.6.2, the following sets are bases for
(M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))(h+h′+n,c+c′):{d-λv+⊗wk,i|∣λ∣=n,1≤i≤dim(L(h′,c′)(h′+k,c′))};(3.16){d-λ(v+⊗wk,i)|∣λ∣=n,1≤i≤dim(L(h′,c′)(h′+k,c′))}.(3.17)
We defined
det(M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))(h+h′+k,c+c′)≔det(〈d-λv+⊗wm,j,d-λ*v+⊗wm′,j′〉)
where the entries in the matrix are indexed over partitions λ and λ* and positive
integers m,m′,j,j′
such that ∣λ∣=k-m,∣λ*∣=k-m′,1≤j≤dimL(h′,c′)(h′+m,c′),
and 1≤j′≤dimL(h′,c′)(h′+m′,c′).
From Lemma 2.6.3, we have
det(M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))(h+h′+k,c+c′)=∏j≤k(detM(h,c)(h+k-j,c))dimL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′)×(detL(h′,c′)h′+j,c′)p(k-j).(3.18)
For (h,c),(h′,c′)∈ℝ2
and k∈ℤ≥0,det(M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))(h+h′+k,c+c′)
is given by
∏0≤j≤k(detM(h+h′+j,c+c′)(h+h′+k,c+c′))dimL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′)(aj(h′,c′)(h,c)detL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′))p(k-j),
where
aj(h′,c′)(h,c)=∏1≤r≤srs≤j(𝒞r,s(h,c)𝒞r,s(h+h′+j-rs,c+c′))dimL(h′,c′)(h′+j-rs,c′).
Proof.
Using Equation 3.18, we only need to show that
∏j≤k(aj(h′,c′)(h,c))p(k-j)=∏j≤k(detM(h,c)(h+k-j,c)detM(h+h′+j,c+c′)(h+h′+k,c+c′))dimL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′).
Note that
∏0≤j≤k(detM(h,c)(h+k-j,c)detM(h+h′+j,c+c′)(h+h′+k,c+c′))dimL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′)=∏0≤j≤k1≤r≤s(𝒞r,s(h,c)𝒞r,s(h+h′+j,c+c′))p(k-j-rs)dimL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′)=∏j∈ℤ1≤r≤s(𝒞r,s(h,c)𝒞r,s(h+h′+j,c+c′))p(k-j-rs)dimL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′)⏟We can let the product range over allj∈ℤsincep(k-j-rs)=0forj>kanddimL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′)=0forj<0.=∏j∈ℤ1≤r≤s(𝒞r,s(h,c)𝒞r,s(h+h′+j-rs,c+c′))p(k-j)dimL(h′,c′)(h′+j-rs,c′)⏟We shiftj→j-rs=∏0≤j≤k1≤r≤srs≤j(𝒞r,s(h,c)𝒞r,s(h+h′+j-rs,c+c′))p(k-j)dimL(h′,c′)(h′+j-rs,c′).
□
Fix (h′,c′)∈ℝ2.
Consider (h,c)∈ℝ2 such that
(h+n,c)∉[(h,c)]
for any n∈ℤ>0 (i.e. M(h,c)
is irreducible). For each [μ]∈[𝔥*]
and n∈ℤ≥0, there is a projection map
Prn[μ]:(M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))(h+h′+n,c+c′)→((M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[μ])(h+h′+n,c+c′)
given by
Prn[μ](w)=w-∑[γ]≠[μ]∑1m〈w,vi[γ]〉v‾i[γ]
where {v1[γ],…,vm[γ]}
and {v‾1[γ],…,v‾m[γ]}
are dual bases for ((M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[γ])(h+h′+n,c+c′).
Proof.
Since (h+n,c)∉[(h,c)]
for all n∈ℤ≥0, Equation 3.18 implies that the
contravariant form is nondegenerate on (M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))(h+h′+n,c+c′).
From Proposition 2.7, distinct blocks are orthogonal with respect to the form. Therefore, the contravariant form is nondegenerate on each block.
Let {v1[γ],…,vm[γ]}
be a basis for ((M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[γ])(h+h′+n,c+c′).
Since the contravariant form is nondegenerate on this space, there is a dual basis {v‾1[γ],…,v‾m[γ]}
for this space, i.e. 〈vi[γ],v‾l[γ]〉=δi,l.
We define a map
Prn[μ]:(M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))(h+h′+n,c+c′)→(M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))(h+h′+n,c+c′)
by
Prn[μ](w)=w-∑[γ]≠[μ]∑1m〈w,vi[γ]〉v‾i[γ].
Note that 〈Prn[μ](w),vi[γ]〉=0
whenever [γ]≠[μ] since distinct blocks are orthogonal.
Therefore, Prn[μ](w)∈((M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[μ])(h+h′+n,c+c′).
Also, for w∈((M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[μ])(h+h′+n,c+c′),Prn[μ](w)=w.
□
Fix (h′,c′)∈ℝ2
and n∈ℤ≥0. Suppose
(h,c)∈ℝ2 is such that
(h+j,c)∉[(h,c)]
and (h+h′+j,c+c′)∉[(h+h′+k,c+c′)]
for all j,k≤n with j≠k. Then the submodule of M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′)
generated by
⨁0≤j≤n(M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))(h+h′+j,c+c′)
is isomorphic to
⨁0≤j≤nM(h+h′+j,c+c′)⊕dimL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′).
For a suitable choice of generating highest weight vectors {vj,i+|1≤i≤dim(L(h′,c′))(h′+j,c′)}
of ⨁0≤j≤nM(h+h′+j,c+c′)⊕dimL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′)⊆M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′),
this sum is orthogonal with respect to the contravariant form on M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′), and
∏1≤i≤dim(L(h′,c′))(h′+j,c′)〈vj,i+,vj,i+〉=aj(h′,c′)(h,c)detL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′).
Proof.
Since [(h,c)]≠[(h+j,c)]
for all j≤n, the projection maps from the previous lemma are well-defined.
We have assumed [(h+h′+j,c+c′)]≠[(h+h′+k,c+c′)]
for j,k≤n and j≠k.
Therefore, for μj=(h+h′+j,c+c′)
with j≤n, the set {Prj[μj](v+⊗wj,i)|1≤i≤dimL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′)}
is a basis for ((M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[μj])(h+h′+j,c+c′),
made up of highest weight vectors. Choose vectors {vj,i+}
such that
•
the transition matrix from {Prj[μj](v+⊗wj,i)}
to {vj,i+} has determinant 1;
•
〈vj,i+,vj,k+〉=0
if i≠k.
Note that
∏i〈vj,i+,vj,i+〉=det(〈Prj[μjj](v+⊗wj,i),Prj[μj](v+⊗wj,k)〉).
Then det(〈d-λPrj[μj](v+⊗wj,i),d-μ∼Prj[μj](v+⊗wj,k)〉)=∏i(〈d-μvj,i+,d-λ∼vj,i+〉)
is
(∏i〈vj,i+,vj,i+〉)p(n-j)×(det(h+h′+j,c+c′)(h+h′+n,c+c′))dimL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′).
Therefore, we only need to determine ∏i〈vj,i+,vj,i+〉.
We do this inductively. Suppose
det(〈Prk[μk](v+⊗wk,i),Prk[μk](v+⊗wk,l)〉)=ak(h′,c′)(h,c)detL(h′,c′)(h′+k,c′)
for k<j. Since distinct blocks are orthogonal, we have
det(M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))(h+h′+j,c+c′)
is given by
∏k≤jdet(〈d-μPrj[γk](v+⊗d-λw+),d-μ∼Prj[γk](v+⊗d-λ∼w+)〉)=det(〈d-μPrj[μ](v+⊗d-λw+),d-μ∼Prj[μ](v+⊗d-λ∼w+)〉)∏k<j((detM(h+h′+k,c+c′)(h+h′+j,c+c′))dimL(h′,c′)(h′+k,c′)×(ak(h′,c′)(h,c)detL(h′,c′)(h′+k,c′))p(k-j)).
From Lemma 3.6.1, this implies
det(〈Prj[μj](v+⊗wj,i),Prj[μj](v+⊗wj,l)〉)=aj(h′,c′)(h,c)detL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′).
□
For γ=(h+h′+k,c+c′), the set
Bn[γ]={d-μ(Prj[γ](v+⊗d-λw+))|(h+h′+j,c+c′)∈[γ],∣λ∣=j,∣μ∣=n-j}
is a basis for ((M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[γ])(h+h′+n,c+c′). Define
det((M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[γ])(h+h′+n,c+c′)=det(〈v,w〉)v,w∈Bn[γ]
Let (h,c),(h′,c′)∈ℝ2,[γ]∈[𝔥*],
and n∈ℤ≥0. Suppose
(h+k,c)∉[(h,c)]
for all 0≤k≤n. Then,
det((M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[γ])(h+h′+n,c+c′)
is
=∏(h+h′+j,c+c′)∈[γ]((detM(h+h′+j,c+c′)(h+h′+n,c+c′))dimL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′)×(aj(h′,c′)(h,c)detL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c))p(n-j))
Proof.
Let n∈ℤ≥0 and let K be any set of positive
integers between 0 and n. Fix (h′,c′)∈ℝ2
and consider all (h,c)∈ℝ2 such that
[(h+h′+k,c+c′)]≠[(h+h′+k′,c+c′)]
for any k′ such that k′∉K.
Let
MK=∑k∈K(M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))(h+h′+k,c+c′)
We can construct projection maps PrjK:(M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))(h+h′+j,c+c′)→(MK)(h+h′+n,c+c′)
analogous to those in Propostion 3.6.2. Applying these projection maps to the basis to {v+⊗wij},
we can construct a basis {v1,…,vm}
for (MK)(h+h′+n,c+c′)
which are linear combinations of the basis {d-λ(v+⊗wij)|j≤n,∣λ∣=n-j}
with coefficients which are rational functions of h and c.
Consider
det(MK)(h+h′+n,c+c′)=det(〈vi,vj〉)1≤i,j≤m.
This will be a rational function in h and c.
For most choices of (h,c),[(h+h′+k,c+c′)]={(h+h′+k,c+c′)}
for each k∈K and so
MK≅⨁k∈KM(h+h′+k,c+c′)⊕dimL(h′,c′)(h′+k,c′).
Write γk=(h+h′+k,c+c′).
Lemma 3.6.3 implies that for such choices of h and c,det(MK)(h+h′+n,c+c′)=∏k∈Kdet((M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[γk])(h+h′+n,c+c′)(3.19)=∏k∈K(ak(h′,c′)(h,c)L(h′,c′)(h′+k,c′))p(n-k)M(h+h′+k,c+c′)(h+h′+n,c+c′).(3.20)
Since det(MK)(h+h′+n,c+c′)
is a rational function of h and c, Equation 3.20 holds for all (h,c)
where det(MK)(h+h′+n,c+c′)
is defined. In particular, if [γ]∩{(h+h′+j,c+c′)|0≤j≤n}={(h+h′+k,c+c′)|k∈K},
then det((M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[γ])(h+h′+n,c+c′)
is
∏j∈[γ](aj(h′,c′)(h,c)detL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′))p(n-j)(detM(h+h′+j,c+c′)(h+h′+n,c+c′))dimL(h′,c′)(h′+j,c′).
□
We define a Jantzen-type filtration on M(λ)⊗L(μ)
in the following way. For an indeterminant t, we define the Vir-module M(h+t,c)
as in Section 2.5. The map ε:ℂ[t]→ℂ(t↦0) to a map
ε:M(h+t,c)⊗L(h′,c′)⟶M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′).
For each j∈ℤ≥0, define
(M(h+t,c)⊗L(h′,c′))j={v∈M(h+t,c)⊗L(h′,c′)|tj|〈v,w〉for allw∈M(h+t,c)⊗L(h′,c′)}
and
(M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))j=ε((M(h+t,c)⊗L(h′,c′))j).
Let j∈ℤ≥0. Then
(M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))j=M(h,c)j⊗L(h′,c′).
Proof.
Let v∈(M(h+t,c)⊗L(h′,c′))j.
Since distinct weight spaces are orthogonal with respect to the contravariant form, we may assume
v∈(M(h+t,c)⊗L(h′,c′))(h+h′+t+n,c+c′)
for some n∈ℤ≥0. For each
j≤n, let {wj,i}
be a basis for L(h′,c′) which is orthonormal
with respect to the contravariant form. (Such a basis exists since the contravariant form is nondegenerate on L(h′,c′).)
We may write
v=∑j=0n∑ivj,i⊗wj,i
for some vj,i∈M(h+t,c).
Then, for any v′∈M(h+t,c),k≤n, and 1≤m≤dimL(h′,c′)(h′+k,c′),〈v,v′⊗wk,m〉=∑j=0n∑i〈vj,i⊗wj,i,v′⊗wk,m〉=∑j=0n∑i〈vj,i,v′〉〈wj,i,wk,m〉=〈vk,m,v′〉.
This implies tj|〈vk,m,w〉
for all w∈M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′)
and so vk,m∈M(h+t,c).
□
Let (h,c),(h′,c′)∈ℂ2
and [μ]∈[𝔥*].
Then, for each n∈ℤ≥0∑j>0dim((M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))j[μ])(h+h′+n,c+c′)
is
ord(∏0≤k≤n(h+h′+k,c+c′)∈[μ](ak(h′,c′)(h+t,c))p(n-k)).
Proof.
From the previous lemma and Theorem 3.5.2, we know that for each n∈ℤ≥0∑j>0dim((M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))j)(h+h′+n,c+c′)
is given by
ord∏0≤k≤n(detM(h,c)(h+t+n-k,c))dimL(h′,c′)(h′+k,c′)=ord∏0≤k≤n(ak(h′,c′)(h+t,c))p(n-k).(3.21)
Therefore, to prove the result, we only need to show how these zeros are distributed.
From the previous lemma, we have (M(h,c)⊗L(h′,c′))j=M(h,c)j⊗L(h′,c′).
Theorem 3.5.2 gives the structure of the Jantzen filtration for M(h,c).
We will consider the cases of this result separately.
Case (i): In this case, M(h,c) is irreducible and so
M(h,c)j=0 for all
j. This corresponds to detM(h,c)(h+n,c)≠0
for all n∈ℤ≥0, implying
ord(ak(h′,c′)(h+t,c))=0.
Cases (ii) and (iii): There are integer points (ri,si),1≤i≤k for some k∈ℤ>0,
on the line ℒ(h,c) such that
•
M(h,c)j=M(h+rjsj,c)
for j≤k;
•
(M(h,c)j)(h+m,c)=0
for j>k and m≤n.
Then we have a correspondence between
•
distinct zeros in detM(h,c)(h+m,c),
which will have the form 𝒞rj,sj(h,c);
•
j such that (M(h,c)j)(h+m,c)≠0.
Moreover, the multiplicity of the zero 𝒞rj,sj(h,c)
in detM(h,c)(h+m,c)
is p(m-rjsj)=dimM(h+rjsj,c)(h+m,c).
Now, if 1≤j≤k, we can describe the decomposition of
M(h,c)j⊗L(h′,c′)=M(h+rjsj,c)⊗L(h′,c′)
by blocks. In particular, by Proposition 2.6.1, we know that (M(h+rjsj,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[μ]
has a filtration by Verma modules 0=M0⊆M1⊆⋯
such that
•
(M(h+rjsj,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[μ]=⋃Mi;
•
Mi/Mi-1≅M(h+rjsj+h′+kj,i,c+c′)⊕dimL(h′,c′)(h′+kj,i,c′)
for each kj,i∈ℤ≥0 such that
(h+rjsj+h′+kj,i,c+c′)∈[μ].
This means that
dim((M(h,c)j⊗L(h′,c′))[μ])(h+h′+n,c+c′)=∑kj,ip(n-(rjsj+kj,i))dimL(h′,c′)(h′+kj,i,c′),
where we sum over {kj,i|(h+rjsj+h′+kj,i,c+c′)∈[μ]}.
Then, ∑jdim((M(h,c)j⊗L(h′,c′))[μ])(h+h′+n,c+c′)
is given by
∑j∑kj,i|(h+rjsj+h′+kj,i,c+c′)∈[μ]p(n-(rjsj+kj,i))dimL(h′,c′)(h′+kj,i,c′).(3.22)
On the other hand,
∏0≤k≤n(h+h′+k,c+c′)∈[μ](ak(h′,c′)(h+t,c))p(n-k)
is
ord(∏0≤k≤n(h+h′+k,c+c′)∈[μ]∏1≤r≤srs≤k(𝒞r,s(h+t,c)𝒞r,s(h+t+h′+k-rs,c+c′))dimL(h′,c′)(h′+k-rs,c′)p(n-k)).(3.23)
Given the correspondence stated earlier, we see that (3.23) is
∑0≤k≤n(h+h′+k,c+c′)∈[μ]∑j|rjsj<kdimL(h′,c′)(h′+k-rjsj,c′)p(n-k),
which is equal to (3.22).
Case (iv): We have
M(h,c)j=M(h+nj,1,c)+M(h+nj,2,c)(3.24)
where
M(h+nj,1,c)∩M(h+nj,2,c)=M(h,c)j+1.(3.25)
Consider nj0,i maximal so that
nj0,i≤n. Then,
(M(h,c)j0⊗L(h′,c′))(h+h′+n,c+c′)=(M(h+nj0,1,c)⊗L(h′,c′))(h+h′+n,c+c′)=⊕(M(h+nj0,2,c)⊗L(h′,c′))(h+h′+n,c+c′).
Again, we know the decomposition of each of these summands by blocks. The module
(M(h+nj0,i,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[μ]
has a filtration by Verma modules where M(h+nj0,i+kj0,i,l,c+c′)
appears with multiplicity dimL(h′,c′)(h′+kj0,i,l,c′)
for each kj0,i,l such that
(h+nj0,i+kj0,i,l,c+c′)∈[μ].
Therefore, dim((M(h,c)j0⊗L(h′,c′))[μ])(h+h′+n,c+c′)
is
=dim((M(h+nj0,1,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[μ])(h+h′+n,c+c′)+dim((M(h+nj0,2,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[μ])(h+h′+n,c+c′)=∑kj0,i,ldimL(h′,c′)(h′+kj0,i,l,c′)p(n-(nj0,i+kj0,i,l)).
Using (3.24) and (3.25), we can similarly argue that dim((M(h,c)j0-1⊗L(h′,c′))[μ])(h+h′+n,c+c′) is
=dim((M(h+nj0-1,1,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[μ])(h+h′+n,c+c′)+dim((M(h+nj0-1,2,c)⊗L(h′,c′))[μ])(h+h′+n,c+c′)-dim((M(h+,c)j0⊗L(h′,c′))[μ])(h+h′+n,c+c′)=∑kj0,i,ldimL(h′,c′)(h′+kj0-1,i,l,c′)p(n-(nj0-1,i+kj0-1,i,l))-∑kj0-1,i,ldimL(h′,c′)(h′+kj0,i,l,c′)p(n-(nj0,i+kj0,i,l)).
In general,
dim((M(h,c)j0-m⊗L(h′,c′))[μ])(h+h′+n,c+c′)
is given by
∑s=0m(-1)m-s∑kj0-s,i,ldimL(h′,c′)(h′+kj0-s,i,l,c′)p(n-(nj0-s,i+kj0+s,i,l)).
Suppose that nj,i≤n for j≤m
and nj,i>n for j>m.
(It may be the case that nj,i≤n and
nj,2>n. However, the same argument works
with only minor modifications.) Then,
∑j∈ℤ>0dim((M(h,c)j⊗L(h′,c′))[μ])(h+h′+n,c+c′)
is
∑s=0⌊m-12⌋∑k2s+1,i,ldimL(h′,c′)(h′+k2s+1,i,l,c′)p(n-(n2s+1,i+k2s+1,i,l))(3.26)
Again, the distinct zeros in detM(h,c)(h+m,c)
will be exactly of the form 𝒞rj,i,sj,i(h,c),
where j=2s+1,0≤s≤⌊m-12⌋,
and rj,isj,i=nj,i.
Moreover, the multiplicity of the zero 𝒞rj,i,sj,i(h,c)
in detM(h,c)(h+m,c)
is p(m-nj,i)=dimM(h+nj,i,c)(h+m,c).
We then see that
ord(∏0≤k≤n(h+h′+k,c+c′)∈[μ](ak(h′,c′)(h+t,c))p(n-k))
is
∑0≤k≤n(h+h′+k,c+c′)∈[μ]∑j,i|nj,i<kdimL(h′,c′)(h′+k-nj,i,c′)p(n-k),
which is equal to (3.26).
□
Notes and References
This is an excerpt from the PhD thesis Translation Functors and the Shapovalov Determinant by Emilie Wiesner, University of Wisconsin-Madison, 2005.